Air Quality Division Proposed 2015 Ozone Standards ETF May 2015 Page 1 Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard Air Quality Division Donna F. Huff Air Quality Division.

Air Quality Division • Proposed 2015 Ozone Standards • ETF • May 2015 • Page 1

Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard

Air Quality Division

Donna F. HuffAir Quality Division

May 2015


Presentation Outline

• Proposed Rule• Timeline• Design Values and Trends• Potential Classification Ranges• Potential Attainment Deadlines• Emissions• SIP Development Process• What Might Nonattainment Mean?• Questions and Contacts


Proposed Rule: General

• The EPA proposed revisions to the primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone on November 25, 2014.

• Both standards are proposed to be eight-hour standards set within a range of 0.065 to 0.070 parts per million (ppm), which is often expressed as 65 to 70 parts per billion (ppb).

• The EPA took comment on a primary standard as low as 0.060 ppm as well as retaining the current 0.075 ppm standard.

• The EPA took comment on a secondary standard based on the weighted (W126) metric within a range of 13 to 17 ppm-hours averaged over three years.


Proposed Rule: Monitoring

• Proposed extension of the ozone monitoring season by one month– No impact: Texas already conducts year-round regulatory

monitoring for ozone

• Proposed requirement for photochemical assessment monitoring at existing National Core (NCore) monitoring sites– NCore sites in Texas currently measure photochemical

assessment parameters such as ozone, NO, NO2, NOy, speciated VOC, carbonyls, and meteorology

• Proposed requirement for hourly speciated VOCs using autoGCs to meet photochemical assessment monitoring requirements– No impact to Texas assuming hourly speciated VOC

measurements will only be required at existing NCore sites


Proposed Rule: Permitting

• The EPA generally requires that a project demonstrate compliance with any revised NAAQS that are in effect when a permit is issued. However, the EPA proposed to allow PSD permit applications to be “grandfathered” from this requirement for the revised ozone NAAQS, as long as either of the following conditions apply:

– The application has been determined to be technically complete on or before the date the EPA signs the final rule; or

– The public notice for a draft permit or preliminary determination has been published prior to the date revised ozone standards become effective (60 days after publication in the Federal Register).


Proposed Rule: Costs

• The EPA estimates a cost of $3.9 billion for 70 ppb and $15 billion for 65 ppb by 2025. California is expected to have an attainment date and costs incurred after 2025 and an additional cost of $0.8 – $1.6 billion for 70 or 65 ppb, respectively.

• The EPA estimates benefits of $7.5-$15 billion for a 70 ppb standard and $21 - $42 billion for a 65 ppb standard (includes California benefits after 2025).


Timeline - Comments

• EPA held public hearings – Washington D.C. 1/29 – Arlington, TX 1/29 – Sacramento, CA 2/2

• Written comments were due by March 17, 2015.


Timeline

October 1, 2015 Consent decree deadline for final NAAQS

October 2016 State designation recommendations due to the EPA

June 2017 EPA sends letter to states with proposed nonattainment area designations

October 2017 EPA to sign (finalize) designations and classifications

October 2017 EPA to finalize implementation rule

October 2020-2021 State Implementation Plans (SIP) due

2014 Ozone Design Values by County

CSA/CBSA County2014 8Hr Ozone DV

(ppb)Dallas-Fort Worth Denton 81Dallas-Fort Worth Tarrant 80

Houston-The Woodlands Brazoria 80San Antonio-New Braunfels Bexar 80

Dallas-Fort Worth Collin 78Dallas-Fort Worth Dallas 78Dallas-Fort Worth Johnson 76Dallas-Fort Worth Hood 76

Houston-The Woodlands Montgomery 76Houston-The Woodlands Harris 76

Dallas-Fort Worth Parker 74Dallas-Fort Worth Rockwall 73El Paso-Las Cruces El Paso 72

Houston-The Woodlands Galveston 72Killeen-Temple Bell 72

Dallas-Fort Worth Ellis 71Longview-Marshall Gregg 71Tyler-Jacksonville Smith 71

Beaumont-Port Arthur Jefferson 70Dallas-Fort Worth Kaufman 70Amarillo-Borger Randall 70

Austin-Round Rock Travis 69Dallas-Fort Worth Hunt 69Longview-Marshall Harrison 69

Waco McLennan 69Dallas-Fort Worth Navarro 68

Beaumont-Port Arthur Orange 67Corpus Christi-Kingsville-

Alice Nueces 66

Big Bend (No MSA) Brewster 65Alabama-Coushatta (No

MSA) Polk 65

Victoria-Port Lavaca Victoria 63Laredo Webb 61

Brownsville-Harlingen-Raymondville

Cameron 58

McAllen-Edinburg Hidalgo 57**The Brewster County, Randall County, and Polk County monitors are part of the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) of monitors and report data directly to the EPA.

*2014 design values are calculated as of 4/1/2015. The monitors in Polk and Webb Counties do not have enough complete data under 2008 NAAQS; however, the design values at those monitors could become valid depending on the level of the new NAAQS.

2014 Ozone Design Values by CSA

CSA/CBSA2014 8Hr Ozone DV

(ppb)Dallas-Fort Worth 81

Houston-The Woodlands 80San Antonio-New Braunfels 80

El Paso-Las Cruces 72Killeen-Temple 72

Longview-Marshall 71Tyler-Jacksonville 71Amarillo-Borger 70

Beaumont-Port Arthur 70Austin-Round Rock 69

Waco 69Corpus Christi-Kingsville 66

Big Bend (No MSA) 65Alabama-Coushatta (No MSA) 65

Victoria-Port Lavaca 63Laredo 61

Brownsville-Harlingen-Raymondville 58McAllen-Edinburg 57

**The Brewster County, Randall County, and Polk County monitors are part of the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) of monitors and report data directly to the EPA.

*2014 design values are calculated as of 4/1/2015. The monitors in Polk and Webb Counties do not have enough complete data under 2008 NAAQS; however, the design values at those monitors could become valid depending on the level of the new NAAQS.

2014* Secondary OzoneW126 Design Values by County

*2014 W126 Design Values are preliminary and are subject to change.

> 17

8 - 13

14-17

SecondaryOzone DV’s

Region CountyW126 DV (ppm-hrs)

DFW Denton 17DFW Tarrant 17DFW Collin 15DFW Dallas 13ELP El Paso 13DFW Parker 12BB Brewster 12

DFW Johnson 12DFW Rockwall 11SAN Bexar 11KTF Bell 10DFW Hood 10HGB Brazoria 9DFW Ellis 9NETX Smith 9NETX Gregg 8NETX Harrison 8DFW Hunt 8HGB Harris 8DFW Kaufman 8HGB Montgomery 8ARR Travis 8BPA Jefferson 8DFW Navarro 7WAC McLennan 7BPA Orange 6HGB Galveston 6CC Nueces 5VIC Victoria 4LAR Webb 3

LRGV Cameron 3MEM Hidalgo 2

< 7

Texas Air Quality Trends:


Potential Classification Ranges

Example Classification ThresholdsBased on Percent-Above-Standard Approach

0.070 parts per million (ppm)

Marginal 0.071 up to 0.081 ppmModerate 0.081 up to 0.093 ppmSerious 0.093 up to 0.105 ppmSevere – 15 0.105 up to 0.111 ppmSevere – 17 0.111 up to 0.163 ppmExtreme 0.163 ppm or more


Potential Classification Ranges

Example Classification ThresholdsBased on Percent-Above-Standard Approach

0.065 parts per million (ppm)

Marginal 0.066 up to 0.075 ppmModerate 0.075 up to 0.087 ppmSerious 0.087 up to 0.098 ppmSevere – 15 0.098 up to 0.103 ppmSevere – 17 0.103 up to 0.152 ppmExtreme 0.152 ppm or more


Potential Attainment Deadlines

Based on Section 181(a)(1) of the Federal Clean Air Act:

Marginal 2020

Moderate 2023

Serious 2026

Severe 2032 or 2034

Extreme 2037


Nitrogen Oxides Emissions

2011 Nitrogen Oxides Emissions Contributions by Source Category Source category

Region Point Nonpoint Mobile

Austin (Bastrop, Burnet, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties) 14.8% 8.2% 77.0%

San Antonio (Atascosa, Bandera, Bexar, Comal, Guadalupe, Kendall, Medina, and Wilson Counties) 31.5% 8.6% 59.9%

Dallas-Fort Worth (Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant, and Wise Counties) 8.3% 12.2% 79.5%

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties) 22.2% 5.4% 72.4%


Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions

2011 Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions Contributions by Source Category Source category

Region Point Nonpoint Mobile

Austin (Bastrop, Burnet, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties) 1.7% 63.7% 34.6%

San Antonio (Atascosa, Bandera, Bexar, Comal, Guadalupe, Kendall, Medina, and Wilson Counties) 3.0% 65.4% 31.6%

Dallas-Fort Worth (Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant, and Wise Counties) 6.1% 63.3% 30.6%

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties) 16.7% 57.5% 25.8%


SIP Development ProcessTypically a 3 - 4 Year Process

Pollution-exceeding episode is selected.

Base case and future emissions inventories are prepared.

Photochemical grid modeling is performed to determine the amount of emission reductions required.

Control measures are evaluated to determine how to accomplish the needed reductions.

Draft SIP revision and rules are prepared.

Commission approves the proposed SIP revision and rules package.

1

2

3

4

5

6


SIP Development ProcessTypically a 3 - 4 Year Process

Formal public review and comment period with a public hearing.

Response to comments are prepared and options are reviewed based on comments.

Proposed control measures are re-quantified and re-modeled.

Final revisions are made to SIP and rulemaking packages.

Commission adopts final rules and SIP revision packages.

The state submits the complete rule and SIP revision packages to the EPA.

7

8

9

10

11

12


Nonattainment: What It Could Mean for an Area

SIP revision

Controls for major sources of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds, possibly minor sources as well

Vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) for some areas

Emission offsets for new major sources or major source modification

More stringent permitting requirements

Conformity Process: general and transportation


Nonattainment: Federal Requirements

EXTREME(20 Years)

Clean Fuels and Controls for Boilers

Traffic Controls During Congestion

SEVERE(15-17 Years)

VMT Growth Offset

Major Source Fees for Failure to Attain

(185 Fees)

SERIOUS(9 Years)

Enhanced Monitoring and I/M

Modeled Attainment Demonstration

3% per Year VOC Reductions After 6

Years

RFP Milestone Contingency

Measures

Clean Fuels ProgramVMT Demonstration

Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery

MODERATE(6 Years)

Basic I/M

RACT & RACM Emissions Reductions

Attainment Demonstration

Contingency Measures

RFP - 15% VOC Reductions within 6

years

MARGINAL(3 Years)

Emissions Inventory

Emissions Statements

Nonattainment NSR Program & Emissions

Offsets

RACT Fixups

I/M Corrections

Nonattainment requirements compound as classification increases.

10

1.5 : 1

25

1.3 : 1

50

1.2 : 1

100

1.15 : 1

100

1.1 : 1


Air Quality Division Contacts

•David Brymer, [email protected] 512-239-1725

•Kim Herndon, Assistant Director•[email protected] •512-239-1421

Donna F. Huff, Air Quality Planning [email protected] 512-239-6628

Steve Davis, Air Modeling and Data Analysis [email protected]

Kevin Cauble, Emissions Assessment [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]






Air Quality Division Proposed 2015 Ozone Standards ETF May 2015 Page 1 Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard Air Quality Division Donna F. Huff Air Quality Division.

Documents