TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
iii
OZONE/CO PROGRAMS
Post 1987 Ozone/Carbon Monoxide
Implementation Issues ...... 1
Ov Antitampering/Fuel Switching 10
Cs Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) 12
(v^ Fuel .Volatility 14
(u Onboard Refueling Emission Control 15
p^ Cold Temperature Motor Vehicle CO Emissions 16
^ Ambient Nonmethane Organic Compounds (NMOC)
^Y Monitoring 17
^ VOC Emission Factors -18
*» Regional ozone Modeling for Northeast .
& Transport (ROMNET) 19
IT Urban-Scale Photochemical Modeling 21
AIR TOXICS PROGRAMS
Schedule for Air Toxics Regulations Currently
Being Considered Under Section 112 of the
Clean Air Act or Other Authorities . 23
National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse 26
Air Risk Information Support Center (Air RISC) ...... 28
Multiyear Development Plans , 30
High Risk Urban Toxics ............. 31
High Risk Point Sources 34
National Air Toxics Workshops .............. 36
Status of Air Toxics Emission Factors and
Estimation Tools 37
Status of Air Toxics Modeling Guidance .......... 39
Ambient Air Toxics Monitoring - Methods .
Development and Sample Analysis . 41
Special Urban Toxics Monitoring Program 42
Inhalation Risk Reference Dose 43
Submittal of VOC Air Toxics Data to AIRS 44
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
Toxics Release Inventory (Title III, Section 313) ... 46
Air/Superfund Coordination Program 48
PM1Q IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS
PM10 Long-Term Nonattainment Policy .... 51
Rural Fugitive Dust Policy 53
Urban Fugitive Dust Policy 54
PM10 Emissions Trading Policy 55
Wood Smoke Reduction Policy 57
Prescribed Burning/Smoke Management 58
'" Status of PM10 Samplers 59
PM10 Emission Factors 60
_ Stack Test Method for PM10 61
J i HEADQUARTERS LIBRARY
- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
£g WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
NSR/PSD PROGRAMS
NOx PSD Increments ..... 62
PM10 PSD Increments _: 63
Fugitive Emissions Rulemaking . . 64
Rulemaking Proposal for Strip Mines 65
Improving New Source Review 66
New Source Review Bulletin Board 68
r
ACID RAIM PROGRAMS
Acid Rain Implementation Issues 69
Implementation of the Special Envoys
Report on Acid Rain . . . 70
NEDS/NAPAP Emission Inventory for 1985 . . . 72
COMPLIANCE/ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS
Rule Effectiveness Evaluation Programs 74
FY 1989 compliance Monitoring Strategy 77
SIP Review for Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency ... 78
Asbestos NESHAP Strategy 79
OTHER PROGRAMS
Status of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) . . .81
Global Atmospheric Change ................ 84
Global/Tropospheric Air Pollution Srategies 86
Implementing SIP Processing Recommendations 88
National Air Audit System . 90
Stack Height Litigation . 92
visibility Protection 93
Indoor Air Program 96
Development of Criteria Pollutant Emission
. Inventory Guidance 98
Status of Guideline on Air Quality Models 99
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) 100
FY 1989-90 NSPS Activity 101
Wood Heater Status Report 102
control Technology Center (CTC) 103
Interstate Pollution Abatement ... 105
BACT/LAER Clearinghouse 107
Emission Measurement Technical Information Center .... 108
Air Grants - Program to Identify State/Local
Program Activities and Costs 109
ii
ce-
rt:
-------
< INTRODUCTION
This collection of status reports has been prepared in order
to provide a timely summary of selected EPA air pollution control
activities to those individuals who are involved with the
implementation of these programs. Persons with general questions
or those who wish to receive additional copies of this report may
contact Bill Hamilton, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Quality Management Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
Telephone number 919-541-5498 or FTS 629-5498. Persons with
specific questions on particular program activities are requested
to call the contact person shown on the individual status report.
iii
-------
-------
POST-1987 OZONE/CARBON MONOXIDE IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended in 1970, was based on
three important premises. The first was that EPA could set
standards for ambient air quality at a level that, if achieved,
would protect the public health with an adequate margin of
safety. The second premise was that State and local governments
could develop State implementation plans (SIP's) that would show
how areas could meet these standards over a three to five year
time period. The third premise was that these plans, if carried
out, would in fact produce the expected result of attaining the
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
For'two widespread air pollutants, ozone and carbon
monoxide, the last two of these premises have not been realized
in practice since the passage of the 1970 amendments. In 1977,
Congress amended the attainment deadlines to allow areas until
1982 or, under cettain conditions, 1987 to attain the ozone and
carbon monoxide standards. However, it became clear as early as
1985 that many areas would fall short of attainment. Current
data now shows that the earlier fears were well founded.
According to data through 1987, 68 areas failed to attain the
ozone standards, and 59 areas failed to attain the carbon
monoxide standard*
This situation prompted considerable Congressional
attention, and was a focus of efforts in the 100th Congress to
amend the Clean Air Act. At the same time, EPA took the position
that it could not simply wait for Congress to act, and developed
a proposed policy on how to treat areas which had not attained
the ozone and carbon monoxide standards by the 1987 deadline.
EPA's proposed policy was .published in the Federal Register on
November 24, 1987, but has not yet been finalized. EPA has also
taken actions on a number of State implementation plans which
remained incomplete, either missing significant portions or not
submitted to EPA at all.
Because of concerns that EPA might act to impose sanctions
on States and uncertainty whether the CAA required EPA to do so,
Congress enacted the Mitchell-Conte Amendment to the Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1987 (Mitchell-Conte) which postponed EPA
implementation of sanctions until August 31, 1988. It also
required EPA to make nonattainment designations which may have
certain regulatory consequences. The Mitchell-Conte deferral of
sanctions has now expired and the construction sanctions have
been imposed in Los Angeles, CA; Ventura Co., CA; and both the
Illinois and Indiana portions of the Chicago metropolitan area.
-------
POST-1987 O3/CO IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES-Continued
Although the final post 1987 ozone/CO policy has not yet
been issued, EPA in recent months has acted to ensure that
progress was made in the interim. On May 26, 1988, EPA made
calls for SIP revisions in 43 states. These SIP calls required
areas to prepare emissions inventories; correct regulatory
loopholes, deviations, and deficiencies; and monitor non-methane
organic compounds (NMOC's). This work would be required under
any possible future option. New planning and control
requirements on nonattainment areas, however, have been deferred
until after the final post-1987 ozone/CO policy is issued.
Finally, notwithstanding this activity, several public
interest groups have pursued litigation to compel EPA to
disapprove State plans and promulgate Federal implementation
plans (FIP's) in these areas. While EPA has been extremely
reluctant to initiate such activities, this litigation and the
requirements of the Clean Air Act have left the Agency with
little choice but to begin FIP activities when sued.
Witriin this context, the background and current status of
specific programs dealing with long-term ozone and CO
nonattainment are discussed in more detail below in the following
order: l) EPA's proposed post-1987 ozone/CO policy, 2) the
Hitchell-Conte Amendment, 3) the proposed SIP disapprovals, 4)
Federal implementation plans, and 5) EPA's May 26, 1988 SIP
calls. -
1. Post-1987 Ozone/CO Policy
Background
EPA proposed its post-1987 ozone/CO policy November 24,
1987. The proposed policy is very lengthy and detailed.
However, a number of key points are particularly important
because they are designed to overcome some of the critical
problems encountered in the past. First, states will have to
make sure that they fully implement all control measures
previously required, eliminating any deficiencies and deviations
from the regulations, so that all areas are at the same base
line. EPA refers to this as "leveling the playing field."
States will also have to develop detailed emission inventories
for a 1987 base year.
Second, the proposed post-87 policy suggests that areas be
allowed to adopt flexible attainment deadlines based on the
severity of the problem. In the past, all areas were under the
same deadlines of 1982 or 1987. This has proven, patently
unrealistic in many cases and resulted in avoidance of
development of long term solutions which did not fit into the CAA
time schedules. It has also encouraged areas, to invest more-
-------
POST-1987 O3/CO IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Continued
effort in "gaming" their SIPs to show attainment on paper while
avoiding the difficult choices needed to make real progress
towards attainment. A significant consequence in the proposed
policy of requesting a long-term attainment date was the
imposition of a major source construction moratorium until 5
years of the attainment date.
The proposed policy requires local areas that cannot
demonstrate near-term (3-5 years) attainment to achieve a minimum
annual emissions reduction of 3% beyond that achieved by
federally implemented measures. This reduction of volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions beyond the decreases produced by
Federal measures such as the Federal Motor Vehicle Control
Program (FMVCP) is quite ambitious for most areas, since most of
the "high yield" control measures have already been implemented.
Finally, the proposal requires that controls in expanded
geographic areas, such as the entire consolidated metropolitan
statistical area (CMSA) or metropolitan statistical area (MSA),
be considered in ozone planning. Nonattainment area problems are
not necessarily created only within city boundaries. In fact,
significant concentrations of pollutants can come from sources
located outside the nonattainment area or from mobile sources
(i..e., cars, trucks, other vehicles) which travel throughout the
area.
Current Status
The comment period for the November 24, 1987 policy proposal
ended on March 27, 1988. By the end of the comment period, 1,820
comments had been made by 292 commenters. The areas given the
most attention in these comments were strategy requirements
(633), requirements for demonstrating attainment (234), legal
issues (198), affected areas (168), general comments (115), and
overall policy approach (102). The commenters include
metropolitan planning agencies (16%), State air agencies (12%),
local air agencies (11%), state highway departments (11%),
industry (9%), and individuals (8%).
Staff work is continuing on the post 1987 policy proposal to
identify and resolve specific issues. This includes all of the
substantive issues mentioned above as well as many other major
and minor comments..
Future Milestones
EPA is currently targeting early 1989 as the date to publish
a final post-1987 ozone/CO policy.
3s
-------
POST-1987 O3/COIMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Continued
2. Mitchell-Conte Amendment
Background
The Mitchell-Conte Amendment to the Budget Reconciliation
Act of 1987 was passed on December 22, 1987. Its primary purpose
was to defer the implementation by EPA of any sanctions until
August 31, 1988, to provide Congress additional time to enact CAA
amendments. However, it also contained a provision which
required EPA to evaluate air quality data for ozone and CO and
take appropriate steps to designate those areas failing to attain
either or both standards as nonattainment within the meaning of
Part D of Title I of the Clean Air Act. '
The exact meaning of this requirement in the Mitchell-Conte
amendment is unclear and little guidance could be found in its
legislative history* Therefore, on June 6, 1988, EPA listed
areas not attaining the O2one and/or CO standards by December 31,
1987 and proposed nonattainment designations for these areas. The
June 6, 1988 notice requested public comment on 3 possible
interpretations of the regulatory consequences of these
nonattainment designations.
The three possible interpretations are:
Option 1: the nonattainment designations under
Mitchell-Conte have no regulatory effect
and are for information only
Option 2: the nonattainment designations affect
section 107 of the CAA and trigger the
Part D planning and implementation
requirements, including a renewed
possibility of sanctions, such as
highway fund restrictions in areas such
as New York and Houston
Option 3: the nonattainment designations under
Mitchell-Conte are the same as Option
2, but Part D regulatory consequences
would only be attached to newly
designated nonattainment areas (e.g.,
counties not already listed as non-
attainment under section 107 authority).
The notice generated a large number of comments.
Generally, a number of state DOT agencies, industrial groups, and
FHWA favored the first interpretation, while a number of members
of Congress, including Senators Mitchell, Burdick and Chafee, as
well as environmental groups, favored the second. GAO,.
-------
POST-1987 O3/CO IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Continued
responding to an inquiry by Congressman Dingell, regards the
first option as the best reading of the statute.
Current Status
Staff work is continuing on both aspects of the Mitchell-
Conte proposal. This includes discussions of the three
alternative interpretations of the regulatory consequences of the
nonattainment designations and the specific nonattainment
designations themselves.
Future Milestones
Early 1989 is when EPA currently plans to take final action
on the Mitcheil-Conte proposal.
3. SIP Disapprovals
Background
On July 14, 1987, EPA published a rulemaking proposing to
disapprove the ozone and/or CO SIPs in 14 areas because the SIP
submittals for those areas did not persuasively demonstrate
attainment. The rulemaking covered areas with extensions of the
attainment date which had never received full approval of their
1982 SIP submittals and areas without extensions which had
received previous notices of SIP deficiency. These areas include
Chicago, IL (ozone); East St. Louis, IL (ozone); Indiana portion
of Chicago (ozone); Indiana portion of Louisville, KY (ozone);
Cleveland, OH (CO); Atlanta, GA (ozone); Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX
(ozone); Denver, CO (CO); South Coast (including Los Angeles), CA
(ozone and CO); Fresno Co., CA (ozone and CO); Sacramento Co., CA
(ozone); Ventura Co., CA (ozone); Kern Co., CA (ozone); and
washoe Co. (Reno), NV (CO).
. A companion general preamble was also published at the same
time as the notices of proposed disapproval. This general
preamble discussed the reasons for EPA's decision to propose
disapproval for these areas, the ramifications of final
rulemaking, other options open to the Administrator, and possible
actions relating to the other remaining, nonattainment areas not
being addressed by this round of proposed disapprovals. The
rulemaking also signaled a change in EPA's position and declared
invalid the use of a reasonable extra efforts program (REEP) to
avoid the construction ban.by delaying disapproval action.
A significant result of any final disapproval of a SIP for
failure to demonstrate attainment is~ the- imposition* of" the?
-------
POST-1987 03/CO IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Continued
statutorily mandated ban on the construction of major sources
emitting the relevant pollutant in the areas of concern. The
imposition of other sanctions available under the CAA is
discretionary on the part of the Administrator and these other
sanctions were not proposed for imposition at that time, except
for Cleveland where they were proposed for failing to make
reasonable efforts to submit a plan. The other possible
sanctions include highway funding limitations, water and sewer
grant limitations, and air grant limitations.
Current Status/Future Milestones
Subsequent to the July 14, 1987 proposed disapproval, Texas
submitted an interim SIP submittal intended to address some of
the problems identified in the proposed disapproval. The
Administrator has notified Texas officials that EPA will defer
the imposition of sanctions in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area because
the interim SIP submitted December 1, 1987 substantially
addresses the concerns raised in the July 14, 1987 proposed
disapproval. Sanctions will be deferred as long as Texas
fulfills commitments made in the interim submittal. The interim
plan is not fully approvable, however, and a new SIP will
eventually have to be prepared according to post-1987 guidance.
For the remaining areas for which EPA proposed disapproval
on July 14, 1987, EPA will probably take final action at or
shortly after publication of the final post 1987 policy.
4. F-EQEJjtAL IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (FIP'sY
Background
The 1970 CAA required EPA to implement FIP's when the states
failed to adopt and implement SIPs. In the 1971-1977 time frame,
this requirement was extremely controversial and provoked bitter
clashes between. Federal and State authorities as well as
extensive litigation. In the 1977 CAA amendments, Congress
recognized the difficulties involved with FIP's, and extended the
attainment deadlines in part for this reason. However, the .
underlying requirement for EPA to prepare a FIP if the state
fails to submit a SIP, if the SIP is inadequate, or if the state
fails to revise its SIP remains in- the statute. Currently,
because of litigation by interested parties based on those
requirements, EPA is now working on FIP's in several areas. It
is feared that further litigation could result in even more
requirements for EPA to promulgate FIP's, with accompanying
severe resource demands on and legal problems for the. Agency.
6
-------
POST-1987 O3/CO IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Continued
Current Status
A FIP was earlier proposed for Arizona but that has now been
superseded by a SIP.
As a result of litigation (Abraraowitz v. EPA, No. 84-7642,
Ninth Circuit) EPA was compelled to disapprove the SIP for the
South Coast Air Basin in California, one of the 14 areas proposed
for disapproval on July 14, 1987. This disapproval was published
on January 22, 1988. Pursuant to this disapproval, a
construction moratorium on major sources of volatile organic
compounds (VOC), which are precursors of ozone, and CO went into
effect on August 31, 1988, the earliest date allowed under the
Mitchell-Conte amendment.
In early 1988, a suit was filed in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California to compel EPA to
promulgate a FIP for ozone and CO in the South Coast Air Basin.
The plaintiffs charged that EPA has a nondiscretionary duty to
promulgate a FIP upon disapproval of a SIP. That case has been'
transferred to the Central District (Los Angeles).
EPA has acknowledged its duty to promulgate a FIP in Los
Angeles and contemplates publishing in November 1988 an advanced
•notice of proposed rulemaking covering what will be included in
the FIP. As a- result of other litigation, EPA has recently
disapproved SIPs for 3 more areas—Ventura Co., CA; Chicago, IL;
and the Indiana portion of Chicago. The Agency is currently
negotiating in these other 3 areas and ultimately expects to
acknowledge its duty to promulgate FIP's there as well. EPA will
soon disapprove the SIP for Sacramento, CA. Discussions continue
with plaintiffs in all of these cases in order to resolve
outstanding issues, including the schedule for developing FIP's.
FIP's are a tremendous resource burden .for EPA and place the
Agency in the position of implementing measures and programs that
are better handled by local and state agencies. Examples are
inspection/maintenance and transportation control measures. If
FIP's are required to show attainment with a short time frame
(such as 3-5 years), extremely unpopular measures such as
gasoline rationing could be required.
Future Milestones
EPA will take final action to disapprove the Sacramento, CA
SIP by the end of 1988. An advance notice of proposed rulemaking
for the South Coast Air Basin is anticipated in November 1988.
-------
POST-1987 O3/CO IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Continued
5. EPA'S May 1988 SIP Calls
Background
Although Part D of the Clean Air Act requires that all
areas attain the NAAQS for ozone and carbon monoxide by December
31, 1987, section 110(a)(2)(H) of the CAA allows the
Administrator to notify such areas whenever he believes that the
area's SIP is "substantially inadequate" to provide for
attainment of the NAAQS. EPA has compiled the most recent air
quality data for ozone (1985-1987) and carbon monoxide (1986-
1987) to determine which areas did not meet the 1987 deadlines.
On May 26, 1988, and subsequently, the EPA Regional
Administrators sent letters to the governors of 42 states and the
mayor of the District of Columbia notifying them that their air
pollution control plans for achieving the ozone and carbon
monoxide standards were found to be substantially inadequate and
that revisions were necessary. The inadequacy of the SIPs was
based upon failure to attain these standards by December 31,
1987, as specified in the CAA.
Current Status .
EPA believes that, even before the final post 1987-policy is
issued, the states should initiate certain fundamental activities
so that they can continue to make progress towards attaining the
standards. The states will be required to correct discrepancies
between EPA's guidance and the earlier approved SIPs, to satisfy
any unimplemented commitments in the SIP to adopt control
measures, and to begin updating the base-year emissions inventory
for the defined planning area. In general, the states have
approximately 1 year to complete this effort. EPA is also
calling upon some areas to commit to a schedule of monitoring for
nonmethane-organic compounds (NMOC's).
The complete response to the SIP call, or second phase of
the response, will await promulgation of EPA's final policy on
post-1987 ozone/CO nonattainment. At that time, states will be
expected to complete development of a SIP that will lead to
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS throughout the expanded
nonattainment planning area.
Future/^ilestones
The current schedule is for States to submit draft emissions
inventories to EPA by October 1989. Revised stationary source
VOC. regulations* are. due;: to* EPA; in. the.* summer of. 1989...
8-
-------
POST-1987 Q3/CO IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Continued
EPA Contact Person
Tom Helms (919) 541-5527
(FTS) 629-5527
-------
ANTITAMPERING/FUEL SWITCH!MS
Background
0 A 1987 tampering survey showed that tampering and fuel switching rates
are alarmingly high. Tampering and fuel switching continues to adversely
impact the quality of our Nation's air.
1987 SURVEY RESULTS (Percent)
' MON-I/M I/H ATP* Only
Overall tampering 32
Fuel switching 14
* ATP = antitampering program
20
9
18
5
I/M + ATP*
16
5
There are 42 existing antitampering/fuel switching programs in 22 States.
These programs cover approximately 25% of the nationwide light-duty
fleet.
Seven new programs were implemented in FY 1988.
Current Status
EPA set Oecember 31, 1987 as the "stop installation" date for aftermarket
and us.ed catalysts that do not meet EPA's testing requirements. In
July, EPA issued notices of violation proposing $475,000 in penalties
against a group of muffler shoos, auto repair facilities and new car
dealers for multiple violations of EPA's after-market catalyst installation
policy.
There are five "ATP only"' sites from the 1987 tampering survey for which
both "before" and "after" program implementation survey results exist.
The survey data show that ATPs are very effective in reducing the catalyst
related violation rates. Under-the-hood tampering, however, was not
reduced significantly.
The proposed post-1987 ozone/CO nonattainment policy includes a policy
on enhanced motor vehicle inspection/maintenance. Many areas may implement
a new ATP or expand an existing ATP to meet the requirements of the
proposed policy.
The final lead phasedown rule allowing only 0.10 grams per gallon of
lead in leaded gasoline was implemented on January 1, 1988. Lead phasedown
should reduce fuel switching prospectively but is not a short-term
solution for the pollution attributable to the many vehicles which
already have lead poisoned catalysts.
10
-------
ANTITAMPERING/FUEL SWITCHING - Continued
EPA' Contact Person
Al Mannato (202) 382-2567
(FTS) 382-2667
IT
-------
MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE (I/M)
Background
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 require the implementation of an
I/M program in any area for which the State had demonstrated in its
1979 SIP revision that attainment of the ozone and/or carbon monoxide
standards was not possible by the end of 1982. Additional areas
adopted I/M after failing to attain the ambient standards by the end
of 1982. l/M programs are currently being operated in 63 urban areas
in 33 States.
Currently Operating or Scheduled I/M Programs:
Centralized
Contractor
Operated
Centralized
State/Local
Operated
Arizona
Connecticut
Illinois
Indiana
Florida (3/90)
Kentucky:
Louisville
Maryland
Minnesota (1/91)
Tennessee:
Nashv.il le
Washington:
Seattle
Spokane
Wisconsin
Delaware
District of
Columbia
New Jersey
Oregon
Tennessee:
Memohis
Decentralized
Computerized
Analyzers
Decentralized
Manual
Analyzers
Parameter
Inspection
Alaska:
Anchorage
Fairbanks
California
Colorado
Georgia
Massachusetts
Michigan
Missouri (9/89)
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Mexico (3/89)
New York
Pennsylvania
Texas:
Dallas (1/90)
El Paso
Utah:
Davis County
Virginia (1/89)
Idaho
North
Carolina
Rhode Island
Utah:
Salt Lake
Provo
Kentucky:
Cincinnati
suburbs
Louisiana
Ohio
Oklahoma
Texas:
Houston
Current Status
o In 1987 and 1988, several States were asked to submit corrective
plans to EPA, because audits indicated major operating problems.
o The Missouri program has submitted a plan-to switch to computerized
analyzers by September 1989. Davis County, Utah has also committed
to switching to computerized analyzers by April 1990.
o The State of Florida and the State of Minnesota have passed
legislation to implement centralized, contractor-run I/M programs.
12
-------
MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE (I/M) - Continued
The North Carolina program was audited in June 1988 and E°A found that
the manual analyzer approach was still not working.
EPA FY 1989 activities include continuing program audits and support
to the States for enhancing I/M programs and reauthorization where
legal authority expires in the near future.
EPA Contact Person
Eugene Tierney (313) 668-4456
(FTS) 374-8456
13'
-------
FUEL VOLATILITY
Background
0 The Agency is concerned over the increasing volatility of motor gasoline.
Higher volatility fuel leads to more in-use emissions of evaporative
hydrocarbons. This has a significant impact on ozone formation.
0 The Reid-Vapor Pressure (RVP) of EPA's certification test fuel has not
changed since it was first specified at 9.0 pounds per square inch (psi)
in the early 1970s. At that time this was representative of commercial
fuel. Since that time, however, the volatility of .commercial fuel has
risen to about 11.7 psi on a national average. Since evaporative control
systems on cars are designed and tested on 9.0 psi fuel, control systems
now in use are not adequate.
0 In addition, this higher volatility fuel results in more evaporative
emissions all along the distribution chain for fuel, at transfer stations,
and in vehicle refueling. Control of fuel volatility would also reduce
these emissions.
Current Status
0 A notice of proposed rulemaking on the issue of fuel volatility was
published by EPA in August 1987. ' ••
0 EPA is currently analyzing the comments received on the volatility
proposal. Me are currently working toward promulgation of a final rule
in time for summertime control in 1989, concurrent with promulgation of
an onboard refueling final rule.
EPA Contact Persons
Rick Rykowski
Tad Wysor
(313) 668-4339
(FTS) 374-8339
(313) 668-4332
(FTS) 374-8332
14"
-------
ONBOARD REFUELING EMISSION CONTROL
Background/Current Status
0 Regulation of motor vehicle refueling emissions by means of onboard
controls was proposed by EPA on August 19, 1987. At the same time, EPA
also proposed- controls on the volatility of gasoline.
* EPA is currently analyzing all of the comments received on the proposal
and will be issuing a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking later
this year, which will include a revised onboard test procedure and
will deal with "changed circumstances" since the publishing of the
onboard proposal. The "changed circumstances" include revised onboard
design and cost estimates, Stage II implementation in several new areas,
a new list of ozone nonattainment areas, and the safety issue.
0 EPA held a workshop on June 30, .1988 to discuss the proposed revised
onboard test procedure.
0 EPA will proceed with promulgation of a final rule, concurrent with
promulgation of a final rule for gasoline volatility controls, after the
publication of the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
EPA Contact Person
Paul Laing (313) 668-4274
(FTS) 374-8274
IS.
-------
COLD TEMPERATURE MOTOR VEHICLE CO EMISSIONS
Background
0 At the end of 1987, 59 local areas were not in attainment of the national
ambient air quality standard for carbon monoxide.
0 About 90 percent of the CO exceedances, nationwide, occur between November
and February. Over half of all CO exceedances occur at temperatures
below 45°F.
0 Motor vehicles contribute the vast majority of all CO emissions. The
Agency currently tests vehicles for compliance with emissions standards
only in the 68° - 86°F temperature range. Setting a cold temperature
CO standard may be a cost-effective method of controlling motor vehicle
emissions at colder temperatures. Such a standard could help local
areas comply with the. CO ambient air quality standard.
0 Other CO control strategies include the use of oxygenated fuels and
various types of transportation control measures.
Current Status
9 On September 6, 1988, EPA's Office of Mobile Sources briefed the EPA
Administrator on the cold temperature CO .issue. The Agency will move
forward with a notice of proposed rulemaking, prooosing an interim cold
temperature vehicle emissions standard. The purpose of the interim
standard is to assist local areas in their efforts to attain the air
quality standard for CO, while the Agency determines the level of CO
control needed in the long term. Th'e Agency expects to publish the
notice of proposed rulema.king in the fall of 1989.
EPA Contact Person
John German (313) 668-4214
{FTS) 374-8214
-------
AMBIENT NONMETHANE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (NMOC) MONITORING
Background
Ambient NHOC/NOX ratios are an important factor affecting the level of
VOC controls needed to reach the ozone air quality standard and are required
as input to ozone models (e.g., EKMA) in preparation of ozone SIP's. In the
past, characterization of NMOC/NOX ratios has been hindered by lack of
reliable, practical procedures for measuring NMOC. This problem has been
overcome by the preconcentration direct flame ionization detection (PDFID)
method. Gas chromatograph (GC) sum-of-species is also an acceptable procedure
for measuring NMOC.
EPA has stated that NMOC data from continuous instruments will not be
acceptable in future ozone SIP's unless the submitter demonstrates equivalence
between these data and GC sum-of-species. Nor will default values be allowed
in substitution for measured values. The POFIO method is an acceptable
alternative to the GC sum-of-species.
During the summers of 1984-88, EPA coordinated special projects to
collect NMOC data via the POFID method. EPA provided for the analyses of
samples at a central analysis facility, while participating State and local
agencies collected the samples and shipped them to EPA for analysis. Data •
recovery is very qood: during the 1985-88 period, there was a 90-95 percent
data capture. A number of samples were also analyzed by the GC procedure.
The sum-of-species concentrations from these samples compared extremely well
with the NMOC concentration as determined by the POFID method.
Current Status
Data collected during the 1988 monitoring programs have been distributed
to EPA Regional Offices and participating State/local agencies. During the
summer of 1988, 43 sites in 30 cities were monitored for NMOC by the
PDFID method. .
Future Milestones
1. EPA plans to coordinate the NMOC monitoring program for the next few
summers. Verbal commitments to participate in the summer 1989 program should
be made to the cognizant Regional Office no later than January 1, 1989.
2. Financial commitments are needed by February 1, 1989.
EPA Contact Person
Harold 6. Richter (919) 541-5367
(FTS) 629-5367
17"
-------
VOC EMISSION FACTORS
Background/Status
EPA has continued development of new and revised VOC emission factors
for publication in Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors in AP-42
and other reports. Also, aV'part of the National Acid Precipitation
Assessment Program (NAPAP), EPA has filled many previously existing gaps in
VOC emission factors. About 600 new VOC factors were developed through the
NAPAP effort, using rapid survey, technology transfer techniques, and
engineering judgment. In addition, about 400 new factors were developed in
this manner for SOX and NOX sources. All of these new factors were published
in the report entitled Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors for the 1985
NAPAP Emissions Inventory. EPA-6nn/7-87-015, May 1987.
EPA has also recently revised AP-4? sections containing VOC emission
factors for the following source categories:
- Refuse (including municipal) Incineration
- Sewage Sludge Incineration
- Waste Oil Combustion
- Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates
- Polyester Resin Plastic Product Fabrication
- Waste Oil Combustion
- Wood Stoves . .
- Soap and Detergents •
The above source category section updates will be included in
Supplement B, AP-42, now scheduled for publication in the Fall of 1988. An
interim report containing these sections was distributed to all STAPPA a'nd
ALAPCO member agencies in August 1988. Work is scheduled to be completed
in the fall of 1988 on better VOC emission estimation techniques for:
- Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs)
- Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)
Also, EPA has completed the updating of VOC Species Data Manual
EPA-450/4-80-013, July 1980, to include new VOC species, as well as
particulate species information. This report was published in April
in two volumes, entitled Air Emissions Species Manual:
- Volume I - Volatile Organic Species Profile
EPA-450/2-88-003a, April 1988!
- Volume II - Particulate Emissions Species Profiles
EPA-450/2-88-003b, April 1988
1988
EPA Contact Person
E. U. Martinez
(919)
(FTS.)
541-5575
629-5575
18
-------
REGIONAL OZONE MODELING FOR NORTHEAST TRANSPORT (ROMNET)
Background
It Is widely believed that during certain meteorological conditions
the transport of ozone and precursor pollutants is a significant
factor in the ozone nonattainment problems of the Northeastern States,
A joint EPA/State study, ROMNET, was initiated in October 1987. The
modeling domain is rectangular, stretching from the Virginia/North
Carolina border to mid-Maine and as far west as the Western border
of Ohio. The study's major purposes are twofold: (1) to estimate
effect of regional control strategies on the concentration of ozone
and precursors transported from city to city and (2) to develop
guidance for considering transport in developing inputs to urban-
scale models. .
ROMNET is a technical study lasting until October 1990. Results are
intended for subsequent use by others, such as the Transport Advisory
Grouo identified in EPA's November 1987 proposed ozone policy, to
formulate appropriate strategies and policies for reducing ozone in
the northeastern U.S.
Current Status
A protocol for conducting the ROMNET study has". been reviewed,, approved
and distributed to all study participants.
The protocol establishes three technical committees addressing:
(1) base case and projected emissions within the domain, (2) selec-
tion and appropriate simulation of control strategies, and (3) incor-
poration of meteorological data and application/interpretation of
the US EPA Regional Oxidant Model (ROM). Each of these committees
has met twice and' provided direction regarding: (1) estimating
base case VOC, NOX, and CO emissions; (2) orojecting these emissions;
(3) adjusting emissions to reflect control strategies; (4) appropriate
ways to lump numerous area sources in devising coherent strategies;
(5) appropriate ways to categorize strategies including consideration
such as geographical, technological and political /institutional con-
siderations; (6) selection of criteria to choose episodes for
modeling; and (7) analyses to perform in evaluating episode selection
criteria.
A coordinated detailed work plan has been completed and distributed.
Methods for making day-specific emission estimates- in ROM-compatible
format have been identified.
19-
-------
REGIONAL OZONE MODELING FOR NORTHEAST TRANSPORT (ROMNET) - Continued
0 A list of recommended control strategies has been prepared
and has been approved by the Management Review Committee (MRC).
0 Recommended episodes have been selected for modeling and have been
approved by the MRC.
Future Milestones
0 Base case inventories should be completed by December 31, 1988.
Simulation of control strategies should begin during the first
half of 1989. A draft final report, describing ROMNET results
and appropriate guidance is expected by October 1990.
0 Follow-up SIP-related analyses during 1991 and later will be
required to integrate the regional ROMNET findings with local
control requirements.
EPA Contact Person
Ned Meyer (919) 541-5594
(FTS) 629-5594
20'
-------
URBAN-SCALE PHOTOCHEMICAL MOHELING
Background Status
0 A screening model and a refined photochemical model are currently
recommended for use in developing SIPs for multi-source urban scale
ozone problems; those models are respectively OZIPM4/EKMA and the
Urban Airshed Model (UAM).
0 The OZIPM4/EKMA model is available on the IBM mainframe computer
and a PC version also exists. OZIPM4 incorporates use of the
Carbon Bond 4 mechanism and an improved procedure for constructing
isopleth diagrams.
0 An undated version of the UAM model has been obtained from the model
developer which contains Carbon Bond 4 chemistry.' The model has been
installed.on EDA's IBM computer and work to gain experience with
operation of this model has begun.
Current Status
* A user's guide and guidance for applying OZIPM4/EKMA in SIP's have
been prepared and have been subject to public comment.. The latter
guidance document addresses issues like precursor transport and
overwhelming transport more completely;
0 Contractual studies have begun to apply the UAM in five cities--
. New York, St. Louis, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Atlanta, and Philadelphia.
The purpose of these applications is to address policy questions and
to develoo information necessary to prepare guidance for the model's
use in SIPs during FY 1990.
0 The EPA Model Clearinghouse has been expanded to include EKMA and
will resolve issues regarding deviations from guidance. Questions
on EKMA should be directed to the appropriate Regional.Office personnel,
Future Milestones
Guidance on the use of OZIPM4/EKMA will be finalized concurrently
with the post-1987 ozone policy.
The' "five-city" study with UAM will be completed by May 1989 with
findings distributed to States. UAM will be installed on State
computers (if desired) for each of the five cities-..
Analyses preparatory to the development of guidance on the use of UAM
in SIP preparation will be completed by September 1989. Guidance
on UAM will be released in FY 1990.
-------
URBAN-SCALE PHOTOCHEMICAL MODELING - Continued
EPA Contact Persons
Rich Scheffe
(919) 541-5391
(FTS) 629-5391
Sharon Reinders (919) 541-5684
(Model Clearinghouse) (FTS) 629-5684
Z2
-------
SCHEDULE FOR AIR TOXICS REGULATIONS CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED
UNDER SECTION 112 OF THE. CLEAN AIR ACT OR OTHER AUTHORITIES
Pollutant/Source Category
Estimated
Proposal
Date
Estimated
Final
Date
Chromi inn - Comfort Cooling Towers
Chromium - Industrial Cooling Towers
Chromium.- Electroplating
Hazardous Organic NESHAP {covers all eight
organic compounds for which notices of
Intent to list have been published and
13 source categories listed below)
Butadiene Production
Miscellaneous Butadiene Sources
CFC Production
Ethylene Oxide Production
Ethylene Dichloride Production
Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Production
•Styrene Butadiene Rubber Production
Polybutadiene Production
Neoprene Production
Chlorine Production
Chlorinated HC Use in Chemical Production
Pesticides Production
Pharmaceutical Production
Ethylene Oxide - Commercial Sterilizers
Perch!oroethylene - Dry Cleaning
Trichloroethylene - Hegreasing
(Also covers perch!oroethylene,
methyl ene. chloride)
Coke Oven Emissions - Charging and
Tooside Leaks
Benzene - Coke Oven By-Product Plants
Proposed
3/29/88
See Note 6
See Note 6
See Note 6
See Note 6
See Note 6
See Note 6
Proposed
4/23/87
Reproposal
See Mote 6
Proposed
6/6/84
Reproposal
7/28/88
FY 1990
12/88'
23
-------
SCHEDULE FOR AIR TOXICS REGULATIONS CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED
UNDER SECTION 112 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT OR OTHER AUTHORITIES - Continued
Pollutant/Source Category
Estimated
Proposal
Date
Estimated
Final
Date
Benzene - Reconsideration of equipment leak NESHAP 7/28/88
and withdrawal of proposals for maleic
anhydridge, ethyl benzene/styrene, and
storage tanks.
Asbestos Revision - Manufacturing, demolition,
renovation, fabrication,
waste disposal
Rule clarification,
monitoring, recordkeeping
Radionuclides - Reconsideration of existing
NESHAP for DOE facilities,
NRC licensed facilities,
elemental phosphorous plants,
underground uranium mines, and
uranium mill tailings. Standards
for ohosphogyosum piles.
MULTI-POLLUTANT SOURCES:
Municipal Waste Combustion2
Sewaqe Sludge Incineration^
Municipal Landfills2'
Hazardous Waste TSDF*
Accelerated Rule
Comprehensive Rule
Wastewater Facilities5
Machinery Manufacturing/Rebuilding
See Note 6
12/88
2/89
12/887
2/90
8/89
11/89
FY89
12/89
2/91
FY90
FY91
Proposed
2/S/87 6/89
11/89 3/91
6/89 9/90
No schedule
The projects listed below are in various stages of study.. No
decision has been made yet on whether or not emission standards
are appropriate.
Multi-Pollutant Source - Fossil Fuel Combustion
Butadiene - Nitrile/ABS Rubber
Ethyl ene. Oxide. -Hospital Sterilizers
-------
SCHEDULE FOR AIR TOXICS REGULATIONS CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED
UNDER SECTION 112 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT OR OTHER AUTHORITIES - Continued
Estimated. Estimated.
Proposal Final
Pollutant/Source Category Date Date
Methylene Chloride - Paint Stripping
- Aerosols
Cadmium - Primary Cadmium Smelters
Chloroform - Pulp Manufacturing
NOTES:
1 Standards being developed under TSCA, Section 6.
2 Standards being developed under Section ill and lll(d) of the Clean Air Act*
3 Standards for sludge management being developed under Clean Water Act
amendments by the Office of Water Regulations and Standards. OAQPS is
coordinating on incineration provisions.
4 Standards being developed under RCRA, Section 3004{n).
5 Control techniques document is being produced for use by State and local-
agencies.
6 Alternative policies for responding to the vinyl chloride case proposed in
July 1988 (benzene NESHAP proposal). Schedule depends on timing of .final
decision on benzene and development of priorities for applying policy to
remaining NESHAP projects.
' Additional time will be requested from the court after public comment period
closes.
EPA Contact Person
John Crenshaw (919) 541-5574 •
(FTS) 629-5574
25'
-------
NATIONAL AIR TOXICS INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE
Background
The National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse was established to
assist State and local (S/L) air pollution control agencies In their
development and Implementation of air toxics control programs. The
Clearinghouse is operated by EPA's Office of Air Ouality Planning and
Standards. The EPA works closely with STAPPA/ALAPCO to ensure that the
Clearinghouse effectively meets the needs of its intended audience.
Goals and Objectives
The primary purpose of the Clearinghouse is to collect, classify, and
disseminate air toxics information from S/L agencies, EPA, and other Federal
and international agencies. Providing a mechanism for exchange of information
reduces the potential for duplication of efforts.
Current Status
The Clearinghouse collects information by sending data collection
forms to all S/L agencies annually. State and local agencies are requested
to submit information on agency contacts, regulatory program development,
acceptable ambient levels, permitted facilities, source testing data,
emissions inventories, ambient monitoring, ongoing projects, and published
reports on air toxics activities. In addition, an annual survey of Federal
ongoing research and regulatory development projects and Federal and
international published air toxics information 1s also conducted. Areas of
particular interest (e.g., selection of pollutants of concern, quantifying
cancer risks) are covered in more depth in special reports.
Information may be submitted to the Clearinghouse by completing the
collection forms and submitting them to the Clearinghouse. If a large
amount of data is contained in computer files, this information may be
transferred electronically to the Clearinghouse data base (NATICH) files.
In addition, the Clearinghouse has a mechanism for S/L agencies to directly
enter and edit data.contained in NATICH for their agency. This allows
continuous updating of the data base.
Clearinghouse information is distributed in five ways.
1. A computerized, user-friendly data base (NATICH), available at a
cost of approximately $10-$15 per hour of use. The NATICH contains all of
the information collected by the Clearinghouse, generally indexed by agency,,.
pollutant, emission source, and research information.
-------
NATIONAL AIR TOXICS INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE - Continued
2.. Hard copy reports of data contained in NATICH, issued on a regular
bas.is.*
3. Special reoorts on specific air toxics issues.*
4. Bimonthly newsletters containing information on S/L and Federal
air toxics programs and activities, research, case studies, etc.*
Future Milestones
In fiscal year (FY) 1989 the feasibility of linking NATICH with the
Toxic Release Inventory System (TRIS) will be explored. The TRIS is a data
base of information collected as a result of Section 313 (right-to-know) of
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA).** Early indications
are that this linkage should be feasible and, therefore, is likely to occur
in CY 1989.
The Clearinghouse newsletter has long been a valuable source of
information on issues concerning toxic air pollutants. An index of subjects
which have been addressed in the newsletters will be developed and incorporated
in the data base.
More useful and efficient ways of retrieving NATICH data are being
developed for FY 1989. These improvements will primarily affect the permitting
and source test data.
Another development under consideration is a means of printing selected
Clearinghouse reports remotely at the user's location.
EPA Contact Persons
Tim Mohin (919) 541-5349
(FTS) 629-5349
Scott Voorhees (919) 541-5348
(FTS) 629-5348 -
Nancy Riley (919) 541-0805
(FTS) 629-0805~
*Available free of charge to Government agencies.
**See status report entitled "Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act. Toxic. Release Inventory, (Title. LII.,, Section .313)" for more
th formati onr on: thrss top.rcv*"
27'-
-------
AIR RISK INFORMATION SUPPORT CENTER (Air RISC)
Background
The Air RISC has been established to assist State and local air
pollution control agencies and EPA Regional Offices on technical matters
pertaining to health, exposure, and risk assessment for noncriteria air
pollutants. It is operated by EPA's Offices of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAOPS), and Health and Environmental Assessment (OHEA). The Air
RISC is managed by a Steering Committee that provides guidance and makes
decisions on funding and various operational procedures. Joann Held, from
the New Jersey Department of Environment Protection, represents STAPPA and
ALAPCO by her participation as an advisory member to the Steering Committee.
Nicholas Ciceretti, from the Philadelphia Air Management Services, is the
back-up contact for Ms. Held. The purpose is to ensure that Air RISC is
meeting the needs of its client community.
Goal and Objectives
The goal of the Air RISC is to support State/local (S/L) agencies and
Regional Offices in the implementation .of air toxics control programs by
providing technical guidance and information on matters pertaining to
health, exposure, and risk assessment of toxic air pollutants. The objectives
of the center are as follows:
1. To provide a mechanism to transfer to S/L agencies available health
and risk assessment information through summaries of health effects information
and workshops and seminars.
2. To provide telephone access to EPA expertise as an initial quick
response to individual problems.
3. To provide technical review and/or consultation on site-specific
risk assessments.
4. To provide guidance to S/L agencies on how to conduct hazard,
exposure and risk analyses, as well as how to interpret their results.
5-.,.. To provide*a--mechanism-so-that S/L" agencies-can*have*access to~EPA
expertise in answering questions pertaining to the scientific basis for
conducting risk assessment.
6. To obtain feedback from S/L's to EPA on technical support needs of
those agencies in the area of health and risk assessment.
Current. Status
The Air RISC became fully operational in the last quarter of FY 1988.
The Steering Committee, formed to provide direction and make Air RISC
management decisions, meets monthly. The committee includes membership from
28"
-------
AIR RISK INFORMATION SUPPORT CENTER (Air RISC) - Continued
OAQPS and the Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, with advisory
members from the E"A Regional Offices,. S/L agencies, the EPA library and
EPA's Health Effects Research Laboratory. It is important to note the
three kinds of services which Air RISC provides:
1. Hotline - for quick referral to experts, and provision of available
EPA health assessment.
2. Technical assistance - for more in-deoth evaluation and retrieval
of information than can be provided via the hotline.
3. Technical guidance - for questions general enough in nature to be
applicable for many S/L agencies.
Future Milestones
The next milestones include the preparation of a six-month progress
report and a planning and implementation schedule for conducting training
workshops in risk assessment and risk communication. Currently three such
workshops are being discussed for presentation in the late spring to early
summer of 1989. In the fall of 1988, Air RISC will publish a directory of
Agency contacts for answers to various questions pertaining to air toxics
and a glossary of health, exposure and risk assessment terms.
EPA^Contact Persons -. •
Office of Air Duality Planning and Standards
•£,
f9l
Karen Blanchard(919) 541-5501
(FTS) 629-5503
Office of Health and Environmental Assessment
Winona Victery(919) 541-4828
(FTS) 629-4928
Air RISC HOTLINE (919) 541-0888
(FTS) 629-0888
29
-------
MULTIYEAR DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Discussion
For FY 1988, EPA continued to assist State and local air
pollution control agencies in developing multiyear development
plans (MYDP's) for air toxics. The MYDP guidance containing
adequacy criteria for FY 1988 maintained the concept of
flexibility in meeting those criteria. At the beginning of the
year the universe of agencies actively working on MYDP's was 71.
One State and one local agency were added to the universe during
the year. At years' end, 65 MYDP's were considered adequate by
EPA whereas the target for adequate MYDP's for the year had been
57. Milestones in MYDP's indicate progress is being made in.
program development - in some cases significant development
(e.g., Wisconsin, Maryland, and Rhode Island passed air toxics
regulations this past year). . . •
MYDP guidance for FY 1989 was issued July 27, 1988. The
draft guidance had been previously presented to STAPPA/ALAPCO's
air toxics subcommittee on May 15, 1988 and subsequently comments
were received and incorporated into the final package. The
guidance reemphasized the concepts of flexibility and
incorporation of air toxics concerns in PM and ozone programs.
The focus for FY 1989 consists of asking agencies to report
progress made in air toxics programs, of moving from the planning
phase to an implementation phase of the MYDP program, and of
encouraging intraoffice coordination with personnel in other but
related programs such as the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorissation Act (SARA) of 1986.
EPA__C6ntactJPerson
Mike Trutna
(919) 541-5345
(FTS) 629-5345
30;
-------
HIGH RISK URBAN TOXICS.
Background/Status
A major focus of the national air toxics strategy is the
multisource, multipollutant urban toxics problem. High residual
cancer risks from the cumulative effects of multisource,
multipollutant situations may exist in many large, densely
populated or industrialized urban areas. Problems and solutions
vary from city to city. Thus, the identification, investigation,
and control in these areas are primarily State and local agency
responsibilities. Studies of the problem indicate high cancer
risks, even after existing and planned Federal, state, and local
regulatory programs for criteria and toxic pollutants are fully
implemented. The EPA Regional Offices have been working with
State and local agencies to initiate the process of identifying,
investigating, and controlling the general air toxics problem in
urban multisource areas and to have these agencies begin to
develop regulatory programs where needed. (See map on following
page for an indication of related activities underway.)
Additionally, further analyses are being completed on the most
recent data available to further evaluate the seriousness of the
urban problem in five selected cities. A data base analysis
software package is being evaluated for use by States and others
for such purposes. .
Future Milestones
- Review and track work.plans from State and local
agencies for the high risk, urban toxics assessment portion of
the multiyear development plan activities. Continue efforts to
encourage State and local agencies to undertake additional
assessment work.
Present an EPA/STAPPA/ALAPCO workshop on urban air
toxics in January - April 1989 in Los Angeles, Denver, and
Baltimore, cohosted by the State/local agencies involved.
Continue evaluation of application and support of
PIPQUIC (a software package for manipulating and analyzing air
toxics data bases) for urban air toxics analyses.
- Continue- operation of the EPA managed Urban Air Toxics
Monitoring Program- (toxic- "canisternri program:) targeted' to urban-
areas (FY 1988 — FY 1991+). Initiate sampling new monitoring
sites for urban air toxics sampling program in January 1989.
Continue evaluation of candidate SIP control
strategies, to assess their relative effectiveness in controlling
both" air." toxics~ and?- criteria-, polTutants?;..
31..
-------
HIGH RISK URBAN TOXICS - Continued
Expand analysis of effectiveness of State and local
air toxics programs at assessing and mitigating urban air toxics.
EPA Contact Persons
Technical Design of Assessment Activities
James H. Southerland (919) 541-5523
(FTS) 629-5523
Regulatory Mitigation Strategies
Mike Trutna (919) 541-5345
(FTS) 629-5345
321
-------
CO
CD
CO
CO
CD
CO
CO
CD
5
CD
DC
CO
o
"x
o
05
.0
CO
£
<
33
-------
HIGH RISK POINT SOURCES
The air toxics high risk point source (HRPS) program is
included as an important part of the national air toxics
strategy, since HRPS are believed to result in many fenceline
situations where at least 10** individual lifetime cancer risk is
involved. Approximately one million dollars of section 105 funds
have been allocated annually to the Regional Offices in FY 1987
and FY 1988 for the purposes of achieving State and local agency
progress in identifying and evaluating potential HRPS. In
addition, approximately $400K of section 105 funds have been set
aside at the national level in fiscal years 1986, 1987, and 1988
to enable funding of certain HRPS initiative projects. Typically
$10K - $15K are given to a State or local agency which agrees to
address a potential HRPS identified by EPA (i.e., promoted
initiative) or by the State or local agency itself (i.e., State
initiative).
Initial evaluation of the national initiatives program
suggests that it has been quite successful in accomplishing
additional control (about half of the cases reportedly resulted
in more control) and has been popular .with participating agencies
(14 of the 15 State and local agencies surveyed considered the
program beneficial). In contrast, it is less clear as to the
benefits that have resulted from the yearly $1 million allocated
to general HRPS program development. Considerable progress has
and continues to be made by State and local agencies in
developing regulatory programs to address new and/or existing
point sources. However, in the absence of these programs,
concerns have been raised that the general State and local
screening activity included in State and local multiyear
development plans (MYDP's) for air toxics has not yet produced
significant quantifiable results.
The FY 1989 MYDP guidance (see attached status report)
recommends that each Regional Office work with State and local
agencies to identify early in FY 1989 specific HRPS candidates
for investigation. Candidates should be selected by the Regional
Office and State: and local agencies using various criteria,
including those used for funding the national initiatives such as
the perceived existence of a health problem, (e.g., citizen
complaints or agency screening analyses) and the expected
commitment of the State and local agency to evaluate the
particular HRPS candidate and to come to some regulatory decision
in., a, timely way (preferably in a public forum), and to document
the results.
The number of possible sources screened and expected from a
given State or local agency for follow-up evaluation activities
should be consistent with the amount of section 105 funds
allocated- to. that. agency for. HRPS- activities.. These sources
would* bes separates andii distinct, from:* any:-sources', being' addressed?
34-
-------
HIGH RISK POINT SOURCES - Continued
by the national initiatives program which will also continue to
fund HRPS candidates in FY 1989.
EPA Contact Person
Mike Trutna (919) 541-5345
(FTS) 629-5345
35.
-------
NATIONAL AIR TOXICS WORKSHOPS
One., of; the best examples of how State and local air-
pollution control agencies and EPA can constructively work
together has been the program of national air toxics workshops.
Three specialty air toxics workshops were held in 1988: Air
Toxics Permitting/Control Technology (three locations); Hospital
Waste Incineration/Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers (two locations);
and Air Toxics Modeling (two locations). These workshops were
developed as a result of feedback on future workshop needs
obtained from State and local air pollution control agency
participants at the four comprehensive air toxics workshops held
in 1987. Attendees at those workshops requested specialty
workshops on the above-mentioned three subjects.
All the FY 1988 workshops were jointly planned and sponsored
by STAPPA/ALAPCO and EPA. In addition, the hospital waste work-
shops were also cosponsored by the Northeast States for
Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) and the California Air
Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). There was again
substantial support from a number of State and local agencies who
provided speakers as a key part of the proceedings. There were
approximately 500 attendees from State and local agencies at all
the FY 1988 workshops and 300 industry personnel attending just
the permitting/control technology workshops.
The FY 1988 workshops were well received, particularly the
ones on hospital waste incineration. As a result, STAPPA/ALAPCO
decided to endorse the concept of future specialty workshops
continuing into FY 1989. Current plans are to hold the final Air
Toxics Modeling workshop in San Francisco during the week of
October 17, 1988 to hold three workshops addressing urban air
toxics problems in Los Angeles, Denver, and Baltimore over the
January to April 1989 timeframe, and to hold two to three
workshops on assessing and communicating risk later in 1989. The
selection of these workshops (as well as any held in the future)
was based on feedback from STAPPA/ALAPCO's air toxics
subcommittee. The urban air toxics workshops will focus on
evidence of the problem, monitoring, emissions estimation and
modeling, risk assessment, and mitigation of urban problems. The
risk., communication- workshop, will, address, understanding, and.
communicating risk to the public.
EPA Contact Persons
Urban Air Toxics Workshops
Bill. Lamason (919) 541.-53.74'.
(FTS) 629-5374
Risk Communication
Karen Blanchard (919) 541-5503
(ETS-); 629-5503-
36-
-------
STATUS OF AIR TOXICS EMISSION FACTORS AND ESTIMATION TOOLS
Background
EPA, through its Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), has
underway a number of different programs to compile and publish emission
factors for various air toxics.
"Locating and Estimating" Series:
To date, 15 reports have been published as part of this program dealing
with the following substances:
SUBSTANCE
Acrylonitrile
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Ethylene Hi chloride
Formaldehyde
Nickel
Chromium
Manganese
Phosgene
Epichlorohydrin
Viriylidene Chioride
Ethyl ene Oxide
Chlorobenzenes
Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCRs)
Polycyclic Organic
Matter (POM)
Benzene
Storage Tanks
EPA PUBLICATION NO.
NTIS ORDER NO.
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 4.50/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
EPA 450/4-
84-007a
84-007b
84-007C
84-007d
84-007e
•84-007f
84-0(17g
•84-007h
•84-0071
84-007J
84-007k
84-0071
84-007m
PB 84-
?B 84-
PB 84-
PB 84-
PB 84-
PB 84-
PB 85-
PB 86-
PB 86-
PB 86-
PB 86-
PB 87-
?B 87-
200609
200625
200617
239193
200633
210988
106474
117587
117595
117603
117611
113973
189841
EPA 450/4-84-007n
EPA 450/4-84-007p
EPA 450/4-84-007q
Number not assigned
PB 87-209540
PB 88-149059
PB 88-196175
Delayed until
September '88
The title of each report is Locat i ng And Est i mat i ng Air Emi ssi ons From
Sources Of (Substance) or U)catinj[ and Estimating Air Toxic Emissions""
From (Source Category)..
Compilation of Air Toxic Emission Factors:
The general emission factor listing for more' pollutants than shown above is
available in the report Preliminary Compilation Of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors For. Selected Air"Toxic Compounds (EPA 450/4-86-010a). This report
essential! yHists- available air toxic emission- factors and references from'
where the emission factors were obtained. Because the focus is on a list of
available air toxic emission factors, the report provides little technical
detail concerning the derivations or applicability of any of the factors
therein. An update of this document, which will greatly increase the
number of-factors, and source; categories,, will be> available in early fall
1988"th*bothv:hardicopy/and" rn'rcomputer.!' format.-
37'
-------
STATUS OF AIR TOXICS EMISSION FACTORS AND ESTIMATION TOOLS - Continued
Source/Pol 1utant Crosswalk;
A report, Toxic Air Pollutant Crosswalk; A Screening Tool For Locating
1SL
45
Possible Sources Emitting Toxic Air Pollutants (EPA 450/4-87-023a). was
released in December 1987.This reoort is an aid in locating possible
sources for further investigation by listing known valid combinations of
SCC, SIC and pollutants from various data sources. It also features a PC
computerized data base.
Air Emissions Species Manual;
The Air Emissions Spedes Manual in two volumes (VOC and particulate,
respectively) has been released {Aoril 1988). This report contains various
source profiles useful in estimating air toxics emissions, identification
of possible sources, source reconciliation work (receptor modeling),
photochemical modeling, and other similar uses. The EPA numbers are:
EPA 450/2-88-003a - Volume I, VOC
EPA 450/2-88-OO.Ib - Volume II, Parti oil ate Matter.
How.To Obtain These'Reports:
Government agencies generally may obtain single copies of these reports by
submitting requests, along with EPA publication number, to: Library (MD-35),
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
telephone numbers (919) 541-2777 or (FTS) 629-2777. These documents are
also available for a fee through the National Technical Information Service
(NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, telephone number (703)
487-4650.
Other Milestones:
- Reports on emissions factors for municipal incinerators, chromium
(update) 1,3 Butadiene, Perch!oroethylene, and Trichloroethylene
will be published in late 1988 to early 1989.
- A compilation of mainly State and local air toxics emission inventory
questionnaires was published in June 1988 (EPA-450/4-88-008).
- An air toxic'area source factors-and'procedures document will" be~
available by the end of 1988.
- A brochure, "Tools for Est-imating Emissions of Air Toxics," was
published and distributed in June of 1988. This brochure describes
the reports above as well as other tools available. For copies,
call the EPA contact, person shown below.,
EPA Cont act P ers on:
James H. Southerland (919) 541-5523
(FTS) 629-5523
38
-------
STATUS OF AIR TOXICS MODELING GUIDANCE
Background
There is increasing emphasis on the assessment of air quality and
health impacts of toxic chemical releases. Considerations include
both long-term health effects and short-term acute health effects.
Support in both long-term and short-term air quality impacts is
being provided for the listing of chemicals as toxic and in the
development of control regulations under section 112 of-the Clean
Air Act (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants).
Additional support to States has been provided in the evaluation of
source impacts under the State initiative program.
Long-term air. quality impacts are generally assessed using Guideline
Air Duality Models.* Short-term impacts must assess the effect of
short-term,, high volume releases which frequently occur from equipment
upsets and malfunctions. These short-term events have not been
classically examined.
Current Status
EPA is currently examining available techniques for assessing the
air quality impact of short-term releases. ..
EPA sponsored three week-long workshops on modeling air toxic releases,
About 75 State/local agency modelers attend as well as EPA staff.
Each workgroup featured 1 1/2 days of hands-on computer modeling .
problem exercises. Course materials will be used by EPA1s Air
Pollution Training Institute to develop further courses.
EPA published "A Dispersion Model for Elevated Dense Gas Jet Chemical
Releases" in two volumes. The model is known as DEGAOIS Version 2.0
and operates on a VAX .computer system. The two volumes and diskettes
for uploading the program via a PC to the VAX are available from
NTIS as PB 88-202379.
Future Milestones
0 EPA will publish a Workbook of Screening Techniques for Assessing
Impacts of Toxic Air Pollutants by November 1988.
0 A PCI version,of the procedures, in-the Workbook shoul'd- be:>av.'a?iTabTa?
early in FY 1990.
* See status report entitled "Status of Guideline on Air Quality Models."
39-
-------
STATUS OF AIR TOXICS MODELING GUIDANCE - Continued
An air toxics model evaluation project has been initiated for
selected models and available-data^bases.^a-peport should be
published, by EPA in the first half of FY 1990.-
EPA Contact Person
Jim Dicke (919) 541-5682
(FTS) 629-5682
40;
-------
AMBIENT AIR TOXICS MONITORING - METHODS DEVELOPMENT AW SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Background
As a part of the ambient air toxic monitoring strategy, a pilot project
called the Toxic Air Monitoring System (TAMS) was implemented. The goals for
this project are to evaluate methods of sample collection and analysis for
volatile toxic pollutants in the ambient air, to characterize ambient
concentration of such pollutants in selected urban atmospheres, to gain
quality assurance experience, and to share technology with State/local agencies,
Current Status
To date, sampling is being conducted at ten sites, three each in Houston,
Boston, and Chicago, and one in Seattle/Tacoma. At the sites, twenty-four
hour integrated samples are collected every 12th day using the stainless
steel "summa" polished canisters.. The samples are concentrated prior to
being analyzed using a gas chromatograph equipped with a mass selective
detector and/or a combination of traditional gas chromatograph detectors.
The latest status report on the TAMS was issued in August 1988. It includes
a section on methods comoarison, and provides data through April 1988.
EPA Contact Person "
Jane Leonard (FTS) 629-5653
(919)541-5653
41
-------
SPECIAL URBAN TOXICS MONITORING PROGRAM
Backg/pund ./Current Status
Because of recent concern for high cancer risk from multisource,
multipollutant interactions in urban areas, State and local agencies have
been seeking ways in which to assess the magnitude of potentially toxic
compounds in their ambient air. To fill the need, EPA is coordinating toxic
monitoring programs designed to provide air quality data for screening pur-
poses. These programs are separate from programs within the Toxics Air
Monitoring System (TAMS) described elsewhere in this compilation of status
reports.
In 1987, EPA began managing a orogram for ambient toxics.screening at
19 sites in 18 cities. The first sample was collected on October 1, 1987
and sampling continued until September 30, 1988. Samples were collected over
24-hour periods at 12-day intervals through a special heated manifold in
order to prevent aldehydes from being lost on moist surfaces. The canisters
were analyzed for selected hydrocarbons and halogenated compounds. A
collocated hi-vol sampler collected particulates for metals and 8(a)P
analyses, nata were sent to the participating agencies on a quarterly
schedule.
EPA provided the sampling equipment needed to collect the samples, while
the participating State and local agencies provided manpower .to collect the
samples. The samples were analyzed by a central contractor. Participating
agencies provided necessary funds to support the program.
Future Milestones
0 EPA plans to coordinate similar programs during the next few years.
The next one will begin on January 1, 1989. Verbal commitments to participate
in that program should be made to the cognizant Regional Office by Oct-
ober 31, 1988.
0 Financial commitments ($21K per each site) are needed by November 30.
EPA; Contact Person
Harold Richter (919) 541-5367
FTS 629-5367
42"
-------
INHALATION RISK REFERENCE DOSE
Background
The risk reference dose (RfD) is a benchmark level (exposure
concentration or dose) used by the Agency for assessment of noncancer
health effects. The RfD is an estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps
an order of magnitude) of a daily exposure to the human copulation (including
sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be without appreciable risks of
deleterious .effects during a lifetime.
Derivation of an RfD involves review of toxicological literature,
determination of the critical endpoint and critical study, and selection of
appropriate uncertainty factors. Based on all the data from human and
animal studies, the endpoint which is most relevant to humans is selected
and the no-observed-adverse effect level (NOAEL) is identified. The RfD is
derived from the NOAEL by consistent.application of typically order of
magnitude uncertainty factors that reflect various types of data used to
estimate RfD1s, and an additional modifying factor reflecting a scientific
judgment of the entire data base for the chemical. After derivation, the
RfD and supporting documentation are reviewed by an intra-Agency work group,
and acceptable RfD's are verified and included on the Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS) data base.
To date, the Agency has developed and verified oral RfO's and a
methodology for development of "inhalation RfO's has been prepared. The
draft document titled "Interim Methods for Development of Inhalation
Reference Doses" (August 1987) was reviewed in a public workshop in
October 1987. A revised draft was completed in March 1988. Verification
meetings of the RfD work group for inhalation RfD's are underway.
An informal work group with Agency wide participation is planned to
discuss the use of RfD's in OAQPS risk assessment and regulatory decisions.
Current Status
0 A total of 273 oral RfD's have been verified.
0 Supporting documentation has been'prepared for inhalation-RfO's-
for approximately 50 chemicals.
0 An additional 50-100 inhalation RfD's are expected to be submitted
for verification in the next year..
EPA Contact Person
Dan Suth (919) 541-5340
(FTS) 629-5340
43
-------
SUBWTTAL OF VOC AIR TOXICS DATA TO AIRS
Background
The Interim State and Local Air Toxic Volatile Organic Chemical Data
Base was created to:
0 Compile State, local and Federal volatile organic chemical (VOC)
data collected at fixed monitoring sites on a voluntary basis.
0 Provide for information exchange for participating agencies.
0 Provide participating agencies with an opportunity to share VOC
data and information on sampling and analytical methods, siting, averaging
times of. individual measurements, and VOC summary statistics such as
maximum and second maximum values quarterly and annual averages, etc.
0 Remain in effect until the VOC data is stored on AIRS (FY 1988-89).
0 During 4th quarter FY 1988 AIRS became capable of handling VOC
data; therefore, there was no need to keep the Interim VOC data base
active.
Current Status . .
0 Data base will remain frozen in its present state. There will
be no more updates.
0 There were 12 participating agencies in the interim VOC data base:
- State: California Air Resources Board, California Department
of Health Services, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality,
Massachusetts .Department of Environmental Quality, New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection, and the Texas Air Control Board.
- Local: Bay Area-Air Quality Management District (San Francisco,
CA), Clark County Department of Health (Las Vegas, NV) Sacramento Air
Pollution Control District,, and the Philadelphia Department of Health.
Agency.
- Federal: Environment Canada, U. S. Environmental Protection
VOC Pollutants and Benzo(a)Pyrene
- 96"-pollutants,with- some.'.data.
- 35 pollutants with 10 or more site-years of data to characterize
individual VOC distributions
44
-------
SUBMITTAL OF VOC AIR TOXICS DATA TO AIRS - Continued
0 148 monitoring sites measuring VOCs and/or BaP
— 69 sites classified as center city
-- 25 sites classified as rural
— 25 sites classified as suburban
— 23 sites unclassified
0 EPA publication, Report on the Interim Data Base for State and
Local Air ToxicVolatile Organic Chemical Measurements, is available.
0 EPA publication, The Environmental Protection Agency Interim
Data Base for Air Toxic Volatile Organic Chemicals, is available.
Future Milestones
9 All data in the interim VOC data base which submitted the
complete record of all observations (not just summary statistics) will
be entered onto AIRS. These include:
- The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality and California
Air Resources Board data sets will be placed in AIRS during FY 1989.
- The urban air toxics monitoring program data collected in
cooperation with State and local agencies will be placed in AIRS during
FY 1989. . -
0 The Toxic Air Monitoring Sites (TAMS) VOC data will be placed
in AIRS during FY 1989.
EPA Contact Person
Rob Faoro (919) 541-5459
(FTS) 629-5459 • • .
45
-------
SUPERFUNO AMENDMENTS AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT
TOXIC RELEASE" INVENTORY (TITLE: IIF. SECTION 313)
Background
The development of a Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) was mandated by
Congress through the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of
1986. The "right to know" law provided for the public to have access to
Information on the quantity of emissions to the environment of over 300
specific chemicals and groups of chemicals, and obligated industry to
provide this data to EPA and to State agencies. The Office of Toxic
Substances (OTS) of EPA has principal responsibility to compile information
submitted by industry in a computerized data base accessible to the public.
Initial reporting from an estimated 30,000.manufacturing facilities (in
Standard Industrial Classification codes 20 through 39) on 300,000 forms
was due by July 1, 1988. Reporting facilities were required to provide
estimates (no measurements are required) of their annual releases to the
air, water and land, aggregated by facility for each chemical. All
continuous and accidental releases were to be combined, with air emissions
seoarated into the general categories of fugitive emissions and stack
emissions.
The-Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAOPS) coordinated
with OtS on development of TRI implementation activities. OAQPS has assumed
responsibility for interpretation of TRI data with respect to air emissions
in response to inquiries from State and local agencies, from within EPA,
and from Congress. OAQPS is also supporting State and local agencies in
their use and interpretation of the TRI data, since these agencies are
the first point of contact for public inquiries.
Current Status
Information and guidance materials we're forwarded through EPA*s
Regional Offices to State and local air pollution control agencies prior to
the July 1 deadline. Approximately 70,000 forms have been received by OTS
and are being computerized. Availability for internal EPA use is expected
during the first quarter of FY 1989. State agencies will also have early
access to the EPA data base, through a timesharing arrangement at the-
Regional Office level.
Future Milestones
The. computerized data- base; will be. ava.ilablei to. the: pub.lic. in -the..
spring of 1989. Public access will be through the computer facilities of
the National Library of Medicine, which will enable association of the TRI
data with health effects and other information available through the
Hazardous Substances Data Bank. Several user-friendly software programs
will be developed to enable users to search the TRI files.
46
-------
SUPERFUND AMENDMENTS AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT
TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY (TITLE III, SECTION 313) - Continued
The-EPA- is~/ developing., plans, for use of- thetTRI. data: by the. various.
program offices. The OAOPS anticipates the principal utility of'the-data
will be in the preliminary evaluation and prioritization of pollutants and
source categories and to focus supplemental information gathering. There
are potential uses by OAOPS, contingent upon resources, in development of
emission factors, in cross-checking with other EPA data bases, in support
of urban air toxics analyses, in PSD reviews, and in responding to
Congressional and EPA management questions. At this point, many of the
potential uses are uncertain until a better understanding of the quality
and completeness of the collected data is available.
EPA Contact Persons
Richard Rhoads (919) 541-5613
(FTS) 629-5613
Robert Kellam (919) 541-5647
(FTS) 629-5647
Tim Mohin
(919) 541-5349
(FTS) 629-5349
47
-------
AIR/SUPERFUND COORDINATION PROGRAM"
Background
Beginning in FY 1987, the Administrator has allocated
Superfund resources to EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) to
assist each Regional air office to establish a permanent
Superfund liaison function and participate more actively in
evaluations and decisions related to Superfund site activities
involving air pollution issues.
Air/Superfund coordinators have been assigned in each
Regional Air office to facilitate air program participation in
pertinent Superfund activities. Air offices provide routine site
support services, such as consultation and review of proposals,
plans, and studies, and participate in decisions related to
preremedial, remedial, and removal actions that may have
significant air impacts. They help to assure that Superfund site
decisions involving air pollution issues are consistent with air
program regulations and policies. They also may perform special
field evaluations during removal and preremedial actions at
selected sites and assist Superfund contractors by consulting in
areas such as air modeling, monitoring, and the use and .
effectiveness of air pollution control devices.
A number of support activities are needed to assist Regional
Air offices to effectively perform the above'described functions.
There also is a need to coordinate air activities with the Office
of Emergency Response (OERR) to ensure that they are fully
integrated with the overall Superfund program. These functions
and the overall management of the Air/Superfund Program are the
responsibility of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS). - • .
Support Activities Under The Air/guperfund Program
Four basic' types* of"- support' activities are1 funded1 by
extramural funds. These are:
o Regional office coordination
o Training
o National technical guidance studies
o<- Technical", assistance
Regional Office Coordination involves the exchange of
information among Regional Air Offices and between Regions and
OAQPS and provides updated technical information to Regions and
-------
AIR/SUPERFUND COORDINATION PROGRAM- Continued
OAQPS and periodic reports on ongoing studies. Coordination
meetings are held at four month intervals to provide Regions an
opportunity to exchange information, help to guide the overall
program, participate in workshops, and receive briefings on
pertinent technical and administrative subjects.
Training is required to instruct Regional air office staff
on Superfund program issues, methods, and procedures; and
Regional Superfund staff on air issues, methods, procedures, and
services and expertise which can be provided by Air Offices. The
training for Superfund staff focuses on the fundamentals of air
pollution control, including monitoring, modeling, emission
controls, health effects from ambient concentrations, and risk
analysis techniques unique to air pollution control.
National technical guidance studies provide Regional air and
Superfund staffs with technical support, data, and guidance
needed to improve the quality of the data base and the analysis
of air issues associated with Superfund sites.
Technical assistance is provided to Regional Air offices to
assist them in evaluating specific sites, analyses prepared by
Superfund contractors, and preparing recommendations on remedial
actions needed to minimize air impacts. .
Current Status
Three national guidance studies were initiated in FY 1987
and are expected to continue through FY 1989. Region III has the
lead for the first study which provides procedures for air
pathway analyses and defines monitoring and modeling
methodologies needed to gather data required for these analyses.
Region I has the lead for the second study which provides
emission factors and methods for estimating emissions at sites
prior to initiating remedial action. Region V has. the lead for
the third study which provides information and guidance to
improve our ability to estimate emissions during remedial
actions. Field studies planned in FY1989 will extend these
studies to improve our data base and ability to estimate air
emissions and ambient levels of air toxics. Guidance manuals
will be updated as required.
Additional studies have been initiated in FY 1989. These
include: (1.)* design of air strippers' and.-soiT vapor-extraction'
systems and their impact on air*emissions, (2) guidance on
developing data quality objectives for air studies, (3) selection
of optimum dispersion models for low level air toxic releases
from Superfund sites, (4) procedures for incorporating emission
and, ambient air. data from Superfund, site, studies, into existing
49?-
-------
AIR/SUPERFUND COORDINATION PROGRAM - Continued
data systems', and- (5) guidance for-more-effective-review of:
potential air impacts based on Superfund site studies.
Additional national technical guidance studies will be
initiated as needs are identified and the studies described above
are completed.
Future Mi1estones
To date, five Regional Air offices have held training
sessions with their counterparts in the Superfund program and
four Air offices have been briefed on the Superfund program. In
addition to completing this series of training sessions, future
activities will emphasize training to ensure that results of
guidance studies are integrated into the Superfund analysis and
remedial selection process. Information and guidance from these
studies will be disseminated to both EPA personnel and State and
local agencies via workshops and other appropriate methods.
Guidance manuals developed under the national technical
guidance studies will be updated to incorporate new information .
and based on the experience of Regional Air and Superfund offices
and contractors who will be using them.
EPA•Contact Person
Joe Padgett
(919) 541-5589
(FTS) 629-5589
50
-------
PHin LONG-TERM NONATTAINMENT POLICY
Background
It is clear that attaining the PMJQ air quality standard promulgated
in July 1^87 will be a long-term problem for a number of areas. Preliminary
estimates indicate that 22 areas, ranging in size from small rural
agricultural and mountain communities to major urban areas are unlikely to
attain the standards in 3 to 5 years. The severity of the PMjo problem
varies substantially with the mix of sources and the populations exposed in
these areas.
Current Status
- A task force, including representatives from the Regions, QAQPS, and
OGC, was formed in April to examine the issue and .to develop an overall policy
for dealing with SIP's in problem areas, following issuance of the overall
policy, detailed guidance on specific issues such a wood smoke, prescribed
burning, and both urban and rural fugitive dust, will be issued to supplement
the policy.
- To date, task force examination has revealed notable constraints
under the current law.
-•? Abramowitz decision on LA SIP- and. ongoing litigation for ozone
sets difficult hurdle for developing a flexible PMjQ attainment
policy..
— Part 0 sanctions are not available to force actions-, leading
quickly to FIP's, either as EPA hammer or likely outcome of
citizen suits,
• !•- Guidance on areas where persuasive attainment within statutory
timeframes is not demonstrated must be resolved on a case-by-case
. basis.
- The task force concludes that if CAA amendments pass for ozone/CO
and not PM^Q,,,the. problems, for long-term nonattainment. policy wil.l be. even
greater.
- For these reasons, the task force strongly supports amending the Act
and has advanced a concept paper addressing PMio long-term nonattainment to
numerous congressional staff..
- The; task;,:force*has- also, crafted a>draft, policy guidance^ memorandum
to articulate-the. overall" oolicy.
51
-------
PMin LONG-TERM NONATTAINMENT POLICY - Continued
Future Milestones
- OAQPS'is' working-on--guidance/sub-oolicies that will address" control
approaches for long-term nonattainment problems associated with key source
categories, including wood stoves, urban fugitive dust, prescription burning,
atmospherically formed particles (e.g., sulfates, nitrates) and rural
fugitive dust. This guidance will be provided to State and local agencies
as it becomes available.
Contact Persons
John Bachmann
(919) 541-5359
(FTS) 629-5359
David Stonefield (919) 541-5350
(FTS) 629-5350
Tom Pace
(919) 541-5634
(FTS) 629-5634
52
-------
RURAL FUGITIVE DUST POLICY
Background
When the EPA promulgated the PMjg national ambient air quality standard
(NAAOS) in July 1987, it retained, on an interim basis, the 1977 Rural
Fugitive Dust Policy. This policy, which was originally intended for use
with the total suspended particulate (TSP) NAAQS, allowed States with rural
fugitive dust areas to deemphasize the control of fugitive dust in rural
areas when developing and enforcing their State implementation plans for
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS for PMig. The policy directs that
efforts to control particulate matter be expended first at sources in urban
areas and next at certain large manmade sources in rural areas. Concurrent
with the PMjn promulgation, EPA proposed three alternative policies for
controlling rural fugitive dust and solicited comments on the alternatives
and on the adequacy of the definitions which are used in identifying rural
fugitive dust areas (52 FR 24716).
Current Status
On July 22, 1988, the third work group meeting was held to review the
criteria for a rural fugitive dust area and discuss alternative control
policies. Substantial progress has been made on revisions to the criteria
and the policy. However, ho final decision can be made until the resolution
and implementation of the PM^g long-term nonattainment policy.* -
Since rural fugitive dust is an element of the PMjo long-term
nonattainment problem, EPA decided to revise its original plan to publish a
separate rural fugitive dust policy in the Federal Register by December 31, 1988.
Under the revised approach, the policy will be issuecTaVa""policy memorandum
or guidance document and will be considered as a subcomponent of the PM]^
long-term nonattainment policy.
Future Milestones .
Completion of an economic analysis is scheduled for mid November. This
analysis, will provide. EPA with costs and benefits for each alternative. This
information will be useful in the selection of a final policy.
EPA Contact Person
Robin Ounkins (919) 541-5335
(FTS) 629-5335
* See status report entitled "PMjg Long-Tertn Nonattainment Policy."
53'
-------
URBAN FUGITIVE DUST POLICY
Background
Fugitive dust in urban areas generally is due to vehicle resuspension
on and around paved roads, unpaved roads, parking areas, or windblown dust
emitted from open areas with inadequate ground cover. Previous efforts
to control paved road emissions have proven unsuccessful, largely because
they relied on periodic street cleaning to reduce surface loadings.
Under the urban fugitive dust policy, programs to prevent dust from
reaching the road surface will be emphasized. The policy will also
address unpaved roads and areas. It will identify best available control
measures (3ACM) and additional control measures (ACM) for adoption and
implementation under the PMjo long-term nonattainment policy umbrella.*
Current Status
A technical support document, "Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources,"
EPA-450/3-88-008, September 1988, was developed by the Emission Standards
Division in OAQPS and distributed to the PMjn, Regional Contacts. The
document provides control and cost effectiveness information and a regulatory
framework which will be helpful in developing and reviewing State implementation
plans for PMif). In addition, EPA is also in the process of developing a draft
guidance .memorandum for the urban fugitive dust.
Future Activities
Workshops are to be held in the Regions to discuss in the technical
support document described above. These workshops are tentatively scheduled
for December 1988. The urban fugitive dust policy itself will be issued
after the PMjQ long-term nonattainment policy has been developed.
Contact Person
Robin Ounkins (919) 541-5335
(FTS) 629-5335
* See status report entitled "PMjo Long-Term Nonattainment Policy."
54
-------
PMm EMISSIONS TRADING POLICY
Background
The emissions trading policy statement was published fn the Federal
Register on December 4, 1986 (51 FR 43814). That policy, statement addresses
requirements for trading partlculate emissions as total suspended particulate
but not as PHiQ. Therefore, it was necessary to review these requirements
for their applicability to PMjo trades and to revise them if necessary.
Current Status
A paper addressing many of the policy questions was prepared for
presentation at the APCA/EPA PMjo Specialty Conference held in San Francisco,
February 23-25, 1988. The paper sets forth the following special rules
regarding PM^Q trades:
0 Demonstrating Ambient Equivalence
Analysis of ambient equivalence is not required if the sum of the
emissions increases, considering only the increasing sources, is less
than 15 tons per year.
Baseline for Measuring Emission Reduction Credits (ERC's)
1. Group I areas - treated as nonattainment areas
a. Trade must show progress - yield 20 percent net decrease
b.. Prior reductions not creditable . .
c. Baseline emissions lower of actual, SIP allowable, or
RACT allowable
2. Group II areas - treated as unclassifiable area until shown to
be attaining the NAAOS
a. Trade must not result in an increase in emissions but
is not required to show progress
b... Prior reductions, are: not. creditable*
c. Baseline emissions lower of actual, SIP allowable, or
RACT allowable
3. Group III areas - treated as attainment areas without demonstrations
a. Prior reductions are not, creditable
b:.. BaselTne:-emrssibns" Vbwer*of:' actual"- or SIP* a^Towab-re? unless'
Level" IF analysi's- demonstrates that" higher- alTbwable values
will not interfere with NAAQS or PSD increments
0 Prior (Banked) Emission Reductions
55
-------
EMISSIONS TRADING POLICY - Continued
Credit" generally cannot- be granted for emission reductions made
before the ambient monitoring data are or were collected for use in
developing the Pfljn, SIP. {Reductions prior to 1985 would generally not be
creditable because areas were grouped for SIP development based on 1985-1987
ambient data.)
0 Precursors of Secondary Particles
ERC's for reducing emissions of precursors to secondary particles
can be obtained if:
a. the precursor is emitted from a local 'source (in the same
airshed);
b. a model applicable to the area has been developed to
demonstrate proportional benefit to PM^Q of reducing precursor emissions;
c. the control strategy for the area requires reduction of
secondary particles and has been demonstrated by dispersion modeling to
attain the PM NAAQS.
Future Milestones
0 Define what, constitutes a ".significant increase" in ambient
concentrations.
0 Drepare a policy statement addressing how emission trading rules
are to be met for sources of PM
EPA Contact Person
Ken Woodard (919) 541-5351
(FTS) 629-5351
56
-------
WOOD SMOKE REDUCTION POLICY
Background/Current Status
Wood smoke from residential wo.od heaters and fireplaces significantly
impacts concentrations of PM^fj in many areas of the country. This is
especially true in the northwest quarter of the Nation (Regions VIII and X).
PMjQ concentrations reach episodic levels when inversions trap smoke in
mountain valleys.
Since some areas impacted by wood smoke could require several years to
attain the PM^o NAAQS, a statement identifying the key elements which should
be addressed in State implementation plans (SIP's) for areas with long-term
nonattainment problems is being developed. Currently, EPA believes that
?MIQ SIP's in long-term nonattainment wood smoke areas should address
four points:
1. Reducing emissions from the current population of stoves through
installation, safety, and maintenance inspections; permits; and incentives
to convert to cleaner stoves or to alternative clean fuels.
2. Curtailing the use of wood stoves and fireplaces during adverse
meteorological conditions.
3. Preventing continued long-term increases in wood smoke emissions
by limiting future growth in the.numbers of wood stoves and fireplaces,
making alternative fuels available, and curbing subsidies for wood combustion
(i.e., free wood from State and national forests).
4. Establishment of a concerted outreach program to educate the
public on the need for curtailment programs and on improving the burn
efficiency in existing stoves.
Future Milestones
A policy statement on wood stove reduction will be issued in conjunction
with the PMjn, long-term nonattainment policy.*
Contact Person
Tom Pace (919) 541-5634
(FTS) 629-5634
* See status reoort entitled "PM^ Long-Term Nonattainment Policy.""
57
-------
PRESCRIBED BURNING/SMOKE MANAGEMENT
Background
One of the five major, causes of long-term nonattainment of the PMjg
air quality standard is emissions from prescribed burning for silviculture
and agriculture activities. In the past, EPA has generally treated episodes
of high PM concentrations caused by prescribed burns the same as episodes
caused by wildfires, i.e., considered them as exceptional events. However,
high concentrations from prescribed burning is a routine occurrence in some
parts of the country and, to a limited extent, controllable.
Current Status
At this time, EPA does not have a specific policy on prescribed burning.
However, we have established an interagency task force, through the National
HiTdfire Coordinating Group (NWCG), to assist EPA is establishing such a
policy. Our basic philosophy in discussions with the NWCG is that although
prescribed burning is a useful, and sometimes the only, tool available to
accomplish silviculture and agriculture goals, it should only be conducted
using good smoke management techniques.
An outline of a draft policy statement has been developed. However,
work on the full policy statement has been delayed because of NWCG's need
to address the wildfires that occurred this summer.
Future Milestones
A schedule for development of a draft policy on prescribed burning
will be developed in the near future. . ,
ContactJ'erson
Dave Stonefield (919) 541-5350
(FTS) 629-5350
58
-------
STATUS OF PMm SAMPLERS
Background,
The PMjQ network desi'gn and siting requirements of 40 CFR 58 were
promulgated on July 1, 1987. Under Section 53.34 of this action, the
National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS) for PMjo and the State and Local
Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) for Group I and Group II areas were
required to be operational by August 1, 1988. (Group I areas are
those having a high probability of violating the PMjg national ambient.
air quality standard, based upon an analysis of that area's total
suspended particulate air quality data. Group II areas are those
where the data are inconclusive.) The remaining SLAMS must be operational
by August 1, 1989.
In 1984, EPA procured a total of 662 PMio samplers (541 size-selective
inlet (SSI's) and 121 dichotomous) in order to accelerate the collection
of amb i ent" PMi'g data. These sampTers1 were' distributed to the States- and
local agencies in late 1984 and early 1985 based on prescribed criteria.
Approximately 300 additional samplers were procured by the States with
section 105 grant funds by September 1988.
Current Status
As of September 1998, there were 913 samplers operating and 141 of 146
urbanized areas had the minimum number of sites operating and meeting
the required sampling frequency.. Of the 41 Group I areas (excluding
the urbanized areas) 38 areas had sites operating at the required
every day sampling frequency. There were 49 of 59 Group II areas
(excluding the urbanized areas) which had PMjQ sites operating at the
required every other day sampling frequency.
EPA Contact Person
David Lutz (919) 541-5476
(FTS) 629-5476
59
-------
PMin EMISSION FACTORS
Background
EPA is continuing development of PMjg emission factors and is assisting
States in filling gaps in PMjQ emission inventories where published PM^Q
emission factors are not yet available for particular source categories.
Current Status/Future Milestones
PMin emission factors have been published in AP-42 in the Fourth
Edition (September 1985) and in Supplement A (October 1986). Additional
factors are being published in Supplement B In the Fall of 1988 for:
- Residential Wood Stoves
- Waste Oil Combustion
- .Refuse Incineration
- Sewage Sludge Incineration
- Srain Elevators and Processing Plants
- Crushed Stone Processing
- Western Surface Coal Mining
- Wildfire and Prescribed Burning
- Unpaved Roads
: Aggregate Handling and Storage Piles
- Industrial Paved Roads .
- Industrial Site Wind Erosion .
An interim report containing the PMjQ factors for all, except the Last, of
the listed categories was distributed to STAPPA and ALAPCO member agencies
in August 1988.
Efforts are ongoing to fill gaps in PMjg emission factors by technology
transfer and engineering judgment techniques. Gap fillers developed to date
hav.e been published in Sap Filling PMin Emission Factors for Selected Open
Dust Sources, EPA-45Q/4-83-003 (February 1988) and in NEDS Source Classification
CodesL and^Emissi on Factor 11sting, August 1988. These two reports were
also distributed to STAPPA/ALAPCO member agencies in August 1988.
Also-, EPA" has established" a-clearinghouse to review requests or proposal's
for filling gaps in emission factors as identified by State/local agencies
during the PMjQ emission inventory process. Gap filling requests will be
processed through the EPA Regional Offices. A periodic (e.g., quarterly)
newsletter is planned for the clearinghouse to inform agencies of its
activities and availability of new emission factors and acceptable gap fillers.
EPA Contact Person
E. I. Martinez (919) 541-5575
(FTS) 629-5575.
50
-------
STACK TEST METHOD FOR
Background
0 A test method for source emissions of PMjn, is to be published in the Federal
Register in»40 CFR Part 52, for two reasons:
1. To provide a method for use by States in imolementation plans.
2. To provide a method for use by EPA in situations where a State plan
includes a PM^g emission standard and does not include an approvable
compliance test method.
0 Two methods have been under evaluation by EPA's Office of Research and
Development: The Constant Flow Rate sampling method uses EPA Ml7 fitted
with a cyclone particle separator; the Emission Gas Recycle method uses a
special sampling train equipped with a means to maintain constant flow
through a particle separator and variable flow at the sampling- nozzVe.
Both methods measure PMjg at stack gas conditions; therefore, they do not
provide a measure of condensible emissions.
Current Status
0 An advance notice of proposed rulemaking was published on April 8, 1988.
The notice requested comments as to which of the two basic sampling.
methods is preferred For publication in 40 CFR Part 52. The notice also
solicited comments on the perceived need and the preferred procedure for
the measurement of condensibles. Public comments on the notice have been
evaluated and full descriptions of both methods will be published as part
of the proposed rulemaking.
Future M11_e_s_tg_nes_
0 Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) to OMB for review - November 1988
0 Publication of NPR in Federal Register - January 1989
0 Publication of final rulemaking in Fed era! Regi st er - November 1989
EPA Contact Person
RoyHunt.ley (919) 541-1060
(FTS'), 629-1060'
61
-------
NOx PSD INCREMENTS
Background
Section 166 of the Clean Air Act requires prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) regulations to be developed for hydrocarbons, carbon
monoxide, photochemical oxjdants, and nitrogen oxides. These regulations
had to meet two basic requirements: (1) they had to be at least as effective
as the PSD increments enacted for -S02 and PM, and (2) they had to be
promulgated within two years.
A orogram was initiated in 1979 to develop regulations for the pollutants
referenced in section 166, plus lead. This program was terminated in 1931
without setting any regulations.
In 1986, the Sierra Club and the Environmental Defense Fund filed suit to
force EPA to develop a PSD regulation for nitrogen oxides, one of the
pollutants referenced in section 166. On April 9, 1987, the court ordered
EPA to provide a status report on August 28, 1987, to propose regulations
by February 9, 1988, and to promulgate regulations by October 9, 1988.
Proposed regulations, were subsequently published by EPA on February 8, 1988.
Current Status
The final PSD regulations for nitrogen oxides were published by EPA in
the October 17, 1988 Federal Register.
Future^li 1 estones
As required in section 166 of the Act, the effective date for the PSD
regulations for NOx is one year after promulgation, in this case, October 17,
1989. Also in accordance, .with section-166, State implementation plan
revisions are due to EPA within 21 months of promulgation, or July 17, 1990.
EPA Contact Person
Eric Noble
(919) 541-5362
(FTS) 629-5362
62
-------
PM10 PSD INCREMENTS
Background
On July 1, 1987, (52 FR 24634) EPA promulgated revised national ambient.
air quality standards for particulate matter, "in making this revision, EPA
established a new indicator based on particles nominally 10 microns and less
in diameter (PM^Q) to replace the total suspended particulate (TSP) indicator
for both the primary and secondary standards. However, EPA retained the TSP
indicator for the existing prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
increments for particulate matter and announced its intent to promulgate,
in a subsequent rulemaking, PM10 increments which would be equivalent to
the existing TSP increments (52 FR 24685).
Current Status^
On August 25,. 1987, an EPA work group began meeting regularly to review
and assist in the development of PM10 increments. The work group consists
of representatives from EPA Headquarters and Regional Offices, the Department
of Energy, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Land Management.
. The rulemaking package proposing PM10 increments is nearly complete at
the work group level. Within several months, we expect to begin the formal
Agency review process known as Red Border Review.
Future Activities
EPA plans to propose PM10 PSD increments in May 1989. Promulgation
of the new increments is anticipated in April .1990. As required by section
166 of the Clean Air Act, the PMig increments would then become effective
in April 1991 (1 year after their date of promulgation). States will have 9
months from the effective date to adopt the new.increments and submit
revised plans to EPA for approval.
When EPA approves State revisions to their PSD rules containing the new
P?IIO increments, State requests to delete all or any TSP area designations
will also be approved.. Since PSD increments for Class II and Class III. areas
(as" described in section-163" of "the Act) are tied'to an'area's" attainment/
nonattainment designation, in any area where a TSP area designation no
longer exists, Class II and III TSP increments will not apply. For mandatory
Federal Class I areas, PSD increments are not tied .to the area designation
process. The EPA intends to allow States to implement the new Class I PM10
increments as a surrogate for the existing Class I TSP increments.
EPA ContactPerson
Dan deRoeck (919) 541-5593
(FTS) 629-5593.
63
-------
FUGITIVE EMISSIONS RULEMAKING
Discussion
The provisions of the Clean Air Act related to new source review (NSR)
apply to any new source or major modification of a source. Pursuant to
Section 302(j) of the Act, all pollutants, regardless of how emitted, are
included in this determination; however, fugitive emissions are to be
included "as determined by rule by the Administrator." Since the emissions
of some sources are largely fugitive, the inclusion of those emissions can
be critical in determining whether those sources or changes at such sources
are subject to review.
Section 302(j) is vague with regard to what rulemaking is required for
inclusion of fugitive emissions in applicability determinations. On August
7, 1980, EPA promulgated rulemaking for inclusion of fugitive emissions in
applicability determinations for 30 categories of sources.. (Strip mines
were not one of the categories.) In a settlement with the Chemical
Manufacturers Association (CMA), EPA, on August 23, 1983, proposed to
reverse its August 1980 rule on including fugitive emissions in applicability
determinations. On October 26, 1984, EPA published final rulemaking in the
Federal Register which affirmed and clarified the August 1980 fugitive
emissions rulemaking and rejected the August 1983 CMA proposal.
"source"
The mining industry is strongly advocating changes to the definition of
and the review of secondary emissions. This concern, is linked to
this rulemaking because the presence of certain categories on the "list of
30" could trigger prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) review of
mines even if EPA has not promulgated a listing of any mine type, e.g.i
coal preparation olants and strip mines. In addition, the mining industry
is concerned about fugitive emissions increases at mines triggering PSD
review because of the proposal with respect to fugitives and modifications.
Comments" on this issue have been -analyzed. Publication of final
action on fugitive emissions is planned for 1989. This action will also
include action related specifically to strio mines (see status report
entitled "Rulemaking Proposal for Strip Mines").
EPA Contact Person
Bill Lamason
(919) 541-5374
(FTS) 629-5374
64
-------
RULEMAKING PROPOSAL FOR STRIP MINES
Discussion
On Auqust 7, 1980, EPA listed 30 source categories for Inclusion of fugitive
emissions In new source review (NSR) applicability determinations. (This
is described in greater detail in the "Fugitive Emissions Rulemaking"
status report.) Surface mines were not included on this list and, as a
result, the Sierra Club sued EPA to compel listing. On August 26, 1983,
the O.C. Circuit Court of Appeals remanded this matter to EPA for submittal
of an explanation as to why mines were not listed. In its response to the
remand, EPA agreed that it should commence rulemaking on that matter.
On October 26, 1984, EPA proposed that surface coal mines be listed, pursuant
to the. criteria set forth for Section 302(j) rulemaking in the accompanying
final action document on the fugitive emissions portion of the Chemical
Manufacturers Association (CMA) proposal. The proposal stressed the need
for commenters to present a record indicating whether listing would produce
unreasonable social and economic impacts when compared to the benefits.
The notice presented an innovative alternative by which only mines which
would impact Federal Class I areas would be listed.
The public comment period was reopened on February 28, 1986, when EPA
announced the availability of the regulatory impact analysis for comment.
A hearing was held in Denver, Colorado, on April 9, 1986, and extensive
comment was received from industry. The public comment period closed on
June 30, 1986.
Current Status/Future Milestones
continues to analyze the comments received and anticipates final
action on the strip mines proposal in 1989. This action will also include
action on fugitive emissions as mentioned in the accompanying status
report. .
In a related develooment, EPA has commented on a notice of proposed
rulemaking published by the Department of Interior (001) in the November 3,
1987 Federal Register for roads at surface and underground mines,, including.
requiring dust" suppression measures. OOT's final" rule is scheduled to be
published in November 1988.
EPA Contact Person
Bill Lamason- (919) 54-1-5374-
(FTS) 629-5374"
65
-------
IMPROVING NEW SOURCE REVIEW
Background
In 1986, EPA formed a special task force on new source review. The
principal purpose in organizing this task force was to address growing
concerns about the consistency and certainty of permits issued under the
Clean Air Act's new source review (NSR) requirements. The basic goal of
the Task Force effort was to improve the timeliness, certainty and
effectiveness of the NSR permit process.
In December 1936, the task force issued a draft report of its findings
and options for improving the NSR permits. The members of the task force •
concluded that, in general, program problems could best be resolved by
improvements in:
- additional general NSR program assistance and-detailed technical training
and assistance in the determination of best available control technology
(BACT) and;
.- enhanced communications and information flow between EPA and the State
and local permitting-agencies in a manner consistent with State and
local permitting procedures and manpower.
Current Status/Future Milestones .
In December 1987, EPA began to implement several initiatives designed
to improve NSR program implementation. The initiatives included:
- increased emphasis on Regional review of State permit actions during
the public comment period;
- development of the "top-down" approach to determining 8ACT;
- development of guidance regarding deficient permit actions; and
- increased Regional and State agency training.
In addition, EPA formed an NSR task group which, in- consultation with
State and local agency representatives, will monitor the progress and
problems associated with NSR program implementation. The first meeting of
the task group was held on May 18, 1988; a second meeting is currently
scheduled for December 1988.
Progress' to:-date.-in- implementing: NSR" program" improvements- include-the-
following:
- all Regions have now taken steps to increase their overview of State
permit actions during the public comment period.
66
-------
IMPROVING NEW SOURCE REVIEW - Continued
- a contract has been let In order to develop "top-down" 8ACT guidance.
- final guidance'regarding-deficient-permit actions is beinq. developed
and will be issued by EPA in mid-1989.
- training manuals on NSR implementation are being updated by EPA and a
training course will be available in 1989.
EPA Contact Person
David Solomon (919) 541-5375
(FTS) 629-5375
67
-------
NEW SOURCE REVIEW BULLETIN BOARD
Background/Current Status
Federal policy determinations play a very significant role in the everyday
implementation of the prevention of significant deterioration and nonattainment
area programs.
The Agency has established a new source review (NSR) electronic bulletin
board. The bulletin board is available for use by State and local agencies
implementing the NSR regulations.
The NSR electronic bulletin board allows the user to:
- access a listing and summary of EPA NSR program policy and guidance
memoranda;
- obtain a complete copy of recent reference memoranda;
- obtain a-current listing of EPA program contacts; and
- send and receive messages within general and soecific categories.
The NSR bulletin board is now operational. State and local agencies
should contact their Regional NSR contact for a copy of the NSR electronic
bulletin board user's manual. .-.-...
EPA Contact Person
David Solomon (919) 541-5375
(FTS) 629-5375
68
-------
ACID RAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
Background
0 In 1984, EPA initiated an effort to explore with the States the issues that
might arise in implementing an acid rain control program.
0 Over 200 implementation issues were identified as associated with potential
legislation that focused on emission reductions.
0 In late 1^84, Congress approoriated $3 million of Section 105 funds to
examine implementation, administrative and institutional issues.
0 A total of 47 State Acid Rain (STAR) projects were funded to examine
potential implementation issues.
0 Two workshops were conducted to review progress of the STAR projects-one
in Pittsburg, PA in 1985, and one in Asheville, NC in 1986. Proceedings
of both workshops are available.
Current Status
9 Most STAR projects have been completed; copies of project summaries and
final reports are, currently available for these projects.
0 EPA is preparing a final report on the results and findings of the STAR
program in an effort to draw conclusions and identify findings which may
have national significance if Congress were to enact, a control program.
0 In consultation with representatives from the National Association of
Regulatory Utility Commissioners, EPA has prepared a report on acid rain
implementation issues from the perspective of State utility commissioners.
Future Mi 1 estones . .
0 Completion of final report on the STAR program.
0 Possible workshop between State air agency and' utfli tyre gul at ory
officials and EPA in early 1989.
EPA Contact Person
DaviidiBassett: (202) 475r9306^
(FTS) 475-9306
69
-------
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPECIAL ENVOY?; REPORT ON ACID RAIN
Background and Current Status
0 At their March 1985 summit conference, President Reagan and Canadian Prime
Plinister Mulroney appointed Special Envoys Drew Lewis and William Davis,
respectively, to study and report to them on acid rain.
0 The Special Envoys Report was accepted by President Reagan in January
1986. It found that add rain is indeed a problem between Canada and the
United States, but that neither country is in a position to solve the
problem at the present time. It recommended a $5 billion, 5-year ($2.5
billion federal, $2.5 private) retrofit control technology demonstration
program in the United States, review by each country of its existing legal
authority and programs affecting acid rain, continued bilateral discussions,
. and continued research.
° Appropriations for Clean Coal Technologies- On December 22, 1987, President
Reagan signed Public Law No, 100-202 which provides $575 million over
fiscal years 1988 ($50 million) and 1989 ($525 million) for the Department
of Energy (DOE) to conduct an innovative clean coal techno!ogy (ICCT)
program to demonstrate on a commercial scale retrofit or repowering
ICCT. These technologies would be selected using criteria" essentially
the same as those recommended by the Special Envoys. OOE issued the
solicitation for ICCT projects on February 22, 1988. A total of 54
proposals were received and on September 28, 1988, OOE selected 16 projects
for funding.
0 ICTAP Participation - To provide advice to DOE on the ICCT program, EPA Acting
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, Eileen Claussen,
and John Skinner, Director of the Office of Environmental Engineering
and Technology Demonstration, were named to the Department of Energy's
Innovative Control Technology Advisory Panel (ICTAP}. There are 36 other
federal, industry, environmental, union, academic, Canadian, and state
representatives to ICTAP, including Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Wyoming and the Navajo Nations. This.Panel
has met three times since its formation (September 30, 1987, February
25, 1988, and June 22, 1988). EPA also has participated on a subcommittee
of the ICTAP reviewing potential incentives and disincentives to demonstration
of innovative5technologies';
0 Review of Existing Authorities - The recommended review of existing U.S.
authorities was completed and given to Canada in'March 1987. We also
conducted our own analysis of the Canadian air pol.lution and acid rain
programs in September 1987.
°" Parti ci'patimr in Continuing- Discuss tons1- with'-Canadians' (BACG) — Dtscus"—
sions regarding a possible bilateral accord between the United States and
Canada on acid rain began at a May 22, 1987 meeting of the U.S. Canadian
Bilateral Advisory and Consultative Group (BAGS). The U.S. continues
to hold regular discussions with the Canadians on this and other subjects.
-------
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPECIAL ENVOYS REPORT ON ACID RAIN - Continued
° Vp Task Force on RegulatoryRe]lef - This task force reviewed current
lawf to. see. if OD port unities Texis ted. to- encourage innovation in control
technology, and-developed recommendations-for-several federal agencies,
which were endorsed by the President. The four recommendations
applicable to EPA are:
- "New-New'' Bubbles - Encourage greater-use of the recently promulgated
pollcy of al 1owing emissions trading between two sources subject to
certain new source performance standards (NSPS).
- Complementary Use of "New-New" Bubblesand Innovative Technology
Hawers - Encourage use of these existing emission trading options by
utilities that are uncertain whether an innovative clean coal
technology will actually achieve NSPS levels before a waiver expires.
- Commercial Demonstration Permits - Expand the availability and appli-
.cability of commercial demonstration permits (40 CFR 60.45a) that
.allow utility-boilers using innovative control technologies to meet
less stringent" standards than required for other new sources.
- NOx Contrql Strategies for Ozone - Issue guidance encouraging those
areas of the country that can reduce ozone by controlling nitrogen
oxides to examine the potential role of NOx reductions in place of
more expensive volatile organic compound reductions in State
implementation plans (either through interpollutant emission trades.
or .direct State regulatory actions).
Future Milestones
0 The next meeting of the Innovative Control Technology Advisory Panel
is scheduled for December 1, 1988.
EPA Contact Person .
John Schakenbach (20'2) 475-8545
(FTS) 475-8545
71
-------
NEDS/NAPAP EMISSION INVENTORY FOR 1985
Background
0 One of the major objectives of the National Acid Precipitation
Assessment Program (NAPAP) is the development of a high quality national
emissions inventory to support acid deposition research and policy
analysis. NAPAP selected 1985 as the base year for the emissions
inventory.
0 Over one million dollars in supplementary resources were made available
to States for work on this project, $500,000 in section 105 grants and
$600,000 in contractor assistance.
0 A complete, up-to-date inventory of the emissions .of all the criteria
pollutants was originally desired, but the bottom-line data requirements
focused on sources of SOX, NOX, and reactive VOC. Both high quality and
timeliness were required for the data for 1000-ton-and-up sources;
lesser requirements applied to small sources. State/source agreement on
- emissions estimates for 2500-ton-and-up sources of SOX and NOX was an
important aspect of the project.
Current Status
0 The States provided the best-ever nationwide emissions-inventory. All
49 participants provided the 1985 data required and all responded to the
subsequent QA reports.
0 The EPA (AEERL) sent each State its point-source emissions data for
review. State data are translated into NEDS format by computer software
and a chief purpose of the State review was to make sure that nothing
got lost in the translation. All States responded.
AEERL also sent each State its area-source emissions for review.
emissions were calculated by EPA (OAOPS). All States responded.
These
Future- Milestones
0 The States have completed their work on this project. The 1985 NEDS
data base has been put in final form and sent to NAPAP for their use.
OAOPS will s'end each State a copy of the National Emissions Report for
1985, based on 1985 NEDS, AEERL will send each State a data summary
report, based on the 1985 NAPAP data base, and EPA Headquarters will
send:.to*each* State;a^we:l 1-deserved. 1 etter- of apprec.i at.ton*: for* their*
excellent support of this project.
72
-------
NEOS/NAPAP EMISSION INVENTORY FOR 1985 - Continued
EPA Contact Persons
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards-
John Bosch(919) 541-5583
(FTS) 629-5583
John Fink (919) 541-5584
(FTS) 629-5584
AJr and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
Dale Pahl(919) 541-1851
(FTS) 629-1851
73
-------
RULE EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION PROGRAMS
Background
0 EPA's Rule Effectiveness Protocol was distributed to the Regional Offices
on March 31, 1988.
0 A teleconference was held in June 1988 resulting in development of an
implementation guide and a schedule for conducting the studies outlined in
the orotocol. This was distributed in July prior to the annual air
programs workshop held at Southern Pines, North Carolina.
0 Presentations were given at the Southern Pines workshop by Region III and
Region IX on the status of their rule effectiveness evaluation programs.
0 A meeting was held in Washington in September 1988 between coordinators
from nine regions and representatives from OAQPS and from California State
and local environmental agencies. The California personnel presented
some of their experiences and "lessons learned" from conducting similar
studies in their state and an overview presentation and discussion
was given on the rule effectiveness protocol developed by EPA. Regional
status updates were also given.
Current Status
0 The Regions are initiating their rule-effectiveness studies and/or
preparing their respective study protocols. Region III is preparing the
final report on its FY 1988 study on gasoline marketing activities in
southeast Pennsylvania.
0 A checklist is being developed by EPA's Stationary Source Compliance
Division (SSCD) for use in reviewing the study protocols developed by
the Regions.
0 The status of the ten Regional programs as of October 5, 1988 is as
fol1ows:
Protocol Estimated.
Region Status Delivery Date
I Undecided on source category but study *
will be done in Connecticut with
Massachusetts and Rhode Island
assisting.
IT Papercoaters in New Jersey; checklists 11788'
developed, 20 inspections completed, permits
reviewed, section 114 letters currently being
reviewed. Protocol for Stage II vapor recovery
and. bulk, loading.terminals, in Metro New York
in- draft: form- - to-be, reviewed- by NY' i n October-.,
74
-------
RULE EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION PROGRAMS - Continued
Protocol Estimated
Region Status Deljvery; Date
III First study almost complete on gasoline To be
marketing sources including refineries, bulk submitted
terminals, bulk plants, leaks from tank trucks in FY 1988
and Stage I in Southeast PA. Baltimore and
Washington Metro area planned for study next
year. Also planned study for next year are
graphic arts in Southeast DA, Baltimore, Metro
Washington and Pittsburgh.
IV Source category undecided - planned for *
Metro Atlanta
V Source category - surface coating (probably . 12/38
paper coating, miscellaneous metal parts or
graphic arts) planned for Cleveland, OH.
VI Petroleum Refineries Group I storage facilities - 11/88
floating roof and fixed roof tanks in Harris
County, TX. Looking into vent gas regulation
in Louisiana.
VII Gasoline marketing: including bulk terminals, 1/89
gasoline stations, and trucks, in Kansas City
(both Missouri and Kansas). "
VIII Petroleum Refineries - Salt Lake City and Metro 1/89
Henver areas .
IX Source category - Aerospace in Say Area, South 11/88
Coast, San Diego, and Ventura County. Planning
an aerospace seminar (2-day workshop) for
November 14-15 at the Hyatt Hotel in Oakland.
X Undecided on source category but looking at pulp/ *
paper/wood products and/or refineries in nonattainment
or attainment areas. Pollutants of interest are
S02. and. PM10...
* As yet undetermined
Future Milestones
°' Accordi ng_ to<-the.rschedu.le? qiv.en-' im-our- imp.Vementat.ion1-plan- mentioned"above?
and- distributed- in* July- 1988', Regional'studies-are to be initiated by
October 31, 1988. This includes the following tasks: negotiating with
States, identifying study team and all regulations and policies affecting
study, and identifying the sources to be inspected.
75
-------
RULE EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION PROGRAMS - Continued
0 The protocol review checklist now being developed by SSCD wil
i endt of- October;-.
be distributed
Issues of concern may be discussed during a oortion of the EPA VOC work groun
meeting to be held on November 16-17, 1983 in Oakland, CA. (Except for
Region II, the lead personnel are the same for both the rule effectiveness
studies and the VOC work group.)
EPA Contact Person
Linda Lay (202) 382-3017
(FTS) 382-3017
76.
-------
FY 1989 COMPLIANCE MONITORING STRATEGY
Background
0 EPA Issued the FY 1989 Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) on March 31,
1988.
0 Issuance of the strategy was the culmination of a multiyear effort focusing
on some very important Issues raised about the section 105 inspection grant
program and EPA's Inspection Frequency Guidance.
0 New features of the CMS that address these issues are: (1) the ability to
address local air pollution concerns, (2) the use of inspection targeting,
(3) the accounting for the total inspection activity, and (4) the focus
on national priorities.
Current Status
0 The Compliance Monitoring Strategy replaces the Inspection Frequency
Guidance in =Y 1989.
0 The strategy requires EPA and the State to negotiate a State inspection
Dlan that addresses national priorities and spells out FY 1989 inspection
commitmen.ts.. . .
0 Training in the use of the inspection targeting model portion of the CMS
has been conducted .and continued support is being offered.
Future' Milestones
0 Sources in the negotiated inspection plans will be flagged in the.Compliance
Data System in the. second quarter of FY 1989.
.* The CMS for FY 1990 will be issued to the States by March 31, 1989.
0 Analysis of the first full year under the CMS will occur in the second
quarter- of FY 1990.,
EPA Contact Person
Howard Wright (202) 475-7034
(FTS) 475-7034
77
-------
SIP REVIEW FOR ENFORCEABILITY ANDlliEGAL SUFFICIENCY"
Background
o On September 23, 1987, the General Counsel of EPA, and the
Assistant Administrators for Air and Radiation, and for
Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring, jointly issued guidance
on the review by EPA of proposed revisions to State
Implementation Plans (SIP's). The guidance was to assure that
regulations adopted by the States under the Clean Air Act were
enforceable and legally sufficient. It stated that the review
should ensure that the rules in question are clearly worded,
explicit in their application and that any provisions which
allow "alternate equivalent techniques" must be completely
defined. The Region should also try to review developing SIPs
prior to final approval by the State, when the provisions are
"most malleable." The guidance stressed that the Regional Air
Compliance staff and Regional Counsel's office have the
primary responsibility for this enforceability review, because
they have the most direct experience in compliance and rule
interpretation.
o .. On the same date, the Associate General Counsel for Air and
Radiation, the Associate Enforcement Counsel for Air * •
Enforcement, and the Director of the Stationary Source
Compliance Division issued implementation guidance for SIP
review. It explained how the following issues were to be
addressed: applicability, time, effect of changed conditions,
standard of conduct, incorporation by reference, transfer
efficiency, compliance periods, equivalency provisions and
discretionary emission limits, tecordkeeping, test methods,
exemptions, and malfunction and variance provisions. The
guidance contained a "SIP Checklist" to aid the State and
Region in evaluating the enforceability and legal sufficiency
of the proposed revisions.
Current Status
o This guidance was a topic during the FY 1988 Compliance
and Enforcement Program Evaluation conducted in each
Region. All the Regions indicated that they would
implement the guidance in FY 1989 and use the SIP
checklist..
EPA Contact Person
Gerard C.. Kraus (202) 382-2829
(ETS)' 382--2829S;
78
-------
ASBESTOS NESHAP STRATEGY
Background
On March 31, 1988, EPA issued a revised Asbestos NESHAP Strategy.
The original strategy, issued on April 6, 1984, intended to promote 100%
compliance through the implementation of an inspection plan. According to
the 1984 strategy an inspection plan could consist of inspecting "all
sources, all contractors, or any other program consistent with the Agency
goal of 100% compliance." •
Because the annual notification rate has risen to over 50,000 in
FY 1988, it is no longer feasible for most agencies to inspect all sites.
Inspecting all contractors may have been the best alternative for an
effective inspection plan under the 1984 strategy, however, the 1984
strategy did not fully describe how such a plan would implemented. After
auditing three Regional asbestos NESHAP enforcement programs, the Inspector
General's office remarked that the- 1984 strategy "does not provide
additional criteria for developing an effective inspection strategy."
The revised strategy orovides criteria for targeting inspections
among a field of an estimated 5,000 contractors as opposed to selecting
inspection sites from over 50,000 notifications. Inspection efforts focused
on contractors should result in a more resource-effective enforcement
program. • . . •
Appendix A of the strategy establishes a computerized asbestos NESHAP1
compliance tracking system using dBase III. Regions are expected to send
quarterly reports of the data elements defined in Appendix A to Headquarters,
preferably through electronic transmission. The aggregated nationwide
data base will be used to target inspections and promote enforcement as
described in the 1988 strategy.
Current Status
With the beginning of FY 1989 the strategy is in its initial stage of
implementation. Although the nationwide data base is far from complete,
there.- is- much, informat.ion-.contained- in it. considering', its;. early.- s.tage!.of-
implementation. In fact, the data base is now being used to answer
Freedom of Information Act requests concerning contractor compliance
histories. There is some concern among contractors that the tracking
system information may be misleading if not interpreted correctly.
Put ure
Report on progress .of the implementation of the 1988 strategy.
79
-------
ASBESTOS NESHAP STRATEGY - Continued
EPA Contact Person
For Policy Questions and Applicability Determinations
Ken Malmberg (202) 382-2870
(FTS) 382-2870
Technical Issues
Omayra Salgado (202) 382-2837
(FTS) 382-2837
80
-------
STATUS OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NAAQS)
The 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments require review and revision, if needed,
of all existing NAAQS by December 1980 and at 5-year intervals thereafter.
- Review of the ozone standard was completed February 1979. The standard
was raised from 0.08 ppm to 0.1? ppm, maximum 1-hour concentration.
- The non-methane hydrocarbon standard was revoked January 1983.
- Review of the carbon monoxide standard was completed in September 1985.
No change was made to the primary standards; secondary standards were
revoked.
- The nitrogen dioxide standard was reaffirmed in June 1985..
- Major revisions to the particulate matter standards were promulgated
on July 1, 1987. The primary and secondary standards are identical and
based on particles less than or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter
(PMiQ) rather than total suspended particulate matter (TSP). The
revised standards are 50 micrograms per cubic meter, expected annual
arithmetic mean, and 150 micrograms per cubic meter, 24-hour average,
with no more than one expected-exceedance per year. Also on July 1,.
1987, an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published to
solicit comment on a possible fine particle (less than 2.5 micrometers)
secondary standard to protect against visibility impairment.. .'
Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
- The revised criteria document for sulfur oxides (and particulate matter)
was issued in March 1984 in conjunction with the proposed revision to
the particulate matter NAAQS. The criteria document was again updated
in an addendum.that was issued July 1987. The staff paper for sulfur
oxides was completed in 1982 and updated to reflect the revised criteria
in an addendum dated December 1986.
- The EPA's proposed decision not to revise the SO? standards was announced
in the Federal Register oh April 26,. 1988.
- Recent controlled human exposure studies reviewed in the criteria
document and staff paper addenda have prompted consideration of a short-
. term $02 primary standard in addition to the existing standards. Accor-
dingly, the Federal Register notice also solicits comment on the alter-
native of .adding, a- l.-hour S02- primary standard, of-0.4 parts, per million
(ppnr)v,
- The. Agency also proposed to revise the 24-hour significant harm level
by changing it from 1.00 ppm to 0.29 ppm. In addition, EPA proposed a
new short-term significant harm level of 5 ppm, 5 minute average, together
with a 1-hour guide of 2.5 ppm. Associated episode criteria were also
proposed".,
81
-------
STATUS OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NAAQS) - Continued
- In addition, EPA also proposed several technical changes to the
NAAQS to codify prior Agency guidance.
- The comment period on EPA's proposed decision not to revise the
standards is now scheduled to close on November 22, 1988.
- A meeting of EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC)
to discuss the proposal is tentatively scheduled for early March 1989.
- Final action on the proposal is anticipated in December 1989.
Ozone
Lead
The key issues confronting EPA in the ozone standard review are the
significance of emerging longer-term health effects data and the
appropriate averaging time for controlling welfare effects.
Attainment and maintenance of the existing one-hour ozone standard
appears more important than ever based on the accumulation of the
collective health and welfare effects data base.
Proposal of revised or reaffirmed standards will probably not occur
until 1991.
At a December 1987 meeting, CASAC informally advised EPA of the need
for a one-hour standard at a level not higher than ti.12 pom and their .
continuing concern over new longer-term health effects data. Most
CASAC members, however, did not feel adequate data were available
to set a new longer-term standard.
The EPA's current plan is to extend review of the ozone standard until
adequate data are available to make a judgment on the need for, and if
necessary, the level of any new longer-term standard.
The EPA plans .to meet with CASAC on December 14-15, 1988 to
complete discussion on the acute health and welfare effects data
and discuss plans for completing the review. At that meeting, it •
is likely CASAC will recommend that EPA complete action on the
review of the 1-hour ozone standard. •
The primary and secondary ambient air quality, standards for lead
(1..5. micrograms per cubic, meter,., quarterly average) were, established in-
October-1978':,
CASAC closed on the revised criteria document and addendum in August
1986. The Committee reviewed the second external review draft of tha
staff paper in March 1986. A third draft of the staff paper is
tentatively scheduled for review by CASAC in late January/February
1989V
32
-------
STATUS OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NAAOS) - Continued
- EPA has spent considerable effort in the past two years developing
and. va.lidat.ing".an: exposure* analys.is: methodology.» A- draft report:
was submitted to CASAC's lead exposure subcommittee in August
1988 and will be reviewed by the subcommittee on October 25, 1988.
- Proposal in the Federal Register is scheduled for early 1990.
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
- Preparation of a criteria document for the next review of the CO air
quality standard is now under way. Public and CASAC review of the
criteria document and the staff paper should be complete by fall
1990.
Summary of NAAQS Status
Carbon Monoxide - Last review compl'eted 9/85", new criteria document scheduled
for CASAC review 3/90
Nitroqen Dioxide - Last review completed 6/85, new criteria document scheduled
for CASAC review 5/90 .
Partial!ate Matter (PM10) - Last review completed 7/87
Sulfur Oxides - Last review completed 9/73; recent proposal 4/88, promulgation
scheduled for 12/89
Lead - Standard promulgated 10/78; proposal scheduled for 3/90
Ozone - Last review completed 2/79;. criteria document, scheduled for CASAC
review 3/90
EPA Contact Person
Bruce Jordan (919) 541-5656
(FTS) 629-5656
83
-------
GLOBAL ATMOSPHERIC CHANGE
Background
In September 1987, the U.S. and 23 other nations signed the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, a landmark agreement on
the protection of the stratospheric ozone layer. In accordance with the U.S.
commitment under the Protocol, on August 12, 1988 the EPA issued its final
rule on stratospheric ozone protection. This rule places limits on the
domestic production and consumption of chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's) and
halons.
On August 12, 1988, the Agency also published an advance notice of
proposed rulenaking for possible future actions on this issue. The Agency
is considering additional rulemaking in the event that timely progress is
not made toward the reduced use of these stratospheric ozone depleting
chemicals. . • '
Additional scientific studies released subsequent to the Protocol show
that the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer might be of greater
risk than was originally anticipated. In light of these events, Lee Thomas,. •
Administrator of EPA, recently called for even greater efforts in halting
the depletion of stratospheric ozone by asking all nations to ratify the
Montreal protocol and then move toward a complete phasebut of CFC's and
halons.
Current Status
In the upcoming year, EPA's Global Change Division will be involved in
implementing the domestic regulatory program as well as domestic and
international activities in support of the Montreal Protocol. The EPA will
also be involved in activities related to global warming and other atmospheric
change issues.
The major areas of attention in 1989 are the implementation of the
domestic program, preparation of economic, environmental, scientific and
technical assessments in support of the Montreal Protocol, and both
international and domestic efforts on alternative technologies and technology
transfer..
To domestically implement the final rule, the E&A will be completing
and implementing the production and consumption tracking system for the
chemicals that are regulated. This will involve putting in place reporting
and recordkeeping systems, and once regulations take effect, operating
these systems.. EPA will also be involved in harmonizing data on imports
-and: exportsi-and' assessing;the?market: response^to' regulations,
EPA will also be participating in a series of international protocol
assessments and studies. The first of these assessments required under the
Protocol is scheduled for 1989. These assessments include the analysis of
84
-------
GLOBAL ATMOSPHERIC CHANGE - Continued
technical issues (i.e., controls and substitutes) and economic issues
(evg~..,. costs'; of" reductions",, benefits) related to the.-* 1989/90 assessments'...
EPA will also be assessing the scientific issues that are related to the
1989/90 assessment.
The EPA will work closely with the State Department in efforts to
encourage other countries to join the Protocol. This includes work on
technology and the transfer of existing technologies among lesser developed
countries. The work on alternative technologies includes support for
reducing barriers to recycling, technologies to reduce emissions from
halons and technology transfer. This work also includes assessments of
new chemical alternatives and alternatives for.CFC's and halons.
The EPA will also be involved in studying the emissions associated
with global climate change. These include emissions from a variety of
natural and manmade sources. EPA will be actively involved in the
assessment of the possible control, strategies in controlling the sources
of global warming.
Future Milestones
International Protocol assessments (technical, economic, scientific
and environmental) are to be completed in the late summer of 1989.
The public comment period on the advance notice of proposed
rulemaking is scheduled to close on November 1, 1988 and decision on
future regulatory activities will be made after all comments are analyzed.
Preparation for the resumption of international negotiations
will continue. This will include the first meeting of affected parties
and the initiation of negotiations on Protocol limits. .
EPA Contact Persons •
John S. Hoffman (202) 383-4036
(FTS) 382-4036
Steve.-Seide.l (202) 382-2787
(FTS) 382-2787
85
-------
GLOBAL/TROPOSPHERIC AIR POLLUTION STRATEGIES
Background
Preliminary analyses of the impacts of projected changes in
global climate and stratospheric ozone suggest a potential for
severely compromising efforts to address both rural and urban ozone
problems, increasing background levels of ozone and carbon
monoxide, and changing weather circulation patterns that may
themselves have significant implications for all major air
pollutants. During the 1988 summer heat waves, many areas of the
U.S. experienced some of the worst ozone problems of the past
decade. . The combination of heat and stagnant air, which are likely
to become more typical in North America with greenhouse warming,
appear to be major factors in some of these severe ozone readings.
Long range strategies for ozone and acid deposition need to
consider the potential consequences of climate change over the next
20 to 50 years. Moreover, control strategies for tropospheric and
global concerns should be examined to enhance the potential for
common solutions and minimize situations in which controls for
ground level air pollution impede progress on global issues.
Current Status -. ... . .
EPA has begun an assessment of global-tropospheric air
pollution. The assessment will: 1) examine likely changes in
ozone and possibly other air pollutants expected with changes in
temperature, UV-B, air stagnation, and natural and anthropogenic
emissions, and 2) examine current and alternative strategies for
limiting changes over the next 20 to 50 years.
The project will be coordinated with several offices within
EPA. Currently, we are developing a work plan that will involve.
several projects to be done by contract and inhouse. At least some
of the effort will be targeted for completion in early-calendar
year 1989.
EPA is also sponsoring a symposium on "Implications of Climate
Change for Air Quality Planning." The meeting, managed by the
Climate Institute, is planned for March 1989 and will feature
speakers on a variety of topics related to global/tropospheric air
quality and strategy interactions. We will encourage a broad
spectrum of. air. quality managers, from, governmental, agencies- to-
participate1..
Future Milestones
Initial assessment results should be available beginning in
early 1989'...
86
-------
GLOBAL/TROPOSPHERIC AIR POLLUTIONSTRATEGIES - Continued
Symposium - March 1989 (Tentative)
SPA Contact Persons
Bern Steigerwald (919) 541-5557
(FTS) 629-5557
John Bachmann (919) 541-5359
(FTS) 629-5359
87
-------
IMPLEMENTING SIP PROCESSING RECOMMENDATIONS
Background
Prompted by concern for SIP processing delays, the Impact of delays
on meeting program objectives, and the negative effect of delays on EPA's
relationship with State and local control agencies, EPA established a task
group to identify problems in, and recommend changes to, the SIP review
process. The recommendations of the task group have been approved by
senior EPA management and are described in the report entitled "Final
Report of the Task Group on SIP Processing" dated October 1987. The task
group identified two basic problems with the current approach to SIP
review: (1) excessive review of SIP packages, and (2) uncertainty
regarding the outcome of EPA review. The EPA has initiated a program to
improve the process of SIP review based upon the recommendations of the
task group.
Current Status
An intra-Agency task force has been formed to implement the
recommendations contained in the task group report. As a result of the
recommendations and implementation discussions, EPA has already issued a
policy memorandum on the increased use of direct final rulemaking for
noncontroversial SIP actions, a policy on the review of implementation
packages received from the States for completeness, and a policy on
grandfathering SIP actions submitted prior to policy changes. The use of
direct final processing is a program instituted in 1982 (47 FR 27073} and . .
has, where used, resulted in substantially decreased processing times.
The task group report has recommended increased use of this effective tool
to enhance SIP processing. .
Guidance on "completeness criteria" was issued on March 18, 1988 to
the EPA Regional Offices. The Regional Offices have been discussing these
criteria with the appropriate State/local control agencies and in many
cases have incorporated the completeness criteria into the FY 1989 section
105 air grants, conditions. The objective of this program is to ensure
that SIP packages submitted by the State are complete from the perspective
of EPA review. SIP processing will be expedited by having complete packages
submitted and the EPA Regional Offices not having to request additional
infbrmat.iomfronr..the-State.-to determine: whether- the? rev.ision, is. approvable..
Sy sharing these criteria with the States, submitting agencies will be more
familiar with EPA requirements prior to SIP submission.
On June 27, 1988, E°A issued a policy permitting, the grandfathering
of certain SIP actions from meeting the requirements of recently issued EPA
policies.. Where, approval of such action has no significant: or lasting
enwrronmenta.r impact",, grandfathering- the* action*may better" serve: the;- purpose1
of EPA.
88
-------
IMPLEMENTING SIP PROCESSING RECOMMENDATIONS - Continued
Future Milestones
Th'e-EPA is- currently preparing two Federal Register notices to inform-
the public on all phases of the implementation of the task group
recommendations.
EPA Contact Person
Johnnie Pearson (919) 541-5691
(FTS) 629-5691
89
-------
NATIONAL AIR AUDIT SYSTEM
Background
0 The National ATP Audit System (NAAS) was developed through the joint
effort of STAPPA/ALAPCO and EPA in FY 1983. The program"was designed to
audit five phases of the air quality management program in State and
selected local control agencies. These areas are:
(1) A1r quality planning and SIP activity;
(2) New source review;
(3) Compliance assurance;
(4) Air monitoring; and
(5) Automobile inspection and maintenance.
0 Audits are now conducted on a 2-year cycle with sixty-five, audits (44
State and 21 local and territorial agencies) having been conducted in
the FY 1986-87 cycle.
Current Status
0 . The EPA Regional Offices identified 333 priority deficiencies as a result
of the FY 1986-87 audit program. Many of these deficiencies have already
been corrected through the joint efforts of State and local agencies and
the EPA Regional Offices. Through the process of grant negotiations and
EPA/State/local agreements, the remaining deficiencies will be addressed.
0 EPA distributed the audit guidance and protocol for the FY 1988-39 audit
cycle on April 1, 1988. During the course of the 2-year cycle each
State in each Region should, receive an audit.' In FY 1988 the EPA Regional
Offices conducted audits in 21 States and 6 local agencies. Twenty-eight
States and 3 local agencies will be audited in FY 1989.
Put'ure*_MiTest ones*
0 In an effort to improve the audit guidance, EPA will initiate a project
during the FY 1988-89 audit cycle to pilot modifications to the audit
program. The pilot program will focus on changes to the air quality
planning and SIP activity area. EPA Regional Offices V and X have agreed
to> pilot; this:, program-s during: therlater stages- of the." current, audit; cycle*...
Each- Region' wiTl use1 a: different approach in* its" efforts to make the
audit more effective. Region V will focus on identifying recurring
deficiencies in State SIP activities and developing corrective actions,
at both the State and Federal levels. This will be accomplished by
90
-------
NATIONAL AIR AUDIT SYSTEM - Continued
reviewing all rulemaking actions and SI" completeness determinations
prior to thei0n-site.vvisit., A.list, of deficiencies, would, then be;
prepared and provided to the State in-advance. This list would be
discussed along with possible solutions for corrective actions during
the on-site audit. Region X's pilot will differ from Region V in that
it will replace the current SIP and planning audit with one that involves
extensive on-site file review by the EPA audit team. Initially Region X
will audit the SIP development and statewide emission inventory
maintenance aspect of the State's planning program. If successful, the
pilot program will be expanded to include modeling and the monitoring/
planning interface. These pilot programs will be available by October
1938 and will be tested in Michigan by Region V and in Washington and
Oregon by Region X. It is hoped that the experience in Regions V and X
will lead to substantial improvements in the audit program and that the
best features of both programs can be incorporated into the FY 1990-91
audit cycle.
Efforts are also underway to create a task force of EPA personnel from
headquarters-and the Regional Offices to study the-current NAAS
recommendations for improvements.
EPA Contact Person
Jerry Yarn (919) 541-5534
(FTS) 629-5534
91
-------
STACK HEIGHT LITIGATION
Background
On February 8, 1982 EPA issued regulations restricting the use of tall
stacks and other dispersion techniques as methods by which national ambient
air quality standards could be attained. These regulations implement
Section 123 of the 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments. The 1982 regulations
were challenged in court and portions were reversed or remanded to EPA. On
July 5, 1985 the revised regulations were published. Portions of the 1985
regulations were subsequently challenged.
Status
On January 22, 1988 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the n.C. Circuit issued
its opinion in NRDC v. Thomas, 838 F.2d 1224 (O.C. Cir. 1988). The court
upheld the 1985 regulations, except for three grandfathering provisions
which were remanded for further consideration and rulemaking. These
provisions affect emissions credit for:
1. Pre-1/79 original construction using H + 1.5L;
2. Pre-10/83 within formula increases;
•3. Original construction with merged stacks.
In March 1988 five petitions for rehearing were filed. All five.petitions
were denied in April 1988. In June and July 1988 industry groups filed
petitions requesting review by the U.S. Supreme Court of the D.C. Court of
Appeals decision. On October 11,, 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to
review the case.
Future Milestones
An EPA work group was formed in March 1988 and is currently evaluating the
January 22,. 1988 remand.
EPA Contact Person
Doug Grano (919) 541-5255
(FTS) 629-5255
92
-------
VISIBILITY PROTECTION
Background
Ambient Standards
On July 1, 1987, EPA rescinded the TSP-based secondary national
ambient air quality standard and instituted PMjg-based 24-hour and annual
secondary standards to protect against soiling and nuisance effects. On
the same date, EPA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking
which solicited comment regarding the development of a secondary national
ambient air quality standard for fine particles (those less than 2.5
micrometers in aerodynamic diameter). The principal welfare effect to be
addressed by such a standard is impairment of visibility.
Class I Area Protection
Visibility rules to protect visual air quality in^Federal Class I
areas were promulgated by EPA on December 2, 1980. These rules were
based on requirements of section 169A of the Clean Air Act.
In 198?, the Environmental Defense Fund (E.DF) sued EPA to implement
the visibility rules for States that has. not submitted SIP's. Because EPA
has a nondiscretionary duty under section 110(c) of the Clean Air Act to
implement rules for those States which fail to do so, EPA entered into a
settlement agreement with EOF to implement the December 1980 rules in three
parts. The first part, completed in July 1985, established a monitoring
strategy and new source review procedures for visibility impacts in the
Class I areas. The second part, completed in November 1987, established
(!}. a long-term strategy for visibility protection which included periodic
review of the SIP's to ensure progress in remedying existing problems and
preventing future problems, and (2) protection for specific views (integral
vistas) which extend beyond the borders of the Roosevelt-Campobello
International Park. The third part required EPA by August 31, 1988 to
address existing impairments in Class I areas.which can be.reasonably
attributed to a specific source or group of sources. The settlement
agreement was recently revised to allow EPA to address the existing
impairment in two parts.
The EPA", along with other Federal" agencies, has created a technical"
steering committee called the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments Committee (IMPROVE) to oversee the Federal monitoring effort.
The EPA has set aside a portion of the section 105 grant funds "to operate
the monitoring network. The EPA has agreed to fund the program through
FY 1989 after which time the responsibilities for the monitoring network
W'iTl" be? delegated": to? the-States.. The1 States-w.i?TTJ rece.ive* the- sect.iom 105*
grants directly and'will* be apportioned by the number of IMPROVE" sites in
each State.
93
-------
VISIBILITY PROTECTION - Continued
Current Status
Ambient Standards
At this time, EPA is reviewing comments made in response to the
advance notice of proposed rulemaking for a fine particle standard.
The Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., filed suit on the
rulercaking which, in part, challenges EPA's decision to defer action on a
possible fine particle secondary standard to orotect visibility. This
case was combined with other suits on the PMjfj standards and all action
is now stayed pending EPA response to administrative petitions for
reconsideration of the PMjQ promulgation on other issues.
Class I Area Protection
On September 15, 1988, EPA proposed regulations to address existing
visibility impairment in the Roosevelt-Campobel lo International Park,
Voyageurs National Park, the Petrified Forest National Park, and the
Saguaro Wilderness and to clarify the integral vista listing for-Roosevelt -
Campobello International Park. The EPA delayed action on existing impairment
in the Grand Canyon and Canyon Lands National Parks because the results of
the 1986-1987 winterhaze study (called WHITEX) would not be available until
November 1988.
The EPA also delayed .action on the existing visi.bil.ity impairment in
the Moosehorn Wilderness because the source in question was in the process
of securing a prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permit for a
plant modification which would eliminate the impairment.
Future Actions
Ambient Standards
The EPA is beginning to proceed with development of a possible fine
particle secondary ambient air quality standard. The next steps in
proceeding with development of a standard are: (1) establishment of a
development plan, and (2) updating the scientific assessment.
Class" I Area' Protection-
The public comment period on the September 15 proposal described above
closes on November 14, 1988. Under the settlement agreement, final action
must be completed by May 14, 1989.
When EPA receives the report on the. WHITEX study,, it will distribute.
it;tor the?concerned'parties" and host at meetrng between the-parties-to-
discuss its use. The meeting will most likely be scheduled for Denver in
February or March 1989.
The Maine Deoartment of Environmental Protection, the EPA, the
National Park Service,,, and-the. sourcei are: discussingi the? above mentioned'
94
-------
VISIBILITY PROTECTION - Continued
PSD permit and required controls for the source impacting the Moosehorn
Wilderness... Action-on* the. PSO permit" should be- taken1 by January 1989.-
After the permit" is~ either issued or denied-, EPA'will" take-action, if"
necessary, on addressing any remaining visibility .impairment.
EPA Contact Persons
Ambient Standards
Bruce Polkowsky (FTS)-629-5532
(919) 541-5532
Class I Areas
David Stonefield (FTS) 629-5350
(919) 541-5350
95
-------
INDOOR AIR PROGRAM
Background
0 In Title IV of the 1986 Superfund amendments, Congress gave EPA a
clear mandate to: 1) establish a Federally-coordinated indoor air
research program, 2) disseminate information on indoor air pollution
and mitigation techniques, and 3} assess the appropriate Federal role
in solving indoor air pollution problems.
0 In June, 1987, EPA submitted to Congress a report on its Indoor Air
Program for the following 12-18 months as required by Title IV of the
Superfund amendments. The report stated that it is E^A's policy to
reduce risks from indoor air pollution by using one or more of the
following strategies, as needed:
Issuing regulations under existing statutes to reduce significant
health risks..
Increasing state and local government and private sector capacity
to identify and solve indoor air pollution problems through
information, dissemination and technical assistance.
.Referring problems to other federal agencies with appropriate
regulatory authority.
Requesting separate indoor air regulatory authority from Congress,
if appropriate.
0 An Interagency Committee on Indoor Air Quality (CIAQ) coordinates
Federal research activities on indoor air issues. Sixteen Federal
agencies are members; four serve as co-chairs. David Dull, Acting Director
of the Office of Atmospheric and Indoor Air Programs in the Office of
Air and Radiation, serves as the EPA co-chair.
Current Status
0 The indoor air program has two publications which the Agency i.s now
distributing~or~ i s* about tor-distr.i buter-
A Directory of State Indoor Air Contacts, prepared by the Public
Health Foundation (PHF) and TsTued jointly by EPA and the PHF, is
available from the EPA Public Information Center (PM-211B), 401 M
Street SW, Washington, DC 20460. The directory lists staff contacts
in-, state: agencies*, for-up-to; 16-indoor air^related:, issues., for-each
States.
A booklet for the general public on indoor air quality, The
Inside Story; A Guide to Indoor Airr Quality, will be available in
1 ate October.
96
-------
INDOOR AIR PROGRAM - Continued
0 EPA is working with other public and orivate sector organizations to
prepare two technical manuals. One pertains to the diagnosis,, prevention,
and: mfti'gatiom of" buiIding--related i 1 Tness" and- the: other addresses how.
to assess and mitigate risks from exposure to environmental tobacco
smoke.
* EPA is working with the Public Health Service and the National Environmental
Health Association to produce a self-paced, self-directed course on
indoor air pollution. The primary audience for this course is staff
in State and local agencies with indoor air responsibilities.
0 EPA is conducting a survey of private sector organizations that are
offering indoor air diagnostic and mitigation services to the public.
As of the end of September 1988, over 800 responses had been received.
0 The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee reported out the
Indoor Air Ouality Act of 1988 (S. 1629), which was introduced by
Senator Mitchell. Congressman Kennedy introduced a bill identical to
the Senate committee bill (H.R.. 5373) in September 1988 and Congressman
Scheuer and Congresswoman Schneider held a hearing on the Kennedy bill
before the Scheuer subcommittee of the House Science, Space, and
Technology Committee on September 28. EPA opposes these bills as not
being needed at this time.
Put ure Mi lestones
0 EPA must submit a comprehensive report to Congress on indoor air and
radon. The report is to include a description of the research, information
dissemination, and other activities undertaken by EPA under Title IV
of the 1986 Superfund..amendments. It is to include assessments of the
current state of knowledge of indoor air pollution, mitigation options,
the adequacy of existing standards, and long term research needs.
Finally, the report is to make recommendations regarding the appropriate
Federal role in mitigating indoor air pollution. At the Scheuer
.hearing, EPA's Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, Don
Cl.ay, said that the report would be sent to Congress by December 30th.
0 Substantial effort in FY 1989 will be devoted to completing the information
materials that are listed above, all of which are scheduled for completion
in-1989.
EPA Contact Person
Bob. Axel rad. (202) 475-7174
(FTS)- 475-7174*
97
-------
DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA POLLUTANT
EMISSION INVENTORY GUIDANCE
Current Status/Future Milestones
0 Revised emission Inventory guidance belnq developed by EPA Includes:
- General technical guidance for preparation of emission Inventories
for VOC, NOX and CO (stationary and mobile sources)
- Specific requirements for post-1987 ozone and CO SIP emission
Inventories
These reports are expected to become available In the fall of 1988.
0 Additional emission Inventory guidance concerning- ozone and CO SIPs will
be presented at workshops in Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco, and
Philadelphia in October and November.
0 Personal computer based system for compilation and reporting of ozone and
CO SIP emission inventories being developed by EPA as a tool for State
and local agencies. System to be available in the fall of 1988.
0 Specific PM^Q emission inventory requirements and additional general
inventory guidance have been included in a recently issued supplement to
the PM-in SIP Development Guideline. . .
EPA Contact Persons
VOC/NOy/CO)
avid C. Misenheimer (919) 541-5473
(FTS) 629-5473
(PMin)
E. L. Martinez (919) 541-5575
(FTS) 629-5575
98
-------
STATUS OF GUIDELINE ON AIR QUALITY MODELS
Background
The Guideline on Air Quality Models (originally issued 4/78) is incor-
porated by reference in 40 CFR 51.24 and 52.21 and is referenced in EPA
guidance for development of SIP revisions; it was prepared in response
to requirements of Sections 165(e)(3)(0), 301, and 320 of the CAA.
Final rulemaking on Supplement A to the Guideline was promulgated on
January 6, 1988. That supplement, provides additional guidance on a new
complex terrain screening model (RTDM), an improved downwash algorithm
in the industrial source complex (ISC) model, and an offshore
dispersion model (OCD).
New/revised computer codes and user's guides for RTDM and ISC have been
made available to- all States through EPA's Regional Offices. OCO is
already available, from the,National Technical Information-Service..
Current Status
0 The Fourth Conference on Air Quality Modeling is scheduled for October
12-13, 1983 in Washington,. D.C. The conference seeks public comment
on the merits of expanding the modeling guideline to include a
variety of new techniques for such issues as complex terrain,
roadway intersections, visibility, long-range transport, and others.
A number of States are participating.
Future Milestones
0 Based on input submitted during a 60 day public comment period following
the Fourth Conference, EPA plans .to publish by late 1989 a notice of
proposed rulemaking on formal changes to the modeling guideline to
incorporate those new techniques that appear to enhance the regulatory
modeling program.
EPA" Contact" Person-
Joe Tikvart (919) 541-5561
. (FTS) 629-5561
99
-------
AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
Background/Status
The basic AIRS Air Quality Subsystem (AIRS/AQS) has been in production
since July 1987. The AIRS development team has upgraded the system in FY 1988
to add an interactive browse capability, three new retrievals, and various
minor enhancements. All the Regional Offices, 25 States and 2 local agencies
are directly accessing AIRS/AOS as of October 1989.
The AIRS Facility Subsystem (AIRS/AFS) is currently in the software
development stage of the project since the final specifications were completed
and reviewed by the user group representatives this past fiscal year. This
joint effort between the technical Support Division (TSD) and the Stationary
Source Compliance Division (SSCO) has worked closely with the State/Local
agencies, Regional Offices, and the National Computer Center throughout
this project.
Hardware and telecommunications support for the State and Regional Office
end users is being coordinated with the National Computer Center. Also,
timesharing allocations have been determined for these users for FY 1989.
Future Milestones •
For the AIRS/AQS, training is planned for another 15 States in FY 198.9.
In addition, matntenancey enhancements and user support activities will be .
provided as needed by the end users.
The AIRS/AFS is currently scheduled to go into production in August
1989. At least 16 States will be trained and provided with direct access
beginning in FY 1990.
EPA Contact Persjw • •
John C. Bosch (919) 541-5583
(FTS) 629-5583
100
-------
FY 1989-90 NSPS ACTIVITY
FY 1989
FY 1990
Proposals
Small Steam Generating Units
SOCHI-Reactor Processes
Proposals
Municipal Landfills NSPS, lll(d)
Municipal Waste Combustion NSPS, lll(d)
Promulgations
Calciners and Dryers (2 NSPS)
Polymers Manufacturing (4 NSPS)
Refinery Hastewater Treatment
SOCHI-A1p Oxidation
SOCHI-Oistillation
Magnetic Tapes
Polymer Coating of Fabric
Portland Cement Revision
Refinery FCCU Revision
Sewage Sludge Revision
Promulgation
Small Boilers
Review of NSPS
None
Under Development
.SOCMI Batch Processes
SOCMI Reactor Processes.
Offset Lithography
EPA Contact Person
John Crenshaw (919) 541-5574
(FTS) 629-5574
101
-------
WOOD HEATER NSPS STATUS REPORT
Background
0 On February 26, 1988, EDA promulgated New Source Performance Standards
for residential wood heaters. These new source standards are unique in
a number of respects. The regulations require that all performance
testing be done by EPA accredited laboratories. These laboratories
obtain and maintain accreditation by performing a series of annual
proficiency tests with the prescribed test methods.
0 When accredited, these laboratories may perform certification tests
on individual model stoves to determine compliance. In a phase-in program,
all stoves must be certified between 1990 and 1992 for sale to the public.
Current Status
Eight laboratories are currently accredited by EDA,
EPA Contact Person.
Accreditation of Laboratories
Oennis P. Ho1zschuh
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emission Measurement Branch (MD-14)
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
Telephone: (919) 541-5239
(FTS) 629-5239
Certification Program
Doreen Cantor
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Stationary Source Compliance Division {EN-341}
401 M Street, SW
Washington, O.C. 20460
Telephone: (202) 382-2874
(FTS) 382-2874
102
-------
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CENTER (CTC)
Background
The CTC was formed in 1987 to assist State and local (S/L) air pollution
control agencies in their implementation of programs to control air toxics
and VOC and other criteria emissions. It is operated by EPA's Offices of
Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAOPS) and Research and Development
(ORO) and draws from the expertise of those two organizations. It has been
operating for approximately two years.. A STAPPA/ALAPCO Workgroup headed by
Mr. Paul Munn and Mr. John Glunn was formed to assure a close working
relationship between STAPPA/ALAPCO and the CTC.
Three levels of support are provided - a HOTLINE (for rapid response
to questions), direct engineering assistance (for more in-depth support to
individual S/L agencies), and technical guidance products (for dissemination
of information of broad national interest).
Status and Future Milestones .
During the past 2 years of operation, the CTC has received over 500
requests for information over the HOTLINE. In addition,, several engineering.
assistance projects have been completed and several more have.been initiated.
The new projects include evaluation of air emissions and controls for a
wastewater treatment .system in West Virginia, evaluation of controls for a
significant source of methylene chloride in New York and review and comment
on- an^arsine/phosphine scrubber design for1 the San Diego Air Pollution .
Control Oistrict. Typical engineering assistance projects involve site
visits with support from EPA engineers and contractors.
In addition to the HOTLINE and engineering assistance projects, the
CTC has several technical guidance products in various stages of development.
Upon completion, these products are made available to all S/L agencies.
The projects and estimated completed dates are:
- PC software to assist permit writers on Distribution/October 1988
air toxics [CAT - Advisory System] Version 2 /early 1989
- Traintng-matertalV for- operations" of' hospital' December* 1988'
waste incinerators
- PC software to help estimate emissions Initial review/October 1988
from surface impoundments Distribution/January 1989
- VOC area?- sources-controls-- — technology,-transfer* Late'* SprtTig-; 1989r
- Fiberglass boat manufacturing - emissions and February 1989
controls
- Emissions, from tire: burning March 1989
103
-------
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CENTER (CTC) - Continued
The PC software was developed as a cooperative effort with the New
Jersey Bureau of Air Pollution Control. This software Is being expanded
to- include screening"level reviews-.. The-- hospital" waste* incinerator training-
project is being developed in cooperation with the State of Maryland*and
Region II! to provide training materials for operators of these incinerators.
The VOC area sources project will disseminate information on controls for
area sources of VOC either through a workshop (if desired by STAPPA/ ALA°CO)
or other appropriate means. A portion of the funds budgeted for the CTC
will be set aside for engineering assistance provided directly to S/L
agencies. The EPA is looking to STAPPA/ALAPCO for guidance on the technical
assistance needs of the S/L agencies.
EPA Contact Person
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Fred Dimnrick(919) 541-5432
(FTS) 629-5432
Office of Research and Development
Sharon No!en (919) 541-7607"
(FTS) 629-7606
CTC HOTLINE (919) 541-0800
(FTS) 629-0800
104
-------
INTERSTATE. POLLUTION ABATEMENT
Background
In 1980 and 1981, petitions were filed by several Northeast States
claiming that air pollution from sources in the midwest prevented the .
petitioning States from attaining and maintaining national ambient air
quality standards, consumed a portion of their prevention of significant
deterioration increments, interfered with visibility, and caused acid rain.
On September 4, 1984,, EPA proposed to deny the petitions since the petitioning
States' demonstrations did not adequately support their claims of injury. On
December 10, 1984 EPA published its final determination to deny these petitions.
Petitions for review of EPA's action were filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the O.C. Circuit early in 1985. On December 24, 1987, the court ordered all
parties to submit entirely new, updated briefs on a schedule between January
28 and April 8, 1988... Oral arguments were made on April 26, 1988.
In another action, on November 17, 1987, the. New York Department of
Environmental Conservation filed a petition under section 126 claiming that
emissions from upwind States was preventing attainment of the ozone air
quality standards in New York. On December 15, 1987, the State requested
that EPA not act on the petition until it could be supplemented. On July 15,
1988, EPA received the addendum in which' New York claimed that the petition was
complete for the purpose of triggering the section 126 process.
Status
On July 22, 1988 the D.C. Circuit denied the petitions that had been
filed by the States in the Northeast. The court agreed with EPA that Maine
had no claim under section 126 because its SIP does not and is not required
to contain regional haze visibility measures. The court upheld EPA's conclusion
that Pennsylvania had not supported its claim that sulfur dioxide sources in
upwind states were causing NAAOS violations in Pennsylvania. And, in light
of the new particulate matter ambient air quality standard promulgated by EPA •
in July 1987, the court remanded New York's petition to allow submittal of
new data.
The court" rejected'the arguments- of* the Northeast' States-- that" the-1977"
amendments to the Clean Air Act created a duty to reevaluate all existing
State implementation plans to determine if they are in compliance with the
prohibitions on interstate effects contained in section 110(a)(2)(E) of the
Act.. The court also rejected petitioners' contentions.that EPA must conduct
its own investigations or conduct, its own modeling to affirmatively disprove
petitioners*' modeling- theories".
With regard to the section 126 petition filed by New York related to
ozone, EPA is currently reviewing this petition and will decide what action
to take in the near future.
105
-------
INTERSTATE POLLUTION ABATEMENT - Continued
EPA Contact Persons
Northeast States-Petition-
Doug Grano
(919) 541-5255
(FTS) 629-5255
New York Ozone Petition
Larry Wilson
(919) 541-5365
(FTS) 629-5365
106
-------
BACT/LAER CLEARINGHOUSE
Background
The BACT/LAf-R Clearinghouse was established to assist State and local air
pollution control agencies in selecting best available control technology (8ACT)
and the lowest achievable emission rate (LAER) for new or modified sources in a
nationally consistent manner.
Goals and Objectives
The basic purposes of the BACT/LAER Clearinghouse are to: (1) provide State
and local air pollution control agencies with current information on the case-by-
case technology determinations that are made nationwide, and (2) oromote communica-
tion, cooperation, and sharing of control technology information among permitting
agencies. ' . .
Current Status
r™ 4
0 July 1988 Compilation of Control Technology Determinations contains all
determinations made and submitted to the BACT/LAER Clearinghouse between May. 1987
and June 1988. It was distributed mid-August 1988..
0 Users Manual for computerized BACT/LAER Information System (3LIS) explains
"HOW-TO" use 8LIS on EPA's mainframe IBM computer. It was- distributed July 1988.
0 The issuance of "top-down" BACT and the need to consider noncriteria
air pollutants in BACT determinations have increased the emphasis on a complete
BACT/LAER Clearinghouse with quick access to the information in the data base.
Accordingly, there is a need to consider ways to increase participation by all
agencies, to improve the type and quality of the data in 8LIS, and to ensure
that all agencies have access to the computerized BACT/LAER data base.
0 A teleconference was held with John Paul (Montgomery County, Ohio),
Bob Collum (Georgia) and Chuck Collins (Wyoming) in early Seotember. to discuss
potential revisions to the Clearinghouse. Discussion topics included: (1)
changes, to the information collected and reported for VOC/solvent-source.
categorfes';, and;.(2.) provisions; to:co.11~ectt: andi-report. performance? test: results'
to supplement permit limits. Also discussed were making BLIS more user-friendly
and what information sources should be reviewed and considered during
BACT/LAER determinations.
0 As a result of the teleconference, EPA and STAPPA/ALAPCO agreed to
form1 work. groups, to* cons.ider the: potential, changes* to the-r Clearinghouse? and:.
then"-set- prfbri't.iesv on-* wh.ichr- changes: shou.Vd • happen?. firstv.
EPA Contact Person
107
Fred Dimmick [917) 541-5432
(FTS); 629-5432!
-------
EMISSION MEASUREMENT TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTER
Background
0 The Emission Measurement Technical Information Center (EMTIC) Is being
established to promote consistent, uniform application of stationary
source emission test methods in the development and enforcement
of emission control programs on a national basis.
0 The EMTIC will establish a technical information exchange network and a
test methods depository.
0 The EMTIC is being organized by the Emission Measurement Branch of the
Technical Support Division of OAOPS and will be conducted as a, joint effort
including the.Quality Assurance Division of ORD and the Stationary Source
Compliance Division of OAQPS.
Current Status
e A draft of the basic concepts for EMTIC has been mailed to 104 compliance
testing contacts in order to establish a network and to receive input for
.EMTIC.
Future Milestones
0 Completion of list of participants for the Technical Information Exchange
Network — October 1988.
0 Establishing the elements of EMTIC based on comments — November 1988.
0 Initial mailout of technical information — January 1989.
EPA Contact Persons
Roger T. Shigehara
U.S., Env.i ronmental Protect.ion•• Agency-
Emission1 Measurement Branch-(MD-T9)
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
Telephone: (919) 541-1058
(FTS) 629-1058
108
-------
AIR. GRANTS—PROGRAM. TO IDENTIFY, STATE/LOCAL.
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES AND COSTS
Background
In 1986, EPA and STAPPA/ALAPCO reached agreement on several
principles for governing the air grants process. Among these was
a recognition that each grantee agency implements a number of
recurring activities in enforcement, monitoring, new source
review, planning, etc., which form the foundation of the agency's
air pollution control program. Following the establishment of
these principles, EPA agreed to work with STAPPA/ALAPCO to
develop the data base necessary for defining this foundation.
Efforts started in late 1986, focusing on the design and conduct
of a survey of each State and local agency.
In January- 1987, at. a meeting of' the-Regional Air Grant.
Coordinators and attended by the Chairman of the STAPPA Funding
Committee, agreement was reached to proceed with the development
of a protocol and survey package for implementation in 1987 on a
pilot basis among a limited number of State and local agencies.
The survey package would consist of a listing of activities
carried out by State and local agencies.. The participating
agencies would identify the current levels and costs for
the activities. The survey package was developed over the course
of several months.evolving through a series of drafts «nd reviews
by both the EPA Regional Offices and representatives of the
STAPPA/ALAPCO Funding Committees. In June 1987, the package was
reviewed with the Funding Committees and several of the State and
local agencies which had agreed to participate in the pilot
exercise. Agreement was reached on the package with the 1987
pilot commencing in early July.
By October 1, 1987, completed forms were provided by the 12
States and 6 local agencies participating in the pilot. The
submissions were received and data compiled for conducting a
limited series of analyses. Copies of the individual submissions
and, several, tables, summarizing, activity, and., cost. data. were, sent
to the Regional* Officesv the participating agencies, and-
STAPPA/ALAPCO for review. In late October 1987, a meeting was
held with the EPA Regional air staff involved in the development
and implementation of the pilot exercise to review the Regional
experiences in conducting the pilot, suggestions for improving
the program in 1988, and recommendations for the next steps. In
early "November: a:, simrlar- meeting: was* heldt with, representatives-: of:
STAPPA/ALAPCO-.. The- consensus at both" meetings? was*, to' work; towards
expanding the pilot to all agencies in 1988 following review and
discussion with the STAPPA/ALAPCO Funding Committees and general
membership at the 1987 winter meeting in Orlando. A short report
summarizing; the^ pilot exercise was prepared for distribution to
the- STAPPA/ALAPCO"/ membership at, ther Orlando; meeting;.,. At. that,
109
-------
AIR GRANTS—PROGRAM TO IDENTIFY STATE/LOCAL
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES AND COSTS - Continued
meeting, the membership endorsed expansion of the exercise in
1988 provided that participation remained voluntary.
To bolster support for the 1987 exercise, the Presidents of
STAPPA and ALAPCO sent a letter on January 22, 1988, to the
membership encouraging their full participation. The survey
package and instructions for conducting the 1988 exercise were
sent to the EPA Regional Offices in early February.
Current Status
As of October 15, 1988, EPA had received 88 survey forms
from participating. S/L agencies. This participation represented
about 95 percent of Section 105 grant, monies awarded in FY 1987
as well as 95 percent of the national total of $281 million
Federal and non-Federal monies identified in S/L air program
budgets. While this level of response is high, the 1988 survey
generally suffered from major delays in receiving responses from
many of the agencies as well as a lack of detail in the
information provided by a number of the respondees. Initially,
the due date for sending in completed questionnaires was April 1,
but by May 15 only 55 forms had arrived and, by the end of July,
only 70 forms had been received. Only one-quarter to one-third
of the questionnaires attempted to display air program data in
the level of detail requested by the survey form. The remainder
provided much less detail and many were incomplete.
Two primary reasons voiced for the reluctance of agencies to
participate were that a number of agencies felt threatened by an
EPA request for detailed program information and that the
questionnaire represented yet another burden on already strained
resources. Also, a few agencies felt the approach was
incompatible with their accounting or tracking systems;
therefore, they could only provide estimates for some activities.
Also, the anticipated increase in air grant monies which started
to> surf ace? in> late? Spring-'- may/ have- reduced, in. the- minds of" some;
of the agencies part of the urgency for- the survey results.
The data provided on the survey forms have been compiled by
an EPA contractor into a computerized data base which allows
various analyses by a powerful statistical software package.
This, data base will provide the input for selected analyses which
will., ber, described!: im an- summary report: currently- planned: to: be1;.
completed by the end of CT 1988. A report" on- the status- of' the-
survey and the future of the survey program were discussed by EPA
with the membership of the STAPPA/ALAPCO Funding Committee at
their Fall meeting in late September.
110
-------
r
AIR GRANTS—PROGRAM TO IDENTIFY STATE/LOCAL
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES AND COSTS - Continued
At the September STAFPA/ALAPCO meeting, the discussion
focused on whether EPA and the Committee should attempt to go
back to individual agencies to collect information omitted from
original survey submissions and whether work should proceed on
the program study. Also discussed with the Funding Committee at
the September meeting was a plan to work with certain
STAPPA/ALAPCO Standing Committees to define core program needs
for three of the larger program areas--ambient monitoring, the
inspection elements of the stationary source compliance program,
and new source permitting. The proposed joint effort would
establish separate work groups for each of three program areas
which would coordinate with the appropriate STAPPA/ALAPCO
Standing Committee to develop specific guidelines and criteria
for defining what level of activity or combination of tasks or
capabilities, constitute the core for that element of a State or
local air program. These core criteria, once established, would
define that portion of the current program and associated
resources which would be protected from future inroads as new
programs emerge and inflationary pressures erode current
programs. A pilot study involving 10-15 State and local agencies
in each of the three major program areas was suggested with the
results of the pilots to be presented and discussed at the next
STAPPA/ALAPCO general meeting in April 1989. .
It was agreed at the September meeting that the Funding
Committee would informally poll all of the general membership on
both the proposal to follow-up with agencies that did not fully
complete the original survey package and the proposal to conduct
a pilot to define the core for the three program areas.
Subsequently a conference call would be scheduled within a few
weeks between EPA and members of the Funding Committee to decide
if either or both efforts should proceed.
Future Milestones
Efforts;, are?-underway- to.^ schedule: thet joint. EPA-STAPPA/ALAECO,-
conference call.
EPA Contact Person
Steve Hitte- (919.). 5 41.-08 8.6.
(F.TS-)•- 629--0886*
111
.
-------
------- |