I >

ORIGINAL

Ij

I

CHICAGO 8-HOUR OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION

AND REDESIGNATION REQUEST

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

PUBLIC HEARING FOR STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

SUBMITTALS FOR CHICAGO OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA

December 16, 2008

9:05 a.m.

100 West Randolph

Room 9-031

Chicago, Illinois

1

I),

.1

Ii

McCorkle Court Reporters,••In.c•................................. Chicago, Illinois (312). •

ATTACHMENT 4
1 ATTENDEES:

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

MS. DANA VETTERHOFFER

Hearing Officer

MR. JEFFREY SPRAGUE

MR. ROBERT J. KALEEL

MS. RACHEL DOCTORS

MS. PAMELA BROOKS

MR. MIKE ROGERS

MR. SCOTT LEOPOLD

MR. DAVID ASSELMEIR

MR. BRIAN URBASZEWSKI

MR. ERIC MELVIN

MR. CHRIS DEMEDOURAS

MR. ALEC DAVIS

MR. BOB ELVERT

MR. BILL CONSTAUTELOS

MR. SCOTT MILLER

MR. ROSS PATRONSKY

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

2

"

I

I
1 HEARING OFFICER VETTERHOFFER: It's about 9:05,

2 so if everybody is ready, we will get started and

3 we can go on the record.

I

4 Good morning. My name is Dana

5 Vetterhoffer and I work for the Illinois

6 Environmental Protection Agency. I want to thank

I

7 everyone for coming today. I've been designated to

8 serve as the Hearing Officer in this matter. As

9 the Hearing Officer, my sole responsibility is to

10 make sure this proceeding runs properly and in

11 accordance with the rules.

12 This is a public hearing before the

13 Illinois EPA for the purpose of gathering public

14 comments related to the 1997 8-hour National

15 Ambient Air Quality Standards, or NAAQS.

16 First, the Illinois EPA is seeking

1

Ii

17 comments on the draft attainment demonstration

18 which contains the state's plan for attaining the

19 state's planned 8-hour ozone maximum. III i noi s EPA

I,I'

I

20 intends to request that the United States EPA

21 redesignate 1997 bas~d on ambient monitoring data

22 from 2006 through 2008.

23 Second, the Illinois EPA is seeking

24 comments on the draft maintenance plan, which

3

.

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
Copies of these procedures can be obtained from me ••

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

b,

22

23

24

contains the state's plan for maintaining the

8-hour ozone maximum for at least ten years after

the US EPA redesignates the area to attainment.

Both documents contain the new motor vehicle

emission budget. The Illinois EPA proposes to

submit these to meet the requirements of the

federal Clean Air Act. This hearing will satisfy

the requirements of Section 1-10-L of the Clean Air

Act, codified at 42 United State~Code 74-10-L.

Finally, at the conclusion of the

discussion regarding the two sets of material, we

will conclude the hearing and then the Illinois EPA

will then take comments off the record regarding

establishing boundary for the nonattainment areas

to be established pursuant to the 2008 ozone

maximum protection.

It's now approximately 9:07 on December

16, 2008. This public hearing is being held under

the Illinois Supreme Court procedure for hearing

for informational and quasi-public legislative

hearings, which can be found at Illinois 3635.

upon request, or they can be accessed on the

website of the Illinois Pollution Control Board.

I

,.

,

4 '.'

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 That website is www.ipcb.state.il.us. Public

2 hearing means this is strictly an informative

3 hearing and an opportunity for Illinois EPA to

4 provide information. And it's also an opportunity

5 for you to provide information to the Illinois

6 EPA. This is not a contested hearing.

7 I would like to explain briefly how

8 today's hearing is going to proceed. First, we

~9 will hear from the Illinois EPA staff members

10 present today to present themselves, and each is

11 going to give a brief slide show presentation.

12 Following the presentation I will ask the public

13 for comments. You are not required to comment at

14 this hearing. Written comments maybe submitted to

15 the agency at any time within the public comment

16 period, which ends at midnight on January 15, 2009.

17 Any person who wants to make oral

18 comments may do so as long as the issues are

19 relevant. If you have lengthy comments or

20 questions it may be helpful to submit them to me in

21 writing before the close of the comment period.

22 All speakers will have the opportunity to direct

23-- questions to the Illinois EPA panel, or they can

24 just make general comments, or they can do both.

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

5

I
1 Our panel members will make an effort to address

2 your comments, but I will not permit or allow

3 anyone to engage in long dialog with our panel.

4 Also, there is a sign-in sheet at the

5 entrance to the room. If you haven't signed in

6 already, if you can do so, that would be great.

7 The Illinois EPA following this hearing

8 will prepare a response of this summary, which will

-9 be available on its website. In the response

10 summary the agency will attempt to answer all the

11 relevant and significant questions raised at that

12 hearing or submitted to me prior to the close of

13 the comment period.

14 Again, the written record of this matter

15 will close on January 15, 2009. Therefore, I will

16 accept all written comments as long as they're

I

17

18

19

20

21

postmarked by midnight on that date.

Please send all written documents or

data to my attention at the following address.

Dana Vetterhoffer, Hearing Officer, at the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency, 1021 North Grand

I

Ie

I

22 Avenue East, P.O. Box 19276, Springfield, Illinois.

23 For anyone wishing t~make comments or

24 request questions, I want to remind you that we

6

.

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

I
1 have a court reporter here to take a verbatim

2 record of these proceedings for the purpose of

3

4

making our administrative record. For her benefit

please keep the general background noise to a

I

I'

I

I'

5 minimum, which I don't think will be a problem

6

7

8

today.

Also, please remember that the court

reporter can only record one person speaking at a

I,

-- " 9 time, so pl ease try not to speak over-one another.

10 When it's your turn to speak, please state your

11 name, spell your last name, and if applicable,

12 state any governmental body, organization, or

13

14

society that you represent. Please speak clearly

and slowly so that the court reporter can

I'

1\

I

15 understand what you are saying.

16 Before we start the Illinois EPA's

17, presentation, I would like to record a number of

18 preliminary documents into the record as Exhibits.

19 I would like to record as Exhibit No.1 a copy of

20 the notice of public hearing. Exhibit No.2 is a

21 copy of the Illinois EPA's attainment

22 demonstration, including two appendices. And

23 - -Exhi bi t 3 is a copy of the mai ntenance pl an.

,

I

:

24 The agency's slide presentation will be 1%

7 I:

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
I

MR. ASSELMEIR: My name is David Asselmeir, I I'

the Illinois EPA, air quality planning section. I

8

I

I

My I· MR. ROGERS: name is Mike Rogers, I'm in the

MR. LEOPOLD: My name is Scott Leopold, with

MS. BROOKS: My name is Pamela Brooks, I'm in

MS. DOCTOR: My name is Rachel Doctors, I'm an

cMRc,KAI:EEL: My name is Robert Kaleel, I'm a

MR. SPRAGUE: My name is Jeffrey Sprague, I'm a

Now I will ask that the Illinois EPA

MR. KALEEL: Shall we start?

manager of the air quality planning section.

uni t manager for the III i noi s EPA>-,·

make their presentations.

Exhibit 4. Although we don't have a copy of the

inventory and data support unit.

go by "Buzz," and I am the unit manager for the

division of mobile source programs.

attorney within the division of legal counsel.

actual slides today, they will be posted on the

the Bureau of Air, air quality planning section.

also request that as well.

wishes to get a copy of the Exhibits from me can

agency's website probably by weekend. Anyone who

staff present today to introduce themselves and

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

.- .- 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

f!,

22

23

24

...... -- .

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 HEARING OFFICER VETTERHOFFER: Yes.

2 MR. KALEEL: We'll go ahead and start our Power

3 Point show. We will make these Power Point slides

4 available on our website as soon as we get back to

5 Springfield. And maybe we ought to dim the lights

6 a little bit.

7 It's going to be one of these rare

8 meetings where I don't talk much. You can hold me

--.-'-" -9 to that. -

10 Dana covered this already in her

11 introductory remarks, but what we are presenting

12 today is the attainment demonstration for 8-hour

13 ozone. I just wanted to make a few remarks about

14 what that includes. It includes a model attainment

15

16

17

18

19

,-

demonstration, a photo chemical modeling exercise,

including a listing of the control measures that we

are rel ying upon in our attainment demonstration to

attain the standard. I;

There is a section on transportation

20 conformity as required by the Clean Air Act. There I

21 is a discussion of the base year 2002 emissions

22 _inventory, another Cl ean Ai r Act requi rement. That

'·23 inventory document, by the way ,was submitted I

I;

24 believe in 2004 to US EPA. So it's long been part I

9 Ii

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
I

area qualifies for redesignation to attainment of t

the 8-hour ozone standard. This is the 1997 ozone

I

I

I

I.

I.

10 h

, .'

When we got nonattainment areas

So with that, I will turn it over to

MR. LEOPOLD: Good morning. My name is Scott

maintenance plan. We will be discussing that also.

photochemical modeler on staff.

There is a reasonable further progress,

Leopold. I'm with the Illinois Environmental

And a discussion of reasonably available control

And finally, as Dana had mentioned, the Chicago

designated in Illinois for the 1997 8-hour ozone

redesignation request is a submittal of a

Protection Agency and I am now the only

or RFP, demonstration that we'll discuss today.

technology as it is required by the Clean Air Act.

area, as well as nonattainment counties in nearby

attainment demonstration. And indeed, we have a

of US EPA's record of our attainment demonstration.

Scott Leopold who will talk about the model

attainment demonstration.

standard, we suddenly needed to produce an

standard, One of the requirementsfor'a

··number of nonattai nment counti es,j n theGhi cago

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

fI,

22

23

24

"

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
meteorology through the summer. We have used -- we I,

talk about here shortly, we developed both a base I';

11 Ii;

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-,,,-,,', 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

'~23

24

states. Part of my duties as a photochemical

modeler with the Illinois EPA is to participate and

contribute also in the LADCO, the Lake Michigan Air

Directors Consortium. And the other states

participating in that group also have photochemical

modelers, and we pool our resources to produce more

data and more analyses.

In the process of modeling we use -- the

US EPA requires that we use a couple-of-different

models. They are very complex models for

emissions, for meteorology, and for the actual

photochemistry. Ozone is not actually emitted, it

is produced by photochemical reactions. So we have

to have a model that is complex enough to

understand how to do that.

And I'm not familiar with this slide

quite yet, so -- there are steps that we use to do

this. We go through development of a

meteorological data set which reflects actual

produced both 2002 meteorology and 2005

meteorology.

And inventory-wise, which Jeff will

I

I'

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
,

the Atlantic Ocean to the east. We focus in with a

the Rockies all the way to the east coast, and then

I'

I

r-

,-

I. ~'1

I

,-

12

MR. SPRAGUE: As I introduced myself

I think that's you.

midwestern area, up into even the southern region

modeling most of the eastern half of the country,

The photochemical modeling grid nests

Michigan basin. 0

As an example, the MM5, which is the

have used a 4 kilometer grid, the finest grid in

of Canada.

inside the meteorological modeling grid, but it'smeteorological model we use, the modeling goes all

still very substantial. At 36 kilometers we are

and at 12 kilometers we are monitoring all of the

most of the eastern half of the United States.

the areas of prime interest, which are in the Lake ;

locally and transported. So our data sets cover

recognized decades ago that ozone is both formed

smaller grid, a 12 kilometer grid spacing east of

these inventories and meteorological data sets

cover a very wide spatial area, because we

year inventory and a future year inventory. And

-th-e 'way"Out'i n the Paci fi c Ocean to the west and

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

(

22

23-

24

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

";' 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

previously, my name is Jeff Sprague and I'm the

modeling unit manager in the air quality planning

section.

Fundamentally, with respect to ozone SIP

modeling, we need to develop a base year

inventory. And this is for two purposes: for model

validation; and secondly, for having a foundation

from which to project future year emissions.

Now, US EPA in their mod-el:inggui'da-nce

recommends a 2002 inventory, but they also provide

for alternate base years. In the case of the

Chicago SIP demonstration, what we have done, of

course, is we've gone and actually produced base

years, two base year inventories; one for 2002 and

one for 2005. The reason being that coordinating

the two, we felt that it just enhanced the overall

assessment we were undertaking.

Now, there is a great many people and a

great many entities that have contributed to

developing the base year inventory, as well as the

future year inventories of course. The states, as

f!,

indicated under the second bullet point there, have

provided the various data elements to the base year

inventory. And under the third bullet point there,

13

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

I

I

,

,
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, the

various contractors that they have hired, have

contributed emission estimates for the various

source sectors that are identified there.

One element that is missing is the nonroad component, other than airports, rail and

commercial, which was largely provided by the State

of Wisconsin.

_'.0 :;:,Lastl y, there are vari aus tool s whi ch we

use to implement this processing. The primary ones

being EMS and CONCEPT, which are the acronyms for

two emission models. And then there are various

software tools that we used to generate

sub-portions of the inventory prior to processing

the whole inventory through those two emission

models.

When we look at the base year inventory,

keep in mind again we said we generated one for

2002, we also generated one for 2005. The bar

histogram you see here were extracted from the TSD

document, which supports our scenario. And the

topmost portion of this diagram breaks out the

I:

-2'3 "'average emi ss·tons for the fi ve stateLADCO regi on

24 for each of the individual states. So you have a

14

. '.'

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
I

breaks it out on a source sector basis. So we are

likewise, for the bottom one, vae on the left and

The bottom porti on of t-hat diagram

portion is for NOx emissions.

'.:

-.

I

:

I

Ii'

Ii

If you look on the vae side, you can

What is not easily extractable from this

So again, basecase 2002 and 2005 for

marine, airports and rail, and lastly for area

Nax on the right.

EGUs, which is an acronym for electrical generating

units, for non-EGUs, which are point sources other

are. And if you look at what I've included in the 0

15

And in the case of NOx, we have the on-road sector

as predominating.

emissions, non-road emissions, plus commercial,

than electrical generating units. On-road

see that area source emissions dominate for voe.

I see. This portion is for vae emissions, and this

vae on the left and for NOx on the right. And

seeing here, well, how much is being contributed by

general feel there for what each state was

contributing. And this got chopped off at the top

diagram is, is what the Illinois'contributions--c'"

- emi ssi ons .

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

- -7.' 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

c-",2<l .:' .,.,' '-'-"-

24

. ..

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 parentheses here, for VOC for the 2002 base year we

2 are looking at 1681 tons per summer weekday for

3 2002. And then for 2005 we are looking at 1576.

4 And as you read down a little bit further, for NOx

5 we are looking at 2621 tons per summer weekday for

6 2002, and 2010 for 2005.

7 The subheads under there provide

8 breakouts which are not discernible from the bar

-9 ---hislogr-ams, but give you a feel for just what the

10 tonnages are when we looked at individual sectors

11 for Illinois alone.

12 The emission modeling, the emission

I

13 process, is just a way of taking an inventory and

14 essentially ratcheting it down, resolving it to the

15 level needed by the air quality simulation model.

16 And there is a slight distinction. True emissions

17 modeling will generate emission estimates from what

I

I

18 are called first principles. These are the

19 fundamental calculations that you would undertake,

20 but the model actually does it, to produce emission

21 estimates. For emissions processing what we are

22 doing is we are really taking the estimates and

--- ·'-23 -~ then, as I ;ndi cated, resol vi ng:::them down to the

24 level that is needed for the air quality model.

16

'" , "

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

;" '"9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

'·'·,:...2-3c··'

24

........

But perhaps of greatest importance is

what our emissions modeling, emissions processing

software is doing. And again, those are the two

tools referred to as EMS and CONCEPT. And what

they're doing is they are going through and

spatially allocating emissions.

So we have point sources and we have

coordinates, we place them in the grid cells we

need. If we have area source emi ss; ons., wS"';:have to

rely on something called spatial surrogates to

allocate county level emissions to the individual

grid cells. The same applies for non-road. So

it's just a way of putting emissions where they

need to go.

Temporal allocation allows us to

account for the variability on a day-of-the-week

basis or an hour-of-the-day basis. And then

lastly, speciation takes these, a complex grouping,

in the case of VOCs organic compounds, to a much

more simplified group of species that the air

quality model can in turn-handle.

it,

Throughout the process of doing

em'i;ssi ons processi ng, there i squaTi ty assurance~'

checks that are intrinsic to the model so that

17

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

I

I,

I:

I:

I

I
1 warning and air messages may be generated

2 indicating where there is data missing, where data

3 may be out of bounds, any of a host of potential

4-

5

6

problems that may generate these messages.

But the inventory as it's being

processed undergoes truly a thorough quality

F

1

7 assurance to demonstrate indeed that any potential

8 errors are being removed. And with the

9 - ""tdent4-:ftcati on of corrections, - of-c· course , you make

10 adjustments to the inventory and it truly becomes

11 an iterative process where you make the corrections

12 or you make improvements to the inventory, you

I

13 reprocess and provide new data sets for the air

14 quality model.

15 The map graphic that you see in the

I

16 lower right there is just kind of a means of

17 visuallyassessi ng whether the emi ssi ons have been

18 placed where they should be placed. And in this

19 case, for vehicle NOx emissions for 2005 on a July

20 weekday. Just for kind of a crude assessment as to

21

22

whether we've done everything properly.

What we have done, we have talked about

-23 ,- bur base yecrr estimates, and thatts important as I

24 mentioned for model validation, and as a foundation

18 I,

",,' ,,,. .' "

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 for developing our future year estimates.

2 The future year estimates then make use

3 of growth factors. And in this case a specific

I

on-the-book controls, which are the federal and I

wayside with the vacatur of the CAIR rule. And in 'i

I"

its pl ace what has been i mpl emented in the model is· H

used, along with activity data to project the base Ii

year emissions to the future year just based upon

I

I

That has subsequently gone by the

When we then overlay controls, we end up

mentioned.

other source categories th~t have already been

And the future year controls that were used

included the integrated planning model which takes

piece of software called EGAS, and the version 5 is

into consideration electric power generation and

simply applicable on-the-book controls. And the

state rules that on the books, also apply to the

to produce emission estimates.

growth.

distribution with full consideration of least cost

":;' -.~ ,-- - -.._-' ._..

with our final future years' emissions' inventory .

4

5

6

7

8

'':,-'!'-''. '---'~,-. .--.,-9 -

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

';,.;"-..;-<.

~";-:-_2-a-c And 1astl y, any court orders appl i cabl e

24 to whatever facilities to which they relate are

19

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 also included with the EMV emission adjustments for

2 the future year.

3 The second bullet point here, biogenic

I.

4 emissions and Canadian emissions were assumed

5 constant, so no changes between the base year and I

I

6 future year. And then for non-LADCD states we used

7 whatever the other regional planning organizations

8 would provide to us.

A-closer look at the~future year

10 emissions again. VDC on the left, NDx on the

11 right. The first two bars more or less reproduce

12 what we saw on the previous slides for the 2002

13 base year and the 2005 base year. But we have also

14 included some selective out years for 2009, 2012

15 and 2018.

16 These are aggregate totals for the whole

17 five state LADCD region, so they.have some value.

18 They don't tell the complete story, of course, but

1

I:'

19 on an emission sector basis you can pretty much see r

1

20 the breakout there as well. And we see some we

21 see reductions, of course, in on-road mobile for

I

I

22 VOCs. For non-road we see some reductions. We

23 see significant reductions in,EGYs from the base

24 year to the future year. And what you're seeing in

20

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 part there is just regulatory programs phasing in

2 that are translating into reduced emissions. So

3 this is true not only for the base years in part

4 between 2002 and 2005, but more markedly between

5 the base years and the outlying future years.

6 And again for your benefit, some

7 specific numbers for Illinois, both in totals and

8 for individual emission sectors.

9c What aretheseon-the-book controls?

10 First of all, we have these utility boiler NOx

11 emission controls as a result of the Title IV under

12 the Clean Air Act Amendment. And these are due to

13 translate into approximately 2 million tons NOx

14 lower from 1980 levels.

15 Secondly, our NOx SIP CO, which is a

16 trading program based on electrical generating

1J _ units not emitting more than 1.5 pounds per million

18 BTU. In addition to that, boiler and turbine

19 limits, these are the non-EGU limits that are

20 referred to there, of 60 percent, and then some

21 additional controls. So 30;production from NOx 1

22 from cement kilns, and then 82 percent control

'«2'3 .. effi ci ency on NOx for stati onary engi'nes.

24 This program was implemented on May 31,

21 Ii

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9- -

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

"23-

24

2004, and again we are seeing the benefits in

reduced emissions from the base year as a result of

this federal rule making.

Then a host of smaller ones, but all

contributing in their own way. We have the

national emission standards for hazardous air

pollutants in NAAQS, and the new source performance

standards. We have aerosol coatings and

"-~archi tectural and i ndustri al maintenance coati ngs,

as well as consumer solvent re-makings, as

indicated there. These VOM reductions are

approximately .114 pounds of UM per capita for

aerosol coatings, 1.1 pounds per capita for AIM

coatings, and .9 pounds per capita for consumer

solvents coatings.

There is also a portable fuel container

rule making, in which the limit to evaporation and

permeation emissions in portable fuel containers is

.3 grams of hydrocarbons per gallon per day. The

vehicle inspection and maintenance program provides

reductions from mobile emissions, reformulated

gasoline and like matter.

Then we have a seRias: of-federal rule

makings that relate to tail pipe emissions for

22

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

,
1 passenger vehicles, light duty trucks, and medium

2 duty vehicles. And these are at least for the tier

3 two motor vehicle standards and low sulfur gas rule

4 making. There is an 80 PPM s~lfur cap that's fully

5 effective in 2006, and tail pipe standards which

6 become fully effective or fully phased in in 2007

7 and 2009 time frames.

8 For the on-road heavy duty diesel

9 engi nes and the sul fur diesel fue-l requirement

10 phased in by 2007, so obviously that's already

11 taken place. And the ultra low sulfur diesel

12 requirement was required by June of 2006.

13 The last bullet point on this slide,

14 non-road diesel engines and diesel sulfur

15 requirements. So we've addressed some on-road rule

16 makings, and now lastly, there is a non-road rule

17 making. And as indicated here, year 2007 ,phased in

18 new emission standards and introduced standards of ,

19 a 500 PPM cap by June of 2007 and reduced to a 15

20 PPM standard by June of 2010.

21 And lastly, for \he on-the-books

22 controls, there are several other motor vehicle

24 ignition, recreational vehicle standards, and

""'-?23-" federal programs. Evaporative large spark "

,

23

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 marine compression ignition standards and

2 locomotive engine standards.

3 There have been a series of consent

4 decrees entered into between various companies and

5 the courts. These have a direct impact on the

6 allowable NOx and YOM emissions. And for DYNEGY

7 Midwest Corporation, requires the installation of

8 certain NOx controls. Some of the equipment they

-9:"':'-81 re:~n:t~-:'currently' have;. it'sJust placing it into

I

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

U', 21

22

. '23

24

operation and in another instance at least

acquiring those controls.

Refinery consent decrees, you can see a

listing of some of the affected sources there

translating into, of course, NOx control. There

are other pollutants as well that are captured by

these consent decrees, including silver oxide

emisstons1particulate emissions, carbon-monoxide

emissions. But for our purposes, the NOx control

is the most important here for the ozone set.

And lastly, the ethanol plant consent

decree affecting sources as you see them listed

there, and primarily affecting YOM emissions.

Many of you are aw.8r-Ef·of the current

pending Illinois NOx RACT rule making. This

24 I,I:

I

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 addresses a host of sources that are within the

2 nonattainment areas for sources that are major

3 sources emitting greater than a hundred tons per

4 year. Included amongst these are el ectri cal

5 generating unit boilers, process heaters, cement

6 kilns, lime kilns, furnaces at iron and steel

7 manufacturing facilities.

8 And the particular emission limits are

9 -a function of di fferent-thi ngs.- Ins-:i'P~1@-:.,:terms"

10 it either reflects a pounds per million BTU heat

11 input limit, or in the case of cement kilns and

12 lime kilns and glass manufacturing, that it's eight

13 pounds per essentially product produced, be it

14 clinker, glass, things of that nature.

15 So that's the form of the emission

16 limitations. It's somewhat different depending on

17 whether you're talking a combustion source~or

18 whether you're tal ki ng about - - well, _I shoul d say

19 a boiler or process heater versus a process unit

20 like a glass manufacturing furnace.

21 And I believe that's my last slide, so

22 I'll turn it over to the next presenter.

MR. LEOPOLD: Well, whenwe·'use the

24 t, photochemical model we use it in a relative sense. I:

25 I,

F ., ., " ,

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

0.' 21 <

22

".' '23

24

That is, we don't necessarily look at the actual

values coming out of the model and use them

explicitly, but we look at the percent change and

apply that to the actual monitored design value.

So the design value that we get for a

forecast is the design value in the base year,

which is the monitored design value times this

thing called an RRF, which is a relative reduction

'·factor-;,-·And that is the amount.,percentage change

that we see in the modeling between the future year

and the base year.

In the process of combining the

emissions and the meteorology all together in the

photochemical model, we finally get the actual

ozone parts per billion prediction. We do a base

year model in order to validate that the model is

behavi ng corr.ectl y . We can do .thjs, .of course,

because 2005 has already occurred. We can compare

that against the monitored values to insure that

indeed our model is predicting reasonably well and

can be used then to project into a future year.

The final results with and without the

controls -- well, go back tothe·base year. There

are a number of sites that are not in attainment in

26

I,

~.

.... ..

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

....
1 the base year. We initially went ahead and modeled

2 with CAIR when CAIR was still with us, and then

3 came back and did the same modeling for future

4 years, 2009, the attai nment year, and 2012,..Jmd

5 found that at least for ozone there was not that

6 much difference between including the CAIR controls

7 and not including the CAIR controls. In 2009 we

8 are basically clean except for this stubborn

Holland monitor where we are-j ustbarely_~er·the

10 standard, both considering CAIR controls and

11 considering life without CAIR. And by 2012, then,

12 we have attainment throughout the Lake Michigan

13 area.

14 Note that there are no actual Illinois

15 sites listed here. That's because the Illinois

16 monitors are already in attainment.

17 Next, please. Well, when weare

18 modeling a result that is that close to the

19 standard, whether we are just under the standard or

20 just above the standard, US EPA requires that be

21 put together in what's called·a weight of evidence

22 demonstration. Which is just additional analysis

-i-.:;,: :;.$=~23 ,--~that contri butes to the concl usi on that we have

24 come to.

27

,.... " ." .

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

"
1 What this weight of evidence analysis

2 can comprise could be additional modeling, and this

3 could be, for example, US EPA's CAIR modeling. Air

4 quality trends, which is pretty self-explanator~.

5 And what US EPA calls other diagnostics often

6 comprising statistical analyses, source of portion

I

7 method and such.

I·

Next, please. This is an example of k

out of the attainment, and very clearly throughout 1

Michigan basin is in attainment for 8-hour ozone. >

•

monitor we have is the Holland monitor here on the

east side of Lake Michigan. Otherwise, the Lake

Next, please. By the time we get to

validated. But having said that, the only stubborn

again because the 2008 ozone data has not yet been

looktng at-the air qual tty trends.. Agai n, pretty

deep red colors there are those monitored that are

2006 to 2008, and these are preliminary values

a number of locations out of attainment.

the Lake Michigan basin and throughout the Midwest,

straightforward. 2000 to 2002 design values. The

8

----_....: .. _.", - -9'

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

, 22 And certainly the Chicago area is included.

,-. '23 Next, please. An example- of the other

24 kind of analyses we can do, and again, in the

28

. . " ' ,

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

.-' .. ···-9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

:> ·23

24

attainment document we have provided is also the

technical support document that LADCD has put

together, and these analyses are included in there

along with a lot of other information. So if

you're interested in the different kind of analyses

that were done, you can certainly refer to that.

This is just one excerpt from that

document. A process that two people from US EPA

named Cox; C-o-x,- and Chu, C-h-u,came·l.lp~with·a

number of years ago with a statistical technique to

try to minimize the effects of meteorology on ozone

trends such that a trend that is left reflects

emission reductions. And this is done for the

Chiwaukee monitor. This is in Wisconsin, but it's

just over the border and has been historically what

we call a control monitor for the Chicago area. A

moni tor that is affected by the Chi cago pl ume_,

And since 1997, we have seen a downward

trend in ozone design values. The upward parts of

the trend there in 2001, 2005, are likely due still

to meteorology. Again, this tfchnique minimizes

the effect of meteorology, but does not completely

eliminate it. But overall from~1997 to 2007, "we

have a very good downward trend in ozone design

29

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

,

I

I

I

I.

I

I

I

'1

I:

I'

I

I
" ,', ,

1 values in that critical Chiwaukee monitor.

2 Next, please. The fundamental

3 question. That's a great slide. Do the analyses ,

4 show that we can demonstrate attainment with the

58-hour ozone standard by the 2010 deadline? And we

6 say yes.

7 MR. SPRAGUE: We have already addressed all

8 those control programs, so this is an additional

- 9",qn~~~\Ale.don't need.

Chicago.

Respiratory Health Association for Metropolitan F

In the slide that Jeff haq up above the

MR. URBASZEWSKI: Brian Urbaszewski,

I.:

I

Iet

I

I.

k

r

k

Not that

30

MR. URBASZEWSKI: Why?

MR. SPRAGUE: There was"_ a,","J ot, oJ di ffi cul ty

MR. SPRAGUE: Yes.

MR. KALEEL: Should we pause for a little bit

model attainment demonstration before we move on to

emissions, you indicated Canadian emissions were

with working with the Canadian inventory.

what emissions were assumed in the gross factoring

and see if there are any questions just on the

the RFP analysis?

constant going forward.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

fI.

22

" 23-

24

" ,,' " , "'" ', .. , .. '" , .. ,'" " '

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 considerable effort wasn't expended to do so,

2 through. There was a lot of proprietary concerns

3 regarding the Canadian database. And in the

4 absence of feeling really comfortable that we could

5 produce a future year inventory that could really !

6 past the test, the option was just to essentially

7 eliminate that potential source of what would be f

8 added error, just to keep it constant from the base

9

10

year.

MR. URBASZEWSKI: Okay. '.

I'

11 MR. SPRAGUE: I fully appreciate that it kind

12 of defies rational thinking, but in the absence of

13 actually being able to produce a future year

14 inventory, you can be comfortable that a lot of

15 quality assurance that's gone into it would be

16 acceptable to the Canadians that you would be

17 -better off just eliminating that potential source

18 of error.

19 MR. KALEEL: If I can add to that, there is a

,

20

21

22

lot of effort between the US government and the

Canadian government to work on'emission inventories

and to coordinate quality issues, and we are kind

--23" of tracking that. That is not anything, being Fed,

24 or that LADCD could fully be involved in. It's

31

.. ,

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 really government to government. It's just been

2 very difficult to get accurate emissions data from

3 Canada.

4 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Okay. In terms of the

5 modeling that is used, I'm not that familiar with

6 the guts of the modeling, so whoever wants to

7 answer this, feel free.

8 But looking at between 2009 and prior

! 9 to 2009 and going out to 2012 there are going to be

10

11

12

13

14

certain reductions from 502 from closed power plant

units. I'm trying figure out if you get a !'

reduction in S02, my understanding is sulfate

formation is opaque, it helps reflect sunlight back

in space, contributes to global cooling. That

15 would also mean that less -- sulfur would block

16 sunlight from reaching the ground and forming

17 ground level ozone. But if you remove S02, then

18 you're actually increasing the amount of solar

19 radiation that is reaching the ground.

20 Is that going to.be driving more ozone

'21 formation, and is that accounted for in the model?

22 MR. SPRAGUE: That is a great question.

23 Scott, you understand

24 MR. LEOPOLD: I understand the question. No,

32

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
We project future year emissions of course, but not II,

33

demonstration here.

[,

I

I

I

The sul phate issue is' one of the thi ngs

MR. KALEEL: I thi nk that is out of the real m

MR. URBASZEWSKI: But this would -- okay. Just

modeling.

meteorology that is used is simply a replica of

meteorology.

it's really outside of the realm of our

incorporated into the model going forward?

that is being looked at by our researchers, but

implications for ozone formation, no? Is somebody

going forward, I'm thinking, I'm making some

that is not accounted for in the model. The

We don't actually project future year meteorology.

report on here. There is a lot of research on

way, shape, or form, if there are SOx regs going

as well as upstate, which could have significant

assumptions here. If CAIR goes into effect in some

climate change and a lot of efforts in the

looking into that or making sure that is

2005 basecase. So we are using 2005 meteorology.

of the state planning process that we are trying to

see significant reduction in S02 emissions in state

forward in the state, which there may be, you could

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

.-".-:.. - -23

24

-,' '"'

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 MR. URBASZEWSKI: All right. Just from the

. 2 document itself, I was looking at and I was

3 confused by a couple of things.

4 For the internal combustion engines,

5 the NOx rules that were implemented took effect in

6 2008, it said that the original attempt would be

7 covering turbines and internal combustion engines,

8 and from what I read it said that the 2008

-,:9 ,,-r,egu~lati'ons'only affected internal combustion

10 engines.

11 Are those turbines mentioned EGUs, or

12 was there something separated that was excluded?

13 MR. KALEEL: They are non-EGUs. It's for the

14 turbines that are involved in the current rule

15 making.

16 MR. URBASZEWSKI: So this is something that

17 would be bumped into the RACT rules?

18 MR. KALEEL: There are a couple of different

19 rule makings going on in regards to the engine

20 rules. There are certain large engines that were

i21 identified in the NOx SIP CO rule making. These

22 are sources located statewide, I think there is a

23 total of 278 engines. Thatrule'making is

24 complete. I am forgetting the exact compliance

34 I

" " '-

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

--'-'-~.- 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

deadline, but that is now passed.

There is a separate rule making that

IEPA has submitted to the Pollution Control Board

dealing with other engines and turbines located in

nonattainment areas. That is part of our NOx

RACTS. That rule is still pending before the

Pollution Control Board.

MR. URBASZEWSKI: Looking on in the actual

document and 1isti ng out all. the consent, decr:.ee_s

that are occurring with the DYNEGY and the

refineries and such, there is some of them list

dates by when things are going to go on and there

ARE some that don't. The DYNEGY settlement in the

actual document says that some NOx controls are

going to go on, but it doesn't say when. Whereas

in the other descriptions in the other consent

decrees it does list out certain dates what is

going to happen.

MR. SPRAGUE: Yes. There are variable

compliance dates for ADM, and I don't want to say

it was an oversight, but kind of. gets pretty

ft;

lengthy if you begin to list all the compliance

dates for particular emissions sources at each of

the ADM facilities for YOM controls versus NOx

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

35

I

I

I

I
1 controls versus whatever.

2 So it was a conscious decision to not

3 go to the lengthy listing of all those, thinking

4 that just referring you to, just citing the consen~

5 decree order itself would probably be sufficient to

6 direct you to the specific information if you were

7 truly interested in getting into it.

8 MR. KALEEL: We will try to do a better job or

.- g-nrcrre-complete job and get more information in

10 there.

11 MR. URBASZEWSKI: It was just there was a

12 little less detail was in the DYNEGY settlement

13 than other things that were described.

14 MR. KALEEL: We will try to do better on that.

15 MR. URBASZEWSKI: And in the ADM settlement,

16 too, and this is what kind of confused me about how

17 SOx emissions were worked into the modeling. The

18 ADM description actually talks about SOx

19 reductions, which I didn't understand how all that

20 fit into the ozone emissions.

MR. SPRAGUE: It does not.

22 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Just one real quick check on

23 the inventory related to the inspection and

24 maintenance program.

36

I

I

I·

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

.
very moist year here. Perhaps we wi 11 be record

setting by the end of the year. - There was"can

unusually low number of 90-plus degree days at I

37

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

_.. _- 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

-". 2-3

24

Was the inventory corrected for the

change of DOC, has that occurred because of a

switch from a treadmill test? Because there was a

document I had seen in the past that indicated that

there was going to be an increase from the past

because of the switches to OBD only.

MR. KALEEL: The future year inventories do

account for that. The base year inventory, that

conversi on hadn't happened ye-t t n2002T-nventory.

By the time we're projecting to 2009 or 2012, we

are accounting for that.

MR. URBASZEWSKI: One final question. Just in

terms of meteorology in the 2006 and 2008 years,

would you consider that that meteorology was

typical in terms of those years, was it close to

average in terms of the temperature and rainfall?

MR. KALEEL: We are sti 11 1ooki ng at that.

I don't know, Scott, if you have some

comments on the 2008 meteorology.

MR. LEOPOLD: Well, 2008 meteorology in

Chicago, certainly it was very moist. ~t's been a

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

I

I

I

I

I
1 O'Hare Airport. However, for example the month of

2 July was actually above normal for average

3 temperature, which would indicate that there was

4 not much variability in the temperature during the

5 month of July. That is, days were likely I'

6 consistently high in the 80s, lows in the 60s,

7 rather than what happens in some years when we have

8 extremely hot spells followed by cool breaks.

- 9 -That kind of scenario could lead to

10 having an above normal July temperature without

11 having above normal number of 90 degree days.

12 MR. URBASZEWSKI: In terms even if the average

13 temperature in July were higher, how would that --

14 would that be more critical than the number of 90

15 degree days in determining how many exceedences

16 occurred?

17 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm really not sure of the

18 magnitude of either of those variables as to

I

I

19 whether one is more important than the other.

21 wi tho fewer 90 degree days woul d 1ike1y 1ead to few

22 exceedences. But the scenario that we have this

20 Certainly a below normal temperature year along I

I

23 year 'I Teally can't say at this mO.ment whether one

24 is more important than the other.

I

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

established the form of the standard. Which we I)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

=--~.:-, 23~

24

MR. KALEEL: If I may make a comment about the

meteorology, US EPA of course recognizes the

importance of meteorology in ozone levels in a

particular are~, and they try to deal with

meteorological variability in the way they

look at three years of data, not one year, and you

also don't look at just the peak values, but look

at the fourth high value. So the~:idea~is to try to

dampen out as best you can the experience of

meteorology and try to assess air quality.

So it is a three year standard, based on

the fourth high, and what a particular year's ozone

produces is really not relevant to determining

whether the air is attainment or non- attainment.

MR. URBASZEWSKI: Would you say that 2006 was

also below a year average or below average in terms

of ozone production?

MR. KALEEL: Well, I persona11 y honestly don't

recall. I don't know if Scott has a comment on

2006 meteorology.

MR. LEOPOLD: I'm really not up to speed on

exactly what happened in 2006 for meteorology.

MR. KALEEL: We are really talking more about

I

1

I:

1

39 r

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

....
1 the redesignation petition rather than the

2 modeling. Modeling wasn't considered in 2006

3 meteorology or 2008 meteorology. It considered

4 2005 meteorology and just strictly a prediction of

5 air quality to 2009 or to 2012. So that we are

6 really kind of getting ahead of ourselves with this

7 discussion.

8 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Okay. I will leave it there I

--9,. --,j:or no,w . • "'0. 0"._

10 MR. KALEEL: Okay. Any other questions?

11 MR. ASSELMEIR: I guess I will start here. As

12 I said before, my name is David Asselmeir and my

13 primary responsibility is for compiling the

14

15

16

emissions inventories that are used in these models

and by other groups.

My primary focus is on what we call

Ii

I'

I

17 point and area sources. Again, indu~try and a

18 bunch of little things that are dry cleaners, all

19 the body shops, consumer solvents, coating, things

20

21

22

23

24

like that. And I also get other data from our

mobile source group from the on-road and off-road

emissions.

But, first sl ide 'cAs:_part of this

demonstration, US EPA also requires us to progress

40

I

I:

I

.

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 towards meeting attainment by what we call a

2 reasonable further progress. And what that is is

3 they required a 15 percent reduction in YOM six

4 years after the base inventory. And again, using

5 the base year, the data I have is 2002. Six years

6 later, of course, is 2008.

7 They give a couple of options on how you 1<

8 ~et your 15 percent reduction. As you've heard

9 before wi th Jeff, and 'Scott, there 'are many' thi ngs

10 that go into forming ozone. Many ones are YOM and

11 NOx emissions. The way that US EPA has set that

12 up, you move all YOM, all NOx, or a combination of

13 both of the two. You can do it, certainly you have

14 to work with inside nonattainment area, but since

15 again it is a transport problem also for ozone they

16 do allow you to take into consideration YOM sources

17 within 100 kilometers and NOx sources within 200 ,

18 kilometers. And as the documents you have

19 previously been shown show, we are just dealing

20 with YOM reductions in the Chicago area.

21 Next slide. So we have heard about the

22 2002 base year inventory at least based on emission

-23 reports or data computer models we have. What we

24 had to do was grow that inventory to 2008 for the

41

. .. .. ,

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 point of areas and sources. How we do that is by

2 what we call growth factors. I say growth factors,

3 this doesn't necessarily mean emissions are always

4 going up. They can go down, too, in certain

5 situations. Point of area, more industrial and

6 economic based area type sources are more. Again,

7 employment population type.

8 Usually the growth factors do take into

- ~-- 9 ·~:account some type of i ndust ri es and new pl ants

10 being added. Growth factors, we probably did not

11 take into account the growth and the boom, at least

12 the new planned ethanol and biodiesel plants. So

13 we went and made sure we accounted for those in the

14 Chicago area.

15 Certainly those growth factors don't

16 take into account the consent degrees, so we

17 include those in our growth and updates to 2008.

18 And Chicago also has a little bit different one,

19 they have a cap and trade program for YOM. It's

20 our emissions reduction market systems, ERMS. So

21 we have to worry about just allowing companies to

22 grow, whether they bump up against the cap. And

23 when-f checked into that nature ,-'i f they were or

24 were not going into the cap, they were not anywhere

42

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
these guys have done, the potential possibility has Ii

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

.- ... 23

24

near reaching the cap. So ERMS did not limit the

growth in this case for 2008.

For our on-road mobile sources, US EPA

has a computer model called MOBILE6 for many

different types of vehicles, speeds, temperatures,

things like that, ran that for 2008. Similarly for

off-road, lawn mowers, garden tractors, things like

that, the US EPA has what they call the non-road

model. That -doesn't include the locomotive, the

commercial marine vessels, and the aircraft. We

get those different ways.

Again, what we had to take into account

certainly for the Chicago area is the O'Hare

expansion, and we used the documents that they have

put together for that and the long-rumored third

Chicago airport. So I did a check before you came,

we do not have the third Chicago airport operating

in 2008. So for RFP purposes we don't worry about

that. But for future projections and modeling

been included in future year inventory.

Next slide. In general, there is a

little bit more pertaining to a little bi~ more

detail of where the emissions are coming from in

43

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

!
1 the Chicago area for VOM emissions in tons per day.

2 Again, RFP only goes to 2008, while you

3 also see 2009, 2010, US EPA, especially Region V

4 here in Chicago, kind·of also want to see us

5 project and go out to the attainment date of 2010.

6 For the most part, as you can see, big

7 reductions of VOM for on-road and off-road vehicles

8 and area source reductions. Where the majority of

9 those reductions come from is from the

10 architectural and maintenance coating rules and the

11 consumer solvent rules.

12 I can't recall if those have been

13 passed yet, but even so, industry and other

14 manufacturers are accounting for that and slowly

15 coming into compliance before the rule is passed.

16 And US EPA issued some guidance on what credits we

17 can take for reductions we can expect to see~ and

18 those have been included.

19 As I recall, we can take a 75 percent

20 reduction into 2008, and 25 percent to -- well, not

21 reduction, but 75 percent of the total reduction we

22 would expect to see. We went a little bit more

23 conservative and did a 50/50 split. So from that,

24 certainly with mobile sources, we expect to be

44

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 meeting our reasonable further progress.

2 Next slide. I'll go through this.

3 Calculating 15 percent of a number sounds fairly

4 easy. One thing you_have to take into account is

5 there are certain things we are not allowed to take

6 credit for in the reductions. And the example is

7 the lone case I have here is the Federal Motor

8 Vehicle Control Program. So we have to subtract

9 that, so we don't get that credit. Then we do our

10 15 percent.

11 This little step in the calculation is

12 gone through but in more detail in the document,

13 just going through here. But our a target is 628

14 tons per day of VOM. That is what reasonable

15 further progress gets us. Based upon our projected

16 inventories, the new sources, different control

17 strategles, we're projecting 591 tons per day,

18 which is close to a 20 percent reduction.

19 So again, we are believing we will

20 easily get the 15 percent reduction for VOCs. That

21 is all we are taking into consideration in the

22 Chicago area.

23 And I believe that is the last one

24 there.

45

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 MR. KALEEL: Any questions on the RFP

2 demonstration? Again, this is a required element

3 of our attainment demonstration.

4 Brian.

5 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Just out of curiosity, the

6 ethanol plants being incorporated into the

7 inventory, there were quite a number of ethanol

8 plant proposals which even with the economic

9 changes going forward there is still a federal

10 mandate for an increase in the federal mandate for

11 ethanol. So I assume a lot of these are still

12 going to be built because this is where the corner

13 is, in Illinois, but perhaps just outside the

14 Chicago nonattainment area.

15 And I'm trying to figure out in terms

16 of effect on ozone formation, how the emissions

17 from the plant that you would expect to be bUllt

18 just outside the nonattainment area are going to

19 affect attainment?

20 MR. KALEEL: Jeff, do you want it?

21 MR.. SPRAGUE: My understanding from our

22 permitting section is really we have no ethanol

23 plants to be built just outside the Chicago non24 attainment area. We have two down in the Metro

46

.".'.'

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

.......
1 east area, one in Alton, and I think the other ones

2 are more or less clustered in the west around the

3 northwestern part of the state, with one

4 exception. There is one other one down in the far

5 southeastern part of the state. Is it Palatine?

6 No, that's not right. It escapes me right now.

7 MR. KALEEL: Have we included the ones we know

8 of in the modeling exercise?

9 MR. SPRAGUE: Yes.

10 MR. KALEEL: So I think we have made a fair

11 estimate of at least what we know is in the

12 pipeline, so to speak. And in terms of future

13 analyses or maintaining the standard after that

14 present date, I will talk about our maintenance

15 plan in a little while. But one of the elements in

16 our maintenance plan is to review the emissions

17 inventory on a regular basis. So we will be happy

18 to take your comments on that element or best ways

19 to do that. We are trying to do that.

20 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Okay.

21 MR. KALEEL: Why don't you go ahead and ~lick

<

22 ahead on the next slide here, Jeff. Reasonably

23 available control technology. I will make a few

24 remarks about where we are with that with this

47

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263·0052
1 particular requirement.

2 The Clean Air Act RACT requirements for

3 both VOM, volatile organic materials, or sometimes

4 VOCs, we use those terms kind of interchangeably,

5 and also for nitrogen oxides. We have a long

6 history of VOM RACT rules in Illinois in the

7 Chicago nonattainment area. These were promulgated

8 in the 1990 Clean Air Act and adopted for the

9 purp~se of obtaining the one-hour ozone standard.

10 Obviously that standard has since been released for

11 8-hour ozone, but these earlier RACT rules still

12 provide predictions that help us for the 8-hour

13 standard.

14 In 2006 and 2007, US EPA issued new

15 control technology guidance documents, or CTGs. We

16 are still working on regulatory proposals to

-

17 promulgate the requirements of those CTGs. We need

18 to complete thoee rule makings and submit those to

19 the US EPA before the attainment demonstration is

20 considered complete. So we don't expect that US

21 EPA will be able to take final action on this

22 submittal until those rules are completed and

23 submitted to the US EPA.

24 Similarly, NOx RACT requirements are

48

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 contained in the Clean Air Act. We should have

2 submitted NOx RACT rules a couple years ago. We

3 have not yet done that. The RACT requirements for

4 NOx are before the Illinois Pollution Control Board

5 right now, and what we intend to do in this

6 submittal to US EPA is to provide a commitment to

7 US EPA to adopt the NOx RACT rule and submit that

8 as soon as the Board has finished with the rule

9 making. And a similar commitment for the VOM RACT

10 requirements.

11 So this is not an area that Illinois is

12 complete. And again, US EPA won't be able to take

13 final action until these requirements are completed

14 and submitted.

15 In terms of contingency measures, this

16 is another area of the Clean Air Act. We need to

17 make a demonstration or include measures that are

18 to be implemented if we fail to achieve reasonable

19 further progress. If we fail to achieve the

20 attainment by the attainment date, these

21 contingency measures are supposed to be in effect.

22 We are required to or supposed to take further

23 action, state action, to get these reductions. To

24 meet this requirement we are relying on both state

49 %

:;

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
I"

1 and federal measures that have already been adopted [0

Ii

2 that will provide emission reductions beyond 2010.

3 Next slide. There is a list of these

4 measures. Many of these measures you have already

5 seen in our attainment demonstration. In other

6 words, these are measures that we are relying on to

7 demonstrate attainment. But many of these measures

8 will provide continuing emission reductions,

9 greater reductions in the future year than they

10 have by the attainment year. So those additional

11 reductions beyond 2010 are being relied upon to

12 - meet thi s requi rement . I won't read this 1ist, but

13 these are the measures.

14 Unless there are questions on RAeT or on

15 contingency measures, I will pause for a second.

16 Mike Rogers is going to talk about the

17 transportation conformity requirements.

18 MR. ROGERS: Good morning. My name is Mike

19 Rogers, I'm with the Illinois Environmental

20 Protection Agency's Bureau of Air, and I am

21 responsible for dealing with issues related to

e

22 transportation conformity and the development of

23 State Implementation Plan, "SIP" motor vehicle

24 emissions budgets.

50

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 Section 176(c)(4) of the Clean Air Act

2 Amendments of 1990 requires that transportation

3 plans funded or approved under Title 23 USC must be

4 determined to conform with state or federal air

5 implementation plans. In order to demonstrate

6 conformity, motor vehicle emissions resulting from

7 the implementation of transportation plans and

8 transportation improvement programs must be equal

9 to or less than the motor vehicle emissions budget

10 established in the SIP.

11 The Chicago 8-hour ozone attainment

12 demonstration and maintenance plans being discussed

13 today· contain estimates of year 2009 and 2020

14 Chicago area volatile organic compound, "VOC," and

15 oxides of nitrogen, "NOx," on-road motor vehicle

16 emissions. These levels of motor vehicle emissions

17 establish a cap or "budget" for the purpose of

18 determining conformity between transportation

19 planning activities and air quality plans.

20 The motor vehicle .emissions budgets

21 proposed in the 8-hour ozone attainment

22 demonstration were developed consistent with the

23 methodology and control strategy assumptions used

24 in the air quality modeling. They are based on the

51

.,.

McCorkle Court Reporters. Inc.

Chicago. Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 compared to baseline 1990 fuel.

2 The 11M program, in effect since 2007,

3 requires biennial on-board diagnostics, "OBD,"

4 testing on all model year 1996 and newer light duty

5 gasoline vehicles, and exhaust idle and gas cap

6 testing on model year 1996 and newer heavy duty

7 gasoline vehicles registered in the testable area.

8 The Chicago testable ara is based on

9 urbanized areas and includes all of Cook, DuPage,

10 and Lake Counties, and parts of Kane, Kendall,

11 McHenry, and Will Counties. The program includes a

12 four-year grace period for new vehicles. The

13 benefits of national motor vehicle emissions

14 control programs such as the Tier 2 emissions

15 standards and fuel sulfur controls are accounted

16 for within the emissions factors generated by the

17 US EPA MOBLIE6 model.

18 Combining these VMT assumptions with the

19 year-specific voe and NOx gram per mile emission

20 rates from the MOBILE6 model, the proposed Chicago

21 attainment demonstration year 2009 motor vehicle

14

22 emissions budgets are 106.92 tons per summer day of

23 VOC, and 261.02 tons per day of NOx. The

24 maintenance plan year 2020 motor vehicle emissions

53

.... . ..

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 budgets are 56.07 tons per summer day of VOC, and

I

I,

2 79.09 tons of NOx.

3 This concludes my testimony.

4 HEARING OFFICER VETTERHOFFER:Doesanybody

5 have any questions?

6 MR. KALEEL: Okay. As we mentioned in our

7 introductory remarks, the agency is going to be

8 submitting the attainment demonstration document,

9 which is what we have described up until now in

10 this hearing. The other SIPS submittal, the

11 implementation plan submittal that we will be

12 making is a maintenance plan for the Chicago non13 attai~ment area. And the maintenance plan is a

14 required element of a request by the state to US

15 EPA to redesignate the Chicago area to attainment

16 status for the 1997 standard.

17 At the same time that we are making a

18 request to redesignate the area to attainment for

19 the 1997 standard, we will be working on a

20 recommendation to US EPA. This recommendation is

21 due next March, which is to establish boundarie~

22 for the nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone

23 standard. We will talk about this at the

24 conclusion of the hearing. We will be seeking

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

54
1 comments from the public on what those boundaries

2 should be for the new standard.

3 I guess the policy statement that we are

4 making today is that we want to move ahead to

5 planning for attainment of the new, more stringent

6 standard. The 1997 standard has been superceded at

7 the federal level, and by moving ahead with our

8 planning we would be able to address the more

9 stringent standard.

10 The 1997 8-hour ozone standard, there

11 are others requirement in terms of new source

12 review and permitting that we would like to just

13 get behind us. One of those is actually a legacy

14 of the previous one our standard. So that we are

15 basically making the statement that the Chicago

16 area is not attaining the current ozone standard,

17 but we are moving beyond the 1997 to look at the18 2008 standard. So that is I guess the reason why

19 we are doing that, and we are trying to do it

20 simultaneously.

21 We don't want to send a signal that

22 Chicago is attaining the ozone standard, because

23 clearly we have not. But we have attained the 1997

24 standard that has being replaced by US EPA.

55

:,

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

j'i

So I will discuss the requirements of a I~

2 maintenance plan, the idea of a maintenance plan as

3 it provides for continued attainment of the air

4 quality standard for a period of at least ten years

5 after the area has been designated to attainment.

6 The idea is to prevent future violations through

7 the implementation of contingency meters that would

8 have an automatic trigger or virtually automatic

9 trigger, not requiring years of additional rule

10 making. We are required, since this is a SIP

11 submittal, to have a public hearing and that is the

12 reason for bringing it up today.

13 Let's walk through some of the elements

14 of the maintenance plan. The actual document is

15 available on our website, so this is just going to

16 discuss or this Power Point is just discussing the

17 highlights -of that plan. We need to identify what

18 is the, quote, attainment year. What is the year

19 that we actually are attaining the ozone standard.

20 The ozone standard is not really

21 attained, and the way the standard is written, it's

22 really not attained in any given year. It really

23 takes a three year period of record. And what

24 we're I guess identifyi~g 2006 as our attainment

56

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 year, it's really the first of a three year period

2 of monitored attainment; 2006, 7 and 8. So for the

3 purposes of this demonstration, we are calling 2006

4 the attainment year.

5 In terms of projecting our inventory, as

6 I mentioned before we need to show maintenance for

7 a period of at least ten years following

0.

8 redesignation. We don't really know when US EPA is

9 going to act on this submittal. So to cover our

10 bases we were really projecting out 14 years from

11 the attainment year; or in other words, out to the

12 year 2020. We will do a demonstration and

13 inventory to show that the attainment level of

14 emissions will not be exceeded in the future

15 years. At least within this period of record.

16 Then a final comment here is that we

17 will continue to operate an appropriate monitoring

18 network.

19 Some more requirements. We need to

20 maintain within the State of Illinois the legal

21 authority to implement and enforce control

22 measures. We have to provide provisions for future

23 updates of the emissions inventory to track

24 emission levels. We need to make a commitment to

57

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1

2

adopt a requirement for transportation plans that

conform. And these are all comments that we are

I

I:

Ii

I

I

3 making with this.

4 Continuing, we need to commit to submit

5 a revised plan eight years after the

6 redesignation. The idea to this is in eight years

7 we revise the plan so that we can continue to

..

8 maintain for a period of ten years following the

9 exploration of this maintenance plan. So in other

10 words, from 2020 to 2030. So that commitment is

11 contained in the plan.

12 We have to commit to enact and implement

13 contingency measures in the event that the air

.. 14 quality standard is exceeded after the area has

15 been redesignated to attainment. In other words,

16 what happens if ozone levels get worse unexpectedly

17 or what is our response to that. That is to be

18 addressed by the contingency measures, and we are

19 providing and I will go through a list of measures

20 that we are relying upon in this plan.

Ii

I

21

22

Now, first off, I think this is a

similar slide to what Scott showed earlier. To

23 qualify for redesignation obviously we need to be

24 attaining the standard. The panel on the left

58

.,<...•.. ,:

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 shows monitored design values for the period of

2 2001 through 2003. This is the data that US EPA

3 looked at in establishing the nonattainment area

4 boundaries. It's a little hard to read the values

5 there on the slide, but at least looking at the

6 color code, the red dots represent monitor

7 locations where monitored design values for that

8 period of time were above the level of the 1997

9 standard. In other words, 85 parts per billion or

10 greater.

11 The panel on the right reflects the same

12 information for the most recent three year period

13 of record, 2006 through 2008. Just comparing'

14 visually the slide on the left versus the one on

15 the right, clearly much improvement is evidenced by

16 the number of green circles that you see there.

17 These are the monitors that are below the level of

18 the design value. All the monitors in the

19 Chicagoland region and in eastern Wisconsin,

20 northern Indiana are showing attainment with the

21 air quality-standard.

22 One monitor in the Lake Michigan region

23 that is not yet showing attainment based on the

24 most recent three-year period of record is the one

59

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 located in Holland, Michigan. And as Scott Leopold

2 had testified earlier, our attainment plan does

3 address Holland, Michigan in terms of its ability

4 to attain the air quality standard. I think the

5 modeling is showing that that monitor will attain

6 no later than 2012 with measures that are contained

7 in our attainment plan. So based on this

8 monitoring data, the Chicago nonattainment area

9 qualifies for redesignation to attainment.

10 This slide is showing the changes in

11 emission levels from 2002 through 2006. What we

12 are trying to demonstrate here is we did achieve

13 attainment through the implementation of control

14 measures and not just to the vagaries of the

15 meteorology. I think in both columns for VOC and

16 NOx you can see significant emission reductions

17 within the Chicago nonattainment area from 2002

18 through 2006.

19 The control measures that provided those

20 reductions are listed here. These are the same

21 measures that we have of course relied upon in our

22 attainment demonstration. I won't repeat them all

23 here. But again, they are enforceable measures

24 that are in place that cause these emission

60

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 reductions to happen.

2 Now, in terms of demonstrating

3 maintenance after the area has been redesignated to

4 attainment, we need to project our inventory out to

5 the year 2020. And in projecting those emissions

6 we need to account for growth of various emission

7 sectors as well as the effects of control measures

8 that have been or will be impl~mented between the

9 attainme~t year and that future year projecting out

10 at least ten years or out to year 2020.

11 And these are some control measures that

12 we believe will continue to provide ECO and NOx

13 emissions out to the year 2020. The Illinois'

14 pollution standard and combined commuter

15 maintenance and the Illinois mercury control will

16 provide significant reductions in the future years,

17 not just in the nonattainment area but statewide.

18 These requirements affect the electric generating

19 units in the state. Coal-fired power plants. Our

20 NOx RACT requirements discussed earlier that has

21 not yet been -adopted by the Pollution Control

22 Board, but will provide NOx reduction in the

23 nonattainment areas after -- well, obviously after

24 the year 2006, but well before the year 2020. So

61

., '.

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 within that time period.

I

I~

2 Buzz had previously talked about the

3 aerosol coats, the architectural industrial

4 maintenance coats rule, portable fuel containers,

5 aerosol coats. Most of these are still pending

6 before the Illinois Pollution Control Board, but we

7 will provide significant DOC reductions in future

8 years.

9 The vehicle inspection and maintenance

10 program will be continued. The motor vehicle

11 control programs, the tier two, the heavy duty

12 vehicle standards, the off-road engine standards.

13 These are"all programs that will provide reduction,

14 continuing reductions in future years.

15 And then the consent decrees, I think

16 Jeff had listed those previously. Those reductions

17 are not yet ail in place, and we commented to Brian

18 that we would try to provide a better listing of

19 what the dates are of when those reductions are

20 expected. But again, all of these measures will be

21 providing emission reductions up through the year

22 2020.

23 This slide I guess depicts

24 quantitatively what we have been discussing. The

62

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

I

I~
1 chart on the top shows the emission reductions for

2 the year 2006. The chart on the bottom shows

3 emission levels for 2020. And comparing VOC and

4 NOx numbers between 2006 and 2020, you see

5 substantial reductions from the attainment year to

6 the projection year.

7 And another program that will provide

8 continued maintenance or attainment of the qual,ty

9 standard of course is the multiple pollutant

10 standards from the utility boilers. And that's

11 kind of a tabulation of what the area on that slide

12 that shows 2007 -- it should be 2020 and

13 basically the level of NOx emissions in future

14 years will be cut in half from the electric utility

15 sectors. Or at least-the coal boilers.

16 Now, in terms of the contingency measure

17 portion of the maintenance plan, what we are

18 proposing is a commitment to enact and implement

19 additional measures in the event future violation

20 of the air quality standards occurs. We have done

21 this similar to this in years past. I think what

22 has been fairly successful in the past, we have

23 identified conceptually two levels of contingency

24 levels, we call them level I and level II, and each

63

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Ill;no;s (312) 263-0052
1 of these have different triggers, if you will, in

2 terms of when these measures would be implemented.

3 It will help us determine what is the

4 appropri ate response. The i d.ea to the Jevel I are

5 measures the state would take before we actually

6 violate the air quality standard and perhaps end up

7 back in a nonattainment status. The idea is to try

8 to track emission levels and air quality levels,

9 and if we think we are getting close, try to

10 implement measures to prevent the actual violation

11 happening. I will try to talk about that in the

12 next slide here.

13 . The two triggers, the level I trigger

14 would be tracking air quality on a year-to-year

15 basis. As we have discussed, attainment or

16 nonattainment is based on three years of monitoring

17 data, but what-the IEPA asked us to do is look at

18 monitored values on a year-to-year basis, and when

19 we see a fourth high ozone concentration on any

20 . monitor in the nonattainment area exceeding 84

.,

21

22

23

24

parts per billion, which is the level of 1997

standard, that we would implement level I measures.

Also, as a trigger under level I to

review the emissions inventory on a regular basis,

64 ~j'] .

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 on an every-three-year basis and evaluate emission

2 trend. If again we see emissions trending above

3 what we have projected, what we are expecting to be

4 the level of emissions to maintain the standards,

5 then we would implement level I contingency

6 measures.

7 The level II, this is really the part

8 that is required by US EPA. This would be

9 conting~ncy measures that are implemented if the

10 air quality standard is in fact violated.

11 Now, in both level I and level II

12 contingency measures the agency will conduct an

13 analysis. We try to figure out as best we can what

14 is causing exceedences of the standard or causing

15 violation of the standard. And this lists the type

16 of things we will look at, the weather patterns,

17 the conclusiveness of the meteorology, what is the

18 emission source that we think are contributing to

19 the exceedences or the violations. Emission

20 trends, what kind of control measures can be

21 implemented, and when we think we could reasonably

22 get emission reduction from those measures. What

23 new technologies are available and what the

24 geographic applicability should be of those

65

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 measures. Should it be just within the non2 attainment area or should we consider upwind

3 control measures. So this is one of the analyses

4 that we will conduct regardless of whether it's a

5 level I or level II trigger.

6 We have I think a more complete list in

7 the document of potential contingency measures.

8 But again, these are measures that we expect will

9 provide continued emission reductions beyond the

10 attainment year. All of these programs either have

11 been or will soon be implemented or promulgate by

12 the Pollution Control Board and/or US EPA.

13 And I mentioned the various commitments

14 that are part of a maintenance plan. We are

15 committing to redo the maintenance plan eight years

16 after US EPA redesignates the area to attainment.

17 We will continue to perform emission inventory

18 updates every three years. We will continue to

19 monitor ozone levels in Illinois and we will we

20 have the authority to enforce all the same

21 requirements that are contained in our state

22 implementation plan. And again, we are committing

23 to implement contingency measures based on the

24 level I and level II triggers that I've discussed.

66 _.

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 Any questions on the maintenance plan?

2 MR. URBASZEWSKI: My memory is a little foggy

3 on the status of the one-hour ozone standard. But

4 it's correct that US EPA revoked the one-hour

5 standard?

6 MR. KALEEL: Yes.

·7 MR. URBASZEWSKI: So if we get into a similar

8 situation where the new ozone standard promulgated

9 this year goes into effect, there is potential for

10 US EPA to revoke the old 1997 ozone standard as

11 well?

12 MR. KALEEL: I think that potential exists. I

13 don't think the US EPA has issued any guidance yet

14 on how they will implement the new standard. The

15 complications that arose from the revocation of the

16 one standard, as I mentioned, is one of the reasons

17 why we're pursuing redesignation now. The

18 implementation rule that.US EPA issued subsequent

19 to the 1997 standards had been subject to legal

20 challenge. There were a number of things that the

21 US EPA told us we could do in our program that in

22 fact were taken away by the courts years later and

23 very much complicated our program.

24 So we think the best way to make a

67

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 clean break from the 1997 standards is to go ahead

2 with the redesignation at this time. And again, we

3 really don't expect the area to be attainment for

4 ozone, at least not for any great length of ~ime,

5 because of the 2008 air quality standards.

6 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Can you briefly explain in

7 the current absence of CAIR how the state is

8 dealing with" the NOx SIP CO rules to insure the

9 existing NOx reduction standpoint.

10 MR. KALEEL: The state's NOx SIP CO rules are

11 still in effect. We did not include a sunset

12 provision in Illinois's CAIR rule, so there is

13 nothing we need to do to insure the NOx SIP CO

14 stays in place. US EPA has not yet allocated

15 allowances under theNOx SIP CO, which they have to

16 do before the 2009 summer season. I think they are

17 going to wait until the last possible minute to

18 make those allocations, waiting to see what the

19 court does with the CAIR rule. There is nothing we

20 need to do to continue to implement the NOx SIP CO.

21 MR. URBASZEWSKI: That's it.

22 MR. KALEEL: Any other questions?

23 HEARING OFFICER VETTERHOFFER: Does anyone have

24 any comments they would like to make for the

68

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 record? I am not seeing anyone indicating that --

2 oh.

3 MR. URBASZEWSKI: One other real quick

4 question. We are bouncing around a lot of

5 different subjects today. But on the maintenance

6 plan there was a tape or there was a table C2 which

7 looked at 2005 Chicago nonattainment area emissions

8 that I had trouble understanding the difference

9 between tons per day and tons per year. There were

10 some situations where it was a tons per year, but

11 it was broken out by tons per day. And in others·

12 it was broken out by tons per day and tons per

13 year, but I couldn't figure out how it added up.

14 It didn't seem to make sense.

15 MS. DOCTORS: Was this in the document?

16 MR. URBASZEWSKI: It was in the --

17 MS. DOCTORS: Do you have a page number?

18 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Table C 2.

19 MR. KALEEL: I'm having trouble finding it. So

20 the comment is just clarifying the tons per day and

21 tons per year?

22 MR. URBASZEWSKI: And how tons per year, what

23 developed from tons per day or vice versa. It just

24 wasn't clear how the numbers matched up. There is

69

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 no explanation for the table really.

2 MR. KALEEL: I think what we will do is take a

3 look at that table and see if we can clarify how

4 it's presented and what we are trying to say or how

5 we relied upon that information.

6 MR. URBASZEWSKI: Okay.

7 MR. KALEEL: Thank you.

8 MR. URBASZEWSKI: That's it.

9 HEARING OFFICER VETTERHOFFER: Does anyone have

10 any other questions or comments? I don't see

11 anybody indicating that they wish to make any

12 comment or ask additional questions.

13 I would like to remind everyone that if

14 you decide after this hearing that you have some

15 comment you would like to make that you didn't

16 think of today, you can send that in as a written

17 comment. Agai n, -the comment peri ad, for the

18 record, in this matter closes on January 15, 2009.

19 Any written comments must be postmarked before

20 midnight on that day and sent to me to be accepted

21 as part of the record.

22 Copies of the transcripts of this

23 hearing will be made available on the Illinois

24 EPA's website as soon as we obtain a copy from the

70

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 court reporter and have it posted on the Illinois

2 EPA website. The website address is

3 www.epa.state.il.us.

4 Any of the copies of the drafts

5 identified today are available on request. All of

6 the Exhibits that we have used are also available

7 off of the Illinois EPA website.

8 The time is now approximately 10:45 a.m.

9 Seeing that there are no other members of the

10 public with questions or comments,we will now

11 adjourn this hearing. I would like to thank

12 everyone for their participation.

13 (Which were all the proceedings

14 heard or offered at the hearing

15 of said cause.)

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

71

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
1 STATE OF ILLINOIS

2

3 COUNTY OF COO K

4

)

) SS:

)

5 April T. Hansen, being first duly sworn

6 on oath, says that she is a court reporter doing

7 business in the City of Chicago, and that she

8 reported in shorthand the proceedings of said

9 hearing, and that the foregoing is a true and

10 correct transcript of her shorthand notes so taken

11 as aforesaid, and contains the excerpts of

12 proceedings given at said hearing.

13

14

15

16

+L/cd~ Certified Shorthand Reporter

20

19 of~\

17

18

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO

Before me this day

2009.

"OFFICIAL SEAL"

MELISSA ALLEGRETTI

Nutary Public. SI,lIc uf lIIinuis

My l'ull\lllis.~iun Exp, ()312.UI20 12

21

22 ~"~'~9te ~.

23 Notary Public

24

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052

72
1

A activity agency allocate 7:22

abil i ty 19:5 1: 9 3: 6 17: 11 appl i cab ... 60:3 actual 5:15 6:10 allocated 65:24

able 8:2 11 :11 6:21 10: 17 68: 14 applicable

31 : 13 48: 21 11 : 19 26: 1 54: 7 65: 12 allocating 7: 11 19: 18

49: 12 55: 8 26: 4,14 agency's 17:6 19: 23

absence 27: 14 35: 8 7:24 8:3 allocation applies

31 :4,12 35: 14 50:20 17: 15 17: 12

68:7 56: 14 aggregate allocations apply

accept 64: 10 20: 16 68: 18 19:20 26:4

6: 16 add ago allow appreciate

acceptable 31 : 19 12: 4 29: 10 6:2 41 :16 31 : 11

31 :16 added 49:2 allowable appropriate

accepted 31 : 8 42: 10 ahead 24:6 57: 17 64:4

70:20 69: 13 9: 2 27: 1 allowances approved addition 40:6 47:21 68: 15 51 :3 "

accessed

4:23 21 : 18 47:22 55:4 allowed approxi m... account additional 55:7 68:1 45:5 4: 17 21: 13

17: 16 37: 8 21 : 21 27:22 AIM allowing 22: 12 71 :8

42: 9,11 ,16 28:2 30:8 22: 13 42:21 April

43: 12 45:4 ,50: 10 56: 9 air allows 72:5

61:6 63: 19 3:15 4:7,8 17: 15 ara

accounted 70: 12 8:10,14,14 alternate 53:8

32:21 33: 1 address 8: 18 9: 20 13: 11 architec ... 42: 13 6: 1 ,19 55: 8 9:22 10:5 Alton 22:9 44: 10

53: 15 60:3 71:2 11:3 13:2 47: 1 62:3

accounting addressed 14: 1 16: 15 ambient area

37: 11 44: 14 23: 15 30: 7 16:24 3:15,21 1 : 11 4:3

accurate 58: 18 17: 20 18: 1 Amendment 10:7,24

32:2 addresses 18: 13 21 :12 12: 3,21

achieve 25: 1 21 : 12 22: 6 Amendments 15:16,19

49: 18,19 adjourn 28:3,9 51 :2 17: 9 27: 13

60: 12 71 : 11 39: 11 ,15 amount 28:22

acquiring adjustments 40:5 48:2 26:9 32: 18 29: 16 39:4

24: 11 18: 10 20: 1 48:8 49:1 analyses 40: 17

acronym ADM 49: 16 11:7 28:6 41 : 14,20

15: 12 35:20,24 50:20 51:1 28:24 29:3 ' 42; 5,6, i 4

acronyms 36: 15,18 51 :4,19,'24 29:5 30:3 43: 13 44: 1

14: 11 admi ni st ... 56: 3 58: 13 47:13 66:3 44:8 45:22

act 7:3 59: 21 60:4 analysis 46: 14, 18

4:7,9 9:20 adopt 63:20 64:6 27:22 28:1 46:24 47:1

9:22 10:5 49:7 58:1 64: 8,14 30: 13 48:7 49:11

21 :12 48: 2 adopted 65: 10 68: 5 65: 13 49: 16

48: 8 49: 1 48: 8 50: 1 aircraft and/or 51: 14

49: 16 51: 1 61 : 21 43: 10 66:12 52: 10,21

57:9 aerosol airport annual 53: 7 54: 13

action 22: 8,13 38: 1 43: 16 52:7,12 54: 15, 18

48 :21 49: 13 62:3,5 43: 17 answer 54:22

49:23,23 affect airports 6: 10 32: 7 55: 16 56: 5

activities 46: 19 61: 18 14:6 15:16 anybody 58: 14 59: 3

51 :19 aforesaid ALEC 54:4 70:11 60: 8,17

72:11 2: 16 appendices 61 :3,17

-...

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
63:11

64:20 66:2

66: 16 68: 3

69:7

areas

4:14 10:19

12: 14 25: 2

35: 5 42: 1

53:9 61:23

area-wide

52:7

arose

67: 15

asked

64: 17

Asselmeir

2:12' 8:19

8: 19 40: 11

40: 12

assess

39:11

assessing

18: 17

assessment

13: 17 18: 20

Association

30: 15

assume

46:11

assumed

20: 4 30: 18

assumptions

33:9 51 :23

52: 1 53: 18

assurance

17:23 18:7

31 : 15

Atlantic

12: 10

attain

9: 18 60: 4,5

attained

55: 23 56:21

56:22

attaining

3: 18 55: 16

55:22

56: 19

58:24

I attai nment

1:73:17

4:3 7:21

9:12,14,17

10:1,7,14

10:22

26:24 27:4

27: 12,16

28: 12,14

28: 21 29: 1

30: 4, 12

39: 15,15

41:144:,5

46: 3,19,24

48: 19

49:20,20

50: 5,7,10

51:11,21,

53:21 54:8

54: 13,15

54: 18 55: 5

56: 3,5,18

56:24 57:2

57: 4,11 ,13

58: 15

59:20,23

60:2,7,9

60: 13,22

61 :4,9

63:5,8

64: 15 66: 2

66: 10,16

68:3

attempt

6: 10 34: 6

ATTENDEES

2: 1

attention

6: 19

atto,"ney

8: 12

authority

57:21 66:20

automatic

56:8,8

availabl e

6:9 9:4

10:4 47:23

56: 15

65:23

70:23 71:5

71 :6

Avenue

6:22

average

14: 23 37: 16

38: 2,12

39: 17,17

52: 8,14

aware

24:23

a.m

1 :15 71: 8

B

back

9:4 26:23

27: 3 32: 13

64:7

background

7:4

bar

14:19 16:8

barely

27:9

bars

20:11

base

9:21 11:24

13:5,11,13

13: 14,20

13:23

14:17 16:1

18:23 19:5

20: 5,13,13

20:23 21:3

21:5 22:2

26: 6,11 ,15

26:23 27:1

-31:8 37:8

41 :4,5,22

52:5

basecase

15:5 33:3

based

3: 21 19: 6

21 : 16

39: 12

41:22 42:6

45: 15

51 :24 53:8

59:23 60:7

64: 16

66:23

baseline

53: 1

bases

57: 10

basically

27: 8 55: 15

63: 13

basin

12: 15 28: 13

28 :21

basis

15:10 17:17

17: 17

20: 19

47:17

64:15,18

64:24 65:1

behaving

26: 17

believe

9:24 25:21

45:23

61 :12

believing

45: 19

benefit

7:3 21:6

benefits

22: 1 53: 13

best

39: 10 47: 18

65: 13

67:24

better

31:17 36:8

36: 14

62 :18

beyond

50'2,11

f :17 66:9

r"mnial

:3 I

('t g

44:6

BILL

2: 18

bill ion

26: 15 59: 9

64:21

biodiesel

42 :12

biogenic

20:3 '

bit

9:6 16:4

2

30: 10

42: 18

43:23,23

44:22

block

32: 15

Board

4:24 35: 3,7

49:4,8

61:22 62:6

66: 12

BOB

2: 17

body

7: 12 40: 19

boiler

21 :10,18

25: 19

boilers

25: 5 63:10

63: 15

books

19:20

boom

42:11

border

29: 15

bottom

15:7,9 63:2

bouncing

69:4

boundaries

54:21 55:1

59:4

boundary

4: 14

bounds Ii

18: 3 ;;

Box

6:22

b k ~;

rea !:

68: 1 :,

breakout g

"

20:20 ::

breakouts

16: 8 :~

breaks

14: 22 15: 10

38:8 ',:

Brian .':;

2: 13 30: 14,

46: 4 62: 17

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
brief

5:11

briefly

5:7 68:6

bringing

56: 12

broken

69: 11,12

Brooks

2:9 8:13,13

BTU

21 : 18 25: 10

bUdget

4:551 :9,17

bUdgets

50:24 51:20

53: 22 54: 1

built

46: 12, 17,23

bullet

13: 22,24

20: 3 23: 13

bump

42:22

bumped

34: 17

bunch

40: 18

Bureau

8: 14 50:20

busi nesS

72:7

Buzz

8:20 62:2

C

C

69: 18 72: 3

CAIR

19: 16 27: 2

27:2,6,7

27: 10,11

28:3 33:9

68: 7,12,19

Calculating

45:3

calculation

45: 11

calculat ... 16: 19

call

29: 16 40: 16

41 : 1 42: 2

43:8 63:24

called

16:18 17:10

19:4 26:8

27:21 43:4

calling

57:3

calls

28:5

Canada

12:22 32:3

Canadian

20:4 30: 19

30:24 31:3

31:21

Canadians

31 : 16

cap

23 :4,19

42: 19,22

42:24 43: 1

51 : 17 53: 5

capita

22 :12 , 13 , 14

captured

24: 15

carbon

24: 17

case

13: 11 15: 20

17: 19

18:19 19:3

25:11 43:2

45:7

categories

19 :21

cause

60: 24 71: 15

causing

65: 14, 14

cells

17:8,12

cement

21 :22 25:5

25:11

certain

24:8 32: 10

34:20

35: 17 42: 4

45:5

certainly

28:22 29:6

37:21

38:20

41: 13

42: 15

43: 13

44:24

Certified

72: 15

challenge

67:20

change

26:3,9

33:20 37:2

changes

20:5 46:9

60: 10

chart

63:1,2

check

36:22 43: 16

checked

42:23

checks

17:24

chemical

9: 15

Chicago

1:7,11,18

10:6,23

13: 12

28:22

29: 16, 17

30: 16

37:21

41:20

42: 14, 18

43: 13, 16-

43: 17 44: 1

44:4 45:22

46: 14,23

48:7 51 :11

51 : 14 52: 9

52:21 53:8

53:20

54: 12, 15

55: 15,22

60: 8,17

69:7 72:7

Chicagoland

59: 19

Chi waukee

29: 14 30: 1

chopped

15 :2

CHRIS

2: 15

Chu

29:9

ci rcl es

59 :16

citing

36:4

City

72:7

clarify

70:3

cl ari fyi ng

69:20

clean

4: 7,8 9:20

9:22 10:5

21 :12 27:8

48:2,8

49 :1,16

51 :1 68: 1

cleaners

40:18

clear

69:24

clearly

7: 13 28: 12

55:23

59:15

click

47:21

climate

33:20

clinker

25:14

close

5: 21 6: 12

6: 15 27: 18

37:15

45:18 64:9

closed

32:10

closer

20:9

closes

70:18

clustered

47:2

coal

3

63: 15

Coal-fired

61 :19

coast

12: 12

coating

40: 19 44: 10

coatings

22: 8,9, 13

22: 14, 15

coats

62:3,4,5

code

4:9 59:6

codified

4:9

color

59:6

colors

28:11

columns

60: 15

combination !J

41 :12 ,;

~;l combined "

;~ 61: 14 .";:,;,)

combining "i

26 :12 53: 18 $

combustion

25: 17 34: 4

34:7,9

15 come

27:24 44:9

comfortable

31 :4, 14 ~1 coming z

~l

3: 7 26:2 ' ~

43:24

::; 44: 15 f!

comment

5: 13 t 15 t 21 )

6: 13 39: 1 :l

39:20

57: 16 t~ 69:20 ,

i~ ~: ,~ commented

62: 17 :)

comments

3 : 14, 17, 24 "

4:13 5:13 j

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
5: 14, 18 ,19 camp1i ca ... 5:24 6:2 67:15

6:16,23 component

37:19 14:6

47: 18 55: 1 compound

58:2 68:24 51 :14

70: 10,19 compounds

71 :10 17: 19

commercial compression

14: 7 15: 15 24: 1

43:10 comprise

commit 28:2

58:4,12 comprising

commitment 28:6

49:6,9 computer

57:24 41 :23 43:4

58 :10 concentr ... 63:18 64:19

commitments CONCEPT

66 :13 14 :11 17: 4

committing conceptu ... 66:15,22 63:23'

commuter concerns

61 :14 31:2

companies conclude

24:4 42:21 4:12

compare concludes

26: 18 54: 3

compared conclusion

53:1 4:10 27:23

comparing 54:24

59:13 63:3 conclusi ... compiling 65:17

40:13 conduct

complete 65:12 66:4

20: 18 34: 24 conform

36: 9, 48: 18 I 51 :4 58: 2

48:20 conformity

49:12 66:6 9:20 50:17

completed 50:22 51:6

48:22 49:13 51:18

completely confused

29:22 34:3 36:16

complex conscious

11 :10 ,14 36 :2

17: 18 consent

compliance 24:3,12,16

34:24 35:20 24:20 35:9

35:22 35:16 36:4

44: 15 42: 16

complicated 62:15

67:23 conserva ...

44:23

consider

37: 14 66: 2

consider ... 31 :1

consider ... 19:12,13

41: 16

45:21

considered

40:2,3

48:20

considering

27: 10,11

consistent

51 :22

consi ste ... 38:6

Consortium

11:4 14:1

constant

20:5 30:20

31 :8

CONSTAUT ... 2: 18

consumer

22: 10,14

40: 19

44: 11

contain

4:451:13

contained

49:1 58:11

60:6 66:21

container

22: 16

containers

22: 18 62: 4

contains

3:18 4:1

72: 11

contested

5:6

contingency

49: 15, 21

50: 15 56: 7

58: 13,18

63: 16,23

65: 5,9,12

66:7,23

continue

57:17 58:7

61 :12

66:17,'18

68:20

continued

56: 3 62: 10

63:8 66:9

continuing

50:858:4

62:14

contractors

14:2

contribute

11 :3

contributed

13:19 14:3

15: 11

contributes

27:23 32: 14

contri bu ... 15: 2 22: 5

65: 18

contri bu ... 15:23

control

4: 24 9: 16

10:4 21 :22

24:14,18

29: 16 30:8

35:3,7

45: 8,16

47:23

48: 15 49:4

51:23 52:3

52: 17

53: 14

57:21

60: 13,19

61:7,11,15

61:21 62:6

62: 11

65:20 66:3

66: 12

controls

19:8,10,18

19: 19 21: 9

21 :11 ,21

23:22 24:8

24: 11

26:23 27:6

27: 7,10

35: 14,24

36: 1 53: 15

conversion

37:9

Cook

53:9

cool

38:8

cooling

32: 14

coordinate

31:22

coordinates

17: 8

coordina ... 13: 15

copies

4:22 70:22

71 :4

copy

7: 19, 21,23

8:1,4

70:24

corner

46: 12

Corporation

24:7

correct

67:4 72: 10

corrected

37: 1

corrections

18:9,11

correctly

26: 17

cost

19: 13

counsel

8: 12

counties

10:23,24

53: 10,11

country

12: 19

county

17: 11 52: 9

72:3

couple

11:9 34:3

34: 18 41: 7

49:2

course

13:13,21

18: 9 20: 18

4

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263·0052
20:21

24: 14

26:17 33:5

39:2 41 :6

60:21 63:9

court

4:19 7:1,7

7:14 19: 23

68: 19 71: 1

72:6

courts

24:5 67:22

cover

12:3,5 57:9

covered

9: 10

covering

34:7

Cox

29:9

credit

45:6,9

credits

44: 16

critical

30:1 38:14

crude

18:20

CTGs

48: 15,17

curiosity

46:5

current

24: 23 34 :14

55: 16 68: 7

currently

24:9

cut

63: 14

C-h-u

29:9

C-o-x

29:9

C2

69:6

o

dampen

39: 10

Dana'

2:3 3:4

6: 20 9: 10

10:6

data

3: 21 6: 19

8: 21 11: 7

11 :19 12:2

12:5 13:23

18:2,2,13

19: 5 28: 17

32:2 39:7

40:20 41:5

41 :23 52:5

59:2 60:8

64: 17

database

31:3

date

6: 17 44: 5

47: 14

49:20

dates

35 :12, 17,20

35:23

62:19

David

2:12 8:19

40: 12

DAVIS

2: 16

day

22: 19 44: 1

45: 14,17

53:22,23

54:1 69:9

69: 11 ,12

69:20,23

70:20

72: 18

days

37:24 38:5

38: 11 ,15

38:21

day-of-t ... 17: 16

deadline

30:5 35:1

deal

39:4

dealing

35: 4 41: 19

50:21 68:8

decades

12 :.4

December

1:14 4:17

decide

70: 14

decision

36:2

decree

24:21 36:5

decrees

24: 4,12,16

35: 9,17

62: 15

deep

28:11

defies

31 : 12

degree

37: 24 38: 11

38: 15,21

degrees'

42: 16

DEMEDOURAS

2: 15

demonstrate

18:7 30:4

50:7 51:5

60: 12

demonstr. , . 61:2

demonstr, . , 1:7 3:17

7: 22 9: 12

9:15,17

10:1,3,14

10:22

13: 12

2'7:22

30: 12

33:24

40:24 46:2

46: 3 48: 19

49: 17 50: 5

51 :12,22

53:21 54:8

~57:3,12

60:22

Department

52:6

depending

25: 16

depicts

62:23

described

36:13 54:9

description

36: 18

descri pt .. , 35: 16

design

26:4,5,6,7

28:10

29:19,24

59:1 ,7,18

designated

3:7 10:20

56:5

detai 1

36: 12 43: 24

45:12 '

determine

64:3

determined

51 :4

determi ni ng

38: 15 39: 14

51 :18

develop

13:5

developed

11 :24 51 :22

52:4 69:23

developing

13: 20 19: 1

development

11 :18 50:22

diagnostics

28:5 53:3

diagram

14: 22 15: 9

15:23

di al og

6:3

di esel

23:8,9,11

23: 14,14

difference

27:6 69:8

different

11 :9 25: 9

25: 16 29: 5

34:18

42:18 43:5

43: 11

45: 16 64: 1

5

69:5

difficult

32:2

difficulty

30:23

dim

9:5

direct

5:22 24:5

36:6

Directors

11:4 14:1

discernible

16:8

discuss

10: 3 56: 1

56: 16

discussed

51:12'61:20

64: 15 " 66: 24

di scussi ng '1

10: 11 56: 16

62: 24

discussion

4: 11 9: 21 "

10: 4 40: 7

disti ncti on'1

16:16 4

~< distribu.,. i

19:13 f!

division

8:12,16

DOC

37:2 62:7

DOCTOR

8: 11

Doctors

2:8 8:11

69: 15,17

document

9: 23 14: 21

29:1,2,8

34:2 35:9

35: 14 37: 4

45: 12 54: 8

56: 14 66: 7

69: 15

documents

4:4 6:18

7:18 41 :18

43: 14

McCorkle Court Reporters. Inc,

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
6

48: 15 ECO 16:12,12 52:17,24 4:3,5,12 doing 61 : 12 16: 17,20 53: 13,14 5:3,6,9,23 16:22 17: 3 economic 19: 14 20: 1 53: 16,22 6:7 8 :6,18 17:5,22 42:6 46:8 20: 19 21 :8 53:24 8:23 9:24

55: 19 72:6 effect 21 : 11 22:6 57:14,23 11 :2,9 dominate 29:22 33:9 23: 18 25:8 61:5,13 13:9 27:20

15: 19 34:5 46: 16 25: 15 63 :13 28:5 29:8 dots "

49:21 53:2 29: 13 64:24 65:2 39:2 40:24

59:6 67:9 68: 11 31 :21 65:4 69:7 41 :11 43:3 ~~ downward effective 41 :22 50:2 emitted 43:8 44:3

29: 18,24 23:5,6 50:8 53: 19 11 : 12 44:16 'i;

;y draft effects 57:24 emitting 48: 14, 19

3: 17,24 29:11 61 :7 60: 11 ,16 21 :17 25:3 48:21,23 ~;?"i

drafts efficiency 60:24 61 :6 employment 49: 6, 7 ,12 }~

71:4 21:23 62 :21 63: 1 42:7 53 :17 driving effort 63:3 64:8 EMS 54: 15,20

3:

32:20' 6: 1 31 : 1 ,20 65: 1 ,18,19 14: 11 17:4 55:24 57:8 ". dry efforts 65:22 66:9 EMV 59:2 65:8 r

40: 18 33:20 66: 17. I 20: 1 66: 12,16 ,

due EGAS emissions enact 67: 4, 10,13 ;<; 21: 12 29:20 19:4 9:21 11 : 11 58: 12 63: 18 67:18,21 R

54:21 EGUs 13:8 14:23 ends 68: 14 71 :2 "

e

duly 15: 12 20:23 15:3,4,15 5: 16 71 :7

72:5 34: 11 15:15,17 enforce EPA's

DuPage eight 15: 19 57: 21 66:20 7:16,21 ~~

53:9 25: 12 58:5" 16:16,21 enforceable 10: 1 28:3 i

duties 58:6 66: 15 17:2,2,6,9 60:23 70:24 ~'(

11 : 1 either 17:11,13 engage equal -1 duty 25: 10 38: 18 17:23 6:3 51:8 ~\

~;.:

.~' 23:1,2,8 66: 10 18:17,19 engine- equipment 53:4,6 electric 19:6,9 24:2 34: 19 24:8 ii

';l

~.' 62:11 19: 12 61 : 18 20: 4,4,1 0 62: 12 ERIC ~~

"

~~ DYNEGY 63: 14 21 :2 22:2 engines 2: 14 'i

f·;

j;,'

24:6 35: 10 el ectri cal 22: 18,21 21 :23 23:9 ERMS ~:

1 35: 13 15: 12,14 22:24 24:6 23: 14 34:4 42:20 43: 1

36: 12 21 :16 25:4 24: 17,17 34: 7 ,1 0 ,20 ;~ error

element 24:18,22 34:23 35:4 31:8,18 E 1 14: 5 46:2 26: 13 enhanced errors ;~

earlier 47: 18 30: 18,19 13: 16 18:8 .'

'" 48:11 58:22 54: 14 30: 19 32:2 entered escapes ,~ 60:2 61 :20 elements 33: 5,12 24:4 47:6 ;,; easily 13:23 47: 15 35:23 entities especially ii

15:22 45:20 56: 13 36: 17 ,20 13: 19 44:3 east eliminate 40: 14,22 entrance essentially . ~

6:22 ~2 12: 10 29:23 31 :7 41 : 11 42:3 6:5 16: 14 25: 13 ..

.'1 12:11,12 eliminating 42:20 Envi ronm ... 31 :6 {!

.,

28:20 47: 1 31 : 17 43:24 44: 1 1 :9 3:6 establish eastern ELVERT 46: 16 6:21 10: 16 51 : 17 54:21 12:6,19 2: 17 47: 16 50:19 established

59: 19 emission 50:24 51 :6 EPA' 4: 15 39:6

easy 4:5 14:3,12 51:9,16,16 3:13,16,19 51 :10 45:4 14: 15 51 :20 52:2 3:20,23 establ is...

.."" ,

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
7

.... ....... ,. .. "."',,

64: 19

four-year

53: 12

frames

23:7

free

32:7

fuel

22: 16,18

23:9 52:23

53: 1 ,15

62:4

full

19: 13

fully

23:4,6,6

31 :11 ,24

function ;

• 25:9 ~.

fundamental;

16: 19 30: 2 i

Fundamen ... 13 :4

funded

51 :3

furnace

25:20

furnaces

25:6

further

10:2 16:4

41: 2 45: 1

45: 15

49: 19.) 22 g

52: 12

, fut.ure

12:1 13:8 j

13:21 19:1 "

19:2,6,9 l

19: 10 20: 2,

20:6,9,24

21 : 5 26: 10 J

26:21 27:3 "

31:5,13

33:4,5

37:7 43: 19 l

43'211

47~ 12 50: 9

56: 6 57: 14\

57:22 61:9

61:16 62:7 k

62: 14

12: 13

finished

49:8

fi rst

3:16 5:8

16: 18

20: 11

21 :10

40:23 57:1

58:21 72:5

fit

36:20

five

14: 23 20: 17

fleet

52: 1

focus

12: 10 40: 16

foggy

67:2

followed

38:8

foll owing

5:12 6:7,19

57:7- 58:8

forecast

26:6

foregoing

72:9

forgetting

34:24

form

25: 15 33: 10

39:6

formation

32: 13,21

33:14

46: 16

formed

12:4

forming

32:16 41 :10

forward

30:20 33:8

33: 11,16

46:9

found

4:21 27:5

foundation

13: 7 18 :24

fourth

39: 9,13

factor

26:9

factoring

30: 18

factors

19:3 42:2,2

42: 8,10,15

53: 16

fail

49: 18,19

fair

47: 10

fai rl y

45:3 63:22

famil i ar

11 : 16 32: 5

far

47:4

Fed

31:23

federal

4:7 19:19

22:3,23

23:23 45:7

46: 9,10

50:1 51:4

55:7

feel

15:1 16:9

32:7

feeling

31:4

felt

13: 16

fewer

38:21

figure

32: 11 46: 15

65: 13

69: 13

final

19:9 26:22

37: 12

48:21

~9: 13

57: 16

finally

4:10 10:6

26: 14

finding

69: 19

finest

F

facilities

19:24 25:7

35:24

fact

65: 10 67:22

excluded

34: 12

exercise

9:15 47:8

exhaust

53:5

Exhibit

7: 19,20,23

8: 1

Exhibits

7:18 8:4

71 :6

exi sting

68:9

exists

67: 12

expansion

43: 14

expect

44:17,22,24

46: 17

48:20 66:8

68:3

expected

62:20

expecting

65:3

expended

31 : 1

experience

39: 10

explain

5:7 68:6

explanation

70: 1

explicitly

26:3

exploration

58:9

extractable

15:22

extracted

14:20

extremely

38:8

4: 14 59: 3

estimate

47:11

estimated

52: 12

estimates

14:3 16:17

16:21,22

18: 23 19: 1

19:2,14

51 : 13

ethanol

24:20 42:12

46:6,7,11

46:22

evaluate

65: 1

evaporation

22: 17

Evaporative

23:23

event

58: 13 63: 19

everybody

3:2

every-th ... 65: 1

evidence

27:21 28:1

evidenced

59: 15

exact

34:24

exactly

39:23

example

12:7 28:3,8

28: 23 38: 1

45:6

exceeded

57: 14 58: 14

exceedences

38: 15,22

65: 14,19

exceeding

64:20

exception

47:4

excerpt

29:7

excerpts

72:11

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
I 63: 13,19

G

gall on

22: 19

garden

43:7

gas

23:3 53:5

gasoline

22: 22 52: 18

52:20 53:5

53:7

gathering

3: 13

general

5 :24 7:.4

15: 1 43: 22

generate

14:13 16:17

18:4

generated

14:18,19

18: 1 53: 16

generating

15:12,14

21 : 16 25: 5

61 : 18

generation

19: 12

geographic

65:24

getting

36:7 40:6

64:9

give

5:11 16:9

41:7

given

56: 22 72: 12

glass

25: 12, 14,20

global

32: 14

go

3:3 8:20

9:2 11 :18

17: 14

26:23

35: 12,15

36: 3 41: 10

42:4 44:5

45:2 47:21

58: 19 68: 1

goes

12:8 33:9

44:2 67:9

going

5:8,11 9:7

17:5 30:20

32:9,9,20

33: 8,10,16

34: 19

35: 12,15

35:18 37:5

42:4,24

45:13 46:9

46: 12, 18

50: 16 54:7

56: 15 57: 9

68:·17

good

3:4 10:15

29:24

50: 18

government

31:20,21

32:1,1

governme ... 7: 12 .

grace

53: 12

gram

53: 19

grams

22:19

Grand

6:21

graphic

18: 15

great

6:6 13:18

13: 19 30: 3

32:22 68:4

greater

25:3 50:9

59: 10

greatest

17: 1

green

59: 16

grid

12:11,11,13

12:13,16

12:17 17:8

17: 12

gross

30: 18

ground

32 : 16 , 17 , 19

group

11:5 17:20

40:21

grouping

17: 18

groups

40: 15

grow

41:24 42:22

growth

19: 3,7 42: 2

42: 2 ,8, 10

42: 11, 15

42: 17 43: 2

52: 7 ,13

61:6

guess

40:11 55:3

55 :18

56:24

62:23

guidance

13: 9 44: 16

48: 15

67: 13

guts

32:6

guys

43~20

H

half

12:6,19

63: 14

handle

17: 21

Hansen

72:5

happen

35:18 61:1

happened

37:9 39:23

happening

64:11

happens

38:7 58:16

happy

47: 17

hard

59:4

hazardous

22:6

Health

30: 15

hear

5:9

heard

41 :8,21

71: 14

hearing

1:10 2:4

3:1,8,9,12

4:7,12,18

4:19 5:2,3

5:6,8,14

6: 7,12,20

7:20 9:1

54:4,10,24

56: 11

68:23 70:9

70: 14,23

71 : 11 ,14

72: 9,12

hearings

4: 21

heat

25: 10

heater

25: 19

heaters

25:5

heavy

23:8 53:6

62: 11

held

4: 18

help

48: 12 64: 3

hel pful

5:20

helps

32:13

high

38:6 39:9

39: 13

64:19

higher

38:13

8

highlights

56: 17

hired

14:2

histogram

14:20

histograms

16:9

historie ... 29: 15

history

48:6

hold

9:8

Holland

27 : 9 28: 19 \1

60:1,3

honestly

39: 19

host

18:3 22:4

25: 1

hot

38:8

hour-of- . .. 17:17 <~ hundred ':j

'd 25:3 (j

hydrocar ... 22: 19 ;

I ---=---- !!

idea

39:9 56:2,6

58:6 64:4

64:7,

i dent i fi . " g

18: 9 -,; identified

14:4 34:21

63:23 71:5

identify

56: 17

identifying

56:24

idle

53:5

IEPA

35: 3 64: 17

ignition

23:24 24:1

II

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago. Illinois (312) 263-0052
52:22 implicat ... 63:24 65:7 33:14

65:11 66:5 importance

66 :24 17: 1 39: 3

Illinois important

1 :9 ,18 3: 5 18 :23 24: 19

3: 13, 16 , 19 38: 19 , 24

3:23 4:5 improvement

4:12,19,21 51:8 59:15

4:24 5:3,5 improvem ... 5:9,23 6:7· 18:12

6:20,22 include

7: 16,21 42: 17 43: 9

8 : 6 ,18 , 23 49 :17

10:16,20 68:11

11:2 15:23 included

16:11 21:7 15:24 19:.11

24:24 20:1,14

27:14,15 25:4 28:22

46:13 48:6 29:3 43:21

49:4,11 44:18 47:7

50:19 52:5 includes

57:20 9:14,14

61:13,15 53:9,11

62:6 66:19 including

70:23 71:1 7:22 9:16

71:7 72:1 24:16 27:6

Illinois's 27:7

68: 12 i ncorpor ... impact, 33:16 46:6

24:5 increase

implement 37:5 46:10

14:10 57:21 increasing

58: 12 32: 18

63:18 Indiana

64:10,22 59:20

65:5 66:23 indicate

67: 14 38: 3

68:20 indicated

implemen... 13:22 16:23

1 : 10 50: 23 22: 11

51 :5,7 23:17

54:11 56:7 30:19 37:4

60:13 indicating

66:22 18:2 69:1

67:18 70:11

implemented individual

19 : 17 21 :24 14 :24 16 : 10

34: 5 49: 18 17: 11 21: 8

61:8 64:2 industrial

65:9,21 22:9 42:5

66:11 62:3

industries

42:9

industry

40: 17 44: 13

information

5:4,5 29:4

36:6,9

59: 12 70: 5

informat ... 4:20

informative

5:2

initially

27: 1

input

25: 11

inside

12:17 41 :14

inspection

22:20 36:23

52: 19 62:9

installa ... 24:7

instance

24: 10

insure

26: 19 68: 8

68: 13

integrated

19: 11

intend

49:5

intends

3:20

intercha ... 48:4

interest

12:14

interested

29:5 36:7

internal

34:4,7,9

intrinsic

17:24

i IQ;troduce

8:7

introduced

12: 24 23: 18

i ntroduc ... 9: 11 54: 7

inventories

12:2 13:14

13: 21

31 :21 37:7

40 :14

45 :16

inventory

8:21 9:22

9: 23 12: 1

12:1 13:6

13: 10,20

13:24

14:14,15

14: 17

16:13 18:5

18:10,12

19:9 30:24

31:5,14

36 :23 37: 1

37:8,9

41 :4,22,24

43:21 46:7

47:17 57:5

57: 13,23

61 :4 64:24

66 :17

inventor ... 11 : 23

i nvol ved

31 :24 34: 14

iron

25:6

issue

33:21

issued

44: 16 48: 14

67:13,18

issues

5: 18 31: 22

50:21

iterative

18: 11

IV

21 :11

11M.

52:20 53:2

J

J

2:7

January

5:16 6:15

70:18

Jeff'

11 :23 13: 1

30: 17 41: 9

46:20

47:22

62: 16

Jeffrey

2:6 8:22

job

36:8,9

Jul y

18: 19 38: 2

38: 5,10,13

June

23 :12 , 19 ,20

K

K

72:3

Kaleel

2:7 8:9,9

8:24 9:2

30: 10

31: 19

33: 17

34: 13, 18

36: 8,14

37:7,17

39: 1, 19,24

40:10 46: 1

46:20 47:7

47:10,21

54:6 67:6

67: 12

68: 10,22

69: 19 70: 2

70:7

Kane

53: 10

keep

7:4 14:18

31:8

Kendall

53: 10

kilns

21 :22 25:6

25: 6,11,12

kilometer

12:11,13

kilometers

12: 18 ,20

41:17,18

kind

9

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
I 28:24 29:5

31 : 11 ,22

35: 21

36: 16 38: 9

40:6 44:4

48: 4 63: 11

65:20

know

37: 18 39: 20

47:7,11

57:8

L

LADeo

11 : 3 14: 23

20: 17 29: 2

31 :24

Lake

11:3 12:14

14: 1 27: 12

28: 13,20

28:20

53: 10

59:22

large

23:23 34:20

largely

14:7

lastly

14:9 15:16

17: 18

19:23

23:16,21

24:20

lawn

43:7

lead

38:9,21

leave

40:8

left

15:6,7

20: 10

29: 12

58:24

59: 14

1egacy

55: 13

legal

8:12 57:20

67: 19

legislative

4:20

1ength

68:4

1engthy

5: 19 35 :22

36:3

Leopold

2:11· 8:17

8:17 10:13

10:15,16

25:23

32:24

37:20

38: 17

39:22 60:1

Let's

56: 13

1evel

16: 15,24

17: 11

32: 17 52: 1

52:4,8,12

52: 15 55: 7

57: 13 59: 8

59: 17

63: 13,24

63:2464:4

64:13,21

64:22,23

65:4,5,7

65: 11 ,11

66:5,5,24

66:24

1evel s

21 : 14 39: 3

51 : 16 . 57:24

58: 16

60:11 63:3

63:23,24

64:8,8

66: 19

life

27:11

light

23: 1 53: 4

lights

9:5

1i kewi se

15:7

1i me

25: 6,12

1i mi t

22: 17 25: 11

43: 1

1i mi tati ons

25: 16

1i mi ts

21 : 19,19

25:8

1i st

35 : 11 , 17 , 22

50: 3,12

58: 19 66: 6

listed

24:21 27:15

60:20

62: 16

listing

9: 16 24: 13

35:9 36:3

62: 18

lists

65: 15

1i ttl e

9:6 16:4

30: 10

36: 12

40: 18

42: 18

43:23,23

44:22

45:11

47:15 59:4

67:2

local

52: 16

locally

12:5

located

34:22 35:4

60: 1

locations

28: 14 59: 7

locomotive

24:2 43:9

lone

45:7

long

5:18 6:3,16

9:24 48:5

long-rum ... 43: 15

look

14:17 15:18

15:24 20:9

26:1,3

39:7,8,8

55 :17

64:17

65: 16 70: 3

looked

16:10 33:22

59:3 69:7

1ooki ng

16:2,3,5

28:9 32:8

33: 15 34: 2

35:8 37:17

59:5

lot

29:4 30:23

31 :2,14,20

33:19,20

46:11 69:4

low

23:3,11

37:24

lower

18:16 21 :14

lows

38:6

M

magnitude

38: 18

maintain

57:20 58:8

65:4

maintaining

4:1 47:13

maintenance

3:24 7:23

10:11 22:9

22:20

36:24

44: 10

47:14,16

51: 12

52:11,20

53:24

54: 12,13

56: 2, 2,14

57:6 58:9

61: 3,15

62:4,9

10

63: 8,17

66: 14,15 I,

67 :1 69: 5 I'.

major

25:2

majority

44:8

making

7:3 22:3,17

23: 4,17

24:24 33:8

33: 15

34: 15,21

34:23 35:2

49: 9 54: 12

54: 17 55:4

55: 15

56: 10 58::3

makings

22:24 23:16

34: 19

48: 18

manager

8: 10,20,23

13:2

mandate

46: 10,10

manufact ... 44: 14

manufact ... 25: 7,12,20

map

18: 15

March

54:21

marine

'j 5: 16 24: 1

43: 10

markedly

21:4

market

42:20

matched

69:24

materi al

4:11

materials

48:3

matter

3:86:14

22:22

70: 18

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
maximum

3:19 4:2,16

McHenry

53: 11

mean

32: 15 42: 3

means

5:2 18:16

measure

63: 16

measures

9: 16 49: 15

49: 17,21

50:1,4,4,6

50: 7,13,15

57:22

58: 13,18

58: 19 60: 6

60 :14,19

60:21,23

61:7,11

62:20

63: 19 64: 2

64: 5,10,22

65: 6,9,12

65:20,22

66:1,3,7,8

66:23

medium

23: 1

meet

4:6 49:24

50: 12

meeting

41:145:1

meetings

9:8

MELVIN

2: 14

members

5: 9 6:1

71 :9

memory

67:2

mentioned

10:6 18:24

19:22

34:11 54:6

57: 6 66: 13

67: 16

mercury

61 : 15

messages

18: 1,4

meteorol ... 11: 19 12:2

12:8,17

39:5

meteorology

11 : 11,20,21

11 :22

26: 13

29: 11,21

29:22 33:2

33:3,4,6

37: 13,14

37:19,20

39:2,3,11

39:21,23

40:3,3,4

60 :.15

65: 17

meters

56:7

method

28:7

methodology

51:23

Metro

46:24

Metropol ... 30: 15

Michigan

11:3 12:15

14: 1 27: 12

28: 13,20

28:21

59:22 60:1

60:3

midnight

5:16 6:17

70:20

Midwest

24: 7 28: 13

midwestern

12:21

Mike

2:10 8:15

50: 16,18

mile

53: 19

mil es

52: 1, 10,15

MILLER

2: 19

mi 11 ion

21:13,17

25: 10

52: 10,15

mind

14: 18

minimize

29:11

minimizes

29:21

minimum

7:5

minute

68: 17

missing

14:5 18:2

MM5

·12: 7

mobile

8:16 20:21

22:21

40:21 43:3

44:24

MOBILE6

43:4 53:20

MOBLIE6

53: 17

model

9:14 10:13

11 :14 12:8

13:6 16:15

16:20,24

17:21,24

18: 14,24

19:11,17

25:24 26:2

26: 14, 16

26: 16, 20

30: 12

32:2133:1

33: 16 43:4

43:9 53:4

53: 6,17,20

mo~eled

27: 1

modeler

10:18 11:2

modelers

11 : 6

modeling

9:15 11:8

12:8,16,17

12:19 13:2

13:5,9

16:12,17

17:2 26: 10

27 :3,18

28:2,3

32:5,6

33:21

36 :17 40:2

40:2 43: 19

47:8 51 :24

60:5

models

11:10,10

14:12,16

40 :14

41 :23

moist

37:21,22

moment

38:23

monitor

27: 9 28: 19

28:19

29: 14,16

29: 17 30: 1

59:6,22

60:5 64:20

66: 19

monitored

26: 4,7,19

28:11 57:2

59:1,7

64: 18

monitoring

3: 21 12: 20

57:17 60:8

64: 16

monitors

27: 16 59: 17

59:18

monoxide

24:17

month

38:1,5

morning

3:4 10:15

50: 18

motor

4:4 23:3,22

45:7 50:23

11

51:6,9,15 I.~ 51 :16,20

52:2,16

53: 13,21

53:24

62: 10

move

30: 1241 : 12

55:4

moving

55: 7,17

mowers

43:7

mUltiple

63:9

N

NAAQS

3: 15 22: 7

name

3:4 7:11,11

8:9,11,13

8:15,17,19

8: 22 10: 15

13: 1 40: 12

50: 18

named

29:9

national

3: 14 22: 6

53: 13

nature

25: 14 42:23

near

43: 1

nearby

10:24

necessarily

26: 1 42: 3

need

13:5 17:9

17: 14 30: 9

48: 17

49: 16

56: 17 57: 6

57:19,24

58:4,23

61 :4,6

68: 13,20

needed

10:21 16:15

16:24

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
nests

12: 16

network

57: 18

new

4:4 18:13

22: 7 23: 18

42: 9,12

45: 16

48: 14

53: 12 55: 2

55:5,11

65:23 67:8

67: 14

newer

53:4,6

nitrogen'

48: 5 51: 15

noise

7:4

non

14: 5 39: 15

46:23

54: 12 66: 1

nonattai ... 1:114:14

10: 19,23

10:24 25:2

35: 5 41: 14

46: 14, 18

48: 7 52: 10

54:22 59:3

60: 8,17

61:17,23

64: 7 ,16,20

69:7

non-EGU

21: 19

non-EGUs

15: 13 34: 13

non-LADeO

20:6

non-road

15 :15 17: 12

20:22

23: 14,16

43:8

normal

38: 2,10,11

38:20

North

6:21

northern

59:20

northwes ... 47:3

Notary

72:23

Note

27: 14

notes

72: 10

notice

7:20

NOx

15:4,6,8,20

16:4 18:19

20: 10

21 : 10,13

21 :15,21

21:23 24:6

24: 8,14,18

24:24 34:5

34:21 35:5

35: 14, 24

41 :11,12

41: 17

48:24 49:2

49:4,7

51 : 15

53: 19,23

54: 2 60: 16

61: 12, 20

61:22 63:4

63: 13 68: 8

68: 9, 10,13

68: 15,20

number

7 :17 'j 0: 23

26:24

28: 14

29: 10

37:24

38: 11 ,14

45:3 46:7

59: 16

67:20

69: 17

numbers

21:7 63:4

69:24

o

o

72:3,3

oath

72:6

OBO

37:6 53:3

obtain

70:24

obtained

4:22

obtaining

48:9

obviously

23: 10 48: 10

58:23

61:23

occurred

26: 18 37:2

38: 16

,occurri ng

35: 10

occurs

63:20

Ocean

12:9,10

offered

,71: 14

Officer

2:4 3:1,8,9

6: 20 9: 1

54:4 68:23

70:9

off-road

40:21 43:7

44:7 62: 12

oh

69:2

okay

31:10 32:4

33:7 40:8

40: 10

47: 20 54: 6

70:6

old

67: 10

ones

14: 10 22: 4

41 :10 47:1

47:7

one-hour

48:9 67:3,4

on-board

53:3

on-road

15: 14,20

20:21 23:8

23: 15

40:21 43:3

44:7 51 :15

on-the-book

19:18,19

21 :9

on-the-b ... 23: 21

opaque

32: 13

operate

57: 17

operating

43: 17

operation

24:.10

opportunity

5:3,4,22

option

31 :6

options

41 :7

oral

5: 17

order

26: 16 36: 5

51 :5

orders

19 :23

organi c

17: 19 48: 3

51: 14

organi za ... 7:'12

organi za ... 20:7

ori gi nal

34:6

ought

9:5

outl yi ng

21 :5

outside

33 :23 46: 13

46:18,23

overall

13:16 29: 23

overl ay

19 :8

12

oversight

35:21

oxide

24: 16

oxides

48: 5 51: 15

ozone

1:7,113:19

4:2,15

9:13 10:8

10:8,20

11 :12 12:4

13: 4 24: 19

26: 15 27:5

28:17,21

29: 11 ,19

29:24 30:5

32: 17,20

33:14

36:20 39:3

39: 13,18

41:10,15

46:16 48:9

48:11

51 : 11 ,21

52:24

54:22

55: 10,16

55:22

56: 19 ,20

58: 16

64: 19

66: 19 67: 3

67: 8,10

68:4

O'Hare

38:'1 43 :13

p

Pacific

12:9

page

69:17

Palatine

47:5

Pamela

2:9 8:13

panel

5:23 6:1,3

58:24

59:11

parentheses

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
16: 1

part

9:24 11:1

21 : 1,3

35:5 40:23

44:6 47:3

47:5 65:7

66: 14·

70: 21

participate

11 : 2

parti ci p... 11 : 5

parti ci p... 71 : 12

particular

25:8 35:23

39: 4,13

48: 1

particulate

24: 17

parts

26: 15 29: 19

53: 10 59: 9

64:21

passed

35: 1 44: 13

44: 15

passenger'

23: 1

PATRONSKY

2:20

patterns

65: 16

pause

30: 1050: 15

peak

39:8

pending

24:24 35:6

62:5

people

13: 18 29: 8

percent

21 :20,22

26:3 41:3

41 : 8 44: 19

44:20,21

45: 3,10,18

45:20 52:8

52: 13, 24

percentage

26:9

perform

66: 17

performance

22:7

period

5:16,21

6:1-3 53:12

56:4,23

57: 1 ,7,15

58:8 59:1

59: 8,12,24

62: 1 70: 17

permeation

22: 18

permit

6:2

permitting'

46:22 55: 12

person

5:17 7:8

personally

39: 19

pertaining

43:23

petition

40: 1

Phase

52:22

phased

23: 6,10,17

phasing

21 : 1

photo

9: 15

photoche ... 10:18 11:1

11:5,13

12: 16

25:24

26: 14

photoche ... 11 :12

piece

19:4

pipe

22:24 23:5

pipeline

47: 12

place

17:8 19:17

23:11

52: 17,22

60:24

62: 17

68: 14

placed

18:18,18

placing

24:9

plan

1 :10 3:18

3: 24 4: 1

7: 23 10: 11

47:15,16

50:23

52:11

53:24

54: 11,12

54: 13 56: 2

.56 :2 ,14 , 17

58: 5,7 ,9

58: 11 ,20

60:2,7

63: 17

66: 14, 15

66:22 67:1

69:6

planned

3: 19 42: 12

planning

8:10,14,18

13:2 19:11

20: 7 33: 18

51 :19 55: 5

55:8

plans

51:3,5,7,12

51 :19 58: 1

plant

24 :20 32: 10

46: 8,17

plants

42: 9,12

46:6,23

61 : 19

pl e~,se

6:18 7:4,7

7:9,10,13

27: 17 28: 8

28: 15 ,23

30:2

plume

29: 17

plus

15: 15

point

9:3,3 13:22

13 :24

15:13 17:7

20:3 23: 13

40 :17 42: 1

42:5 56: 16

policy

55:3

pollutant

63:9

pollutants

22:7 24:15

pollution

4: 24 35: 3 ,7.

49:4 61 :14

61 :21 62:6

66:12

pool

11 :6

population

42:7

portable

22: 16,18

62:4

portion

14: 22 15: 3

15:4,9

28:6 63: 17

possibility

43:20

possible

68: 17

posted

8:2 71:1

postmarked

6: 17 70: 19

potential

18:3,7 31:7

31: 17

43:20 66:7

67:9,12

pounds

21 :17 22: 12

22: 13,14

25: 10,13

power

9:2,3 19:12

32:10

56:16

13

61 :19

PPM

23:4,19,20

predicting

26:20

prediction

26: 15 40: 4

predictions

48 :12

predomi n... 15: 21

preliminary

7: 18 28: 16

prepare

6:8

present

5:10,10 8:7

47: 14

presenta ... 5:11,12

7: 17 ,24

presenta ... 8:8

presented

70:4

presenter

25:22

presenting

9: 11

pretty

20: 19 28: 4

28:9 35:21

prevent

56: 6 64: 10

previous

20: 12 55: 14

prev"i ous1y

13:1 41 :19

62: 2,16

pri mari 1y

24:22

primary

14: 10 40: 13

40: 16

52: 16

prime

12: 14

principles

16: 18

prior

6:12 14:14

32:8

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
probably

8:3 36:5

42: 10

problem

7:5 41 :15

problems

18:4

procedure

4: 19

procedures

4:22

proceed

5:8

proceeding

3: 10

proceedings

7: 2 71: 13'

72: 8, 12

process

11:8 16:13

17:22

18:11 25:5

25: 19,19

26: 12 29: 8

33: 18

processed

18:6

processing

14:10,14

16:2117:2

17:23

produce

10:21 11:6

16:20

19:14 31:5

31: 13

produced

11 :13,21

13: 13

25: 13

produces

39: 14

product

25: 13

production

21 :21 39: 18

program

21: 16,24

22:20

36:24

42: 19 45: 8

52: 19,20

52:22 53:2

53: 11

62: 10 63: 7

67:21,23

programs

8: 16 21: 1

23:23 30:8

51 :8 52:3

52: 17

53: 14

62: 11 ,13

66: 10

progress

10:2 40:24

41 :2 45: 1

45: 15

49: 19

project

13:819:5

26:21 33:4

33:5 44:5

61 :4

projected

45: 15 52: 6

65:3

projecting

37:10 45:17

52: 12 57: 5

57:10 61:5

61 :9

projection

63:6

projections

43: 19

promulgate

48: 17 66: 11

promulgated

48:7 67:3

properly

3:10 18:21

proposals

46:8 48:16

proposed

51 :21 53:20

proposes

4:5

proposing

63: 18

proprietary

31 :2

protection

1: 9 3: 6

4: 16 6: 21

10: 17

50:20

provide

5:4,5 13:10

16:7 18:13

20: 8 48: 12

49:6 50:2

50:8 57:22

61:12,16

61:22 62:7

62: 13,18

63:7 66:9

provided

13: 23 14: 7

29: 1 60: 19

provides

22:20 56:3

providing

58:19 62:21

provision

68: 12

provisions

57:22

public

1-:10 3:12

3:13 4:18

'5:1,12,15

7:20 55: 1

56:11

71 :10

72:23

purpose

3:13 7:2

48: 9 .51 : 17

purposes

13: 6 24: 18

43: 18 57: 3

pursuant

4: 15

pursuing

67: 17

put

27:21 29:2

43: 15

putting

17: 13

PoO

6:22

Q

qualifies

10: 7 60: 9

qualify

58:23

quality

3:15 8:10

8:14,18

13:2 16:15

16:24

17:21,23

18:6,14

28:4,9

31 :15,22

39:11 40:5

51 :19,24

56:4 58: 14

59:21 60:4

63:8,20

64:6,8,14

65: 10 68: 5

quantitao 0 0

62:24

quasi -pu 0 • 0

4:20

question

30:3 32:22

32:24

37:12 69:4

questions

5:20,23

6: 11 ,24

30:11

40: 10 46: 1

50 :14 54: 5

67:1 68:22

70:10,12

71 :10

qUick

36:22 69:3

quite

11 :17 46: 7

quote

56: 18

R

Rachel

2:8 8:11

RACT

24 :24 34: 17

48:2,6,11

48:24 49:2

49:3,7,9

50:14

14

61 :20

RACTS

35:6

radiation

32: 19

rail

14:6 15:16

rainfall

37: 16

raised

6:11

ran

43:6

Randolph

1 : 16

rare

9:7

ratcheting

16: 14

rate

52:7

rates

53:20

rational

31 : 12

reaching

32: 16,19 .1

43: 1 ;:

~~ reactions " 11 :13 ! ~

read

16: 4 34: 8 " 50: 12 59: 4)

ready :;

3:2 :;

real ,;

:~ 36:22 69:3 '

~;

rea" y ;

16 : 22 31: 4 f;

li:'

31 :5 32: 1 ,J

33:23

38: 17,23 :;

39 :14 , 22 ;i:

39:24 40:6 9-

46:22 2

~~~~~'~~:1 ;

") 57:8,10 ;'

65:7 68:3 \

70: 1 :.;

realm ,.

:~ 33: 17,23 ;:

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
reason

13: 15 55: 18

56: 12

reasonable

10:2 41:2

45: 1 ,14

49: 18

reasonably

10:4 26:20

47:22

65:21

reasons

67: 16

recall

39: 20 44: 12

44: 19

recognized

12:4

recognizes

39:2

recommen ... 54:20,20

recommends

13: 10

record

3:3 4:13

6:147:2,3

7:8,17,18

7:19 10:1

37:22

56:23

57: 15

59: 13,24

69: 1 70: 18

70:21

recreati ... 23:24

red

28:11 59:6

redesignate

3:21 54:15

54: 18

redesign ... 58: 15 61: 3

redesign ... 4: 3 66: 16

redesign ... 1:8 10:7,10

40: 1 57: 8

58:6,23

60: 9 67: 17

68:2

redo

66: 15

reduce

52:23

reduced

21:2 22:2

23: 19

reduction

26: 8 32: 12

33: 12 41: 3

41:8 42:20

44:20,21

44:21

45: 18,20

61:22

62: 13

65:22 68:9

reductions

20:21 , 22 _, 23

22: 11 ,21

29: 13

32: 10

36: 19

41:20 44:7

44: 8,9,17

45:6 49:23

50:2,8,9

50: 11

60: 16,20

61:1,16

62: 7,14,16

62:19,21

63:1,5

66:9

refer

29:6

referred

17:4 21:20

referring

36:4

refineries

35: 11

Refinery

24: 12

reflect

32: 13

reflects

11 : 19 25: 10

29: 12

59: 11

reformul ... 22: 21 52: 18

52:20

regarding

4:11,13

31:3

regardless

66:4

regards

34: 19

region

12: 21 14 :23

20: 17 44:3

59: 19,22

regional

20:7

registered

53:7

regs

33: 10

regular

47 :17 64:24

regulations

34:9

regulatory

21 : 1 48: 16

relate

19:24 22:24

related

3: 14 36: 23

50:21

relative

25:24 26:8

released

48: 10

relevant

5:19 6:11

39: 14 . rel i ed

50: 11 60: 21

70:5

rely

17: 10

relying

9: 17 49 :24

50:6 58:20

remarks ,

9:11,13

47:24 54:7

remember

7:7

remind

6 :24 70: 13

remove

32: 17

removed

18:8

repeat

60:22

replaced

55:24

replica

33:2

report

33: 19

reported

72:8

reporter

7:1,8,14

71:172:6

72:15

reports

41 :23

represent

7: 13 59: 6

reprocess

18: 13

reproduce

20: 11

request

1: 8 3: 20

4:23 6:24

8:5 10:10

54: 14,18

71 :5

required

5: 13 9: 20

10:5 23: 12

41:3 46:2

49:22

52:21

54:14

56: 10 65: 8

requirement

9:22 23:9

23: 12 48: 1

49:24

50:12

55: 11 58: 1

requi rem ... 4:6,8 10:9

23: 15 48:2

48: 17,24

49: 3,10,13

50: 17 56: 1

57: 19

15

61 : 18,20

66:21

requires

11:9 24:7

27:20

40:24 51:2

52:23 53:3

requiring

56:9

research

33: 19

researchers

33:22

resolving

16: 14,23

resources

11 : 6

respect

13:4

Respiratory

30: 15

response

6: 8,9 58: 17

64:4

responsi ... 3: 9 40: 13

responsible

50:21

result

21:1122:2

27: 18

resulting

51:6 52:14

results

26:22

review

47: 16 55: 12

64:24

revise

58:7

revised

58:5

revocation

67: 15

revoke

67: 10

revoked

67:4

re-makings

22: 10

RFG

52: 19

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
RFP 4:7

10: 3 30: 13 saw

43 : 18 44: 2 20 : 12

46:1 saying

right 7:15

15:6,8 says

18 : 16 35 :14 72: 6

20:11 34:1 scenario·

47:6,6 14:21 38:9

49:5 59:11 38:22

59:15 Scott

road 2:11,19

14:6 8:17 10:13

Robert 10:15

2:7 8:9 32:23

Rockies 37:18

12:12 39:20 41:9

Rogers 58:22 60:1

2: 10 8: 15 season

8:15 50:16 52:24 68:16

50 : 18 , 19 second

room 3:23 13:22

1 :17 6:5 20:3 50:15

ROSS secondly

2:20 13:7 21 :15

RRF section

26:8 4:8 8:10,14

rul e 8: 18 9: 19

19:16 22:3 13:3 46:22

22:17,23 51:1

23: 3, 15, 16 sector

24: 24 15: 10,20

34: 14 , 19 20 : 19

34:21,23 sectors

35:2,6 14:4 16:10

44:15 21:8 61:7

48 :18 49: 7) 63 : 15

49:8 56:9 see

62:4 67:18 14:20 15:3

68: 12 , 19 15: 19

rul es 18: 15

3:11 19:20 20:19,20

34:5,17,20 20:21,22

44:10,11 20:23

48:6,11,22 24:12,21

49:2 68:8 26:10

68: 10 30: 11

runs 33:12 44:3

3 : 10 44 :4 , 6 , 17

------ 44 :22

S 59: 16

satisfy 60:16 63:4

64: 19 65: 2

68: 18 70: 3

70: 10

seeing

15: 11 20: 24

22: 1 69: 1

71 :9

seeking

3: 16,23

54:24

seen

29: 18 37:4

50:5

selective

20: 14

sel f-exp ... 28:4

send

6: 18 55: 21

70: 16

sense

25:24 69: 14

sent

70:20

separate

35-: 2

separated

34: 12

series

22:23 24:3

serve

3:8

set

11 : 19 24: 19

41 : 11 -

sets

4:11 12:2,5

18: 13

setting

37:23

settlement

35: 13 36: 12

36: 15

shape

33: 10

sheet

6:4

shops

40: 19

shorthand

72: 8,10,15

shortly

11 : 24

show

5:119:3

30: 4 41 : 19

57:6,13

showed

58:22

showing

59:20,23

60:5,10

shown

41 : 19

shows

59:163:1,2

63 :12

side

15: 18 28: 20

signal

55:21

signed

6:5

significant

6:11 20:23

33: 12,13

60: 16

61 :16 62:7

sign-in

6:4

silver

24: 16

si mil ar

49:9 58:22

63:21 67:7

Similarly

43:6 48:24

simple

25:9

simplified

17 :20

si mpl y

19: 18 33: 2

simulation

16: 15

si mul tan ... 55:20

SIP

13:4,12

21: 15

34:21

50:23

51: 10

56:10 68:8

16

68: 10,13

68: 15,20

SIPS

54: 10

sites

26 :24 27: 15

situation

67:8

situations

42: 5 69: 10

six

41 :3,5 52:9

slide

5: 11 7: 24

11 : 16

23: 13

25:21 30:3

30: 17

40:.23

41: 21

43:22 45:2

47:22 50:3

58:22 59:5

59: 14

60: 10

62:23

63: 11

64: 12

slides

8:2 9:3

20: 12

slight

16: 16

slowly

7: 14 44: 14

smaller

12: 11 22: 4

society

7: 13

software

14:13 17:3

19:4

solar

32: 18

sold

52:21

sole

3:9

solvent

22: 10 44: 11

solvents

22: 15 40: 19

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
somebody

33: 14

somewhat

25: 16

soon

9:4 49:8

66: 11

70:24

sounds

45:3

source

8:16 14:4

15:10,19

17: 9 19: 21

22: 7 25: 17

28:6 31:7

31: 17

40:21 44:8

55 :11

65: 18

sources

15:13 17:7

24:13,21

25:1,2,3

34:22

35:23

40: 17

41:16,17

42:1,6

43:3 44:24

45: 16

southeas ... 47:5

southern

12: 21

SOx

I

33: 10 36: 17

36: 18

502

32: 17 33: 12

space

32: 14

spacing

12: 11

spark

23:23

spatial

12:3 17:10

spatially

17: 6

speak

7:9,10,13

47: 12

speakers

5:22

speaking

7:8

speciation

17: 18

species

17:20

specific

19: 3 21: 7

36:6

speed

39:22

speeds

43:5

spell

7: 11

spells

38:8

split

44:23

Sprague

2:6 8:22,22

12: 24 13: 1

30:7,21,23

31 :11

32:22

35: 19

36:21

46:21 47:9

Springfield

6:22 9:5

SS

72:2

staff

5:9 8:7

10: 18

standard

9:18 10:8,9

10: 21

23:20

27: 10,19

27: 19,20

30:5 39:6

39: 12

47:13 48:9

48: 10,13

54: 16, 19

54:23 55:2

55:6,6,9

55: 10,14

55: 16, 18

55:22,24

56 :4,19,20

56:21

58: 14,24

59:9,21

60:4 61 :14

63:964:6

64:22

65: 10,14

65: 15 67: 3

67:5,8,10

67:14,16

standards

3: 15 22: 6,8

23: 3,5, 18

23: 18,24

24:1,2

53:15

62: 12, 12

63: 10,20

65: 4 67 :19

68:1,5

standpoint

68:9

start

7: 16 8 :24

9:2 40:11

started

3:2

state

1 :10 7:10

7:12 14:7

14: 23 15: 1

19:20

20: 17

33: 11, 12

33:18 47:3

47:5 49:23

49:24

50:23 51:4

54: 14

57:20

61 :19 64:5

66:~1 68:7

72:~

statement

55: 3, 15

states

3:20 4:9

11 :1,4

12: 6 13: 21

14:24 20:6

statewide

34: 22 61 :17

state's

3:18,19 4:1

68:10

stationary

21 :23

statisti cal

28: 6 29: 10

status

54: 16 64:7

67:3

stays

68: 14

steel

25:6

step

45: 11

steps

11 :17

story

20 :18

strai ght ... 28: 10

strategies

45:17

strategy

51 :23

strictly

5:2 40:4

stringent

55:5,9

stubborn

27:8 28: 18

subheads

16:7

subject

67: 19

subjects

69:5

submit

4:6 5:20

48: 18 49:7

58:4

submittal

10: 10 48: 22

49: 6 54: 10

54:11

56:11 57:9

SUBMITTALS

1 : 11

17

submitted

5:14 6:12

9:23 35:3

48:23 49:2

49: 14

sUbmitting

54:8

SUBSCRIBED

72: 17

subsequent

67: 18

subseque ... 19: 15

substantial

12: 18 63: 5

subtract

.45:8

sub-port ... 14~14

successful

63:22

suddenly

10:21

sufficient

36:5

sulfate

32: 12

sulfur

23:3,4,9,11

23: 14

32: 15

53: 15

sUlphate

33:21

summary

6: 8,10

1

5ummer

11:20 16:2

16:5 52:8

52: 14

53:22 54:1

68: 16

sunlight

32: 13, 16

sunset

68: 11

superceded

55:6

support

8:21 29:2

supports

14:21

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
18

supposed 50: 16 53:7,8 tier track 11 49:21,22 54:23 testified 23: 2 53: 14 57:23 64:8 Supreme 64:11 60:2 62: 11 tracking 4: 19 talked testimony time 31:23 64:14

sure 18:22 62:2 54:3 5:15 7:9 tractors

3: 10 33: 15 talking testing 23:7 28 :15 43:7

38: 17 25:17,18 53:4,6 37 :10 trade

42: 13 39:24 thank 54: 17 5.9: 8 42: 19

surrogates talks 3:6 70:7 62: 1 68:2 trading 17: 10 36: 18 71: 11 68:4 71:8 21 : 16 switch tape thing times transcript 37:3 69:6 26:8 45:4 26:7 72: 10 switches target thi ngs Title transcripts 37:6 45: 13 25: 9,14 21 : 11 51 :3 70:22

sworn technical 33 :21 34:3 today translate

72: 5,17 29:2 35: 12 3:7 5:10 21 : 13

systems technique 36: 13 7:6 8:2,7 translating 42:20 29:10,21 40: 18,19 9:12 10:3 21 :2 24: 14

502 technolo ... 41:9 43:6 5t:13 55:4 transport , 32:.10,12 65:23 43:7 45:5 56:12 69:5 41 : 15

technology 65: 16 70:16 71:5 transpor ... T 10:5 47:23 67:20 today's 9: 19 50: 17 T 48: 15 think 5:8 50:22 51 :2 72:5 tell 7:5 12:23 told 51:7,8,18 table' 20: 18 33: 17 67: 21 52:6 58:1

69: 6,18 temperature 34:22 47: 1 tonnages transported 70:1,3 37: 16 38: 3 47: 10 16: 10 12:5 tabulation 38:4,10,13 58: 21 60:4 tons .travel 63:11 38:20 60: 15 16:2,5 52:2 tail temperat ... 62: 15 21: 13 25: 3 treadmill 22:24 23:5 43:5 63:21 64:9 44: 1 45: 14 37:3 take Temporal 65: 18,21 45:17 trend

4:13 7:1 17: 15 66: 6 67: 12 53:22,23 29 :12 , 19 , 20 41 : 16 42: 8 ten 67: 13,24 54:1,2 29:24 65:2 42: 11 ,16 4:2 56:4 68:16 70:2 69:9,9,10 trending 43: 12 57:7 58:8 70: 16 - 69: 11 ,12 65:2

44: 17,19 61: 10 thinking 69: 12,20 trends

45:4,5 terms 31 :1233:8 69:21,22 28:4,9 -47: 18 25:9 32:4 36:3 69:23 29: 12

48: 21 37: 13,15 third tools 65:20

49: 12,22 37: 16 13: 24 43: 15 14:9,13 trigger 64:5 70:2 38: 12 43: 17 17:4 56:8,9 taken 39: 17 thorough top 64: 13,23 23: 11 67:22 46: 15 18:6 15:2 63: 1 66:5

72: 10 47: 12 48: 4 three topmost triggers takes 49: 15 39: 7 112 14:22 64: 1 ,13 17:18 19:11 55: 11 57:5 52:9 56:23 total 66:24

56:23 60:3 61:2 57: 1 59: 12 34:23 44:21 trouble talk 63: 16 64: 2 64: 16 totals 69: 8,19 9:8 10:13 test 66: 18 20: 16 21:7 trucks

11 : 24 31:6 37:3 three-year township 23: 1

47:14 testable 59:24 52:9 true '0 ,,'

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
16: 16 21:3

72:9

truly

18:6,10

36:7

try

7:9 29:11

36: 8,14

39:4,9,11

62:18 64:7

64:9,11

65: 13

trying

32: 11 33: 18

46: 15

47: 19

55: 19

60: 12 70:4

TSD

14:20

turbine

21 :18

turbines

34: 7,11 ,14

35:4

turn

7:10 10:12

17: 21

25:22

two

4:11 7:22

13:6,14,16

14:12,15

17:3 20:11

23:3 29:8

41 : 13

46:24

62:11

63:23

64: 13

type

42:6,7,9

65: 15

types

43:5

typical

37: 15

U

ultra

23:11

UM

22: 12

undergoes

18:6

understand

7:15 11:15

32:23,24

36: 19

understa ... 32: 12 46: 21

69:8

undertake

16: 19

undertaking

13: 17

unexpect ... 58: 16

unit

8:20,21,23

--~13-:2· 25 : 5

25: 19

United

3:20 4:9

12:6

units

15:13,14

21 :17

32: 11

61 :19

unusually

37:24

updates

42: 17 57 :23

66: 18

upstate

33: 13

upward

29: 19

upwind

66:2

urbanized

53:9

Urbaszewski

2: 13 30: 14

30: 14,22

31 :10 32:4

33: 7 34: 1

34: 16 35: 8

36: 11 ,15

36:22

37: 12

38 :12

39: 16 40: 8

46:5 47:20

67:2,7

68:6,21

69: 3,16,18

69:22 70:6

70:8

USC

51 :3

use

11:8,9,17

12:8 14:10

19:2 25:23

25:24 26:2

48:4

Usually

42:8

.uti 1i ty

21 :10 63: 10

63': 14

v

V

44:3

vacatur

19: 16

vagaries

60: 14

validate

26: 16

validated

28: 18

validation

13:7 18:24

value

20: 17 26: 4

26:5,6,7

39: 9 59: 18

values

26: 2,19

28: 10,16

29: 19 30: 1

39:8 59:1

59:4,7

64: 18

vari ab4l i ty

17: 16 38: 4

39:5

variable

35: 19

variables

38: 18

various

13:23 14:2

14:3,9,12

24:4 61:6

66: 13

vehicle

4:4 18:19

22:20 23:3

23:22,24

45:8 50:23

51 :6,9,15

51 :16,20

52: 1 ,2,16

52:19

53: 13,21

53:24 62:9

62: 10,12

vehicles

23:1,2 43:5

44:7 53:5

53:7,12

verbatim

7: 1

versa

69:23

version

19:4

versus

25: 19 35:24

36: 1 59: 14

vessels

43: 10

Vetterho ... 2:3 3:1,5

6: 20 9: 1

54:4 68:23

70:9

vice

69:23

violate

64:6

violated

65: 10

violation

63: 19 64: 10

65: 15

violations

56: 6 65: 19

virtually

56:8

visually

18: 17 59: 14

VMT

19

52:2,4,5,7

52: 8,11 ,13

52:14

53: 18

VOC

15:3,6 , 7, 18

15:19 16:1

20:10

51 :14

52:23

53: 19,23

54: 1 60: 15

63:3

VOCs

17: 19 20 :22

45 :20 48:4

vol atil e

48: 3 51 :14

VOM·--·

22:11 24:6

24:22 l;

35 :24 41: 3 ,;

41:10,12

41 :16, 20 ;~ J~

42: 19 44: 1

44:7 45: 14,

48:3,6

49:9 i

,

w ~.

wait

68: 17

waiting

68: 18

walk

56: 13 !

want

3:6 6:24

35:20 44:4 ,;

46:20 55:4

55:21

wanted _~1

9: 13 :;i

,

wants

5: 17 32: 6 ,;

warning

18:11

wasn't·1

t 31:1 40:2

69:24

way))

9:23 12:9 ,

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
y

year

9: 21 12: 1 ,1

13:5,8,14

13: 20,21

13:23

14:17 16:1

18: 23 19: 1

19:2,6,6

19: 10 20:2

20:5,6,9

20: 13,13

20:24,24

22: 2 23: 17

25:4 26:6

26: 10,11

26: 16,21

26:23 27:1

27:4 31:5

31:9,13

33:4,5

37:7,8,22

37:23

12: 12 6: 23

16: 13 words

17:13 22:5 50:6 57:11

33: 10 39: 5 58 :10 , 15

41 :11 59:9

56: 21 work

67:24 3:5 31:21

'Ways 41: 14

43:11 47:18 worked

wayside 36:17

19: 16 worki ng

weather 30:24 48:16

65: 16 54: 19

website worry

4:24 5:1 42:21 43:18

6:9 8:3 worse

9 : 4 56: 15 58: 16

70:24 71:2 writing

71 :2,7 5:21

weekday written

16:2,5 5:14 6:14

18 : 20 52: 8 6 : 16 , 18

52:14 56:21

weekend 70:16,19

8: 3 www.epa ....

weight 71:3

27: 21 28: 1 www . i pcb ...

went 5: 1

27: 1 42: 13

44:22

west

1 :16 12:9

47:2

we'11

9:2 10:3

we're

37: 10 45: 17 I

56:24

67: 17

we've

13: 13 18: 21

23: 15

wide

12:3

Wisconsin

14: 8 29: 14

59: 19

wish

70: 11

wishes

8:4

wishing

38:20,23

39: 7,12,17

41 :5,22

43:21 50:9

50: 10

51: 13 52: 5

52: 11 ,13

53:4,6,21

53:24

56: 18,18

56:22,23

57:1,1,4

57:11,12

59: 12 61: 5

61:9,9,10

61': 13,24

61 :24

62:21 63:2

63:5,6

66: 10 67: 9

69: 9,10,13

69:21,22

years

4:2 13:11

13:14 19:9

20.: 14 21: 3

21:5,5

27:4 29: 10

37:13,15

38:7 39:7

41 :4,5

49:2 56:4

56:9 57:7

57:10,15

58 :5,6 ,_8

61:10,16

62: 8,14

63: 14, 21

64: 16

66: 15,18

67:22

year's

39: 13

year-spe ...

53: 19

year-to- ...

64: 14, 18

1

1

7: 19

1-10-L

4:8

1 .1

22: 13

1 .27

52: 7,13

1 .5

21 : 17

10: 45

71 :8

100

1:1641:17

1021

6: 21

106.92

53:22

114

22: 12

12

12: 11 ,20

14

57: 10

15

5:16 6:15

23:19 41:3

41:8 45:3

45: 10,20

70:18

1576

16:3

16

1:14 4:18

1681

16:2

176(c)(4)

51 : 1

19276

6:22

195.5

52: 10

1980

21 :14

1990

48:8 51:2

53: 1

1995

52:22

1996

53:4,6

1997

3: 14,21

10:8,20

29: 18,23

20

54: 16,19

55: 6,10,17

55:23 59:8

64:21

67: 10,19

68: 1

2

2

7:20 21 :13

53: 14

69: 18

20

45: 18

200

41: 17

2000

28: 10 52: 23

2001.,.

29:20 59:2

2002

9: 21 11: 21 '

13:10,14 s.

14:19 15:5 \

16:1,3,6 k

20: 12 21: 4 M

" 28: 10 37: 9 ;;, .;:

41 :5,22

52 :5 60: 11 :,

60 .'17 fi

2003

59:2

2004 i

9: 24 22: 1

2005 :

~, 11 : 21 13: 15

14:19 15:5

16:3,6

18:19,

20: 13 21: 4

26 '.18 11.'i

29:20 33:3 }

33:3 40:4'

69:7 '!

2006 "{

3:22 23:5

23: 12 t,

28: 16

37: 13 ,"

39: 16,21

39 :23 40: 2 :\

48: 14 l

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, Illinois (312) 263-0052
56:24 57:2 52: 14, 18

6 37:24

57:3 59: 13 53:24 60 60: 11, 18 57: 12 21 :20 61:24 63:2 58: 10 61: 5 60s 63:4 61:10,13 38:6 2007 61 :24 628 23: 6,10,17 62:22 63:3 45: 13 23: 19 63: 4, 12

29:23 2030

7

48: 14 53:2 58: 10

7

63: 12 224.6 57:2

2008 52: 15 74-10-L

1:14 3:22 23 4:9

4:15,18 51:3 75

28: 16,17 25 44: 19,21 34:6,8 44:20 52:24 79.09

37:13,19 261 .02 54:2

37:20 40:3 53: 23. 41:6,24. 2621 ·8

"

-

42: 17 43:2 16:5

8

43: 6,18 278 57:2

44:2,20 34:23 8-hour

54:22 1:73:14,19

55: 18

3 4:2 9:12

59: 13 68:5

3 10:8,20 2009 7: 23 22: 19 28:21 30:5

5:16 6:15 30 48: 11,12

20: 14 23:7 21 :21 51:11,21

27:4,7 31 55: 10

32:8,9 21 :24 80

37: 10 40:5 36 23:4

44:3 51 :13 12: 18 80s

52:4,6,8 3635 38:6

52: 18 4:21 82

53:21 21 :22

68: 16

4 84

70: 18

4 64:20

72: 19 8:

1 12: 13 85

2010 42 59:9

16:6 23:20 4:9

30:5 44:3

9

44:5 50:2

5

9

50:11

5 22: 14

2012 19:4 9-031

20: 14 27:4 50/50 1 : 17 t;

27: 11 32:9 44:23 9:05

37: 10 40:5 500

1 :15 3:1

60:6 23: 19 9:07

2018 56.07 4: 17 .. 20: 15 54:1 90

2020 591 38: 11 ,14,21

51:13 52:11 45: 17 90-plus

McCorkle Court Reporters, Inc.

Chicago, III

i nois (312) 263-0052

21