1
Presented to:Air and Waste Management Association
Indiana Chapter
Scott DeloneyOffice of Air Quality
March 16, 2005
Ozone and Fine Particle Standards in Indiana: Implementation Update
2
Allen
Jay
Lake
Knox
Vigo
White
Jasper
Cass
Clay
Pike
Rush
LaPorte
Parke
Grant
Greene
Perry
Clark
Ripley
Noble
Gibson
Porter
Wells
Elkhart
Owen
Henry
Posey
Boone
Miami
Putnam
Jackson
Dubois
Shelby
Pulaski Fulton
Marion
Clinton
Wayne
Harrison
Sullivan
BentonCarroll
MartinDaviess
Orange
Kosciusko
Morgan
Monroe
Madison
Marshall
Newton
Warrick
Wabash
Brown
Warren
DeKalb
Franklin
Adams
Spencer
Starke
Decatur
Randolph
Lawrence
Whitley
FountainHamilton
St. Joseph
Washington
Tippecanoe
Jennings
Delaware
Tipton
Hendricks
Montgomery
Jefferson
LaGrange Steuben
Howard
Johnson
Scott
Huntington
Hancock
Crawford
DearbornBartholomew
Fayette Union
Floyd
Switzerland
Lk Michigan
Ohio
Blackford
Vermillion
Vanderburgh
LegendAttainment Counties
Nonattainment (Subpart 1/EPA - Basic)
Nonattainment (Subpart 2/EPA - Moderate)
Nonattainment (Subpart 2/EPA - Marginal)
Indiana Nonattainment Countiesfor the 8-Hour Ozone Standard
0 30 6015 Miles
U.S. EPA’s
Final Ozone
Nonattainment
Designations
for Indiana
April 15, 2004
3
S t a t e w id e O z o n e P r e c u r s o r s T r e n d s
0
2 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 9 9 6 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 2
N O X
V O C
4
Monitor Design Values by County
Area Monitor Location 2001-2003
Value
2002-2004
Value
Central Indiana Noblesville 96 92
Evansville Alcoa 85 83
Fort Wayne Leo High School 88 85
Greene County Plummer 88 84
Jackson County Brownstown 85 79
Lafayette Flora 73 82
LaPorte County Michigan City 93 86
Louisville Charlestown 92 88
Muncie Albany 88 83
NW Indiana – Lake/Porter counties
Valparaiso 86 84
South Bend/Elkhart Granger 93 88
Terre Haute Sandcut 87 83
5
Statewide Annual Ozone Average Value
0.060
0.070
0.080
0.090
0.100
0.110
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Parts
per b
illion
6
Assessment of Critical Values
7
Redesignations for Ozone
• Delaware, Greene, Jackson, Vanderburgh, Vigo, and Warrick counties eligible for redesignation to attainment/maintenance.
– Draft redesignation petitions and maintenance plans are complete for all areas.
– Public hearings are being scheduled for April-May 2005.
– All final submittals to be made from late April-June.
– U.S. EPA approvals should be issued this year.
8
Likely Implementation Milestones for Ozone
Requirement Basic/Subpart 1 Marginal Moderate
Attainment Deadline
June 15, 2009June 15, 2007 June 15, 2010
Attainment SIP Deadline June 15, 2007 Not Required June 15, 2007
Transportation Conformity
Required-June 15, 2005
Required-June 15, 2005
Required-June 15, 2005
NSR-Source Permit Trigger 100 Tons per Year 100 Tons per Year 100 Tons per Year
Vehicle Emissions Testing Not Required Not Required Required
NSR Offset Ratio 1 to 1 1.1 to 1.0 1.15 to 1.0
Rate of Further Progress Not Required Not Required
15% Reduction in Total VOC-
June 15, 2007
U.S. EPA expected to issue Phase II of the Final Implementation Rule for Ozone this summer.
9
Overview: New Fine Particle Standard
July 1997, U.S. EPA issued new health standards for fine particles (PM 2.5):
15 ug/m3 - annual standard
65 ug/m3 - daily standard
A legal challenge was filed and the standard was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court on February 27, 2001.
U.S. EPA issued final designations for attainment and nonattainment areas under the new standard on December 17, 2004.
Published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2005
Effective date is April 5, 2005
10
Fine Particles Reduce Visibility
Indianapolis on a Clear Day
Summer of 2003
Indianapolis on a Hazy Day
Winter of 2005
Photo: Midwest HazeCam
11
PM2.5 Monitor Values
•PM 2.5 standard :
15.0 µg/m3 Annual
65.0 µg/m3 Daily
• No Indiana counties exceed daily standard.
•6 Indiana counties exceed annual standard as of the end of 2003
•3 Indiana counties exceed the annual standard as of the end of 2004
County2001-2003
2002-2004
Allen 14.3 13.7
Clark 16.2 15.6
Delaware 14.3 13.6
Dubois 16.2 15.5
Elkhart 15.2 14.4
Floyd 14.9 14.2
Howard 14.7 13.9
Lake 15.2 14.2
LaPorte 13.6 12.9
Madison 14.6 14.0
Marion 16.7 16.0
Porter 13.8 13.2
St. Joseph 14.3 13.6
Tippecanoe 14.0 13.5
Vanderburgh 15.5 14.7
Vigo 14.6 13.8
Value above the Annual Standard
12
In d ia n a P M 2 . 5 A n n u a l V a lu e s
1 2 .0 01 2 .5 01 3 .0 01 3 .5 01 4 .0 01 4 .5 01 5 .0 01 5 .5 01 6 .0 01 6 .5 01 7 .0 01 7 .5 01 8 .0 0
2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 4
Y e a r
Ann
ual V
alue
s (u
g/m
3) S ta te w i d eM o n i to r s
A n n u a lP M 2 .5S ta n d a r d
Statewide PM2.5 Averaged Monitor Trend
13
U.S. EPA
Final Designations
for Fine Particles
December 17, 2004
Allen
Jay
Lake
Knox
Vigo
WhiteCass
Jasper
Clay
Pike
Parke
Rush
LaPorte
Greene
Grant
Perry
Clark
Noble
Ripley
Gibson
Porter
Wells
Owen
Henry
Posey
Elkhart
Boone
Miami
Putnam
Dubois
Jackson
Wayne
Shelby
Pulaski
Marion
Fulton
Harrison
Benton
Sullivan
Clinton
Orange
Carroll
Daviess Martin
Morgan
Monroe
Newton
Madison
Marshall
Wabash
Kosciusko
Warrick
Warren
DeKalb
Spencer
Adams
Starke
Brown
Franklin
Decatur
Lawrence
Randolph
Whitley
FountainHamilton
St. Joseph
Tippecanoe
Delaware
Washington
Jennings
Tipton
Montgomery
Hendricks
LaGrange Steuben
Jefferson
Howard
Scott
Johnson
Hancock
Huntington
Crawford
DearbornBartholomew
Fayette Union
Floyd
Vermillion
Switzerland
Lk Michigan
Ohio
Vanderburgh
Blackford
Legend
Attainment
Nonattainment
Unclassifiable
U.S. EPA Final Designations for Fine Particle "PM 2.5" StandardDecember 2004
0 20 4010 Miles
* County may be eligibile for attainmentclassification prior to designation effective date
14
Criteria U.S. EPA Used to Designate Areas:
• Monitoring data• Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) Boundaries• Emissions trends • Emissions contributing from neighboring
jurisdictions• Traffic and employment patterns• Population growth• Commercial, residential, and industrial growth• Meteorology
15
Potential Reclassifications for PM 2.5• U.S. EPA provided states an opportunity to submit 2004 PM 2.5 monitoring
data prior to the April 5, 2005 effective date for designations.• U.S EPA indicated that it will consider reclassification of areas that are in
compliance with the standard based on 2004 data, prior to effective date.
February 17, 2005 IDEM submittal to USEPA:– 2004 monitoring data and trends analysis– Only counties with a violating monitor should be designated nonattainment– Elkhart, Lake, Porter, St. Joseph and Vanderburgh counties monitor
attainment through 2004.– Separation of 6-county SW IN nonattainment area into two areas (urban
and rural).
March 7, 2005 Indiana Challenges USEPA Designations:– Only counties with a violating monitor should be designated nonattainment
16
Estimated Source Contribution to Fine Particle Levels*
Ammonium
Carbon
Nitrates Sulfates
Dust
Cars, trucks, forest fires, waste burning and biogenics
Cars, trucks, and power generation
Fertilizers and animal feed operations
Dust from roads and construction
Power generation
*Source: U.S. EPA 2002 National Averages
17
Likely Implementation Milestones for Fine Particles
Requirement Basic/Subpart 1
Final Designations December 17, 2004
Effective Date for Designations April 5, 2005
Attainment Plan Deadline April 5, 2008
Attainment Deadline April 5, 2010
Transportation Conformity April 5, 2006
NSR-Source Permit TriggerPrecursors and thresholds to be
determined
NSR Offset Ratio To be determined
U.S. EPA to publish draft implementation rule in December 2005, and final rule in December 2006.
18
What Measures Will Improve Air Quality?
Federal Measures in Place to be Implemented Prior to 2007
•NOx SIP Call (Indiana’s NOx Reduction Rule)
•Tier II motor vehicle engine standards
•Low Sulfur Gasoline Standards
•Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Standards
•Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Standards
•Non-road Diesel Engine and Low Sulfur Fuel Rule
•Clean Air Interstate Rule-Signed on March 10, 2005
Federal Measures Currently Under Consideration•Multi-pollutant legislation (Clear Skies)
19
Areas That Require Additional Planning
• Based on photochemical modeling to date, it appears that additional emission reductions may be required in order for Northwest and Central Indiana to attain the new standards.
• Air Quality advisory groups established and active in reviewing control options and devising a recommended control strategy.
• Central Indianahttp://www.in.gov/idem/air/ciaqag/index.html• Northwest Indiana (Lake and Porter Counties)http://www.in.gov/idem/air/nirpc/index.html
20
IDEM also provides daily information about the air quality in seven regions of the state. Like the AQI, the SmogWatch site will give you information that you can use to protect your health from ozone or fine particles.
Visit SmogWatch website at: http://www.in.gov/idem/air/smogSmogWatch Forecast Phone Number: 1-800-631-2871
21
Other Key WebsitesIDEM Website:
www.in.gov/idem/air
U.S. EPA 8 Hour Ozone Guidance:www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/o3imp8hr/
U.S. EPA Particulate Matter Guidance:www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/
IDEM New Source Review Questions:www.in.gov/idem/air/8hrstandard/nsrfacts.htmlwww.in.gov/idem/air/8hrstandard/july04nsrfacts.html
IDEM Emission Credit Registry:www.emissioncredit.in.gov
22
How Do I Find Out More?
EMISSION
REGISTRY
OZONE FINE
PARTICLES
EDUCATION/
AWARENESS
NEW SOURCE
REVIEW
Kim Cottrell Laurence Brown
Shawn Seals Sarah Raymond
Gurinder Saini
317-233-0870 317-234-3097 317-233-0425 317-232-8449 317-233-0206
23
Central Indiana Air Quality Advisory Group
• Facilitated by Center for Urban Policy and the Environment (IUPUI)
• Participants include:– Local government (cities, counties, towns, etc.)– Regional government (MPO)– State government– Business and industry– Environmental interest groups– Concerned citizens
24
Central Indiana Air Quality Advisory Group
• Reviewing control options-regional and local• Focus has first been on local reductions (VOC)
– Local VOC options have been prioritized• Once photochemical modeling is complete,
regional controls will be reviewed and considered (NOx, VOC, SO2, PM 2.5)
• Control strategy (combination of local and/or regional controls) to be recommended in Fall 2005
25
Evaluation Criteria RACT Extended Degreasing Auto Refinishing
Short Description The extension (to the collar counties) of industry controls that currently apply in Marion County.
Rules that currently apply to Clark, Floyd, Lake & Porter counties for area sources using solvent degreasing.
Rules that currently apply to Clark, Floyd, Lake & Porter counties for area sources that paint cars.
1. Short-term quantifiable, SIP-eligible reduction potential
a. 1-5 years (SIP period) VOC-up to 0.5 tons per day (0.2% of total VOC).
VOC-up to 6 tons per day (2% of total VOC).
VOC-up to 6 tons per day (2% of total VOC).
2. Long-term quantifiable reduction potential
b. 6-15 years No expected change. No expected change. No expected change.
c. 15+ years No expected change. No expected change. No expected change.
2. Cost Varies. Varies. Varies.
3. Cost effectiveness $50 - $6,500 per ton VOC. Insufficient data; costs are not expected to be high (< Auto Refinishing).
$1,250 – $4,500 per ton of VOC.
4. Technical feasibility Yes. Yes. Yes.
5. Timing of implementation (can it be implemented in the time required for the SIP?)
Yes. Yes. Yes.
6. EPA approvability Yes. Yes. Yes.
7. State and local policy acceptance
a. Adequate state authority Yes. Yes. Yes.
b. Acceptance by state officials Probable. Probable. Probable.
c. Acceptance by local officials Probable. Probable. Probable.
d. Acceptance by the public Probable. Probable. Probable.
26
Evaluation Criteria RACT Extended Degreasing Auto Refinishing
8. Environmental justice (the measure does not affect low income, minority, elderly, or disabled populations disproportionately?)
No disproportionate consequences; may reduce VOC industrial emissions in areas located near residences.
No disproportionate consequences; may reduce VOC industrial emissions in areas located near residences.
No disproportionate consequences; may reduce VOC industrial emissions in areas located near residences.
9. Equitable distribution of the benefits and costs (i.e., across industries, communities, etc.)
Costs are on industry. Improves equity within the region where currently rules only applies to Marion County.
Costs are on industry. Applies equitably to affected industries in the 9 counties. Rule is same as Chicago & Louisville areas.
Costs are on industry. Applies equitably to affected industries in the 9 counties. Rule is same as Chicago & Louisville areas.
10. Finance tools Industry pays. Industry pays. Industry pays.
11. Secondary/co-benefits
a. Environmental May reduce toxic air pollutants, odors.
May reduce toxic air pollutants, odors.
May reduce toxic air pollutants, odors.
b. Other None identified. None identified. None identified
12. Secondary costs (such as economic impact, etc.)
May cause industry to locate beyond boundaries of the region or affect other economic decisions by businesses.
Impact may be reflected in consumer prices.
Small businesses may be affected disproportionately.
May cause industry to locate beyond boundaries of the region or affect other economic decisions by businesses.
Impact may be reflected in consumer prices.
Small businesses may be affected disproportionately.
May cause industry to locate beyond boundaries of the region or affect other economic decisions by businesses.
Impact may be reflected in consumer prices.
Small businesses may be affected disproportionately.
13. Additional considerations May be required by EPA. None identified. None identified.
27
Prioritization-Steps 1&2Table 3: Comparison of control measures chosen for inclusion or exclusion regardless of reduction required
Control measure Include Eliminate
Enhanced I&M 4 6
Hybrid I&M 5 8
LRVP 14 1
Calif-like RFG 8 10
ULSD non-road 10 3
RACT Extended 7 3
Degreasing 11 1
Auto refinishing 12 0
Voluntary mobile 12 3
Other voluntary 14 0
TCM regulatory 13 2
28
Table 9: Preferred control measures identified through three activities for 5% reduction goal
Chosen least often for elimination regardless of reduction goal
Chosen most often for inclusion regardless of reduction goal
Chosen most often to meet a 5 % reduction goal
Auto refinishing LRVP LRVP
Degreasing Auto refinishing Degreasing
Table 10: Preferred control measures identified through three activities for 10% reduction goal
Chosen least often for elimination regardless of reduction goal
Chosen most often for inclusion regardless of reduction goal
Chosen most often to meet a 10 % reduction goal
Auto refinishing LRVP Degreasing
Degreasing Auto refinishing Auto refinishing
LRVP TCM regulatory LRVP
Table 11: Preferred control measures identified through three activities for 15% reduction goal
Chosen least often for elimination regardless of reduction goal
Chosen most often for inclusion regardless of reduction goal
Chosen most often to meet a 15% reduction goal
Auto refinishing LRVP Degreasing
Degreasing Auto refinishing Auto refinishing
LRVP TCM regulatory LRVP
TCM regulatory Degreasing I&M
RACT extended ULSD non-road ULSD
ULSD non-road California-like RFG RACT Extended
RACT extended California-like RFG
Results of Prioritization
Exercise for Local VOC Reduction
Strategies