Miscellaneous Stuff William Harnett WESTAR Spring Meeting April 3, 2007

WESTAR PSD Recommendations Recommendation 1: ….WESTAR recommends that EPA promulgate the significant impact levels for Class I, II, and III areas that are contained in EPA’s 1996 proposed PSD rule. (Under consideration) Recommendation 1: ….WESTAR recommends that EPA promulgate the significant impact levels for Class I, II, and III areas that are contained in EPA’s 1996 proposed PSD rule. (Under consideration) Recommendation 2: WESTAR recommends that permitting authorities conduct Periodic Review of increment consumption, and that Periodic Reviews be implemented using a “tiered” approach with the rigor and cycle of analysis tied to increment consumption conditions in the air quality planning area. (Not for EPA action) Recommendation 2: WESTAR recommends that permitting authorities conduct Periodic Review of increment consumption, and that Periodic Reviews be implemented using a “tiered” approach with the rigor and cycle of analysis tied to increment consumption conditions in the air quality planning area. (Not for EPA action) Recommendation 3: …WESTAR recommends that EPA, with input from WESTAR, prepare guidelines that delineate both the geographic scope and the categories of sources that should be included in emissions inventories and how they should be included for use in PSD program implementation. (Under evaluation and consideration) Recommendation 3: …WESTAR recommends that EPA, with input from WESTAR, prepare guidelines that delineate both the geographic scope and the categories of sources that should be included in emissions inventories and how they should be included for use in PSD program implementation. (Under evaluation and consideration)

WESTAR PSD Recommendations Recommendation 4: WESTAR recommends that EPA, with input from WESTAR, develop a menu of emissions calculation approaches and guiding principles for use when preparing emissions inventories for cumulative PSD increment analyses. (To be addressed in upcoming rulemaking) Recommendation 4: WESTAR recommends that EPA, with input from WESTAR, develop a menu of emissions calculation approaches and guiding principles for use when preparing emissions inventories for cumulative PSD increment analyses. (To be addressed in upcoming rulemaking) Recommendation 5: WESTAR recommends EPA take immediate steps to address the ambiguity that exists regarding the regulatory basis for conducting or not conducting an Air Quality Related Values cumulative analysis. (Under consideration) Recommendation 5: WESTAR recommends EPA take immediate steps to address the ambiguity that exists regarding the regulatory basis for conducting or not conducting an Air Quality Related Values cumulative analysis. (Under consideration) Recommendation 6: WESTAR recognizes the FLAG guidance as a useful tool supporting AQRV impact analyses provided that expectations around the use of threshold values are clarified acceptably. (Not for EPA action) Recommendation 6: WESTAR recognizes the FLAG guidance as a useful tool supporting AQRV impact analyses provided that expectations around the use of threshold values are clarified acceptably. (Not for EPA action)

WESTAR PSD Recommendations Recommendation 7: WESTAR recommends that an explicit consultation relationship be established between States and FLMs to develop policy approaches for the use of “critical loads” information for pollutants in Class I areas. (Not for EPA action) Recommendation 7: WESTAR recommends that an explicit consultation relationship be established between States and FLMs to develop policy approaches for the use of “critical loads” information for pollutants in Class I areas. (Not for EPA action) Recommendation 8: WESTAR recommends that modeled indications of increment violations associated with PSD Major Source permit actions should be addressed in a manner that provides time to refine models to ensure accurate results, but would ultimately result in denial of the permit application in the absence of mitigation measures adequate to address impacts that could be directly attributed to the proposed source. (Under consideration) Recommendation 8: WESTAR recommends that modeled indications of increment violations associated with PSD Major Source permit actions should be addressed in a manner that provides time to refine models to ensure accurate results, but would ultimately result in denial of the permit application in the absence of mitigation measures adequate to address impacts that could be directly attributed to the proposed source. (Under consideration) Recommendation 9: WESTAR recommends that EPA adopt a tiered response process to provide permitting authorities flexibility to address formal findings of increment violations identified during Periodic Review or a permitting action. (Under consideration) Recommendation 9: WESTAR recommends that EPA adopt a tiered response process to provide permitting authorities flexibility to address formal findings of increment violations identified during Periodic Review or a permitting action. (Under consideration)

WESTAR PSD Recommendations Recommendation 10: WESTAR recommends that a tiered response system should be developed to provide permitting authorities flexibility to address adverse AQRV impacts identified during AQRV impact analyses. (Under evaluation and consideration) Recommendation 10: WESTAR recommends that a tiered response system should be developed to provide permitting authorities flexibility to address adverse AQRV impacts identified during AQRV impact analyses. (Under evaluation and consideration) Recommendation 11: WESTAR recommends that proven, new technical tools and emissions data should be used when they become available for future analysis involving evaluating and planning air quality management. However, fair and equitable approaches must be sought when addressing increment exceedances associated with revised assumptions and/or techniques. (EPA concurs) Recommendation 11: WESTAR recommends that proven, new technical tools and emissions data should be used when they become available for future analysis involving evaluating and planning air quality management. However, fair and equitable approaches must be sought when addressing increment exceedances associated with revised assumptions and/or techniques. (EPA concurs) Recommendation 12: WESTAR recommends that EPA explicitly acknowledge the roles that ambient monitoring information can play in PSD program implementation. (Under evaluation and consideration) Recommendation 12: WESTAR recommends that EPA explicitly acknowledge the roles that ambient monitoring information can play in PSD program implementation. (Under evaluation and consideration)

WESTAR PSD Recommendations Recommendation 13: WESTAR recommends that States and FLMs should recognize the importance of, and work to improve where necessary, communication, coordination, and public notification expectations and procedures associated with PSD permitting activities. Such expectations and procedures are crucial to an effective working relationship between the FLMs and each unique State. (Not for EPA Action) Recommendation 13: WESTAR recommends that States and FLMs should recognize the importance of, and work to improve where necessary, communication, coordination, and public notification expectations and procedures associated with PSD permitting activities. Such expectations and procedures are crucial to an effective working relationship between the FLMs and each unique State. (Not for EPA Action) Recommendation 14: In the context of single source permit and Periodic Review inter-jurisdictional emissions impacts, WESTAR encourages States to consult early and often and agree in advance on modeling protocols to enable consistency between the States in performing the analyses and to ensure equity in application of the analysis. WESTAR further recommends EPA take steps to ensure EPA Regions, in partnership with States and FLMs, operate consistently among themselves in inter-jurisdictional contexts and develop data and methods that will better enable inter-jurisdictional analysis. (Partially to be addressed in upcoming rulemaking) Recommendation 14: In the context of single source permit and Periodic Review inter-jurisdictional emissions impacts, WESTAR encourages States to consult early and often and agree in advance on modeling protocols to enable consistency between the States in performing the analyses and to ensure equity in application of the analysis. WESTAR further recommends EPA take steps to ensure EPA Regions, in partnership with States and FLMs, operate consistently among themselves in inter-jurisdictional contexts and develop data and methods that will better enable inter-jurisdictional analysis. (Partially to be addressed in upcoming rulemaking)

Upcoming Key NSR Regulatory Actions and Court Decisions Supreme Court Decision in Duke Energy Case Supreme Court Decision in Duke Energy Case Supreme Court response to cert request on ERP Supreme Court response to cert request on ERP Response to Court Decision on PTE Response to Court Decision on PTE Proposal of SILs and SMCs for PM2.5 Proposal of SILs and SMCs for PM2.5 Supplemental proposal on emission test for EGUs Supplemental proposal on emission test for EGUs Proposal on PSD Modeling procedures. Proposal on PSD Modeling procedures.

Upcoming Key NSR Regulatory Actions and Court Decisions Final action on Federal Major/Minor NSR for tribal lands Final action on Federal Major/Minor NSR for tribal lands Final action on major source definition and corn milling operations Final action on major source definition and corn milling operations Final action on debottlenecking, aggregation and project netting Final action on debottlenecking, aggregation and project netting Final action on the scope of monitoring for State and Federal operating permits Final action on the scope of monitoring for State and Federal operating permits

Title V Task Force Planned Rules Rulemaking on three specific recommendations Rulemaking on three specific recommendations Allowing alternative forms of public notice Allowing alternative forms of public notice Excluding I.E.U. from permit Excluding I.E.U. from permit Possible additions to allowed list of administrative and minor permit revisions Possible additions to allowed list of administrative and minor permit revisions Petition process rulemaking Petition process rulemaking Recognize flaws in current process Recognize flaws in current process Considering possible improvements via rule Considering possible improvements via rule

Exceptional Events SAFE-TEA-LU revised section 319 of the Act requiring EPA to propose a rule on exceptional events by March 1, 2006, and to finalize the rule within 1 year of the proposal. SAFE-TEA-LU revised section 319 of the Act requiring EPA to propose a rule on exceptional events by March 1, 2006, and to finalize the rule within 1 year of the proposal. Exceptional events rule was proposed on March 10, 2006 (See 71 FR 12592). Exceptional events rule was proposed on March 10, 2006 (See 71 FR 12592). Final rule signed by the Administrator on March 14, Final rule signed by the Administrator on March 14, 2007.

Rule addresses the following issues: Definition and applicability Definition and applicability Procedures for exceptional events, including natural events, flagging, notification and demonstrations to support exclusion of data Procedures for exceptional events, including natural events, flagging, notification and demonstrations to support exclusion of data Actions to protect public health (mitigation efforts) Actions to protect public health (mitigation efforts) Treatment of wildland fires Treatment of wildland fires How prescribed fire issues may qualify as an exceptional event How prescribed fire issues may qualify as an exceptional event How to address data impacted by emissions from fireworks How to address data impacted by emissions from fireworks

Timelines Required by the Rule Flagging Data Flagging Data All flags should be reported to EPA prior to July 1st of the year following the event. All flags should be reported to EPA prior to July 1st of the year following the event. Submittal of demonstrations: Submittal of demonstrations: Full demonstrations should be submitted to EPA within 3 years of the event (to support annual average determinations). Full demonstrations should be submitted to EPA within 3 years of the event (to support annual average determinations). However, demonstrations must be submitted no later than 12 months prior to any nonattainment decision for an area However, demonstrations must be submitted no later than 12 months prior to any nonattainment decision for an area The rule requires States to submit full documentation for events annually (by July 1st) for exceedances of the short term NAAQS. The rule requires States to submit full documentation for events annually (by July 1st) for exceedances of the short term NAAQS. Special schedule for data that may impact the upcoming 24-hour PM 2.5 designations. Special schedule for data that may impact the upcoming 24-hour PM 2.5 designations. The rule also states that special circumstances related to EPA regulatory determinations may call for expedited submittal of data, flagging of data, and submittal of documentation related to exceptional events. The rule also states that special circumstances related to EPA regulatory determinations may call for expedited submittal of data, flagging of data, and submittal of documentation related to exceptional events.

State Demonstrations In Support of Flagged Data The demonstration must show a “clear causal relationship” between the affected data and the event. The demonstration must show a “clear causal relationship” between the affected data and the event. Under the rule there are no specific requirements concerning the contents of the State’s demonstration. Under the rule there are no specific requirements concerning the contents of the State’s demonstration. It is a case-by-case submittal with an emphasis on weight-of-evidence. It is a case-by-case submittal with an emphasis on weight-of-evidence. Demonstrations should generally include documentation showing: Demonstrations should generally include documentation showing: The event occurred and emissions related to the event were transported in the direction of violating monitor, The event occurred and emissions related to the event were transported in the direction of violating monitor, Size of the affected area, Size of the affected area, Relationship in time between event, transport of emissions, and recorded concentrations, and Relationship in time between event, transport of emissions, and recorded concentrations, and Pollutant species-specific information supporting causal relationship, if appropriate. Pollutant species-specific information supporting causal relationship, if appropriate. Types of data that states could employ: Types of data that states could employ: Satellite images, Satellite images, Surface measurement data, Surface measurement data, Monitoring data from one or more downwind monitors, Monitoring data from one or more downwind monitors, Chemical composition analysis from speciation monitors or laboratory analysis of filters, and Chemical composition analysis from speciation monitors or laboratory analysis of filters, and Meteorological data and historical record. Meteorological data and historical record.

Mitigation of Exceptional Events on the Public The rule calls for States to provide: The rule calls for States to provide: Prompt public notification that an event is occurring or is expected to occur. Prompt public notification that an event is occurring or is expected to occur. Public education on how to reduce individual exposures to air pollution due to an event. Public education on how to reduce individual exposures to air pollution due to an event. Implementation of reasonable measures to protect public health. Implementation of reasonable measures to protect public health. This could include mitigation of significant contributing anthropogenic sources, if present, or otherwise minimizing or abating public health impacts. This could include mitigation of significant contributing anthropogenic sources, if present, or otherwise minimizing or abating public health impacts. States have significant flexibility on how to mitigate the impact of emissions from exceptional event on the public with this requirement under the rule. States have significant flexibility on how to mitigate the impact of emissions from exceptional event on the public with this requirement under the rule. Review and decision on flagged data are independent of mitigation efforts. Review and decision on flagged data are independent of mitigation efforts.

Fireworks Fireworks are not explicitly covered by section 319 or this rulemaking. Fireworks are not explicitly covered by section 319 or this rulemaking. However, under the rule EPA will treat certain types of firework events in a manner similar to exceptional events in terms of excluding the data. However, under the rule EPA will treat certain types of firework events in a manner similar to exceptional events in terms of excluding the data. Specifically, where States can show that the use of fireworks displays are integral to significant traditional national, ethnic, or other cultural events (e.g., 4th of July celebrations, Chinese New Year), under the rule EPA states that air quality data associated with such events can be excluded from regulatory determinations. Specifically, where States can show that the use of fireworks displays are integral to significant traditional national, ethnic, or other cultural events (e.g., 4th of July celebrations, Chinese New Year), under the rule EPA states that air quality data associated with such events can be excluded from regulatory determinations. For such events, public health protection efforts must also be taken. For such events, public health protection efforts must also be taken.

The Treatment of Wildland & Prescribed Fire The rule states that wildfires or “wildland fire use fires” will be treated as natural events. The rule states that wildfires or “wildland fire use fires” will be treated as natural events. Prescribed fires managed for resources benefits may, under certain circumstances, qualify as exceptional events: Prescribed fires managed for resources benefits may, under certain circumstances, qualify as exceptional events: “Unlikely to recur at the same location” and “not reasonably controllable or preventable,” “Unlikely to recur at the same location” and “not reasonably controllable or preventable,” Where a state certifies that a smoke management plan was in place or basic smoke management practices are employed, or Where a state certifies that a smoke management plan was in place or basic smoke management practices are employed, or Fires not meeting the definition of an exceptional event will continue to be addressed by the Wildland and Prescribed Fire Policy. Fires not meeting the definition of an exceptional event will continue to be addressed by the Wildland and Prescribed Fire Policy. EPA will start the process for revising the Wildland and Prescribed Fire Policy later this year. In a letter from EPA to the USDA we agreed to complete the revision of the policy within 16 months of rule promulgation. EPA will start the process for revising the Wildland and Prescribed Fire Policy later this year. In a letter from EPA to the USDA we agreed to complete the revision of the policy within 16 months of rule promulgation.