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

kcottrel@dem.state.in.us

lbrown@dem.state.in.us sseals@dem.state.in.us sraymond@dem.state.in.us

gsaini@dem.state.in.us

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