A&WMA Southern Section Annual Meeting Biloxi, MS September 12, 2012 Carla Brown, P.E. MS Dept. of Environmental Quality 601-961-5235

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Modeled NAAQS Non-compliance in NE Minnesota and Proposed Path Forward.

Advertisements

AWMA Meeting October 15, 2013 Stack testing issues and questions Dennis Thielen.

Emissions Reductions Beyond the Clean Smokestacks Act (CSA) Emissions Reductions Beyond the Clean Smokestacks Act (CSA) Environmental Management Commission.

Modeling the New 1-Hour Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2 ) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 ) NAAQS Alan Dresser Research Scientist I October 14, 2011.

Examples of 1-Hour NO 2 and SO 2 Modeling William O’Sullivan Director, Division of Air Quality NJDEP June 14, 2011.

Dispersion Modeling Jim McGraw Program Development Supervisor.

Update: National Ambient Air Quality Standards Association of California Airports September 15, 2010 Phil DeVita.

EPA PM2.5 Modeling Guidance for Attainment Demonstrations Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS February 20, 2007.

Boiler MACT and Other Air Developments 2011 Southern Section AWMA Conference Callaway Gardens, GA Boiler MACT and Other Air Developments 2011 Southern.

Impact Area 1-hour standards. SILs used to determine when a proposed source’s ambient impacts warrant a comprehensive (cumulative) source impact analysis.

Maricopa County Air Quality Department 1001 North Central Ave. Phoenix, Arizona Maricopa County Air Quality Department Protecting and improving our.

Air and Waste Management Association-Gulf Coast Chapter Meeting October 7, 2014.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards for NO 2 and SO 2 – New Modeling Challenges August 4, 2011 Air & Waste Management Association – Southern Section.

Meeting of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe/State of Colorado Environmental Commission and the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission 4/16/2015.

How Ozone is Regulated under the Clean Air Act Darcy J. Anderson AZ Dept. of Environmental Quality.

NAAQS UPDATE SIP Steering Committee January 13, 2011.

Air Quality Beyond Ozone and PM2.5 Sheila Holman North Carolina Division of Air Quality 6 th Annual Unifour Air Quality Conference June 15, 2012.

ADEM Air Update Ron Gore November, National Issues EPA is delaying many controversial decisions and issues: Implementation of new SO 2 NAAQS Setting.

A&WMA Georgia Regulatory Update Conference Current State of the Air in GA Jac Capp, GA EPD, Branch Chief, Air Protection Branch April 16, 2013.

EPA Update- Bob Judge Maine Air Quality Monitoring Committee April 18, ) NAAQS schedule 2) Budget 3) Technical Systems Audit.

1 PSD - Case #1 Case #1: –A simple cycle natural gas power plant with PTE NOx of 300 tpy and GHGs of 150,000 tpy CO2e receives a PSD permit addressing.

IOWA Department of Natural Resources Air Quality Program Development Jim McGraw Environmental Program Supervisor  8 hr Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation.

AWMA – Georgia Chapter Air Permitting Update April 16, 2013 Eric Cornwell Stationary Source Permitting Program.

Indiana New Source Review Reform Plantwide Applicability Limitations (PALs) IDEM/Office of Air Quality September 7, 2004.

GA EPD Air Protection Branch AWMA Southern Section August 2015.

Ozone Regulation under the Clean Air Act Darcy J. Anderson AZ Dept. of Environmental Quality.

| Philadelphia | Atlanta | Houston | Washington DC SO 2 Data Requirements Rule – A Proactive Compliance Approach Mark Wenclawiak, CCM |

Development of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch 2012 CMAS Conference October 16,

Mississippi Air Update Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality September 12, 2012.

Environmental Protection Division Air Quality Update Georgia EPD Jimmy Johnston Georgia Environmental Protection Division August 5, 2010.

SIP Steering Committee Meeting March 29,  In October 2011, EPA issued draft SIP and modeling guidance related to the 1-hour SO2 standard issued.

Air Quality Regulations – What’s New? (for Ethanol Plants) Shelley Schneider Air Quality Division Administrator.

Air Quality Policy Division D P A Q PM 2.5 Final NSR Implementation Rule Nat’l Tribal Air Assoc. July 16, 2008.

Sound solutions delivered uncommonly well Understanding the Permitting Impacts of the Proposed Ozone NAAQS Pine Mountain, GA ♦ August 20, 2015 Courtney.

EPA’s DRAFT SIP and MODELING GUIDANCE Ian Cohen EPA Region 1 December 8, 2011.

ANPR: Transition to New or Revised PM NAAQS WESTAR Business Meeting March 2006.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Current Status of Air Quality Laura Boothe North Carolina Division of Air Quality MCIC Workshops March 2012.

Regulatory Requirements For Modeling. Air Quality Model Estimates Developing Air Pollution Control Plans Assessment of Environmental Impacts Projecting.

1 SJVAPCD DRAFT SCHEDULES May 2, Hr OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN PM10 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN.

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permit Training Other Aspects of PSD Title V Permitting.

Jessica Montanez Environmental Protection Agency NEW SOURCE REVIEW (NSR) PROGRAM.

1 Mississippi Air Quality Update Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality Air Division August 5, 2011.

WESTAR 2003 Fall Technical Conference on PSD Increment Tracking & Cumulative Effects Modeling Seattle, Washington Conducting Class I Area Increment Analyses.

New Source Review Rules Update Jessica Montanez U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Air Quality Policy Division.

NAAQS and Criteria Pollutant Trends Update US EPA Region 10.

1 Modeling Under PSD Air quality models (screening and refined) are used in various ways under the PSD program. Step 1: Significant Impact Analysis –Use.

1 NSR Rule Review and Guidance 25 Pa. Code, Chapter 121. General Provisions Chapter 127 Subchapter E. New Source Review The Allegheny Mountain Section.

1 Status of SO 2 Implementation and Modeling Issues Michael Ling Associate Director, Air Quality Policy Division U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning.

Permitting and National Ambient Air Quality Standards Changes Rick Goertz, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced.

Compliance Challenges in Meeting 1-Hour Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) NAAQS Sube Vel, GHD Co-speaker: James VanAssche, GHD.

SO 2 NAAQS Modeling MassCAIR Stakeholder Meeting December 13, 2011.

Nonattainment New Source Review (NA NSR) Program Raj Rao US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards ,

1 MDEQ Air Division Air Update August 6, Mississippi Update Ozone PM2.5 Lead Regional Haze CAIR, CAMR Vacatur Boiler MACT Vacatur Area Source.

Implementation of National Ambient Air Quality Standards Bill Harnett NACAA Fall Meeting September 22, 2009.

N EW Y ORK S TATE D EPARTMENT OF E NVIRONMENTAL C ONSERVATION Short Term Ambient Air Quality Standards and The Effect on Permitting Margaret Valis NESCAUM,

NAAQS Status in GA & PSD Inventory Update James W. Boylan Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch Manager, Planning & Support Program AWMA Regulatory Update.

Regulatory background How these standards could impact the permitting process How is compliance with the standards assessed.

Jerry Beasley, Ph.D., P.E. Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality MMA Environmental & Safety Conference and Expo October 16, 2015.

New Ozone NAAQS Impacts: What Happens Next with a Lower O3 Standard? Nonattainment Designation and Industry’s Opportunity to Participate New Ozone NAAQS.

New Source Review (NSR) Program Basics

Draft Modeling Protocol for PM2.5

NACAA Permitting Workshop, Chicago June 14, 2011

Major New Source Review (NSR) Part 2

Examples of 1-Hour NO2 and SO2 Modeling William O’Sullivan Director, Division of Air Quality NJDEP April 28, 2011.

Enforcing the NAAQS Case Study Sean Taylor

PM2.5 NSR and Designations

CAIR Update WESTAR October 2, 2008.

DOGM Collaborative Meeting

EPA Region 4 Spring Grants/Planning Meeting

Presentation transcript:

A&WMA Southern Section Annual Meeting Biloxi, MS September 12, 2012 Carla Brown, P.E. MS Dept. of Environmental Quality

PollutantAveraging Period CurrentPreviousDate of Final Rule* PM-10Annual---50 ug/m 3 July 1, hr150 ug/m 3 July 1, 1987 PM July 18, ug/m 3 October 17, 2006 NO 2 Annual53 ppb April 30, February 9, 2010 SO 2 Annual---30 ppbApril 30, hr ppbApril 30, hr500 ppb April 30, August 23, 2010 *Final Rule that established the most current standard, excluding those rules revoking previous standards.

 The background concentrations must be added to modeled concentrations to determine compliance with NAAQS.  MS Ambient Air Data:  Annual PM-2.5 ( ): ug/m 3  24-hr PM-2.5 ( ): ug/m 3  1-hr NO 2 (2011, only one site): 32 ppb  1-hr SO 2 (2011, only one site): 29 ppb  Problem – very limited monitor data and background can result in double-counting emissions from stationary sources that are also being included as nearby sources in the model.

 Roxul, a proposed mineral wool facility, was MDEQ’s first PSD processed under these significant NAAQS changes.  Proposed emissions from Roxul:  PM-10/PM-2.5 = 562/510 TPY  SO 2 = 1035 TPY  NO x = 403 TPY  Modeling initially predicted…  35 violations of 1-hr SO 2  One violation of 24-hr SO 2  61,446 violations of 1-hr NO 2

 Significant NOx contributions from natural gas compressor station engines:  Trunkline Compressor Station – 5,500 TPY PTE  ANR Sardis Compressor Station – 2,900 TPY PTE  Tennessee Gas, New Albany Compressor Station – 1,900 TPY PTE  For those receptors showing violations after applying the 0.8 NO 2 :NOx default ratio (still 34,475 instances), the highest contribution from Roxul was determined to be less than 30% of SIL.  Per 40 CFR (b), if less than the SIL, source/project does not cause or contribute to the violation.

 For PSD projects, months added to application preparation.  MDEQ has suggested submitting applications piece-meal so as not to delay the permitting process.  Time and $$$ due to refining modeling runs to meet the standards or to show no culpability should there be modeled violations.

 How does the State address modeled violations due to existing sources?  Based on decisions from the Sixth Circuit Court ( ), modeled violations are considered just as valid as measured violations.  Require those significant sources to perform air quality analysis?  Include limitations in SIP or enforceable operating permit?  Install monitor(s) in area of highest predicted impacts (at whose expense?)

 Based upon current modeling protocols, modeled concentrations will generally be much greater than monitored.  EPA acknowledged this in March 1, 2011, guidance memo regarding the 1-hr NO 2 standard.  Yet EPA had planned to require state-wide modeling to demonstrate compliance with the 1-hr SO 2 standard (generally due to lack of monitors for SO 2 ).