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 Forneyforney.kathleen@epa.gov

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