Connecticut Regional Haze State Implementation Plan November 2009



### ATTACHMENT DD

Technical Support Document on Measures to Mitigate Visibility Impacts of C onstruction Activities in the MANE-VU RegionDraft: October 20, 2006

Page 1 of 13 Technical Support Document on Measures to Mitigate the Visibi lity Impacts of Construction Activities in the MANE-VU Region Draft: September 1, 2006

1. Introduction

Each state must develop a long-term (10-15 years) strategy for making reasonable progress towards the national goal stated in 40 CFR section 51.300(a), “preventing any future, and remedying any existing, impairment of visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas which impairment results from man-made air pollution. ” States are required to develop long-term strategies for each mandatory Class I Federal ar ea located within the state and each mandatory Class I Federal area located outside the state that may be affected by sources within the state. According to 40CFR section 51.308(d)(3)(v)(B), stat es must consider “measures to mitigate the impacts of construction activities” in developi ng its long-term strategi es for regional haze. The purpose of this technical support document is to assist States in consid ering measures in the MANE-VU Region to mitigate the impacts of cons truction activities. This document provides background information on the air quality impacts of construction activities, presents relevant emissions inventory and contribution assessment re sults, describes potential control measures, and summarizes state regulations current ly in place in the MANE-VU Region.

2. Air Quality Impacts of Dust and Diesel Usage from Constr uction Activities

According to the EPA ( www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch13 ), construction activ ities may have a significant, albeit temporary, imp act on local air quality. Constr uction activities are sources of fugitive dust and air pollutants from the use of diesel powered equipment. There are two primary mechanisms of generating fugitive dust, pulverization of surface materials by mechanical equipment and entrainment of dust by wind. Large dust particles typically settle out near the source, creati ng potential nuisance issues. Particles larger than 100 μ m generally settle out within six to nine meters from the source while par ticles between 20 and 100 μ m typically fall out within a few hundred feet of the source. Smaller particle s, especially particles smaller than 10 μ m (PM 10 ) can persist in the atmosphere, pos sibly contributing to diminished visibility.

Construction activities that can contribute s ubstantial dust emissions include land clearing, drilling and blasting, ground excavation, hauli ng dirt, and the construction of roads and buildings. Equipment traffic over temporary ro ads at construction site s can make up a largeDraft: October 20, 2006

Page 2 of 13 portion of the emissions. The use of diesel fuel in construction equipment causes the emission of Carbon Monoxide (CO), Volatile Organic Comp ounds (VOCs), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), and Particulate Matter (PM) into the air. These po llutants may contribute to reduced visibility. Construction activities that cont ribute to the release of the ab ove mentioned pollutants include, idling, the use of high sulfur fuel and diesel, th e lack of exhaust cont rols, and the use older vehicles that are not properly maintained. In contrast to other fugitive dust sources, su ch as dust generated from unpaved roads and agricultural tilling practices, construction activitie s are temporary with a definable beginning and end, and vary significantly over di fferent phases of the constructi on project. Dust and diesel emissions from construction sites vary daily depending on the level of activity, specific operations, specific machinery used, and meteorol ogical conditions. Other factors that play a role in dust emissions include the silt (particles smaller than 75 μ m in diameter) content of the soil, soil moisture, the speed a nd weight of construction equi pment. Dust emissions are positively correlated with silt content and the weight of vehicles and negatively correlated with soil moisture content.

3. Relevant Emissions Inventory Results

The Mid-Atlantic Regional Ai r Management Association (MAR AMA), on behalf of MANE-VU, developed a “Fugitive Dust Construction Ar ea Source Category Calculation Methodology Sheet,” for use by MANE-VU States. The calcu lation methodology sheet describes how States may calculate emissions of particulate matter from residential, non-re sidential, and road construction activities. The calculation methodol ogy sheet, which was most recently updated in December 2004, is available online at http://www.marama.org/visibility/Calcula tion_Sheets/FugitiveDustConstruction122004.doc

. States submitted PM 2.5 and PM 10 data on emissions from constructi on activities of various types, which were compiled in the MANE-VU 2002 Inve ntory. Under contract by MARAMA, E.H. Pechan and Associates summed the PM 2.5 and PM 10 data for the categor ies of residential construction, road construction, and industria l/commercial/institutional construction. These category values were added together to determ ine the Total Construction Emissions for each state, shown in Tables 1 and 2 and Total Off-Hi ghway Diesel Emissions for each state shown in Tables 3 and 4. Each table below shows the Total Emissions of PM 2.5 and PM 10 from all sources of pollution, including point sour ce, area, non-road, and on-road in units of tons per year. In the case of non-diesel construction ac tivities, the percenta ges of construction emissions from area sources and the percentage of construction emissi ons from all sources were calculated and shown in Tables 1 and 2 for PM 2.5 and PM 10 respectively. In the case of diesel emissions the total emissions from all sources are followed by the Total Nonroad Source Emissions, and then the Total Off-Highway Diesel Emissions, the Cons truction Emissions as a percent of Nonroad Inventory and finally the Construc tion Emissions as a percent of Total Inventory were calculated and shown in Tables 3 and 4 for PM 2.5 and PM 10 respectively.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 3 of 13 Table 1: 2002 PM 2.5 emissions from construction activities (Data Source: 2002 MANE-VU Modeling Inventory, Version 3.0)

State Total Emissions

from all sources of PM 2.5 (tons/year) Total Area Source Emissions PM 2.5 (tons/year) 1 Total Construction

Emissions PM 2.5 (tons/year) Construction Emissions as a % of Area Sources Emissions Construction Emissions as a % of

Total Inventory Connecticut 18365.9 14247.3 932.7 6.5 5.1 Delaware 8210.2 3203.6 268.6 8.4 3.3 District of Columbia 1388.8 804.8 156.9 19.5 11.3 Maine 40824.9 32773.7 373.4 1.1 0.9 Maryland 38929.7 27318.3 2835.1 10.4 7.3 Massachusetts 51864.4 42067.5 2530.8 6.0 4.9 New Hampshire 21996.8 17532.0 352.9 2.0 1.6 New Jersey 31595.3 19349.6 88.3 0.5 0.3 New York 108952.6 87154.2 7039.8 8.1 6.5 Pennsylvania 108811.6 74924.7 7694.7 10.3 7.1 Rhode Island 2901.3 2064.2 301.8 14.6 10.4 Vermont 12300.3 11064.5 264.5 2.4 2.2 MANE-VU 446142.0 332504.5 22839.4 7.5 5.1

1 SCC 23110xxxx

Table 2: 2002 PM 10 emissions from construction activities (Data Source: 2002 MANE-VU Modeling Inventory, version 3.0)

State Total Emissions

from all sources of PM 10 (tons/year) Total Area Source Emissions PM 10 (tons/year) 1 Total Construction

Emissions PM 10 (tons/year) Construction Emissions as a % of Area Source

Emissions Construction Emissions as a % of

Total Inventory Connecticut 53430.1 48280.7 9327.4 19.3 17.5 Delaware 18857.7 13038.6 2712.1 20.8 14.4 District of Columbia 3962.6 3269.2 784.3 24.0 19.8 Maine 178918.5 168953.4 3733.8 2.2 2.1 Maryland 112193.1 95060.2 28350.7 29.8 25.3 Massachusetts 205629.6 192838.7 25306.1 13.1 12.3 New Hampshire 48531.8 43328.1 3529.2 8.1 7.3 New Jersey 76893.3 61600.9 882.8 1.4 1.1 New York 398048.9 369594.6 70397.9 19.0 17.7 Pennsylvania 449572.9 391896.9 76946.6 19.6 17.1 Rhode Island 9439.7 8294.6 3018.0 36.4 32.0 Vermont 57633.7 56130.6 2645.1 4.7 4.6 MANE-VU 1613112.0 1452286.6 227634.0 16.6 14.3

1 SCC 23110xxxxDraft: October 20, 2006

Page 4 of 13 Table 3: 2002 PM 2.5 emissions from diesel emissions (Data Source: 2002 MANE-VU Modeling Inventory, Version 3.0)

State Total Emissions

from All Sources

PM 2.5 (tons/year) Total Nonroad Source Emissions PM 2.5 (tons/year) Total OffHighway

Diesel Emissions PM 2.5 (tons/year) 1 Construction Emissions as a % of Nonroad Source Emissions Construction Emissions as a % of

Total Inventory Connecticut 18365.9 1793.9 582.5 32.5 3.2
Delaware 8210.2 925.6 215.3 23.3 2.6 District of Columbia 1612.8 298.7 235.9 79.0 14.6
Maine 40824.9 1329.4 261.8 19.7 0.6 Maryland 38929.7 4357.1 1161.6 26.7 3.0
Massachusetts 51864.4 3226.4 1032.0 32.0 2.0 New Hampshire 21996.8 965.4 268.0 27.8 1.2 New Jersey 31595.3 4997.2 1437.4 28.8 4.5
New York 108952.6 8820.9 2556.2 29.0 2.3 Pennsylvania 108811.6 8440.1 1862.7 22.1 1.7
Rhode Island 2901.3 443.1 128.7 29.0 4.4
Vermont 12300.3 485.8 109 22.4 0.9
MANE-VU 446365.9 36083.6 9851.2 27.3 2.2

1 SCC 2270002xxx

Table 4: 2002 PM 10 emissions form diesel emissions (Data Source: 2002 MANE-VU Modeling Inventory, Version 3.0)

State Total Emissions

from All Sources

PM 10 (tons/year) Total Nonroad Source Emissions PM 10 (tons/year) Total OffHighway

Diesel Emissions PM 10 (tons/year) 1 Construction Emissions as a % of Nonroad Source Emissions Construction Emissions as a % of

Total Inventory Connecticut 53430.1 1952.1 633.2 32.4 1.2 Delaware 18857.7 1021.4 234.0 22.9 1.2 District of Columbia 6986.7 310.2 243.2 78.4 3.5 Maine 178918.5 1436.8 269.9 18.8 0.2 Maryland 112193.1 4936.0 1262.7 25.6 1.1 Massachusetts 205629.6 3531.2 1121.7 31.8 0.5 New Hampshire 48531.8 1057.8 291.3 27.5 0.6 New Jersey 76893.3 5495.1 1562.3 28.4 2.0 New York 398048.9 9605.3 2778.5 28.9 0.7 Pennsylvania 449572.9 9737.9 2024.7 20.8 0.5 Rhode Island 9439.7 500.2 139.9 28.0 1.5 Vermont 57633.7 529.9 118.5 22.4 0.2 MANE-VU 1616136.2 40113.9 10679.9 26.6 0.7

1 SCC 2270002xxxDraft: October 20, 2006

Page 5 of 13 Data on area source emissions and the total emissions for PM 2.5 and PM 10 are also shown in Tables 1 and 2. Both tables show that constructio n dust is a major contributor to total emissions of PM 2.5 and especially PM 10 with 5.1% and 14.3% emission contribution respectively. The MANE-VU states with the largest contribution to PM 2.5 emissions are the District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. The MANE-VU states with th e largest contribution to PM 10 emissions are the Rhode Island, Maryla nd, and the District of Columbia. Data on off-highway and nonroad diesel emissions sources for PM 2.5 and 10 are also shown in Tables 3 and 4. These tables show that diesel emissions do not contri bute significantly to PM 2.5 and PM 10 emissions with 2.2% and 0.7% respectively. Ho wever, they do make a contribution to PM emissions. According to Table 3, the Distri ct of Columbia, New Je rsey, and Pennsylvania contribute the most to PM 2.5 diesel emissions of all the M ANE-VU states. The District of Columbia, New Jersey, and Rhode Island contribute the most to PM 10 diesel emissions in MANE-VU states as seen in Tabl e 4. Construction emissions are a large percentage of the total PM inventory in urban areas, for example in the Di strict of Columbia has the highest percentage of construction emissions as a percentage of nonroad source emissions a nd the total inventory. It should be noted that “a fugitive dust transpor t fraction” is applied to emissions numbers for construction activities to account for dust settling out of the air close to the sources. This application essentially reduces fugitive dust emissions to approximately one-fourth of the emissions values before they are used in photoche mical transport models. As a result of this application, photochemical models produce more c onsistent results with ambient air quality monitoring data. In addition, the EPA has recentl y recommended that a new emissions factor be used in determining fugitive dust emissions from construction activities. MANE-VU States have agreed to use the new emissions factor , and, as a result, the values for PM 2.5 and PM 10 emissions from construction activities are significantly lower in Version 3.0 of the 2002 MANE-VU Modeling Inventory, compared to Version 2.0 of the 2002 MANE-VU Modeling Inventory.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 6 of 13 4. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data

The Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM), on behalf of MANEVU, analyzed ambient air quality data from th e Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) network in several ar eas within and near Class I Areas in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic Region. Figure 1 shows the relative contri butions of sulfate, nitrate, organic carbon, crustal material, elemental carbon, and Rayleigh sca ttering to visibility impairment on the 20% clearest and 20% haziest days in 1999. Constructi on activities contribute only a fraction to the crustal material emissions that were measured and diesel emissions from construction sites contribute to elemen tal carbon, nitrate, and organic carbon.

Figure 1: Speciated contribution to total atmospheric light extin ction in or near Class I Areas in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states on 20 percent of days with the worst (left bar) and best (right bar) visibility conditions during 1999. (Source: Technical Memorandum #1: Updated St atistics for the MANE-VU Region, prepared by the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, on behalf of MANE-VU in February 2002. The memorandum is available online at http://bronze.nescaum.org/regionalhaze/memoranda/Memo1-VisData.pdf .)

On the 20% haziest days in 1999, su lfate was the greatest contributor to visibility impairment at all of the sites analyzed, and sulfate and Rayleigh scattering were the largest contributors on the 20% clearest days in 1999. Crustal material , including dust from construction activities and other sources of dust, was only a minor contributor to haze on the 20% clearest and haziest days in 1999.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 7 of 13 Data from the IMPROVE monitoring network has also been analyzed to estimate the contribution of soil dust to PM 2.5 concentrations across the nation. Figure 2 shows the results of an analysis on 2001 IMPROVE data.

Figure 2: Annual Soil Fraction of Fine Particle Mass (2001). (Source: “Spatial and Seasonal Patterns in Speciated Fine Particle Concentration in the Rural United States,” a presentation by Bret Schichtel of the National Park Service and William Malm, Marc Pitchford, Lowell Ashbau gh, Robert Eldred, and Rodger Ames, made available online by IMPROVE at http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve /Publications/GrayLit/gray_literature.htm .)

According to IMPROVE results, whereas soil dust contributes more than 50% of the PM 2.5 mass in parts of the western United States, dust cont ributes less than 10% in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast Regions of the United States. Cons truction activities are not the only sources of construction dust in the Region. Other sources of fugitive dust, such as dust from paved and unpaved roads and agricultural tillin g practices, are also significan t sources. Since construction dust only partially comprises th e total dust component and sin ce soil dust is not a large contributor to ambient PM 2.5 concentrations, dust from construc tion activities is unlikely a large component of PM 2.5 concentrations measured in MANE-VU Class I Areas. These results confirm the NESCAUM findings that dust is not a major contributor to haze in the Region.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 8 of 13 5. Potential Available Control Measures

There are several control options for reducing dust and diesel emissions from construction activities. The most common methods for cont rolling dust emissions include watering surface materials and minimizing surface wind speed using windbreaks or source en closures. Chemicals can also be used to stabilize surface materials, but these methods can be expensive and/or have adverse ecological effects. Dust minimizati on techniques used when hauling dirt include covering trucks and rapidly cleani ng up spillage. Early paving of permanent roads can also help control dust during certain construc tion activities. In the case of reducing diesel emissions, four options have been utilized with success. The us e of cleaner fuels (e.g., low sulfur, emulsified diesel), the installation of exha ust controls (e.g., diesel oxidati on catalysts), placing limitations on the time and location of idling machines, and assuring that heavy duty vehicles comply with state regulations (e.g., smoke standards).

6. Existing Regulations

Most MANE-VU states and the District of Colu mbia have regulations in place to control dust emissions from construction activ ities that are relevant to re gional haze and certain MANE-VU states have regulations in place to control di esel emissions. MARAMA requested information regarding state control measures, and received responses from every MANE-VU state and the District of Columbia. The following descriptions of state regulations incorporate the information provided by Connecticut (Michael Geigert and Merrily Gere), Delaware (Jack Sipple), the District of Columbia (Rama Tangirala), Maine (Jeff Crawford), Maryland (Brian Hug), Massachusetts (Ken Santlal and Eileen Hine y), New Hampshire (Andy Bodnarik), New Jersey (Ray Papalski), New York (John Kent), Pennsylva nia (Nancy Herb), Rhode Island (Ted Burns), and Vermont (Paul Wishinski). The following descriptions are pr ovided as background information and are not intended to incorporate any regulations, policies, programs or projects into the State Implementation Plan.

6.1 Connecticut Section 22a-174-18 of the Regulations of Connec ticut State Agencies, “Control of particulate matter and visible emissions,” addresses the cont rol of airborne particulate matter and fugitive particulate matter in subsections (c) and (d). These regulati ons, which include dust control measures and visible emissions from diesel power ed mobile sources, apply to road building and construction activities. Regulations are available online at http://www.dep.state.ct.us/air2/regs/mainregs.htm

. Two additional emissions control programs related to construction activities are currently underway in Connecticut. First, the Connecticut Clean Air Cons truction Initiative is a 10-year pilot project designed to reduce idling and opera tional emissions from construction equipment used to complete the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Improvement Proj ect also called the Q Bridge Project. Retrofits and idli ng restrictions for this project ar e required as part of contract specifications with the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT). Diesel retrofits and idling restrictions for construc tion vehicles were also writte n into a special act called the Connecticut Clean Diesel Plan by the Connectic ut Department of Environmental Protection (CTDEP). The CTDEP hopes to work with CTDOT to expand this program to all state road construction projects. Currently, 150 diesel powered construction m achines have been retrofits with oxidation catalysts and by the projects completion 200 machines will be retrofitted.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 9 of 13 Second, a PM 10 limited maintenance plan for the City of New Haven was approved by EPA. The plan includes some contingency measures that apply to New Haven unde r a state order. The measures focus on street paving and sweeping.

The Connecticut Department of Transportation ha s implemented diesel vehicle emission controls that Contractors and Sub-cont ractors are obligated to follo w. Any non-road construction equipment with engine horsepow er (HP) rating of 60 HP and above that are assigned to a contract for a period in excess of 30 consecutive calendar days must be retrofitted with Emission Control Devices and/or use Clean Fuels in order to reduce diesel emissions. Contractors must submit a certified list of non-road diesel powered construction equipment what will be retrofitted with emission control devices and/or use Clean Fuel and include the addition or deletion of nonroad diesel equipment. The list has three parts and a monthly report must also be submitted by the contractor updating the above stated info rmation. If these rules are not followed the contractor will be issued a Non-Compliance a nd given 24 hours to bring the equipment into compliance or removed it from the project. If th e contractor still does not comply further and more extreme actions will be taken. For furt her information on this project contact the Connecticut Department of Tr ansportation, regarding the I- 95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Improvement Program.

Connecticut has regulations in pl ace to control fugitive emissions from construction. In Section 22a-174-18(c) of regulations from the Department of Environmental Prot ection state that, “No person shall cause or allow th e emission of visible particul ate matter beyond the legal boundary of the property on which such emission occurs th at either diminishes the health, safety or enjoyment of people using a building or st ructure located beyond th e property boundary...No person shall emit particulate matter into the ambien t air in such a manner as to cause a nuisance.” The regulations also place strict controls on the t ype and amount of visibl e particulate matter that can be released by the owner or operator of the equipment. These regulations are available online

at: http://www.dep.state.ct.us/air2/regs/mainregs/sec18.pdf

6.2 Delaware Delaware Air Quality Management (AQM) Re gulation 6, “Particulate Emissions from Construction and Materials Handling,” addresses c ontrol measures for particulate emissions from construction and materials handli ng operations to minimize air po llution. This regulation is available online at http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/a ir/aqm_page/docs/pdf/reg_6.pdf

. Delaware has no regulations or laws to control emissions from diesel equipment at construction sites.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 10 of 13 6.3 District of Columbia Chapter 6 of the Title 20 D.C. Municipal Regulat ions (20 DCMR), addresses control measures for particulate matter. Section 605 of 20 DC MR "Control of Fugitiv e Dust" specifically addresses the fugitive dust control measures th at apply to roads, parking lots, vehicles transporting dusty materials, loading & unloa ding and demolition of buildings activities. Additionally, Section 90 3 of the Title 20 DCMR addresse s odorous or other nuisance air pollutants.

There are no regulations or laws in place to contro l emissions from diesel at construction sites in Washington D.C. However, ther e are restriction on the use of heavy duty diesel engines produced for the 2005 and 2006 model years and hea vy duty vehicles containing these engines. These vehicles are not allowed to be registered in the District of Columb ia without the applicant presenting documentation that the California Air Resources Board has issued an Executive Order for the vehicle or engine certi fying that it complies with the applicable exhaust emission standards under the California C ode of Regulations. The emission standards for these engines are referenced to CARB Title 13, sectio n 1956.8 which are available online at http://www.calregs.com/linkedslice/defa ult.asp?SP=CCR-1000&Action=Welcome

.

6.4 Maine The Department of Environmental Protecti on (DEP) Regulations Chapter 101, “Visible Emissions,” establishes opacity limitations fo r emissions from seve ral categories of air contaminant sources, including fugitive emissions. DEP Regs Chapter 101 can be applied to construction activities and is available online at http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/rules/06/096/096c101.doc

Maine has no regulations or laws to control em issions from diesel e quipment at construction sites.

6.5 Maryland

COMAR 26.11.06.03D addresses “Particulate Matter from Materials Handling and Construction.” This regu lation, available online at http://www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/26/26.11.06.03.htm , states that during construction activities there must be “reasonable precautions to preven t particulate matter from becoming airborne” and lists possible control measures.

Maryland has no regulations or laws to control em issions from diesel equipment at construction sites.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 11 of 13 6.6 Massachusetts Control measures to mitigate the emission of part iculate matter from cons truction activities are included in the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protecti on Air Pollution Patrol regulations. According to regulation 310 CMR 7. 09, “No person having control of any dust or odor generating operations such as construction work shall permit emissions therefrom which cause or contribute to air pollu tion,” and written notification to the Department is required ten working days prior to the initiation of construction. According to regulation 310 CMR 7.06, “No pers on shall cause, suffer, allow, or permit excessive emission of visible air contaminants, ot her than water, from a diesel engine.” In addition regulation 310 CMR 7.11 st ates that, “All motor vehicles registered in the Commonwealth shall comply with pertinent regulations of the Registry of Motor Vehicles relative to exhaust and sound emissions.”

Regulation 310 CMR 7.06, 7.09 and 7.11 are available online at http://www.mass.gov/dep/air/laws/7b.htm#09

6.7 New Hampshire Fugitive dust control measures for construc tion activities are included in CHAPTER Env-A 1000, “Prevention, Abatement, and Control of Open Source Air Pollution,” PART Env-A 1002, “Fugitive Dust.” Subsection Env-A 1002.04, “Precau tions to Prevent, Abate, and Control Fugitive Dust,” lists potential dust control measures and is available online at http://www.gencourt.state .nh.us/rules/env-a1000.html.

New Hampshire has no regulations or laws to control emissions from diesel equipment at construction sites.

6.8 New Jersey Fugitive emissions are regulated under the New Je rsey Administrative Code, Title 7, Chapter 27, Subchapter 8 (NJAC 7:27-8 et seq.); Permits and Certificates, available on-line at http://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqm/rules.htm . Dust control measures for construction are not specifically mentioned. Any off-site impacts from construction activities are also prevented by NJAC 7-27-5 et seq. - Prohibition of Air Polluti on that prevents any activity from being injurious to human health or we lfare at any off-site location.

New Jersey has recently passed the Diesel Retrof it Law which is expected to reduce particulate emissions from some equipment that will be used in municipal construction or maintenance projects. The 2005 diesel retrof it law regulates publicly-owned off-road equipment in New Jersey by requiring retrofitting with exhaust pa rticulate emissions control systems. The Department of Environmental Protection is char ged with designating Best Available Retrofit Technology and defining specific ty pes of equipment to be retrofitted. The law limits the choices of BART to those verified under the EPA and CARB diesel emissions control strategy verification programs. A constitutionally dedica ted portion of the State Corporate Business Tax serves as the funding source to reimburse the retrofit costs.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 12 of 13 6.9 New York The New York State Department of Environmen tal Conservation Rules and Regulations Part 211, “General Prohibitions” includes a clause th at places limits on particulate emissions, 211.3, “Visible emissions limited.” The regulation is available online at http://www.dec.state.ny.us /website/regs/part211.html

In addition, the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Environmental Procedures Manual Chapter 1.1 Section 15, “C onstruction Related Air Quality Impacts,” addresses air quality issues associated with c onstruction activities and includes possible control measures. This manual is available online at http://www.dot.state.ny.us/eab/epm.html

. New York has no regulations or laws to control emissions from diesel equipment at construction sites.

6.10 Pennsylvania 25 PA Code, Chapter 123, Sections 123.1, “Prohibi tion of certain fugitive emissions,” and 123.2, “Fugitive particulate matter,” regulate emissions fr om construction and other related activities. These regulations were adopted on September 10, 1971 and have been “SIP approved.” These regulations are available online at http://www.pacode.com/secure /data/025/chapter123/s123.1.html and http://www.pacode.com/secure /data/025/chapter123/s123.2.html

. Pennsylvania does not have regulations to c ontrol emissions from diesel equipment at construction sites. However, permits are re quired for the operation of diesel and nonroad engines. Section 2 of the both the General Pl an Approval And/Or General Operating Permit (BAQ-GPA/GP 9) and the General Plan Appr oval And/Or General Operating Permit (BAQGPA/GP 11), states th at nonroad and diesel e ngines must have the best available technology (BAT) installed and in operation and compliance so that the diesel engine is in compliance with regulated emissions standards. Both General Permits (GPs) require the permittee to maintain accurate records of the amount of time the engi ne is in operation per month, including the amount of fuel used for each unit. GP 9 is more specific about the emissions limits for diesel engines and these are different depending on wh en construction commenced and the location of the construction. GP 9 and GP11 are available online at http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/de putate/airwaste/aq/permits/gp.htm

.

6.11 Rhode Island The RI Department of Environmental Manage ment Air Pollution C ontrol Regulation No. 5, “Fugitive Dust,” regulates fugitive dust generated by numerous operations that include construction activities. The regulation is available online at http://www.dem.ri.gov/pubs/regs/regs/air/air05_96.pdf

. Rhode Island has no regulations or laws to control emissions from diesel equipment at construction sites.Draft: October 20, 2006

Page 13 of 13 6.12 Vermont Regulation 5-231 (4) in Vermont’s Air Polluti on Control Regulations addresses fugitive particulate matter emissions. The regulation states that reasonable precautions must be taken to prevent particulate matter from becoming airbor ne during the construction of buildings and nonpublic roads and the handling, transport, and storag e of materials. This regulation is available online at http://www.anr.state.vt.us/air/docs/apcregs.pdf

. In addition to this rule, most of Vermont’s ne w source permits include references to fugitive emissions. New source permits typically includ e language such as, “The Permittee shall take reasonable precautions at all times to control and minimize emissions of fugitive particulate matter from operations at the Facility,” and list possible c ontrol measures.

Vermont has no regulations or laws to control em issions from diesel equipment at construction sites.

7. Conclusions

The following statements summarize the main points of this technical support document.

• Although a temporary source, fugitive dust and diesel emissions from construction activities can have an aff ect on local air quality.

• While construction activities are responsible for a relatively large fraction of direct PM 2.5 and PM 10 emissions in the Region, the impact on vi sibility is less beca use dust settles out of the air relatively close to the sources.

• Ambient air quality data shows that soil dust makes up only a minor fraction of the PM 2.5 measured in MANE-VU Class I Areas, and im pacts of diesel emissions in these rural areas are also a small part of total PM 2.5

.

• The use of measures such as clean fuels, retrofit technology, best available technology, specialized permits, and truck staging areas (to limit the a dverse impacts of idling) can help decrease the effects of dies el emissions on local air quality.

• MANE-VU States have rules in place to m itigate potential impacts of construction on visibility in Class I Areas.