Posts Tagged ‘CAA’

Interim Determination to Stay and Defer Sanctions for the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

Thursday, February 14th, 2013

EPA is proposing to fully approve two permitting rules submitted by California as a revision to the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD or District) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These rules were adopted by the SMAQMD to regulate the construction and modification of stationary sources of air pollution within Sacramento County. EPA is proposing to approve this SIP revision based on the Agency’s conclusion that the rules are consistent with applicable Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements, policies and guidance. Final approval of these rules would make the rules federally enforceable and correct program deficiencies identified in a previous EPA rulemaking on July 20, 2011.  SMAQMD’s Proposed Rule Revions are to Rule 214 & 217.

More detailed  information below.

Air Quality Implementation Plans; Revisions:  California; Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District; Stationary Source Permits, 10589-10591

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-14/html/2013-03249.htm

Interim Final Determination to Stay and Defer Sanctions: Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 10554-10556

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-14/html/2013-03250.htm

PM2.5 NAAQS – EPA Proposes Rule (National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter)

Friday, June 29th, 2012

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes PM NAAQS  rule SUMMARY: Based on its review of the air quality criteria and the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM), the EPA proposes to make revisions to the primary and secondary NAAQS for PM to provide requisite protection of public health and welfare, respectively, and to make corresponding revisions to the data handling conventions for PM and ambient air monitoring, reporting, and network design requirements. The EPA also proposes revisions to the prevention of significant  deterioration (PSD) permitting program with respect to the proposed NAAQS revisions. With regard to primary standards for fine particles (generally referring to particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (mm) in diameter, PM2.5), the EPA proposes to revise the annual PM2.5 standard by lowering the level to within a range of 12.0 to 13.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), so as to provide increased protection against health effects associated with long- and shortterm exposures (including premature mortality, increased hospital admissions and emergency department  visits, and development of chronic respiratory disease) and to retain the 24-hour PM2.5 standard. The EPA proposes changes to the Air Quality Index (AQI) for PM2.5 to be consistent with the proposed primary PM2.5 standards. With  regard to the primary standard for particles generally less than or equal to 10 mm in diameter (PM10), the EPA proposes to retain the current 24-hour PM10 standard to continue to provide protection against effects associated with short-term exposure to thoracic coarse particles (i.e., PM10-2.5). With regard to the secondary PM standards, the EPA proposes to revise the suite of secondary PM standards by adding a distinct standard for PM2.5 to address PM-related visibility impairment and to retain the current standards generally to address non-visibility welfare effects. The proposed distinct secondary standard would be defined in terms of a PM2.5 visibility index, which would use speciated PM2.5 mass concentrations and relative humidity data to calculate PM2.5 light extinction, translated to the deciview (dv) scale, similar to the Regional Haze Program; a 24-hour averaging time; a 90th percentile form averaged over 3 years; and a level set at one of two options—either 30 dv or 28 dv.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 31, 2012.

Public Hearings: The EPA intends to hold public hearings on this proposed rule in July 2012. These will be announced in a separate Federal Register notice that provides details, including specific dates, times, addresses, and contact  information for these hearings.

EPA Announces Settlement With Marathon Petroleum Company

Thursday, April 5th, 2012

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Justice today announced an innovative environmental agreement with Ohio-based Marathon Petroleum Company that already has significantly reduced air pollution from all six of the company’s petroleum refineries. Marathon has agreed to state-of-the-art controls on flares and to a cap on the volume of waste gas it will send to its flares which is expected to reduce harmful air pollution by approximately 5,400 tons per year.

As part of the effort to reach this agreement, Marathon, under the direction and oversight of EPA, spent more than $2.4 million to develop and conduct pioneering combustion efficiency testing of flares and to advance the understanding of the relationship between flare operating parameters and flare combustion efficiency.

From 2008 to the end of 2011, the controls Marathon installed, such as flow monitors and gas chromatographs, have eliminated approximately 4720 tons per year of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 110 tons per year of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) from the air. An additional 530 tons per year of VOCs and 30 tons per year of HAPs are projected to be eliminated in the future.

Marathon, headquartered in Findlay, Ohio, will pay a civil penalty of $460,000 to the United States.

For more about the settlement visit:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/marathonrefining.html

SJV LANDFILL TO SPEND $3.8 MILLION TO RESOLVE CAA VIOLATIONS

Wednesday, March 28th, 2012

The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of California and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that Forward Inc., of Manteca, has agreed to a settlement to resolve alleged violations of air pollution laws at its landfill in Manteca. The settlement requires Forward to spend approximately $3.8 million to improve the landfill’s gas collection and control system and to replace trucks in the landfill’s fleet with less polluting vehicles. Forward has also agreed to pay a civil penalty of $200,000, to be shared with the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, a co-plaintiff in the enforcement action against Forward.

http://www.justice.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html.

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

EPA revises SIP for Placer and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management Districts

Tuesday, November 22nd, 2011

EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) portions of the California State  Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from coatings and strippers used on wood products, wood paneling, and miscellaneous metal parts and products.  We are approving these local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on January 20, 2012 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by
December 21, 2011.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-11-21/pdf/2011-29906.pdf

Oregon; New Source Review (NSR)/Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Air Quality Permit Streamlining Rule

Monday, September 26th, 2011

   EPA is proposing to approve a portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Oregon for the purpose of addressing the third element of the interstate transport provisions of Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standards) and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. The third element of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires that a State not interfere with any other State’s required measures to prevent significant deterioration (PSD) of its air quality.

   EPA is also proposing to approve numerous revisions to the Oregon SIP that were submitted to EPA by the State of Oregon on October 8, 2008; October 10, 2008; March 17, 2009; June 23, 2010; December 22, 2010 and May 5, 2011. The revisions include updating Oregon’s new source review (NSR) rules to be consistent with current Federal regulations and streamlining Oregon’s air quality rules by clarifying requirements, removing duplicative rules, and correcting errors. The revisions were submitted in accordance with the requirements of section 110 and part D of the Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 24, 2011.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-23/html/2011-24525.htm

EPA proposes rule for Secondary NAAAQS Standards for NOx and SOx

Monday, August 1st, 2011

This proposed rule is being issued as required by a consent decree governing the schedule for completion of this review of the air quality criteria and the secondary national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for oxides of nitrogen and oxides of sulfur.

Based on its review, EPA proposes to retain the current nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) secondary standards to provide requisite protection for the direct effects on vegetation resulting from exposure to gaseous oxides of nitrogen and sulfur in the ambient air. Additionally, with regard to protection from the deposition of oxides of nitrogen and sulfur to sensitive aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, including acidification and nutrient enrichment effects, EPA is proposing to add secondary standards identical to the NO2 and SO2 primary 1-hour standards and not set a new multi-pollutant secondary standard in this review. The proposed 1-hour secondary NO2 standard would be set at a level of 100 ppb and the proposed 1-hour secondary SO2 standard would be set at 75 ppb. In addition, EPA has decided to undertake a field pilot program to gather and analyze additional relevant data so as to enhance the Agency’s understanding of the degree of protectiveness that a new multi-pollutant approach, defined in terms of an aquatic acidification index (AAI), would afford and to support development of an appropriate monitoring network for such a standard. The EPA solicits comment on the framework of such a standard and on the design of the field pilot program. The EPA will sign a notice of final rulemaking for this review no later than March 20, 2012.

U.S. EPA Proposes to Approve California’s Air Quality Plans for South Coast, San Joaquin Valley

Wednesday, June 29th, 2011

 

 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to approve California’s air quality plans for fine particles – also known as PM2.5 – in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. These plans will reduce pollution to the level required by the health based 1997 PM2.5 standard by 2015.

“We are approving California’s air plans for fine particles, but our work is far from done. EPA will continue to hold the State accountable for bringing air quality up to national standards,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “Clean air is a critical human health issue in California. In large part, the solution will be found in moving quickly towards zero emission transportation systems.”

Over the past 10 years, at the worst monitors, PM2.5 has improved by 14% in the San Joaquin Valley and by 43% in the South Coast. Yet, these areas continue to be two of the most polluted air basins in the nation. PM2.5 is made up of small particles in the air that can penetrate deep into the lungs and worsen medical conditions such as asthma and heart disease, particularly in children and the elderly. Reducing exposure helps reduce asthma, cardiovascular disease, emergency room visits, cancer and premature death. According to a 2010 California Air Resources Board study, PM2.5 exposure leads to 9,200 premature deaths annually in CA.

Diesel mobile sources such as trucks, construction equipment and marine vessels are the largest source of PM2.5 in California. Trucks and buses account for about 40 percent of diesel emissions from all mobile sources. With its adverse meteorology and substantial pollution from trucks that carry produce and international imports to the rest of the nation, California faces a daunting task in reducing pollution.

In November 2010, EPA proposed to disapprove the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 air quality plans because they relied heavily on emissions reductions from several State diesel and marine vessel rules that had not been finalized or submitted to the EPA for review.

Now, CARB is finalizing these precedent setting rules. They include the In-Use Diesel Truck and Bus rules, the Drayage Truck Rules and the Ocean Going Vessels Clean Fuels rule. California is the only state in the nation to aggressively target diesel emissions from existing diesel engines. These pioneering truck and bus rules will impact almost a million vehicles that operate in California and will prevent an estimated 3,500 deaths annually.

In addition, CARB has revised the plans that were originally submitted to EPA to account for the original overestimation of activity and emissions from trucks and construction equipment as well as the economic recession. As a result, future emissions are forecasted to be lower and fewer emissions reductions are needed to meet the standard. For the San Joaquin Valley, the effect is that about 5% fewer reductions are needed due to the recession and about 18% fewer reductions are needed because of better emissions estimates. For the South Coast, about 5% fewer reductions are needed due to the recession and about 5% fewer reductions are needed due to better emissions estimates.

EPA is, however, proposing to disapprove the plans’ contingency measures because they do not provide sufficient emissions reductions. EPA is continuing to work with the State to address these issues.

While these plans mark a milestone, and the State is currently working on air quality plans for the more stringent 2006 PM2.5 standard, ultimately Californians will need to move to newer technologies to reduce emissions. The State and local districts have launched a number of grant and incentive programs to demonstrate and deploy near zero emitting technologies.

Today’s proposed actions will be published in the Federal Register and will include a 30-day public comment period from the date of publication. EPA invites the public to submit comments on today’s proposals and to resubmit comments on the November 2010 proposals. EPA’s Federal Register notices and technical support documents contain detailed information on our proposed actions.

For More Information: http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/actions/ca.html

EPA requests PM2.5 NAAQS ICR extension to OMB

Tuesday, May 24th, 2011

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard Implementation (Renewal)

Abstract: The purpose of this ICR is to assess the burden (in hours and dollars) of the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as well as associated the periodic reporting and record keeping. The ICR addresses requirements that involve collecting information from states with areas that have been designated nonattainment for the PM2.5 NAAQS.

The time period covered in this ICR is a 3 year period from June 1, 2011 through May 31, 2014. The milestones for the state or local air agency respondents include the required State Implementation Plan (SIP) elements prescribed in the Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 110 and part D, subpart 1 of title I for Implementation plans and the requirements in the PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation Rule (40 CFR 51.1000–51.1012). The PM2.5 SIP will contain rules and other requirements designed to achieve the NAAQS by the deadlines established under the CAA, and it also contains a demonstration that the state’s requirements will in fact result in attainment. The SIP must meet the requirements in subpart 1 to adopt Reasonable Available Control Measures, Reasonable Available Control Technology, and provide for Reasonable Further Progress toward attainment for the period prior to the area’s attainment date. However, not all of the milestones and associated burden and administrative cost estimates apply to every designated PM2.5 nonattainment area. Areas with cleaner air quality have fewer requirements.

Full Federal Register link: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-05-24/html/2011-12789.htm