Federal Advisory Committee Act

Clean Air Act Advisory Committee: Teleconference

Meeting Summary

December 1, 2016
The DuPont Circle Hotel
Washington, D.C.

Welcome

Mr. Jim DeMocker called the meeting to order at 8:30 am on December 1, 2016. Mr. DeMocker
welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked the committee members in the room and on the
phone to introduce themselves, followed by introductions of other attendees in the audience. The
list of meeting attendees is provided in an appendix to this summary. Mr. DeMocker introduced
Tamara Saltman, indicating that Ms. Saltman is the CAAAC Designed Federal Officer (DFO),
and briefly described her duties as DFO and the work she is involved in at the EPA.

Mr. DeMocker mentioned that the CAAAC is entering a new cycle, noting that the terms for
quite a few members are ending, and thus there will be several open slots on the committee for
new members to fill. Mr. DeMocker reviewed the process for soliciting new members to the
CAAAC and reappointing those whose terms are ending but are eligible for re-appointment. Mr.
DeMocker asked that any questions related to the membership process be directed to Ms.
Saltman.

Air Program Update and Discussion

Ms. Janet McCabe thanked the committee for their attendance and noted that this will be her last
CAAAC meeting, due to the change in administration. Ms. McCabe expressed that the EPA
cannot do the good work that it does without stakeholder involvement from industry, academia,
state/local agencies, the community, and other stakeholders, and noted that one of the hallmarks
of this administration has been placing a high value on stakeholder input. The CAAAC has been
exemplary in providing advice to the EPA in how to reduce emissions through programs and
regulations that are clear, easy to comply with, and cost effective.

Ms. McCabe indicated that this administration has had 7 years of accomplishments, highlighting
tremendous progress with programs to reduce ozone, fine particle, and sulfur dioxide pollution,
mercury emissions, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and more. Ms. McCabe referred to the list
of topics on the agenda stating that it speaks to the breadth of the work that has been done and is
ongoing at the EPA, as these are issues that are affecting our communities every day.

Ms. McCabe provided the committee with an update of the EPA air program's ongoing work.
She noted that the EPA has finalized the Cross-State Air Pollution Transport (CSAPR) Update

-------
rule, noting that this is an important rule that will reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and
ozone when it takes effect next year. The EPA also finalized the Exceptional Events Rule and
Guidance to state/local agencies this year. This guidance assists air agencies with interpreting
and implementing the rule to prevent and regulate ozone associated with wildfires. Ms. McCabe
also pointed out that the EPA finalized the Information Collection Request (ICR) for the oil and
natural gas industry, and the industry is currently working on responses to this request. In
addition, the EPA issued the final Control Techniques Guidelines for existing oil and gas
equipment in ozone non-attainment areas. Ms. McCabe mentioned the 2017 Renewable Fuels
Standards (RFS) and that the ozone implementation rule have been proposed. There has been
tremendous progress over the last 7 years and Ms. McCabe noted that the EPA is doing a better
job on providing timely guidance materials. Other progress highlighted by Ms. McCabe included
rules for refrigerants, the Significant New Alternatives Policy or SNAP program, which is very
effective and included huge involvement by industry. Ms. McCabe noted that the EPA put out
the next increment for the EPA's Environmental Justice strategy - EJ 2020. Related to the light-
duty GHG standards, the EPA issued a proposed determination that the existing standards do not
need to be changed. Ms. McCabe indicated that the EPA is waiting for the DC Circuit Court
opinion on the legal challenge to the Clean Power Plan (CPP). Ms. McCabe thanked the Ports
Group for their work, which is very important and affects many people. In late September, the
National Port Strategy Assessment report was published, and the EPA is also working on a pilot
program with Port Everglades to provide an example of air emission reduction strategies that
could be implemented by other ports.

Ms. McCabe concluded the air program update by indicating that the EPA is currently in a
transition period, and it is going smoothly. Ms. McCabe closed by thanking the CAAAC
committee members who are leaving the committee and asked if there were any questions.

Discussion

Ms. Nancy Kruger stated that it has been an honor to serve on the CAAAC committee under Ms.
McCabe's leadership. Ms. Kruger said that grants given to state and local agencies under section
103 of the Clean Air Act need to be increased, and she indicated that the National Association of
Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) has provided funding recommendations to the EPA. Ms. Kruger
emphasized that it is important for Federal grants to provide consistent funding, and she
expressed concern that these funds could potentially decrease under the new administration. Ms.
McCabe thanked Ms. Kruger for her remarks and responded that it is important for states and
NACAA to voice their concerns to the new administration, noting that she would help channel
these comments in any way that she could in the future.

Ms. Pamela Faggert commented that the EPA's door has always been open under Ms. McCabe's
leadership, and she thanked Ms. McCabe for that. Dr. Lee Kindberg echoed Ms. Faggert's
sentiments and also thanked everyone for their input on the Ports work.

2

-------
Ms. Kindberg asked if there were any updates on the Volkswagen settlement. Ms. McCabe
indicated that there is a partial settlement for 2-liter engines, and work is progressing on the
settlement for 3-liter engines. She also noted that Volkswagen has submitted their zero emission
vehicle investment plans for review.

Mr. Howard Feldman also thanked Ms. McCabe and the EPA and commented that he thought
there had been fair discussions between the agency and industry. Mr. Feldman asked which
issues may be subject to rulemaking in the next two months (i.e., before the new administration
takes office). Ms. McCabe said that there are a few rules currently being reviewed by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), including revisions to the regional haze rule. Other rules,
such as some of the residual risk and technology (RTR) rules will likely be proposed, and Ms.
McCabe was hopeful that the Appendix W modeling guidance would be finalized in that
timeframe.

Ms. Joy Wiecks also thanked Ms. McCabe and the EPA. She commented that there are many
differences for tribal groups that the EPA should be mindful of when developing programs and
regulations. Ms. McCabe acknowledged the comment, noting the care tribes take for their
communities.

Members of the committee who joined the meeting via the phone also thanked Ms. McCabe and
the EPA for the open-door policy and one CAAAC member asked about the status of the SNAP
rule. Ms. McCabe replied that the rule was being published today (12/1/16).

Ms. Ann Weeks thanked Ms. McCabe and the EPA, especially for the Agency's support of air
traffic pollution reduction, which is the largest source of air toxics.

Ms. Jalonne White-Newsome asked if there would be any type of communication during the
transition period with the CAAAC with respect to how the EPA is moving forward. Mr.
DeMocker said he would convey the value of this committee to the incoming administration.

Mr. Andrew Hoekzema expressed gratitude to Ms. McCabe for her work as well. Mr. Hoekzema
noted his disappointment that the EPA did not solicit comments on the ozone implementation
approach and asked why the EPA took, in his opinion, a very conservative approach. Ms.
McCabe said that she would characterize the approach differently, that it provides value, and that
many states appreciate the stability in expectations this approach provides. In the area of ozone,
Ms. McCabe explained that the EPA has tried different approaches to reduce ozone-forming
pollutants, but has been squarely told by the courts that those approaches were inconsistent with
the Clean Air Act (CAA). Ms. McCabe added that this current approach is realistic based on
what the courts have told the EPA. Ms. McCabe noted that the EPA asked for input specifically
on consistency with the CAA and legal precedent.

A number of other committee members continued to thank Ms. McCabe for her service. Ms.
Myra Reece asked Ms. McCabe if she thought there would be big challenges or opportunities

3

-------
ahead for states. Ms. McCabe said that relationships between the EPA and the state, local, and
tribal agencies are key, and she hoped these agencies would continue to see the EPA as a
colleague, co-regulator and a resource. Climate issues are and will be a huge concern, and she
hopes state agencies will continue to work with the EPA on this issue.

Mr. Donald Neal expressed gratitude to Ms. McCabe for the EPA's openness over the years. He
also noted there has been a revolution in transportation, charging stations, battery storage
facilities, etc., in the past few years and invited Ms. McCabe to tour his company's battery
storage facility.

Ms. Patricia Strabbing echoed the prior sentiments, adding that the EPA has had a fair, balanced
and stakeholder-inclusive approach. She also asked whether the EPA would issue a final
determination on the light-duty vehicle GHG standards mid-term review before the next
administration comes in. Ms. McCabe responded that the EPA's determination of the
appropriateness of the standards, based on the mid-term evaluation has been proposed and is in
the public comment period. After the comment period closes, the EPA Administrator, Gina
McCarthy, will determine whether there is enough information to finalize the proposed
determination.

Mr. Jason Walker commented that there have been some major steps taken with respect to tribal
issues. He said that the tribes are trying to get their programs up to a level equal to the state
agencies, but this has been difficult. He noted that he hopes tribal representation on the CAAAC
will continue, as the terms for the three tribal representatives on the committee are expiring.

Dr. Nickey Sheats commented that Environment Justice (EJ) needs a big victory as the main
topic of a policy on EJ, and EJ needs to not be relegated to a side topic of another policy or
regulation. He asked whether EJ will be a priority for the next administration. Ms. McCabe
agreed that EJ needs to be addressed. She noted that progress is difficult though, and there is still
a lot of work to do in this area.

Mr. John Busterud was appreciative for the openness and transparency of the EPA with respect
to the Clean Power Plan. He noted that regardless of what happens with that regulation, it makes
sense for companies to keep moving forward.

Ms. Gillian Mittelstaedt requested that Ms. McCabe communicate to the new administration the
importance of the indoor environment and that there is not enough leverage in the CAA to
properly address indoor air quality.

Presentation: EPA Response to CAAAC Air Toxics Report

(Note: All presentations and meeting materials are available online at:

https://www.epa.gov/caaac.)

4

-------
Mr. Mike Koerber with the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards provided a
presentation on the EPA's response to the recommendations included in the CAAAC Air Toxics
Report. He indicated that the EPA has reviewed and developed responses for all of the
recommendations and has work underway for most recommendations. Other recommendations
are highly complex, resource intensive or involve decision makers outside the EPA. Mr. Koerber
gave an overview of the recommendations for which EPA has work under or is planning to do,
those still under review, and those needing involvement by other parties. He noted that the EPA
plans to keep the CAAAC informed about recommendation outcomes. Mr. Koerber referred to a
chart of living recommendations with current draft responses where the EPA has tried to be as
specific as possible. He invited everyone review the chart.

Discussion

Mr. Hoekzema suggested that tools for air toxics assessments could be more useful if the EPA
also included future projections. Mr. Koerber responded that this is a good idea. He noted that
the EPA is trying to be more timely with its assessments but would like to be more forward-
looking if they can still complete the assessments in a timely manner.

With respect to Recommendation #9 on the chart, which is about reviewing, revising and
updating the list of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) under section 112(b)(1) of the CAA, Ms.
Kruger asked about the status of petitions to add HAP and also to add industrial source
categories to the source category list. Mr. Koerber replied that the EPA was petitioned to add n-
propyl bromide and other HAP to the HAP list. He noted that for n-propyl bromide, the EPA has
made a technical finding of completeness and would next be making a finding about whether or
not to list the chemical through the notice and comment process. He also noted that there had
been some work done to investigate adding methyl bromide sources to the list of source
categories, but he was unsure of the status of the process for that chemical.

With respect to Recommendation #7 on the chart, concerning a cumulative impacts policy, Dr.
Sheats urged the EPA to move past tools and resources and to implement a policy to get
pollution reductions. He noted that state agencies often will not go beyond the actions of the
EPA due to state mandates, so it is important for the EPA to take action. Dr. Sheats further stated
that EJ communities must be officially identified before any real action can occur for them. Mr.
Koerber said that communities and sub-communities must be engaged and agreed that
characterization is important before policy for EJ can be developed. Mr. Sheats suggested that
the EPA develop a timeline for completing this characterization.

Ms. Wiecks asked for clarification with respect to Recommendation #24 on the chart, which is a
recommendation to create an independent, standing committee. Dr. Jalonne White-Newsome
added that the intent of this recommendation was to ensure that the recommendations of the
report were addressed by the EPA. Bill Harnett indicated that the EPA will continue to report to
the CAAAC on the progress in responding to and implementing the recommendations.

5

-------
Mr. Bob Morehouse asked if the EPA had received petitions to add any other HAP to the HAP
list. He also noted that he would like probability levels reported when risks, particularly public
health risks, are presented, such as in the context of Residual Risk and Technology Review
(RTR). Mr. Koerber replied that the EPA received a petition to add hydrogen sulfide to the HAP
list. He also mentioned that a Science Advisory Board review of EPA's risk methods is coming
up, which may be a good forum to address the presentation of risk information.

Ms. Julie Simpson asked about the status of Recommendation #'s 6, 7 and 17 on the chart as they
relate to tribes. Mr. Koerber responded that the efforts are ongoing and that the EPA welcomes
participation by tribes in working to complete the actions described in the responses to the
recommendations.

Mr. Hoekzema echoed Dr. Sheats' comment that the EPA should be the leader on technical
issues. Mr. Hoekzema stated that state and local agencies will never have the resources to tackle
these issues independently.

Ms. Gillian Mittelstaedt commented that analysis is needed to show what programs are reducing
risk and a process is needed to continue to identify high risks.

Presentation: International Update (Embassy Monitoring and AirNOW Department of
State; Montreal Protocol HFC Amendment)

Mr. Bill Harnett with the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards provided an
overview of AirNow, an air quality monitoring program developed by the EPA that provides
real-time ozone and particulate matter (PM) data for 50 states, 24 national parks and 6 Canadian
provinces. In addition, the State Department and the EPA developed an agreement to monitor air
quality in countries that either do not measure or do not post air quality data and send that data to
AirNow. These international monitors are generally at US embassies in these countries and are
there to ensure U.S. citizens in those countries have data to make informed health decisions and
also to provide an opportunity for the U.S. to create air quality partnerships with other countries.
Currently there are 20 AirNow monitors located at international embassies and consulates, with
30 more planned. Mr. Harnett mentioned NowCast, which is a new realtime data computation
method used in AirNow to show real-time Air Quality Index values. This new method improves
the former approach that was biased low for PM, is more reactive, and does not require ongoing
data analysis.

Ms. Cindy Newberg, with the EPA's Office of Atmospheric Programs continued with a
presentation on the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol. The Montreal Protocol is a
treaty between 197 countries established in 1987 to protect the ozone layer by phasing out
ozone-depleting substances. There are two types of parties involved; Article 5 Parties and non-
Article 5 Parties, where Article 5 Parties are typically under-developed countries that are
generally given longer phase-out times. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons were phased out
globally in 2010 and the phase out for hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) is underway.

6

-------
Recently, amendments were made to the Montreal Protocol, referred to as the Kigali
Amendments. The Kigali Agreement consisted of intensive negotiation to arrive at a global
agreement to phase down hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) through step-wise reductions. Ms.
Newberg explained that HFCs were developed to replace ozone-depleting substances, but these
substances are potent GHGs that have a much higher global warming potential than CO2. Ms.
Newberg indicated that a smooth phase-down is expected and that the Kigali Amendment is a
meaningful step toward reducing global warming.

Discussion/Comments

Daniel Greenbaum commented that there are now other countries using air monitors and selling
pollution control technologies, and there is a business opportunity for U.S. companies selling
emissions control equipment.

Ms. Simpson commended the EPA on the AirNow program. She also noted that while the
presentation highlighted high air quality index values in India and other countries and low values
in the U.S., there have been high values seen in the U.S. in AirNow related to fires.

Howard Feldman encouraged the EPA to use "interference-free" ozone monitors for the AirNow
program.

Mr. John Walke asked whether data from AirNow was being used in the review of the PM2.5
standards. Mr. Harnett replied that in the U.S., there are not a lot of people in the rural areas
experiencing impacts from wildfires where high monitoring values may occur, so it is difficult to
make a connection between health effects and air data there. There is more information in China
and India in this respect because there is a higher population of people in the areas where there is
bad air quality.

Mr. Daniel Nickey asked if any more embassy monitors were planned and also what the
incentives are for embassies and consulates to install them. Mr. Harnett answered that the interest
in having the air monitors comes from the embassies themselves due to the nature of the air
quality in that location. The interest is also dependent on how the information will be used. In
some cases, countries adopt standards to address the air pollution once a problem is noted and
quantified through the monitors.

Mr. Hoekzema asked if there is a process for adding monitors to AirNow, noting that there could
be existing monitors in other countries to add to the system. He also asked whether the EPA
compares other countries' data to the U.S. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Mr. Harnett replied that monitors can be added to AirNow, but for monitors in the U.S., the
monitor information would be used in determining NAAQS attainment, which may limit the
number of areas wanting to voluntarily add monitors to the network. Mr. Harnett responded that
generally, the process for monitor placement is to look for a confluence between the potential for
bad air quality and a potentially exposed population.

7

-------
Presentation: Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for Radiation

Ms. Sara DeCair with the EPA's Office of Radiation and Indoor Air provided a summary of
Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for radiation. Ms. DeCair explained that PAGs are non-
regulatory guidance for action in the event of nuclear emergencies. The EPA proposed revisions
to the PAG manual and received about 5,000 comments. As a result of comments, changes were
to the manual and the final PAG will be published soon.

Discussion/Comments

Ms. Simpson emphasized that this guidance is important for specific groups and requested
outreach to tribes.

Mr. Adrian Shelley asked whether natural radiation in groundwater was accounted for in the
drinking water PAG. He also asked whether the EPA had investigated de-centralized storage vs.
centralized storage for low-level radioactive waste. Ms. DeCair indicated that low-level waste
storage was outside the purview of the PAGs. She also responded that for drinking water,
naturally-occurring materials are not a factor in relation to a nuclear incident, but is more a Safe
Drinking Water Act issue.

Ms. Wiecks urged for continued follow-up on this issue, considering turn-over that occurs within
groups that would need to implement the protective actions.

Presentation: E-Enterprise State and EPA Collaborative Leadership Model

Mr. Chet Wayland with the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards gave a
presentation on E-Enterprise for the Environment, a model to improve environmental protection
through collaborative leadership between federal, state, and tribal environmental co-regulators.
Mr. Wayland listed three key goals of the model, which are: 1) improving environmental
protection through better program performance, 2) enhancing/streamlining services for
stakeholders and agency partners, and 3) operating a partnership as a transformative model for
Joint Governance. The keys to success are leveraged resources, collaboration, business process
improvement, early engagement, and transparency. Mr. Wayland explained that E-Enterprise
includes team membership with various teams co-chaired between state agencies and the EPA.
There are many E-Enterprise projects underway, Mr. Wayland added, including LDAR,
modernizing SIP submission and review, fuels reporting, and pesticide label matching. Mr.
Wayland indicated that he foresees E-Enterprise living on and progressing under the new
administration.

Discussion/Comments

8

-------
Mr. Greenbaum asked if there is an evaluation piece to determine what was accomplished with
E-Enterprise. Mr. Wayland did not think that had been considered, but that he would raise that
issue to the leadership council.

Mr. Sheats asked if there would be more funding for this in the future. Mr. Wayland replied that
he hoped that would be the case, but that the project is a stand-alone activity that has not had a
dedicated stream of funding.

Mr. Hoekzema asked if any thought had been given to using E-Enterprise for the rulemaking
process. Mr. Wayland indicated that it has been talked about, however one obstacle is to figure
out legal considerations. Mr. Wayland stated that more information than usual was shared ahead
of the rulemaking for the Clean Power Plan, and this could be used as a model for future
rulemakings.

Mr. Gary Jones commented that his industry struggles with annual emissions reporting, which
has different requirements in different states, and he asked whether E-Enterprise might improve
this process. Mr. Wayland said that the EPA is working on improving the Source Classification
Code (SCC) database, which may help with these reporting issues. Mr. Wayland suggested that
Mr. Jones contact the EPA group working to revise the SCC database for more information and
promised to help make that happen.

Mr. Morehouse asked how the regulated community might be affected by E-Enterprise. Mr.
Wayland indicated that the EPA needs to perform more outreach to better understand the
regulated community's perspective in relation to E-Enterprise, but envisions that the regulated
community would be a beneficiary of streamlined reporting and other efficiencies being
developed under E-Enterprise.

Presentation: HEI Studies on Diesel PM and Subsequent Activities

Mr. Greenbaum with the Health Effects Institute (HEI), an independent research institute, gave a
presentation on diesel PM. Mr. Greenbaum talked about PM emissions from old diesel engines,
which is the primary area of health concern. Mr. Greenbaum highlighted the 2012 International
Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) review of diesel emissions, which classified diesel as a
known human carcinogen. Mr. Greenbaum summarized HEI's Advanced Collaborative
Emissions Study (ACES), which looked to characterize emissions from newer diesel engines
(model year 2007 and 2010) and determine the health effects from those engines' emissions.
Results from the study show no evidence of lung cancer from exposure to these engines, which is
in contrast to previous studies with older diesel engines. Mr. Greenbaum concluded that the rules
are working, and diesel emissions from new technology clean diesel engines are substantially
lower. However, more work is needed to accelerate the replacement and retrofit of older diesel
engines and to refine/strengthen vehicle controls in real-world conditions.

9

-------
Discussion/Comments

Susan Collet indicated that Toyota is a sponsor of HEI and supported the ACES study. She noted
that in Japan, there is another study being conducted to look at the cardiovascular effects of
diesel emissions exposure, with results expected in late 2017. Ms. Collet indicated that the
technology is available for cleaner diesel engines. She emphasized that a wide portfolio of
technologies needs to be available and added that the 15 parts per million fuel standard has
helped reduce health effects from diesel emissions. Lastly, Ms. Collet indicated that Toyota has
conducted an attributions study, which shows that a large percentage of PM emissions originate
from area and point sources.

Jay Duffy urged the EPA to focus on existing sources and to require particulate filters on older
trucks when the engines are rebuilt. He also urged the EPA to develop a cancer risk factor for
diesel emissions.

Mr. Nickey emphasized that it is important to assist small businesses in reducing diesel
emissions. He noted that while several states have small business assistance programs to help
businesses understand and comply with rules, such as the standards for reciprocating internal
combustion engines, this avenue could also be used to help businesses understand the effects of
diesel emissions from their mobile sources. Diesel emissions calculators would be helpful, as
well as more guidance and compliance tools for small businesses.

Ms. Kruger also indicated that there is a need to continue to reduce diesel emissions. She noted
that in a recent petition to the EPA, 11 state and local agencies urged stricter heavy-duty truck
NOx limits. She noted that NACAA is trying to help states develop mitigation project plans to
use the Volkswagon settlement funds, and she indicated this is also an opportunity to reduce NOx
emissions. Ms. Kruger added that the 5-year grant under the Diesel Emission Reduction Act
(DERA) is ending, and she is hopeful that DERA will be re-authorized.

Ms. Kindberg commented that the information presented in Mr. Greenbaum's presentation
vindicates the long-term approach to diesel emissions reductions, noting that the work the EPA
and others have done over the years have had a great impact. Ms. Kindberg asked whether any
non-cancer endpoints were examined in the studies presented. Mr. Greenbaum clarified that
many different health endpoints have been studied, not just cancer. He noted that mild
inflammation was seen, but no other real effects were observed in the study.

Ms. Mittelstaedt emphasized the importance of understanding that the causes of observable
health effects are complex and involve many factors, including nutrition, existing health and the
environment. For instance, she noted that in one study, there was a larger health effect observed
in rats exposed to roadside air when lipids were present in the bloodstream. She also asked if
immune suppression had been studied. Mr. Greenbaum agreed that many factors can contribute
to health effects and noted there have been other studies that examined other factors related to

10

-------
mobile sources, such as noise. He also responded that the link between diesel exhaust and
immune suppression was studied a few years ago.

Mr. Nickey asked whether there was a drop in horsepower in retrofitted engines. Mr. Greenbaum
replied that the HEI study only included new engines, but no issue with horsepower was noted.

Mr. Hoekzema commented that a lot of state implementation plan (SIP) measures are predicated
on the expected durability of engines and controls and asked whether it would make sense to
have diesel testing programs for on- and off-road vehicles. Mr. Greenbaum emphasized that to
get further diesel emission reduction, the focus should be on older vehicles in urban centers. He
also noted that the EPA does extensive in-use testing for heavy-duty vehicles and historically has
done less testing for light-duty diesel vehicles because there are fewer of them in the U.S.
However, due to recent experiences with emission control defeat devices, more testing of light-
duty vehicles is being done.

Mr. Hoekzema said that there are still many nonroad engines in use from the 1940's, 1950's and
1960's, and he is curious as to whether the age data the EPA has for non-road vehicles includes
these engines.

Ms. Strabbing commented that due to the Volkswagon scandal, the EPA has been forced to
perform more on-road testing. She noted that this is causing problems with getting vehicles
certified and hopes the EPA can get make to more definite testing schemes in the future.

Presentation: Ozone and PM Advance Program Review and Accomplishments

Ms. Laura Bunte with EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards gave a presentation
on the Advance program, which is a collaborative effort to reduce emissions in attainment areas
and to assist these areas in continuing to meet the NAAQS for ozone and PM2.5. Ms. Bunte
described the goals of the program as the following: 1) help attainment areas to ensure continued
health protection, 2) better position these areas to remain in attainment, and 3) efficiently direct
available resources towards action to address ozone and PM2.5 problems quickly. Ms. Bunte
stated that each Advance area has unique issues to address to remain in attainment, such as wood
smoke in the Northwest, and Ms. Bunte showed a map illustrating the Advance Areas. Ms. Bunte
talked about the achievements so far under this program, noting that an important achievement
has been the development of air quality programs. Ms. Bunte listed new trends in Advance
Programs, which include mobile source programs, energy efficiency/renewable energy, green
infrastructure, wood smoke reduction, education, and stationary source efforts. Information on
the Advance Program is available at http://www.epa.gov/advance.

Discussion/Comments

Mr. Jason Walker noted that he was pleased to learn about this program and would like to get
involved.

11

-------
Ms. Wiecks asked about wastewater and how it relates to the Advance Program. Ms. Bunte
replied that there are significant energy savings possible through process tweaks, and these could
possibly translate to air pollution benefits as well.

Mr. Shelley commented that in Houston, the Advance Program was only used to identify things
that had already been done to improve air quality, noting that no new program emerged. Ms.
Bunte responded that some areas are just cataloging their past initiatives, but she stated that this
activity also provided some benefits.

Ms. Mittelstaedt asked how the EPA balances the competing forces of the use of woodstoves vs.
woody biomass boilers. She noted that incorrect storage of the biomass can lead to high moisture
content and higher emissions when it is burned. Ms. Bunte indicated that there may be more
discussion with the Forest Service and others that are promoting commercial-scale woodburning.

Mr. Hoekzema emphasized the importance of the EPA sending consistent signals about
voluntary actions and how those actions are treated for determining attainment. He noted that it
is possible that sources taking voluntary action might be penalized with lower standards in the
future by rulemaking. Mr. Hoekzema urged the EPA to not discourage voluntary emission
reduction actions. Mr. DeMocker replied that he would take this point regarding the clarity and
coordination of voluntary and regulatory programs back to the EPA leadership.

Opportunity for Public Comment

Mr. DeMocker asked if the public had any comments or questions. There were no comments
from the public in attendance at the meeting.

Miscellaneous Business and Close

Mr. DeMocker indicated that the next CAAAC meeting will be scheduled for the spring of 2017.
He asked the committee members to communicate with Ms. Saltman about any topics they
would like to discuss at the next meeting.

Mr. Hoekzema expressed that he feels the discussion that occurs at these meetings is the most
beneficial, indicating that the presentations he can read at home. With more discussion, Mr.
Hoekzema believes the meetings can be more useful and that as an advisory committee, more
advice from the committee members can be communicated to the EPA in this manner. Mr.
DeMocker replied that the EPA is open to all ideas.

Mr. Nickey said that he would be interested in more information on the Volkswagen settlement
and on what states are planning to do with the settlement funds.

12

-------
Ms. Strabbing urged the EPA to keep a cadence with the CAAAC meetings and to continue to
have at least two meetings per year. She felt that with any fewer meetings than they currently
have, the group would lose momentum. Mr. DeMocker acknowledged the comment and said that
this is something the committee can keep revisiting.

Mr. DeMocker adjourned the meeting.

13

-------
Attachment A

CAAAC Meeting Attendance List

Committee Members

Name

Affiliation

John Busterud

Pacific Gas and Electric Co.

Susan Collet

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America Inc.

Pamela Faggert

Dominion Resources Services Inc.

Howard Feldman

American Petroleum Institute

Daniel Greenbaum

Health Effects Institute

Robert Hilton

Robert Hilton Energy

Andrew Hoekzema

Capital Area Council of Governments

Gary Jones

Printing Industries of America (sub for Mark Bohan)

Robert Kaufmann

Koch Companies Public Sector, LLC

Lee Kindberg

MAERSK, Inc.

Nancy Kruger

National Association of Clean Air Agencies

Gillian Mittelstaedt

Tribal Healthy Homes Network

Robert Morehouse

Air Permitting Forum

Donald Neal

Southern California Edison

Daniel Nickey

Iowa Waste Reduction Center

Myra Reece

SC DHEC

Nickey Sheats

Thomas Edison State College

Adrian Shelley

Air Alliance Houston

Julie Simpson

Nez Perce Tribe

Geraldine Smith

Public Service Enterprise Group Inc.

Patricia Stabbing

Chrysler Group, LLC

Mary Uhl

Western States Air Resources Council

John Walke

Natural Resources Defense Council

Jason Walker

Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation

Ann Weeks (on phone)

Clean Air Task Force

Jay Duffy

Clean Air Task Force (sub for Ann Weeks)

Dr. Jalonne White-Newsome

The Kresge Foundation

(on phone)



Peter Pagano (on phone)

Boeing

Joy Wiecks

Fond du Lac Band

Michael Buser

Oklahoma State University

KPA AUendees/Presenlers

14

-------
Janet McCabe

Presenter

Jim DeMocker

Presenter

Tamara Saltman

Designated Federal Official (DFO)

Mike Koerber

Presenter

Chet Wayland

Presenter

Laura Bunte

Presenter

Cindy Newberg

Presenter

Bill Harnett

Presenter

Sara DeCair

Presenter

Catrice Jefferson



Shanika Whitehurst



Erica Roberts



Wendy McQuilkin



Oilier AUoikIoos

Patrick Ambrosio

Bloomberg BNA

Dan Charter

Consultant

Rachel Feinstein

HPBA

John Kinsman

Edison Electric Institute

Fran Marshall

SC DHEC

Sean Reilly

E&E News

Leslie Ritts

National Environmental Development Association's Clean Air
Project

Ted Steicher

American Petroleum Institute

(onlrnclor Support

Lesley Stobert

EC/R Incorporated (a wholly owned subsidiary of SC&A)

Tanya Parise

EC/R Incorporated (a wholly owned subsidiary of SC&A)

15

-------