7-1 

### 7.0 Air Quality Trends, Basel ines & Projections for the New York Nonattainment Area (New York Metropolitan Area, Connecticut and Northern New Jersey)

7.1 Air Quality Trends - New York

With the promulgation of the annual and daily PM 2.5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in 1997, and t he establishment of the Federal Reference Method (FRM) for monitoring PM 2.5 and the PM 2.5 monitoring network, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (Department) initiated monitoring for th is pollutant on a statewide basis beginning in 1998/1999. A majority of the monitoring efforts to date have involved 24-hour, filter-based FRM samp lers. Most of the FRM samplers operate on a 1-in-3-day schedule, al though a few monitors operate on a daily basis. Also, as per network des ign requirements, several FRM sites have collocated duplicate samplers.

The PM 2.5 NAAQS is mass-based, but ambient PM 2.5 has a complex morphology and chemical composition. In order to obtain information on species composition, the Departm ent also has operated Speciation Trends Network (STN) monitors at se veral locations across the state. Similar to the FRM network, the ST N samplers operate on a 1-in-3-day schedule. The STN program provides for the conc entration of major ions, carbon compounds, and trace elements, which generally constitute the bulk of PM 2.5 mass.

7.1.1 FRM data

Table1 lists the site locations and sampling periods between 1999-2006 for all FRM monitors in the three D epartment sub-regions that cover parts of the New York Metropolitan Non- Attainment Area (NY Metro NAA): Region 1 (Long Island; 6 sites), Region 2 (New York City; 19 sites), and Region 3 (Lower Hudson River Valley; 3 sites). The analysis included Dutchess County for completeness, even though it is not part of the NY Metro NAA area. Seven of the Regi on 2 sites have collocated duplicate monitors. Three of the sites also operated daily for at least part of the time. A map of the FRM locations is shown in Figure 7-1.

Table 2 lists the linear trends in PM 2.5 mass at longest-running sites FRM sites in the New York metropolitan area. These sites operated from 1999/2000 through 2006, and the trends repo rted in Table 7-2 are based on quarterly average values at each site. Only those quarters with at least 10 valid data points were included in t he linear trend estimates. Consistent7-2 with the composite aver ages presented earlier, PM 2.5 mass appears to be decreasing at each of these longest-r unning sites, by ~0.1-0.5 ug/m3/yr.

7.1.2 STN data

Table 7-3 lists the site locations and sampling periods of the STN monitors. Each of these sites is collocated with an FRM monitor. The STN samplers collect five ions – sulfate (SO 4 ), nitrate (NO 3 ), ammonium (NH 4 ), potassium (K), and sodium (Na) – nearly 50 trace elements, and various carbon species – elemental carbon (EC) and organic carbon (OC). For this analysis, it was assumed that PM 2.5 is primarily composed of only SO 4 , NO 3 , NH 4 , EC, OC, and major crustal s pecies (major oxides of Al, Ca, Fe, Si, and Ti; e.g., US EPA, 2007) , and hereafter refer to the sum of these species as the “reconstr ucted mass.” Although the PM 2.5 NAAQS is strictly mass-based, here an attempt is made to approximate the average species composition of the ambient PM 2.5 in New York City.

Figure 2 displays the annual, wintert ime, and summertime average major PM 2.5 speciation levels. On an overall annual basis, SO 4 and OC account for about 27% and 35%, respectively, of the reconstructed mass in New York City, roughly twice the contribution of NO 3 . During the winter months, OC is the largest contributor to the reconstructed mass (34%), while SO 4 and NO 3 also account for about 20%. The relative importance of NO 3 is higher during the winter months because NO 3 volatilization is much lower during the colder months . During the summer months, SO 4 and OC levels are considerably higher than during the winter months, and account for about 70% of the rec onstructed mass. The smallest components of reconstructed mass correspond to EC and crustal mass (~4-8%). On average, the reconstr ucted mass in New York City is about 18.2 ug/m3 during the summer mont hs, and about 15.2 ug/m3 during the winter months.

7.1.3 Trend Summary - New York

The FRM data collected across the New York metropolitan area over the past seven years suggest that PM 2.5 levels are generally higher in the core urban areas compared to the surroundi ng suburban counties. While this is a rather short time period, it appears that PM 2.5 levels have been decreasing across the entire metropolitan area since the early 2000’s. In terms of species composition, SO 4 and OC are the most important species, especially during the summer months, while NO 3 is also an important species during the winter months. It appears that emissions control programs that ta rget precursors of SO 4 , NO 3 , and OC will be needed to further reduce PM 2.5 levels across the metropolitan area.7-3 7.2 Air Quality Trends - Connecticut and New Jersey

An analysis was conducted of the ambi ent data for those monitors in Connecticut (two counties) and New Jersey (10 counties) that are part of the NY Metro NAA for PM 2.5 . The analysis is based upon the FRM data covering the period of 1999 to 2006, which were extracted from the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) data on De cember 26, 2007. To be consistent with the analysis reported in TSD-3a (2007) “Analysis of Ambient PM 2.5 Mass and Speciation for the New Yo rk metropolitan area through 2006. NYSDEC, Division of Air Resources, Albany, NY 12233,” the data from July 6-9, 2002 that was associated wit h large-scale Canadian forest fires were excluded.

7.2.1 Connecticut

The Connecticut portion of the NY Metro NAA had 14 sites at various times during this period; five of these sites have collocated duplicate monitors and two of the sites had every day sampling for at least a portion of the time. It should be noted that the New Haven/ Stiles St. monitor was designated as a “special purpose” monitor, and as such cannot be used to make an attainment or non-attainmment designation. The stations are listed in Table 4 along wit h their operational dates.

7.2.2 New Jersey

The New Jersey portion of the NY Metro NAA had 15 monitoring sites at various times during this period; th ree of these sites have collocated duplicate monitors and two of the sites had every day sampling for at least a portion of the time. Information on thes e monitors is listed in Table 7-4.

7.2.3 Analysis

A very cursory analysis was performed on these data, similar to what was done for the NY sites. The annual average estimates are listed in Table 7- 5. Only those monitors with at least 75% valid samples in a given year are shown and blank cells indicate that ei ther the sampler wa s not in operation or it did not meet the 75% criteria.

In general, the CT monitors are be low the level of the annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standar d (NAAQS) of 15 ug/m3, with the exception of the New Hav en/Stile Street special purpose monitoring site.7-4 In the case of NJ, there is obvious y ear-to-year variation at some of the sites, and a few of the monitors ar e above the level of the annual PM 2.5 NAAQS. However, this estimated annual average should not be confused with that based on the r egulatory process that requires estimation of the annual average bas ed upon individual quarterly data.

Table 7-6 lists the 98 th percentile of the PM 2.5 concentration at each of these monitors, and again, only thos e years that had 75% valid samples are shown.

7.2.4 Trend Summary - Connecticut and New Jersey

The above data were used to estimate the annual trends at the longestrunning sites. For this analysis, quar terly averages were computed at these sites. Quarters were consider ed to be complete if there were at least 10 valid samples.

Table 7-7 lists the estimated linea r trends on an annual basis. All monitors except for the New Haven/Stiles Street special purpose monitor show a downward trend, varying between 0.05 ug/m3 and 0.49 ug/m3, indicating general improvement in PM2.5 air quality over the region and consistent with what was r eported for the NY monitors.

7.3 Baseline and Future PM2.5 Design Values

Baseline PM2.5 design values for a given area are based solely on measured Federal Reference Method (FRM) data, whereas air quality model-based results utilizing emissions from a target future year are needed to project PM2.5 design values to determine future attainment status of that area. The modelin g guidance (USEPA, 2007a) states that the results from the regul atory applications of air quality models are not to be used in an absolute sense; rather , they are to be used to estimate the effects of changes in emissions on pollutant levels in a relative sense. For a single pollutant like ozone, the future design value at a given location is the product of the current observed value and the ratio of the future-to-current model predictions. The ratio of the future-tocurrent model prediction is also know n as the relative response factor (RRF). Unlike ozone, PM2.5 is comp rised of a variety of ions, trace elements, and carbon species. To dem onstrate future attainment of air quality standards for PM2.5, one needs to project how each of the major species changes between the baseline and future model years. That is, it is necessary to estimate speciated RRF values. In this document, an overview is presented of the calcul ation of the baseline PM2.5 design values and speciated RRFs for monitors in the 22-county New York City7-5 non-attainment area (NYC NAA), which when combined yield future year PM2.5 design values across the NYC NAA.

In the February 11, 2008 addendum to the technical support documentation (See the appendices to this document) for the annual PM2.5 SIP for the New York City non-attainment area (NYC NAA), “Current and Future PM2.5 Design Values in the New York City Metropolitan Non-Attainment Area (T SD-5).” The USEPA has since released a beta version of the M odeled Attainment Test Software (MATS, version 1.3.1) for computi ng baseline and future design values for the annual National Ambient Ai r Quality Standard (NAAQS). This Addendum does not replace TSD-5, al though all design values listed in TSD-5 should be considered preliminary because they were not computed with the MATS. Note that one site – 340172002 (Union City [Hudson County], NJ) – was included in TSD-5 but is not included in the addendum. The data from this site were classified as complete in the MATS because of “minimum value s ubstitution,” with a design value exceeding 15 ug/m3 for the 2001-2002 period; however, the monitor was shut down during the first quarte r of 2002. With only one complete, classifiable year of ac tual monitoring data during the five-year baseline design value period (2000-2004), this site was not used by the MATS and is, therefore, not incl uded in this Addendum.

The PM2.5 data across much of t he northeastern United States was dramatically affected by large forest fires in eastern Canada during the July 6-9, 2002 period. Many states submitted exceptional event flags with the data on selected days during th is period. In March 2003, the Department sent documentation (see Attachment A) to USEPA Region 2 seeking concurrence that the data from July 7, 2002 be excluded for the estimation of the daily and annual standards. Since the USEPA did not concur with these ex ceptional event flags, t he data from this day and other flagged days around this day were included in the official Federal Reference Method (FRM) database in the beta version of the MATS. This issue was raised again with USEPA Region 2 in January 2008, which has since concurred with the Department’s findings (see Attachment B). In terms of official FRM locations in the NYC NAA, there are two daily sites in New York (360050110, I.S. 52 [Bronx County]; and 360810124, Queens College [Queens C ounty]) and one daily site in New Jersey (340390004, Elizabeth/NJ Tu rnpike [Union County]). In the USEPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) database, the data from the daily New York sites are flagged as excepti onal events on July 6 and 7, while the Elizabeth data are flagged from July 7-9.7-6 It should be noted that Connecticut flagged all data from July 6-9, 2002 and received EPA concurrence. Hence, the official quarterly average FRM database in this beta version of the MATS does not include these days at the Connecticut monitors, and as such, the design values at these monitors are not impacted by this unusual period.

7.3.1 Current PM2. 5 Design Values

The first step in the modeled attainm ent test for the annual NAAQS is to compute the baseline design values at each FRM site in the NYC NAA. The current design value is based on a five-year weighted average of observations from 2000-2004 to straddle the baseline emissions/modeling year of 2002 (USEPA, 2007). MATS was used to compute the baseline PM2.5 design va lues two ways. The first method takes the official quarterly aver age database included in the MATS, which incorporates the flagged FRM data from New York and New Jersey during July 2002. For the second method, the FRM data on these flagged days were ignored at the New York and New Jersey monitors, and recomputed the averages for the third quarter of 2002. Table 7-8 lists the av erage PM2.5 levels at the New York and New Jersey monitors during the third quar ter of 2002, both including and excluding the flagged days. By ignor ing these exceptional days, the averages during this quarter were lo wer by about 2 ug/m3 across these sites. The only site whose quarterly average was not impacted by this day was 360390006 (Elizabeth [Union County], NJ), because the FRM data were already missing on this day.

Table 7-9 lists the baseline PM2. 5 design values using these two methods. At the Connecticut monito rs there is no difference between these two methods, since the data fr om this day were already flagged and not used. At most of the Ne w York and New Jersey monitors, exclusion of the flagged data from July 2002 results in lowering of the baseline PM2.5 design values which by about 0.1-0. 2 ug/m3. All subsequent analysis presented here disr egard all flagged data from July 2002.

7.3.1.1 Baseline Species Concentrations

The next step in the modeled atta inment test is to determine the baseline species composition at eac h FRM monitor, based on measured species data. The PM 2.5 species composition is highly complex, but if the goal of air quality management decisions is to reduce PM 2.5 , it is necessary to know the dominant chemical species. The MATS includes speciation data for the 2002-2004 per iod, which are derived from7-7 Speciation Trends Network (STN) and Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (I MPROVE) monitor data. These networks measure major ions, including sulfate (SO 4 ), nitrate (NO 3 ), and ammonium (NH 4 ); carbonaceous species, including elemental carbon (EC) and organic carbon (OC); and dozens of trace elements.

It is known that FRM monitor filters do not retain semi-volatile species such as ammonium nitrate and some organics with high efficiency, particularly during the warmer mont hs. Hence, one cannot simply add up the major species measured by t he STN or IMPROVE monitors and expect to relate this identically to the total mass from the FRM monitor. According to the modeling guidance (USEPA, 2007) t he mass from the FRM monitor can be expressed as:

PM 2.5 = “retained nitrate mass” + “ammoniated sulfate mass” + “ammonium [Eq. 1] associated with sulfate and retained nitrate” + “particle-bound water”+ “other primary PM 2.5 ” + “salt” + “blank mass” + “carbonaceous mass”

Where PM 2.5 refers to the total mass measured at each FRM site; “retained nitrate mass” (NO 3 r) and “ammonium associated with sulfate and retained nitrate” refer only to the fractions of NO 3 and NH 4 , respectively, that are not volatiliz ed; “ammoniated sulfate mass” refers to the SO 4 that is measured by the STN; “particle-bound water” refers to water that is associated with the hygroscopic ammonium sulfate and nitrate, and can be estimated as a polynomial function of retained ammonium, sulfate, and nitr ate; “other primary PM 2.5 ” refers to unspeciated, inert PM 2.5 such as soil/crustal elements (here assumed to be the sum of major crustal oxides – Si , Ca, Fe, and Ti); “salt” is 1.8×Cl; “blank mass” refers to passively co llected contamination, assumed to be 0.5 mg m -3 ; and “carbonaceous mass” refers to EC and an estimate of retained OC. Because of uncertainties in the measured OC, the modeling guidance suggests that or ganic mass be computed as the difference between the measured FR M mass and the sum of the other species listed above.

MATS and the official speciation database, which includes adjustments to the various species, were used to compute baseline species concentrations at each FRM site in the NYC NAA. The MATS also performs spatial averaging of the adjus ted speciation data since actual STN or IMPROVE data are not availa ble at every FRM location. It should be noted that the July 7, 2002 dat a from the STN monitors in the NYC NAA in the official MATS database were flagged by EPA and, hence, not used to compute baseline species composition. Table 7-10 lists the non-blank baseline species co mposition, as defined in Equation7-8 1 above. Note that in the case of retained NH 4 , the actual measured data were not used here, due to uncerta inties in its measurement. The modeling guidance (USEPA, 2007) suggests that NH 4 be estimated according to degree of neutraliz ation (DON) of sulfate:

NH 4 = DON×SO 4 + 0.29×NO 3 r [Eq. 2]

to allow the future NH 4 value to depend only on SO 4 and NO 3 r, since reductions in emissions generally are targeting precursors of SO 4 and NO 3

.

7.3.1.2 Relative Response Factors

As stated in the modeling guidan ce (USEPA, 2007), the air quality modeling results are to be used in a relative sense to compute future PM2.5 design values. For each species i, the future concentration of each species (CFi) is the product of the current concentration (CCi) and the corresponding RRFi:

CFi = CCi×RRFi [Eq. 3]

The RRF values for SO4, NO3r , OM, EC, and OPP were based on application of the CMAQ model for t he baseline year of 2002 and future year of 2009. All RRF values were computed by the MATS on a quarterly basis. Earlier chapters of the technical supporting documentation describe the annual model applications in detail: biogenic emissions (TSD-2a), base year 2002 emissions (TSD-2b), emissions processing and air quality modeling using CMAQ (TSD-2c), and future year 2009 emissions (TSD-4).

7.3.2 Future PM 2.5 Design Values

Table 7-11 lists the current and fu ture design values at each FRM location in the NYC NAA. Note t hat on the average the design values across the NYC NAA were lowered by about 1.6 ug/m3, ranging from 1.3-2.1 ug/m3, in 2009 compared to the baseline 2002 design values. Also note that every site has a fu ture design below the annual NAAQS level of 15 ug/m3, with the exception of one site – P.S. 59 (360610056) in New York County, NY – which has a future design value of 15.2 ug/m3. Additional corroboratory anal yses and weight of evidence (WOE) determinations are necessary to demonstrate attainment at this monitor, since this future design va lue falls within the 14.5-15.5 ug/m3 WOE guideline range. In addition, the Canal Street (360610062)7-9 monitor, also in New York County, has a future year design value of 14.5 ug/m3. Attachment 2 from TS D-5 details the Department’s WOE analysis that supports the projection that the NYC NAA, including New York County, will be considered to be in attainment of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

7.4 Weight of Evidence (WOE) in S upport of Modeled Attainment of the PM 2.5 NAAQS in the New York City Nonattainment Area

The EPA modeling guidance (US EPA, 2007), in conjunction with ambient Federal Reference Method (FRM) PM 2.5 mass data from 2000- 2004 and baseline and future air qua lity modeling results, has been applied to determine the attainment status of the NY Metro NAA with respect to the annual National Ambi ent Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The application of the EPA guidance for estimating the future design values based on the use of relative response factor (RRF) has resulted in one monitor – P.S. 59 (360610056), lo cated in New York County, NY – to exceed the annual PM 2.5 NAAQS level of 15 ug/m3. The estimated future PM 2.5 design value at this monitor, based on this procedure, is 15.3 ug/m3. This value falls within the uncertainty range of ±0.5 ug/m3 of the annual PM 2.5 NAAQS, and supplemental analyses are needed for this monitor to be considered to be in attainment. In the following sections, information is provided to s uggest that there is high degree of potential that estimated future design value will be below the annual NAAQS.

7.4.1 Monitoring Network in New York County and Surroundings

For most of the 2000-2004 period Ne w York County, NY had 4 FRM monitors, but only one Speciation Trends Network (STN) monitor collocated with the FRM at the Canal Street site (360610062) to provide information on composition of the bas eline PM2.5 species. Figure 7-3 displays the location of the four moni tors as well as monitors in the surrounding counties. Table 7-12 lists the dates of operation of the FRM monitors in New York County; t he base year design value for 2002, which is a weighted average of the measurements in the 2000 to 2004 period; and the nearest STN monitor. It should be noted that not all monitors in New York County were assigned the same STN monitor, because the approach selected was to use the nearest neighborhood monitor to link the FRM and STN. In the case of the J.H.S.45 (36061007) FRM monitor in New York County, the nearest STN monitor is the Bronx County I.S.52 site (360050110), and this site is also included in Table 7-12.7-10 The current speciation levels estimat ed at these monitors are listed in Table 7-13. Only two of these site s – Canal Street and I.S.52 – have collocated STN monitors, while the species composition at the other FRM sites are only estimates based on the speciation data from a nearby monitor. Examination of the speciation data at Canal Street and I.S.52 suggests that there may be fairly substantial gradients in PM 2.5 species composition over the non-a ttainment area, on the order of several tenths of a ug/m3

. Thus the estimates listed for the other monitors should only be considered approximate, and in some cases may not necessarily be representativ e of species composition at these monitors. This is certainly a limi tation that needs to be taken into consideration when projecting the future design values using the model results and the current speciation levels.

Although the air quality modeling resu lts are to be used in a relative sense, it is instructive to examine the changes in PM 2.5 mass that the model predicts in an absolute sens e to see the direct impacts of emissions reductions. The CMAQ-predicted average PM 2.5 mass over the nine-grid cells that surround each of these FRM moni tors (see Table 14) in the base (2002) and future (2009) years was examined. Note that CMAQ predicts a consistent reduc tion of about 16% over each FRM monitor in New York County. Although not shown here, future PM 2.5 concentrations at each FRM location across the 22-county NY Metro NAA are predicted by CMAQ to decrease by 12-18%.

7.4.2 Other Data Analysis

A recent study by Qin et al. ( 2006) suggest that sum of sulfate and nitrate comprise about 40% or more of the PM 2.5 mass in the NYC metropolitan area, and that 70% or more of the PM 2.5 measured in NYC results from transport into the regi on. Based on results from source apportionment modeling using Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF), the authors determined that the largest singl e source factor affecting NYC is “secondary sulfate” associated with SO 2 emissions from upwind regions. It is clear that emission reducti ons in upwind states will be needed to further reduce PM 2.5 in the NY Metro NAA.

In TSD-3a, found in the appendices to this document, PM 2.5 levels appear to be decreasing across the NY Metro NAA. Although the data records for PM 2.5 are somewhat short, it is estimated that PM 2.5 mass is decreasing by about 0.1-0.5ug/m 3 /yr. At the P.S.59 site PM 2.5 mass measurements are decr easing by about 0.3ug/m 3 /yr during 1999-2006. In addition to PM 2.5 mass, several criteria pol lutants are also measured at the P.S.59 site. The trends in SO 2 and NO 2 from 1993 to 2006 were7-11 examined using the s easonal Kendall test, a nd found that ambient levels are declining at rates of 3.4% yr -1 and 1.7% yr -1 , respectively. This again points to the potent ial that this area would be meeting the annual NAAQS, given that there are various measures under c onsideration that are aimed at decreasing the emissions of PM 2.5 precursors.

7.4.4 Summary

In summary, the above analysis shows that, based upon the EPA guidance only one monitor in the New York PM 2.5 nonattainment area falls slightly above the level of t he annual NAAQS, but still within the framework of uncertainty. The analysis suggests that lack of collocated speciation monitors and use of spec iation information from the nearest neighborhood monitor may have contri buted to the estimate of PM2.5 being above the level of NAAQS at the P.S.59 monitor. Examining the trends in precursors as well as measured PM2.5 at P.S.59 suggests a downward path and that coupled wit h the observation that the contribution to the secondary species is from upwind regions rather than local, favors strongly that this monito r will also be in attainment similar to the rest of them in t he region. Analysis based on the only other monitor (360610062) with similar PM 2.5 concentrations is projected to be below the level of the annual NAAQS, suggests that P.S.59 (360610056) would also be similarly be below the level of the annual NAAQS.

7.4.5 Additional Information

It should be noted that more specific information and the detailed analyses on the determination of baseline and future design values, and air quality trends, are presented in Appendix B of this document.

7.5 Weight of Evidence: Additio nal Measures Not Accounted for in Modeling Projections *This section was modified by the NJ DEP by information received by NY*

A number of control programs are bei ng adopted or implemented that are not represented in the projection inventories fo r 2009. The control programs in this section include:

- Part 222, Distributed Generation - Part 227-2, NOx RACT (Hi gh Electric Demand Day Units) - Parts 243, 244, and 245, Cl ean Air Interstate Rule - Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2006 - Existing and New/Revised St ate VOC Reduction Measures7-12 - Federal Rules for VOC Reductions - Proposed Federal Rules for VOC, NOx and PM Reductions - Canadian Air Quality Efforts - Governor Spitzer’s “15 by 15” Initiative - NYSERDA Programs

As discussed in section 7.1 of this document, the species composition of PM2.5 has a significant influence on t he measured levels. In terms of species composition, SO 4 and OC (the primary sources of which are VOC emissions) are the most import ant species, especially during the summer months, while NO 3 is also an important species during the winter months. It appears that emissi ons control program s that target precursors of SO 4 , NO 3 , and OC will be needed to further reduce PM 2.5 levels across the metropolitan area. The measures described below will reduce PM and precursor emissions by significant amounts. The Part 222 and Subpart 227-2 regulations bei ng adopted by the Department will yield quantifiable, enforceable NOx emissi ons reductions on the order of 50 tons per day. When co mpared to those measures included in the modeling and the base and proj ected NOx inventories, it is apparent that reductions of this magnitude have the ability to reduce PM2.5 levels substantially. Given that New Jersey and Connecticut as well as other northeastern st ates (Delaware, Maryland and Pennsylvania) are committing to sim ilar measures that will also yield substantial reductions in PM2.5 and pr ecursor emissions, it is expected that NOx and PM2.5 emissions on days of high electricity demand will be reduced substantially throughout the Northeast corridor.

7.5.1 Part 222, Dis tributed Generation

This regulation will set limits on sma ll generators that are not currently controlled. As minor sources, these sources need only to stay below the major source threshold to av oid reasonably available control technology (RACT). Most of thes e sources (generally diesel-fired stationary internal combustion engines) tend to operate on days of high electricity demand and when called upon to address reliability concerns. This regulation will place NOx and PM limits on existing sources as well as restrict the number of megawatts that can be called to operate under demand response. It will also set strict emission standards for new units. It is expected that NOx em issions on High Electricity Demand Days (HEDD) could be reduced by 10 to 15 tons per day in 2012 through the implementation of this regulation.

7.5.2 NOx RACT (High Elec tricity Demand Day Units)7-13 This regulatory revision will set new more stringent NOx limits on electricity generating units. On High Electricity Demand Days (HEDD) base loaded, load following and peaking units all increase operations to meet demand. HEDDs are generally those days when the potential for ozone formation is highest (hazy, hot and humid weather). The Department is specifically moving to revise the NOx emission limits for all very large boilers and combustion turbines. These emission limits are expected to result in the reducti on of 35 to 40 tons per day of NOx emissions.

7.5.3 Clean Air Interstate Rule

On May 12, 2005, EPA published its Clean Air Interstate Rule (70 FR 25162) designed to reduce northeastern U.S. power plant emissions which affect air quality in downwind states. Because New York State contributes to ozone and PM2.5 nona ttainment areas in downwind states, it was required to address NOx and SO2 emissions under CAIR. CAIR specified the reductions necessary in order to fulfill its obligations under CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D), and es tablished budgets for EGUs in New York and the other CAIR states.

The CAIR Trading Program was estab lished in three parts under Title 6 which establish the necessary allow ance programs for New York State: Part 243, “CAIR NOx Ozone Season Tr ading Program; Part 244, “CAIR NOx Annual Trading Program; and Part 245, “CAIR SO2 Trading Program.” These three regulations represent the three model rules released by EPA in association with CAIR which the Department chose to adopt.

All three regulations were effect ive October 19, 2007. Within the regulations, CAIR NOx units and CAIR SO2 units are defined. Also included are permit and monito ring requirements, emission requirements pertaining to allowanc es, and guidelines for recordkeeping and reporting.

EPA’s CAIR Program set the goal of 70 percent SO2 and NOx emissions reductions. Aside from the intended goal of aiding the nonattainment areas in downwind states, these reductions through CAIR will greatly benefit PM2.5 levels within New York State. This includes a reduction of PM2.5 levels in the NYMA nonattainment area due to decreased SO2 and NOx emissions by upwind facilities. The NOx portion of the trad ing program will go into effect in 2009, while the SO2 trading program goes into effect in 2010.7-14 7.5.4 Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2006

The New York State Senate recently approved the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2006, for which rulemaking is currently underway. This regulation will require thousa nds of state-owned or -operated diesel-powered vehicles to be re trofitted with emission control equipment to cut down on the release of exhaust particles, of which a large percentage is direct PM emi ssions. The benefit will be seen with existing engines which are not ex pected to be replaced with new, cleaner engines for some time. Pr omulgation of this regulation is currently anticipated to be completed in time to see some reductions in 2009, which will contribute to the attainment of the PM NAAQS.

7.5.4 Existing State VO C Reduction Measures

7.5.4.1 Part 230: Gaso line Dispensing Sites and Transport Vehicles

Requirements for Stage I and Stage II gasoline dispensing sites are contained in 6 NYCRR Part 230, "Gasoline Dispensing Sites and Transport Vehicles." Stage I systems are required state-wide, while Stage II systems are mandated only in the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA) and lower Orange County. Pa rt 230 affects those gasolinedispensing sites whose annual thr oughput exceeds 120,000 gallons. (This minimum throughput leve l is waived for NYMA.)

A Stage I vapor collection system capt ures gasoline vapors which are displaced from underground gasoline storage tanks when those tanks are filled. These vapors are forced into a vapor-tight gasoline transport vehicle or vapor control system th rough direct displacement by the gasoline being loaded. A Stage II v apor collection system captures at least 90 percent, by weight, of the gasoline vapors that are displaced or drawn from a vehicle fuel tank duri ng refueling; these vapors are then captured and either retained in t he storage tanks or destroyed in an emission control device.

7.5.4.2 Part 212: General Process Emission Sources

This rule, which applies to both VO C and NOx emissions, requires the application of Reasonably Availabl e Control Technology (RACT) for each emission point which emits NOx for major NOx facilities or VOCs for major VOC facilities. Its r equirements are mostly generic, with specific requirements only for coating operations not subject to Part 228.

7.5.4.3 Part 226: So lvent Metal Cleaning7-15 Guidelines for the cleaning of me tal surfaces by VOC-containing substances are expressed in 6 NYCRR Part 226, "Solvent Metal Cleaning Processes." Listed in this regulation are general provisions for storage and recordkeeping, specificat ions for the types of control equipment to be used, and operating practices for solvent metal cleaning. The Department may acc ept a lesser degree of control upon submission of satisfactory evidenc e that the person engaging in solvent metal cleaning is applying RACT and has a plan to develop the technologies necessary to co mply with the aforementioned requirements.

7.5.4.4 Part 228: Surf ace Coating Processes

6 NYCRR Part 228 limits the VOC c ontent for each gallon of coating and sets minimum efficiency for VOC incinerators used as control equipment for VOC emissions from coating processes. It also provides for the use of source-specific anal yses of control requirements where the requirements of the rules cannot be met. Additionally, Part 228 contains requirements for paints and coatings used in auto body refinishing and repairing, includin g spray equipment and housekeeping.

7.5.4.5 Part 229: Petroleum and Volati le Organic Liquid St orage and Transfer

Limitations are placed on VOC emissi ons from applicable gasoline bulk plants, gasoline loading terminals, marine loading vessels, petroleum liquid storage tanks, and organic liqui d storage tanks in 6 NYCRR Part 229, "Petroleum and Volatile Organic Liquid Storage and Transfer." The regulation details the separate applicability thresholds and compliance schedules for NYMA, the Lower Or ange County metropolitan area, upstate ozone non-attainment areas, and remaining areas.

7.5.4.6 Part 233: Pharmaceutical and Cosmetic Manufacturing Processes

VOC emissions from synthesized pharmaceutical or cosmetic manufacturing processes at a major source facility are limited under 6 NYCRR Part 233, "Pharmaceutical and Cosmetic Manufacturing Processes." This regulation out lines the separate requirements and compliance schedules for NYMA, the Lower Orange County metropolitan area, and facilities outside these areas. Compliance requires the installation of cont rol devices, along with monitoring, recordkeeping, and leak repair.7-16 7.5.4.7 Part 205: Architectural and I ndustrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings

Applicability of 6 NYCRR Part 205, "Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings," ext ends to anyone who supplies, sells, offers for sale, or manufactures an y architectural coating for use within New York State, as well as anyo ne who applies or solicits the application of any architec tural coating within the st ate. This regulation places VOC content limits on a wide va riety of architectural coatings. Part 205 also contains labeling an d reporting requirements, compliance provisions and test methods.

7.5.4.8 Part 208: Landfill Gas Collecti on & Control Systems for Certain Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

The operation of certain municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills is regulated under 6 NYCRR Part 208, " Landfill Gas Collection & Control Systems for Certain Municipal Soli d Waste Landfills." For landfills whose non-methane hydrocarbon emi ssions exceed 50 megagrams per year, the operator must design and install a collect ion and control system to be operated in accordance with the provisions of the regulation. The regulation additio nally contains requirements for monitoring, testing, re cordkeeping and reporting.

7.5.5 New or Revised Stat e VOC Reduction Measures

7.5.5.1 Part 228: Surface Coating Processes and Part 235: Consumer Products

As a method to combat ozone issues in nonattainment areas throughout New York State, the Department worked in c onjunction with the Ozone Transport Commission (O TC) on measures to reduce NOx and VOC emissions from a number of source s. In 2006 the OTC released its model rule for VOC emissions from adhesives, sealants, adhesive primers and sealant primer s. The Department int ends to use this model rule as a guide in revising 6 NYCRR Part 228, "Surface Coating Processes," and Part 235, "Consumer Products." Emission reductions should be observed for area sources as well as point sources, due to the variety of industrial and commer cial applications for the subject products.

EPA's consumer and commercial products rule was published September 11, 1998 (40 CFR Part 59 Subpar t D). This rule applied only to household adhesive use, and did not regulate adhesives used in commercial and industrial applications. The OTC's 2001 model rule7-17 proposed additional product categorie s and stricter standards, but its definitions of products generally exempted those products being sold in large containers.

The OTC 2006 model rule, based upon 1998 RACT and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT ) developments by CARB, places stricter VOC limits on a greater r ange of products. The proposed rule prohibits the sale or use of adhes ives, sealants, adhesive primers or sealant primers in excess of it s proposed VOC content limits after January 1, 2009. It also requires that labels have the product's VOC content clearly expressed, and pr esents an option for add-on control systems to meet the requi red content limit. OTC calculations predict that New York State will see a sa vings of 21.5 tons of VOC each summer day, or 3290 tons over the entire 153-day ozone season lasting from May 1-September 30.

7.5.5.2 Part 235: Consumer Products

The Department is intending to m odify 6 NYCRR Part 235, "Consumer Products," under which a VOC content limit is placed on a range of consumer and commercial produc ts. A federal consumer and commercial products rule was pub lished on September 11, 1998 as 40 CFR Part 59 Subpart D. Feeling th is rule regulated an inadequate portion of the consumer and commercial products inventory, the OTC in 2001 developed model regulations for additional product categories and more stringent VOC limits. These suggestions were used as a basis for the VOC limits contained in Part 235, which took effect on January 1, 2005.

The OTC developed its 2006 model rule , finalized September 13, 2006, to again expand the VOC content limitat ions that participating states may adopt for their own programs. Included are limits for 13 new product categories, a more restrictiv e limit on one previously regulated category, and additional requirements fo r two other previously regulated categories. The OTC rule is in fluenced by amendments put forth by CARB in July 2005. The Department will again use the OTC's proposed model rule as a guideline fo r its amendment of Part 235.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) calculated per capita VOC reductions in conjunction with its 2005 ru le. Because the proposed rule mirrors that of CARB so closely, it is assumed that a similar per capita savings will result, which equates to a yearly reduction of 0.122 lb/capita. These reductions come in addition to the 6.06 lb/capita witnessed from the 2001 model rule. Adoption and implementation of7-18 the OTC 2006 model rule will result in VOC emissions reductions of 3.7 tons per summer day and 566 tons over the ozone season in New York State in 2009. CARB estimated the av erage cost effectiveness of these amendments to be $4,000 per ton VOC reduced.

7.5.5.3 Part 234: Graphic Arts

Amendments are being made to the gr aphic arts industry regulations under 6 NYCRR Part 234, "Graphic Arts ." These amendments are in response to two Control Techniq ues Guidelines (CTG) documents published by the EPA in Septem ber 2006: "Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Pr inting" and "Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Pr inting and Letterpress Printing."

CAA Section 182(b)(2)(A) provides that for non-attainment areas designated moderate or worse, RACT provisions must be included in the applicable SIP for "each cat egory of VOC sources in the area covered by a CTG document issued by the Administrator between the date of the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and the date of attainment." These CT Gs present guidance in determining RACT for VOC emissions from inks, coatings, adhesives and cleaning materials within facilities that co nduct the aforementioned printing processes. The Department will use the CTG emission limit and control technology recommendations for flex ible package printing, offset lithographic printing, and letterpress prin ting in its revisions to Part 234.

Cost analyses were performed by the EPA, for which details can be found in the CTG documents. Thes e calculations included equipment, instrument and installati on costs, as well as estimations of labor, maintenance, utility, and overhead cost s. For flexible package printing, a catalytic oxidizer was analyzed under different operating scenarios, leading to estimated costs of $1, 300-$5,700 per ton VOC removed. Lithographic and letterpress printing presses will see estimated costs of $2,010 per ton of VOC removed by c ontrols on heatset inks; costs of $855/ton for cleaning materials; and an actual savings due to alcohol substitutes in fountain solutions. Consumers are not expected to incur any significant price increases.

7.5.5.4 Part 239: Port able Fuel Containers

EPA recently finalized the rule, "Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants From Mobile Sources" (72 FR 8427) . The Department is planning to use this federal rule as a basis for amending the existing 6 NYCRR Part 239, "Portable Fuel Contai ner Spillage Control."7-19 With this federal rule, EPA sets regul ations for portable fuel containers (PFCs), as well as for gasoline and passenger vehicles. The purpose is to significantly reduce emissions of hazardous air pollutants from mobile sources, referred to as "mobile s ource air toxics" (MSATs), to which exposure is known or suspected to cause serious health effects, including cancer. The PFC controls will considerably reduce such MSATs as benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and naphthalene, in addition to the secondary PM reductions.

Since the Department issued Part 239 in October 2002, a number of problems have been identified, as follows:

$ An automatic shutoff feature, in tended to cut off fuel flow when the tank reaches a prescribed level, has proven to be incompatible with many types of fuel tanks. This leads to additional spillage and has frustrated many consumers;

$ Poor production qualit y of the PFCs, as demonstrated by a CARB compliance test resulting in nearly 50 percent failure of PFCs that have already been introduced to the market; and

$ Storage of gasoline in non-regulated containers designed for other fluids, such as kerosene.

As a result of these issues, emissions will still be lost due to evaporation through the diurnal cycle, as well as th rough spillage. The federal rule contains methods considered "best av ailable controls" to correct these problems. The anticipated m odifications to Part 239 will:

$ Eliminate the existing automatic shutoff featur e, fill height and flow rate standards to simplify fueling and lessen spillage;

$ Require certification and complia nce of PFCs prior to their introduction to the market; and

$ Expand the definition of a non-co mpliant container, effectively regulating diesel and kerosene cont ainers in the same manner as PFCs

Along with these modifications, EPA has issued a standard of 0.3 grams per gallon per day (g/gal/day) of hydrocarbons. This standard was established based upon the emissions from a can over a diurnal test cycle, and requires stringent complianc e testing to ensure emissions7-20 control over the life of the product. This st andard must be met for containers manufactured on or afte r January 1, 2009. These new requirements will reduce hydrocarbon em issions from uncontrolled fuel containers by approximately 75 percent.

Both area and non-road source invent ories are expected to be affected by these amendments. Of the projected VOC emission reductions, approximately 70 percent will be attributed to the area source inventory. These changes come from reductions in diurnal and permeation emissions from storage, and transpor t/spillage emissions from re-fueling at gas pumps. The remaining 30 percent will be accounted for in the non-road source inventory, where emissions will be reduced during refueling of non-road sources (e.g. lawnmowers, personal watercraft, etc.).

7.5.5.5 Part 241: Asphalt Formulation

The Department is considering ch anges to the use of cutback and emulsified asphalts in paving operat ions. The proposed ban on cutback asphalts and increased restrictions on emulsified asphalts will be made in 6 NYCRR Part 241, "Asphalt Formulation."

While cutback and emulsified asphalts are used in similar applications, they differ in how they are prepared. In preparing cutback asphalt, asphalt cement is blended with a diluent t hat is typically 25 to 45 percent by volume petroleum distillate. Em ulsified asphalt preparation involves mixing asphalt cement with water and an emulsifying agent, such as soap. It is possible for emulsifi ed asphalts to contain no VOCs, though some may contain up to 12 percent VOC by volume.

Currently, New York permits the use of cutback asphalt only during the cooler portion of the year from Oc tober 16 to May 1, and allows for emulsified asphalt to contain 2 to 12 percent VOCs, depending on the grade established by the American So ciety for Testing and Materials (ASTM). This proposed rule will hav e a similar, ozone-season ban on cutback asphalt; and will also limit the use of emulsified asphalt to that which contains not more than 0. 5mL oil distillat e from a 200mL sample—effectively 0.25 percent VO C content. Certain exemptions when necessary may be granted by the State Commissioner.

In calculating reductions resulting fr om these anticipated rule changes, an average baseline VOC content of 2.5 percent for emulsified asphalt was assumed. Thus, reducing t he average VOC cont ent from 2.5 percent to 0.25 percent represents a 90 percent reduction in emissions.7-21 This would lead to a projected savi ngs of 16.5 tons VOC per summer day, or 2525 tons per ozone season for New York State in 2009. It is believed that no additional costs woul d be incurred from the use of lowVOC emulsified asphalts due to their current availability.

7.5.6 Federal VOC Measures

7.5.6.1 VOC MACT

Pursuant to Section 112 of the CAA, the EPA is required to promulgate National Emission Standards for Haza rdous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), otherwise known as Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards for chemicals known to caus e cancer or other serious health effects. As EPA updates or releas es new MACT standards, they are incorporated by reference into 6 NYCRR Part 200. Many of the chemical substances regulated as VOCs are also listed as HAPs. Therefore, many of the MACT cont rol requirements effectively reduce emissions of VOCs as well.

7.5.6.2 Federal Reformulated Gasoline

Section 211(k) of the CAA deemed that reformulated gasoline, which is blended to burn cleaner and reduce em issions of certain pollutants, must be sold in major metropolit an areas with the worst ozone air pollution problems. Federal reformul ated gasoline allows for a maximum of 1 percent benzene by volume. Phase I of the rule took effect January 1, 1995 with preliminary VOC and air toxics standards. These reformulated gasoline standards were replaced with Phase II standards, effective January 1, 2000, which calle d for broader emissions controls, requiring 25 to 29 percent VOC emission reductions and 20 to 22 percent air toxics reductions. Retail distribution of re formulated gasoline is required in the New York Metropolitan Area and Orange County. Dutchess County and a portion of E ssex County have voluntarily opted to use reformulated gasoline.

7.5.7 Proposed Federal Rules

7.5.7.1 Aerosol Coatings Proposed Rule

On July 16, 2007, EPA published its proposed rule titled “National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings”7-22 (72 FR 38952). The proposed rule will apply to manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers of aerosol coatings used by the general public and in i ndustrial applications. The proposed rule will also apply to distributors who are responsible for labeling of aerosol products.

While traditional VOC limits were based on the weight of VOC ingredients per weight or volu me of product, the proposed rule implements a standard based upon the ra te of ozone production of the VOC components, expressed in terms of weight of ozone generated from the VOC ingr edients per weight of coating material. The proposed regulatory limits are a seri es of reactivity limits for six general coating categories and 30 subcategories of s pecialty coatings, expressed in terms of mass of ozone generat ion per gram of product.

The proposed rule requires all regulated entities to comply by January 1, 2009. Temporary variances may be gr anted to entities are unable to comply with the proposed requirement s. The proposed rule also requires certain labeling, recordkeeping and reporting measures. EPA believes nationwide emissions of VO Cs from aerosol products would be reduced by 18 to 19.4 percent from the 1990 baseline value (88.3 tons).

7.5.7.2 Locomotive Engines and Mari ne Compression-Ignition Engines Proposed Rule

Locomotives and marine diesel engines are important cont ributors to the nation’s air pollution, as they emit la rge amounts of direct PM and NOx. In 2007, these engines accounted fo r approximately 20 percent of mobile source NOx and 25 percent of mobile source diesel PM2.5 emissions. EPA published its proposed ru le, “Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From Locomotiv e Engines and Marine CompressionIgnition Engines Less than 30 Liters per Cylinder” on April 3, 2007 (72 FR 15938) to dramatically reduce em issions from these engines. It would set new exhaust emission standards on all types of locomotive engines, and on all types of marine diesel engines below 30 liters per cylinder displacement.

This proposed program includes a se t of near-term emission standards for newly-built engines, which would begin to be phased in starting 2009, and for existing locomotives, which would take effect as soon as7-23 2008 but no later than 2010 (2013 for Ti er 2 locomotives)–as soon as certified remanufacture systems ar e available. Further long-term standards would be phased in over time , starting in 2014. Provisions are also being proposed to reduce unnecessary locomotive engine idling. Compared to engines meeti ng current standards, these stricter requirements would ultimately result in estimated PM reductions of 90 percent and NOx reducti ons of 80 percent. In addition to PM and NOx reductions, the proposed standards would effectively reduce nonmethane hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and air toxics.

7.5.7.3 Federal Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines/E quipment Proposed Rule

EPA has proposed emission standards for spark-ignition engines used in marine vessels, including outboard engines, personal watercraft, and sterndrive/inboard engines in their proposed rule, “Control of Emissions from Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and Equipment” (72 FR 28098).

The engines and vehicles covered by this proposal are significant sources of air pollution. They account for about 25 percent of mobile source hydrocarbon emissions and 30 percent of mobile source carbon monoxide emissions.

The proposed standards continue t he process of establishing nonroad standards as required by the Clean Air Ac t. EPA is required to study emissions from nonroad engines and vehicles and to set emissions standards if the level of pollutants from these sources cause or significantly contribute to air pollution and, more specifically, if the emissions of CO, NOx or hydrocarbons contribute significantly to the formation of ozone and carbon monoxide in more than one area of the country currently not meeting ozone and carbon monoxide standards.

EPA has proposed a more stringent level of emission standards for outboard and personal watercraft engines starting with the 2009 model year. The proposed standards for engines above 40 kW are 16 g/kW-hr for HC+NOx and 200 g/kW-hr for CO. For engines below 40 kW, the standards increase gradually based on the engine's maxi mum power. It is expected that manufacturers will meet these standar ds with improved fueling systems and other in-cylinder controls. The levels of the standards are consistent with the requirements recently adopted by Calif ornia ARB with the advantage of a simplified form of the standard for di fferent power ratings and with a CO standard.7-24 EPA has also proposed new exhaust emission standards for sterndrive and inboard marine engines. The proposed st andards are 5 g/kW -hr for HC+NOx and 75 g/kW-hr for CO starting with the 2009 model year. Manufacturers are expected to meet these standards with three-way catalysts and closed-loop fuel injection. To ensure proper functi oning of these emission control systems in use, a requirement is proposed t hat engines have a diagnostic system for detecting a failure in the emission c ontrol system. For sterndrive and inboard marine engines above 373 kW with high-per formance characteristics (generally referred to as "SD/I high-performance engines"), a CO standard of 350 g/kW-hr is being proposed. EPA is also proposing a variety of other special provisions for these engines to reflect unique oper ating characteristics and to make it feasible to meet emission standards using emission credits. These standards are consistent with the requirements re cently adopted by California ARB, with some adjustment to the provisions fo r SD/I high-performance engines and with a CO standard.

The emission standards described above relate to engine operation over a prescribed duty cycle for testing in the laboratory. Also pr oposed are “not-toexceed” standards that requi re manufacturers to main tain a certain level of emission control when engines operate under normal speed-load combinations that are not included in t he certification duty cycle.

EPA is also proposing new standards to control evaporative emissions for all vessels using marine spark-ignition engines. The new standards include requirements to control fuel tank permeat ion, fuel line perm eation, and diurnal emissions, including provisions to ens ure that refueling emissions do not increase. When fully implemented, the proposed st andards would result in a 70 percent reduction in HC+NOx emissions, and a 20 percent reduction in CO from new engines’ exhaust. The proposed standards would result in a 70 percent reduction in evaporative emissions.

EPA estimates that by 2030, the proposed st andards would result in significant annual reductions of pollutant emissions from regulated engine and equipment sources nationwide, incl uding 630,000 tons of vola tile organic hydrocarbon emissions, 98,000 tons of NOx emissions, and 6,300 tons of direct particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions. These r eductions correspond to significant reductions in the formation of gr ound-level ozone and ambient PM2.5. In addition, these measures are expected to result in annual reductions of 2.7 million tons of carbon m onoxide emissions, with the greatest reductions in7-25 areas where there have been probl ems with individual exposures.

7.5.8 ** This section was removed by NY**7-26 7.5.9 Canadian Emission Reductions

Some portion of the particulate matter present in the air in the northern United States originates in Canada. The sources of this contamination are the industrial and commercial operations, fossil fuel and woodburning and especially the emissions of particulate matter and its precursors from coal-fired power plants A number of initiatives have been put in place in Canada that will reduce emissions and have a positive effect in the air quality in the northeast United States.

The first of these are the Canada- Wide Standards for Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Electric Power Generation Plants. Under these provisions, a reduction of approximatel y 52% to 58% in mercury emissions is expected nationally by 2010. T he Ontario Power Authority (OPA) has been directed to replace Ontario’s coal-fired generation facilities by cleaner sources “in the earliest practi cal time frame that ensures adequate generating capacity and elec tricity system reliability in Ontario.” The reduction in mercury emissions is expec ted to have the co-benefit of the reduction of the emission of other pollu tants as well, including particulate and its precursors (SO2 and NOx) , organics, metals and greenhouse gases. The replacement of coal-fired units in Ontario, which are most likely to affect New York’s air quality, will have a significant effect on ambient particulate c oncentrations and haze.

The second initiative in Canada that will affect New York’s air quality is the promulgation of air quality standards for PM2.5 and ozone at a level of 30ug/m3 on a 24-hour basis and 65 ppb on an 8-hour basis, respectively. The intention is to meet these standar ds by 2010, and the result of which will have a positive effect on New York’s air quality as well. Quebec’s fiveyear report on their reduction efforts to date discusses the measures taken from 2001 to 2005 1 . The control measures instituted by Canada are

1 http://www.menv.gouv.qc.ca/air/p articules_ozone/rapport_quin-en.pdf7-27 aimed at reducing industrial emissions . Specifically, regulations like Quebec's "Regulation respecting the quality of the atmosphere" 2 contain control measures for new and existing s ources of VOC's similar to those in New York and other states, and set ambient air quality standards. VOC controls address surface coating processes, automotive painting operations, printing, dry cleaning, formaldehyde from panelboard mills, pulp and paper operations, styrene from composite material manufacturing (fiberglass and resins), and transportation. Particulate emissions measures include the control of fugitive emissions from mining and sandblasting, granaries, mills, di stilleries, breweries, powder milk plants, fertilizer mixing plants, concrete plants, vitreous enamel operations, earthenware and ceramic products plant, polyvinyl chloride production or processing plant, wood processing plants, and aluminum manufacturing. Programs also cont rol particulate and NOx emissions from combustion operations (boilers, turbines, and internal combustion), as well as fuel sulfur content (2.0% by weight for "heavy oil," 1.0% by weight for "intermediate oil," 0.5% by weight for "light oil," and 2.0% in weight for coal). Many other cate gories are covered as well woodburning, smelting, charcoal kilns, incinerators, refineries, storage tanks, metallic processing plants, as well as other industrial processes.

Additional measures are planned in t he next five years to achieve their goals by 2010, including reducing emissions from residential wood heating, establishing and inspection and maintenance program for light vehicles, and implementing "other meas ures in the transportation, energy and climate change sectors."

The above measures are efforts by the Canadian or Provincial governments to improve air quality. T hey were not included in the present attainment demonstration and will not be enforceable by New York or the federal government. However, give t he proximity to New York State, air quality improvements in Canada will certainly im pact New York and the northeastern United States.

7.5.10 New York State’s “15 by 15" Program

New York Governor Spitzer has init iated a clean energy plan with the goal

2 http://www2.publications duquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamic Search/telecharge.php?t ype=3&file=/Q_2/Q2R20_A.htm7-28 of reducing New York's energy demand by 15% by 2015. The plan, known as "15 by 15," focuses on energy efficiency, conservation, and investment in renewable energy sources as the keys to achieving economic and environmental goals. The specific goals and highlights of the plan include:

$ Reduce electricity use by 15 percent from forecasted levels by the year 2015 through new energy efficiency programs in industry and government;

$ Eliminate incentives in the mark etplace that discourages utilities from conserving energy by requiring annual adjustments to rates to make utilities whole for lost revenues c aused by energy efficiency programs.

$ The approval of 21 contract aw ards by state agencies for clean, renewable power plants upstate that will replace older plants.

$ Establish new appliance efficiency standards and set more rigorous energy building codes;

$ Invest $295 million for renewable energy projects througho ut the state; and

$ Propose power plant siting legislation that creates an expedited review process for new wind power projects, repowering projects that reduce emissions, and other power plants that have very low levels of carbon dioxide emissions.

The benefits of this plan for New Yo rk and for the environment include a reduction in the electricity that mu st be purchased, t he creation of new jobs, and a reduction in emissions as a result of the need to produce less power and the substitution of clean pow er sources for those already in operation. The emission reductions for the “15 by 15" plan are also estimated to result in an annual ca rbon dioxide reduction of about 12.8 million tons, which is the equivalent of removing 2.5 million cars from the road.

The Department is not committing to the inclusion of any of these measures as part of the SIP at this time, The Department will evaluate each measure resulting from this initiative individually to determine if it is appropriate to be included in the SIP. The Department will need to consider among other things whet her the measure is7-29 quantifiable, enforceable, and include emissions reductions that are additional to other adopted SIP measures.

7.5.11 NYSERDA Programs

The New York State Energy Rese arch and Development Authority (NYSERDA) was established in 1975 and is primarily funded by state rate payers through the System Benefits Char ge (SBC). The SBC has recently been extended through June 30, 2011. NYSERDA has introduced a number of programs and services to promote energy efficiency amongst the industrial, commercial, munici pal, and residential sectors throughout the state, for which they provide technical and financial assistance.

One initiative that has seen succe ss is the New York Energy $mart Program. NYSERDA has allocated funding towards energy efficiency programs, low-income energy affor dability programs, and research and development projects with focuses on renewable resources, distributed generation, and combined heat and power inst allations. In the last five years, the New York Energy $mart Program has created a wealth of economic and environ mental benefits 3 :
$ Approximately $198 million in annual energy savings

$ 1,400 Gwh saved per year

$ 860 MW in reduced demand

$ Fuel savings of 3.3 Tbtu

$ Annual carbon dioxide reduction equivalent to 200,000 fewer cars

$ Significant annual greenhouse ga s emission reductions: Nitrogen Oxides - 1,280 tons Sulfur Dioxides - 2,320 tons Carbon Dioxide - 1,000,000 tons

In addition to Energy $mart, there are many other programs which result in reductions of emissions of PM and its precursors. For example, the PeakLoad Reduction Program offers incentives to offset costs to companies

3 http://www.nyserda.org/ny_energy_smart.asp7-30 that implement either short-term demand response measures, or longterm permanent demand reduction, for da ys in which electric demand is very high. The Enhanced Commercia l/Industrial Performance Program contains three tiers of incentives fo r the installation of energy-efficient equipment resulting in reduced elec trical demand and cost. A wide range of businesses, schools, universitie s, state and loca l governments, and other institutions are eligible for these incentives. And, NYSERDA’s Alternative-Fuel Vehicle Program aims to encourage fleets to purchase vehicles powered by natural gas, pr opane, biofuels, and el ectricity, and to encourage the use of emi ssion reduction technologies and anti-idling technologies for diesel vehicles.7-31 Table 7-1. Listing of FRM sites, 1999-2006. Some locations have primary (“P”) and duplicate (“D”) samplers. Dates with an asterix denote daily sampling for at least part of the period.

NYSDEC

Region Site Name County Dates

1 Eisenhower Park Nassau 1/1999 – 12/1999 1 Hempstead Nassau 1/1999 – 12/2006

1 Briarcliffe Nassau 2/2000 – 3/2003 1 Roslyn Nassau 7/2000 – 3/2003 1 Roslyn Heights Nassau 1/1999 – 3/2000 1 Babylon Suffolk 1/1999 – 12/2006

2 Mabel Dean H.S. New York 1/1999 – 6/2001*

2 J.H.S. 45 New York P: 1/2000 – 12/2006

D: 1/2006 – 12/2006

2 P.S. 59 New York P: 1/1999 – 12/2006

D: 1/1999 – 12/2005

2 P.S. 19 New York 10/2001 – 12/2006

2 Canal Street Post Office New York P: 1/1999 – 12/2006

D: 8/1999 – 9/2001

2 I.S. 155 Bronx P: 1/1999 – 7/1999

D: 1/1999 – 7/1999

2 Morrisania II Bronx 1/1999 – 12/2006

2 N.Y. Botanical Gardens Bronx 1/1999 – 12/2006

2 I.S. 52 Bronx P: 9/1999 – 12/2006*

D: 9/1999 – 12/2006

2 Greenpoint Kings P: 1/1999 – 12/2000

D: 1/1999 – 7/1999 2 P.S. 321 Kings 1/1999 – 3/2003 2 P.S. 314 Kings 4/2000 – 1/2003 2 J.H.S. 126 Kings 1/2001 – 12/20067-32 2 Queensboro Community College Queens 1/1999 – 12/2000

2 P.S. 29 Queens P: 7/1999 – 1/2003

D: 8/1999 – 1/2003

2 P.S. 214 Queens 4/2000 – 3/2003 2 Queens College II/P.S. 219 Queens 1/2001 – 4/2006* 2 Susan Wagner H.S. Richmond 1/1999 – 12/2006

2 Port Richmond Post Office Richmond 12/1999 – 12/2006 3 Poughkeepsie Dutchess 7/1999 – 3/2003 3 Newburgh Orange 2/2000 – 12/2006

3 Mamaroneck Westchester 2/2000 – 12/20067-33 Table 7-2. Trends in PM 2.5 mass at the longest running FRM monitors, based on quarterly averages from 1999-2006, in mg m -3 yr -1 . Only those quarters with at least 10 valid samples are incl uded in this trend estimate.

Site Name Trend (ug/m 3 /yr) Hempstead -0.12

Babylon -0.34

J.H.S. 45 -0.42

P.S. 59 -0.30

Canal Street Post Office -0.50

Morrisania II -0.27

N.Y. Botanical Gardens -0.15 I.S. 52 (P) -0.33 I.S. 52 (D) -0.23 Susan Wagner H.S. -0.13

Port Richmond Post Office -0.20 Newburgh -0.20

Mamaroneck -0.207-34 Figure 7-1 - Map of Downstate FRM Sites

Table 7-3. Listing of Speciation Trends Ne twork (STN) sites, 2000-2006. All sites are located in NYSDEC Region 2.

Site Name County Dates

Canal Street Post Office New York 8/2002 – 12/2006

N.Y. Botanical Gardens Bronx 2/2000 – 12/2005

I.S. 52 Bronx 1/2001 – 12/2006 Queens College II/P.S. 219 Queens 4/2001 – 12/2006

Figure 7-2 - Average PM 2.5 Speciation – Annual, Winter, and Summer7-35 Table 7-4. Listing of FRM sites, 1999-2006. Some locations have primary (“P”) and duplicate (“D”) samplers. Dates with an asterix denote daily sampling for at least part of the period. The New Hav en/Stiles St. monitor was designated as “special purpose,” and is included here for completeness only ( in italics ).

State AQS ID Site Name County Dates

CT 090010010 Bridgeport/Roosevelt School Fairfield CT P: 1/1999 – 12/2006

D: 1/1999 – 1/2003 090010113 Bridgeport/Edison School Fairfield CT 9/2000 – 12/2003 090011123 Danbury WCSU Fairfield CT 1/1999 – 12/2006

090012124 Stamford H.S. Fairfield CT 1/1999 – 12/2004
090013005 Norwalk Health Dept. Fairfield CT 3/2000 – 12/2006
090019003 Westport/Sherwood Island Fairfield CT 1/1999 – 12/2006

090090018 New Haven/Stiles St. New Haven CT P: 1/1999 – 9/2005*

D: 1/1999 – 1/2003

090090026 New Haven/Woodward Firehouse New Haven CT 4/2003 – 12/2006

090090027 New Haven/Criscuolo Park New Haven CT P: 1/2004 – 12/2006*

D: 2/2005 – 12/2006

090091123 New Haven/State St. New Haven CT P: 1/1999 – 12/2006

D: 1/1999 – 2/2005 090092008 New Haven/Ag. Center New Haven CT 4/2003 – 12/2006

090092123 Waterbury/Bank St. New Haven CT P: 1/1999 – 12/2006

D: 1/1999 – 12/2006

090098003 West Haven Toll New Haven CT 4/2003 – 12/2004

090099005 Hamden Mill Basins New Haven CT 7/1999 – 12/2003

NJ 340030003 Fort Lee Library Bergen NJ 1/1999 – 12/2006

340130011 Newark/St. Charles Essex NJ 1/1999 – 12/1999

340130015 Newark/Willis Center Essex NJ 4/1999 – 12/2006

340130016 Newark Lab Essex NJ P: 8/2001 – 5/2003

D: 8/2001 – 5/2003

340171003 Jersey City Firehouse Hudson NJ P: 1/1999 – 12/2006

D: 12/1999 – 12/2006

340172002 Union City Hudson NJ 1/1999 – 3/2002,

7/2005 – 12/2006

340210008 Trenton Mercer NJ 1/1999 – 12/20067-36 340218001 Washington Crossing Mercer NJ 1/1999 – 12/2006

340230006 New Brunswick Middlesex NJ 1/1999 – 12/2006

340270004 Morristown Ambulance Squad Morris NJ 5/1999 – 12/2006

340273001 Chester Morris NJ 1/1999 – 12/2006

340310005 Paterson Passaic NJ 1/1999 – 12/2006

340390004 Elizabeth Lab Union NJ P: 1/1999 – 12/2006*

D: 1/1999 – 12/2006 340390006 Elizabeth/Mitchell Bldg. Union NJ 1/1999 – 12/2006 340392003 Rahway Union NJ 12/1999 – 12/2006*7-37 Table 7- 5. Annual average PM 2.5 levels for sites with at least 75% valid samples in a given year, 2000-2006. Incomplete years are left blank.

Site Name 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Bridgeport/Roosevelt School (P) 13.88 13.71 12.72 12.98 12.92 14.32 12.51

Bridgeport/Roosevelt School (D) 15.63 13.49 11.82

Bridgeport/Edison School 12.77 12.88 12.27 Danbury WCSU 12.70 13.22 12.51 13.37 11.25 13.44 12.17

Stamford H.S. 12.90 13.01 12.81 13.51 11.78
Norwalk Health Dept. 12.86 13.41 12.58 12.96 12.23 13.32 11.77 Westport/Sherwood Island 13.03 12.15 11.49 11.63 11.06 12.18 10.69

New Haven/Stiles St. (P) 15.94 16.88 16.00 16.91 15.40 New Haven/Stiles St. (D) 18.78 18.60 16.19

New Haven/Woodward Firehouse 11.56 13.05 11.72

New Haven/Criscuolo Park (P) 12.21 13.62 12.21

New Haven/Criscuolo Park (D) 14.01 12.81

New Haven/State St. (P) 14.07 14.32 13.03 13.59 12.66 13.88 12.63 New Haven/State St. (D) 14.58 12.38 15.49 12.39 New Haven/Ag. Center 11.14 11.73 10.76 Waterbury/Bank St. (P) 13.61 13.98 13.23 12.64 12.04 14.00 11.98 Waterbury/Bank St. (D) 14.82 14.21 12.75 14.09 11.97 14.14 12.26

West Haven Toll 12.91

Hamden Mill Basins 11.49 11.88 11.09 12.29

Fort Lee Library 14.57 13.85 12.99 13.34 12.05 14.65 11.82

Newark/Willis Center 15.60 13.06 13.16 13.84 13.17 14.35 12.12 Newark Lab (P) 14.12 Newark Lab (D) 14.05 Jersey City Firehouse (P) 16.78 14.01 14.34 14.81 13.66 15.10 13.35 Jersey City Firehouse (D) 13.99 16.26 12.93 16.07 14.67 Union City 17.08 15.54 13.83

Trenton 14.71 14.46 12.94 13.41 12.48 12.90 12.197-38 Washington Crossing 12.05 11.35 12.18 10.96 12.27 10.06

New Brunswick 13.00 12.72 11.12 12.91 11.11 13.33 10.77 Morristown Ambulance Squad 12.88 11.48 12.16 11.27 12.33 10.12

Chester 11.09 10.46 10.77 9.99 10.77 9.01

Paterson 13.56 12.90 13.26 12.60 13.44 11.88 Elizabeth Lab (P) 15.53 14.56 15.96 15.08 15.24 14.16 Elizabeth Lab (D) 18.49 15.42 14.78 16.97 14.19 16.65 14.72 Elizabeth/Mitchell Bldg. 15.20 12.88 13.11 13.97 12.68 14.33 12.36
Rahway 14.10 12.77 12.04 13.24 12.53 13.91 11.927-39 Table 7-6. The 98 th percentile of PM 2.5 levels for sites with at least 75% valid samples in a given year, 2000-2006. Incomplete years are left blank.

Site Name 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Bridgeport/Roosevelt School (P) 41.5 40.1 32.9 39.6 34.2 38.3 36.7

Bridgeport/Roosevelt School (D) 42.8 40.6 34.0

Bridgeport/Edison School 32.1 33.2 40.4 Danbury WCSU 32.9 35.2 30.7 37.3 27.5 33.4 33.8

Stamford H.S. 36.3 37.4 34.5 41.5 32.2
Norwalk Health Dept. 35.3 35.7 34.3 42.9 35.2 34.9 35.9 Westport/Sherwood Island 33.4 34.5 30.8 44.0 30.9 35.2 31.3

New Haven/Stiles St. (P) 39.5 40.6 40.4 44.0 34.9 New Haven/Stiles St. (D) 44.8 43.0 34.5

New Haven/Woodward Firehouse 31.5 36.4 36.5

New Haven/Criscuolo Park (P) 33.2 38.2 36.7

New Haven/Criscuolo Park (D) 39.1 31.6

New Haven/State St. (P) 37.2 39.5 32.4 40.6 36.2 40.8 38.1 New Haven/State St. (D) 40.6 32.3 38.9 29.9 New Haven/Ag. Center 32.1 32.8 33.9 Waterbury/Bank St. (P) 34.4 35.4 32.6 37.7 30.4 34.1 35.6 Waterbury/Bank St. (D) 36.0 34.9 33.5 32.8 26.1 35.9 35.2

West Haven Toll 30.8

Hamden Mill Basins 34.7 32.1 29.4 44.0

Fort Lee Library 36.4 34.4 33.0 38.9 31.0 40.5 38.2

Newark/Willis Center 41.6 32.1 32.3 39.8 34.9 40.4 39.9 Newark Lab (P) 34.6 Newark Lab (D) 39.9 Jersey City Firehouse (P) 39.5 34.1 34.3 46.4 37.4 37.9 41.0 Jersey City Firehouse (D) 36.8 41.1 29.1 38.3 38.9 Union City 39.3 39.5

Trenton 43.1 35.4 35.4 40.5 33.3 33.6 36.27-40 Washington Crossing 31.5 32.2 34.9 28.0 33.0 29.5

New Brunswick 34.5 34.1 26.0 45.0 35.5 33.8 32.8 Morristown Ambulance Squad 30.2 29.7 36.8 31.1 32.9 30.4

Chester 29.4 30.0 35.7 29.8 33.4 28.3

Paterson 35.4 34.9 39.8 31.0 40.5 33.4 Elizabeth Lab (P) 39.7 41.7 37.0 40.5 42.5 39.8 Elizabeth Lab (D) 46.6 50.3 39.3 41.2 36.5 39.8 41.9 Elizabeth/Mitchell Bldg. 36.0 33.8 30.0 40.9 33.1 38.6 38.7
Rahway 38.0 30.4 31.1 35.2 36.6 38.2 37.57-41 Table 7-7. Trends in PM 2.5 mass at the longest running FRM monitors, based on quarterly averages from 1999-2006, in ug/m 3 /yr. Only those quarters with at least 10 valid samples are incl uded in this trend estimate.

Site Name Trend (ug/m 3/ /yr)
Bridgeport/Roosevelt School (P) -0.07
Danbury WCSU -0.05
Norwalk Health Dept. -0.18
Westport/Sherwood Island -0.19

New Haven/Stiles St. (P) +0.02
New Haven/State St. (P) -0.19
New Haven/State St. (D) -0.32
Waterbury/Bank St. (P) -0.16 Waterbury/Bank St. (D) -0.13
Fort Lee Library -0.25

Newark/Willis Center -0.37 Jersey City Firehouse (P) -0.34
Jersey City Firehouse (D) -0.25

Trenton -0.27
Washington Crossing -0.14

New Brunswick -0.11
Morristown Ambulance Squad -0.49

Chester -0.21

Paterson -0.06
Elizabeth Lab (P) -0.27
Elizabeth Lab (D) -0.43
Elizabeth/Mitchell Bldg. -0.30
Rahway -0.157-42 Table 7-8. Third quarter 2002 average PM 2.5 values at the NY and NJ FRM monitors in the NYC NAA, both includi ng and excluding the flagged data from July 2002.

FRM site County, State 3 rd Quarter 2002 Average PM 2.5 , ug/m3 (include flagged days) 3 rd Quarter 2002 Average PM 2.5 , ug/m3 (exclude flagged days) 340030003 Bergen Count y, NJ 16.05 13.99

340171003 Hudson Count y, NJ 16.83 14.68

340210008 Mercer Count y, NJ 17.99 15.03

340218001 Mercer Count y, NJ 16.71 14.74 340230006 Middlesex County, NJ 16.60 13.84 340270004 Morris County, NJ 16.84 14.49 340273001 Morris County, NJ 16.14 13.63

340310005 Passaic Count y, NJ 16.50 14.43 340390004 Union County, NJ 18.97 17.18 340390006 Union County, NJ 13.69 13.69 340392003 Union County, NJ 17.03 14.37 360050080 Bronx County, NY 16.96 14.92 360050083 Bronx County, NY 15.80 13.66 360050110 Bronx County, NY 16.82 15.85 360470052 Kings County, NY 16.66 13.63 360470076 Kings County, NY 15.82 13.66 360470122 Kings County, NY 16.50 14.34

360590008 Nassau Count y, NY 13.93 11.62

360610056 New York C ounty, NY 17.38 15.33

360610062 New York C ounty, NY 17.44 15.26

360610079 New York C ounty, NY 16.50 14.39

360610128 New York C ounty, NY 17.61 15.40 360710002 Orange County, NY 14.84 12.96
360810124 Queens Count y, NY 15.69 14.74

360850055 Richmond Count y, NY 16.26 13.907-43 360850067 Richmond Count y, NY 14.86 12.60

361030001 Suffolk Count y, NY 14.34 12.16

361191002 Westchester C ounty, NY 14.85 12.767-44 Table 7-9. Baseline PM 2.5 design values at all FRM monitors across the NYC NAA as computed by MATS using the official EPA database (which includes flagged data from July 2002 in NY and NJ ), and excluding t he flagged data from July 2002 in NY and NJ.

FRM site County, State Baseline Design Value, ug/m3 (include flagged days) Baseline Design Value, ug/m3 (exclude flagged days)

090010010 Fairfield Co unty, CT 13.1 13.1

090010113 Fairfield Co unty, CT 12.7 12.7

090011123 Fairfield Co unty, CT 12.8 12.8

090012124 Fairfield Co unty, CT 12.9 12.9

090013005 Fairfield Co unty, CT 13.0 13.0

090019003 Fairfield Co unty, CT 11.4 11.4 090091123 New Haven County, CT 13.7 13.7 090092123 New Haven County, CT 13.1 13.1 090099005 New Haven County, CT 11.6 11.6 340030003 Bergen Count y, NJ 13.0 12.8

340171003 Hudson Count y, NJ 14.9 14.8

340210008 Mercer Count y, NJ 13.9 13.7

340218001 Mercer Count y, NJ 11.6 11.5 340230006 Middlesex County, NJ 12.5 12.2 340270004 Morris County, NJ 11.8 11.6 340273001 Morris County, NJ 10.7 10.5

340310005 Passaic Count y, NJ 13.1 12.9 340390004 Union County, NJ 15.7 15.5 340390006 Union County, NJ 13.2 13.2 340392003 Union County, NJ 13.1 12.9 360050080 Bronx County, NY 15.8 15.6 360050083 Bronx County, NY 13.8 13.7 360050110 Bronx County, NY 14.3 14.3 360470052 Kings County, NY 15.7 15.5 360470076 Kings County, NY 14.6 14.47-45 360470122 Kings County, NY 14.7 14.5

360590008 Nassau Count y, NY 12.2 12.0

360610056 New York C ounty, NY 16.9 16.7

360610062 New York C ounty, NY 16.3 16.1

360610079 New York C ounty, NY 14.7 14.5

360610128 New York C ounty, NY 15.9 15.6 360710002 Orange County, NY 11.5 11.4
360810124 Queens Count y, NY 12.9 12.8

360850055 Richmond Count y, NY 14.4 14.2

360850067 Richmond Count y, NY 12.1 12.0

361030001 Suffolk Count y, NY 12.1 11.9

361191002 Westchester C ounty, NY 12.2 12.0

Table 7-10. Baseline non-blank species compos ition at all FRM monitors across the NYC NAA as computed by MATS. “SO 4 ” is sulfate; “NO 3 r” is retained nitrate; “OM” is organic aerosol mass; “EC” is elemental carbon (OM+EC = carbonaceous mass); “PBW” is particle-bound water; “NH 4 ” is ammonium associated with SO 4 and NO 3 r; “OPP” is ot her primary PM 2.5 , assumed to equal the sum of major crustal oxides (Si, Ca, Fe, and Ti); and “Salt” is 1.8×Cl.

FRM site SO 4 NO 3 r OM EC PBW NH 4 OPP Salt

090010010 3.60 0.59 4.84 0.80 1.05 1.27 0.45 0.03

090010113 3.55 0.55 4.52 0.79 1.04 1.24 0.44 0.03

090011123 3.75 0.65 3.97 0.87 1.15 1.36 0.46 0.04

090012124 3.59 0.67 4.44 0.83 1.06 1.30 0.46 0.03

090013005 3.46 0.55 5.16 0.75 0.97 1.19 0.43 0.02

090019003 3.59 0.62 2.78 0.88 1.19 1.37 0.46 0.06

090091123 3.90 0.50 4.84 0.86 1.21 1.41 0.46 0.04

090092123 3.92 0.69 3.83 0.94 1.26 1.47 0.49 0.05

090099005 3.59 0.65 2.93 0.89 1.18 1.38 0.46 0.06

340030003 3.71 0.80 3.25 1.08 1.28 1.52 0.55 0.08

340171003 3.99 1.14 4.08 1.24 1.36 1.75 0.60 0.09

340210008 4.51 0.98 3.06 0.74 1.52 1.81 0.50 0.05

340218001 3.86 0.67 2.61 0.58 1.30 1.49 0.41 0.03

340230006 3.67 0.70 3.16 0.99 1.26 1.46 0.45 0.05

340270004 3.93 0.59 2.72 0.71 1.28 1.45 0.38 0.037-46 340273001 3.15 0.50 2.85 0.75 1.08 1.21 0.38 0.03

340310005 3.79 0.80 3.28 1.10 1.31 1.54 0.53 0.07

340390004 4.29 0.99 4.95 1.02 1.45 1.76 0.56 0.08

340390006 3.57 0.78 3.72 1.37 1.23 1.49 0.52 0.06

340392003 3.54 0.76 3.60 1.29 1.22 1.46 0.50 0.05

360050080 4.11 1.02 4.91 1.19 1.41 1.74 0.62 0.12

360050083 4.17 1.01 2.96 1.10 1.43 1.76 0.61 0.12

360050110 3.96 0.93 4.06 1.20 1.34 1.62 0.59 0.08

360470052 4.13 1.18 4.44 1.28 1.41 1.81 0.61 0.10

360470076 3.82 1.12 4.18 1.15 1.30 1.68 0.57 0.09

360470122 4.01 1.12 3.86 1.16 1.37 1.75 0.60 0.10

360590008 3.67 0.82 2.84 0.83 1.26 1.51 0.50 0.09

360610056 4.35 1.17 5.28 1.27 1.49 1.88 0.64 0.11

360610062 4.31 1.04 4.97 1.23 1.48 1.80 0.62 0.12

360610079 4.20 1.05 3.61 1.17 1.44 1.78 0.62 0.12

360610128 4.02 1.19 4.84 1.23 1.37 1.78 0.60 0.10

360710002 3.68 0.62 2.79 0.81 1.15 1.34 0.43 0.03

360810124 3.80 0.89 3.02 1.10 1.31 1.58 0.56 0.09

360850055 3.94 0.92 3.71 1.47 1.36 1.66 0.58 0.08

360850067 3.12 0.67 3.69 1.09 1.08 1.29 0.45 0.06

361030001 3.74 0.73 2.87 0.85 1.23 1.44 0.50 0.06

361191002 3.64 0.76 2.80 1.05 1.23 1.44 0.53 0.067-47 Table 7-11. Baseline and future PM 2.5 design values at all FRM monitors across the NYC NAA as computed by MATS, excluding flagged FRM days.

FRM site County, State Baseline Design Value, ug/m3 Future Design Value, ug/m3

090010010 Fairfield Co unty, CT 13.1 11.7

090010113 Fairfield Co unty, CT 12.7 11.2

090011123 Fairfield Co unty, CT 12.8 11.2

090012124 Fairfield Co unty, CT 12.9 11.5

090013005 Fairfield Co unty, CT 13.0 11.7

090019003 Fairfield Co unty, CT 11.4 9.8 090091123 New Haven County, CT 13.7 12.0 090092123 New Haven County, CT 13.1 11.4 090099005 New Haven County, CT 11.6 10.0 340030003 Bergen Count y, NJ 12.8 11.3

340171003 Hudson Count y, NJ 14.8 13.2

340210008 Mercer Count y, NJ 13.7 11.6

340218001 Mercer Count y, NJ 11.5 9.6 340230006 Middlesex County, NJ 12.2 10.3 340270004 Morris County, NJ 11.6 9.7 340273001 Morris County, NJ 10.5 8.8

340310005 Passaic Count y, NJ 12.9 11.1 340390004 Union County, NJ 15.5 13.5 340390006 Union County, NJ 13.2 11.5 340392003 Union County, NJ 12.9 11.2 360050080 Bronx County, NY 15.6 14.2 360050083 Bronx County, NY 13.7 12.2 360050110 Bronx County, NY 14.3 13.0 360470052 Kings County, NY 15.5 14.0 360470076 Kings County, NY 14.4 13.1 360470122 Kings County, NY 14.5 13.1

360590008 Nassau Count y, NY 12.0 10.7

360610056 New York C ounty, NY 16.7 15.27-48 360610062 New York C ounty, NY 16.1 14.5

360610079 New York C ounty, NY 14.5 13.2

360610128 New York C ounty, NY 15.6 14.2 360710002 Orange County, NY 11.4 10.0
360810124 Queens Count y, NY 12.8 11.5

360850055 Richmond Count y, NY 14.2 12.4

360850067 Richmond Count y, NY 12.0 10.5

361030001 Suffolk Count y, NY 11.9 10.5

361191002 Westchester C ounty, NY 12.0 10.67-49 Table 7-12. Information for the five FRM m onitors considered in this analysis: site name and ID, dates of operat ion during 2000-2004, base year PM 2.5 design value, and the nearest STN monitor.

Site Name FRM site Operational periods during 2000-2004 Base year Design Value, ug/m 3 Nearest STN monitor

P.S.59 360610056 1 st qtr 2000 – 4 th qtr 2004 16.9 360610062

Canal

St 360610062 1 st qtr 2000 – 4 th qtr 2004 16.3 360610062

J.H.S.4 5 360610079 1 st qtr 2000 – 4 th qtr 2004 14.7 360050110

P.S.19 360610128 3 rd qtr 2001 – 4 th qtr 2004 15.9 360610062

I.S.52 360050110 1 st qtr 2000 – 4 th qtr 2004 14.7 360050110

Table 7-13. Current PM 2.5 species composition at each site: sulfate (SO 4 ), retained nitrate (NO 3 r), organic carbon (OC), elem ental carbon (EC), particlebound water (PBW), retained ammonium (NH 4 ), and other primary PM 2.5 (OPP).

FRM site SO 4 NO 3 r OC EC PBW NH 4 OPP

360610056 4.98 1.50 3.81 1.51 1.65 2.19 0.77

360610062* 4.81 1.40 3.66 1.45 1.59 2.10 0.74

360610079 4.41 1.05 3.58 1.13 1.47 1.84 0.71

360610128 4.68 1.39 3.59 1.42 1.55 2.05 0.72

360050110* 4.39 1.08 3.56 1.14 1.46 1.84 0.71

* FRM Monitor with collocated STN

Table 7-14. Annual average PM 2.5 mass over the nine grid cells surrounding each monitor from the base year ( 2002) and future year (2009) CMAQ simulations, as well as the absolute and percent reductions.

FRM site 2002 avg., ug/m 3 2009 avg., ug/m 3 Change ug/m 3 Change (%)

360610056 24.28 20.51 -3.77 -15.57-50 360610062 23.70 19.80 -3.90 -16.5

360610079 24.28 20.51 -3.77 -15.5

360610128 23.66 20.01 -3.65 -15.4

360050110 24.28 20.51 -3.77 -15.57-51 Table 7-15. Base and future year PM 2.5 design values.

FRM site Base Year Design Value, ug/m 3 Future PM 2.5 Design Value, ug/m 3

360610056 16.9 15.3

360610062 16.3 14.4

360610079 14.7 13.3

360610128 15.9 14.3

360050110 14.7 13.3

Figure 7-3 - PM2.5 FRM Si tes in New York City