Archive for December, 2011

Ocean-going Vessels “At Berth Regulation” approved

Tuesday, December 13th, 2011

EPA has granted the California Air Resources Board (CARB) its request for an authorization to adopt and enforce regulations for its airborne toxic control measures for auxiliary diesel engines operated on ocean-going vessels at-berth in California ports (‘‘At- Berth Regulation’’). The At-Berth Regulation is designed to reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter from auxiliary diesel engines on container vessels, passenger vessels and refrigerated cargo vessels while they are docked at specified California ports.

DATES: Petitions for review must be filed by February 13, 2012.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-12-13/pdf/2011-31909.pdf

Financial penalties are one of the tools EPA uses to maintain business compliance with EPA Rules and Regulations

Thursday, December 8th, 2011

Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its annual enforcement and compliance results. EPA’s enforcement and compliance program enforces environmental laws that protect our nation’s air, land and water by taking action to cut illegal pollution and protect people’s health and communities. In fiscal year Fiscal Year 2011, EPA enforcement actions led to more than 1.8 billion pounds in pollution reduced, an estimated $19 billion in required pollution controls and approximately $168 million in civil penalties.

“Our annual results reflect the fact that a strong and effective enforcement program is good for responsible businesses, public health and communities across the country,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “As we continue our focus on the most serious pollution problems, we expect to see better environmental performance and greater public health benefits.”

In FY 2011, EPA enforcement resulted in commitments to:

• Install pollution controls for a cleaner tomorrow: $19 billion invested to improve environmental performance and compliance efforts, a record year, including $3 billion dollars to clean up hazardous waste in communities

• Protect people’s health from dangerous pollution: 1.8 billion pounds of harmful air, water, and chemical pollution reduced and 3.6 billion pounds of hazardous waste reduced, properly disposed of or treated

• Deter illegal pollution through civil penalties: $168 million in civil penalties assessed ($152 million in federal penalties and $16 million in actions taken jointly by EPA and state and local governments)

• Fight environmental crime: $35 million in fines and restitution, $2 million in court ordered environmental projects and 89.5 years of incarceration to deter future violations and hold violators accountable

• Invest additional resources in affected communities: $25 million committed by companies through enforcement settlements to conduct supplemental environmental projects in communities

More information on EPA’s FY 2011 enforcement and compliance results:
http://epa.gov/compliance/resources/reports/endofyear/eoy2011/index.html

More information on EPA’s national enforcement initiatives: http://epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/initiatives/index.html

EPA proposed amendments to Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants NESHAP

Tuesday, December 6th, 2011

The EPA is proposing amendments to the national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants for Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants to address the results of the residual risk and technology review that the EPA is required to conduct by the Clean Air Act. If finalized, these proposed amendments would address previously unregulated emissions (i.e., carbonyl sulfide (COS) emissions from new and existing potlines and polycyclic organic matter (POM) emissions from new and existing prebake potlines and existing pitch storage tanks); remove the vertical stud Soderberg one (VSS1) potline subcategory; reduce the MACT limits for POM emissions from horizontal stud Soderberg (HSS) and VSS2 potlines; eliminate the startup, shutdown and malfunction exemption in accordance with recent actions by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; add provisions for facilities to avail themselves of an affirmative defense in the event of a malfunction under certain conditions; and make certain technical and editorial changes. The proposed emissions limits for POM and COS are based on maximum achievable control technology (MACT). While the proposed modifications would result in some reduction in actual emissions of POM from existing pitch storage tanks, reduce the potential emissions of POM from Soderberg potlines, and prevent increases in emissions of COS and sulfur dioxide, the health risks posed by actual emissions from this source category are currently within the acceptable range and would not be reduced appreciably by the proposed modifications.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 20, 2012.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-12-06/pdf/2011-29881.pdf

EPA proposing to approve revisions of San Joaquin Valley Air District Rules 2020 and 2201

Tuesday, December 6th, 2011

EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the California Air Resources Board. These revisions concern pre-construction review of new and modified stationary sources (‘‘new source review’’ or NSR) within the District. The revisions are intended to remedy deficiencies we identified when granting limited approval and limited disapproval to the rules in 2010, and to add NSR requirements for new major sources of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and major modifications at existing major PM2.5 sources as required by the Clean Air Act. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by January 5, 2012.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-12-06/pdf/2011-31183.pdf

Also, the EPA made an interim final determination to defer imposition of sanctions based on a proposed approval of revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or District) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) published elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. The revisions concern SJVUAPCD Rules 2020 and 2201.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-12-06/pdf/2011-31184.pdf

Revised Boiler MACT and Incinerator MACT rules out for public comment (Major source, Area source, CISWI)

Friday, December 2nd, 2011

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing changes to Clean Air Act standards for boilers and certain incinerators based on extensive analysis, review and consideration of data and input from states, environmental groups, industry, lawmakers and the public. The proposed reconsideration would achieve extensive public health protections through significant reductions in toxic air pollutants, including mercury and soot, while increasing the rule’s flexibility and addressing compliance concerns raised by industry and labor groups. The changes also cut the cost of implementation by nearly 50 percent from the original 2010 proposed rule while maintaining health benefits. These standards meet important requirements laid out in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments.

“With this action, EPA is applying the right standards to the right boilers,” said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation. “Gathering the latest and best real-world information is leading to practical, affordable air pollution safeguards that will provide the vital and overdue health protection that Americans deserve.”

More than 99 percent of boilers in the country are either clean enough that they are not covered by these standards or will only need to conduct maintenance and tune-ups to comply. Today’s proposals focus on the less than one percent of boilers that emit the majority of pollution from this sector. For these high emitting boilers, typically operating at refineries, chemical plants and other industrial facilities, EPA is proposing more targeted emissions limits that protect Americans’ health and provide industry with practical, cost-effective options to meet the standards – informed by data from these stakeholders. These limits are based on currently available technologies that are in use by sources across the country.

As a result of further information gathered through the reconsideration process, including significant dialog and meetings with stakeholders, the proposal maintains the dramatic cuts in the cost of implementation that were achieved in the final rules issued in March while continuing to deliver significant public health benefits. As a result, EPA estimates that for every dollar spent to cut these pollutants, the public will see $12 to $30 in health benefits, including fewer premature deaths.

Using a wide variety of fuels, including coal, natural gas, oil and biomass, boilers are used to power heavy machinery, provide heat for industrial and manufacturing processes in addition to a number of other uses, or heat large buildings. EPA’s proposal recognizes the diverse and complex range of uses and fuels and tailors standards to reflect the real-world operating conditions of specific types of boilers.

Some of the key changes EPA is proposing include:

Boilers at large sources of air toxics emissions: The major source proposal covers approximately 14,000 boilers – less than one percent of all boilers in the United States – located at large sources of air pollutants, including refineries, chemical plants, and other industrial facilities. EPA is proposing to create additional subcategories and revise emissions limits. EPA is also proposing to provide more flexible compliance options for meeting the particle pollution and carbon monoxide limits, replace numeric emissions limits with work practice standards for certain pollutants, allow more flexibility for units burning clean gases to qualify for work practice standards and reduce some monitoring requirements. EPA estimates that the cost of implementing these standards remains about $1.5 billion less than the April 2010 proposed standards. Health benefits to children and the public associated with reduced exposure to fine particles and ozone from these large source boilers have increased by almost 25 percent and are estimated to be $27 billion to $67 billion in 2015.

Boilers located at small sources of air toxics emissions: The proposal also covers about 187,000 boilers located at small sources of air pollutants, including commercial buildings, universities, hospitals and hotels. However, due to how little these boilers emit, 98 percent of area source boilers would simply be required to perform maintenance and routine tune-ups to comply with these standards. Only 2 percent of area source boilers may need to take additional steps to comply with the rule. To increase flexibility for most of these sources, EPA is proposing to require initial compliance tune-ups after two years instead after the first year.

Solid waste incinerators and revisions to the list of non-hazardous secondary materials: There are 95 solid waste incinerators that burn waste at a commercial or an industrial facility, including cement manufacturing facilities. EPA is proposing to adjust emissions limits for waste-burning cement kilns and for energy recovery units.

EPA is also proposing revisions to its final rule which identified the types of non-hazardous secondary materials that can be burned in boilers or solid waste incinerators. Following the release of that final rule, stakeholders expressed concerns regarding the regulatory criteria for a non-hazardous secondary material to be considered a legitimate, non-waste fuel, and how to demonstrate compliance with those criteria. To address these concerns, EPA’s proposed revisions provide clarity on what types of secondary materials are considered non-waste fuels, and greater flexibility. The proposed revisions also classify a number of secondary materials as non-wastes when used as a fuel and allow for a boiler or solid waste operator to request that EPA identify specific materials as a non-waste fuel.

Following the April 2010 proposals, the agency received more than 4,800 comments from businesses, communities and other key stakeholders. As part of the reconsideration process, EPA also received additional feedback after the agency issued the final standards in March 2011. EPA will accept public comment on these standards for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register. EPA intends to finalize the reconsideration by spring 2012.

More information: http://www.epa.gov/airquality/combustion