CBIA

Curt Spalding

June 19, 2015

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• Trends in New England 

• Status of Connecticut Ozone Nonattainment Areas

• Interstate Transport of Air Pollution

• Proposed Ozone Standard

Ozone Air Quality in Connecticut
Ozone Exceedance Days in New England
Connecticut Continues to Suffer Poor Air Quality

Air Quality Index (AQI)
• Existing 2008 ozone standard is 75 parts per 

billion (ppb) on an 8-hour average basis.

• Ozone nonattainment areas in New England

• Dukes County (Martha’s Vineyard)

• Greater Connecticut

• CT portion of the New York City area

• Attainment date for “Marginal Areas” is July 20, 

2015, which is determined based on 2012-2014 

ozone data.

Existing Ozone Standard
County with violating monitor.

County with attaining monitor.

County with no monitor 

or incomplete data.

Reclassification – For Marginal 

areas that fail to attain, EPA 

working on bump ups to 

higher classification (i.e., 

Moderate)

Moderate Areas – CT would 

get approx. 1 year from final 

notice to submit attain demo 

SIP

• CT would work w/ NJ & NY 

on SIP for multi-state area

Counties with Monitors Exceeding 75 ppb based on 2012-2014
7

2008 Ozone NAAQS 

Interstate Air Pollution Transport

• EPA Guidance - Jan 22, 2015 EPA memo to help states as they 

develop SIPS to address cross-state transport

• Includes preliminary 2018 air quality modeling results

• Areas in CT, MD, NY, TX projected to exceed NAAQS in 2018

• Maintenance concerns in CT plus 8 other states

• Preliminary Contributions for 2008 NAAQS –

• No New England state linked to nonattain/maintenance in 

another state

• 10 States linked to nonattain/maintenance in CT in 2018 (IL, 

IN, MD, MI, NJ, NY, OH, PA, VA, WV)

• Good Neighbor SIPs -

• a state could demonstrate that its contribution is below the 

screening threshold, or 

• it could evaluate the scope of its transport obligation and 

identify measures to achieve any needed emissions 

reductions.

New York City

Philadelphia Baltimore

Louisville 

Allegan

Dallas

Sheboygan

St Louis

Houston

Nonattainment Sites

Maintenance Sites

2018 Projected Nonattainment 

& Maintenance Sites
Next Steps on Good Neighbor SIPs 

•Finding of Failure to Submit - EPA under court order to 

make findings by June 30, 2015

• CT SIP submitted June 15, RI expected soon.

•Final Modeling – Final EPA modeling this summer; 

focused on 2017 using updated emission inventories

•State Role –

•Identify emissions reductions necessary to significant 

contribution

• Adopt control measures to achieve reductions

•EPA Role -

•Facilitate transport SIP development

•Carry out federal “backstop” role, if necessary

• Proposal anticipated fall or winter 2015

8
9

2015 Ozone NAAQS

• Proposed Rule – On Nov 25, 2014, EPA proposed to 

strengthen air quality standards for ground-level ozone 

• Reflects strong scientific evidence – including more than 

1,000 new studies.

• Consistent with CASAC range of 60 to 70 ppb. 

• Final Rule - Signed by Oct 1, 2015 (per consent decree)

• Final Designations – Oct 2017 (based on 2014-2016 AQ), if 

new ozone standard

• Attainment Dates –Marginal (Dec 2020), Moderate (Dec 

2023), Serious (Dec 2026)

Proposed 

Ozone Standards

Health-based: 65-70 ppb

Welfare-based: 65-70 ppb

Current standard: 75 ppb
358 counties would violate 70 parts per billion (ppb)

200 additional counties would violate 65 ppb for a total of 558

Based on 2011 – 2013 monitoring data

Counties Where Measured Ozone is Above Proposed Range of 

Standards (65 – 70 parts per billion)
Existing and Proposed Federal Rules Will Help 

Reduce Ozone Pollution

• Rules intended to reduce ozone precursors such as NOx and VOCs, along with rules that will 

reduce these pollutants as a co-benefit of reducing toxic emissions and carbon pollution, will 

help most areas of the country meet a revised primary and secondary ozone standard in the 

range of 65-70 ppb by 2025.

• These federal programs include:

• Requirements to reduce the interstate transport of ozone,

• The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS),

• Mobile Source-Related Standards, especially the Tier 3 emission control requirements for motor fuels 

and vehicles,

• Regional Haze Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Emission Standards,

• Emissions Standards for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines,

• Emissions Standards for Industrial, Commercial and Industrial (ICI) Boilers, and

• The Clean Power Plan (CPP)

11
EPA Projects Most Counties Would Meet the Proposed Range of 

Standards in 2025

9 counties outside of California would violate 70 parts per billion (ppb) 

59 additional counties outside of California would violate 65 ppb for a total of 68

Because several areas in California are not required to meet the existing standard by 2025 and may not be required to meet a revised standard until sometime between 

2032 and 2037, EPA analyzed California separately. Details are available in the Regulatory Impact Analysis for this proposal.
• Lays out different approaches for new and existing 

sources

• New sources under section 111(b)

• Federal standards for new, modified and reconstructed 

sources

• Existing sources under section 111(d) 

• State programs for existing sources that are equivalent to 

federal guidelines

•Applies the “Best System of Emissions Reduction” 

(BSER)

• Feasibility

• Costs

• Technology

• Size of Reductions

13

Proposed Carbon Pollution Standards 

Clean Air Act Section 111
This Proposal Deals With the Largest Source 

of GHG Emissions in the U.S.

14
Building Block Strategy EPA Used to 

Calculate the State Goal

Maximum Flexibility:

Examples of State 

Compliance Measures

1. Make fossil fuel-fired

power plants more 

efficient

Efficiency Improvements Efficiency improvements

Co-firing or switching to natural 

gas

Coal retirements

Retrofit CCS (e.g.,WA Parish in 

Texas)

2. Use lower-emitting 

power sources more

Dispatch changes to 

existing natural gas 

combined cycle (CC)

Dispatch changes to existing 

natural gas CC

3. Build more zero/lowemitting energy sourcesRenewable Energy

Certain Nuclear

New NGCC

Renewables

Nuclear (new and up-rates)

New coal with CCS

4. Use electricity more 

efficiently

Demand-side energy 

efficiency programs

Demand-side energy efficiency 

programs

Transmission efficiency 

improvements

Energy storage

15
State Performance Goals (lbs/MWh)

State 2012 Fossil 

Emission Rate1

Interim Goal (2020 -

2029 average)2

Final Goal (2030 

and thereafter)2

Connecticut 844 597 540

Maine 873 393 378

Massachusetts 1,001 655 576

New Hampshire 1,119 546 486

Rhode Island 918 822 782

16

1 From Goal Computation Technical Support Document, Appendix 5 – 2012 Emissions Rate and Building Block Application

2 From Table 1 to Subpart UUUU of Part 60 – State Rate-Based CO2 Emission Performance Goals, Proposed
• Timing: 

o Up to 15-year window in which to 

plan for and achieve reductions in 

carbon pollution

o Up to two or three years to 

submit final plans

• Form of goal: States can use either a 

rate-based or mass-based goal

• Single or multi-state plans: States 

can collaborate and develop plans on 

a multi-state basis

• Selection of measures: 

o States can build off existing 

reduction programs 

o States can choose their 

collection of measures 

o State can design programs to 

reduce CO2 emissions from 

utilities on a regional basis

17

Flexibilities Available to States
24%

12%

-20%

-71%

-93%

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

New England Economic Growth and ISO New England System 

Emissions, 1999-2013

New England GDP Total Generation CO2 Emissions NOx Emissions SO2 Emissions
Next Steps

Milestones Dates

Final Standards for New Sources Summer 2015

Final Standards for Modified and 

Reconstructed Sources

Summer 2015

Final Emissions Guidelines for 

Existing Sources

Summer 2015

Proposal for Federal Plan Summer 2015

State Plans/Extension Requests due Summer 2016

Multi-state compliance plans due Summer 2018

19
Phase 2 GHG Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for 

Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles 

• Proposed by EPA and NHTSA this morning

• Consistent with timeline announced by President Obama in February 2014

•Builds on Phase 1 standards set by EPA and NHTSA in 2011, which 

took effect in 2014. 

•Would extend GHG Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for 

Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles beyond model year 

2018

20
CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AND RISK ANALYSIS - CIRA

• CIRA report to be released June 22, 2015

•U.S. impacts and benefits of reducing GHG emissions

•Uses several emission reduction scenarios including business as usual

• Looks at economic impacts to sectors across the US including

• Water resources

• Human health

• Ecosystems

• Energy

• Agriculture
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Thank You

Curt Spalding

EPA New England Regional Administrator

Spalding.Curt@epa.gov