2012 a&wma southern section annual meeting &technical conference september 2012 biloxi, ms...
TRANSCRIPT
2012 A&WMA Southern SectionAnnual Meeting &Technical Conference
September 2012Biloxi, MS
Doug NeeleyAir, Pesticides, and Toxics Management DivisionU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyAtlanta, Georgia
An EPA Update
Topics to Cover
Criteria Pollutants, Designations and Redesignations
Other Recent and Upcoming Regulations
Recent Litigation
Enforcement Priorities
Southeast Diesel Collaborative
Community Initiatives
CEH, October is CEH month and our work with the other federal partners
MILESTONE
POLLUTANT
NO2/SO2 Secondary
PM Ozone Lead NO2 Primary SO2 Primary CO
Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking2016 Jun 2012 2013 Jan 2014 Aug 2015 Feb 2016 Jul 2016
Notice of Final Rulemaking Mar 2017 Dec 2012 * 2014 Nov 2014 May 2016 Nov 2016 Apr 2017
NOTES:* By consent decree EPA is required to sign a notice of final rulemaking on the PM NAAQS no later than December 14, 2012. For more information see: http://epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/
Current Schedule for Ongoing NAAQS Reviews
http://www.epa.gov/ozonedesignations/
5
Cumulative % Reduction in Population-weighted Ozone Concentrations
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
3%
6%7%
6%
9%
12%
15%
2%3%
5%
6% 8%
10%11%
12%13%
15%
Actual
Target
3-Year Averaging Period
National Progress on Ozone
Permitting Challenges for NO2/SO2
Permitting with the new NO2/SO2 1-hour standards
Modeling is more challenging due to the shorter averaging time and form of the standards (guidance documents issued by OAQPS)
Open and early communication on modeling protocols is imperative to ensuring issues are identified and resolved early in the process
SO2 Implementation
On April 12, 2012, EPA announced our plan to seek additional input from states, tribes, and other interested parties to refine the Agency's approach for implementing the SO2 standard.
We have initiated an outreach process that allows for focused discussion of monitoring, modeling and implementation issues
This effort will ensure that the Agency has the information it needs to determine whether SO2 levels in all areas of the country are, or will be, protective of public health
EPA developed a white paper that identifies important questions about how we could determine whether an area is meeting the SO2 standard and how we might use monitoring, modeling, or a combination of monitoring and modeling
http://www.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/implement.html
SO2 Implementation Schedule
Milestone Date
Final NAAQS signed June 2, 2010
SO2 Designations guidance to States on using modeling to define “Nonattainment” boundaries and demonstrate “Attainment" plus general designations guidance i.e., “factors for consideration”
March 24, 2011
EPA announced our plan to seek additional input from states, tribes, and other interested parties to refine the Agency’s approach for implementing the SO2 standard
Governors’ recommendations due to EPA June 3, 2011
EPA sends out 120-day letter to all States/Tribes and notifies public via FR TBD
Deadline for States/Tribes to respond to EPA’s modifications TBD
Final designations Statutory Required June 2013
Infrastructure SIPs due June 3, 2013
Requirements for areas not designated nonattainment TBD
Attainment deadline TBD (2018)
12
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
3%
5%7%
8%
13%
17%
23%
1% 2% 2% 3%4%
5%6%
15%16%
20%Actual
Target
3-Year Averaging Period
Cumulative % Reduction in Population-weighted PM2.5 Concentrations
National Progress on PM2.5
Progress on Regional Haze Activities
SIPs with Final Action taken AL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC. TN (all but BART)
SIP Actions with Upcoming Consent Decree Deadlines
Florida Tennessee (BART)
Or This…
This…
March 21, 2011 - EPA promulgated final rules
May 18, 2011 – EPA delays effective date of major source boiler rule until completion of reconsideration or litigation on the rule, whichever is earlier; effective date of the area source boiler rule not delayed
December 23, 2011 - EPA issued proposed rule amendments for major source boilers and specific aspectsof area sources; resets compliancedate for major sources and the CISWI Rule
January 9, 2012 - U.S. District Court for the DC Circuit vacated EPA's May 18, 2011, delay of effective datefor major sources
14
Area & Major Source Boilers
EPA issues No Action Assurance Letters (NAAs)
EPA will exercise its enforcement discretion to not pursue enforcement
action for violations of certain notification deadlines in the final Area Source Boiler rule (NAA dated 3/13/12) or final Major Source Boiler Rule (NAA dated 2/7/12)
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/boiler/boilerpg.html
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators
Proposed rule 12/23/11 No Action Assurance Letter issued February 7, 2012 EPA may finalize the CISWI rule with new compliance dates
Comments on Rule Reconsideration from: Environmental Groups, Industry/Trade Associations, and States, DOD, 2
SBAs, the National Tribal Air Association, as well as NACAA, NACWA, and NESCAUM
Major Issues Raised by Commenters: Small Remote Incinerator (SRI) standards are
too costly Definition of contained gaseous material Definition of “homogeneous waste”
EPA issues No Action Assurance Letter (NAA)
The EPA issued a No Action Assurance Letter to establish that we will exercise our
enforcement discretion to not pursue enforcement action for violations of certain
notification deadlines in the final CISWI rule. The EPA has not identified any new sources that have commenced operation.
(NAA dated 2/7/12)
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/129/ciwi/ciwipg.html
NHSM Waste/Fuel
Regulated community concerns regarding criteria for a non-hazardous secondary (NHSM) material to be considered a legitimate non-waste fuel, and how to demonstrate compliance with criteria
Based on comments received, EPA proposed the following clarifications and amendments:
Materials within the scope of biomass Petition Process Identify non-waste fuels Revise the legitimacy criteria
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/129/ciwi/ciwipg.html
On March 27, 2012, EPA proposed the first Clean Air Act standard for carbon pollution from future power plants
Does not apply to existing units already operating or units that will start construction over the next 12 months
The proposed standard is flexible and achievable for the next generation of power plants
Output-based standard of 1,000 pounds of CO2 per MW-h
New natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plant units should be able to meet the proposed standard without add-on controls
EPA, DOE, and industry projections indicate that, due to the economics of coal and natural gas among other factors, new power plants that are built over the next decade or more would be expected to meet the proposed standard even in the absence of the rule
New power plants that are designed to use coal or petroleum coke would be able to incorporate technology to reduce CO2 emissions to meet the standard, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS)
GHG NSPS for New Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants
http://www.epa.gov/carbonpollutionstandard/index.html
December 21, 2011 - EPA announced final standards to limit mercury, acid gases and other toxic pollution from new and existing electric generating units >25 MW that burn coal or oil for the purpose of generating electricity for sale and distribution through the national electric grid to the public
Existing sources generally will have up to 4 years if they need it to comply with MATS
EPA also providing a pathway for reliability critical units to obtain a schedule with up to an additional year to achieve compliance
On May 17, 2012, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved a policy statement outlining how it will advise EPA on requests for extra time for electric generators to comply with the new mercury and air toxics standards rule
On July 20, 2012, EPA announced that it will review new technical information that is focused on toxic air pollution limits for new power plants under the MATS; this reconsideration does not cover the standards set for existing power plants
Mercury Air Toxics Standard (MATS)
http://www.epa.gov/mats/ and http://ferc.gov/media/news-releases/2012/2012-2/05-17-12-E-5.asp
Stationary Sources - The Tailoring Rule
Final Rule issued May 13, 2010
Establishes thresholds for GHG emissions and defines when permits under the New Source Review
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities
“Tailors" the requirements of these CAA permitting programs to limit which facilities will be required to obtain PSD and Title V permits
Includes the nation's largest GHG emitters -power plants, refineries, and cement production facilities
Emissions from small farms, restaurants, and all but the largest commercial facilities are not covered by these programs at this time
IMPORTANT!
Florida has not taken delegation of the GHG
permitting program. GHG permits for FL industry are
currently issued by EPA Region 4 in Atlanta.
Contact: Katy [email protected]
404-562-9130http://www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgpermitting.html
Permitting Timeline Under the Tailoring Rule
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Study Complete
2016
Step 1: Source already subject to PSD “anyway” (tpy CO2e) New source: N/A Modification: 75,000
Step 2: All Stationary Sources (tpy CO2e)New source: 100,000Modification: 75,000
Step 3: Implementation of potential additional phase-in and streamlining options
5-year study: To examine GHG permitting for smaller sources
Implementation of rule based on 5-year study
July 1, 2011 new thresholds subject
to regulation began
Step 3 Rule was issued July 3, 2012.
Proposed no changes to thresholds.
The Tailoring Rule
One public hearing was held on March 20, 2012, in Arlington, VA.
Biomass GHG Permitting EPA temporary defers certain CO2 emissions from PSD
and Title V permitting July 1, 2011, final rule deferred for 3 years GHG permitting requirements for
CO2 emissions from biomass-fired and other biogenic sources
Interim guidance was issued to assist facilities and permitting authorities with permitting decisions until the Proposed Rule was finalized
A scientific analysis will be conducted during the 3 year deferral to consider issues that the Agency must resolve in order to account for biogenic CO2 emissions in ways that are scientifically sound and also manageable in practice
Accounting Framework for Biogenic CO2 Emissionsfrom Stationary Sources (September 2011)
21
Biomass Permitting
http://www.epa.gov/NSR/actions.html#2011
Purpose is to collect accurate and timely GHG data to inform future policy decisions
EPA issued Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule (74 FR 5620)
Requires reporting of GHG emission data from specific entities in the U.S.
GHG suppliers Direct emitting source categories Facilities that inject CO2 underground
For 2011 emissions, reports were due to EPA due March 31, 2012
22
GHG Reporting Program
2010 Data now available on EPA’s website!
Highlights for 2010 Direct Emitters
• Power plants were the largest stationary sources of direct emissions - 2,324 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (mmtCO2e); petroleum refineries second - 183 mmtCO2e
• CO2 accounted for 95% of emissions; methane second at 4%; NO2 and fluorinated gases remaining 1%
• 100 facilities with emissions over 7 mmtCO2e (96 power plants, two iron and steel mills, two refineries)
http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/
MACT Standard Proposal Date Final Rule Date
Chromium Electroplating 10/21/20101/20/2012 (reproposal)
Final 8/15/12
Steel Pickling-HCL Process 10/21/20101/20/2012 (reproposal)
Final 8/15/12
Primary Lead Smelting 2/17/2011 11/15/2011
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair 12/03/2010 11/21/2011
Wood Furniture 12/03/2010 11/21/2011
Oil and Gas Sector 8/26/2011 8/16/12
Pulp and Paper I & III 12/15/2011 7/31/2012 (s)
Secondary Lead Smelters 5/19/2011 1/5/2012
Aerospace 3/15/14 1/15/2015
Ferroalloys Production 11/23/2011 Extended to 12/10/2012
The Risk and Technology Review (RTR) is a combined effort to evaluate both risk and technology as required by the Clean Air Act (CAA) after the application of maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards. http://epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html
Upcoming RTR Rulemaking Schedule
RED = Projected Date; (s) = Signed
MACT Standard Proposal Date Final Rule Date
Mineral Wool 11/25/2011 Extended to 11/30/2012
Primary Aluminum 12/6/2011 Extended to 3/14/2014
Wool Fiberglass 11/25/2011 Extended to 11/30/2012
Secondary Aluminum 2/14/2012 10/31/2012
Pesticide Active Ingredient Production 1/9/2012 11/30/2012
Polyether Polyols Production 1/9/2012 11/30/2012
Polymers and Resins IV 1/9/2012 11/30/2012
Petroleum Refineries Sector Negotiating Negotiating
Acrylic/ Modacrylic Fibers 10/31/2012 10/31/2013
Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production 10/31/2012 10/31/2013
Off-Site Waste Recovery Operations 10/31/2012 10/31/2013
Phosphoric Acid/Phosphate Fertilizers 10/31/2012 10/31/2013
Polycarbonates Production 10/31/2012 10/31/2013
Polymers and Resins III 10/31/2012 10/31/2013
Portland Cement 6/15/2017 6/15/2018
Upcoming RTR Rulemaking Schedule
RED = Projected Date
Petition to List H2S as a HAP
Sierra Club petitioned EPA in June 2009 to list hydrogen sulfide (H2S) as a HAP
EPA performed an initial review of the petition for completeness and it is waiting for additional information from the petitioners to complete such review.
Potential H2S exposures routinely raised as a concern in communities
Several states regulate H2S, but regulations are inconsistent
EPA has used an open, collaborative and iterative process to guide petitioners thru the listing/delisting process
EPA met with petitioner and shared initial review findings of the petition
EPA met with the H2S Coalition regarding their letter to EPA stating that Sierra Club H2S listing petition is not complete
If the petition is deemed complete, EPA will publish a FR notice of complete petition and request public comments before proceeding with the technical review of the petition
Some Common Sources of H2S
• Natural sources (volcanoes, stagnant water, low oxygen coal pits, etc.)
• Tanneries• Waste water treatment facilities• Landfills• Manure and sewage facilities• Rayon manufacturing plants• Sulfur producers• Coke oven plants• Kraft paper mills• Iron smelters• Food processing plants• Tar and asphalt manufacturing
plants• Animal feeding operations• Natural gas and petrochemicals
plants
Mobile Source GHG/CAFE Standards
Final rule (published 5/7/10) - Passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, model years 2012 through 2016
Average 250 grams CO2 per mile, 35.5 mpg in model year 2016
Final rule (published 9/15/11) - Medium- and heavy-duty engines and vehicles, model years 2014 through 2018
Estimated combined standards will reduce CO2 emissions by about 270 million metric tons and save about 530 million barrels of oil over the life of vehicles built for the 2014 to 2018 model years, providing $49 billion in net program benefits
Final rule (issued 8/28/2012) – Extends passenger vehicle program to model year 2017 through 2025
Average163 grams CO2 per mile, 54.5 mpg in model year 2025
http://epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations.htm#1-1
Coal Combustion Residuals
On June 21, 2010, EPA proposed 2 approaches for regulating disposal of CCRs under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA):
As a hazardous waste (Subtitle C approach) As a nonhazardous waste (Subtitle D approach) Received over 450,000 comments
Proposal covers CCRs generated from the combustion of coal at electric utilities and independent power producers
Does not cover coal-fired electric plants used captively by industries or universities.
Engineering requirements (e.g., liners, groundwater monitoring) of the two options are very similar; differences are primarily in enforcement and implementation
Bevill exemption from regulation remains in place for beneficial uses of CCRs (i.e. road fill, cement, and wallboard)
Mine filling is not covered by the proposal
www.epa.gov/coalashrule
D.C. Circuit – Climate Change Litigation
Coalition for Responsible Regulation Inc. v. EPA -- On June 26, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld EPA's Endangerment Finding and greenhouse gas regulations issued under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for passenger vehicles and CAA permitting for stationary sources.
28http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/ghgcourtdecision.html
Today's ruling is a strong validation of, in the Court's own words, the "unambiguously correct" approach we have taken in responding to the 2007 Supreme Court decision. I am pleased that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found that EPA followed both the science and the law in taking common-sense, reasonable actions to address the very real threat of climate change by limiting greenhouse gas pollution from the largest sources.
Lisa JacksonEPA Administrator
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR)
July 6, 2011 - EPA finalized CSAPR
December 30, 2011 - U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its ruling to stay the CSAPR pending judicial review
March 1, 2012 - EPA filed its brief on the merits of the legal challenges to the CSAPR
EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA. On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), also known as the Transport Rule, in a 2-1 decision.
The Court left EPA’s Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in effect.
http://www.epa.gov/airtransport/
Other Recent Issues before D.C. Circuit
National Environmental Development Association's Clean Air Project v. EPA – upholding EPA's denial of petitions for reconsideration on the SO2 NAAQS.
American Petroleum Institute v. EPA – upholding EPA's rulemaking promulgating a new 1-hour primary NO2 NAAQS.
National Chicken Council v. EPA – upholding EPA's 2010 rule implementing the renewable fuels standard and finding that certain livestock groups that challenged provisions exempting existing facilities from greenhouse gas requirements lacked standing to sue.
Upcoming Oral Arguments scheduled in Mississippi v. EPA – a challenge to the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. Arguments scheduled for November 2012
Enforcement Initiatives
NSR/PSD Sectors Coal-fired Utilities Cement Plants Glass Manufacturing Acid Manufacturing
Air Toxics Leak Detection and Repair Industrial Flares Excess Emissions
Energy Extraction Land-Based Natural Gas Extraction &
Production Activities
Southeast Diesel Collaborative
GOAL: Improve air quality and public health by reducing emissions from existing diesel engines
By the Numbers (Cumulative)
Number of Projects: 462
Number of Engines: 53,535
Children Impacted: ~ 14,000 buses and 3 million plus children impacted through idle reduction and bus retrofit programs in SE
Funding: $69.5 million (EPA) - $650.3 million (partner investment)
Emission Reductions (tons): NOx 36,668 VOC 3,913 PM 2,832 CO 12,059 CO2 769,684
NOX
PM
HC
CO
CO2
Example - Port of Savannah Diesel Grants
3 grants to Port of Savannah, $3.1 million total
Installed automatic start/stop systems on 11 switcher locomotives
Installed more efficient Tier 4 engines on 20 rubber tired gantries
Community Initiatives
North Birmingham Pilot Air Toxics Study One-year follow-up study to the School Air Toxics Initiative (SAT) Evaluation of VOCs, PM10 metals, and PAHs in Fairmont, Harriman Park, Collegeville, and North
Birmingham Communities Completion of a risk assessment at the end of 2012
Community Air Toxics Study – Columbus, MS One-year study to evaluate VOCs and PAHs in response to
citizen complaints in environmental justice communities
Competitively Funded EPA Community-Scale Studies
Reducing Exposure to Airborne Chemical Toxics – Memphis, TN
Eighteen-month study to evaluate volatile organic compound concentrations in environmental justice communities
Evaluation of Alternative Methods for the Quantification of Carbonyl and PAH Concentrations in Ambient Air – Broward Co., FL
Two year study to evaluate alternative methods for carbonyl and PAH sampling and analysis
Courtesy of Sustaining the Environment and Resources for Canadians
Children’s Environmental Health
CEH is one of EPA’s priority programs Region 4 has >16.5 million children (19.5% of the US population)
3.5 million (21%) live in poverty or an underserved location Region 4 has ~20,000 schools, public and private
Region 4 CEH Program has two primary focus areas: Outreach and education for multiple issues, including:
Asthma Second-hand Smoke and other air pollution Contaminated lands and soils Pesticides, lead-based paint, and persistent chemicals (PCBs, Mercury, other carcinogenic agents) Treatment-resistant microbes in drinking water
School Improvements Development of State School
Environmental Health Programs School Siting Guidelines
Children’s Environmental Health
Children’s Health Month is October 2012
Theme: Back to the Basics - Children’s Environmental Health is a Challenge for All
Major Activities Kick-off Event at Coretta Scott King Young Women’s Leadership Academy Lead Poisoning Prevention Week in Memphis, TN Leptite LeMans Road Race
www.epa.gov/children
Questions?
www.epa.gov/air
Doug NeeleyU.S. EPA, Atlanta, GA, 404-562-9097