Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard

Proposed 2015  Ozone Standard Proposed 2015  Ozone Standard - Start

Added : 2018-09-20 Views :4K

Download Presentation

Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard




Download Presentation - The PPT/PDF document "Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.



Presentations text content in Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard

Slide1

Proposed 2015 Ozone Standard

Air Quality Division

Donna F. Huff

Air Quality Division

May 2015

Slide2

Presentation OutlineProposed Rule

TimelineDesign Values and TrendsPotential Classification RangesPotential Attainment Deadlines

EmissionsSIP Development ProcessWhat Might Nonattainment Mean?Questions and Contacts

Slide3

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.

Slide4

Proposed Rule: Monitoring

Proposed extension of the ozone monitoring season by one monthNo impact: Texas already conducts year-round regulatory monitoring

for ozoneProposed requirement for photochemical assessment monitoring at existing National Core (NCore) monitoring sitesNCore

sites in Texas currently measure photochemical assessment parameters such as ozone, NO, NO2, NO

y, speciated VOC, carbonyls, and meteorologyProposed requirement for hourly speciated VOCs using

autoGCs to meet photochemical assessment monitoring requirementsNo impact to Texas assuming hourly speciated VOC measurements will only be required at existing

NCore sites

Slide5

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; orThe 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).

Slide6

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

).

Slide7

Timeline - CommentsEPA held public hearings

Washington D.C. 1/29 Arlington, TX 1/29 Sacramento, CA 2/2 Written comments were due by March 17, 2015.

Slide8

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

Slide9

2014 Ozone Design Values by County

CSA/CBSA

County

2014 8Hr Ozone DV (ppb)

Dallas-Fort Worth

Denton

81

Dallas-Fort Worth

Tarrant

80

Houston-The Woodlands

Brazoria

80

San Antonio-New

Braunfels

Bexar

80

Dallas-Fort Worth

Collin

78

Dallas-Fort Worth

Dallas

78

Dallas-Fort Worth

Johnson

76

Dallas-Fort Worth

Hood

76Houston-The WoodlandsMontgomery76Houston-The WoodlandsHarris76Dallas-Fort WorthParker74Dallas-Fort WorthRockwall73El Paso-Las CrucesEl Paso72Houston-The WoodlandsGalveston72Killeen-TempleBell72Dallas-Fort WorthEllis71Longview-MarshallGregg71Tyler-JacksonvilleSmith71Beaumont-Port ArthurJefferson70Dallas-Fort WorthKaufman70Amarillo-BorgerRandall70Austin-Round RockTravis69Dallas-Fort WorthHunt69Longview-MarshallHarrison69WacoMcLennan69Dallas-Fort WorthNavarro68Beaumont-Port ArthurOrange67Corpus Christi-Kingsville-AliceNueces66Big Bend (No MSA)Brewster65Alabama-Coushatta (No MSA)Polk65Victoria-Port LavacaVictoria63LaredoWebb61Brownsville-Harlingen-RaymondvilleCameron58McAllen-EdinburgHidalgo57

**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.

Slide10

2014 Ozone Design Values by CSA

CSA/CBSA

2014 8Hr Ozone DV (ppb)

Dallas-Fort Worth

81

Houston-The Woodlands

80

San Antonio-New

Braunfels

80

El Paso-Las

Cruces

72

Killeen-Temple

72

Longview-Marshall

71

Tyler-Jacksonville

71

Amarillo-Borger

70

Beaumont-Port

Arthur

70

Austin-Round

Rock

69

Waco

69Corpus Christi-Kingsville66Big Bend (No MSA)65Alabama-Coushatta (No MSA)65Victoria-Port Lavaca63Laredo61Brownsville-Harlingen-Raymondville58McAllen-Edinburg57**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.

Slide11

2014*

Secondary Ozone

W126 Design Values by County

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

> 17

8 - 13

14-17

Secondary

Ozone DV’s

Region

County

W126 DV

(ppm-

hrs

)

DFW

Denton

17

DFW

Tarrant

17

DFW

Collin

15

DFW

Dallas

13

ELP

El Paso13DFWParker12BBBrewster12DFWJohnson12DFWRockwall11SANBexar11KTFBell10DFWHood10HGBBrazoria9DFWEllis9NETXSmith9NETXGregg8NETXHarrison8DFWHunt8HGBHarris8DFW

Kaufman

8

HGB

Montgomery

8

ARR

Travis

8

BPA

Jefferson

8

DFW

Navarro

7

WAC

McLennan

7

BPA

Orange

6

HGB

Galveston

6CCNueces5VICVictoria4LARWebb3LRGVCameron3MEMHidalgo2

<

7

Slide12

Texas Air Quality Trends:

Slide13

Potential Classification Ranges

Example Classification ThresholdsBased on Percent-Above-Standard Approach0.070 parts per million (ppm)

Marginal 0.071 up to 0.081 ppm Moderate 0.081 up to 0.093 ppm Serious 0.093 up to 0.105 ppm Severe – 15 0.105 up to 0.111 ppm Severe – 17 0.111 up to 0.163 ppm

Extreme 0.163 ppm or more

Slide14

Potential Classification Ranges

Example Classification ThresholdsBased on Percent-Above-Standard Approach0.065 parts per million (ppm)

Marginal 0.066 up to 0.075 ppm Moderate 0.075 up to 0.087 ppm Serious 0.087 up to 0.098 ppm Severe – 15 0.098 up to 0.103 ppm Severe – 17 0.103 up to 0.152 ppm

Extreme 0.152 ppm or more

Slide15

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

Slide16

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%

Slide17

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%

Slide18

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

Slide19

SIP Development Process

Typically 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.

78

9

10

11

12

Slide20

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 wellVehicle 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

Slide21

Nonattainment: Federal Requirements

Slide22

Air Quality Division Contacts

David Brymer,

Director

david.brymer@tceq.texas.gov

512-239-1725

Kim Herndon,

Assistant Directorkim.herndon@tceq.texas.gov

512-239-1421Donna F. Huff, Air Quality Planning Manager

donna.huff@tceq.texas.gov

512-239-6628

Steve Davis,

Air Modeling and Data Analysis Manager

stephen.davis@tceq.texas.gov

512-239-1412

Kevin Cauble

, Emissions Assessment Manager

k

evin.cauble@tceq.texas.gov

512-239-1874


About DocSlides
DocSlides allows users to easily upload and share presentations, PDF documents, and images.Share your documents with the world , watch,share and upload any time you want. How can you benefit from using DocSlides? DocSlides consists documents from individuals and organizations on topics ranging from technology and business to travel, health, and education. Find and search for what interests you, and learn from people and more. You can also download DocSlides to read or reference later.
Youtube