Update on Reclassification of HGB for 2008/2015 Ozone Standards and Implications for Industry - Presented at A&WMA Gulf Coast Chapter August 26 ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
1
Update on Reclassification of HGB
for 2008/2015 Ozone Standards and
Implications for Industry
Presented at
A&WMA Gulf Coast Chapter
August 26, 2021
Arijit Pakrasi, Ph.D., P.E.
2 Topics • Background • HGB Reclassification • Reclassification Scenarios • Implication for Industries • Planning Tips • Q&A
3 Background
4 Ozone NAAQS Timeline Source: EPA
Non-attainment Classifications 5
2008/2015 Ozone NAAQS
2008 Ozone Standard 2015 Ozone Standard
(Area DV) (Area DV)
Area Attainment (ppb) (ppb)
Classification Time (years) * Up to but Up to but
From Not From Not
Including Including
Attainment N/A 75 and below 70 and below
Marginal 3 76 86 71 81
Moderate 6 86 100 81 93
Serious 9 100 113 93 105
Severe (15) 15 113 119 105 111
Severe (17) 17 119 175 111 163
Extreme 20 175 >175 163 >163
* after initial classification
DV – Annual 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hr Concentration, averaged over 3 yearsNA Reclassification Process 6
Example: 2008 Ozone Standard
If NAAQS
attained on or
Initial before timeline,
Classification reclassification
Sets Timeline for to Attainment
based on 2008- Attainment
2010 DV (3,6,9, 15, 17, 20
Effective years) If NAAQS not
July 20, 2012 attained on
timeline,
reclassified to
higher NA
category
DV – Annual 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hr Concentration, averaged over 3 years7 HGB Reclassification
8
HGB Nonattainment Area
Source: TCEQ9 * Source: TCEQ
HGB Ozone Standard 10
Classification History
Ozone Standard Initial/Intermediate Current
1979: 1-hour 120 ppb Severe 17 Revoked
1997: 8-hour 80 ppb Moderate/Serious Revoked
2008: 8-hour 75 ppb Marginal/Moderate Serious*
2015: 8-hour 70 ppb Marginal Marginal*
* Up for reclassification review in 202111
Why Reclassification Now?
2008 Standard 2015 Standard
(Effective July 2012) (Effective August 2018)
Current Designation Serious Marginal
Design Value (DV)
75 ppb or less 70 ppb or less
or Attainment
Current Scheduled
20-Jul-21 03-Aug-21
Attainment Date
Attainment Year 2020 2020
3-yr avg. DV
Exceeded Exceeded
(2018-2020)
Not exceeded in any
2020 1-yr Design Value Exceeded
monitor
DV – Annual 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hr Concentration, averaged over 3 years12
Recent TCEQ Action
• 2008 Standard
• 1-yr extension of reclassification may be applicable
• TCEQ submitted request for 1 year extension of
reclassification on April 6, 2021.
• 2015 Standard
• No 1-yr extension applicable
• HGB area will be reclassified to “Moderate” in January
202213 Reclassification Scenarios
Likely Reclassification Scenarios 14
2008 Ozone Standard
Attainment Year Attainment
Serious EPS Approves 1-yr 2021: Reclassification in Attainment
(Current) Extension 3 yr DV = 75 ppb or January 2023: Clean Designation in 2025
lower Data Policy in Place
Attainment Year 2021: Potential Reclassification Attainment Year
3-yr DV = 76 ppb or to “Severe” in January
higher 2023 2027
EPA rejects 1-yr Potential Reclassification to Attainment Year
extension “Severe” in January 2022 202715
HGB Ozone Trend 2021 Update
Fourth Highest Average
Monitor 2019 2020 2021(8/23) Current 3-yr Avg
Seabrook Friendship Park C45 64 64 59 62
Houston Westhollow C410/C3003 73 66 67 68
Hou.DeerPrk2 76 73 72 73
Houston North Wayside C405/C1033 67 61 64 64
Houston Monroe C406 71 62 65 66
Conroe Relocated C78/A321 74 75 65 71
Houston East C1/G316 70 67 76 71
Channelview C15/AH115 67 62 66 65
Lake Jackson C1016 63 65 61 63
Baytown Garth C1017 69 66 69 68
Park Place C416 72 70 78 73
Houston Croquet C409 75 66 81 74
Houston Aldine C8/AF108/X150 81 68 68 72
Houston Bayland Park C53/A146 80 73 78 77
Clinton C403/C304/AH113 73 71 70 71
Northwest Harris Co. C26/A110/X154 73 71 62 68
Manvel Croix Park C84 79 70 71 73
Lang C408 75 69 65 69
Galveston 99th St. C1034/A320/X183 79 68 62 69
Lynchburg Ferry C1015/A165 68 61 62 63
Note: 2021 Monitoring data is incomplete and uncertified.16 * Source: TCEQ
Likely Reclassification Scenarios 17
2015 Ozone Standard
Attainment Year Attainment
Marginal “Moderate” 2024: Reclassification in Attainment
Expected in January 2025: Designation in
(Current) January 2022 3 yr DV = 70 ppb or Clean Data Policy 2027
lower in Place
Potential Attainment Year
Attainment Year
Reclassification to
2024: 3-yr DV = 71 2027:
“Serious” in January
ppb or higher Potential for “Severe”
202518 Implication for Industries
Attainment Scenario – Clean Data Policy 19
Example: 2008 Standard
TCEQ Submits EPA Approves
Attainment of
EPA Issues Clean Request for Request via
Standard
Data Determination Redesignation and Rulemaking
(2022) Maintenance SIP Area is in Attainment
HGB: 2024-2025
2-3 years
Suspended: Continuing:
• Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) • Major Source Thresholds
Requirements • Offset Ratio
• Attainment Demonstrations
• Contingency MeasuresSevere Reclassification 2008 Standard 20
EPA Requirements
Area Classification Control Measures
Serious RACT; 18% RFP over 6 years; Enhanced I/M;
(Current) Stage II Gasoline Recovery
All above and:
Severe 15 VMT Growth Offset; Low VOC Reformulated
(Attainment Year 2027) Gas; Section 185 Penalty Fee Program for Major
Sources21
Severe Reclassification Impact - Facilities
• Major Source Threshold reduced from 50 tpy to 25 tpy
• Major Modification Threshold remains at 25 tpy
• Netting Threshold remains at 5 tpy
• Emission Offset increased from 1.2 to 1.3
New construction &
Existing Sources
Modification
RACT LAER
Operating Permits
Emission Offsets
Emission Inventory
Increased Penalty for ERCs
Violations
RACT: Reasonably Available Control Technology; LAER: Lowest Achievable Emissions Rate;
ERC: Emission Reduction CreditsSevere Reclassification 2008 Standard 22
Likely New Major Sources in HGB Area
VOC NOx
CY
Sources Sources
2019 55 29
2018 52 26
2017 47 29
Reported Actual Emissions Between 25 tpy and 50 tpy
* Source: TCEQ “2014-2019 Statesum.xlsx”23 RACT • Reasonably available and facility capable of meeting • All CTG categories and non-CTG “major” sources for VOC and NOx • Current RACTs are satisfied with 30 TAC 115 (VOC) and 30 TAC 117 (NOx) • Under “Severe” classification, TCEQ will have to determine adequacy or propose more stringent control RACT = Reasonably Achievable Control Technology
24
Operating Permits
• Existing minor sources turned “major” due to lower
major source threshold:
• Abbreviated operating permit application within 12
months followed by full application
• New “major” sources or minor sources “major”
due to modification:
• Cannot operate prior to submitting an abbreviated
application for major source25 Operating Permits (Cont.) • New Compliance Requirements • Annual compliance certifications • Permit renewals • Monitoring reports, deviation reports • Additional reporting and recordkeeping • Emission inventories
26 Emission Inventory (EI) • Facilities emitting 10 tpy VOC and 25 tpy NOx in Ozone NA areas are currently subject to EI • Unchanged with the “Severe” classification • New major sources per 30 TAC 116.12 will have to report • Lowered to 25 tpy threshold with the “Severe” classification • EI may be used for future netting calculations • Good documentation is important • Testing may be required to develop credible EI
27
TCEQ Penalty Policy (RG-253)
Major Harm Moderate Harm Minor Harm
Source Major/Minor Major/Minor Major/Minor
Actual Release 100%/50% 50%/25% 30%/15%
Potential Release 30%/15% 15%/5% 7%/3%
Source: TCEQ Penalty Policy RG-253 effective January 2021.28 LAER • LAER – Lowest Achievable Emission Rate • Most stringent emission rates in any SIP or achieved in practice • No consideration of cost of technology – only technical feasibility • Case-by-case determination
29
Emission Offsets
• Offsets are emission reductions required for
permitting new projects/modifications in NA Areas
• Offset ratio: 1.2 = Additional 20% emission reductions
over project emissions
• Offset ratio will be 10% higher for “Severe”
classification: 1.2 to 1.3
• Offsets demand and cost in HGB area will depend
mostly on business growth30
Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs)
• ERCs are used for offsets
• ERCs are permanent reductions
• shutdown, process change, or installed control
technology
• Facilities have 2 years from emission reduction date
to apply for ERCs
• Expires after 5 years of emission reduction date if
not applied to permitPotential New SIP Year for 31
ERC Generation for Point Sources
HGB Emission Sources Current SIP Year Future SIP Year
Electric Generating Units 2018 2019
All Other Point Sources 2016 2019
Area source base year remains same as before: 2017 (latest triennial NEI)
Source: TCEQ Communication32
ERC Availability (2010-2020)
Current (8/20/2021) ERC Availability in HGB Area:
VOC: 538.9 tons; NOx: 163.6 tons (Source: TCEQ Communication August 2021)
Figure - Courtesy: Emission AdvisorsNOx ERC Cost Variability 33
(2016-2020) HGB
Figure - Courtesy: Emission AdvisorsVOC ERC Cost Variability 34
(2016-2020) HGB
Figure - Courtesy: Emission Advisors35 Planning Tips
36
Planning Tips
• Follow the regulatory developments
• 2021 will be key for HGB for 2008 standard
• Several potential HGB reclassification scenarios between
2022-2027
• Evaluate feasibility to avoid being a “major” source
in potential “Severe” classification
• Estimate current sitewide NOx and VOC PTE
• Look for emission reduction opportunities, if feasible
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.37
Planning Tips (Cont.)
• Review facility growth plans and modifications
projects between 2021-2024 with significant
VOC/NOx emissions
• Review options and generate documentation for netting
• Review options for generating ERCs
• Review potential RACT and LAER installation cost and
technical challenges
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.38
Planning Tips (Cont.)
• New major sources needs to be cognizant of
potential additional regulatory requirements
• Not business as usual
• More attention from TCEQ
• Develop good documentations and recordkeeping
procedures
• Compliance certifications, deviation reports, emission
inventories, netting, release reporting, and ERCs
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.39 Questions & Answers These questions were received during and after the presentations. Please note that answers are based on best information available at this time and should not be considered as legal advice. Applicability should be determined on a case-by-case basis.
40
Question 1
Question:
What kind of testing is necessary to determine whether EI is credible?
Answer:
EI should be based on TCEQ approved methodology described in RG-360/20 dated
January 2021 ( https://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/point-source-ei/psei.html).
Continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMs), predictive emission monitoring
systems (PEMs), and stack testing of emission sources are preferred options over
published emission factors or material balance. Stack testing must be conducted
following appropriate USEPA or TCEQ test methods. To be considered
representative, stack-test data must reflect current operations and processes
including control equipment. If laboratory test data used in emission inventory,
only data from accredited laboratories approved by TCEQ should be used. Contact
TCEQ for current list of approved laboratories.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.41
Question 2
Question:
Would the TCEQ penalize a company that had an operating permit, but was forced
to change their minor/major status because of revisions to environmental
regulations?
Answer:
Not sure what type of penalty we are talking here but in general the answer is
“No”, sources are not penalized because of changes in regulations. If the source
becomes “major” source due to change in regulation, then additional
requirements may apply with preset compliance timelines. If the facility is in
compliance with these new requirements, there could not be any penalties.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.42
Question 3
Question:
What is the criteria to determine something not happened to be a "potential
release" that needs to be reported?
Answer:
In RG-253, Potential (release) is defined as “existing in possibility; capable of
development into actuality.” No further guidance is provided. TCEQ maintains that
each case has different circumstances and backgrounds and hence interpretations
of their actual and potential releases are subject to those conditions. TCEQ
recommends to contact the Houston Region investigators at (713) 767-3500 for
questions whether a scenario needs to be reported or not. Based on this
information, TCEQ will determine if there was any possibility of additional
potential releases.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.43
Question 4
Question:
Can you use DERC instead of ERC in permitting new projects?
Answer:
Yes, DERCs can be used to satisfy an NSR Offset Requirement; however, DERCs are
generated and used in tons, while ERCs are generated and used in units of tons per
year. For example, let’s say a unit is required to offset 10 tons per year (tpy) of VOC
for their project. A company can either provide 10 tpy of ERCs or provide 10 tons
of DERCs each year of operation. If the unit operates 10 years, the company will
surrender 100 tons of DERCs over the lifetime of the unit. The requirements for
use of DERCs as offsets can be found under 30 Texas Administrative Code
§101.376. Note that a combination of ERCs and DERCs can be used also to satisfy
an offset requirement.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.44
Question 5
Question:
What is the definition of emission reduction date? The date you file the ERC
application? Or the date the actual control is in?
Answer:
The reduction date is the date that the strategy to generate ERCs is implemented.
For example, if a unit is generating ERCs from permanent shutdown, the emission
reduction date is the date the unit ceased operating and emitting into the airshed.
For a control strategy, the reduction date would be the date the emissions from
the affected unit first start to be controlled. The reduction date is not the date the
ERC application is filed. For example, if you submit your application for a
permanent shutdown, but the affected unit stopped operating over 2 years prior,
then the emission reductions cannot generate any ERC.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.45
Question 6
Question:
I know this great presentation focused on HGB. Is BPA at risk of becoming
nonattainment again?
Answer:
No, BPA is not currently at risk of reclassified as non-attainment for either the 2008
or the 2015 ozone standards. Latest ozone monitoring data shows the highest 3-yr
average design value in the BPA area as 65 ppb at the Jefferson County Airport
monitor. This DV is well below the 2008 ozone standard of 75 ppb and 2015 ozone
standard of 70 ppb.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.46
Question 7
Question:
Are you able to explain what constitutes "major harm" on the 'TCEQ Penalty
Fee Program' slide?
Answer:
A “major harm” for a release is one in which “Human health or the environment
has been exposed to pollutants which exceed (or would exceed) levels that are
protective of human health or environmental receptors as a result of the
violation.” For air releases, this will be the Effects Screening Levels (ESL) published
by TCEQ for air toxics (https://www.tceq.texas.gov/toxicology/esl) or the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants
(https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table)
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.47
Question 8
Question:
Slide 31 – Source TCEQ Communication – Future SIP is 2019 for Point Sources, but
area source stays at 2017:
o Can you provide the link or document for that?
o Expected timing when the SIP year will change for ERC generation?
Answer:
The new SIP year in this slide was based on a presentation in TCEQ’s Technical
Information Meeting on June 23, 2021. TCEQ will develop an Attainment
Demonstration (AD) for reclassification of HGB for 2015 and/or 2008 ozone
standard. This AD will include the revised SIP year of 2019 for point sources. Once
the AD SIP revision is adopted by the commission for submittal to the EPA,
emissions for credit generation will be based on the approved revision. The area
source SIP year remains same as 2017 because the 2020 area and mobile source
triennial EIs will not be finalized until early 2022; so, they may not be available
when the AD SIP(s) are developed by TCEQ.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review..
48
Question 9
Question:
What is the word on Section 185 fees?
Answer:
As part of the EPA’s reclassification of an area to “severe” non-attainment under
the 2008 eight-hour ozone NAAQS, EPA will specify the due date for the Section
185 SIP revision in the final reclassification notice. See p. 12,266 in the EPA’s final
2008 eight-hour SIP requirements rule. TCEQ is currently awaiting guidance from
USEPA on section 185 fee program for the 8-hr ozone standard.
Please note that Section 185 fees are not assessed upon reclassification to severe.
Instead, Section 185 fees would be assessed when a severe ozone nonattainment
area fails to attain the applicable NAAQS by the EPA-specified attainment date.
Disclaimer: These are opinions only and not legal advice. Each facility and project are recommended to take actions after legal review.49
For any further questions
Contact:
Arijit Pakrasi, Ph.D., P.E.
apakrasi@edge-es.com
www.edge-es.comYou can also read
