Top Banner
Modeling Guidance and Examples for Commonly Asked Questions (Part II) Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014
26

Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Apr 02, 2015

Download

Documents

Cecilia Jeffery
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Modeling Guidance and Examples for Commonly

Asked Questions(Part II)

Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E.

Air Permits Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014

Page 2: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

What Is PM2.5?

NOx and SO2Stationary Sources

PM2.5

Direct Chemical Formation

The chemical composition of PM2.5 can vary with the local topography, source emissions, time of year, and weather.

Page 3: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 StandardsNAAQS:

24-hr: 35 µg/m3

Primary Annual: 12 µg/m3

Secondary Annual: 15 µg/m3

Increments:24-hr: 9 µg/m3

Annual: 4 µg/m3

SIL*:24-hr: 1.2 µg/m3

Annual: 0.3 µg/m3

*with sufficient justification

Page 4: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Using the SILPM2.5 SIL justification for NAAQS:

Determine a representative background value

Subtract the background from the NAAQS

Compare the difference to the SIL

Background Value SILNAAQS

Page 5: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

4 Assessment CasesCase 1: Direct PM2.5 < 10 tpy SER; NOx and/or SO2 < 40 tpy SER

Primary impacts only

Case 2: Direct PM2.5 ≥ 10 tpy SER; NOx and/or SO2 < 40 tpy SER

Primary impacts, still must address secondary formation

Case 3: Direct PM2.5 ≥ 10 tpy SER; NOx and/or SO2 ≥ 40 tpy SER

Primary impacts AND secondary impacts

Case 4: Direct PM2.5 < 10 tpy SER; NOx and/or SO2 ≥ 40 tpy SER

Primary impacts AND secondary impacts

Page 6: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 1Direct PM2.5 emissions < 10 tpy and SO2 and/or NOx

emissions < 40 tpy:Model direct PM2.5 emissions following guidance for a

NAAQS analysis

Page 7: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 2Direct PM2.5 emissions ≥ 10 tpy:

Model direct PM2.5 emissions following guidance for a NAAQS analysis

SO2 and/or NOx emissions < 40 tpy:

Discuss in AQA why proposed SO2 and NOx emissions are not significant to the secondary formation of PM2.5

Page 8: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3Direct PM2.5 emissions ≥ 10 tpy:

Model direct PM2.5 emissions following guidance for a NAAQS analysis

SO2 and/or NOx emissions > 40 tpy:

Provide a qualitative, hybrid qualitative/quantitative, or quantitative assessment of the secondary formation of PM2.5

Page 9: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Qualitative ApproachIdeas to consider:Peak impacts from direct

emissions and secondarily formed PM2.5 likely do not overlap

Assessment of background data and condition with the NAAQS

Page 10: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Qualitative Approach (Continued)Ideas to consider:Evaluation of speciated PM2.5 data:

Magnitude of secondary PM2.5 precursor emissions from existing sources

Comparing project precursor emissions to those of existing sources

Limitations of chemical species necessary for photochemical reactions to form secondary PM2.5

Page 11: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Hybrid ApproachQualitative: Follow the Case 3 qualitative assessments

General conclusions from existing photochemical modeling

Page 12: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Quantitative ApproachQuantitative #1:

Assume 100% conversion from SO2 and NOx to PM2.5

Assess combined impacts of direct and equivalent direct PM2.5 emissions

Quantitative #2: Full quantitative photochemical grid modeling exercise*

*No requirement for photochemical modeling - this will be discussed further

Page 13: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 4Direct PM2.5 emissions < 10 tpy:

Model direct PM2.5 emissions following guidance for a NAAQS analysis

SO2 and/or NOx emissions ≥ 40 tpy:

Provide a qualitative, hybrid qualitative/quantitative, or quantitative assessment of the secondary formation of PM2.5

Page 14: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 ExampleDirect PM2.5 emissions: 62 tpy

NOx emissions: 96 tpy

SO2 emissions: 10 tpy

Need to address secondary formation of PM2.5.

Page 15: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Qualitative ExampleSlow transformation and small portions of NOx emissions

can convert to PM2.5

Maximum concentration areas for secondary impacts of NOx are not likely to overlap with direct impacts of PM2.5

Page 16: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Example (Cont.)Qualitative (Cont.):

Speciated PM2.5 data shows nitrates make up 2% of total PM2.5 concentration

Regional NOx emissions have a magnitude of 25,000 tons

Project emissions of NOx (96 tpy) are small and not likely to contribute to secondary formation of PM2.5

Page 17: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Example (Cont.)Quantitative:

Assume 100% conversion of NOx to (NH4)NO3

Using NACAA formula: 1 µg/m3 of NOx could form 1.7391 µg/m3 of (NH4)NO3

24-hr and annual NOx from the source predicted to be 2.9 µg/m3 and 0.3 µg/m3, respectively

Using the formula, 24-hr and annual secondary formation from the source would be 5 µg/m3 and 0.5 µg/m3, respectively

Page 18: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Case 3 Example (Cont.)Quantitative (Cont.):

24-hr and annual predicted concentrations from the direct emissions of PM2.5 were 2 µg/m3 and 1 µg/m3, respectively

Add all components together for a total value

Pollutant

Averaging Time

Project GLCmax (µg/m3)

Secondary Formation

from Project (µg/m3)

Background

(µg/m3)

Total Predicted

Concentration

(µg/m3)

NAAQS

PM2.5 24-hr 2 5 26 33 35

PM2.5 Annual 1 0.5 9.6 11.1 12

Page 19: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 Increment

What to consider:Major source baseline date - October 20, 2010Trigger date - October 20, 2011Minor source baseline date - county specific

SIL:Additional justification

Output metric:Yearly H1H vs. 5-year average

Page 20: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 SIL Justification for IncrementEvaluate proposed direct PM2.5 emissions increases:

Report the maximum predictions and not a 5-year average

Provide justification for using the SILs to compare with the model predictions

Page 21: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 SIL Justification for Increment

Page 22: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 Monitoring for Increment5 years of monitoring data (µg/m3):

24-hrConcentratio

ns

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

H1H 23.4 23.2 22.9 23.5 23.3

H2H 21.9 22.1 21.4 22.3 22.9

Increment Consumed 2013-2010

SILIncrement Standard

Page 23: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 Increment

When predictions are greater than the SIL or if the SIL cannot be justified:

Evaluate increment affecting sources together with the project sources

Document approach to identify increment affecting sources

Receptors - the extent of the receptor grid needs to capture maximum concentrations from the project and show that concentrations are decreasing

Page 24: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 Increment (continued)Further detail:PSD major sources were further evaluated:

Projects with completion dates 18 months prior to the major source baseline date up to the minor source baseline date were identified

Projects were reviewed to determine if PM2.5 was associated with project

The extent of the modeling domain used to limit search for PSD major sources:

24-hr and annual GLCmax locations, distance from property line, etc.

Page 25: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

PM2.5 Increment (continued)

Page 26: Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.

Contact InformationReece Parker

Air Dispersion Modeling Team (512) 239-1348 [email protected]

Justin Cherry, P.E.Air Dispersion Modeling Team (512) 239-0955 [email protected]

Air Permits Division

Reece Parker

(512) 239-1348

[email protected]

Air Permits Division

(512) [email protected]

Justin Cherry