WPCYm rm_\ۚ+c%i@2GQ"lcPҭVXSHFNBJ\0.'(Ja-1fb 6>̱ ,> jw z7ʙ]wj=q#2q/= I qxK\R1[u [ei@Sv,Πr\^]p+` &.%ߜŕJ@sN=# UF % 0(Mw43 BGB 0D 1u 0 cJ 0w 0_$ 0eUB 1*NM D3N6^ 8D mF 72] BB 0D 1 0N 72( AkD 1 726 0Th 0 w 0 3 0  0 ] 0  0  0  1 0L+! 72w!! 1o" 72" 1[(# 72# 0f# 1$ 72$ 1$ 72[% 1% 72& 0 F& 0:' 0+( 0) 0* 0* 0+ 0, 0- 0n. 0P/ 0/0 0 1 01 02 03 0]4 0*5 05 06 07 08 0f9 0;: 0 ; 0; B< 0D< B* = 03= 0D=@> B? C#? B=? AQZ?? 0Dq@ 00@ D5@ D5A D5OA BA D5A BA D1A D5$B B*YB D5B 0<B 0B D-C 0>C 0vD 0`D 0`D ASE 0`E BB\F B*F 0`F 0`(G 08G 0G 02H 0H 0:I 0YI 0_SJ 0 J 0jK 0&M D/N 0N D/]P 0P 06ZQ 0Q 0:R 0^R 0<0SU6lSU>SU*SS D5 T D5?T B*tT D5T B7T B7 U CAU C[U CuU CU CU CU CU CU CV C+V CEV BO_V 0UV 0W 0W 0X 0Y 0Z 0r[ 0L\ 0#] 0C] 0:^ 0_ 0_ 0` 0a 0Ob 0c 0c 0@d 0d 0e 0f 0Og 0h 0h 0i 0ij 1e&k B5kbkUNk BG(l BZolU@lUN mEWm\\DEQLAND\DEQLAND-5SI-PQ$,,,,$0<9Z .Courier New Regular($뢥0t3|xCTriple 1+| d d d(3$ !  3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  H4heading 1heading 1&    XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW'  H4Body TextBody Text  XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTWH4heading 2heading 2  W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW\  `*Times New RomanTT &'()*+,hssCEIMQUY]aAutoList122222222i)1)a)  EIF RHR MTFvsEICEIDARS CEFS RFP ITEP NAUPolkowski LTSdeciviewsdVtimelinesQA MOUECLatimerREMSAD P PTimelineVVVV'dxd0s U2>Thick/Thin 2[ d -d(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#2#     )3  0p(#p(#  &'()*+,hsCEIMQUY]aAutoList222222222i)1)a)(O$2[W]Inline Te&xt" <<C &'()*+,hsCEIMQUY]aAutoList322222222i)1)a)#2(W$     (O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#(b$0  0` (#(#2#   .3  0 ` (#` (#(xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(#({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(# &'()*+,xGaeimquy}Bullet ListBullets List>c$"Small Circle"0  i)Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 &'()*+,hsCEIMQUY]aAutoList422222222i)1)a)12y379;=?AGM1.a.1)3a)(W$ @*   A  &'()*+,hsCEIMQUY]aAutoList522222222i)1)a)62 &'()*+,hsCEIMQUY]aAutoList622222222i)1)a)82 &'()*+,hsCEIMQUY]aAutoList722222222i)1)a):22J+M 0_level1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2G+M 0_level2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2D+M 0_level3   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2A+M 0_level4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2>+M 0_level5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2;+M 0_level6   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  28+M 0_level7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  25+M 0_level8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  22+M 0_level9    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levsl1  X 2( ` hp x 223  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levsl2   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levsl3   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levsl4  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levsl5   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levsl6   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levsl7  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levsl8   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levsl9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levnl1  X 2( ` hp x 223   5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levnl2   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levnl3   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levnl4  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levnl5   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levnl6   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levnl7  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levnl8   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5   d(3$ !  &P d d22M 0_levnl9    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  (3$ !  ݀Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5P Pdd  d`ZWaC<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  0.Normal^^^^)!dxdx\\\\)!dxdxffff)!dxdx dhhhh)!dxdx d\\)! dxdxkkkk)!dxdx&0 d dXXXX)!dxdx<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5)!dxdx86Definition(''&H1      XXX(&H2  XXX(&H3  XXX[o&Draw Object <<=8C HKKKK(&H4 XXX XXX>Thick Double Pd Pd&p d Pd(&H5  XXX(&H6  XXX20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K<6X9`(Courier NewK XXXS\  `&Times New RomanS<:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/K<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7(X7  ?%2A`Arial?7o(X7  XXXS\  `&Times New RomanSk)1dxd<:zTop of For7(X7  ?%2A`Arial?7o(X7  XXXS\  `&Times New RomanSk)2dxd0KS.SampleK<6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  <6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arialwwww)!dxdx)!dxdx&p Pd d)!dxdx3+0 d d d3+0 d d dd dd(d2d+M (_22   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *;+M (_21   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *8+M (_20  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *5+M (_19   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *2+M (_18    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  * (_1723  Ԁ*GM (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *DM (_15   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *AM (_14  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *>M (_13   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *;M (_12   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *8M (_11  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *5M (_10   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  (2M &_9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  ( &_823  (GM &_7   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  (DM &_6   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  (AM &_5  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  (>M &_4   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  (;M &_3   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  (8M &_2  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  (5M &_1   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  &2M $_    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  <<<<<<<<(35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1Large Dashed dPage of &6Times New Roman RegularCTriple 3+ d <d dVQuadruple 28 d d d d(O Z(Times New Roman (9 Z6Times New Roman Regular !  _EX:XE      X8dd8@``# `$ XX:MeetingMinutes#X:X `$#   @ WRAPStationarySourceJointForum $ @June23,2004@Denver,Colorado  X:XXX:TheStationarySourceJointForumconvened#X:XXX:#ԀattheAdamsMarkHotelinDenver,Coloradoat1:00_PM_  June2ndandmetthrough3:00PMonJune3,2004.TheMeetingAgenda,PowerPointPresentationsand   alistofAttendeesareallpostedontheWRAPwebsite. p  A) xdEG A H  @# MeetingSummary     OnJune23,2004,IattendedameetingofthenewWRAPStationarySourceJointForum(SSJF)held   inDenver,Colorado.ThismeetingwasheldtoupdatetheForummembershipontasksfacingthe   ForumnowthattheoptionofnationalUtilityregulationundertheCleanAirInterstateRule(formerly   knownastheInterstateAirQualityRule:IAQR)hasbeentakenoffthetable. k  TobeginthemeetingwetalkedaboutBARTEligibleSources;hearingapresentationonthebackground C oftheBARTregulationandthestatusoftheSSJFsBARTEligibleSourceIdentificationProject.It / waspointedoutthatidentificationofBARTEligiblesourcesisarequirementforstatesspecifically k calledoutintheRegionalHazeRule,andtodate,theWRAPhasonlyidentifiedBARTeligiblesources W thatemitSO2,andthenonlyfortheSO2BARTeligiblesourceswithinthe9stateGrandCanyon C VisibilityTransportregionaddressedunder309oftheRHR.Under308wenowneedtoaddressall / pollutants(NOx,PM&VOC)forall14stateswithintheWRAP,aswellasaddressSO2forthosestates  thatdidntadopt309SIPs.AcontractorhasbeenhiredforBARTEligibleSourceIdentification  Project,andtheyareprovidingassistancetotheWRAPstatesindevelopingthedatabaselistingofthe  BARTeligiblesourceswithintheregion.  EPArepresentativesthengaveapresentationonthestatusofEPAsactionsonrevisionoftheRegional g HazeRuleandtheBARTGuidelines.EPAreproposedtheBARTGuidelinesearlierthisyear,and S commentsareduebacktoEPAbyJuly6thofthisyear.Theproposalsincludemethodsofexemption ?  fromformalBARTanalysisforindividualsourceusingCALPUFFmodelinganda0.5dVimpact +!{ threshold.EPAistakingcommentonusingsome"lessburdensome"alternativesfortheexemption "g  methodology.RegardingdeterminationofBARTcontrols,EPAisproposingaprocesssimilartoa"top #S! down"BACTanalysis.Andthereare"presumptive"controllevelsforFossilFuelFiredPowerPlants #?" >250MWsgeneratingcapacity,atpowerplantswhicharegreaterthan750MWsintotalsize. $+ # Regarding"AlternativestoBART",EPAwillrequirethatanyalternativetradingprogrammusteither %!$ showgreateroverallemissionreductions(similarlygeographicallydistributedtoBART), or show &"% greateroverallvisibilityimprovementthancasebycaseBARTimplementation. '"& ASSJFsubcommitteehasbeenworkingthepastcoupleofmonthstoexaminetheseproposedBART {)$( Guidelines,andidentifypotentialWRAPconcerns.TheForumheardapresentationhighlightingthe g*%) issuesthatthisWorkgrouphasraised,anddiscussedhowtoproceedinprovidingformalcommentfrom S+&* theWRAP.ItwaspointedoutthatthewholediscussionofBARTismootiftheWRAPeventually ?,'+ decidestousean"Annexlike"marketapproachwhichappliestoallsignificantsources. +-{(,  .g)- Therewasadiscussiononthe"NextSteps"theSSJFshouldpursueindefining"AlternativestoBART"  suchasaninterpollutantorintersectortradingprogram.Therewasdiscussiononwhethera backstop   tradingprogramisanoptionunder308,anditwasagreedthattheanswertothisquestionwouldgoa  longwayintermsofprovidingfuturedirectionfortheForum. t EPAStafffromRTP,joinedthemeetingbyphoneinthemorningofJune3rd,todiscusstheCleanAir L  InterstateRule(CAIR).LydiaWegmanconfirmedthattheEPAhadmadethedecisionnottoextendthe 8  IAQRtothewest,mainlybecauseAdministratorLevittfeltthatthecomplexityofsuchexpansionwould $ t makeitproblematictogetCAIRcompletedbyadeadlineattheendof2004.TheEPAhasntruledout  ` anationalregulationatsometimeinthefuture,buttheyfeltthattheywouldntworkonthatbefore  L  CAIRisfinalized.TheEPAhadconductedseveralanalysesonimpactsofwesternexpansionorthe  8  rule,andthisdatetheydidshareresultsofsomeoftheseanalyses.Theyhadlookedatcombustion $  controlofNOx,andfoundemissionsratescouldbereducedtoaround0.2lb/MMBTUnationallywith   thistechnology,eveniftheexpenseswerecappedat$1300/ton.TheyhadlookedatnationalSO2   EmissionCap,withanestedWesternCapthatwouldcostapproximately$280MMtoimplement   through2015.TheyhaddonesomeanalysesofincorporatingutilitiesintotheSO2programwithinthe5   WRAP309states,the9WRAPGCVTCStatesandthe13continentalWRAPstates;andtheyshared p someoftheresultsofthesevaryingcontrolschemes.ItwasagreedthattheEPAworkprovidesa \ startingpointfortheForumtobeginanalyzingwesternStationarySourcesemissioncontrolschemes. H Besidesutilities,theWRAPhasconcernswiththeimpactofOil&GasactivitiesintheWRAPregion,  p anditwasnotedthattheO&GindustryislikelythesecondlargestsourceofNOxintheWRAPregion.  \ Discussionswereheldregardinghowtoproceedwithanalysisofthisrelativelyundefinedemission H sectorinthewest. 4 ThegroupthenheardanupdateontheWRAPsAttributionofHazeproject,anditwasnotedthatthe   workgroupsmissionwastoidentifythegeographicsourceofemissions,themassandspecies  distributionofemissionsbysourcecategory,andthenaturalvs.anthropogenicsplitofemissions  affectingeachoftheWRAPregionClassIareas.TheinitialAttributionreportwillbecompletedbythe  endof2004,andthatisanticipatedtoprovidesomeguidanceonhowsignificantstationarysourcesare l inthewesternRegionalHazepicture. X  Finallyattendeesheldadiscussiononthe2005WorkplanfortheStationarySourcesJointForum.NOx 0"  andSO2dominatetheconcernsthattheSSJFhasidentifiedfromstationarysources,andthemajorityof #l! theseemissionsaresuspectedtobegeneratedbytheUtilityandtheOil&Gasindustries.WRAPstaff $X" willworktogetadraftworkplantogetherforForumReview,beforeincorporatingthatworkintothe $D # overallWRAPworkplandevelopmentprocessthissummer. %0!$ A) xdE' A  '#& X@PP# MeetingDetails   @H BARTEligibleSources H  TobeginthemeetingLee_Alter_ԀgaveaPowerPointpresentationonthebackgroundoftheBART d regulation,andthestatusoftheSSJFsBARTEligibleSourceIdentificationProject.Henotedthat P  identificationofBARTEligiblesourcesisarequirementforstatesspecificallycalledoutintheRegional <  HazeRule.Todate,theWRAPhasonlyidentifiedBARTeligiblesourcesthatemitSO2,andthenonly ( x fortheSO2BARTeligiblesourceswithinthe9stateGrandCanyonVisibilityTransportregion  d addressedunder309oftheRHR.Under308wenowneedtoaddressallpollutants(NOx,PM&  P  VOC)forall14stateswithintheWRAP,aswellasaddressSO2forthosestatesthatdidntadopt309  <  SIPs.TheSSJFhasnowhiredEasternResearchGroup(ERG)underacontracttoprovideassistanceto (  theWRAPstatesindevelopingidentificationmethodologyandconfirmingidentificationofsourcesin   thisBARTidentificationtask.ThefinalproductwillbeadatabaselistingoftheBARTeligiblesources   withintheWRAPregion.   Regardingprojectprogress,Mr.AlterindicatedthatERGhasbeenworkingtoestablishedstatecontacts t andhasidentifiedvariousdatabasesthatcontainrelevantinformation(EPAsTitleV,NEIandAcid ` Raindatabases;theEnergyInformationAdministration[EIA]data,theCaliforniaDistrictRules L database&ITEPtribalsourcedata).TheyhavebeenrefiningthelistsofSIC,SCCandMACTcodes 8 foridentifyingsources,draftingcommonmethodologyforidentifyingsources,lookingatspecific $t methodsforCaliforniaandfortribalsources.Theyalsohavebeensurveyingstatestocompilethe ` preliminarylistofBARTeligiblesources,with8statescurrentlyhavingsubmittedthispreliminarydata L (NM,CO,UT,ID,MT,ND,SD,WA&AK).ThusfarERGhasfoundthatfossilfuelfiredpower 8 plantsdominatetheBARTsourcelistfortotalemissionsofallpollutants,exceptforVOCs.VOCsare $ dominatedbypetroleumrefineries,w/EGUsthesecondlargestemissionsourceforthispollutant.  ThenextstepsincludefinalizingdesignofthemechanismforincorporationoftheBARTlistwithinthe  WRAPsEDMSemissiondatabase,completingverificationworkonthecurrentBARTinformation,  gatheringfurtheremissioncontrolinformation,plottingthesesourcesonmaps,consultingwithother p RPOs,andtalkingwithEPAaboutthespecialcaseofCaliforniaBARTsources.TheotherRPOsare \  alsoworkingonthisBARTidentificationtaskfortheirrespectiveregions,andasdescribedinMr. H! AltersPowerPointpresentationslides,theyarehavingvariousdegreesofprogressincompilingthis 4"  information.  #p! RegardingemissionsofNH3,VOCs&PM,thereisabodyofinformationwhichsuggeststhatthese $H # pollutantsmaynotbesignificantcontributorstoregionalhazedegradation.Giventheconcurrent %4!$ reductionsofNOxandSO2,underthecurrentBARTproposal,EPAwouldexemptNH3entirely. & "% RegardingVOCs,theyarealsotakingcommentongivinglessattentiontoruralsources,whilefocusing ' #& morecloselyonurbansourcesofVOCs. (#' AsanalternativeapproachtoconductingdetailedBARTanalysesforemissionscontrolofNH3,VOCs *%) &PM,onewouldfirstcomparethemagnitudeoftheseemissionsfromBARTeligiblesourcesagainst l+&* thetotalanthropogenicinventory.Second,thelevelofcurrentemissioncontrolswouldbedeterminedat  thesesources.Thentheprobableimpactoftheseemissionswouldbedeterminedbasedonthebest  availablescience(monitoring,modeling,etc).IfemissionsofthesethreepollutantsfromallBART  eligiblesourcesintheregioncompriseasmallpartoftheinventoryandtheyarecurrentlyreasonably t wellcontrolled;and/oriftheemissionsarentreasonablyanticipatedtosignificantlyaffectvisibility, ` thenfurtherBARTanalysisorcontrolthesesubordinatepollutantswouldnotbenecessary. L  @A A H EPAReProposaloftheRHRandBARTGuidelines H $ t KathyKaufmanthengaveapresentationonthestatusofEPAsactiononrevisionoftheRegionalHaze  P  RuleandtheBARTGuidelines.ShedescribedthehistoryoftheCornGrowerssuitandthe2002  <  DistrictCourtrulingonBARTguidelines.ShenotedthatEPAhasnowreproposedtheBART (  Guidelines,withcommentsduebacktoEPAbyJuly6thofthisyear.   SheexplainedthatthecourtonlyrequiredEPAtoprovideamechanismforexemptingindividual   BARTeligiblesourcesfromBARTanalysisbasedonvisibilityimpact,butleftstatestheoptionof   choosingtosubjectalltheseeligiblesourcestoformalBARTanalysis.Toexemptaparticularsource t underthecurrentEPAproposal,theguidelinemandatesuseofCALPUFFmodeling.Resultsmustshow ` negligibleimpact(>0.5dVforall24hourperiodsintheyear),inordertoexemptaBARTeligible L sourceonthebasisofvisibilitycontribution.ButMs.KaufmannotedthatEPAistakingcommenton 8 usingoneoffourlessburdensomealternatives(CALPUFFScreening,LookUpTables,SourceRanking $t andanEmissionsDistanceFactor). ` RegardingtheBARTdetermination,shenotedthattheprocessissimilartoa"topdown"BACT 8 analysis,consideringthefivestatutoryfactors(costs,remainingusefullife,energy&nonairquality $ impacts,existinglevelofcontrolanddegreeofvisibilityimprovement).Thequestionwasraisedasto  thedifferencebetweenBARTandBACTanalyses.Itwaspointedoutthatcostswouldlikelybehigher  forretrofitthantheywouldbeforachievingsimilarcontrolinnewconstruction.Andthe"remaining  usefullife"ofanexistingsourcewilltypicallybelessthanfornewconstruction,thusexacerbatingthe  amortizedcostdifferentialforagivencontrollevel.Withthesedifferences,itissuspectedthatthetop p levelsofcontroloptionswillbeeliminatedmorequicklyunderaBARTanalysis,thanwhenconsidering \  BACT. H! TherewasdiscussionthatDust&FireinventoryelementstendtodistinguishtheRegionalHaze  #p! "problem"inthewest,whereastheStationaryPointSourcesaremuchmoredominantintheeasternhalf  $\" ofthecountry.PatCumminspointedoutthatwewillmuchmorelikelybeusingtheStationarySource $H # controlsasacomponentofReasonableProgress,thanwewillbeusingBARTdeterminationsforfully %4!$ resolvingRegionalHazequestions. & "% RegardingFossilFuelFiredPowerPlants,Ms.KaufmanexplainedthatEPAhasestablished (#' "presumptive"controllevelsforthoseunitswith>250MWsgeneratingcapacity,atpowerplantswhich )$( aregreaterthan750MWsintotalcapacity.ForSO2,EPAisproposingeithera95%controlefficiency, *%) oremissionratesdowntothe0.1to0.15lb/MMBturange.ForNOx,allBARTeligibleEGUs l+&* currentlyusingSCRfortheozoneseason,wouldnowhavetoextenduseofthattechnologyforthefull  yeararound.ForthosesourcescurrentlyoperatingwithoutSCR,theproposalcallsforemissionrates  0.2lb/MMBtuNOxemissionrate.HerpresentationslidesshowseveralexamplesofpotentialBART  determinationandexemptions. t @HAlternativestoBARTH L  KathyKaufmanthencontinuedherpresentation,offeringinformationonEPAsperspectivefor $ t "AlternativestoBART".Shenotedthatanyalternativetradingprogrammusteithershowgreateroverall  ` emissionreductions(similarlygeographicallydistributedtoBART), or showgreateroverallvisibility  L  improvement.Underthissecondoption,visibilitymodelingmustshowthatvisibilitywill notdecline at  <   any affectedClassIareaintheWRAPRegion,andthattheaveragevisibilityis better at all affected (  ClassIareasunderthealternative.Shenotedthatanyalternativeprogrammustbeimplementedduring   thefirstplanningperiod(by2018).   Itwasclarifiedthatthe1999RegionalHazeRulerequiresthatanyBARTalternativeprovide"greater   reasonableprogress",ratherthansimplyjust"morevisibilityimprovement"thanBART.Thedistinction t revolvesaroundthefactthatthereareadditional"factors"thatcomeintoplaywhenevaluating ` reasonableprogress,ratherthansimplyconsideringabsolutevisibilityimprovement.Themain L differenceisthe"timing"oftheimprovements,whichcanbeconsideredunderRP,butnotunderBART 8 (musthaveanabsolute5yearimplementationschedule).AlsoRPneednotconsiderthe"existing $t pollutioncontrols"onastationarysource,whileBARTcantakethatfactorintoaccount. ` ItwaspointedoutthattheSSJFmustlooktodeterminewhethertheywillrecommendthattheWRAP 8 pursuesomeBARTalternative.Becauseoftheexperienceofthesignificanttimeandeffortexpendedin $ developingtheAnnexMilestonesprogramunder309,PatCumminsfeltthatinordertoprovidestates  withatradingoptionunderthe308timetable,theForummustactfairlyrapidlytomakeadecisionon  thedirectionthattheywillgo.  @HRHBARTKeyIssuesH p Continuingthemeeting,EricMasseyexplainedthattherehasbeenaSSJFsubcommitteeworkingthe H! pastcoupleofmonthstoexaminetheBARTGuidelines,andidentifypotentialWRAPconcerns.Eric 4"  MasseygaveapresentationhighlightingtheissuesthatthisWorkgrouphasdiscussed.Theseissuesare  #p! furtherdescribedbelow:  $\" NSPSMayNotSatisfyBART󀄀EPAisarguingthatsomerecentemissioncontrolretrofitshave %4!$ achievedloweremissionsthanNSPSlevels,thusimplementingNSPSalonemaynotsatisfyBART.The & "% Forumwasconcernedabouttheimplicationthatifthisistrue,anewsourcemeetingNSPScontrol ' #& levelsmayactuallyhavegreateremissionsthanaBARTretrofitonasimilartypeofunit.Thepointwas (#' madethatnewsourcesprobablywouldntreceiveNSPSlimitswithoutathoroughBACTanalysis )$( however,sothisillogicalscenariowashighlyunlikely. *%)  l+&* RequiredUseofBARTGuidelines󀄀TheWGwasconcernedthattheEPAmandateforsoleuseofthe  BARTGuidelinesmightlimitState/Local/Tribaldiscretion,whichisinconsistentwiththeprinciplesof  theCornGrowerscase.  PollutantstobeAddressed󀄀TheWGnotedthatthecurrentEPAproposaldoesntincludeammonia ` (citinghighuncertaintyofNH3data),andtheyquestionedwhetherthispreemptsRABARTfor L  individualsources.TheWGwonderedwhetherpermittingsourcesshouldretaindiscretiontoinclude 8  NH3ifaccuratedataisavailable. $ t Also,theEPAproposaldoesincludeVOC,eventhoughknowledgeoftherelationshipbetweenVOC  L  andPMfineisstillevolving.TheWGsuggestedthattheWRAPshouldrequestamoreconsistent  8  approachforNH3,VOC&PMpollutants. $  BARTDeMinimusLevels󀄀TheWGnotedthatsourcesdeemedtobeBARTeligibleforonepollutant,   aresubsequentlyrequiredtoaddressBARTfor"anyvisibilityimpairing"pollutant.TheWGthought   thatsomedeminimuslevelwouldprobablyreducetheburdenonpermittingauthoritiesandsources.   DeterminingWhichBARTEligiblesSourcesAreSubjecttoBART󀄀Currentoptionsinclude: \ Option1:determiningthatallBARTeligiblesourcesaresubjecttoBART 4 Option2:usingacumulativeapproach,statescanchosetodemonstratethatnostationarysourcesare  \ subjecttoBART H Option3:statesmaychoseindividualexemptionsfromBART   TheWGwonderedwhetherafourthoptionshouldallowstatestodevelopsomealternativescheme.  BetterthanBARTDeterminations󀄀TheWGquestionedwhethertheguidelinesshouldmoreexplicitly  allowotherreasonableprogressfactorstobeconsideredwhena"BetterthanBART"determinationis l made(ie/Cost,TimetoImplement,EnergyImpacts,etc). X  CaliforniaApproach󀄀TheWGwonderedwhetherBARTguidelinesshouldallowforanalternative 0"  approachwhereBARTcompliancecanbedemonstratedthroughevaluationofexistingrulesandpermit #l! conditions.TheyfeltthatthiscouldpotentiallyrelievetheburdenonCaliforniaandotherstateswith $X" NH3,VOC&PMissues. $D # VisibilityImpairmentTrigger󀄀TheWGnotedthatEPAhasproposeda0.5dVimpact(single24hr &"% average)asathresholdfordeterminingwhetherastationarysourceiscontributingtovisibility '#& impairment.TheissuewasraisedastowhethertheWRAPcancometoaconsensusonanappropriate (#' thresholdnumber.Itwaspointedoutthatasourceisactually"contributing"ifithasa0.5dVimpact, )$( butothersnotedthatittakes1dVtobe"perceptible". |*%)  h+&* TopDownAnalysis󀄀TheWGquestionedwhethera"BACTlike"topdownBARTanalysiswasthe  mostappropriatemethodologyfordeterminingBARTcontrol.EPAisseekingcommentonwhethera  "floorup"approachmaybemoreappropriate,orperhapssomevariationofanintermediatecontrol  approach. t FourAlternativesforIndividualSourceExemption󀄀Asnotedearlierinthismemo,theEPAhas L  proposedfourlessburdensomealternativestothe0.5dVthresholdforindividualsourceexemption 8  (CALPUFFScreening,LookUpTables,SourceRankingandanEmissionsDistanceFactor).TheWG $ t wonderedwhetherthesestepsshouldbeusedinlieuof,orpossiblyasfirststepsofanexemption  ` analysis.  L  ItwaspointedoutthatthiswholediscussionofBARTeligibilityismootiftheWRAPeventually $  decidesthatwewanttousean"Annexlike"marketapproachforcontrollingstationarysources;an   approachwhichtakesinallsourceswithemissionsoveradefinedthreshold,regardlessoftheirBART   status.   ThisBARTWorkgroupisplanningtoreconvenetheweekofJune7thtoreviewtheresultsofthis p meeting.ThentheywilldraftaletterbyJune11thandgetreviewfromtheSSJFmembersbyJune16th. \ ThereviseddraftwillgobeforetheWRAPBoardbyJune23rd,andfinalcommentswillbeduebyJune H 30th.ThenthefinalWRAPcommentletterontheBARTGuidelineswillbesubmittedtoEPAbyJuly 4 6th.  p @W W HSSJFNextStepsonAlternativestoBARTH H PatCumminsbeganthediscussionbyexplainingthathefeelstheSSJFneedstodefineageneral   directionthattheWRAPshouldgoregardingdevelopingatradingprogram;includingaddressing   questionssuchasinterpollutanttradingorintersectortrading(ie/areavspoint).  Itwaspointedoutthatunderthe309Annex,thestationarysourceSO2milestonesresultedinlessthan  adVimprovementinvisibilityatwesternClassIareas.Giventhismarginalvisibilityimprovement l obtainedfromstationarysources,therewasgeneralagreementthatthestationarysourcesectorneedsto X  beviewednotinisolation,butincontextwiththebalanceofthetotalemissioninventoryfortheregion D! andwhatcontrolsmightbepossibleintheseothersourcesectors.Questionsrevolvearoundwhats 0"  reallyneededforReasonableProgresstowardstheRH2064goal,andwhatisthestationarysource #l! sectorcontributiontovisibilityimpairingpollutants.ItwasfeltthatSO2&NOxaretheprimary $X" pollutantsofconcernfromstationarysources. $D # Itwaspointedoutthatunder309,theAnnexwasa backstop tradingprogram,butthequestionwas &"% raisedastowhetherabackstopprogramisanoptionunder308.WhethertheWRAPcanhavestates '#& "optin"tothecurrentAnnexwasnotconclusivelyansweredduringthisdiscussion. (#' JohnNielsonsuggestedthattheremightbesomesortofhybridtradingprogramforSO2developed, |*%) whereanactiveprogramwasoverlaidontopoftheAnnexBackstopProgram.Optionsseemedto h+&* includeanactivecap&trademarkettradingprogram,abackstopprogramandcommand&control  limitsonstationarysources.  VickiPattonfeltthattherewerephilosophicalreasonswhy308shouldlimittradingtoanactive t system.Conversationrevolvedaroundthepointthattherewouldbenoincentiveforstatestoimplement ` anactivesystem,iftheycanoptintosomebackstopprogram. L  FrankPragerraisedthequestionastowhethertherewasanydistinctionbetweenthose308statesthat $ t originallyhadthe309option,butdidntacceptthatoption(ie/Colorado),asopposedtoastatethat  ` neverhadthe309optionatall(ie/Montana).ItwaspointedoutthatundertheAnnex,therewereno  L  allowancesbrokendownforstatebystatedistribution,butweresimplyfirstgivenfortribalandnew  8  sourcesetasides,withthebalancesplitbetweenutilityandnonutilityindustries. $  @HCleanAirInterstateRuleH   TheCAIRwasformerlydesignatedastheInterstateAirQualityRule(IAQR).ThisdateLydiaWegman   wasonthephone,andsheconfirmedthattheEPAhadmadethedecisionnottoextendtheIAQRtothe p west,mainlybecauseAdministratorLevittfeltthatthecomplexityofsuchexpansionwouldmakeit \ problematictogetCAIRcompletedbyadeadlineattheendof2004.TheEPAhasntruledouta H nationalregulationatsometimeinthefuture,buttheywouldntworkonthatbeforeCAIRisadopted. 4 ShenotedthattheEPAdidconductseveralanalysesonwhatparametersmightbeincludedinany  p westernexpansion,andthoseanalyseswereforwardedtotheWRAP.  \ JohnRobbinsthendescribedtheEPAsNOxanalysis.Heexplainedthattheyfoundthat127Western 4 EGUshadcurrentemissionsof727KTPYNOx(676KTPYfromcoal&51KTPYgasfiredunits),or   anaverageof0.301_lb_/MMBtuemissionrate.Thentheyevaluatedapplying"combustioncontrols"on   allunits,againstapplying"combustioncontrolswitha"$1300/tonmaximumcost".Thefullcombustion  controlscenarioresultedina35%reduction(251Ktons)inthewest,butthecostlimitedcontrolsgot  almostasmuchwith34%reduction(247Ktons).Thusfullcombustioncontrolwouldresultin476K  TPYregionwidetotalNOxemissions(0.197lb/MMBtuaverageperformance),whilethecostlimited l controloptionresultedin489KTPYNOx(0.199lb/MMBtuaverage).VickiPattonnotedthat X  EnvironmentalDefensewassomewhatdisappointedinthelevelofemissionreductionfromcombustion D! controls,andexpectedemissionratescloserto0.15lb/MMBtu. 0"  RegardingtheSO2analysis,EPAusedtheIPMmodeltoanalyzetheeffectsofanationalSO2cap,witha $X" nestedWesternCap.Theanalysisconfirmedthattheycouldgetintherangeof400500KtonsSO2 $D # reductionbyimplementinganationwidecapforutilities.ThecostofincorporatingtheWesternhalfof %0!$ thecountryinthisSO2capispredictedatapproximately$280MMthrough2015. &"% Forthe5WRAP309states,EPAmodeledacapof179KSO2,atacostof$200perton.Forthe9 (#' WRAPGCVTCStates,267KTonsofSO2wasusedasthecap,cominginatacost$260/ton.When )$(  theyanalyzedthe13WRAPcontinentalstates,becauseNorth&SouthDakotaachieveverysignificant |*%) reductionsunderanationalSO2program,they"drain"emissionsbelowtheregions373Ktoncap,thus  thiscapisnotbindingforthese13states.   PatCumminsthankedEPAforsharingtheseanalyses,andnotedthattheForumhadbeendiscussing t whetherBackstopprogramsareallowedunder308.HeexplainedthattheWRAPwillbeaskingfor ` moreclarificationonthispointfromtheEPA,andMs.Wegmanpromisedtoresearchtheissue. L  @//HOil&GasDevelopmentH $ t Lee_Alter_ԀthenmadeapresentationonOil&GasindustryandhenotedthattheO&Gindustryislikely  L  thesecondlargestsourceofNOxintheWRAPregion.Itisrelativelyhardtopullouttheexact  8  contributionofO&Gfromareasourceinventoriesbecausetheinventoriesmayhaveoverlapping $  contributionfromO&Gmixedinwithotheremissionsources.Forexample,inventoriessimplyshowa   totalindustrialgascombustion,someofwhichmaycomefromtheconsumer,ratherthanattheproducer   wellsite.Mr.Alternotedthatstatescurrentlyhavedifferentinventoryprocedures,thuswhatdatais   availableisthatmuchhardertointerpret.   MaryHilbertthenexplainedhowNewMexicoisapproachingtheirevaluationsoftheO&Gindustry. \ TheyhavebeenworkingextensivelyinSanJuanBasininNorthernNewMexicotoaddresspotential H ozoneproblems,andtheynowhaveanEarlyActionCompactinplacetolookatandminimize 4 emissionsfromtheO&Gindustry.  p RegardingWyoming,ChadSchlichtemeiernotedthatO&Gisoneofthelargestcomponentsofthe H Wyomingminorsourcepermittingload.LeeGriboviczaddedthatWyomingisdedicatingaspecific 4 efforttocalculatingemissionsfromtheO&Gfieldoperationsbydevelopingspecificemissionfactors   forindividualfieldactivities(ie/dehydration,condensateflashing,smallheaters,leaking&pneumatic   valvesandetc).  DanWalshexplainedthatMontanaalsohasaminorsourcepermittingprogramwhichprovidesfairly  completeanalysisoftheO&Gactivitiesinthestate.TheyhaverecentlycompletedanEISforNOx l emissionsinacoupleofcounties,wheretheyhaddetailedinventoriesandmodelingofO&Gactivities. X  ItwasnotedthatsincemostofthestatesweretacklingtheO&Ginventoryquestion,thatinformation 0"  wasexpectedtobeeventuallycapturedintheWRAPEDMSemissiondatabaseforimprovedWRAP #l! analysis.TherewasdiscussionthatthereisahierarchyinsignificanceofO&Gemissions,startingwith $X" thelargeinterstatepipelines,movingdowntotheprocessingandgatheringactivities,andendingatthe $D # fieldproductionactivities. %0!$ ThepointwasbroughtupthatprobablyNOxisthepollutantfromtheO&Gindustrythatmostimpacts '#& regionalhaze,butthequestionsrevolvingaroundVOCarenotverywelldefinedatthispoint.Itwas (#' pointedoutthatOrganicCarbonwasrightthere,alongwithSulfates,asthelargesttwomonitored )$(  componentsofhazeinthewest.ButitwasalsonotedthatOCcomesoverwhelminglyfrombiogenic |*%) emissions,aswellasfromareaandmobileinventorysectors.AndonceaVOCisintheatmosphere,  thenitisveryhardtodetermineitsspecificsource.   PatCumminssuggestedthattheSSJFneedstoestablishaworkgrouptoworkcloselywiththeEmission t ForumonevaluatingthisO&Gindustry,andLeeAlterwillcontactStationarySourcemembersto ` identifyacrewforthistask. L  @HAttributionofHazeH $ t TomMooregaveapresentationofthestatusoftheAoHwork,notingthatthefunctionofthis  L  Workgroupistoidentifythegeographicsourceofemissions,themassandspeciesdistributionof  8  emissionsbysourcecategory,andthenaturalvs.anthropogenicsplitofemissionsaffectingeachofthe $  WRAPregionClassIareas.Theywillthenprepare"simple"andclearsummariesoftheattribution   resultstopolicymakers,alongwithcompletedocumentationofalltheassumptions,methodologyand   uncertaintiesthatwentintotheanalysis.ThisWorkgrouphashadaninitialmeeting,andtheyare   movingtoobtaincontractorassistanceincompilingandanalyzingvariousWRAPdata(EIs,modeling,   monitoring,_etc_)fortheAttributionreport. p @}}HWorkPlanDiscussionH H RegardingNOx,theSSJFhasidentifiedtheelementofO&Gevaluationforfurtherattentionin2005.  p AlsoPatCumminssuggestedthattheForumneededtoconsideracontractforastudytoidentifyNOx  \ emissionsandcontrolcapabilityintheUtilitysector.AthirdcomponentoftheSSJFtaskistoanalyze H theunidentified"other"categoryofNOxemissions.ItwasnotedthatevaluationofBARTandnon 4 BARTsourceswillhelptoclarifythis"other"sector.   RegardingSO2,wereallyhavetogettheBARTandnonBARTsourcesidentifiedinthefourcontinental  WRAPstatesthatwerentevaluatedinthe309Annex(WA,MT,ND&SD).Andthemethodologyof  combiningthesenonGCVTCstatesintoamarketapproachwiththeBackstopMilestonesprogram  needssignificantwork.AnditwasnotedthattheSSJFmustdecidejusthowwidespreadthisprogram l willbe(5state,9state,13state,other???). X  PatCumminsexplainedthatheandtheWRAPstaff(TomMoore,LeeAlter)willworktogetadraft 0"  workplantogether.ThiswillbecirculatedtotheSSJFmembershipforreviewandcomment,before #l! incorporatingintheoverallWRAPworkplandevelopmentprocessthissummer.