OAQPS Rule and Program Update National Tribal Forum

1. OAQPS Rule and Program Update National Tribal Forum Laura McKelvey June 2 1

2. NAAQS and Designations Schedule

3. *Court ordered deadline **Current Schedules do not reflect possible revised schedules reflecting options for reconsideration

4. EPA Tribal Designations for NAAQS - Update • Ozone Designations Schedule Overview (subject to change): • State & Tribal recommendations due March 12, 2009 • Send 120-Day Letters to S/T/l November 12, 2009 • Publish FRN re: 120-day letters November 2009 • End of 60-day comment period for S/T/l January 2010 • End of 30-day comment period for public December 2010 • Prepare responses to S/T/T,public comments Jan-Feb 2012 • Produce final TSDs Jan-Feb 2012 • Administrator signs final designations March 12, 2012 • Publish designations final rule ~April, 2012

5. Technology Standards

6. Technology Standards Sector Strategy Achieves better environmental benefits and public health protection; • Uses a more holistic, multipollutant approach; • Minimizes regulatory and administrative burdens; and • Leverages federal, tribal, state, and local resources more efficiently and effectively

7. Goal of Sector Strategy • To group activities that are under common control and typically fall within a facility fenceline, and are used to make a product or group of products. • Activities comprise various equipment, control devices and air pollution sources • To use these groupings to align elements of the federal stationary source emissions standards programs and set priorities • Synchronize rules, assign resources, maximize environmental benefits, etc. • Types of activities • Boilers • Heaters • Storage tanks • Vents • Wastewater • Engines • Furnaces

8. Summary of Regulations By Industry Group

9. Sector Strategy Example Petroleum Refineries Regulatory Actions Sector Approach NSPS Db tech review New Boiler MACT(?) Sector Action NSPS tech review UUU Residual Risk Rule and Technology Review CC Residual Risk Rule and Technology Review EEE Residual Risk Rule NSPS tech reviews Sector Action

10. Progress Under Way • Designing comprehensive sector analysis • Initial scoping sectors: • Petroleum Refineries, Cement, Iron and Steel, Pulp & Paper • Prioritize sectors and opportunities • Develop work plans • Refine tools for holistic analysis • Encourage staff buy-in • Using to inform deadline discussions • Working to identify issues with long-term goals

11. Preliminary Sector Priorities • Non-Ferrous Metals • Chemical Manufacturing • Oil and Gas Production and Distribution • Waste Incineration • Metal Foundries • Formulated Products Manufacturing and Use • Plywood Manufacturing • Electric Utilities • Boilers and Process Heaters • Ferrous Metals • Pulp and Paper • Petroleum Refineries • Cement Manufacturing • Brick Manufacturing

12. Proposed Cement MACT Emission Limits a For Hg, THC, and PM these limits would apply to major and area sources. For HCl these limits only apply to major sources. bWe believe this value may be biased low due to lack of data.

13. Other Requirements and Emissions Reductions • Emissions Monitoring – All sources • Continuous monitors for mercury and THC • Bag Leak detectors for PM (PM CEMS as an alternative) • Continuous monitors for HCl if no wet scrubber • Test Methods and Performance Specifications • Reproposing PS-12A and Proposing PS12B for Mercury Monitoring • Lowering the detection limit of EPA Method 321 • Emissions Reductions • Mercury: 11,600 to 16,250 pounds, or a reduction of 81 to 93 percent; • Total hydrocarbons: 11,670 to 13,900 tons, or a reduction of 75 percent; • Particulate matter: 10,500 to 10,600 tons, or a reduction of 90 to 96 percent; • Hydrochloric acid: 2,800 to 3,600 tons, or a reduction of 92 to 94 percent; and • Sulfur dioxide: 135,700 to 160,000 a reduction of 77 to 90 percent.

14. Estimated Costs and Benefits of Proposed Cement NESHAP a Assumes PM2.5 fraction is 45%. Includes emission reductions from existing kilns and assumes 20 new kilns by 2013. Includes emission reductions from controls on HCl, THC, and Hg. b Benefits estimates are for the year 2013. c Includes compliance costs and costs to consumers due to increases in cement prices.

15. Rulemaking Update

16. Area Source MACT Current Status • A total of 70 area source categories have been listed • Standards have been promulgated for 51 categories • 19 categories remain to be addressed under March 2006 Court Order (Unopposed motion to amend filed 5/7/09) • 3 source categories by June 15, 2009 • 14 source categories by August 17, 2009 • 3 source categories by July 15, 2010 (tied to 112(c)(6) deadline & proposal for gold mining by August 15, 2009)

17. Remaining Categories: BINS 5 and 6 • Bin 5 Final Rules August 2009: • Chemical Manufacturing (450 facilities) covers processes such as vents, cooling towers, wastewater, equipment leaks, and tanks, (9 categories in one rule) • Bin 6 Final Rules June 2009: • Copper, Aluminum and Other Nonferrous Foundries (3 categories in one rule) • Bin 6 Final Rules August 2009: • Chemical Preparation • Prepared Feeds • Paint and Allied Products • Asphalt Roofing • Three categories extend into 2010 for promulgation: • Commercial Institutional Boilers • Industrial Boilers • Sewage Sludge Incineration

18. Current Status of Risk and Technology Rule Projects • RTR Phase 2 Group 1 • Final rule signed December 10, 2008; 8 Categories • RTR Phase 2 Group 2 • Published the Group 2 ANPRM on March 29, 2007; 22 categories • Group 2A – Proposal signed September 29, 2008; proposed 5 MACT • November 13, 2008, Sierra Club notice of intent to sue on 34 source categories for residual risk and technology review (Answer deadline July 21, 2009) • Halogenated Solvents (Joint motion filed November 3, 2008 to hold case in abeyance per EPA agreement to issue final rule October 30, 2009). • Dry Cleaning (April 29, 2009 Court granted unopposed motion for voluntary remand of the record to permit reconsideration). • Petroleum Refineries (Signed January 16, 2009, but not published) • New Administration to review current policies

19. Electric Generating Units (EGUs) • EPA has outstanding obligations under the Clean Air Act to issue or consider rules affecting power plants. For example, EPA must: • Issue a replacement rule for the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), following a court decision that found CAIR legally flawed • Issue a utility MACT standard, following a court decision that struck down the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) • Take action on the boiler NSPS (which includes utility boilers: • Remand to decide whether the new source performance standard should limit CO2 • Pending litigation on SO2 and NOx limits • PM2.5 rule

20. Status of Utility MACT • In February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated the cap-and-trade program regulation and EPA’s rule removing power plants from the list of sources to be regulated by section 112 • This leaves EPA with a requirement to set a MACT standard for coal and oil-fired power plants • The new Administration withdrew its petition for certiori for Supreme Court review of the appeals court decision. The Supreme Court denied certiori to the industry petitioners • Several environmental and health organizations have filed a deadline suit for setting MACT for coal- and oil-fired power plants • The Parties recently filed a joint motion, asking the Court to extend the answer deadline to June 20, 2009. The Court granted the motion, in part. Specifically, the Court ordered that EPA must file its answer by May 26, 2009

21. Status of Data to Support Utility MACT • EPA has limited data, particularly on the non-mercury HAP, and industry-wide data gathering is necessary to develop a good, defensible rule • EPA’s current mercury data were collected prior to the development of the now vacated CAMR • The limited data on non-mercury HAP come from the 1998 Report to Congress • We have more data for coal-fired units than oil-fired units • Facilities have additional HAP emissions data readily available

22. Case-by-Case MACT under sec. 112(g) • R. J. Meyers to EPA Regional Administrators, January 7, 2009 • New Jersey v. EPA – court rejection of CAMR: EGUs remain listed source categories for 112 MACT • All plants commencing construction after March 2000 must have 112(g) • Includes those permitted under CAMR • Ongoing permit issues

23. EPA’s Tribal School Monitoring Initiative

24. About the Initiative • On March 31, 2009 EPA announced monitoring of outdoor air at 62 schools in 22 states. • Measuring the levels of pollutants in the air will help EPA understand whether outdoor air quality at the schools poses any health concerns. • We are focusing on schools near • Large industries • In urban areas, where air toxics come from a variety of sources • In low-income areas, which are sometimes disproportionately affected by pollution

25. What We’re Monitoring For • We are monitoring at schools where we have questions about the air that merit investigation. • Specifically monitoring for HAPs from industrial facilities and cars, trucks and buses.

26. Tribal School Effort • Information on Tribal schools and Inventories is limited preventing EPA from including most tribal schools in the analysis • BUT EPA wants to ensure that school children in Indian country are equally protected. Gathering air quality data at schools in Indian country will help us accomplish this. • Worked with the Regional Offices to identify two tribes with nearby sources and potential concerns. • Additional Tribal schools will be identified later.

27. Protocal for Additional Tribal Schools • After the monitoring for these first two schools monitors will be sent to the TAMS center for re-deployment • Workgroup of tribal staff will determine criteria for re-deployment of monitors • We will work with the RTOCs and NTOC to identify additional interested tribes

28. Nez Perce Lapwai Middle/High school and Southern Ute Sunnyside Elementary School • Selected because • Information raised some questions about outdoor air quality around the schools on the list • Nez Perce – Paper Mill and agricultural burning • Southern Ute – Oil and Gas production • Monitoring will allow us to understand whether the air quality poses any health concerns

29. What to expect • EPA is purchasing monitors for this project. Those monitors are being ordered now. • EPA will pay for sample analysis • Tribal air staff will visit the site to determine where monitors should be set up. • Monitors will take samples of air every six days for 60 days. • In addition the Tribal agency may take up to three additional samples, on a random schedule

30. Examples of Equipment You May See

31. What About Results? • We will post results on the web as the project is under way. • There is a lag-time between when monitoring begins and when results are available. • We will post data after each sample is analyzed and quality assured. • But we will need all 10 samples before we can make a rough projection of health effects from chronic exposure to air toxics at a school. • We’ll share complete results about three months after monitoring begins.

32. Next Steps Depend on Results • If we find that potential health concerns are: • Low: We may end monitoring at that school. • High: EPA will take steps to mitigate the pollution causing the problems, and possibly continue monitoring. • If EPA cannot estimate potential effects based on the initial phase of monitoring, we may continue monitoring to obtain additional data.

33. EPA’s Residential Wood Smoke Program Great American Wood Stove Changeout Burn Wise Education Campaign Wood Smoke Control Strategies Document

34. Great American Wood Stove Changeout • Changeout Benefits • Reduces fine particles and toxic air pollution by 70% • Reduces indoor PM2.5 emissions by 70% according to U. Montana • Improves energy efficiency by 50%, by using 1/3 less wood • Funding Opportunities • HUD Indian Housing Block Grants • USDA Rural Development Grants • Low-income Weatherization • Federal Tax Credit: Stimulus Bill provides for a 30% tax credit (up to $1,500) for the purchase in 2009 and 2010 of a 75%-efficient biomass-burning stove.  For more information contact your EPA Regional TAC or Larry Brockman at brockman.larry@epa.gov

35. Burn Wise Education Campaign Special focus will be given to individuals who: burn what's available, (e.g., green wood, trash) use older appliances are turning to wood as an alternative fuel source to heat their homes Primary message: If you burn wood, Burn Wise burn as cleanly as possible with the right wood, the right way in the right appliance. For more information contact: Kristen Bremer at bremer.kristen@epa.gov

36. Wood Smoke Control Strategies Draft Document • A comprehensive document that includes options to address wood smoke in a given community • Specific information includes: • Education and outreach tools • Regulatory options • Wood stove and fireplace changeouts • Funding options • Hydronic heater and fireplace programs • Partnerships • Emission calculation estimates and air quality benefits • Basic components of a PM2.5 SIP/TIP for wood smoke dominated nonattainment areas To review and provide comments: contact Larry Brockman at brockman.larry@epa.gov

37. Other Upcoming Issues • Lead in Aviation Fuel • Next NTAA call OTAQ will walk through their study on lead at small airports • Exploring NSPS for woodstoves