# 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 StandardCounty 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 - 20147



# 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 – F inal 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 89



# 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 ppb358 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.

14Building 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 sources Renewable 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 Rate 1 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 CO 2 

### emissions from utilities on a regional basis

17 

# Flexibilities Available to States24% 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 • AgricultureU.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

# Thank You Curt Spalding EPA New England Regional Administrator Spalding.Curt@epa.gov