Www.hunton.com Class I Air Quality Related Values Kevin J. Finto Hunton & Williams APPA Energy and Air Quality Task Force Washington, D.C. March 10, 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
FOIA and NEPA Federal Highway Administration Environmental Conference June 2006.
Advertisements

FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS’ AQRV WORKGROUP (FLAG): CONSTRUCTING A CONSISTENT PROCESS.
1 Air Quality Impact Analysis and Other PSD Requirements Donald Law U.S. EPA Region 8.
Status of Exceptional Events Implementation Guidance Janet McCabe Deputy Assistant Administrator US EPA, Office of Air and Radiation WESTAR Spring Meeting.
Water Allocation and Protection of the Environment: Is a Collaborative Approach Possible? William E. Cox Professor of Civil Engineering Virginia Tech.
National Park Service U. S. Forest Service Bureau of Land Management U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service.
Deciding How To Apply NEPA Environmental Assessments Findings of No Significant Impact Environmental Impact Statements.
Working with State and Federal Regulatory and Land Management Agencies Trent Wickman USDA Forest Service Eastern Region, Lakes States.
AIR QUALITY for the Interagency Wilderness Fire Resource Advisor 2011 SOUTHERN AREA ADVANCED FIRE AND AVIATION ACADEMY Discussion Topics: Very Brief Overview.
US FOREST SERVICE REGIONAL ROUNDTABLE Planning Rule Revision Photographer: Bill Lea.
IOWA Department of Natural Resources Air Quality Program Development Jim McGraw Environmental Program Supervisor  8 hr Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation.
Is NEPA Preventing Energy Development? Bryan Hannegan, Ph.D. Associate Director – Energy and Transportation White House Council on Environmental Quality.
1 Overview of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)  Objective: Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated Rulemaking Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated.
Building Strong! 1 US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Kimberly McLaughlin Program Manager Headquarters Operations and Regulatory Community of.
Agency Drafts Statement of Scope Governor Approves Statement of Scope (2) No Agency Drafts: Special Report for rules impacting housing
The Endangered Species Act: Species Listings and Implications for Development in Alaska Presented by: Cherise Oram Stoel Rives LLP.
What is the purpose of the Class I Redesignation Guidance? Provides guidance for tribes who are considering redesignating their areas as Class I areas.
SIP Steering Committee Meeting March 29,  In October 2011, EPA issued draft SIP and modeling guidance related to the 1-hour SO2 standard issued.
Air Quality Policy Division D P A Q PM 2.5 Final NSR Implementation Rule Nat’l Tribal Air Assoc. July 16, 2008.
Insert graphic on title master CURRENT ISSUES IN BACT Kevin J. Finto Hunton & Williams June 28, 2006 APPA New Generation Meeting: Anticipating new permitting.
Tribal Perspective and Engagement: Regional Haze Planning March 2015 Regional Haze Planning Meeting – TEAM.
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
Distinguishing: Clean Air Act, EPA Rules, Regulations and Guidance David Cole U.S. EPA, OAQPS Research Triangle Park, NC.
NEW COAL-BASED POWER PLANT PERMITTING Kevin J. Finto Hunton & Williams APPA New Generation: Emerging Technologies and Financing San Antonio,
U N I T E D S T A T E S D E P A R T M E N T O F C O M M E R C E N A T I O N A L O C E A N I C A N D A T M O S P H E R I C A D M I N I S T R A T I O N State.
EPA’s DRAFT SIP and MODELING GUIDANCE Ian Cohen EPA Region 1 December 8, 2011.
REGIONAL HAZE BART – Key Issues For Consideration Eric Massey, Arizona DEQ Lee Alter, WGA SSJF Meeting June 3, 2004 Denver, Colorado.
1 EPA’s Climate Change Strategy Robert J. Meyers Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation December 3, 2007.
Regulatory Requirements For Modeling. Air Quality Model Estimates Developing Air Pollution Control Plans Assessment of Environmental Impacts Projecting.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permit Training Other Aspects of PSD Title V Permitting.
Recent PSD Experiences in SWRO Regulatory & Statutory Requirements Relationship with EPA Federal Land Managers - FLAG Appeals.
FLAG, Policy Overview 15 December 1999 Presenter - Bruce Bayle USDA/Forest Service.
1 Exceptional Events Rulemaking Proposal General Overview March 1, 2006 US EPA.
VISIBILITY ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS’ AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUES WORKGROUP.
FLMs, PSD Increment, and AQRVs: the Oregon experience WESTAR Fall Technical Conference Seattle September 2003 Philip Allen, Oregon DEQ.
WESTAR 2003 Fall Technical Conference on PSD Increment Tracking & Cumulative Effects Modeling Seattle, Washington Conducting Class I Area Increment Analyses.
Proposed Revisions to the Guideline on Air Quality Models
Life After Class I Natalene Cummings Air Program Director Forest County Potawatomi NTF 2011.
1 Modeling Under PSD Air quality models (screening and refined) are used in various ways under the PSD program. Step 1: Significant Impact Analysis –Use.
Effects Analysis and Comparison. Objectives Accurately determine which impacts need to be evaluated in the land use plan. Develop a matrix comparing the.
Identifying the Role of Government in Forest Management.
PSD Permitting Process Nancy Mayer EPA OAQPS. 2 Topics Find technical resources for permit review Describe how permits are constructed Describe what to.
ANPR Tutorial U.S. Chamber of Commerce October 30, EPA Regulation of CO 2 William L. Kovacs, Vice President Environment, Technology & Regulatory.
Exceptional Events and Fire Policy Presented by Don Hodge, U.S. EPA Region 9 Interagency Air and Smoke Council meeting May 2, 2012 Disclaimer: Positions.
VISIBILITY SIPS The Regional Haze Rule Requirements for Fire The Role of the RPOs Opportunities for Participation US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Dennis Haddow.
OAQPS Update WESTAR Fall Meeting October 2, 2008.
Renewable Energy in California: Implementing the Governors Renewable Energy Executive Order California Energy Commission Department of Fish and Game Fish.
WESTAR 2003 Fall Technical Conference Introduction to Class I Area Impact Analyses September 16, 2003 John Bunyak National Park Service.
Air Quality and Seney National Wildlife Refuge Jill Webster June 14, 2007.
OAQPS Update WESTAR April 3,  On March 12, 2008, EPA significantly strengthened the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level.
Protective Agencies Natural Resources Unit Nontraditional Agriculture.
N EW Y ORK S TATE D EPARTMENT OF E NVIRONMENTAL C ONSERVATION Short Term Ambient Air Quality Standards and The Effect on Permitting Margaret Valis NESCAUM,
Miscellaneous Stuff William Harnett WESTAR Spring Meeting April 3, 2007.
Western States / EPA Exceptional Events Meeting February 25-26, 2009.
Final Rulemaking: 25 Pa. Code Chapters 121 and 139 Measurement and Reporting of Condensable Particulate Matter Emissions Environmental Quality Board Meeting.
EPA Region 10 Cumulative Effects Analysis Methodology Development Rob Wilson and Herman Wong WESTAR Fall Technical Conference September 16, 2003.
David Klemp State of Montana
WESTAR Increment Recommendations
Attribution Of Haze Case Study for Nevada Jarbidge Wilderness Area
DNR’s Smoke management Plan Update: Options, Tradeoffs, and Challenges
Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality Water Resources Division
Attribution Of Haze Case Study for Nevada Jarbidge Wilderness Area
WESTAR Business Meeting April 7, 2004 Tempe, Arizona
Natural Resources Unit Nontraditional Agriculture
John Bunyak National Park Service
Exceptional and Natural Events Rulemaking
Western Regional Haze Planning and
Status of Exceptional Events Implementation Guidance
Uinta Basin General Conformity
Federal EIS Air Quality Analysis
Presentation transcript:

Class I Air Quality Related Values Kevin J. Finto Hunton & Williams APPA Energy and Air Quality Task Force Washington, D.C. March 10, 2005

The Problem Obtain A PSD permit must To obtain an permit, must show compliance with increment and protection of air quality related values in Class I areas. Class I areas are National Parks, Wilderness Areas, Monuments and Wildlife Refuge described in 40 CFR (e) and listed in FLAG. Air quality related values include visibility, soils and vegetation and endangered species

The Problem Obtain A PSD permit must Federal Land Manager has primary responsibility for protection of Class I areas States and EPA have to coordinate with FLM but have final decision making role on Class I Areas FLM on one hand and States/EPA on the other use different criteria and have different perspectives Result is confusion, inefficiency and delay

Obtain A PSD permit must Applicant must show emissions will not cause or contribute to Class I increment using modeling and objective criteria. Modeling for ISC3C if Class I area is within 50 km and CALPUFF if Class I area is > 50 km distant. See 40 CFR Part 51 App W. Visibility impairment is modeled as light extinction Background information

Obtain A PSD permit must Class I areas are located throughout the United States and the FLM takes a liberal view of what might affect them. Background information

Obtain A PSD permit must State/EPA must send application to FLM if project emissions may effect a Class I area FLM may comment on project including providing a visibility analysis State/EPA has to consider FLM comments; if State/EPA disagrees, have to explain why in public notice on draft. 1 - Buffer Map of PSD Class I Areas What the Regulations say: 40 CFR (p)

Obtain A PSD permit must State/EPA has to send draft permit to FLM who gets to comment with the public; FLM can make a finding of adverse impact. If modeling shows the project will not cause or contribute to a violation of Class I increment, burden is on FLM to demonstrate adverse impact to AQRVs including visibility. What the Regulations say: 40 CFR (p)

Obtain A PSD permit must If State/EPA concurs with FLM, it shall not issue the permit. State/EPA may issue the permit over FLM adverse finding if State/EPA determines that project emissions will not result in an adverse impact to AQRVs including visibility. FLM can appeal such a determination as any other citizen. 1 - Buffer Map of PSD Class I Areas What the Regulations say: 40 CFR (p)

Obtain A PSD permit must “Adverse Impact to Visibility” Visibility impairment which interferes with the management, protection, preservation or enjoyment of the visitor’s visual experience of the Federal Class I area… Visibility impairment means any humanly perceptible change in visibility (light extinction, visual range, contrast, coloration) from that which would have existed under natural conditions. What the Regulations say: 40 CFR 52.21(b)(29)

Obtain A PSD permit must …This determination must be made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the geographic extent, intensity, duration, frequency and time of visibility impairment, and how these factors correlate with (1) times of visitor use of the Federal Class I area, and 2) the frequency and timing of natural conditions that reduce visibility. What the Regulations say: 40 CFR 52.21(b)(29)

Obtain A PSD permit must In a nutshell, the determination is Case-by-case; considers frequency, extent and intensity of visibility impairment considers geographic extent of vista considers timing of impairment relative to visitation considers natural factors that impair visibility((e.g. weather). What the Regulations say

Obtain A PSD permit must FLAG = Federal Land Managers Air Quality Related Values Workgroup FLM is the Secretary of Interior (Deputy Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks) and Secretary of Agriculture Implementing Agencies are U.S Forest Service, U.S Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service. Agencies developed guidance to promote consistency and manage expectations. What is FLAG?

Obtain A PSD permit must FLAG provides guidance on visibility modeling acid deposition ozone modeling Best Available Control Technology What FLAG says.

Obtain A PSD permit must As to visibility See flow chart on page vi If single source will contribute to impairment > 10% extinction FLM is likely to object If source contributes > 0.4% to cumulative impact > 10 % extinction FLM likely to object If single source contributes < 5% extinction FLM is not likely to object. What FLAG says.

Obtain A PSD permit must If single source contributes 10% extinction FLM is not likely to object. FLAG recommends very conservative assumptions in CALPUFF modeling FLAG uses a very pristine definition of natural background. What FLAG says.

Obtain A PSD permit must Rigid application of FLAG is not case- by case (and is unlawful also because it uses guidance as a rule). Site Specific refinements in modeling make the predictions more accurate. Meteorological data Ammonia Relative humidity Background visibility Differences between FLAG and Regulations

Obtain A PSD permit must Regulations allow consideration of weather events that are reflected in modeling parameters (fog, rain). Regulations allow for comparison of time of visibility extinction to visitation times (e.g. modeling may show low visibility at night due to high relative humidity but park is closed then anyway). Although light extinction may be based on 100 km vistas, park may not have vista more than a few kilometers Differences between FLAG and Regulations

Obtain A PSD permit must Science is still developing on what level of light extinction is detectable. FLAG threshold of 5% is conservative. More recent science suggests 20% might be more reasonable. There is no special role for FLMs in BACT analysis Difficulty with deposition analysis, ozone modeling and endangered species ( a whole other symposium). Differences between FLAG and Regulations

Obtain A PSD permit must Executive Oversight. (letter in Round- up) Agency Rulemaking Congressional Oversight/ Legislation (Clear Skies) Judicial decisions Fixes