ML082880732

SEIS Ch. 8 Air Quality Web References, Technical Support Document

ML082880732
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	03/31/2005
From:	US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air & Radiation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
OAR 2003 0053
Download: ML082880732 (55)

Text

Technical Support Document for the Clean Air Interstate Rule Notice of Final Rulemaking Regional and State SO 2 and NOx Emissions Budgets March 2005 Prepared by Office of Air and Radiation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA Docket: OAR 2003-0053

Regional and State SO2 and NOx Emissions Budgets This technical support document (TSD) provides a description of the data sources used in the calculation of regional and State emission budgets for sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) under the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and EPAs proposal to include Delaware and New Jersey in the CAIR region. In addition, it describes in further detail the approaches used in State budget calculations, and the data used in each of these approaches.

This TSD outlines the calculation of the following:

• Regional Annual SO2 Budgets with and without NJ and DE

• State Annual SO2 Budgets with and without NJ and DE

• Regional Annual and Ozone Season NOx Budgets with and without NJ and DE

• State NOx Budgets with and without NJ and DE

< Annual

< Ozone Season

• Annual NOx Compliance Supplement Pool Overview EPA developed annual regional and state emissions budgets for SO2 and NOx in three steps.

EPAs first step was to determine the total amount of emissions reductions that would be achievable based on a highly cost-effective control strategy for the set of States covered. The Agency found this level of reductions was not possible at the program outset in 2010 (2009 for NOx), but achievable by 2015. The levels set for 2010 (2009) reflect the Agencys assessment of what was reasonable to achieve by these dates (with the dates driven largely by process requirements, i.e. development of State SIPs, and providing adequate time to install equipment).

In the second step, EPA used the amount of emissions reductions that were highly cost-effective across the region for electricity generating units (EGUs) to set annual NOx and SO2 emissions caps in 2010 (2009) and 2015 that would apply for States that chose to obtain reductions from EGUs. In the third step, EPA apportioned the regional emissions reductions - and the associated EGU caps - on a State-by-State basis, so that the affected States may determine the necessary controls of SO2 and NOx emissions.

Under CAIR, States have several options for reducing emissions that significantly contribute to downwind non-attainment. They can adopt EPAs approach of reducing the emissions in a cost-effective manner through an interstate cap and trade program primarily for EGUs. This approach would, by definition, achieve the required cost-effective reductions. As an alternative, States could achieve all of the necessary emissions reduction from EGUs, but choose not use EPAs interstate emissions trading program. In this case, a State would need to demonstrate that it is meeting the EGU budgets outlined in this TSD. Finally, States could obtain at least some, or all, of their required emissions reductions from sources other than EGUs.

1

EPAs final air quality modeling found that 23 States + DC contribute significantly to PM 2.5 nonattainment, while 25 States + DC contribute to ozone nonattainment. The 23 States in addition to the District of Columbia found to contribute significantly to PM 2.5 nonattainment, and thus subject to the CAIR annual reduction requirements for SO2 and NOX, are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. The 25 States in addition to the District of Columbia found to contribute significantly to ozone nonattainment and thus subject to the CAIR seasonal requirement for NOx are Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Note that Kansas, which was found to contribute significantly in earlier EPA modeling is no longer included in the program based on results of EPAs most recent modeling. Likewise, Massachusetts, which was originally found to contribute to PM 2.5 and ozone nonattainment, was found to contribute only to ozone nonattainment, and thus is now only subject to a seasonal requirement.

Regional SO2 Budgets The regional annual SO2 budget represents the total cap level for SO2 emissions for the region, whether it is achieved by EGUs or non-EGUs, or some combination of the two. For facilities in States that elect to control EGUs and participate in a cap-and-trade program, their portion of the regional budget is linked directly to existing allowance allocations under the Acid Rain Program.

The calculated regional budget applies specially-designed allowance retirement ratios to existing Acid Rain Program allowances under CAIR beginning in 2010, (2:1), and increasing in 2015 and beyond (2.86:1). These ratios were developed to cut the allowance emission levels by half beginning in 2010 and 65 percent beginning in 2015.

EPA determined, through IPM analysis, that the resulting regionwide emissions caps (if all States choose to obtain reductions from EGUs) are highly cost-effective levels. More detail can be found in section IV of the preamble.

Under the final rule the annual regionwide SO2 budget is calculated by adding together the title IV Phase-II allowances for all of the States in the control region, as listed in the Acid Rain Program 1998 Reallocation of Allowances for 2010 (63 FR 51,705) and making a 50 percent reduction for the 2010 cap and a 65 percent reduction for the 2015 cap. This results in a first phase SO2 cap of about 3.6 million tons and a second phase cap of about 2.5 million tons, in the 23-State and DC control region. When Delaware and New Jersey are included, the total first phase cap is increased to approximately 3.7 million tons, and the total second phase cap to about 2.6 million tons. The regionwide budget is then apportioned to individual States, as is discussed in the following section.

2

As is discussed in the Notice of Final Rulemaking (NFR), EPA believes that basing budgets on title IV allowances is necessary in order to ensure the preservation of a viable title IV program.

EPA believes it is important not to undermine the confidence that has developed in the market for title IV allowances, recognizing that it is key to the success of a trading program under CAIR.

Title IV allocation data based on the 1998 reallocation is available online at

<http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/allocations/index.html> .1 In addition to the final title IV allowances from the 1998 reallocation, EPA also included the Special Allowance Reserve - a 250,000 annual set-aside from sources that was created for auction by EPA. Each boiler/generator included in the program contributes to this set-aside. This 250,000 allowance set-aside is created by deducting from each States adjusted basic allowances on a pro rata basis, according to their share of total adjusted basic allowances. In calculating the CAIR SO2 budgets, EPA redistributes the Special Allowance Reserve back to States on that same basis. Thus, the share of this reserve that is redistributed to States in the CAIR region is included in the calculation of the CAIR regional SO2 budget. The column 250,000 Ton Special Allowance Reserve in Table 1 shows the State results from this redistribution. Note, however, that this redistribution is merely an accounting mechanism for calculating State budgets. The actual allowances are not redistributed to the sources, but sold through the existing title IV auction.

State SO2 Budgets In the NFR, EPA is finalizing the proposal that annual State SO2 budgets be based on each States allowances under title IV of the CAA Amendments adjusted by CAIR retirement ratios for 2010 and 2015. As discussed above, before adjusting title IV allocations by these retirement ratios, EPA distributes the Special Allowance Reserve allowances back to sources in the States. Table 1 presents the 1998 title IV SO2 allowance allocation that is used as a basis for CAIR state budgets.2 1

The 1998 Reallocation of Allowances is discussed in detail in the document Technical Documentation for the 19 98 R eallocation o f Allowances, available at http://www.epa.gov/airm arkets/allocations/arp/techdoc.pdf.

2 The column Ad ditional allowances for Phase I Units represents State shares of an additional permanent 50,0 00 to ns that was allocated to Phase I units under S ec. 40 5 (a)(3) of the CA AA.

3

Table 1. Original Title IV Allowance Allocations that Include Special Allowance Reserve and Serve as a Basis for CAIR Calculation of SO2 State Budgets for Electric Generation Units (tons) 2010 title IV Allocation with 2010 Total Annual Phase I Addition Allowances with Special Allowance Reserve Total Additional 250,000 Ton Special Annual for Allowances 1998 Final for Phase I Total Allowance CAIR State Allocation Units Annual Reserve Adjustment Alabama 303,781 2,580 306,361 8,803 315,164 District of 1,375 0 1,375 40 1,415 Columbia Florida 492,741 0 492,741 14,159 506,900 Georgia 407,677 6,534 414,211 11,903 426,114 Illinois 371,340 3,237 374,577 10,764 385,341 Indiana 489,082 5,892 494,974 14,223 509,197 Iowa 124,608 0 124,608 3,581 128,189 Kentucky 363,834 3,166 367,000 10,546 377,546 Louisiana 116,546 0 116,546 3,349 119,895 Maryland 137,444 0 137,444 3,950 141,394 Michigan 347,232 0 347,232 9,978 357,210 Minnesota 97,181 0 97,181 2,793 99,974 Mississippi 65,640 0 65,640 1,886 67,526 Missouri 262,797 3,965 266,762 7,666 274,428 New York 262,728 0 262,728 7,550 270,278 North Carolina 267,011 0 267,011 7,673 274,684 Ohio 639,630 8,778 648,408 18,632 667,040 Pennsylvania 530,637 5,925 536,562 15,418 551,980 South Carolina 111,342 0 111,342 3,199 114,541 Tennessee 262,449 4,316 266,765 7,666 274,431 Texas 623,962 0 623,962 17,930 641,892 Virginia 123,410 0 123,410 3,546 126,956 West Virginia 414,095 5,607 419,702 12,060 431,762 Wisconsin 169,653 0 169,653 4,875 174,528 Total CAIR Region 6,986,195 50,000 7,036,195 202,190 7,238,385 Delaware 43,569 0 43,569 1,252 44,821 New Jersey 62,973 0 62,973 1,810 64,783 Total CAIR + DE, NJ 7,092,737 50,000 7,142,737 205,252 7,347,989 Source: US EPA EPA is finalizing the budgets as noted in the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPR), correcting for the proper inclusion of States covered under the final CAIR. The final annual State SO2 Budgets are included in Table 2, below. State annual budgets for the years 2010-2014 (Phase I) are based on a 50 percent reduction from title IV allocations appearing in the Total Annual for CAIR Adjustment column in Table 1 for all units in the affected State.

The State annual budgets for 2015 and beyond (Phase II) are based on a 65 percent reduction of title IV allocations in that column.

4

Table 2. Final Annual Electric Generation Units State SO2 Budgets , 23 States + DC Region (tons)

State SO2 Budget 2010 - State SO2 Budget 2015 State 2014 and thereafter Alabama 157,582 110,307 District of Columbia 708 495 Florida 253,450 177,415 Georgia 213,057 149,140 Illinois 192,671 134,869 Indiana 254,599 178,219 Iowa 64,095 44,866 Kentucky 188,773 132,141 Louisiana 59,948 41,963 Maryland 70,697 49,488 Michigan 178,605 125,024 Minnesota 49,987 34,991 Mississippi 33,763 23,634 Missouri 137,214 96,050 New York 135,139 94,597 North Carolina 137,342 96,139 Ohio 333,520 233,464 Pennsylvania 275,990 193,193 South Carolina 57,271 40,089 Tennessee 137,216 96,051 Texas 320,946 224,662 Virginia 63,478 44,435 West Virginia 215,881 151,117 Wisconsin 87,264 61,085 Total CAIR Region 3,619,196 2,533,434 Delaware 22,411 15,687 New Jersey 32,392 22,674 Total CAIR + DE, NJ 3,673,999 2,571,795 Source: US EPA The 23 final and 2 proposed State budgets would serve as effective binding caps, if States chose to control only EGUs, but did not want to participate in the trading program. For States controlling both EGUs and non-EGUs (or controlling only non-EGUs), these budgets would be compared to the States 2010 total annual title IV allocation (with Special Allowance Reserve) to calculate the emissions reduction requirements for non-EGUs and the required caps for EGUs.

Emissions reduction requirements for non-EGUs are described in detail in the section VII discussion in the CAIR preamble on SIP approvability. Table 3 presents the annual SO2 emissions reduction requirements under CAIR.

5

Table 3. SO2 Emissions Reduction Requirements under CAIR and the Proposal to Include DE and NJ (tons) 2010 2015 Total Total Annual Annual 2010 2010 Title Title IV State Reduction IV State Reduction State Allowances Budget Requirement Allowances Budget Requirement Alabama 315,164 157,582 157,582 315,164 110,307 204,857 District of Columbia 1,415 708 707 1,415 495 920 Florida 506,900 253,450 253,450 506,900 177,415 329,485 Georgia 426,114 213,057 213,057 426,114 149,140 276,974 Illinois 385,341 192,671 192,670 385,341 134,869 250,472 Indiana 509,197 254,599 254,598 509,197 178,219 330,978 Iowa 128,189 64,095 64,094 128,189 44,866 83,323 Kentucky 377,546 188,773 188,773 377,546 132,141 245,405 Louisiana 119,895 59,948 59,947 119,895 41,963 77,932 Maryland 141,394 70,697 70,697 141,394 49,488 91,906 Michigan 357,210 178,605 178,605 357,210 125,024 232,186 Minnesota 99,974 49,987 49,987 99,974 34,991 64,983 Mississippi 67,526 33,763 33,763 67,526 23,634 43,892 Missouri 274,428 137,214 137,214 274,428 96,050 178,378 New York 270,278 135,139 135,139 270,278 94,597 175,681 North Carolina 274,684 137,342 137,342 274,684 96,139 178,545 Ohio 667,040 333,520 333,520 667,040 233,464 433,576 Pennsylvania 551,980 275,990 275,990 551,980 193,193 358,787 South Carolina 114,541 57,271 57,270 114,541 40,089 74,452 Tennessee 274,431 137,216 137,215 274,431 96,051 178,380 Texas 641,892 320,946 320,946 641,892 224,662 417,230 Virginia 126,956 63,478 63,478 126,956 44,435 82,521 West Virginia 431,762 215,881 215,881 431,762 151,117 280,645 Wisconsin 174,528 87,264 87,264 174,528 61,085 113,443 Total CAIR 7,238,385 3,619,196 3,619,189 7,238,385 2,533,434 4,704,951 Delaware 44,821 22,411 22,410 44,821 15,687 29,134 New Jersey 64,783 32,392 32,391 64,783 22,674 42,109 Total CAIR +

DE, NJ 7,347,989 3,673,999 3,673,990 7,347,989 2,571,795 4,776,194 Source: US EPA Regional NOx Budgets EPA is finalizing CAIR regional annual and ozone season NOx emissions budgets. The regional NOx budgets represent the total annual (or ozone season) cap level for NOx emissions for EGUs in the program. If a State wants to have non-EGUs make some of the reduction, the reductions in emissions from the base case need to be estimated to determine the level of emission reduction required.

6

In developing regional NOx budgets, EPA initially identified NOx budget amounts, as target levels for further evaluation, through the methodology of determining the highest recent Acid Rain Program (ARP) heat input from years 1999-2002 for each affected State, summing the highest State heat inputs into a regionwide heat input, and multiplying the regionwide heat input by 0.15 lb/mmBtu and 0.125 lb/mmBtu for 2009 and 2015, respectively. The EPA determined, through IPM analysis, that the resulting regionwide emissions caps (if all States choose to obtain reductions from EGUs) are highly cost-effective levels.

EPA proposed regional budgets as calculated above in the NPR. EPA determined that using the highest of recent years Acid Rain Program heat input provided an approximation of the regionwide heat input, even though it did not include heat input from non-Acid Rain sources.

Acid Rain Program data is available online in EPAs Clean Air Markets Division Data and Maps database (http://dcjsweb01.customs.epa.gov/gdm/index.cfm). The data set used by EPA in these budget calculations is available in the docket. This data is reported at the unit level, and was aggregated to the State level by EPA for use in budget calculations.

A number of commenters expressed concern that the regional budgets did not include heat input data from non-Acid Rain units. Multiplying the approximate recent heat input by 0.125 lb/mmBtu to develop a regionwide annual 2015 NOx cap could reasonably be expected to yield an average effective NOx emission rate (considering all EGUs potentially affected by CAIR for annual reductions, not only the Acid Rain units, and considering growth in heat input) somewhat less than 0.125 lb/mmBtu, on the order of about 0.12 lb/mmBtu or less. Likewise, multiplying the approximate recent heat input by 0.15 lb/mmBtu to develop a regionwide annual 2010 NOx cap could reasonably be expected to yield an average effective NOx emission rate for all CAIR units of about 0.15 lb/mmBtu or less. The EPA believes that the use of the highest annual heat input provides for a reasonable adjustment to reflect that there are some non-Acid Rain units that operate in these States that will be subject to the NOx budgets.

A number of commenters interpreted the correction of annual State NOx budgets made in the Notice of Annual Data Availability (NODA) to imply that non-ARP heat input had been incorporated into the calculation of the total regional NOx budget. EPA did not propose calculating region-wide budgets that reflected non-ARP heat input. However, as is discussed later in this document, State budgets - the distribution of the regional budget - were calculated using both ARP and non-ARP heat input. The NOx regionwide budget presented in the NODA remains unchanged from that presented in the SNPR. The Regional NOx budgets in the SNPR are slightly higher than those in the NPR because of the use of updated ARP heat input data in calculating the regional budget. The SNPR notes this in its discussion of the NOx budgets.

In the final rule, EPA is establishing both an annual and an ozone season only regionwide budget for NOx. The annual NOx budget applies to the 23 States + DC that the Agency finds contribute to PM 2.5 nonattainment. EPA is finalizing the approach of calculating the regional NOx budget using the highest Acid Rain Program heat input for each State for the years 1999-2002, multiplied by 0.15 lb/mmBtu (for 2009) and 0.125 lb/mmBtu (for 2015). This proposed approach provides a regionwide budget of 1.5 million tons beginning in 2010 and 1.3 beginning 7

in 2015. For the proposal to include Delaware and New Jersey, EPA calculated these States contributions to the total regional budget in the same way. When these States are included, the regionwide NOx budget beginning in 2009 increases by approximately 18,000 tons, and the regionwide NOx budget beginning in 2015 increases by approximately 15,000 tons.

The ozone season regionwide budget applies to 25 States + DC that the Agency finds contribute to ozone nonattainment. These budgets are calculated using the same methodology as the annual regional budget, with the exception that ozone season Acid Rain Heat input data (May through September) is substituted for annual heat input data. The total NOx regionwide ozone-season budget is approximately 568,000 tons beginning in 2009 and 485,000 tons beginning in 2015.

State NOx Budgets State Annual NOx Budgets In the January 2004 proposal, EPA proposed annual NOx State budgets for a 28-State (and D.C.)

region based on each jurisdictions average heat input - using heat input data from Acid Rain Program units - over the years 1999 through 2002. EPA summed the average heat input from each of the applicable jurisdictions to obtain a regional total average annual heat input. Then, each State received a pro rata share of the regional NOx emissions budget based on the ratio of its average annual heat input to the regional total average annual heat input.

In the June 2004 SNPR, EPA proposed to revise its determination of State NOx budgets by supplementing Acid Rain Program unit data with annual heat input data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), for the non-Acid Rain unit data, subtracting the heat input for potentially exempt cogeneration plants. A number of commenters had suggested that this would better reflect the heat input of the units that will be controlled under CAIR, and EPA agrees. For example, a State with a large number of non-Acid Rain units would not have the heat input from those units reflected in the percent of regional average annual heat input that the States generation represents.

EPA also took comment in the SNPR on an alternative methodology that determines State budgets by multiplying heat input data by adjustment factors for different fuels. In the August NODA, EPA presented the corrected annual NOx budgets resulting from the improved methodology proposed in the SNPR.

The EIA data used by EPA for budget calculations can be downloaded from the EIAs electricity website, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/data.html The databases used by EPA to calculate heat input were the EIA-860 (2001 and 2002), EIA-860 A and B (1999 and 2000), EIA-759, 900, and 906, EIA-767, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) FERC-423. These databases are described in Appendix A of this document. The specific datasets assembled by EPA are also described in Appendix A, and are available in the docket. The annual fossil fuel heat inputs used in budget calculations were calculated on a plant-level basis using 8

fuel and heat content information provided in various EIA databases and the FERC 423 database.

Heat input was calculated at the plant level for plants having a generator using a fossil energy source with a nameplate capacity greater than 25 MW. Plant-level calculations were performed because the EIA data format prevented unit-level calculations for combustion turbines in the 1999-2002 data, and in the 1999 and 2000 data for non-utility boilers. In using State heat input totals from EIA data, EPA only considered heat input from plants that did not have any units reporting Acid Rain Program heat inputs for the specific year.

Furthermore, EPA subtracted heat input from potentially exempt cogeneration plants from the EIA heat input data. CAIR contains an exemption for FERC-qualifying cogenerators that do not sell more than one-third of their potential generating capacity to the grid. FERC-qualifying cogenerator plants were identified based on information in the 1999 and 2000 EIA-860B and 2002 EIA-860 databases. Potential exempt facilities were identified by calculating the ratio of annual sales to potential capacity (plant nameplate capacity times 8,760 potential operating hours) for FERC-qualifying cogenerators in the 1999 and 2000 EIA-860B databases. Sales data were no longer available with consolidation to a single EIA-860 database after 2000. A plant was flagged as potentially exempt if the ratio did not exceed 0.33 in 1999 and 2000, and the plant was not subject to the Acid Rain Program.

To calculate total State-level heat inputs for use in apportioning the regionwide budget to States, EPA summed the State-level ARP heat input total with the EIA non-Acid Rain plant heat input data for each of the four data years.

For the final rule, EPA has made a number of revisions to the heat input data used for NOx State budget calculations in reponse to comments. These comments in general addressed missing or erroneous unit heat input data, and correction of the exempt cogeneration status of plants. A detailed summary of revisions to heat input data in the response to comments is included in Appendix B.

EPA is finalizing an approach of calculating States budgets through a fuel-adjusted heat-input basis. State budgets would be determined by multiplying historic heat input data (summed by fuel) by different adjustment factors for the different fuels. These factors reflect for each fuel (coal, gas and oil), the 1999-2002 average emissions by State, summed for the CAIR region, divided by average heat input by fuel by State, summed for the CAIR region. The resulting adjustment factors from this calculation are 1.0 for coal, 0.4 for gas and 0.6 for oil. The factors would reflect the inherently higher emissions rate of coal-fired plants, and consequently the greater burden on coal plants to control emissions.

Such an approach is not equivalent to an approach based on historical emissions (which would give fewer allowances to States which have already cleaned up their coal plants). Under this approach, all coal, whether clean or controlled, would be counted equally in determining State budgets.

EPA believes that such an approach provides more allowances to States which are expected to 9

face the greatest costs of installing controls. It would also better match each States projected need for allowances in the future (after installing controls) with the number of allowances they would receive.

It is not expected that this decision would disadvantage States with significant gas-fired generation. One reason is that the determination of the adjustment factor for natural gas included the contribution of heat input and emissions from older steam gas units. These units capacity factors are declining and are expected to decline further over time as new cleaner combined-cycle gas units ramp up generation.

State NOx budgets are calculated for both the annual regional NOx trading program and the ozone season regional NOx trading program. State budgets were determined by multiplying State-level average historic annual season heat input data (summed by fuel) by different adjustment factors for the different fuels. These factors reflect for each fuel (coal, gas and oil),

the 1999-2002 average emissions by State, summed for the CAIR region, divided by average heat input by fuel by State, summed for the CAIR region. The resulting adjustment factors from this calculation are 1.0 for coal, 0.4 for gas and 0.6 for oil. The total State budgets are then determined by calculating each States share of total fuel-adjusted heat input, and multiplying this share by the regionwide budget.

Proposed Inclusion of Delaware and New Jersey EPAs proposal to include Delaware and New Jersey in CAIR would make these two States subject to an annual NOx reduction requirement. However, including these States in the apportionment calculation for States currently included in the CAIR annual NOx program, would change the budgets for those States. To maintain a consistent methodology, but avoid having to recalculate States budgets, EPA considered these three States the equivalent of a small region.

EPA took the highest year heat input of 1999-2002 annual Acid Rain Program heat input for each of these States, and multiplied the total of these highest heat inputs by 0.15 for 2009-2014 and 0.125 for 2015 and beyond. The total budget for these two States is equal to approximately 17,000 tons annually in 2009-2014 and approximately 14,000 tons annually in 2015 and beyond (equal to these States contribution to the regionwide budget when they are included). State budgets for DE and NJ are apportioned from the total budget for these two States based on each States share of total fuel-adjusted heat input for the two States. Table 4 presents the Annual EGU State NOx budgets for the CAIR region plus DE and NJ.

10

Table 4. Final Annual Electric Generating Units NOx Budgets (tons)

State NOx Budget State State NOx Budget 2009* 2015**

Alabama 69,020 57,517 District of Columbia 144 120 Florida 99,445 82,871 Georgia 66,321 55,268 Illinois 76,230 63,525 Indiana 108,935 90,779 Iowa 32,692 27,243 Kentucky 83,205 69,337 Louisiana 35,512 29,593 Maryland 27,724 23,104 Michigan 65,304 54,420 Minnesota 31,443 26,203 Mississippi 17,807 14,839 Missouri 59,871 49,892 New York 45,617 38,014 North Carolina 62,183 51,819 Ohio 108,667 90,556 Pennsylvania 99,049 82,541 South Carolina 32,662 27,219 Tennessee 50,973 42,478 Texas 181,014 150,845 Virginia 36,074 30,062 West Virginia 74,220 61,850 Wisconsin 40,759 33,966 Total CAIR Region 1,504,871 1,254,061 Delaware 4,166 3,472 New Jersey 12,670 10,558 Total CAIR + DE, NJ 1,521,707 1,268,091

• Annual budget for NOx tons covered by allowances for 2009-2014.

• • Annual budget for NOx tons covered by allowances for 2015 and thereafter.

Source: US EPA These final State budgets would serve as effective binding caps, if States chose to control only EGUs, but did not want to participate in the trading program. For States controlling both EGUs and non-EGUs (or controlling only non-EGUs), these budgets would be compared to a baseline level of emissions to calculate the emissions reduction requirements for non-EGUs and the required caps for EGUs. Emissions reduction requirements for non-EGUs are described in detail in the Section VII discussion on SIP approvability in the CAIR preamble. Table 5 presents the annual NOx emissions reduction requirements under CAIR.

11

Table 5. Annual NOx Emissions Reduction Requirements under CAIR (tons) 2009 2015 State Reduction State Reduction State Base Case Budget Requirement Base Case Budget Requirement Alabama 132,019 69,020 62,999 133,842 57,517 76,325 District of 0 144 0 35 120 0 Columbia Florida 151,094 99,445 51,649 150,997 82,871 68,126 Georgia 143,140 66,321 76,819 140,759 55,268 85,491 Illinois 146,248 76,230 70,018 159,452 63,525 95,927 Indiana 233,833 108,935 124,898 233,303 90,779 142,524 Iowa 75,934 32,692 43,242 81,311 27,243 54,068 Kentucky 175,754 83,205 92,549 176,208 69,337 106,871 Louisiana 49,460 35,512 13,948 50,274 29,593 20,681 Maryland 56,662 27,724 28,938 57,366 23,104 34,262 Michigan 117,031 65,304 51,727 120,234 54,420 65,814 Minnesota 71,896 31,443 40,453 74,289 26,203 48,086 Mississippi 36,807 17,807 19,000 37,477 14,839 22,638 Missouri 115,916 59,871 56,045 117,912 49,892 68,020 New York 45,145 45,617 0 43,994 38,014 5,980 North 59,751 62,183 0 61,235 51,819 9,416 Carolina Ohio 263,814 108,667 155,147 274,372 90,556 183,816 Pennsylvania 198,255 99,049 99,206 202,249 82,541 119,708 South 48,776 32,662 16,114 50,429 27,219 23,210 Carolina Tennessee 106,398 50,973 55,425 105,613 42,478 63,135 Texas 185,798 181,014 4,784 179,448 150,845 28,603 Virginia 67,890 36,074 31,816 59,823 30,062 29,761 West 179,125 74,220 104,905 175,828 61,850 113,978 Virginia Wisconsin 71,112 40,759 30,353 69,280 33,966 35,314 Total CAIR 2,731,858 1,504,871 1,230,035 2,755,730 1,254,061 1,501,754 Delaware 9,389 4,166 5,223 10,678 3,472 7,206 New Jersey 16,760 12,670 4,090 17,924 10,558 7,336 Total CAIR

+ DE, NJ 2,758,007 1,521,707 1,239,348 2,784,332 1,268,091 1,516,296 Source: US EPA States Subject to Ozone-season NOx Requirements EPA apportioned the ozone season regional budget to the 25 States + DC that were found to contribute significantly to ozone nonattainment using a methodology analogous to that which was used to apportion the annual regionwide NOx budget to States that were found to contribute significantly to PM nonattainment. In EPAs final air quality modeling for CAIR, CT and MA were found to contribute significantly to ozone nonattainment, and were included in the program.

TX and GA, which were found to contribute to PM nonattainment but not ozone nonattainment, are not included in the ozone season program, and rather are subject only to the annual NOx 12

requirements.

For States subject to the ozone season NOx reduction requirements under CAIR, the budget calculation was performed using ARP and EIA heat input data that covers only the five month ozone season. State-level average ozone season heat input data (summed by fuel) was multiplied by different adjustment factors for the different fuels (1.0 for coal, 0.4 for gas, and 0.6 for oil).

The total State budgets were then determined by calculating each States share of total fuel-adjusted heat input, and multiplying this share by the regionwide ozone season NOx budget. For States that have lower EGU budgets under the SIP call than their 2009 CAIR budget, their SIP Call budgets are their State budgets under the CAIR seasonal NOx program.3 State ozone-season NOx budgets are presented in Table 6, below.

3 For C onne cticut, the S IP call bud get is also used in 201 0 and beyond.

13

Table 6. Final Ozone Seasonal Electricity Generating Unit NOx Budgets (tons)

State NOx Budget State State NOx Budget 2009* 2015**

Alabama 32,182 26,818 Arkansas 11,515 9,596 Connecticut 2,559 2,559 Delaware 2,226 1,855 District of Columbia 112 94 Florida 47,912 39,926 Illinois 30,701 28,981 Indiana 45,952 39,273 Iowa 14,263 11,886 Kentucky 36,045 30,587 Louisiana 17,085 14,238 Maryland 12,834 10,695 Massachusetts 7,551 6,293 Michigan 28,971 24,142 Mississippi 8,714 7,262 Missouri 26,678 22,231 New Jersey 6,654 5,545 New York 20,632 17,193 North Carolina 28,392 23,660 Ohio 45,664 39,945 Pennsylvania 42,171 35,143 South Carolina 15,249 12,707 Tennessee 22,842 19,035 Virginia 15,994 13,328 West Virginia 26,859 26,525 Wisconsin 17,987 14,989 Total 567,744 484,506

• Seasonal budget for NOx tons covered by allowances for 2009-2014.

For States that have lower EGU budgets under the SIP Call than their 2009 CAIR budget, this table includes their SIP Call budget.

• • Seasonal budget for NOx tons covered by allowances for 2015 and thereafter.

Source: US EPA Like the annual NOx State budgets, these final State budgets would serve as effective binding caps, if States chose to control only EGUs, but did not want to participate in the trading program.

For States controlling both EGUs and non-EGUs (or controlling only non-EGUs), these budgets would be compared to a baseline level of emissions to calculate the emissions reduction requirements for non-EGUs and the required caps for EGUs. Emissions reduction requirements for non-EGUs are described in detail in the Section VII discussion on SIP approvability in the preamble.

Annual NOx Compliance Supplement Pool EPA is establishing a NOx compliance supplement pool in the final CAIR of 198,494 tons of NOx allowances, which would result in a total compliance supplement pool of approximately 14

200,000 tons of NOx allowances when combined with EPAs proposed rulemaking to include Delaware and New Jersey. EPA is apportioning the compliance supplement pool to States based on the assumption that a States need for allowances from the pool is proportional to the magnitude of the States required emissions reductions (as calculated using the States base case emissions and annual NOx budget). EPA is apportioning the 200,000 tons of NOx on a pro-rata basis, based on each States share of the total emissions reduction requirement for the region in 2009. This is consistent with the methodology used in the NOx SIP Call. The compliance supplement pools for CAIR States and DE and NJ are calculated from these 200,000 tons. Table 7 presents each States compliance supplement pool. Adjusting State shares of the 200,000 ton CSP to round to the nearest whole allowance results in a total CSP of 199,997 tons of NOx.

15

Table 7. State Annual NOx Compliance Supplement Pool (allowance tons)

Base Case 2009 State Compliance 2009 Annual NOX Reduction Supplement State Emissions Budget Requirement Pool Alabama 132,019 69,020 62,999 10,166 District Of 0 144 0 0 Columbia Florida 151,094 99,445 51,649 8,335 Georgia 143,140 66,321 76,819 12,397 Illinois 146,248 76,230 70,018 11,299 Indiana 233,833 108,935 124,898 20,155 Iowa 75,934 32,692 43,242 6,978 Kentucky 175,754 83,205 92,549 14,935 Louisiana 49,460 35,512 13,948 2,251 Maryland 56,662 27,724 28,938 4,670 Michigan 117,031 65,304 51,727 8,347 Minnesota 71,896 31,443 40,453 6,528 Mississippi 36,807 17,807 19,000 3,066 Missouri 115,916 59,871 56,045 9,044 New York 45,145 45,617 0 0 North 59,751 62,183 0 0 Carolina Ohio 263,814 108,667 155,147 25,037 Pennsylvania 198,255 99,049 99,206 16,009 South 48,776 32,662 16,114 2,600 Carolina Tennessee 106,398 50,973 55,425 8,944 Texas 185,798 181,014 4,784 772 Virginia 67,890 36,074 31,816 5,134 West Virginia 179,125 74,220 104,905 16,929 Wisconsin 71,112 40,759 30,353 4,898 CAIR Region 198,494 Subtotal Delaware 9,389 4,166 5,223 843 New Jersey 16,760 12,670 4,090 660 Total 199,997 Source: EPA 16

Regional and State SO 2 and NOx Emissions Budgets Appendix A Heat Input Calculations 17

Regional and State SO2 and NOx Emissions Budgets Overview of EPA Heat Input Data Files in the Docket and Online EPA revised and updated heat input data files that were used for budget calculations in the SNPR and NODA, in response to comments. Revised data files are available in the docket. Plant heat input, both Acid Rain and Non-Acid Rain for the years 1999 to 2002 are provided in the "Plant 1999 to 2002 HI.xls" spreadsheet file, available in the docket. The file identifies at the plant level for each year the plant heat input used in the State heat input totals for each year, the classification of that heat input by Acid Rain or Non-Acid Rain (Plant Program field), and the source of the heat input data (HI Data Source field). State total heat input summaries can be checked using this spreadsheet by filtering on plant program, State, and year. EIA plant level heat input data is available in the spreadsheet Rev EIA Plant HI.xls. Additionally, Acid Rain unit heat input data is available in the spreadsheet CAIR State Acid Rain Units.xls. Both of these spreadsheets are available in the docket.

Revised State-level heat input values for the 1999 through 2002 period have been summarized for the States subject to the Clean Air Interstate Rule. The data are in the "CAIR State Annual HI.xls" spreadsheet, available in the docket. This spreadsheet also provides State totals for Acid Rain heat input data and the supplemental EIA heat input data, excluding exempt cogeneration.

In addition to the updated State, unit, and plant files outlined above, heat input files differentiated by fuel type, which were used for the final State NOx budget calculations, were added to the docket. State level heat input by fuel type is available in the file State Heat Input by Fuel.xls.

This file contains State total heat input by fuel, State level Acid Rain Program heat input by fuel, and State level non-Acid Rain Program heat input by fuel. Also available in the docket are Acid Rain unit and non-Acid Rain plant level annual heat input by fuel, in the spreadsheet Unit and Plant Level Fuel Annual Heat Input.xls. For ozone season heat input, State level heat input by fuel type is contained in the spreadsheet State Ozone Season Heat Input by Fuel.xls. Acid Rain unit and non-Acid Rain plant level ozone season heat input by fuel is available in the spreadsheet Unit and Plant Level Fuel Ozone Season Heat Input.xls.

Acid Rain Program Heat Input Data Acid Rain Program units annual heat input data (million Btus) for the 1999 to 2002 were assembled by querying EPA's Data and Maps database. The data are summarized by State in the file CAIR State Total HI.xls and by unit in the file CAIR State Acid Rain Units.xls.

Acid Rain Program unit level heat input data for the ozone season was also downloaded from EPAs Data and Maps database.

For the final rule, fuel-specific heat input data was used for the budget calculations. Fuel type information is not available for the hourly heat input reported by Acid Rain units that use flow CEMS to determine heat input (the majority of the total heat input). The primary fuel for the 18

units, however, is reported in Emission Data Report monitoring plan records. For estimating fuel-specific heat input EPA attributed all of a units heat input to the primary fuel. Some Acid Rain units had refuse or wood listed as a primary fuel. Because these units had been included in State-level ARP heat input data for calculation of the regional NOX budgets, they were retained for the calculation of fuel-specific heat input. For the actual budget calculation, they were assigned the same adjustment factor as gas. Fuel types and EPAs classification of them are presented in Table A-1.

Table A-1. Acid Rain Program Fuel Codes and Categories EDR Fuel Code EDR D escription Heat Input Fuel Category C Coal Coal DSL Diesel Oil G Gas Gas NNG Natural Gas Gas OGS Other Gas Gas OIL Oil Oil OOL Othe r Oil Oil PNG Pipeline Natural Gas Gas PRG Process Gas Gas R Refuse Refuse W Wood Wood EIA Annual Heat Input Data The EIA annual fossil fuel heat inputs in the spreadsheet tables were calculated on a plant-level basis using fuel use and heat content information provided in various EIA databases and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) 423 database (see Table A-2). Heat input was calculated at the plant level for plants having a generator with a nameplate capacity greater than 25 MW - fossil energy source. Plant-level calculations were performed because the EIA data format prevented unit-level calculations for combustion turbines in all years, and for non-utility boilers prior to 2001. Changes in EIA data reporting in 2001, which will be explained in more detail, resulted in different calculation methodologies for 1999 and 2000 heat input compared to 2001 and 2002 heat input. There is a drop-off in EIA heat input from 1999-2000 levels to 2001-2002 levels that may be because of the different methodologies.

EIA Heat Input Calculations For utility units, annual heat inputs were calculated separately for boilers and turbines. The EIA-767 database was used for boilers. The database provides annual fuel quantity along with the corresponding heat content. The EIA-759 and FERC-423 databases were used to calculate heat input for utility combustion turbines. EIA-759 provides annual fuel quantity for all combustion turbines combined at a plant. To calculate heat input, the fuel quantity was matched with the fuel heat content reported for the plant in the FERC-423 database. Average FERC-423 fuel heat contents were used when there were no FERC-423 data for the fuel and plant. The EIA-759 is 19

now called EIA-906.

The calculations for non-utility plants were performed in two different ways because of a change in EIA databases after 2000. The 1999 and 2000 heat inputs were calculated using the EIA-860B data with heat input first calculated by the fuel burned based on reported quantity and heat content, and then totaled for all fossil fuels.

Some plants reported both non-utility and utility data (plants that were sold to a non-utility at some point during the reporting year) in 1999 and 2000. In those cases, the higher of the two calculated plant heat inputs was used, which in most cases was the utility heat input.

The 2001 and 2002 non-utility data were calculated similarly to the utility calculations due to changes in EIA reporting. Combustion turbine heat inputs were calculated at the prime mover level, based on consumption data in the EIA-906 database and fuel heat content data from the 2000 EIA-860B database. The post-2000 EIA-860 database no longer has fuel heat content and consumption information for non-utilities. The data in EIA-906 correspond to the utility EIA-759/900/906 data, and contain the amount of fuel burned by prime mover type, but do not contain fuel heat content information. Therefore, average fuel contents were calculated based on all fuels used and reported in the prior year 2000 EIA-860B, then applied to the EIA-906 fuel data to calculate heat input.

Non-utility plants began reporting the EIA-767 form for boilers in 2001, so the EIA-767 fuel quantity and heat content data were calculated on a boiler-specific basis for non-utility boilers having a generator with a nameplate capacity greater than 25 MW for 2001 and 2002.

It is important to note that the heat input calculated for all combustion turbine units (and for non-utility boilers prior to 2001) may contain heat input for generators under 25 MW. There was no way to segregate the fuel use for smaller units from the plant or prime mover level data.

The better segregation of non-utility boiler data after 2001 may account for some of the drop-off in EIA plant heat input when comparing 2001-2002 to 1999-2000. It also appears that not all of the non-utility boilers serving an affected generator were represented in the 2001 and 2002 data, but we estimate the magnitude of this missing data at about 1% of the total annual heat input (based on comparisons to the 1999-2000 methodology).

Exempt FERC Qualifying Cogenerators The final CAIR contains an exemption for FERC-qualifying cogenerators that do not sell more than 33% of the potential generating capacity to the grid. FERC-qualifying cogenerator plants were identified based on information in the 1999 and 2000 EIA-860B and 2002 EIA-860 databases. Potential exempt facilities were identified by calculating the ratio of annual sales to potential capacity [plant nameplate capacity times 8,760] for FERC-qualifying cogenerators in the 1999 and 2000 EIA-860B databases. Sales data were no longer available with consolidation to a single EIA-860 database after 2000. A plant was flagged as potentially exempt in the EIA 20

Plant HI worksheet if the ratio did not exceed 0.33 in 1999 and 2000, and the plant was not subject to the Acid Rain Program.

EIA Ozone Season Heat Input Data For the EIA ozone season heat input data, calculations and adjustments were done using the methodology described above, used fuel use data only for the months of May through September.

The exception to this is non-utility plant fuel data in the EIA-860B database, which was used for the 1999 and 2000 heat input calculations, and available only on an annual basis. Annual heat input based on these files was adjusted by a factor of 5/12.

Table A-2 describes the EIA databases used in heat input calculations.

Table A-2. EIA and FERC Databases Used in Calculation of Heat Input Data to Supplement Acid Rain Program Heat Input Data Database Description EIA-860 Plant- and generator-level data for power plants owned and operated by (Utility and Non-utility 2001- electric utilities and non-utilities. Includes generator nameplate, energy 2002) source, and FERC cogenerator status. Does not include electricity delivered to a utility by a non-utility plant.

EIA-860A Plant- and generator-level data for electric power plants owned and operated (Utility 1999-2000) by electric utilities. Includes generator nameplate capacity and energy source.

EIA-860B Plant- and generator-level data, including specific information about (Non-utility 1999-2000) generators and p lant-level fue l usage a nd heat content, qua lifying facility status, and electricity delivered to a utility for non-utility electric power plants.

EIA-759/900/906 Monthly and annual data on generation and fuel consumption at the power (Utility all years and No n-utility plant and prime m over level. N on-utility plants began rep orting this data in 2001-2002) 1999. No heat content data.

EIA-767 Monthly and annual steam-electric plant data from organic-fueled or (Utility all years and No n-utility com bustible renewable steam -electric p lants with a generator na mep late 2001-2002) rating of 10 or more megawatts. Non-utilities began reporting EIA-767 beginning in 2001. Includes monthly generator generation and boiler fuel consump tion and hea t content.

FERC-423 Mo nthly deliveries of fossil fuels to utility, and now non-utility, generating (Utility all years) facilities. Included are the specific energy source, quantity of fuel delivered, the Btu content, sulfur content, ash content, coal state and county of origin, coal mine type (surfac e/undergro und), as well as the supplier of fuel.

Includes facilities with a fossil-fueled nameplate generating capacity of 50 or more m egawatts.

No te: Databases were downloa ded from E IA's electricity website:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/data.html 21

EIA Annual And Ozone Season Heat Input Data by Fuel Type To categorize EIA annual and ozone season heat input data by fuel type, fossil fuel heat inputs were calculated as described above using fuel type, fuel use, and heat content information provided in the various EIA databases and the FERC Form 423 database. For the purposes of calculating adjusted heat input by fuel type, EPA did not include non-fossil EIA heat input. To categorize heat input on a fuel basis, fuels were categorized as described in Table A-3.

Table A-3. EIA Database Fuel Codes and Categories ENGYSRC Description Fossil Other Coal Oil Gas Fuel AB Agriculture Byproducts (Bagasse, Rice No Yes No No No Hulls, Peanut Hulls, Nut Shells, Cow Manure)

AC Anthracite C ulm Yes No Yes No No BG Bitum inous C ulm Yes No Yes No No BL Black Liquor No Yes No No No BP Butane (Liquid) Yes No No No Yes BT Batteries No No No No No BU Butane (Gas) Yes No No No Yes COL Coal (Generic) Yes No Yes No No DG Digester Gas No Yes No No No DI Diesel Yes No No Yes No FC Fine Coal Yes No Yes No No FO1 Fuel Oil No 1 Yes No No Yes No GAS Gas (Generic) Yes No No No Yes GE Geothermal No No No No No HY Hydrogen No Yes No No No KE Kerosene Yes No No Yes No LB Liquid Byproduct No Yes No No No LF Landfill Gas No Yes No No No LW Lignite W aste Yes No Yes No No ME Methane No Yes No No No MW Municipal Solid Waste (Refuse) No Yes No No No NU Nuclear No No No No No OW Oil W aste Yes No No Yes No PET Petroleum (Generic) Yes No No Yes No PG Prop ane (G as) Yes No No No Yes PH Pitch Yes No No Yes No PL Propane (Liquid) Yes No No No Yes PP Pap er Pellets No Yes No No No PS Purchased Steam No No No No No PT Peat No Yes No No No RL Red Liquor No Yes No No No RT Railroad Ties No Yes No No No SB Solid Byp roducts No Yes No No No SL Solar No No No No No SM Sludge W aste No Yes No No No 22

SP Sludge O il Yes No No Yes No SS Spent Sulfite Liquor No Yes No No No SU Sulfur No Yes No No No SW Sludge Wood No Yes No No No TI Tires No Yes No No No TO Tall Oil No Yes No No No UP Utility Poles No Yes No No No WA Waste Alcohol No Yes No No No WC W aste Coal Yes No Yes No No WH W aste Heat Yes No No No No WN W ind No No No No No WT W ater No No No No No WW W ood /W ood W aste No Yes No No No BFG Blast-Furnace Gas Yes No No No Yes BIT Bituminous Coal Yes No Yes No No DFO Distillate Fuel Oil (Diesel, No 1 Fuel Yes No No Yes No Oil, N o. 2 F uel Oil, No. 4 Fuel O il)

JF Jet Fuel Yes No No Yes No KER Kerosene Yes No No Yes No LFG Landfill Gas No Yes No No No LIG Lignite Yes No Yes No No MSW Municipal Solid Waste (Refuse) No Yes No No No NG Natural Gas Yes No No No Yes NUC Nuclear (Uranium, Plutonium, No No No No No Thorium)

OBG Other B ioM ass Gases (D igester Gas, No Yes No No No Methane, other gase s)

OBL Other Biomass Liquids No Yes No No No OBS Other Biomass Solids No Yes No No No OG Other Gas Yes No No No Yes OO Othe r Oil Yes No No Yes No OTH Other (Batteries, Chemicals, Hydrogen, No No No No No Pitch, Sulfur, misc technologies)

PC Petroleum Coke Yes No No Yes No RFO Residual Fuel Oil (No 5 Fuel Oil, No 6 Yes No No Yes No Fuel O il)

SLW Sludge W aste No Yes No No No SUB Subbituminous Coal Yes No Yes No No SUN Solar (Photovoltaic, T hermal) No No No No No WOC W aste/Other Coal (Anthracite, Coal Yes No Yes No No Mixtures, Coke Breeze, Fine Coal, Tar Coal)

WDL Wood/W ood Waste Liquids No Yes No No No 23

WDS W ood /W ood W aste So lids (Peat, No Yes No No No Railroad Ties, Utility Poles, Wood Chips,other so lids)

WND W ind No No No No No WAT W ater No No No No No UR Nuclear No No No No No FO2 Fuel Oil No 2 Yes No No Yes No FO6 Fuel Oil No 6 Yes No No Yes No ANT Anthracite Yes No Yes No No OIL Fuel Oil (Used prior to 1980) Yes No No Yes No GEO Geothermal No No No No No WOD Wood No Yes No No No WAS W aste No Yes No No No WI W ind No No No No No SP Solar - Pho tovoltaic No No No No No SO Solar - Thermal No No No No No W ater No No No No No 1 Nuclear No No No No No 2 Light O il Yes No No Yes No 3 Heavy O il Yes No No Yes No 4 Anthracite Yes No Yes No No 5 Coke Yes No Yes No No 6 Bituminous Yes No Yes No No 7 Lignite Yes No Yes No No 8 Fuel Oil (Used prior to 1980) Yes No No Yes No 9 Natural Gas Yes No No No Yes A Geothermal No No No No No B Wood No Yes No No No C W aste No Yes No No No D W ind No No No No No E Solar - Pho tovoltaic No No No No No F Solar - Thermal No No No No No BTM Bitumen Yes No Yes No No REF Refuse No Yes No No No WD Wood No Yes No No No RG Refinery Gas No No No No No COG Coke Oven Gas Yes No No No Yes FO4 Fuel Oil No 4 Yes No No Yes No FO5 Fuel Oil No 5 Yes No No Yes No CRU Crud e Oil Yes No No Yes No TOP Top Crude Yes No No Yes No BKO Bunker O il Yes No No Yes No LPG Liquified Gas Yes No No No Yes RRO Rerefined Motor Oil Yes No No Yes No MIX Coal-Oil Mixture Yes No No Yes No TDF Tire-Derived Fuel No Yes No No No 24

WO W aste/Other Coal (Anthracite, Coal Yes No Yes No No Mixtures, Coke Breeze, Fine Coal, Tar Coal)

BLQ Black Liquor No Yes No No No OTG Other Gas Yes No No No Yes SC Coal-based Synfuel (includes Yes No Yes No No briquettes, pellets, or extrusions formed by binding materials and othe Heat Input for Non-Acid Rain Plants Provided by Commenters There were a number of non-Acid Rain plants for which commenters had provided heat input data for the 1999-2002 period to replace plant heat input calculated based on EIA data. These were all plants with units subject to the NOX Budget Program, and which had submitted primary fuel information in EDR monitoring plans. Heat input for these plants was attributed entirely to the primary fuel as described for Acid Rain Program units. Thes commenters provided only annual heat input. To calculate ozone season heat input for these plants, the annual heat input was multiplied by 5/12. Specific changes to the heat input data made in response to commenters are discussed in Appendix B.

25

Regional and State SO 2 and NOx Emissions Budgets Appendix B Data Set Corrections 26

Regional and State SO2 and NOx Emissions Budgets Revised EIA Heat Input Values Heat inputs for individual plants were changed as a result of comments from Exelon, Dominion Power, and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. The revised annual heat inputs for the plants are identified in the table below.

Table B-1. Revised Facility Heat Inputs from Commenters (mmBtus)

Or is 1999 Heat 2000 Heat 2001 Heat 2002 Heat State Code FACILITY NAME Input Input Input Input PA 3168 Richmond 174,437 117,683 115,893 196,329 PA 8012 Croydon Generating Station 678,112 461,682 344,261 686,569 PA 7704 Fairless Hills 2,687,828 3,001,110 2,780,378 3,068,851 VA 3797 Chesterfield 7 8,751,684 6,016,004 6,095,216 54,75,243 MA 1588 Mystic River 81 and 82 2,159,197 MA 10176 South Boston Combustion Turbine 33,273 MA 52026 Dartmouth Power 2,005,226 In addition, three plants (one in New Jersey and two in Maine) had been incorrectly identified as Massachusetts plants. The State locations of the plants have been revised.

Massachusetts also pointed out missing heat input for other Non-Acid Rain plants, but did not provide heat input data, and in addition OTC NOx Budget Program data were not available in CAMD's Data and Maps Database. No changes were made in these cases, presented in Table B-2:

Table B-2. Missing Heat Input Data Noted in Comments but Not Provided State Oris Code FACILITY NAME M issing Heat Input Years MA 1678 W aters River 2000 and 2001 MA 10802 Lowell Cogen 1999, 2000, and 2001 The April 14, 2004, EIA heat input data left out heat input from plants with fossil energy source steam turbines greater than 25 MWs that were located at plants with less than 100 MW total capacity. The error has been corrected in the "Sept1 Revised EIAPlantHI.xls" spreadsheet.

Revised heat input values, as well as other corrections, are highlighted in red.

One commenter pointed out duplication errors in the EIA plant level heat input data. In these cases, the spreadsheet contained a duplicate plant row locating the plant in a different State in addition to the row with the correct location. EPA has corrected the data so that the spreadsheet 27

contains only the correct row. The list of corrections made is in Table B-3, below. State heat input budgets were revised for New Jersey. In most cases, the existence of a duplicate row had no effect on heat input data, because the data for the plant was only used if no units from the plant were included in the Acid Rain heat input data.

Table B -3. Duplicate Rows Deleted from EIA Plant Heat Input Worksheet Incorrect Plant ORIS Impact State FL W illiam F. W yman 1507 No ne - Used correct Acid Rain d ata MA North Jersey Energ y Associates 10308 None - Plant was initially identified as an exem pt cogeneration p lant.

MI Fitchburg 1601 No ne - No hea t input during period .

MI Georgetown Substation 7759 No ne - Used correct Acid Rain d ata.

NE John S. Rainey Generating Station 7834 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

NJ Hunterstown 3110 Reduces N J 1999 hea t input NJ Mountain 3111 Red uces N J 19 99 - 2 002 heat inp ut.

NJ Portland 3113 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

NJ Titus 3115 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

NJ Conemaugh 3118 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

NJ Seward 3130 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

NJ Shaw ville 3131 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

NJ W arren 3132 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

NJ W ayne 3134 Red uces N J 19 99 - 2 002 heat inp ut.

NJ Keystone 3136 None - Used correct Acid Rain data.

Exempt Cogeneration Status There were also comments on the exempt cogeneration status of four cogeneration plants, one in Virginia, and three in Massachusetts. The plants are all Acid Rain plants, so the plants are now identified as EGUs and not exempt. Affected plants are shown in Table B-4.

28

Table B-4. Plants for which Cogeneration Status Was Corrected in EPA Data State Oris Code FACILITY NAME MA 10502 Indeck Pepp erell MA 10802 Lowell Cogen MA 54586 Lowell Power, LLC VA 54844 Go rdonsville Additionally, EPA has revisited the list of non-Acid Rain plants and has flagged and also excluded from heat input budget calculations any industrial plant which while operating, did not deliver electricity to a utility in 1999 or 2000 (years for which the data are available from EIA).

The CAIR budgets only apply to plants which generate electricity for sale, and the industrial plants without sales should not have been included.

Further revisions to cogeneration status are highlighted in the spreadsheet Rev EIA Plant HI.xls, available in the docket. The exemption flag, a "Y" in the column "F" field - "Exempt FERC Cogen (H and I # 0.33) of the worksheet is based on whether the plant is a FERC qualifying cogeneration plant, and the amount of electricity delivered to utilities in 1999 or 2000.

As is discussed earlier, heat input for plants for which the ratio of electricity sales to potential capacity did not exceed 0.33 were dropped from the data set.

29

Clean Air Mercury Rule l US EPA Clean Bookmark Air Mercury Rule Contact Us Search: All EPA This Area Go You are here: EPA Home Air and Radiation Clean Air Rules of 2004 Clean Air Mercury Rule Clean Air 2004 Home On March 15, 2005, EPA issued the Notice Clean Air Mercury Rule to On February 8, 2008, the D.C. Circuit permanently cap and reduce vacated EPA's rule removing power plants from the Clean Air Act list of Clean Air Mercury Rule sources of hazardous air pollutants. At Home mercury emissions from coal-fired the same time, the Court vacated the Clean Air Mercury Rule. EPA is reviewing power plants for the first time ever. the Court's decisions and evaluating its Basic Information impacts.

This rule makes the United States Regulatory Actions Read the Court's Opinion (PDF) (18pp, the first country in the world to Charts & Tables 51k) regulate mercury emissions from Technical Information utilities. Clean Air Rules of 2004 Implementation The actions described here are part of On March 10, 2005, in a separate the suite of inter-related rules but related action, EPA issued the collectively known as the Clean Air Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), a Rules of 2004. These rules address rule that will dramatically reduce ozone and fine particle pollution, air pollution that moves across nonroad diesel emissions, and power state boundaries. plant emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury.

Together the Clean Air Mercury Rule and the Clean Air Interstate Rule create a multi-pollutant strategy to reduce emissions throughout the United States.

Where to find more information:

Basic Information - Summary of the final Clean Air Mercury Rule as well as a summary of the design of the program and the benefits it will provide.

Regulatory Actions - Links to proposed and final rules, fact sheets, and other rulemaking documents.

Charts and Tables - A collection of printable charts, tables, and graphics http://www.epa.gov/air/mercuryrule/ (1 of 2) [10/14/2008 10:57:03 PM]

Clean Air Mercury Rule l US EPA demonstrating the health and environmental benefits of the Clean Air Mercury Rule.

Technical Information - Technical support information and links to related information.

Mercury Home - Provides a broad range of information: actions by EPA and others, including international actions; effects on people and the environment; and how to protect you and your family.

Implementation - Links to frequently asked questions, implementation status, and other implementation topics.

EPA Home Privacy and Security Notice Contact Us Last updated on Thursday, April 10th, 2008.

http://www.epa.gov/air/mercuryrule/

Print As-Is http://www.epa.gov/air/mercuryrule/ (2 of 2) [10/14/2008 10:57:03 PM]

Nitrogen Oxides: Health and Environmental Impacts of NOx l Six Common Pollutants l Air & Radiation l US EPA Six Common Air Pollutants Bookmark Contact Us Search: All EPA This Area Go You are here: EPA Home Air & Radiation Six Common Pollutants Nitrogen Oxides Health and Environmental Impacts of NOx Health and Environmental Impacts of NOx Air & Radiation Home Nitrogen Oxides Six Common Air NOx causes a wide variety of health Pollutants Home and environmental impacts because NOx Home Ozone Emission Sources of various compounds and derivatives Causes for Concern Particulate Matter Health & Enviro Impacts in the family of nitrogen oxides, EPA Efforts to Reduce NOx Carbon Monoxide EPA Offices including nitrogen dioxide, nitric acid, NOx: How nitrogen oxides affect Nitrogen Oxides the way we live and breathe nitrous oxide, nitrates, and nitric (PDF) (4pp, 774k)

Sulfur Dioxide oxide.

Lead Designations Ground-level Ozone (Smog) - is formed when NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react in the presence of sunlight. Children, people with lung diseases such as asthma, and people who work or exercise outside are susceptible to adverse effects such as damage to lung tissue and reduction in lung function. Ozone can be transported by wind currents and cause health impacts far from original sources. Millions of Americans live in areas that do not meet the health standards for ozone. Other impacts from ozone include damaged vegetation and reduced crop yields Acid Rain - NOx and sulfur dioxide react with other substances in the air to form acids which fall to earth as rain, fog, snow or dry particles. Some may be carried by wind for hundreds of miles. Acid rain damages; causes deterioration of cars, buildings and historical monuments; and causes lakes and streams to become acidic and unsuitable for many fish.

Particles - NOx reacts with ammonia, moisture, and other compounds to form nitric acid and related particles. Human health concerns include effects on breathing and the respiratory system, damage to lung tissue, and premature death. Small particles penetrate deeply into sensitive parts of the lungs and can cause or worsen respiratory disease such as emphysema and http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/nox/hlth.html (1 of 2) [10/14/2008 10:57:21 PM]

Nitrogen Oxides: Health and Environmental Impacts of NOx l Six Common Pollutants l Air & Radiation l US EPA bronchitis, and aggravate existing heart disease.

Water Quality Deterioration - Increased nitrogen loading in water bodies, particularly coastal estuaries, upsets the chemical balance of nutrients used by aquatic plants and animals. Additional nitrogen accelerates "eutrophication," which leads to oxygen depletion and reduces fish and shellfish populations. NOx emissions in the air are one of the largest sources of nitrogen pollution in the Chesapeake Bay.

Climate Change - One member of the NOx, nitrous oxide or N2O, is a greenhouse gas. It accumulates in the atmosphere with other greenhouse gasses causing a gradual rise in the earth's temperature. This will lead to increased risks to human health, a rise in the sea level, and other adverse changes to plant and animal habitat.

Toxic Chemicals - In the air, NOx reacts readily with common organic chemicals and even ozone, to form a wide variety of toxic products, some of which may cause biological mutations. Examples of these chemicals include the nitrate radical, nitroarenes, and nitrosamines.

Visibility Impairment - Nitrate particles and nitrogen dioxide can block the transmission of light, reducing visibility in urban areas and on a regional scale in our national parks.

EPA Home Privacy and Security Notice Contact Us Last updated on Friday, May 9th, 2008.

http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/nox/hlth.html Print As-Is http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/nox/hlth.html (2 of 2) [10/14/2008 10:57:21 PM]

How Sulfur Dioxide Affects the Way We Live l Six Common Pollutants l Air & Radiation l US EPA Six Common Air Pollutants Bookmark Contact Us Search: All EPA This Area Go You are here: EPA Home Air & Radiation Six Common Pollutants Sulfur Dioxide Sulfur Dioxide Air & Radiation Home Sulfur Dioxide Sulfur dioxide, or SO2, belongs to SO2 Home Six Common Air the family of sulfur oxide gases

Emission Sources Pollutants Home (SOx). These gases dissolve easily in Causes for Concern Health & Enviro Impacts Ozone water. Sulfur is prevalent in all raw EPA Efforts to Reduce SO2 Particulate Matter materials, including crude oil, coal, EPA Offices Carbon Monoxide and ore that contains common metals like aluminum, copper, zinc, lead, and Nitrogen Oxides iron. SOx gases are formed when fuel containing sulfur, such as coal and oil, Sulfur Dioxide is burned, and when gasoline is extracted from oil, or metals are extracted Lead from ore. SO2 dissolves in water vapor to form acid, and interacts with other Designations gases and particles in the air to form sulfates and other products that can be harmful to people and their environment.

SO2 Emission Sources - Summarizes sulfur dioxide emissions by source at national, state and local levels.

Chief Causes for Concern Health and Environmental Impacts of SO2 EPA's Efforts to Reduce SO2 U.S. EPA Offices EPA Home Privacy and Security Notice Contact Us Last updated on Friday, May 9th, 2008.

http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/so2/

Print As-Is http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/so2/ [10/14/2008 10:57:47 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA Radon Bookmark Contact Us Search: All EPA This Area Go You are here: EPA Home Air Indoor Air Quality Radon Health Risks Radon Home Health Risks For More Information on Radon Health Where You Live Exposure

Risks:

to A to Z Site Index Radon Frequent Questions Causes Radon Frequently Asked Questions Lung Glossary Cancer

Publications In Non- EPA's 2003 Radon Risk Assessment Related Links smokers and Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation Smokers National Radon Action Alike (BEIR) VI Report: "The Health Effects Month of Exposure to Indoor Radon" Radon Health Risks Lung cancer kills thousands of Americans every year. The untimely Who Can Test or Fix Radon Publications Your Home for Radon? deaths of Peter Jennings and Dana Citizen's Guide to Radon Radon and Real Estate Reeve have raised public awareness Home Buyer's and Seller's Guide to Radon Radon Resistant New about lung cancer, especially among Consumer's Guide to Radon Construction (RRNC) Reduction people who have never smoked.

EPA Map of Radon Technical Support Document to the Smoking, radon, and secondhand Zones 1992 Citizens Guide [EPA 400-R smoke are the leading causes of lung Radon in Drinking 011, May 1992] Copies can be ordered Water cancer. Although lung cancer can be from EPA's National Center for State Indoor Radon treated, the survival rate is one of Environmental Publications (NSCEP)

Grants (SIRG) the lowest for those with cancer.

www.epa.gov/nscep Kids, Students and From the time of diagnosis, between Teachers 11 and 15 percent of those afflicted will live beyond five years, depending Hotlines upon demographic factors. In many cases lung cancer can be prevented; TV and Radio Ads this is especially true for radon.

Smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer. Smoking causes an estimated 160,000* cancer deaths in the U.S. every year (American Cancer Society, 2004). And the rate among women is rising. On January 11, 1964, Dr.

http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (1 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA Luther L. Terry, then U.S. Surgeon General, issued the first warning on the link between smoking and lung cancer. Lung cancer now surpasses breast cancer as the number one cause of death among women. A smoker who is also exposed to radon has a much higher risk of lung cancer.

Radon is the number one cause of lung cancer among non-smokers, according to EPA estimates. Overall, radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer. Radon is responsible for about 21,000 lung cancer deaths every year. About 2,900 of these deaths occur among people who have never smoked. On January 13, 2005, Dr. Richard H. Carmona, the U.S.

Surgeon General, issued a national health advisory on radon. Visit www.

cheec.uiowa.edu/misc/radon.html for more on a study by Dr. William Field on radon-related lung cancer in women.

Secondhand smoke is the third leading cause of lung cancer and responsible for an estimated 3,000 lung cancer deaths every year. Smoking affects non-smokers by exposing them to secondhand smoke. Exposure to secondhand smoke can have serious consequences for childrens health, including asthma attacks, affecting the respiratory tract (bronchitis, pneumonia), and may cause ear infections.

Learning more about lung cancer. The following sources provide a wide range of good information about lung cancer, prevention, and treatment.

American Cancer Society -- www.cancer.org American Lung Association -- www.lungusa.org ALA offers Facts About Lung Cancer National Cancer Institute -- www.nci.nih.gov/

Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center -- www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/vicc Memorial Sloan-Kettering -- www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/44.cfm Studies Find Direct Evidence Linking Radon in Homes to Lung Cancer

- Two studies show definitive evidence of an association between residential radon exposure and lung cancer. Two studies, a North American study and a European study, both combined data from several previous residential studies. These two studies go a step beyond earlier findings. They confirm http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (2 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA the radon health risks predicted by occupational studies of underground miners who breathed radon for a period of years. Early in the debate about radon-related risks, some researchers questioned whether occupational studies could be used to calculate risks from exposure to radon in the home environment. These findings effectively end any doubts about the risks to Americans of having radon in their homes, said Tom Kelly, Director of EPAs Indoor Environments Division. We know that radon is a carcinogen. This research confirms that breathing low levels of radon can lead to lung cancer.

Read the University of Iowa press release about the North American study at www.uihealthcare.com/news/

news/2005/03/21radon.html Abstract of the pooling of North American Residential Radon studies (PDF) (2 pp, 22KB, About PDF).

Abstract of the pooling of the European Residential Radon studies (PDF) (1 page, 21KB, About PDF).

Top of page World Health Organization Launches International Radon Project The World Health Organization (WHO) says radon causes up to 15% of lung cancers worldwide. In an effort to reduce the rate of lung cancer around the world, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched an international radon project to help countries increase awareness, collect data and encourage action to reduce radon-related risks. The U.S. EPA is one of several government agencies and countries supporting this initiative and is encouraged by WHOs attention to this important public health issue. "Radon poses an easily reducible health risk to populations all over the world, but has not up to now received widespread attention," said Dr. Michael Repacholi, coordinator of WHOs Radiation and Environmental Health Unit. He went on to say that "radon in our homes is the main source of exposure to ionizing radiation, and accounts for 50% of the publics exposure to naturally-occurring sources of radiation in many countries."

http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (3 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA Read the WHO Press Release Read the EPA News Release Visit the World Health Organization's International Radon Project site - www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/env/radon/en/index.html The U.S. Surgeon General, Richard Carmona, Issues National Health Advisory on Radon The Surgeon General of the United States issued a Health Advisory in 2005 warning Americans about the health risk from exposure to radon in indoor air. The Nations Chief Physician urged Americans to test their homes to find out how much radon they might be breathing. Dr. Carmona also stressed the need to remedy the problem as soon as possible when the radon level is 4 pCi/L or more. Dr. Carmona noted that more than 20,000 Americans die of radon-related lung cancer each year.

Read the Surgeon General's News Release Top of page Why is radon the public health risk that it is?

EPA estimates that about 20,000 lung cancer deaths each year in the U.S. are radon-related. Exposure to radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer after smoking.

Radon is an odorless, tasteless and invisible gas produced by http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (4 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA the decay of naturally occurring uranium in soil and water.

Radon is a form of ionizing radiation and a proven carcinogen. Lung cancer is the only known effect on human health from exposure to radon in air.

Thus far, there is no evidence that children are at greater risk of lung cancer than are adults.

Radon in air is ubiquitous. Radon is found in outdoor air and in the indoor air of buildings of all kinds. EPA recommends homes be fixed if the radon level is 4 pCi/L (pico Curies per Liter) or more. Because there is no known safe level of exposure to radon, EPA also recommends that Americans consider fixing their home for radon levels between 2 pCi/L and 4 pCi/L. The average radon concentration in the indoor air of Americas homes is about 1.3 pCi/L.

It is upon this level that EPA based its estimate of 20,000 radon-related lung cancers a year upon. It is for this simple reason that EPA recommends that Americans consider fixing their homes when the radon level is between 2 pCi/L and 4 pCi/L. The average concentration of radon in outdoor air is .4 pCi/L or 1/10th of EPAs 4 pCi/L action level.

For smokers the risk of lung cancer is significant due to the synergistic effects of radon and smoking. For this population about 62 people in a 1,000 will die of lung-cancer, compared to 7.3 people in a 1,000 for never smokers. Put another way, a person who never smoked (never smoker) who is exposed to 1.3 pCi/L has a 2 in 1,000 chance of lung cancer; while a smoker has a 20 in 1,000 chance of dying from lung cancer. Figure A compares the risks between smokers and never smokers; smokers are at a much higher risk than never smokers, e.g., at 8 pCi/L the risk to smokers is six times the risk to never smokers.

The radon health risk is underscored by the fact that in 1988 Congress added Title III on Indoor Radon Abatement to the Toxic Substances Control Act. It codified and funded EPAs then fledgling radon program. Also that year, the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General issued a warning about radon urging Americans to test their homes and to reduce the radon level when necessary (U.S. Surgeon General).

http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (5 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA Unfortunately, many Americans presume that because the action level is 4 pCi/L, a radon level of less than 4 pCi/L is safe. This perception is altogether too common in the residential real estate market. In managing any risk, we should be concerned with the greatest risk. For most Americans, their greatest exposure to radon is in their homes; especially in rooms that are below grade (e.g., basements), rooms that are in contact with the ground and those rooms immediately above them.

It's never too late to reduce your risk of lung cancer.

Don't wait to test and fix a radon problem. If you are a smoker, stop smoking. Consider quitting. Until you can quit, smoke outside and provide your family with a smoke-free home (www.epa.gov/smokefree).

Take the Smoke-free Home Pledge today!

Top of page Radon Risk If You Smoke The risk of If 1,000 people cancer from who smoked WHAT TO DO:

Radon radon were exposed to Stop smoking Level exposure this level over a and...

compares lifetime*... to**...

About 260 people 20 pCi/L 250 times the could get lung Fix your home risk of drowning cancer About 150 people 200 times the 10 pCi/L could get lung risk of dying in a Fix your home cancer home fire About 120 people 8 pCi/L 30 times the risk could get lung Fix your home of dying in a fall cancer About 62 people 5 times the risk 4 pCi/L could get lung of dying in a car Fix your home cancer crash About 32 people 6 times the risk Consider fixing 2 pCi/L could get lung of dying from between 2 and cancer poison 4 pCi/L About 20 people 1.3 pCi/L (Average indoor could get lung radon level) cancer (Reducing radon http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (6 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA levels below 2 About 3 people pCi/L is difficult.)

0.4 pCi/L (Average outdoor could get lung radon level) cancer Note: If you are a former smoker, your risk may be lower.

pCi/L (pico Curies per Liter)

• Lifetime risk of lung cancer deaths from EPA Assessment of Risks from Radon in Homes (EPA 402-R-03-003).

• • Comparison data calculated using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's 1999-2001 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Reports.

Radon Risk If You've Never Smoked If 1,000 people The risk of who never cancer from Radon smoked were radon WHAT TO DO:

Level exposed to this exposure level over a compares lifetime*... to**...

About 36 people 20 pCi/L 35 times the risk could get lung Fix your home of drowning cancer About 18 people 20 times the risk 10 pCi/L could get lung of dying in a Fix your home cancer home fire About 15 people 8 pCi/L 4 times the risk could get lung Fix your home of dying in a fall cancer About 7 people 4 pCi/L The risk of dying could get lung Fix your home in a car crash cancer About 4 people Consider fixing 2 pCi/L The risk of dying could get lung between 2 and from poison cancer 4 pCi/L About 2 people 1.3 pCi/L (Average indoor could get lung (Reducing radon radon level) cancer levels below 2 pCi/L is (Average outdoor difficult.)

0.4 pCi/L radon level)

Note: If you are a former smoker, your risk may be higher.

pCi/L (pico Curies per Liter)

• Lifetime risk of lung cancer deaths from EPA Assessment of Risks from Radon in Homes (EPA 402-R-03-003).

• • Comparison data calculated using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's 1999-2001 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Reports.

Top of page http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (7 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

Health Risks l Radon l Indoor Air Quality l Air l US EPA About the Indoor Environments Division l Where You Live l Ask the Radon Expert l Site Index EPA Home Privacy and Security Notice Contact Us Last updated on Monday, August 4th, 2008.

http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html Print As-Is http://www.epa.gov/radon/healthrisks.html (8 of 8) [10/14/2008 10:58:57 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Search Subjects Pennsylvania Bureau of Air Quality Clean Air Plans Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Region 1 l Region 2 Region 3 l Region 4 Reducing Fine Particulate Pollution Region 5 l Region 6 Reducing Ozone Pollution Reducing Carbon Monoxide For files not found Reducing Sulfur Dioxide Pollution here, please see the Clean Air Plans Archive Multi-Pollutant Regulations/Plans Business Reducing Toxic Emissions Cars/Trucks Reducing Pollution from Vehicles General Monitoring Pollutants Infrastructure SIP Submittals Permits Regs/Plans Proposed Revision to Pennsylvania Section 110(a)(2)(K) Infrastructure SIPSection Advisory Groups Infrastructure (110k) SIP revision Infrastructure (110k) PA Bulletin Notice Air Quality Home The Department of Environmental Protection (Department)has submitted a SIP revision Site Index that confirms the Commonwealth's compliance with section 110(a)(2)(A)--(M) of the Latest News CAA (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 7410(a)(2)(A)--(M)) pertaining to general responsibilities. and a Upcoming Events SIP revision meeting the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of Contact Air Quality the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 7410(a)(2)(D)(i)).

Air Related Links Pa. Bulletin Announcement 9/15/07 Submittal Letter to EPA 12/7/07 Infrastructure SIP Submittal, Confirmation (PDF)

Submittal Letter to EPA 12/7/07 CAIR SIP Submittal (PDF)

Comment/Response Document Allegheny County Implementing Agreement (PDF)

Philadelphia County Implementing Agreement (PDF)

Plans for Reducing Fine Particulate Pollution http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (1 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans PM2.5 Modeling Protocols The modeling protocols provide background information and describe the basic structure of the PM2.5 modeling demonstration that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection will undertake. These demonstrations will become part of the Commonwealths State Implementation Plan that will ensure the eight annual PM2.5 nonattainment areas will meet ambient standards. Modeling protocols follow the structure outlined in section 12.2 of the U.S. EPAs April 2007 guidance.

Harrisburg - Lebanon - Carlisle (PDF)

Appendices - A, B, C, D, E Johnstown (PDF)

Appendices - A, B, C, D, E Lancaster (PDF)

Appendices -A, B, C, D, E Philadelphia - Wilmington - PA, NJ, DE (PDF)

Appendices - A, B, C, D, E Pittsburgh - Beaver Valley (PDF)

Appendices - A, B, C, D, E Liberty-Clairton (PDF - Accessed 12/5/07)

Reading (PDF)

Appendices - A, B, C, D, E York (PDF)

Appendices - A, B, C, D, E Plans for Reducing Ozone Pollution Ground-level ozone pollution occurs when hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides bake in the sun. These gases come from unburned fuel and solvents, car exhaust, factory stack emissions and homeowners' and individuals' activities. The federal government set a National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone to protect public health. For areas that do not meet the standard, the state must submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to the EPA that outlines the measures that will be taken to attain the health-based ozone standard. States are also responsible for submitting maintenance plans to the EPA that detail how the state will assure the standard will continue to be met for the next 10 years.

Final RACT SIP Revision for the 8-hour Ozone Standard Submitted to EPA for Approval DEP has submitted to EPA for approval a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision is a demonstration that shows existing rules enacted by the DEP fulfill the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements under the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Transmittal Letter to EPA (PDF) 9/25/06 RACT SIP Revision (PDF) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (2 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Comment and Response Document (PDF)

Final RACT Revision for Philadelphia County Under the 8-Hour Ozone Standard Submitted to EPA for Approval DEP has submitted to EPA for approval a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Philadelphia County. The DEP concurs with the Philadelphia Air Management Services that this Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) SIP revision meets the requirements under the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

Transmittal Letter to EPA 9/25/06 Philadelphia County RACT SIP Revision Philadelphia Area Attainment Plan DEP has submitted a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Southeastern Pennsylvania area included in the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-DE-MD-NJ eight-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area (Philadelphia Nonattainment Area). The Pennsylvania portion of this moderate eight-hour ozone nonattainment area consists of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties.

The SIP revision demonstrates how the area will attain the health-based eight-hour ozone NAAQS by June 2010 by presenting evidence from photochemical modeling, ozone trends and regional transport impacts.

The plan demonstrates how the area will meet 2008 and 2009 reasonable further progress milestones for emission reductions through state and federal control measures. It also contains the base year 2002 emissions inventory, a reasonably available control measure analysis, a contingency plan to bring the area back into attainment should violations of the NAAQS occur after the standard is attained, and mobile source emission budgets for purposes of transportation conformity.

Appendices to all documents are available upon request by contacting the division staff at 717-787-9495.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Final Attainment Plan (PDF)

Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices TOC (PDF)

State Implementation Plan Revision Incorporating the Amended Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program.

DEP has submitted to EPA for approval a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revision incorporates the recently amended Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles (PCV) program requirements.

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (3 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Transmittal Letter to EPA (PDF) 5/31/07 Final Amended PCV Program Regulation (12/9/2006)

Technical Correction of PCV Program Regulation (1/13/2007)

Proposed Amended PCV Program Regulation (02/11/2006)

PCV Program Regulation Comment & Response Document (PDF)

SIP Revision Technical Support Document (PDF)

Redesignation Requests, Maintenance Plans and 2002 Base Year Inventories DEP has submitted eight-hour ozone maintenance plans and base year inventories for twelve counties that were designated "attainment" for the eight-hour standard.

However, one-hour ozone redesignation requests and maintenance plans for these counties were never approved by EPA prior to revocation of the one-hour standard, obligating Pennsylvania to submit State Implementation Plan revisions demonstrating attainment of the eight-hour ozone standard for at least ten years.

Pa. Bulletin Notice Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Columbia 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS 8mb)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Crawford 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS 8mb)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Juniata 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Lawrence 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS 8mb)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Northumberland 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS 8mb)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Pike 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (4 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Schuylkill 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Snyder 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Somerset 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Susquehanna 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Warren 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Wayne 2002 Base Year Inventory (MS XLS)

DEP is submitting State Implementation Plan revisions for all nonattainment areas which are attaining the eight-hour ozone standard and requesting that these areas be redesignated. The Maintenance Plans demonstrate how the air quality in the area will be maintained through 2018. Base year (2002) inventories are also being submitted.

Appendices to all documents are available upon request by contacting Arleen Shulman at 717-772-3926.

County/Area Plan Detail Ozone SIP Revision Submitted to EPA May 23, 2008 Pa. Bulletin Notice Transmittal Letter SIP Revision Approved by EPA on January 14, 2008 .

York-Adams Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (5 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Ozone SIP Revision Submitted to EPA May 23, 2008 Pa. Bulletin Notice Transmittal Letter SIP Revision Submitted to EPA on June 14, 2007.

Clearfield-Indiana Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on November 14, 2007 Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

State College Request for Redesignation (PDF)

(Centre County) Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Proposed to be approved by EPA on January 7, 2008.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Allentown- Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Bethlehem-Easton Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Proposed Ozone SIP Revision Pa Bulletin Notice Proposed SIP Revision Submitted to EPA on June 12, 2007.

Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (6 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Proposed to be approved by EPA on July 11, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Pittsburgh-Beaver Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Valley Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on October 9, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Erie Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on October 19, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Mercer Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on August 1, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Cambria Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (7 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Approved by EPA on July 25, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement Comments & Responses (PDF)

Harrisburg - Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Lebanon - Carlisle Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on August 1, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Blair Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Ozone SIP Revision Submitted on May 23, 2008 Pa. Bulletin Notice Transmittal Letter SIP Revision Submitted to EPA on January 25, 2007.

Greene Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Comments & Responses (PDF)

Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (8 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Submitted to EPA on January 25, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement (PDF)

Comments & Responses (PDF)

Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Reading Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on July 25, 2007.

Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Franklin Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on July 6, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Tioga Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Approved by EPA on July 6, 2007.

Pa. Bulletin Announcement Redesignation Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Lancaster Request for Redesignation (PDF)

Maintenance Plan Transmittal Letter (PDF)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Technical Appendices Table of Contents (PDF)

Architectural Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Variances SAU-SEA Application for Variance (8/04)

Application (PDF)

Addendum (PDF)

Draft Proposed Order (PDF) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (9 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Sherwin-Williams Stain Variance (5/04)

Denial Letter (PDF)

Denial Document (PDF)

Minwax Water-Based Product Specifications (PDF)

Comment/Response Document (PDF)

Application (PDF)(1.1M)

Draft Proposed Order (PDF)

Sherwin-Williams - Clear Wood Coatings (Varnishes)

Variance Application (PDF)(1.4M)

Draft Proposed Order (PDF)

Coating Descriptions (PDF)(3.3M)

Comment/Response Document (PDF)

Denial Document (PDF)

Denial Letter (PDF)

Ozone Transport SIP Revisions To Reduce Regional Transport of Ozone See the Air Quality Regulations page.

Plans for Reducing Carbon Monoxide Final Revision to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan for Maintaining the Carbon Monoxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Years 2007-2017 in Philadelphia County (9/3/04) (PDF)

Notice of Public Hearing Final SIP Transmittal Letter to EPA Plans To Reduce Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Pollution The federal government has set standards for SO2 to protect public health. For areas that do not meet the standard, the state must submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to the EPA that outlines the measures that will be taken to attain the health-based standard. After areas achieve the standard, states must also submit maintenance plans to assure the standard will continue to be met for the next 10 years.

Status: Approved by EPA on 7/1/04 Final Warren County SIP Revision - Conewango Township, Pleasant Township, Glade Township, and City of Warren, Warren County SO2 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request (5/04)

Maintenance Plan (PDF)

Redesignation Request (PDF)

Letter to EPA (PDF)

PA Bulletin Notice (PDF) http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (10 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Multi-Pollutant Regulations/Plans DEP Comments on EPA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (4/5/04)

DEP Comments (PDF)

Multi-Pollutant Strategy Position of the OTC (PDF)

Plans to Reduce Toxic Emissions Section 111 of the federal Clean Air Act contains a priority list of pollution sources that states must regulate. New sources must meet certain performance standards, and existing sources must meet prescribed emissions guidelines. The following plans aim to reduce toxic emissions and meet these standards.

Section 111(d)/129 State Plan for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators (9/98)

Download State Plan (PDF)

Section 111(d)/129 State Plan For Large Municipal Waste Combustors (4/98)

Download State Plan (PDF)

Section 111(d)/129 State Plan For Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (6/97)

Download State Plan (PDF)

Plans to Reduce Pollution from Vehicles Vehicles emit a number of harmful air pollutants that have the potential to adversely affect people's respiratory systems. These chemicals and particles are particularly dangerous for children, the elderly and those with existing respiratory problems such as asthma. As people increasingly depend on their cars and drive more and more miles, it is important that the vehicles' exhaust systems become cleaner. The following plans aim to reduce air pollution resulting from automobiles and other vehicles to help Pennsylvania attain the health-based ozone standard.

Transportation Conformity SIP Revision Submitted to EPA May 29, 2008 Pa Bulletin Notice Final Transportation Conformity SIP Revision Volume I Volume II Cover Transmittal Letter Comment/Response Document http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (11 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]

PA DEP BAQ - Plans - Pennsylvania's Clean Air Plans Final SIP Revision Vehicle Emissions Inspection/Maintenance Program; Program Changes for Philadelphia and Pittsburgh Regions (1/04). Approved by the EPA October 6, 2005.

Final SIP Revision (PDF)

Technical Appendices available upon request. Please contact Yvette House, at (717) 787-9495.

Final SIP Revisions for the Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection/Maintenance Program (11/03). Approved by the EPA October 6, 2005.

Final SIP Revisions (PDF)

Technical Appendices are availabel upon request. Please contact Yvette House, at (717) 787-9495.

Enhanced Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program PA Home Site l Ask DEP l Plug-Ins l Home Page http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/aq/plans/Clean_air_plans.htm (12 of 12) [10/14/2008 11:02:17 PM]