The EQ Companies

EQ Engineers, LLC

Contact EQ

800.229.7495

E-Mail EQ

 

Environmental News - Regulations, Engineering & Management

EPA Proposes Interstate Transport Rule to Reduce Ozone and Fine Particle Pollution

On July 6, 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) announced the proposal of regulations to reduce power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) that cross State lines.  SO2 and NOx are precursors to the formation of ozone and fine particles (PM2.5), which are widespread problems in the eastern half of the country.  The Transport Rule requires power plants in 28 eastern States to reduce annual emissions of SO2 and NOx to address PM2.5 air quality problems in downwind States.  Twenty-six States would be required to reduce ozone season emissions of NOx. 

The Transport Rule replaces U.S. EPA’s 2005 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) which was overturned by a 2008 court decision, but was allowed to remain in place until U.S. EPA completed rulemaking to address the court’s concerns.  U.S. EPA is proposing a cap-and-trade program to meet an assigned emission budget for the affected States.   U.S. EPA is proposing several alternatives to their preferred approach. 

The proposal will be published in the Federal Register in the next several weeks and U.S. EPA will hold hearings and take written comments for 60 days following proposal.  For more information, refer to EPA’s web site or contact EQs Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299 or Jeff Slayback at (800) 229-7495. 

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines

On March 3, 2010, the U.S.EPA promulgated changes to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE), 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart ZZZZ, which expanded upon the existing RICE standards by adding standards for:

1. sting stationary compression ignition internal combustion engines that are located at area sources of hazardous air pollutant emissions,
2. Existing stationary compression ignition internal combustion engines that have a site rating of less than or equal to 500 brake horsepower and are located at major sources of hazardous air pollutant emissions, and
3. Existing non-emergency stationary compression ignition engines greater than 500 brake horsepower and are located at major sources of hazardous air pollutant emissions.

In addition to the new standards for these source categories, the rule revised the provisions related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction for engines that were previously regulated by these standards.  The rule also clarifies that emergency engines may operate as part of emergency demand response programs for a limited number of hours per year in situations where grid failure and blackout are imminent.  The compliance date for existing sources is March 3, 2013, and the initial notification date for existing sources is August 31, 2010 (where required).  U.S. EPA has recently published two tools to help with the implementation of the RICE rule. The tools are (1) an applicability flow chart and (2) a summary table of requirements.

For more information, contact Sheri Bussard at (800)-229-7495.

Significant New Use Rules Issued For 17 Chemicals; Two Pose Risks, EPA Says

On June 28, 2010, the U.S. EPA announced that it is issuing direct final significant new use rules (SNURs) for 17 chemicals, subjecting any proposed manufacture or importation of the substances designated as “new” to 90-day review by the agency.

The 90-day review will give the agency an opportunity to examine manufacturing methods, uses, and potential environmental releases.

Although the direct final rules will take effect immediately, there is a 30-day window during which parties may object or file a notice of intent to object to one or more of the SNURs. If U.S. EPA receives an objection or notice that an objection would be filed, it will withdraw the direct final rule by August 23, 2010,  and issue it as a proposed SNUR, according to the notice.

Risks of Two Chemicals Controlled Through Orders.

The 17 chemicals have already been reviewed under U.S. EPA's new chemicals program. During the new chemicals evaluation process, called a premanufacture notice (PMN) review, U.S. EPA determined that two of the chemicals--ethylhexyl oxetane and substituted aliphatic amine--could pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. To protect confidential business information about the two compounds, both chemical names are generic.

Ethylhexyl Oxetane.

U.S. EPA was concerned that ethylhexyl oxetane could harm the liver and thyroid as well as cause systemic toxicity throughout the body. The original manufacturer of the compound was required to have workers use certain personal protective equipment and to provide information about the hazards of that substance.

The SNUR would impose the same requirements on any other company making or importing the chemical.

Substituted Aliphatic Amine.

For the substituted aliphatic amine, U.S. EPA said that during the PMN review it determined the chemical could pose an unreasonable risk of injury because of its potential to harm the liver, skin, lungs, and eyes of workers.

U.S. EPA's consent order requires the use of personal protective equipment, including specific gloves and a respirator that could meet the agency's New Chemical Exposure Limit of 0.14 milligram per cubic meter of air over 8 hours (mg/m3).

15 Other Chemicals.

U.S. EPA did not determine whether the remaining 15 chemicals posed an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. The 15 chemicals are:

• aliphatic triamine (generic);
• 1,2-propanediol, 3-(diethylamino)-, polymers with 5-isocyanato-1-(isocyanatomethyl)-1,3,3-trimethylcyclohexane, propylene glycol and reduced methyl esters of reduced polymerized oxidized tetrafluoroethylene, 2-ethyl-1-hexanol-blocked, acetates (salts) (CAS No. 328389-90-8);
• 4-morpholinepropanamine, N-(1,3-dimethylbutylidene) (CAS No. 1003863-30-6);
• fatty acids, tall-oil, reaction products with 4-methyl-2-pentanone and aliphatic polyamine (generic);
• fatty acids, tall-oil, reaction products with (butoxymethyl) oxirane formaldehyde-phenol polymer glycidyl ether, morpholinepropanamine, propylene glycol diamine and aliphatic polyamine, N-(1,3 -dimethylbutylidene) derives (generic);
• formaldehyde, polymer with aliphatic diamine and phenol, reaction products with 4-methyl-2-pentanone (generic);
• amides, coco, N-Α-(dibutylamino)propyl] (CAS No. 851544-20-2);
• amides, coco, N-Α-(dibutylamino)propyl], acrylates (CAS No. 851545-09-0);
• 1-butanaminium, N-(3-aminopropyl)-N-butyl-N-(2-carboxyethyl)-, N-coco acyl derivatives, inner salts (CAS No. 851545-17-0);
• dialkylcocoamidoalkylpropionate (generic);
• dialkylcornoilamidoalkylamine (generic);
• dialkylcornoilamidoacrylate (generic);
• dialkylcornoilamidoalkylbetaine (generic);
• dialkylcornoilamidopropionate (generic); and
• benzenacetonitrile, -cyclohexylidene-alkyl substituted (generic)

Comments on the direct final SNURs should be marked Docket No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0920 and submitted to http://www.regulations.gov.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

U.S. EPA Requires Four Industrial Sectors to Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions

On June 29, 2010, the U.S. EPA announced a final rule that requires facilities in four industrial sectors to report greenhouse gas emissions.

The agency also announced a proposed rule that would make public certain information on greenhouse gas emissions from all reporting facilities, but withhold other information as confidential business information.

The final rule imposes emissions reporting requirements on industrial landfills, industrial wastewater treatment facilities, underground coal mines, and magnesium production facilities with emissions exceeding 25,000 metric tons of carbon-dioxide-equivalent greenhouse gases.

In addition, all underground coal mines that are subject to quarterly or more frequent sampling of ventilation systems by the Mine Safety and Health Administration must report greenhouse gas emissions to U.S. EPA.

The four source categories were excluded when U.S. EPA issued an economywide greenhouse gas emissions reporting rule in October 2009 that applies to sources which emit more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon-dioxide-equivalent greenhouse gases. Facilities covered by that rule had to begin measuring emissions January 1, 2010, and must file their first reports by March 31, 2011 (74 Fed. Reg. 56,260; 40 C.F.R. Subpart 98).

The four source categories must begin monitoring greenhouse gas emissions beginning January 1, 2011. They must submit the first annual report of emissions to EPA by March 31, 2012.

Methane, Sulfur Hexafluoride.

Methane is the primary greenhouse gas emitted from industrial landfills, wastewater treatment facilities, and coal mines. According to U.S. EPA, methane is 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide in warming the atmosphere and causing climate change. Sulfur hexafluoride is the primary greenhouse gas emitted from magnesium-production facilities and has thousands of times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide.

U.S. EPA in the final reporting rule also said it will not issue separate requirements for ethanol production and food processing. These facilities are already covered by requirements issued under the economywide rule, the Agency said.

U.S. EPA estimates that approximately 680 facilities, responsible for 1 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, will be required to report emissions under the final rule. The estimated total cost of the reporting is estimated at $7 million for the first year of reporting and $5.5 million in subsequent years.

U.S. EPA will take comments on the confidentiality proposal until August 30. Comments should be labeled with Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0924 and may be submitted at http://www.regulations.gov.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EPA Extends Comment Period on a Number of Proposed Rules

On July 22, 2010, the U.S. EPA extended the comment period for the following proposed rules: 

• National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants For Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, And Institutional Boilers And Process Heaters;
• National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants For Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, And Institutional Boilers;
• Standards Of Performance For New Stationary Sources And Emission Guidelines For Existing Sources: Commercial And Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units

This is the second extension of the comment period for three related proposed rules published on June 4, 2010, that amend regulations under 40 CFR 60 and 63.  Comments are now due August 23, 2010.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Tire Companies Oppose EPA Proposal to Consider Whole Scrap Tires Solid Waste

Tire manufacturers and other groups say they are concerned that the U.S. EPA will be eliminating an important market for used tires if it decides that whole scrap tires are solid waste when incinerated rather than burned as fuel.

They raised their concerns in early responses--submitted as of July 14--to U.S. EPA's June 4 proposal to classify whole tires as solid waste and regulate their burning under Section 129 of the Clean Air Act. Shredded tires from which the steel has been removed would be excluded from the definition of solid waste--and regulated less stringently--because they would be considered fuel.

As part of the larger process of regulating incinerator emissions, U.S. EPA is examining the question of whether hazardous secondary materials used as fuels or ingredients in combustion units are solid wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (75 Fed. Reg. 31,844; 41 ER 975, 5/7/10).

U.S. EPA proposed the rules following a 2007 U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision striking down the previous air toxics standards for boilers. In the decision, a three-judge panel ruled that EPA had wrongly excluded many industrial boilers from the definition of solid waste incinerators, which have more stringent emissions limits under Section 129 of the Clean Air Act (NRDC v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 04-1385, 6/8/07).

U.S. EPA will continue to accept comments on the proposals at http://www.regulations.gov until August 3.

Comments on the proposed rule to identify nonhazardous secondary materials that are solid waste should reference Docket No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0329.

For more information, refer to the EPA website or contact EQ’s Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299.

Lautenberg Introduces Bills to Secure Chemical Facilities, Water Treatment Plants

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) introduced legislation July 15 to secure chemical plants and drinking water and wastewater treatment plants from terrorist attacks and require high-risk plants to evaluate and implement, if feasible, the use of safer processes or chemicals.

Plants would be required to assess their vulnerability to attack, develop plans to address those vulnerabilities and respond to an emergency, and provide worker training to carry out the plans.
The legislation was introduced as two separate bills. The Secure Chemical Facilities Act (S. 3599) would be administered by the Department of Homeland Security, while the Secure Water Facilities Act (S. 3598) would be administered by U.S. EPA in cooperation with DHS.

The bills would replace an interim chemical security law that is set to expire October 4. The interim law was enacted as a rider to the 2007 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill and temporarily authorized Chemical Facility Antiterrorism Standards (CFATS), which were set to expire last October but were extended for another year.

The Lautenberg bills are similar to legislation (H.R. 2868) passed by the House in November 2009 (33 CRR 1125, 11/16/09).

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Environmental Managers Have Important Role in Compliance, Sustainability and Cost Savings

A Plant Environmental Manager is not only responsible for the environmental compliance of a facility, they are also in a very unique position to foster and champion Sustainability through Compliance with the potential added benefit of cost savings.  These measurable savings improve the bottom line, with or without additional revenue generation.  The benefits of Sustainability are threefold and include: extending the longevity of a company, maintaining job position(s), and protecting the environment. 

Sustainability through Compliance requires compliance as the minimum objective, not the ultimate goal.  Establishment of baselines allows for the development of measurable improvements.
Companies can initiate their Sustainability through water and energy conservation, recovery and reuse, and implementation of deduct meter programs.

Sustainability can also be improved by the complete removal of hazardous waste streams by recognizing the potential value of the constituents in the once categorized waste and identifying potential users of those constituents.  The material is no longer designated hazardous waste and has generated a revenue stream where it was previously an economic and environmental liability.

To learn how EQ can assist your facility in Sustainability and potential cost savings measures, contact EQ’s John Wentz at (800)-229-7495.

EPA Planning Survey to Support Rule on Cooling Water Intake Structures

On July 21, 2010, the U.S. EPA announced that it is planning a survey to determine how much the public is willing to pay for reducing the number of fish killed at intake structures that draw cooling water into power plants, manufacturing facilities, and other industrial plants (75 Fed. Reg. 42,438).

The planned survey comes as U.S. EPA is developing a proposed rule to address those structures following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said it can consider costs and benefits of protecting fish and other aquatic organisms.

U.S. EPA said it has designed the survey to provide data to support several objectives including estimating the total value that individuals place on preventing losses of fish and other aquatic organisms caused by cooling water intake structures and understanding how much individuals value preventing fish losses, increasing fish populations, and increasing commercial and recreational catch rates.

Cooling water intake structures are used by industrial facilities to withdraw water for cooling from surface water bodies such as rivers or lakes. The intakes harm and kill aquatic life by entraining small organisms through the plant's heat exchangers and trapping larger fish and wildlife on intake screens.

The Supreme Court held in April 2009 that it was permissible for utility companies and regulators to apply a cost-benefit analysis under the Clean Water Act in determining the best technology available needed to protect fish from being killed by large industrial cooling water intake structures (Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper Inc., 129 S. Ct. 1498, 68 ERC 1001 (2009); 40 ER 770, 4/3/09).

The court essentially left it to U.S. EPA to decide whether and how to compare costs to benefits as it drafts appropriate rules for cooling water structures.

Section 316 of the Clean Water Act requires U.S. EPA to ensure that the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures reflect the best technology available to protect aquatic organisms from being killed or injured by impingement or entrainment.
In September 2009, U.S. EPA announced  plans to issue a proposed rule in mid-2010  concerning existing cooling water intake structures at power plants and manufacturing facilities (40 ER 2127, 9/11/09).

For more information, contact EQ’s John Wentz at (800)-229-7495.

EPA Finalizes More Stringent NAAQS for SO2

On June 22, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) published a final more stringent National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (SO2).  U.S. EPA set a new 1-hour primary (health-based) standard at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb) and revoked the current annual standard of 30 ppb and the current 24-hour standard of 140 ppb.  The form of the 1-hour standard is based on the 99th percentile of 1-hour measurements over a 3-year period.    U.S. EPA did not change the current 500-ppb 3-hour secondary (welfare-based) standard, but is considering changes under a separate review. 

There are six areas that violate the current primary standards, but under the new 75-ppb  1-hour standard, 60 counties in 24 States and Territories would be designated nonattainment (based on available 2007 to 2009 data).  Non-attainment designations under the new standard based on the current monitoring network will be made by June 2012.  In addition, U.S. EPA is requiring States to begin monitoring SO2 at over 160 new sites by January 2013, which could result in the designation of additional non-attainment areas in the 2016/2017 timeframe.  Also, U.S. EPA is requiring each State to demonstrate, through refined air quality modeling, that major SO2 sources in their State do not cause or contribute to a NAAQS violation throughout the State, regardless of the attainment status of the area. 

The final rule will be effective on August 23, 2010.  One immediate effect of this action is that Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits issued after the effective date of the new NAAQS must include a compliance demonstration with respect to the new NAAQS. 

For more information, refer to the Federal Register notice or contact EQ’s Jeff Slayback at 800-229-7495 or Kent Berry at 800-229-5299.  

Revised Boiler NESHAP Rules Published

On June 4, 2010, the U.S. EPA’s revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) rules for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers for both major and area sources (see May EQ newsletter) were proposed in the Federal Register.  The public comment period on these controversial rules will close on August 3, 2010.

For more information, view the summary PowerPoint on EQ’s website or contact EQ’s Tom Robertson or Kent Berry at 800-229-5299.  

EPA Proposes Revised Rules for Incinerator

On June 4, 2010, EPA finally published the proposal of revised Clean Air Act (CAA) rules for commercial and industrial solid waste incineration (CISWI) units in the Federal Register.  Also on June 4, EPA proposed a RCRA rule that clarifies which nonhazardous secondary materials are, or are not, “solid waste” when burned.   Sources burning “solid waste” are subject to the CISWI rules if they are not subject to other incinerator rules such as municipal waste incinerator rules.  The CISWI rules include new source performance standards (NSPS) for new sources and emission guidelines (EG), to be adopted by the States, to regulate existing CISWI.  The CISWI rules would set emission limits for metals (Pb, Hg, Cd), dioxins, 4 criteria pollutants, and HCl and would apply to the 176 existing CISWI.  The public comment period on the rules closes on August 3, 2010.

For more information, refer to the Federal Register notices or contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at 800 229-5299. 

EPA Set to Propose General Discharge Permit for Certain Aquatic Pesticide Applications

On May 27, 2010 the White House Office of Management and Budget cleared a draft general plan prepared by the U.S. EPA that would set general conditions for discharges to waters of the United States from the application of certain pesticides. The conditions would be issued by each of U.S. EPA's 10 regions and would cover discharges in areas where U.S. EPA is the permitting authority for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. These areas include several states (most states operate the NPDES program themselves), Indian Country lands, and certain federal facilities. According to Jack Faulk with the U.S. EPA Office of Water, “the draft, which will be subject to a 30-day comment period, could be published in early June.” “The U.S. EPA regions' joint proposal of the permit is normal procedure,” Faulk said. The draft permit would apply to pesticide control of mosquitoes and other flying insects; aquatic weeds and algae; aquatic nuisance animals, including mollusks and lamprey eels; and forest canopy pests, the notice said. Under a general permit, instead of applying for individual permits, dischargers would obtain coverage by filing a notice of intent with the permitting agency. The draft permit is in response to a federal appeals court rejection of a U.S. EPA regulation that excluded pesticide applications from discharge permit requirements.

For more information, contact EQ’s Mike Arozarena at 1-(800)-229-7495.

EPA Withdraws RCRA Fuels Exclusion, Citing Difficulty Verifying Comparability 

On June, 8, 2010, the U.S. EPA announced it is withdrawing a final rule that had allowed companies to burn certain hazardous wastes as fuel by exempting the wastes from Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulation. The Emission-Comparable Fuels Exclusion was intended to reduce regulatory costs by reclassifying materials that generate emissions similar to those of fuel oil when burned, the agency said. The reclassification of materials such as waste chemicals meant that they would no longer be regulated as hazardous waste.

The rule has been criticized by industry and environmental groups since it was issued during the final days of the Bush administration in December 2008. U.S. EPA is formally withdrawing the earlier regulation in a final rule. The withdrawal will be effective on the date of publication of the new final rule in the Federal Register. U.S. EPA stated that the rule was issued initially because the agency believed that some of the compounds contained in the waste materials, including benzene, acrolein, naphthalene, and polyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, would be burned off during combustion, leaving emissions of the waste material comparable to those of fuel oil burned in industrial boilers. The agency said it is withdrawing the rule because of the difficulty of ensuring that the emissions would be comparable to emissions from burning fuel oil. “The ECF rule was criticized for potentially allowing hazardous waste to evade the hazardous waste regulatory system, and for being difficult to administer,” U.S. EPA said. “Industry members have also criticized it because of the detailed conditions for reclassification, which they believe will limit the rule's use.” The U.S. EPA said the fuel is “more appropriately classified as a hazardous material and regulated as a hazardous waste.”  

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson or John Miller at 1-(800) 229-7495.

EPA Extends Deadline for Label Compliance on Pesticide Containers, Cites Constraints

On June 14, 2010, The U.S. EPA announced that it will extend by 4 months the deadline for complying with pesticide container and containment labeling regulations while a proposed rule granting pesticide formulators a year's extension goes through the rulemaking process.

The final rule pushing back the deadline from Aug. 16 to Dec. 16 and the proposed rule extending it until Aug. 16, 2011 are both scheduled to be published in the June 15 Federal Register.
The final rule “will avoid the temporary removal of a significant number of pesticides from the market” while pesticide registrants, U.S. EPA, and states work to update the pesticide labels to comply with label requirements in the container and containment regulations that were initially promulgated in 2006, U.S. EPA said in the final rule notice. It also will allow more time for U.S. EPA to propose and solicit comments on the proposed 1-year extension “to address concerns raised by stakeholders,” the agency said.

The potentially affected industry pesticide formulators includes establishments that mix and prepare insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, or other pesticides from technical chemicals or concentrates produced by pesticide manufacturing establishments, U.S. EPA said. Most label changes have likely been submitted and approved, the agency said. But there are at least 1,000 labels and potentially several thousand remaining pesticide product labels that the agency said it still needs to review.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EPA ISSUES FINAL GHG TAILORING RULE

On May 13, 2010, the U.S. EPA announced the release of final rules for permitting sources of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) under the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and Title V air permitting programs (see the April 2010 issue of the EQ newsletter for additional background).  The rules require that between January 2, 2011 and June 30, 2011, only sources that are currently subject to PSD and Title V permitting would be subject to permitting for GHGs (i.e., no sources would be subject to the Clean Air Act permitting due solely to GHG emissions).  During this time, only GHG increases of 75,000 tons per year (tpy) or more would be subject to a Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis of GHGs under the PSD program.  As noted in the April e-newsletter, there is no “grandfathering” of PSD applications in process as of January 2, 2011 (i.e., a BACT analysis would be required for GHG emission increases greater than 75,000 tpy for any PSD permit issued after that date). 

After July 1, 2011, new sources emitting more than 100,000 tpy of GHGs and modifications increasing GHG emissions more than 75,000 tpy would be subject to PSD review, regardless of whether PSD was triggered for other pollutants.  Facilities that emit at least 100,000 tpy would be subject to Title V permitting requirements.  EPA estimates that 550 additional sources will need to obtain Title V permits due to their GHG emissions.  EPA plans additional rulemaking that would govern permitting after June 2013. 

The tailoring rules will be published in the Federal Register shortly. 

For more information, refer to the EPA website or contact EQ’s Kent Berry or Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299 or Jeff Slayback at (800) 229-7495. 

For additional Greenhouse Gas tailoring rules, go to the EPA website.  

EPA Proposes Incinerator Emissions Limits, Addresses Court Decision on Solid Waste

On April 30, 2010, the U.S. EPA announced that it is proposing revisions to the new source performance standards for solid waste incinerators to control emissions of nine pollutants, including air toxics. The proposed revisions to the new source performance standards for commercial and industrial solid waste incinerators would require the facilities to install controls to reduce emissions of mercury, lead, cadmium, hydrogen chloride, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, dioxins and furans, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. In addition to those proposed standards, U.S. EPA also released a separate proposed rule to determine whether a combustion unit is required to meet emission standards for solid waste incineration units or emission standards for commercial, industrial, and institutional boilers. U.S. EPA proposed the performance standards for incinerators and revisions to the definition of solid waste rules as part of a package of rules targeting the incinerator and boiler industries.  In two other separate rules, U.S. EPA proposed air toxics control requirements for boilers and process heaters. (See related article in this issue.)

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299 or Jeff Slayback at (800) 229-7495.

EPA Postpones Effective Date of Aggregation Rule

In the May 18, 2010 Federal Register, the U.S. EPA announced that it has decided to delay indefinitely the effective date of a rule limiting some circumstances when facilities are required to install updated pollution controls when they make modifications that increase emissions. The Bush-era rule would require permitting authorities to consider aggregate emissions from power plants, refineries, mines, and paper mills when modifications at those facilities are “substantially” related economically or technically. However, it also would require permitting authorities to presume modifications are unrelated if the modifications occurred three or more years apart. Under the Obama administration, EPA has repeatedly delayed the effective date of the rule and has proposed revoking it and returning to the previous policy on new source review, requiring industrial facilities to consider their emissions in aggregate after completing various projects that increase emissions. EPA announced May 14 that it is extending the comment period on that proposal until June 16 (75 Fed. Reg. 27,191; 92 DEN A-17, 5/14/10).

For more information, refer to the Federal Register notice or contact EQ’s  Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Cincinnati Area Receives Ozone Attainment Redesignation

On May 11, 2010, the U.S. EPA announced that it has promulgated final attainment designations for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton air quality planning area with the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm.  Their final redesignation is based on 2007, 2008, and 2009 monitoring data.  The areas affected by this notice include Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County in Indiana, and Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Hamilton, and Warren Counties in Ohio. In a separate action, U.S. EPA’s proposed redesignation of the northern Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area appeared in the May 12, 2010 Federal Register (75 FR 26685).  The areas affected by this notice include Boone, Campbell, and Kenton Counties.  U.S. EPA is accepting comments through June 11, 2010 and is expected to promulgate the final redesignation by early Fall 2010.

For more information, contact EQ’s Julie Wagner or Jeff Slayback at (800) 229-7495.

EPA Releases Corrections, etc. to the GHG Ruling

On May 27, 2010, the USEPA Administrator signed a proposed rule that includes technical corrections, clarifying and other amendments to the Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting rule (MRR), which was published on October 30, 2009 (40 CFR part 98). In general, the proposed updates would not change the overall requirements of the rule but would improve clarity and ensure consistency across the calculation, monitoring and data reporting requirements.

The proposed amendments consist of the following types of changes:

• Changes to correct cross references within and between subparts.
• Additional information to better or more fully understand compliance obligations in a specific provision.
• Amendments to certain equations to better reflect actual operating conditions.
• Corrections to the terms and definitions in certain equations.
• Corrections to data reporting requirements so that they more closely conform to the information used to perform emission calculations.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Northwest Indiana Receives Ozone Attainment Redesignation

U.S. EPA has promulgated final attainment designation for Lake and Porter Counties in Indiana with the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm. The two counties represent the Indiana portion of the Chicago-Gary-Lake County, Illinois-Indiana ozone nonattainment area. Metropolitan Chicago remains nonattainment with the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Their final redesignation appeared in the May 11, 2010 Federal Register (75 FR 26113) and took effect on that date.

For more information, contact EQ’s Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299 or Jeff Slayback at (800) 229-7495.

U.S. EPA Inspection and Enforcement Actions Continue in 2010

The U.S. EPA is continuing a surge of inspections, enforcement actions, and information collection requests that was stepped up in the latter part of 2009.  Consistent with projections by U.S. EPA themselves, activities concerning hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) are often at the forefront of these efforts. 

Large and small chemical and petrochemical manufacturers continue to be targeted for leak detection and repair (LDAR) program requirements.  Risk Management Program inspections and audits under 40 CFR Part 68 continue to be scrutinized by onsite inspections at different industries, including chemical and metals manufacturers.  Similarly, SARA Title III, Section 313 (TRI Form R) onsite inspections and inquiries by U.S. EPA were very active in the first part of 2010. 

Another example of U.S. EPA’s heightened activities is the recent section 114 Information Collection Request made to the Ferroalloy Manufacturing Industry.  This round of information collection included the typical data collection forms for raw materials, operating parameters, equipment specifications, and product data - as well as time-consuming and costly source testing for HAPs. 

To help prepare for U.S. EPA inquiries, companies can:

• Perform internal or third-party audits;
• Conduct specific regulatory program comparisons (e.g., Form R versus annual emission inventories);
• Review relevant HAP release or emission calculations; and
• Review the existing EMS program or develop a new internal compliance management system that incorporates regular inspections of HAP requirements.

 For more information, contact George Mesing at (724) 775-2910.

Penalties for REACH Violations Vary Widely Among EU Member Countries, Report Finds

On April 27, 2010, the European Commission (EC) released a study showing that penalties for breaches of the European Union’s Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH) legislation vary widely among countries and might not be sufficient to ensure compliance. The study, prepared for the commission by the Belgian consulting firm Milieu, showed that countries differ in the type of enforcement regime, the level of sanctions, and the dissuasiveness of penalties. The differences “could lead to a risk of some companies avoiding countries with a more stringent compliance system,” the report said. This could create EU market distortions and “reduce the level of protection of human health and the environment in those countries with less severe systems of penalties,” the report added. Under EU registration, evaluation, and authorization of chemicals regulation (EC No. 1907/2006), EU countries were required to adopt enforcement legislation and report it to the European Commission by Dec. 1, 2008.

Differing Levels of Fines

According to the study, “the fine is the sanction most commonly provided for in the legislation” of EU member states. Maximum fines range from less than €5,000 ($6,615) in Latvia and Lithuania to €55 million ($73 million) in Belgium, while the United Kingdom does not state a limit. Ireland and Poland also apply high fines, the report added. Countries are divided over the use of criminal or administrative penalties, with Austria, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Greece, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia largely applying administrative sanctions, while Ireland, Malta, and the United Kingdom enforce REACH under their criminal law, and other countries use a combination of administrative and criminal sanctions. Reportedly, for chemicals imported into the European Union in annual volumes of 1,000 metric tons or more, “the level of fine incurred is not high enough to match the high costs of compliance” in most countries. However, powers to enforce REACH have been “well allocated under national law” and enforcement authorities are well prepared to ensure a maximum effectiveness of the measures at their disposal.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Fluorescent and HID Lamps Handling Requirements

Many waste fluorescent lamps are hazardous wastes due to their mercury content. Other examples of lamps that, when spent, are commonly classified as hazardous waste include: high-intensity discharge (HID), neon, mercury vapor, high-pressure sodium, and metal halide lamps. Low-mercury lamps that pass the TCLP are not regulated as hazardous wastes but still contain mercury and may be subject to various Mercury-Added Consumer Products Laws on a State by State basis.

Generators of hazardous waste lamps may choose between handling their lamps under the traditional regulatory scheme or as universal wastes. However, once lamps are declared to be universal wastes, the owner must continue to handle them as universal wastes because jumping back and forth between the traditional RCRA approach and the universal waste rule to avoid any requirements is prohibited.  A handler of hazardous waste lamps who fails to comply with the universal waste rule may be in violation of hazardous waste laws and regulations.

For more information, visit EQ’s website or contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EPA Proposes Revised Rules for Incinerators

On April 29, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) announced the proposal of revised Clean Air Act (CAA) rules for commercial and industrial solid waste incineration (CISWI) units.  Also on April 29, EPA released a proposed RCRA rule that clarifies which nonhazardous secondary materials are, or are not, “solid waste” when burned.   Sources burning “solid waste” are subject to the CISWI rules if they are not subject to other incinerator rules such as municipal waste incinerator rules.  The CISWI rules include new source performance standards (NSPS) for new sources and emission guidelines (EG) to be adopted by the States to regulate existing CISWI.  The CISWI rules would set emission limits for metals (Pb, Hg, Cd), dioxins, 4 criteria pollutants, and HCl and would apply to the 176 existing CISWI units. 

For more information, refer to the EPA website or contact EQ’s Kent Berry or Tom Robertson at 800 229-5299. 

EPA Proposes Revised Boiler NESHAP Rules

On April 29, 2010, USEPA announced the proposal of revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) rules for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers, commonly known as the Boiler MACT rules.  One set of rules applies to boilers located at plants that are considered major sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) and would affect approximately 13,500 existing boilers nationwide.  The other rules affect “area source” facilities (non-major HAP plants) and would affect approximately 183,000 existing boilers at 92,000 plants. 

The area source rules apply to boilers that burn coal, oil, and biomass, but not units that burn solid waste.  Separate requirements are proposed for large and small boilers (above and below 10 million Btu/h) and for new and existing boilers.  For existing large boilers, emission limits are proposed for mercury and CO for coal-fired units and only for CO for biomass- and oil-fired units.  Existing small boilers would not be subject to emission limits, but would be required to perform a boiler tune-up every 2 years. 

The major source rules would apply to boilers producing steam and to process heaters fired by the above fuels as well as natural gas and refinery gas.  Standards and operating practices are proposed for 11 different subcategories based on size, fuel type, design, and age (existing versus new).  Gas-fired boilers and units less than 10 million Btu/h would only be required to perform a tune-up every 2 years.  All other boilers would be subject to emission limits for mercury, dioxins, particulate matter, hydrogen chloride (HCl), and CO. 

The proposals will be published in the Federal Register in the next several weeks.  EPA is under court order to finalize these rules by December 16, 2010. 

For more information, refer to the EPA website or contact Kent Berry at 800 229-5299 or Jeff Slayback at 800 229-7495. 

EPA Issues New NESHAP Reporting Standards

On 24 March 2010, the USEPA issued a proposed rule [75 FR 15655] to address how states must permit facilities when a National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) has been vacated by the courts and how and when a source would submit a Title V permit application or revision to initiate a case-by-case maximum achievable control technology (MACT) determination. Section 112(j) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), also known as the “permit hammer,” requires states to establish case-by-case permit emission limits for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) when a NESHAP is not in place.

CAA Section 112(j) requires major sources in a listed category or subcategory for which USEPA fails to promulgate MACT standards by established deadlines to submit permit applications beginning 18 months after the deadlines. Federal or state permitting agencies must then determine on a case-by-case basis emission limits equivalent to the limits that would apply if a MACT standard had been issued on time. The Section 112(j) rule, however, does not include the situation when a NESHAP is vacated and does not address the timing or process of permit applications. This proposed rule was developed due to confusion following the recent vacatures of the NESHAPs for the following source categories: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production; Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing; Clay Ceramics Manufacturing; and Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters.

The proposed rule includes minor edits to verbiage, in addition to the following substantive changes:

• Clarifies that CAA Section 112(j) applies in the case of the complete vacature of a Section 112(d) rule establishing MACT standards for an initially listed major source category.  Streamlines the permit application process by combining the Part 1 and Part 2 permit applications into one application.
• Adjusts the timeline for permit application submittals. Permit applications for sources affected by a NESHAP vacature would be due within 90 days after promulgation of the final rule (rather than the previous timeline of 180 days).
• Eliminates the applicability determination requests.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EPA STAYS BUSH ADMINISTRATION NSR RULES INVOLVING FUGITIVE EMISSIONS

On March 31, 2010, USEPA published an additional stay of a Bush Administration rule published on December 19, 2008 (see January 2009 e-newsletter) regarding inclusion of fugitive emissions in determining the applicability of New Source Review (NSR) rules for major sources being modified.  The December 2008 rules changed previous rules under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment NSR (NNSR) program by limiting the inclusion of fugitive emissions only to modified sources in 28 named source categories.  The March 31 final rule continued until October 3, 2011, an existing stay that reinstated the previous provisions on a temporary basis pending further rulemaking.  During the stay, fugitive emissions must be included, to the extent quantifiable, in determining whether PSD or NNSR applies to modifications for all types of sources, not just the 28 named source categories. 

For additional information, see the Federal Register or contact EQ’s Kent Berryat (800) 229-5299. 

EPA PROPOSES RECONSIDERATION OF NSR AGGREGATION RULE

On April 15, 2010, the USEPA proposed to reconsider a Bush Administration rule published on January 15, 2009, concerning when a source must aggregate emissions from nominally separate projects for determining applicability of major source New Source Review (NSR) programs (see February 2009 e-newsletter).  The April 2010 notice proposes to extend the effective date of the NSR Aggregation Amendments until at least November 18, 2010, and requests comments on a range of legal and policy issues presented by environmental petitioners on the Aggregation Rule.  USEPA’s preferred option is to revoke the January 2009 NSR Aggregation Amendments. 

For additional information, see http://www.epa.gov/nsr/guidance.html, or contact EQ’s Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299. 

Compliance Monitoring/Sulfur Dioxide Compliance Requirements

A Notice from the Department of Environmental Management, Air Pollution Control Board, announced a second comment period for a Dec. 1, 2005, draft proposal that amends regulations under 326 IAC 3-4-1 through 3-7-5 (nonconsecutive) and 7-2-1 and adopts regulations under a new Section 326 IAC 3-6-6 regarding compliance monitoring and sulfur dioxide compliance requirements. The rule corrects deficiencies identified by USEPA in the compliance monitoring requirements to clarify that when the commissioner exercises discretion to modify or remove federally enforceable requirements, the exercise of this discretion is to be accompanied by USEPA approval as a revision to the state implementation plan. The rule also allows peaking units that are subject to the acid rain provisions under 40 CFR 75 to comply with the continuous emission monitoring provisions in 40 CFR 75 instead of those under the new source performance standards under 40 CFR 60. In addition, the rule allows the use of a continuous emission monitoring system for measuring particulate matter rather than a continuous opacity monitoring system, if certain criteria are met and it is approved by the department. Finally, the rule makes technical corrections and clarifications concerning emission monitoring requirements. A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 1, 2010, in Indianapolis. Comments are due April 30, 2010. Contact: Susan Bem, DEM, Office of Air Quality (317-233-5697). --Indiana Register (03/25/2010)

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Climate Bill Collapse in the Senate

On April 26, 2010, Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) plan to release a bipartisan climate bill in the Senate collapsed.  Sen. Graham, one of the bill’s three authors, declared he couldn’t support it if Democrats decided to prioritize Immigration Reform. "I want to bring to your attention what appears to be a decision by the Obama Administration and Senate Democratic leadership to move Immigration instead of energy,” Graham said in a letter released Saturday. “Unless their plan substantially changes this weekend, I will be unable to move forward on energy independence legislation at this time. I will not allow our hard work to be rolled out in a manner that has no chance of success."

Graham has been negotiating a bipartisan agreement with John Kerry (D– Mass) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) for months. The trio appeared to be closing in on a deal over the last few weeks—talking with industry groups and hammering out last-minute compromises—and had planned to release the legislation on April 26.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EPA to Consider Energy Efficiency as Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Green House Gas Emission Controls

On April 9, 2010, USEPA’s Assistant Administrator Gina McCarthy said she and her staff are seeking advice on how the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) process can be used to encourage energy efficiency and how a waiver for innovative control technologies can be used to promote the development of new pollution controls.  Specifically, she requested the agency’s Clean Air Act Advisory Committee’s climate change work group to consider how an “innovative control technology” waiver can be used or changed to promote the development and application of new pollution controls.  She further requested them to finalize their report by the next meeting of USEPA’s clean air advisory committee, which is scheduled for May 26-27.

As USEPA proceeds with climate rules, large new stationary sources and modified facilities will need to install BACT to obtain federal air permits. State regulators will determine what constitutes BACT on a case-by-case basis as they review individual applications. State and local air regulators and industries are anxiously awaiting USEPA’s guidance as they prepare for the agency to begin regulating some large industrial facilities in January 2011. 

Some industry representatives have expressed concern that USEPA would issue guidance recommending fuel-switching or nascent technologies such as carbon capture and sequestration, but McCarthy has sought recently to downplay those possibilities. She recently told an audience at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies that the agency has not required switching fuels before, adding “There’s been good reason why we haven’t done it in the past.”

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EU Agency Publishes List of Chemicals Scheduled for Registration Under REACH

On April 16, 2010,The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) published a list of 4,415 substances that it expects to be registered by a deadline of Nov. 30 in compliance with the European Union’s REACH legislation. The list was compiled from information supplied by companies concerning their plans to register substances and will be updated periodically, ECHA said.

The agency added that the list is primarily aimed at companies using chemical substances in the manufacture of their products, because it would enable them to check “whether the critical chemical substances that they need are going to be registered in time.”  Companies using substances not on the list should contact their suppliers to determine the suppliers' intentions to register, ECHA said.

Nov. 30 is the first major deadline for substance registrations under the registration, evaluation, and authorization of chemicals legislation, known as REACH. The deadline applies to substances manufactured in, or imported into, the EU in annual volumes of 1,000 metric tons or more and to some toxic substances at lower volumes. 

The figure of 4,415 substances on the ECHA “intended registrations” list contrasts with a European Commission figure of 9,000 substances that will need to be registered by the Nov. 30 deadline. The figure also contrasts with a total of 2,448 substances for which Substance Information Exchange Forums (SIEFs) had been formed by April 14.

REACH requires companies to share substance data and make joint registrations through SIEFs, and thus to comply with a principle of “one substance, one registration.”  ECHA warned companies that if they miss the Nov. 30 deadline, “it will be illegal to manufacture or sell [nonregistered substances] within the EU.”

For more information, contact EQ’s  Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Ohio EPA Proposes to Amend RCRA Regulation

The Ohio EPA (OEPA) proposed to amend regulations under OAC 3745-50-11 through -62 (nonconsecutive) and -51-02 to update hazardous waste management standards to incorporate amendments to federal RCRA regulations as of March 16, 2009. The rule revises provisions concerning incorporations by reference, exclusions of hazardous wastes, permits, variances, recycling, inspection of public records, and trade secrets. The rule also addresses fees, siting criteria documents, public notification procedures, inclusions and exclusions for permits, and trial burns. A hearing is scheduled for May 20, 2010, in Columbus. Comments are due May 20, 2010. Contact: Kit Arthur, OEPA, Division of Hazardous Waste Management (614-644-2932).

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EPA PROPOSES CHANGES FOR CASE-BY-CASE MACT DETERMINATIONS

On March 30, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) proposed changes to clarify and streamline the determination of case-by-case Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) emission limits under Section 112(j) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (the so-called MACT Hammer provision).  The changes only apply to major source categories initially listed by U.S. EPA  in 1992, and a court has vacated the subsequent MACT rules in their entirety.  The rules and source categories affected by the revised 112(j) procedures are:  PVC and Copolymers Production; Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing; Clay Ceramics Manufacturing; and Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Processes Heaters.  For these source categories, U.S. EPA is proposing a permit application deadline (to be submitted to the State Title V permitting authority) of 90 days after promulgation of the revised 112(j) rules or the date requested by the permitting authority, whichever is earlier.  The current Part 1 and Part 2 application process would be replaced by a single application. 

For additional information, see the Federal Register or contact EQ’s Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299. 

EPA DEFERS PERMITTING FOR GHGs

On March 29, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection agency (U.S. EPA) announced the signing of a final Federal Register (FR) notice that defers Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V air permitting for greenhouse gases (GHGs) – see the February 2010 issue of the EQ newsletter.  The notice reaffirms the policy issued under the Bush Administration that PSD permitting is not triggered for a pollutant such as GHGs until a final nationwide rule requires actual control of the pollutant.  The notice further interprets that “actual control” means when the rule “takes effect” – rather than upon FR publication or the effective date of the nationwide rule.  This means that the upcoming publication of rules limiting GHG emissions from cars and light trucks, which will require control of vehicles sold in the United States after January 2, 2011, does not trigger PSD and Title V permitting until after that date.  The notice states that there is no “grandfathering” of pending permit applications, however, so PSD permits still in process will need to include a Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis for GHGs if they are not issued by January 2, 2011.  Finally, U.S. EPA notes that it intends to complete final action soon on the GHG Tailoring rule that would raise the GHG emission thresholds that trigger PSD and Title V permitting.  The above policy decisions are effective on March 29, 2010. 

For additional information, see http://www.epa.gov/nsr/guidance.html , or contact EQ’s Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299. 

EPA PROPOSES ADDITIONAL GHG REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

On March 22, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) announced proposed rules that would amend its October 30, 2009, Mandatory Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Rules (see October 2009 e-newsletter) to require reporting by seven additional source categories.  These proposed rules would require reporting of fugitive and vented methane and CO2 from approximately 3000 facilities in the petroleum and natural gas industry.  The proposed rules would also require reporting of fluorinated GHGs, the most potent and persistent of the GHGs, by five source categories covering approximately 385 facilities where these gases are manufactured or used. 

The additional facilities covered by the proposed rules would be required to report by March 31, 2012 for calendar year 2011.  U.S. EPA also proposed minor additional reporting requirements in the Subpart A General Provisions that would apply to all sources covered by the GHG reporting rules. 

For additional information, see the U.S. EPA Website or contact EQ’s Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299. 

EPA Authorizes Changes to RCRA

On March 18, 2010 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) proposed and simultaneously published direct final rules on a number of technical changes that correct or clarify several parts of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste regulations.  RCRA relates to hazardous waste identification; manifesting; the hazardous waste generator requirements; standards for owners and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; standards for the management of specific types of hazardous waste and specific types of hazardous waste management facilities; the land disposal restrictions program; and the hazardous waste permit program. These changes clarify existing parts of the hazardous waste regulatory program and update references to Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations that have changed since the publication of various RCRA hazardous waste final rules. The Direct Final Rule is effective on June 16, 2010 unless adverse comments are received by May 3, 2010.

Authorized States are required to modify their programs only when U.S. EPA promulgates Federal regulations that are more stringent or broader in scope than the authorized State regulations. This Direct Final rule is considered to be neither more nor less stringent than the current standards. Therefore, authorized States would not be required to modify their programs to adopt the technical corrections promulgated today, although U.S. EPA strongly urges the States to adopt these technical corrections to avoid any confusion or misunderstanding by the regulated community and the public.  One exception to the above discussion concerns clarifications of the manifest regulations in 40 CFR 262.23. All authorized States will be required to adopt these revisions in accordance with the consistency requirements in 40 CFR 271.4(c).

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Cincinnati Area Proposed for Ozone Attainment Designation

In the February 26, 2010 issue of the Federal Register (75 FR 8871), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) proposed that the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton air quality planning area be redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).  The proposed redesignation is based on 2007, 2008, and 2009 air quality monitoring data.  The areas affected by this notice include Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County in Indiana, and Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Hamilton, and Warren Counties in Ohio.  U.S. EPA notes that proposed redesignation for the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton region will appear in the FR under a separate action.  U.S. EPA accepted comments through March 29 and is expected to promulgate the final redesignation by Summer 2010.  One immediate impact of this action is that permits for major new or modified sources involving  emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) or NOx that are issued after the final redesignation would be under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules rather than  the Nonattainment New Source Review requirements. 

For further information, refer to the Federal Register notice or contact EQ’s Kent Berry at (800) 229-5299 or Jeff Slayback at (800) 229-7495.

EPA Proposes Changes to TSCA

In the February 19, 2010 issue of the Federal Register, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) announced that it is seeking to alter its procedures for negotiating binding agreements that require chemical makers to conduct toxicity testing, proposing among other things to set a firm deadline for ending talks that are not likely to result in an agreement.  The proposal generally would require negotiations to terminate automatically after 6 months, at which point the agency could pursue a formal test rule for a substance under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). This proposal would alter regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 790 that were promulgated in 1986.
In addition, U.S. EPA has for the first time made available the public portion of the TSCA inventory free online.  Until now, the public portion of the TSCA inventory has been available only by purchase from sources such as the Department of Commerce’s National Technical Reports Library.  The inventory consists of a public or “non-confidential” section and a confidential section that protects information that could harm a company’s ability to sell its product.  U.S. EPA’s announcement said that more than 84,000 chemicals are listed on the comprehensive inventory.

For more information, refer to the Federal Register notice or contact EQ’s  Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

EPA Plans to Lift Stay on Hydrogen Sulfide Releases Reporting

In the February 26 Federal Register, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) announced that a 16-year-old administrative stay on a requirement for industrial facilities to report releases of hydrogen sulfide should be lifted.  The stay applies to a 1993 rule requiring power plants, petroleum refineries, mining operations, and other industrial facilities to annually report releases of hydrogen sulfide. 

U.S. EPA listed hydrogen sulfide under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning Community Right-to-know Act of 1986 on December 1, 1993, in response to a petition from the Natural Resources Defense Council and the State of New York. 

U.S. EPA will accept comments on its consideration of lifting the administrative stay until April 26, 2010.  Comments may be submitted to http://www.regulations.gov and should reference docket No. EPA-HQ-TRI-0844.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

DHS Reauthorizing the Chemical Security Bill for Water Systems

On March 3, 2010, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that it is writing legislation to reauthorize the chemical facility security program to requires the use of safer chemicals and more stringent security measures at water system facilities.

The provision, known as “inherently safer technology” (IST), was included in a bill that passed the House of Representatives in November.  This bill would strengthen and expand existing interim security standards and make them permanent.  The Chemical Facility Antiterrorism Standards (CFATS) were established as interim rules under a 2006 appropriations bill.  Authority of the CFATS program expired in 2009, but was extended for another year.  Under the rules, DHS required high-risk chemical facilities to complete security vulnerability assessments, develop site security plans, and implement protective measures necessary to meet DHS-defined risk-based performance standards.

For more information, contact EQ’s Mike Arozarena at (800) 229-7495.

EPA Names 4 of 71 Drinking Water Rules for Likely Changes After 6-Year Review

On March 22, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) announced that it has selected four regulated chemicals as candidates for rule revisions under the agency's 6-year review of primary drinking water regulations.The four are the common solvents trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene and two impurities that show up in drinking water treatment, epichlorohydrin and acrylamide.

Those were selected from among 71 regulations considered under the Safe Drinking Water Act, which mandates the 6-year reviews. This was the agency's second 6-year review. U.S. EPA explained that it did not select some notable rules for revision because they are the subject of recent and ongoing regulatory actions, as in the case of the lead and copper rule and the total coliform rule.

Trichloroethylene is widely used as a degreasing compound. Cynthia Dougherty, director of the U.S. EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, told a meeting of the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies that the agency concluded that improvements in analytic feasibility were reason enough to revise the trichloroethylene rule.

Tetrachloroethylene, also called perchloroethylene, is used for dry cleaning and is a common solvent in the textile industry as well as being used to degrease metals. Epichlorohydrin and acrylamide get into the polymers that water utilities use in the coagulation process, which causes particles to clump together so that filtration can more easily remove them. Most metropolitan water agencies use such coagulant polymers, Dougherty said.

Various health problems have been associated with chronic exposure to the four chemicals. In terms of cancer risk, U.S. EPA classes epichlorohydrin and acrylamide as probable carcinogens, while the agency is less settled on classifications for the two chlorinated solvents. EPA is working on an update of its trichloroethylene health assessment (15 DEN A-7, 1/26/10).

For more information, contact EQ’s John Wentz at (800) 229-7495.

U.S. EPA New Enforcement Initiatives for Fiscal Years 2011-2013

On February 22, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) announced new enforcement goals and the National Enforcement Initiatives for fiscal years 2011-2013.  During this time period, the U.S. EPA has determined it will use National Enforcement Initiatives to address the following six environmental and public health problems:

1. Keeping raw sewage and contaminated stormwater out of our nation’s waters.
2. Preventing animal waste from contaminating surface and ground water.
3. Cutting toxic air pollution that affects communities’ health.
4. Reducing widespread air pollution from the largest sources, especially the coal-fired utility, cement, glass, and acid sectors.
5. Reducing pollution from mineral processing operations.
6. Ensuring energy extraction sector compliance with environmental laws.

U.S. EPA selects these priority areas every 3 years in order to focus federal resources on the most important environmental problems where noncompliance is a significant contributor.

For more information, contact EQ’s Tom Robertson at (800) 229-5299.

Wind Power Strengthens in the Midwest

In May 2008, Ohio passed the third-most-aggressive standard (the Ohio Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard) in the US calling for 25% of electricity consumed in Ohio by 2025 to be advanced/renewable. Therefore, there is expected to be approximately 6,000 megawatts (MW) of wind energy development in the next 15 years based on Ohio’s historical 7 MW of wind power.  State regulators have approved construction of the first large wind turbine farms in Ohio.

The Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB) last week approved three separate projects in western Ohio after about a year of review and hearings. The siting board is still reviewing three additional wind farm projects.

Hardin Wind Energy LLC is approved to construct up to 200 wind turbines with a generation capacity of about 300 MW.  JW Great Lakes Wind LLC is approved to build up to 27 wind turbines in Hardin County, and Buckeye Wind LLC is approved to construct up to 54 wind turbines in Champaign County northeast of Dayton. This means there could be an impact to Ohio employment at least in the Hardin/Marion county area where it is estimated that the wind farm projects will generate hundreds of short-term jobs.  Additionally the wind farms will produce about 10 permanent jobs in operation and maintenance. Construction of both Hardin County wind farms is expected to begin this year, with the 27-turbine farm beginning commercial operation in mid-2011.

The Buckeye wind project application process has stretched on since April of last year, and mixed reactions have followed the OPSB decision. Those who are in favor of the turbines have said the project could bring new jobs and investment to the county, while those opposed have raised concerns that the turbines are not set back far enough from homes in the county.  For others, the state’s decision means the project can finally get under way.  Michael Speerschneider, director of development for Everpower, said Everpower will still need to conduct additional engineering and survey work, as well as a cultural and historical survey of the area, among other requirements. He said the turbines should be able to produce electricity in 2011. 

Pat Davies, Morrow County's director of operations, estimates that the wind farm project being considered in Morrow County would create 50 to 100 construction jobs and 10 to 12 long-term positions. That wind farm was projected in 2008 to include 33 to 100 wind turbines. 

The windswept Great Lakes hold huge promise for wind power, experts say. Until recently, most attention in the United States was focused on land-based wind power. But now it appears that offshore wind power is not far off, and some states and the province of Ontario are racing to bring wind power to the Great Lakes. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) rates the wind on the Great Lakes as "outstanding" in certain places. Overall, the DOE rates the wind on the Great Lakes as equal to or better than the wind on the Great Plains.The Great Lakes region has several new offshore wind farm possibilities for the near future as U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Governor Ted Strickland joined Cleveland leaders on March 29 to outline plans to advance offshore wind energy projects. Michigan has been planning to capitalize on its wind power potential for some time. New York has ambitious plans for wind power as well.

For more information, go to http://ourmidland.com, or contact EQ’s Colleen Lear at 1-800- 229-7495.