Air Quality Agreement
2002 Progress Report
-------
THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION REQUESTS YOUR COMMENTS
ON THIS REPORT
The Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement is now 10 years old, a new annex has been added, and reporting of the Air Quality
Committee routinely includes information on sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide reductions, cooperative air quality programs, noti-
fication and assessment actions, and research efforts related to aquatic environment, forest, materials and human health effects.
• Do you feel the agreement has been successful?
• Are there other transboundary air quality issues that should be addressed through this agreement?
• Are the progress reports useful?
The International Joint Commission (IJC) is responsible for inviting public comment on the Air Quality Agreement Progress Reports
and for providing a synthesis of the comments to the governments to assist them in implementing the agreement. Comments on any
aspect of the agreement would be appreciated.
Written comments on this report should be sent by February 28, 2003 to:
Secretary, Canadian Section
International Joint Commission
234 Laurier Avenue, West
22nd Floor
Ottawa, Ontario KIP 6K6
Fax: (613) 993-5583
Email: commission@ottawa.iic.org
Secretary, United States Section
International Joint Commission
1250 23rd Street, NW
Suite 100
Washington, DC 20440
Fax: (202) 467-0746
Email: commission@washington.iic.org
-------
Table of Contents
SECTION I INTRODUCTION l
SECTION II PROGRESS AND COMMITMENTS 2
Acid Rain Annex
Sulphur Dioxide Reductions 2
Nitrogen Oxides Reductions 3
Monitoring of Emissions 4
Prevention of Air Quality Deterioration and Visibility Protection 5
Notification, Assessment, and Mitigation of Significant Transboundary Air Pollution 7
Ozone Annex
Overview 8
Key Emission Reduction Commitments 9
Domestic Progress and Updates 9
SECTION III ADDITIONAL AIR QUALITY PROGRAMS 14
Cooperation on Particulate Matter 14
Domestic Programs to Address Particulate Matter 14
Other Cooperative Air Quality Efforts 18
Emerging Country Issues 20
SECTION IV SCIENTIFIC COOPERATION 21
Data Measurement and Analysis
Emissions Inventories 21
Acid Deposition Monitoring 23
Ground-Level Ozone Monitoring and Mapping 25
Particulate Matter Monitoring, Data Analysis, Modelling, and Mapping 28
Effects of Air Pollution
Health Effects 32
Aquatic Effects Research and Monitoring 34
Forest Effects 35
Effects on Materials 38
SECTION V CONCLUSION 40
SECTION VI SECOND FIVE-YEAR REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF THE
CANADA-UNITED STATES AIR QUALITY AGREEMENT 41
Introduction 41
Issues Raised in the 1996 Review 41
New Transboundary Air Issues 44
Conclusion 44
APPENDIX A: United States—Canada Air Quality Committee 45
B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex 47
C: Trend Site Monitoring Locations 56
i
-------
Figures
Figure 1 U.S. SO2 Emissions for Phase I and Phase II Units 3
Figure 2 U.S. N0X Emissions for Phase I and Phase II Electric Generating Sources 4
Figure 3 Canada - U.S. SO2 Emissions, 1980-2010 21
Figure 4 Canada - U.S. SO2 Emissions By Sector (1999) 21
Figure 5 Canada - U.S. N0X Emissions, 1990-2010 22
Figure 6 Canada - U.S. N0X Emissions By Sector (1999) 22
Figure 7 Canada - U.S. VOC Emissions By Sector (1999) 22
Figure 8 Canada - U.S. VOC Emissions, 1980-2010 23
Figure 9 1990-1994 Wet Sulphate Deposition 24
Figure 10 1990-1994 Wet Nitrate Deposition 24
Figure 11 1996-2000 Wet Sulphate Deposition 24
Figure 12 1996-2000 Wet Nitrate Deposition 24
Figure 13 Composite Trends: Annual Fourth Highest Daily Maximum 8-hr Ozone Concentration 26
Figure 14 Ozone Concentrations in the Eastern Regions of the U.S. and Canada (Average Annual Fourth Highest Daily
Maximum 8-Hour Ozone, 1998-2000) 27
Figure 15 Ozone Concentrations in the Western Regions of the U.S. and Canada (Average Annual Fourth Highest Daily
Maximum 8-Hour Ozone, 1998-2000) 27
Figure 16 Composite Trends: Annual Average Hourly N0X Concentration 28
Figure 17 Composite Trends: Annual Average 1-Hour Hydrocarbon Concentration 28
Figure 18 1999-2000 Average Concentrations of Particle-Sulphate and Particle-Nitrate Concentrations 31
Figure 19 Annual Average U.S. PM2.5 Concentrations, 1999-2000 31
Figure 20 Frequency Distribution of Average Percent Forest Subjected to Levels of Ozone Injury 37
Figure 21 Trend Sites for Annual Fourth Highest Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Concentration 56
Figure 22 Trend Sites for Annual Average Hourly N0X Concentration 57
Figure 23 Trend Sites for Annual Average Hourly Hydrocarbon Concentration 58
-------
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACDEP Atmospheric Chemistry and Deposition model
AIRMoN Atmospheric Integrated Research Monitoring
Network
AQC Air Quality Committee
AQI Air Quality Index
ARNEWS Acid Rain National Early Warning System
AURAMS A Unified Regional Air Quality Modelling System
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BART Best Available Retrofit Technology
BAT Best Available Technology
BC British Columbia
BDPS Boundary Dam Power Station
CAPMoN Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring
Network
CASTNet Clean Air Status and Trends Network
CCME Canadian Council of the Ministers of the
Environment
CEM continuous emissions monitoring or monitors
CEPA Canadian Environmental Protection Act
CFS Canadian Forest Service
CHRONOS Canadian Hemispheric and Regional Ozone and
N0X System
CL critical loads
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CMAQ Community Multiscale Air Quality model
CUTA Canadian Urban Transit Association
CWS Canada-Wide Standards
E-GRID Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated
Database
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
eq equivalence
FHM Forest Health Monitoring
FRM Federal Reference Method
g/bhp-hr grams per brake horsepower hour
g/mi grams per mile
IMPROVE Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments
km kilometres
kt kilotonnes
LRTAP Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution Protocol
MACT maximum achievable control technology
mm millimetre
MERS Multi-pollutant Emission Reduction Strategies
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MRP Materials Research Program
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NADP/NTNNational Atmospheric Deposition
Program/National Trends Network
NAMS National Air Monitoring Stations
NAPS National Air Pollution Surveillance
NARSTO North American Research Strategy for
Tropospheric Ozone
NCPTT National Center for the Preservation of Technology
and Training
NEG/ECP New England Governors and Eastern Canadian
Premiers
NERAQC Northeast Regional Air Quality Committee
NESCAUM Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use
Management
NH4 Ammonium
NO nitrogen oxide
NOx nitrogen oxides
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NPRI National Pollutant Release Inventory
O3 Ozone
OTC Ozone Transport Commission
PEMA Pollutant Emission Management Area
PM particulate matter
PM10 particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns
PM2.5 particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns
ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
PSD prevention of significant (air quality) deterioration
REMSAD Regional Modelling System for Aerosols and
Deposition
RESEF Quebec Forest Intensive Monitoring Network
RPO Regional Planning Organization
SIP State Implementation Plan
SLAMS State and Local Air Monitoring Stations
SMB simple mass-balance
SO2 sulphur dioxide
SO42 sulphate ion
SPM special purpose monitors
SUV sport utility vehicle
TEOM Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance
USFS U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service
VOC volatile organic compound
\im3 cubic micrometres
-------
-------
SECTION I
Introduction
The 2002 Progress Report is the sixth report under the 1991
Canada—U.S. Air Quality Agreement and the first to address new
requirements under the Ozone Annex (Annex III), signed by
Canada and the United States in Washington in December
2000. This report highlights actions undertaken by Canada and
the United States in the last two years to address transbound-
ary air pollution under the Agreement—namely acid rain and
ground-level ozone. The report, prepared by the bilateral Air
Quality Committee (AQC), builds on previous progress reports and
includes the second five-year comprehensive review of the Air
Quality Agreement.
Actions to address acid rain in the last two years have been sig-
nificant both in the United States and in Canada. In Canada, total
sulphur dioxide (SO?) emissions are already 20% below the national
emission cap commitment of 3.2 million tonnes. New emission
reduction targets have been set for SO2 under the Canada-Wide
Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000. In addition, the Canada-wide
Standards for Particulate Matter (PM) will result in further reduc-
tions. The United States has achieved a reduction in SO2 emis-
sions of about 35% when compared with 1980 levels. Full
implementation in 2010 will result in a 10-million-ton reduction
of SO2 emissions, approximately 40% below 1980 levels.
The amendments to the Air Quality Agreement to address
ground-level ozone were comprehensive and far-reaching.
Based on the domestic legislation adopted by each country to
achieve long-term ozone reduction, the amendments committed
the Parties to aggressive measures to reduce emissions of nitro-
gen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), the pre-
cursors to ground-level ozone and contributors to transboundary
air pollution. To track progress and report to the public, the Ozone
Annex set in place commitments to report the Ozone air quali-
ty levels from ambient air quality monitors within 500 kilome-
tres (km) of the U.S.—Canada border starting in 2002 and
industrial facility emissions starting in 2004. The first of these
air quality reports is contained on pages 26-28 and 56-58 of the
2002 Progress Report. Finally the Ozone Annex made new com-
mitments to undertake joint research and technical work that will
support the reduction of emissions and the achievement of the
air quality standards.
Joint work resulting from the 1997 Joint Plan of Action for
Addressing Transboundary Air Pollution on ground-level ozone
and particulate matter (PM) led to the Ozone Annex. Cooperative
efforts to address transboundary PM are now underway and are
reported in the 2002 Progress Report. The Report also outlines coop-
erative efforts on acid deposition monitoring, emissions invento-
ries and forecasts, and air quality programs in both countries.
The second five-year comprehensive review of the Air Quality
Agreement is set in the context of an amended, enhanced
cooperative Agreement. Clearly, the fact that the Ozone Annex
was negotiated and addresses an issue of concern to both Parties
demonstrates that the Agreement can be a valuable instrument
for bilateral cooperation. The review addresses issues raised in 1996
when the first review was undertaken, outlines where progress has
been made, and indicates where challenges continue to exist.
Note: Canadian spelling is used throughout. Future reports will
alternate the use of Canadian and American spelling.
-------
SECTION II
Progress and Commitments
This section focuses on Canadian and U.S. progress in meeting commitments under Annex 1, the Acid Rain Annex, and
Annex 3, the Ozone Annex, of the Air Quality Agreement.
Acid Rain Annex
SULPHUR DIOXIDE REDUCTIONS
Canadian Commitment
• Sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions reduction in the seven east-
ernmost provinces to 2.3 million tonnes1 by 1994.
• Maintenance of 2.3 million-tonne annual cap for eastern
Canada through December 1999.
• Pemianent national cap for SO2 emissions of 3.2 million tonnes
by 2000.
Canada is committed to reducing acid rain in all parts of the coun-
try to levels below those that cause harm to ecosystems. In the
year 2000, total Canadian sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions were
2.5 million tonnes, which is about 20% below the national cap
of 3.2 million tonnes and a 45% reduction from 1980 emission
levels. The 1.6 million tonnes of emissions in the seven east-
ernmost provinces in 2000 were 29% below the eastern Canada
cap of 2.3 million tonnes. Forecast of emissions developed by the
federal—provincial Emissions and Projections Working Group indi-
cate that emissions will remain below all applicable caps well into
the future.2 Significant further reductions of SO2 will result from
reduction initiatives not included in the forecasts, those coming
into effect after 2000, such as the new SO2 targets under The
Canada-Wide Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000,3 and federal and
provincial implementation activities to achieve the Canada-Wide
Standards for particulate matter (PM).
Measures to implement the permanent national cap of 3.2 mil-
lion tonnes per year by 2000 and the 2.3 million-tonne eastern
Canada cap were initially undertaken through the Eastern
Canada Acid Rain Program, under bilateral agreements between
each respective province and the federal government. This pro-
gram, which ended in 2000, is being succeeded by the
Canada-Wide Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000. This strategy calls
for a number of actions designed both to deal with the contin-
uing acid rain problem in eastern Canada and to prevent the
problem from occurring in other parts of the country. In partic-
ular, the Strategy calls for further emission reductions in the
provinces of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia.
In fulfillment of this commitment, each of these provinces has
announced a 50% reduction in its existing emissions cap estab-
lished under the Eastern Canada Acid Rain Program. Quebec, New
Brunswick, and Nova Scotia are committed to doing so by 2010.
Ontario committed to meet its new cap in 2015; however, a pro-
posal to advance the timeline to 2010 is under consideration (see
provincial updates, pp. 14-16).
U.S. Commitment
• SO2 emissions reduction of 10 million tons4 from 1980 lev-
els by 2000, taking into account credits ("allowances") earned
for reductions from 1995 to 1999.
• Permanent national cap of 8.95 million tons of SO2 per year
for electric utilities by the year 2010.
• National SO2 emissions cap of 5.6 million tons for industrial
sources beginning in 1995.
In 2001, the second year of Phase II of the Acid Rain Program,
all participating sources achieved a total reduction in SO2 emis-
sions of about 32% when compared to 1990 levels and over 35%
from 1980 levels. Compared with 2000 levels, these sources
reduced SO2 emissions by 5%, or 572,000 tons. In 2000, sources
emitted approximately 10.6 million tons, some 1.08 million tons
more than the allowances granted for the year, reflecting the use
of banked allowances. The bank of allowances used in 2000 was
less than in 2001; however, it is expected to decrease as sources
continue to comply with stringent Phase II requirements. The
number of participating units in 2001 was 3,065. Full imple-
mentation of the program in 2010 will achieve a 10 million-ton
reduction of SO2 emissions, about 40% below 1980 levels.
During Phase II, allowance market trading under the SO2
Allowance Trading Program continues to increase steadily
1 One tonne is equal to 1.1 short tons.
2 Forecast emissions are interim estimates using 1999 values reported by the provinces and territories. The forecasts are projected with
growth factors calculated from total provincial changes in emissions found in the Emissions and Projections Working Group Consensus
National Base Case Forecast. 2002.
3 The Canada-Wide Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000 can be found at http://www.ec.gc.ca/acidrain/done-canada.html.
4 One (short) ton is equal to 0.907 tonne.
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
18
16
14-
12 -
10-
_o
*co 4
in
£ 2
m o
7-9 0
16.09
15.73
6.79
7.03
9.40
9.30
8.70
11.87
7.51
¦ ¦ ¦
7.81
¦
6.57
¦ ¦ B
7.07
¦ ¦ ¦
5.30
5-44
5-47
5.29
12.46
7-52
10.63
10.63
80 85 90 95 96 97 98 99 00 01
~ Phase I Sources ~ All Sources
~ Phase II Sources
Allowances allocated during that year
U.S. SO? Emissions for Phase I and Phase II Units
Figure 1
among all participants, contributing to lower than expected costs
for reducing emissions. SO2 allowance trading is the centrepiece
of the Acid Rain Program, under which all affected utility units
are allocated a specific number of allowances authorizing the
emission of one ton of SO2. The allowances are tradable, and util-
ities may buy, sell, or bank them for future use. Every year each
individual source must hold allowances that equal or exceed its
annual emissions.
The Online Allowance Transfer System (OATS), introduced by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in December 2001, is
expected to further accelerate trading of SO2 as well as N0X
allowances (see p. 13 for N0X budget trading information). OATS
enables participants to record trades directly on the Internet rather
than submit paper forms to EPA for processing. By the end of April
2002, the monthly record of SO2 and N0X transfers using the sys-
tem was 94.5%.
Industrial SO2 emissions from stationary sources continue to
remain below the 5.6 million-ton cap and are projected to remain
below for at least the next 10 years. Should emissions from these
sources exceed the cap, EPA is authorized to establish regulations
to reduce emissions to below 5.6 million tons.
NITROGEN OXIDE REDUCTIONS
Canadian Commitment
By 2000, reduce stationary source emissions 100,000 tonnes
below the forecast level of 970,000 tonnes.5
By 1995, develop further annual national emissions reduction
requirements from stationary sources to be achieved by 2000
and/or 2005.
Implement an N0X control program for mobile sources.
Nitrogen oxide (XOx) emissions have been reduced by more than
100,000 tonnes below the forecast level of 970,000 tonnes at power
plants, major combustion sources, and metal smelting operations.
In relation to further reducing annual national emissions,
Canada is developing programs to reduce N0X emissions in a
number of areas (see section III, p. 14). The provinces and the fed-
eral government are working together to achieve multi-pollutant
emission reductions for pollutants contributing to PM and
ozone for key industrial sectors. Through analytical studies, pol-
lutants that cause PM and ozone (including NOx) will be char-
acterized and best available technologies (BAT) identified to assist
jurisdictions in developing plans to meet the Canada-wide
Standards for PM and Ozone by 2010. These plans are expected
to include measures and actions to reduce emissions of N0X.
The proposed On-Road Vehicle and Engine Emission Regulations
and Sulphur in Diesel Fuel Regulations, in combination with cur-
rent regulations and programs, will result in a 60% reduction in
N0X emissions from on-road vehicles in the year 2010 compared
with the year 2000.
U.S. Commitment
• By 2000, reduce total annual emissions of N0X by 2 million tons.
• Implement stationary source control program for electric
utility boilers.
• Implement mobile source control program.
Reductions in N0X emissions have significantly surpassed the
two-million-ton reduction for stationary and mobile sources man-
dated by the 1990 Clean Air Act. Under the Acid Rain Program
alone, N0X emissions in 2001 continue to be about three million
tons below what they would have been. In 2001, N0X emissions
for the 2,626 affected sources were 4.69 million tons, which was
;!:!!;!!!UI1]]!1]
5 The 970,000 tonnes is forecast for 2005 in the ]\IOX/VOC Emission Forecast 90-B from the 1990 NOx/VOC Management Plan.
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
6.66*.
I 6-°9 5.91 6.04 5-97
Jl ll IIZZII 1 549
5-53 5-44
90 95 96 97
¦ NOx-affected Sources
~ Title IV Sources not affected for NOx
Project emissions without Title IV
U.S. NOx Emissions for Phase I and Phase II
Electric Generating Sources
Figure 2
0.42 million tons, or 8.2%, lower than 2000 levels and 1.97 mil-
lion tons, or 30%, lower than in 1990.
Under continuing implementation of the Clean Air Act Amendments
(CAAA) requirements for mobile sources, EPA announced in
December 2000 a major program to significantly reduce emissions
from heavy-duty engines and vehicles. The program will reduce
precursor emissions from trucks and buses by 95% beyond cur-
rent levels. This comprehensive 50-state control program regulates
the heavy-duty vehicle and its fuel as a single system. New emis-
sion standards will begin to take effect in 2007 and will apply to
heavy-duty highway engines and vehicles operated on any fuel.
The program will reduce emissions in 2030 of N0X by 2.6 million
tons and nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC) emissions by
115,000 tons per year. Particulate emissions from these vehicles
would be reduced by 109,000 tons per year in 2030.
The particulate matter (PM) emissions standards for new heavy-
duty engines of 0.01 grams per brake horsepower hour (g/bhp-hr)
will take effect in the 2007 model year. Standards for N0X and
NMHC are 0.20 g/bhp-hr and 0.14 g/bhp-hr, respectively. These
standards will be phased in together for diesel engines between
2007 and 2010 on the same schedule as standards for complete
heavy-duty vehicles. For vehicles between 10,000 and 14,000
pounds, the standards are 0.4 grams per mile (g/mi) for
N0X, 0.02 g/mi for PM, and 0.23 g/mi for NMHC. Standards for
diesel fuel specify that beginning in June 2006 fuel sold to con-
sumers for use in highway vehicles have a sulphur content no
greater than 15 ppm (parts per million). Current sulphur content
in fuel is about 500 ppm.
The United States is also moving forward with implementing
December 1999 tailpipe emissions and low-sulphur fuel standards
for light-duty vehicles (Tier 2). These standards, will take effect
in 2004 and include new requirements for sport utility vehicles.
The new standards will require passenger vehicles to be 77% to
95% cleaner than those on the road today and will reduce the
sulphur content of gasoline by up to 90%.
Additional N0X reductions will be achieved as a result of efforts
to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for
ozone (see p. 12) and for PM (see p. 16).
Since 1999, EPA's work with nine northeastern states and the
District of Columbia in the Ozone Transport Region to implement
a trading program for N0X, known as the N0X Budget Program,
has led to reductions of N0X emissions by more than 50% from
1990 levels. In 2001, sources emitted approximately 193,000 tons,
11% below the allocation for that year.
Furthermore, EPA has finalized the N0X SIP Call to reduce ozone
in the eastern United States. This topic is discussed under the
Ozone Annex subsection of this report (see pp. 12-13).
MONITORING OF EMISSIONS
Canadian Commitment
• By 1995, estimate emissions of N0X and SO2 from new elec-
tric utility units and existing electric utility units greater than
25 megawatts electric (MWe) using a method of comparable
effectiveness to Continuous Emissions Monitors (CEMs).
• By 1995, investigate feasibility of using CEMs.
• Work toward comparably effective methods of emission
estimation for SO2 and N0X emissions from other major sta-
tionary sources.
Having met the existing Air Quality Agreement commitments,
Canada is studying the use of continuous emissions monitoring
(CEMs) in the context of the implementation of market-based con-
trol programs such as emissions trading. Under the Ozone
Annex, both governments agreed to cooperate and exchange
information with respect to their analysis of and experience with
market-based mechanisms, including emissions trading. Emission
trading programs have been successful in the United States in pro-
viding flexibility to industrial emission sources regarding their
reduction options while achieving substantial emission reductions
and improved ecosystem and human health.
At this time, reviews of CEMs undertaken in Canada have
revealed that the Environment Canada 1993 guidelines for CEM
systems, "Protocols and Perfomiance Specifications for Continuous
Monitoring of Gaseous Emissions from Thermal Power
Generation," Report EPS l/PG/7, compare favourably with the
U.S. 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 75 specifications
for CEMs in accuracy and precision of data. At the same time,
the EPS 1/ PG/7, allows the use of calculations for determining
emission flow rather than requiring the installation and use of
flow monitors at each industry source. This facilitates an uncer-
tainty that the U.S. Part 75 monitoring requirement would not
permit in an emissions trading program.
Furthermore, a U.S. requirement that all industrial sources
involved in emissions trading must report their data electronically
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
—
CEM monitor for SO2, NOx and CO2
to the U.S. EPA in electronic data report format is not mirrored
in Canada.
At this time, the preliminary conclusions of the Canadian
reviews are that EPS l/PG/7-compliant CEM systems in Canada
would meet Canadian monitoring requirements for domestic pur-
poses but that these might have to be enhanced to meet the needs
of transboundary emissions trading if such a joint program were
to be developed in the future.
U.S. Commitment
• By 1995, new electric utility units and existing units greater
than 25 MWe operate CEM systems.
CEMs are widely used in the United States. All affected utilities
under the Acid Rain Program installed the required CEMs by 1995,
and CEMs continue to provide some of the most accurate and
complete data Collected from utility units. All coal-fired units must
use CEMs to measure concentrations of SO2 and N0X as well as
volumetric flow to determine hourly mass emissions of SO2 and
N0X. Those natural gas and oil-fired units that do not use CEMs
use fuel flow meters and frequent fuel sampling and analysis to
determine mass SO2 emissions for conservative emission factors.
These units must also use CEMs with volumetric flow to deter-
mine N0X mass emissions.
Relative accuracy standards for CEMs at Phase I and Phase II units
remained at continuing high levels in 2001. These standards were
met respectively by 96.7%, 93%, and 99.2% of the SO2, N0X, and
volumetric flow CEMs. In 2001, availability of data exceeded 99%
for coal-fired units and approximately 98% for oil and gas units.
In 2001, for the second year, 100% of affected sources were report-
ing hourly emissions electronically. Electronic reporting allows
immediate quality assurance analyses by EPA's Emissions Tracking
System, feedback to utilities, and verification of quarterly data com-
piled from hourly data on SO2, N0X, and carbon dioxide (CO2).
Quarterly emissions reports for every affected unit are available
to the public on the Internet at www.epa. gov/airmarkets.
Data from CEMs provide the foundation for the SO2 Allowance
Trading Program as well as the N0X Budget Trading Program and
are used to determine compliance with both the SO2 and the N0X
reduction programs.
PREVENTION OF AIR QUALITY
DETERIORATION AND VISIBILITY
PROTECTION
Canadian Commitment
• By 1995, develop and implement means (comparable to
those implemented in the United States) for prevent air qual-
ity deterioration and to ensure visibility protection for sources
that could cause significant transboundary air pollution.
Canada
Canada is addressing this commitment to prevent deterioration
of air quality and to ensure protection of visibility through the
implementation of Canada-wide Standards for PM and Ozone and
through the Canada-Wide Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000.
In addition to achievement of the Standards for PM and Ozone
by the 2010 target date, implementation of principles such as pol-
lution prevention, continuous improvement (CI), and keeping clean
areas clean (KCAC) are part of the Canada-wide Standards and
will prevent the deterioration of air quality and address the pol-
lutants involved in impairment of visibility. The KCAC principle
recognizes that polluting "up to a limit" is not acceptable and that
the best strategy to avoid future problems is to keep clean areas
clean. CI applies in areas with ambient levels below the levels of
the standards but still above the levels associated with observ-
able health effects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to take remedi-
al and preventive actions to reduce emissions from anthropogenic
sources to the extent practicable. Over the next year, jurisdictions
will be cooperatively developing a national guidance document
on CI/KCAC.
Federal, provincial, and territorial governments will work with
stakeholders over the next several years to establish imple-
mentation plans and programs for PM2.5 and Ozone Canada-wide
Standards that apply pollution prevention and best management
practices. These practices could include ensuring that new
facilities and activities incorporate the best available econom-
ically feasible technologies to reduce PM and ozone levels and
reviewing new activities that might contribute to PM and
ozone level increases.
The largest contributor from stationary sources is the electric
power sector. Therefore, the Government of Canada is taking steps
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
to tighten emission limits for key air pollutants from new fossil
fuel power plants. Following consultations with partners and
stakeholders, Environment Canada plans to issue revised emis-
sion guidelines under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act
(CEPA) during fall 2002.
The "Thermal Power Generation Emissions - National Guidelines
for New Stationary Sources" are intended to provide national
emission standards for application by the provinces to new coal,
oil, and gas-fired steam-electric power plants.
The revised guidelines include emission limits for SO2, N0X, and
total PM consistent with the performance capability of current
economically feasible best available technologies. This is based
on information from the United States, Germany, and other west-
ern European nations on emission requirements being applied to
power plants and on the demonstrated performance capabilities
of best available technologies in these jurisdictions. In particu-
lar, the proposed revisions will align with U.S. standards and best
available control technology (BACT) determinations.
U.S. Commitment
• Maintain means for preventing significant deterioration of air
quality and protecting visibility as required under the Clean
Air Act for sources that could cause significant transbound-
ary air pollution.
The U.S. Prevention of Significant Air Quality Deterioration (PSD)
program is designed to protect public health from any adverse
effects that might occur from the addition of new sources of air
pollution, even at levels lower than the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). The program is also a means of pre-
serving, protecting, and enhancing air quality in Class I areas,
such as large national parks and wilderness areas, by assessing
impacts on visibility and other air quality-related values before
construction permits are issued. These reviews and procedures
ensure that economic growth occurs in harmony with the
preservation of clean air.
The PSD program sets limits on air quality degradation to
ensure that air quality in many areas of the country remains bet-
ter than levels mandated by the NAAQS. The program establishes
three classes of land areas that require BACT for all new sources.
EPA has issued visibility protection rules for federally designat-
ed Class I areas. The original rules issued in 1980 focused on the
impacts of new and existing "nearby" sources. Regulations issued
in 1999 address visibility impairment by many sources located
across broad geographic areas. States are now working together
in five regional planning organizations to develop strategies to
address haze. Individual states will then develop implementation
plans designed to achieve "reasonable progress" toward the
national visibility goal of no human-caused impairment in the 156
mandatory Class I Federal areas across the country.
Glacier Lake National Park: good to poor visibility day
at the same location
Source: National Park Service
6
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
States are required to establish goals to improve visibility on the
20% worst days and to allow no degradation on the 20% best
days for each Class I area in the state. In establishing progress goals,
states must analyze the rate of progress for the next 10-to- 15-year
implementation period that, if maintained, would achieve nat-
ural visibility conditions within 60 years from the baseline period
of 2000 through 2004. In addition, State plans must, among other
things, include requirements for Best Available Retrofit Technology
(BART) on certain large existing sources (or use of an alterna-
tive emissions trading program). In 2001, EPA issued draft
guidance for implementation of BART requirements, tracking
progress, and estimating "natural conditions." A portion of the
regional haze rule, the BART provisions, was vacated by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in June 2002,
although other portions were ratified.
Regional haze plans are due in the 2005 to 2008 time frame for
most states. The states and regional planning organizations (RPOs)
collected monitoring data and emissions inventory data and
assessed regional modelling tools in 2001. (For information on
RPOs, see p. 17). Technical assessments will continue for the next
few years. One provision of the regional haze rule allows nine
Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission States (i.e.,
Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico,
Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming) to submit initial plans in 2003 to
implement their past recommendations within the framework of
the national regional haze program. Many of these states are pur-
suing that option.
The new regional haze regulations require ambient monitoring
representative of each of the Class I areas to track progress toward
the U.S. national visibility goal. Required regional haze trend
assessments will be based on changes in visibility expressed in
deciviews.6 To facilitate these assessments, the aerosol portion of
the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments
(IMPROVE) visibility network was expanded from 30 to 110 sites
in 2001. The expanded network is representative of all Class I areas
where monitoring can be practicably implemented. IMPROVE sites
are collecting speciated fine particle sampling on a schedule
matching that of the ambient air quality monitoring network
known as State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) (see
section IV, p. 25).
Implementation of the PM and ozone NAAQS, in conjunction with
the regional haze program, is expected to improve visibility in
urban as well as rural areas across the country. Other air quali-
ty programs that are expected to bring about reductions in emis-
sions will also improve visibility. The Acid Rain Program, by
achieving significant regional reductions in SO2 emissions, is
expected to reduce sulphate haze, particularly in the eastern United
States. The ozone transport reduction rule, or N0X State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Call, which will cut emissions from
sources of N0X to reduce the formation of ozone, should also
improve regional visibility to some degree.
In addition, visibility in Class I areas should improve as a result
of a number of other programs, including mobile source emis-
sions and fuel standards, certain air toxics standards, and the
implementation of smoke management and woodstove programs
to reduce fuel combustion and soot emissions. Under the visibility
protection program, state and Federal land managers are explor-
ing options for management of smoke from wildfires to help
achieve health and visibility requirements.
NOTIFICATION, ASSESSMENT, AND
MITIGATION OF SIGNIFICANT
TRANSBOUNDARY AIR POLLUTION
Joint Commitment
• Each party shall notify the other concerning a proposed action,
activity, or project that would be likely to cause significant
transboundary air pollution.
Notification
Canada and the United States have ongoing notification procedures,
established in fall 1994, to identify possible new sources and mod-
ifications to existing sources of transboundary air pollution with-
in 100 kilometres (km)—62 miles—of the border. Each government
is also notifying the other of new sources or modifications of con-
cern beyond the 100 km limit. Since the last progress report,
Canada has notified the United States of 6 additional sources, for
a total of 26. The United States has notified Canada of 9, for a
total of 23. Transboundary notification information is available
on the Internet sites of the two governments at:
Canada: www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/can_us/canus_applic e.cfm
U.S.: www.epa.gov/ttn/gei/uscadata.html
Canada and the United States are reporting significant continuing
progress on joint monitoring efforts arising from successful, ongo-
ing consultations on the Boundary Dam Power Station (BDPS),
near Estevan, Saskatchewan, and the Algoma Steel Plant, near
Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. In 2000, a binational consultation group
of Federal, State, provincial, and BDPS authorities developed a five-
year monitoring plan for the Estevan community, an area around
the power station on both sides of the border.
SaskPower, the operator of BDPS, is installing electrostatic
precipitators (ESPs) on the stacks at the power station over a five-
year period beginning in October 1999. By the end of 2001, ESPs
were installed and operational at three 150 MW units. The last two
6 A measure of visibility that captures the relationship between air pollution and human perception of visibility. When air is free of parti-
cles that cause degradation, the Deciview Haze Index is zero. The higher the deciview level, the poorer the visibility.
7
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
Boundary Dam Power Station
66 MW units will be worked on next.
Unit 6, which is 300 MW, was originally
built with an ESP.
As a result of the installation of ESPs on
the power station, the monitoring network
will capture changes in air quality before
and after the complete installation of
this control technology. The first report of
ambient air monitoring data from the net-
work will be completed this year and post-
ed on the Internet. Data from 1999 to 2000
showed no exceedance of any ambient air
quality standards at any of the sites.
In continuing consultation regarding the Algoma Steel Mill,
Canadian and U.S. representatives of the Federal, State, and provin-
cial governments, the Inter Tribal Council in Michigan, the
Ontario provincial regional health unit, and the Algoma Steel com-
pany met to discuss transboundary issues of concern in the com-
mon airshed in October, 2001. Ontario gave a detailed air quality
monitoring report for the airshed, using data from both Canada
and the United States. There were exceedances of air quality stan-
dards for total dustfall and fine particulate on the Ontario side
(Bonney St. site near the steelworks). There have been only two
exceedances of total dustfall at one site in Sault Ste. Marie,
Michigan, and both were the result of road dust and natural
sources. So far, the dustfall monitoring results on the U.S. side show
only traces of coarse particulate matter (coal, coke, kish, coal soot,
iron oxide) normally associated with steel mill/works emissions.
To enhance air quality monitoring in the transboundary airshed
and to help develop comparable Canada—U.S. air quality data for
use in reporting information to the public, a Canadian and U.S.
ambient air quality monitor had been installed earlier in the year
at a location downwind of the Algoma Steel plant, at the Lake
Superior State College complex in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. The
installation was reviewed at the October, 2001 meeting. The con-
sultation will continue among the governments and other inter-
ested groups within the context of the guidelines set by the
Canada—U.S. Air Quality Committee for such discussions.
Assessment and Mitigation
The benefits of progress made by Canada and the United States
in assessment and mitigation have continued despite different inter-
pretations of the commitment under the Air Quality Agreement
(see 1996 Progress Report and Five-Year Review). Joint inter-
governmental information sharing and cooperation between the
United States and Canada continue, as demonstrated by Windsor-
Detroit issues such as the Minergy proposal and the Detroit
Incinerator permit. For example, when the Detroit Incinerator per-
mit was under review for Title 5 requirements, both countries,
including Federal, State, and provincial representatives, partici-
pated in a joint teleconference call to exchange information on
the facility and on the results of air quality studies that had been
completed in the study area surrounding
the incinerator. The teleconference call
concluded with the creation of joint infor-
mation distribution lists for the Windsor-
Detroit notification area.
The United States has continued to
improve and update the electronic data-
base—The Emissions and Generation
Resource Integrated Database (E-GRID)—
that reports publicly available emissions
and generation data for virtually every
power plant and company that generates
electricity in the United States. E-GRID was initiated in 1999 in
response to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's adop-
tion of the open access transmission policy and Canada's con-
cerns about possible increased transboundary flow of emissions.
The current version, E-GRID 2000, reports plant-specific emis-
sions and emission rates for mercury for the first time. E-GRID
2002, which is expected to be available in the latter part of 2002,
will create an interactive on-line version allowing data to be more
easily accessed. The E-GRID Web site is located at
www.epa.gov/airmarkets/egrid.
Ozone Annex
OVERVIEW
The Ozone Annex to the Air Quality Agreement was signed by
Canada and the United States in December 2000 in Washington,
D.C. (See Appendix B for complete text.) The Annex is expect-
ed to result in significant reductions of emissions of N0X and
VOCs, the precursor pollutants to ground-level ozone, the major
component of smog. It defines a transboundary region in each
country most associated with flows of ozone pollution. In
Canada, the region includes central and southern Ontario and
southern Quebec (more than 50% of Canada's population). In the
United States, the region covers 18 states and the District of
Columbia (approximately 40% of the U.S. population).
The Annex commits to emission reductions from the major sources
of N0X and VOCs, thereby helping both countries attain their air
quality goals to protect human health and the environment. These
key reduction commitments are summarized below. In addition,
the monitoring and reporting requirements in the Annex com-
mit the Parties to reporting annual emissions from major source
categories beginning in 2004; reporting ambient air quality within
500 km of the border between Canada and the lower 48 U.S. states
beginning in 2002; improving public access to information on
emissions and air quality; and consulting and sharing respective
information on data, tools, and methodologies and developing
joint analyses on ground-level ozone and precursors. The Annex
also requires the Parties to revisit the agreement in 2004 to review
progress in implementing their respective commitments, with a
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
y
view to negotiating further reductions. At the same time, Parties
can add new transboundary regions.
KEY EMISSION REDUCTION
COMMITMENTS
Canada
Canada estimates that total N0X reductions in the Canadian trans-
boundary region will be 44% year-round by 2010.
• Aggressive annual caps by 2007 of 39 kilotonnes (kt) of nitro-
gen dioxide (NO2) emissions from fossil-fuel power plants in
central and southern Ontario and 5 kt of NOg in southern
Quebec aligned with U.S. standards year-round.
• New stringent emission reduction standards regulated to
align with the United States to reduce N0X and VOCs from
vehicles and fuels including cars, vans, light-duty trucks, off-
road vehicles, small engines, diesel engines, and fuel.
• Measures required to attain the Canada-wide Standard for Ozone
to address N0X emissions from industrial boilers and to address
VOCs emissions from solvents, paints, and consumer products.
United States
The United States estimates that the total N0X reductions in the
U.S. transboundary region will be 36% year-round by 2010 and
43% during the ozone season.
• The N0X emission reduction program, known as the N0X SIP
Call, is expected to reduce summertime N0X emissions in the
U.S. transboundary region by about 35% in 2007. EPA
expects that this will be achieved by a more than 70% reduc-
tion in summertime emissions from power plants and major
industrial sources.
• N0X and VOC reductions are associated with existing U.S. vehi-
cle and fuel quality rules and standards for new and modified
stationary sources. VOC reductions are associated with stan-
dards for stationary sources of hazardous air pollutants,
consumer and commercial products, architectural coatings, and
automobile repair coatings.
DOMESTIC PROGRESS AND UPDATES
Joint Efforts
The Ozone Annex commits Canada and the United States to
reporting ozone, VOC, and N0X ambient air concentrations
within 500 km of the border. The two governments are meeting
this commitment. Air quality reporting data is provided on pages
26-28 and in Appendix C, pages 56-58.
Canada
In February 2001, the Canadian government announced an imple-
mentation plan and a funding package toward the costs of
implementing measures committed in the Annex
(http://www.ec.gc.ca/press/2001/010219_n_e.htm). The high-
lights of the package include the following measures:
• Canada will implement new emissions standards for vehicles and
engines and the fuels that power them over the next four years.
• Environment Canada will expand and refurbish federal and
provincial networks of air quality monitoring stations across
Canada in the next five years.
• Canada will expand the National Pollutant Release Inventory
(NPRI) in 2002 to include annual public reporting of precur-
sors of ground-level ozone and components of smog such as
N0X, VOCs, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and CO.
• Canada has committed further investments toward industri-
al programs to reduce N0X and VOC emissions from industrial
sectors and to address regional risk analyses to characterize
major sources of smog in Canada and assess progress to meet
the Canada-wide Standards with modelling of transboundary
air pollution.
Since 2000, Canada has made progress in meeting all of the com-
mitments included in the Ozone Annex.
Vehicles, Engines, and Fuels
The Sulphur in Gasoline Regulations were passed on June 23,
1999. Starting in 2005, low-sulphur gasoline will be required
throughout Canada. Low sulphur gasoline has an average sulphur
level of less than 30 parts per million (ppmj. As an interim step,
starting in July 2002 gasoline with an average sulphur level of
not more than 150 ppm will be required.
The proposed Sulphur in Diesel Fuel Regulations were published
in the Canada Gazette, Parti, on December 22, 2001. A 15-ppm
maximum limit for on-road diesel fuel sulphur content is pro-
posed to come into effect in 2006. This standard will enable new
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
technology that will be used in heavy-duty on-road vehicle
engines to meet emission control standards that come into effect
in 2007. The final regulations are being developed for publica-
tion in the Canada Gazette, Part II, in early fall 2002.
The proposed On-Road Vehicle and Engine Emission Regulations
were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on March 30, 2002
and had a 60-day comment period. A final regulation will be
developed for implementation in the 2004 model year. The pro-
posed regulations align Canadian emission standards for on-road
vehicles and engines with the Tier 2 levels in the United States
The On-Road Vehicle and Engine Emission Regulations are the
first of a series of planned regulations for vehicles and engines.
Off-road vehicles and engines are being addressed for the first
time in Canada, and a discussion draft of the Small Spark Ignition
Engine Emissions Regulations is the subject of consultation with
major stakeholders before formal proposal in the Canada Gazette,
Part 1, scheduled for fall 2002. These proposals will be followed
by proposals for off-road diesel engines, marine engines (out-
boards and personal watercraft), large spark ignition engines
(engines above 19 kW), and recreational vehicles (such as snow-
mobiles and ATVs).
The proposed regulations are consistent with Environment
Minister David Anderson's 10-year Plan of Action for Cleaner
Vehicles, Engines and Fuels announced on February 19, 2001. The
plan includes Canadian emission standards for vehicles and
engines aligned with those of the United States in EPA measures
targeted at improving the quality of diesel fuels and gasoline.
Pending the final implementation of the proposed vehicle and
engine regulations, memoranda of understanding have been
signed with automobile and engine manufacturers covering on-
road vehicles and selected categories of off-road engines. The
memoranda provide for vehicles and engines for the Canadian
market to have the same emission controls as those for the U.S.
market. In the case of on-road vehicles, the memorandum of
understanding complements existing emission regulations under
the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
With respect to fuels, Canada is proposing to reduce sulphur in
fuel oils with the view to matching the requirements set by the
European Union (1% by weight sulphur in heavy fuel oil and 0.1%
by weight sulphur in light fuel oil). Once implemented, this ini-
tiative will result in the reduction of SO2 and wet sulphate dep-
osition concentrations, mostly in eastern Canada.
Stationary Sources of NOx Emissions
Canada will comply with its commitment to achieve a 39 kt NO2
emission cap in the Ontario portion of the Pollutant Emission
Management Area (PEMA) by 2007 from fossil fuel-fired elec-
tricity generators with capacities larger than 25 megawatts.
New regulated electricity sector emission caps in Ontario took
effect January 1, 2002. At the same time, the province introduced
an emission reduction trading system, a new environmental
assessment regulation for electricity sector activities, and require-
ments for Lakeview Generating Station to cease burning coal by
April 2005.
Discussions are underway between the federal government and
the Quebec provincial government regarding compliance with the
commitment to cap NO2 emissions in the Quebec portion of the
PEMA at 5 kt by 2007.
On December 8, 2001, Canada published a notice in the Canada
Gazette initiating a public comment period on the proposed
Renewable Low-Impact Electricity Guideline, the purpose of which
is to update criteria under s.54 of CEPA, 1999, for the certifica-
tion and labelling of renewable low-impact electricity under the
government's Environmental Choice Program. The Government
of Canada has committed to purchase, by 2006, 20% of its elec-
tricity consumption as emerging renewable low-impact electricity
having an acceptable environmental certification.
Sources of VOCs
Paints, solvents, and other industrial, commercial, and consumer
products are major sources of VOCs that contribute significant-
ly to air pollution. A 10-year federal agenda is being developed
to reduce VOCs emissions from consumer products and from
paints, solvents, and other products used in industrial and com-
mercial processes. Development of foundation infomiation is being
completed and includes an analysis of U.S. measures, refinement
of inventory information, and a review of temporal factors relat-
ing to VOCs emissions from solvents. Proposed elements of the
agenda are taking shape and will be discussed with affected stake-
holder groups starting in spring 2002. Broad multi-stakeholder
consultations will begin in fall 2002 with the distribution of a
discussion document outlining all elements of the proposed fed-
eral agenda. A multi-stakeholder workshop is scheduled for early
2003, and consultations will wrap up by the end of 2003.
Following these consultations, the measures for the federal
10
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
agenda will be finalized and published as a Notice of Intent in
the Canada Gazette, Part I.
In addition, Canada is developing two regulations that will reduce
VOCs: The Degreasing Regulation is currently being reviewed and
publication in the Canada Gazette is anticipated in 2002. The Dry
Cleaning Regulation was published in the Canada Gazette I on
August 18, 2001 and is expected to come into force later in 2002
with the publication of the Canada Gazette II notice.
Measures for NOx Emissions based on
Multi-Pollutant Emission Reduction
Strategies
Certain industrial sectors will be important contributors to the
achievement of the Canada-wide Standards for PM and Ozone.
Canada is preparing foundation analysis reports for key sectors:
pulp and paper, lumber and allied wood products, concrete batch
and asphalt mix, base metal smelting, and iron and steel. The
information is being prepared in consultation with provinces and
stakeholders and is expected to be completed by fall 2002. The
reports will contain a description of the sector, emissions
released, performance standards, available pollution prevention
and control techniques, and preliminary analyses of technical-
ly feasible emission reduction options. Provinces and territories
will use the reports in preparing their implementation plans.
Quebec
The Province of Quebec made progress in meeting its commitments
in the Ozone Annex. Amendments to Le Reglement sur la qualite
de l'atmosphere du Quebec ("Quebec's Regulation respecting the
Quality of the Atmosphere") have been proposed to reduce N0X
emissions from new and modified industrial and commercial boilers
in accordance with the Canadian Council of the Ministers of the
Environment (CCME) code and measures requiring the replacement
of burners on an existing unit by low N0X burners. The proposed
amendments also include measures to reduce VOC emissions from
surface coatings, commercial printing, dry cleaning, and above-
ground storage tanks.
Currently, Quebec is implementing the existing Reglement sur les
produits petroliers du Quebec ("Quebec's Regulation on Petroleum
Products") concerning gasoline volatility for the summer months
in the Montreal Urban Community's territory and for the Hull-
Pointe-aux-Trembles part of the Windsor—Quebec corridor with
a mandatory initiative for lower gasoline volatility.
With respect to amendments to "Quebec's Regulation on
Petroleum Products" to reduce VOC emissions from gasoline dis-
tribution networks, Quebec has implemented a mandatory pro-
gram for the Montreal Urban Community territory. The regulation
will address stage I initiatives including gasoline storage and trans-
fer depots for new installations in the Windsor—Quebec corridor
and for existing installations in the Hull-Pointe-aux-Trembles part
of the Windsor—Quebec corridor.
Ontario
Ontario has made progress toward its commitments under the
Ozone Annex. The province's Drive Clean program is expected
to reduce C02 emissions by 100,000 tonnes once fully imple-
mented and has already achieved a reduction in smog-causing
pollutants of 11.5% in the first phase. Drive Clean initially applied
to owners of designated passenger and light-duty vehicles reg-
istered in the Greater Toronto Area (City of Toronto and the regions
of Halton, Peel, Durham, and York), the City of Hamilton, and other
urban centres and their commuting zones from Peterborough to
Windsor. On July 1, 2002, the program expanded across south-
ern Ontario's smog zone and now includes vehicles registered in
centres such as Ottawa, Kingston, and Cornwall in eastern
Ontario and Chatham-Kent in southwestern Ontario.
Stage II of the vapour recovery regulation is not required at this
time, since new vehicles now have an onboard canister for col-
lecting vapour during filling. Similarly, Ontario has been imple-
menting its regulation of volatility of gasoline at 9 pounds per
square inch (psi) during the summer months in southern Ontario
and 10.5 psi in northern Ontario for a number of years. No addi-
tional activities are required at this time. The Ontario Ministry
of the Environment is currently updating the Dry Cleaners
Operators course to provide comprehensive environmental train-
ing for dry cleaners.
Ontario has also implemented the CCME guidelines on turbines
and boilers and the CCME guideline for new and modified com-
mercial/industrial boilers and heaters.
The Ozone Annex calls for a regulation (Ontario Environmental
Protection Act Regulation 227/00) to be applied to the electricity
sector requiring annual monitoring and reporting of 28 pollutants
of concern along with a commitment to extend the monitoring
requirements to other industry sectors. Regulation 127/01, effec-
tive May 1, 2001, covers 358 pollutants and applies to electric-
ity, industrial, commercial, and institutional facilities.
United States
Revised Ozone Standards
The revised ozone7 and PM standards (for PM, see section III, p. 16)
had been challenged in 1997 by various industry groups, based in
part on the claim that the EPA interpretation of the Clean Air Act
in setting these standards represented an unconstitutional delega-
tion of authority. In February 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld
the constitutionality of the Clean Air Act as EPA had interpreted it,
7 The revised primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) ozone standards are based on 8-hr average ozone concentrations to pro-
tect against longer exposure periods of concern for human health and the environment. The 8-hr ozone standards are set at a level of
0.08 ppm and are met when the three-year average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hr concentration is less than 0.08 ppm.
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
reversing a 1999 opinion issued by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia and reaffirmed that EPA must set air
quality standards at levels necessary to protect public health and
welfare without consideration of economic cost. In March 2002, the
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected
all remaining challenges to EPA 1997 8-hr ozone standard relat-
ing to whether the standards were arbitrary and capricious by unan-
imously finding that EPA engaged in "reasoned decision-making"
in establishing the standard. In its initial 1999 decision, however,
the court directed EPA to consider any potential beneficial health
impacts from ground-level ozone. EPA's proposed response to this
directive was published on November, 2001, in the Federal Register.
The directive concluded that no revision to the 8-hr ozone standard
was warranted. A final response is anticipated in August, 2002.
8-Hour NAAQS Implementation
EPA plans to propose an implementation program in July 2002
and take final rulemaking action on designating areas for the eight-
hour (8-hr) standard a year later. EPA plans to designate 8-hr ozone
nonattainment areas in mid-2004. EPA has posted a variety of
materials regarding implementation options on the following web-
site: www.epa.gov/ttn/rto/ozonetech/o3imp8hr/o3imp8hr.htm
The Ozone Transport Reduction Rule and
Related Actions
In September 1998, EPA finalized the Ozone Transport Reduction
Rule» known as the N0X SIP Call, which addresses the regional
transport of ground-level ozone. By improving air quality and
reducing N0X emissions, the actions directed by the required state
SIPs will decrease the transport of ozone across state boundaries
in the eastern half of the United States. The final rule does not
mandate which sources must reduce pollution; states will have
the ability to meet the rule's requirements by reducing emissions
from the sources they choose. However, utilities and large non-
utility point sources would be the most likely sources of N0X
reductions. The final rule includes a model N0X Budget Trading
Program which will allow states to achieve more than 90% of the
required emissions reductions in a highly cost-effective way.
EPA's final action was subject to legal challenge by a number of par-
ties. In March 2000, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit issued a 2 to 1 ruling in favour of EPA on all major
issues associated with the N0X SIP Call. The court remanded sever-
al issues to EPA for further consideration. As a result, EPA split the
N0X SIP Call into two phases. Nineteen states and the District of
Columbia (D.C.) are now required to submit SIPs under Phase I.8 (The
original N0X SIP Call included the 19 states and Wisconsin, Georgia,
and Missouri.) The rule now requires emission reduction measures
to be in place by May 2004. As of June 2002, EPA has published
final approval for SIPs submitted by 15 states-Massachusetts,
Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Maryland,
Alabama, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, West
Virginia, South Carolina, and the District of Columbia.
Phase I is expected to achieve 90% of the emission reductions
required under the original N0X SIP Call. Phase I will reduce total
summertime N0X emissions in the affected 19 states and the
District of Columbia by about 23% from 1996 levels (approxi-
mately 900,000 tons) beginning in 2004. This will help reduce
ozone levels in the remaining nonattainment areas east of the
Mississippi River.
EPA issued a proposed rulemaking addressing the issues remand-
ed by the court (Phase II of the N0X SIP Call) in February, 2002
and expects to complete the final action later in 2002. The EPA
proposal addresses definitions for electric generating units and
nonelectric generating units, the control level for stationaiy inter-
nal combustion engines, how cogenerators should be included,
emission limits for Georgia, Missouri, Alabama, and Michigan,
the removal of Wisconsin from the SIP Call, and due dates for
Phase II for all affected states.
In January 2000, EPA issued the Section 126 Rule for the
purpose of reducing the interstate transport of ozone. EPA devel-
oped this rule in response to petitions from eight states asking that
EPA find that N0X emissions from certain utilities and other indus-
trial sources in 30 upwind states and the District of Columbia are
significantly contributing to their ozone nonattainment problems.
EPA partially granted petitions from Connecticut, Massachusetts,
New York, and Pennsylvania under the 1-hr ozone standard.9 As
8 The 19 states are Alabama. Connecticut, Delaware. Illinois. Indiana, Kentucky. Massachusetts. Maryland. Michigan. North Carolina, New
Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.
9 All eight petitioning states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont)
requested findings under the 1-hr ozone standard. EPA denied petitions for the one-hour standard filed by Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode
Island, and Vermont because these states no longer had areas that were not attaining the 1 In standard. Five states also requested find-
ings under the 8-hr standard. For each petition, EPA made separate technical determinations for the 1-hr and 8-hr ozone standards. EPA
has stayed its action under the 8-hour standard.
-------
SECTION II: Progress and Commitments
a result, 392 facilities, located in 12 states and the District of
Columbia, will have to reduce ozone season N0X emissions by a
total of about 510,000 tons from projected 2007 levels. All of the
sources affected by the Section 126 Rule are located in states sub-
ject to the N0X SIP Call. EPA promulgated a Federal N0X Budget
Trading Program as the control remedy. This trading program is
integrated with the trading program that states may choose to
adopt to meet the N0X SIP Call requirements.
The Section 126 Rule was also legally challenged by a num-
ber of parties. The court subsequently suspended the compli-
ance deadline for the majority of sources subject to the rule
until EPA resolved one of the remanded issues related to emis-
sions growth factors. The administrator signed the EPA
response to that remand in April , 2002, at which time EPA
established a new compliance date of May 2004. EPA is coor-
dinating the two ozone transport rules such that if a state con-
trols its transported N0X emissions under the N0X SIP Call, EPA
will withdraw the requirements for sources in that state under
the Section 126 Rule.
Other Regulatory Efforts
Other N0X reductions under the ground-level ozone provisions
of the CAAA that are expected to significantly lower future emis-
sion levels—the heavy-duty diesel rule, Tier 2, and vehicle fuel
standards—are reported in section II, p. 4 as part of mobile sources
regulatory efforts. In addition, EPA is implementing rulemaking
on smaller sources of VOCs, including consumer and commer-
cial products, that contribute approximately 28% annually to VOC
emissions for areas in the United States that do not meet the ozone
NAAQS. VOC, along with N0X, are the major contributors to
ground-level ozone.
Under EPA's final rules issued in 1998 and effective in 1999, the
following VOC reductions were achieved: consumer products, 20%
from 1990 emission levels; architectural and industrial mainte-
nance coatings, 20% from 1990 levels; and automobile refmishing
coatings, 33% from current levels.
State Efforts
Attainment Demonstrations
The Clean Air Act requires each state containing an area desig-
nated nonattainment for ozone to submit an attainment demon-
stration plan to meet the ozone standard. EPA recently approved
attainment demonstration plans for 10 major urban areas:
Atlanta, Baltimore, Houston, New York, Philadelphia, Chicago,
Milwaukee, western Massachusetts, greater Connecticut, and
Washington, D.C. Attainment demonstrations for these areas will
involve 13 states and the District of Columbia.
The Clean Air Act specifies certain measures that must be
adopted in nonattainment areas—reasonably available control
technology on major sources and vehicle inspection and main-
tenance, for example; however, each state can choose the addi-
tional measures needed for attainment. The rulemaking action
for each plan provides details of the control measures the plan
relies upon.
Northeast Ozone Transport Region
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments established the Northeast
Ozone Transport Region (OTR) and the Ozone Transport
Commission (OTC) in recognition of long-standing regional
ozone problems in the northeastern United States. The OTC com-
prises the governors or their designees and an air pollution con-
trol official from Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Vermont, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. Administrators
for three northeastern EPA regions also participate. The purpose
of the OTC is to assess the formation and transport of ground-
level ozone in the OTR and develop strategies for mitigating the
interstate pollution.
The OTC states have decided on a number of steps to reduce
regional ozone pollution; for example, they have agreed to sig-
nificantly reduce N0X emissions throughout the region from large
stationary sources such as power plants and other large fuel com-
bustion sources using market-based approaches. This program is
expected to reduce 1990 baseline emissions by 52%. The OTC has
developed several model rules for states to adopt to control VOC
and N0X emissions and has also focused on reducing emissions
from mobile sources.
13
-------
SECTION III
Additional Air Quality Programs
This section focuses on the expanding cooperative efforts the United States and Canada have undertaken and the progress
they have made on air quality issues, including particulate matter (PM). Other air quality efforts undertaken internationally,
through provincial-state cooperation and public/private partnership, are also reported.
COOPERATION ON
PARTICULATE MATTER
Cooperative Efforts
Canada and the United States have continued their cooperative
efforts to address PM as an outgrowth of the Joint Plan of Action
signed in April 1997 by the environmental ministers and the min-
isters' 1998 report characterizing transboundary issues. Over the
past two years, the two governments have undertaken cooper-
ative modelling, monitoring, and data analysis and developed a
work plan to characterize transboundary contributions of PM.
Their objective is to issue a report on transboundary PM issues
by the end of 2003 that will be the focus of decision-making on
whether to develop a PM annex to the Air Quality Agreement
(for more detail, see section IV, p. 28).
DOMESTIC PROGRAMS TO ADDRESS
PARTICULATE MATTER
Canada
Federal Initiatives
The federal government of Canada has identified clean air as a
national priority. In May 2000, Canada announced the devel-
opment of a Clean Air Agenda aimed at improving air quality
in Canada and reducing negative impacts on human health and
the environment. The federal government's action on PMio and
ozone is one of a number of immediate and long-term efforts
developed under the Clean Air Agenda.
In May 2001, the federal government added PMio to the List of Toxic
Substances in Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection
Act 1999 (CEPA 1999). Efforts are also being undertaken to
address the precursor pollutants to PM and ozone. In July 2000 and
June 2001, respectively, the federal government announced its inten-
tion to recommend to the Governor in Council that the principal
precursors to PM (SO2, N0X, VOCs, and NH4) and ozone and its pre-
cursors (N0X and VOCs) be added to Schedule 1 of CEPA. These
announcements launched 60-day periods during which interested
parties had the opportunity to provide the ministers of Environment
and Health with comments regarding the proposals. The comments
are currently being considered by the ministers prior to their rec-
ommendation to the Governor in Council, which will initiate an addi-
tional 60-day comment period under CEPA. In April, 2001, the
federal government of Canada published its Interim Plan 2001 on
Particulate Matter and Ozone which outlines the initial strategies
the government will pursue to reduce levels of PM and ozone and
meet the targets agreed to under the Canada-Wide Standards process.
Specific areas identified for action in the Interim Plan include
transportation and petroleum fuels as well as stationary sources.
The plan also provides for further scientific research and analy-
sis of the smog problem, better ambient air monitoring and report-
ing, and public education.
Furthemiore, Canada is expanding the National Pollutant Release
Inventory (NPRI) in 2002 to require industries to report on their
emissions of several criteria air contaminants, including PM, N0X,
SO2, and VOCs, and, under the Interim Plan, Canada is also imple-
menting multi-pollutant emission reduction strategies for key
industrial sectors.
Provincial/Regional Air Management
Initiatives
British Columbia
British Columbia (BC) continues to identify PM and ozone as key
air quality issues and to work actively with other levels of gov-
ernment to address them. A separate section of this report
addresses the Canada—U.S. Georgia Basin Initiative, which pro-
vides a context for actions in the Canadian portion of this air-
shed (referred to as the Lower Fraser Valley). See p. 19.
The Lower Fraser Valley Air Quality Coordinating Committee
actively coordinates the efforts of the federal and provincial envi-
ronmental agencies with those of the Greater Vancouver Regional
District (GVRD) and Fraser Valley Regional District (FVRD), each
of which has an air quality management plan aimed at main-
taining and improving air quality in the region. The committee
also provides a mechanism for informal coordination with the
Northwest Air Pollution Authority (the local air quality author-
ity for Whatcom County in Washington State). The GVRD has
been delegated provincial powers for air quality management (one
of only two such regional agencies in Canada), and the FVRD
has been delegated planning powers for air quality. Detailed
information on air quality management efforts in both regions
can be found at www.gvrd.bc.ca/services/air/index.html and
www.lVrd.bc.ca/home.html.
14
-------
SECTION ill: Additional Air Quality Programs
The Lower Fraser Valley coordinating mechanism has been
effective in cooperatively addressing a number of issues, includ-
ing an assessment and update of BC's AirCare light-duty vehi-
cle inspection and maintenance program; an evaluation of the
mandatory AirCare OnRoad testing program for heavy-duty diesel
vehicles; and a joint technical assessment of major new sources
such as the Sumas 2 power generation proposal, including an
inter-agency air quality report.
In transportation, BC remains committed to adopting the U.S. Tier 2
new vehicle standards, preferably by harmonizing them with
national standards; BC is providing a fuel tax exemption to encour-
age the use of natural gas, propane, and high-level alcohol blends
to help reduce emissions related to smog, fine particle formation,
and greenhouse gases. BC has also established a Voluntary
Scrapping of Older Vehicles Program (SCRAP) which provides
financial incentives to take older polluting vehicles off the road
and, in addition, provides support to enhanced transit under a
province-wide cost-sharing program for cycling infrastructure and
a network of high-occupancy vehicle lanes in the Greater
Vancouver area.
Provincial efforts are currently focused on improving under-
standing of PM2.5 sources and levels and developing a framework
for airshed planning that can be applied to threatened airsheds
and to helping keep clean areas clean.
Nova Scotia
Nova Scotia released an Energy Strategy in December 2001 that
includes commitments to reduce emissions of SO2 and N0X and to
promote the production of renewable energy. The province has com-
mitted to a 25% reduction of its existing SO2 cap, to 142,000 tonnes,
by 2005 and has a 2010 target of reducing SO2 emissions from exist-
ing sources by 50% to 94,500 tonnes. The gap between the emis-
sion target for existing sources and the 142 kt target established in
2005 is to establish a reserve that could be used to reduce the cap
if further studies show that such a reduction is necessary. In addi-
tion, the reserve could be Used to provide room for new facilities
(i.e„ related to Nova Scotia's growing offshore industry) without com-
promising the: environment. All new facilities will be expected to
operate using best available, proven technologies to minimize emis-
sions. The province has also committed to a 20% reduction from
2000 N0X levels by 2009.
The Energy Strategy also includes a short-term renewable ener-
gy target totalling 2.5% of Nova Scotia Power's current gener-
ation capacity. This target will be monitored for three years, at
which time a longer term mandatory renewable energy portfolio
standard will be established.
Ontario
Ontario has committed to reducing the province's SO2 emissions
50% beyond the Countdown Acid Rain Program cap of 885 kt
per year by 2015 under the strategy. Under the Anti-Smog Action
Plan (ASAP), Ontario committed to reducing N0X and VOC emis-
sions by 45% below 1990 levels by the year 2015.
Ontario announced several other initiatives during the 2001-2002
period, including those presented in section I, under the Ozone
Annex (see p. 11), and the following:
• Consultation is ongoing for a "Clean Air Plan for Industry" to
develop options for addressing N0X and SO2 reductions from
selected industry sectors. This could include emission caps for
major industrial emitters, including sectors such as pulp and
paper, cement, iron and steel, petroleum refineries, chemicals,
and non-iron metal smelters.
• The Ontario government has also proposed to consult on reduc-
ing the sulphur content in fuel oil and coal used by industry,
commercial, institutional, and residential sources to further
reduce provincial sulphur dioxide emissions.
• Ontario will continue to work with the federal government and
Ontario stakeholders to adopt process-specific CCME "codes
of practice" for VOC, a key component of smog.
• In 2002 Ontario will revise an order to Inco and Falconbridge
to reduce the allowable limits of annual emissions of SO2 by
34% by 2007.
Quebec
Since 1998, the Communaute Urbaine de Montreal (Montreal Urban
Community), the Departement de sante publique de Montreal-centre
(Department of Health - Montreal Centre), and Environment
15
-------
SECTION III: Additional Air Quality Programs
Canada have been working together to determine the impact of
wood heating on air quality in a residential neighbourhood. The
results will be used to help develop a Quebec-wide educational cam-
paign to improve wood stove use to reduce emissions of pollutants
in general and of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in particular.
In 1994, Environment Canada, the Ministere de l'Environnement
du Quebec (Quebec Ministry of the Environment), the Departement
de sante publique du Quebec (Quebec Department of Public
Health), and the Communaute Urbaine de Montreal, now the City
of Montreal, established the INFO-SMOG program as a way of
advising the public to limit its activities and take measures to
reduce smog-producing emissions on days when ozone levels are
high. The program has been extended to the entire southwestern
part of Quebec.
Through a partnership among two industry associations in the
Montreal area, the Ministere de l'Environnement du Quebec, and
Environment Canada, a 60% drop in benzene and a 40% drop
in VOCs were measured in the ambient air, the results of volun-
tary adjustments to equipment in Montreal refineries, the intro-
duction of gasoline vapour recovery equipment as required by
municipal by-laws, and the reduction of benzene content and the
gasoline dispensing flow rate, as required by regulations enacted
under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.
In addition, partnerships (EnviroclubMO) have been formed
between small and medium-sized manufacturing companies to
demonstrate the benefits of pollution prevention and help them
implement a technical source reduction program. In 2001, 18 small
and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) joined EnviroclubMO, and
the environmental results have been highly encouraging, con-
sisting of a 4,396 kilogram (kg) drop in VOCs emissions and a
59,117 tonne drop in greenhouse gas emissions.
United States
Revised PM Standards
In July 1997, EPA established revised national ambient air
quality standards for PM and ozone (for ozone, see section II,
p. 12), having concluded in the last reviews of these standards
that further protection from adverse health effects was needed.
Two new PM2.5 standards were added to provide protection from
fine particles. New annual and 24-hour primary PM2.5 standards
were set at 15 micrograms per cubic metre (pg/m3) and 65 pg/m3,
respectively. Secondary PM2.5 standards were made identical to
the primary standards and will be implemented in conjunction
with a revised visibility protection program to address regional
haze in Federal Class I areas. EPA is currently conducting the next
periodic review of the PM standards, which is now targeted for
completion in late 2003/early 2004.
In 1997 various industiy groups and others challenged the revised
PM (and ozone) standards, in part based on the claim that the EPA
interpretation of the Clean Air Act in setting the standards rep-
resented an unconstitutional delegation of authority. In February
2001, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the
Clean Air Act as EPA had interpreted it, reversing a 1999 opin-
ion issued by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia, and reaffirmed that EPA must set air quality standards
at levels necessary to protect public health and welfare without
consideration of economic cost. On March 26, 2002, the U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected all
remaining challenges to the EPA 1997 revised PM standards relat-
ing to whether those standards were arbitrary and capricious by
unanimously finding that EPA engaged in "reasoned decision
making" in establishing those standards.
As a result of the court decisions, EPA is continuing to implement
the 1987 PM10 NAAQS and will begin the process of designating
areas that do not meet the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS this year.
Implementation of the PM10 NAAQS means continuing to apply
the regulatory and statutory requirements of the 1990 Clean Air
Act to existing PM10 nonattainment and attainment areas. This
includes requiring additional emission reductions and establishing
new attainment dates in nonattainment areas. The latest attain-
ment date that can be established under the Clean Air Act is
December 31, 2006. For those PM10 nonattainment areas that have
attained the NAAQS, EPA continues to encourage states to
pursue redesignation to attainment to ensure that the NAAQS can
be maintained into the future. For attainment areas, EPA wants
to ensure that attainment of the NAAQS is maintained and that
existing regulatory programs remain in place unless a persuasive
demonstration is made that would allow the state to modify
existing requirements.
In conjunction with state and local agencies, EPA began ambient
monitoring of PM2.5 in 1999 (see pp. 29 and 31) and will have
three years (1999—2001) of quality assured PM2.5 air quality data
by the summer of 2002 for many areas in the United States. The
first step in the implementation process will be to designate geo-
graphic areas within the United States as attainment, nonat-
tainment, or unclassifiable according to their air quality data and
other factors. Preliminary analyses of the data show that areas
not meeting the PM2.5 standard are likely to be located prima-
rily across a broad region of the eastern United States and in
California. States have up to one year (by the summer of 2003)
to make recommendations regarding attainment and nonattain-
ment areas using the first three years of data. EPA will then pro-
ceed to finalize designations by the summer of 2004.
Based upon the final EPA designations, states will have up to three
years (summer 2007) to submit SIPs, which will outline the con-
trol strategies necessary to attain the NAAQS. Attainment of the
NAAQS is to be as expeditious as practicable but no later than
five years from the date of designation, or summer 2009. If the
state is unable to demonstrate attainment by summer 2009, then
EPA can extend the attainment date up to another five years to
summer 2014. Similarly, for the 2000-2002 data, EPA expects to
have three years of complete quality-assured PM2.5 data for the
entire United States in the summer of 2003; that states will make
-------
SECTION ill: Additional Air Quality Programs
designation recommendations in the summer of 2004; and that
EPA wili finalize those designations in late 2004.
Since PM2.5 is a regional problem, the United States is concerned
about the issue of interstate transport. Under the Clean Air Act,
the SIP for any state must demonstrate that sources within the state
do not contribute significantly to violations of the PM2.5 NAAQS
in another state. Therefore, EPA will begin work shortly on an
analysis of the regional transport of PM2.5 that may be used to
support development of a rule to address the interstate transport
of PM2.5 and its precursors. EPA expects to begin technical analy-
ses to support the rule in 2003, with completion of the technical
work in 2004 and proposal of the rule in 2005-6. This rule is
expected to go forward whether or not President Bush's Clear Skies
Initiative (see p. 20) is enacted in legislation and will provide reduc-
tions needed to ensure attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS.
Implementation of PM SIP programs as well as current plans to
develop a regional haze rule to return visibility in Class I areas
to natural conditions (see pp. 6-7). are very closely related and
will enhance efforts to improve visibility throughout the coun-
try. Many of the milestones in the regional haze rule are triggered
by the designation process for PM2.5.
Regional Haze/Regional Planning
Organizations
Since the pollutants that lead to regional haze can originate from
sources located across broad geographic areas, EPA has encour-
aged the states and tribes across the United States to address the
impairment of visibility from a regional perspective. Congress pro-
vided the first funding in 1999 to establish RPOs to address region-
al haze on a multi-state level, rather than state-by-state. Five:
organizations were initially designated as funding organizations:
the Ozone Transport Commission for the Northeast; the Southeast
States Air Resources Management (SESARM) for the Southeast;
Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) for the
Midwest; Central States Air Resources Agencies (CenSARA) for
the central states; and the Western Regional Air Partnership
(WRAP) for the West.
As they worked to organize in their initial grant year, four of the
newly identified organizations (all but WRAP) created new
organizations to accommodate changes in state alignment and
to separate the regional haze funds and work from their other
funding and work. The RPOs for regional haze are as follows;
• The Mid-Atlantic/North East Visibility Union (MANE-VU)
includes Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
Washington, D.C. The Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use
Management (NESCAUM) and Mid-Atlantic Regional Air
Management Association (MARAMA) are working in
cooperation with the OTC on regional haze issues.
• The State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS)
includes states that are also members of the Southern
Appalachian Mountain Initiative (SAMI): Alabama, Georgia,
Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
and West Virginia. Formed in 1992, SAMI is working to com-
plete a regional strategy to protect the Southern Appalachian
environment from the adverse effects of air pollution, includ-
ing visibility impairment, ground-level ozone effects on
plants and trees, and acid deposition effects on water bodies
and vegetation.
• The Midwest Regional Planning Organization includes five state
— Ohio in addition to Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin
from LADCO.
• The Central States Regional Air Partnership (CENRAP) includes
nine states — Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Minnesota,
Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana. This is a new
grouping of states without a prior history of working togeth-
er on regional haze or ozone issues.
• The Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) is the successor
organization to the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport
Commission. The Commission was formed in 1991 and issued
recommendations to EPA in 1996 for improving the air qual-
ity in the 16 Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau. The Western
States Air Resources Council (WESTAR) is working in
cooperation with WRAP. WRAP states now have the option
of implementing many of the commission's recommendations
within the framework of the national regional haze rule.
• EPA manages the RPO project on a national level to ensure
consistency. The lead EPA regions manage the specific grants
for their individual RPOs. National meetings of the RPOs with
EPA, State, and tribal representatives and Federal Land
Managers have been held in various locations throughout the
country since spring 2000.
The RPOs are first evaluating technical infonnation to better under-
stand how their states and tribes have an impact on national park
and wilderness areas (Class I areas) across the country. RPOs will
then pursue the development of regional strategies to reduce emis-
sions of particulate matter and other pollutants leading to region-
al haze. All of the new RPOs have begun technical assessment work
as they completed their organizational development.
17
-------
SECTION III: Additional Air Quality Programs
The RPOs have each held their own technical work group
sessions at meetings throughout the country to make decisions
on joint technical work, including the location of new monitors,
development of common protocols for emissions inventories, iden-
tification of data gaps, and assessment of modelling resources.
This effort is designed to lead to SIPs for regional haze, which
are due in 2007-2008.
Although the RPOs are funded specifically to develop regional
haze plans, they will also study the precursors of haze, develop
strategies for reaching haze goals through the control of a vari-
ety of pollutants, and account for pollutants from outside their
borders, from either another state or another country. To this end,
CENRAP will host a meeting in fall 2002 for all RPOs to begin
to discuss international issues.
OTHER COOPERATIVE
AIR QUALITY EFFORTS
United Nations Convention on
Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe's
Convention on Long-Range Transboundaiy Air Pollution (LRTAP),
signed in 1979, was the first international agreement recogniz-
ing environmental and health problems caused by the flow of air
pollutants across borders and the need for regional solutions. On
LRTAP's 20th anniversary, in December 1999, Canada and the
United States signed the Protocol to Abate Acidification,
Eutrophication, and Ground-LeVel Ozone. The signing of this
agreement initiates a new phase within LRTAP to increase
emphasis on implementation, compliance, review, and extension
of existing protocols.
To accommodate the domestic and bilateral agreements in place
or currently underway in both countries, Canada and the United
States will incorporate their emission reduction commitments for
SO2, N0X, and VOCs into the protocol at the time of ratification.
The Ozone Annex will be the basis for both countries' emission
reduction commitments for the protocol.
Emission reduction commitments relate to: (1) limits for emis-
sions from new and existing stationary sources and new mobile
sources; (2) application of BAT; and (3) measures to reduce VOC
emissions associated with the use of products. There are no
Canadian or U.S. commitments related to ammonia. For further
information on the LRTAP Convention and protocols, see
www.unece.Drg/env/lrtap.
New England Governors and
Eastern Canadian Premiers
In 1998, the Conference of New England Governors and Eastern
Canadian Premiers (NEG/ECP) developed Action Plans to
coordinate research, public outreach, and action for both mer-
cury and acid rain. In 2001, the NEG/ECP developed a Climate
Change Action Plan along these same lines. The NEG/ECP has also
recognized the links between air issues and the energy sector and,
where appropriate, is involving both its Environment Committee
and its Energy Committee. Work underway includes the devel-
opment of a communications plan and the continuation of the
Forest Mapping Project.
A significant part of the NEG/ECP's work focuses on a survey
aimed at gauging public understanding and attitudes toward acid
rain and mercury. The Acid Rain Partnership: Data Without
Borders, released in August 2001, highlights both the progress and
the future requirements to address the acid rain issue.
The Forest Mapping Project aims to generate maps of eastern
Canada and the northeastern United States that identify the areas
most sensitive to acid deposition. More specifically, the project
will estimate acid deposition rates that would maintain forest
ecosystem health and related productivity indefinitely based on
sulphur and nitrogen deposition inputs. A Protocol for Assessing
and Mapping Forest Sensitivity to Atmospheric Sulphur and
Nitrogen Deposition has been developed and is being used as the
foundation for the Forest Mapping Project.
Harmonization and presentation of data from both sides of the
border is continuing through participation in the AIRNOW real-
time ozone map program (see p. 27). Plans are underway to have
a Canada—U.S. map included as a supplement to air quality and
weather forecasts in the region. Work is also progressing on the
development of a similar mapping program for PM2.5. The
NEG/ECP has also collocated a number of PM2.5 monitors to help
harmonize that data while a regional temporal network has been
developed to assess water quality trends over time.
18
-------
SECTION III: Additional Air Quality Programs
Recognizing the links between the emissions that cause acid rain
and those that cause smog, the NEG/ECP is increasing its
emphasis on the health effects of acidifying emissions. A con-
ference in Quebec in May 2002 brought together scientists to dis-
cuss the links between health and air pollution.
NEG/ECP recognizes the importance of using a more harmonized
approach when addressing air issues. More details on NEG/ECP
work are available at http://www .cmp.ca/en-main 1 .html.
Canada—U.S. Georgia Basin/Puget
Sound Initiative
More than six million people live in the Georgia Basin region of
southwestern British Columbia and the Puget Sound region of
northwestern Washington State. The Canadian cities of Vancouver
and Victoria and the U.S. cities of Seattle and Tacoma are locat-
ed here. This international region shares a common geography,
climate, ecosystem, and strong social and economic links. These
factors, combined with the rapid growth of population and sig-
nificant motor vehicle use on both sides of the border has led to
joint efforts to address shared air quality issues and concerns.
Air quality in the Georgia Basin and Puget Sound International
Airshed generally meets Canadian standards north of the
Canada—U.S. border and U.S. standards south of the border as
a result of actions taken by various levels of government includ-
ing: (1) regional air quality agency emission control programs
for commerce and industry; (2) provincial and state initiatives
for early action on cleaner vehicles and fuels, on motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance programs, and on woodstove emis-
sions; and (3) more stringent federal government standards for
vehicle emissions and fuel quality. However, there is concern that
the continuing rapid growth in the Georgia Basin and Puget Sound
area may result in more industrial and motor vehicle emissions
and worsening air quality in the future.
In February 2001, Environment Canada and the EPA initiated a
collaborative process to develop a Georgia Basin/Puget Sound
International Airshed Strategy, which will include early action
to address some high-priority air quality issues, an airshed char-
acterization to provide a good understanding of present and future
air quality issues and challenges, and a strategic plan to address
air quality problems that are identified in the scientific studies.
Participants in the process include provincial and state govern-
ments, regional air quality management agencies, local govern-
ments, and First Nations and tribes from both sides of the
international border.
The goal of the international airshed strategy is to protect air qual-
ity and address concerns about the impacts of air pollution on
human and environmental health. This supports the commitment
under the Ozone Annex to the 1991 Canada—U.S. Air Quality
Agreement to determine if air quality issues along the border
between British Columbia and adjacent U.S. states should be con-
sidered when the Annex is assessed in 2004. A final draft report
on the Georgia Basin International Airshed Strategy will be ready
for review in fall 2003.
Considerable progress has been made in the Georgia Basin/Puget
Sound International Airshed Strategy. Since February 2001, two
meetings of the coordinating committee have been held in the
United States and two in Canada. Participating agencies have
broadly supported the bilateral draft Statement of Intent on areas
of future cooperation between the EPA and Environment Canada,
and work is underway on six early action items, including an
issue-ranking information system, a transboundary air quality
data exchange, a Web-based information clearinghouse, an
improved transboundary new source review process, and activ-
ities relating to clean vehicles and fuels.
NARSTO
NARSTO,10 a North American consortium for support of atmospheric
research in support of air quality management, is a public/private
partnership whose membership spans government, the utilities,
industry, and academia throughout Mexico, the United States, and
Canada. NARSTO's primary mission is to coordinate and enhance
policy-relevant scientific research and assessment of tropospheric
pollution behaviour including PM and ozone. Its activities provide
input for science-based decision making and determination of
workable, efficient, and effective strategies for local and region-
al management of air pollution. NARSTO coordinates tri-national
research under four broad technical program areas: (1) atmos-
pheric chemistry and modelling research; (2) emission research;
(3) observations research; and (4) integrated analysis and assess-
ment. More information on this organization, its plans and
progress, and recent science assessments is available at
http: //www, cgenv. com/N arsto/.
The NARSTO state of science assessment on ozone, An Assessment
of Tropospheric Ozone Pollution—A North American Perspective,
June 2000, is available in print, on the Internet (see above address)
or can be dowloaded on Adobe Acrobat. The document synthe-
sizes the policy-relevant science insights from 24 critical review
papers spanning the atmospheric science and source-to-receptor
relationships of ozone and its precursor gases. An executive sum-
mary presents answers to policy questions such as (1) Are exist-
ing control measures helping to bring the ozone problem under
control? and (2) What are alternative approaches for reducing cur-
rent and future ozone concentrations?
A comparable assessment of PM science for ambient PM man-
agement is being developed and is available in draft form
through the NARSTO Web site. The document is scheduled to com-
plete tri-national scientific peer review in September 2002 and
10 Formerly an acronym for "North American Research Strategy for Tropospheric Ozone." the term NARSTO has come to signify this tri-nation-
al. public—private partnership for dealing with multiple features of tropospheric pollution, including ozone and suspended particulate matter.
19
-------
SECTION III: Additional Air Quality Programs
will be available to the general public in March 2003. The authors
prepared this assessment to assist policy makers. Topics covered
in the document include meteorological and chemical process-
es, emission estimations, ambient measurements, source attri-
bution, air quality modelling, and their health and visibility
context. In addition, chapter 10 and the appendix present sum-
mary conceptual descriptions of what is known about PM over
nine major urban and regional North American areas.
NARSTO has also undertaken a comparison of air quality mod-
els currently in use in the United States and Canada. Comparative
and operational evaluations of the modelling systems will be per-
formed using configurations and inputs currently in use for air
quality assessments. The focus will be on ozone. Model outputs
from a common domain and time period will be compared among
the modelling systems and with selected observations, including
those made during the summer of 1995. The models' relative and
absolute abilities to simulate observed conditions will be eval-
uated and their comparability established, at least for the con-
ditions simulated. The models will also be compared to determine
if they suggest the same emission-control directions to policy-
makers for some simple control scenarios>-50% across-the-
board cuts in VOC and N0X emissions.
EMERGING COUNTRY ISSUES
Canada
Air pollution continues to be a serious threat to Canada's health
and environment, despite improvements to air quality. It is clear
that human health is a key factor in reducing air pollution. To
further improve air quality and human health, there is a need to
reduce emissions of particulate matter, sulphur and nitrogen diox-
ides, mercury, and persistent organic pollutants.
Health science has shown that particulate matter and ozone are
linked to serious health effects including chronic bronchitis, asth-
ma, and premature death. PMgj has been recognized to have the
potential for the greatest health impact on a larger segment of
the general population.
Although Canada has made significant progress on acid rain,
Canadian scientists believe that lakes and forests need further pro-
tection. As Canada moves forward to encompass other pollutants
such as fine PM, this is expected to have a positive impact on acid
rain issues.
Mercury is a significant health and environmental concern and
Canada is involved in several international initiatives, many
regionally with the United States, as well as domestic programs
that address mercury in the environment. Domestic programs
include the Canada-wide Standards for Mercury and the
Collaborative Mercury Research Network.
Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are toxic chemicals that pose
a significant health concern for Canadians. Over the past years,
Canada has taken strong actions domestically to deal with
POPs, but more work is necessary to deal with the long-range
atmospheric transport of these pollutants.
United States
Since the last Progress Report, there has been increasing interest
in both the public and the private sector in a multi-pollutant
approach to reducing air pollution. In February 2002, President
Bush proposed an Administration plan, The Clear Skies Initiative,
which would significantly reduce power plant emissions of
three of the worst air pollutants—SO2 , N0X, and mercury.
The initiative would establish national enforceable emission caps
on all the pollutants (placing the first national cap on mercury
emissions) and reduce emissions of all three pollutants by
approximately 70%. If passed by Congress, The Clear Skies
Initiative would provide the following reductions: (1) a cut in SO2
emissions of 73%, from current emissions of 11 million tons to
a cap of 4.5 million tons in 2020 and 3 million tons in 2018;
(2) a cut of N0X emissions by 67%, from current emissions of
5 million tons to a cap of 2.1 million tons in 2008 and 1.7 mil-
lion tons in 2018; and (3) a cut of mercury emissions by 69% from
current emissions of 48 tons to a cap of 26 tons in 2010 and
15 tons in 2018. Emission caps for N0X would be set to account
for different air quality needs in the East and West. The caps for
all three pollutants would be reassessed by 2010.
The initiative builds on the Acid Rain Program under the CAAA,
using a market-based approach to clean air and encouraging the
use of new pollution control technologies.
20
-------
SECTION IV
Scientific Cooperation
This section focuses on U.S. and Canadian progress under Annex 2 of the Air Quality Agreement to cooperate and to
exchange scientific information related to transboundary air quality issues.
Data Measurement
and Analysis
EMISSIONS INVENTORIES
Emissions inventories provide the foundation for air quality man-
agement programs. They are used to identify major sources of
air pollution, provide data to input into air quality models, and
track the progress of control strategies. This section addresses
mainly SO2, N0X, and VOCs. SO2 and N0X emissions are the dom-
inant precursors of acidic deposition; N0X and VOCs are primary
contributors to the formation of ground-level ozone; and all three
pollutants contribute to the formation of PM.
This section outlines emission trends estimates for SO2, N0X, and
VOCs for both Canada and the United States, reflecting new
methodologies for determining total estimates and using new
models and results. In addition to the joint emission trends data,
the latest available data (1999) on sources of emissions by sec-
tor are presented in figures 4,6, and 7. Canadian emissions data
are preliminary.
Sulphur Dioxide
Electric utilities continued to contribute to the majority of total
North American SO2 emissions in 1999. In the United States, well
over 90% of these emissions come from coal combustion.
Non-ferrous mining and smelting is the main contributor to
35-,
I15"
c 10.
_o
~ 5 +
—r~
00
01
1 1 1 r
80 85 90 95 99
Year (Jan.01)
— Canada —U.S. Total
T"
05
30
25
15 £
10
Canada - 1999
Transportation Other
4% <1%
Industrial Sources
53%
! V
Electric Utilities
5%
Fuel Combustion
18%
United States - 1999
Transportation Other
7% <1%
Industrial Sources
Fuel Combustion
18%
Electric Utilities
67%
Canada-U.S. SO2 Emissions by Sector (1999)
Figure 4
anthropogenic sources of SO2 in Canada and along with indus-
trial coal combustion, is a primary source in the United States.
Overall, a 38% reduction in SO2 emissions is projected in Canada
and the United States from 1980 to 2010. In the United Sates,
these reductions are mainly a result of controls in electric util-
ities under the Acid Rain program and desulphurization of diesel
fuel under Section 214 of the 1990 CAAA. In Canada, they are
mainly attributed to reductions from the non-ferrous mining and
smelting sector and electric utilities as part of the Canada-Wide
Acid Rain Strategy program.
Nitrogen Oxides
Canada-U.S. SO2 Emissions, 1980-2010
Figure 3
The principal anthropogenic source of N0X emissions remains
the combustion of fuels in stationary and mobile sources.
Motor vehicles, residential and commercial furnaces, industri-
al and electric utility boilers and engines, and other equipment
contribute to this category.
21
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
U.S. reductions in N0X emissions are attributed to controls in elec-
tric utilities under the Acid Rain Program, the estimated controls
associated with EPA Regional Transport N0X SIP Call, the Tier 2
Tailpipe Standard, and Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards
and Highway Diesel Fuel Rulemaking.
Canadian N0X emissions as portrayed in figure 5 show a relatively
constant level since 1990 and into the future; however, this fore-
cast does not include the substantial N0X reductions that will result
from the implementation of the Ozone Annex, including the sta-
tionary source commitments for N0X emissions and the 10-year
vehicle and fuels agenda, which implement the Tier 2 Tailpipe
Standards, among other initiatives.
Overall estimated trends for anthropogenic emissions of N0X in
Canada and the United States from 1990 to 2010 are shown in
figure 5.
Volatile Organic Compounds
Anthropogenic emissions of VOCs continue to de dominated by
on-road vehicles and solvent use source categories (e.g., surface
coating, consumer products, and degreasing). In 1999, these two
categories contributed to almost 60% of VOC emissions in the
United States and 37% in Canada. The primary contributor to VOC
emissions in Canada in 1999 was the upstream oil and gas indus-
try. Emissions in Canada and the United States are expected to
decline by 40% from 1980 through 2010. U.S. reductions in recent
years are a result of the control of VOCs through various max-
imum achievable control technology (MACT) standards. Overall
estimated trends in anthropogenic VOC emissions for Canada and
the United States from 1980 to 2010 are shown in figure 8.
351
o 30
o 25-
- 20
-10
<= 10-
00
Year (Jan.01)
—U.S.
01
10
Canada
¦Total
Canada-U.S. NOx Emissions, 1990-2010 Figure 5
Canada - 1999
Other
2% Electric Utilities
12%
Transportation
56%
Fuel Combustion
19%
Industrial Sources
11%
United States - 1999
Other
1%
Transportation
55%
EI e ct
!
^J^lndus
Electric Utilities
23%
Fuel Combustion
17%
Industrial Sources
4%
Canada-U.S. NOx Emissions by Sector (1999)
Canada - 1999
Other
Transportation
23%
17%
0
Fuel Combustion
14%
Industrial Sources
46%
United States - 1999
Other Fuel Combustion
4% 5%
Transportation
47%
I
Industrial Sources
44%
Figure 6 Canada-U.S. VOC Emissions by Sector (1999)
Figure 7
22
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
—T"
00
—r
01
1 1 1 r
80 85 90 95 99
Year (Jan.01)
— Canada —U.S. Total
—r
05
30
- 25
- 20
15
10
- 5
10
Canada-U.S. VOC Emissions, 1980-2010
Figure 8
United States
ACID DEPOSITION MONITORING
Airborne pollutants are deposited on the earth's surface by three
processes: wet deposition, dry deposition, and deposition by cloud-
water and fog. Wet deposition is relatively easy to measure
through the analysis of rain and snow.
Wet and dry deposition are monitored in Canada and the United
States through well-established networks that measure the
chemical composition of air and precipitation. Both countries con-
tribute their monitoring results to an integrated data set from
which maps are produced of sulphate and nitrate wet deposition
across eastern North America (see figures 9-12).
Canada
Wet deposition in Canada is measured by various federal, provincial
and territorial governments. Environment Canada operates the
Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network (CAPMoN) with
21 measurement sites in Canada and 1 in the United States. A map
of the CAPMoN measurements sites can be found at the follow-
ing website: http://www/msc.ec.gc.ca/capmon/Index_e.cfm.
Provincial wet deposition monitoring networks are operated by the
governments of British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, New Brunswick,
Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and the Northwest Territories.
Dry deposition in Canada is measured at 13 of Environment
Canada's CAPMoN sites. No dry deposition measurements are
made by the provinces or territories.
CAPMoN sites across Canada are currently being upgraded
under the implementation of the Ozone Annex and special funds
from the Acid Rain Program. The upgrades include an increase
in the number of sites, hardware improvements and an increase
in the number of pollutants monitored at selected sites.
Also included is the establishment of a new Canada/U.S.
Intercomparison site at Frelighsburg, Quebec
The United States has three acid deposition monitoring networks:
NADP/NTN; AIRMoN, which is part of NADP; and CASTNet.
NADP/NTN has 238 sites monitoring wet deposition, including
15 collocated diy deposition sites, monitored weekly. AIRMoN has
10 sites monitoring wet deposition and 5 sites monitoring dry dep-
osition daily. CASTNet has 79 sites monitoring dry deposition and
rural ozone concentrations.
By comparing the wet deposition maps before and after the 1995
Phase 1 emission reductions under the Clean Air Act Amendments,
it has been possible to assess the impact of the emission decreas-
es on large-scale wet deposition.
Information and Data Exchange
Environment Canada and EPA are collaborating to improve
Canadian and U.S. atmospheric deposition measurements and to
enhance the exchange, accessibility, and analysis of data with-
in the two countries. Under a cooperative agreement initiated this
year, the two governments are planning to establish a common,
cooperative, Canadian—U.S. deposition database, analysis, and
Web-based mapping capability that will include data from the
NADP, CASTNet, and AIRMoN networks as well as Canadian fed-
eral and provincial acid rain monitoring networks.
Status and Trends
Five-year average sulphate wet deposition for the years 1996—
2000 (figure 11) is considerably reduced from that for the five-
year period prior to the Phase 1 reductions (1990—1994). For
example, the large area that received 25 to 30 kg/ha/yr (kilogram
per hectare per year) of sulphate in 1990—94 almost disappeared
in 1996—2000. The marked shrinkage of wet deposition strong-
ly suggests that the Phase 1 SO2 emission reductions were suc-
cessful in reducing the sulphate wet deposition over a large section
of eastern North America.
For nitrate wet deposition, the spatial patterns shown in figures
10 and 12 are approximately the same before and after the Phase
1 emission reductions. This suggests that the minimal reductions
in N0X emissions after Phase 1 resulted in minimal changes to
nitrate wet deposition over eastern North America.
The data used for this assessment came from national and provin-
cial networks in Canada and from national networks in the United
States. Five-year average wet deposition maps were produced in
order to minimize meteorological variability that seriously
affects annual wet deposition patterns. The 1996—2000 maps are
less certain in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec because of
the lack of provincial data in 1999 and 2000.
23
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
Wet Sulphate and Nitrate Deposition in 1990-1994 and 1996-2000
1990-1994 Wet Sulphate Deposition Figure 9 1990-1994 Wet Nitrate Deposition Figure 10
1996-2000 Wet Sulphate Deposition Figure 11 1996-2000 Wet Nitrate Deposition Figure 12
1
15
10
5
24
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
Analyses of National Atmospheric Deposition Program/National
Trends Network (NADP/NTN) data continued to show dramatic
reductions in sulphate deposition over the past decade. Data for
1998—2000 showed up to 30% reductions over a large area of
the eastern United States compared with 1989—1991 data. The
greatest reductions were in the northeastern United States,
where many sensitive ecosystems are located.
NADP/NTN data for nitrate deposition showed variable decreas-
es in nitrate deposition in the Northeast and increases in the Upper
Midwest and Rockies for the 1998—2000 period compared with
the 1989—1991 period. Nitrate deposition was 10% to 20% less
in New York and West Virginia; in Maine, 10% less. Nitrate dep-
osition percentages in low deposition areas in the western
United States increased by 20% to 50%.
A trend analysis for the 1990 to 1999 period at 34 eastern U.S.
Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNet) sites showed sig-
nificant declines in SO2 and sulphate concentrations in ambient
air. The average SO2 reduction was 32%; for sulphate the reduc-
tion was 24%. Patterns were similar to those reported in the last
Progress Report.
In the early 1990s, ambient SO2 concentrations in the rural east-
ern United States were highest in western Pennsylvania and along
the Ohio Valley in the vicinity of Chicago and Gaiy, Indiana. Large
SO2 air quality improvements can be seen by comparing the 1990
to 1992 period with the 1999 period. The largest decrease in con-
centrations is noted in the vicinity of Chicago and throughout
states bordering the Ohio Valley (Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Kentucky, and West Virginia). The highest SO2 concentrations in
the rural parts of the eastern United States are concentrated in
southwestern Pennsylvania.
As reported in the last Progress Report, CASTNet data for ambi-
ent concentrations of nitrogen containing compounds from
1990 tol999 from sites in the rural eastern United States did not
change appreciably. The highest concentrations were found in
Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois.
GROUND-LEVEL OZONE MONITORING
AND MAPPING
Ground-level ozone continues to be a pervasive pollution prob-
lem throughout many areas of the United States and southern
Canada. Ozone, formed by the reaction of VOCs and N0X in the
presence of heat and sunlight is not emitted directly into the air
but rather is readily formed in the atmosphere by photochemi-
cal reactions under summer sunlight.
Ozone Monitoring
Both governments have extensive ground-level ozone
monitoring programs.
Canada
Ambient monitoring of ground-level ozone and precursors is con-
ducted throughout Canada under the National Air Pollution
Surveillance (NAPS) network, a joint program of the federal and
provincial governments. As of December 31, 2000, 164 ozone
monitoring sites were reporting data to NAPS.
Data records for ozone, NO2, NO, and N0X date back to the early
1980s, and special VOC measurements have been collected
since 1989 at more than 40 sites across Canada. Most monitoring
of ground-level ozone and precursors is focused in the country's
densely urbanized regions. In addition, Environment Canada oper-
ates CAPMoN which samples at regionally representative, non-
urban locations across Canada.
United States
The national ambient air quality monitoring program—the State
and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) network—is imple-
mented by state and local air pollution control agencies. The
SLAMS network consists of three major categories of monitor-
ing stations: (1) those that are SLAMS only; (2) National Air
Monitoring Stations (NAMS); and (3) Photochemical Assessment
Monitoring Stations (PAMS). PAMS measure a variety of criteria
and noncriteria pollutants, specifically ozone precursors. EPA oper-
ates CASTNet, which provides ozone levels in rural areas as well
as dry acidic deposition levels and trends.
Currently, there are 646 SLAMS and 189 NAMS sites for ozone
which are used for SIP support, state/local data, national policy
support, national trends development, measurement of maximum
concentrations and population exposures, EPA regional office
oversight, and EPA headquarters oversight. Additionally, the state,
local, tribal, and other nongovernmental agencies operate
approximately 332 special purpose monitors (SPM) for ozone.
These are generally used for special studies and state/local
oversight. The SPM are also used for regulatory purposes,
including designations. There is little distinction among the state,
local, or tribal sites that are SLAMS, NAMS, or SPM for ozone-all
types are used as described above.
The PAMS networks measure ozone precursors as required by the
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) to monitor the most
severe ozone nonattainment areas. The PAMS requirements
were designed to provide information on the roles of ozone pre-
cursors, pollutant transport, and local meteorology in the pho-
tochemical process and to assist in information gathering for
proposed ozone control strategies. In 2000, approximately 83
PAMS were in operation in five regions of the United States-the
Northeast, the Great Lakes area, Atlanta, Texas (primarily
Houston), and California.
25
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
Ozone Mapping
Joint Efforts
AIRNOW
In 2001, Canadian and American jurisdictions (primarily provinces
and states) expanded EPA's AIRNOW, real-time air quality pro-
gram, to include data and develop maps from six Canadian
provinces. The real-time ozone air quality maps include the
provinces of New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia,
Ontario, Prince Edward Island, and Quebec and the northeastern
United States. The maps were generated using the ozone stan-
dard for Canada and the Air Quality Index (AQI) for the United
States. Work is underway to expand the Canadian ozone map-
ping effort to include data from British Columbia in conjunction
with Washington State in the summer of 2002.
For the United States, the project completes existing smog advi-
sory programs and the smog forecasting program. Forty states
are participating in the AIRNOW program.
Air Quality Index
Over the past year, Canada has been engaged in a
multi-stakeholder review of the air quality index (AQI) system in
use in the country. The primary objective has been to ensure that
the index becomes more reflective of the health risk of air pol-
lution and a better means of providing people with information
they can use to protect their health. Issues considered include the
relationship between pollutants and combined exposures; the dis-
tinction between air pollution management targets and relative
risks; monitoring capabilities and limitations; national consistency
versus regional flexibility; associated health messages; and the
marketing challenges. A report containing recommendations will
be available this fall. Decisions about real-time reporting of ambi-
ent air quality remain at the provincial or local level, so the next
step will be to develop a mechanism that brings together deci-
sion makers and stakeholders for the ongoing coordination and
implementation of changes to the AQI.
EPA's AQI continues to provide data on health risks associated with
increased pollutant concentrations, pollutant-specific health and cau-
tionaiy statements on effective risk reduction behaviour, an AQI update
for use by the media, an ozone subindex in terms of 8-hr average
concentrations, and a subindex for PM (PM2.5). (For AQI on the
Internet, see www.epa.gov/airnow/publications.html.')
Air Quality Reporting Data
As part of the new Ozone Annex to the Air Quality Agreement
(see section II, p. 8 and appendix B), Canada and the United States
agreed to report on air quality data beginning in 2002. Data include
ambient ozone concentrations in the form of applicable standards
10-year trends in ambient ozone concentrations, ambient VOC con-
centrations, 10-year ambient VOC concentrations, ambient N0X
concentrations, and 10-year trends in ambient N0X.
Data were collected for all sites within 500 km of the Canada-
U.S. border, and all available data were used to create the con-
tour maps presented below. However, only sites meeting certain
data completeness requirements were used in the statistical trends
analysis. For ozone, these criteria required that each annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hr concentration be based on 75% or
more of all possible daily values during the EPA designated ozone
monitoring season and that eight or more annual values in the
10-year period analyzed (1991-2000) are valid.
Trend sites for N0X have eight or more valid annual averages
where a valid average is based on 50% or more of all possi-
ble hourly averages. Hydrocarbon monitoring stations were
included as trend sites if there were three or more annual aver-
ages reported. The completeness criteria were relaxed for
hydrocarbons because these data are far more limited than is
the case for N0X and ozone. Additionally, only urban moni-
toring sites in Canada were included in trend calculations to
provide trends that are roughly comparable to the urban-ori-
ented U.S. monitoring network.
These data are presented in figures 13-17 and in Appendix C (fig-
ures 21-23). Figure 14 shows the annual fourth highest daily max-
imum 8-hour ozone averaged over the period 1998-2000. The
highest values are generally near major urban areas in the east-
ern region of the U. S.. Ozone concentrations are based on mon-
itoring data from ozone sites located within approximately 500
km of the U.S./Canadian border depicted in Appendix C (five
Canadian sites subject to significant NO scavenging or at high
altitude excluded). Figure 15 shows the annual fourth highest daily
maximum 8-hour ozone averages over the period 1998-2000. The
lowest values are generally found in southern Manitoba and
southern British Columbia near Vancouver. Ozone concentrations
East, Canada
West, Canada
East, US
West, US
Linear Regression Trendlines
100-.
90,
2" 80-
Q.
-B 70-
£ 60-
00
Year
Composite Trends: Annual Fourth Highest Daily Maximum
8-Hour Ozone Concentration Figure 13
This graph shows the composite trend in the annual fourth highest
daily maximum 8-hour ozone during the period 1991-2000. These
8-hour ozone concentrations are on average showing little change
or slight decreases in some areas during this period.
26
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
Ozone Concentrations in the Eastern Regions of the U.S. and Canada (Average Annual Fourth Highest Daily Maximum
8-Hour Ozone, 1998-2000) Figure 14
Ozone Concentrations in the Western Regions of the U.S. and Canada (Average Annual Fourth Highest Daily Maximum
8-Hour Ozone, 1998-2000) Figure 15
-120
-r
-110
-105
LONGITUDE
-100
500 km
1
-80
LONGITUDE
45
27
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
are based on monitoring data from ozone sites located within
approximately 500 km of the U.S./Canadian border depicted in
Appendix C (five Canadian sites subject to significant NO scav-
enging or at high altitude excluded).
-*_West, Canada -.-East, US
-ii-East, Canada -- - Linear Regression Trendlines
XI
CL
CL
| 30-
2 25 -
c 20-
a>
£ 15-
u 10.
00
Year
Composite Trends: Annual Average Hourly N0X Concentration
Figure 16
This graph shows the composite trend in annual average 1-hour
N0X concentrations for the period 1991-2000. Note there are no
trend sites monitoring N0X concentrations in the western U.S.
within 500 km of the U.S./Canadian border. These N0X concentra-
tions are on average showing a downward trend during this period
in all areas.
-•-West, Canada -*-East, US
East, Canada -- - Linear Regression Trendlines
G" 200J1
XI
CL
CL
' 150.
l/> J
S
<
CL 100.
l/>
00
Year
Composite Trends: Annual Average 1-Hour Hydrocarbon
Concentration Figure 17
This graph shows the composite trend in annual average 1-hour
hydrocarbon concentrations for the period 1991-2000. Note there
are no trend sites monitoring hydrocarbon concentrations in the
western U.S. within 500 km of the U.S./Canadian border. These
hydrocarbon concentrations are on average showing a downward
trend during this period in all areas. The relative differences
between the US and Canadian hydrocarbon concentrations shown
on the graph are currently being investigated.
PARTICULATE MATTER MONITORING,
DATA ANALYSIS, MODELLING
AND MAPPING
Transboundary PM Analysis and
PM Workplan
As an outgrowth of the Joint Plan of Action to address trans-
boundaiy PM issues (see page 14), the governments of Canada and
the United States are executing and evaluating regional air qual-
ity models with parallel ambient data analysis to characterize trans-
boundary contributions of PM and precursors in border regions by
the end of 2003. The report will be the focus of decision making
on whether to develop a PM annex to the Air Quality Agreement.
As part of this undertaking, the governments have developed a
PM workplan resulting from discussions at a second joint PM
workshop held in the United States in November 2001. The first
workshop was held in Canada in 1999. Key elements of the PM
workplan are outlined below.
Canada and the United States plan to jointly analyze high PM2.5
episodes in North America. The largest component of PM2.5 in
the summer is sulphate; nitrate can be a significant component
of PM2.5 in the winter. Organic carbon is a large component of
PM2.5 in all seasons.
A joint 1995/1996 Canada-U.S. emissions inventory for 36 km
grids is being developed and processed for the Regional Modelling
System for Aerosols and Deposition (REMSAD) and the
Community Multiscale Air Quality model (CMAQ) with a target
completion date of August 2002. Projected Canada-U.S. emission
inventories to future years are targeted for completion by fall 2002.
An approach for resolving confidentiality issues associated with
Canadian data was identified and is being used in the develop-
ment of these inventories. Considerable work is already under-
way in both countries using the air quality transport model
AURAMS (A Unified Regional Air Quality Modelling System) in
Canada and the CMAQ model in both the United States and
Canada to investigate the impact of emission changes on PM and
ozone air quality. Over the next six months to a year, the mod-
els will move through their evaluation phases and begin to be
applied against emission reduction scenarios investigating the
potential for transboundary impacts.
Joint Canada-U.S. modelling will take place for the full year of
1996 (MM5 meteorology) with REMSAD at 36 km horizontal grid
resolution run as a base case with the 1995/1996 emissions inven-
tory. The REMSAD modelling domain is being expanded north-
ward and eastward to cover most of Canada. Episodes for July
1995 with MM5 meteorology will be run with the CMAQ and
AURAMS models. Projection years (e.g., 2010, 2020) will also be
run with the models. The joint 1995/1996 base case modelling
is scheduled to be completed before the third U.S.—Canada
workshop. The workshop, which will be held in Toronto, Canada
28
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
in fall 2002, will focus on assessing progress and refining
measures to complete the transboundary impact assessment.
The Canadian National Atmospheric Chemistry (NAtChem)
Database And Analysis System, NAPS, CASTNET, IMPROVE, and
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) air quality
databases also are being used to illustrate transboundary trans-
port by combining the PM data with meteorological data and tra-
jectories. Over the next year, specific ambient data analysis tasks
will be identified and carried out.
This undertaking will be one of the first major policy applications
of the PM regional air quality models. The combined approach
of using regional air quality models and ambient data analysis
is essential for PM. Using the weight of evidence derived from
both approaches will result in the best policy guidance based on
current scientific understanding.
PM Monitoring Comparison
Several different monitoring methods are used within the
Canadian and U.S. networks. They operate on various sampling
schedules, from continuous hourly measurements to 24-hour
average measurements taken once every six days.
Monitoring agencies in the United States and Canada are operating
both filter-based and continuous fine PM samplers. In the United States,
a robust network of Federal Reference Method (FRM) samplers is aug-
mented by a smaller number of continuous monitors. Most U.S. mon-
itoring agencies use the Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance
(TEOM) as their continuous monitor; a smaller number of agencies
use other technologies. However, many of the TEOMs operated are
using different method approaches with respect to operating tem-
perature and use of a particle separation device. In Canada, most city
and provincial monitoring agencies operate the dichotomous sam-
pler at a limited number of sites to obtain filter measurements col-
located with the TEOM continuous monitor for a real-time PM signal.
A larger number of Canadian sites operate the TEOM without a col-
located filter-based measurement. Canadian monitoring agencies
are also operating the TEOMs in varying ways with respect to tem-
perature and particle separation device. Since each countiy primarily
relies on different methods for filter-based measurements and dif-
ferences within a method with respect to the TEOM, an under-
standing of the comparability of these methods is required for data
to be appropriately analyzed across the two countries. To provide
an understanding of methods employed in each countiy, monitoring
representatives from Canada and the United States have been coop-
erating by sharing information on methods used.
Monitoring contacts at the Federal, State, and regional levels from
the United States have participated with Canadians in workshops
designed to work toward better data comparability within each
country and between the countries. Additionally, EPA is work-
ing with monitoring agencies in the United States and Canada
to test mapping of data from continuous PM monitors.
Through the work of NEG/ECP there are collocated TEOMs and FRMs
in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, and Prince Edward Island.
PM Monitoring
Canada
In Canada, the PM2.5 and PM10 monitoring initiated in the mid-
1980s is continuing to be updated to meet current scientific and
policy needs. In 2002, the regional CAPMoN network is planning
to add up to five PM2.5 and PM10 gravimetric monitors, in addi-
tion to all the gaseous precursors (SO2, N0X, VOCs, and NH3) at
two of the five sites. Currently, in the primarily urban NAPS net-
work the federal and provincial governments are operating
106 gravimetric PM10 monitors and 50 TEOM PM10 monitors.
Similarly, there are 102 PM2.5 TEOM sites and 21 gravimetric mon-
itors. PM2.5 chemical monitors being set up at five sites in the
NAPS network this year will identify particle sulphate, nitrate,
ammonium, organic carbon, black carbon, and soil contributions
to total PM2.5 mass.
United States
In the United States, deployment of new monitoring networks for
PM2.5 is supplying PM2.5 compliance monitoring data and Air
Quality Index data for reporting to the public. Specific monitoring
network data include:
• Approximately 1,100 Federal Reference Method PM2.5 sites,
which were installed throughout 1999 and into 2000. Data from
this compliance portion of the network are available publicly.
Work has begun to identify design values for upcoming des-
ignation decisions.
• Approximately 267 continuous ambient monitors, which are
particularly needed for public data reporting and mapping work
that is being planned currently. EPA is focusing on getting near
real-time data reporting through the AIRNOW system in the
36 metropolitan areas that are carried by various media sources,
including USA Today.
• A network of sites that provide chemically speciated PM data,
including 54 urban trends sites operated by state and local
agencies, 213 supplemental sites important for SIP develop-
ment and also operated by state and local agencies, 28 rural
sites operated by state and local agencies that use the region-
al haze program's IMPROVE protocols, and 110 sites operat-
ed by Federal land managers in Class 1 areas for the IMPROVE
program. Also within the state and local agencies' urban net-
works, EPA expects to have up to 15 chemical speciation sites
that use continuous speciation technologies for nitrates, sul-
phates, and carbon. EPA is investigating these continuous
methods at five state and local agency locations prior to releas-
ing states to purchase equipment for all sites. Tribal agencies
are also providing additional fine PM data through the use of
29
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
both filter-based Federal reference methods and the IMPROVE
protocols.
• Eight supersites with useful data in 2001, specifically from
monitoring sites located in New York, Pittsburgh, Baltimore,
St. Louis, Atlanta, Fresno, Los Angeles, and Houston. The super-
sites were developed as platforms for research and measure-
ment methods by various universities in these eight areas. The
measurement equipment and analysis techniques used at each
supersite were often experimental or more advanced than those
typically used in the routine PM networks. Data and infor-
mation from each supersite are being analyzed both by the
individual universities and through a data analysis program
designed to evaluate data centrally from all eight supersites.
• CASTNet data
Figure 19 shows the annual average PM2.5 concentrations for the
period 1999-2000 measured by these networks.
Sulphate and Nitrate Concentrations in
the Eastern United States and Canada
Particle sulphate concentrations in eastern North America are high-
est in the central portion of the eastern United States in an area encom-
passing southeastern Ohio, southwestern Pennsylvania, Kentucky,
Virginia, West Virginia, Tennessee, northern Georgia, and northwestern
Alabama (see figure 18). Almost all states south of the Great Lakes
(except Florida) show moderately high concentrations. Southwestern
Ontario has the highest concentrations in eastern Canada.
In contrast, particle nitrate concentrations are highest in the north-
west part of the eastern United States in an area that includes
Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and southwestern Ontario. The lowest con-
centrations occur in the southern Appalachian area, New
England, and northern and Atlantic Canada.
PM Modelling
Canada
At the Meteorological Service of Canada (MSC), work is underway
on a "unified" regional air quality modelling system to address mul-
tiple-pollutant, multiple-issue applications, including PM, ozone,
acid rain, and air toxics—AURAMS . The four foundation compo-
nents for this new modelling system are the Environment Canada
CEPS (Canadian Emission Processing System), MC2 (Mesoscale
Compressible Community Multiscale Meteorological Model),
CHRONOS (Canadian Hemispheric and Regional Ozone and N0X
System), Eulerian regional photochemical model, and a sectional
size distributed aerosol module. The latest version (March 2002) of
AURAMS will be evaluated with available data. Current model devel-
opment and evaluation uses data sets from the 1990 emission inven-
tory and various studies. Visibility modelling in Canada is planned
via application of the CMAQ methodology based upon anomalous
diffraction theory within the AURAMS framework post 2001. Also
at MSC, CHRONOS, a tropospheric ozone model whose domain now
includes all of Canada and most of the United States, is being
enhanced to include methodologies from AURAMS for PM process-
es and ultimately to feed public air quality advisory programs.
Environment Canada and Indiana University have been applying
a Lagrangian aerosol model, ACDEP (Atmospheric Chemistry and
Deposition model), to simulate aerosol levels in the Lower Fraser
Valley airshed in southwestern British Columbia and northwest-
ern Washington State. Model-predicted inorganic aerosol fields have
been evaluated against 1993 event-specific field data (the Pacific
1993 field campaign). The model has been extended to describe the
fomiation of secondary organic aerosols and has been renamed the
Inorganic and Secondaiy Organic PARTicle model (ISOPART). Also
for this region, MC2/UAM-VPM (Urban Airshed Model V Particulate
Matter) is under development by Environment Canada and other
government and industrial partners. In cooperation with the
University of Washington and Environment Canada, CMAQ is being
applied over the Pacific Northwest on a 12 km grid.
The Ontario Ministry of the Environment, the University of
Waterloo, and Environment Canada are working with the
Models-3/CMAQ platform. The model domain extended from 300
km west of Chicago to Quebec City, with Tennessee as the south-
ernmost state. At the National Research Council of Canada, the
Models-3/CMAQ modelling system has been modified, evaluat-
ed, and applied to the Lower Fraser Valley (LFV), which includes
southwest British Columbia and northwest Washington State. To
generate better boundary conditions for the LFV study, model runs
have also been conducted for a larger area extending southward
into the State of Oregon. The modifications to the Models-3/CMAQ
system include the development and integration of a new sec-
ondary organic aerosol modelling component, development of
a new CMAQ postprocessor for converting CMAQ model PM
results into size-resolved PM concentrations, and adjustment to
the CMAQ parameters for primary PM speciation.
United States
The United States is proceeding with development, testing,
application, and evaluation of REMSAD and CMAQ. REMSAD has
been revised to include updates recommended by a scientific peer
review panel. EPA is planning to use Version 7 of REMSAD. The
latest version of CMAQ was issued in June 2002. Both models have
been applied for the continental United States, southern Canada,
and northern Mexico for every hour of a full year using 1996
MM5 meteorology generated at 36 km horizontal grid square res-
olution. REMSAD has also been applied using 1998 Rapid
Update Cycle (RUC) meteorology. The emission inventory for the
United States is the 1996 National Emissions Inventory (NEI).
The United States has been using Canadian data for REMSAD appli-
cations. Canadian emissions for the REMSAD applications have
been 1990 point, area, and mobile sources. The Canadian emis-
sions for the CMAQ applications have been 1995 area and
30
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
0.5
1999-2000 Average Concentrations of Particle-Sulphate and Particle-Nitrate Concentrations Figure 18
The estimated pattern of two-year (1999-2000) average concentrations of particle-sulfate (left) and particle-nitrate (right) concentrations
in ambient air at non-urban sites (in pg/m3). Data provided by the U.S. Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNet) and the
Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network (CAPMoN). Dots represent monitoring sites.
Annual average concentration, pg/m3
~ 3-4 to 9.7
~ 9.7 to 12.1
~ 12.1 to 13.6
13.6 to 15.1
15.1 to 16.6
16.6 to 29.7
Annual Average U.S. PM2.5 Concentrations, 1999-2000
Figure 19
31
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
mobile sources. The latest 1995 Canadian point, area, and mobile
emissions will be incorporated into future applications of both
models. REMSAD has been run for future years (2010, 2020, and
2030) to evaluate the effects of regulatory initiatives, including
the heavy-duty engine rule (see p. 4) and President Bush's pro-
posed Clear Skies Initiative (see p. 20). The REMSAD modelling
domain is currently being expanded northward and eastward to
include most of Canada. REMSAD 1996 base case modelling using
the latest Canadian emissions and the expanded modelling
domain are scheduled for completion by October 2002.
PM Mapping
Joint Efforts
In 2001, initial work was completed to begin the transfer, as with
ozone (see p. 28), of real-time PM2.5 data from six Canadian
provinces and several northeastern states to begin exploring the con-
cept of mapping PM2.5. The plan is to test the real-time delivery of
the data and explore the feasibility of mapping this parameter.
Effects of Air Pollution
In Annex 2, the Parties also specifically agreed "to cooperate and
exchange information" concerning the monitoring of ecosystem
effects such as those evident in aquatic ecosystems, visibility, and
forests and concerning effects of atmospheric pollution in gen-
eral on human health and ecosystems, including research on
health effects of acid aerosols and research on the long-term
effects of low concentrations of air pollutants on ecosystems, "pos-
sibly in a critical loads framework." This section focuses on
Canadian and U.S. progress in meeting this commitment.
HEALTH EFFECTS
Joint Efforts
In addition to the American Cancer Society cohort study,
Canadian, American, and European researchers are collaborat-
ing on a joint analysis of the relationship between air pollution
and mortality, with support from the Health Effects Institute and
the European Union.11
Canada
Research on the health effects of air pollution involves scientists from
federal and provincial governments as well as university-based
researchers. Health Canada maintains an in-house program of
research in toxicology, epidemiology, and biostatistics, and also funds
outside collaborators on a contractual basis. Until March 2002, Health
Canada and Environment Canada also provided grants to external
researchers through the Toxic Substances Research Initiative, one
theme of which was the health effects of air pollution.12:
Recent research in toxicology includes evidence linking exposure
to particulate matter with the release of endothelin, which plays
an important role in the pathophysiology of circulatory disease-1
Controlled clinical studies of exposure to particulate matter and
ozone have also identified modest effects on chemical mediators
of thrombosis or blood clotting1'1 Related work in clinical stud-
ies produced evidence linking exposure to particulate matter with
vascular reactivity or reversible constriction of blood vessels.15
U K. Katsouyanni. 2002. J. Samet, and A. Cohen, Air Pollution and health. A European and North American Approach, Abstract presented at
the Health Effects Institute Annual Conference, Seattle. Washington. April 28--30, 2002.
12 M. Jerrett et al. 2001. TSRI Environmental Justice and Health Research, Summaries of the Toxic Substances Research Initiative
Projects(Ottawa: Health Canada and Environment Canada. 2002), 100.
13 R. Vincent et al. 2001. "Inhalation toxicology of urban ambient particulate matter: Acute cardiovascular effects in rats," Res Rep Health
Efflnst. 104 Oct.:5--54
14 F. Silverman et al., 2002. Cardiorespiratory effects of controlled human exposures to particulate matter and ozone, Summaries of the Toxic
Substances Research Initiative Projects (Ottawa: Health Canada and Environment Canada), 105.
15R.D. Brook, et al. 2002. "Inhalation of fine particulate air pollution and ozone causes acute arterial vasoconstriction in healthy adults"
Circulation 105(13): 1534--36,
32
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
A study of air pollution exposure and heart rate variability has
also been completed and analysis is underway.16
In epidemiology and biostatistics research, a team of investigators
including Health Canada researchers and scientists from Canadian
and American universities recently reported results from extend-
ed follow-up of the American Cancer Society cohort study.17 This
significantly strengthened the evidence base linking long-term
exposure to air pollution with cardiopulmonary mortality and pro-
vided persuasive evidence of a link with lung cancer. Canadian
investigators have also reported evidence identifying circulato-
ry conditions, including diabetes and congestive heart failure as
factors that potentially increase the probability of adverse
effects of air pollution.18 With respect to time-series studies, Health
Canada scientists recently completed a meta-analysis of the more
than 100 studies linking short-term air pollution exposure with
mortality.19 A study in Hamilton, Ontario, also found that areas
characterized by lower socioeconomic status experienced more
pronounced adverse effects from air pollution exposure20.
United States
EPA continues to carry out a major PM research program that
seeks to answer the following key questions about health effects:
• What characteristics of PM (e.g., size, chemical composition)
cause harm?
• What are the physiologic mechanisms by which PM causes
health problems?
• What is the role of PM, alone and in combination with other
pollutants, in producing health problems?
• What groups of people (e.g., asthmatics, children, elderly) are
most sensitive to PM and what are the critical levels of expo-
sure for these groups?
This research program is consistent with the recommendations
of the National Research Council's Committee on Research
Priorities for Airborne Particulate Matter. Some of the research
being conducted to answer the key questions is summarized below.
To better understand the health problems related to PM, EPA con-
ducted a series of epidemiologic studies looking at the relation-
ship between exposure to PM and physiologic responses in
sensitive populations such as the elderly, children, and asthmatics.
Several important findings emerged: the relationship between
PM2.5 and heart rate was consistent with findings from earlier
studies; heart rate variability decreased at higher concentrations
of PM2.5; and respiratory function decreased with increasing PM2.5
concentration. Decreased heart rate variability has been identi-
fied as a risk factor for death from cardiovascular disease.
To further characterize the effects of PM on humans, EPA scientists
conducted clinical studies in which volunteers in a controlled
exposure chamber were exposed to concentrated particles col-
lected from outdoor air.21 Healthy young adult participants (18-35
years old) experienced no symptoms of illness, no reduction in
lung function, and no change in heart rate variability after a total
exposure of two hours, during which they exercised. However,
when elderly participants (65-80 years old) were subjected to the
same conditions, they immediately experienced decreased heart
rate variability which persisted for many hours after exposure
stopped. These findings are consistent with the studies conducted
at retirement homes and suggest that PM exposure influences
nervous system control of heart rate in older people.22
EPA has a strong program in animal toxicology studies investi-
gating PM and other air pollutant.23 The program encompasses
studies of PM constituents, molecular mechanisms, and patho-
physiologic outcomes in healthy and susceptible animal models.
Recent findings include studies where rodents were exposed to PM
and other pollutants collected from outdoor air.24 Exposure to PM
was associated with reduced heart rate and an increased incidence
16 R. Dales. . 2002. "The adverse cardiac effects of air pollution", Summaries of the Toxic Substances Research Initiative Projects (Ottawa:
Health Canada and Environment Canada). 95.
17 C.A. Pope III et al. 2002. "Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution." JAMA
287(9):1132—41.
18 M.S. Goldberget al. 2001. "Identification of persons with cardio respiratory conditions who are at risk of dying from the acute effects of
ambient air particles." Environ Health Perspect. Aug.109, Supp 4:487--94; M.S. Goldberg et al. 1986. "The association between daily mor-
tality and ambient air particle pollution in Montreal. Quebec. 2. Cause-specific mortality." Environ Res. May 86(l):26--36.
19 D.M. Stieb, S. Judek, and R.T. Burnet,. "Meta-analysis of time series studies of air pollution and mortality: Effects of gases and particles
and the influence of cause of death, age and season." J Air Waste Manage Assoc. 52:470--484.
20 Toxic Substances Research Initiative. National Conference Programme. March 5-8, 2001. Crowne Plaza Hotel. Ottawa, pp. 18-19.
21 A. Ghio, C. Kim. and R. Devlin. 2000. "Concentrated ambient air particles induce mild pulmonary inflammation in healthy human
volunteers." Am J Respir Crit Care Med. Sep:162(3 Pt 1) :981 8.
22 J. Creason et al.. 2001. "Particulate matter and heart rate variability among elderly retirees: the Baltimore 1998 PM study." J Expo Anal
Environ Epidemiol. Mar-Apr:ll(2):116--22. PMID: 11409004.
23 D.L. Costa and K.L. Dreher. 1997. "Bioavailable transition metals in particulate matter mediate cardiopulmonary injury in healthy and com-
promised animal models." in K.E. Driscoll and G. Oberdorster, eds.. Proceedings of the sixth international meeting on the toxicology of nat-
ural and man-made fibrous and non-fibrous particles. September 1996, Lake Placid. NY. Environ. Health Perspect. Suppl. 105(5): 1053 1060.
24 R. Silbajoris, A.J. Ghio.J.M. Samet, R.Jaskot, K.L Draher, L.E. Brighton. "In vivo and in vitrocorrelation of pulmonary MAP kinase activation
following metallic exposure." Inhal Toxicol. 2000 Jun:12(6)-453-68. W.P. Watkinson, M. . Campen, and D.L. Costa. 1998. "Cardiac arrhyth-
mia induction after exposure to residual fly ash particles in a rodent model of pulmonary hypertension." Toxicol. Sci 41:209-216.
33
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
of abnormal heart rhythms and death, especially among rodents
with compromised heart or respiratory function.2? EPA is explor-
ing potential mechanisms responsible for these effects.
In a particularly interesting study a labour strike that closed a steel
mill in the Utah Valley for a year provided opportunities to eval-
uate the toxicity of ambient air particles. Previous epidemiologic
studies found a reduction in hospital admissions for respiratory con-
ditions when the mill was closed compared with when it was oper-
ating. EPA scientists, in collaboration with academic researchers,
obtained particulate matter (PMio) samples from a Utah Valley air
monitoring station for the year before (year 1), the year during (year
2), and the year after (year 3) the steel mill closure. Year 2 dust had
lowest concentrations of soluble iron, copper, and zinc and gen-
erated the lowest number of oxidants (reactive compounds
believed to be a major cause of lung particulate matter) from each
of the three years. Dust from years 1 and 3 caused significant lung
injury and inflammation, whereas dust from year 2 caused min-
imal injury. This study, and additional laboratory research, suggests
a potential mechanism for the health effects reported in the Utah
Valley. EPA investigators demonstrated that cultured human lung
cells exposed to particulate matter from years 1 and 3 produced
significantly higher levels of inflammatory mediators than cells
exposed to particulate matter from year 2. Researchers are currently
using this in vitro system to investigate whether transition met-
als in Utah Valley particulate matter cause the inflammation.26
In addition to in-house research, EPA has established five PM
Research Centers to investigate the heath effects of PM (see
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/pmcenter.htrnl'). University scien-
tists are working with EPA to characterize the relationship
between ambient PM levels and actual personal exposure, iden-
tify the toxic components of PM and their associated biological
effects, investigate the amount and distribution of PM deposit-
ed in the respiratory tract, and identify groups of people that are
particularly susceptible to the adverse effects of PM. Findings from
the first two years of research include the following:
• Inhalation of PM at concentrations only slightly above peak
ambient levels can cause airway inflammation which can lead
to other physiological responses, such as thickening of the blood.
• Controlled exposure studies in humans and animals have
shown associations between ultrafine particles and changes
in heart rate, heart rate variability, abnormal heart rhythms,
and other heart and blood characteristics.
• Asthmatics may be particularly sensitive to ultrafine particles
because these particles tend to be deposited in central airways
of the respiratory system.
• In a study of healthy senior citizens, outdoor PM2.5 concen-
trations were significantly correlated with an individual's per-
sonal exposure to PM2.5:.
• An epidemiologic study found significant associations between
mortality and exposure to PM from traffic and coal-combustion
sources but not between mortality and exposure to PM from oil
combustion or soil.
EPA is also conducting research related to health effects of pol-
lutants such as air toxics and ozone. (For more information on
PM research, see the international inventory of PM research activ-
ities at www.pmra.org)
AQUATIC EFFECTS RESEARCH AND
MONITORING
Water Chemistry Trend Analyses
A study of the 1989—1999 water chemistry trends observed at sites
included in the International Cooperative Programme on Assessment
and Monitoring of Acidification of Rivers and Lakes27 confirmed
the results of previous analyses that used data up until 1995.28 The
new study showed that in midwestem North America (northwestern
Ontario, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota) and in eastern North
America (central Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic Canada, and New York)
25 U.P. Kodavanti et al. 2000a."Variable pulmonary responses from exposure to concentrated ambient air particles in a rat model of
bronchitis," Toxicol. Sci. 54:441--451: U P. Kodavanti et al. 2000b. "The spontaneously hypertensive rat as a model of human cardiovascular
disease: Evidence of exacerbated cardiopulmonary injuiy and oxidative stress from inhaled emission particulate matter," Toxicol. Appl.
Pharmacol. 164:250-263.
26 A. J. Ghio and R.B. Devlin. 2001. "Inflammatory lung injury after bronchial instillation of air pollution particles," Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care
Med. 164:704-708:M.W. Frampton et al. 1999. "Effects of aqueous extracts of PM10 filters from the Utah Valley on human Airway epithe-
lial cells," Am. J. Physiol. 277:L960-T967: J.A. Dye, et, al. 2001. "Acute pulmonary toxicity of particulate matter fiber extracts in rats:
coherence with epidemiological 52 studies in Utah Valley residents." Environ. Health Perspect. 109(supp. 3), 395-403.53.
27 G.T. Skjelkvale, J.L. Stoddard. Amd T. Anderson. 2001. "Trends in surface water acidification in Europe and North America (1989-1998),"
Water Air and Soil Pollution 130:787-792.
28 J.L. Stoddardl et al. 1999. Nature 401:575-578
34
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
declining sulphate and base cation (calcium + magnesium + sodium
+ potassium) concentrations were the predominant trends, i.e., they
occurred in more than 50% of the monitored sites. These trends
were both spatially widespread in occurrence and highly statisti-
cally significant. The fact that base cation declines appear to be a
primary ionic compensation for sulphate declines is at least part
of the reason why increases in pH and/or alkalinity (considered by
many the "real" measure of acidification recovery) were not so pre-
dominant (see following paragraph). Nitrate concentrations also
remain mostly unchanged in both regions, but concentrations of
dissolved organic carbon (DOC) are increasing in some lakes.
Increasing DOC may be important since, like increasing base cations,
it can offset the pH and/or alkalinity improvements expected to
accompany declining sulphate, On the other hand, increasing
DOC may have the beneficial effect of reducing aluminum toxicity.
Acidic waters typically have elevated concentrations of inorganic
forms of aluminum that are toxic to aquatic biota. In the presence
of DOC, inorganic aluminum combines with organic molecules,
which renders it much less harmful.
Analyses of recent water chemistry trends observed in long-term
monitoring networks from some eastern Canadian provinces con-
firm the foregoing generalities; however, they also show that dif-
ferences exist both between provinces and between lake types.
Declining sulphate was the predominant trend in long-term mon-
itoring networks from Newfoundland and Nova Scotia,29 Quebec,30
and Ontario31 but declining base cation concentrations was the most
important compensatory response for only the latter two. Another
Ontario network with a sample population composed of small lakes
in wetland landscapes gave an entirely different result: 32 For this
network, "no significant change" was the dominant sulphate
response, probably reflecting mobilization (oxidation) and export
of sulphur from wetland soils during periods of drought.33 The effect
of this climatic stressor is to counteract the chemical signal
expected from declining sulphate deposition. Increasing lake pIT
or alkalinity was observed in 10%, 14%, 49%, 15%, and 41% of
the lakes from Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario
(with wetland lakes), and Ontario (without wetland lakes), respec-
tively. Continued monitoring is required to understand the com-
plex chemical responses that are occurring in the face of multiple
and sometimes competing ecosystem stressors.
FOREST EFFECTS
Several factors affect forest health: biotic, climatic, soil-related
as well as management intervention. Eastern forests are routinely
exposed to acid deposition (as sulphur and nitrogen), as well as
to ground-level ozone, in levels that are known to cause dam-
age to sensitive components of ecosystems.
Joint Efforts
The NEG/ECP Forest Mapping Project
As reported on page 18, the Acid Rain Action plan, endorsed by
the Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian
premiers (NEG/ECP), includes a component called The Forest
Mapping Project. The project recognizes that in the presence of
triggering stresses acid precipitation reduces soil fertility in some
forests and is the underlying cause of decline of forest health and
dieback. The goal of The Forest Mapping Project is to determine
sustainable levels of acid deposition for forest soils in northeastern
United States and eastern Canada using a calculation and map-
ping system inspired by a model developed and implemented in
Europe for estimating 'critical loads' and their 'exceedances'.
The project receives funding and in-kind resources from a num-
ber of organizations and involves scientists from both countries.
In 1991, a Protocol for Assessing and Mapping Forest Sensitivity
to Atmospheric Sulphur and Nitrogen Deposition was developed
and published. The protocol lays out the methodology for esti-
mating the 'sustainable' acid deposition rate, i.e., the rate that main-
tains or enhances the current level of soil base saturation such that
soil reserves of plant nutrients can be maintained under given for-
est management practices and/or natural disturbance regimes for
the foreseeable future (i.e., several forest rotations). The assessment
of sustainable deposition is based on the long-term equilibrium
2SX.A. Clair et al., 2002 "Changes in freshwater acidification trends in Canada's Atlantic provinces: 1983-1997." Water, Air Soil Pollution
135:335-354.
so A. Kemp. 1999. "Trends in lake water quality in southern Quebec following reductions in sulphur emissions." Environment Canada-Quebec
Region, St. Lawrence Centre, Scientific and Technical Report ST-21ZE, 126 p.
31 W. Keller et al.. 2001. "Sulphate in Sudbury. Ontario, Canada, lakes: Recent trends and statistics," Water, Air Soil Pollution 130:793-798:
32D.K. McNicol et al.. 1996. "Recent temporal patterns in the chemistry of small, acid-sensitive lakes in central Ontario. Canada." Water, Air
Soil Pollution 105:343—351.
33 D.S. Jeffries et al., 2002. "Temporal trends in water chemistry in the Turkey Lakes Watershed, Ontario, Canada. 1982 -1999.," Water Air
Soil Pollution: Focus 2:5—22
35
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
between the provision and removal of nutrients (calcium, mag-
nesium, potassium, and nitrogen) from forest ecosystems. The pro-
tocol takes the following into account: atmospheric deposition,
mineral nutrients freed from weathering of soil minerals, nutri-
ents removed from a site through forest harvesting, and nutrients
leached out of the soils by acidic deposition.
During phase 1 of the project, maps of sustainable deposition and
actual exceedances were prepared for Vennont and Newfoundland.
Preliminary results were presented and discussed with some
foresters in both jurisdictions, and as a result, additional data and
further improvements were incorporated in the calculations.
During the next three years, maps will be produced for all of the
New England states and eastern provinces.
Documenting Effects of Ozone on Forests
The North American Forestry Commission (NAFC; Mexico,
United States, Canada) has developed a proposal outlining
research and field activity to carry out an integrated assessment
of the effects of air pollution on forest ecosystems of North
America. Monitoring protocols are being developed as a first step
toward implementation of the proposal. Examples of pollutants
of concern to forest health that can be sampled with passive sam-
plers are O3, SO2, NH3, NO2, and HNO3.
NAFC is also producing a pamphlet, aimed at a general audience,
looking at impacts of ground-level ozone on sensitive forest ecosys-
tems in North America. This pamphlet will concentrate on four
sensitive forest ecosystems: one in Canada, two in the United States,
and one in Mexico. The tentative date of publication is early 2003.
Canada
The Forest Indicators of Global Change (FIGC) project complet-
ed its third year of activity since the establishment of plots in 1998.
The project comprises 26 eastern Canadian, forested, permanent
sample plots arranged across four zones of acidic deposition crit-
ical load exceedence and four of ozone critical level exceedence.
The 1,800 km transect features a 2-7°C variation of mean
annual temperature and a 700-1,500 millimetre (mm) variation
of mean annual precipitation. The most westerly plot is located
at Turkey Lakes in northern Ontario and the most easterly near
the Bay of Fundy, New Brunswick.
Sugar maple is contiguous as a dominant species across the gra-
dient; white pine dominates as the coniferous species in Ontario;
and red spruce is the predominant species in Quebec/New
Brunswick. Sugar maple and red spruce have been the most promi-
nent northeastern species suffering decline since the 1960s. The
gradient includes CFS Acid Rain National Early Warning System
(ARNEWS), Canada—U.S. North American Maple Project (NAMP),
and new plots selected to fill geographical gaps. Nested within the
whole are two sub-gradient studies focusing on high-elevation
cloud/fog impacts and the 1998 ice storm. ARNEWS plots have
been intensively monitored for up to 15 years, while NAMP plots
have been monitored for more than 10 years. With respect to the
11 Ontario plots, 0% to 83.3% of trees per plot were classed in 2001
as moderately damaged and 0% to 35.5% classed as healthy.
Outputs planned for in the FIGC include new indicators for early
detection of changes in forest health as a result of global
change, enhanced global change risk assessment, and linkage of
indicator responses with monitoring trends.
United States
The USDA Forest Service initiated the Forest Health Monitoring
(FHM) program in 1991 as a multi-agency, cooperative effort to
determine the status, changes, and trends of health indicators in
all forest ecosystems in the United States. The FHM program com-
prises four interrelated components:
• Detection Monitoring - field plot and aerial survey activities
for national and regional monitoring
• Evaluation Monitoring - intensified monitoring or analysis in
problem areas
• Intensive Site Ecosystem Monitoring - monitoring to under-
stand processes and improve predictive capabilities
• Research on Monitoring Techniques - research to improve
monitoring
The FHM program uses the Santiago Declaration and accompanying
Criteria and Indicators as a framework for forest sustainability
assessment and reporting.34 Periodic assessments and reports are
issued by the FHM program evaluating the status and changes of
forest health indicators and stressors such as land use and forest
fragmentation, air pollution, drought, storms, insects and pathogens,
alteration of fire cycles, and invasive species.35 The forest health
indicators are analyzed in another report by ecoregion section.36
More information on the FHM program is available on the FHM
national Web site at http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/fhm/index.htm.
In 1999, the ground plot activities of FHM's Detection Monitoring
component were integrated with the Forest Inventory and Analysis
(FIA) program to maximize the strengths of both programs. More
information about the enhanced FIA program can be found on the
FIA national Web site at http://www.fia.fs.fed.us.
34 USDA Forest Service. 2001. "2000 RPA assessment of forest and range lands. FS-687" (Washington. D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture).
78 p. (http://svinet2 .fs.fed.us/pi/rpa/rpaasses.pdfl
35B.L. Conkling, J.W. Coulston, and M.J. Ambrose, eds., 2002. FHM national technical report 1991-1999 (Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Forest Service. Southern Research Station. To be published as a General Technical Report.)
36R.G. Bailey. 1995."Description of the ecoregions of the United States." 2nd ed.. Misc. Pub1. 1391 (Washington. DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture). 108 p.
36
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
Current Forest Conditions
The FHM program produces annual summaries of forest health
indicators, including species diversity, bioindicator species
(lichens and plants sensitive to ozone), changes in trees (crown
condition, damage, and mortality), soil physical and chemical
characteristics, and above- and below-ground carbon pools. The
program tracks several tree health variables that relate to
amount and fullness of foliage and the vigour of the apical
growing points of the crown. Two of these variables are the
mortality of the terminal twigs in the sun-exposed portions of
tree crowns (dieback) and the transparency of the foliage of the
whole tree crown to sunlight (i.e., sparseness of the crown foliage).
Hardwood transparency has been increasing in portions of the
United States over the period of FHM data collection (1991—1999),
particularly in the Upper Midwest and portions of northern Idaho
and eastern Washington. Hardwood dieback was highest in north-
eastern Maine and moderately high in New England. Softwood
transparency was found to be increasing in the Appalachian
Mountain area as well as in portions of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Softwood dieback was increasing in north-central Wyoming, east-
ern Maine, and lower New England in the Hudson Valley.
Tree mortality was analyzed by comparing the volume of mor-
tality to the volume of growth for specific sections of ecoregions.
Areas of highest mortality relative to growth were Central Till
Plains and Beech-Maple in Illinois, Shawnee Hills in Indiana, and
northern California Coast Ranges.
Air pollution
The FHM program has analyzed average exposure and trends
in exposure of forests to air pollution for wet deposition of
nitrate (NO3") and sulphate (SO42") and ozone (SUM60)37
from 1994 to 2000. A biomonitoring approach based on
ozone-sensitive plants and lichens is also used to assess
air pollution effects on forest environments. More than
900 biomonitoring sites in 33 states were evaluated in 2000.
Data and field documentation are available online at
http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/fhm/ozonetrng/biozone.htm.
Average wet sulphate deposition rates were highest in the north
and south forest regions from 1994 to 2000, with approximate-
ly half of the forest areas exposed to more than 23 kg/ha/yr.
Significant decreasing trends in wet sulphate deposition rates were
detected in north and south regions. The rates in Pacific Coast
and Rocky Mountain forests were about one-sixth of the depo-
sition rates for the North and South.
Wet nitrate deposition was highest in the North, with approxi-
mately half of the forest exposed to more than 18 kg/ha/yr. The
only region with a significant decreasing trend in nitrate depo-
sition was the South. Relatively low wet nitrate deposition rates
occurred in the Pacific Coast and Rocky Mountain regions, with
50% of the forests receiving less than 6 kg/ha/yr.
Eft
.2 50
100
10
0-5
(little or
no injury)
5-15
(low injury)
Biosite Index
~ North "South "Rocky Mnt. ~ Pacific Coast
15-25 25+
(moderate injury) (severe injury)
Frequency Distribution of Average Percent Forest Subjected to
Levels of Ozone Injury Figure 20
Growing season ozone concentrations were generally highest in
the South, with 90% of the forests exposed to SUM60 ozone
concentrations of more than 25 ppm-hours. High ozone expo-
sure also occurred in forested areas in California. A plot level index
calculated for ozone biomonitoring plots was based on amount
and severity rating for each plant and the number of species eval-
uated at each site. Index values between 0 and 4.9 indicated lit-
tle or no foliar injury; values between 5 and 24.9 indicated low
to moderate injury ; and values greater than 25 indicated severe
foliar injury. Little or no ozone injury to plants was recorded on
most biomonitoring plots. In the North and South, approximately
77% of the plots had little or no injury from ambient levels of
ozone. Only a small portion of plots had severe foliar injuiy. These
were clustered in the airsheds surrounding the more industrial-
ized portions of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, and all along the east-
ern corridor from Georgia, north through Virginia and up into
southern New England had severe foliar injury. Severe foliar injuiy
was also recorded on approximately 1% of the plots in the Pacific
Coast region.
The relative exposure of forest types to air pollution was
analyzed via cluster analysis of six air pollution indicators (ozone
biosite index, average SUM60, average NO3", NO3" change, aver-
age SO42", and SO42" change). Higher relative air pollution expo-
sure scores indicate higher exposure to air pollution. Forest types
in the eastern United States had higher relative air pollution expo-
sure scores than western forest types (figure 20). The oak-hickory
forest type, which covers much of north and south forest
regions, had the highest relative air pollution exposure score. Other
eastern forest types with high relative air pollution exposure scores
were oak-gum-cypress, loblolly-shortleaf pine, and oak-pine.
Western forest types with the highest relative air pollution
exposure score were the western hardwoods, pinyon-juniper, and
chaparral types.
37 The sum of all average hourly concentrations greater than 60 parts per billion (ppb).
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
EFFECTS ON MATERIALS
Joint Efforts
The U.S. National Center for the Preservation of Technology and
Training (NCPTT) and the Canadian Conservation Institute are con-
tinuing studies begun in 2000 on using lasers for conservation
of cultural materials and on the potential benefits of laser tech-
nology, in general.
United States
The effects of sulphur dioxide and other pollutants on cultural
resources such as monuments, buildings, and sculpture are being
studied by NCPTT, an office of the U.S. National Park Service.
NCPTT operates an Environmental and Materials Research
Program that focuses on determining the effects of air pollution
on cultural resources and on developing treatments to mitigate
those effects. The research focuses on air pollution interactions with
limestone, marble, and bronze materials. Recently published
work includes the effects of stone surface morphology on pollu-
tion deposition; studies on pollution-caused soiling to limestone
buildings; a review of acid deposition and stone deterioration; and
the interaction of pollutants and microorganisms on stone decay.
NCPTT funds research on new treatments to prevent deterioration
caused by air pollution, including development and testing of
organic coatings for the protection of outdoor bronze. Finally,
NCPTT funds the development of particle-modified material to con-
solidate deteriorating stone caused by pollution damage.
NCPTT operates a one-of-a-kind environmental exposure facility,
including an environmental exposure chamber constructed in 1987
by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the
U.S. Geological Survey in conjunction with the National Park Service.
The chamber is used to test the uptake of pollution onto materials.
One recent NCPTT laboratory study focused on effects of stone
surface morphology and stone porosity on SO2 deposition.38 The
study focused on four high-calcium limestones: Salem, Cordova
Cream, Cottonwood Top Ledge, and Monks Park.
The results of this work show that porosity emerged as the dom-
inant factor influencing dry deposition of SO2 onto limestone.
A secondary factor influencing deposition was surface roughness.
Findings showed that the valleys on a stone surface enhanced dep-
osition while the protruding "peaks" limited deposition.
NCPTT-funded research with Carnegie Mellon University con-
cluded in 2001 with the culmination of 10 years of study of the
effects of air pollution on tall limestone buildings.39 This proj-
ect encompassed a series of graduate and undergraduate projects
designed to document the soiling patterns and characterize the
conditions that led to the soiling of the Cathedral of Learning in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The overall goals of this project were
to better understand why and how soiling occurs and to devel-
op models that link soiling to pollution types and concentrations.
Results show that soiling at the Cathedral occurred somewhat uni-
formly over the building surface and that the building became
soiled relatively quickly (within a few years) after construction.
The main pollutants responsible are sulphur oxides, elemental car-
bon, and fly ash, all from coal combustion. Since pollutant lev-
els have decreased since construction from the 1920s to the 1930s,
the soiling patterns now seen are the result of rain eroding the
soiled surfaces of the building. Computational fluid dynamics
modelling results are consistent with soiling patterns observed
on the building. Furthermore, measurements of rain fluxes to the
building walls are in reasonable agreement with the fluid
dynamics modelling.
In other studies, a review of the field of scientific literature on stone
deterioration due to "acid rain" was conducted.40 The reviewed arti-
cles indicate that dry deposition, mainly influenced by short-range
transport of pollutants from local sources, is the main source of
damage. A secondary source is wet deposition that is responsi-
ble for long-range transport of pollutants. However, in areas where
buildings and monuments remain wet for long periods of time,
and in rural areas, wet deposition can be a major source of dam-
age. If pollution is very low, this phenomenon becomes indistin-
guishable from the "normal" weathering of stone by "clean" rain.
Other NCPTT-funded research studies concluded in 2000 on inter-
actions between air pollutants and microorganisms on the
deterioration of stone.41 This three-year project resulted in
38 Elizabeth A. Bede, 2000. "Characterization of surface morphology of carbonate stone and its effect on surface uptake of SO2." InVasco
Vassina, ed. 9th International Congress on Deterioration and Conservation of Stone vl (Amsterdam. Netherlands: Elsevier Science).303 11.
39 Cliff Davidson et al., 2002. "Soiling patterns on a tall limestone building: Changes over 60 years." Environmental Science and Technology
34(4): 560-565: V. Etyemezian et al.2000. "Impingement of rain drops on a tall building." Atmospheric Environment 34:2499-12: W. Tang
et al.. in press. "Wind-driven rain on a tall limestone building: Washoff of soiling caused by pollutant deposition" in Proceedings,
International Symposium on Atmospheric Deposition and Impacts on Ecosystems (Antwerp. Belgium: University of Antwerp Press).
40 A. Elena Charola, 2001. "Acid deposition on stone." US/ICOMOS Scientific Journal III (1) : 19 58. M. Zinn et al.. "Deterioration of historic
limestone materials by biofilms in a polluted environment." In Proc. Annual Meeting Amer. Soc. Microbiology Q, 156.
41 M.Zinn, et.al. 2000 Deterioration of historic limestone materials by biofilms in a polluted envirionment. Proc. Eastern Analytical
Symposium, 62. R. Mitchell. T. Perry, and M. Bruekker, 2000. "Interaction of air pollutants with microbial biofilms on historic limestone."
Proc. Eastern Analytical Symposium, 62: R. Mitchell and J-D. Gu. 2000. "Changes in biofilm microflora of limestone caused by atmos-
pheric Pollutants." International Biodegradation 46:299--303:C. McNamara, T. Perry, and R. Mitchell. 2002. "Biodeterioration of concrete
and stone." Corrosion, in press: Mary F. Striegel, Ralph Mitchell, and Margaret Bruekker. in press 2001. "Biodeterioration of coatings on
bronze sculpture." Metals. UNESCO ICOM-CC.
38
-------
SECTION IV: Scientific Cooperation
the development of a new analytic technique called
micro-computer-assisted-tomography (mCT), which investigates
the processes involved in microbial interactions with these pol-
lutants on limestone. The data showed that stone treated with
products of acid rain increased in volume and gypsum crusts were
formed. When researchers exposed this stone to other microbial
acids, they detected no loss in volume or voids within the stone
and concluded that the minerals fomied by the interaction of sul-
phates with the limestone provided protection from the action
of microbial acids. Therefore, while pollutants do affect the micro-
bial ecology found on limestone, the microorganisms do not
enhance the chemical deterioration of limestone.
In other studies, a team of researchers at North Dakota State
University is developing new coating systems for the protection
of outdoor bronze from air pollution.42 Pollutants such as
SO2, N0X, CO2, and chlorides affect various materials including
bronze and lead to greater atmospheric corrosion. The team
focuses on exploration of new coating technologies that would
be appropriate for outdoor bronze sculpture.
Another NCPTT-funded project is developing new treatments to
strengthen degraded stone.43 Calcareous stone, such as limestone
and marble, is susceptible to attack by sulphur dioxide in air pol-
lution, a chemical interaction that leads to the formation of cal-
cium sulphate, also known as gypsum. Since calcium sulphate is
relatively water soluble, rain can dissolve and remove material,
including the cementitious materials that bind the grains of stone
together. The result is a weak, sugaring stone. Ethyl silicate-based
consolidants are used to restore strength to degraded stones; how-
ever, one of the limitations of strength development using these
products is cracking during drying. The research team is using par-
ticle modified consolidants (PMC), which consist of a silicate matrix
plus colloidal oxide particles, to consolidate degraded stone. The
presence of particles physically limits the silicate network from
shrinking under capillary pressures and thereby reduces the loss
of strength during drying. In addition, the network maintains a
higher permeability because the dried consolidants remain porous.
42 G. Bierwagen, T. Shedlosky, and L. Ellingson, in press "Electrochemical studies of the protection of bronzes from corrosion by organic
coatings." Metals 2001, UNESCO ICOM-CC.
43 Eleni Aggelakopoulou et al., in press. "Rheology optimization of particle modified consolidants." Materials Issues in Art and Archeology
VI. Materials Research Society; Matthew R. Escalante, John Valenza, and George W. Scherer, 2000. "Compatible consolidants from particle-
modified gels, "in Vasco Vassina, ed. 9th International Congress on Deterioration and Conservation of Stone 2. ed. Vasco Vassina, Vol 2 :
(Amsterdam. Netherlands: Elsevier Science) 459—65.
39
-------
SECTION V
Conclusion
Continued success is being achieved both in Canada and in the
United States in reducing emissions of SO2 and N0X, the major
contributors of acid rain. Acid rain was the original focus of coop-
erative transboundary efforts under the 1991 Canada—U.S. Air
Quality Agreement, and both countries continue to be on target
for meeting reduction requirements for these pollutants.
Since the 1997 signing of the commitment to develop a Joint Plan
of Action for Addressing Transboundary Air Pollution, both gov-
ernments have expanded their commitments to address trans-
boundary flows of air pollution to include ground-level ozone
and PM.
The signing of the Ozone Annex to the Canada—U.S. Air Quality
Agreement in December 2000 represents an achievement that will
address transboundary flows of ground-level ozone and precur-
sor pollutants in eastern Canada and the eastern United States. Both
countries are on track to meet their emission reduction obligations
in addition to their joint analysis and reporting commitments.
Cooperation between the two countries on transboundary smog
issues is rich and complex. Joint efforts are underway from the
East, where the Ozone Annex is currently focused, to the West,
where the Georgia Basin-Puget Sound airshed discussions are
underway. Other cooperative efforts are evaluating the scope and
nature of the transboundary PM issue, tracking air quality and
industrial emissions, and exploring emissions trading.
¥>
-------
SECTION VI
Second Five-year Review and
Assessment of the Canada—
United States Air Quality Agreement
INTRODUCTION
Article X, Review and Assessment of the Canada—United States
Air Quality Agreement is intended to ensure that the Parties peri-
odically review and assess the Agreement to determine whether
it is working well and is "a practical and effective instrument to
address shared concerns regarding transboundary air pollution."
This second review will address the issues raised in 1996 when
the first review was undertaken, outline where progress has been
made, and indicate where challenges continue to exist.
ISSUES RAISED IN THE 1996 REVIEW
i. Article III: General Air Quality Objectives - The Parties agreed
in 1996 that the control of transboundary air pollution has
not occurred to the extent necessary to fully protect the envi-
ronment, particularly in highly sensitive areas.
There are three components to this issue. First is the lack of an
evolving environmental objective in the acid rain annexes of the
Air Quality Agreement against which to measure progress. In
Canada, the goal of the acidification program is to prevent dam-
age and assess recovery to the sensitive ecosystems by achiev-
ing the critical loads for sulphate in aquatic ecosystems. While
the United States does not use sulphate or acidification critical
loads to guide its acid rain program but uses emission reductions
and a cap to achieve its goals, sulphate deposition levels are close-
ly followed and compared to ecosystem damage to assess recov-
ery. The Parties agree that tracking progress made by emission
reductions toward a goal of reducing and, when possible, pre-
venting damage to the environment is important and should be
a routine part of the work undertaken under the Air Quality
Agreement.
The second part of this issue is the recognition that nitrogen emis-
sions are an important part of the acidification issue, in addition
to being a smog precursor. The development of nitrogen critical
loads would be an important and useful tool through which to
guide assessments of how much greater N0X emission reductions
should be to address both acidification and smog. This is par-
ticularly important since the scientific research in the past
decade has shown clearly a strong link between sulphate and
nitrate deposition. To prevent acidification damage, the extent
of the reduction necessary from nitrogen oxide emissions may
be greater than originally thought. The Parties agree that the role
of nitrogen oxide emissions in both acidification and smog issues
is important and that revised ecological goals for acidification,
such as nitrogen critical loads, should be developed as soon as
possible to guide assessments of transboundary issues.
The third component of the issue is the recognition that more
reductions of emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen diox-
ide are required to prevent damage to areas in Canada and the
United States that are moderately and highly sensitive to acid-
ification. The Parties agree that further reductions of emissions
of the pollutants that cause acidification should be an important
goal for future bilateral cooperation on transboundary air pol-
lution under the Agreement, including in any future negotiations
of an annex to address transboundary particulate matter. Joint
efforts to analyze the impacts of current commitments to reduce
sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide pollutants should be con-
ducted to answer the question of how further emission reductions
would impact the environment from acidification.
2. Article III: General Air Quality Objectives - The Parties
recognized in 1996 that the Agreement and its annexes
focused on acid rain and did not address other types of
transboundary air pollutants, such as ground-level ozone or
air toxics and particles.
The first Five-Year Review recognized the value of expanding the
Agreement to address other issues of concern. Concrete steps were
taken to respond to this issue on the occasion of the meeting
between the Canadian prime minister and U.S. president in April
1997 when the Canadian minister of the Environment and the
U.S. administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
signed a commitment to develop a Joint Plan of Action to address
transboundary air pollution. The Joint Plan of Action set in motion
cooperative analyses and work plans on transboundaiy ozone and
fine inhalable particles. The development of the joint trans-
boundary ozone report, its conclusion that a bilateral negotia-
tion to address ground-level ozone would benefit air quality and
health in both Canada and the United States, and the subsequent
Canada—U.S. negotiation of the Ozone Annex in 2000 fulfill the
first part of the 1997 Joint Plan of Action. The second part to
address particulate matter (PM) in air in an effort to reduce trans-
boundary particle levels is underway with a joint report of the
transboundary PM issue being developed by scientists in both
countries. The Parties agree to review the conclusions regarding
the transboundary PM issue and to make a decision regarding
a recommendation to governments in 2004 when the Ozone
Annex is revisited, as the terms of the Annex provide.
41
-------
SECTION VI: Five-Year Review
With respect to addressing air toxics under the Air Quality
Agreement, the Air Quality Committee decided in 1996 at its annu-
al meeting that overlap and duplication among various existing
bilateral mechanisms dealing with air pollution should be avoid-
ed. Transboundary air toxics are being addressed by Canada and
the United States jointly through bilateral, trilateral, and multi-
lateral agreements and arrangements. The Parties agree that they
will keep abreast of and share information on developments on
toxic pollutants of concern with a view toward discussions with-
in the context of the Air Quality Agreement in the future if such
discussions would be effective and not duplicative.
3. Article IV: Specific Air Quality Objectives: Annex 1 - The United
States expressed concerns in 1996 regarding Canada's com-
pliance with the prevention of significant air quality deteri-
oration and the protection of visibility commitment in the
Air Quality Agreement.
Canada's commitment in the Air Quality Agreement is to devel-
op and implement for the Canadian sources that could cause
significant transboundary air pollution the means to prevent sig-
nificant air quality deterioration and to protect visibility in a way
that is as effective as the U.S. programs for Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and protection of visibility in parks
and wilderness areas. There are two key elements in the U.S. pro-
grams that are important with respect to transboundary air quality
issues. First is the principle in the PSD and visibility programs
that air quality should be protected not only where air quality
standards are exceeded but also where air quality standards are
already met. Second is the principle that both new industrial
sources and the modifications made to existing sources should
be built as cleanly as possible to prevent pollution.
Canadian governments, in June 2000, agreed to Canada-wide
Standards (CWS) for ozone and particle air quality, including the
principles to "keep clean areas clean" and to "continuously
improve" air quality. As Canadian jurisdictions develop their plans
and programs to meet the ozone and PM Canada-wide Standards
by 2010, they will build in the measures to protect against dete-
rioration of air quality. In addition, through the programs being
developed to achieve the PM Canada-wide Standard, visibility will
be improved across the country, including in areas where there
is transboundary flow.
The Parties now agree that Canada's implementation of the
Canada-wide Standard for PM and Ozone will likely address
further air quality deterioration and may have benefits for vis-
ibility protection. However, the United States continues to be con-
cerned that prevention of air quality deterioration and the
protection of visibility are required programs in the United States
while Canada does not have comparable requirements.
4. Article V: Assessment, Notification, and Mitigation - The Parties
concluded in 1996 that they had concerns with the functioning
of assessment and mitigation under the Agreement.
Although Canada and the United States have differences in laws
and regulations on assessment and mitigation, the Parties have
been successful in setting this different interpretation to the side
and working together to address issues where there is a trans-
boundary pollution concern. In 1998, at the annual Air Quality
Committee meeting, Guidelines for Implementing the Consultation
Process under Article XI of the United States—Canada Air
Quality Agreement were approved. The guidelines provide for
informal consultation between the Parties and are an effective
process for implementing the consultation commitment laid out
in Article XI of the Agreement. The immediate concerns leading
to the development of the guidelines were a desire to discuss con-
cerns expressed by U.S. residents regarding possible trans-
boundary air pollution in the Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, area in
relation to the Algoma steel plant and in the Estevan area in
Saskatchewan in relation to the Boundary Dam Power Station.
Following the guidance in the guidelines, important working level
cooperation and relationships have been developed that are not
only addressing the original concerns expressed but also help-
ing to address future issues that may arise under the information
consultation provision of the Air Quality Agreement.
In addition to the informal bilateral intergovernmental consul-
tations that are continuing successfully with respect to the Algoma
steel plant and the Boundary Dam Power Station, a third infor-
mal consultation on the Conners Creek Power Plant in Detroit,
Michigan, has been successfully concluded. In this case, Canadian
residents expressed concerns about possible transboundary pol-
lution resulting from the startup of a coal-fired power plant. The
requirement for the power plant to refuel with natural gas was
considered a positive conclusion by Canadians concerned about
the plant's operations.
The Parties agree to continue to meet the consultation commit-
ment under the Agreement using as guidance the informal guide-
lines established in 1998.
5. Article VI: Scientific and Technical Activities and Economic
Research - The Parties concluded in 1996 that additional
research and monitoring activities would be helpful in
addressing transboundary air pollution issues.
Annex 2, which covers scientific and technical activities and eco-
nomic research, falls under this article. The three issues that the
science focuses on are acid rain, ground-level ozone, and par-
ticulate matter.
Acid deposition is seen as a success story as sulphate levels fall
in most of the sensitive areas. In view of this, ongoing scientific
work focuses on the role of nitrogen, the monitoring of acid dep-
osition, and of lake and river chemistry. Some work is also being
done to assess whether sulphate and nitrogen deposition loads
will be reduced sufficiently to protect sensitive ecosystems after
emission control programs are implemented in both countries.
Until recently, most of the work has been carried out in parallel
rather than in a truly cooperative mode. Efforts are now under-
way to enhance cooperation.
42
-------
SECTION VI: Five-Year Review
Since the 1996 review, the focus of the science program has shift-
ed to ground- level ozone with emphasis almost entirely on health
effects. In contrast to the acid rain issue, the science of ground-
level ozone and particulate matter is focusing almost entirely on
health effects. Both the United States and Canada have pioneered
epidemiological studies based on large data bases that have shown
an association between mortality /morbidity and air pollution lev-
els with no apparent threshold. In addition to the health work,
some forest effects ozone research is underway.
The Ozone Annex to the Air Quality Agreement and the amend-
ments to the Annex II to address ozone science builds upon exist-
ing bilateral reporting under the Agreement and provides for each
country a commitment to complete monitoring and assessment
activities to track progress toward the achievement of each coun-
try's ozone air quality standards, to track facility-specific emis-
sion levels, to evaluate transboundaiy flow, and to monitor health
and air quality along the border within 500 km.
The Ozone Annex committed Canada and the United States to
explore market mechanisms and, in particular, emissions trad-
ing. Emissions cap and trade programs for N0X and SO2 emis-
sions in the United States have proven to be an efficient and
cost-effective method of achieving emission reductions to
address acidification and ground-level ozone air quality concerns.
There have been bilateral discussions of emissions trading,
including a workshop in April 2001, when details were shared on
U.S. trading programs. The Parties are developing a joint proj-
ect designed to analyze and explore required infrastructure for
a cross-border N0X emissions cap and trade and to evaluate the
impact of emissions trading on public health and the environ-
ment.
There is joint scientific work underway to understand the trans-
boundary nature of particulate matter in order to frame the issue
for the Air Quality Committee in a report to be issued by the end
of 2003 that will be the focus of decision-making on whether to
develop a PM annex to the Air Quality Agreement.
6. Article VII: Exchange of Information - The Parties agreed in
1996 that, when resources allowed, exchange of information
ought to be expanded.
Exchange of information between the Parties has been enhanced
through the new commitments under the Ozone Annex. The Ozone
Annex requires, for the first time in 2002 and thereafter, specif-
ic ozone, ambient nitrogen oxide (NOx), ambient volatile organ-
ic compound (VOC) concentration, and trend data will be
reported in the biennial Canada—U.S. Progress Report for all rel-
evant sites within 500 km of the border between Canada and the
United States. To prepare the reports, common protocols and
reporting formats are being defined.
Furthermore, the Ozone Annex requires by the 2004 biennial
Canada—U.S. Progress Report and, thereafter, both Canada and the
United States to begin reporting annual and ozone season and five-
year trend data on nitrogen oxide and volatile organic compound
emissions for the key source sectors in the transboundaiy ozone
region or Pollutant Emission Management Area (PEMA) defined in
the Annex. In addition, the Parties have broadened their coordination
and exchange of data relating to acid deposition measurements.
In 2001, Canada and the United States established a cooperative
agreement to characterize and improve U.S.—Canadian atmos-
pheric deposition measurements and to enhance the exchange,
accessibility, and analysis of data within the two countries. Under
a cooperative agreement initiated this year, the two governments
are planning to establish a common, cooperative, Canadian—U.S.
deposition data-base, analysis, and Web-based mapping capability
that will include data from the NADP, CASTNet, and AIRMoN net-
works as well as Canadian federal and provincial acid rain mon-
itoring networks.
7. Article VIII: The Air Quality Committee - In 1996, the Parties
agreed that detailed progress reports every five years and
short interim progress reports would be sufficient.
In response to the Five-Year review comment, the Air Quality
Committee decided that the progress reports should be shortened
and attempts should be made to make them more "accessible" to
the lay public. The 1998 and 2000 reports were shorter and less
detailed to respond to the committee's direction. Despite their small-
er size, however, they are technical in nature. At the same time,
the academic community has found the lengthy 1996 progress
report useful as course material. The Parties agree that while a bien-
nial compliance report is technical in nature, such a report could
be accompanied by a much shorter summary that can highlight
the successes of the bilateral cooperation under the agreement.
8. Article IX: Responsibilities of the International Joint
Commission (IJC) - The Parties' views on the role and respon-
sibilities for the IJC differed in 1996.
At the 1999 annual meeting of the Air Quality Committee, the role
and responsibilities of the International Joint Commission were dis-
cussed. The impetus for the discussion was a letter from the IJC in
which a proposal was made that the role of the IJC be expanded.
The Air Quality Committee agreed that the IJC should continue in
its current role of soliciting and synthesizing public comments on
the progress reports.
9. Article X: Review and Assessment - The Parties concluded
in 1996 that involvement of a third party could assist in the
review process.
After some consideration, the Parties do not see strong value in
involving a third party in the review and assessment of the
Agreement at this time. The Ozone Annex negotiation demon-
strates the ability of the Agreement to function and adapt to trans-
boundary pollution issues of concern to the Parties.
10. Articles XI: Consultations; XII: Referrals; and XIII: Settlement
of Disputes - The Parties questioned in 1996 whether mat-
ters could be successfully resolved through a formal con-
sultation process.
-------
SECTION VI: Five-Year Review
The Parties are satisfied that development and use of the infor-
mal Guidelines for Implementing the Consultation Process under
Article XI of the United States—Canada Air Quality Agreement
provide an appropriate opportunity for addressing and potentially
resolving concerns regarding transboundary pollution.
NEW TRANSBOUNDARY AIR ISSUES
The Parties are each developing domestic programs through which
to implement their PM air quality standards for particles.
Subcommittee 2 is currently developing a description of the trans-
boundary PM issue for the Air Quality Committee. This charac-
terization will provide information to the Air Quality Committee
from Subcommittee 1 on the benefits of developing bilateral man-
agement options to address the contribution of transboundary
flows to the achievement of the air quality standards in the two
countries. If the Air Quality Committee agrees that a bilateral
approach to the transboundary PM issue is warranted, the com-
mittee may recommend to both governments that a PM annex
be negotiated under the Air Quality Agreement.
The Georgia Basin-Puget Sound region in British Columbia and
Washington State is currently undertaking to describe its
transboundaiy air pollution issue sufficiently to enable an assess-
ment of the value of a bilateral management approach in the
area. Under the Ozone Annex, the opportunity to add a new
region or Pollutant Emission Management Area exists. In
2004, when the Ozone Annex is revisited, the consensus
achieved through the current discussion will be brought to the
table for review and assessment.
Protection of visibility continues to be a requirement in the United
States, while it is not considered an issue of concern in Canada.
However, the Parties now agree that Canada's implementation
of the Canada-wide Standard for PM and Ozone will likely
address further air quality deterioration and may have benefits
for visibility protection.
However, the United States continues to be concerned that pre-
vention of the deterioration of air quality and the protection of
visibility are required programs in the United States while
Canada does not have comparable requirements.
The Air Quality Committee may be interested in mercury-relat-
ed analyses as it relates to emissions from power plant genera-
tion and multipollutant efforts in both countries to address
emissions from this sector.
of transboundary pollution still has not occurred to the extent
necessary to fully protect the environment, particularly in high-
ly sensitive areas. To address this shortcoming, the Parties agree
that 1) progress in tracking emissions reductions must be con-
tinued, and the United States continues to be particularly inter-
ested in making facility-specific emissions data publicly accessible;
2) revised ecological goals must be developed, particularly to assess
the role of nitrogen oxide emissions in transboundary pollution
issues; and 3) further reductions of the pollutants causing acid-
ification should be a goal for future bilateral cooperation on trans-
boundary pollution under the Agreement.
The first Five-Year Review recognized the value of expanding the
Agreement to cover other issues of concern. Since the last review,
the Parties successfully negotiated an Ozone Annex setting sum-
mertime nitrogen oxide emission reduction targets, or "caps," to
address transboundary ozone pollution in the eastern border
regions of each country. Efforts to address particulate matter to
reduce transboundary PM transport are underway, and ajoint sci-
entific report on transboundary PM issues is being developed. The
Parties agree to review the conclusions regarding transboundary
PM issues and to make a decision regarding a recommendation
to governments in 2004 when the Ozone Annex is revisited as
the terms of the Annex provide.
In the first Five-Year Review, the Parties expressed disagreement
over two main obligations, and both are areas in which progress
has been made over the intervening five years. First, the Parties
disagreed in 1996 over the prevention of air quality deteriora-
tion and the protection of visibility. The Parties now agree that
Canada's implementation of the Canada-wide Standard for PM
and Ozone will likely address further air quality deterioration and
may have benefits for the protection of visibility. However, the
United States continues to be concerned that prevention of air
quality deterioration and protection of visibility are required pro-
grams in the United States while Canada does not have compa-
rable requirements. Second, the Parties disagreed in 1996
regarding certain aspects of assessment and mitigation. The Parties
continue to interpret differently the commitment on assessment
and mitigation as a result of differences in laws and regulations.
However, they have successfully set aside this difference and
worked together to address transboundary pollution concerns. One
result of this progress has been the approval of informal
Guidelines for Implementing the Consultation Process under Article
XI of the United States—Canada Air Quality Agreement, facili-
tating a practical and effective process for implementing the
consultation commitment laid out in Article XI of the Agreement.
CONCLUSION
Over the last five years, Canada and the United States continued
to successfully fulfill the obligations set forth in the Air Quality
Agreement. Implementation of each country's acid rain control
program continues to be a particularly notable achievement of
the Agreement. However, both countries recognize that control
-------
APPENDIX A
United States-Canada Air Quality Committee
CANADA
UNITED STATES
Co-Chair:
Barry Stemshorn
Assistant Deputy Minister
Environmental Protection Service
Environment Canada
Co-Chair:
Jeffry Burnam
Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Environment
Department of State
Members:
Randy Angle
Air Issues and Monitoring
Alberta Environmental Protection
Lynn Bailey
Water, Air and Climate Change Branch
Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection
British Columbia
John Banigan
Environmental Affairs Group
Industry Canada
Raynald Brulotte
Service de la Qualite de lAtmosphere
Ministere de l'Environnement
David Egar
Air Pollution Prevention Directorate
Environmental Protection Service
Environment Canada
Marc-Denis Everell
Meteorological Services Canada
Environment Canada
Peter Fawcett
U.S. Transboundary Division
Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Robert Langdon
Environment and Natural Areas Management
Nova Scotia Department of Environment and Labour
John Lowe
Energy Policy Branch
Natural Resources Canada
Mark Raizenne
Healthy Environment and Consumer Safety Branch
Health Canada
Tony Rockingham
Air Policy and Climate Change Branch
Ontario Ministry of Environment
Members:
Dennis Drake
Chief
Air Quality Division
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Bruce Hicks
Director Air Resources Laboratory
National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration
Nancy Mason
Director
Office of Canadian Affairs
Department of State
Steve Page
Director of the Office of Air Quality, Planning and Standards
Environmental Protection Agency
Bruce Polkowsky
Air Resources Division
National Park Service
Brian McLean
Director
Office of Atmospheric Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
Stephen Rothblatt
Air and Radiation
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5
David Shaw
Assistant Director
Division of Air Resources
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Ed Watts
Office of Policy and International Affairs
Department of Energy
45
-------
APPENDIX A: United States-Canada Air Quality Committee
SUBCOMMITTEE ON PROGRAM
MONITORING AND REPORTING
Co-Chairs:
Peggy Farnsworth
Director
Transboundary Air Issues Branch
Environmental Protection Service
Environment Canada
Brian McLean
Director
Office of Atmospheric Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENTIFIC
COOPERATION
Co-Chairs:
Ann McMillan
Director
Policy and International Affairs
Policy and Corporate Affairs
Meteorological Services
Environment Canada
Laurel Schultz
Office of Science Policy
Office of Research and Development
Environmental Protection Agency
46
-------
APPENDIX B
Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
Protocol between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America Amending the
"Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America on Air Quality"
The Government of Canada and the Government of the United
States of America, hereinafter referred to as "the Parties",
Recalling the Agreement between the Government of Canada
and the Government of the United States of America on Air
Quality done at Ottawa March 13, 1991, hereinafter referred to
as "the Agreement,"
Recognizing that cooperative and coordinated action through
the Agreement provides an effective means of addressing
transboundary air pollution;
In tending to reduce the transboundary flow of tropospheric ozone
and precursor emissions (N0X and VOC), thereby helping both
countries attain their respective air quality goals;
Recognizing that tropospheric ozone and its precursors (N0X and
VOC) originating in Canada and the United States are transported
across their international border, thereby affecting the ability of
downwind areas in each country to attain their air quality goals;
Concerned about the serious adverse effects to human health and
the environment from these pollutants;
Recognizing the need to take new scientific evidence into account;
and
Acknowledging the importance of public awareness, information,
education and involvement;
Have agreed as follows:
Article I
A new Annex 3, titled "Specific Objectives Concerning Ground-
Level Ozone Precursors" and attached as an appendix to this
Protocol, shall be added to the Agreement.
Article II
Paragraph 2 of Article IV of the Agreement shall be deleted and
replaced with the following:
"2. Each Party's specific objectives for emissions limitations
or reductions are set forth in annexes to this Agreement
as follows:
(a) Specific objectives for sulphur dioxide and nitrogen
oxides, which will reduce transboundaiy flows of these
acidic deposition precursors, are set forth in Annex 1.
(b) Specific objectives for volatile organic compounds and
nitrogen oxides, which will reduce transboundary flows
of tropospheric ozone and these precursors, thereby
helping both countries attain their respective air
quality goals over time, are set forth in Annex 3.
Specific objectives for such other air pollutants as the Parties agree
to address should take into account, as appropriate, the activi-
ties undertaken pursuant to Article VI."
Article III
1. Article VII of the Agreement shall be amended by adding a
new paragraph 2 as follows:
"2. The Parties agree to provide, subject to their respective laws
and regulations, public access to the databases contain-
ing the emissions and monitoring data reported or shared
under this Agreement."
2. Paragraph 2 of Article VII of the Agreement shall be renum-
bered paragraph 3.
Article IV
Paragraph 3 of Annex 2 of the Agreement shall be amended as
follows:
1. Subparagraph (e) shall be deleted and replaced with the
following:
"(e) their analysis of and experience with market-based
mechanisms, including emissions trading. Specifically,
through the Air Quality Committee established under
Article VII of the Agreement, the Parties shall exchange
information, within 12 months of entry into force of the
Protocol amending this Agreement and as may be agreed
upon thereafter, about the structure, components, public
information and disclosure requirements (including ver-
ification), environmental impacts, and administration of
their respective N0X and SO2 emissions trading programs
including emissions monitoring, reporting and tracking
of transfers of authority to emit;"
2. Subparagraph (f) shall be amended by deleting the period and
replacing it with "; and".
3. A new subparagraph (g) shall be added as follows:
"(g) public engagement and outreach activities."
47
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
Article V
Annex 2 of the Agreement shall be amended by adding a new
paragraph 5 as follows:
"5. The Parties further agree, subject to their respective laws
and regulations, to consult and share respective informa-
tion on data, tools and methodologies and develop joint
analyses on ground-level ozone and precursors, including:
(a) research and applications that contribute to tracking of
human health and environmental responses to controls;
(b) facility-specific emissions data, quantification methods,
and related information required for modeling and
regulatory policy development, assumptions and
models used to estimate emissions from other sources, and
air quality data for all relevant monitors;
(c) evaluation of transboundary transport, using methods such
as, inter alia, monitoring and meteorological data analyses,
and modeling;
(d) evaluation of adequacy of monitoring networks;
(e) review of new technologies; and
(f) analysis of options for reductions from significant
emitting source categories such as transportation,
manufacturing and electricity where there may be oppor-
tunities to achieve further cost-effective emission reduc-
tions through various means, for example, energy
efficiency, renewable energy, cleaner fuels, and alterna-
tive technologies and approaches."
Article VI
Pursuant to Article XVI of the Agreement, this Protocol shall enter
into force upon signature by the Parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized
by their respective Governments, have signed this Protocol.
DONE this day of , 2000, in dupli-
cate in the English and French languages, each version being
equally authentic.
FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA
FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
48
APPENDIX TO THE PROTOCOL
Annex 3
Specific Objectives Concerning Ground-Level
Ozone Precursors
Part I -- Purpose
The objective of the annex is to control and reduce, in accordance
with the provisions herein, the anthropogenic emissions of nitrogen
oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) that are pre-
cursors to the formation of ground-level ozone and that contribute
to transboundaiy air pollution, thereby helping both countries attain
their respective air quality goals over time to protect human health
and the environment. The Parties' goal is that in the long term and
in a stepwise approach, taking into account advances in scientific
knowledge, atmospheric concentrations not exceed:
A. For Canada, the Canada Wide Standard (CWS) for Ozone; and
B. For the United States, the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone.
Part II -- Pollutant Emission Management Area
Each Party hereby designates a Pollution Emission Management
Area (PEMA), to which obligations in this Annex shall apply in
accordance with the provisions herein.
A. For Canada, the area of 301,330km_ that covers all of the
Canadian territory south of about the 48th parallel beginning east
of Lake Superior to the Ottawa River, and south of the corridor
that extends from the Outaouais Region east to Quebec City, as
definitively designated on the map at Appendix 1 to this Annex.
B. For the United States, the area comprising the states of
Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine,
Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York,
New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West
Virginia, and Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, as indi-
cated on the illustrative map at Appendix 2 to this Annex.
Part III -- Specific Obligations
A. For Canada:
1. With respect to mobile sources of N0X and VOC emissions,
Canada shall control and reduce its emissions of N0X and VOC
in accordance with the following obligations:
(a) Continue the application of the following emission con-
trol measures:
(i) Emission standards for new light-duty vehicles,
light-duty trucks, heavy-duty vehicles, heavy-duty
engines and motorcycles: Motor Vehicle Safety Act
(and successor legislation), Schedule V of the Motor
Vehicle Safety Regulations: Vehicle Emissions
(Standard 1100), SOR/97-376, (28 July, 1997).
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
(ii) The Recreational Marine Engine Memorandum of
Understanding between Environment Canada and man-
ufacturers of spark-ignited marine engines to supply the
Canadian market with engines designed to comply with
U.S. federal spark-ignited marine engine emissions
standards starting with the 2001 model year. This is an
interim measure that will be overtaken and replaced by
the regulation referred to in subparagraph (b)(iv) below.
(iii) The Handheld Spark-Ignition Engine Memorandum
of Understanding between Environment Canada and
manufacturers of handheld spark-ignited utility
engines to supply engines to the Canadian market that
are designed to comply with U.S. federal emissions
standards for spark-ignited handheld utility engines
starting January 1, 2000. This is an interim measure
that will be overtaken and replaced by the regulation
referred to in subparagraph (b)(iv) below.
(iv) The Nonhandheld Nonroad Engine Memorandum of
Understanding between Environment Canada and
manufacturers of Class I and II non-handheld spark-
ignited utility engines to supply engines to the
Canadian market that are designed to comply with
U.S. federal emissions standards for new class I and
class II nonhandheld nonroad spark-ignition engines
starting January 1, 2001. This is an interim measure
that will be overtaken and replaced by the regulation
referred to in subparagraph (b)(iv) below.
(v) The Non-Road Diesel Memorandum of Understanding
between Environment Canada and manufacturers of
compression ignition (C.I.) non-road engines to sup-
ply engines designed to comply with U.S. federal
emissions standards to the Canadian market starting
with the 2000 model year. This is an interim meas-
ure that will be overtaken and replaced by the reg-
ulation referred to in subparagraph (b)(iv) below.
(vi) Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Diesel Fuel
Regulations, SOR/97-110 (4 February 1997).
(vii) Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Benzene in
Gasoline Regulations, SOR/97-493 (6 November,
1997).
(viii) Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Sulphur in
Gasoline Regulations, SOR/99-236 (4 June, 1999).
(ix) Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Gasoline and
Gasoline Blend Dispensing Flow Rate Regulations,
SOR/2000-43 (1 February, 2000).
(b) Develop and implement the following new emission
control measures:
(i) Proceed with consultations with the objective of
developing and implementing a Memorandum of
Understanding between Environment Canada and
manufacturers and importers of on-road vehicles to
ensure that low-emission vehicles will be marketed
and sold in Canada in the 2001-2003 model years, in
alignment with the voluntary U.S. National Low
Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program.
(ii) Emission regulations under the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act 1999 for new on-road
vehicles and engines to align with future U.S. nation-
al standards beginning with the 2004 model year,
including the U.S. Tier 2 program for new light-duty
vehicles, light-duty trucks and medium-duty passen-
ger vehicles and Phase 1 and Phase 2 programs for new
heavy-duty vehicles and engines. The final standards
and effective dates are subject to the procedures and
outcome of the regulatory development process.
(iii) A regulation under the Canadian Environmental
Protection Act 1999 to reduce the allowable level of
sulphur in on-road diesel fuel to align with future U.S.
standards. The final standards and effective dates are
subject to the procedures and outcome of the regu-
latory development process.
(iv) Emission regulations under the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act 1999 for new non-road
engines aligned with the U.S. federal emissions pro-
gram. The final scope of the standards and effective
dates are subject to the procedures and outcome of
the regulatory development process.
2. With respect to stationary sources of N0X emissions, Canada
shall control and reduce its emissions in accordance with the
following obligations:
(a) By 2007, cap the annual total emissions of N0X (as NO2)
from fossil fuel-fired power plants with a capacity greater
than 25 megawatts within the PEMA at 39 kilotonnes for
the Ontario portion of the PEMA and 5 kilotonnes for the
Quebec portion of the PEMA.
(b) Proposed national Guideline under s.54 of the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act, 1999, respecting Renewable
Low-Impact Electricity.
3. With respect to sources of emissions of VOC, Canada shall con-
trol and reduce its emissions in accordance with the follow-
ing obligations:
(a) Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999, Proposed
national Regulation on Tetrachloroethylene and other toxic
substances used in dry cleaning.
(b) Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999, Proposed
national Regulation on degreasing from commercial and
industrial degreasing facilities.
(c) Limit values for controlling emissions of VOC from new
stationary sources in the following stationary source cat-
egories will be determined on the basis of available infor-
mation on control technology and levels, including limit
values applied in other countries, and the following
documents:
(i) Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment
(CCME). Environmental Guideline for the Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds Process Emissions from
49
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
New Organic Chemical Operations. September 1993.
PN1108;
(ii) CCME. Environmental Code of Practice for the
Measurement and Control of Fugitive VOC Emissions
from Equipment Leaks. October 1993. PN1106;
(iii) CCME. A Program to Reduce Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions by 40 Percent from Adhesives
and Sealants. March 1994. PN1116;
(iv) CCME. A Plan to Reduce Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions by 20 Percent from
Consumer Surface Coatings. March 1994.
PN 1114;
(v) CCME. Environmental Guidelines for
Controlling Emissions of Volatile Organic
Compounds from Aboveground Storage Tanks.
June 1995. PN1180;
(vi) CCME. New Source Performance Standards and
Guidelines for the Reduction of Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions from Canadian
Automotive Original Equipment Manufacturer
(OEM) Coating Facilities. August 1995.
PN1234;
(vii) CCME. Environmental Guideline for the
Reduction of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from the Plastics Processing Industry.
July 1997. PN1276; and
(viii) CCME. National Standards for the Volatile
Organic Compound Content of Canadian
Commercial/Industrial Surface Coating Products
- Automotive Refinishing. August 1997.
PN1288.
4. In order to attain the CWS for Ozone in the PEMA by 2010,
Canada shall undertake by 2005, and implement between
2005 and 2010, measures based on a comprehensive,
national multi-pollutant emission reduction approach as
agreed by Canadian Ministers of Environment, consistent
with the overall program for achieving the CWS for Ozone,
for the following sectors: pulp and paper, lumber and allied
wood products, electric power, iron and steel, base metal
smelting and concrete batch mix and asphalt mix plants.
These measures shall address, inter alia, N0X emissions
from new, modified and existing industrial and commercial
boilers. In addition, measures shall be developed to reduce
VOC emissions from solvents, paints and consumer prod-
ucts using a mix of instruments such as eco-labelling cri-
teria and public education programs pertaining to VOC in
consumer products, environmental performance standards
for key products (e.g. surface coating of wood products,
automotive parts, metal products) and for other signifi-
cant solvent sources.
5. In addition, in the Quebec portion of the PEMA, the fol-
lowing shall be implemented:
(a) Proposed amendments to Le Reglement sur la qual-
ite de I'atmosphere du Quebec ("Quebec's Regulation
respecting the Quality of the Atmosphere") to reduce
N0X emissions from new and modified industrial and
commercial boilers.
(b) Proposed amendments to Le Reglement sur la qual-
ite de I'atmosphere du Quebec ("Quebec's Regulation
respecting the Quality of the Atmosphere") to reduce
VOC emissions from surface coatings, commercial
printing, dry cleaning and aboveground storage
tanks.
(c) Implementation of the Agreement on Environmental
Management between the Government of Quebec and
petroleum refineries and major petrochemical plants to
control and reduce VOC emission from their operations.
(d) Implementation of the existing Reglemen t sur les produits
petroliers du Quebec ("Quebec's Regulation on Petroleum
Products") concerning gasoline volatility.
(e) Proposed amendments to Le Reglement sur les produits
petroliers du Quebec ("Quebec's Regulation on Petroleum
Products") to reduce VOC emissions from gasoline dis-
tribution networks.
6. In addition, in the Ontario portion of the PEMA, the following
shall be implemented:
(a) The Ontario Drive Clean program (Ontario Environmental
Protection Act Regulation 361/98) as amended by Ontario
Regulation 401/98, as amended by Ontario Regulation
86/99 and as amended by Ontario Regulation 438/99.
(b) Regulation (Ontario Environmental Protection Act
Regulation 455/94) of Stage I vapour recovery.
(c) Regulation (Ontario Environmental Protection Act
Regulation 271/91 as amended by Ontario Environmental
Protection Act Regulation 45/97) of volatility of gasoline
at 9 psi during the summer months in southern Ontario
and 10.5 psi in northern Ontario.
(d) Regulation (Ontario Environmental Protection Act
Regulation 323/94) requiring environmental training for
dry cleaners.
(e) Implementation of the CCME guideline for new and
modified combustion turbines.
(f) Implementation of the CCME guideline for new com-
mercial/industrial boilers and heaters.
(g) Regulation (Ontario Environmental Protection Act Regulation
227/00) to be applied to the electricity sector requiring annu-
al monitoring and reporting of 28 pollutants of concern with
a commitment to extend the monitoring and reporting
requirement to other industry sectors.
50
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
B. For the United States:
1. Specific NOx Reduction Commitments
(a) The United States shall require States that are located in
the PEMA and that are subject to EPA's NOx regulation
(referred to as the "N0X SIP Call") to implement that reg-
ulation in accordance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) sections 51.121 and 51.122 including any modifi-
cations as a result of any court decision. The N0X SIP Call
requires States to ensure that seasonal N0X emissions do
not exceed specified levels ("budgets").
(b) The United States shall implement a motor vehicle con-
trol program in the PEMA that meets the requirements of
40 CFR Part 80, Subpart D (reformulated gasoline), 40 CFR
Part 86 (control of emissions from new and in-use high-
way vehicles and engines); and 40 CFR Part 80, section
80.29 (controls and prohibitions on diesel fuel quality).
(c) The United States shall implement standards for non-road
engines in the PEMA as provided for in 40 CFR Part 87
(aircraft), Part 89 (compression-ignition engines), Part 90
(spark-ignition engines), Part 92 (locomotives), and Part
94 (marine engines).
2. Specific VOC Reduction Commitments
(a) The United States shall implement controls in the PEMA
that reduce VOC emissions as required by 40 CFR Part 59,
Subpart B (automobile repair coatings), Subpart C (con-
sumer and commercial products), and Subpart D (archi-
tectural coatings).
(b) The United States shall implement controls on hazardous
air pollutants in the PEMA that also reduce VOC emissions
as required by 40 CFR Part 63. This includes the follow-
ing Subparts:
Subpart M (dry cleaning);
Subparts F, G, H, and I (Hazardous Organic NESHAP);
Subpart GG (aerospace industry);
Subpart N (chromium electroplating);
Subpart L (coke ovens: charging, top side and door leads);
Subpart 0 (commercial sterilizers);
Subpart T (degreasing organic cleaners);
Subpart R (gasoline distribution (Stage 1));
Subpart Q (industrial cooling towers);
Subpart EE (magnetic tape);
Subpart Y (marine vessel loading operations);
Subpart DD (off-site waste and recovery operations);
Subpart CC (petroleum refineries);
Subpart U (polymers and resins I);
Subpart W (polymers and resins II);
Subpart JJJ (polymers and resins III);
Subpart KK (printing/publishing);
Subpart X (secondary lead smelters);
Subpart II (shipbuilding and ship repair);
Subpart JJ (wood furniture);
Subpart XXX (ferralloys production);
Subpart III (flexible polyurethane foam production);
Subpart YY (generic MACT);
Subpart DDD (mineral wool production);
Subpart HH (oil and natural gas transmission and
production);
Subpart MMM (pesticide active ingredient production);
Subpart GGG (pharmaceuticals production);
Subpart AA/BB (phosphoric acid/phosphate fertilizers);
Subpart PPP (polyether polyols productions);
Subpart 000 (polymers and resins III: amino/phenol
resins);
Subpart LLL (portland cement manufacturing);
Subpart LL (primary aluminum production);
Subpart TTT (primary lead smelting);
Subpart VVV (publicly owned treatment works);
Subpart S (pulp and paper (Non-combust) MACT I);
Subpart S (pulp and paper cluster rule MACT III);
Subpart RRR (secondary aluminum);
Subpart CCC (steel pickling);
Subpart F (tetrahydrobenzaldehyde manufacture); and
Subpart NNN (wool fiberglass manufacturing).
(c) The United States shall implement controls in the PEMA
on motor vehicles and non-road engines as described
above in Part III.B (1) above.
3. New Source Standards
The United States shall require major new VOC and N0X sources
in the PEMA to meet New Source Performance Standards as
required by 40 CFR Part 60. This includes the following
Subparts:
Subpart D (fossil fuel fired steam generators);
Subpart Da (electric utility steam generating units);
Subpart Db (industrial/commercial/institutional steam
generating units);
Subpart Dc (small industrial-commercial-institutional steam
generating units);
Subpart E (incinerators);
Subpart Ea (municipal waste combustors);
Subpart Eb (large municipal waste combustors);
Subpart Ec (hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators);
Subpart G (nitric acid);
Subpart K (storage vessels for petroleum liquids);
Subpart Ka (storage vessels for petroleum liquids);
Subpart Kb (volatile organic liquid storage vessels);
Subpart EE (surface coating of metal furniture);
Subpart GG (stationary gas turbines);
Subpart MM (automobile or light-duty truck assembly
plants);
Subpart QQ (graphic arts industry: publication rotogravure
printing);
Subpart RR (pressure sensitive tape and label surface
coating operations);
Subpart SS (industrial surface coating of large appliances);
Subpart TT (metal coil surface coatings);
Subpart VV (synthetic organic chemical manufacturing
industry (SOCMI));
51
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
Subpart WW (municipal solid waste landfill);
Subpart XX (bulk gasoline terminals);
Subpart BBB (passenger and light duty truck tire
manufacturing);
Subpart DDD (polymer manufacturing industry);
Subpart FFF (rotogravure printing of flexible vinyl or
urethane products);
Subpart GGG (petroleum refinery leaking equipment);
Subpart HHH (synthetic fiber production facilities);
Subpart JJJ (petroleum dry cleaners);
Subpart KKK (onshore natural gas processing plant leaking
equipment);
Subpart NNN (SOCMI distillation operations);
Subpart QQQ (individual drain systems;
Subpart RRR (SOCMI reactor processes);
Subpart SSS (magnetic tape manufacturing);
Subpart TTT (surface coating of plastic parts for business
machines);
Subpart VVV (polymeric coating of supporting substrates);
and
Subpart WWW (municipal solid waste landfills).
C. For both Parties:
Taking into account the purpose of this Annex, the Parties agree
that the regulations, guidelines and caps referenced in all of the
commitments in Part III above are subject to modification from time
to time as a result of domestic legal processes that may take place.
Part IV -- Anticipated Additional Control Measures
and Indicative Reductions
In addition to the obligations set forth in Part III above, each Party
currently implements or anticipates implementing additional
measures that are expected to contribute to overall reductions of
N0X and VOC emissions. For illustrative purposes only, additional
control measures currently in place and anticipated additional con-
trol measures are set forth below, as are predicted overall emis-
sion reduction rates.
A. For Canada:
1. National Reductions
In order to achieve, by 2010, the CWS for Ozone (65 ppb 8-hour
average 4th highest averaged over 3 years), Canada intends to
develop and implement further reductions of emissions of N0X
and VOC.
2. Area-Specific Reductions
In Ontario, a 45% reduction of N0X and VOC emissions from
1990 levels is expected to be required to meet the CWS for
Ozone, assuming comparable reductions in the U.S. PEMA. In
the Ontario portion of the PEMA, measures to reduce VOC
emissions from small to medium sized solvent users will be
developed. In the Quebec portion of the PEMA, measures to
reduce N0X and VOC emissions from existing light and
heavy-duty vehicles will be considered.
3. Quantitative Estimates
The emission reduction obligations identified in Part III. A above
are estimated to reduce annual N0X emissions in the PEMA
from 1990 levels by 39% by 2007 and 44% by 2010 and annu-
al VOC emissions in the PEMA from 1990 levels by 18% in
2007 and 20% in 2010. Once all the measures identified in
Part III. A are implemented, in conjunction with the anticipated
national and area-specific reductions identified above, it is
expected that emissions reductions will be greater than cur-
rently estimated.
B. For the United States:
1. National Reductions
The United States has developed or intends to develop and
implement standards to further reduce emissions of N0X and
VOC, including:
(a) Tier 2 vehicle and fuel sulphur standards
(b) Tier 3 standards for nonroad compression ignition engines
(c) Heavy-duty engine standards
(d) Recreational vehicle standards
2. Area-Specific Reductions
The United States has implemented and intends to continue
to implement N0X and VOC control measures in specific areas
as required by applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act. The
area specific measures include: N0X and VOC reasonably avail-
able control technology, marine vessel loading, treatment stor-
age and disposal facilities, municipal solid waste landfills,
onboard refuelling, residential wood combustion, vehicle
inspection/maintenance, and reformulated gasoline. In addi-
tion to these measures, under Clean Air Act mandates, U.S.
states have already adopted or will be required to adopt addi-
tional measures for particular areas in the PEMA in order to
meet the applicable National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone.
3. Quantitative Estimates
The emission reduction obligations identified in Part III.B above,
in conjunction with the anticipated national and area-specific
reductions identified above, are estimated to reduce annual N0X
emissions in the PEMA from 1990 levels by 27% by 2007 and
36% by 20101 and annual VOC emissions in the PEMA from
1990 levels by 35% in 2007 and 38% in 2010.1 Further, the
emission reduction obligations identified in Part III.B above
in conjunction with the anticipated national and area-specific
reductions identified above, are estimated to reduce ozone sea-
son N0X emissions in the PEMA from 1990 levels by 35% by
1 The assumptions used in calculating the indicative reductions are detailed in "Procedures for Developing Base Year and Future Year Mass
Modeling Inventories for the Tier 2 Final Rulemaking" (EPA420-R-99-034, September 1999).
52
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
2007 and 43% by 2010 and ozone season VOC emissions in
the PEMA from 1990 levels by 39% in 2007 and 36% in 2010.
C. For Both Parties:
Each Party shall update its quantitative estimates referred to above,
by 2004 and from time to time thereafter, and shall make such
estimates available to the other Party and to the public.
Part V --Reporting
A. Beginning in 2004, as part of the biennial progress reports
under Article VIII. 2 of the Agreement, the Parties agree to pro-
vide information on all anthropogenic N0X and all anthropogenic
and biogenic VOC emissions within the PEMA specified in Part
II above. This information shall be from a year not more than
two years prior to the year of the report and shall include:
1. Annual and ozone season (May 1 to September 30) estimates
for VOC emissions categorized into the following sectors:
(a) Industrial Sources
(b) Non-Industrial Fuel Combustion
(c) Electric Power Generation
(d) Onroad Transportation
(e) Nonroad Transportation
(f) Solvent Utilization
(g) Other Anthropogenic Sources
(h) Biogenic sources (VOC emissions from vegetation and N0X
emissions from soil).
2. Annual and ozone season (May 1 to September 30) estimates
for N0X emissions categorized into the following sectors:
(a) Industrial Sources
(b) Non-Industrial Fuel Combustion
(c) Electric Power Generation
(d) Onroad Transportation
(e) Nonroad Transportation
(f) Other Anthropogenic Sources.
3. N0X and VOC 5-year emissions trends for the sectors listed
above as well as total emissions.
B. For the purpose of these reports, the Parties shall develop a
common definition of what source categories are covered in each
sector and a common format and level of aggregation and dis-
aggregation of data for reporting emissions.
C. Beginning in 2002, as part of the biennial progress reports,
the Parties agree to provide the following ambient air quality infor-
mation:
1. Ambient ozone concentrations, reported in the form of the
applicable standards
2. 10-year trends in ambient ozone concentrations
3. Ambient VOC concentrations
4. 10-year trends in ambient VOC concentrations
5. Ambient N0X concentrations
6. 10-year trends in ambient N0X.
D. The ambient air quality information listed above shall be
reported for all relevant monitors located within 500 km of the
border between Canada and the lower 48 states of the United
States.
E. For the purpose of these reports, the Parties shall develop com-
mon protocols and reporting formats, including identification of
relevant monitors, for reporting air quality and trends informa-
tion.
F. Beginning in 2004, as part of the biennial progress reports,
the Parties agree to provide information on implementation of
the controls agreed to under this Annex.
Part VI - Revisiting
A. The Parties agree to assess in 2004 progress in implement-
ing the obligations in the Annex with a view to negotiating fur-
ther reductions.
B. The Parties agree to discuss, at the request of either Party,
the possibility of amending this Annex to designate additional
emission management areas and/or to revise the emissions
commitments currently specified.
C. As part of the comprehensive review under Article X of the
Agreement, the Parties shall also review the adequacy of the obli-
gations in this Annex for achieving the objectives of this Annex.
Part VII - More Stringent Measures
Either Party may take more stringent measures to control and
reduce N0X and VOC emissions than those specified in this Annex.
53
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
APPENDIX 1 TO THE OZONE ANNEX
86*30" 50*00' 85*30' 85°00' 84°30' 84*00' 83*30' 83*00' 82°30' 82*00' 81 °30' 49*30' 80*00' 79*30' 79*00' 78*30' 78°00' 77°30' 49°0076°30' 76"00' 75*30' 75°00' 74°30' 48°30' 73*00' 72*30' 72*00' 71 °30'48"00' 70*30' 70*00' 69*30'
Legend
Ontario Portion
Quebec Portion
50 100 150 Kilometers
87*30' 41*3086*30' 86*00' 85*30' 85*00' 84*30' 84*00' 83*30' 83*00' 82*30' 41 *00'81 *30' 81*00' 80*30' 80*00" 79*30' 79*00' 40*3078*00' 77*30' 77*00' 76*30' 76*00' 40*00' 75*00' 74*30' 74*00' 73*30' 39*30'
54
-------
APPENDIX B: Air Quality Agreement - Ozone Annex
APPENDIX 2 TO THE OZONE ANNEX
United States Pollutant Emission Management Area (PEMA)
Maine
amp's hirte
- chlisetts
e Island
ctieut
. New Jersey
Delaware
irSrA'fi:District of Co umbi
^ v
mzm
inn n 100 Kilometers
ii \ ^
87" 36"
72* 71 *
55
-------
APPENDIX C
Trend Site Monitoring Locations
50
40
•»4,ND *
p,
^ Ozone Trend Sites
~ All Ozone Monitoring Sites
1—
-120
500
1000 km
-130
-110
-100
-90
-80
LONGITUDE
-70
-60
Trend Sites for Annual Fourth Highest Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Concentration
Figure 21
56
-------
APPENDIX C: TREND SITE MONITORING LOCATIONS
BC
AB
SK
MB
ON
ND
MN
MT
LU
o
SD
OR
WY
NY
PA
OH
40
NOx Trend Sites
All NOx Monitoring Sites
-60
-80
-120
-110
-100
-90
-70
LONGITUDE
Trend Sites for Annual Average Hourly NOx Concentration
Figure 22
-------
APPENDIX C: TREND SITE MONITORING LOCATIONS
~ Hydrocarbon Trend Sites
~ All Hydrocarbon Monitoring Sites
km
-120
-no
-100
LONGITUDE
Trend Sites for Annual Average Hourly Hydrocarbon Concentration Figure 23
58
------- |