Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0253-0175
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2008-10-16T04:00Z

"King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov> 

09/18/2008 05:54 PM

	

To

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Al McGartland/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Alexander Cristofaro/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,
Charlotte Bertrand/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Nathalie Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,
Brian Heninger/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Rosalina
Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Darryl
Weatherhead/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tom Walton/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal
Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Charles Fulcher/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tricia
Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: Pb NAAQS RIA analysis data requested at meeting on 8/18

Ron et al,

Thank you.  In the cost/ton by control measure worksheet, would it be

possible to add a column representing the tons of emissions identified

in the analysis area for each control measure/category pair?

I will be out of office tomorrow (Fri) but will check email Saturday.  I

would suggest that we include in our Monday conversation any follow ups

from our last conf call, and analysis next steps.  

I hope you have a good weekend,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From: Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:45 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: McGartland.Al@epamail.epa.gov; Cristofaro.Alexander@epamail.epa.gov;

Bertrand.Charlotte@epamail.epa.gov; simon.nathalie@epa.gov;

Heninger.Brian@epamail.epa.gov; Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov;

Rodriguez.Rosalina@epamail.epa.gov; Kaufman.Kathy@epamail.epa.gov;

Weatherhead.Darryl@epamail.epa.gov; walton.tom@epa.gov;

fann.neal@epa.gov; Fulcher.Charles@epamail.epa.gov;

Crabtree.Tricia@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: Pb NAAQS RIA analysis data requested at meeting on 8/18

Heidi, here is the supporting data which Art Fraas requested during the

Pb NAAQS RIA cost meeting on 8/18.   The list of requested items is

below, with a brief explanation of what is provided.   Please let Kathy

or I know if you have any questions.

1.    Cost/ton by control measure

This data is provided in the attached excel file.  We have provided the

average cost/ton for each measure applied as part  of the 0.1 ug/m3

identified controls analysis.

A unique control measure is the combination of the control measure and

the source category to which it is applied.

2.    $/ug for geographic areas where large sources (sources between

10-20km from monitor) were included in the analysis.

The air quality modelers suggested that sources greater than 10

kilometers from the monitor would have no appreciable effect in either

reality or in our simplified distance weighted monitor to emission

source model.

We screened the impact of including large sources located 10 to 20

kilometers from the monitor to see if adding the sources would result in

more attainment with identified control.   For the 0.1 standard the

change only affected three areas.  One of them, Salt Lake, UT, was

already reaching attainment but was overshooting the standard because of

lumpiness of available control options and the addition of large sources

made no significant change.   Adding the sources for Berks, PA reduced

the progress towards attainment.  For Cuyahoga, OH adding the sources

did not change the emission reductions but did lead to a slight

reduction in the baseline air quality after the adjustment for MACTs and

hence the post identified control air quality was slightly better.

Because of these small and sometimes counterintuitive changes and the

likelihood that these sources would neither actually contribute or be

chosen for control we will not pursue a scenario that includes sources

further than 10 kilometers from the monitor.

(Embedded image moved to file: pic15169.jpg)

3.    Number of sources per geographic area

This data is provided in the 2nd tab of the attached excel file.  We

have provided the number of point source emission points included in the

analysis.

Please note: emission point does not equal the number of plants, as a

single plant may have many emission points.  Also, the number of

emission points does not equal the number of emission points with

controls applied to them.

 (See attached file: Data request for OMB.xls)

Ron Evans

Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group

HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA

Mail Drop C-439-02

919-541-5488

919-541-0839 fax