1 / 12

Response to WRAP Air Managers Committee Memo “Request for Cost Estimates”

Response to WRAP Air Managers Committee Memo “Request for Cost Estimates”. April 6, 2009 WESTAR Council. Purpose of AMC memo (November 25, 2008). Understand the funding needed to maintain the most critical ongoing systems for implementation of regional haze requirements;

earmijo
Télécharger la présentation

Response to WRAP Air Managers Committee Memo “Request for Cost Estimates”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Response toWRAP Air Managers Committee Memo“Request for Cost Estimates” April 6, 2009 WESTAR Council

  2. Purpose of AMC memo (November 25, 2008) • Understand the funding needed to maintain the most critical ongoing systems for implementation of regional haze requirements; • Understand what additional funding would be needed to conduct periodic monitoring, emissions, modeling and other analyses required by the regional haze rule; and • Estimate costs to carry out additional regional technical analyses or assessments, assuming that full funding is provided for items 1) and 2).

  3. Color-coding for funding categories in AMC Memo • Base 1 Funding for Operation and Maintenance of Critical Systems • Base 2 Funding for Regional Haze – Periodic Assessments • Additional Funding for Other Regional Technical Analyses • Assumes Base 1 + Base 2 funding

  4. Scope of “Other Regional Technical Analyses” • Multi-state or regional-scale analyses • Ozone, e.g., inventory development and refinement for ozone precursors, monitoring data analysis and gap assessment, air quality modeling, etc. • Mercury (Hg), e.g., Hg emissions inventory development and refinement, monitoring data analysis and gap assessment, necessary fate and transport analyses, etc. • Ammonia/Nitrogen (deposition) modeling and analysis, e.g., emissions inventory development and refinement, monitoring data analysis and gap assessment, necessary fate and transport information, etc.

  5. Schedule and Process December ’08 - January ‘09 • From AMC memo, Technical Oversight Committee reviewed: • 2010-11 Workplan document format and level of detail • List of proposed projects by Forum and WorkGroup January - February ‘09: • Multiple calls of each Forum and WorkGroup to review drafts of proposed projects and costs • Sent to hundreds across all Forum and WorkGroup distribution lists • Reviewed by dozens of participants in each Forum and WorkGroup call

  6. Schedule and Process, continued March 11-12: • TOC-hosted Workplan Review meeting • 30+ participants March 31st - Final Draft Workplan released April 6-8: Review at WESTAR Meeting April 20th - Review on Air Managers Committee call (100 PM Mountain time) WRAP Board call

  7. Results • Workplan covers technical work needed for • Maintenance/needed development of technical systems • Regional haze implementation for required 2012 SIP check-in analyses, sets stage for 2018 SIPs • Leverages regional haze work for other air quality technical analyses and planning for Ozone and PM NAAQS, Nitrogen and Mercury deposition • Supports and enables regional and national air quality projects with extramural funding

  8. Examples of Results for States to Use #1 • Low-cost/maximum utility for RHR implementation • EDMS operations, trends from RHR 2002 base year + EDMS-based portal for air quality planners - cross-referencing state, tribal, local, and national control effectiveness to historic and projected future emissions • $115,000/year • Oil & Gas emissions tracking tools + control analyses • $85,000 in 2010, $25,000 in 2011 • Implementation WG: “Area of Influence” analysis + controls/costs for “sources beyond BART” • $75,000 in 2010, $125,000 in 2011 • Fire emissions tracking + emissions averted by smoke management • $125,000 in 2010, $150,000 in 2011

  9. Examples of Results for States to Use #2 • Medium-cost & high utility for both RHR implementation & Additional Technical Analyses • VIEWS operations for RHR, add Ozone, PM, Nitrogen, Mercury data, & trends from RHR 2000-04 baseline + “what if emissions or air quality changes upwind” tools • $300,000 in 2010, $225,000 in 2011 • Coordinated monitoring plan, methods, & data • $175,000/year • New base & revised projection years’ emission inventories for 2012/13 planning milestones • $450,000 in 2010, $400,000 in 2011 • Improve mobile sources emissions estimates for O&G basins • $175,000

  10. Examples of Results for States to Use #3 • High-cost & regionally complete, optimized utility, & application for RHR implementation & Additional Technical Analyses • Next generation of Regional Modeling Center – emissions, meteorology, air quality, & source apportionment results for RHR, Ozone, PM, Nitrogen & Mercury delivered via tools on the VIEWS/TSS (for 2012/13 planning milestones) • $1.35 million/year • Staff, travel & meetings, overhead, et cetera • $655,000/year

  11. Cost Estimates

  12. Thanks for your attention -

More Related