Impact of Recent EPA Actions on New England’s Air Quality

Michael Kenyon

Air Programs Branch Chief – EPA New England

April 5, 2005

2

What Has EPA BeenDoing Lately?

• Eight-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Designations– Announced April 2004– Guidance on implementation provided in Phase 1 & Phase 2 Ozone

Rules

• Fine Particles Nonattainment Designations– Announced December 2004– Guidance on implementation provided in Fine PM Rule

• Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)– Announced on March 9, 2005 – Caps and reduces SO2 and NOx emissions from power plants

• Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR)– Announced on March 15, 2005– Caps and reduces mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants

3

• In 1997, EPA set new health-based

ambient air standards for ozone (averaged over 8-hours) and fine particulate matter (PM)

• Exposure to ground-level ozone causes – Changes in lung function and respiratory

symptoms – Aggravation of asthma and other

respiratory conditions, and may contribute to premature mortality

• Exposure to fine particles can lead to– Aggravation of heart and lung disease– Premature death– Irregular heartbeats and heart attacks– Work and school absences

Health Impacts of Ozone & Fine Particles

4

Chapter 1:Ozone Designations

and Control Strategies

5

6

8-Hour NonattainmentAreas in New England

(effective June 15, 2004)

7

• 2001 US Supreme Court upholding ozone & PM standards required EPA to use Subpart 2 of CAA for classifications

• EPA approach to Subpart 1 vs. 2 -- – If 2001-2003 1-hour design values were under

.0121 ppm, then classified under Subpart 1– If 1-hour design values were equal to or

above .0121 ppm, then classified under Subpart 2

• EPA converted classification table thresholds for 1-hour standard in Subpart 2 into thresholds using 8-hour design values

Classification of Ozone Nonattainment Areas

8

Conversion of CAA Classification Thresholds for Eight-Hour Standard

Area Classification

Translated 8-hour ozone

design value thresholds

(ppm)Marginal >0.085

Moderate >0.092

Serious >0.107

Severe-15 >0.120

Severe-17 >0.127

Extreme >0.187

9

Classifications

in New England

10

Eight-Hour Ozone Implementation Rules

• Phase 1 (published April 2004) covers: – Classifications, attainment dates– Transition from one-hour standard– Anti-backsliding

• Phase 2 (not yet final): – RACT– RFP and attainment demonstrations – Eight-hour NSR

11

Timelines for 8-Hour Ozone Designations and Implementation

Action Date

EPA finalizes phase 1 implementation rule

April 15, 2004

EPA finalizes designations April 15, 2004

Effective date of designations June 15, 2004

EPA finalizes phase 2 implementation rule

Spring 2005

Revocation of 1-hr ozone standard

June 15, 2005

State plans due June 15, 2007

Attainment dates for New England nonattainment areas

Marginal - June 15, 2007Subpart 1 - June 15, 2009Moderate - June 15, 2010

12

Revocation of Old 1-Hour Standard and Anti-

Backsliding• Revocation of 1-hour standard will occur

June 15, 2005• Existing ozone requirements remain

applicable after 1-hour standard is revoked– Examples: I/M programs, stage 2, RACT

– Exception for NSR: Major source applicability cut-offs and offset ratios for the area’s old 1-hour classification may not continue to apply• Depends on language of state SIP

13

Downward Trend for Ozone Standards

14

New Planning Requirements to Address 8-Hour Ozone

• States required to prepare 2002 inventories for VOC and NOx

• States need to prepare attainment demonstrations by June 2007 with modeling showing attainment by attainment deadline

• State plans need to show they are implementing all Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)

15

Programs That Will Help States Address Ozone

• EPA and state strategies to reduce VOC and NOx emissions:

VOC and NOx reasonably available control technology (RACT)

Stage 2 vapor recovery programsFederal reformulated gasolineNOx SIP call reductions from power plants in the Eastern

US, implemented 2003/2004Cleaner motor vehicles – EPA’s Tier 2 tailpipe standards

in 2004 and California’s LEV2 standardsFederal NOx limits for heavy duty diesel engine controls

(2004 & 2007)Federal non-road standards for diesel equipment, lawn

and garden equipment, marine engines, locomotivesClean Air Interstate Rule

16

Major Air Pollution Rules Since 1990: NOx Emission Reductions at Full Implementation

17

Chapter 2:Fine PM Designations and Control Strategies

18

Human Hair (70 µm diameter)

Hair cross section (70 m)

PM2.5

(2.5 µm)PM10

(10µm)

M. Lipsett, California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Particulate Matter: What is it?

A complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets

~30 times smaller than an average human hair

19

Where does particulatematter come from?

20

Fine Particle Attainment and Nonattainment Areasin the East

21

Fine Particle Nonattainment Areasin the Northeast

22

What is the timeline for implementing PM2.5 standards?

Date Action

Dec. 2004 EPA finalized designations

Spring 2005

EPA proposes implementation rule

Spring 2006

EPA finalizes PM2.5 implementation rule

April 2008 State implementation plans due

2010-15 Attainment dates for nonattainment areas

23

Strategies that Will Reduce

Future PM2.5 Levels• Ozone strategies for NOx emissions

– (NOx SIP call, Tier 2 vehicle standards)

• Diesel emission improvements– Heavy-duty standards for new vehicles and ultra-low

sulfur diesel fuel• (90% less PM per vehicle in 2007)• (95% less NOx per vehicle -- 2007/2010 phase in)

– Similar NOx & PM standards for new non-road engines– Retrofit programs for existing vehicles

• Reductions of power plant emissions– Completion of SO2 reductions under acid rain

program– SO2 & NOx reductions under Clean Air Interstate Rule

24

Other Fine Particle Pollution Concerns

• Although no New England areas outside of Connecticut are exceeding the PM2.5 standards, some urban areas have elevated levels

• Addressing PM2.5 in these areas can still produce significant public health benefits and reduce regional haze

• Addressing diesel emissions everywhere can also produce significant public health benefits

25

Reducing Fine Particles Will Also Reduce Regional Haze

The Boston skyline on a clear day(Jan. 12, 2001)

Hourly conc. of fine particles in the 9-11 g/m3

range

The Boston skyline on a hazy day(March 8, 2001)

Hourly conc. of fine particles 55.4 g/m3

26

Diesel Exhaust and Air Toxics• EPA’s National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment (NATA)

is showing high predicted ambient concentrations in New England’s urbanized counties.

27

Regional Diesel Activities:Anti-Idling & Urban Buses• Anti-idling education and enforcement

– EPA and states have developed educational materials to discourage idling, particularly by school bus drivers

– CT, MA & NH have anti-idling rules– Anti-idling enforcement by EPA against:

• Eleven bus operators at Logan Airport in Boston• The MBTA, the Boston area transit authority

• Urban transit bus retrofits– MBTA -- Entire fleet of 980 buses will either be

retrofitted with filters and use ULSD or run on compressed natural gas

– Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) -- Using ULSD and plans to retrofit 156 buses

– Connecticut Transit – Stamford Division -- 31 buses equipped with filters and using ULSD

28

Regional Diesel Activities:School Buses

• EPA’s Clean School Bus USA Grants– Statewide, Maine – 450 buses – Medford, Massachusetts – 70 buses– Stamford, Connecticut – 35 buses – Manchester/Nashua, New Hampshire – 45 buses – Warwick, Rhode Island – 70 buses

• Funded through EPA or State Enforcement Settlement Agreements– Boston, Massachusetts – 600 buses– Norwich, Connecticut – 42 buses– New Haven, Connecticut –180 buses – Hartford, Connecticut – 200 buses– Bridgeport, Connecticut – 200 buses

29

Regional Diesel Activities:Construction Retrofit Projects

• Central Artery (“Big Dig”) Project in Boston– 200 construction vehicles

• Q-Bridge on I-95 in New Haven, CT– 64 construction vehicles

• Massachusetts Highway Department – Effective March 2005, all construction contracts include

requirements for retrofitted equipment• In 2003, MassHighway invested $416 million in 475 road

and bridge construction projects

• MBTA has, since 2001, included requirements for retrofits in all construction contracts– More than 40 projects in Greater Boston using retrofitted

equipment

30

Retrofit and Idle Control Projects in New England

31

Chapter 3:Clean Air Interstate Rule

32

Electric Power Generation: A Major Source of Emissions

Source: SO2 and NOx data is from EPA’s 2003 National Emissions Inventory. “Other” sources of pollutants include transportation and other mobile sources and industrial sources.

SO2 Emissions

Total: 15.9 Million Tons

Power Sector22%

Other78%

Total: 20.8 Million Tons

10.9 Million Tons

5.0 Million Tons

4.5 Million Tons

16.3 Million Tons

NOx Emissions

69%

Power Sector

Other

31%

33

Three Regulatory Approaches At Play

• Clear Skies Act -- Pending– Congressional bill to reduce NOx, SO2 and mercury

emissions from power plants by roughly 70% each– Congressional action would provide more certainty and

simplify implementation– Northeast states oppose largely due to NSR and Section

126 petition provisions and absence of CO2 caps• Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) -- March 10, 2005

– EPA finalized rule to reduce NOx and SO2 emissions in order to reduce interstate contributions to ozone and fine particle nonattainment

• Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) – March 15, 2005– As result of deadline in settlement agreement, EPA

finalized rule setting 2010 and 2018 caps on power plant emissions of mercury and allowing trading to meet caps

– Relies heavily on reduction control technologies for NOx, SO2 and PM

34

Long-Range Transport of Air Pollution

• Emissions contributing to PM2.5 and ozone nonattainment often travel across state lines, especially in the eastern U.S.• SO2 and NOx, and other pollutants,

contribute to PM2.5 transport• NOx and other pollutants contribute to

ozone transport.

• Attaining national ambient air quality standards will require some combination of emission reductions from:• Sources located in or near

nonattainment areas (such as mobile sources) and

• Sources, such as power plants, located further from the nonattainment area.

• EPA is also addressing ozone and particle pollution from mobile sources by implementing national fuel and engine standards.

35

Areas Designated Nonattainment for Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS in 2004

Nonattainment areas for both 8-hour ozone and fine particle pollution

Nonattainment areas for fine particle pollution only

Nonattainment areas for 8-hour ozone pollution only

126 ozone nonattainment areas with 474 counties

47 PM2.5 nonattainment areas with 224 counties

36

The CAIR Approach

• EPA analyzed SO2 and NOx emissions from power plants to determine whether states will significantly contribute to other states’ nonattainment of either ozone or fine PM standards

• If significant contribution was projected from individual states, those states were included in CAIR– 25 states and DC were found to significantly contribute to

other states’ ozone nonattainment• Only New England states were Massachusetts and Connecticut

– 23 states were found to significantly contribute to other states’ fine particle nonattainment

• No New England states

37

Key Elements of CAIR

• CAIR sets an emission reduction requirement (or “budget”) for each affected state, based on capping power plant emissions collectively at levels that EPA believes are highly cost-effective to achieve

• Provides an optional cap and trade program based on successful Acid Rain and NOx Budget Trading programs as a method to implement the necessary reductions

• Includes a two-phase program with declining power plant emission caps:

– SO2 annual caps: 3.6 million tons in 2010 and 2.5 million in 2015– NOx annual caps: 1.5 million tons in 2009 and 1.3 million in 2015– NOx ozone season caps: 580,000 tons in 2009 and 480,000 tons in

2015– Emission caps are divided into State SO2 and NOx budgets

• Allows states flexibility on how to achieve the required reductions, including which sources to control and whether to join the trading program

38

CAIR Health and Environmental Benefits: Benefits over 25 Times Greater than Costs

By 2015, CAIR will result in:

$85-100 billion in health benefits each year, preventing:

–17,000 premature deaths–22,000 non-fatal heart attacks–12,300 hospital admissions–1.7 million lost work days–500,000 lost school days.

Almost $2 billion in improved visibility benefits each year.

Other non-monetizable benefits – reductions of mercury emissions, acid rain, nitrification, eutrophication, and more.

In 2015, CAIR will cost about $3.6 billion a year. Implementation beyond 2015 leads to higher annual benefits and costs.

39

0

5

10

15

20

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Mil

lio

n T

on

sNational NOx and SO2 Power Plant Emissions:Historic and Projected with CAIR

SO2

NOx

Source: EPA

Projected, w/ CAIR

40

Ozone and Fine Particle Nonattainment Areas (March 2005)

Projected Nonattainment Areas in 2010 after Reductionsfrom CAIR and Existing Clean Air Act Programs

Projections concerning future levels of air pollution in specific geographic locations were estimated using the best scientific models available. They are estimations, however, and should be characterized as such in any description. Actual results may vary significantly if any of the factors that influence air quality differ from the assumed values used in the projections shown here.

Ozone and Particle Pollution: CAIR, together with other Clean Air Programs, Will Bring Cleaner Air to Areas in the East - 2010

Nonattainment areas in 2010 w/ CAIR and other programs for fine particles

Nonattainment areas in 2010 w/ CAIR and other programs for 8-hour ozone

Nonattainment areas for both 8-hour ozone and fine particle pollution

Nonattainment areas for fine particle pollution only .

Nonattainment areas for 8-hour ozone pollution only

104 ozone nonattainment areas with 408counties

43 PM2.5 nonattainment areas with 211 counties

14 ozone nonattainment areas

20 PM2.5 nonattainment areas

41

With Clean Air Interstate Rule and Other EPA Clean Air Rules

8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREAS

42

CAIR Summary

CAIR will significantly cut emissions of SO2 and NOx from power plants and:

– Helps cities and states in the East meet new, more stringent national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone and fine particles.

– Guarantees substantial benefits for public health and the environment.

– Achieves the largest reduction in air pollution in more than a decade (since the highly successful Acid Rain Program).

– Provides one of the largest investments in pollution control technology in history.

43

Chapter 4:Clean Air Mercury Rule

44

Power Generation Is a Major Source of Mercury

2000 Sulfur Dioxide

2000 Nitrogen Oxides

* Other stationary combustion includes residential and commercial sources.

1999 Mercury

Fuel Combustion-electric utilitiesOther stationarycombustion *

Industrial Processing

Transportation

Miscellaneous

Utilities (63%)

Utilities (40%)

Utilities (22%)

45

Mercury Emissions from Power Plants Causes Human Exposure to Mercury

Wet and Dry Deposition

Emissions Atmospheric

Transport and Deposition

Ecosystem Transport and Methylation

Human and Wildlife Exposure

HealthImpacts

Fishing• commercial• recreational • subsistence

Mercury transforms into methylmercury in soils and water, then can bioaccumulate in fish

Atmosphericdeposition

Lake

methylation

Ocean

methylation

Impacts • Best documented

impacts on the developing fetus: impaired motor and cognitive skills

• also: cardiovascular, immune, and reproductive system impacts

Power Plant Emissions

Humans and wildlife affected primarily by eating contaminated fish

46

Mercury Contamination in Fish• Currently 44 states have issue fish consumption advisories for some or all of

their waters due to contamination from mercury.*

States with Fish Advisories Due to Mercury

*Note: For more information about the relationship between fish advisories and human exposure to mercury, see the EPA Report “America's Children and the Environment: Measures of Contaminants, Body Burdens, and Illnesses” available at http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/publications.htm

Mercury Advisories by Type

Advisories for specific waterbodies only

Statewide freshwater advisory only

Statewide coastal advisory

No mercury advisory

Statewide freshwater advisory + advisories for specific waterbodies

47

Clean Air Mercury Rule

• US is first country in world to regulate mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants

• Reflects a market-based, cap-and-trade approach to address mercury from coal-fired generation units, which allows utilities to obtain reductions in most cost-effective manner

• Sets two phased-in caps:– 2010 cap: 38 tons per year – 2018 cap: 15 tons per year

• When fully implemented, will reduce utility emissions of mercury from 48 tons a year to 15 tons, a reduction of nearly 70%

48

• Section 111 Provisions:– Guidelines for State Plans – 111(d)

• Sets emission rates for existing coal-fired utility units under a cap-and-trade program

– Phase 1: 2010 Capped at 38 tons– Phase 2: 2018 Capped at 15 tons

• States are assigned an emissions “budget” for mercury and each state must submit a State Plan on how it will meet budget

• States can choose to join trading program by adopting EPA’s model trading rule (or adopt regulations that mirror necessary components)

– Federal rule for new sources – 111(b)• Includes new utility emission limits for mercury

• Benefits of 111 Approach: – Will reduce nationwide mercury emissions by 33 tons (69

percent) from today’s levels when fully implemented after 2018

– Potential for earlier and greater reductions than MACT alternative

– Meshes well with CAIR, creating an integrated multipollutant approach to controlling emissions from power plants.

Use of Section 111 for CAMR

49

Proposed Section 112 MACT Approach

• History– December 2000: EPA announced that it had concluded

that it was “appropriate and necessary” to regulate mercury from power plants under Section 112 Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) provisions, which started 4-year clock to propose and finalize mercury MACT

– December 2003: EPA proposed Section 112 MACT standards but in alternative proposed to regulate pursuant to Section 111

– March 2005: Chose to regulate pursuant to Section 111• Reversed 2000 determination that it is “appropriate and

necessary” to regulate under Section 112

• Characteristics of Section 112 MACT Approach– Limits are based on the average of the top 12% of sources– Three-year compliance deadline– Emission standards applicable to each source

50

Controls to Capture Mercury

Removal in PM Controls • Mercury can be adsorbed onto fly ash surfaces; Hg2+ is

more readily adsorbed than Hg0

• Mercury can be physically adsorbed at relatively lower temperatures (hot-side ESP vs. cold-side ESP)

Capture in Wet Scrubbers• Hg2+ capture depends on solubility of each compound;

Hg0 is insoluble and cannot be captured• Capture enhanced by SCR

Mercury Specific Controls • New sorbent injection technologies very promising• No mercury-specific controls found to be commercially

available yet, but are projected to soon be

51

Local and Global Context of EPA’s Clean Air Mercury Rule

• US and New England are reducing mercury emissions significantly

• CAMR is first requirement to reduce mercury emissions from power plants in world

• CAMR alone cannot solve health issues associated with mercury– Mercury cycling through

environment– US emissions are dwarfed

by global emissions– Fish consumed by

Americans mostly caught overseas

52

51.05

56.73

49.73

63.56

51.25

31.78

40.47

72.76

47.91

58.21

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990Emissions

1996Emissions

1999Emissions

Other

Medical WasteIncinerators

MunicipalWasteCombustorsUtility CoalBoilers

US Mercury Emissions Have Dropped 45%

Source: EPA

221 Tons

196 Tons

112 Tons

To

ns

Per

Yea

r

1.64.9

(Gold mines, institutional boilers, chlorine production, hazardous waste incineration, etc.)

53

EGU Electric Generating UnitMWC/MWI Municipal Waste Combustor/Medical Waste IncineratorSSI Sewage Sludge IncineratorOther Rest of Point Sources (other than above 3 Classes)

Plus Area and Mobile Sources TPYShort Tons per Year (Emission Unit)

NESCAUM Region ~60% reduction based on 1996 and 2003 emission

inventories

Canada8.8 TPY

Rest of the US 123.7 TPY

2003 EINESCAUM7.0 TPY

1996 EINESCAUM17.6 TPY

60% Reduction in New England Mercury Emissions 1996-2003 from Forthcoming NESCAUM Report

54

Mercury Cycling Pathways

55

Mercury Emissions Are a Global Problem

Source: Based on Pacyna, J., Munthe J., Presentation at Workshop on Mercury, Brussels, March 29-30, 2004

U.S. Power Plant

Emissions1%

U.S. All Other

Sources2%

Emissions from All

Other Countries

97%

1999 Global Mercury Emissions

56

Mercury Deposition in the U.S.T

on

s o

f M

ercu

ry

2001 Total Deposition 2001 U.S. Utilities Deposition

2020 U.S. Utilities Deposition after CAIR and CAMR

13.5

327

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

13.5

3.9

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

To

ns

of

Mer

cury

341.3

U.S. Mercury Deposition from U.S. UtilitiesU.S. Mercury Deposition from All Global Sources

Source: EPA

57

Solutions to Mercury Impacts on New England

• CAMR is one important step

• Reductions by other countries are needed– US active in UNEP discussions

• EPA NE’s and states’ continued aggressive implementation of regional mercury actions are needed– EPA New England has been active participant and supporter of

New England Governors/Eastern Canadian Premiers Mercury Action Plan

– Since 2001, EPA has provided New England states and institutions over $2.17 million in grants for implementation of mercury activities or research

– Just a few of EPA New England’s mercury activities are:• Obtaining commitments from 124 New England hospitals to identify

and eliminate use of mercury products and generation of mercury waste

• Organizing conferences on how to reduce mercury in schools• Support of recycling of fluorescent bulbs• Support of mercury deposition monitoring and fish sampling• Education and outreach about mercury exposures

• Educate public about EPA/FDA and state fish advisories

58

For Further Information:

www.epa.gov/cairwww.epa.gov/mercury