2
 Regulatory Updates
 NAAQS Updates:
 Ozone
 SO
2
 NSPS e-Reporting
 Boiler/RICE MACT updates
 Additional Regulatory Updates
 GHG in Permitting
 Climate Action Plan
 Enforcement Priorities
 Making a Visible Difference in Communities
 SEDC

Air, Pesticides & Toxics Management Division
Beverly H. Banister, Director
Carol L. Kemker, Deputy Director
Jeaneanne M. Gettle, Deputy Director
Immediate Office Staff
Grants and Strategic Planning Office
Air Enforcement
& Toxics Branch
Air Planning &
Implementation
Branch
Scott Davis
Air Analysis and
Support Branch
Gregg Worley Beverly Spagg
North Air
Enforcement and Toxics
Section
Richard Dubose
South Air
Enforcement and Toxics
Section
Todd Russo
Air Permitting
Section
Heather Ceron
Air Regulatory
Management
Section
Lynorae
Benjamin
Air Data and
Analysis Section
Todd Rinck
Communities
Support Section
Amber Davis
Chemical Safety
& Enforcement
Branch
Anthony Toney
Chemical
Management and Emergency
Planning Section
Robert Bookman
Lead & Asbestos
Section
Steve Scofield
Pesticides
Section
Kimberly
Bingham

(as of September 2015)
4
Ozone Lead
Primary
NO
2
Primary SO
2
Secondary
NO
2 and SO
2
Last Review
Completed
(final rule signed)
Mar 2008 Oct 2008 Jan 2010 Jun 2010 Mar 2012
Recent or
Upcoming
Major
Milestone(s) 1
Oct 1, 2015 2
Final rule signed
January 5,
2015
Proposed rule published in
FR
June 2-3, 2015
CASAC meeting to discuss 2 nd draft ISA and
REA Planning document
April 6, 2015
Comment period closed
Aug. 13, 2015
CASAC call to discuss letters on 2 nd draft ISA and REA
Planning
Document
Fall 2015
1 st draft ISA
Fall 2015
Draft IRP
PM
Dec
2012
Dec 2015
Draft IRP
Additional information regarding current and previous NAAQS reviews is available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/
1 IRP – Integrated Review Plan; ISA – Integrated Science Assessment;
REA – Risk and Exposure Assessment; PA – Policy Assessment
3
2 Indicates court-ordered deadline
TBD = to be determined
CO
Aug
2011
TBD 3

5
2015 Final
Ozone Standards
Primary: 70 ppb
Secondary: 70 ppb
 Updated standards
 The Clean Air Act charges the EPA Administrator with setting primary standards that are requisite to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety.

6
 In setting the primary standard, the Administrator:
 Examined the body of scientific evidence on ozone and health
 Evidence expanded significantly since EPA last reviewed the ozone standards in 2008.
 Focused on new studies that have become available since 2008.
 New clinical studies -- provide the most certain evidence of health effects in adults, clearly show ozone at 72 ppb can be harmful to healthy, exercising adults.
 Clinical studies also show effects in some adults following exposures as low as 60 ppb; however, there is uncertainty that these effects are adverse.

7
 The Administrator also reviewed results of analyses of exposure to ozone and looked at how different levels of the standard would reduce risk.
 Analyses take into account how people are exposed to ozone in their daily lives.
 Focused on risks to children, particularly due to repeated exposures to ozone.

8
 Based on the science, the Administrator has determined that the 2008 standard was not adequate to protect public health.
 Revised standard of 70 ppb:
 Is requisite to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety.
 Is below the level shown to cause adverse health effects in the clinical studies.
 Essentially eliminates exposures shown to cause adverse health effects, protecting 99.5 % of children from even single exposures to ozone at 70 ppb.
 Substantially reduces exposures to levels lower than 70 ppb, reducing multiple exposures to 60 ppb by more than 60%.

9
 EPA also is strengthening the secondary
(welfare) standard to 70 ppb.
 New studies add to evidence that repeated exposure to ozone reduces growth and has other harmful effects on plants and trees. These types of effects have the potential to harm ecosystems.

10

11
 Final rule extends ozone monitoring season for 32 states and D.C.
 One month extension for 22 states and D.C.
 Additional extensions of two months to seven months for 10 states, including states where ozone can be elevated during the winter;
 Year-round seasons for all NCore multi-pollutant sites.
 EPA Regional Administrators will still be allowed to approve changes to states’ ozone monitoring seasons without rulemaking.
 Does not affect the CSAPR trading program ozone season (remains May 1 – Sept 1).

12
Effective January 1, 2017
4-10
5-9
5-9
4-9
1-12
1-12
1-12
1-12
4-9
1-9
1-12
1-12
1-12
3-9
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-11
3-11
3-10
3-
10/15
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-11
3-10 3-10
3-10
1-12
3-10
1-12
1-12
4-9
4-9
3-9
NH
RI
MA
CT
3-10
NJ
DE
MD
DC
Season Change
No Change
1-12

13
Designation Schedule
State and Tribe
Recommendations
Schedule
Within 1 year after
NAAQS promulgation
Tentative Date
October 1, 2016
EPA responds to state and tribal recommendations
June 1, 2017
Final Designation Within 2 years after
NAAQS promulgation
(Administrator has discretion to extend the deadline by one year to collect sufficient information.)
October 1, 2017
Effective date may vary.
(Air quality data years: 2014 –
2016)
Implementation Schedule
Infrastructure SIP Within 3 years after
NAAQS promulgation
October 2018
Attainment Plans
Due
Within 36 - 48 months after designations depending on classification
October 2020-2021
Attainment Schedule by Classification
Classification
Marginal
Moderate
Serious
Severe
Schedule*
3 years to attain
6 years to attain
9 years to attain
15 to 17 years to attain
Extreme 20 years to attain
*Areas must attain as expeditiously as practical, but not later than the schedule in the table. Two oneyear extensions are available in certain circumstances based on air quality.

2
 EPA revised primary SO
2
(75 ppb/1-hour) standard on June 3, 2010
 Attainment plans for 29 areas currently designated nonattainment were due April 4, 2015
 5 Areas in Region 4 – none in NC
• Sullivan Co., TN
• Hillsborough, FL
• Nassau, FL
• Campbell Co., KY
• Jefferson Co., KY

15
2
 Consent decree entered on March 2, 2015, by U.S.
District Court for Northern California “triggered” the following deadlines:
 July 2, 2016 - The EPA must complete a round of designations for areas associated with 68 EGUs in 24 states and any undesignated areas with violating monitors
 December 31, 2017 - The EPA must complete an additional round of designations for any area a state has not elected to monitor per the provisions of the DRR starting January 1, 2017
 December 31, 2020 - The EPA must complete all remaining designations (primarily expected to be areas where states have elected to monitor per the provisions of the DRR)
 Plaintiff states have appealed the March 2, 2015 court order, and in a separate action, North Carolina has filed its own designations deadline suit

16
2
 Initial group of designations include:
 Areas with violation of the 2010 SO
2
(based on 2013-2015 data)
NAAQS
 Preliminarily (based on final 2012 – 2014 data):
 Chatham County, Georgia
 Hawaii County, Hawaii
 Iron County, Missouri
 Williams County, North Dakota
 Brown County, Wisconsin
 Carbon County, Wyoming

17
2
 Initial round of designations also includes
:
 Areas where there are sources (electric power plants) that as of March 2, 2015, have not been “announced for retirement,” and meet one of the following emissions thresholds:
 16,000 tons of emitted in 2012 or
 2 ,600 tons of SO mmBtu
2 emitted in 2012 with an average emission rate of at least 0.45 pounds of SO
2 per
 Yields 68 sources in 24 states

18
R4 State County Facility Name
GA
KY
MS
NC
TN
State
IL
IN
Monroe
Ohio
Pulaski
Lamar
Robert W Scherer Power Plant (Plant Scherer)
D B Wilson Generating Station
John S. Cooper Power Station
R D Morrow Senior Generating Plant
Brunswick CPI USA North Carolina Southport
Sumner TVA: Gallatin Fossil Plant
Sources External to R4 that May Be Impacting R4 States
County
Massac
Posey
Jefferson
Facility Name
Joppa Steam Coal Power Plant
A B Brown Generating Station
Clifty Creek Power Plant
Clermont W H Zimmer Generating Station OH
* Source in AL previously included but AL able to provide proof that source should not be subject to July 2, 2016 round of designations.

19
2
Milestone Date
Court Order
Impacted states may submit updated recommendations and supporting information for area designations to the EPA
The EPA notifies impacted states concerning any intended modifications to their recommendations (120-day letters)
End of 30-day public comment period
Impacted states provide additional information to demonstrate why an
EPA modification is inappropriate
The EPA promulgates final SO from Court Order)
2 area designations (no later than 16 months
March 2, 2015
No later than September 18, 2015
On or about January 22, 2016, but absolutely no later than 120 days prior to final designations (March 2, 2016)
On or about March 4, 2016
On or about April 8, 2016
No later than July 2, 2016

20
2
 Final Data Requirements Rule - issued on August
10, 2015
 Establishes requirements to monitor or model ambient
SO
2 levels in areas with largest sources of SO
2 emissions
 At a minimum, must characterize air quality around sources that emit 2,000 tons per year (tpy) or more of SO
2 or adopt enforceable emission limits that ensure that the source will not emit more than 2,000 tpy of SO
2
 Final rule establishes a schedule for air agencies to characterize air quality and to provide that air quality data to the EPA

21
2
 January 15, 2016: Air agency identifies sources exceeding threshold and other sources for which air quality will be characterized
 July 1, 2016: Air agency specifies (for each identified source) whether it will monitor air quality, model air quality, or establish an enforceable limit
 Air agency also accordingly submits a revised monitoring plan, modeling protocols, or descriptions of planned limits on emissions to less than 2,000 tpy

22
2
 January 2017
 New monitoring sites must be operational by Jan. 1, 2017
 Modeling analyses must be submitted to
EPA by Jan. 13, 2017
 Documentation of federally enforceable emission limits and compliance must be submitted to EPA by Jan. 13, 2017
 Early 2020: Monitoring sites will have 3 years of quality-assured data, which must be submitted to EPA

 Signed on February 26, 2015 (FRN on 3/20/15)
 Public Comment Period ended on June 18, 2015
 EPA is currently reviewing and responding to comments
 Expected Final in 2016
 Affects MOST NSPS sources, such as:
 Pulp Mills, Stationary Combustion Turbines, Coating
Operations, Landfills, Glass Manufacturing, etc…
 Requires electronic reporting using the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) through EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX)
 Allows some sources to maintain electronic records
 Contact: Gerri Garwood (OAQPS) 919-541-2406

 Final Rule – March 21, 2011
 Final Amendments – January 31, 2013
 Compliance Date – January 31, 2016
 10 Petitions for Reconsideration
 EPA granted reconsideration for 3 issues: o Definition of Work practice for S/S periods o Revised CO limits for certain subcategories o Use of PM CEMS
 Add’l Rule Amendments proposed – January 21, 2015
 Ongoing Litigation from environmental groups and industry
 Issues: MACT floor, Boiler subcategories, Use of CO as a surrogate, Health based compliance alternatives, Authority to require energy assessments
 Hearing on litigation scheduled for Dec 3, 2015

 Final Rule amendments – January 30, 2013
 3 Petitions for Reconsideration
 No changes were made to regulations – Aug 15, 2014 decision by EPA
 Court vacates emergency RICE provisions – May 1, 2015 and amends decision on July 21, 2015
 Vacated exemption for 63.6640(f)()2)(ii)-(iii) only
(ii) Emergency Demand Response
(iii) 5% deviation of voltage or frequency
 Did not vacate exemption for maintenance and testing
 Court grants EPA’s motion to delay mandate to vacate until May 1, 2016
 Court accepts EPA’s voluntary remand of 63.6640(f)(4)(ii)
 50 hour/year exemption to supply power as part of a financial arrangement.

26
 June 23, 2014 Supreme Court Decision in Utility Air
Regulatory Group (UARG) v EPA
 Key outcomes:
 EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source is a major source required to obtain a PSD or Title V permit
 EPA could continue to require that PSD permits otherwise required based on emissions of non-GHG pollutants, contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of BACT

27
 On April 10, 2015, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an
‘amended judgment’ in response to parties’ motions to govern which was consistent with the relief requested by the
EPA
 The court vacated only those regulations that implement
Step 2 of the PSD and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule and required EPA to study whether it was feasible to take additional steps to phase-in permitting requirements for smaller sources
 The judgment did not vacate the EPA regulations that implement Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule and preserves the ongoing application of the Best Available Control
Technology (BACT) requirement to greenhouse gas emission from sources that are required to obtain a PSD permit based on emissions of pollutants other than greenhouse gases
(“anyway sources”)

28
 In April 2015, EPA issued a final rulemaking action revising EPA’s PSD regulations to enable the EPA to rescind EPA-issued PSD permits.
 In Aug. 2015, EPA issued a final rulemaking to remove certain provisions from PSD and title V that were vacated. 80 FR 50199
 The EPA is working on a proposed rule to establish a significant emissions rate for GHGs under the PSD program.
 This will be a proposed rulemaking and available for public comment

29
 The initial round of RH SIPs is nearly complete
 Only two actions remain to satisfy the consent decree:
 Texas and Oklahoma
 Litigation lingers in several states
 Next round of comprehensive planning SIPs are due July 31, 2018
 EPA plans to propose rule amendments to:
 Shift the due date for these next SIPs to July 2021
 Change the schedule and process for submitting 5year Progress Reports
 Revise aspects of RAVI provisions

30
 EPA plans to develop guidance for two key aspects of the program:
 Reasonable Progress (RP) Guidelines
 RP Goals (Glidepath Metrics)- Setting the reasonable progress goals based on visibility impacts from controllable, anthropogenic emissions instead of all sources
 Timing – draft guidance and/or rulemaking in early
2016

31
 EPA began implementation of this rule on January
1, 2015. It addresses interstate transport obligations for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM
2.5
NAAQS and 2006 PM
2.5
 On July 28, the D.C. Circuit issued its opinion on the remaining issues raised with respect to CSAPR
 Transport Rule to address the 2008 ozone NAAQS
 EPA issued preliminary interstate transport modeling on January 22, 2015
 EPA issued updated modeling for public notice and comment on July 23. The comment period will close
October 23.
 We intend to propose this rule by the end of this year
 Additional information at http://www.epa.gov/airtransport/

32
 Final action was signed May 22, 2015, in response to a Sierra Club petition for rulemaking concerning startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM)
 SIP Call applies to 36 states (45 jurisdictions), the majority of which were named in the original petition
 Deadline for state action to remove provisions from their rules and make corrective SIP submissions is
November 22, 2016
 Litigation from multiple parties filed with DC Circuit

33
 December 21, 2011: EPA final standards issued
 June 29, 2015: Supreme Court remands MATS back to Appeals Court finding that EPA interpreted the Act unreasonably when it deemed cost irrelevant to the decision to regulate power plants.
 EPA is developing a response that addresses costs.

34
 Relies on a federal-state partnership to reduce carbon pollution from the biggest sources – power plants
 EPA identified 3 “Building Blocks” as BSER and calculated performance rates for fossil-fueled EGUs and another for natural gas combined cycle units
 Then, EPA translated that information into a state goal – measured in mass and rate – based on each state’s unique mix of power plants in 2012
 The states have the ability to develop their own plans for
EGUs to achieve either the performance rates directly or the state goals, with guidelines for the development, submittal and implementation of those plans

35
 EPA has established a national CPP implementation team
 The team includes representatives from EPA
Headquarters Offices (HQ) and all 10 EPA Regions
 The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
(OAQPS) is the lead for managing CPP implementation
 The Regions are the first point of contact (POC) for states and will coordinate with HQs to provide assistance to states in an efficient and effective way
 National CPP Website with guidance and tools http://www2.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

36
Submittals
State Plan OR initial submittal with extension request
Progress Update, for states with extensions
State Plan, for states with extensions
Milestone (Status) Report
Interim and Final Goal Periods 1
Interim goal performance period (2022-2029) 2
- Interim Step 1 Period (2022-2024) 3
- Interim Step 2 Period (2025-2027) 4
- Interim Step 3 Period (2028-2029) 5
Interim Goal (2022-2029) 6
Final Goal (2030)
Dates
September 6, 2016
September 6, 2017
September 6, 2018
July 1, 2021
Reporting
July 1, 2025
July 1, 2028
July 1, 2030
July 1, 2030
July 1, 2032 and every 2 years beyond
1 State may choose to award early action credits (ERCs) or allowances in 2020-2021, and the EPA may provide matching ERCs or allowances, through the
Clean Energy Incentive Program. See section VIII.B of the final rule preamble for more information.
2 The performance rates are phased in over the 2022-2029 interim period, which leads to a glide path of reductions that “steps down” over time. States may elect to set their own milestones for Interim Step periods 1, 2, and 3 as long as they meet the interim and final goals articulated in the emission guidelines.
3 4 5 State required to compare EGU emission levels with the interim steps set forth in the state’s plan. For 2022-2024, state must demonstrate it has met its interim step 1 period milestone, on average, over the three years of the period. For 2025-2027, state must demonstrate it has met its interim step 2 period milestone, on average, over the three years of the period. For 2028-2029, state must demonstrate it has met its interim step 3 period milestone, on average, over the two years of the period. See section VIII.B of the final rule preamble for more information.
6 State required to compare EGU emission levels with the interim goal set forth in the state’s plan. For 2022-2029, state must demonstrate it has met its interim goal, on average, over the eight years of the period.

37

 Overall Coordination – Ken Mitchell mitchell.ken@epa.gov
 North Carolina Contact – Dave McNeal mcneal.dave@epa.gov
 South Carolina Contact – Katy Lusky lusky.kathleen@epa.gov

38
NSR/PSD Investigations and Enforcement
 Glass – Container and Flat Glass
 Acid – Sulfuric and Nitric
 Cement
 Coal-Fired Utilities
Air Toxics – Cutting Toxic Air Pollution
 Leak Detection and Repair
 Flares
 Excess Emissions
Energy Extraction – Land-based Natural Gas Extraction and
Production
 FY 2016 Region 4 intends to sample VOC emissions at condensate tanks at the well-heads

39





40
Park Bench
 Durham, NC Library
 Installed in June 2013
 Purpose: Research and educational outreach
 Air instruments (PM
2.5
& Ozone)
 Meteorological Instruments
 Solar-powered
 One minute data uploaded to publically available website



th
 Diesel Revolution: Creating Sustainable
Neighborhoods One Engine at a Time
 100+ attendees
 SmartWay workshop on August 17 th


 CONGRATS to Mecklenburg Co.!