Section 309 STIP-2 Project
Model TIP Template for
Section 309 of the Regional Haze Rule
(64 Federal Register 35714 – July 1, 1999)
FINAL
October, 2004
WRAP Air Manager’s Committee
Model TIP Author:
Rosanne Sanchez
New Mexico Environment Department
Model SIP Author:
Brian Finneran
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
TIP Working Group:
EPA Members:
Monica Morales, Region 8
Laurie Ostrand, Region 8
Laurel Dygowski, Region 8
Wienke Tax, Region 9
Doug McDaniel, Region 9
WRAP Staff:
Bob Gruenig, National Tribal Environmental Council
Bill Grantham, National Tribal Environmental Council
Acknowledgements:
Tom Moore, TSD author
WRAP Technical Coordinator
Lily Wong, EPA Region 9
Thomas Webb, EPA Region 9
Steve Body, EPA Region 10
Section 309 TIP Template
Table of Contents
TitlePage
I.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Overview of the Section 309 STIP-2 Project
B. Relation to the Model SIP
C. Relation to the Regional Technical Support Document
II.BACKGROUND ON THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE
A. Introduction
B. 1977 Clean Air Act
C. Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission
D. Western Regional Air Partnership
III.SECTION 309 TIP REQUIREMENTS AND TEMPLATE LANGUAGE
A. Projection of Visibility Improvement
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
B. Clean Air Corridors
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
C. Stationary Sources
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
D. Mobile Sources
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
E. Fire Programs
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
F. Paved and Unpaved Road Dust
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
G. Pollution Prevention
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
H. Additional Recommendations
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
I. Periodic Implementation Plan Revisions
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
J. Tribal Planning and Coordination with States and Tribes
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
K. Geographic Enhancements
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
L. Reasonable Progress for Additional Class I Areas
1.Regulatory Language
2.General Discussion of Rule Requirement
3.Template Language
4.Applicable WRAP Reports and Documents
IV.APPENDICES
Master List of TIP Appendices (A through T)
Appendix M. Complete Citation of Stationary Source Requirements in Section 309(f) and 309(h).
Appendix N: General Definitions in the Regional Haze Rule
Appendix O: Western Backstop SO2 Trading Program - Model Rule. (See Section C, Stationary Sources.)
Appendix P: EPA Completeness Criteria for the Regional Haze SIP
Appendix Q: Tribal Emissions Inventory Software Solution (TEISS)
Appendix R: List of Eligible Tribes
Appendix S: Fact Sheet. EPA’s Interim Air Quality Policy on Wildland and Prescribed Fires.
Appendix T: Interim Air Quality Policy on Wildland and Prescribed Fires
1
I.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Overview of the Section 309 STIP-2 Project
The STIP-2 Project was established to provide a model for preparing Section 309 Tribal and State Implementation Plans of the Regional Haze Rule (40 CFR 51.309). The Project addresses both tribal and state needs separately by having two templates. The template for tribes is referred to as the “Model TIP” and is included in this document. The template for states is referred to as the “Model SIP” and is the basis for the TIP template. Both templates include general language and other elements that are necessary in obtaining U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approval of regional haze implementation plans. The templates are intended to be “working” documents that will allow tribes and states to easily insert additional but appropriate language in their plans. The templates also list each of the 309 regulatory requirements, provide a general description of each requirement, and summarize the pertinent Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) policies and technical support documentation while discerning where this documentation should be inserted in an implementation plan.
As a result of recommendations developed by the Grand Canyon Transport Visibility Commission (GCVTC) in 1996, nine western states within the transport region (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming) have the option to follow Section 51.308 or Section 51.309 of the Regional Haze Rule (RHR). For those states choosing to follow Section 51.309, they must have submitted to the EPA by December 31, 2003, a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for protecting 16 federal Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau.[1] Indian tribes within the same transport region have the option of submitting a Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP), but are not held to the same deadlines or other requirements for which states must comply.[2]
Adoption of a regional haze TIP is optional for tribes. Tribes may adopt TIPs that include all of the Section 308 or 309 provisions of the RHR (as required of states in their SIPs), or a combination of both, and only those provisions that they believe applicable, and that both the EPA and tribe find to be reasonably severable for their specific circumstance. This flexibility is provided for under the Tribal Authority Rule[3] (TAR), which allows the EPA to treat tribes in the same manner as states for purposes of implementing air quality programs under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The TAR allows tribes to implement programs as they are developed, rather than in accordance with statutory deadlines. This independence means that regional haze (RH) strategies selected by tribes are not dependent upon the strategies selected by the state or states in which the tribe is located. A tribe may request a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) and the EPA will determine in consultation with the tribe if FIP provisions are necessary or appropriate to protect air quality.
Preparation of the 309 TIP and SIP will be a major undertaking by tribes and states due to the large amount of technical support documentation that will be needed. Section 309 of the RHR contains specific requirements, such as emissions inventories, for clean air corridors, stationary and mobile sources, fire, and paved and unpaved road dust. Recognizing that tribes and states have limited resources to effectively organize this information under a TIP or SIP, the Air Managers Committee of the WRAP saw a need for a model TIP and SIP that could be used for preparing 309 Implementation Plans. The Model SIP was patterned after the SIP/TIP Template developed by the Western States Air Resources Council (WESTAR) Regional Haze SIP Development Working Group in 2001.
The Model TIP contained in this document includes 12 chapters based on each requirement in Section 309. Each chapter contains four sections:
(1) the actual rule language;
(2) a description of the rule requirement and how a tribe will meet the requirement, using WRAP work products;
(3) the template language that a tribe can use in its regional haze TIP; and
(4) a summary of all WRAP reports and documents prepared to help a tribe meet
the applicable rule requirement.
At the end of the Model TIP is the Appendices section, which includes the following:
- A master list of all appendices referenced in the Model TIP template language, and a summary of what information is needed for each appendix;
- The complete regulatory text for stationary source 309 requirements, not included in Chapter C;
- A list of general RHR definitions that tribes should include in their TIPs;
- A model rule that tribes and states can adopt for the market trading program in Chapter C;
- EPA’s completeness criteria for SIPs and TIPs, from 40 CFR, Appendix V to Part 51;
- A description of the Tribal Emissions Inventory Software Solution (TEISS);
- A list of 185 federally recognized tribes located in the transport region;
- An EPA Fact Sheet on Wildland and Prescribed Fires; and
- EPA’s Air Quality Policy on Wildland and Prescribed Fires
The 309 Model TIP was developed by Rosanne Sanchez with the New Mexico Environment Department. The Model SIP was developed by Brian Finneran with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Assistance for both efforts is being provided by Tom Moore (WRAP Technical Coordinator) who assembled the Technical Support Document (TSD) for the WRAP. A working group of EPA representatives and the National Tribal Environmental Council (NTEC) staff members helped review this Model TIP.
B. Relation to the Model SIP
The Model SIP was intended to help states meet Section 309 requirements by the December 31, 2003 SIP submission deadline. The Model TIP closely resembles the Model SIP, but includes a separate guidance document for tribes that will aid in their decision of whether or not to develop and implement the 309 TIP on their own. There are three questions a tribe must ask.
- Does the tribe need an implementation plan to address regional haze?
- If the tribe needs an implementation plan, is a TIP or FIP more appropriate?
- If a TIP is more appropriate, what steps must the tribe follow in order to implement a TIP?
C. Relation to the Regional Technical Support Document
The regional TSD summarizes key information from WRAP technical forums and committees related to Section 309 of the RHR. This technical information is to be used by states and tribes for preparing SIPs and TIPs. Underlying the key information presented in the chapters of the TSD are the contractor reports prepared for the WRAP and technical memoranda. The analytical work described in the TSD evaluates the visibility improvement associated with regional strategies and programs, but does not describe specific state or tribal control strategies and regulatory programs. By recognizing this, we hope that any future data gathered may be more representative of tribes as they continue to advance in developing their skills and knowledge with respect to air quality. The Model TIP and SIP, and the TSD, are to be used jointly by tribes and states in preparing regional haze implementation plans. Throughout the Model TIP there are important references to TSD technical information needed to address each RHR requirement. The TSD is available at or on CD-ROM.
II.BACKGROUND ON THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE
A. Introduction
Regional haze is air pollution that is transported long distances and reduces visibility throughout the country. Over the years this haze has reduced the visual range from 145 kilometers (90 miles) to 24-50 kilometers (15-31 miles) in the East, and from 225 kilometers (140 miles) to 56-145 kilometers (35-90 miles) in the West. The pollutants that create this haze are sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, elemental carbon, and soil dust. Human-caused haze sources include industry, motor vehicles, agricultural and forestry burning, and windblown dust from roads and farming practices.
In 1999, the EPA issued regulations to address RH in 156 national parks and wilderness areas across the country (64 FR 35714). The goal of the RHR is to eliminate human-caused visibility impairment in national parks and wilderness areas across the country. It contains strategies to improve visibility over the next 60 years, and requires states to adopt implementation plans.
The EPA’s RHR provides two paths to address regional haze. One is Section 308, and requires states to develop long-term strategies out to the year 2064. These strategies must be shown to make “reasonable progress” by improving visibility in Class I areas[4] inside the state and in neighboring jurisdictions. The other is Section 309, and is an option for nine states[5] and the 185 tribes located within those states to adopt RH strategies for the period from 2003 to 2018. These strategies are based on recommendations from the GCVTC for protecting the 16 Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau area. Adopting these strategies constitutes reasonable progress until 2018. These same strategies can also be used by the nine western states and tribes to protect the other Class I areas within their own jurisdiction.[6] Tribes may adopt either a 308 or 309 RH TIP anytime prior to 2018 after which time they can only adopt a 308 RH TIP. In addition to these two options, tribes may also choose to adopt Section 308 in conjunction with Section 309.
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) is one of the main provisions in the RHR. It applies to certain industrial sources built between 1962 and 1977. Section 308 requires states to identify BART-eligible sources, estimate the expected visibility improvements, and determine BART for each eligible source. Section 309provides an alternative method of satisfying the 308 BART requirement by setting voluntary SO2 emission reductions for BART sources, with a backup market trading program if the SO2 reduction milestones are not met. This alternative to BART in Section 309 is referred to as the Annex (40 CFR Part 51, Revisions to Regional Haze Rule to Incorporate Sulfur Dioxide Milestones and Backstop Emissions Trading Program for Nine Western States and Eligible Indian Tribes Within that Geographic Area). SO2 reductions in the Annex have been demonstrated to be “better than BART” because, in part, the Annex addresses all stationary sources that emit 100 tons/year of SO2 and because more SO2 emission reductions are expected from the Annex than from BART.
The early development stages of the RHR are described in the following sections: 1977 Clean Air Act, Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission, and Western Regional Air Partnership.
B. 1977 Clean Air Act
In 1977, Congress amended the CAA to include provisions to protect the scenic vistas of the nation’s national parks and wilderness areas. In these amendments, Congress declared as a national visibility goal:
The prevention of any future, and the remedying of any existing impairment of visibility in mandatory class I federal areas which impairment results from
man-made air pollution.
To address this goal, the EPA developed regulations to reduce the impact of large industrial sources on nearby Class I areas. It was recognized at the time that RH, which comes from a wide variety of sources that may be far from a Class I area, was also a part of the visibility problem. However, monitoring networks and visibility models were not yet developed to the degree necessary to understand the causes of RH.
C. Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission
Amendments to the CAA in 1990 created the GCVTC. The Commission was given the charge to assess the currently available scientific information pertaining to adverse impacts on visibility from potential growth in the region, identify clean air corridors, and recommend long-range strategies for addressing RH. The GCVTC completed significant technical analyses and developed recommendations to improve visibility in the 16 mandatory federal Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau. The Commission found that visibility impairment on the Colorado Plateau was caused by a wide variety of sources and pollutants. A comprehensive strategy was needed to address all of the causes of RH. The GCVTC submitted these recommendations to the EPA in a report dated June 1996 for consideration in rule development. These recommendations were summarized as follows.
Air Pollution Prevention. Air pollution prevention and reduction of per capita pollution was a high priority for the Commission. The Commission recommended policies based on energy conservation, increased energy efficiency and promotion of the use of renewable resources for energy production.
Clean Air Corridors. Clean air corridors are key sources of clear air at Class I areas, and the Commission recommended careful tracking of emissions growth that may affect air quality in these corridors.
Stationary Sources. For stationary sources, the Commission recommended closely monitoring the impacts of current requirements under the Clean Air Act and ongoing source attribution studies. Regional targets for SO2 emissions from stationary sources should be set, starting in 2000. If these targets are exceeded, this will trigger a regulatory program, probably including a regional cap and market-based trading.
Areas In And Near Parks. The Commission's research and modeling showed that a host of identified sources adjacent to parks and wilderness areas, including large urban areas, have significant visibility impacts. However, the Commission lacked sufficient data regarding the visibility impacts of emissions from some areas in and near parks and wilderness areas. In general, the models used by the Commission were not readily applicable to such areas. Pending further studies of these areas, the Commission recommended that local, state, tribal, federal, and private parties cooperatively develop strategies, expand data collection, and improve modeling for reducing or preventing visibility impairment in areas within and adjacent to parks and wilderness areas.
Mobile Sources. The Commission recognized that mobile source emissions are projected to decrease through about 2005 due to improved control technologies. The Commission recommended capping emissions at the lowest level achieved and establishing a regional emissions budget, and also endorsed national strategies aimed at further reducing tailpipe emissions, including the so-called 49-state low emission vehicle, or 49-state LEV.
Road Dust. The Commission's technical assessment indicated that road dust is a large contributor to visibility impairment on the Colorado Plateau. As such, it requires urgent attention. However, due to considerable skepticism regarding the modeled contribution of road dust to visibility impairment, the Commission recommended further study in order to resolve the uncertainties regarding both near-field and distant effects of road dust, prior to taking remedial action. Since this emissions source is potentially such a significant contributor, the Commission felt that it deserved high priority attention and, if warranted, additional emissions management actions.