Workshop H How Changes to U.S. EPA’s Guideline on Air Quality Models Could Affect Permit Modeling in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana Tuesday, March 21, 2017 11:15 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
Biographical Information George J. Schewe, CCM, QEP, Principal Consultant Trinity Consultants, 1717 Dixie Hwy. S. Ste. 900, Covington, KY 41011 859-341-8100 FAX: 859-341-1021 gschewe@trinityconsultants.com Mr. Schewe is a Certified Consulting Meteorologist as well as a Qualified Environmental Professional who has over 40 years of dispersion modeling and air quality management experience in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio. He has prepared permit applications, interfaced with state agencies, prepared overall air quality impact assessments as well as regulatory review requirements, prepared additional impacts analyses, and modeled both criteria and toxic chemical releases to assess potential air impacts. He has contributed to a wide variety of environmental assessment studies including Prevention of Significant Deterioration, non-attainment area net emission modeling, state and federal air toxics analyses and risk assessments, RACT and BACT assessments, and State Implementation Plan (SIP) preparation. He has used modeling approaches for emergency as well as routine releases of air contaminants. He has prepared modeling studies covering plantwide point-source emissions as well as plantwide fugitives from roadways, materials handling, waste and scrap areas or other process related fugitive emissions. While with the U.S. EPA, he performed dispersion modeling in support of emission standards development and helped develop and improve industrial source dispersion models. He has conducted numerous workshops, seminars, and technical classes over the past 25 years for the U.S. EPA - Air Pollution Training Institute, Ohio EPA, and the Dayton Regional Air Pollution Control (RAPCA). Christopher P. Beekman, Environmental Specialist II Ohio EPA, Division of Air Pollution Control, 50 West Town Street, Columbus, OH 43215 (614) 644-3597 Fax: (614) 644-3681 christopher.beekman@epa.ohio.gov Mr. Beekman works in the State Implementation Section of the Ohio EPA, Division of Air Pollution Control. His primary duties include dispersion modeling in support of air quality permits and State Implementation Plans, as well as the statistical analyses of various air quality issues in the State of Ohio. He serves as the primary contact for the NOx Budget Trading Program, Cross State Air Pollution Rule, and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. Chris has been with the Ohio EPA for five years. Prior to working for the Ohio EPA, Chris served as a Chemistry lecturer for The Ohio State University. He has his Bachelor of Science in Chemistry and Environmental Science from Muskingum University, and his Doctoral degree in Environmental Science from The Ohio State University. David J. Long, P.E, Environmental Engineer / Principal in the Air Quality Services Section of Environmental Services, American Electric Power Service Corporation 1 Riverside Plaza, Columbus, OH 43215 614-716-1245 Fax: 614-716-2255 djlong@aep.com Mr. Long has over 35 years of experience in various aspects of environmental management and compliance in the utility industry. He is currently responsible for supporting air quality compliance and permitting activities at several company facilities in the states of Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois, as well being the technical lead in the areas of air quality modeling and ambient monitoring in support of AEP System facilities across the eleven state American Electric Power System. Mr. Long currently serves as Chair of the Atmospheric Processes Division of the Air and Waste Management Association and is active on several utility industry committees in the area of ambient air quality and air quality modeling. Mr. Long holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Mechanical Engineering from the West Virginia University Institute of Technology and a Master of Science Degree in Environmental Studies from the West Virginia College of Graduate Studies, now a part of Marshall University. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the states of West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana, and a member of the Air and Waste Management Association, and American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Workshop H - How Changes to EPA’s Guideline on Air Quality Models Could Affect Permit Modeling in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana March 21, 2017 – Cincinnati Convention Center David J. Long AEP , Environmental Engineer - Principal George J. Schewe, CCM, QEP Trinity, Principal Meteorologist/Consultant Christopher Beekman Ohio EPA, Specialist III Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Presenters George Schewe Trinity David Long AEP Chris Beekman Ohio EPA Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Agenda for Workshop H ˃ George – overview of changes ˃ Discussion Break ˃ Chris – Change effects in Ohio ˃ Discussion break ˃ David Long – industry observations and concerns with the changes ˃ Roundtable discussion of Guideline changes implications for permitting Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Changes to the Guideline on Air Quality Models – Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51 George Schewe Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
What is the Guideline? A document that directs how acceptable regulatory air quality modeling should be performed. Industry and control agencies have long expressed a need for consistency in the application of air quality models for regulatory purposes. In the 1977 Clean Air Act (CAA), Congress mandated such consistency and encouraged the standardization of model applications. The Guideline on Air Quality Models (hereafter, Guideline) was first published in April 1978 to satisfy these requirements by specifying models and providing guidance for their use. Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Changes to the Guideline on Air Quality Models – Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51 ˃ Signed off December 20, 2016 ˃ Published in Federal Register January 17, 2017 ˃ Overview of the Guideline ˃ How these changes can affect modeling Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
But An Executive Order Put the Brakes on Effective Date! Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Why do we need a guideline? For consistency in regulatory activity U.S. – Clean Air Act 1970 CAA, 1977 CAAA, 1990 CAAA Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
What is the Guideline on Air Quality Models? ˃ 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix W or the Guideline provides direction to EPA, states, tribes, and industry on how to conduct air dispersion modeling ˃ Outlines requirements and recommendations for: SIP revisions, NSR/PSD permitting, and Other regulatory modeling ˃ Appendix W is a legally binding regulation Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Guideline on Air Quality Models – Summary of 2017 FR Version ˃ Some changes streamline modeling process Tier 3 NO 2 as recommended default Incorporation of Buoyant Line Plume into AERMOD Modified ADJ_U* available in AERMET De minimis thresholds for secondary pollutants (MERPs) ˃ Some changes could slow the process Codified requirements for Model Clearinghouse Removal of recommended model for LRT – drops CALPUFF Drops CALINE3 Lack of prescriptive guidance or models for secondary pollutant modeling Some meteorological options not in final version (LowWind) Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
What’s in the Guideline? Guideline provides preferred models ˃ Guideline provides other recommended techniques ˃ Guideline provides guidance for their use in estimating ambient ˃ concentrations of air pollutants Guideline provides models for PSD ˃ Guideline provides enhancements to AERMOD ˃ Guideline provides tiered demonstration approach for secondary chemical ˃ formation of ozone and PM 2.5 Guideline provides change of preferred status and model removal ˃ Guideline provides updated and reorganized information to streamline ˃ compliance assessment process Effective date was February 15, 2017 but has moved by Executive Order to ˃ March 21, 2017 One year transition period for regulatory processes to January 17, 2018 ˃ Three year period for modeling for transportation conformity purposes to ˃ January 17, 2020 Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Background and Preamble ˃ 21 pages of background information, pp 5182-5203 ˃ Does this action apply to me? ˃ Summary of 10 th & 11 th Modeling Conferences ˃ Public Comments on proposed changes ˃ Summary of AERMOD updates ˃ Status of AERSCREEN ˃ Status of CALINE3 Models ˃ Single source ozone and PM 2.5 impacts ˃ Status of CALPUFF ˃ Role of Clearinghouse ˃ Updates to cumulative impact modeling ˃ Updates on meteorology use in regulatory modeling ˃ Summary of editorial changes Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
The Guideline 32 pages of jam-packed information - pp 5203- 5235 Intro 1. Overview of model Use 2. Preferred and Alternative AQ models 3. Models for CO, Pb, SO 2 , NO 2 , PM 2.5 , and PM 10 4. Models for Ozone and Secondarily Formed PM 5. Modeling for AQRVs and other Gov’ Programs 6. General Modeling considerations 7. Model Input Data 8. Regulatory Application of Models 9. 10. References Summary of preferred models А Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well
Recommend
More recommend
