Recommendations to the Clean Air Act Advisory
Committee

Air Quality Management Subcommittee
Phase II Recommendations
June 2007

I


-------
2


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Tribute to Gregg Cooke

Gregg Cooke served on the AQM Subcommittee until his passing on September 17,
2006. Through all of his public life Gregg sought to forge partnerships and creatively solve
problems. Gregg was widely recognized as an air quality policy expert, respected for his
knowledge and insight, and trusted as a partner in working to resolve many complex problems.
The AQM Subcommittee dedicates the AQM report to him. This dedication affirms that the
subsequent improvements in air quality management are a product of Gregg's seemingly tireless
efforts, his legacy to us, and to the people he so ably served.


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

AQM Subcommittee Phase II Report
June 2007

Table of Contents

I. Introduction	6

II Air Quality Management (Phase I) Work Group	8

III.	Current Air Quality Management System	9

IV.	Challenges for Air Quality Management	10

V.	Approach for Phase II AQM Subcommittee	14

VI.	Recommendation for a Comprehensive Air Quality Management Planning
Process	17

VII.	Recommendations Related to the Comprehensive Air Quality Management
Planning Process	21

Recommendation 1: Improve environmental and health data	22

Recommendation 2: Improve the priority setting process	23

Recommendation 3: Improve accountability mechanisms	24

Recommendation 4: Take climate change into account	26

Recommendation 5: Support transportation and land use scenario
planning	30

Recommendation 6: Integrate air quality planning into land use,
transportation and community development plans	35

Recommendation 7: Encourage pollution prevention, energy efficiency and
renewable energy	37

Recommendation 8: Expand the use of episodic controls	40

Recommendation 9: Overcome potential barriers to clean energy/air quality
integration	41

4


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendation 10: Provide incentives for voluntary and innovative land
use, energy, and transportation approaches	46

Recommendation 11: Develop programs to reduce public demand for
polluting activities	48

Recommendation 12: Establish an inter-agency liaison group to coordinate
land use, energy, transportation, climate change, and air quality goals
	50

VIII.	Need for Tools to Address Remaining Air Quality Problems and Planning
Needs	53

IX.	Unresolved Areas of Discussion	61

X.	Conclusions	71

XI.	Appendices	72

Appendix A: Membership and Organizational Structure of the Air Quality

Management Subcommittee	73

Appendix B: Need for Tools to Improve Air Quality Matrix and

Needs and Tools Paper	78

Appendix C: Proposed Framework for an Air Quality Management

Plan	91

Appendix D: Letter Transmitting Final Report to EPA	93

Appendix E: Commentary from stakeholders	96

5


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

I. Introduction

In March 2005, the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) formed the Air
Quality Management (AQM) Subcommittee to continue efforts to improve the air quality
management process in the United States. The primary charge of the AQM Subcommittee was
to develop recommendations that would improve the air quality management system and address
the air quality challenges in this country expected over the next 10 to 20 years. This report
addresses those challenges and includes recommendations for the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), states, tribes, and others to improve the planning and implementation
of air quality protection programs. The work of the AQM Subcommittee continues air quality
improvement efforts started by:

•	The National Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences in its
January 2004 report entitled "Air Quality Management in the United States, " and

•	The Air Quality Management Work Group, also established by the CAAAC, and
its January 2005 report "Recommendations to the Clean Air Act Advisory
Committee: Phase I and Next Steps. "

From May 2005 to October 2006, the AQM Subcommittee convened to discuss changes
to the AQM system and develop recommendations. The Subcommittee had a diverse
membership with representatives from industry, state and tribal air agencies, regional planning
organizations, environmental and health communities, and EPA.

The AQM Subcommittee recommends in this report that EPA transition its current AQM
paradigm from a single pollutant focus to an integrated, multiple pollutant model that: 1)
recognizes and encourages consideration of the related and sometimes conflicting national air
quality, land use, transportation, and energy goals and policies and 2) recognizes the range of
benefits realized by consolidating the elements of an implementing authority's clean air program
into one comprehensive Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The proposed AQMP will
make implementation of air quality programs more effective by realizing the co-benefits of
control measures, and creating a one-stop shop for the public and regulated entities to understand
all of the elements of a clean air program. The change advocated in this report will require a new
way of thinking about air quality management by federal, state, tribal, and local officials.

Initially, AQMPs would likely be resource intensive. However, the AQM Subcommittee's
recommendation comes with the expectation that an AQMP will, in the longer term, lead to
improved air quality through more efficient air quality protection strategies that utilize fewer
resources than the current State Implementation Plan (SIP) and Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP)
processes. Over time, the AQMP process would also enhance coordination between federal,
state, tribal, and local governments; provide more access and transparency to the public
regarding what its government agencies are doing to protect public health; and, serve as a
valuable tool that identifies gaps where more needs to be done. The proposed AQMP, through
more coordinated revision cycles, would also deliver the regulatory certainty that industry
requires to remain competitive.

6


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

During its deliberations, the AQM Subcommittee considered a wide range of
recommendations and after extensive discussion is advancing a number of those for
consideration. Most of the recommendations made by the AQM Subcommittee in this report are
part of the overarching comprehensive AQMP recommendation. While the AQM Subcommittee
urges that the recommendations be considered as a whole, each of the recommendations should
be implemented regardless of whether the comprehensive AQMP approach is undertaken by a
particular state or tribe.

The recommendations in this report, if implemented, would result in improved air quality
management by creating a more comprehensive approach that necessitates consideration of land
use, transportation, energy, and other related issues into the air quality planning process. The
AQM Subcommittee believes that the recommendations in this report may be implemented under
the current Clean Air Act (CAA).

7


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

II. Air Quality Management (Phase I) Work Group

In June 2004, the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) formed an Air Quality
Management Work Group to evaluate the National Research Council's (NRC) comprehensive
recommendations and to advise EPA on ways to improve the Air Quality Management (AQM)
system. The Work Group included representatives from industry, state and local governments,
tribal interests, regional organizations, environmental and public health organizations, and EPA.

In December 2004 the CAAAC submitted the Phase I AQM report which included 38
recommendations to EPA. The recommendations fall into the five broad categories outlined in
the original NRC report:

(1)	Strengthening scientific and technical capacity;

(2)	Expanding national and multistate control strategies;

(3)	Transforming the SIP process;

(4)	Developing an integrated program for criteria pollutants; and

(5)	Enhancing protection of ecosystems and public welfare.

The Work Group recommended several improvements be made to the AQM system as a
whole that would greatly increase its effectiveness. Because of the pending SIP deadlines faced
by states for ozone, fine particles, and regional haze, the Work Group chose to make
recommendations that could be implemented in the nearer term. The Work Group also agreed
that it would focus on recommendations that were responsive to the issues raised by the NRC,
but when implemented would not require statutory changes, and in many cases would not
involve regulatory or policy changes. The Work Group also recommended that a second phase
focusing on additional and more comprehensive improvements be undertaken.

The Phase I recommendations are described in full in the Work Group's Report,
"Recommendations to the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee: Phase 1 and Next Steps, " which
was fully adopted by the CAAAC and submitted to EPA in January 2005. In April 2005, EPA
conveyed to the CAAAC its agreement with the recommendations, its intent to implement the
Phase I recommendations, and to report to the CAAAC on progress. While there was unanimous
agreement among both EPA and the CAAAC that all of the recommendations should be pursued,
they also recognized that resource considerations would dictate the manner and time in which
certain recommendations could be pursued and satisfied.

Implementation of Phase I Recommendations

EPA has completed work on many of the Phase I recommendations and is making
progress on addressing the vast majority of the recommendations. Longer-term projects such as
improving information through monitoring, emissions inventories, modeling; developing a
framework for accountability; and improving ecosystem protection are moving forward and may
take several years to complete. The Phase I report, current EPA implementation updates, and
additional information can be found on the CAAAC website at http://www.epa.gov/air/caaac.

8


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

III. Current Air Quality Management System

The CAA created a framework for authorities to manage air quality, assigning different
roles to federal, state, tribal, and local governments. The CAA requires EPA to set standards for
"criteria" pollutants. A criteria pollutant is one of the six pollutants that EPA has found to
damage public health and the environment, for which EPA has set National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). While other pollutants can cause such damage, there are only six for which
EPA has set this type of standard.

There are two types of NAAQS, primary and secondary. Primary standards are set to
protect public health with an adequate margin of safety, including the health of "sensitive"
populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards are set to protect
public welfare, including protection against visibility impairment, damage to animals, crops,
vegetation, and buildings.1

For the criteria pollutants, EPA and states designate those geographic areas that
experience unhealthy levels of those pollutants. Once an area has been designated as out of
compliance (nonattainment) for a particular NAAQS, state and local governments are
responsible for implementing and enforcing rules that reduce air pollution. The responsible state
or local government has three years to develop a body of rules that will lower pollution in order
to comply with (or attain) the standard. States use computer-based modeling to show
(demonstrate) that the body of rules (collectively called a SIP) will bring about compliance with
the standard (attainment). Tribes may develop Tribal Implementation Plans (TIP) to address the
NAAQS in Indian Country. In areas where tribes choose not to develop a TIP, EPA is
responsible for implementing the program in Indian Country. Once EPA approves the SIP or
TIP, it has the force of federal law. States and tribes retain primacy for developing and
implementing the SIPs and TIPs, thus allowing them to tailor air quality approaches to their
individual local or regional concerns.

Aside from setting the standards, EPA has additional roles. EPA issues national rules that
reduce pollution throughout the country, such as on cars and trucks. EPA also issues procedures
and guidance to ensure consistency and certainty to states and tribes as SIPs and TIPs are
developed and implemented. EPA then reviews SIPs and TIPs and approves them when they
meet federal requirements, or takes action when plans are inadequate or not submitted. On
occasion EPA must take action when mandated progress goals are not met within the required
timeframes. EPA may also enforce state or tribal programs that are included in a SIP or TIP, if
for some reason a state or tribe fails to do so. As required or appropriate for pollutants other than
criteria pollutants, EPA may issue national emission control programs such as the maximum
achievable control technology (MACT) standards for stationary sources of hazardous air
pollutants.

Air Quality Management in the 21s' Century

While much progress has been made in air quality management, the Subcommittee sees
clear need for improvement. The NRC report identifies a number of significant challenges that

1 http://www.epa.gov/particles/standards.html

9


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

require a more comprehensive perspective, new and improved tools, and innovative strategies.
Addressing these challenges will help ensure future progress and keep pace with meeting current
and future clean air goals.

Presently, EPA, states, tribes, and local agencies are well underway in their efforts to
achieve the NAAQS. EPA has continued efforts to routinely review the NAAQS as required
under the CAA. In 2006, EPA revised the particulate matter (PM) standards and is currently
reviewing the standards for ozone, lead, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur oxides. Such reviews
underscore the need for a dynamic air quality planning strategy approach.

The Phase I recommendations by the CAAAC along with the Phase II recommendations
in this report are designed to assist EPA and state, tribal and local agencies to improve air
quality, protect public health, and protect the environment. Not only will it enable agencies to
achieve the NAAQS, but it also aims to take a more holistic multipollutant approach, including
reducing air toxics and greenhouse gases.

IV. Challenges for Air Quality Management - A Look Ahead

The economic and societal activities that generate air pollution continue to grow. Despite
this growth, air quality management programs in the United States have made significant
progress in several key areas. Concentrations of key pollutants have improved considerably in
much of the country. This progress has resulted in substantial public health benefits, economic
savings, ecosystem protection, and improved aesthetics during a period of growth in the
economy, energy production, vehicle use, and population.

A number of serious AQM challenges persist, especially areas that continue to have
public health and nonattainment problems with ground-level ozone and particulate matter. There
is also a heightened awareness and concern over exposure to air toxics, increasing levels of
pollution transported from abroad, ecosystem effects, and effects of air pollution on visibility in
and near national parks, effects of air pollution on climate change, and the feedback effects of
climate change on air pollution. The AQM Subcommittee believes that to be more effective,
future air quality management should address all of these challenges in a more holistic manner.

Nonattainment Problems: Ground-level Ozone and Particulate Matter

Following the anticipated emissions reductions from implementing the federal SIP Call
for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), federal mobile source rules,
existing state and tribal air pollution control programs, and existing local initiatives, federal air
quality modeling suggests that a number of areas, especially heavily populated areas, will
continue to violate the current NAAQS for ground-level ozone and PM (See Figure 1). The
number of nonattainment areas is expected to increase in light of the more protective 2006 fine
particles (PM2.5) standard. The geographic scope and number of nonattainment areas is also
expected to increase if a new, more protective ozone standard is promulgated.

10


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Figure 1. Areas Projected to Exceed the PM2.5 and 8-hour Ozone Standards in 2015 with
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), and the Clean Air
Visibility Rule (CAVR) Absent Additional Local Controls.

Nonattainment areas are of particular concern, given the increased evidence linking
ozone and PM exposure to a wide range of serious human health effects. In addition to the long-
recognized effects of ozone on lung function, more recent scientific studies have linked ozone to
increases in mortality (especially among the elderly), hospital admissions for respiratory ailments
(particularly children), school absenteeism, and incidence of asthma.

The most recent scientific information on the health and environmental effects of
particles, ozone, and related precursor pollutants suggest that the NAAQS will likely remain at
current or more restrictive levels in the foreseeable future. Developing strategies to attain and
maintain these standards over the long term poses a significant challenge, especially in light of
growth that is expected to continue. New and innovative strategies will likely be needed to
achieve reductions from emissions sources that have the potential for cost-effective reductions,
such as marine vessels, locomotives, existing legacy fleets and off-road vehicles, as well as
under-controlled and "grandfathered" industrial facilities. It could also include instituting
additional transportation control measures to address increased vehicle use and initiating local
and regional planning efforts to engage in a more holistic approach to air quality management.

11


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Air Toxics

Historically, the AQM system has not allocated the same level of resources to air toxics
control and management efforts as compared to criteria pollutants. While the air toxics
standards, ozone, and PM programs have yielded reductions of a number of toxic components
and precursor pollutants, air toxics problems continue to exist on local, regional, and even global
scales. The NRC report and EPA's most recent National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA),
suggests a background cancer risk associated with air toxics for much of the nation between 1 to
25 in one million, with much of the risk being attributed to benzene.2

A growing body of evidence suggests a potential overlap between air toxics and PM. The
overlap creates potential exposure and health effects concerns for populations that spend
significant time on or near heavily-traveled roadways. This issue may be related to direct
localized emissions of particles, organic or inorganic gaseous tailpipe emissions, or toxic
subcomponents. While exposure to air pollution along roadways is the subject of ongoing
research, EPA and states also need to focus on strategies to deal with "hotspots." Air quality
planning for localized areas will require innovative management techniques that could include
transportation planning, city planning, and a variety of mitigating actions.

Other Effects of Air Pollution/Interactions

Air quality management, in addition to addressing the lingering nonattainment problems
for ozone and PM, and air toxics problems, should include consideration of the interplay between
air quality objectives and other policies such as national land use, energy, transportation, and
climate. These other programs are intertwined with air quality policies and programs and
sometimes may cause increases in air emissions that make meeting air quality goals more
difficult. Similarly, air quality policies and programs may conflict with land use, transportation,
and energy goals. Where possible, the AQM Subcommittee recommends that these programs be
better aligned and function more effectively.

A similar interplay can exist between air quality and climate change. Climate change can
influence the concentration and distribution of air pollutants through a variety of direct and
indirect processes, including: (1) temperature increases and decreases which affect biogenic
emissions, atmospheric water vapor content, and the reactions forming ground-level ozone and
PM; and (2) altered weather patterns that affect wind speed and direction, vertical mixing,
precipitation, lightning frequency, and clouds. Particulate matter emissions have direct effects
by scattering and absorbing heat. The scattering of heat generally means that PM has a cooling
effect. Particulate matter also interacts with clouds, thereby indirectly affecting climate. Indirect
effects arguably represent the greatest uncertainty in our understanding of PM effects on climate.

During the past several years, many cities and states have initiated actions to reduce
greenhouse gases. To date, 41 states and Puerto Rico have completed greenhouse gas
inventories and 28 states and Puerto Rico have completed, or are working on, action plans that
identify options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions or enhancing greenhouse gas
sequestration. Over 300 mayors representing more than 50 million Americans have signed the

2 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/natal999/natafinalfact.html

12


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement that commits cities to take action to meet or exceed
the Kyoto Protocol targets3. The AQM Subcommittee believes that a number of cities and states
are interested in integrating air quality planning with their climate change programs. For
example, California has established greenhouse gas standards for passenger vehicles beginning
with the 2009 model year. Several Northeast and Western states have also adopted these
California measures. In addition, eight northeast states (CT, DE, ME, NH, NJ, NY, RI and MD)
participate in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions from the electric generating sector through a cap and trade program, and they have
issued a model rule. Two northwest states, Oregon and Washington, are also considering similar
greenhouse gas control initiatives.

Environmental Effects

Prior to the 1990 CAA Amendments, federal, state, tribal, and local air quality
management programs focused on health-based programs. The U.S. Congress amended the CAA
in 1990 to enhance the health-based programs, including setting a new national air toxics
program, programs to address visibility, and reductions in pollutants that cause acid rain. The
programs mandated by Congress in the 1990 CAA Amendments resulted in substantial
reductions in emissions of air toxics, sulfur oxides, and nitrogen oxides. EPA has launched
research on ecosystem health and the CAA contains requirements for secondary standards for
certain criteria pollutants to protect public welfare, including the environment. The 2004 NRC
report recommended establishing ecosystem protection as an AQM priority. In addition, the
NRC suggested the need for more monitors to measure ecosystem health, improved
meteorological and exposure models, risk assessment research, and researching the interplay of
ecosystems with factors such as air quality, climate, and topography.

3 For more information visit http://usmayors.org/climateprotection.

13


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

V. Approach for Phase IIAQM Subcommittee

Air Quality Management Subcommittee and Phase II Process

In its Phase I recommendations, the CAAAC recommended that a new subcommittee be
established to continue the assessment and development of recommendations for long-term
changes to the air quality management system. It recommended that discussion of all remaining
issues and options be directed towards further strengthening the U.S. air quality management
framework over the next decade. 4

In response to this recommendation, the CAAAC established the AQM Subcommittee in
March 2005. The AQM Subcommittee was charged with developing Phase II recommendations
for long-term systemic changes to the AQM system and with monitoring EPA's implementation
of the AQM Phase I recommendations. As with the original AQM Work Group, the
Subcommittee's membership was comprised of representatives from industry, state, tribal and
local governments, regional organizations, environmental and public health organizations, and
EPA. The list of Subcommittee members and other participants can be found in Appendix A of
this report and is available at the CAAAC website at http://www.epa.gov/air/caaac/aqm.html.

The AQM Subcommittee established two teams to facilitate data collection efforts and
develop recommendations. The first team was charged with evaluating improvements to the
AQM process. This team focused on three areas: 1) problem definition and priority setting; 2)
the AQM planning process; and 3) strategies for improved coordination and communication. The
second team was charged with examining and developing tools to support state, tribal, and local
agencies to improve air quality. An organizational chart is provided on page 76 of this report.

The AQM Subcommittee deliberated on recommendations developed by both teams. The
Subcommittee reached agreement on many of the recommendations; for other recommendations,
substantial consensus could not be reached. In addition, the Subcommittee spent considerable
time and effort on two significant overarching areas for improvement: 1) developing a
comprehensive AQM planning process; and 2) establishing a revised process for setting
nonattainment boundaries.

In October 2006, the AQM Subcommittee reached agreement on recommendations to present
to the CAAAC. Where there was not substantial consensus on proposed recommendations (i.e.,
reasonable performance levels, continuous improvement, and the process for setting
nonattainment boundaries), the Subcommittee decided to document discussions where
substantial consensus could not be reached, (see Section IX of this report). In January 2007, the
Subcommittee presented draft Phase II recommendations to the CAAAC.

4 CAAAC, Air Quality Management Work Group. January 2005. Recommendations to the Clean Air Act
Advisory Committee, http://www.epa.gov/air/caaac/aqm/reportl-17-05.pdf

14


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Decision Making Process

Prior to drafting recommendations, the AQM Subcommittee agreed to use substantial
consensus as the means for deciding which recommendations to adopt and forward to the
CAAAC. Using this process, the AQM Subcommittee achieved substantial consensus on the 13
recommendations presented in this report. However, the Subcommittee found that it was unable
to develop consensus on a few recommendations that would have substantial regulatory impact.
Such proposals, such as the ones listed in the Unresolved Areas of Discussion section below,
often require tradeoffs. For example, a stricter standard could be balanced with a longer period
of repose. The Subcommittee found that this forum did not allow for such specific
considerations.

Recommendations on Changes to the Air Quality Management System

The recommendations contained in this report represent the AQM Subcommittee's vision of
a comprehensive AQM system that can assist in meeting future air quality challenges in this
country.

As such, the AQM Subcommittee is making an overarching recommendation for taking a
holistic approach to AQM through utilization of a more comprehensive planning process. The
Subcommittee is making 12 additional recommendations that serve as integral components of
this improved process. Though these recommendations work together, each should be
considered on its specific merits and implemented regardless of the extent to which a
comprehensive AQM plan is implemented.

The AQM Subcommittee considered recommendations based on their merit, separate from
consideration of whether current statutory authority supports them. Tremendous progress has
occurred as a result of the CAA as it exists today, and the Subcommittee believes that changes to
the CAA are unnecessary to implement the Phase II recommendations in this report. In
particular, it is important to note that the primary recommendation - to establish a
comprehensive AQM process - would be voluntary. This recommendation is intended to
provide a vision for states, tribes and local governments, as well as EPA, to enhance clean air
planning by being more proactive and comprehensive.

Unresolved Areas of Discussion

The Subcommittee discussed at great length three AQM system changes on which the
members were unable to reach substantial consensus: (1) boundaries, (2) reasonable
performance levels, and (3) continuous improvement. The areas are highlighted here and are
discussed at greater length in Section IX of the report.

With respect to boundaries, the AQM Subcommittee was in substantial agreement on two
concepts related to boundary setting, and achieved consensus on a set of principles to guide the
development of a new approach to establishing boundaries. The Subcommittee agreed on the
need for an airshed approach to boundaries and on the need to replace the current system with an

15


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

approach where areas that violate NAAQS and areas where controls are needed are defined
independently based on scientific assessments. The Subcommittee also agreed that control areas
should encompass all significant contributors to the NAAQS violation, without regard to state,
tribal, or other geo-political boundaries, such that by controlling emissions from the sources
included within the control area boundary, timely attainment of the NAAQS will be assured.
The AQM Subcommittee could not, however, reach agreement on the details of how these
concepts and the underlying principles should be implemented.

The Subcommittee considered a concept called "reasonable performance levels" (RPL).
It is based on the idea of treating airsheds as a finite and essential resource, and sources are not
entitled to pollute. The RPL approach would require all categories of air pollution to take steps
to limit their emissions. RPLs would be established and periodically updated for all air pollution
sources and all pollutants, beginning with the sources and pollutants that pose the greatest risk to
public health and ecosystems. The RPL approach would provide a foundation for additional
controls that might be needed to address existing or potential area-specific problems. For
example, due to transport issues from upwind sources implementing RPLs, an area may still
violate a NAAQS. Under these circumstances, attainment SIPs with specific deadlines may still
be needed to protect public health. An RPL program would likely require amendments to the
CAA. Several Subcommittee members supported this concept as a recommendation, but several
Subcommittee members had significant concerns that prevented substantial consensus of this
recommendation.

Finally, the Subcommittee discussed the concept of "continuous improvement." The idea
is defined as continuous improvement in emissions reductions from all stationary, mobile and
area sources that would lead to continuous air quality improvement in all geographic regions of
the nation. The improvements would be achieved via a combination of mechanisms, including
voluntary programs at the local level, continued use of a national program of command and
control emission standards, and several options for strengthening and enhancing various market-
based programs to encourage continuous improvements. The goal of Subcommittee members
who developed the concept was to design a program that would result in more efficient and cost
effective reductions of emissions associated with manufacturing and energy generation, while
maintaining or improving environmental and/or public health conditions. The AQM
Subcommittee members had a wide range of disagreement about this concept. Some
Subcommittee members supported the concept. Others felt the proposed options lacked certainty
and were cost prohibitive if there was no related limit. They also saw the programs as redundant
with programs yielding reductions achieved through the NAAQS and national emission
standards.

16


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

VI. Recommendation for a Comprehensive Air Quality Management Planning Process

The AQM Subcommittee makes the following overarching
recommendation for improving the current AQM system: EPA, states,
local governments, and tribes should adopt a comprehensive AQM
planning process and, through this process, create plans to move from a
single pollutant approach to an integrated, multiple pollutant approach to
managing air quality.

The NRC report noted that an integrated, multiple pollutant approach to managing air quality
would be more effective, efficient and timely than the current pollutant-by-pollutant approach.
The concept of a comprehensive air quality management plan, or AQMP, is to provide a
framework that could be used to integrate analysis, planning, and implementation of air quality
management programs.

The AQMP would be developed at the discretion of the state, tribal, or local government, or a
multijurisdictional organization that is responsible for dealing with air quality issues in a
geographic area. The plan would outline how a jurisdiction(s) intends to address air pollutants in
an integrated manner, including, but not limited to, attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS,
sector-based reductions of criteria pollutants and air toxics, improvements for visibility in Class I
areas, area-wide strategies for reducing air toxics, ecosystem protection, and local environmental
issues. The AQMP would document the critical planning process and decisions made. Because
the AQMP would be developed on a voluntary basis at the discretion of the state, tribal, or local
governments, or a multijurisdictional organization, only the CAA mandated components
contained in the AQMP (e.g., the SIP) would be required to be submitted to EPA.

Development of an AQMP is envisioned by the Subcommittee as a broad, iterative process
that would reflect significant interaction between all stakeholders at the state, tribal, local and
regional levels, as well as the full range of affected parties. Issues that relate to air quality, such
as energy policy, climate change, transportation, and land use should, to the extent possible, be
considered in a comprehensive AQMP. The goal would be to create a comprehensive plan that is
multipollutant based, addresses all of the critical air pollution issues within the jurisdiction,
focuses on other important air quality goals in the geographic area, sets priorities, and provides
an overall plan for moving forward with the strategies outlined in the plan. The AQMP also
should be revised periodically (e.g., every five to 10 years).

At the same time that initial AQMPs are under development, EPA, and, as appropriate, the
states should be developing multipollutant regulations. This concept affirms a recommendation
from the NRC that EPA should address multiple-related pollutants in parallel.

The NRC encouraged a new approach in the steps and processes in setting the NAAQS that
could result in better coordination of deadlines and would facilitate the development of
multipollutant AQMPs. While the AQM Subcommittee agrees that better aligned deadlines
between various NAAQS revisions and their subsequent SIPs/TIPs could maximize planning

17


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

efforts, any alignment should not result in the delay of any CAA mandated deadline. Finally, the
NRC also recommended that the hazardous air pollutants that pose the highest risk to human
health and welfare be included in multipollutant AQMPs.5

Benefits of AQMDevelopment

The AQM Subcommittee achieved broad consensus on the concept and desirability of a
comprehensive AQM planning process and associated AQMP. The Subcommittee proposes a
framework for the plan which incorporates federally required elements for criteria pollutants
(State Implementation Plan elements) and non-SIP elements (e.g., MACT standards) in addition
to elements that are not federally required such as local planning, growth forecasts, and
communication strategies. The framework found in Appendix C provides a proposed structure
that a state, tribe, local government and/or multijurisdictional organization could use when
developing an AQMP.

The merits of preparing an AQMP include:

•	Relationships between federal, state, tribal, and local governments would be enhanced
through the coordinated planning effort;

•	The public would have greater access to air quality information and greater ease in
participating in the programs to manage air quality via centralization of one easy-to-
access plan;

•	The role for local governments and multijurisdictional organizations in air quality
planning would be facilitated;

•	The AQMP would be a valuable tool that highlights gaps where more air quality planning
needs to occur;

•	The AQMP could initiate a process to coordinate multiple emission requirements and
deliver regulatory certainty, enabling industry to optimize emission control decisions; and

•	The AQMP would better enable the selection of effective control strategies. More
effective control strategies would insure that in the process of reducing a pollutant,
increases in one or more other pollutants do not occur.

The AQM Subcommittee agreed that states and tribes should not be required to develop an
AQMP. Instead, the benefits of having an AQMP, coupled with new and expanded incentives for
developing these plans, could provide sufficient motivation for a jurisdiction to prepare an
AQMP voluntarily. The comprehensive AQMP recommendation does not contemplate changes
to the CAA with respect to the NAAQS or air toxics standards or processes.

Resources, Incentives, and EPA Oversight

Two major issues were identified by the Subcommittee that would need to be addressed
before most areas could consider developing and implementing an AQMP. First is the issue of
resources, including staff time and funds to implement comprehensive planning. The second

5 National Research Council, Air Quality Management in the United States, (Washington, D.C.; National Academies
Press, 2004), p. 21,310.

18


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

issue is EPA oversight; for example, the extent to which a state that develops an AQMP would
be required under the CAA to secure EPA approval of plan revisions.

The AQM Subcommittee suggested that EPA consider the following incentives:

•	Offer in-kind resources from EPA staff to assist in developing the AQMP;

•	Streamline the SIP and TIP process through measures like parallel processing;

•	Provide states and tribes with flexibility to place a lower priority on administrative
obligations that achieve little in terms of public health protection for air quality
improvement. Instead, those resources could be devoted to activities that enhance public
health protection, which could constitute an appropriate "trade-off." For example, Title
V sources are required to undergo two sets of reviews for federal and state approvals. If
EPA were to merge its review of Title V permit actions with state Title V permit notice
and public review processes, significant state, federal, and permittee time and resources
could be saved; and

•	Explore CAA section 110 authorities for the purpose of providing support for the
development of AQMPs. Such support could include expedited EPA approval of
regulatory measures that have been adopted or are in the process of approval by a state or
tribe outside of a nonattainment area, but would benefit the area in attaining the
standards.

These incentives would provide motivation for an area to commit resources to the
development of an AQMP. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA fully assess the
implications and options related to these incentives including, but not limited to, the legal
implications, the impact on inter-state obligations/expectations, the basis for approval, and the
need for consultation with various stakeholders.

EPA has broad authority to prescribe what is included in a SIP or TIP to decide which
proposed actions are acceptable and to determine when revisions to the SIP/TIP are consistent
with CAA requirements. The NRC noted in its report that the current planning system has
significant flaws. The AQM Subcommittee believes that these flaws could be minimized with
implementation of the AQMP recommendation. Regarding EPA's oversight, the AQM
Subcommittee recommends that a state or tribe would need to submit only the provisions of the
AQMP that are federally required and would include in the submission evidence that the state or
tribe has developed a comprehensive AQMP.

The current CAA emphasizes a pollutant by pollutant approach for criteria pollutants, and a
source sector-based approach to regulating air toxics. The AQM Subcommittee believes that a
multi-pollutant approach to air quality management can function within the framework of the
current CAA and it offers several advantages. These advantages may include:

•	Reaching attainment in a more cost-effective, efficient way, thus reducing public health
and ecosystem impacts, while yielding greater overall reductions of pollutants;

•	Optimizing the mix of control measures for multiple pollutants, thus avoiding control
measures that, while beneficial in reducing one pollutant, may result in increases in
others;

19


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	Making better use of limited federal, state, tribal, and local resources, and those of the
regulated community, for improving air quality;

•	Providing a more proactive, predictable, and manageable air quality planning process;
and

•	Making it easier and less expensive for potentially affected sources to plan the
installation of controls and/or the implementation of process changes, rather than having
to install controls in a piecemeal fashion.

In addition, the AQMP would provide a formal mechanism for providing the public with a
comprehensive picture of air quality where they live. It would also show how state agencies,
tribes, local governments and multijurisdictional organizations are working together and in
coordination with EPA to protect public health and ecosystems. Moreover, the AQMP would
help to highlight to the public and government decision-makers where there may still be
significant air quality issues that need to be addressed and raise the profile of these issues for
consideration for further action.

20


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

VII. Recommendations Related to the Comprehensive AQM Planning Process

In addition to the overarching recommendation related to the AQMP, the AQM
Subcommittee is making 12 supporting recommendations to expand on the concept of the
comprehensive air quality management process. The Subcommittee believes that these
recommendations will lead to improvements in how information is gathered and analyzed, how
air quality management strategies are developed, and how the strategies are implemented. The
Subcommittee realizes that many decisions remain regarding how changes in the air quality
management system will evolve, but that the recommendations in this report should be
implemented regardless of whether a state, tribe, or local agency implements a comprehensive
AQM planning process and an associated AQMP.

A comprehensive AQM system must address three principle components: assessing current air
quality, air quality management planning, and implementing air quality strategies.

Assessing
Current Air
Quality

Air Quality
Management
Planning

Implementing
Air Quality
Strategies

Figure 2: The Air Quality
Management System is
comprised of three iterative
steps: 1) Assessing Current Air
Quality; 2) Air Quality
Management Planning; 3)
Implementing Air Quality
Strategies.

Assessing Current Air Quality

The AQM Subcommittee is making the following four recommendations related to assessing
current air quality (Recommendations 1 through 4). The recommendations are based on the
premise that a comprehensive AQM needs to include programs to assess current air quality
impacts on public health and ecosystems and a means by which the effectiveness can be
measured.

21


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendation 1: Improve environmental and health data - Improve the
accuracy, robustness, and availability of environmental and health data (I) to
enable more complete characterization of air quality, emissions, and
environmental and health outcomes and (2) to facilitate the assessment and
characterization of relative risks.

Background/Explanation:

To meet future air quality management needs and to help air quality planning agencies
prioritize those needs, the supporting data must be continuously improved. Scientific
advancements continue to improve our understanding of air pollution and its impacts on
public health and the environment. Several of the following recommended actions are
expansions of recommendations that were made in the Phase IAQM report,
"Recommendations to the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee: Phase 1 and Next Steps"
(January 2005) and will improve the quality of the data that help inform air quality
management decisions.

Recommended Actions:

A.	EPA, states, tribes, and others should work to improve air quality data by continually
improving air quality monitoring networks to collect data on pollutants of concern, in
areas of concern.

B.	Fill in the information gaps and continually improve emissions inventories and air quality
modeling.

C.	EPA should improve the information on health endpoints and on the relative risk of
exposure to single and multiple pollutants, at both the population and individual level.

D.	Air quality planning agencies should improve the coordination and communication
between environmental groups, governmental agencies and external stakeholders,
including health agencies, academic institutions, and the medical community.

E.	EPA should improve the collection of control and cost data to facilitate analysis of
projected and actual implementation costs for major regulations.

Benefits:

•	Improved air quality data and information will improve decisions related to control
strategies.

•	Better environmental and health data will enhance the ability of governmental agencies to
evaluate the results of implemented strategies and to make changes as needed to improve
air quality resulting in improvements to public health and the environment.

•	Improved communication between multiple parties will help ensure that information is
shared and used to enhance program results.

22


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendation 2: Improve the priority setting process - Improve the priority
setting process by creating mechanisms to systematically realign resources and
regulatory focus toward areas of greatest health and environmental risk.

Background/Explanation:

To address current and future air quality issues, the AQM system should be realigned to
more effectively address the interaction of multiple pollutants. While some progress has
been made in addressing some multi-state transport of air pollution, transport issues still
need to be identified and proactively addressed. In addition, urban areas have a mix of
emissions that may be more appropriately addressed in a multipollutant fashion than on an
individual pollutant by pollutant basis.

Problem/Challenges Addressed:

•	Ability to address new priorities promptly.

•	Identification and assessment of most significant exposures and problems.

•	Integration of a multipollutant approach.

Recommended Actions:

A.	EPA should use the updated information provided by the state, tribal, and local air
agencies in AQM planning to develop national regulatory priorities. EPA should also,
through modeling and monitoring, help define problems that occur on a national scale
that can be used to support state and tribal plans.

B.	EPA should start discussions with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and state health
agencies to determine if it is feasible to produce an air quality health trends report. The
report would attempt to link changes in ambient air quality to health data on a five-year
cycle, using the best available information while recognizing the limitations of those data.

C.	EPA, the Federal Land Managers, and other agencies, working with the states, tribes, and
local agencies should report on links between ambient air quality and the health of
ecosystems on a five year cycle, using the best available information while recognizing
the limitations of that information.

D.	EPA and other stakeholders should strengthen the link between improved science and
improved policy by developing new mechanisms to encourage more rapid adjustment of
policy priorities in the face of new scientific information. EPA should investigate
mechanisms (incentives and hammers) to encourage the realignment of regulatory
priorities and implementation efforts to deal with the highest priority problems, both
within the Agency and among implementing authorities.

Benefits:

•	The additional consideration given to pollutant interactions will produce a more
comprehensive approach to improving air quality than the current process.

•	Using updated information to develop national priorities will allow state, tribal, and local
agencies to better align and shift resources to areas of higher priority.

23


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	An air quality health trends report will lead to improved communication with the public
on public health impacts from poor air quality.

•	New regulatory programs can be adapted that improve the linkages between emissions
and public health and ecosystem impacts.

Recommendation 3: Improve accountability mechanisms - Improve
accountability by systematically monitoring progress and evaluating results, by
ensuring that data collection is meaningful and that feedback loops exist so actual
environmental results inform the future allocation of resources and the
establishment of priorities.

Background/Explanation:

The AQM system must include an ongoing process for accountability, evaluating progress
and developing ways to make adjustments in activities and resource allocations based on the
success or failure of existing programs. Part of this process involves continuing investments
in technical tools, such as modeling, monitoring, and emissions inventory capabilities, to
ensure decisions are informed by the best possible information. AQM Phase I focused on
needs in this area. In addition, it is important to evaluate program performance relative to air
quality and cost-benefit goals, and to adjust program efforts and priorities accordingly.

In the past, EPA has had difficulty shifting resources and establishing programmatic
momentum in the face of new problems. For example, EPA first promulgated a fine particle
national ambient air quality standard in 1997 after evaluating available health data that
indicated fine particles posed a significant health risk. However, attainment and
nonattainment designations were not effective until April 2005, the SIPs are not due until
2008, and the first attainment deadlines are due in 2010. States have little discretion in how
they devote SIP development resources. States and tribal air agencies are trying to integrate
planning and reduction programs in a multipollutant framework. However, the rigid statutory
structure and unaligned deadlines make it difficult.

Even when targeted programs are developed to tackle a specific problem, measuring
progress accurately and assuring that the programs are actually reducing the targeted
pollutants and improving public and ecosystem health can be difficult. Current ways of
measuring progress are slow and, in some cases, not very accurate.

The current system is extremely cumbersome when faced with new information about health
and air pollution priorities, no matter how compelling the evidence.

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

• The need to be able to address new priorities promptly.

24


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	Lack of confidence in the effectiveness of pollution reduction programs because of weak
accountability systems (and therefore potential lack of support for continuing or future
programs).

•	Evaluation of the effectiveness of controls and adjustment as necessary.

Recommended Actions:

A.	EPA should make information available to the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee
(CASAC)6, state, tribal, and local agencies, and the public on an ongoing basis about
significant new research and studies on the health, welfare and ecosystem impacts of air
pollution. Provide a summary of significant new studies annually to the CASAC and to
the CAAAC. Provide notice in the Federal Register as to the availability of this summary
and prominently display the summary on EPA's website.

B.	EPA and other regulators should include metrics and schedules for tracking progress
within programs and rules at the time they are initiated. Using these metrics, EPA and
state, tribal, and local agencies should evaluate the progress that is being made under
various regulatory control programs by assessing compliance rates, actual reductions
achieved, and cost-benefit analysis. EPA and other stakeholders should improve the
collection of control and cost data to facilitate analyses of projected and actual
implementation costs for major regulations, as follows:

a.	EPA should develop an improved means of assessing control and compliance
measures and actual costs of these measures. Prospective modeling to estimate
costs and benefits in advance of new rules should be matched with retrospective
analyses of actual implementation costs, so that results and impacts can be
assessed more accurately.

b.	EPA and state, tribal, and local agencies should invest jointly in a complete, up-
to-date system to catalog available pollution control technologies and reduction
strategies and their associated costs and benefits.

c.	EPA and other stakeholders, including the CDC, should improve the assessment
of the prospective and retrospective benefits associated with avoiding air
pollution-related health impacts and premature mortality, ecosystem damage,
agricultural impacts and other public welfare impacts.

d.	Pollution control information and cost-benefit calculations should be combined
with the information in EPA's Trends Reports to produce a more comprehensive
"accountability" assessment that tracks program progress in a transparent and
publicly accessible way.

e.	Initial accountability efforts should focus on major rules such as the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), and mobile source
rules. Accountability metrics should ultimately be incorporated into all types of
programs.

Benefits:

• The public will benefit if regulators are focusing on the more important public health

issues and have more flexibility to respond to newly developed information.

6 For more information about the Clean Air Science Committee visit the EPA Science Advisory Board website at
http://www.epa.gov/sab/about.htm.

25


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	Publicizing significant new health and ecosystem studies on a regular basis will
increase focus on public health and environmental goals.

•	Publicizing these studies should help streamline the review/revision of primary
standards and facilitate the development of meaningful secondary standards that will
protect ecosystems.

•	Furthermore, ongoing efforts to track effectiveness and cost/benefit of programs
should enhance program design and effectiveness in the future. Accountability is
always necessary to ensure public and private resources are being used to the greatest
purpose, and to assure confidence in the effectiveness of current and future programs.

Recommendation 4: Take climate change into account - Take climate change
into account in air quality management strategies.

Background/Explanation:

The NRC report includes the following discussion on climate change:

The earth's climate is warming. Although uncertainties remain, the
general consensus among the scientific community is that this warming
trend will continue or even accelerate in the coming decades. The AQM
system will need to ensure that pollution reduction strategies remain
effective as the climate changes, because some forms of air pollution, such
as ground-level ozone, might be exacerbated. In addition, emissions that
contribute to air pollution and climate change are fostered by similar
anthropogenic activities, that is, fossil fuel burning. Multipollutant
approaches that include reducing emissions contributing to climate
warming as well as air pollution may prove to be desirable.

Air Quality Management in the United States, National Research Council
(January 2004) p. 16.

During the past several years, many cities and states have initiated actions to inventory
and/or reduce greenhouse gases. For instance, according to EPA, 41 states and Puerto Rico
have completed greenhouse gas inventories and 28 states and Puerto Rico have completed,
or are working on, action plans that identify options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions
or enhancing greenhouse gas sequestration. Many cities and states are interested in
integrating air quality planning with their climate change programs.

California has established greenhouse gas standards for passenger vehicles beginning with
the 2009 model year, a move several northeast and west coast states have also adopted.
Eight northeast states (CT, DE, ME, NH, NJ, NY, RI and MD) participate in the Regional
Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to reduce CO2 emissions from the electric generating
sector through the application of a cap and trade program. A draft model rule was issued in
2006. California, Oregon and Washington are currently considering similar greenhouse gas

26


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

control initiatives. The AQM Subcommittee discussions and recommendations preceded the
Massachusetts v. EPA Supreme Court decision. The AQM Subcommittee recognizes
ongoing discussions on climate change will occur outside of the AQM process.

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

In the January 2005 AQM Phase I Report, a recommendation was made that "EPA should
assist states and localities in quantifying the potential increases or decreases in greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions from reduction measures primarily designed to address ozone, fine
particles, regional haze, and air toxics." This recommendation was made in the Phase I
report in the context of the NRC core recommendation titled, "Develop an integrated
program for criteria pollutants."

Many AQM Subcommittee (Phase II) members felt that with the recommendation made in
the Phase I report that the scope of the AQM in Phase II should be further expanded on the
topic of climate change. Most Subcommittee members agreed that climate change was an
important issue worthy of further discussion as it relates to air quality. However, some
members believed that climate change was being expanded beyond the intended scope of the
AQM Subcommittee and should not be the forum for this topic as more qualified experts, not
present in this process, should be a part of a broader national debate. Therefore, the AQM
Subcommittee agreed to narrow discussion to certain aspects of three air quality related
linkages to climate change:

•	Maintenance of AQM efficiency in the face of changing climate;

•	Consideration of the effects of climate change in air quality decision making;
and,

•	Coordination of air quality and urban planning strategies.

Recommended Actions:

A.	EPA should continue to pursue Recommendation 4.3 from the AQM Phase I Report:
"Greenhouse Gas Co-Benefits and Disbenefits" - EPA should assist states and localities,
in quantifying the potential greenhouse gas co-benefits and disbenefits of emissions
reduction measures primarily designed to address ozone, PM2.5, regional haze and air
toxics. In evaluating control measures, EPA should assist states and localities in
quantifying potential greenhouse gas emissions increases and decreases. Many states and
localities have adopted policies to assess and/or reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Under
this recommendation, where requested, EPA should support state, tribal, or local efforts
to determine how pollution reduction alternatives might also impact greenhouse gas
emissions.

B.	EPA should undertake a comprehensive assessment of the implications climate change
will have on future air quality objectives and include other federal agencies and climate
change scientists in that endeavor.7 The assessment should include estimation of the

7 Aspects of the activities described under "B" are being carried out by EPA. For example, the EPA Office of
Research and Development (ORD) initiated a large program in 2001 to assess the impact of climate change on US
regional air quality. The EPA STAR Grant program funded 25 climate change-related projects; ORD and the

27


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

potential increases in the average and high temperatures during ozone season and the
impacts of such increases on ozone formation. An estimate of the air quality impact of
secondary effects of temperature increases, such as wildfires, heat island effects,
increased electric use, decreased hydroelectric generation, etc. should also be provided.
The assessment should include an estimation of costs and savings associated with
mitigation strategies to address impacts of climate change or temperature increases
associated with these potential secondary impacts.

C. EPA should assist states in the development of annual greenhouse gas emission

inventories.8 The Emission Inventory Improvement Program quantification guidance
should be finalized and made available to states to promote comparability between state
inventories.9 These enhanced inventories should be reflected in the assessment
conducted under recommended action B and should enable states to better evaluate the
air quality benefits associated with various control strategies. Coordination with
greenhouse gas emissions inventories collected by other governmental entities, such as
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), should be pursued to avoid duplication of efforts
and to ensure integrity of the data. EPA, at the request of state, tribal, or local
governments, should also provide additional technical assistance to states so they may
effectively evaluate greenhouse gas reduction strategies in conjunction with the
development of their air quality management plans.

Implementation:

•	For recommended actions A and C, EPA should work with states, local agencies and
tribes to provide technical assistance to assess greenhouse gas emission co-benefits and
disbenefits, and associated air pollution reduction strategies, as well as provide states,
tribes, and local agencies with the improved emission inventory information called for in
recommendation C.

•	For recommended action B, EPA should conduct the comprehensive assessment of the air
quality implications associated with climate change in a manner that utilizes the best
information available, and provides for stakeholder input.

National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) began a large project involving global and regional simulations, in
conjunction with DOE through a cooperative agreement. In addition, ORD's National Risk Management Research
Laboratory (NRMRL) began development of data resources and tools for emissions projections. These activities
will yield results that will be summarized in two assessment reports due in 2007 and 2010, to be produced by ORD's
National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) in collaboration with EPA's Office of Air and Radiation
and key stakeholders.

8	Aspects of the activities described under "C" are being (or have been) carried out by EPA. For example, 42 states
and Puerto Rico have completed their own greenhouse gas emission inventories in partnership with EPA. EPA's
draft guidance and draft State Inventory Tool have been instrumental in the progress to date.

9	See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/techreport/volume08/index.html for more information regarding the
Emission Inventory Improvement Program.

28


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Benefits:

•	These three initiatives will provide critical information to states, tribes, and local agencies
to use in any air quality and climate change program assessment or development they
may be pursuing.

•	Recommended action C will provide essential guidance on potential adjustments to be
considered in the air quality planning process as a result of climate change.

29


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

AQM Management Planning

The three recommendations the AQM Subcommittee is making regarding air quality
management (AQM) planning (Recommendations 5 through 7) represent an expansion of
traditional air quality management where the states play the lead role and the focus is on
point and mobile sources. The proposed comprehensive AQM planning process
recommends an enhanced role for tribal, local governments, and multijurisdictional
organizations, including the utilization of scenario planning and other tools. The AQM
Subcommittee also recommends an increased effort to encourage pollution prevention,
energy efficiency, and renewable energy as a means to reduce emissions.

Recommendation 5: Support transportation and land use scenario planning -

The AQM Process should support transportation and land use scenario planning
at the multijurisdictional, state, tribal, and local levels and other means to identify
emissions reduction opportunities and improve tribal and local engagement.10

Background/Explanation:

Tribal and local governments have critical control and approval authority over land use
choices that significantly impact air pollution, transportation systems (which some would
argue is the most critical driver of locally controlled development), air pollution, energy
use and greenhouse gas emissions. Multi-jurisdictional planning organizations are also
significantly involved in local land use and transportation planning in several ways, such
as providing technical planning support to local governments. For example, tribes, local
governments, and multi-jurisdictional planning organizations have the power to
determine or influence the way in which land is developed, how vehicle use and
transportation patterns evolve, which land is opened to development, and whether local
funds and land use are used to support mass transit, rather than discourage it. Some may
also influence whether energy efficiency or demand side management techniques are
required or implemented (e.g., in residential and commercial development). There is no
single federal requirement for coordination among transportation, land use and air
quality. Metropolitan and statewide transportation planning must address land use, air
quality factors, and transportation conformity. The conformity process seeks to integrate
transportation planning to the SIP's purpose of reducing violations and contributing to
attainment of the NAAQS. By virtue of their role in these multiple areas, multi-
jurisdictional planning organizations, tribal and local governments have a unique
opportunity to coordinate air quality, land use, energy, transportation, and climate
programs. For these and other reasons, the AQM Subcommittee recommends that

10 For purposes of Recommendation 5, "multi-jurisdictional planning organizations" include, but are not limited to,
multi-state organizations such as state transportation departments, multijurisdictional and regional planning
organizations (MJOs and RPOs), council of governments (COGs), nonprofit planning organizations and independent
system organizations.

30


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

multijurisdictional planning organizations, including all governments and planning
organizations be an integral part of the AQM process.

The AQM Subcommittee recognizes that considerations such as quality of life are
frequently the drivers for planning organizations (often with the support of
multijurisdictional planning organizations) to recommend and adopt land use restrictions
and other practices that are also good for air quality. EPA can play a constructive role in
supporting such practices by providing tools and resources to assess the air quality
benefits of alternative land use scenarios.

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

•	Attaining and maintaining the NAAQS for ozone and PM2.5 and reducing
regional haze.

•	Addressing air quality on the appropriate geographic scale (locally, regionally and
globally).

•	Addressing remaining pollution problems, including unregulated and smaller
"area sources".

•	Coordinating air quality, energy, transportation and urban planning strategies.

Recommended Actions:

To achieve enhanced multijurisdictional planning organization, state, tribal, and local
governments involvement in the AQM process and better coordination of AQM, land use,
energy, transportation and climate programs, the AQM process should be modified so
that multijurisdictional planning organizations including local planning choices are better
integrated with, and have meaningful input into, federal, state, and tribal AQM processes.
To accomplish this objective:

A. EPA should encourage states and tribes to coordinate with multijurisdictional planning
organizations and tribal and local governments by aligning planning schedules. EPA
should provide resources to multijurisdictional planning organizations, and tribal and
local governments so they can better understand the impact that land use, energy, and
transportation decisions in their areas will have on air quality and greenhouse gas
emissions. EPA (in consultation and coordination with DOT, states, and tribes) should
assist, where appropriate, in linking multijurisdictional planning organizations and tribal
and local governments that are actively implementing integrated planning approaches
(e.g., Sacramento, Portland, Chicago, Minneapolis) with those that are considering, but
not yet implementing, such approaches (e.g., Atlanta).

EPA, drawing on outside expertise), should also develop a clearinghouse of planning
related resources and tools, as proposed in the 2005 AQM Phase I report. Over the
longer term, multijurisdictional planning organizations, including governmental and other
planning organizations, need more sophisticated transportation and land use models that
adequately capture local land design issues, bicycle and pedestrian travel, and reduced
demand. These models will need to be supported by high quality, sufficiently
disaggregated land use, and travel data. In the nearer-term, regions, communities and

31


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

tribal entities need scenario analyses and visioning tools that allow them to understand,
visualize and quantify the opportunity costs of business-as-usual development trends and
the benefits of more efficient transportation and land use scenarios. Local land use and
transportation infrastructure decisions are typically driven more by the quality of life and
economic concerns than by air quality and environmental issues. Thus, it is critical that
scenario analysis tools address multiple factors (such as emissions, mobility, consumer
fuel costs, water quality, infrastructure costs, etc.) of concern to the public and the private
sector.

B.	EPA, in partnership with states, tribes, and DOT in consultation with other interested
stakeholders, should encourage multijurisdictional planning organizations, tribal, and
local governments to conduct a visioning and scenario planning process in which the area
in question decides where it wants to be in the future with regard to land use,
transportation, and energy; and, the area in question adopts a plan to incorporate the
necessary policies and requirements/mandates that further its vision. These efforts should
be coordinated with and supported by the transportation planning process. This could
produce an "integrated" strategy that addresses land use, energy, and transportation in a
manner that is directionally correct for air quality or explicitly tied to attainment. As part
of their visioning and scenario planning process, multijurisdictional planning
organizations, tribal, and local governments should be encouraged to work with state
and/or tribal planning organizations to identify strategically located communities that are
appropriate for new fuel and energy generation, storage, transportation technologies,
facilities, and infrastructure requiring changes to the existing land and built environment.

C.	EPA, in partnership with states, tribes, and DOT and in consultation with other interested
stakeholders, should explore the advantages and disadvantages of mandatory and
voluntary visioning and scenario planning that, among other things, identifies the
environmental benefits and detriments of various land use choices. Such a program could
be conducted as part of the multijurisdictional planning organizations or tribal or local
government's transportation planning and air quality planning process.11 If a mandatory
program is appropriate, significant changes would be required not just to the AQM
system, but to the transportation planning and conformity processes and underlying
statutes.

D.	EPA should allow SIP/TIP credit and make available other forms of recognition or
alternative "credit" for multijurisdictional planning organizations, tribal, and local
governments that revise their land use laws consistent with EPA's model goals and
ordinances, or that implement quantifiable land use, energy or transportation technologies
or approaches that benefit air quality.

11 A recommendation to mandate scenario planning for Transportation Improvement Plans and Long Range
Transportation Plans was initially developed by a group of transportation, land use and air quality experts convened
by the Center for Clean Air Policy and the local Government Commission in December 2004. See
http://www.ccap.org/transportation/smart_two.htmfor more information.

32


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Implementation:

•	For recommended action A, EPA should develop a plan in consultation with states, tribes,
DOT, and the various associations that represent municipalities (e.g., National
Association of Regional Councils). The plan should include a mechanism for facilitating
communication and scheduling between and among multijurisdictional planning
organizations, tribal, and local governments, as well as issuing guidance on integrated
planning approaches.

•	Further, with respect to the clearinghouse of planning resources and tools, EPA (drawing
on outside expertise) should gather items that will help multijurisdictional planning
organizations and tribal and local governments achieve planning and development
practices that benefit air quality. The clearinghouse of resources and tools should
include, without limitation:

1)	Software that enables multijurisdictional planning organizations and tribal and local
governments to model current and alternative land use patterns, energy trends and
transportation options so that they can study how different land use, energy and
transportation scenarios would impact future emissions;

2)	Modeling software that enables multijurisdictional planning organizations and tribal and
local governments to quantify the emission reductions associated with certain land use,
energy and transportation technologies or approaches;

3)	On-line tutorials and manuals for use of modeling software;

4)	Model codes and ordinances that benefit air quality (e.g., model codes and ordinances
that promote increased urban density, multiuse clustering, energy efficiency and public
transportation);

5)	Guidance that identifies land use, energy and transportation technologies or approaches
that benefit air quality and establish certain minimum steps that multijurisdictional
planning organizations and tribal and local governments should take to obtain SIP or TIP
credit when pursuing such technologies and approaches;

6)	Model educational and citizen involvement practices; and,

7)	Guidebooks that identify funding opportunities for innovative land use, energy and
transportation approaches.

•	In assembling this clearinghouse, EPA should determine what tools have been developed
and what items need to be enhanced or developed. EPA and the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) currently provide some technical assistance and guidance on
scenario planning tools and integrating transportation and land use planning. Increasing
awareness of these existing tools would be straightforward and low cost. For tools
needing to be enhanced or developed, EPA should decide which ones to develop first
based on stakeholders' needs.

•	To help ensure these tools are readily accessible to multijurisdictional planning
organizations and tribal and local governments, EPA should make the clearinghouse
available in a central place on the web. EPA should also consider featuring the tools at a
conference with a particular emphasis on creating champions or advocates such as local

33


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

politicians and land planners who can utilize the information to promote beneficial land-
use practices in their communities.

The clearinghouse and the other recommendations in this proposal are intended to deepen
current support and systematize it so these tools and approaches can be implemented more
broadly. The clearinghouse would require additional staff and financial resources for
implementation, especially for new tool development.

For recommended actions B and C to improve the effectiveness of scenario planning, EPA
should partner with states, tribes, local governments, and DOT to support pilot transportation
and land use scenario analyses in a few metropolitan regions across the U.S. These pilot
efforts would test the premise that scenario analyses can identify cost-effective emissions
reduction options that would otherwise be missed in the current system that does not
explicitly consider land use as a policy variable. The pilots would assess whether scenario
analyses yield persistent emission reduction strategies that will help maintain air quality and
aid in meeting future SIP/TIP objectives. These pilot efforts should be designed to fully
understand what is involved in making scenario analysis requirement a mandatory feature of
AQM and inform how it would be structured and implemented. Another goal of the pilots
should be identifying next steps to make use of scenario planning more widespread,
including consideration of whether making such analyses should be mandatory.

For recommended action D, EPA should give states and tribes the option to include the
visioning and scenario planning process as an input into their SIPs or TIPs in one of three
ways: 1) as a measure in the baseline; 2) a measure warranting credit; and/or, 3) a growth
assumption. EPA has developed several useful guidelines for calculating SIP and TIP credit.
For example, EPA has provided guidance on SIP credit for emission reductions from electric
sector energy efficiency and renewable energy projects and plans to provide guidance on SIP
credit for emission reductions from highway and off-road diesel vehicles and retrofits. EPA
should continue developing guidelines for calculating SIP and TIP credit associated with
other land use, energy and transportation technologies and approaches and should work with
EPA regional offices and in consultation with states and tribes to follow such guidelines for
SIP and TIP planning and development. EPA should develop guidance that explains how
areas can get SIP/TIP credit for well documented land use measures that multijurisdictional
planning organizations and tribal and local governments adopt that yield emission reductions.
EPA should also develop new guidance to allow some amount of SIP/TIP credit where the
total reductions for innovative strategies would exceed the three percent for mobile voluntary
measures and six percent for stationary source related VOC measures under current
guidance. Recommendation 10 details measures that EPA could pursue to further credit and
other recognition programs outside the SIP/TIP process.

Benefits:

• Current land use and transportation decisions will impact emissions over many decades.
Providing multijurisdictional planning organizations, tribal, and local governments with
tools and resources to better understand the interaction among land use, transportation,
energy, and greenhouse gas emissions, will empower them to make better decisions over
the short- and long-term.

34


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	Alternative transportation and land use scenario analyses have been used to identify cost-
effective emissions reduction options that would otherwise be missed in the current
system that does not explicitly consider land use as a policy variable.

•	In addition to emissions benefits, smart growth policies can yield multiple benefits on
issues of significant public and private sector concern including: energy security, traffic
congestion, ecosystem preservation, reduced infrastructure costs, and protection of water
resources.

Recommendation 6: Integrate air quality planning into land use,
transportation and community development plans - Local planning
organizations should integrate air quality planning into their land use,
transportation and community development plans when high population growth is
occurring in order to prevent significant deterioration of air quality.

Background/Explanation

As America grows, it is particularly important that land use, transportation, and air quality
linkages be established in a manner that educates, provides incentives, and flexibility for
local officials and governing boards or commissions. Local forums have great power to
design and manage growth in ways that stimulate creative, cost effective solutions that
maintain clean air.

During the history of the CAA, air quality planning by local governments has primarily
occurred when a nonattainment problem had to be solved. Local governments, elected
officials, and the business community can react quickly to bring about cost-effective
solutions to air quality problems when they understand the possible adverse impacts of
inaction. Opportunities for flexibility and inventiveness should be encouraged early in the
AQM process to avoid a nonattainment designation and the prescriptive programs that
would accompany those designations.

Preservation of clean air is no longer solely focused on large industrial and mobile source
challenges. Local governments and leaders have a growing appreciation of the value of
clean air as a health, quality of life, and economic resource. Chronic erosion of air quality
that gradually builds to violations of the NAAQS is an outcome Congress foresaw in 1977.
While Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) increment standards and baseline dates
set the foundation for preserving clean air, they are no longer sufficient to address the
challenge of urban expansion, where air quality is often eroded by small point, area, and
mobile source air pollution.

Comprehensive state-wide or regional airshed planning could potentially be developed from
a mosaic of local plans. However, if all areas were required to undertake local planning, it
could become a significant and unnecessary burden for local governments. This planning
requirement would need to be accompanied by new planning tools and educational
components to aid local governments.

35


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

•	A new local planning paradigm is needed if states, tribes, and local governments are going
to preserve clean air below the NAAQS level while also promoting population and
economic growth.

Recommended Actions:

A.	Engage local leaders early in the AQM process by encouraging flexibility and customized
solutions that would spur preemptive action. This could help avoid a nonattainment
designation and the more prescriptive programs that would accompany nonattainment.
Local governments and the business community can react quickly to bring about cost-
effective solutions to air quality problems when they understand the possible adverse
economic impacts of inaction.

B.	Selected local areas, particularly those with high population growth, should be required to
develop local air quality plans. This planning requirement would need to be
accompanied by new planning tools to aid the selected tribal and local governments.

Benefits:

•	This recommendation fills a gap in the existing AQM system to manage chronic pollution
increases in high population growth areas of the country in order to preserve existing
clean air areas. Some recent examples have shown this can be achieved in a way to
stimulate local leaders' protection of air resources, promoting health, quality of life, and
the economic vitality of our cities and communities.

•	This recommendation also relates to ecosystem protection and creates stronger
opportunities for local government air quality management that may also assist
environmental justice goals.

36


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendation 7: Encourage pollution prevention, energy efficiency and
renewable energy - Analyze existing laws to determine the extent to which they
can be used to encourage pollution prevention, energy efficiency, and renewable
energy as they may be effective in reducing emissions.

Background/Explanation:

Tremendous progress has been made in the U.S. over the past 30 years in reducing air pollution
using primarily command and control approaches under the CAA. In addition, several
environmental and energy statutes directly or indirectly address energy efficiency, cleaner
energy, and renewable energy and may present another means of achieving CAA air quality
objectives. These statutes are potentially amenable to a number of legally permissible
interpretations and the regulations implementing them are amenable to a number of legally
permissible regulatory frameworks.

For example, the CAA Amendments of 1990 establish prevention as "a primary goal" of
the Act (see Title 1, Part A, section 101 (a) (3) and section 101 (c)). The Act also
addresses concerns related to multi-media transfer of pollutants.

The Pollution Prevention Act establishes as national policy:

".. .that pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible;
pollution that cannot be prevented should be recycled in an environmentally safe
manner, whenever feasible; pollution that cannot be prevented or recycled should
be treated in an environmentally safe manner whenever feasible; and that disposal
or other release into the environment should be employed only as a last resort and
should be conducted in an environmentally safe manner."

Similarly, the Energy Policy Act in Section 2108 (a) (titled Energy Efficient
Environmental Program) states:

"(a) PROGRAM DIRECTION- The Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection Agency, is authorized to continue to carry out a five
year program to improve the energy efficiency and cost effectiveness of pollution
prevention technologies and processes, including source reduction and waste
minimization technologies and processes. The purposes of this section shall be to

(1)	apply a systems approach to minimizing adverse environmental effects of
industrial production in the most cost effective and energy efficient manner; and

(2)	incorporate consideration of the entire materials and energy cycle with the
goal of minimizing adverse environmental impacts."

A clean air strategy that takes full advantage of opportunities to use pollution prevention,
energy efficiency and renewable energy measures may offer three advantages. First, such
an approach could, with a single investment, reduce multiple emissions and reduce and/or

37


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

eliminate pollutants and emissions to other media, as well as emissions that are currently
unregulated but which may be in the future. Second, viewed from a systems perspective
(as the Energy Policy Act dictates) pollution prevention, energy efficiency and renewable
energy measures may be more cost effective than command and control strategies. Third,
such measures may help the U.S. accomplish important public policy goals outside the
environmental and clean air arena, such as energy security, national security, and
homeland security. Many states have established pollution prevention programs that have
garnered tremendous successes.

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

•	Coordinating air quality and energy strategies;

•	Meeting the NAAQS for ozone and PM2.5 and reducing regional haze; and

•	Addressing impacts on specific communities (environmental justice).

Recommended Actions:

A.	EPA should examine the scope and extent of pollution prevention-based strategies
permissible under the CAA, Pollution Prevention Act and Energy Policy Act; assess the
cost effectiveness of such strategies as compared to current regulatory strategies; and
identify opportunities for taking advantage of pollution prevention-based approaches that
may exist in the current legal framework. In addition, EPA should examine the potential
for new enforceable regulatory requirements which allow for use of pollution prevention
strategies where they prove to be more effective from cost- and performance-based
perspectives.

B.	Existing and prospective prevention-based strategies should be identified and
implemented, particularly where they offer the opportunity to achieve national goals such
as greater energy independence and energy security, and/or where they allow the nation
to accomplish reductions in greenhouse gas emissions as an ancillary benefit that imposes
low net costs.

Implementation:

• For recommended action A, EPA should convene a team including state and local

officials, the Environmental Law Institute, Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., the
National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA), National Association of State
Energy Officials (NASEO), American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy
(ACEEE), DOE's energy laboratories, Electric Power Research Institute, Environmental
Council of States (ECOS), and representatives from tribes, industry, and environmental
advocacy groups, to thoroughly examine the scope and extent of pollution prevention-
based strategies permissible under the CAA, the Pollution Prevention Act and the Energy
Policy Act, including pertinent rules, regulations, and other policy documents. The
review and analysis should include examples of where pollution prevention strategies that
have been tried, used, and where opportunities exist to further the use of these strategies.

38


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	Second, for recommended actions A and B, EPA should convene an analytical team
including state and local officials, DOE, National Renewable Energy Laboratory
(NREL), NACAA, NASEO, ECOS, and representatives from tribes, industry, and
environmental advocacy groups, to gather all information and data on the pollution
prevention provisions of all pertinent statutes, rules, guidance, and policies. In addition,
the team should gather and analyze performance and cost data on energy efficiency and
renewable energy technologies to examine their performance and cost-effectiveness as
compared to current regulatory strategies in achieving air quality objectives and
providing other ancillary benefits.

•	The above two teams should be asked to merge their findings and any proposed
recommendations into a single document and to present that document to EPA and DOE
for consideration.

Benefits:

•	This recommendation promotes meeting air quality objectives in the most cost-effective
manner, with lower compliance and administrative costs, conservation of fuels and
resources, enhanced national and energy security, and reductions of greenhouse gases at
little or no additional expense while providing new and clean sources of electricity
generation, and enhanced local and regional economic development.

Implementing Air Quality Strategies

The Subcommittee recommends an integrated approach for implementation that calls for air
quality goals, strategies, and plans to be implemented in coordination with a range of related
issues. EPA should work with state air and energy organizations, tribal governments, and
regional air quality planning organizations to overcome potential barriers to clean energy/air
quality integration. Incentives (including, but not limited to, more flexible forms of credit,
regulatory incentives and economic incentives) for voluntary and innovative land use, energy,
and transportation technologies or approaches need to be developed and promoted. In addition a
federal inter-agency liaison group should be established with EPA and other federal agencies to
coordinate land use, energy, transportation, greenhouse gas, and air quality goals.

The AQM Subcommittee is making five recommendations related to implementation of a
comprehensive AQM system (Recommendations 8 through 12).

39


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendation 8: Expand the use of episodic controls - Expand the use of

episodic control measures to help attain and maintain national ambient air quality
standards in areas where all reasonable continuous and seasonal control
measures have already been required.

Background/Explanation:

The U.S. AQM system relies on the use of continuous (i.e., year-round) and seasonal
control measures. A number of communities have supplemented the use of continuous
and seasonal control measures with public information campaigns and voluntary
programs designed to reduce emissions on specific days when high ozone or PM
concentrations are expected. In 1977, Congress rejected the use of "intermittent" controls
as part of a SIP for achieving the NAAQS. Since that time, EPA has concluded that the
CAA does not restrict SIP approval (or credit) for peak day (i.e., episodic) reduction
measures that apply to: (1) consumer products or services (2) certain consumer actions,
(3) episodic transportation control measures, and (4) certain other mobile source
measures that may be approved for SIP credit. EPA maintains, however, that the CAA
limits the use of intermittent controls at stationary sources as part of an approvable SIP.

Recommended Actions:

A.	Expand federal research and technical assistance to communities regarding the design,
implementation and evaluation of successful programs to reduce peak day emissions
from non-stationary sources

B.	Expand the use of stationary source episodic control measures as a backup insurance
mechanism (i.e., outside the scope of an approved SIP) for areas struggling to attain or
maintain the short-term ambient standards.

Implementation

If the use of episodic control measures is to be expanded, a number of implementation issues
must be addressed, including:

How the results of such programs are measured;

How well high pollution days are predicted and how best episodic measures can be called
into effect in a timely manner; and,

What types of episodic control measures will be practical, enforceable, and cost
effective?

Benefits

40


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Episodic control measures can provide an expanded set of cost-effective control
opportunities for states and local communities that are capable of yielding emission
reductions.

A variety of measures that could not be implemented on a continuous or seasonal basis
could prove to be suitable and cost effective for episodic use.

For areas that are working to attain or maintain a NAAQS, episodic control measures can
serve as a backup insurance mechanism by preventing air quality violations on days when
meteorological conditions might otherwise cause a violation.

By reducing peak concentrations on the highest pollution days, episodic control measures
may provide considerable health and environmental benefits to all affected populations.

Recommendation 9: Overcome potential barriers to clean energy/air quality
integration - EPA should work with state, tribal, and local air agencies, energy
organizations, and regional air quality planning organizations to overcome
potential barriers to clean energy/air quality integration.

Background/Explanation:

Many states and tribes have developed programs to implement energy
efficiency/renewable energy measures. Several states and tribes have expressed interest
in implementing these energy related measures to help achieve their air quality
objectives. Toward that end, EPA has established the Clean Energy-Environment State
Partnership Program, a voluntary state-federal partnership to support state efforts to
increase the use of clean energy to achieve environmental, energy and economic benefits.

To support state, tribal, and local clean energy programs, EPA has issued three key
documents:

1.	"Guidance on State Implementation Plan Credits for Emission Reduction
Measures from Electric-sector Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Measures," August 2004 (hereinafter, EPA SIP Energy Guidance);

2.	"A Toolkit for States: Using Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) To
Promote Energy Efficiency (EE) and Renewable Energy (RE)," January 2005;
and,

3.	"Clean Energy-Environment Guide to Action: Policies, Best Practices and Action
Steps for States," February 2006.

The requirement for SIP and TIP revisions to meet the new 8-hour ozone standard and
the PM 2.5 standard provides an opportunity for clean energy and air quality integration.
This integration can be achieved through the inclusion of energy efficiency and
renewable energy measures into SIPs/TIPs utilizing state and EPA programs and
resources like the ones cited above.

41


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

There is limited precedent for adoption of energy efficiency and renewable energy
measures within SIPs and TIPs. States must submit ozone and PM2.5 SIPs over the next
two years, leaving little time to accommodate the lengthy process required for
incorporating energy efficiency and renewable energy measures into the plans.
Notwithstanding, EPA should lead the way now to overcome real and perceived obstacles
to including energy efficiency and renewable energy measure adoption and inclusion in
SIPs and TIPs.

Barriers to clean energy/air quality integration:

•	Some states have indicated that they are unlikely to pursue energy efficiency and
renewable energy measures as part of their SIPs to meet the ozone and PM standards
because they believe that an insignificant amount of SIP credit may be obtained or that
EPA requirements (including inconsistent application of requirements across the regions)
for documenting the benefits within the SIP will be too burdensome. For example, the
EPA SIP Energy Guidance is unclear as to what extent states and local governments can
rely on existing modeling under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to document
upwind areas, thereby avoiding the need for extensive new modeling.

•	EPA is currently working with the states, tribes, and local governments on incorporating
energy efficiency and renewable energy measures into SIPs and TIPs. The effort is not
sufficient to provide many governments with the necessary assurances that EPA will
approve their proposals for inclusion of energy efficiency and renewable energy
measures into SIPs when they are submitted to the Agency. For example, some
interpretations of the applicable guidance are more restrictive than EPA intended. For
example, the extent of documentation necessary to obtain SIP credit for renewable energy
and energy efficiency measures undertaken as part of a Renewable Portfolio Standard or
Alternative Portfolio Standard is unclear.

•	Some states, tribes, and local governments do not realize the extent of the opportunities
they have for incorporating energy efficiency and renewable energy measures into
SIPs/TIPs, and do not realize they can work with EPA and its regional offices on
proposals during early SIP planning discussions.

•	When a Best Available Control Technology (BACT) determination in the context of New
Source Review (NSR) involves the use of an add-on control device, it appears that some
EPA regional offices and some states believe that the determination requires that the
permittee must always use that control device to achieve the related emission limit. This
should not always be the case. If, after the permit is issued, the permittee is able to
achieve the required emission limit without using the control device (e.g., through
pollution prevention by replacing a solvent-borne coating with a water-borne coating
containing much less VOCs), the permittee should be allowed to discontinue using that
control device and thus eliminate the associated energy use, assuming the reformulation
of the coating is consistent with the air toxic requirements of the state. For example, a
permittee with a coating line is initially subject to a BACT determination based on the
use of an oxidizer to meet a volatile organic compound (VOC) emission limit. The

42


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

permittee subsequently reformulates its coating material to use a water-borne coating
with an inherently lower VOC content and can now meet the VOC limit without using
the oxidizer. Assuming the reformulation of the coating is consistent with the air toxic
requirements of the state, the permittee should be allowed to turn off the oxidizer thereby
saving energy and eliminating the emissions associated with the oxidizer while at the
same time continuing to ensure compliance with the VOC emissions and/or performance
limit.

•	In addition, new permit applicants should not be required to install control devices if they
are able to comply with a comparable or equivalent BACT limit using other means. For
example, if a permittee is able to use a more advanced low NOx burner that has
emissions that are comparable to or better than BACT limits, the permittee should not be
required to install an add-on control device, such as Selective Catalytic Reduction.

•	Incorporation of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures into SIPs/TIPs raises
significant national policy issues that require time to resolve. For example, in some
locations, due to the nature of the electric grid, it can be challenging to determine how the
emissions benefits will occur in locations that are relevant to the nonattainment area in
question. Some states are uncertain how to interpret EPA guidance on determining where
net emissions reductions need to occur for clean energy measures with respect to a
nonattainment area for that area to be able to take credit. There are also unrealized
opportunities for regional cooperation to credit the dispersed emissions reductions.

•	The relationship between cap and trade programs and SIP credits for energy efficiency
and renewable energy actions can be complex. Some state, tribal, and regional air
agencies may not realize that they need to retire allowances to receive SIP credit for NOx
emission reductions if the state is subject to CAIR. Some state air agencies may not
realize that they must create energy efficiency and renewable energy set-aside or other
allocation mechanism under their CAIR implementation rules to obtain SIP credits for
energy efficiency and renewable energy measures for the period from 2009 forward.

•	State, tribal and local governments are often unaware of existing resources, including the
timing, and amount of DOE, EPA, and DOT funding of clean energy/air quality
integration measures. Interest by government and tribal entities in energy efficiency and
renewable energy measures will be greatly enhanced if they are provided with readily
accessible information on funding sources.

•	State, tribal, and local governments are facing budgetary constraints that may limit their
ability to adopt energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. Increased provision of
information on creative financing approaches (e.g., performance contracting for
solar/efficiency in schools) that overcome the financial barriers posed by high upfront
capital costs can greatly spur the adoption of energy efficiency and renewable energy
measures.

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

•	Meeting the NAAQS for ozone and PM2.5 and reducing regional haze.

43


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

• Coordinating air quality and energy planning strategies.

Recommended Actions:

EPA should expedite actions to overcome the barriers to clean energy/air quality
integration. All relevant EPA regional and headquarters offices should work with state,
tribal, and local air permitting authorities and air planning organizations to:

A.	Communicate with state air agencies, tribal governments, local planning organizations,
and related non-profit organizations (ECOS, NACAA, NASEO, NARUC) using different
formats such as conference calls and webcasts to determine actual and perceived barriers
to clean energy/air quality integration and to resolve policy issues on including energy
efficiency and renewable energy measures in SIPs/TIPs.

B.	Serve as a facilitator and mediator to ensure a consistent approach encouraging use and
incorporation of clean energy measures and to help resolve policy issues and encourage
the inclusion of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures into SIPs/TIPs.

C.	Engage with state, tribal, and local air planning organizations in early discussions
regarding energy efficiency and renewable energy measures being considered for
inclusion in SIP/TIP submittals. This will help resolve any issues of interpretation or
other technical concerns, including reconciliation of the anticipated locations of the clean
energy measure emissions reductions with any SIP requirements in EPA guidance and
rules.

D.	Issue guidance confirming that energy-consuming control devices may be shut down if,
through pollution prevention, a permittee is able to meet the associated emission limits
without using controls.

E.	Clarify that, a permit applicant is not required to the add-on BACT control if they
demonstrate a pollution prevention measure is a substitute to BACT through a "top-
down" BACT analysis.

F.	Clarify that, a permit applicant is not required to install an additional add-on control
devices if they use pollution prevention approaches to meet an emission limit as long as it
is comparable/equivalent to the limit that would be achieved by the add-on control
device.

G.	Provide outreach to EPA regional officials, state officials, and state, tribal, and local
governments on the interface between the CAIR regulations and energy efficiency and
renewable energy measures in SIPs/TIPs.

H.	Define a sample of energy efficiency and renewable energy control measures currently
under consideration by state, tribal, and local governments to meet the ozone and PM
standards and anticipate and proactively work through the issues that will arise during the
SIP/TIP review process. For example, the Control Measures Work Group of the
Technical Advisory Committee of the Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee

44


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

would be one good candidate for such a proactive review since this Work group already
has developed a number of potential energy efficiency and renewable energy measures.

I. Increase awareness among state, tribal, and local governments of existing funding
opportunities made available by DOE, EPA, and DOT relating to clean energy/air
quality, including eligibility, funding levels, and amount of awards. This includes
making these governments aware of such information sources as the Clean Energy
Environment State Partnership online funding guide provided by EPA. EPA should also
make funding information available on the EPA Air Innovations web site and other high
visibility EPA websites. This suggestion was presented to EPA at the 2005 Air
Innovations Conference and EPA implementation would help overcome a major
information barrier.

J. Identify innovative financing strategies (e.g., state performance contracting laws) to assist
state, tribal, and local governments in implementing clean energy/air quality integration
measures. For example, EPA should make information available on the development of
financing strategies, such as performance contracting and effective use of tax incentives
provided in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, to spur cash-strapped municipalities to adopt
energy efficiency and renewable energy measures.

Implementation:

•	For recommended actions A, B, C, and F, EPA should convene an implementation group
to convene on a regular basis. This group should discuss the interface between cap and
trade programs, such as the CAIR regulations, and energy efficiency and renewable
energy measures, identify actual and perceived barriers to clean energy/air integration and
develop recommendations for addressing such perceived barriers. The group should
focus on facilitating the implementation of energy efficiency/renewable energy measures
across the country and incorporating such measures in SIPs/TIPs, including set-asides
under CAIR. Membership on the group should include EPA headquarters and regional
offices, DOE/NREL, NACAA, NASEO, ACEEE, tribal governments, environmental
advocacy groups, industry, and others.

•	For recommended actions D and E, EPA should issue clarifying guidance.

•	For recommended actions F, G, H, and I, EPA should consult NASEO, DOT,

DOE/NREL, ACEEE, states and others to obtain information, consolidate it, and then
make it available on an EPA website dedicated to energy efficiency and renewable
energy.

Benefits:

•	Reducing demand for energy reduces emissions associated with energy production and
combustion, which benefits air quality. Renewable energy projects can help improve air
quality today by offsetting fossil fuel-fired generation, especially during peak demand.

45


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendation 10: Provide incentives for voluntary and innovative land
use, energy, and transportation approaches - The AQMprocess should include
incentives (including, but not limited to, more flexible forms of credit, regulatory
incentives and economic incentives) for innovative and voluntary land use, energy,
and transportation technologies or approaches that provide air quality benefits.

Background/Explanation:

The AQM process should include incentives for voluntary and innovative land use, energy,
and transportation technologies or approaches that benefit air quality in nonattainment and
other areas. Encouragement should particularly be given to low emission technologies, smart
growth, energy efficiency measures, cogeneration, demand-side management and renewable
resources. The AQM process should better integrate incentives that incorporate these
technologies and approaches into the NAAQS implementation process. Incentives could
include, but are not limited to:

•	More flexible forms of SIP and TIP credit;

•	Regulatory incentives (such as streamlined or expedited permitting opportunities) and
economic incentives (such as tax incentives, public benefits programs);

•	State and utility funding programs for energy efficiency projects, where appropriate and
properly structured; and,

•	Recognition programs or forms of alternative "credit" for communities that implement
voluntary and/or innovative land use, energy or transportation policies, programs or
practices that benefit air quality.

While EPA has already developed incentives for voluntary and innovative measures that
address the above objectives (e.g., 2001 Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive
Programs12), many stakeholders are unaware of these programs.

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

•	Meeting the NAAQS for ozone and PM2.5, and reducing regional haze;

•	Addressing air quality on the appropriate geographic scale (locally, regionally, and
globally);

•	Addressing remaining pollution problems, including unregulated and smaller "area"
sources; and,

•	Coordinating air quality, energy, transportation, and urban planning strategies.

12 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,
available at http://epa.gov/ttn/caaa/tl/memoranda/eipfin.pdf.

46


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommended Actions:

A.	EPA should develop a communication strategy to inform interested stakeholders about
land use, energy and transportation-related programs that already exist.

B.	EPA should continue to develop new programs that motivate the implementation of
voluntary and innovative measures. Appropriate and properly structured incentive
programs such as expedited and streamlined permitting opportunities, the Texas
Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) program, EPA's Performance Track Program, and
innovative measures such as voluntary mobile emissions reduction programs (VMEP)
and projects funded by Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds can, in the
aggregate, make greater overall contributions to future SIPs and TIPs than they have in
the past.

C.	Current SIP/TIP approval requirements have recently been made more flexible in
crediting such measures, but they still require a ton-denominated precursor reduction
applied to each such measure. The AQM process should allow for additional alternative
forms of credit for such measures. EPA should assist in determining and allowing SIP
and TIP credits for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs.

D.	With respect to community recognition programs, EPA should compile a list of existing
recognition programs (e.g., Indiana CLEAN Community Challenge), their strengths and
weaknesses, and what the recognizing entity offers as an incentive to areas that
implement environmentally beneficial measures (e.g., technical assistance, public
recognition, and cash awards). Drawing from this research, in partnership with other
organizations that work with local governments, EPA should develop a community
recognition or other alternative "credit" program for nonattainment and other areas that
adopt voluntary and/or innovative land use, energy or transportation policies, programs or
practices that benefit air quality. EPA should develop clear criteria for how an area
would qualify for this recognition or alternative "credit."

Implementation:

•	For recommended action C, EPA should consider the predicted effects of a package of
measures presented in a SIP or TIP, potentially over a longer time horizon than the
SIP/TIP review period. Specifically, EPA should identify or develop model land use,
transportation and energy planning documents that address SIP/TIP credit issues
applicable to each voluntary and innovative measure that is identified under
recommended action B. Among other things, the documents should demonstrate how to
quantify emission reductions expected from each identified measure in a manner where
they can be considered for SIP/TIP credit.

•	EPA should also encourage adaptive plan revisions as indirect effects of innovative
measures become better understood, which is consistent with current SIP requirements for
reasonable emission reduction progress checks. The implementation challenge for this
recommendation will be identifying appropriate targets for emission reduction initiatives
and quantifying the air quality benefits expected or actually achieved as a result of any

47


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

one initiative.

Benefits:

•	This recommendation shifts the focus for new programs away from traditional command
and control strategies to strategies that are more likely to be effective in achieving
additional air pollution gains in the areas of land use, transportation and energy planning.

Recommendation 11: Develop programs to reduce public demand for
polluting activities - Develop programs that focus on reducing public demand for
polluting activities. Such programs could include incentive programs for
encouraging use of lower-polluting activities, reduction programs, and tax and use
restrictions.

Background/Explanation:

Much of air quality management has been directed at large scale sources of pollution, from
all sectors of the inventory. While additional reductions from such sources are possible,
further reductions may also be achieved by encouraging the public to reduce activities that
produce pollution or to pursue less polluting alternatives.

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

•	Meeting the NAAQS for ozone, PM2.5, and reducing regional haze.

•	Addressing air quality on the appropriate geographic scale (locally, regionally, and
globally).

•	Addressing remaining pollution problems, including unregulated and smaller "area"
sources.

•	Coordinating air quality, energy, transportation and urban planning strategies.
Recommended Actions

A.	EPA should develop a social marketing and outreach strategy that includes, but is not
limited to, helping the public make environmentally beneficial choices and understand
the impact their decisions have on air quality. This marketing and outreach strategy
should include approaches such as California's 3-star recreational watercraft labeling
program and DOT/EPA's "Best Workplaces for Commuters" and "It All Adds Up to
Cleaner Air" programs. EPA efforts should discourage activities that create more air
pollution and encourage alternative activities that minimize environmental harm. As
appropriate, EPA should consult with other federal agencies and stakeholders in
developing the strategies.

B.	EPA should evaluate options for discouraging higher polluting activities (e.g., education,
taxes, fees imposed on federal lands, and use restrictions) and encouraging less polluting
activities (e.g., economic incentives, education, and expedited or streamlined permitting

48


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

opportunities). For example, energy demand might be reduced through programs that
educate the public about energy efficient practices or provide funding for energy
efficiency and renewable energy projects.

Implementation:

•	One implementation challenge will be possible resistance from industries that serve the
demand for polluting activities. This resistance may be reduced by shaping programs to
create opportunities for such industries to serve demand for activities with less air
pollution impact.

Benefits:

•	This recommendation would reduce air pollution at its source, which is the demand for
activities that cause it. It also would involve the public directly in the decisions
individuals make that affect air pollution.

49


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendation 12: Establish an inter-agency liaison group to coordinate
land use, energy, transportation, climate change, and air quality goals - An

inter-agency liaison group should be established with EPA and other federal
agencies (e.g., FAA, HUD, DOE, NRC, FERC, USDA, CDC, DOI, and DOT) to
explore issues and opportunities for coordinating land use, energy, transportation,
climate change, and air quality goals.

Background/Explanation:

Land use, transportation, energy, and climate-related policies and programs are
inextricably intertwined with air quality. Such policies and programs can conflict with
attaining national air quality goals. Conversely, air quality policies and programs can
conflict with or frustrate national transportation and energy goals.

Federal agencies already coordinate their activities to some extent. For example, when
EPA undertakes a major rulemaking, the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB)
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) facilitates an inter-agency review
process to ensure other federal agencies have an opportunity to review and provide
comment on EPA rulemakings. Moreover, Executive Orders 13211 (May 18, 2001) and
12866 (September 30, 1993) require federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy
Effects when undertaking certain rulemaking actions that are likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution or use of energy. A Statement of Energy
Effects must include, among other things, detailed information regarding any adverse
effects the agency action will have on energy supply, distribution, or use (including a
shortfall in supply, price increases and increased use of foreign supplies). OIRA uses the
Statements of Energy Effects to ensure that one federal agency's proposed actions do not
conflict with another agency's policies or actions. Federal agencies must also publish
their Statements of Energy Effects, or a summary in each notice of proposed rulemaking
and in any resulting final rule.

With the objective of enhancing the above efforts and facilitating earlier and more
meaningful coordination between federal agencies and national programs and objectives,
an Inter-agency Liaison Group should be established based on the guiding principle that
our nation's land use, transportation, energy, climate change, and air quality programs
and objectives must be aligned to serve consistent goals. The Liaison Group should
include EPA and several other federal agencies such as FAA, HUD, DOE, NRC, FERC,
USDA, CDC, DOI, and DOT.

The creation of a federal coordination group has precedent. In the late 1970s EPA
participated in the Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group or "IRLG." This group brought
together high-level officials from EPA and other federal agencies to discuss policies and
issues of common concern. At least two current AQM Subcommittee members recall
participating in the effort and believe it was highly effective.

50


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Problems/Challenges Addressed:

•	Coordination of air quality, energy, transportation and urban planning strategies.

•	Maintenance of AQM efficiency in the face of changing climate.

Recommended Actions:

A.	EPA should proactively work with its federal partners (e.g., FAA, HUD, DOE, NRC,
FERC, USD A, CDC, DOI, and DOT) to establish an Inter-agency Liaison Group to
explore issues and opportunities for coordinating and aligning federal agency goals and
objectives on energy, land use, transportation, climate change, and air quality. The
purpose of the group would be to help ensure federal agencies work together in achieving
coordinated and integrated solutions to these issues.

B.	In addition to periodically meeting, sharing information and working to align national
programs and objectives, the group should work with OMB, CEQ and other interested
stakeholders to develop a protocol under which federal agencies would (a) formally
analyze major proposed federal rulemakings that are likely to have significant impacts on
national land use, energy, transportation, climate change, and/or air quality programs or
objectives; (b) for those proposed major regulations that are likely to have such
significant impacts, prepare a Statements of Effects similar in content to the Statements
of Energy Effects that Executive Orders 13211 (May 18, 2001) and 12866 (September
30, 1993) currently require; and (c) subject such Statements of Effects to public review
and comment.

Implementation:

•	The Inter-agency Liaison Group should be established at the political or senior career
level. It should include representatives from EPA's air office and from other federal
agencies. EPA should also create a lower-level working group to implement future
recommendations of the group. The liaison group should use a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) or other vehicle to establish a common understanding of its
purpose and activities. The group should meet at least quarterly to share information and
coordinate policies and programs.

•	In exploring and developing a protocol for analyzing and disseminating information
regarding major proposed federal rulemakings, the liaison group (working with OMB,
CEQ and other interested stakeholders) should consider and address several issues,
including what proposed federal regulations are covered and the appropriate scope and
extent of analysis and public participation. In addition, to avoid duplicative analyses, to
the extent that a federal agency is required to prepare an impacts analysis pursuant to
another statutory or regulatory requirement (e.g., the National Environmental Policy Act)
that is substantially similar to the analysis that the protocol requires, the protocol should
allow the federal agency to use that analysis in lieu of preparing a new duplicative
impacts analysis.

51


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Benefits:

• This recommendation encourages policy makers to better coordinate national air quality,
energy, transportation and greenhouse gas programs and objectives. The rulemaking
protocol would provide information on significant impacts proposed major federal
rulemakings may have. It would allow policy makers and interested stakeholders to
understand the degree to which proposed major federal rulemakings would further or
undermine national air quality, energy, transportation, and greenhouse gas programs and
objectives, including identifying opportunities to reduce the potential for adverse air
quality impacts.

52


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

VIII. Need for Tools to Improve Air Quality

Today's air quality problems pose difficult and in many ways different challenges to
EPA, states, and tribes than the challenges of the past. While traditional air quality management
has focused on reducing emissions from large stationary sources, fuels, and new car and truck
engines, such strategies alone may no longer ensure attainment and maintenance of the nation's
air quality and public health goals. To meet the air quality challenges, EPA, states, and tribes
must utilize and enhance existing tools, while simultaneously developing new and innovative
tools to address emissions from a variety of sources such as existing cars and trucks (so-called
"legacy fleets"), a wider range of engine and vehicle types (e.g., marine vessels), and many types
of small and mid-size emission sources. Furthermore, although new engine emission standards
promise to reduce dramatically (sometimes to near zero) the emissions from new cars, trucks,
and from off-road vehicles and products such as lawn mowers, boats, and all-terrain vehicles, the
continued growth in travel and the delivery of goods spurred by increasing population and
personal income will likely make it necessary to go beyond technology-focused air pollution
control strategies to address transportation, land use and energy efficiency concerns in major
metropolitan areas. Although the nation now boasts some of the world's cleanest products, fuels
and vehicles, much can still be done to accelerate the turnover of existing fleets and to increase
penetration of the cleanest products by implementing demand-side strategies to a greater extent
than in the past.

The Subcommittee focused on several types of sources whose relatively uncontrolled or
undercontrolled emissions contribute significantly to ozone or fine particle nonattainment in
several areas of the country. The specific categories identified are legacy vehicle and engine
fleets, ports and goods movement-related sources (e.g., trucks, ships and rail), airports,
agricultural emissions, small sources (e.g., bakeries, restaurants, dry cleaners), consumer
products, and industrial boilers.

The AQM Subcommittee also discussed a range of measurement-related tools needed.
For criteria pollutants, these include the need for improved baseline emissions inventory data and
ambient air quality data (e.g., due to existing gaps in monitoring). Measurement tool needs for
toxic air pollutants are considered even more pressing. There is a need for data in many areas,
including ambient concentrations, better risk assessment and speciation data improvements,
significance levels, and potential impacts of air toxics on sensitive populations. The
Subcommittee identified other measurement challenges, including consideration of the co-
benefits and impacts of various control strategies, and potential local impacts associated with
emissions trading.

The AQM Subcommittee discussed a number of other air quality planning challenges
related to tools, including how to ensure SIP or TIP credit for non-traditional strategies, such as
diesel reduction programs or innovative and voluntary incentive programs. The Subcommittee
recognized resource limitations faced by many state, tribal, and local agencies. The AQM
Subcommittee also recognized the lack of incentives available for attainment and nonattainment
areas to encourage air quality problems from developing or worsening. For example, the
Subcommittee discussed the need to encourage conservation on both the user and supplier side in
several priority areas, including energy efficiency and consumer travel and purchasing choices.

53


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Potential Tools to Address Air Quality Challenges and Planning Needs

The AQM Subcommittee evaluated a variety of tools that could be used to address these
challenges. Current tools, such as emissions limits, add-on controls, and emissions cap and trade
programs, have been and will continue to be successful in improving air quality. The purpose of
this evaluation was to identify and characterize additional tools that air pollution control officials
could use in their efforts to manage air quality. The Subcommittee believes that a few of these
tools are likely to prove valuable in areas of the country where, for example, there is a shared
need to address older, higher-emitting vehicles or to address relatively uncontrolled or
undercontrolled large stationary sources. Other tools may be appropriate for use in areas that
face unique difficulties, such as ports and large airports. At large regional ports, for example, the
existing and anticipated high density of engines requires that engine turnover or retrofits be
accelerated. In these cases, strategies are needed to promote rapid and large-scale investment in
clean fuels and technologies to help attain and maintain the ozone or PM 2.5 standards and
thereby, protect public health. The use of tools such as emissions trading, pricing, or other
financial strategies may raise novel or significant public policy questions (e.g., the use of
acceptable risk benchmarks, inter-pollutant trading, emissions banking and borrowing, "in lieu"
compliance strategies) that would need to be carefully considered at local, regional, and national
levels.

The AQM Subcommittee selected four areas to be given additional priority and review
for developing tools for improving air quality. Examples of these programs include:

(1)	Financial tools for fleet turnover and diesel retrofits;

(2)	Financial tools for land use and transportation planning;

(3)	Information programs for land use and transportation planning; and,

(4)	Emission limits for industrial, commercial, residential boilers and heaters, and legacy
equipment and sources.

The AQM Subcommittee has prepared a matrix of potential tools which is presented in
the appendix B to this report. The matrix focuses on specific newer tools that could be effective
at reducing emissions for various sources or sectors. An outline of the needs and tools that have
been identified can also be found in appendix B.

(1) Financial Tools for Fleet Turnover and Diesel Retrofits

Financial tools and financial demand-side strategies that encourage fleet turnover and diesel
retrofits include tax strategies, loans, equity strategies, and targeted rebates.

Carl Moyer Program

California's Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program is a state
and local partnership that provides incentive grants to cover the incremental costs of cleaning up
heavy-duty engines more than is required by air pollution regulations. The program, established
in 1998, was recently expanded and given a 2015 sunset date. Heavy-duty on-road and off-road
equipment may qualify for grants, including farm and construction equipment, marine vessels,

54


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

locomotives, and airport ground support equipment. Projects are diverse and range from the
purchase of new alternative-fuel heavy-duty vehicles, such as transit buses, to engine
replacements for construction equipment and marine vessels.

Grants are issued and monitored locally by air pollution control districts and air quality
management districts, following guidelines developed by the California Air Resources Board.
The program achieves near-term reductions in emissions of NOx, PM, and reactive organic gas.

The California Air Resources Board and local air districts fund the program jointly.
Sources of revenue include smog check fees and tire fees. Local districts can also use vehicle
registration fees. Districts match $1 in local funds for every $2 in Moyer funds. In recent years,
about $140 million of incentive funding has been available annually through the Carl Moyer
Program. Demand for the program is expected to remain high, given that the cost of cleaning up
the state's existing diesel engine fleet is estimated to be at least ten times the available Carl
Moyer Program funds.

Each California district is eligible to receive a minimum funding allocation. More
populous districts in nonattainment areas are eligible for additional funding. In districts with
populations over one million, at least 50 percent of Carl Moyer Program funds must benefit low
income communities.

In its first six years, the Carl Moyer Program provided over $140 million to clean up
more than 6,300 heavy-duty engines, reducing NOx emissions by over 18 tons per day at a cost
of about $2,600 per ton of NOx reduced. It is estimated that the program reduced lost workdays
by about 17,000, prevented 2,800 asthma attacks and 100 premature deaths.

TERP

Another example of the use of incentive grants to encourage fleet turnover and diesel
retrofits is the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP), established in 2001 and administered
primarily by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). TERP includes a
number of financial incentive and other assistance programs to help improve air quality. The
main financial incentive programs are the Emissions Reduction Incentive Grants Program and
the New Technology Research and Development Program.

The Emissions Reduction Incentive Grants Program provides funds to eligible projects in
nonattainment and near-nonattainment areas to offset incremental costs associated with reducing
NOx emissions from high-emitting internal combustion engines. The Rebate Grants Program is
a simplified application process available only for diesel on-road and off-road replacement and
repower projects. Funds are also set aside for small business.

The New Technology Research and Development Program offers grants to encourage
research, development, and commercialization of pollution-reducing technologies.

Other TERP programs include the Clean School Bus Program, which funds projects
including diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, and add-on equipment to reduce

55


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

exposure to diesel exhaust from school buses; the Small Business Grants Program, which helps
small businesses participate in TCEQ incentive programs; the Heavy-Duty Motor Vehicle
Purchase or Lease Incentive Program, which can reimburse the purchaser or lessee of a new on-
road heavy-duty vehicle for incremental costs of purchasing or leasing the vehicle in lieu of a
higher-emitting diesel powered vehicle; and the Light-Duty Motor Vehicle Purchase or Lease
Incentive Program, which provides rebates for the purchase or lease of an eligible new car or
light truck.

TERP grants are allocated through an annual or bi-annual application process. Sources of
funding for TERP include a surcharge on some registration fees, a surcharge on the sale, lease or
rental of off-road heavy-duty equipment, a surcharge on the sale or lease of diesel on-road
vehicles, and a fee on commercial vehicle inspections. Revenues have been predicted to average
about $150 million per year. About $130 million is allocated to the Emissions Reduction
Incentive Grants Program, including about $2 million for small business incentive grants. About
$14 million is allocated for the New Technology Research and Development Program.

More information on financial incentives and other strategies to encourage fleet turnover
and diesel retrofits may be found in the April 2006 report to the CAAAC from the Mobile
Sources Technical Review Subcommittee, Recommendations for Reducing Emissions from the
Legacy Diesel Fleet, at http://www.epa.g0v/cleandiesel/publications.htm#caaac-aprO6.

(2) Financial Tools for Land Use and Transportation Planning

Financial tools and financial demand-side strategies used as incentives to encourage land use and
transportation planning include differential pricing and tax strategies.

Differential Pricing

One innovative example of the use of differential pricing to reduce sprawl and emissions
as part of a land use and transportation plan is occurring in Madison, Wisconsin. Beginning in
2001, Dane County and the University of Wisconsin encouraged public transit through more
accurate price signals. The introduction of marginal cost pricing for parking at the University
was linked to the expansion of fixed price universal transit passes. According to initial
estimates, participation by 500 employees who curtail driving by one day per week can reduce
vehicle miles traveled by 350,000 per year, resulting in hydrocarbon reductions of four tons.

Another example of differential pricing that has controlled sprawl and reduced emissions
is occurring in Portland, Oregon. A plan was designed in the mid 1970s to increase transit use
by eliminating free parking, reducing the number of parking spaces, encouraging dense
development around transit stations, and providing free transit service for workers and shoppers
within the central business district, called the Fareless Square. In the last ten years, the
economically depressed Lloyd district on the edge of downtown has become Portland's fastest
growing economic district. That growth prompted transportation planners to focus on reducing
use of cars for trips between downtown and the Lloyd district, to increase shopping and
recreational opportunities through an extended downtown, and to increase the potential for new
development downtown and in the Lloyd district. To meet these goals, the Fareless Square was

56


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

extended to include the Lloyd district, and new parking meters and regulations were
implemented to decrease car use. Development and zoning codes have been put in place to
encourage high density, mixed use development along transit corridors. Ride sharing programs,
guaranteed rides home, and reserved parking places for carpools and vanpools in the Lloyd
district have contributed to Portland's commitment to smart growth through innovative
transportation and planning tools.

Tax Strategies

In 2007, the federal tax code allows tax-free transportation fringe benefits of up to $110
per month per employee for transit or vanpool expenses. Unlike ordinary wage payments,
employers do not have to pay their share of federal payroll taxes on tax-free transit benefits, and
the cost of providing tax-free transit benefits can be deducted as a normal business expense.
These benefits can be deducted from corporate gross income for purposes of taxation when paid
by an employer. Employees pay no federal income tax on commuter benefits. This benefit
encourages transit ridership and van or carpooling, both of which reduce vehicle miles traveled
and thus reduce emissions that form ozone. Several states have also implemented tax incentive
programs to encourage commuter benefits, including Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Maryland,
Minnesota, New Jersey, and Oregon.

An example of the innovative use of tax strategies is the Eco Pass, an annual photo ID
transit pass developed by the Denver Area Regional Transportation District that is distributed to
participating employers at significant discounts. The Eco Pass is tax deductible to employers
and is a tax-free benefit for employees. If an employee has an unexpected change of schedule or
emergency, the Eco Pass will guarantee a free taxi ride home. Pass holders can use all regular
transit services seven days per week. The mayor has offered Eco Passes to all City of Denver
employees, and expects over 35 percent of them to take advantage of the program.

More information on these examples of financial tools used as incentives to encourage
land use and transportation planning, and additional examples, may be found in the 2005 report
of the National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals, "Clean
Communities on the Move See http://www.nalgep.org.

(3) Information Programs for Land Use and Transportation Planning

Information programs, reward programs, and non-financial demand-side strategies (collectively
referred to in this section as "information programs) for land use and transportation planning
include clearinghouses, labeling, performance benchmarking, community "Green Action" lists,
surveys, frequent flyer-type programs, and web tools that educate and influence decisions.
Information programs can be targeted to a specific audience or designed for general
consumption. Here are some examples of successful information programs.

Clearinghouses and Web Tools

The Smart Growth Network operates a web-based clearinghouse aimed at land use and
transportation planning. The clearinghouse promotes economic development that simultaneously

57


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

fosters healthy communities, strong neighborhoods, and transportation choices by providing
tools, resources, and information sharing. For more information, visit
http://www.smartgrowth.org.

Web-based tools to assist in land use and transportation planning are also available. For
example, the Smart Growth INDEX model simulates alternative land use and transportation
scenarios using GIS sketch models to incorporate smart growth principles into planning
processes. See http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/topics/sg index.htm.

Similarly, EPA Region 3's Green Communities Program has a web-based clearinghouse
that provides access to tools, technical assistance, and training to integrate environmental goals
applicable to urban, suburban, and rural communities. For more information, see
http://www.epa. gov/ greenkit.

Information and Reward Programs

As part of a program to address air pollution and congestion challenges in Tulsa, the
Indian Nations Council of Governments sponsored an innovative information program called
Driving Toward Clean Air. The program targeted high school students, providing teen drivers
with information about "green" vehicles, carpooling, air pollution, and alternative transportation
methods. The Tulsa Air Quality Enhancement and Education Project sponsored a competition
where students pledged to carpool, ride the bus, or walk to school during a six-week period. The
high school with the most participation received a new Toyota Prius hybrid as a reward. This
program was recognized by EPA with a 2004 Clean Air Excellence Award. See
http://www.epa.gov/air/caaac/2004awar.html.

(4) Emission Limits for Industrial, Commercial, Residential Boilers and Heaters and
Legacy Equipment and Sources

Several examples of efforts addressing this source category are worth highlighting, some
of which have been completed and some of which are underway. The examples range from
traditional emission limits to voluntary-based approaches and a hybrid of the two.

Hazardous Air Pollutants

In September 2004, EPA promulgated a national emission standards specifying
application of MACT to address HAPs from industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and
process heaters. EPA identified this source category as a major source of HAP emissions
Implementation of the standard is expected to reduce HAP emissions by 50,600 to 58,000 tons
per year. The air toxics emitted by facilities in the boiler and process heater source category
include arsenic, cadmium, chromium, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, lead, manganese,
mercury, nickel, and various organic air toxics. For more information, visit:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/boiler/boilerpg.html.

Criteria Air Pollutants

As part of Phase I, the AQM Work Group recommended to EPA that it complete as soon
as possible a review of the contributions from the industrial, commercial, and institutional boiler

58


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

category and the technical and economic feasibility of further controls, given the high priority
assigned to this sector (Recommendation 2.1). It indicated that EPA should then initiate
development of a regional or national emissions control regulation for the category, or take
alternative action consistent with the results of its analysis. To respond, in coordination with
EPA, the Regional Planning Organizations will collect and analyze data concerning industrial,
commercial, and institutional boilers to effectively characterize these sources and their
environmental impacts. EPA plans to include the National Association of Clean Air Agencies
(NACAA) and other organizations in this comprehensive approach.

In March 2006, NACAA released a report, "Controlling Fine Particulate Matter under the
Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options." Chapter 6 presents control options for industrial and
commercial boilers. The report is available at: http://www.4cleanair.org/PM25Menu-Final.pdf.

Residential Units

Voluntary Approaches

In January 2007, EPA launched a voluntary partnership program to reduce emissions
from outdoor wood-fired hydronic heaters (OWHH), also called outdoor wood boilers or outdoor
wood-fired furnaces. The voluntary program will bring significantly cleaner outdoor wood-fired
hydronic heaters (OWHH) to market beginning in 2007. OWHH burn wood to heat water,
which is generally piped underground to provide heat for homes. A typical OWHH looks like a
small shed with a smokestack, and is usually located next to the building to be heated.

Sixteen OWHH manufacturers have signed a memorandum of understanding with EPA
that commits them to use their best efforts to develop, manufacture, and market one or more
cleaner models. Under this agreement, the new models must emit no more than 0.6 pounds of
particle pollution per million BTUs of heat input (i.e., wood burned). The models must be tested
by an accredited third-party laboratory to verify that they meet these levels. The cleaner heaters
made available through the voluntary program will be about 70 percent less polluting than
current models. Consumers interested in the new, cleaner models should look for an orange
hangtag that will show how a specific model compares to EPA's performance specifications. A
list of program partners can be found at http://www.epa.gov/woodheaters/partners.htm

In addition to the effort for OWHHs, EPA and many states, tribal and local agencies are
continuing the effort begun as far back as the 1980s to change out old and dirty residential
woodstoves with EPA certified wood-burning appliances that burn more cleanly and efficiently.
EPA has developed a how-to guide for areas to use to determine whether it is feasible for a
jurisdiction to develop and implement a Woodstove Changeout program. The how-to guide can
be found on EPA's Clean Wood Burning Stoves and Fireplaces website at
http://www.epa. gov/woodstoves/.

Regulatory Approaches

In addition to the voluntary OWHH and woodstove programs, EPA has provided technical
assistance to the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM), an

59


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

association of eight northeastern states, to develop a model rule that states, tribes and local
governments may use if they choose to regulate OWHH. The rule can be tailored to address
specific local situations. The model rule establishes emission limits and labeling requirements
for new units. It also contains the following components for both new and existing OWHH:

•	Setback requirements from property lines, structures and residences,

•	Stack height requirements, and,

•	Distributor and buyer notification requirements.

The model rule can be found at: http://www.nescaum.org/topics/outdoor-hydronic-heaters

The State of Vermont recently promulgated regulations for OWHH based on the
NESCAUM model rule. Under the new regulation, all new boilers sold/installed in Vermont
must certify a particulate emissions limit of 0.44 lb/mmBTU by March 2008. Other states are
also developing regulations to address OWHH emissions.

In addition, EPA is assessing other non-regulatory options including labeling to
differentiate between regulated and non-regulated units and emission limits.

60


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

IX. Unresolved Areas of Discussion

The AQM Subcommittee was unable to reach substantial consensus with regard to a few
proposed recommendations. This section summarizes the key areas where this occurred and the
nature of the differences of opinion that arose.

Unresolved Recommendation 1: Implement the use of "regional airsheds" to approximate the
boundaries of emission source areas most likely to contribute to nonattainment areas.

Background

Historically, nonattainment area boundaries have been established to focus primarily on
local scale (i.e., state- or area-specific) control measures, though some also included
control measures for which agreement on regional application was reached outside of the
SIP process. The more traditional local-problem and local-control approach that proved
successful in the past for many of the criteria pollutants, has more recently had limited
success in remedying ozone and fine particle NAAQS nonattainment issues, as well as
regional haze problems.

For two important reasons, the current approach to boundaries with respect to
nonattainment area designations warrants review. First, the designation process has been
based on geo-political boundaries, which causes some difficulties in dealing with
problems that transcend such boundaries. Second, many states feel that there is a stigma
associated with the label of "nonattainment." This is largely due to the mandatory
requirements that take effect in nonattainment areas. As a result, in some areas, there
has been a tendency to define nonattainment boundaries as small as possible.

Goals

The AQM Subcommittee discussions regarding boundaries were initiated with the
following desired endpoints on the need to:

•	Address situations where emissions in upwind areas contribute significantly to violations
elsewhere;

•	Provide a mechanism that can address interstate transport during the SIP/TIP
development process and ensures that areas with contributing sources are involved in the
initial SIP/TIP planning process;

•	Minimize disincentives for monitoring;

•	Reduce the desire/incentive to define areas of violation as small as possible;

•	Not punish areas where air quality is poor if they have taken all reasonable steps to
reduce local emissions;

•	Better define sources that actually contribute to NAAQS violations and have a system
that naturally includes those sources in the area subject to control requirements;

•	Set boundaries based more on science and less on geo-political boundaries;

61


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	Recognize the increasing necessity for regional programs within which states must work
cooperatively and ensure accountability;

•	Respect state/tribal rights and balance local and regional control programs with
complimentary national control programs; and,

•	Recognize the increasing need for national control programs in which the federal
government takes the lead and ensures accountability.

Recommendations

The AQM Subcommittee was in substantial agreement on two important concepts related
to setting boundaries, and achieved consensus on a set of principles that should guide the
development of a new approach to establishing boundaries. The Subcommittee could not,
however, reach agreement on the details of how the concept should be implemented.
Instead, the Subcommittee substantially agreed on the need for an airshed approach to
boundaries (regional, as appropriate) and the following concepts:

A.	The current approach to establishing nonattainment area boundaries that define
both the area that violates a NAAQS as well as the area within which emissions
must be reduced to achieve attainment should be replaced. The new approach
should include areas that violate NAAQS and areas where controls are needed and
should be defined independently based on scientific assessments.

B.	Control areas should encompass all significant contributors to the NAAQS
violation, without regard to state/tribal or other geo-political boundaries. By
controlling emissions from the sources included within the control area boundary,
timely attainment of the NAAQS will be assured.

Consensus was also reached on the following guiding principles:

C.	Revisions to the current nonattainment area boundary approach should improve
upon the current system, resulting in one or more of the following:

•	More timely emissions reductions;

•	More effective emissions reductions;

•	Less dispute;

•	More flexibility to choose appropriate controls; and,

•	Facilitation of an airshed-based approach to managing air quality.

D.	When a NAAQS is violated, people exposed to unhealthful air quality must be
informed.

E.	When a NAAQS is violated, prompt steps must be taken to restrict emission
growth that might aggravate the problem.

F.	Defining the area within which air quality is unhealthful, and the area within
which emission sources need to be controlled, should be based on scientific
factors.

62


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

G. Any new boundary-setting approach should facilitate, or at least not further
complicate, efforts to address air quality on a multipollutant basis, as
recommended in the NRC report.

The AQM Subcommittee agreed that significantly more in-depth discussion would be
needed before a specific recommendation could achieve substantial consensus. Because
such a recommendation would need to discuss trade-offs between currently mandated
CAA requirements and other (presumably more effective) emission control requirements,
further discussions would need to include a broad array of stakeholders potentially
affected by the changes.

Summary of Boundaries Discussion

The AQM Subcommittee formed a work group to advise it on recommendations related
to boundaries. Based on consensus of the above concepts and principles, and building
from the Federal Advisory Committee (FACA) work in the early 1990s on Areas of
Violation and Influence (AOV and AOI), the boundaries work group recommended to the
AQM Subcommittee that EPA expand its conventional application of nonattainment area
boundaries through a concept of "control regions." The work group thought that broader
application could maximize effectiveness and establish equity in implementing air
pollution controls needed to bring areas that violate the NAAQS into attainment. The
concept of "airsheds" was accepted by consensus of the AQM Subcommittee. However,
questions regarding the details of its implementation arose during subsequent
conversations of the Subcommittee.

The boundaries work group recommended separating areas with NAAQS violations from
areas that contribute emissions to those areas. For purposes of the discussion, the
boundaries work group referred to areas where air quality does not meet the NAAQS as
"areas of violation" and areas where emissions contribute to those violations as "control
regions." As envisioned, the area of violation would usually be contained within the
control region, though there would be situations in which there is partial or even no
overlap.

The basic components of the proposal made by the boundaries work group to the AQM
Subcommittee on implementation include:

•	An area of violation defined by air quality monitoring data where public education
and health advisories are emphasized;

•	A control region based on existing scientific information (from the states and EPA)
about which types of sources in which geographic areas are contributing to the
violations of NAAQS (which in most cases, but not always, will encompass the area
of violation);

•	A stationary source program for the control region that involves:

• state of the art controls for entirely new significant sources and significant
modifications at existing sources;

63


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

•	reasonable retrofit controls (and continuation of existing requirements) for
significant existing sources; and,

•	reasonable retrofit controls for small sources once their actual emissions
exceed a significance threshold;

•	An emissions offset requirement that targets the emissions reductions needed to offset
growth (with a default to the stationary source offset program);

•	Local mobile sources programs in the control region to complement the basic federal
programs as the state/tribe deems appropriate as part of its SIP/TIP (programs
currently required by the Act would remain); and,

•	Mechanisms to assure multi-state control programs are implemented when the
pollution problems are regional (interstate).

Under this proposal, EPA and regional and state modeling centers would work together to
understand meteorology and transport of all NAAQS pollutants, and once an air quality
violation was found, they would work to establish preliminary control regions. These
preliminary control regions could be refined into more scientifically defined regions
through an exercise conducted in a state, multi-state, and tribal collaboration that could
be moderated by multi-state organizations with the assistance of EPA. Once such
geographic regions are finalized, regional control strategies (through Air Quality
Management Plans) could be developed and incorporated in individual enforceable
SIPs/TIPs. The value of using SIP calls by EPA under the CAA section 110 at the time of
designation was also discussed. The SIP calls would provide the needed forcing function
for each state identified in the preliminary analysis to develop enforceable plans that
contain all appropriate measures needed for attainment in the affected areas of violation,
both in state and out of state. The appropriateness of area of violation and control region
boundaries should be periodically reviewed with a technical analysis to ensure
appropriate coverage and progress toward attainment.

Reactions to Boundaries Proposal

The Subcommittee focused its discussion on the specifics of mandated levels of controls
and the details of how to apply the control region boundaries. Some believed that the
control regions should be very large to be highly inclusive of all contributing sources,
while others wanted to limit their size to minimize impacts on more remote businesses.
One member was concerned about the ability of states to be able to transcend political
issues and geo-political consideration, and base boundaries solely on scientific evidence.
There was concern that, as a result, boundaries would be smaller, not larger. After
considerable discussion, the AQM Subcommittee asked the work group to provide further
clarifications on levels of specified controls and their applicability. One member
requested that the work group develop a boundary proposal based on existing political
boundaries.

After considerable deliberations, the boundaries work group developed a two-option
recommendation. The first option built upon and clarified the previously proposed
airshed-control region proposal, which would be multi-state, as appropriate. The second
option presented a "no-boundary" approach that allows states/tribes to remedy their own

64


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

problems without defining boundaries. It would allow states and tribes to use appropriate
flexibility in pollution control requirements to meet attainment while being clearly
required to comply with CAA transport provisions. Under this two-option proposal,
states/tribes capable of remedying their own attainment problems would be granted
greater flexibility in control levels and those controls would be specified without needing
to formally define a control region, while states/tribes dealing with regionalized air
pollution would be required to work together to develop an acceptable area to control
assuming a certain base-level of mandated controls and supplemented by other, more
flexible control measures. Both types of nonattainment areas would need to demonstrate
that their plan could meet attainment as expeditiously as possible, as required under the
CAA. Some members believed that multiple states/tribes needed a formal mechanism to
require them to work together upfront in some areas of the country where interstate
transport is a factor. Some Subcommittee members also believed that some prescribed
control measures are needed to supplement more flexible measures to meet attainment.
Others supported a full no boundary approach for all states/tribes where they would be
free to use approaches they deemed appropriate and necessary to fix their own problems.
Some members were optimistic that revising the boundary setting process would be
sufficient to address interstate transport so that all states could attain the NAAQS. Others
thought that another mechanism, not yet deliberated or developed, would be needed to
address interstate transport.

Following much discussion, the Subcommittee agreed that the boundaries issues could
not be resolved within the AQM Subcommittee. For this reason, the Subcommittee
agreed to describe the proposed boundaries approaches in this report and provide a
summary of views made by Subcommittee participants in hopes that it be useful to any
future forum on the boundaries topic.

65


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Unresolved Recommendation 2: Over a period of time, all sources of air pollution should
be required to demonstrate that they are achieving reasonable performance levels (RPLs)
to control emissions. The form and substance of this concept should be developed with
consideration of applicable emission control regulations, technical feasibility, and costs as
well as all fuel, operational, and emission control options.

Background

The Subcommittee considered a concept called "reasonable performance levels" (RPL).
It is based on the idea of treating airsheds as a finite and essential resource, and sources
are not entitled to pollute that no source would be left uncontrolled. The RPL approach
would require all categories of air pollution to take steps to limit their emissions. RPLs
would be established and periodically updated for all air pollution sources and all
pollutants, beginning with the sources and pollutants that pose the greatest risk to public
health and ecosystems. New and expanding sources not otherwise subject to emission
control mandates would be required to demonstrate that reasonable performance levels
have been achieved at start-up. The RPL approach would provide a foundation for
additional controls that might be needed to address existing or potential area-specific
problems. For example, due to transport issues from upwind sources implementing RPLs,
an area may still violate a NAAQS. Under these circumstances, attainment SIPs with
specific deadlines may still be needed to protect public health. An RPL program would
likely require amendments to the CAA.

Discussion

Reasonable performance levels could address many of the challenges defined in the NRC
report, such as taking an integrated multi-pollutant approach and utilizing performance-
based control strategies for under-regulated sources. Criticisms of the recommendation
focused on:

•	How to define "reasonable control." The discussion centered on two aspects, i.e.
would reasonable controls be decided on a case-by-case basis, and what nature
and level of cost-effectiveness criteria would apply?

•	Whether a regulatory review and control action would be imposed on all sources
(without regard to location, age, size or existing regulatory status) or whether the
review should be imposed on a subset with the greatest potential for cost-effective
and significant emissions reductions. The concern was for the trade 6off between
the administrative and control cost and the air quality benefit.

•	Whether this would be a one-time review to address "grandfathered" uncontrolled
sources or whether this would be a measure imposed at certain time intervals.

66


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

A few alternative approaches were offered to improve the recommendation, such as
applying it only to sources that emit 100 tons per year but that have never undergone a
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit review. Some Subcommittee
members also felt that the recommendation did not do enough to control emissions from
under-regulated sources. Based on the varying viewpoints, the Subcommittee decided
that substantial consensus on this issue was not possible.

67


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Unresolved Recommendation 3: "Continuous improvement" should be achieved via a
combination of mechanisms to achieve continuous emission improvements nationwide.
Mechanisms discussed included voluntary programs at the local level, continuing a
national program of command and control emission standards, and several options for
strengthening and enhancing various market-based programs to encourage continuous
improvements.

Background

The AQM Subcommittee considered mechanisms to achieve continuous emission
reductions from all stationary, mobile and area sources that would lead to continuous air
quality improvement in all geographic regions of the nation with the improvements going
beyond attainment of the NAAQS. Continuous improvement could occur via a flexible
system that would accommodate changes in science and air quality planning needs. A
work group was convened by the Subcommittee to inform it on the subject of continuous
improvement. The work group realized that to be successful, a combination of
continuous improvement approaches would be needed to address all appropriate source
sectors and provide options to reduce emissions at reasonable cost.

Several options were considered such that, when used in combination, they could
provide a new approach to managing air quality. Different geographic or political areas
would utilize different combinations of options to custom design an air quality approach
that would work best for that area. Two forms of continuous improvement were
considered:

The first concept focused on maintaining existing air quality by offsetting
emissions increases associated with growth in demand for goods and services. The goal
was to improve operational efficiencies to generate more electricity, produce more
products, provide more services, and accommodate more vehicles on the road without
increasing air pollution emissions. This concept currently exists in components of many
SIPs (e.g., reasonable further progress requirements, requirements to maintain the
NAAQS), conformity regulations, cap and trade programs (e.g., where industries must
accommodate increased production under a fixed cap), and in prescribed offset ratio
requirements for certain nonattainment areas. While market-based programs have helped
address improvements for large point sources, improvements in certain mobile and area
source sectors have been more difficult to achieve.

The second concept focused on health and environmental improvements that
would be achieved by gradually reduce ambient air pollution levels over time to lower
levels than currently foreseen under the current NAAQS. The concept was intended to
realize public health and environmental benefits through a program that would result in
continuous improvement in emission rates and ambient air pollution concentrations.

68


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Recommendations and Options

The continuous improvement work group recommended that a combination of
options be considered and implemented to achieve continuous emission improvements
across multiple source sectors (i.e., mobile, stationary, and area). Recommendations
included voluntary and incentive-based programs at the national, state, tribal, and local
levels. This included options for strengthening and enhancing various market-based
programs to encourage continuous improvements. The work group agreed that a one-
size-fits-all requirement could not be justified and that multiple programs should be
pursued simultaneously. It agreed that there should be an emphasis placed on demand-
side or end-use efficiencies, as well as on mobile and less regulated emission sources.

Based on historical successes with market-based systems and the general
preference of businesses and individuals to control their own decisions, the work group
supported, where appropriate, the use of market-based incentive programs as a
component of continuous improvement. Examples of such programs include:

•	Public emissions reporting/product use emission information (all source types)
similar to the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) program to apply public pressure for
"cleaner" products;

•	Emission fees (all source types) with revenues used to pay for other
environmental initiatives; and,

•	Emission fee system based on an industry average performance.

The work group also acknowledged that there might be advantages to greater use of
cap and trade approaches to continuous improvement where SIP/TIP strategies require
specific source sector emissions reductions. These might include:

•	Traditional emissions cap and trade, especially for high growth industries; and,

•	Emissions cap and trade with a continuously declining cap or allowance
retirement.

The work group first reviewed a wide range of continuous improvement options
ranging from doing nothing to mandated controls to achieve ongoing improvements.
Many options were eliminated quickly because they were unattractive to industry in that
the concept of continually improving emission controls introduces uncertainty that could
hamper long-term investments, and that could possibly cause them to be outdated before
being paid off.

Reactions to the Continuous Improvement Proposal

There was a wide range of reaction within the AQM Subcommittee to the
continuous improvement concept that ultimately led to the conclusion that substantial
consensus would not be possible. Some Subcommittee members supported the concept.
Other members stated that the proposed options lacked certainty, and would constrain the
business activities at affected facilities. Some believed cost-effectiveness criteria would

69


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

be needed to limit such a program and those criteria would be redundant with the
emissions reductions achieved through the NAAQS and national emission standards.

Some members advocated a voluntary program and suggested that a voluntary emission
reporting program similar to mandatory Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting would
produce the needed improvements. Others stated that mandatory programs would be
necessary to drive needed improvements and push technology development.

General concerns expressed:

•	Proposal was targeted at stationary sources and did not focus enough on emissions
from other sources;

•	Proposal could be costly and the role of cost effectiveness was not defined;

•	Programs incorporating a fixed glide slope forces technology development that
may be beyond source's ability to produce and/or may be too expensive;

•	Voluntary programs will not work without a mandatory backstop and a reasonable
amount of time to produce results; and,

•	Continuous improvements set unreasonable expectations, left open the question of
"when is enough continuous improvement enough?" and creates too much
uncertainty for the business and industry constituents.

Again, following much debate on this issue, the AQM Subcommittee decided to
include continuous improvement as an area worthy of future discussions. The intent here
is to document the discussions and viewpoints to help inform those future discussions.

70


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

X. Conclusions

The Clean Air Act continues to deliver significant benefits both in terms of protection of
public health and the environment. As described in the report for the first phase of this AQM
review (January 200 Phase I Report) and in the 2004 NRC report that spawned this process, the
nation has made enormous strides since 1970 at improving air quality during a period of
economic prosperity and population growth.

The future of air quality management offers tremendous opportunities to continue the
Clean Air Act's record of progress toward protecting public health and the environment. With
these opportunities come unique challenges. New scientific information indicates an ongoing
need to address significant threats to public health and the environment from air pollution.
Climate change and improved understanding of the risk posed by hazardous air pollutants will
also challenge air quality management planners by highlighting the need for new approaches and
strategies.

The AQM Subcommittee strongly believes that moving from the pollutant by pollutant
approach of the current air quality management system to the comprehensive multipollutant
approach outlined in this report will substantially help meet the air quality challenges of the 21st
century. This more holistic approach calls for collective efforts of governmental organizations,
including states, tribes, local communities, EPA, DOE, DOT, and others to develop and
implement this comprehensive planning approach. The AQM Subcommittee recommends that
the concept for a comprehensive air quality management system be implemented in its entirety.
The Subcommittee also believes that the 12 recommendations contained in this report stand on
their own merits and can, therefore, be implemented separately to improve the current approach
to air quality management in this country. Continuing to protect and preserve clean air is a duty
and responsibility that this Subcommittee has taken seriously and these recommendations have
been considered with the goals of protecting public health and the environment.

71


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Appendices

Additional documentation of the work completed by the Air Quality Management
Subcommittee can be found at the Clean Air Act Advisory website at
http://www.epa.gov/air/caaac.html. The additional documentation includes meeting
summaries, draft ideas considered by the work groups not adopted by the Subcommittee,
and presentations from the Subcommittee meetings.

72


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Appendix A: Membership and Organizational Structure of the
Air Quality Management Subcommittee

73


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

AQM Subcommittee Chairs

Gregory A. Green
US EPA

Patrick Cummins

Western Governors' Association

AQM Subcommittee Members

Michael Bradley (CAAAC)

M.J. Bradley Associates Inc.

Don Clay (CAAAC)

Koch Industries, Inc.

Gregg Cooke (CAAAC)

Guida, Slavich, and Flores, PLLC

Greg Dana (CAAAC)

Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers

Anna Garcia

Ozone Transport Commission

Carolyn Green (CAAAC)

Sunoco Inc.

Lisa Gomez (CAAAC)

Sempra Energy

Stephen Hartsfield
National Tribal Air Association

Jim Hendricks (CAAAC)

Duke Energy

Christopher Hessler (CAAAC)

AJW, Inc.

John Hornback
SESARM/Metro 4, Inc.

Sharon Kneiss (CAAAC)

American Chemistry Council

74


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Mark MacLeod
Environmental Defense

J. Mark Morford
Stoel Rives LLP

Janet McCabe (CAAAC)

Improving Kids Environment

Brock Nicholson
State of North Carolina

Janice Nolen (CAAAC)

American Lung Association

Margie Perkins
State of Colorado

David Shaw
State of New York

John Seitz
ES&P, LLC

Lynn Terry
State of California

Leah Weiss

Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)

Robert Wyman, Esq. (CAAAC)

Latham and Watkins LLP

Significant Contributors to the AQM Subcommittee

Tom Chappie
State of Alaska

Pamela Giblin (CAAAC)

Baker Botts, LLP

Tim Hunt

American Forest and Paper Association
Dan Johnson

Western States Air Resources Council (WESTAR)

75


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Chuck Mueller
State of Georgia

Michael Sheehan
State of New York

Patty Strabbing
DaimlerChrysler

Jeff Underhill

State of New Hampshire

Larry Greene
Sacramento Air Quality

Jerry Kotas
US Dept of Energy

Steve Winkelman
Center for Clean Air Policy

Camille Mittleholz
US Dept of Transportation

76


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

77


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Appendix B: Matrix of Tools to Improve Air Quality

78


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Matrix of Potential Tools to Address Air Quality Challenges and Planning Needs

Sources or

Recommended

Specific Tool Options

Pollutant

Sectors (not

Tool Type



Targeted

in priority







order)







(1) Fleet

A. Financial tools

A. Tax strategies, loans, equity strategies, and targeted rebates are

PM, NOx,

turnover &

and financial

financing strategies that may encourage fleet turnover (e.g., TERP, DERA,

VOCs, CO

diesel retrofits

demand-side

Moyer).





strategies







B. Emissions

B. Emissions trading may offer an appropriate private sector source of





Trading

financing to accelerate turnover. Approaches that might work best for







fleet turnover purposes include inter-sector trading strategies as well as







fleet averaging programs.





C. Information

C. Clearinghouses can disseminate information on technology and





programs, reward

incentives to educate and promote the use of technologies that have a





programs and non-

positive impact on air quality. Labeling can be used to inform the general





financial demand-

public of the relative benefits of choices they are making and to promote





side strategies

the use of new and innovative technologies and resources. Performance







benchmarking can be used to highlight the positive characteristics of new







and innovative technologies through comparison of these technologies







against standard market practices and/or the continued use of existing







products. Surveys can be used to gauge the effectiveness of the programs







and to inform federal, state, tribal and local entities of program results and







market changes. Frequent flyer-type programs can be used to provide







incentives for entities that make frequent purchases by offering discounts,







rebates, credits or other offerings to promote repeated use of the product(s)







being promoted. Web tools can be used to move product information.







This information can be targeted to a specific audience or for general







consumption to inform, promote, educate and influence decisions.





D. Planning tools

D. Modeling to estimate the emission reduction benefits of fleet turnover







and retrofit is recommended. An inventory of the number of diesel







engines that could benefit from retrofit is recommended.





E. Retrofit

E. Retrofit strategies include converting existing engines to an alternative





strategies

fuel, engine recalibration, adding additional emission controls,







replacement with a new, cleaner engine, anti-idling, and other changes in







operating strategies that reduce emissions.





F. Enforcement

F. Use Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEP) funding to encourage





enhancements

fleet turnover and retrofits. Use remote sensing to measure reductions.





I. Emission limits

I. Require mandatory diesel retrofit. Require scrapage programs. Use







green contract conditions in government contracts. Use state and federal







leadership programs.



79


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Sources or
Sectors (not
in priority
order)	

Recommended
Tool Type

Specific Tool Options

Pollutant
Targeted

(2) Land use
&

transportation
planning
(including
road

exposures)

A. Financial tools
and financial
demand-side
strategies

C. Information
programs, reward
programs and non-
financial demand-
side strategies

D. Planning tools

H. Targeted
strategies

A. Financial demand-side strategies like differential pricing and tax
strategies can be used as an incentive.

C.	Clearinghouses can disseminate information on technology and
incentives to educate and promote the use of technologies that have a
positive impact on air quality. Labeling can be used to inform the general
public of the choices they are making and to promote the use of new and
innovative technologies and resources. Performance benchmarking can be
used to highlight the positive characteristics of new and innovative
technologies through comparison of these technologies against standard
market practices and/or the continued use of existing products.

Community "Green Action" lists can be utilized to provide access to tools
and information that will help promote the use of more sustainable "Green
Community" concepts, including on line tutorials in the use of modeling
software, model codes and ordinances, sample plans, community
involvement practices and funding opportunities. Surveys can be used to
gauge effectiveness of the programs and to inform federal, state, tribal, and
local entities of program results and market changes. Frequent flyer-type
programs can be used to provide incentives for entities that make frequent
purchases by offering discounts, rebates, credits or other offerings to
promote repeated use of the product(s) being promoted. Web tools can be
used to move product information. This information can be targeted to a
specific audience or for general consumption to inform, promote, educate,
and influence decisions.

D.	Provide modeling software for scenario envisioning and to quantify
emission reductions. Modeling to project VMT for transportation
planning is recommended.

H. Non-measured VOC sources can be detected by thermal IR camera
(e.g., floating roof storage tanks, VOC loading racks, pipeline operations,
marine vessels, and marine loading operations).

PM, NOx,
VOCs, CO

_8Q_


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

(3) Ships

A. Financial tools

A. Tax strategies, loans, equity strategies, and targeted rebates are

PM,

and ports,

and financial

strategies that provide financial incentives to reduce emissions. FAA

NOx,

airports,

demand-side

grants through the VALE program are available.

VOCs,

and rail

strategies



S02, air

systems





toxics



B. Emission trading

B. Emissions trading can work together with appropriate emissions







performance standards to provide private sector financing and to







accelerate engine turnover. Depending upon the overall compliance







program, the emissions trading element could consist of one or some







combination of a performance averaging program (e.g., by a terminal







operator or among fleets), inter-sector trading, banking, and a cap and







trade program.





C. Information

C. Clearinghouses can disseminate information on technology and





programs, reward

incentives to educate and promote the use of technologies that have a





programs and non-

positive impact on air quality. Performance benchmarking can be used to





financial demand-

highlight the positive characteristics of new and innovative technologies





side strategies

through comparison of these technologies against standard market







practices and/or the continued use of existing products. Web tools can be







used to move product information. This information can be targeted to a







specific audience or for general consumption to inform, promote, educate,







and influence decisions.





D. Planning tools

D. Modeling to estimate emission reduction benefits of various strategies







is recommended.





E. Retrofit strategies

E. Retrofit strategies include converting existing engines to an alternative







fuel, engine recalibration, adding additional emission controls,







replacement with a new and cleaner engine, and anti-idling and other







changes in operating strategies that reduce emissions.





F. Enforcement

F. Use SEP funding to accelerate emission reductions through





enhancements

electrification.





H. Targeted

H. Non-measured VOC sources can be detected by thermal IR camera





strategies

(e.g., floating roof storage tanks, VOC loading racks, pipeline operations,







marine vessels and marine loading operations).





I. Emission limits

I. Use green contract conditions when facilities are enlarged or rebuilt, or







when leases are up. Emission limits would be effective for any source







with discrete, measurable points of emissions.





J. Work practice

J. Imposing work practice restrictions on intermittent sources can be





standards

effective to address high ozone levels (like taxiing on one engine).



81


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

(4) Rural Sources







(a) Agriculture

A. Financial tools

A. Predicate approval of loans on agreement to implement

PM, VOCs,

(including potential

and financial

best management practices (BMPs).

ammonia

effect on PM

demand-side





formation and acid

strategies





deposition)









C. Information

C. Clearinghouses can disseminate information on





programs, reward

technology and incentives to educate and promote the use of





programs and non-

technologies that have a positive impact on air quality.





financial demand-

Performance benchmarking can be used to highlight the





side strategies

positive characteristics of new and innovative technologies







through comparison of these technologies against standard







market practices and/or the continued use of existing







products. Web tools can be used to move product







information. This information can be targeted to a specific







audience or for general consumption to inform, promote,







educate, and influence decisions.





D. Planning tools

D. Permit streamlining replaces redundant and unnecessary







requirements in favor of practically enforceable limits that







can reduce administrative costs, reduce timing, and improve







enforcement. Modeling to estimate emission reduction







benefits of various strategies is recommended.





E. Retrofit strategies

E. Retrofit strategies include converting existing engines to







an alternative fuel, engine recalibration, adding additional







emission controls, replacement with a new and cleaner







engine, anti-idling, and other changes in operating strategies







that reduce emissions.





J. Work practice

J. Work practice standards (referred to as BMPs) are





standards

currently in use and effectively controlling emissions from







many agricultural sources.



(b) Dust

A. Financial tools

A. Predicate approval of loans on green clauses in

PM



and financial

development contracts.





demand-side







strategies







C. Information

C. Clearinghouses can disseminate information on





programs, reward

technology and incentives to educate and promote the use of





programs and non-

technologies that have a positive impact on air quality. Web





financial demand-

tools can be used to move product information. This





side strategies

information can be targeted to a specific audience or for







general consumption to inform, promote, educate and







Influence decisions.





J. Work practice

J. Work practice standards are effective tools for dealing





standards

with "area" type sources such as dust.



82


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

(5) Small Emitters

(e.g., dry cleaners,

bakeries,

restaurants)

C. Information
programs, reward
programs, and non-
financial demand-
side strategies

D. Planning tools

H. Targeted
strategies

I. Emission limits

J. Work practice
standards

C.	Clearinghouses can disseminate information on
technology and incentives to educate and promote the use of
technologies that have a positive impact on air quality.
Labeling can be used to inform the general public of the
choices they are making and to promote the use of new and
innovative technologies and resources. Performance
benchmarking can be used to highlight the positive
characteristics of new and innovative technologies through
comparison of these technologies against standard market
practices and/or the continued use of existing products.
Community "Green Action" lists can be utilized to provide
access to tools and information that will help promote the use
of more sustainable "Green Community" concepts. Surveys
can be used to gauge effectiveness of the programs and to
inform federal, state, tribal and local entities of program
results and market changes. Frequent flyer-type programs
can be used to provide incentives for entities that make
frequent purchases by offering discounts, rebates, credits or
other offerings to promote repeated use of the product(s)
being promoted. Web tools can be used to move product
information. This information can be targeted to a specific
audience or for general consumption to inform, promote,
educate, and influence decisions.

D.	Permit streamlining replaces redundant and unnecessary
requirements in favor of practically enforceable limits that
can reduce administrative costs, reduce timing, and improve
enforcement. Assessing inventory and population density is
recommended.

H.	Non-measured VOC sources can be detected by thermal
IR camera (e.g., floating roof storage tanks, VOC loading
racks, pipeline operations, marine vessels, and marine
loading operations).

I.	Emission limits would be effective for any source with
discrete, measurable points of emissions. With very small
sources, it may not be cost effective to conduct routine or
continuous source sampling.

J. Work practice standards would be an effective alternative
to emission limits for most of these sources.

PM, NOx,
VOCs, air
toxics

83


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

(6) Consumer
Products (e.g.,
VOC-containing
consumer products)

A.	Financial tools
and financial
demand-side
strategies

B.	Emissions trading

C. Information
programs, reward
programs, and non-
financial demand-
side strategies

I. Emission limits

A. Financial strategies such as targeted rebates have proven
successful.

B.	One or more emissions trading tools may be effective in
this area, including averaging and banking.

C.	Clearinghouses can disseminate information on
technology and incentives to educate and promote the use of
technologies that have a positive impact on air quality.
Labeling can be used to inform the general public of the
choices they are making and to promote the use of new and
innovative technologies and resources. Performance
benchmarking can be used to highlight the positive
characteristics of new and innovative technologies through
comparison of these technologies against standard market
practices and/or the continued use of existing products.
Community "Green Action" lists can be utilized to provide
access to tools and information that will help promote the use
of more sustainable "Green Community" concepts. Surveys
can be used to gauge effectiveness of the programs and to
inform federal, state, tribal and local entities of program
results and market changes. Frequent flyer-type programs
can be used to provide incentives for entities that make
frequent purchases by offering discounts, rebates, credits, or
other offerings to promote repeated use of the product(s)
being promoted. Web tools can be used to move product
information. This information can be targeted to a specific
audience or for general consumption to inform, promote,
educate, and influence decisions.

I. Emission limits would be effective for any source with
discrete, measurable points of emissions. With certain types
of sources, it will not be cost effective to conduct routine or
continuous source sampling.	

PM, NOx,
VOCs, S02,
air toxics

84


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

(7) Industrial,
Commercial and
Residential Boilers
and Heaters, and
Legacy Equipment
and Sources

B. Emissions trading

C. Information
programs, reward
programs, and non-
financial demand-
side strategies

D. Planning tools

I. Emission limits

J. Work practice
standards

B.	Emissions trading tools such as plant-wide applicability
limits may be effective.

C.	Clearinghouses can disseminate information on
technology and incentives to educate and promote the use of
technologies that have a positive impact on air quality.
Labeling can be used to inform the general public of the
choices they are making and to promote the use of new and
innovative technologies and resources. Performance
benchmarking can be used to highlight the positive
characteristics of new and innovative technologies through
comparison of these technologies against standard market
practices and/or the continued use of existing products.
Surveys can be used to gauge effectiveness of the programs
and to inform federal, state, tribal and local entities of
program results and market changes. Web tools can be used
to move product information. This information can be
targeted to a specific audience or for general consumption to
inform, promote, educate, and influence decisions.

D.	Permit streamlining replaces redundant and unnecessary
requirements in favor of practically enforceable limits that
can reduce administrative costs, reduce timing, and improve
enforcement. Modeling to estimate emission reduction
benefits of various strategies is recommended. Inventory
assessment is recommended.

I. Emission limits can be an effective tool to address these
types of sources.

J. Work practice standards might be an effective alternative
to emission limits for some of these sources.

PM, NOx,
VOCs, S02

85


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report
Needs, Tools, and Attributes

1. List of "Needs" or Problems:

A.	Priority Emission Reduction Areas

(1)	Vehicles and Engines:

(a)	Issues related to vehicle and engine emissions:

i.	Insufficient turnover of existing fleets

ii.	Need to encourage higher market penetration of clean engines
and fuels

iii.	Need for greater implementation of retrofits

(b)	Issues related to vehicle and engine use (i.e., vehicle miles traveled

(VMT)):

i.	lack of land use planning to reduce VMT

ii.	lack of transportation planning to reduce VMT

(2)	Special Under-Managed Problem Areas:

(a)	ports and goods movement (including some related on-road engines,
e.g., trucks)

(b)	airports

(c)	other federally preempted sources (e.g., railroads, ships, etc.)

(d)	agricultural emissions (including both their potential effect on PM
formation and on acid deposition; includes, e.g., ammonia, dust from
tillage, land clearing burning)

(e)	dust emissions

(3)	Small Emitters (e.g., dry cleaners, bakeries, restaurants)

(4)	Consumer Products (e.g., VOC-containing consumer products)

(5)	Industrial Boilers and Other Under-Regulated Stationary Sources

B.	Problems and Needs Related to Measurements (of Problem or Actions Taken)
and Performance Tracking

(1) Baseline Air Quality Data

(a) Current Disincentives - Current program discourages data development
and other efforts to update the technical underpinning of attainment

86


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

SIPs. Currently, areas are penalized for discovering that their problem
is worse than previously understood.

(b)	Need for More Refined Data - we need more information regarding
speciation of fine particulates if we are to identify the most appropriate
sources to target for controls.

(c)	Inventory Gaps - we have not yet adequately estimated emissions from
many source categories, including:

-	marine emissions

-	locomotive emissions

-	off-road diesel emissions

(d)	Insufficient ambient air quality monitoring networks- lack of ambient
data

(2)	Hazardous Air Pollutants

(a)	Limited or non-existent monitoring data.

(b)	Need better risk assessment methodology that incorporates both
scientific and traditional knowledge.

(c)	Lack of understanding regarding levels of significance

(d)	Lack of ambient thresholds.

(e)	Need more understanding of potential impact of hazardous air
pollutants on sensitive populations.

(3)	Planning Challenges

(a)	Co-benefit evaluations - we lack the tools or metrics to account
properly for co-benefits of various strategies.

(b)	Difficulty of evaluating local impacts of trading programs.

C.	Problems or Needs Related to Authority or Jurisdiction

(1)	Preemption - states and tribes are preempted from regulating many source
Categories.

(2)	Limitations - e.g., many states and tribes can't go beyond federal measures or
can't regulate minor sources.

(3)	International and Border Emissions.

(4)	Authority and jurisdictional regulatory "patchwork" of state/local regulations
versus national regulations.

D.	Other SIP Challenges

87


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

(1) SIP Credit - how should credit for non-traditional strategies be allocated,
including:

-	Mobile source strategies (e.g., diesel reduction programs).

-	Voluntary/incentive programs.

E.	Resources - many state, tribal and local agencies lack sufficient resources

F.	Other Needs

(1)	Lack of incentives to prevent air quality problems (e.g., in attainment areas)

(2)	Conservation, both user and supplier side, including:

-	Energy efficiency.

-	User side behavior/choices.

-	Purchasing/consumption.

-	Mass transit.

2. List of Potential "Tools:"

A.	Financial Tools and Financial Demand-Side Strategies

Tax strategies (e.g., deductions, credits, accelerated depreciation, etc.)

Loans

Equity strategies
Clean air investment funds
Emission fees
Fees in lieu of offsets
Targeted rebates
Differential pricing

B.	Emissions Trading Tools

Cap and trade
Open market strategies

Bubbles (e.g., by category of equipment, facility, industry, port or airport)

Plant-wide applicability limits

Mobile to stationary trading

Interpollutant trading

Risk-based trading

Reactivity-based trading

C.	Information Programs, Reward Programs and Non-Financial Demand-Side
Strategies

Clearinghouses for Technology, Regulations, Incentives

88


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Labeling (e.g., star programs, nutrition label model)

Performance Benchmarking
Community "green" action lists
Surveys (e.g., impacts of personal choices)

Frequent flyer-type programs (e.g., points for personal clean air actions)

Web tools (e.g., info availability, personal clean air web account)

D.	Planning Tools

Permit streamlining

Model local ordinances and guidance

Quantification models to project impacts of land use choices

Federal agency ombudsman for assisting local governments to identify available

funds, good land use models, etc.

Memoranda of understanding
Remote sensing

Monitoring tools for dealing with inventory uncertainties

E.	Retrofit Strategies (other than financial incentives, which are listed separately
above)

Useful life limits on equipment

Retrofit requirements (Super RACT)

Minimum technology standards based on pollutant focus

Fuel type and usage

Operational protocol

Compliance flexibility

Direct regulations requiring retrofits

F.	Enforcement Enhancements

Incentives for self certification
Source specific emission limit agreements
Privatization Strategies

G.	Targeted Strategies

Sensitive zones
Sensitive receptors
Time of day restrictions
Seasonal restrictions

H.	Emission Limits

89


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

3. Attributes - for evaluating and comparing tools:

DIRECT:

A.	Environmental benefits and dis-benefits (e.g., emission reductions, air quality
benefits, public health benefits, cultural benefits, ecological benefits, aesthetic
benefits), including a statement of which "need" is being addressed.

B.	Economic impacts (e.g., cost and cost effectiveness).

C.	Time (e.g., lead time, duration in years, continuity of benefit during day and week).

D.	Ease of monitoring and accountability.

AUTHORITY, JURISDICTION AND MECHANISMS:

E.	Jurisdictional attributes (e.g., do states and tribes have necessary authority, are there

limits, who would implement - business, local, state, tribe, federal, international).

F.	Would the strategy require CAA amendment?

G.	Replicability.

INDIRECT:

H.	Impact on personal choice and quality of life.

I.	Benefits and dis-benefits of energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reductions.

90


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Appendix C: Proposed Framework for an Air Quality Management
Plan

91


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Proposed Framework for an Air Quality Management Plan

The following framework for an AQMP is based, in part, on the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (AQMD) 2003 air quality management plan
(http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/AQMD03AQMP.htm).

Elements of an AQMP and a Proposed Framework

1)	Executive Summary

a)	Presents philosophy and direction

b)	Summarizes key components and discusses how they will be implemented

2)	Overview

a)	Explains concept of AQMP and provides context for current plan versus the past

b)	Discusses how the plan developed, who is involved in the process

c)	Discusses benefits and impacts of an AQMP

3)	Air Quality Requirements and Goals

a)	Purpos q-why are we doing an AQMP?

b)	Challenges

c)	Current requirements and goals addressed by the AQMP (both federal and state, tribal,
or local)

4)	Air Quality, Health, and Ecosystem Effects

a)	Explains current air quality issues in the area covered by the plan - what are the
problems in the area?

b)	Includes both criteria and non-criteria pollutants

c)	Discusses health effects and other issues for all pollutants covered by the plan

5)	Air Emissions Assessment

a)	Provides a picture of where the area is and may be in terms of its current and future
emissions inventories from all sources - what does it look like now and in the future?

b)	Discusses how emissions will be monitored, what modeling has been done, and
what/how information is being provided to stakeholders and the public

6)	Strategy for Managing Emissions from New and Existing Sources

a)	Outlines the various control strategies and other measures the planning agency is
undertaking in the stationary, area and mobile sectors - what are we doing about if!

b)	Covers all pollutants addressed by the AQMP

7)	Future Air Quality

a) Provides the future air quality picture based on implementation of the strategies and
measures in the AQMP - where do these actions get usl

8)	Implementation

a) Explains how the organizations involved in the AQMP will execute the programs and
strategies outlined in the AQMP - how would we get this done?

9)	Looking Beyond Current Requirements

a) Provides a forward look at air quality problems and requirements on the horizon and
how the area is approaching those issues

10)	Glossary and Appendices

a) Provides detailed technical support documents and information

92


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Appendix D: Letter Transmitting Final Report to EPA

93


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Honorable Stephen L. Johnson
Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Johnson:

On behalf of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC), we are pleased to
present to you a report and recommendations from the Committee for your consideration. The
CAAAC is a senior-level policy committee consisting of managers and experts representing
State and local government, environmental and public interest groups, academic institutions,
unions, trade associations, utilities, industry, and others. The Committee provides advice and
counsel to EPA on a variety of important air quality policy issues.

In 2004, the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies released a
report entitled, "Air Quality Management in the United States." In this report, the NRC outlined
the many substantial achievements of the U.S. Air Quality Management (AQM) system over the
past 30 years. The NRC also identified areas where additional changes in the AQM system
would provide further benefits to human health and the environment. The NRC advanced
recommendations for change in the AQM system on a number of levels. Some of the NRC's
recommendations involve short-term changes of limited scope and immediate impact. Other
NRC recommendations involve sweeping changes to the Nation's approach to AQM over the
mid- to long-term.

For the past 2 years, a CAAAC Subcommittee has examined the latter category of the
NRC recommendations and has developed this report detailing options for long-term, systemic
ways to improve the AQM system in this country. The Subcommittee's findings support a shift
from the current pollutant-by-pollutant AQM system to a fully integrated multipollutant,
comprehensive AQM system that functions in coordination with energy, land use, and
transportation plans. The AQM Subcommittee included representatives from State and local
organizations, Tribes, regional organizations, environmental and public health organizations,
industry, and the EPA.

94


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

On behalf of the Committee, we thank you for the opportunity to provide advice on
developing air quality management strategies for the future.

Sincerely,

Gregory A. Green, Co-Chair

Air Quality Management Subcommittee

Patrick Cummins, Co-Chair

Air Quality Management Subcommittee

Robert J. Meyers, Chair

Clean Air Act Advisory Committee

Enclosure

95


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Final Report

Appendix E: Commentary from Stakeholders

96


-------
The Clean Air Association of the Northeast States

101 Merrimac Street, 10th Floor Boston, MA 02114
Phone 617-259-2000 Fax 617-742-9162
Arthur N. Marin, Executive Director

NESCAUM

www.nescaum.org

June 8, 2007

Patrick Cummins and Gregory Green, Co-Chairs

Air Quality Management Subcommittee of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mail Code C304-01

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Dear Mr. Cummins and Mr. Green:

As participants in the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee's Air Quality Management (AQM)
Subcommittee's deliberations over the past few years and on behalf of the NESCAUM states, we
submit these comments to you in response to the May 2, 2007 draft report of the AQM
Subcommittee, entitled Recommendations to the Clean Air Act Committee; Air Quality
Management Subcommittee Recommendations, Phase II, Jane 2007. The NESCAUM states are
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and
Vermont.

With regard to the statement in the report that the recommendations in the report are "the AQM
Subcommittee's vision of a comprehensive AQM system that can assist in meeting future air
quality challenges in this country" (see page 15), we can only agree in part. Without opportunity
for in-depth discussion of climate change, it proved impossible to develop what constitutes, in
our minds, a truly comprehensive AQM system. As such, the recommendations represent some
good initial steps toward a more comprehensive paradigm of integrated multi-pollutant planning
and management that is yet to be achieved.

Contextualizing the Phase II Recommendations - Process Observations

Phase II of the AQM deliberations proved to be more challenging than Phase I for several
reasons, including process dynamics. We feel it important to describe some of these process
dynamics in order to place the report in context for readers who may wish to pursue future
discussions on new approaches to air quality management with this report in hand.

First, the group was charged to look broadly at longer term, possibly more large-scale changes to
the air quality management system. While brainstorming on new ideas sounds like a stimulating
and uncomplicated task, the policy context in which the Subcommittee was operating compelled
many participants to consider the potential and substantial regulatory impacts of such innovative
ideas, particularly with respect to impacts on their constituencies. As mentioned in the AQM
Subcommittee report, coming to consensus on more groundbreaking proposals such as the ones
listed in the Unresolved Areas of Discussion section (i.e., airshed-based boundaries, reasonable
performance levels, and continuous improvements) would have required deliberating on and
conceding to regulatory and policy tradeoffs. Many Subcommittee members found that this
forum did not allow — and may not have been the place — for such specific considerations. As a

NESCAUM Members:

Connecticut Bureau of Air Management, Anne Gobin
Maine Bureau of Air Quality Control, James Brooks

Massachusetts Bureau of Waste Prevention, Barbara Kwetz
New Hampshire Air Resources Division, Robert Scott
New Jersey Division of Air Quality, William O'Sullivan

New York Division of Air Resources, David Shaw
Rhode Island Office of Air Resources, Stephen Majkut
Vermont Air Polution Control Division, Richard Valentinetti


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Report
NESCAUM	

June 8, 2007
	Page 2

result, there was discomfort among participants, particularly in engaging in conversations on
how an innovative concept might be envisioned or implemented.

Second, in the context of brainstorming new approaches, we observed a concern on the part of
many Subcommittee members that formally endorsing a new concept could be erroneously
interpreted to imply that the corresponding concept currently in place was no longer supported or
deemed adequate. This further affected the Subcommittee's ability to explore new approaches as
a group with rigor.

Third, early on in the deliberations, it became clear that the Subcommittee could not reach
consensus as to whether or not to discuss climate change as part of the AQM process.

Participants on both sides of the issue felt strongly about their positions. Rather than expending
time and resources further debating the issue, a compromise position was reached that climate
change would only be discussed within a very narrowly defined context, i.e., as presented in the
three action items contained in Recommendation #4: Take climate change into account in air
quality management strategies. We believe that such a narrow bounding of the topic of climate
change significantly disadvantaged the deliberations. Our specific thoughts on this are
elucidated below.

Fourth, while Subcommittee and workgroup deliberations were at times engaging and truly
exploratory, the open-ended nature of the Subcommittee's charge, coupled with the process
concerns, ultimately resulted in constrained dialogue. We suggest that, for future CAAAC
subcommittee deliberations, specified goals or endpoints accompany the charge so that ideas and
draft recommendations can be more easily compared to and assessed with respect to those goals.
Such an approach could greatly enhance that group's overall deliberative process.

Multi-Pollutant Planning without Climate Change - Scratching the Surface

From the NESCAUM states' perspective, the Subcommittee's inability to discuss climate change
in the context of criteria pollutant planning and management was disappointing. During the time
period coinciding with the AQM Subcommittee's deliberations, the NESCAUM states were
actively working together and with states across the nation on several key climate initiatives,
including the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) and The Climate Registry, as well as
developing State Implementation Plans for ozone, particulate matter, and regional haze. The
NESCAUM states have started to confront some critical policy challenges concerning climate,
criteria pollutant, and air toxics integration, and would have welcomed an opportunity to discuss
them with a larger constituency. Some of the key issues specifically involve climate-criteria
pollutant tradeoffs, and include: (1) science and analytical assessment needs for assessing multi-
pollutant interactions and tradeoffs; (2) policy challenges and needs for addressing multi-
pollutant interactions and tradeoffs; (3) institutional barriers that need to be addressed in order to
move to more integrated multi-pollutant planning and management; (4) local, state, tribal, and
federal roles in integrating climate change into multi-pollutant planning; and (5) building


-------
Air Quality Management Subcommittee Report

June 8, 2007
	Page 3

NESCAUM

capacity at the state, tribal, and federal levels to successfully implement multi-pollutant planning
and management.

Moving Forward

We are pleased that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has initiated steps to
launch a pilot program, in response to the Subcommittee's recommendation, for developing
statewide Air Quality Management Plans over the next few years. We agree that federally
sponsored pilots aimed at building capacity at the state level to conduct multi-pollutant analyses,
as well as identifying policy, regulatory, and institutional challenges and ways to address them
during the integration process, will prove beneficial. We recommend that a series of pilots be
launched and subsequently documented, evaluated, and made publicly available so that we can
learn from those experiences. We hope to work with EPA in the near future on such efforts.

We greatly appreciated the work of the EPA staff in convening the AQM Subcommittee
meetings and writing and producing the final report. We thank you for your efforts in
shepherding this process to its conclusion. If you have any questions on our comments, do not
hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

David Shaw, Director
Division of Air Resources
NY DEC

Jeffrey Underhill, Chief Scientist
Air Resources Division
NHDES

Michael Sheehan, Chief
Mobile Source Planning Section
Division of Air Resources, NY DEC

NESCAUM

Leah Weiss, Senior Policy Advisor

cc: NESCAUM Directors

Arthur Marin, NESCAUM


-------