Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

2012 A&WMA Southern Section Annual Meeting &Technical Conference September 2012 Biloxi, MS Doug Neeley Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "2012 A&WMA Southern Section Annual Meeting &Technical Conference September 2012 Biloxi, MS Doug Neeley Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division."— Presentation transcript:

1 2012 A&WMA Southern Section Annual Meeting &Technical Conference September 2012 Biloxi, MS Doug Neeley Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Atlanta, Georgia An EPA Update

2 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

3 MILESTONE POLLUTANT NO 2 /SO 2 Secondary PMOzoneLeadNO 2 PrimarySO 2 PrimaryCO Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 2016 Jun 2012 2013Jan 2014Aug 2015Feb 2016Jul 2016 Notice of Final Rulemaking Mar 2017 Dec 2012 * 2014Nov 2014May 2016Nov 2016Apr 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/http://epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ Current Schedule for Ongoing NAAQS Reviews

4 http://www.epa.gov/ozonedesignations/

5 5 Cumulative % Reduction in Population-weighted Ozone Concentrations National Progress on Ozone

6 Permitting Challenges for NO 2 /SO 2 Permitting with the new NO 2 /SO 2 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

7 SO 2 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 SO 2 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 SO 2 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 SO 2 standard and how we might use monitoring, modeling, or a combination of monitoring and modeling http://www.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/implement.html

8 SO 2 Implementation Schedule MilestoneDate Final NAAQS signedJune 2, 2010 SO 2 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 Agencys approach for implementing the SO 2 standard Governors recommendations due to EPAJune 3, 2011 EPA sends out 120-day letter to all States/Tribes and notifies public via FRTBD Deadline for States/Tribes to respond to EPAs modificationsTBD Final designationsStatutory Required June 2013 Infrastructure SIPs dueJune 3, 2013 Requirements for areas not designated nonattainmentTBD Attainment deadlineTBD (2018)

9

10

11

12 12 Cumulative % Reduction in Population-weighted PM 2.5 Concentrations National Progress on PM2.5

13 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…

14 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 aspects of area sources; resets compliance date 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 date for 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

15 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

16 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

17 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

18 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

19 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 Forney forney.kathleen@epa.gov 404-562-9130 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 Forney forney.kathleen@epa.gov 404-562-9130 http://www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgpermitting.html

20 Permitting Timeline Under the Tailoring Rule 20112012201320142015 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: 100,000 Modification: 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.

21 Biomass GHG Permitting EPA temporary defers certain CO 2 emissions from PSD and Title V permitting July 1, 2011, final rule deferred for 3 years GHG permitting requirements for CO 2 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 CO 2 emissions in ways that are scientifically sound and also manageable in practice Accounting Framework for Biogenic CO 2 Emissions from Stationary Sources (September 2011) 21 Biomass Permitting http://www.epa.gov/NSR/actions.html#2011

22 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 CO 2 underground For 2011 emissions, reports were due to EPA due March 31, 2012 22 GHG Reporting Program 2010 Data now available on EPAs 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 (mmtCO 2 e); petroleum refineries second - 183 mmtCO 2 e CO 2 accounted for 95% of emissions; methane second at 4%; NO 2 and fluorinated gases remaining 1% 100 facilities with emissions over 7 mmtCO 2 e (96 power plants, two iron and steel mills, two refineries) http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/

23 MACT StandardProposal DateFinal Rule Date Chromium Electroplating10/21/2010 1/20/2012 (reproposal) Final 8/15/12 Steel Pickling-HCL Process10/21/2010 1/20/2012 (reproposal) Final 8/15/12 Primary Lead Smelting2/17/201111/15/2011 Shipbuilding and Ship Repair12/03/201011/21/2011 Wood Furniture12/03/201011/21/2011 Oil and Gas Sector8/26/20118/16/12 Pulp and Paper I & III12/15/20117/31/2012 (s) Secondary Lead Smelters5/19/20111/5/2012 Aerospace3/15/141/15/2015 Ferroalloys Production11/23/2011Extended 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.htmlhttp://epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html Upcoming RTR Rulemaking Schedule RED = Projected Date; (s) = Signed

24 MACT StandardProposal DateFinal Rule Date Mineral Wool11/25/2011Extended to 11/30/2012 Primary Aluminum12/6/2011Extended to 3/14/2014 Wool Fiberglass11/25/2011Extended to 11/30/2012 Secondary Aluminum2/14/201210/31/2012 Pesticide Active Ingredient Production1/9/201211/30/2012 Polyether Polyols Production1/9/201211/30/2012 Polymers and Resins IV1/9/201211/30/2012 Petroleum Refineries SectorNegotiating Acrylic/ Modacrylic Fibers10/31/201210/31/2013 Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production10/31/201210/31/2013 Off-Site Waste Recovery Operations10/31/201210/31/2013 Phosphoric Acid/Phosphate Fertilizers10/31/201210/31/2013 Polycarbonates Production10/31/201210/31/2013 Polymers and Resins III10/31/201210/31/2013 Portland Cement6/15/20176/15/2018 Upcoming RTR Rulemaking Schedule RED = Projected Date

25 Petition to List H 2 S as a HAP Sierra Club petitioned EPA in June 2009 to list hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) 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 H 2 S exposures routinely raised as a concern in communities Several states regulate H 2 S, 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 H 2 S 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 Some Common Sources of H 2 S 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

26 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 CO 2 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 CO 2 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 CO 2 per mile, 54.5 mpg in model year 2025 http://epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations.htm#1-1

27 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

28 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 Jackson EPA Administrator

29 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 EPAs Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), also known as the Transport Rule, in a 2-1 decision. The Court left EPAs Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in effect. http://www.epa.gov/airtransport/

30 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

31 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

32 Southeast Diesel Collaborative GOAL: Improve air quality and public health by reducing emissions from existing diesel engines

33 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): NOx36,668 VOC3,913 PM2,832 CO12,059 CO2769,684

34 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

35 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

36 Childrens Environmental Health CEH is one of EPAs 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

37 Childrens Environmental Health Childrens Health Month is October 2012 Theme: Back to the Basics - Childrens Environmental Health is a Challenge for All Major Activities Kick-off Event at Coretta Scott King Young Womens Leadership Academy Lead Poisoning Prevention Week in Memphis, TN Leptite LeMans Road Race www.epa.gov/children

38 Questions? Doug Neeley U.S. EPA, Atlanta, GA, 404-562-9097


Download ppt "2012 A&WMA Southern Section Annual Meeting &Technical Conference September 2012 Biloxi, MS Doug Neeley Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google