Department of the Environment

What Will It Take?

2013 Power Plant Regulations Stakeholder Meeting - October 21, 2013

Meeting the New Ozoneand Sulfur Dioxide Standards

Topics Covered• The new standards for ground level

ozone and sulfur dioxide (SO2)

– Background

– Maryland status

• Ozone Implementation

– What the science tells us

– Efforts to address ozone transport

– Maryland efforts to adopt new local pollution control programs

• SO2 Implementation

– Current status

The Good News

Progress in Cleaning Maryland’s Air

p. 4

15.8 15.914.5

11.7 11.3

17.1

11.1

12.915.616.215.9

0

4

8

12

16

20

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Ann

ual P

M2.

5 (u

g/m

3 )

Annual Fine Particulate41 41 39

35

2930

42 4137

33 29

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Dai

ly P

M2.

5 (

ug/m

3 )

0

10

20

30

40

50Daily Fine Particulate

152 147 143 137 126 121 119119

0

40

80

120

160

1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011

1-H

our

Ozo

ne (

ppb)

1-Hour Ozone 8-Hour Ozone

107 107 10494 93 91 89 93

1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011

8-H

our

Ozo

ne (

ppb)

0

40

80

120

Air Quality Trend Maps

p. 5

p. 6

Continuous Air Quality ProgressNumber of 90 Degree Days at BWI

11

29

29

30

31

31

37

37

43

44

45

50

51

52

54

56

57

60

60

63

68

68

71

72

73

73

75

80

80

84

86

86

88

2009

2011

2003

2012

2004

2008

2000

2006

2010

2005

1992

1989

2001

1996

2007

1997

1990

1981

1984

1994

1999

2002

1995

1982

1986

1988

1998

1983

1987

1993

1985

1991

1980

Number of Maryland’sOzone Exceedance Days

11

11

13

14

14

15

16

17

18

21

22

22

22

27

29

32

34

35

37

37

37

38

40

42

45

46

46

48

49

51

51

55

59

2000

2004

2009

1996

2003

1984

1989

1990

1982

1985

1981

1992

2001

2008

2005

1986

1997

1994

1987

1999

2006

1998

2011

1993

2007

1980

2012

2002

1983

1991

1995

1988

2010

One-Hour SO2 TrendsMaximum 1-Hour SO2 Concentrations for Active Sites

Essex

Piney Run

HU-Beltsville

0

40

80

120

160

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

ppb

YearTotal Brandon Shores Wagner Crane Average Max 1-hour

2007 92,931 42,041 20,259 30,631 12.45 452.72008 79,282 39,924 15,006 24,352 11.08 172.72009 60,390 32,821 15,093 12,477 8.55 146.62010 15,877 1,260 9,028 5,589 6.77 86.42011 17,518 2,829 9,007 5,682 5.30 139.22012 12,494 2,848 7,473 2,173 4.55 67.8

SO2 Concentrations at Essex (ug/m3)

SO2 Emissions (Tons/Year)

Phase 1 SO2 controls under the MD Healthy

Air Act

A Ten Second Celebration

No Rest for the Weary

9

Comparing the Old and NewOzone Standards

Who is in nonattainment under the old standard?

Who might be nonattainment under the new standard?

Problem areas for the old85 ppb ozone standard

Problem areas for the 75(or 60 to 70) ppb ozone standard

The New Challenges

The New Ozone Standard - Background

• Finalized by EPA in 2008

– 75 ppb as an 8-hour standard

• Delayed in 2010

– EPA announced plans to adopt an even more stringent standard (in the 60 to 70 ppb range)

• This range was consistent with EPA’s science advisors

• 2011 - Decision to not move ahead with more stringent standard announced

• June 2012 – EPA designates 3 areas in Maryland as “nonattainment”

– Other areas across the Country also designated nonattainment

The New SO2 Standard - Background

• Finalized by EPA in 2010

– 75 ppb as a 1-hour standard

• August 2013 – EPA only designated areas of the country that were monitoring nonattainment

• Rest of country, including all of Maryland, has not been designated:

– Neither “unclassified/attainment” nor “nonattainment” designation

– Undesignated areas will be designated in 2017-2020, based on monitoring or modeling data yet to be collected

– Early attainment option also included in draft EPA guidance

Implementing the New Standards• Ozone

– Maryland must submit an updated NOx RACT SIP for the new 75 ppb standard by July 2014

• SO2

– Maryland can take advantage of “early action” concepts in EPA’s Feb. 2013 strategy paper:

• Avoid “nonattainment” designation for 1-hr SO2

• A Multi-Pollutant Approach for power plants and these new standards

– Additional reductions from power plants will be needed to meet both new standards

– MDE plans to adopt regulations that address both pollutants at once

• More efficient, avoids inconsistent requirements, but some timing challenges

Implementing the New Ozone

Standard

15

Baltimore – The Last Purple Dot

Parts per Billion (ppb)

<7171-7374-7576-85 (mar)>85 (mod)

• Only area in the East designated as a “Moderate” nonattainment area

– 2015 SIP & 2018 attainment

– Rest of the East is “Marginal”• 2013-2015 attainment

• No requirements to do anything

• Still not meeting old 85 ppb standard

June 8, 2011

Map is courtesy of EPA AIRNow.

A Little Glimpse at the Science

• 20 plus year “science partnership” with UMCP, UMBC, HU, PSU, EPA and others

• Local emissions in Cities (nonattainment areas) – Reducing local emissions is always important

• Three distinct types of transport– Short range - City to city

• “Ground level” transport

• Washington to Baltimore, Baltimore to Philadelphia, etc.

– Westerly, Long range (up-over-and-down)• “Aloft” transport - 100s of miles

• Generally from W or NW

– Southerly, Nocturnal Low Level Jet (NLLJ)• “Aloft” transport at night !!!

• 100s of miles

• SW to NE – a “jet” of air funneled between the Atlantic Ocean and the Appalachian Mountains

• 20 plus year “science partnership” with UMCP, UMBC, HU, PSU, EPA and others

• Local emissions in Cities (nonattainment areas) – Reducing local emissions is always important

• Three distinct types of transport– Short range - City to city

• “Ground level” transport

• Washington to Baltimore, Baltimore to Philadelphia, etc.

– Westerly, Long range (up-over-and-down)• “Aloft” transport - 100s of miles

• Generally from W or NW

– Southerly, Nocturnal Low Level Jet (NLLJ)• “Aloft” transport at night !!!

• 100s of miles

• SW to NE – a “jet” of air funneled between the Atlantic Ocean and the Appalachian Mountains

Where Does Our Ozone Come From?There are Four Distinct Parts

Will Regional Controls Work?

2 1 25

18

23

77

50

13

8

30

15

62 2

2 3 5 10

28

51

128

178191

199

229

244250 252 254

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1995 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

0

50

100

150

200

250Number of Units

Cumulative Total Units 1.92

1.22

0.59 0.520.38

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

1990 2000 2005 2008 2009

Year

Ozo

ne S

easo

n N

OX (

mil

lio

n t

on

s) .

1.92

1.22

0.59 0.520.38

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

1990 2000 2005 2008 2009

Year

Ozo

ne

Sea

son

NO

X (

mil

lio

n t

on

s) .

• Case study – 2004 NOx SIP Call

• The classic ozone transport story

– Incoming ozone levels (as high as 80 ppb) collect in an elevated reservoir over night

– Real world programs like the NOx SIP call have shown that

• Adding regional controls

• Results in regional NOx emission reductions …

• Which lead to reduced ozone in the elevated reservoir …

• Which lead to lower ozone at ground level and public health protection!

• Case study – 2004 NOx SIP Call

• The classic ozone transport story

– Incoming ozone levels (as high as 80 ppb) collect in an elevated reservoir over night

– Real world programs like the NOx SIP call have shown that

• Adding regional controls

• Results in regional NOx emission reductions …

• Which lead to reduced ozone in the elevated reservoir …

• Which lead to lower ozone at ground level and public health protection!

80 ppb at 2

000 ft.

at 6 a.m

.

Morning Elevated Reservoir of Ozone Above the OTR

Huge Investment in SCRs in 2003 and

2004

Regional NOx Emissions Drop

Dramatically in 2004

Ozone Levels in the Elevated Reservoir

Reduced by 25% after 2004

Ground Level Ozone Drops Dramatically in the Same Time

FrameMaryland's 8-Hour Ozone Design Value per Year

60

80

100

120

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

8-Ho

ur O

zone

Des

ign

Valu

e (p

pb)

8-Hour Ozone Design Value (ppb) 8-Hour Ozone Standard (85 ppb)8-Hour Ozone Standard (75 ppb)

The Path Forward• We understand the science of ozone

better than ever

• We’ve implemented programs that have worked in the real world

• We need a two-part strategy– Local (Baltimore and Washington)

controls are still critical • Can help reduce about 1/3 of the ozone

problem in most OTC cities

– National/super-regional controls are now essential to reduce transport

• Incoming ozone is already measured at levels above the 75 ppb standard

• Regional contribution represents approximately 2/3 (or more) of the ozone problem in most OTC cities

Will This Strategy Get Us to 75 ppb?

19

PRELIMINARY OTCMODELING,

“SCENARIO 4,”GENERALLY GETS

US TO THE 75 PPB STANDARD

Benefits Outside ofthe OTR are

even More Dramatic

Before After

Potential Transport Actions• A group of Mid-Atlantic and Northeast states

have been working together to push for a clear action plan to address transport– A great deal of frustration

• Earlier efforts by EPA have fallen short or ended up in Court

• Clean Air Act “Tools” that are in the works:– Pushing & supporting federal measures

– Making recommendations for very large nonattainment areas (Section 107)

– Challenging upwind states’ “Transport SIPs” (the Section 110(a)(2)(D) “Good Neighbor” SIP)

– Filing Section 176A Petition to expand the Ozone Transport Region

– Filing Section 126 petitions against stationary sources

– Creating another “state partnership” effort, like OTAG

“Those of us in the Northeasthave a simple message for our friends upwind:

it is time for you to act. While we haveinvested heavily in cleaning up our power plants

for too long, many states have failed to do the same.This failure threatens the health of our citizens, damages

sensitive ecosystems, and distorts economic activity,” said Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy (D)

in an address at the meeting.

“Let me be clear about this -- our patience has run out.The time to curb these emissions is now. If necessary,

the Northeast states will press this case at the highest levels of our federal government and the highest

courts in our nation,” Malloy said.

ECOS Meeting - June 7, 2012

Working on TransportData through 9/28/2011

• Individual or groups of states – Not OTC – can consider taking action.

• Some states (MD, DE, CT and DC) have already taken action under Sections 107 and 110

• NY, MD, DE, CT, DC, MA, RI and VT are close to filing a petition under Section 176A

Other Transport Activities• EPA’s Proposed Tier 3 and Low Sulfur

Fuel Regulation

– The most important control program left to reduce ground level ozone

• Will dramatically reduce mobile source NOx emissions by 2018

• The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

– Focused on power plants

– Rejected/Vacated by DC Circuit Court

– U.S. Supreme Court case starts December 10, 2013

• EPA Meetings on Transport

– EPA will develop a rule establishing “good neighbor” responsibilities for upwind states

– Will leave “remedy” or “solution” to the states

Pushing Local Controls• Maryland continues to push new local

controls

– Lessons learned from the $2.6 Billion Healthy Air Act

• Moving forward with strengthening regulations

– Tougher controls on distributed generation sources, incinerators, cement kilns, and more

– Multiple new area source control efforts (many through OTC Committees)

• Mobile sources reductions & conformity regulation effort

– Our science tells us that the #1 local emissions to target for reductions is NOx from mobile sources

Reducing Mobile Source Emissions in MD

• Maryland Clean Cars program

– Last update just approved

• EPA’s Tier 3 and Low Sulfur Fuel program

– Critical to Maryland

– Largest NOx emission reducing program left

– Support from many – including Maryland

• Maryland’s Long Range Planning Targets for Transportation Planning Regulation

– Briefed AQCAC several times already

– Designed to further reduce NOx emissions from local (Baltimore and Washington) mobile sources

– Still controversial

• Electric Vehicle Initiatives

Stationary (Smokestack) Sources• Power Plants

– The topic of today’s meeting

– Have seen huge NOx, SO2 and mercury reductions from the Healthy Air Act

– That said, were working to address several issues that need to be addressed

• Short-term emissions

• Plant-by-plant controls

• Distributed generation sources

– Focus on making sure that behind the meter units that run as part of demand response programs are clean – bad timing

• Cement kilns

• More …

New Regional Control Efforts

• MDE works with 13 other states that are part of the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) to evaluate and develop model rules or model programs for priority categories

• Current efforts include:

– Consumer Products

– Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings

– Solvent Degreasing

– Demand Response

– Asphalt Paving

– Ports

– Idling

– More …

Priorities• Highest Priority

– Transport

• Highest Priority for Local Control

– Mobile sources• Tier 3/LSF

• EV initiatives

• Long Range Planning Target for Transportation Planning Regulation

• Second Highest Priority for Local Control

– Power Plants

– Distributed Generation sources

• Other Priorities– All other initiatives

Implementing the New SO2 Standard

A Different Kind of Standard• New SO2 standard is very different:

– Focus is on ambient air quality in areas around and impacted by larger stationary sources

• Other standards, such as ozone and PM:

– Linked to diverse set of sources• Power plants, cars, and many other

sources

– High levels can be found anywhere across a broad region

• This standard shines a spotlight on power plants and other large stationary sources of SO2 – and requires us to look at exposures close to the source

The EPA Process• Standard finalized in 2010

• 2011 - EPA issues draft guidance that based nonattainment designations primarily on modeling analyses

– Linked to the source-specific nature of the standard

• 2012 – EPA has a series of discussions and meetings

– Multiple stakeholders involved

• Early 2013 – EPA releases a strategy paper and technical assistance documents that moved away from the modeling focused approach

– Now proposing a “hybrid” approach that could include monitoring and/or modeling

The Hybrid Approach for Designations

• Basic pieces:

– The role for modeling

– The role for monitoring

– Early action alternative to avoid a nonattainment “designation” all together

• Expect legal challenges

• Maryland plans to use the early action alternative to insure expeditious public health protection

Hybrid Approach – The Schedule

• 2013 – Earliest time for states to take action– The early action option in EPA strategy

• 2016 – Modeling protocols for states choosing to use modeling to support designations

• 2017 – Monitoring operating for states that choose to use monitors to support designations – Need 3 years of data to support designations

• Designations– Never – If using early action provisions

– If modeling path chosen – as early as 2017

– If monitoring path chosen – as early as 2020

• State Implementation Plans (SIPs) due:– 2019 for modeling path

– 2022 for monitoring path

• Controls would be required in the 2020 to 2023 timeframe as part of the SIPs

Implementation in Maryland

• All of Maryland’s coal fired power plants will need to be analyzed, and if necessary, controlled to comply with this new standard

• To use the early attainment alternative, states must work with sources to:– Review emissions and controls

– Establish appropriate short-term SO2 emission limits

– Model to show that those emissions will not cause exceedances of the new standard

– Add controls if the modeling shows that additional controls are necessary

Maryland’s 2013 Power Plant Regulations

• Power plants are critical emission sources for both the new ozone and sulfur dioxide standards

• For ozone, Maryland must update it’s power plant regulations by July of 2014

• For SO2, states may work to take early action and insure attainment as early as 2013

• Maryland plans to adopt multi-pollutant power plant regulations in 2014 to comply with the two new standards

Proposed Regulatory Schedule

• Earlier 2013– Preliminary discussions with interested

stakeholders

• October 21, 2013– First formal stakeholder meeting

• November 2013 to April 2014– Additional stakeholder meetings and

discussions

• April/May 2014– Proposed Regulation to Maryland Air

Quality Control Advisory Council (AQCAC)

• July 2014– Regulation fully adopted

– RACT SIP submitted to EPA

Questions?