OAQPS Rule and Program Update National Tribal Forum

1
OAQPS Rule and Program Update National Tribal
Forum

• Laura McKelvey
• June 2

1
2

• NAAQS and Designations Schedule

3
Court ordered deadline
Current Schedules do not reflect possible
revised schedules reflecting options for
reconsideration
4
EPA Tribal Designations for NAAQS - Update

• Ozone Designations Schedule Overview (subject to
  change)
• State Tribal recommendations due March 12,
  2009
• Send 120-Day Letters to S/T/l November 12, 2009
• Publish FRN re 120-day letters November 2009
• End of 60-day comment period for S/T/l January
  2010
• End of 30-day comment period for public December
  2010
• Prepare responses to S/T/T,public
  comments Jan-Feb 2012
• Produce final TSDs Jan-Feb 2012
• Administrator signs final designations March 12,
  2012
• Publish designations final rule April, 2012

5

• Technology Standards

6
Technology Standards Sector Strategy

• Achieves better environmental benefits and public
  health protection
• Uses a more holistic, multipollutant approach
• Minimizes regulatory and administrative burdens
  and
• Leverages federal, tribal, state, and local
  resources more efficiently and effectively

7
Goal of Sector Strategy

• To group activities that are under common control
  and typically fall within a facility fenceline,
  and are used to make a product or group of
  products.
• Activities comprise various equipment, control
  devices and air pollution sources
• To use these groupings to align elements of the
  federal stationary source emissions standards
  programs and set priorities
• Synchronize rules, assign resources, maximize
  environmental benefits, etc.

• Types of activities
• Boilers
• Heaters
• Storage tanks
• Vents
• Wastewater
• Engines
• Furnaces

8
Summary of Regulations By Industry Group
9
Sector Strategy Example Petroleum Refineries
Regulatory Actions
Sector Approach
NSPS Db tech review
New Boiler MACT(?)
Sector Action
NSPS tech review
UUU Residual Risk Rule and Technology Review
CC Residual Risk Rule and Technology Review EEE
Residual Risk Rule NSPS tech reviews
Sector Action
10
Progress Under Way

• Designing comprehensive sector analysis
• Initial scoping sectors
• Petroleum Refineries, Cement, Iron and Steel,
  Pulp Paper
• Prioritize sectors and opportunities
• Develop work plans
• Refine tools for holistic analysis
• Encourage staff buy-in
• Using to inform deadline discussions
• Working to identify issues with long-term goals

11
Preliminary Sector Priorities

• Electric Utilities
• Boilers and Process Heaters
• Ferrous Metals
• Pulp and Paper
• Petroleum Refineries
• Cement Manufacturing
• Brick Manufacturing

• Non-Ferrous Metals
• Chemical Manufacturing
• Oil and Gas Production and Distribution
• Waste Incineration
• Metal Foundries
• Formulated Products Manufacturing and Use
• Plywood Manufacturing

12
Proposed Cement MACT Emission Limits
a For Hg, THC, and PM these limits would apply to
major and area sources. For HCl these limits
only apply to major sources. b We believe this
value may be biased low due to lack of data.
13
Other Requirements and Emissions Reductions

• Emissions Monitoring All sources
• Continuous monitors for mercury and THC
• Bag Leak detectors for PM (PM CEMS as an
  alternative)
• Continuous monitors for HCl if no wet scrubber
• Test Methods and Performance Specifications
• Reproposing PS-12A and Proposing PS12B for
  Mercury Monitoring
• Lowering the detection limit of EPA Method 321
• Emissions Reductions
• Mercury 11,600 to 16,250 pounds, or a reduction
  of 81 to 93 percent
• Total hydrocarbons 11,670 to 13,900 tons, or a
  reduction of 75 percent
• Particulate matter 10,500 to 10,600 tons, or a
  reduction of 90 to 96 percent
• Hydrochloric acid 2,800 to 3,600 tons, or a
  reduction of 92 to 94 percent and
• Sulfur dioxide 135,700 to 160,000 a reduction of
  77 to 90 percent.

14
Estimated Costs and Benefits of Proposed Cement
NESHAP
a Assumes PM2.5 fraction is 45. Includes
emission reductions from existing kilns and
assumes 20 new kilns by 2013. Includes emission
reductions from controls on HCl, THC, and Hg. b
Benefits estimates are for the year 2013. c
Includes compliance costs and costs to consumers
due to increases in cement prices.
15
Rulemaking Update
16
Area Source MACT Current Status

• A total of 70 area source categories have been
  listed
• Standards have been promulgated for 51 categories
• 19 categories remain to be addressed under March
  2006 Court Order (Unopposed motion to amend filed
  5/7/09)
• 3 source categories by June 15, 2009
• 14 source categories by August 17, 2009
• 3 source categories by July 15, 2010 (tied to
  112(c)(6) deadline proposal for gold mining by
  August 15, 2009)

17
Remaining Categories BINS 5 and 6

• Bin 5 Final Rules August 2009
• Chemical Manufacturing (450 facilities) covers
  processes such as vents, cooling towers,
  wastewater, equipment leaks, and tanks, (9
  categories in one rule)
• Bin 6 Final Rules June 2009
• Copper, Aluminum and Other Nonferrous Foundries
  (3 categories in one rule)
• Bin 6 Final Rules August 2009
• Chemical Preparation
• Prepared Feeds
• Paint and Allied Products
• Asphalt Roofing
• Three categories extend into 2010 for
  promulgation
• Commercial Institutional Boilers
• Industrial Boilers
• Sewage Sludge Incineration

18
Current Status of Risk and Technology Rule
Projects

• RTR Phase 2 Group 1
• Final rule signed December 10, 2008 8 Categories
• RTR Phase 2 Group 2
• Published the Group 2 ANPRM on March 29, 2007 22
  categories
• Group 2A Proposal signed September 29, 2008
  proposed 5 MACT
• November 13, 2008, Sierra Club notice of intent
  to sue on 34 source categories for residual risk
  and technology review (Answer deadline July 21,
  2009)
• Halogenated Solvents (Joint motion filed November
  3, 2008 to hold case in abeyance per EPA
  agreement to issue final rule October 30, 2009).
• Dry Cleaning (April 29, 2009 Court granted
  unopposed motion for voluntary remand of the
  record to permit reconsideration).
• Petroleum Refineries (Signed January 16, 2009,
  but not published)
• New Administration to review current policies

19
Electric Generating Units (EGUs)

• EPA has outstanding obligations under the Clean
  Air Act to issue or consider rules affecting
  power plants. For example, EPA must
• Issue a replacement rule for the Clean Air
  Interstate Rule (CAIR), following a court
  decision that found CAIR legally flawed
• Issue a utility MACT standard, following a court
  decision that struck down the Clean Air Mercury
  Rule (CAMR)
• Take action on the boiler NSPS (which includes
  utility boilers
• Remand to decide whether the new source
  performance standard should limit CO2
• Pending litigation on SO2 and NOx limits
• PM2.5 rule

20
Status of Utility MACT

• In February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
  the D.C. Circuit vacated the cap-and-trade
  program regulation and EPAs rule removing power
  plants from the list of sources to be regulated
  by section 112
• This leaves EPA with a requirement to set a MACT
  standard for coal and oil-fired power plants
• The new Administration withdrew its petition for
  certiori for Supreme Court review of the appeals
  court decision. The Supreme Court denied
  certiori to the industry petitioners
• Several environmental and health organizations
  have filed a deadline suit for setting MACT for
  coal- and oil-fired power plants
• The Parties recently filed a joint motion, asking
  the Court to extend the answer deadline to June
  20, 2009. The Court granted the motion, in part.
  Specifically, the Court ordered that EPA must
  file its answer by May 26, 2009

21
Status of Data to Support Utility MACT

• EPA has limited data, particularly on the
  non-mercury HAP, and industry-wide data gathering
  is necessary to develop a good, defensible rule
• EPAs current mercury data were collected prior
  to the development of the now vacated CAMR
• The limited data on non-mercury HAP come from the
  1998 Report to Congress
• We have more data for coal-fired units than
  oil-fired units
• Facilities have additional HAP emissions data
  readily available

22
Case-by-Case MACT under sec. 112(g)

• R. J. Meyers to EPA Regional Administrators,
  January 7, 2009
• New Jersey v. EPA court rejection of CAMR EGUs
  remain listed source categories for 112 MACT
• All plants commencing construction after March
  2000 must have 112(g)
• Includes those permitted under CAMR
• Ongoing permit issues

23
EPAs Tribal School Monitoring Initiative
24
About the Initiative

• On March 31, 2009 EPA announced monitoring of
  outdoor air at 62 schools in 22 states.
• Measuring the levels of pollutants in the air
  will help EPA understand whether outdoor air
  quality at the schools poses any health concerns.
  
• We are focusing on schools near
• Large industries
• In urban areas, where air toxics come from a
  variety of sources
• In low-income areas, which are sometimes
  disproportionately affected by pollution

25
What Were Monitoring For

• We are monitoring at schools where we have
  questions about the air that merit investigation.
• Specifically monitoring for HAPs from industrial
  facilities and cars, trucks and buses.

26
Tribal School Effort

• Information on Tribal schools and Inventories is
  limited preventing EPA from including most tribal
  schools in the analysis
• BUT EPA wants to ensure that school children in
  Indian country are equally protected. Gathering
  air quality data at schools in Indian country
  will help us accomplish this.
• Worked with the Regional Offices to identify two
  tribes with nearby sources and potential
  concerns.
• Additional Tribal schools will be identified
  later.

27
Protocal for Additional Tribal Schools

• After the monitoring for these first two schools
  monitors will be sent to the TAMS center for
  re-deployment
• Workgroup of tribal staff will determine criteria
  for re-deployment of monitors
• We will work with the RTOCs and NTOC to identify
  additional interested tribes

28
Nez Perce Lapwai Middle/High school and Southern
Ute Sunnyside Elementary School

• Selected because
• Information raised some questions about outdoor
  air quality around the schools on the list
• Nez Perce Paper Mill and agricultural burning
• Southern Ute Oil and Gas production
• Monitoring will allow us to understand whether
  the air quality poses any health concerns

29
What to expect

• EPA is purchasing monitors for this project.
  Those monitors are being ordered now.
• EPA will pay for sample analysis
• Tribal air staff will visit the site to determine
  where monitors should be set up.
• Monitors will take samples of air every six days
  for 60 days.
• In addition the Tribal agency may take up to
  three additional samples, on a random schedule

30
Examples of Equipment You May See
31
What About Results?

• We will post results on the web as the project is
  under way.
• There is a lag-time between when monitoring
  begins and when results are available.
• We will post data after each sample is analyzed
  and quality assured.
• But we will need all 10 samples before we can
  make a rough projection of health effects from
  chronic exposure to air toxics at a school.
• Well share complete results about three months
  after monitoring begins.

32
Next Steps Depend on Results

• If we find that potential health concerns are
• Low We may end monitoring at that school.
• High EPA will take steps to mitigate the
  pollution causing the problems, and possibly
  continue monitoring.
• If EPA cannot estimate potential effects based on
  the initial phase of monitoring, we may continue
  monitoring to obtain additional data.

33
EPAs Residential Wood Smoke Program

• Great American Wood Stove Changeout
• Burn Wise Education Campaign
• Wood Smoke Control Strategies Document

34
Great American Wood Stove Changeout

• Changeout Benefits
• Reduces fine particles and toxic air pollution by
  70
• Reduces indoor PM2.5 emissions by 70 according
  to U. Montana
• Improves energy efficiency by 50, by using 1/3
  less wood
• Funding Opportunities
• HUD Indian Housing Block Grants
• USDA Rural Development Grants
• Low-income Weatherization
• Federal Tax Credit Stimulus Bill provides for a
  30 tax credit (up to 1,500) for the purchase in
  2009 and 2010 of a 75-efficient
  biomass-burning stove. 
• For more information contact your EPA Regional
  TAC
• or Larry Brockman at brockman.larry_at_epa.gov

35
Burn Wise Education Campaign

• Special focus will be given to individuals who
• burn what's available, (e.g., green wood, trash)
• use older appliances
• are turning to wood as an alternative fuel source
  to heat their homes
• Primary message
• If you burn wood, Burn Wise
• burn as cleanly as possible with the right wood,
  the right way in the right appliance.
• For more information contact Kristen Bremer at
  bremer.kristen_at_epa.gov

36
Wood Smoke Control Strategies Draft Document

• A comprehensive document that includes options to
  address wood smoke in a given community
• Specific information includes
• Education and outreach tools
• Regulatory options
• Wood stove and fireplace changeouts
• Funding options
• Hydronic heater and fireplace programs
• Partnerships
• Emission calculation estimates and air quality
  benefits
• Basic components of a PM2.5 SIP/TIP for wood
  smoke dominated nonattainment areas
• To review and provide comments contact Larry
  Brockman at brockman.larry_at_epa.gov

37
Other Upcoming Issues

• Lead in Aviation Fuel
• Next NTAA call OTAQ will walk through their study
  on lead at small airports
• Exploring NSPS for woodstoves