Indiana Environmental Issues IEA, September 20, 2007
-
Upload
haviva-barnett -
Category
Documents
-
view
51 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Indiana Environmental Issues IEA, September 20, 2007
1
Indiana Environmental IssuesIEA, September 20, 2007
Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP Commissioner
IN Department of Environmental Management
2
IDEM’s Mission and Environmental Goal
IDEM is responsible for protecting human health and the environment while providing for safe industrial, agricultural, commercial and governmental operation vital to a prosperous economy. Our goal is to increase the personal income of all Hoosiers to the national average while maintaining and improving Indiana’s Environmental Quality.
3
Pilot 2006 Environmental Performance Index
Yale Center for Environmental Law & PolicyYale University
Center for International Earth ScienceInformation Network (CIESIN)Columbia University
http://www.yale.edu/epi/
4
5
How Is IDEM Helping to Increase Personal Income?
Clear, consistent and speedy decisionsClear regulationsAssistance first, enforcement secondTimely resolution of enforcement actionsEvery regulated entity will have current valid
permits without unnecessary requirementsWritten Standard Operating Procedures Improved staff training and development
6
Performance MetricsQuality of Hoosiers' Environment Result Target Comments
% of Hoosiers that live in counties that meet air quality standards 85% 100% 80% 2 counties @ 964,725 of
6,271,973 failed
% of CSO Communities with approved programs to prevent the release of untreated sewage
50% 100% 20% 45+9 out of 98+9
Permitting Efficiency Total calendar days accumulated in issuing environmental permits, as determined by state statute
Land 61,779 66,565 86,864 142 permits
6972 permits
45 permits
Air 311,986 207,000 385,000
Water 58,806 48,000 200,000
* Places emphasis on back logged permits
Compliance Total percentage of compliance observations from regulated customers within acceptable compliance standards
Inspections 95.58% 97% 75%
Self reporting 97.77% 99% 95%
Continuous monitoring (COM) 99.66% 99.90% 98.95%* Tracks observations and not just inspections
Organizational Transformation Budgetary agency dollars spent on key outside contracts for core agency functions.
Dollars spent on outside services per year $4,458,843 $0 $3,447,017 $2.1 OLQ + $2.3 OAQ
7
Counties above AQ StandardsJanuary 10, 2005 Allen--Ozone Boone--Ozone Clark--PM & Ozone Dubois--PM Elkhart--Ozone Hamilton--Ozone Hancock--Ozone LaPorte--Ozone Madison--Ozone Marion--PM & Ozone Shelby--Ozone St. Joseph--Ozone
January 1, 2007 Clark--PM Marion—PM
Possible Addition Lake—Ozone
(Whiting Monitor)
8
Ozone Attainment Status
9
PM 2.5 Attainment Status
10
Total Permit Calendar Days
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
Air
Water
Land
11
Percent of Activities Meeting Regulations
0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%
100.00%
Inspections
SelfReporting
EmissionMonitoring
12
Office of Enforcement2002-2006
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007*
Referrals 887 607 467 547 591 372
Violation Letters
17 33 47 203 231 70
Notice of Violations 561 457 318 202 427 263
Agreed Orders 311 349 314 258 417 207
Commissioner's Orders 15 15 6 41 38 19
Dismissals 125 121 44 48 46 24
*August 2007
13
Enforcement Backlog
In early 2005, IDEM identified 120 open enforcement cases over 2 years old—all of those cases have been resolved.
Our goal is to resolve all enforcement cases within one year of the referral.
We currently have 24 cases that are more than 12 months old—no cases over 2 years old.
14
EPA’s Proposed Revisions to NAAQS for Ozone
EPA proposing revised Air Quality Standards Primary standard to protect human health Secondary standard to protect public welfare and
the environment Both currently .08 parts per million (ppm), effectively .084 due to rounding conventionsEPA proposed reduction of primary standard to within the range of .07-.075 ppmEPA proposed two alternative revisions of secondary standard: A new cumulative, seasonal standard, or A standard identical to proposed primary standard
15
Impacts of EPA’s Proposed Revisions to NAAQS for Ozone
Non-attainment designation would trigger planning requirements and other potential clean air measures
Difficult to predict designations Range of options being considered Nothing finalized in federal rule yet
Predictions based on 2003-2005 data, recent data shows fewer monitors violate proposal
Several control measures implemented that do not take effect until 2009-2010
16
PM 2.5 StatusNew 35 microgram per cubic meter 24 hour standard issued in September, 2006—Annual standard retained
Designations will initially be based upon 2004-2006 air quality, but the process may allow the use of data up to 2009
New nonattainment designations will be made April 2010, SIPS due by 2013
SIPS for current nonattainment areas due April, 2008—redesignations and SIPs
17
PM 2.5 StatusBased upon monitored 2004-2006 Air Quality, the following monitor locations exceed the new 35 microgram per cubic meter short term PM 2.5 Standard:Jeffersonville (Clark County) 37SW Purdue Ag Center (Knox County) 36Gary IITRI (Lake County) 38Gary Burr St. (Lake County) 38 Indianapolis S. West St. (Marion County) 38 Indianapolis English Ave (Marion County) 37 Indianapolis W 18th St. (Marion County) 37
18
Recent RulemakingsAir Pollution Control BoardOutdoor Wood Boilers/Hydronic Heaters -
Second notice under review to be issued soon—concept is emission limits for new installations
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) – final adoption expected 10/07
Control measure for regional haze State Implementation Plan
CAIR satisfies rule for EGUs Affects ALCOA, ESSROC Cement Corp., ESSROC
Materials, GE Plastics, and Mittal Steel-Burns HarborEast Coast States are asking us to do more even
though their class I areas are “below the glide path”
19
Recent RulemakingsClean Air Mercury Rule – preliminarily
adopted 5/07—final adoption hearing 10/07Based on federal rule
Clean Air Interstate Rule – final adopted State Implementation Plan submitted to EPA
2/07Enhancement to auto emissions inspection
– Preliminarily adopted 9/5/07Lake and Porter County inspection and
maintenance planVOC rules – first and second notice stages
Regional effort to reduce Ozone
20
Climate RegistryIndiana is one of a handful of States that has not signed on to the Climate Registry
We have no objection to voluntary programs to inventory greenhouse gas emissions
We do not want to spend Hoosier taxpayer dollars on a not-for-profit organization based in Washington DC
Signing on to the Climate Registry might improperly imply that Hoosier businesses need to participate in the Climate Registry
21
Continuous ImprovementIT initiativesTempo – Unified environmental databaseVirtual File Cabinet – File room via Web
Pay for performance Set clear performance expectationsHold staff accountable for their decisionsProvides an incentive to go beyond minimum
job requirements to assist regulated community
22
BP NPDES PermitIDEM issues permits to protect human health and the environment
No exceptions were made with BP’s wastewater permit which is fully protective of drinking water, recreation and aquatic life in Lake Michigan
23
BP NPDES PermitBP’s permitted discharge levels are established at or below the lower of technology based effluent limits and water quality based effluent limits.
BP’s New Permit does allow increased discharges of ammonia and Total Suspended Solids to accommodate the processing of Canadian Heavy Crude derived from tar sands
24
BP NPDES Permit
This permit had the most extensive public outreach to the environmental community of any permit issued by IDEM.
IDEM coordinated with EPA to ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act—On April 5, 2007, EPA issued a written notice of no objection concerning the BP Permit.
25
BP NPDES Permit
The permit was issued on June 21, the permit ended on July 9, 2007 and no appeal was filed—the permit effective date is August 1, 2007 and the permit expires July 31, 2012.
The Alliance for the Great Lakes, which was involved in pre permit discussions with EPA and IDEM has now filed a appeal on the NPDES Permit
26
BP NPDES Permit
At the urging of Illinois politicians, the US House passed a resolution critical of the permit
The City of Chicago and others have delivered petitions with tens of thousands of signatures objecting to allowing increased discharges to Lake Michigan
USEPA originally supported the IDEM BP permit, but is urging BP to go beyond compliance to address public concerns
27
BP NPDES Permit
USEPA has also indicated that they will engage in extensive review of all future major IDEM NPDES permits
USEPA is also raising numerous issues with IDEM’s draft air pollution permit for BP and is taking very conservative positions
Does a legally issued permit allow an activity, or is it the starting point for a beyond compliance negotiation?
28
Thank You—Questions
Tom Easterly
100 N. Senate Ave. IGCN 1301
Indianapolis, IN 46204
(317) 232-8611
Fax (317) 233-6647