EPA’s Clean Air Act Operating Permit Rules

Title V of the Clean Air Act requires tens of thousands of air pollution sources to obtain an operating permit incorporating all applicable requirements under the Act. EPA recently promulgated its controversial Title V regulations, which establish the minimum elements for state permit programs.

The new permit system is among the most important changes made by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, and will significantly alter the way companies comply with air pollution requirements. Previously, the Act only required certain sources to obtain a new source review permit before constructing or modifying the facility (although many states established operating permit systems on their own). Now, all states must adopt operating permit programs consistent with the minimum federal requirements, and submit them to EPA by November 1993. Even though EPA has established minimum requirements, these programs are likely to vary widely from state to state.     

Federal Regulations for New Source Performance Standards

Section 111 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to impose emission standards (NSPS) on those stationary sources that are determined to be significant contributors to air pollution and that consequently endanger the public health or welfare. In five years EPA promulgated 19 final and 1 proposed NSPS for stationary sources. Section 112 of the Act authorizes EPA to promulgate national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS). EPA promulgated three final and 1 proposed regulation under Section 112. In addition, EPA promulgated NSPS for three "designated" pollutants from specific sources under Section Hid. EPA’s use of Section 111 and 112 authority provides for a quick response emission control program compared to the relatively slow process of establishing additional ambient air quality standards and having the states adopt implementation plans (Section 109). Three court cases, argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, established basic guidelines for future promulgation of NSPS although certain legal actions are still pending. Proposed amendments to the Clean Air Act would further broaden and strengthen EPA’s direct regulatory authority.     

The New Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program: EPA’s Proposed Regulations

The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments added a new Title V to the Act which establishes an operating permit program for numerous sources of air pollution. Certain sources are currently required to obtain a construction or “new source review” permit; the 1990 Amendments will require many more sources to apply for a permit which will give them permission to operate. CAA Title V was modeled on the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit provisions of the Clean Water Act, but there are important differences between the two statutes.

Although many states already have their own operating permit programs, by late 1993 every state must establish a program that meets the requirements of Title V and EPA’s implementing regulations. EPA recently proposed these regulations, and by the statutory deadline of November 15, 1991 hopes to issue final regulations establishing the minimum elements of state operating permit programs. These regulations will significantly affect implementation of air pollution measures for years to come because a Title V operating permit will have to assure compliance with all applicable CAA requirements. In addition, permitted sources will be required to pay fees to cover the costs of the permit program.     

Air pollutant source characterization using the revised regional haze tracking metric and a photochemical grid model and implications for regional haze planning

The 2017 revisions to the Regional Haze Rule clarify that visibility progress at Class I national parks and wilderness areas should be tracked on days with the highest anthropogenic contributions to haze (impairment). We compare the natural and anthropogenic contributions to haze in the western United States in 2011 estimated using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommended method and using model projections from the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx) and the Particulate Source Apportionment Tool (PSAT). We do so because these two methods will be used by states to demonstrate visibility progress by 2028. If the two methods assume different natural and anthropogenic contributions, the projected benefits of reducing U.S. anthropogenic emissions will differ. The EPA method assumes that episodic elevated carbonaceous aerosols greater than an annual 95th percentile threshold are natural events. For western U.S. IMPROVE monitoring sites reviewed in this paper, CAMx-PSAT confirms these episodes are impacted by carbon from wildfire or prescribed fire events. The EPA method assumes that most of the ammonium sulfate is anthropogenic in origin. At most western sites CAMx-PSAT apportions more of the ammonium sulfate on the most impaired days to global boundary conditions and anthropogenic Canadian, Mexican, and offshore shipping emissions than to U.S. anthropogenic sources. For ammonium nitrate and coarse mass, CAMx-PSAT apportions greater contributions to U.S. anthropogenic sources than the EPA method assigns to total anthropogenic contributions. We conclude that for western IMPROVE sites, the EPA method is effective in selecting days that are likely to be impacted by anthropogenic emissions and that CAMx-PSAT is an effective approach to estimate U.S. source contributions. Improved inventories, particularly international and natural emissions, and further evaluation of global and regional model performance and PSAT attribution methods are recommended to increase confidence in modeled source characterization.

Implications: The western states intend to use the CAMx model to project visibility progress by 2028. Modeled visibility response to changes in U.S. anthropogenic emissions may be less than estimated using the EPA assumptions based on total U.S. and international anthropogenic contributions to visibility impairment. Additional model improvements are needed to better account for contributions to haze from natural and international emissions in current and future modeling years. These improvements will allow more direct comparison of model and EPA estimates of natural and anthropogenic contributions to haze and future visibility progress.     

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Super-fund Innovative Technology Evaluation of Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in cooperation with Accutech Remedial Systems (ARS) and the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), performed a field demonstration of Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction (PFE)^SM for the removal of chlorinated-volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from vadose zones of low permeability. The demonstration was conducted in the fall of 1992 at an industrial park in Somerville, New Jersey, where removal of VOC contamination in shale bedrock was required to comply with New Jersey’s Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act (ECRA). During the demonstration, airflow and contaminant concentrations were monitored to establish a database against which the developer’s claims about the technology were evaluated. The developer contended that PFE would increase extracted airfkiw rates from the subsurface formation by at least 100 percent and would increase the mass removal rate for the key contaminant, trichloroethene (TCE), by at least 50 percent. Also, during the demonstration hot-gas injection was evaluated. Based on comparisons of four-hour test results before and after fracturing, airflow rates increased more than 600 percent, and TCE mass-removal rates increased about 675 percent. The increase in TCE mass-removal rates appeared to be a result, primarily, of the increased airflow. In addition, the extracted air contained significantly higher concentrations of other VOCs after fracturing. Using data developed in the four-hour postfracture test, the estimated cost for a hypothetical one-year clean-up is $140 per pound of TCE removed, or $140 per ton of soil contaminated with one pound of TCE. Experiments to evaluate the effects of injecting heated air, at 200 to 250°F, into the vadose zone gave inconclusive results.     

The "Least Favored Method"—A Primer on the RCRA Land Disposal Regulations

In May of 1990 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed a four year long series of rulemakings on land disposal of over. 450 hazardous wastes regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The new regulations stipulate that hazardous wastes may not be disposed of on land—if at all—unless they are first treated in a prescribed manner. The Land Disposal Regulations (LDRs) will change disposal requirements for approximately 41 million tons of hazardous waste annually, at a cost to the regulated community of over a billion dollars. Despite EPA’s efforts to educate industry, the LDRs remain a source of confusion for many. This article is intended to clear up at least some of the confusion by providing an overview of the regulations and the decision-making processes which occurred during the four years of EPA rulemakings and, more recently, in the courts.     

1990 Update of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s SITE Emerging Technology Program

The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish an Alternative/Innovative Treatment Technology Research and Demonstration Program. The EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response and the Office of Research and Development established a program called the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program to accelerate the development and use of innovative cleanup technologies at hazardous waste sites. The SITE Program comprises of five areas: the Demonstration Program, the Emerging Technology Program, the Measurement and Monitoring Technologies Development Program, the Innovative Technologies Program, and the Technology Transfer Program.

This paper discusses the Emerging Technology Program (ETP) that supports the development of technologies that have been successfully tested at bench-scale level. Before a technology can be accepted into the Emerging Technology Program, sufficient data must be available to validate its basic concepts. The ETP enters into a co-funding effort with developers for a one- or two-year effort. Developers are responsible for contributing financial support and conducting the developmental research. After development and data collection, the technology’s performance is documented and a report is prepared, which may include recommendations for further developing the technology. If test results are encouraging, a technology may proceed with approval to a field demonstration.

The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with (1) an introduction to the Emerging Technology Program (2) an understanding of how the program operates (3) a summary of those technologies currently being tested and evaluated under the program and (4) information on how to apply to the program.     

Conservative heavy metal total discharge schemes

Currently, according to Taiwan’s Water Pollution Control Act, the environmental control of waterbodies and water quality depends on the effluent standards and the standard of water quality in the rivers. The Act demands that each stationary pollution source comply with the effluent standard before being discharged into the rivers, and that the overall water quality in the river shall not exceed the declared standard of water quality. To improve the condition of the waterbodies and water quality of the rivers, the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) in Taiwan has made stricter regulations concerning the discharge standard. Such regulations will help to reduce the weight of individual pollutants discharged; the discharged wastewater, however, will still gradually worsen the water quality of the rivers even after complying with the effluent standard since some of the pollutant dischargers may decrease the concentration of pollutants by diluting the water before discharging; thus, the total weight of metals discharged in the rivers will not be reduced, and the water quality in the areas where the pollutant sources are concentrated will not thereby be significantly improved. To protect the irrigation water and farmlands from being polluted by discharged heavy metals in industrial wastewater, the EPA started controlling the sources in accordance with the total quantity control (TQC) as defined in the Water Pollution Control Act, in the hope of perfecting the environmental protection of waterbodies and water quality, as well as ensuring clean water sources without any pollution for the rivers, land, and people.     

Impact of three interactive Texas state regulatory programs to decrease ambient air toxic levels

The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) framework envisions a federal-state partnership whereby the development of regulations may be at the federal level or state level with federal oversight. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishes National Ambient Air Quality Standards to describe “safe” ambient levels of criteria pollutants. For air toxics, the EPA establishes control technology standards for the 187 listed hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) but does not establish ambient standards for HAPs or other air toxics. Thus, states must ensure that ambient concentrations are not at harmful levels. The Texas Clean Air Act authorizes the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the Texas state environmental agency, to control air pollution and protect public health and welfare. The TCEQ employs three interactive programs to ensure that concentrations of air toxics do not exceed levels of potential health concern (LOCs): air permitting, ambient air monitoring, and the Air Pollutant Watch List (APWL). Comprehensive air permit reviews involve the application of best available control technology for new and modified equipment and ensure that permits protect public health and welfare. Protectiveness may be demonstrated by a number of means, including a demonstration that the predicted ground-level concentrations for the permitted emissions, evaluated on a case-by-case and chemical-by-chemical basis, do not cause or contribute to a LOC. The TCEQ's ambient air monitoring program is extensive and provides data to help assess the potential for adverse effects from all operational equipment in an area. If air toxics are persistently monitored at a LOC, an APWL area is established. The purpose of the APWL is to reduce ambient air toxic concentrations below LOCs by focusing TCEQ resources and heightening awareness. This paper will discuss examples of decreases in air toxic levels in Houston and Corpus Christi, Texas, resulting from the interactive nature of these programs.

Implications: Texas recognized through the collection of ambient monitoring data that additional measures beyond federal regulations must be taken to ensure that public health is protected. Texas integrates comprehensive air permitting, extensive ambient air monitoring, and the Air Pollutant Watch List (APWL) to protect the public from hazardous air toxics. Texas issues air permits that are protective of public health and also assesses ambient air to verify that concentrations remain below levels of concern in heavily industrialized areas. Texas developed the APWL to improve air quality in those areas where monitoring indicates a potential concern. This paper illustrates how Texas engaged its three interactive programs to successfully address elevated air toxic levels in Houston and Corpus Christi.     

Mercury Measurement and Its Control: What We Know,Have Learned,and Need to Further Investigate

ABSTRACT

Based on the available evidence of health effects, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been evaluating the need to regulate mercury releases to the environment. In response to the congressional mandates in The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), the EPA has issued the Mercury Study Report and the Study of Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units Report. In spite of the enormous effort represented by these reports, as well as the efforts of both the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), in conducting the field measurement programs that form the basis for these reports, a definitive answer on the need for mercury regulation has not been found. However, the EPA, as well as other regulatory agencies and health researchers, have suggested a "plausible link" between anthropogenic sources emitting mercury and the methylation, bioaccumulation in the food chain, and adverse health effects in humans and wildlife.     

The Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS): Its Development and Application at Airports and Airbases

A new complex source microcomputer model has been developed for use at civil airports and Air Force bases. This paper describes both the key features of this model and its application in evaluating the air quality impact of new construction projects at three airports: one in the United States and two in Canada.

The single EDMS model replaces the numerous models previously required to assess the air quality impact of pollution sources at airports. EDMS also employs a commercial data base to reduce the time and manpower required to accurately assess and document the air quality impact of airfield operations.

On July 20, 1993, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the final rule (Federal Register, 7/20/93, page 38816) to add new models to the Guideline on Air Quality Models. At that time EDMS was incorporated into the Guideline as an Appendix A model.     

Overview of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Hazardous Air Pollutant Early Reduction Program.

Under provision of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Title III, the EPA has proposed a regulation (Early Reduction Program) to allow a six-year compliance extension from Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards for sources that voluntarily reduce emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) by 90 percent or more (95 percent or more for particulates) from a base year of 1987 or later. The emission reduction must be made before the applicable MACT standard is proposed for the source category or be subject to an enforceable commitment to achieve the reduction by January 1, 1994 for sources subject to MACT standards prior to 1994. The primary purpose of this program is to encourage reduction of HAPs emissions sooner than otherwise required. Industry would be allowed additional time in evaluating emission reduction options and developing more cost-effective compliance strategies, although, under strict guidelines to ensure actual, significant and verifiable emission reductions occur.     

Making cleanup decisions at hazardous waste sites: the clean sites approach.

This paper provides a summary of the results of an 18-month study conducted by Clean Sites, Inc. of Alexandria, Virginia. The study was designed to take a critical look at the way remedies are selected for abandoned hazardous waste sites that are cleaned up under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) and to develop recommendations for improving that process. The recommendations were released in an October 1990 report entitled "Improving Remedy Selection: An Explicit and Interactive Process for the Superfund Program." Through a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Sites is working to test these recommendations. At two actual Superfund sites, Clean Sites will assist EPA in performing the remedy selection in accordance with the process Clean Sites has developed.     

Making Cleanup Decisions at Hazardous Waste Sites: The Clean Sites Approach

This paper provides a summary of the results of an 18-month study conducted by Clean Sites, Inc. of Alexandria, Virginia. The study was designed to take a critical look at the way remedies are selected for abandoned hazardous waste sites that are cleaned up under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) and to develop recommendations for improving that process. The recommendations were released in an October 1990 report entitled “Improving Remedy Selection: An Explicit and Interactive Process for the Superfund Program.” Through a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Sites is working to test these recommendations. At two actual Superfund sites, Clean Sites will assist EPA in performing the remedy selection in accordance with the process Clean Sites has developed.     

Mercury Measurement and Its Control: What We Know,Have Learned,and Need to Further Investigate

ABSTRACT

Based on the available evidence of health effects, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been evaluating the need to regulate mercury releases to the environment. In response to the congressional mandates in The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), the EPA has issued the Mercury Study Report and the Study of Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units Report. In spite of the enormous effort represented by these reports, as well as the efforts of both the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), in conducting the field measurement programs that form the basis for these reports, a definitive answer on the need for mercury regulation has not been found. However, the EPA, as well as other regulatory agencies and health researchers, have suggested a “plausible link” between anthropogenic sources emitting mercury and the methylation, bioaccumulation in the food chain, and adverse health effects in humans and wildlife.

Policy-makers have recognized that regulations must be based on good science and that a number of issues still remain. These issues can generally be grouped into four main categories: emissions inventory, control technology, fate of releases, and health effects. This paper will discuss recent, ongoing, and planned studies to address the remaining issues regarding the presence of mercury in the environment, with an emphasis on those studies that are directly related to the DOE/Federal Energy Technology Center’s (FETC) programmatic effort.     

Obtaining access to coastal areas for large-scale mussel farming: obstacles and possibilities

Eutrophication in the coastal waters of the northern part of the Swedish west coast is causing structural and functional changes to the coastal ecosystems. Large-scale mussel farming is proposed in the Program of Measures, required by the EU Water Framework Directive to reduce the nutrients in the coastal water and improve water quality over a transition period of 10-20 years. Ownership, land parcelling, conflicts of interest, and the protection of coastal water are obstructing accessibility to suitable water areas for the establishment of mussel farming plants. This paper studies the obstacles and possibilities in the relevant laws and legal regulations governing the accessibility to coastal waters for large-scale mussel farming. Alternative ways to solve the problem are shown and discussed, within the framework of the Planning and Building Act, the Environmental Code and the laws concerning land-parceling and property. It is shown that the Planning and Building Act, when used in a proper manner, can provide useful instruments for society to gain access to coastal water for mussel farming plants with the purpose of improving the ecological status of the water.     

Vapor pressure response to denaturant and water in E10 blends

On December 16, 1993, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the final rule on reformulated gasoline (RFG). This rule will affect the composition of as much as 45% of the gasoline used in the United States by the summer of 1995. The acceptance of any gasoline component lies in its ability to contribute to the RFG program's environmental goals. This study was conducted to determine the effect of water and ethanol denaturant on gasoline Reid vapor pressure (RVP) for which little quantitative data are available. This paper addresses two new areas where environmental goals may be achieved while maintaining the use of ethanol-blended gasolines within ozone nonattainment areas.     

A Regulatory Analysis

The information presented in this paper is directed to those individuals interested in future air quality control programs aimed at areas that are attaining one or more air quality ambient standards. Section 116 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, requires the Environmental Protection Agency to promulgate regulations for the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) of air quality in order to protect the nation's clean air resources from hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen oxides, and lead (Set II pollutants). This program will affect industry siting in many areas of the country, particularly in the rural, undeveloped areas. Among the many alternatives currently being considered by EPA to meet the PSD Set II goals are emission management systems, marketable emission permits, air quality increments, emission fees, and control of transportation related sources. The final regulation may be a combination of several options or may present several alternatives from which a State would choose its specific program.     

Resource allocation for mitigating regional air pollution–related mortality: A summertime case study for five cities in the United States

An important issue of regional air quality management is to allocate air quality management funds to maximize environmental and human health benefits. In this study, we use an innovative approach to tackle this air quality management issue. We develop an innovative resource allocation model that allows identification of air pollutant emission control strategies that maximize mortality avoidances subject to a resource constraint. We first present the development of the resource allocation model and then a case study to show how the model can be used to identify resource allocation strategies that maximize mortality avoidances for top five Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) (i.e., New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Philadelphia) in the continental United States collectively. Given budget constraints in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Air Act assessment, the results of the case study suggest that controls of sulfur dioxide (SO₂) and primary carbon (PC) emissions from EPA Regions 2, 3, 5, 6, and 9 would have significant health benefits for the five selected cities collectively. Around 30,800 air pollution–related mortalities could be avoided during the selected 2-week summertime episode for the five cities collectively if the budget could be allocated based on the results of the resource allocation model. Although only five U.S. cities during a 2-week episode are considered in the case study, the resource allocation model can be used by decision-makers to plan air pollution mitigation strategies to achieve the most significant health benefits for other seasons and more cities over a region or the continental U.S.Implications: Effective allocations of air quality management resources are challenging and complicated, and it is desired to have a tool that can help decision-makers better allocate the funds to maximize health benefits of air pollution mitigation. An innovative resource allocation model developed in this study can help decision-makers identify the best resource allocation strategies for multiple cities collectively. The results of a case study suggest that controls of primary carbon and sulfur dioxides emissions would achieve the most significant health benefits for five selected cities collectively.     

An Evaluation of the Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance Method for Measuring Diesel Particulate Emissions

Abstract

We determined the usefulness of tapered element oscillating microbalances (TEOMs) for researchers and engineers involved with measuring diesel particulate mass. Two different test facilities were used for generating diesel particulates and comparing the TEOM to the commonly used U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) manual filter method. The EPA method is very labor-intensive and requires long periods of time to complete. The TEOM is an attractive approach because it has the potential to reduce the amount of time and labor required in diesel testing, as well as to provide real-time particulate-mass data that are not obtainable with the EPA method. It was found that the TEOM was a precise and easy-to-operate instrument that could measure the mass concentration (MC) of diesel particulate emissions in real time. Although the TEOM diesel particulate MC measurements were highly correlated with the manual filter measurements, the two techniques were not equivalent because the TEOM consistently reported MC results that were 20–25% lower than those obtained using the manual filter technique. In conclusion, the TEOM can be used to increase test-cell throughput and to measure transient values of diesel par-ticulate emissions at sites performing diesel-engine testing. However, unless EPA is able to certify the TEOM as an equivalent method, it cannot replace the manual filter method for diesel certification work.