Activity Update for C

Permits/NSR/Tox

Integration Subcom

Scott Mathias

May 13, 2009
Permitting

• Coal-fired power plant PSD perm• Petition for reconsideration of rea

possibility

• Petition for reconsideration of def

fugitive emissions

• Petition for reconsideration of PM

implementation rule

• Petition for reconsideration of NS

aggregation policy interpretation
Permitting (cont

• Petition for reconsideration of eth

production major source threshold

• Flexible Permits Rule under revie• Final rule establishing PM2.5 PSD 

• Final rule for Tribal NSR program• WI and OH NSR SIPs – reconside

OH to become effective?

• 1-hour ozone anti-backsliding for 

proposal
• EPA revisions to the PM NAAQS (Oct 17, 

– Revised level of 24-hour PM2.5 standard to 35 – Retained level of annual PM2.5 standard at 15 μ

• CASAC recommended a standard in the range 

– Retained 24-hour PM10 standard to provide pro

short-term exposures to thoracic coarse particlannual PM10 standard

– Secondary standards set identical to primary s

• CASAC recommended a sub-daily PM2.5 standa

effects associated with visibility impairment

Status of PM NAAQ
Litigation on 2006 PM NAAQS: 

Court Decision Issued Februar

• Fine Particles 

– Remanded PM2.5 annual primary standard and 

standards for reconsideration 

• Court concluded EPA failed to adequately explain 

sufficient to protect public health with an adequate 

• Court concluded decision to set secondary standa

standards was unreasonable and contrary to the la

– Primary 24-hour PM2.5 standard not challenged

• Coarse Particles 

– Upheld decisions to retain 24-hour PM10 stand

annual PM10 standard

– Court concluded EPA reasonably explained de

all coarse PM (including nonurban PM) and to 

indicator for coarse PM
PM NAAQS: Next St

• EPA is evaluating options for responding to remand 

• Current PM NAAQS review already well underway

– CASAC review of first draft Integrated Science Asse

2, 2009

– CASAC consultation for Risk/Exposure Assessment 

documents – April 2, 2009

– Current schedule:

• Final ISA – December 2009• Final REA – July 2010• Proposed rule – January 2011• Final rule – October 2011

– Schedule subject to change pending decisions on ho

remand
Ozone NAAQS

• EPA issued revisions to Ozone NAAQS – March 27

– Revised level of primary 8-hour ozone standard to 0.0

• CASAC recommended a level between 0.060 - 0.070 p

– Revised secondary standard to be identical to primary 

• CASAC recommended a distinct secondary standard ba

weighted average

• Current status of litigation 

– Petitioners’ briefs were scheduled to be filed April 1, 2– EPA requested “extension to allow time for appropria

appointed by the new Administration to review the Ozdetermine whether the standards established in the Oshould be maintained, modified or otherwise reconsid

– EPA also requested that “it be directed to notify the C

within 180 days of the Court’s order vacating the briefactions the Agency has taken or intends to take, if anOzone NAAQS Rule, and the anticipated time frame f

– Court granted EPA’s request on March 10, 2009
NAAQS Pollutant Proposal 

NO2 Primary* Jun 2009 

SO2 Primary* Nov 2009 

NOX /SOX Secondary* Feb 2010 

CO* Oct 2010 

PM** Jan 2011 

Ozone** Jun 2012 

Lead Jan 2013 

Looking Forward -

National Ambient Air Quality Standards Rev

*Court ordered deadline **Current Schedules do not reflec

schedules reflecting options for r
Status of PM2.5 SIP Subm

• For 39 nonattainment areas, 58 plans were due b

meet the 1997 PM2.5 standards

– Clean air determinations for Harrisburg, PA and Washing– Other States may qualify for clean air determination base

• A number of States have submitted final attainme

for some of the areas 

– EPA has not made findings of failure to submit – SIP submittal actions and findings on hold until direction f

management

• Regional Offices are working with their States for 

areas to receive complete and approvable SIPs

• We are working with our Regional Offices to ensure co

reviewing and acting on SIPs especially on key issues RACT/RACM, contingency measures)
Status of 8-hr Ozone S

• For 26 nonattainment areas, 36 State portions du

meet the 1997 8-hour ozone standards

• 25 final attainment demonstrations submitted

– Final approval for Dallas-Fort Worth, TX– Proposed disapprovals for Philadelphia, NY City & Baltim– NC/SC withdrew Charlotte SIPs

• 6 failure to submit findings – sanction clocks runn

– Clean data determination has stayed Jefferson Co– Findings made for NC & SC withdrawing Charlotte 

• Other actions:

– 2 clean data determinations– 1 final redesignation– 4 reclassifications requested instead of submitting 
Status of 110(a)(2) Infrastruc

• There are 12 elements required for infras• Findings of completeness/incompletenes

on March 24, 2008 for 1997 8-hour ozone November 21, 2008 for 1997 PM2.5

• Three 110(a)(2) SIPs are due soon

– 2006 24-hr PM2.5 NAAQS: October 20– 2008 0.075 ppm Ozone NAAQS: Mar– 2008 Lead NAAQS: November 2011
Regional Haze SIPs

Final SIPs awaiting EPA action: 15 out of 

State Region RPO Submittal DateAlabama

4 VISTAS 7/15/2008

Albuquerque

6 WRAP 9/11/2008

Arkansas

6 CENRAP 9/24/2008

California

9 WRAP 3/17/2009

Delaware

3 MANE-VU 9/26/2008

Iowa

7 CENRAP 3/25/2008

Kentucky

4 VISTAS 6/25/2008

Louisiana

6 CENRAP 6/13/2008

Mississippi

4 VISTAS 9/24/2008

Missouri

7 CENRAP 3/13/2008

North Carolin

a

4 VISTAS 12/17/2007

South C

arolina

4 VISTAS 12/17/2007

Tennessee

4 VISTAS 4/4/2008

Utah

8 WRAP 9/16/2008

West Virginia

3 VISTAS 7/8/2008

Yellow=CAIR state

Blue=met deadline
Regional Haze SIPs

Outstanding/Late SIPs: 38 out of 53 total – received findings o

State (yellow=CAIR state)

Reg 

ion

RPO No. of 

Class I 

areas

Date Expected

Connecticut 1 MANE-VU 0 Sept. 09

Maine 1 MANE-VU 4 Nov. 09Massachusetts 1 MANE-VU 0 Mid 09New Hampshire 1 MANE-VU 2 Mid 09Rhode Island 1 MANE-VU 0 July 09Vermont 1 MANE-VU 1 Mid 09

Ne

w Jersey 2 MANE-VU 1 Late 09

Ne

w York 2 MANE-VU 0 Late 09

Virgin Islands 2 n/a 1 Late 09

DC 3 MANE-VU 0 Mid 09Maryland 3 MANE-VU 0 July 09Pennsylvania 3 MANE-VU 0 Mid 09Virginia 3 VIS

TAS 2 Mid 09

Florid

a

4 VISTAS

3 Sept. 09

G

eorgi

a

4 VISTAS

3 Nov. 0

9

Illinois

5 MWRPO

0 Mid 09

Michigan

5 MWRPO

2 Mid 09

Indiana

5 MWRPO

0 July 09

Minnesota

5 CENRAP

2 Mid 09

Stat

e Re 

gio 

n

RP

O 

Ohio

5 MW

Wisconsin

5 MW

New M

e

xico

6 WRA

Oklahoma

6 CEN

Tex

as 6 CEN

Kansas

7 CEN

Nebraska

7 CEN

C

olorado

8 WRA

Montana

8 WRA

North D

akota

8 WRA

South Dak

ota

8 WRA

Wyomin

g

8 WRA

Arizona

9 WRA

Ha

w

aii 9 WRA

Nev

a

d

a

9 WRA

Alaska 10 WRA

Idaho 10 WRA

Oregon 10 WRAWashingt

on 10 WRA
Issues for Regional Haze 

• Findings of failure to submit issued Jan

2009; FIP clock expires January 15, 20

• No approvals or disapprovals of submitt

have been issued to date

• One state – Michigan – has received a 

incompleteness (Indiana is expected soRegion 5 has asked that the SIPs be re

• CAIR uncertainty, among other things, i

has caused delays in some SIP submittapprovals of those SIPs that have been 

– Uncertainty primarily due reliance on the CA

BART requirements and reasonable progres

• In the West, only 2 SIPs (plus Albuquer

– Utah (309 SIP) and California
Clean Air Interstate Ru

• On appeal, the D.C. Circuit Court remanded, rath

the CAIR. EPA represented to the Court an approof 2 years to complete a revised rulemaking.

• Granting stay to Minnesota sources based on Co• CAIR uncertainty, among other things, in the East 

additional delays in submission of some PM2.5 att

Regional Haze/BART SIPs. It has also caused dereview of those SIPs that have been submitted. 

• Working to develop a replacement rule for the CA

consistent with the Court decision. Will need to a

– Emissions trading– Attainment and maintenance of standards– PM2.5 and ozone standards (1997, 2006, 2008)

– Budget and/or allowance allocations– Significant contribution and remedy
NC and DE Section 126 Pe

• EPA asked for and received a voluntary rema

contested denial of NC’s section 126 petition 2009

– The Court order directs the Agency to conduct an “

reconsideration of the petition but does not set a de

– For purposes of ozone (Charlotte), NC named EGU

Maryland, Virginia, Tennessee, South Carolina, an

– For purposes of PM2.5 (maintenance), NC named E

Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia, KentucTennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama

• Delaware's Section 126 petition received Dec

– Delaware seeks emissions reductions from large E

contributions from their emissions to PM2.5 and ozo

Delaware. 

– Delaware names EGUs in the 9 states of Maryland

Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, PennsylvaWest Virginia.

– EPA’s action deadline extended 6 months to Augus
Other Actions

• PM2.5 Designations: under review

• PM2.5 AQI: The rulemaking propos

hold

• Designations for 2008 Ozone NAA• Fire Policy 

– Draft Policy will be circulated within E– Will not be shared externally until it h

shared and reviewed by OMB and otAgencies