Early
Action
Compact
Technical
Advisory
Committee
and
Public
Meeting
Thursday,
January
22,
2004,
10:
00
AM
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
707
North
Robinson
 
1st
Floor
Meeting
Room
Oklahoma
City,
Oklahoma
An
Oklahoma
Early
Action
Compact
Technical
Advisory
and
Public
Meeting
was
held
at
10:
00
am
on
January
22,
2004
at
the
1st
floor
Oklahoma
City
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
Meeting
Room,
707
North
Robinson,
Oklahoma
City,
Oklahoma.

Present
for
the
meeting:

Technical
Advisory
Committee
Members:
Steve
Moyer,
Sinclair
Oil
Corporation,
Primary
David
Branecky,
OG&
E
Energy,
Alternate
Nancy
Graham,
INCOG,
Primary
Leon
Ashford,
DEQ
Erik
Snider,
EPA
Region
6
Doug
Rex,
ACOG
Gary
Collins,
Terry
Industries,
General
Industry,
Primary
Public:
Ralph
Morris,
ENVIRON
Kit
Wagner,
Atmospheric
Information
Systems
Stuart
Chai,
City
of
OKC
Kim
Kohler,
OIPA
Jane
Sutter,
ACOG
Paul
W.
Matthews,
Oklahoma
Highway
Users
Zach
Taylor,
ACOG
Josie
Adams,
ACOG
Tim
Armer,
INCOG
Sam
Shehab,
ODOT
Larry
Hopper,
COTPA
DEQ
Staff:

Eddie
Terrill
Scott
Thomas
Beverly
Botchlet­
Smith
Kendal
Cody
Morris
Moffett
Matt
Paque
Toni
Payne
Lee
Warden
Myrna
Bruce
Julia
McWhirter
Sign­
in
sheet
is
attached.

Meeting
Summary
Eddie
Terrill
welcomed
everyone
the
Early
Action
Compact
Technical
Advisory
Committee
(
TAC)
and
Public
Meeting
for
Oklahoma
City
and
Tulsa.
He
stated
DEQ
appreciates
everyone
coming;
he
felt
we
needed
to
have
this
initial
meeting
in
order
for
Ralph
Morris
to
share
with
us
where
we
are
with
modeling.
Everyone
needs
to
know
exactly
where
we
are,
because
we
are
going
to
have
to
make
some
decisions
on
control
strategies
both
here
and
in
Tulsa
by
March
31.
He
also
stated
that
we
are
committed
to
having
as
many
meetings
as
necessary
between
now
and
the
end
of
March
to
make
sure
everyone
is
comfortable
that
we
are
doing
what
we
need
to
do
in
order
to
meet
our
requirements
and
move
this
process
along.
He
stated
that
this
is
an
informal
meeting
relative
to
asking
questions.

Mr.
Terrill
introduced
Ralph
Morris,
our
liaison
from
ENVIRON.

Presentations:

Ralph
Morris
from
ENVIRON
gave
a
presentation
on
the
1999
Base
Case
Model
Performance
and
Sensitivity
Results.

Environ
provided
a
current
status
on
the
modeling
effort
in
support
of
the
EAC
agreements.
Results
documented
in
the
1999
Base
Case
Model
Performance
Evaluation
and
Sensitivity
Report
(
http://
www.
deq.
state.
ok.
us/
AQDnew/
EACreport.
htm)
were
presented.
In
this
document,
the
performance
of
the
base
case
runs
presented
at
the
October
meeting
were
reported
and
tested
with
updated
boundary
conditions
provided
by
Community
Multiscale
Air
Quality
(
CMAQ)
model
results
from
EPA.
Broad
cut
sensitivity
analyses
were
also
conducted
per
the
October
recommendation
of
the
Technical
Advisory
Committee
to
test
model
sensitivity.
The
model
proved
to
be
sensitive
to
both
VOC
and
NOx
reductions
in
anthropogenic
emissions.

The
Environ
presentation
also
provided
updates
in
the
modeling
effort
subsequent
to
the
December
report.
Included
in
these
updates
were
corrections
to
the
area
source
inventory,
revised
1999,
2002
and
2007
base
case
modeling,
2007
8­
hour
ozone
design
value
projections
and
ozone
source
apportionment.

The
preliminary
conclusions
are
that
regional
NOx
controls
in
Oklahoma
are
the
most
beneficial,
although
local
NOx
disbenefits
occur
in
Tulsa
and
Oklahoma
City.
Regional
VOC
controls
in
Oklahoma
are
only
effective
at
reducing
ozone
in
and
immediately
downwind
of
Tulsa
and
OKC
and
mitigate
some
(
but
not
all)
of
the
NOx
disbenefits.
Effectiveness
of
Oklahoma
emission
controls
is
dampened
by
contributions
of
ozone
transport.

Erik
Snider
stated
that
we
will
have
to
show
attainment
using
the
1999
(
1998­
2000)
Design
Value
(
DV)
of
93
00b.
Nancy
Graham
stated
that
they
were
happy
to
see
they
will
need
to
use
the
highest
value
of
93
ppm,
and
that
all
the
controls
required
for
an
attainment
demonstration
should
guarantee
that
Tulsa
will
remain
in
attainment
for
a
long
time.

Ralph
Morris,
in
response
to
a
question
from
Doug
Rex,
about
how
our
model
performance
rates
compared
to
the
other
models
he
has
worked
with,
responded
that
this
model
is
about
average.

Federal
Perspective
 
with
comments
from
the
public:
Erik
Snider
talked
with
the
group
and
fielded
questions
about
the
Federal
Perspective.

 
Erik
spoke
about
the
Read
Vapor
Pressure
(
RVP)
and
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA),
and
the
status
on
the
8­
Hour
Implementation
Plan.
He
explained
that
EPA
issued
source
guidance
back
in
1997
pertaining
to
Section
211
of
the
Act.
He
noted
there
is
a
restriction
on
local
areas
doing
more
stringent
rules
beyond
federal
measures
on
fuels.
He
stated
some
of
the
concern
is
commerce­
related,
restricting
commerce,
etc.
Typically,
areas
in
non­
attainment
have
been
restricted
from
using
RVP.

 
Erik
discussed
the
conditions
and
the
waiver
request
required
under
CAA
Part
A,
Section
211,
that
an
area
must
meet
to
qualify
to
use
as
State
Implementation
Plan
(
SIP)
creditable
reductions
in
the
Attainment
Demonstration
Modeling.

Nancy
Graham
asked
about
whether
other
areas
have
been
granted
waivers,
and
his
response
was
that
even
some
nonattainment
areas
have
been
denied
a
waiver.
She
also
asked
if
the
fact
that
we
have
a
very
short
timeline
to
get
reductions
would
qualify
us
to
obtain
a
waiver.
Erik's
response
was
­
possibly,
then
pointed
out
that
we
could
do
the
low
RVP
voluntarily
and
count
it
as
our
3%
voluntary
control
measure.

 
Erik
told
us
that
Austin
is
looking
at
Inspection
and
Maintenance
(
I&
M)
and
energy
efficiency
measures
like
Light­
Emitting
Diode
(
LED)
stoplights
for
control
measures,
and
NE
Texas
is
looking
at
voluntary
controls
on
oil
and
gas
production.
Doug
Rex
asked
what
is
the
minimum
controls
we
can
do,
and
Erik's
response
was
that
EPA
has
not
determined
the
answer
to
that
question
because
of
the
large
spectrum
of
possibilities.

 
Eddie
Terrill
suggested
that
the
most
efficient
use
of
our
time
and
modeling
effort
would
be
for
the
DEQ,
INCOG,
and
ACOG
to
hold
some
conference
calls
to
determine
what
controls
to
model.
 
Lee
Warden
asked
if
any
other
EAC
areas
are
showing
attainment,
and
Erik
responded
that
NE
Texas
is
special
because
they
used
1999
met
data
and
2002
emissions
data
to
show
attainment.

 
Lee
asked
how
do
we
show
attainment
using
a
Weight
of
Evidence
(
WOD)
demonstration,
and
Erik
said
to
start
with,
you
need
to
show
that
the
96
ppb
4th
high
in
2000
is
an
outlyer,
then
develop
all
of
the
possible
supporting
documentation
that
points
to
attainment
in
2007.
He
stated
that
the
restriction
on
WOE
is
that
the
future
year
modeling
(
2007)
must
show
a
90
ppb
or
less.

 
Nancy
Graham
asked
if
we
could
require
a
30%
NOx
reduction
on
point
sources.
Steve
Moyer
clarified
that
Nancy
did
not
intend
to
include
refineries
in
the
30%
NOx
reduction.
He
said
that
a
30%
reduction
for
them
would
probably
not
be
possible
in
the
2005
timeframe.
Nancy
stated
that
an
Electric
Generation
representative
told
her
that
a
30%
reduction
of
NOx
would
be
possible
for
them.
David
Branecky
stated
that
a
30%
reduction
is
definitely
not
possible
in
the
2005
timeline.
Eddie
stated
that
most
likely,
the
electric
generation
industry
will
be
dealt
NOx
reduction
requirements
from
Clear
Skies,
or
EPA's
Interstate
Transport
Rule,
and
DEQ
does
not
desire
to
magnify
their
problem
by
requiring
reductions
in
the
interim.

 
The
question
was
raised
as
to
what
entity
will
control
RVP
levels,
DEQ
or
Oklahoma
Corporation
Commission.

 
Steve
Moyer
asked
if
we
could
participate
in
the
EAC,
but
also
plan
to
obtain
some
controls
that
would
be
outside
the
EAC
(
controls
that
may
take
longer
than
2005
to
get
in
place).

 
A
request
was
made
for
Ralph
to
make
a
report
of
emissions
(
elevated
point,
low
level
point,
area,
biogenic,
nonroad
mobile,
and
mobile)
by
county
for
the
Tulsa
MSA.

Next
Steps/
Recommendations:

After
discussion
Eddie
Terrill
suggested
a
conference
call
with
DEQ,
INCOG,
and
ACOG
within
the
next
week.
He
stated
that
we
need
to
get
some
sense
of
what
we
are
going
to
recommend,
so
DEQ
can
have
something
for
the
Council
and
the
Board
Eddie
Terrill
thanked
everyone
for
coming
and
participating.
He
stated
that,
again,
this
meeting
was
primarily
to
get
Ralph
here
to
give
us
some
idea
where
we
are
with
the
modeling,
and
have
some
frank
dialogue
and
discussion.
