Source: http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/60562.html
Timestamp: 2014-12-19 08:03:47
Document Index: 646075304

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 245', 'art 245', 'art 227', 'art 227', 'art 220', 'art 220', 'art 231']

7.0 Contingency Measures - NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Home » Chemical and Pollution Control » Air » Archive of State Implementation Plans and State Plans » Final Revision - PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS): NY Metropolitan Area, October 27, 2009 » 7.0 Contingency Measures
Under subpart 1 of the CAA, all PM2.5 nonattainment areas must include in their SIPs contingency measures consistent with Sections 172(c)(9).
Contingency measures must be fully adopted rules or control measures that are ready to be implemented quickly upon failure to meet Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) or failure of the area to meet the standard by its attainment date.
An area that demonstrates attainment by 2010, as this SIP does, is considered to have satisfied the RFP requirement and need not submit any additional material to satisfy the RFP requirement (72 FR 20633.) EPA views the attainment demonstration as also demonstrating that the area is making reasonable further progress toward attainment.
The SIP should contain trigger mechanisms for the contingency measures, specify a schedule for implementation, and indicate that measures will be implemented without further action by the State or EPA.
The contingency measures should consist of other control measures for the area that are not included in the control strategy for the SIP for various reasons; for example, they may not be as economically feasible as other measures that are considered to be RACM, or it may not be possible to implement the measures soon enough to advance the attainment date (e.g. federal mobile source measures based on the incremental turnover of the motor vehicle fleet each year).
The measures should provide for emission reductions equivalent to about 1 year of reductions needed for RFP, based on the overall level of reductions needed to demonstrate attainment divided by the number of years from the 2002 base year to the attainment year.
New York must identify contingency measures to be implemented in the event that the State does not attain the PM2.5 standard by April 5, 2010. Attainment is determined by using the 2009 annual PM2.5 design values. The following table shows the calculation of the emissions reductions necessary to demonstrate compliance with the contingency requirements:
Table 7-1 Contingency Calculation (tpy)
2002 Baseline Inventory
2009 Projection Inventory
Difference (2002-2009)
-91,984
-96,625
Contingency (1/7)
In order to demonstrate compliance with the contingency measure provision applicable to the attainment demonstration, the Department has opted to use the SO2 emissions cap associated with 6 NYCRR Part 245, "CAIR SO2 Trading Program" as the program has not been included in the modeling for the New York State portion of the New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT non-attainment area. EPA has already approved numerous SIPs under this interpretation - i.e., that use as contingency measures one or more Federal or local measures that are in place and provide reductions that are in excess of the reductions required by the attainment demonstration or RFP plan. Furthermore, nothing in the statute precludes a State from implementing such measures before they are triggered.
Pursuant to EPA guidance, and as outlined in Table 7-1 above, New York needs to identify reductions of an additional total of 13,804 tpy of PM2.5, NOx and SO2 in the New York State portion of the New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT non-attainment area. New York's 6 NYCRR Part 245, "CAIR SO2 Trading Program" has a state-wide emissions cap of 135,050 tpy SO2, well above the 13,804 tpy necessary to demonstrate compliance with the contingency requirement.
In the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), EPA intended to control and reduce the CAIR states' emissions of PM2.5 precursors that significantly contribute to, or interfere with, maintenance requirements, and claimed that CAIR would provide sufficient emission reductions to alleviate transport issues. On July 11, 2008, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that would have vacated CAIR. EPA appealed the ruling on September 24, 2008. On December 23, 2008, instead of vacating the rule, the CAIR regulations were remanded to the EPA to address deficiencies identified by the court. While the CAIR program rules are being revised by EPA, the original requirements remain in effect at the federal level and reductions will continue while a replacement program is being promulgated. New York commits to implementing the requirements of the replacement program as they become effective to continue reducing emissions of precursors.
There are several additional control measures (existing and potential future) that will provide additional air quality benefits. They have not been included in the modeling, and emissions reductions from these measures are not presented here as they are not being used to satisfy contingency requirements. The measures include:
6 NYCRR Subpart 227-2, NOx RACT (High Electricity Demand Day Units)
Federal Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and Equipment Proposed Rule
6 NYCRR Part 227, Stationary Combustion Installations
Subpart 220-1, Portland Cement Plants
Subpart 220-2, Glass Manufacturing
6 NYCRR Part 231, New Source Review
Large Industrial Spark-Ignition Engines over 19kW and Recreational Vehicles
NOx MACT