EPA-450/2-75-008
September 1975
STATE AIR POLLUTION
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
PROGRESS REPORT,
JANUARY 1 TO JUNE 30, 1975
L.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
-------
EPA-450/2-75-008
STATE AIR POLLUTION
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
PROGRESS REPORT,
JANUARY 1 TO JUNE 30, 1975
Prepared by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of.Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Enforcement
Washington, D.C.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
September 1975
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Enforcement and the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards of the Environmental Protection Agency and
approved for publication.
Document is available to the public through the National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
Publication No. EPA-450/2-75-008
11
-------
FOREMORD
This is the fifth in a continuing series of reports assessing the
progress made by States in implementing the Clean Air Act, specifically
Section 110. Although the report is primarily intended to cover the
first six months of calendar year 1975, the majority of the information
is current through September 1975.
This document has a somewhat different approach from previous
reports in this series in that the bulk of it focuses on information
compiled for each of the 55 states. Depicted for each state are the
attainment status by AQCR for total suspended particulate and sulfur
dioxide, ambient air quality monitoring data, designated air quality
maintenance areas, status of selected portions of the State Implemen-
tation Plans, a comparison of projected and available resources,
compliance status of selected source categories, and an enforcement
action summary. Progress in the reduction of ambient carbon monoxide
and oxidant levels is summarized in Part I. Data for nitrogen oxides
are not included because the Federal reference method for measuring
ambient levels has not been finalized.
m
-------
CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS ix
PART I. SUMMARY 1
Attainment of Standards 1
Data Reporting 5
SIP Revisions for Air Quality Maintenance 6
Overview of SIPs 7
Control Agency Resources 8
Source Compliance Activities 9
PART II. OVERVIEW OF STATE PLANS 10
Enforcement of State Plans 10
Air Quality Monitoring and Data Reporting 19
Air Quality Maintenance 24
Procedures for Processing SIP Revisions ..-••• 28
Control Agency Resources 29
PART III. STATE PROFILES 31
Introduction 31
Region I
Connecticut 3^
Maine 41
Massachusetts 48
New Hampshire 58
Rhode Island 63
Vermont 69
Region II
New Jersey 75
New York 81
Puerto Rico 93
Virgin Islands 101
IV
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
Region III
Delaware 107
District of Columbia 113
Maryland 119
Pennsylvania 128
Virginia 140
West Virginia 148
Region IV
Alabama I56
Florida I63
Georgia 173
Kentucky 181
Mississippi I90
North Carolina I96
South Carolina 202
Tennessee 210
Region V
Illinois 218
Indiana 231
Michigan 246
Minnesota 253
Ohio 261
Wisconsin 275
Region VI
Arkansas 282
Louisiana 288
New Mexico 299
Oklahoma 305
Texas 311
Region VII
Iowa 319
Kansas 329
Missouri 336
Nebraska 344
Region VIII
Colorado 350
Montana 357
North Dakota 363
South Dakota 368
Utah 374
Wyoming 381
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
Page
Region IX
American Samoa 387
Arizona 391
California 398
Guam 413
Hawaii 418
Nevada 424
Region X
Alaska 430
Idaho 436
Oregon 443
Washington 450
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Part I
1-1. Summary of Final AQMA Designations 6
Part II
II-l. Compliance Status of National Priority 13
Sources
II-2. Compliance Status of Major Emitters, 14
by Region, June 30, 1975
II-3. Number of States Implementing Subsystems 22
of CDHS
II-4. Number of States Submitting Semiannual
Emission Reports 23
II-5. Designated Air Quality Maintenance
Areas 26
Part III. (Tables A-H are given for each of the 55 states.
See Table of Contents for page numbers of states.)
A. Estimated Attainment of National TSP and S0?
Ambient Air Quality Standards by AQCR
B. Air Quality Monitoring Activity Reported
to SAROAD, CY 1972-74
C. Designated Air Quality Maintenance
Areas
D. Status of Selected Portions of the SIPs
E. Comparison of Projected and Actual Resources for
FY 75
F. Number of Emission-Producing Processes in
Selected Source Categories
G. Summary of State Enforcement Program
H. Summary of EPA Enforcement Actions
VII
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1. Anticipated Attainment of National TSP 2
and S0? Primary Ambient Air Quality
Standards (August 31, 1975)
1-2. Nationwide Emission Trends, 1970-74 4
VTM
-------
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
AQCRs
AQDHS
AQMAs
CDHS
CO
CDS
40 CFR 51
COG
CY
DOT
EIS/P&R
EMS
EPA
FGD
FY
HC
I/M
NAAQS
N02
OAQPS
°x
SAROAD
SCS
SIP
SMSA
so2
State
TCP
TSP
Air Quality Control Regions
Air Quality Data Handling Subsystem
Air Quality Maintenance Areas
Comprehensive Data Handling System
carbon monoxide
Compliance Data System
Title 40, Part 51, of the Code of Federal Regulations
Council of Governments
calendar year
U.S. Department of Transportation
Emission Inventory Subsystem/Permits and Registration
Enforcement Management System
(U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency
flue gas desulfurization
fiscal year
hydrocarbons
inspection/maintenance
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
nitrogen dioxide
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
oxidant
Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data
supplementary control system
State Implementation Plan
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area
sulfur dioxide
Refers to the District of Columbia and four U.S.
territories as well as the 50 states
Transportation Control Plan
total suspended particulate
IX
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The preparation of this report resulted from information provided
by the state and local air pollution control agencies, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency Regional Offices, and various EPA Headquarters
groups.
As with earlier reports relating to State Implementation Plan
progress, this edition continues to be a joint effort between the
Division of Stationary Source Enforcement, Office of Enforcement, and
the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and
Waste Management.
Information on enforcement activities was provided by the
Division of Stationary Source Enforcement, Office of Enforcement.
Additional specific information on EPA air programs can be obtained
by contacting the EPA Regional Offices.
-------
PART I SUMMARY
ATTAINMENT OF STANDARDS
The attainment date for primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for most states was May 31, 1975. Analysis is con-
tinuing to determine the attainment status of each Air Quality Control
Region (AQCR). When the NAAQS are computed as annual averages, EPA's
current policy is to determine attainment on a calendar year of
ambient air quality data. Thus final decisions concerning attainment
status cannot be made until data for CY 1976 become available. Because
air quality data available for this analysis are generally current only
to the third quarter of 1974, attainment status for each AQCR is a
preliminary judgment rather than an absolute determination and is
subject to change as more information becomes available.
Figure 1-1 presents the anticipated attainment status of the 247
AQCRs for total suspended particulate (TSP) and sulfur dioxide (SO,,).
Over 53 percent of the AQCRs are considered likely to attain TSP
standards, and over 73 percent are considered likely to attain SO-
standards. For 22 percent of the AQCRs information is insufficient for
an estimate at this time. Table A in each State Profile presents the
estimated attainment status of each AQCR in each state for TSP and S02>
These assessments reflect Regional Office analysis current to August
31, 1975.
Ambient air quality data on carbon monoxide (CO) and oxidant (0 )
J\
were analyzed during spring 1975 to determine principal urban areas for
which the data show violations of the NAAQS. According to this analysis,
principal urban areas in 79 AQCRs are reporting violations of the NAAQS
for oxidant/ozone, and principal urban areas in 69 AQCRs are reporting
violations of the NAAQS for CO. The most current analysis of progress
achieved in reducing ambient levels of CO and 0 is discussed in the
A
-------
247
200
150
u
a
CO
5
100
50
PROBABLY
WILL
ATTAIN
182
PROBABLY
WILL NOT
ATTAIN
.''. •• '- ' -.
'.'• • /• ••.')
'•• ".132".'.
*./28
A
35
ATTAINMENT
STATUS
UNCERTAIN
30
TSP BOTH S02
TSP
&S02
TSP BOTH SOz
TSP
&S02
TSP BOTH S02
TSP
&S02
Figure 1-1. Anticipated attainment of national TSP and S02
primary ambient air quality standards (August 31, 1975).
-------
Administrator's Press Conference on Air Quality Progress of May 30,
1975:
For carbon monoxide, associated almost entirely with
motor vehicles, the percentage of readings exceeding
the eight-hour standard has declined nationally by
more than 50 percent. Also, for the limited areas
in which sufficient data now exist to define a trend,
concentrations of photochemical oxidants, which are
produced largely by hydrocarbon emissions from both
mobile and stationary sources, have shown improve-
ments. The Los Angeles and San Francisco areas are
cases in point. ...with auto-related pollutants,
it is important to bear in mind that even if the
90 percent emission reductions originally required
in the Clean Air Act for the 1975 models had gone
into effect on schedule instead of being deferred
by both legislative and administrative actions,
many areas still would have been unable to attain
the air quality standards by the mid-1975 deadline
without transportation controls and other measures.
Similarly, such supplemental measures still will be
needed in a number of areas years from now, even
when all cars on the road meet the statutory emis-
sion standards.
These figures show that much work remains to be done before the
nation as a whole will attain ambient standards. However, significant
progress in reducing levels of pollution has occurred. Since 1970,
for example, the percentage of air monitors reporting values exceeding
the primary (health) standard has decreased from 12 to 3 percent for
sulfur dioxide, from 50 to 23 percent for total suspended particulate
(TSP) annual average, and from 16 to 8 percent for TSP 24-hour average.
The percentages for each of the compared years are based on the total
number of pollutant-specific monitoring instruments reporting to SAROAD
in those respective years.
Source emissions have also been reduced. Figure 1-2 depicts emis-
sion trends for each of the five pollutants from 1970 to 1974.
-------
110
105
100
95
CARBON MONOXIDE
90
E
C/J~
I
30
SULFUR OXIDES
HYDROCARBONS
25
20
NITROGEN OXIDES
PARTICULATES
15
1970
1971
1972
YEAR
1973
1974
Figure 1-2. Nationwide emission trends, 1970-1974.
-------
DATA REPORTING
Nationally, the number of ambient trend monitors reported in CY 74
to SAROAD for each of the criteria pollutants exceeds in every case
the minimum required network. However, for the nation as a whole to
satisfy minimum requirements, the number of sensors in each AQCR must
satisfy the monitoring requirements specific to that AQCR.
Applying the criterion that monitoring requirements for a state
are met only if a state has fulfilled the commitment for each AQCR
within the state, ambient trend monitoring is incomplete or inadequate
in some states. States meeting the minimum requirements without a
deficient AQCR within their boundaries are summarized as follows:
• For TSP, all 55 states are required to have a network and 39
of the 55 currently satisfy this requirement.
• For SCL, all 55 states are required to have a network and 45 of
the 55 are fulfilling this commitment.
• For CO, 25 states are required to have a network and 15 of
the 25 are meeting this commitment. (Thirty states are not
now required to have a CO network.)
• For 0 , 35 states are required to have a network and 17 of
/\
the 35 are fulfilling this commitment. (Twenty states are
not now required to have 0 networks.)
/\
Table B in each State Profile presents the number of ambient trend
monitoring instruments reporting compared to the number of monitors
proposed in the SIP rather than comparing the number reporting to the
minimum number. A significant number of states are operating networks
even though they are not required to do so. This monitoring activity
is summarized as follows:
• For CO, 30 states are not required to have a network; however,
15 of these 30 proposed networks in their SIPs and three of
the 15 submitted data for CY 74.
-------
. For 0 , 20 states are not required to have a monitoring network,
y\
but 7 of these 20 states have proposed networks in their SIPs
and all 7 reported data for CY 74.
(All 55 states are required to have TSP and S02 networks.)
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISIONS FOR AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE
On June 19, 1975, 40 CFR 51.12 was amended to provide that the
Administrator establish by July 1, 1976, a date for submission of a
plan for each designated AQMA. The amended 40 CFR 51.12 further states
that the submittal dates will vary according to the magnitude of the
plan revisions involved. EPA intends to propose the detailed require-
ments concerning the method of AQMA analysis by October 31, 1975. This
proposal will likely modify the existing 10-year period over which the
AQMA plans must be responsive. This latitude will allow regional dis-
cretion in the planning cycles for specific AQMAs. Table 1-1 summarizes
the final AQMAs identified by the Administrator by state and pollutant.
Table C in each State Profile provides details on the AQMAs in each
state.
Table 1-1. SUMMARY OF FINAL AQMA DESIGNATIONS
Number of
states
43a
Number of
AQMAs
168
Pollutant
TSP
159
so2
61
CO
24
°x
49
N02
5
Twelve states have no AQMAs.
-------
OVERVIEW OF STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (SIPs)
The SIPs continue to be amended to correct deficiencies found by
the courts as well as to meet technical changes required by emerging
issues. No state plan is currently fully approved although the degree
to which each plan is disapproved varies from state to state.
On July 22, 1975, new procedures for the development, review, and
approval of SIP revisions were initiated. These procedures will elim-
inate any distinction between "state initiated" and "EPA initiated"
SIP revisions and will also eliminate the previous requirements for
formal headquarters concurrence on most SIP approval/disapproval actions.
The Regional Administrators now have authority to sign Federal Register
notices proposing EPA-initiated SIP revisions in addition to their
existing authority to sign such notices for state-initiated revisions.
Further, all SIP revisions will be categorized as either "normal" or
"special action." Headquarters will not review normal actions and will
be involved only in the policy review of special action SIP revisions.
The special action category will be reserved for revisions having
national policy implications.
Since January 1975 EPA has taken the following significant
actions related to the SIPs:
•Completed final designations for AQMAs; designations for 17
states were completed in the past 6 months, bringing the
total to 43 states (12 states have no AQMAs).
• Published final regulations for the prevention of significant
deterioration, including the addition of ferroalloy-producing
facilities to the list of 18 source categories to be reviewed.
•Amended 40 CFR 51.12 to rescind the June 18, 1975, date for
state submittals of SIP revisions for maintenance and to specify
that Regional Administrators will determine submission dates
for each AQMA.
• Suspended the indirect source regulations from Federal
enforcement.
-------
• Suspended the parking management regulations.
• Proposed S0? control strategy for Kennecott smelter at Hurley,
New Mexico.
During the last 6-month reporting period, a number of SIP revisions
have also been initiated by the states. Seven states have submitted
indirect source plans, four of which EPA has approved. Three states
have submitted plan revisions correcting deficiencies in the public
availability of emission data; two of the revisions have been proposed
and one has been finalized. In addition, SO,, control regulations for
the ASARCO smelter at Helena, Montana, have been proposed, and most
portions of an SCU control strategy assigning each major point source
a sulfur-in-fuel limitation were approved for Puerto Rico.
In addition, excluding the state-initiated actions on compliance
schedules, states submitted 41 proposals for SIP revisions, 19 of
which have been published as final rulemaking. Forty-two approval
actions were taken by EPA on state submittals for compliance schedule
changes.
Table D in each State Profile presents the status of each state on
three selected portions of the SIPs.
CONTROL AGENCY RESOURCES
The gap between the need for and availability of state and local
air pollution control resources to attain and maintain ambient standards
continues to exist. Additional state and local resources are needed to
implement relatively untried or innovative control techniques, espe-
cially those pertaining to the siting of new sources and air pollution
control programs that are related to land use and transportaion. Man-
power models have predicted resource needs to be about 10,000 man-years.
The state air pollution agencies estimated in 1973 that 9500 man-years
were necessary to accomplish the basic implementation plans. The short-
fall, using the 9500 man-year estimate as the base in FY 1975, showed
that approximately 75 percent of the manpower and 77 percent of the
8
-------
funds were actually available. Although there have been token increases
in manpower and funding, in FY 75 only 80 percent of the states expended
an effort in man-years and dollars equivalent to 60 percent or more of
their stated resource needs. Resources increased principally because
state and local funds increased approximately 20 percent over FY 74,
whereas Federal grants increased by slightly less than 2 percent.
Table E in each State Profile compares projected and actual manpower
and funding levels for each state in FY 75.
SOURCE COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES
EPA and states have to date focused on ensuring compliance by major
emitters. Of some 200,000 sources subject to SIP requirements, about
20,000 major emitters are projected to produce 85 percent of all
stationary source air pollution. To date, nearly all (19,360) of the
sources have been identified by state, local and EPA action. On a
national basis, 84 percent of the major emitters are in compliance
(i.e., either by meeting a compliance schedule to abate pollution before
the attainment date or by meeting emission standards); this represents
an increase of 13 percent during the past 6 months. However, 11 percent
of the sources are out of compliance and an additional 5 percent are of
unknown compliance status.
From January to June 1975, EPA made 3,365 investigations of source
compliance (including plant inspections, opacity observations, emission
tests, and formal inquiries for evidence based on the authority of
section 114 of the Act). This total is an increase of over 800
investigations from the previous 6 months. This activity resulted in
360 enforcement actions, a 50 percent increase over the 234 actions
taken in the preceding 6 months.
States report that in the last 6 months they have conducted over
93,000 investigations of compliance status and have taken some 9,686
enforcement actions.
-------
PART II. OVERVIEW OF STATE PLANS
ENFORCEMENT OF STATE PLANS
The Clean Air Act establishes a stringent timetable for EPA and
states to abate air pollution. With a few notable exceptions (e.g.,
sulfur oxide emission limitations for the State of Ohio), all states
now have enforceable emission limitations for stationary installations,
the source of the large majority of all particulate and sulfur oxide
pollution produced by man. These limitations are designed to reduce
ambient pollutant concentrations to levels protective of health and
welfare. The Act provides 3 years from the date of state plan approval
for EPA and states to enforce SIP emission limitations and achieve
health-related air quality standards. . Except for portions of 16 states
(where extensions of up to 2 years were granted for one or more pol-
lutants), the primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
were to be achieved by May 31, 1975.
When the primary NAAQS are computed as an annual average, data
for at least one calendar year after the attainment date are necessary
to establish conclusively whether the standards have been met. How-
ever, of a total of 247 Air Quality Control Regions, it is currently
estimated that 132 will not achieve primary NAAQS for particulate
matter and 35 will not attain primary NAAQS for sulfur oxides. The
reasons for non-attainment are still being assessed, but appear to be
the result of one or more of the following factors: inadequate State
Implementation Plan, continued violations by a relatively small number
of major sources, numerous minor-source violations, windblown dust,
and/or high background levels of a pollutant.
To reach the air quality target levels, state and Federal enforce-
ment programs have the responsibility of ensuring that stationary
10
-------
sources achieve and maintain compliance with emission limitations
established by the SIP. This is an immense task since it is estimated
that on the order of 200,000 stationary sources are subject to SIP
emission limitations. Of this number, however, approximately 20,000
are major emitters (i.e., facilities individually capable of emitting
over 100 tons of a pollutant per year) which, as a class, produce about
85 percent of all air pollution from stationary sources. Accordingly,
EPA, state and local enforcement programs have focused first on ensuring
compliance by this class of heavy emitters in order to produce the
greatest reduction in pollution levels with available resources. As
of June 30, 1975, 19,360 major emitters had been identified by states
and EPA and had been included in state and Federal source inventories.
EPA and state/local agencies have implemented vigorous enforcement
programs to ensure that violations of the SIP requirements are dealt
with expeditiously. States have prime responsibility for achieving the
NAAQS. However, where states cannot or will not act, the Act requires
EPA to enforce. In the past 6 months, EPA has taken some 360 enforcement
actions (about 190 notices of violation and 170 enforcement orders or
civil/criminal actions), a 50 percent increase over the 234 taken in the
preceding 6 months. Summaries of these actions current through June
1975 are included in Table H in each State Profile. Federal inves-
tigations of compliance status also reflect the effort on the part of
EPA to ensure compliance of stationary sources. In the 6-month period
ending June 1975, EPA completed 3,365 investigations (including plant
inspections, opacity observations, emission tests, and formal inquiries
for evidence, based on the authority of section 114 of the Act), an
increase of over 800 such actions from the preceding 6 months.
State actions are responsible for the bulk of an increase in the
number of major sources brought into compliance. These actions have
primarily been independently initiated, but in some cases occurred as
a result of Federal stimulation. States report that in the last
6-month period they have conducted about 93,000 investigations of
11
-------
compliance status and have taken some 9,686 enforcement actions (6,966
notices of violation and 2,720 enforcement orders or civil/criminal
actions). This emphasis on enforcement activity by the state enforce-
ment programs has resulted in great increases in the number of major
sources brought into compliance. Table G in each State Profile
summarizes state and local enforcement activities for each state.
Of the 19,360 identified major sources mentioned above, a total
of some 16,200 (84 percent) now comply with applicable emission limits
or are meeting compliance schedules, an increase of over 2,600 sources
from the level reported as of December 1974. As of June 1975, only about
1,000 (5 percent) of the identified major sources require further
EPA and state investigation to determine compliance status. About
2,100 major sources (11 percent) are suspected to violate emission
limitations or compliance schedules; these sources are subject to
current EPA, state and local agency case development efforts. Table
II-l summarizes the compliance status of major emitters by region.
Despite this progress in SIP enforcement, several categories of
major sources have not achieved compliance with emission standards
within the time limits prescribed by the Act. Notable among these
sources are coal-fired power plants, iron and steel manufacturing
plants, and smelters. (See Table II-2 and Table H in each State
Profile.) Continuing special efforts by EPA to ensure compliance
by these classes of sources are addressed separately below.
In addition to the problems caused by continuing violations by
classes of heavy industrial emitters, it is becoming increasingly
apparent that in many areas of the country poor air quality is the
result of large numbers of violations by categories of the smaller
emitters (i.e., less than 100 tons per year). To date, enforcement
against minor sources has been left almost exclusively to the state
and local agencies. Enforcement against the great numbers of these
lesser emitters has, however, presented a larger task than can be
accomplished by local agencies using the limited resources available.
EPA and states are now conducting analyses of each non-attainment
AQCR to isolate those minor sources responsible for delays in the
12
-------
Table II-l. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR EMITTERS, BY REGION
June 30, 1975
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
Total.
Total
Identified
Sources
1330
1612
2827
4825
1983
2006
1642
444
2104
587
19,360
In Compliance
With
Standard
863
1179
2109
3534
1084
1324
1063
310
1811
431
13,708
With
Schedule
48
69
470
803
486
89
247
103
129
38
2,482
Total in
Compliance
Number
911
1248
2579
4337
1570
1413
1310
413
1940
469
16,190
%a
68
78
91
90
79
70
80
93
92
80
84
Out of Compliance
Not
Meeting
Schedule
30
88
177
199
47
60
30
6
23
80
740
No
Schedule
338
160
71
155
312
207
41
23
73
16
1396
Total out
of Compliance
Number
368
248 -
248
354
359
267
71
29
96
96
2,136
%a
28
15
9
7
18
14
4
7
5
16
11
Unknown
Compliance
Status
Number
51
116
0
134
54
326
261
2
68
22
1034
*a
4
7
0
3
3
16
16
0
3
4
5
a Calculated as percentage of total major sources identified.
-------
Table II-2. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES
Type of Source/
(Primary Pollutant)
I. ALL MAJOR SOURCES
(e.g. sources capable of
ami T. ting 100+ tons/yr of
a pollutant
II. PRIORITY MA.JOR SOURCES
A. Power Plants (SOX)
B. Smelters (SOX)
C. Steel Processes (Particulate)
(includes coke batteries,
sinter lines, open hearth
furnaces, electric arc
furnaces, basic oxygen
furnaces, and blast furnaces
D0 Petroleum Refineries (HC)
Eo Kraft & Sulfite Pulp Mills
-------
attainment of health-related air quality standards, and are developing
action plans to identify and determine the compliance status of an
estimated 130,000 of these sources.
Primary Non-Ferrous Smelters
Though small in number, the nation's 25 non-ferrous smelters
account for about 10 percent of the total sulfur oxides emitted by
stationary sources. Most of the Agency's problems in assuring com-
pliance by non-ferrous smelters have centered in the western U.S.,
where six State Implementation Plans for sulfur dioxide affecting 13
smelters were disapproved in 1972 as inadequate to meet the NAAQS
unless the smelters were controlled. Regulations have been promul-
gated for one smelter and proposed for three others, and will soon be
proposed for the remainder. These regulations require application of
reasonably available retrofit control technology and, if necessary,
allow the interim use of supplementary control systems (SCS) and tall
stacks until adequate constant emission control techniques become
reasonably available. Each smelter using SCS is further required to
conduct a research and development program to hasten the development of
such technology. The one regulation that has been promulgated (in
Nevada) is now under review in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on
a challenge under section 307 of the Clean Air Act.
Five smelters in the eastern U.S. are now violating an approved
regulation. With few exceptions, state agencies are adequately respond-
ing to the problem. In one case, EPA issued an administrative order
to enforce the regulation; in another, enforcement is stayed by a
challenge to the SIP under section 307; and one smelter ceased opera-
tions in May 1975, pursuant to a state order.
About half of the primary non-ferrous smelters are located in AQCRs
where statutory attainment dates have been extended to July 1977. No
major obstacles are anticipated that might prevent achievement of
primary ambient standards in the vicinity of these sources by the mid-
1977 deadlines by using SCS; however, installation of some constant
control devices may not be completed before the attainment date. Those
subject to mid-1975 deadlines are, for the most part, nearing compliance.
15
-------
Iron and Steel Mills/Coke Plants
The iron and steel industry presents one of the most difficult com-
pliance problems for state and Federal air pollution enforcement programs.
There are about 200 of these installations in the United States, of which
140 produce iron and steel (and may or may not produce coke), while the
remainder produce solely coke to be used in metallurgical and other
industries. Nearly all of these installations are located in areas where
the health-related ambient air quality standards are not expected to be
attained. Further, at least one SIP emission limitation is being vio-
lated at almost every installation. Within steel facilities are a
number of processes, each of which presents tough technical problems to
control. Six of these processes, judged to produce the greatest amount
of pollution and be the most difficult to control, are: by-product coke
batteries, blast furnaces, sintering lines, open hearth furnaces, basic
oxygen furnaces, and electric arc furnaces. There are nearly 1,200 of
these major emitting steel processes; they characterize the basic means
of producing iron and steel and are the subject of intensifying EPA and
state enforcement attention.
As indicated in Table 11-2, the steel industry is characterized
by less than half the degree of compliance of all other major sources,
more than twice the violations, and a need for a great deal of investi-
gation of compliance status. It is important to note that this com-
parison shows the steel sources in the most favorable light, since the
compliance status of individual processes within steel facilities is
being compared to the status of total installations. (The source of
the total major source compliance information is the EPA formal report-
ing system; under this system an installation having several processes,
only one of which is in violation or of unknown status, must be clas-
sified as in violation or of unknown compliance as a whole.)
To date EPA has initiated 54 enforcement actions at 33 iron and
steel installations (32 notices of violation, 18 enforcement orders, and
4 referrals to the Justice Department for civil/criminal prosecution).
16
-------
Reflecting the increased emphasis given steel industry compliance, 21
of these actions were taken since December 1974, compared to 25 such
actions in all of 1974 and 8 actions in all of 1973. As a result of
these actions:
2 installations contend they are in final compliance,
14 installations are meeting EPA schedules,
4 installations are meeting state schedules,
6 installations are negotiating schedules with EPA,
1 installation is negotiating a schedule with the state,
3 installations are subjects of state/EPA court actions, and
3 installations are challenging the SIP under section 307 of
the Clean Air Act; further enforcement action is delayed
pending outcome of the SIP review.
Details of each EPA enforcment action are provided in Table H in the
State Profiles.
Coal-Fired Power P_1ants_
By mid-1973, it became evident to EPA that many coal-fired power
plants were not making plans to comply with sulfur oxide emission
limitations because supplies of low-sulfur coal (the favored approach
to compliance with emission standards) were becoming scarce, and
alternative routes to compliance, such as stack gas scrubbers, were
viewed by the industry as unreliable. National public hearings were
held in the fall of 1973 to determine the validity of the utilities'
contentions regarding optional means of compliance. After hearing
testimony from a variety of experts and interested parties, the 1973
hearing panel concluded that the basic technological problems associ-
ated with flue gas desulfurization (FGD) had been solved or were within
the scope of current engineering and, further, that FGD could be
applied at reasonable cost. A special EPA enforcement program was
then initiated for power plants on the basis of these findings.
17
-------
Significant progress has been made since these hearings. Two
hundred seventy-six coal fired power plants (72 percent of all such
installations) now comply with emission limitations or abatement
schedules, up from 240 complying facilities (62 percent) noted as of
December 1974. Emission limitations have yet to be promulgated
for 47 power plants, however, and 60 power plants are owned by utilities
yet to establish firm commitments to comply. Sulfur oxide emissions
from these power plants continue to have a major impact on achieving the
primary ambient air quality standards. Compliance by the power plants
therefore remains a high priority for state and Federal programs. The
status of EPA and state/local enforcement efforts in this area is
indicated in Tables G and H in each State Profile.
18
-------
AIR QUALITY MONITORING AND DATA REPORTING
Judging state achievement of monitoring network commitments is
a complex task; numbers must be interpreted with care. EPA regulations
on air quality surveillance, contained in 40 CFR 51.17, give specifica-
tions for a minimum number of monitors for each pollutant in each AQCR.
In some states, one or more AQCRs may not have the minimum number of
monitors for a given pollutant while other AQCRs in the state may have
more than the minimum. If the numbers of monitors in these AQCRs are
added for a state total, the sum may be equal to or greater than the sum
of the minimum numbers of monitors so that the state appears to have
achieved its minimum monitoring network. To avoid such misleading
results, a state should be considered to have met its commitment only
if every AQCR in that state has met its commitment.
The monitoring network for TSP provides an example of deceptive
totals. Fifty-one of the 55 states (93 percent) report a total number
of TSP monitors that exceeds the minimum. In 12 of these states,
however, at least one AQCR is deficient. Therefore, only 39 states
(71 percent) are known to be fulfilling minimum monitoring requirements.
In addition to the minimum number of monitors, every SIP set a
proposed goal for the number of monitors to be operating in each AQCR
in 1974; this proposed number of monitors is usually larger than the
minimum number. Table B in the State Profiles compares the number of
reporting monitors to the number of proposed monitors rather than
comparing the reporting number to the minimum number. The following
tabulations present, by pollutant, the status of the states with respect
to both minimum and proposed monitoring networks. Numbers of monitors
given reflect numbers in the SAROAD (Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric
Data) system as of July 15, 1975. Because of format errors and time
lags in reporting, SAROAD may not contain information on all active
monitors.
19
-------
Monitoring Network for TSP
Minimum - Thirty-nine of the 55 states (71 percent) are fulfilling
minimum reporting requirements for TSP monitors. Thirty-four states
are reporting more than twice their minimum numbers of TSP monitors.
Proposed - Forty states have proposed networks that are up to
three times the size of minimum networks; of these 40, 15 are meeting
their proposed commitments. The remaining 15 states proposed to have
from three to seven times their minimum number of monitors, but only
three of these are reporting the proposed number.
Monitoring Network fojr SO?
Minimum - Forty-five of the 55 states (82 percent) are reporting
the minimum number of S02 monitors; 43 of the 45 are reporting twice
the minimum number.
Proposed - Thirty-one of the 55 states have proposed networks up
to three times as large as their minimum networks; 16 of these are
reporting the proposed number of monitors. The other 24 states pro-
posed networks more than three times as large as the minimum, but only
5 are fulfilling this commitment.
Monitoring Network for CO
Minimum - Only 25 of the 55 states are required to have CO
monitors. Of these 25, 15 states (60 percent) are reporting the
minimum number of monitors and 10 of the 15 are reporting at least
twice the minimum number. (Although 30 states have no CO requirements,
17 of these have set up monitors and are submitting data.)
Proposed - Of the 25 states required to have CO monitors, 17 have
proposed networks up to three times the size of minimum networks; 7
of the 17 states are meeting these commitments. Eight of the 25 states
have proposed networks more than three times the size of minimum
networks, and three of these are meeting that number. (Of the 30
states not required to have CO monitors, 15 have proposed networks; 13
of these report at least one monitor, but only 3 are meeting the
proposed number.)
20
-------
Monitoring Network for 0
/\
Minimum - Thirty-five of the 55 states are required to have
monitoring networks for 0 . Of these 35, 17 states (49 percent) are
/\
reporting the minimum number of monitors; 10 of the 17 are reporting
twice the minimum number. (Although 20 of the 55 states are not
required to have networks for 0 , 7 of these have established networks
J\
and are submitting data.)
Proposed - Of the 35 states that are required to have 0 monitors,
X
29 have proposed networks that are up to three times the size of
minimum networks; 10 of these are meeting their proposed commitments.
(Of the 20 states that have no 0 requirements, 7 states proposed to
J\
have at least one 0 monitor but only one state met this number.)
A
Data Reporting
The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) and
Regional Offices are continuing the development of the Comprehensive
Data Handling System (CDHS) by installing in state agencies software
packages that are subsystems of CDHS in order to improve the states'
data storage and reporting capabilities. States with the Air Quality
Data Handling Subsystem (AQDHS-II) have the capability to build and
maintain their own data bases, to retrieve information at any time,
and to generate many different kinds of reports - all in a system com-
patible with SAROAD (Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data). The
system also generates the quarterly reports required by EPA and,
because the reports are already compatible with SAROAD, should result
in the data becoming a part of the national data bank in a much more
timely manner. The Emissions Inventory Subsystem/Permits and Regis-
tration (EIS/P&R). another element of CDHS, provides the same general
assistance to states in improving the data handling activities asso-
ciated with emission information. EIS/P&R is compatible with National
Emissions Data System (NEDS). The Enforcement Management System (EMS)
enables states to track and schedule enforcment activities; EMS is
21
-------
compatible with the Compliance Data System (CDS). Table II-3 presents
the number of states implementing each of these systems.
Table 11-3.NUMBER OF STATES IMPLEMENTING
SUBSYSTEMS OF CDHSa
Status
Current installations
(EPA sponsored)
Installations in progress
Planned installations
Totals
AQDjjS-
4
5
12
21
P&R^
9
3
7
19
EMSd
3
4
e
7
Comprehensive Data Handling System.
Air Quality Data Handling Subsystem.
Emissions Inventory Subsystem/Permits and Registration.
Enforcement Management System.
eLimited installation may be supported by the Office of
Enforcement.
22
-------
Timely submission of emission data remains a problem. Table II-4
shows the status of semiannual emission reports for CYs 73 and 74.
Table 11-4. NUMBER OF STATES SUBMITTING SEMIANNUAL
EMISSION REPORTS
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
Totals
No.
states
in region
6
4
6
8
6
5
4
6
6
4
55
Report period0
I, II
CY 73
3
0
1
7
1
4
4
5
3
0
28
III, IV
CY 73
0
1
3
7
2
0
3
4
2
2
24
I, II
CY 74
2
2
3
8
3
4
3
5
4
2
36
III, IV
CY 74
2
0
4
0
4
5
4
0
2
2
23
Roman numerals refer to quarters of the calendar year.
23
-------
AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE
On June 18, 1973, EPA regulations on general control strategy,
contained in 40 CFR 51.12, were amended to require the State Imple-
mentation Plans to identify by May 10, 1974, areas which may have the
potential for exceeding any national standard within the next 10-year
period as a consequence of current air quality and/or the emissions
associated with the projected growth of the area. By August 16, 1974,
the Administrator was to publish, based upon information submitted by
the States, a list of potential problem areas (Air Quality Maintenance
Areas - AQMAs) which would be analyzed by the States in more detail.
By June 18, 1975, the states were required to submit an analysis of the
impact on air quality of emissions from projected growth in each AQMA
designated by the Administrator. Where maintenance problems were
identified, the states would also submit plans containing control
measures to ensure maintenance of national standards during the ensuing
10-year period.
However, on June 19, 1975, the Administrator amended 40 CFR 51.12
to rescind the June 18 submission date; no new date was established,
but by July 1, 1976, the Administrator will establish a date for sub-
mission of each AQMA plan. The submittal dates will vary according to
the magnitude of the tasks involved. Limited resources in a state may
require that an area with an immediate attainment problem be given
priority attention over an AQMA without an immediate attainment problem.
Placing priority on the use of resources is critical to the overall
task of attaining and maintaining standards.
EPA intends to propose by October 31, 1975, detailed requirements
concerning the depth and methods of analysis required of the states
for AQMAs. The proposal would modify the existing 10-year period over
which the AQMA plans must be developed, allowing for planning cycles
of different lengths in different AQMAs, depending on their individual
problems and the existence of other Federal programs in those areas.
24
-------
The final AQMA identifications were published in three stages.
On April 29, 1975, (40 FR 18726) the Administrator identified 43 AQMAs
after considering the submissions of 21 states. The Administrator
identified 59 AQMAs for 19 states on June 2, 1975, (40 FR 23746) and
66 AQMAs for the remaining states on September 9, 1975 (40 FR 41942).
The AQMAs identified by the Administrator are summarized in Table 11-5
by state and by pollutant. Table C in each State Profile presents
more detailed information on each AQMA.
25
-------
Table II-5. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE AREAS
EPA
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
State
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Totals
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Totals
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Totals
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Totals
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Totals
Total
AQMAs
per
state
1
0
4
0
1
0
6
5
10
12
0
27
0
1
3
' 12
7
0
23
3
3
4
3
0
3
2
2
20
4
4
2
2
9
2
23
Pollutant
TSP
1
4
1
6
5
10
10
25
1
3
12
7
23
3
3
4
3
3
2
2
20
4
4
2
2
9
2
23
so2
1
1
1
3
2
3
10
15
1
1
4
6
3
1
4
3
4
1
5
1
TT~
CO
1
1
1
-
0
-
0
1
~T~
°x
1
2
1
4
2
1
3
1
2
2
1
6
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
6
N02
-
0
1
1
-
0
-
0
1
1
26
-------
Table II-5(cont.). DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE AREAS
EPA
Region
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
State
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Totals
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
Totals
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyomi ng
Totals
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Totals
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Totals
National totals
Total
AQMAs
per
state
1
1
5
2
7
6
1
2
1
To"
5
6
2
2
7
2
~2T-
0
2
9
0
0
2
IT"
0
0
3
3
168
TSP
1
1
3
2
5
IT"
6
1
2
1
TO"
5
5
2
2
7
2
23
2
7
2
TT
3
3
6
159
Pollutant
so2
1
1
1
~T~
1
4
1
6
1
T3~
2
2
1
1
~r
61
CO
5
5
1
~r
5
2
1
4
1
6
1
1
~T
24
°x
1 '
2
6
9
1
1
3
1
1
5
2
8
TT
1
1
2
49
N02
~U~
-
0
1
1
2
1
"T~
-
0
5
27
-------
PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING SIP REVISIONS
On July 22, 1975, new procedures for processing SIP revisions
were initiated. These procedures provide the Regional Offices with
additional responsibility and authority for handling plan revisions and
concurrently eliminate the requirement for formal headquarters staff
concurrence on most SIP approval/disapproval actions. An expedited
schedule will apply to headquarters review for those revisions that
still must receive headquarters concurrence. These procedures were
effective August 1, 1975, and may be summarized as follows:
1. Distinction Between "State-Initiated" and EPA-Initiated"
SIP Revisions
The previously used distinction between "state initiated" and
"EPA initiated" SIP revisions has been eliminated. The Regional Admin-
istrators have been delegated authority to sign Federal Register notices
proposing EPA-initiated SIP revisions in addition to their existing
authority to do so for state-initiated SIP revisions.
2. Distinction Between "Normal" SIP Revisions and "Special
Action" SIP Revisions
All SIP revisions will fall into one of two categories with
regard to the nature and extent of appropriate headquarters review of
Regional Office actions: "normal" and "special action" SIP revisions.
Headquarters will not review normal SIP revisions but will be involved
in policy review of special action SIP revisions.
It is anticipated that the majority of SIP revisions will be
treated as normal. The special action category will be reserved for
revisions that have national policy implications. These implications
are inherent in revisions that address unresolved policy issues, that
might compromise on-going litigation, or that raise new conceptual
issues.
28
-------
CONTROL AGENCY RESOURCES
At the end of FY 75 resources for state and local control agencies
totaled approximately 7,150 man-years and $148.0 million. The Federal
Government contributed approximately $52.6 million (36 percent of the
monetary resources through Federal program grant assistance, Federal
assignees, and special contract support and demonstration grants). Fed-
eral Government air resources are provided to control agencies to assist
them in carrying out State Implementation Plans. In addition, these
resources are used for reviewing strategies and techniques that provide
information for revision, update, and changes to operational and pro-
cedural methods necessary to achieve clean air objectives.
The resources needed to attain and maintain standards have con-
tinued to outstrip existing manpower and dollar availability. Included
in these needs are resources for relatively untried or innovative
control techniques, such as those pertaining to siting of sources and
the improvements to monitoring networks required for continual assess-
ment of pollutant concentrations and for special monitoring for non-
criteria pollutants. Predictive methods (based on manpower models
developed in 1967 and 1975) indicate that the resource needs now are in
the range of 10,000 man-years. Estimates provided by the states
through the Regional Offices in 1973 predicted that approximately 9,500
man-years and $192 million are necessary to accomplish the basic imple-
mentation plans and the workload impacted upon the control agencies
through revision and update of these plans. These estimates appear in
Table E in the State Profile portion of this report.
Resources required by FY 77 are estimated at 10,200 man-years and
$210 million. These estimates indicate increases necessary to assist
areas with problems in attaining TSP and S02 national ambient air
standards, new source reviews, and controls related to automotive
pollutants.
29
-------
At the end of FY 75, the agencies had available approximately
75 percent of the manpower and 77 percent of the funds stated as being
needed in 1975. Since 1973 the amount of Federal dollars available
each year has remained relatively constant at approximately $51.5
million, with the 1975 allocation receiving a slight increase to $52.6
million. Total funding increased over FY 74 by approximately 14 per-
cent ($18 million), and man-years of effort increased by 9 percent
(600 man-years). These increases were approximately the same as the
previous year's. In FY 75, however, 80 percent of the states expended
60 percent or more of their stated resource needs. Resources improved
principally because state and local funds increased approximately 20
percent over 1974. Federal grants increased by 1.9 percent.
Preliminary data for FY 76 state and local control agency budgets
indicate that a small number of states may be increasing their funds
but maintaining their staffs at levels equal to or lower than the 1975
levels. This maintenance of staff at non-increasing levels is possibly
caused by increases in agency operating costs. However, the effect on
nationwide FY 76 resources will not be known until the agencies' FY 76
budget is complete.
30
-------
PART III STATE PROFILES
INTRODUCTION
This section presents, in a state-by-state format, information on
attainment of TSP and SOp standards, ambient air quality monitoring
networks, source compliance, enforcement activities, number of emission-
producing processes in 23 source categories, Air Quality Maintenance
Areas, resources, and SIP development. Data are presented primarily in
a series of tables, and states are arranged by EPA Region. No attempt
is made to provide a comparative analysis of any state's program and
progress in relation to the activities of any other state.
Tab]_e_A presents for each state the estimated attainment status of
each AQCR, or interstate portion of AQCR, for TSP and S02. These tables
are based on information provided by the EPA Regional Offices as of
August 31, 1975. In interpreting these tables, several considerations
are important. First, the attainment status of each AQCR is a judgment
rather than an absolute determination and is subject to change as new
air quality and other data become available. (The air quality data
used for these estimates reflect conditions generally no later than the
third quarter of 1974.) Second, the estimate that an AQCR is unlikely to
attain NAAQS as required does not indicate that conditions exceeding
MAAQS prevail throughout the AQCR. In some cases, an AQCR considered
unlikely to attain NAAQS may include two or three states and the exces-
sive pollutant concentrations may exist in only one of the states.
Finally, it is important to consider that, although 132 of the 247 AQCRs
in the nation are considered unlikely to attain NAAQS for TSP by the
statutory attainment date, significant progress in reducing levels of
pollution has occurred. Since 1970, for example, the percentage of air
monitors reporting values exceeding the primary (health) standard has
31
-------
decreased from 12 to 3 percent for sulfur dioxide, from 50 to 23 per-
cent for TSP annual average, and from 16 to 8 percent for TSP 24-hour
average.
Table B compares the number of monitors reporting in each AQCR
for each pollutant except N02 for the years 1972, 1973, and 1974.
(Data on NCL monitors are not included because the Federal reference
method has not yet been finalized.) Each state proposed in its
original SIP, submitted to EPA in May 1972, to have certain numbers of
monitors operating in 1974; these numbers are also listed in the table
for reference. Two categories are given for each year: number of
monitors reporting minimum data, defined as at least three 24-hour
values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for continuous
monitors; and number reporting valid annual averages, which can be
calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statis-
tically valid data are available. Numbers of monitors given in this
table reflect numbers in the SAROAD (Storage and Retrieval of Aero-
metric Data) system as of July 15, 1975. Because of format errors and
time lags in reporting, SAROAD may not contain information on all
active monitors.
Table C gives the Air Quality Maintenance Areas (AQMAs) that have
been designated in each state, if any; the major metropolitan area
involved in each; and the pollutants for which maintenance of air
quality standards is expected to be a problem in that AQMA.
Table D is a summary of the status, as published in the Federal
Register, of three portions of each state's SIP: regulations for
review of new stationary sources, transportation control plans, and
emission limitations for TSP, SO,,, HC, and N02> The status of emis-
sion limitations is given for stationary sources and does not include
any measures used in transportation control plans. The emission limi-
tations category also does not acknowledge those states with 18-month
extensions for secondary standards.
32
-------
Table E compares resources needed in FY 75 (based on SIP pro-
jections) to resources actually available for that period. The com-
parison is given for both man-years and dollars. The projected
resource needs are derived from data provided by Regional Offices in
December 1973 that reflect revisions to implementation plans which
generally require additional manpower. These estimates have not
necessarily been formally submitted as resource revisions to the SIPs.
Additional manpower is needed for such plan revisions as transporta-
tion controls, indirect source controls, significant deterioration
activities, and the additional monitoring and evaluation requirements.
Man-years are in terms of equivalent man-years estimated by
Regions from program information and agency inquiries and are based
on the projected number of budgeted and on-board positions that would
be available in FY 75. Dollar amounts incorporate state and local
funds (including state funds to local agencies) as well as Federal
funds for state and local agency grants. These amounts do not include
Federal support to states from other sources such as contract and
research funds and associated non-Federal expenditures.
Table F presents the number of sources (i.e., facilities) in each
of 23 selected source categories in every state. These categories are
a condensation and consolidation of the source category codes (SCCs)
used in the National Emissions Data System (NEDS). The numbers are
those contained in NEDS as of August 31, 1975.
Table 6 gives the compliance status of selected source categories
in each state and a summary of enforcement action taken by state and
local agencies. EPA enforcement actions that have been taken in each
state are listed by company and status of action in Table H.
33
-------
EPA REGION I
CONNECTICUT
MAINE
MASSACHUSETTS
NEW HAMPSHIRE
RHODE ISLAND
VERMONT
-------
CONNECTICUT
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
041. Eastern Connecticut
*042. Hartford-New Haven-
Springfield Interstate
(Mass.)
*043. New Jersey-New York-
Connecticut Interstate
(blew Jersey, New York)
044. Northwestern Connecticut
TSP
S00
SO,
SO,
TSP
S00
TSP
TSP1
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
34
-------
CONNECTICUT
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
041. Eastern Connecticut
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*042. Hartford-New Haven-
Springfield (Mass.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*043. New Jersey-New York-
Connecticut (N.J.,
N.Y.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
044. Northwestern Connecti-
cut
TSP
so2
%ily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
0
1
0
0
40
6
11
4
4
20
4
. 12
2
3
3
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
3
0
0
0
0
34
3
7
0
1
18
1
10
1
2
2
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
30
2
2
-
.
12
1
3
-
.
2
0
0
-
.
1973
•Unimurn
data0
5
7
0
0
0
37
15
6
1
2
19
9
9
2
4
3
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
2
0
-
_
2
0
1
-
_
0
3
2
-
0
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
5
0
5
0
0
33
6
15
3
6
18
10
7
1
2
2
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
—
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
-_been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
~"QCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
35
-------
CONNECTICUT
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Connecticut
Pollutant
TSP
X
so2
X
CO
X
°x
X
N02
JAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
Emission limitations
State plan is approved,
Plan is required for Hartford-New Haven-
Springfield AQCR and New York-New Jersey-
Connecticut AQCR. Public hearings are
scheduled for January 1976.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
36
-------
CONNECTICUT
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
247
174
103 Dollars
4700
3109
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage •
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
149
30
0
2
85
0
71
4
2
1
2
10
1
5
17
0
0 .
95
6
16
0
4
3
503
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
37
-------
CONNECTICUT
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
:ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
241
86
154
1
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SO?)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
750
2,257
3,007
500
100
15
615
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
38
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Connecticut,
Bridgeport
Connecticut,
Dayville
Jo Connecticut,
Derby
Connecticut,
Groton
Connecticut,
Middletown
Connecticut,
Middletown
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Bullard Castings,
Inc.
Cupola Furnaces
Glass Containers
Corp.
Glass Mfg.
Hull Dye and Print
Works
Textile
Plant
General Dynamics
Electric Boat Div.
Surface coating
Operation.
Russell Mfg. Div.
Fenner America Ltd.
PVC Belting
Operation
Feldspar Corp.
Feldspar
Kiln
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti-
culate (opacity
process weight,
and fugitive dust)
emission stds.
Violation of parti -
culate (opacity and
process weight)
emission limitation.
Violations of
opacity, and
hydrocarbon emis-
sion std. caused
by uncontrolled
emissions from the
drying operation.
Violation of hydro-
carbon emission
limitation
Violation of opa-
city std.
Admin, order issued
Violation of parti-
culate (process
weight) emission
std.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 10/12/73
Admin, order issued
2/14/7U.
Consent order
issued 5/30/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/5/73. Admin.
Order issued 2/1U/7U .
Order amended 8/1U/7H.
extending date for
final compliance to
Notice of violation
issued 5/30/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/11/73.
to be established.
7/5/7U. consent order
issued H/23/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/6/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
In compliance
Co. to submit schedule on
9/1/75, will be followed
by issuance of order.
In ..compliance with incre-
rements of order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
R ES ULTS/STATUS
Connecticut,
Navagatuck
Connecticut,
New Haven
Connecticut,
Rockville
Connecticut,
Waterbury
Uniroyal Chem.
Rubber Reclama-
tion Operation
Gulf Oil Co. U.S.
Amerbelle Corp.
Printino
Plant
Waterbury Rolling
Mills, Inc.
Metallurgical
Operation
Violation of 811«
letters
Violation of hydro
carbon reg. requir-
ing vapor (recovery
system at loading
facility)
Violation of hydro-
carbon emission
standard.
Violations of
opacity std.
Order issued 7/7/75.
Consent order
issued «/10/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/5/7U. Admin.
order issued 9/13/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 10/31/73.
Admin, order issued
2/1U/7U.
Will close reclaim facility
bjr 12/31/75.
Tn compliance with incre-
ments of order.
In compliance.
Compliance test request
letter (sill) sent 5/16/75.
Under new amendment to
order.
-------
MAINE
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*107. Androscoggin Valley
Interstate (N.H.)
108. Aroostook
109. Down East
110. Metropolitan Portland
111 . Northwest Maine
Probably
will
attain
TSP
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSPb
S02
TSP
so2
No data avail-
able
TSP
so2
so2
Point sources
TSP
so2
No data avail
able
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
41
-------
MAINE
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
1
AQCR/Pollutant
*107. Androscoggin Valley
(N.H.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
108. Aroostook
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
109. Down East
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
110. Metropolitan Portland
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
7
8
1
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
6
6
1
0
0
6
5
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
7
6
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
0
1
1
-
1973
Minimum
data0
5
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
2
0
0
8
6
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
4
4
1
-
1974
Minimum
data0
5
1
5
0
0.
0
0
0
0
0
8
2
8
0
0
7
2
6
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
42
-------
MAINE (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
111. Northwest Maine
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
1
1
0
0
0
<
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
dataD
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
dataD
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
43
-------
MAINE
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
44
-------
MAINE
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
30
23
103 Dollars
522
400
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100-
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Smal'l and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying •
Other mineral pro'ducts
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
24
42
1
57
201
0
107
27
43
0
0
12
3
36
42
0
58
80
482
99
100
204
81
1,699
Data available from Na'tional Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
45
-------
MAINE
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
:ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
222
84
118
20
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOg)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
TOTAL
60
224
284
9
30
3
42
"Formal. Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
46
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY/TYPE
STATE/CITY OF SOURCE POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION RESULTS/STATUS
Maine, International Paper Violation of Notice of violation
jay Co. issued 6/17/75. to do stack tests.
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*042.
117.
118.
119.
*120.
*121.
Hartford-New Haven-
Springfield Interstate
(Connecticut)
Berkshire
Central Massachusetts
Metropolitan Boston
Metropolitan Providence
Interstate (R.I.)
Merrimac Valley-South
New Hampshire Inter-
state (N.H.)
Probably
will
attain
so2
c.
TSP
so2
SO,
L.
S00
L.
TSPb
so2D
TSPb
so2
^
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
TSP
Non-point
sources
TSP
Non-point
sources
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
48
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*042. Hartford-New Haven-
Springfield (Conn.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
117. Berkshire
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
118. Central Massachusetts
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
119. Metropolitan Boston
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
9
9
2
1
1
9
9
2
1
1
10
13
2
1
1
23
23
12
6
6
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
8
7
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
0
22
22
3
2
0
Valid
annual
average
6
6
0
-
_
6
6
0
-
_
3
4
0
-
_
17
16
0
-
_
1973
linimum
data
10
8
1
2
1
6
6
1
1
1
10
9
1
1
0
22
22
7
7
5
Valid
annual
average
7
6
0
-
.
5
5
0
-
_
4
2
0
-
_
7
16
2
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
8
1
7
2
1
6
1
6
1
1
8
2
8
1
2
21
6
21
5
5
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and DX-
49
-------
MASSACHUSETTS (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*120. Metropolitan Provi-
dence (R.I.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*121. Merrlmat* Valley-
Southern New Hamp-
shire (N.H.)
TSP
SO-
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
6
2
1
1
6
6
2
1
2
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
dataD
6
6
0
0
0
7
7
0
0
0
Valid .
annual
average
2
5
0
-
_
4
3
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
5
6
0
0
0
8
8
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
5
0
-
_
4
4
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data
5
1
5
0
1
6
Q
u
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data -that have.
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox-
50
-------
Table C.
MASSACHUSETTS
DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Boston
Lawrence-Haverhi 1 1
Springfield
Worcester
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
S09
d.
X
CO
ov
X
X
X
NO
2
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. A revised transportation control plan for
Boston was promulgated on June 12, 1975.
Plan consists of I/M program, on- and
off-street parking restrictions, commuter
vehicle reduction strategies such as car-
pooling, preferential bus/carpool treat-
ment, local CO controls, and stationary
source and gas marketing regulations.
2. Plan is required for Hartford-New Haven-
Springfield AQCR. Public hearings are
scheduled for December 1975.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
51
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
175
157
103 Dollars
2560
2390
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
•17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
115
74
5
10
498
2
202
73
5
0
1
44
2
6
32
0
5
103
117
1,023
156
10
54
2,537
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
52
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
ota i
number
identified
594
1
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
520
•
1
In
violation
51
Unknown
status
23
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
2,750
1,310
4,060
2,215
94
23
TOTAL
2,332
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
53
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Massachusetts,
Quincy
Massachusetts,
Salem
Massachusetts,
Somerset
Massachusetts,
Somerville
Massachusetts,
Walpole
Massachusetts,
Watertown
General Dynamics
Salem, City of
Incinerator
New England Power
Co.
Brayton Point
Sommerville Smelting
Mettalurgical
Process
Farrington Textile
Products Norton Co.
Textile Mfg.
Odell Co.
Violation of parti-
culate (fugitive
dust) & hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of opac-
ity and particulate
emission limita-
tions.
Violation of sulfur
oxide and particu-
late emission stds.
Violation of opa-
city reg.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Notice of violation
issued 10/1/711, 12/30/
7«. Admin, order
issued 1/29/75.
Notice of violation
issued 11/20/7H.
Admin, order issued
1/16/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/6/73.
Notice of violation
issued 1/8/74. Admin.
order issued U/30/74,
ammended 8/29/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 12/12/7U.
Admin, order issued
1/31/75.
In compliance with
amended order.
Electrastat.ic precipitators are
being upgraded. Candidate
for long term ESECA conversion
Pending FEA action.
In compliance.
In compliance with terms
of order.
Notice of violation In compliance.
issued 10/11/7H. Consent
order issued 12/23/7U.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Massachusetts,
Lowell
Massachusetts,
Lynn
Massachusetts,
Lynn
Massachusetts,
Marblehead
Massachusetts,
Needham
Franklin
Framingham
Massachusetts,
Norwood
Lowell, City of
Incinerator
General Elec. Co.
Electronics
Mfg.
North American
Phillips Lighting
Corporation
Marblehead Town of
Incinerator
Penn Central Trans.
Company
Passenger 6
Freight
Terminals
American Biltrite
Massachusetts, Steadfast Rubber
North Eastern
Rubber Mfg.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
limitations.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
limitations.
Transfer of cement
products violating
particulate (opac-
ity) emission stds;
trucks idling con-
trary to require-
ments of MA SIP
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of hydro-
carbon emission
standard.
Notice of violation
issued 11/20/7U.
Notice of violation is-
sued 10/4/74. Order
issued 12/18/74.
Notice of violation
issued 6/26/75.
Notice of violation
issued 11/20/711.
Admin, order issued
1/14/75.
Notice of violation
issued 7/2/73. Admin.
Order issued 4/12/74
for commuter passenger
service.
Notice of violation
issued 11/4/74.
Consent order issued
12/31/74.
Consent order issued
11/11/74.
Will shutdown by
9/11/75.
In compliance with
terms of order.
In compliance.
Commuter passenger service
order to cease excessive idling
violations. Presently in
compliance.
In compliance with
consent order.
In compliance with
terms of order.
-------
Table H. . SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Massachusetts,
Boston
Massachusetts,
Boston
Massachusetts,
Canton
Massachusetts,
Chelsea
Massachusetts,
Everett
Massachusetts,
Indian
Orchard
Massachusetts,
Danvers
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Northeast Utilities
Service
Power Plant
Union Petroleum
Corp.
Fuel distrib.
Plymouth Rubber Co.
Rubber Mfg.
American Barrel
Co.
Incinerator
Boston Edison Co.
Mystic Station
Power Plant
Monsanto Polymers 5
Petro. Chem. Co.
GTE Sylvania
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of sul-
fur oxide emission
limitation.
Violation of sul-
fur oxide std.
(regs. prohibiting
sale of high sul-
fur content, fuel)
Violation of parti-
culate (opacity)
emission regs.
Violation of
opacity and open
burning regs.
Violation of parti-
culate (opacity)
emission regs.
Violation of parti-
culate emission regs.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 3/16/73.
Notice of violation
issued 3/16/73.
Notice of violation
issued 9/27/7U. Admin.
order issued 6/3/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/15/73. Admin,
Order issued 9/18/73.
Notice of violation
issued 11/9/73.
Notice of violation
issued 4/2«/75. Admin.
order issued 6/6/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/26/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Achieved final compliance.
Achieved final compliance
Facility no longer in
operation.
In compliance.
In compliance with terms
of order.
Ma ssachusetts,
Lawrence
Lawrence, City of
Open Burning
Violation of open
burning regs.
Notice of violation
issued 6/6/73.
In compliance.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Masachusetts,
Weymouth
Massachusetts,
Arlington
Massachusetts,
Boston
Massachusetts,
Boston
Ma ssachusetts,
Boston
Massachusetts,
Boston
Massachusetts,
Boston
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Weymouth, Town of
Incinerator
Wilfret Bros.
Realty Trust
Incinerator
Texaco, Inc.
Fuel distrib.
Boston, City of
Incinerator
Boston Edison Co.
L Street Station
Power Plant
Boston Edison Co.
New Boston Sta-
tion
Power Plant
H.N. Hartwell 6 son
Fuel Distrib.
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti-
culate emission
limitations.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
stds.
Violation of
sulfur oxide emis-
sion limitations
(regs prohibiting
sale of high sul-
fur fuel)
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
emission limitat-
ations.
Violation of parti-
culate (opacity)
emission regs.
Violation of
particulate (op-
acity stds.)
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued ll/20/7«.
Admin, order issued
7/3/75.
Notice of violation
issued 7/2/73. Admin.
order issued 12/3/73.
Notice of violation
issued 2/1/73.
Notice of violation
issued ll/20/7i».
Admin, order issued
3/5/75.
Notice of violation
issued 11/9/73.
Notice of violation
issued 11/9/73.
Violation of sul-
fur oxide std.
(regs prohibiting
sale of high sulfur fuel)
Notice of violation
issued 3/16/73.
RESULTS/STATUS
In violation of order.
Attempting to get a Court
ordered consent decree.
In compliance.
Achieved final compliance
2/12/73.
Court ordered shutdown
as of 8/27/75. In
compliance.
In compliance.
In compliance.
Achieved final compliance.
-------
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*107. Androscoggin Valley
Interstate (Maine)
*121. Merrimack Valley-Southern
New Hampshire Interstate
(Massachusetts)
149. New Hampshire
SO,
SO,
TSP
S00
TSP1
TSPU
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
58
-------
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*107. Androscoggin Valley
(Maine)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*121. Merrimac Valley -
Southern New Hamp-
shire (Mass.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
149. New Hampshire
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
3
1
0
0
22
9
2
2
1
4
1
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
8
1
0
0
0
16
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
Valid .
annual
average
4
0
0
-
.
11
1
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data
8
3
1
0
• 1
22
5
2
2
1
3
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
6
0
0
-
_
12
2
1
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
6
1
0
0
19
2
5
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values .for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
59
-------
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
60
-------
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED ANC
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
26
22
103 Dollars
365
310
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
33
11
0
14
143
4
134
9
11
0
0
4
1
33
40
0
15
73
31
42
103
1
2
704
aData available from Na'tional Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
61
-------
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
130
1
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
123
1
In
violation
4
Unknown
status
3
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
0
112
112
32
24
1
TOTAL
57
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
62
-------
RHODE ISLAND
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*120. Metropolitan Providence
Interstate (Mass.)
TSPL
so2u
Area and point
sources
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
63
-------
RHODE ISLAND
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*120. Metropolitan Provi-
dence (Mass.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
lo. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
25
21
4
4
4
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data5
23
18
2
2
0
Valid
annual
average
21
15
2
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
27
22
4
4
2
Valid
annual
average
13
11
2
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
18
3
16
3
1
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
64
-------
RHODE ISLAND
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Metropolitan Providence
Pollutant
TSP
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
Plan is required for Rhode Island. Public
hearings are scheduled for November 1975.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
65
-------
RHODE ISLAND
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED ANC
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
25
19
103 Dollars
305
313
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration:
Other incineration
Total
Number
32
19
0
0
63
0
26
19 .
0
2
0
9
0
1
14
3
0
22
165
558
24
0
5,
962
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
66
-------
RHODE ISLAND
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
tatus with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
Type of source
"otal
number
identified
In
;ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
83
8
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES'3
1.
2,
3,
COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
Coke batteries
Sinter lines
Open hearth furnaces
Electric arc furnaces
Basic oxygen furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
680
80
760
1
4
0
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
67
-------
STATE/CITY
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Rhode Island,
Ashton
Rhode Island,
Bristol
Rhode Island,
Cranston
Owens-Corni ng
Fiberglass Corp.
Bristol, City of
Open dump
ITT Grinnell
Corp.
tn
oo
Rhode Island, Narragansett Grey
Georgiaville Iron Foundry, Inc.
Rhode Island,
Johnston
Rhode Island,
Lincoln
Rhode Island,
Middletown
Rhode Island,
Newport
Seaboard Foundry
Inc.
Grey Iron
Foundry
Taggart Sand Prods.
Corp.
Middletown, City of
Open dump
Newport, City of
Open dump
Violation of parti-
culate emission limi-
tation.
Violation of
open burning
Violation of parti-
culate (opacity)
emission limitation.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
limitations.
Violation of par-
ticulate (opacity
and process weight)
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
limitations.
Violation of open
burning reg.
Violation of open
burning reg.
Notice of violation
issued 2/U/7U. Admin.
order issued 3/29/74.
Notice of violation
issued t/23/73.
Notice of violation
issued 2/7/7U. Admin.
order issued 8/16/74.
Notice of violation
issued 12/10/73.
Admin. order issued
2/ /7
-------
VERMONT
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*159. Champ!ain Valley Inter-
state (N.Y.)
221. Vermont
TSP1
SO,
TSP
S00
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflec.t final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
69
-------
VERMONT
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*159. Champlain Valley
(N.Y.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
221. Vermont-
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
0
4
1
1
5
3
• 2
0
0
• No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
5
0
2
1
0
3
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
-
3
0
0
-
"
1973
Minimum
data0
4
0
2
1
0
3
0
1
.• - 0
0
i
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
-
2
0
o •
-• •_ •
"
1974
Minimum
data0
3
2
0
0
0
3
1
: 0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
~
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D.
70
-------
VERMONT
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission Limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
71
-------
VERMONT
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED ANC
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
21
12
103 Dollars
425
277
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
6
0
2
29
101
2
99
6
19
0
0
8
0
25
34
0
24
49
61
54
0
6
11
536
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
72
-------
VERMONT
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. -COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
1!
33
1
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOe)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
0
80
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
80
20
20
4
TOTAL
44
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Divisionj June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
73
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Vermont,
Burlington
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Burlington, City of
Elec. Light Dept.
Power Plant
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti-
regs. (opacity and
process weight)
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 8/2H/73. Admin.
order issued 7/3/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
In comoliance with terms
of order.
-------
EPA REGION II
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
PUERTO RICO
VIRGIN ISLANDS
-------
NEW JERSEY
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*043.
*045.
150.
*151.
New Jersey-New York-
Connecticut Interstate
(Conn., N.Y.)
Metropolitan Philadelphia
Interstate (Del., Pa.)
New Jersey
Northeast Pennsylvania-
Upper Delaware Valley
Interstate (Pa.)
Probably
will
attain
so2
Tspb
n
so2
TSP
so2
TSPb
SO
c.
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSPb
Point and non-
point sources
and fugitive
dust
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
75
-------
NEW JERSEY
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*043. New Jersey-New York-
Connecticut (Conn.,
N.Y.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*045. Metropolitan Phil-
adelphia (Del.,
Pa.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
150. New Jersey
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*151. Northeast Pa. -Upper
Delaware Valley (Pa.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
40
0
12
12
5
7
0
7
7
2
2
5
2
2
0
1
0
1
1
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
, 6
3
1
1
0
6
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
.
3
2
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
51
4
12
12
4
16
4
7
7
3
7
0
2
2
0
4
0
1
1
0
Valid
annual
average
30
3
9
-
_
8
3
7
-
_
6
0
1
-
_
4
0
1
-
„
1974
Minimum
data0
44
12
4
12
5
17
7
4
7
3
8
2
0
2
0
4
1
0
1
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
76
-------
NEW JERSEY
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Al 1 entown-Bethl ehem-Easton
Interstate (New Jersey
portion)
Atlantic
Metropolitan Philadelphia
Interstate (New Jersey
portion)
New Jersey-New York Inter-
state (New Jersey
portion)
Ocean
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X (in
part of
AQMA)
CO
°x
X
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission Limitations
State plan is approved.
1. New Jersey operates statewide I/M
program.
2. More than 93 employer incentive plans
have been approved by EPA.
3. Trenton has initiated partial vehicle-
free zone program.
4. State established contra-flow lane on
1-495.
1. EPA promulgation (July 3, 1973) is in
effect for HC in New Jersey-New York-
Connecticut AQCR (#043) and Metropol-
itan Philadelphia Interstate AQCR
2. State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
77
-------
NEW JERSEY
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
243
194
103 Dollars
4741
3968
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
90
73
9
7
233
8
382
259
22
12
20
65
0
1
186
173
10
162
27
21
3
16
11
1,790
aData available from Na'tional Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
78
-------
NEW JERSEY
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
687
3
5
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
618
2
In
violation
33
1
Unknown
status
36
5
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY5 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
10,961
29,284
40,245
1,540
1,661
297
TOTAL
3,498
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
79
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
oo
o
New Jersey,
Bogota
New Jersey,
Cape May
New Jersey,
Irving-ton
New Jersey,
Linden
New Jersey,
Perth Amboy
New Jersey,
Ridgefield
Park
New Jersey,
Rockaway
Winston Mills, Inc.
Atlantic City Elec-
tric Co. B.L. Eng-
land Station
Power Plant
Barnett Foundry 6
Machine Co.
Public Service Elec-
tric 6 Gas Co.,
Linden Station
Celotex Corp.
Asphalt Plant
Arnatex Dyeing 6
Finishing Co., Inc.
Textile Mfr.
Halecrest Co.,
Mt. Hope
Materials Corp.
Asphalt Concrete
Plant
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of NSPS
regs.
Violation of particu-
late regs.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of hazard-
ous air pollution
regs.
Violation of opac-
ity reg.
Violation of NSPS
regs.
Notice of violation is-
sued 9/26/7U. Admin.
order issued 11/20/7(1.
Notice of violation
issued 12/2U/7U.
•Admin, order is-
sued 12/2U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 8/8/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/6/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/29/75. Admin.
order issued 5/29/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/26/7U. Admin.
order issued 11/20/74.
Order amended 2/5/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/6/75.
Admin, order issued
1/6/75.
Amended order final
compliance date delayed.
-------
NEW YORK
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*043.
158.
*159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
New Jersey-New York-Con-
necticut Interstate
(Conn., N.J.)
Central New York
Champlain Valley Inter-
state (Vt.)
Genesee-Finger Lakes
Hudson Valley
Niagara Frontier
Southern Tier East
Southern Tier West
Probably
will
attain
so2
so2
TSP?
SO/
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSPb- 2-year
extension from
attainment date;
Point sources
TSP
Point sources
and fugitive
dust
TSP and S02
Point sources
TSP - 2-year
extension from
attainment date;
Point sources
so2
Point and non-
point sources
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
81
-------
NEW YORK
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*043. New Jersey-New York-
Connecticut (Conn.,
N.J.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°.x
158. Central New York
TSP
so2
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*159. Champlain Valley (Vt.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
160. Genessee-Finger Lakes
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
lo. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
78
0
53
17
13
47
0
4
3
2
21
0
2
0
1
34
3
2
2
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
45
8
5
7
6
39
3
4
3
6
10
0
0
0
0
27
9
1
1
2
Valid
annual
average
37
7
1
-
-
29
2
0
-
-
5
0
0
-
-
17
9
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
82
25
4
7
3
47
7
5
3
4
14
2
1
0
1
27
14
1
2
1
Valid
annual
average
39
8
1
-
-
38
3
0
-
-
9
0
0
-
-
23
9
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
46
5
28
8
4
45
6
7
3
3
15
1
2
0
1
27
1
17
1
1
Valid
annual
average
36
24
1
-
-
38
4
0
-
-
11
0
0
-
-
25
13
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
82
-------
NEW YORK (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3 .
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
161. Hudson Valley
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
162. Niagara Frontier
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
163. Southern Tier East
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
164. Southern Tier West
. TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
57
2
7
2
2
54
6
6
3
3
17
0
1
0
1
28
0
4
2
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data6
38
4
3
3
4
48
11
4
2
4
12
0
0
0
0
19
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
28
3
0
-
_
43
7
0
-
_
6
0
0
-
_
12
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
40
9
4
3
3
46
23
7
3
3
14
1
1
0
0
19
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
36
2
0
-
_
44
6
0
-
_
11
0
0
• -
_
17
2
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
47
3
14
3
3
50
7
30
3
3
13
1
3
1
0
20
1
6
1
0
Valid
annual
average
34
7
0
-
-
47
25
0
-
_
8
1
0
-
-
17
5
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
83
-------
NEW YORK
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Binghamton
New Jersey-New York Inter-
state (New York portion)
Niagara Frontier
Utica-Rome
Elmira-Corning
Rochester
Jamestown
Syracuse
Capital District
Mid-Hudson
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
CO
X
°x
X
N02
X
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation
control plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. The State and City of New York agreed
to implement TCP measures including
I/M, stricter traffic and parking con-
trols, and expanded bus service.
2. City operates I/M program for taxis.
3. Regional Office issued notices of violation
to city and state to install tolls on free
bridges. Tolls will be used to improve mass
transit.
4. Program of heavy duty vehicle retrofit
is being tested and appears to promise
emission reductions and fuel savings.
1. Final rulemaking was published June 2,
1975, making sulfur-in-fuel limitations
for residual oil in the New York City
Metropolitan Area consistent with New
York City regulation.
2. State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
84
-------
NEW YORK
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
1028
704
103 Dollars
23,700
15,943
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
193
34
0
1
100
6
325
52
48
0
0
11
34
65
35
0
5
54
0
26
3
0
31
1,023
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
85
-------
NEW YORK
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL- FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOg)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SQz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
822
10
-
14
6
20
14
5
12
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
573
10
9
3
In
violation
174
14
2
Unknown
status
75
4
11
14
2
12
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
100
17,847
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued ,
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
17,947
187
34
16
TOTAL
237
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
86
-------
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
New York,
Staten Us.
New York,
Tonawanda
New York,
Tonawanda
New York,
Utica
New York,
Valley
Stream
New York,
waterford
Consolidated Edison
Co. of New York, Inc.
(Arthur Kill Faci-
lity)
Power Plant
Ashland Petro. Co.
Refinery
Ashland Petro. Co.
Refinery
Dunlop Tire 6
Rubber Co.
Valley Stream, City
of
Incinerator
Violation of opacity
reg.
Failure to respond
to a section 11U
inquiry.
Failure to respond
to a section II1*
inquiry.
Violation of opacity
reg. and failure to
obtain operating
certificate
Violation of parti-
culate regs.
General Electric Co., Failure to file
Silicone Prods. Dept. NYS recertification
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
Admin, order is-
sued 10/2U/7U.
Admin, order is-
sued 10/2U/7H.
Notice of violation
issued 12/13/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 5/2/75. Order
issued 7/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/19/70.
Source complied
with EPA order.
Source complied
with EPA order.
Source in compliance
Electronics Mfa.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
00
00
STATE/CITY
New York,
N. Y. City
New York,
N. Y. City
New York,
Niagara
Falls
New York,
Niagara
Falls
New York,
Rochester
New York,
Rosyln
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Consolidated Edison Violation of opacity
Co. of New York, Inc. reg.
(West 59th St.
Facility)
Power Plant
Consolidated Edison Violation of opacity
Co. of New York, Inc. reg.
(East River
Facility)
Power Plant
Airco Alloys
Foundry
Airco Alloys
Foundry
Castle Co., Div.
of Sybron Corp.
North Hempstead
Municipal Inci-
nerator
Incinerator
Failure to respond
to a section lit
inquiry.
Failure to respond
to a section 11U
inquiry.
Failure to respond
to 8114 letter.
Violation of opac-
ity regs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
Admin, order is-
sued 10/2U/7U.
Admin, order is-
sued 10/2U/7U.
Admin, order issued
6/U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 6/7/7i»;
Admin, order issued
9/25/74; amended
10/11/7H. Supple-
mental order issued
3/31/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Source complies with EPA
with EPA order.
Source complies with EPA
with EPA order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
CO
vo
New York,
Lawrence
New York,
Long Beach
New York,
Lonq Us.
City
Lawrence City of
Incinerator
Power Plant
Violation of parti-
culate regs.
Long Beach Incinera- Violation of parti-
tor culate regs.
Incinerator
Consolidated Edison Violation of opacity
Co. of New York, Inc. reg.
(Ravenswood
Facility)
Power Plant
Notice of violation
issued 5/2/75. Order
issued 7/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/2/75. Order
issued 7/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
New York, Hudson Valley Light
Mount Marion Weight Aggregate
Corp.
Failure to respond to
SHU letter.
New York,
N. Y. City
Consolidated Edison Violation of opacity
Co. of New York, Inc. reg.
(Waterside Facility)
Admin, order issued
6/7/74.
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
Power Plant
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
UD
O
STATE/CITY
New York,
Fort Edward
New York,
Freeport
New York,
Garden City
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Decora, Div. of
United Merchants
Ł Manufacturers,
Inc.
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Failure to file
NYS recertifica-
tion forms.
Freeport Incinerator Violation of particu-
late regs.
Garden City Incinera- Violation of parti-
tor culate reqs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 9/19/741.
RESULTS/STATUS
Source in compliance.
Notice of violation is-
sued 5/2/75. Order issued
7/28/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 5/2/75. Order issued
7/2P/75.
New York,
Golden Bridge
Westchester
County
New York,
Green Island
New York,
Green
Island
New York,
Hicksville
Incinerator
Yorkers Contrac-
ing Co. Inc.
(Golden Bridge
Facility)
Ford Motor Co.
Industrial
Boiler
Bendix Corp.
Friction Material
Div.
Hooker Chem . Corp.
Ruco Div.
Chem. Mfr.
Violation of NSPS
reporting require-
ment.
Violation of opa-
city reg.
Violation of hazard-
ous air pollution
reqs.
Failure to file
NYS recertifica-
tion forms.
Notice of violation
and order issued
6/16/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 1/11/7U.
Notice of violation
and order issued
7/28/75.
Notice of violation
sent 9/12/714.
Source installed new boiler and
upgraded operating procedures;
presently in compliance.
Source in compliance.
-------
STATE/CITY
New York,
Brooklyn
New York,
Brooklyn
New York,
Brooklyn
New York,
Buffalo
New York,
Buffalo
New York,
Buffalo
New York,
New York,
Flushing
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
United Metal Goods
Mfg. Co., Inc.
Power Plant
American Can Co.
Lincoln Metal Prod-
ducts Corp.
The Hanna Furnace
Corp.,
Steel Mfg.
Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Lachawanna Plant
Steel Plant
Buffalo, City of
Incinerator
Buffalo, City of
Buffalo
Incinerator
Frank Mascali and
Sons Inc.
Asphalt Concrete
Mfr.
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of Hydro-
carbon regs.
Failure to respond
to section lit
inquiry.
Failure to respond to
811U inquiry
Violation of opacity
reg.
Violation of opacity
regs.
Violation of opac-
ity reg.
Notice of violation
issued 1/3/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/27/7«.
Admin, order issued
3/20/75.
Notice of violations
issued 1/17/75
Admin order
issued 3/31/75.
Order issued 10/15/7U.
Admin, order issued
issued 5/26/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/29/74.
Notice of violation
issued 8/29/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 11/U/7U. Admin.
order issued 2/5/75.
Source in compliance.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
New York
Schenectady
New York,
Albany
New York,
Astoria
New York,
Babylon
New York,
Babylon
New York,
Brooklyn
New York,
Brooklyn
New York,
Brooklyn
Crushing Stone
Company, Inc.
Rock Crushing
Niagara Mohawk
Power Corp.
Consolidated Edison
Co. of New York, Inc.
(Astoria Facility)
Power Plant
Babylon, City of
Incinerator #2
Babylon, City of
Incinerator
Detecto Scales, Inc.
Diagravure Film Mfr.
Corp.
Failure to file
NYS recertifica-
tion forms.
Violation of particu-
late and opacity regs.
Violation of opacity
reg.
Violation of opac-
ity reg.
Violation of opac-
ity reg.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Consolidated Edison Violation of opacity
CO. of New York, Inc. reg.
(Hudson Hug.
Facility)
Notice of violation
issued 9/11/71).
Notice of violation
issued 7/21/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/28/74. Admin.
Order issued 3/13/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/28/7U. Admin.
Notice of violation issued
1/16/75. Order issued
7/30/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 1/3/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
Source in compliance.
Power Plant
-------
PUERTO RICO
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
244. Puerto Rico
TSP
S00
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
^Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
93
-------
PUERTO RICO
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
244. Puerto Rico
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
22
3
19
1
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
5
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
4
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
5
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
4
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
12
0
11
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
*•= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0^.
94
-------
PUERTO RICO
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Ponce
San Juan
Caguas
Mayaguez
Guanlca
Dorado
Guayani 11 a-Penuel as
La res-Utuado-Ad juntas
Aguadilla
Arecibo-Barceloneta
Guayama
Yabucoa
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CO
. V
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
1. S02 control strategy assigning each major
point source a sulfur-in-fuel limitation
was approved September 11, 1975, except
for the Central Guanica plant in Ensenada
and plants of the following companies in
Barceloneta: Abbott, Merck & Co., Bristol
Meyers, Pfizer, Union Carbide, and Upjohn.
2. State plan is approved for other pollutants.
95
-------
PUERTO RICO
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
65
34
103 Dollars
637
716
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
24
14
0
48
58
0
133
8
23
0
0
5
28
69
43
113
0
33
338
40
0
1
0
978
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
96
-------
PUERTO RICO
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
87
42
40
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES13
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY5 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
100
476
576
187
34
16
237
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
97
-------
STATE/CITY
Puerto Rico,
Guayanilla
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Puerto Rico Water
Resources Authority
South Coast Steam
Power Plant
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of reg.
specifying sulfur
content of fuel.
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Notice of violation
issued 12/17/7U. Order
issued 2/23/75. Amended
order issued 3/27/75.
vo
oo
Puerto Rico,
Hato Key
Puerto Rico,
Monacillos
Puerto Rico,
Monacillos
Puerto Rico,
Ponce
Puerto Rico,
Catano
Puerto Rico,
Puerto Nuevo
Tropicair Mfg.
Corp.
P.R. Medical
Center
P.R. Concrete
Products
Puerto Rico Cement
Inc.
Lime Kilns
Mi linos De Puerto
Rico
Puerto Rico Water
Resources Authority
San Juan "Puerto
Nuevo" Station
Violation of hydro-
carbon regs.
Violation of opac-
ity regs.
Violation of particu-
late regs.
Violation of opac-
ity reg.
Violation of particu-
late matter reg.
Violation of opac-
ity reg.
Notice of violation
and order issued
2/5/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/10/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/1/75
Notice of violation
issued 5/9/74. Con-
sent order signed
8/21/7U.
Stipulation and consent
order issued 7/8/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/19/74. Con-
sent order issued
3/7/75.
Conference held-covered
Ponce facility also.
Power Plant
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Puerto Rico
Toa Ba ja
Puerto Rico,
Aguire
Puerto Rico,
Bayamon
to
10
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Puerto Rico Water
Resources Authority
"Palo Seco" (Toa
Baja) Station
Power plant
Central Aguire
Caribbean Gulf
Refining Corp.
Baymon Facility
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of opac-
ity reg.
Violation of opac-
ity regs.
Violation of opaci-
ty regs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice to violation
issued 9/19/7U.
Consent order
issued 3/7/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/20/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/16/71.
RESULTS/STATUS
Puerto Rico,
Guyanilla
Puerto Rico,
Catano
Puerto Rico,
Guaynabo
Puerto Rico,
Guayanilla
Puerto Rico,
Guayanilla
PPG Industries
(Caribe)
Bacardi Corp.
Puerto Rico Glass
Corp.
Union Carbide
Caribe, Inc.
Puerto Rico water
Resources Authority
South Coast
(Guayanilla)
Steam Plant
Violation of reg.
specifying fuel
content.
Violation of reg.
specifying content
of fuel.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of reg.
specifying sulfur
content of fuel.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Notice of violation
issued 12/17/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 12/17/71.
Order issued 5/9/75.
Notice of violation
issued U/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/17/71.
Stipulation entered
4/10/75.
Consent order issued
3/7/75.
Notice of violation with-
drawn under terms of stipu-
lation.
Power Plant
-------
STATE/CITY
Puerto Rico,
Puerto
Nuevo
COMPANY/TYPE
Of SOURCE
Puerto Rico Water
Resources Authority
San Juan Steam Plant
Power Plant
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION
Violation of reg.
specifying sulfur
content of fuel.
Notice of violation
issued 12/17/7K.
RESULTS/STATUS
o
o
Puerto Rico, San .Tuan Steam Plant Violation of opaci-
Puerto Nuevo ty reg.
Power Plant
Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico Cement Violation of opac-
San Juan Inc. ity reg.
Lime Kiln
Notice of violation issu-
ed 9/19/7U. Consent order
issued 3/1/15.
Notice of violation
issued 5/9/74.
Consent order
signed 8/12/71*.
Source in compliance with
consent order.
-------
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
247. U.S. Virgin Islands
TSP
O w f\
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
101
-------
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
247. U.S. Virgin Islands
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
lo. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
3
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
4
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
4
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
2
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
6
0
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
*•= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
102
-------
VIRGIN ISLANDS
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
New source review plan was published as final
rulemaking September 11, 1975.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
103
-------
VIRGIN ISLANDS
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
10
12
103 Dollars
150
132
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
3
3
0
1
5
0
27
7
1
0
0
0
0
20
8
49
0
6
4
0
2
0
1
137
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
104
-------
VIRGIN ISLANDS
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
:ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
16
15
1
0
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
19
36
55
30
6
2
38
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
105
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
o
01
STATE/CITY
Virgin Islands,
Virgin Islands,
Frederi ksted,
St. Croix
Virgin Islands,
Frederiksted,
St. Croix
Virgin Island,
St. Croix
Virgin Islands,
St. Croix
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
St. Croix Petro-
chemical Corp./
petrochemical
company.
Caribbean Material
Supply CO., Inc.
Virgin Islands,
St. Croix
St. Croix Stone 6
Sand, Inc.
Hess Oil Virgin Us.
Corporation
Refinery
St. Croix Petro-
chemical Corp.
Chemical Mfg.
Vir. Us. Water
& Power Authority
(St. Croix Facility)
Power Plant
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of feder-
ally promulgated
new source review
requirements of
SIP.
Violation of parti-
culate regs.
Violation of parti-
culate regs.
Violation of new
source review
reas.
Violation of feder-
ally promulgated
new source review
requirements of
SIP.
Violation of fed-
erally promulgated
SIP new source re-
view regulations.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
10/18/74.
RESULTS/STATUS
Co. stopped construction
until approval to con-
struct was granted.
Notice of violation with-
drawn 3/7/75 upon granting
Notice of violation issu-
ed 1/11/74. Admin.
order issued 3/26/74.
Notice of violation is-
sued 1/28/74. Admin.
order issued 4/18/74.
Notice of violation
issued 6/6/74.
Notice of violation
issued 10/18/74.
Notice of violation
issued 11/8/74.
Consent order
issued 2/14/75.
Supplemental order
issued 5/22/75.
Co. stopped construction
until approval to con-
struct was qranted.
Source has filed required
new source review data.
Virgin Islands, St. Thomas Paving
St. Thomas Co. Ltd.
Asphalt Concrete
Plant
Violation of NSPS
regs.
Notice of violation and
admin, order issued 2/5/75.
Supplemental orders is-
sued 3/3/75 and 5/8/75.
-------
EPA REGION III
DELAWARE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARYLAND
PENNSYLVANIA
VIRGINIA
WEST VIRGINIA
-------
DELAWARE
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*045. Metropolitan Philadelphia
Interstate (N.J., Pa.)
046. Southern Delaware
TSP'
S02
TSP
S00
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
107
-------
DELAWARE
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*045. Metropolitan Phila-
delphia (N.J.,Pa.)
TSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
046. Southern" Delaware
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
15
11
15
4
4
5
5
5
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
14
2
13
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
11
2
4
-
.
0
1
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
14
2
11
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
2
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
12
11
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
•_
0
0
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0^.
108
-------
DELAWARE
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
1. EPA proposed regulation to change the
size of fuel burning equipment exempt
from particulate matter regulations
(4-30-75).
2. EPA proposed to drop sulfur-in-fuel
limitation in Southern Delaware AQCR
(4-30-75).
109
-------
DELAWARE
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
39
28
103 Dollars
583
547
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
10
14
0
0
76
0
85
74
48
2
0
11
0
0
16
21
3
57
97
5
0
2
0
521
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
110
-------
DELAWARE
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
52
3
2
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
50
2
2
In
violation
2
1
Unknown
status
0
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations....
no data
38
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
38+
no data
no data
no data
TOTAL
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Ill
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COnPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Delaware
Claymont
Allied Chemical
Corp.
Violation of emis-
sion std for sulfur
oxides
Delaware,
Delaware
City
Delmarva Power 6
Light Co.
Power Plant
E.I. duPont de
Nemours Co. Inc.
Sulfate
Mfg.
Delaware, Delmarva Power S
Indian River Light Co.
Power plant
Violation of sulfur
oxide emission
standard.
Delaware,
Edge Moor
Violation of parti-
culate emission
std.
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
emissions regs.
Notice of violation is-
sued on 5/24/72. Order
comply issued on
6/18/72.
Amended order is-
sued on 6/18/71*.
Notice of violation
issued 3/6/72 En-
forcement order
issued 4/17/72.
Consent order issued
10/25/74.
Conset order issued
4/1/75.
Commencing on 11/10/72
bimonthly progress re-
ports have been submitted
to EPA resulted in con-
struction schedule with
increments of progress
schedule is presently being
complied with. Amended order
issued to discontinue monthly
reporting co. in compliance.
Getty oil (supplying hiqh sul-
fur fuel to Delmarva) litioated
the EPA order. Court upheld EPA
in Getty Oil vs. Ruckelshaus
(342 F. Suppl. 1006; "67 F. 2d.
349 ;l/15/73). Court issued
consent decree issued to meet
1% std. Plant in compliance
Source complying with terms
of order.
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*047. National Capital Inter-
state (Maryland, Va.)
SO,
TSPU
Non-point
sources
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. €stimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
113
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*047. National Capital (Md.,
Va.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
10
0
6
5
2
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
2
2
3
2
2
Valid
annual
average
1
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
2
2
1
1
2
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
- •
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
114
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
National Capital Interstate
(District of Columbia
portion)
Pollutant
TSP
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. EPA approved District regulations on
June 23, 1975, which replace parts of
the EPA promulgation for transportation
control.
2. District has inspection/maintenance program
for city-owned vehicles in operation.
3. METRO has continued to increase the size
of the bus fleet.
4. Several bus lanes are already operational.
5. COG-run carpool program is gradually reaching
all Federal employees.
6. EPA proposed revision for bikeways (9-4-75).
EPA proposal for visible emission (TSP) sub-
mitted 7-11-74.
115
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
53
30
103 Dollars
1040
575
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER Of EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
41
18
0
1
16
0
29
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
19
132
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
116
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL.MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting TOO+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
18
14
0
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES*3
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
300
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
300
no data
no data
no data
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
117
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
District of Col.
Washington
District of Col.
Washington
District of Col.
Washington
Dept of the
Treasury
Incinerator
Boiling Air
Force Base
Boiler House
Dept. of Treasury
Incinerator
Violation of parti-
culate matter stds.
Violation of parti-
culate regs.
Violation of parti-
culate regs.
Consent order signed - complying with terms of orc"erg
3/19/75. Order amended
4/22/75
Order issued 5/29/75. Now in compliance.
Order issued 3/10/75. Meeting terms of order.
-------
MARYLAND
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
f047. National Capital Inter-
state (D.C., Va.)
112. Central Maryland
"113. Cumberland-Keyser Inter-
state (W. Va.)
114. Eastern Shore
115. Metropolitan Baltimore
116. Southern Maryland
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
so2
so2
so2
tm
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
TSPb
TSP
Non-point
sources
Attainment
status
uncertain
so2
Point sources
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
^Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
119
-------
MARYLAND
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*047. National Capital
(D.C., Va.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
112. Centra L.Maryl and
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*113. Cumber! and-Keyser
(W. Va.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
114. Eastern Shore
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
28
12
7
5
7
3
3
1
0
0
6
3
6
3
0
3
3
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
28
14
5
4
3
9
6
0
0
0
7
5
4
2
0
7
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
25
14
0
-
_
3
3
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
5
3
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
26
14
5
5
5
8
7
0
0
0
6
6
2
2
0
7
5
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
24
13
3
-
_
7
6
0
-
_
6
5
1
-
.
6
4
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
26
1
14
3
4
8
0
7
0
0
6
0
6
1
0
7
0
5
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
120
-------
MARYLAND (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD9
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
115. Metropolitan Balti-
more
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
116. Southern Maryland
TSP
SO-
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
32
15
10
12
12
2
2
2
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
31
17
11
11
2
3
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
30
15
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
31
21
16
11
5
4
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
28
13
1
-
-
3
2
0
-
-
1974
Minimum
data0
32
9
27
11
5
3
0
3
0
0
Valid
annualr
average"
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
121
-------
MARYLAND
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Baltimore
National Capital Interstate
(Maryland portion)
Potomac River Basin
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X
X
N0?
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
tate plan is approved.
1. EPA promulgations (December 6, 1973) are
in effect for Metropolitan Baltimore
Intrastate and National Capital Inter-
state AQCRs.
Fourth Circuit Court ruled that EPA
exceeded its authority in requiring a
State legislature to formulate a TCP,
thus, the plan is considered unenforce-
able by the Court (Sept. 75).
1. Regulations affecting cup burners and
new residual fuel-fired burners were
published as proposed rulemaking on
January 30, 1975.
2. Proposed rulemaking published January
30, 1975, called for deletion of require-
ment for the use of 0.5 percent sulfur
fuel in place of one percent fuel by
July 1, 1975.
EPA proposed new allowable TSP emission
limitations for fuel-burning equipment;
EPA proposal for TSP limitation on
incinerators; change allowable emission
limit for NO from fuel-burning equip-
ment; EPA proposal for sulfur content
limitation for process gases used as
fuel in existing fuel burning equipment.
(These proposals were effected 3-27-75.)
National Capital and Metropolitan
Baltimore AQCRs are excluded.
bApplies only to National Capital and
Metropolitan Baltimore AQCRs.
122
-------
MARYLAND
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
198
191
103 Dollars
3386
3170
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
63
35
5
9
205
5
341
179
63
23
49
52
50
53
117
18
27
486
21
134
0
7
26
1,968
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
123
-------
MARYLAND
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SO?)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter 1 ines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
211
' 5
12
6
8
6
2
11
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
185
2
1
3
3
In
violation
26
3
12
6
7
2
Unknown
status
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
no data
314
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
314+
no data
no data
no data
TOTAL
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
124
-------
Table H. . SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Maryland
D.C. Area
Maryland,
Bainbridge
Maryland,
Baltimore
Maryland,
Bethesda
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
PEPCO Chalk
Point Station
Power Plant
Naval Training
Center
Boiler C
Incinerator
Southern States
Grain Coops
Grain Dryer
National Med.
Center
Indust. Boiler
& Incinerator
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of sulfur
oxide and parti-
culate emission
standard.
Violation of parti-
culate and opacity
regs.
Violation of opaci-
ty stds.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
std.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 6/ /7U. New
notice issued 3/25/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Conference held on 7/25/7U.
Draft order sent to PEPCO
and to State.
Order issued 12/13/7U. Now in compliance.
12/28/73 - Notice of
violation issued.
Order 9/5/75 ammended
10/15/7U.
1/2U/T3 - conference held
7/5/74 draft consent orders
mailed to co. Letter of intent
received Dec. 19"7t». co.
meeting interim stds. State
regs. to be revised.
Source is now in compliance.
Maryland,
Bethesda
Maryland,
D.C. Area
Dept. of Navy
Naval Med. Center
Boiler
PEPCO Dickerson
Station
Power Plant
Violation of parti -
culate and opacity
regs.
Violation of sulfur
oxide and parti-
culate emission
std.
Order issued 11/8/7U. Now in compliance.
Notice of violation
issued 6/01/7(1. New
notice issued 3/25/75.
Conference held on 9/17/75.
Draft order sent to PEPCO
and to State.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Maryland,
D.C. Area
Maryland,
Eastern
Shore
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
PEPCO Morgantown
Station
Power Plant
Bayshore Foods,
Grain Dryer
Maryland, Perdue, Inc.
Eastern Shore
Grain Dryer
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of sulfur
std.
Violation of opac-
ity stds.
Violation of opac-
ity stds.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 6/ /74.
12/28/73 - Notice of
violation issued.
12/28/73 - Notice of
violation issued.
RESULTS/STATUS
Md. has revised req. for that;
AQCR; ESECA order issued.
1/24/73 - conference hel'?
7/5/^4 - draft consent
order mailed to company.
Letter of intent received
1/24/73 - conference held
"V5/74 draft consent orders
received Dec. 1974. Co. meeting
interim stds. State regs. to be
revised.
Maryland, Snow Hill Grain
Eastern Shore
Grain Dryer
Maryland,
Emittsburg
Maryland,
Rockhill
Maryland,
Sabillesville
Charles Wetzel Dump
Open Dump
Montgomery Cty.
Incinerator
Benchoffs Dump
Open Dump
Violation of opac-
ity standards
Violation of parti-
culate (open burn-
ing) std.
12/28/73 - Notice of
violation issued.
Consent order issued
10/10/74.
Failure to respond to Order issued 4/23/71.
sec. 114 letter.
Violation of parti-
culate (open burn-
ing) std.
Consent order issued
10/10/7 H.
1/24/73 - conference held
7/5/74 draft consent orders
mailed to co. Letter of intent
received Dec. 1974. Co.
interim stds. state regs.
to be revised.
Co. complied with order.
Sourc has shutdown.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Maryland,
Seat
Pleasant
Maryland,
Silver
Spring
Maryland,
Thurmond
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Federal Wrecking
Co.
Demolition
Contractor
Naval Ordinance
Laboratory
Incinerator
Fogels Dump
Open Dump
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of NESHAPS
(asbestos) regulations.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
std.
Violation of parti-
culate (open burning)
std.
TYPE OF ACTION
Order issued 6/13/75.
Consent agreement
signed 12/16/7H.
Order issued. Order
amended 10/15/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Contractor complied with
regs. before further
demolition occurred.
Source is now in compliance.
Source has shutdown.
Maryland,
White Oak
Dept of Navy
Naval Ordinance
•Lab
Violation of parti-
culate 6 opacity regs.
Order issued 9/16/71);
reissued 12/10/7U.
Now in compliance.
Boiler House
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*045.
*151.
*178.
195.
196.
197.
Metropolitan Philadelphia
Interstate (Del., N.J.)
Northeast Pennsylvania-
Upper Delaware Valley
Interstate (N.J.)
Northwest Pennsylvania-
Youngstown Interstate
(Ohio)
Central Pennsylvania
South Central Pennsyl-
vania
Southwest Pennsylvania
Probably
will
attain
so2
S0,b
Ł
~
SO,
c.
so,
L.
Probably
will not
attain
ISPb
S0? -Power
plant
TSPb
TSP
TSP
Point
sources
TSP
Point
sources
TSP
Non-point
sources
S0?-Power
plant
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
DEstimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
128
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*045. Metropolitan Phil-
adelphia (Del.,
N.J.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*151. Northeast Pa. - Upper
Delaware Valley
(N.J.)
TSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*178. Northwest Pa. -Youngs-
town (Ohio)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
195. Central Pennsylvania
TSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
21
0
17
17
10
23
0
9
9
9
9
0
4
4
4
8
0
3
3
3
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
dataD
22
2
6
2
3
29
3
0
0
0
9
1
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
Valid •
annual
average
14
1
0
-
-
25
3
0
-
-
9
1
0
-
-
8
0
0
-
-
1973
Minimum
data0
31
4
3
3
4
29
3
0
0
0
9
1
0
0
0
8
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
1
0
-
-
4
2
0
-
-
2
1
0
-
-
2 ,
0
0
- .
-
1974
Minimum
data0
28
17
0
10
13
24
6
0
0
5
8
3
0
0
2
10
1
0
0
1
Valid
annual
average
0
o
0
-
-
0
o
0
-
-
0
o
0
-
_
0
o
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
129
-------
PENNSYLVANIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-7-4
AQCR/Pollutant
196. South Central Pa.
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
°v
X
197. Southwest Pennsylvania
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
20
0
8
8
8
35
0
18
9
10
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
22
2
0
0
0
15
3
0
0
0
Valid •
annual
average
20
0
0
-
_
14
2
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
23
2
0
0
0
35
3
7
2
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
_
17
0
7
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
20
3
0
0
3
34
11
0
0
3
Valid
annual
average
0
0
1
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
130
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Allegheny County Air Basin
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton
Interstate (Pennsylvania
portion)
Beaver Valley Air Basin
Erie Air Basin
Harrisburg Air Basin
Johnstown Air Basin
Lancaster Air Basin
Monongahela Valley Air
Basin
Reading Air Basin
Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Air
Basin
Metropolitan Philadelphia
Interstate (Pennsylvania
portion)
York Air Basin
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
X
CO
°x
X
X
N02
aAQMAs are designed by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
131
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. EPA promulgation (November 28, 1973) is
in effect for Southwest Philadelphia
AQCR and Metropolitan Philadelphia AQCR.
2. The Governor has announced that there
will be mandatory inspection/maintenance
on a state-wide basis, with implementa-
tion beginning by late summer 1975.
(Implementation has been delayed.)
3. An instructors training course for
inspection/maintenance was to be given
in August.
4. Several employers in Pittsburgh have
submitted acceptable employer incentive
plans.
5. Third Circuit Court has overruled the
air bleed retrofit regulation for Pitts-
burgh (7-74).
1. State plan for attaining secondary SOp
standard in Metropolitan Philadelphia
AQCR was approved June 14, 1975.
2. On August 4, 1975, Pennsylvania proposed
a plan revision to delay the sulfur-in-
fuel decrease from March 31 to October 1,
1975. The decrease is from 0.5 to 0.3
percent sulfur in fuel.
3. On March 14, 1975, State proposed a
revision for pressed, blown, and spun
glass melting furnaces incorporating
new process weight factor to control TSP
emissions.
4. EPA proposed changes in allowable SO,
emissions from coke oven gas (1-10-75).
132
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
507
400
103 Dollars
9904
8612
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
307
147
195
79
478
129
939
324
114
213
10
384
141
76
306
159
51
279
356
502
14
51
52
5,306
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
133
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (Stfc)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
1,712
28
2
57
30
71
96
20
51
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
1 ,547
25 .
1
1
16
20
1
1
In
violation
165
3
1
41
7
17
30
7
4
Unknown
status
0
16
22
38
46
12
46
II.
ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued ,
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
no data
8,020
8,020+
no data
no data
no data
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
134
-------
COMPANY/TYPE
STATE/CITY OF "SOURCE
Pennsylvania, ASG Industries
Philadelphia
Glass Mfg.
JSL Steel Co.
Steel Mill
Pennsylvania,
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania,
Reading
Pennsylvania,
Saxton
Pennsylvania,
Seward
Reading Gray
Iron Casting,
Gray Iron
Foundry
Penn. Elec. Co.
Saxton Station
Penn. Elec. Co.
Seward Station
Power Plant
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
TYPE UF ACTION
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti-
culate regs.
Violation of parti-
culate, opacity,
sulfur oxides, and
fugitive emission
regs.
Failure to respond
to 8114 letter.
Power plant in viola-
tion of particulate
reg.
Violation of parti-
culates
emission
std.
NOV issued 12/26/74.
NOV issued
2/21/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Co. in compliance
Consent agreement has been
negotiated and settlement
appears imminent.
Order issued on 4/3/74. Co. is in compliance.
Consent order is-
sued 11/18/74.
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/74. Con-
sent order issued
11/18/74.
In compliance via
shutdown.
Co. is comolvina with
terms of the orr"er.
Pennsylvania,
Shelocta
Penn. Elec. Co.
Keystone Station
Violation of parti-
culates and sulfur
oxide emission
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/74. Con-
sent order issued
Co. is complying with
terms of the order.
Pennsylvania,
Sheffield
McMillin Lumber
Products of
Sheffield
Failure to respond
to sec. 114 letter.
Order issued 4/3/75.
Co. complied with order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Pennsylvania,
Middletown
Pennsylvania,
New Florence
Pennsylvania,
Oil City
Phila.
Phoenixville
Phoenixville
Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Met. Edison
Crawford Station
Penn. Elec. Co.
Conemaugh Sta-
tion
Power Plant
Electrallory Corp.
Secondary
Smelter
Electric Co.
Eddystone 5
Cromby Station
Power Plant
Philadelphia
Incinerators
Municipal
Incinerators
Sorenson Indust.
Foundry
Allied Chem. Co.
and Wrecking Corp.
of America
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Power plant in viola-
tion of particulate
regs.
Violation of parti-
culates and sulfur
oxide emission
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate stds.
culates and sulfur
oxide emission
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate and opacity
regs.
Violation of NESHAPS
(Beryllium) regs.
Violation of NESHAPS
(asbestos) demoli-
tion regs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Consent order is-
sued 6/30/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/71. Con-
sent order issued
11/18/7U.
Consent order issued
3/26/75.
issued 6/19/7U. Con-
sent order issued
11/18/7U.
Consent order is-
sued 10/17/7U.
Consent order issued
3/ /75.
Order issued
10/18/74.
RESULTS/STATUS
Meeting terms of order; co.-
to shutdown 3/19/77.
Co. in compliance.
Co. complying with
of order.
behind sched. due to
technical problems.
Source complying with
terms of order, but
experiencing slight
delays
Co. in compliance.
Co. in compliance.
Demolition
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Pennsylvania,
Homer City
Pennsylvania,
Jefferson
Twn.
Somerset
Cnty.
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania,
Johnstown
Pennsylvania,
Kittanninq
Pennsylvania,
Lewistown
Pennsylvania,
Meadville
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Penn. Elec. Co.
Homer City Sta-
tion
New Enterprise Stone
6 Lime Co.,
Barkersville Plant
Quarrying
Operation
Bethlehem Steel
Co.
Steel Mill
Manor Minerals,
Inc.
Mineral
Processing
Setkin Smelting
and Refining Co.
Smelter
Abex Corp.
Smelting
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti-
culates and sulfur
oxide emission
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate matter stds.
Violation of opacity
and particulate regs.
No response to Sim
letter requesting
information re-
garding facilities
emissions.
Violation of parti-
culate reg.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
stds.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/7U. con-
sent order issued
11/18/7U.
Order issued 12/12/7U.
Consent order issued
Order issued U/3/7<».
Consent order is-
sued 3/31/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/1/7U.
Consent order signed
9/(i/7i». Ammended order
issued 5/16/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Co. is in compliance
experiencing testing oroblems.
Co. in compliance.
Only covers sinterinq,
coke charging, open
hearth, and misc. sources
Co. complying with terms
of order.
Company complied with
order.
Co. complying with terms
of order.
In compliance with terms
of order. Bag house 8^?
complete; reverb. Furnace
shutdown until controls
are complete.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Pennsylvania,
Delaware
Pennsylvania,
Emleton
Pennsylvania,
Erie
Pennsylvania,
Erie
Pennsylvania,
Erie
Pennsylvania,
Evansville
Pennsylvania,
Farmers
Valley
McKean Cnty.
Pennsylvania,
Freedom
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Delaware County
Municipal Inci-
nerator
Incinerator
Quaker State Oil
Refining Co.
Emleton Plant
Penn. Elec. Co.
Front St. Station
Power Plant
General Electric
Co.
Electrical
Components
Erie Brewing Co.
Brewery
Allentown Port-
land Cement Co.
Cement Plant
Quaker State Oil
Refining Co.
Oil Refinery
Ashland Oil Co.
Refinery
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti-
culate emission
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate and opacity
regs.
Violation of parti-
culates and sulfur
oxide emission
stds.
Violation of NESHAPS
(asbestos) regs.
Violation of SOx,
particulates and
opacity regs.
Failure to respond
SHU letter.
Violation of parti-
culate matter and
opacity stds.
Violation of Hydro-
carbon reg.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 6/25/74.
Order issued 3/10/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/7U. Con-
sent order issued
11/18/74.
Order issued
12/13/74.
Consent order issued
4/22/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Co. complying with terms
of order.
Co. is not complying with
terms of the order. For
particulates due to union
problems.
Co. in compliance
Co. behind schedule with
increments of progress.
To be pursued further.
Order issued on 5/3/7U. Complied with order
Order issued 3/10/75.
Consent order is-
sued 3/26/75.
Complying with terms of order.
Co. complying with terms
of order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Pennsylvania,
Bethlehem
Pennsylvania,
Clairton
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
N.L. Morrel Co.
U. S. Steel Clairton
Works
Coke Ovens
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of Sec. 114
request for info.
Violation of opac-
ity and particulate
emission stds.
TYPE OF ACTION
Order issued
4/30/75.
Notice of violation
issued 11/8/73.
Referred to U. S. Atty.
for combustion stacks
door leaks, 8 topside
emission on 6/7/71.
RESULTS/STATUS
Co. complied with order.
On 11/29/74. Honorable J.L.
Miller stayed grand jury
proceeding Feb. 1975. 3rd Cir.
oral arguments held 9/2/75.
Pennsylvania,
Clearfield
Pennsylvania,
Courtney
Penn. Elec. Co.
Shawville Sta-
tion.
Power Plant
West Penn Power
Co. Mitchell
Violation of parti-
culates
oxide
std.
Violation of parti-
culate and sulfur
Oxide stds.
Referred to U.S. Atty.
for pushing sent on
7/11/74.
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/74. Con-
sent order issued
11/18/74.
Notice of violation
issued 9/13/73.
Orders issued 2/1/75.
and 3/16/75.
Co. is complying with
terms of the order.
Orders stayed pending
co. appeal.
Pennsylvania,
Cromwell
Twnp.
Huntingdon
Pennsylvania
Power Plant
New Enter. Stone f,
Lime Co. Orbinsonia
Plant
Quarrying
Operation
Violation of parti-
culate matter stds.
Order issued 12/12/74.
Co. in compliance.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPF
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
Pennsylvania,
State College
Pennsylvania,
Summit
Pennsylvania,
Warren
Pennsylvania,
Washington
City
Pennsylvania,
Williamsburg
Pennsylvania,
Wyomissing
Penn. State U.
Boiler House
Miles Foundry
Grey Iron
Foundry
Penn. Elec. Co.
Warren Station
Power Plant
Jessop Steel Co.
Steel Plant
Penn. Elec. Co.
Williamsburg
Station
Power Plant
Metals Engineer-
ing, Inc.
Violation of opacity NOV issued 12/26/7U.
regs.
Failure to respond
to sec. 11U letter.
Violation of parti-
culates and sulfur
oxide emission
stds.
Violation of parti-
culates reg.
Violation of parti-
culates emission
stds.
Failure to respond
to SHU letter.
Order issued 3/27/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/7(1. Con-
sent order issued
11/18/7U.
Consent order issued
4/11/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/7U. Con-
sent order issued
11/18/7U.
Order issued on
U/3/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Source now in compliance.
Co. comolied with order.
Co. is complying with
terms of the order.
Co. behind schedule with
increments of progress.
To be pursued further.
Co. is complying with
terms of the order.
Company complied with order.
Metallergy Shop
-------
VIRGINIA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
047. National Capital Inter-
state (D.C., Md.)
'207. Eastern Tennessee-South-
western Virginia
Interstate (Tenn.)
222. Central Virginia
223. Hampton Roads
224. Northeastern Virginia
225. State Capital
226. Valley of Virginia
*
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
so2
so2b
so2
so2
TSP
so2
so2
so2
Probably
will not
attain
TSPb
Industrial
fugitive
emissions
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
TSP
TSP
Industrial
fugitive
emissions
• Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
141
-------
VIRGINIA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*047. National Capital
(D.C., Md.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*207. Easterru Tennessee-
Southwestern Va.
(Tenn. )
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
222. Central Virginia
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
223. Hampton Roads
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
18
11
2
2
2
8
6
2
0
0
18
2
0
0
0
15
11
3
3
3
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
30
4
4
2
2
11
8
1
0
0
25
8
0
0
0
21
14
3
2
1
Valid
annual
average
20
0
0
-
_
8
1
0
-
_
16
1
0
-
.
18
9
0
-
~
1973
Minimum
data
34
10
5
3
6
13
10
1
0
0
28
7
0
0
0
20
15
3
3
2
Valid
annual
average
18
4
0
-
_
11
6
0
-
_
22
6
0
-
_
17
10
0
-
~
1974
Minimum
data
36
5
17
5
6
13
2
7
0
0
25
0
9
0
0
16
4
12
3
2'
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
_
0
0
0
-
~
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
142
-------
VIRGINIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/PoTlutant
224. Northeastern Va.
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
x
225. State Capital
JSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
226. Valley of Virginia
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
"CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
8
3
0
0
0
20
8
2
2
2
21
6
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
4
3
0
0
0
10
8
0
3
2
22
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
2
1
0
-
_
5
3
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
13
5
0
0
0
26
14
2
2
3
38
10
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
_
18
12
0
-
_
28
4
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
11
0
2
0
0
23
2
15
2
2
32
0
10
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported, according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
143
-------
VIRGINIA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Hampton-Newport News
Lynchburg
National Capital Interstate
(Virginia portion)
Norf ol k-Portsmouth-Vi rgi ni a
Beach
Petersburg-Colonial Heights-
Hopewell
Richmond
Roanoke
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
so2
CO
°x
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
EPA promulgation (December 6, 1973) is in
effect for National Capital Interstate
AQCR.
State submitted regulations for hydrocarbon
control from stationary sources (10-1-74).
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
144
-------
VIRGINIA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
284
166
103 Dollars
4736
2529
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
42
79
43
91
131
13
231
101
90
9
0
61
8
403
257
4
157
293
743
64
5
69
18
2912
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
145
-------
VIRGINIA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOa)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
. 3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f . Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
573
7
6
-
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
550
7
In
violation
23
Unknown
status
0
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations....
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
TOTAL
no data
411
411
no data
no data
no data
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
146
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Virginia,
Alexandria
Virginia,
Arlington
Virginia,
Danville
Virginia,
Danville
Virginia,
Richmond
Virginia,
Winchester
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
PEPCO Potomac River
Station
Power Plant
Arlington Cty.
Incinerator
stds.
Sludge
Incinerator
Boise Cascade
Indust. Boiler
Brantly Generating
Station
Power Plant
Federal Paper
Board Inc.
Industrial
Boiler
Abex Corp
Brake Shoes
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of opac-
ity limitation.
Violation of parti -
culate emission
Order to stack test
issued 7/2/7U.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
limitation.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
limits.
Violation of NESHAPS
(asbestos) regs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued l/30/7«.
Notice of violation
sent on 3/1U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 3/15/7U. En-
forcement order issued
6/7/74.
Notice of violation
issued 6/U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 1/17/7U.
Order issued 3/26/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Admin, order to be issued
in near future.
Stack test shows marainal
violation consent order to
be pursued.
Plant has shutdown.
in January 1975 due to
economic reasons.
Conference held on 7/29/7u.
Admin, order to be issued
in the near future.
Stack test shows marginal
violation. Further investi-
gation necessary.
Co. is in compliance.
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*103.
*113.
*179.
*181.
231.
232.
233.
234.
235.
236.
Huntington-Ashland-Ports-
mouth-Ironton Interstate
(Ky., Ohio)
Cumberland-Keyser Inter-
state (Md.)
Parkersburg-Mari etta
Interstate (Ohio)
Steubenvi 1 1 e-Wei rton-
Wheeling Interstate
(Ohio)
Allegheny
Central West Virginia
Eastern Panhandle
Kanawha Valley
North Central West
Virginia
Southern West Virginia
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
K
SO,
L.
TSPb
so2
Tspb
K
so2b
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
so2
Ł
TSP
so2
TSP
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
S09
C-
TSP
Point
sources
SOp-Power
plant
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
148
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*103. Huntington-Ashland-
Portsmouth-Ironton
(Ky., Ohio)
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°*
*113. Cumber Tand- Keyser
(Md.)
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*179. Parkersburg-Marietta
(Ohio)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*181. Steubenvi lie-Wei rton-
Wheeling (Ohio)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
2
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
2
1
0
0
7
5
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
3
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
13
6
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
-
10
0
0
-
-
1973
Minimum
data0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
n
5
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
1974
Minimum
data0
2
0
1
0
0
4
0
3
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
12
2
6
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
149
-------
WEST VIRGINIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
231. Allegheny
TSP
SO,
"Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
232. Central West Virginia
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
233. Eastern Panhandle
TSP
SO,
"Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
234. Kanawha Valley
TSP
S0?
"Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
'• 1
0
0
0
14
8
0
1
3
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
9
0
1
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
.
11
1
0
-
1973
Minimum
data
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
8
1
1
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
.
2
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
dataD
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
1
9
1
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox-
150
-------
WEST VIRGINIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
235. North Central West
Virginia
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
236. Southern West
Virginia
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0Y
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
6
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
0
0
-
-
2
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
5
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
4
0
2
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
151
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved,
None required.
EPA proposed regulations to change allow-
able SO emissions for exit gas streams
in fuel burning sources.(12-24-74).
152
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 753
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
123
77
103 Dollars
1764
1086
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over TOO million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
42
47
36
0
21
0
59
94
0
73
11
8
6
95
113
1
• 14
67
0
14
4
32
1
738
aData available, from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
153
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
261
12
16
3
2
4
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
233
12
In
violation
28
12
2
Unknown
status
0
4
1
2
4
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
TOTAL
no data
270
270 +
no data
no data
no data
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
154
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
west Virginia,
Follansbee
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Wheeling - Pittsburgh Violation of parti-
Steel Corp. culate matter, opaci-
ty and SOx stds.
TYPE OF ACTION
NOV issued 5/9/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Steel Plant
-------
EPA REGION IV
ALABAMA
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
KENTUCKY
MISSISSIPPI
NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
-------
ALABAMA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
001. Alabama and Tombigbee
Rivers
*002. Columbus-Phenix City
Interstate (Georgia)
003. East Alabama
004. Metropolitan Birmingham
*005. Mobile-Pensacola-Panama
City-Southern Missis-
sippi Interstate (Fla.,
Miss.)
006. Southeast Alabama
*007. Tennessee River Valley-
Cumberland Mountains
Interstate (Tenn.)
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
so
so2
TSP
S00
TSP
TSP
TSPU
Mobile -and
point sources
TSPb
S09 -power
* plant
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
k
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
156
-------
ALABAMA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
001. Alabama and Tombigbee
Rivers
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*002. Columbus-Phenix City
(Georgia)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
003. East Alabama
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
004. Metropolitan Birmingham
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
1
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
6
1
0
0
0
10
3
1
3
3
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
4.
0
0
0
0
6
1
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
21
9
1
1
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
4
1
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
-
9
1
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
4
0
0
0
0
7
1
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
19
7
1
1
1
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
2
1
0
-
_
5
0
0
-
-
18
6
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
6
0
1
0
0
6
0
2
0
0
8
0
2
0
0
21
2
10
2
2
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
-
11
2
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
157
-------
ALABAMA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*005. Mobil e-Pensacola-
Panama City-Southern
Mississippi (Fla.,
Miss.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
006. Southeast Alabama
TSP
so2
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*007. Tennessee River
Valley-Cumberland
Mountains (Tenn.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
3
1
0
1
3
1
0
0
0
7
5
2
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
3
0
1
1
2
2
0
0
0
0
17
0
1
0
0
Valid .
annual
average
1
0
1
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
15
0
1
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
3
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
40
3
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
28
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
17
2
4
0
2
5
0
2
0
0
33
2
15
0
0
Valid
annual
average
6
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
_
17
3
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
158
-------
ALABAMA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Birmingham
Gadsen
Mobile
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved,
None required.
1. Revisions to SO? emission limits from
sulfuric acid plants were proposed
9/4/75.
2. Revision to TSP emission limits from
primary aluminum plants was promulgated
5/8/75.
3. Revision to TSP emission limits from
coke ovens was promulgated 8/28/75.
4. Revisions to TSP emission limits from
Portland cement plants was proposed
7/24/75.
5. State plan is in effect for other
pollutants.
159
-------
ALABAMA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
151
93
103 Dollars
2430
1609
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
54
64
11
34
33
0
264
86
82
118
39
379
75
111
197
13
99 -
619
374
52
0
52
0
2,756
Data available from Na'tional Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
160
-------
ALABAMA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SO?)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
1,057
10
29
4
5
5
2
9
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
1,035
8
29
4
5
5
2
9
In
violation
22
2
Unknown
status
0
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
180
6,281
6,461
46
273
1
TOTAL
321
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
161
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Alabama,
Birmingham
Alabama,
Birmingham
Alabama,
Coosa Pines
Alabama,
Demopolis
Alabama,
Demopolis
Alabama,
Sheffield
Alabama,
Stevenson
Alabama,
Tuscombia
U. S. Steel
Steel Plant
U.S. Gypsum Co.
Mineral wood Plant
Kimberly-Clark
Paper Mill
Lone Star Industries
Inc.
Cement Plant
Gulf States Paper
Paper Mill
Union Carbide Corp.
Terroalloys Plant.
TVA-Widows Creek
Station
Power Plant
TVA-Colbert Sta.
Power Plant
PM SIP violation.
Violation of part.
emission std.
PM SIP violation
PM SIP violation
PM SIP violation
Violation of part.
emission stds.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
NOV issued Consent decree signed by
Returned to Justice for U.S. District Judge 7/23/75.
decree
NOV issued 6/18/75.
NOV issued U/2/75
NOV issued 1/1U/7U
Admin, order 7/17/7U.
NOV issued 3/18/75.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/U/7U.
Admin, order 12/9/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 12/U/7U.
Admin, order 12/19/7 (J.
Order being prepared.
Will review State's variance
determine appropriateness.
Administrative order in
process of beinq amended.
Will review State's variance
to determine appropriateness.
-------
FLORIDA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
^005. Mobil e-Pensacola-Panama
City-Southern Missis-
sippi Interstate (Ala.,
Miss.)
048. Central Florida
*049. Jacksonville-Brunswick
Interstate (Georgia)
050. Southeast Florida
051. Southwest Florida
052. West Central Florida
Probably
will
attain
S09
c.
TSP
so2
S09
c.
so2
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
TSPb
Mobile and
point
sources
TSPb
Point
sources
TSP
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSP
so2
c.
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
163
-------
FLORIDA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*005. Mobil e-Pensacola-
Panama City-Southern
Mississippi (Ala.,
Miss.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
048. Central Florida
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*049. Jacksonville-Bruns-
wick (Ga.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
050. Southeast Florida
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
2
1
0
1
3
1
. 0
0
0
9
3
2
0
2
3
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
1
10
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
14
2
3
4
3
6
1
1
1
1
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
_
-
2
1
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data
3
9
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
27
11
0
1
1
42
3
4
1
4
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
_
.
1
1
0
-
_
0
1
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0^.
164
-------
FLORIDA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
051. Southwest Florida
TSP
S0?
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
052. West Central Florida
.JSP
S02
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
1
1
0
0
0
11
8
3
0
0
•
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
dataD
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
3
3
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
3
1
0
0
1
15
14
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
0
1
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
165
-------
FLORIDA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Jacksonville
Lakeland-Winter Haven
Tampa-St. Petersburg
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
CO
°x
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved,
None required.
1. Revisions to S02 emission limits from
fossil fuel-fired steam generators were
proposed 8/15/75.
2. Revisions to S0Ł emission limits from
sulfur recovery plants and sulfuric
acid plants were proposed 3/27/75.
3. State plan is
pollutants.
in effect for other
166
-------
FLORIDA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
221
137
103 Dollars
3971
2251
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.'
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
125
60
0
99
89
4
622
216
148
8
3
23
27
1
565
12
173
497
16
66
0
70
418
3,242
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
167
-------
FLORIDA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOe)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
493
5
5
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
440
3
5
In
violation
49
2
Unknown
status
4
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
216
1,437
1,653
231
4
5
TOTAL
240
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
168
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
/ lire
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Florida
Bradley
Brewster Phosphate
Co.
Rock Crushing
Florida Gulf Power Co.
Chattahoochee
Power plant
Florida
Palatka
Florida,
Bartow
Florida,
Bartow
Florida,
Bartow
Hudson Pulp &
Paper Co.
Pulp and Paper
Plant
W. R. Grace
Sulfuric acid plants
and phosphate
rock dryers.
Swift Chemical Co.
Rock dryers
U.S.S. Agrichemical
Co.
Violation of
Federally approved
compliance schedule
for particulate
emission std.
Violation of par-
ticulate and sul-
fur oxide stds.
Source missed 1st
increment of State
adopted federally
approved compliance
schedule for sulfur
oxide and par-
ticulate matter.
Violation of par-
ticulate and sul-
fur oxide emission
stds.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission,
std.
Violates particu-
late std.
Notice of violation On schedule.
issued 8/26/74. Enforce-
ment order issued
10/9/74.
Notice of violation
issued 8/30/74. Admin.
order issued 2/5/75.
On schedule
Notice of violation Admin, order is being
issued 12/20/73. Admin, amended.
order issued 1/21/74.
Notice of violation
issued 6/11/74. Admin.
order issued 9/6/74.
Notice of violation
issued 9/13/74. Admin.
1/12/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/26/74.
On schedule
On schedule
On schedule
Rock Dryers
Order 12/2/74.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
'Florida,
Bartow
Florida,
Bartow
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
CF chem. Ind.
Sulfur Acid
Plant
Farmland Ind.
Sulfur Acid
Plant
Florida,
Brooksville
Florida,
Chattahoochee
Florida,
Ft. Meade
Florida,
Ft. Meade
Florida,
Gibsonton
Chem. Lime, Inc.
CaO hydrator. Kiln
Florida State Hosp.
Industrial
boiler
Gardinier Inc.
Phosphate rock
dryers
U.S.S. Agrichemical
Co.
Rock Dryers
Gardinier, Inc.
Sulfuric Acid
Plants
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of sulfur
oxide std.
Violation of sulfur
Violation of part.
std.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
Violation of par-
ticulate and
stds.
Violates particu-
late std.
Violation of sul-
ful oxides reg.
TYPE OF ACTION
NOV issued 6/19/75.
NOV issued 6/11/75.
NOV issued 6/19/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Order being prepared.
Order being prepared.
Order being prepared.
Notice of violation On schedule
issued 8/27/7U. Admin.
order 2/12/75.
Notice of violation Amendment is being
issued 6/11/74. Admin, prepared to order.
order for particulate
issued 9/6/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 8/26/74.
Order 12/2/74.
On schedule
Notice of violation is-
sued 6/11/74. Admin, order
issued 1/27/75.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Florida,
Pierce
Florida,
Piney Point
Florida,
Tampa
Florida,
Tampa
Agrico. Chemical Co.
Rockdryers
Borden Chemical
Sulfuric Acid
Plant
Tampa Electric Co.
Power Plant
Kaiser Agricul-
tural Chem.
Nitric Acid
Plant
Florida, occidental Chemical
White Springs Co.
Violated particu-
late std.
Violation of sulfur
oxide std.
Violation of par-
ticulate and sul-
fur oxide emissions
limitations.
Violation of nitrogen
oxide std.
Violation of
sulfur oxide
std.
Notice of violation
issued 12/U/7U.
Order amended 6/30/75.
NOV issued 6/19/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/23/71).
Admin, order
5/12/75.
NOV issued 6/19/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/26/74. Admin.
order issued 1/10/75.
Order being prepared.
Amendment pending review
of S02 reg. revision.
Order being prepared.
Order amended 5/9/^5
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Florida, Exxon Louisiana
Jay Oil Field Land Corp.
Refinery
Borden Chemical Co.
Rock dryers
Gulf Power Co.
Power plant
Mobil Chem. Co.
Florida,
Lakeland
Florida,
Lynnhaven
Florida,
Nichols
Florida,
Pensacola
Phosphate rock
dryers
Gulf Power Co.
Power Plant
Violation of sul-
fur oxide emis-
sion std.
Violation of par-
ticulate std.
Violation of par-
ticulate and sul-
fur oxide stds.
Violation of Fla.
PM reg.
Violation of par-
ticulate and sul-
fur oxide stds.
Notice of violation
issued 9/13/74. Order
2/12/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/30/7«.
Admin, order 1/2/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/30/714. Admin;
order issued 2/5/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/11/7K. Admin.
order issued 9/6/7U.
Order amended '»/25/"75.
On schedule.
On schedule
On schedule
Notice of violation On schedule
issued 8/30/74. Admin.
Admin, order 2/5/75.
-------
GEORGIA
Table A - ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
*002. Columbus-Phenix City
Interstate (Alabama)
*049. Jacksonville-Brunswick
Interstate (Florida)
.*053. Augusta-Aiken Interstate
(South Carolina)
054. Central Georgia
*055. Chattanooga Interstate
(Tennessee)
056. Metropolitan Atlanta
057. Northeast Georgia
*058. Savannah-Beaufort
Interstate (S.C.)
059. Southwest Georgia
Probably
will
attain
TSP
so2
TSPb
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSPb
so2
so2
TSP
so2
so2
L.
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSP
TSPb
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
173
-------
GEORGIA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*002. Columbus-Phenix City
(Ala.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*049. Jacksonville-Brunswick
(Fla.)-
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*053. Augusta-Aiken (S.C.)
TSP
SO,
"Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
054". Central Georgia
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
2
2
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
4
2
1
0
0
7
5
2
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
2
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
1
1
0
_
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
2
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
1
0
-
-
1
1
0
-
_
2
2
0
-
„
4
2
0
-
„
1974
Minimum
data0
4
0
3
0
0
5
0
2
0
0
6
1
4
0
0
7
2
5
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
-
2
1
0
-
_
2
2
0
-
_
5
5
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
a
SAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
A
174
-------
GEORGIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*055. Chattanooga (Tenn.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
056. Metropolitan Atlanta
JSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
057. Northeast Georgia
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*058. Savannah-Beaufort
(S.C.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
3
0
0
0
21
8
5
3
1
3
1
0
0
0
6
4
2
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
2
2
0
0
0
10
1
2
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
0
0
0
-
.
1
1
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
1
1
0
_
_
1973
Minimum
data0
2
2
0
0
0
22
10
5
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
6
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
2
0
-
—
4
1
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
1
0
0
_
_
1974
Minimum
data0
5
0
3
0
0
24
5
11
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
8
2
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
2
0
-
_
21
9
1
-
.
1
0
0
-
.
5
4
0
_
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and DX-
175
-------
GEORGIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3 '
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
059. Southwest Georgia
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
2
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
2
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
2
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
1
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
5
1
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
2
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
176
-------
GEORGIA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Albany
Atlanta
Chattanooga Interstate
(Georgia portion)
Savannah
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
so2
CO
°x
NO,
*AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved,
None required.
1. Cancellation of N02 emission limits from
nitric acid plants was promulgated
May 19, 1975.
2. State plan in effect for other pollutants.
3, On July 9, 1975, SC? limitations were pro-
posed for Plant AtkTnson, and TSP limits
based on stack height were deleted.
177
-------
GEORGIA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
96
93
103 Dollars
1627
1598
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less 'than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
39
49
18
36
107
4
260
76
473
5
3
30
10
199
422
2
78
314
1
9
2
4
81
2,222
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
178
-------
GEORGIA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (Stfe)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
243
11
2
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
230
11
2
In
violation
13
Unknown
status
0
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
153
1,412
1,565
38
4
3
TOTAL
45
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
179
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Georgia,
Atlanta
Georgia,
Augusta
Georgia,
Cartersville
Georgia,
Rockmant
Georgia,
Savannah
Atlantic Steel Co.
Steel Mfg.
SIP PM violation
Peachtree Generating SIP PM violation
Co.
Power Plant
Chemical Products
Corporation
Chem. Co.•
Marguette Cement
Corporation
Cement Plant
Union Camp Corp.
Paper Mill
SIP PM violation
PM SIP violation
PM SIP violation
NOV 2/13/75
Admin. Order U/17/75.
NOV 3/18/75
NOV 3/18/75
Admin. Order 5/20/75.
NOV 3/10/75
Order issued
6/16/75.
NOV 3/18/75
Order issued
6/19/75.
On schedule
On schedule.
On schedule.
On schedule.
-------
KENTUCKY
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*072.
*077.
*078.
*079.
101.
102.
*103.
104.
105.
Paducah-Cairo Interstate
(111.)
Evansvi 1 1 e-Owensboro-
Henderson Interstate
(Ind.)
Louisville Interstate
(Ind.)
Metropolitan Cincinnati
Interstate (Ind., Ohio)
Appalachian
Bluegrass
Huntington-Ashland-
Portsmouth-Ironton
Interstate (Ohio, W.Va.)
North Central Kentucky
South Central Kentucky
Probably
will
attain
TSP
SO b
C.
so2
TSP
so2
SO b
c.
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
SO b-Power
* plant
S0? -Power
^ plant
TSP
TSP
TSPb
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSPb
S09D
L.
TSPb
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
181
-------
KENTUCKY
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*072. Paducah-Cairo (111.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*077. Evansville-Owensboro-
Henderson (Ind.)
*T"SP
so2
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*078. Louisville (Ind.)
TSP
so2
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*079. Metropolitan Cincin-
nati (Ind., Ohio)
TSP
so2
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
27
25
2
1
1
22
18
9
2
2
16
13
6
5
3
15
14
1
1
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
16
20
1
1
0
14
16
1
1
0
19
19
6
3
2
15
19
1
0
1
Valid
annual
average
9
10
0
-
_
12
10
0
-
_
9
0
1
-
_
12
6
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
19
21
5
1
1
20
21
9
1
0
18
18
7
4
2
16
20
1
0
1
Valid
annual
average
12
12
0
-
_
16
12
5
-
.
9
10
3
-
_
13
10
1
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
18
4
18
1
1
15
2
15
1
1
15
7
17
6
2
16
1
16
0
1
Valid
annualc
average
18
18
0
-
-
15
15
1
-
-
12
12
5
-
-
13
13
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
182
-------
KENTUCKY (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
101. Appalachian
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
102. Bluegrass
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*103. Huntington-Ashland-
Portsmouth -
Ironton (Ohio, W.
Va.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
104. North Central
Kentucky
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
16
14
1
1
1
20
20
1
1
1
16
15
1
1
1
17
16
1
1
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
4
4
0
0
0
8
4
0
0
0
11
10
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
.
4
2
0
-
.
7
6
0
-
.
1
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
5
5
0
0
0
15
11
2
0
1
14
13
1
1
1
7
7
0
0
0
Valid
annualc
average
3
3
0
-
_
9
5
0
-
.
7
4
0
-
.
1
1
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
6
0
6
0
0
18
4
14
2
3
13
1
12
1
1
7
0
7
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
2
0
-
_
9
9
0
-
.
12
12
1
-
.
7
7
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
183
-------
KENTUCKY (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
105. South Central Ken-
tucky
TSP
SO,
/Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
16
15
1
1
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
3
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
-
8
7
0
0
0
•
Valid
annual
average
0
1
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
7
0
7
0
0
Valid
annual
average
6
6
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0^.
184
-------
KENTUCKY
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Cincinnati Interstate
(Kentucky portion)
Evansville Interstate
(Kentucky portion)
Louisville Interstate
(Kentucky portion)
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X (in
part of
AQMA)
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
185
-------
KENTUCKY
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
176
167
103 Dollars
3143
2461
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
57
57
56
47
130
28
402
283
421
43
3
202
0
114
384
80
221
379
222
290
0
47
9
3,475
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
186
-------
KENTUCKY
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOg)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
902
19
2
1
8
2
2
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compl iance
692
15
2
2
In
violation
i a c
lob
4
1
8
Unknown
status
/I C
13
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY8 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations....
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
223
3,081
3,304
239
0
126
TOTAL
365
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
187
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
oo
oo
Kentucky,
Ashland
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Louisville
Allied Chem. Corp.
Coke Plant
American
Standard
Foundry
City of Louis
Incinerator
Falls City
Brewing Co.
Beer Indust.
Fawcett
Printing
Magazine pub.
Lori Hard
Cigarette Mfg.
Anderson
Wood Products
BF Goodrich
Chemical Co.
Violation of parti-
culate emission std.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
standard.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
standard.
Violation of parti-
culate emissions std.
Violation of HC
emission std.
Violation of parti-
culate emission std.
Violation of parti-
culate emission std.
Violation of parti-
culate emission std.
NOV issued 9/20/7H
order issued 2/12/7U.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
NOV issued 6/2C/75.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
Currently in violation of
increment #5 on batteries
35" charging operations.
E.G. issued 7/23/75.
E.O. Pendino
Powerhouse
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Louisville
Kentucky,
Paducah
International
Harvester
Henry Vogt
Machine Co.
TVA-Shawnee Sta.
Power Plant
Violation of parti-
culate emission std.
Violation of parti-
culate emission std.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
NOV issued 6/20/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/16/7U.
Owner 12/9/7H.
Region considering further
enforcement action.
Kentucky,
Paradise
TVA-Paradise Sta.
Power Plant
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
Notice of violation
issued 9/16/7U
Order 12/9/7U
Currently in violation
of increment #1
on 10 units.
-------
MISSISSIPPI
Table A • ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*005. Mobile-Pensacola-Panama
City-Southern Missis-
sippi Interstate (Ala.,
Fla.)
*018. Metropolitan Memphis
Interstate (Ark., Tenn.)
134. Mississippi Delta
135. Northeast Mississippi
TSP1
S00
TSPL
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
190
-------
MISSISSIPPI
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*005. Mobile-Pensacola-
Panama City-
Southern Mississippi
(Ala., Fla.)
TSP
SO,
"Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*018. Metropolitan Memphis
(Ark., Tenn.)
TSP
SO-
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
134. Mississippi Delta
TSP
so2
"Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
135. Northeast Mississippi
TSP
S0?
"Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
19
13
3
0
2
1
0
1
0
1
3
1
0
0
0
6
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
dataD
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
20
15
2
0
2
1
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
6
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
2
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
1974
Minimum
data
21
3
16
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
7
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
16
n
1
-
-
1
0
1
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
5
1
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
191
-------
MISSISSIPPI
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
192
-------
MISSISSIPPI
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
73
50
103 Dollars
1220
623
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy Q
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
13
13
2
62
30
1
309
178
2,193
9
11
30
12
11
354
68
417
348
100
94
0
489
155
4,899
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
193
-------
MISSISSIPPI
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR. INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
411.
3
3
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
339
3
In
violation
5
3
Unknown
status
67
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
330
105
435
29
8
1
TOTAL
38
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
194
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
vo
en
Mississippi,
Jackson
Mississippi,
Moss Point
Mississippi,
Natchez
Cook Construction
Co.
International
Paper Co.
Violation of
particulate emis-
sion std.
Violation of par-
ticulate reg.
International Paper Violation of par-
Co, ticulate emission
std.
Pulp 6 Paper Mill
Notice of violation
issued 11/29/71*.
Notice of violation
issued 9/21/7U.
Order issued 1/23/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/21/7U. Order
1/23/^5.
Recent source tests
indicate marginal
compliance; will monitor
source.
Equipment delays will
require U additional
months to achieve compliance.
On Schedule.
Mississippi,
Purvis
Mississippi,
Yazoo City
Amerada Hess
Corp.
Refinery
Miss. Chem. Corp.
Fertilizer Plant
SIP violation for PM
Violation of parti-
culate emission stds.
NOV
NOV issued 6/14/75.
Order pendinq State action.
will Achieve como.
-------
NORTH CAROLINA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
136.
165.
166.
*167.
168.
169.
170.
171.
Northern Piedmont
Eastern Mountain
Eastern Piedmont
Metropolitan Charlotte
Interstate (S.C.)
Northern Coastal Plain
Sandhills
Southern Coastal Plain
Western Mountain
Probably
will
attain
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
so2
Ł
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
so2
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSP
TSPb
TSP
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
196
-------
NORTH CAROLINA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
136. Northern Piedmont
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
165. Eastern Mountain
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
166. Eastern Piedmont
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*167. Metropolitan Char-
lotte (S.C.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
24
24
0
1
1
27
18
0
0
0
15
15
0
1
1
39
25
0
2
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
29
24
0
0
1
29
22
0
0
0
16
16
0
0
0
44
29
0
1
0
Valid
annual
average
20
15
0
-
-
13
1
0
-
-
13
3
0
-
-
19
8
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
27
23
0
0
0
27
20
0
0
0
17
17
0
0
0
39
28
1
1
2
Valid
annual
average
1
1
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
1
1
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
26
0
22
0
0
23
0
18
0
0
15
0
15
0
0
40
1
28
1
1
Valid
annual
average
24
19
0
-
-
16
11
0
-
-
13
13
0
-
-
30
22
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
197
-------
NORTH CAROLINA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
168. Northern Coastal Plain
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
169. Sandhills
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
170. Southern Coastal
Plain
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
171. Western Mountain
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
13
13
0
0
1
8
7
0
0
0
16
15
0
0
0
23
14
0
0
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
14
14
0
0
0
8
7
0
0
0
17
16
0
0
0
26
16
1
1
1
Valid
annual
average
8
2
0
-
_
6
5
0
-
.
14
7
0
-
_
7
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
11
12
0
0
0
9
8
0
0
0
14
13
0
0
0
24
12
0
1
1
Valid
annual
average
0
1
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
11
0
11
0
0
8
7
0
0
0
15
0
14
0
0
19
0
13
0
1
Valid
annual
average
11
11
0
-
_
8
7
0
-
_
13
12
0
-
_
14
11
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
198
-------
NORTH CAROLINA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Charlotte
Greensboro
Winston-Sal em
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
199
-------
NORTH CAROLINA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
215
149
103 Dollars
3454
2293
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
73
97
72
154
328
52
542
177
838
10
15
51
6
150
496
4
353
600
97
122
3
137
44
4,421
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
200
-------
NORTH CAROLINA
Table 6. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES'3
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SO?)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
863
12
4
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
835
12
2
In
violation
24
2
Unknown
status
II.
ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
787
2,168
2,955
85
13
21
TOTAL
119
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
201
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*053.
*058.
*167.
198.
199.
200.
201.
202.
203.
204.
Augusta-Aiken Interstate
(Georgia)
Savannah-Beaufort Inter-
state (Georgia)
Metropolitan Charlotte
Interstate (N.C.)
Camden-Sumter
Charleston
Columbia
Florence
Greenville-Spartanburg
Greenwood
Georgetown
Probably
will
attain
TSP
so2
TSPb
so2
TSPb
so2
TSP
so2
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
so2
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSP
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
^Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
202
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
* 053. Augusta-Aiken (Ga.)
TSP
so2
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*058. Savannah-Beaufort
(Ga.)
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*167. Metropolitan Char-
lotte (N.C.)
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
198. Camden-Sumter
TSP
S0?
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
3
1
0
0
5
3
0
0
0
6
4
1
0
1
4
2
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
dataD
5
4
1
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
7
4
1
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
2
1
0
-
.
3
0
0
-
-
5
4
0
-
.
3
1
0
-
—
1973
Minimum
data0
5
4
1
0
0
4
3
0
0
0
7
6
1
1
1
4
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
4
0
-
.
3
2
0
-
-
5
3
0
-
.
4
2
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
5
1
4
0
0
4
2
3
0
0
7
1
6
1
1
5
2
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
4
0
-
_
4
3
0
-
-
5
4
0
-
.
4
3
0
-
.
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and DX-
203
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
199. Charleston
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
200. Columbia
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
201. Florence
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
202. Greenville-Spartan-
burg
TSP
S0?
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
12
4
2
0
0
12
6
1
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
15
11
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
16
5
1
0
0
12
7
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
15
9
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
0
0
-
.
10
6
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
13
4
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data
11
8
3
0
0
13
8
1
0
1
3
1
1
0
0
26
17
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
2
1
-
.
9
6
0
-
_
3
1
0
-
_
n
7
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
12
4
11
0
0
16
1
8
0
1
3
1
1
0
0
42
2
28
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
2
0
-
_
4
4
1
-
_
3
1
0
-
_
3
2
0
-
_
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
204
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
203. Greenwood
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
204. Georgetown
TSP
30-
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
2
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
2
2
0
0
0
8
2
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data
2
2
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
1
0
-
_
3
2
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
2
2
2
0
0
6
1
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
2
0
-
.
3
2
0
-
.
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
A
205
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Charleston
Greenville
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
206
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
119
72
103 Dollars
2037
1028
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal -fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
63
70
42
52
285
12
511
58
24
4
0
32
11
93
153
0
67
196
16
30
0
49
18
1786
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
207
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb.
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
249
8
6
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
247
8
6
In
violation
2
Unknown
status
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
0
585
585
39
0
Q
TOTAL
39
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
208
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY/TYPE
STATE/CITY OF SOURCE POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION RESULTS/STATUS
South Carolina, Sonoco Products Co. SIP PM violation NOV a/16/75
Huntsville
Mfg. Plant
-------
TENNESSEE
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*007.
*018.
*055.
*207.
208.
209.
Tennessee River Valley-
Cumberland Mountains
Interstate (Ala.)
Metropolitan Memphis
Interstate (Ark., Miss.)
Chattanooga Interstate
(Georgia)
Eastern Tennessee-South-
western Virginia
Interstate (Va.)
Middle Tennessee
Western Tennessee
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
SO,
c.
TSPb
so2
so2
L.
TSP
Probably
will not
attain
TSPb
S02 -Power
plant
TSP
S02 -Power
plant
S02 -Power
plant
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSPb
Point sources
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
210
-------
TENNESSEE
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*007. Tennessee River
Valley-Cumberland
Mts. (Ala.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*018. Metropolitan Memphis
(Ark.,Miss.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*055. Chattanooga (Ga.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*207. Eastern Tennessee-
Southwestern Vir-
ginia (Va.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
7
2
1
0
0
12
9
0
2
2
10
2
1
1
1
29
12
2
1
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
8
1
0
0
0
12
4
0
1
2
11
4
0
0
0
32
9
1
0
1
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
—
11
1
0
-
_.
7
1
0
-
_
7
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
8
3
1
0
0
15
6
2
3
3
13
12
0
0
0
40
12
18
0
2
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
5
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
7
2
2
0
0
12
0
6
2
2
11
0
14
0
0
30
4
14
0
3
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
* .= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
211
-------
TENNESSEE (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
208. Middle Tennessee
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
209. Western Tennessee
JSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
to. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
30
19
2
1
3
8
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
31
18
0
1
1
8
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
11
16
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
44
22
9
2
4
10
0
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
9
1
2
-
.
1
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
30
4
20
2
4
9
0
1
0
0
Valid
annualc
average
0
0
1
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
212
-------
TENNESSEE
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Chattanooga Interstate
(Tennessee portion)
Nashville
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
213
-------
TENNESSEE
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
191
146
103 Dollars
3193
2308
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
45
95
42
92
116
50
489
495
181
37
96
122
41
471
317
25
196
325
451
134
1
110
63
3994
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
214
-------
TENNESSEE
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOg)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
607
8
1
2
3
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
517
2
1
2
3
In
violation
74
6
Unknown
status
'
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
217
3,051
3,268
192
112
4
TOTAL
308
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
215
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Tennessee
Oak Ridge
Tennessee,
Columbia
Tennessee,
Copper Hill
Tennessee,
Gallatin
Tennessee,
Kingston
Tennessee,
Kingsport
Tennessee,
Mount Pleasant
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
TVA-Bull Run Sta.
Power Plant
Monsanto Industries
Chem. Co.
Rotary kilns
Cities Service
Copper Smelter
TVA-Gallatin Sta.
Power Plant
TVA-Kingston Sta.
Power Plant
Mead Paper Co.
Boilers
Stauffer Chem. Co.
Chemical Plant
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
Violation of sulfur
oxide emission stds.
S02 S PM violation
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
PM SIP violation
SO2 SIP violation.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 9/12/7K. Admin.
Order issued 12/U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued U/20/7U.
NOV issued U/15/75.
Admin, order 5/23/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/H/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 12/H/74.
NOV - 8/23/7H
A.O. U/2U/75.
NOV issued 3/18/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
9/12/71* Order
9/12/7U, Order
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Tennessee, E.I. DuPont
Old Hickory
Chemical Plant
Tennessee,
Waverly
TVA-Johnston Sta.
Power Plant
POLLUTION PROBLEM
SO2 6 PM violation.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
std.
TYPE OF ACTION
NOV issued 2/25/7U.
A. O. issued 6/2/75.
Notice of violation
issued 12/H/7i».
RESULTS/STATUS
9/12/7U Order
-------
EPA REGION V
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
OHIO
WISCONSIN
-------
ILLINOIS
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*065. Burlington-Keokuk Inter-
state (Iowa)
066. East Central Illinois
*067. Metropolitan Chicago
Interstate (Ind.)
*068. Metropolitan Dubuque
Interstate (Iowa, Wise.)
*069. Metropolitan Quad Cities
Interstate (Iowa)
*070. Metropolitan St. Louis
Interstate (Mo.)
071. North Central Illinois
*072. Paducah-Cairo Interstate
(Kentucky)
TSP
S00
TSP1
so2
S00
TSP
TSP
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
S02 -Power
plant
TSP
S09 -Power
c plant
TSP1
TSP
S09 -Power
c plant
S02 -Power
plant
SO,, -Power
^ plant
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
218
-------
ILLINOIS (con't.)
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*073. Rockford-Janes vine-
Bel oit Interstate
(Wisconsin)
074. Southeast Illinois
075. West Central Illinois
TSP1
S.°2
Compliance
problem
TSP
TSP
S0
S0
-Power
plant
-Power
plant
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
219
-------
ILLINOIS
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*065. Burlington-Keokuk
(Iowa)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
066. East Central Illinois
TSP
so-
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*067. Metropolitan Chicago
(Ind.)
TSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*068. Metropolitan Dubuque
(Iowa, Wise.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
7
2
2
0
0
3
3
1
0
0
73
29
19
11
9
1
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data6
6
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
85
36
13
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
1
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
73
35
11
-
.
0
0
0
_
_
1973
Minimum
data
8
1
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
89
40
17
11
3
1
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
1
-
_
0
0
1
-
_
74
34
7
-
.
0
0
0
_
_
1974
Minimum
data15
6
1
5
0
1
2
1
2
0
0
88
20
43
10
6
1
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
'o
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
_
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
220
-------
ILLINOIS (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*069. Metropolitan Quad
Cities (Iowa)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*070. Metropolitan St.
Louis (Mo.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
071; North Central Illinoi
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*072. Paducah-Cairo (Ky.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
lo. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
1
1
0
0
16
2
5
4
2
5
3
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
6
0
0
0
1
16
0
. 3
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
14
0
1
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
8
2
0
0
1
16
0
4
1
0
3
1
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
_
14
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
9
1
2
0
1
16
5
2
4
1
2
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
— e-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
221
-------
ILLINOIS (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*073. Rockford-Janesville-
Beloit (Wise.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
074. Southeast Illinois
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
075. West Central Illinois
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
1
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
8
6
2
1
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
4
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
8
0
1
1
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
.
5
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
4
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
8
0
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
1
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data"
4
1
2
0
0
3
1
3
0
0
7
3
2
1
1
Valid
annual
average
0
0
,0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
222
-------
ILLINOIS
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Decatur
Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin
Interstate (Illinois
portion)
Peoria
St. Louis Interstate
(Illinois portion)
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
CO
X
°x
X
X
N02
X
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. City of Chicago has been inspecting
vehicles under a voluntary program since
June 1973. Enforcement orders were
issued in August 1975 for a mandatory
inspection/maintenance program to begin
in March 1976 for cars coming into the
Loop unless the City increases its vol-
untary program to 3000 cars/month by
December 1975. Enforcement orders were
also issued to Cook County in August
1975 for a mandatory I/M program to
begin in March 1976 for cars coming
into the Loop from Cook County.
2. A traffic management plan and parking
prohibitions are being implemented in
the Loop.
Disapproval of CO control strategy in Metro-
politan Chicago AQCR was published June 22,
1973.
223
-------
ILLINOIS
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
623
316
103 Dollars
13,668
7,697
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
225
143
95
55
180
22
768
133
248
59
18
208
6
225
223
209
15
139
320
157
3
51
47
3,549
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
224
-------
ILLINOIS
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
540
31
14
4
4
24
11
15
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
467
26
7
1
4
11
6
15
In
violation
CO
bo
5
4
1
4
Unknown
status
1 C
1 b
3
2
13
1
II.
ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
no data
2,653
2,653+
no data
no data
no data
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
225
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Illinois,
Stickney
Illinois,
Thornton
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Incinerator, Inc.
Marblehead Lime
Company
Quarry
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Incinerator in viola-
tion of particulate
matter std.
Violation of parti-
culate std.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 5/13/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/19/7U. Order
issued 7/3/71*.
RESULTS/STATUS
On State schedule.
ro
IS>
01
Illinois,
Venice
Illinois,
Wood River
Illinois,
Wood Fiver
Blue Island
Illinois,
Wood River
Illinois,
Union Elec. Co.
Venice Plant #2
Power Plant
AMOCO
Refinery
Clark Oil and
Refining Co.
Refinery
Clark Oil Co.
Refinery
Fluid Catalytic
Cracking Unit
American Brick Co.
Brick Kiln
G Crusher
Violation of parti-
culate 5 sulfur
oxides stds.
Steam boilers, and
process heaters in
violation of sulfur
dioxide std.
Violation of sulfur
oxides stds. and Fed.
categorical sched.
FCC unit violates
particulate, hydro-
carbon 5 carbon
monoxide stds.
Violation of 111.
opacity and par-
ticulate emission
stds.
Notice of violation
issued 10/23/7U. Order
issued U/29/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/29/75.
Consent order issued
6/3/75.
Consent orders for both
facilities issued
6/2/75.
Notice of violation
issued 10/2U/7H.
Order issued 6/U/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/21/74.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
In compliance with terms
of order.
Presently in compliance with
terms of orders.
In compliance with terms
of order.
State suit filed, no
further Federal action
at this time.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Illinois,
Morris
Reichhold Chems.,
Inc.
Maleic Anhy-
dride off gas
stack
Violation of carbon
monoxide stds.
Notice of violation
issued 2/6/75.
In compliance with terms
of State order.
Illinois,
Pekin
Illinois,
Quincy
Illinois,
Skokie
Illinois,
Sterling
Illinois,
Stickney
Commonwealth Edison
Powerton Station
Celotex Corp.
Industrial
Boilers
Skokie, Village
of
Municipal
Incinerator
Northwestern Steel
S Wire
Steel Mfg.
Koppers Co., Inc.
Phthalic Anhy-
dride off gas
stack
Power plant in viola-
tion of sulfur oxides
std.
Violation parti-
culate stds. and
Federal categorical
compliance schedule.
Violation of parti-
culate matter
emissoion std.
Electric arc
furnaces violate
particulate stds.
Violation of carbon
monoxide std.
Notice of violation
issued 2/27/75.
Consent order
issued 11/20/7H.
Notice of violation is-
sued 2/20/74. Consent
order issued 4/2/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 8/2/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 2/6/75.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Presently in compliance.
In compliance with terms
of State order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Illinois,
East Alton
Illinois,
Elgin
Illinois,
Elwood
Illinois,
Granite City
Illinois,
Joliet
Illinois Power Co.
Wood River Generat-
ing Station
Power Plant
Woodruff
Edwards, Inc.
Foundry
Stepan Chem. Co.
Phthalic Anhy-
dride off gas
stack
Granite City
Steel Co.
Coke ovens
AMOCO Chem. Corp.
Chem. Plant
Illinois, Texaco Refinery
Lawrenceville Inc.
Refinery
Violation of sulfur
oxides stds. and
Federal categorical
compliance schedule.
Cupola violates
carbon monoxide
stds.
Violation of carbon
monoxide std.
Violation of
particulate std.
and federal
compliance
schedule for coke
ovens.
Violation of carbon
monoxide std.
Violation of car-
bon monoxide and
hydrocarbon stds.
Notice of violation
issued 9/3/7U.
Consent order
issued 6/2U/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/7/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 2/6/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/13/70.
Order issued 6/26/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/7/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/26/74.
Order issued 7/3/7H.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Awaiting results of
stack test.
In compliance with terms
of State order.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
-------
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Illinois,
Chicago
Illinois,
Chicago
Illinois,
Chicago
Illinois,
Chicago
Illinois,
Chicago
Illinois,
East Peoria
International
Harvester Co.
Coke ovens
Republic Steel Corp.
Chicago Works
Steel Mfg.
Republic Steel
Corp. Chicago
Works
Steel Mfg.
Sheffield Foundry
Company
Foundry
U.S. Steel Corp.
South Works
Steel Mfg.
Central Illin-
ois Light Co.
Wallace station
Power Plant
Violation of federal
compliance schedule
for coke oven quench-
ing and pushing.
Notice of violation
issued 11/29/73.
Consent order
issued 4/11/74.
Melt shop roof moni- Notice of violation
tor, Elec. arc furnaces issued 8/28/74. Con-
and violate particulate sent order issued
and visible emission 1/15/75.
stds.
Violation of fed-
eral compliance
schedule for coke
oven pushing and
quenching.
Cupola violates
particulates emis-
sion stds.
Violation of parti-
culate emission
stds.
Violation of Feder-
al compliance
schedule for Illi-
nois particulate
and sulfur oxides
stds.
Notice of violation
issued 11/29/73.
Order issued
Notice of violation is-
sued 10/24/74.
Notice of violation
issued 9/5/74.
Notice of violation
issued 12/20/73.
Consent order issued
1/10/75.
In compliance with terms
of order.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
In compliance with terms
of order.
Now in compliance.
Federal action.
No further
State initiated enforcement
proceeding before Illinois
Pollution Control Board to
require compliance and/or
penalize for past non-compliance
EPA will defer to State
action at this time.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Illinois,
Bartonville
Illinois,
Blue Island
Illinois,
Cahokia
Illinois,
Chicago
Illinois,
Chicago
Illinois,
Chicago
COMPMNY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Central Illinois
Light Co. Edward
Station
Power Plant
Illinois Brick
Company
Brick Mfg.
Union Elec. Co.
Cahokia Plant
Power Plant
City of Chicago,
Cook County
State of Illinois
TCP
City of Chicago
Northwest and
Southwest and
Calumet
Incinerators
Interlake, Inc.
Coke ovens
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of sulfur
oxide std S
Federal compliance
schedule for Illi-
nois sulfur oxide
std.
Kilns violate par-
ticulate std.
Violation of parti-
culates 6 sulfur
oxides stds.
Violation of carbon
monoxide std.
Violation of visible
emission particulate
from incinerator and
carbon monoxide stds.
Coke oven (pushing
S quenching) Opera-
tions.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 5/31/74.
Consent order is-
sued 1/10/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 10/23/7H.
Notice of violation
issued U/17/75.
Notice of violation
issued 2/1U/75.
Consent order issued
for Southwest Inciner-
ator on 6/26/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/16/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Compliant filed before
Illinois Pollution Control
Board, further Federal
action deferred pending State
action.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Negotiating with company
on possible consent order.
-------
INDIANA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*067. Metropolitan Chicago
Interstate (111.)
076. East Central Indiana
*077. Evansville-Owensboro-
Henderson Interstate
(Kentucky)
*078. Louisville Interstate
(Kentucky)
*079. Metropolitan Cincinnati
Interstate (Kentucky,
Ohio)
080. Metropolitan Indian-
apolis
081. Northeast Indiana
*082. South Bend-Elkhart-
Benton Harbor Inter-
state (Mich.)
TSP
so2
TSP1
TSP
so2
TSP1
S00
TSP
S02 -Power
plant
SOp -Power
plant
TSPU
SOp -Power
plant
.TSP
SOp -Power
plant
TSP
S02 -Power
plant
* - Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
C- w I
-------
INDIANA (con't)
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
083. Southern Indiana
084. Wabash Valley
TSP
S0? -Power
plant
TSP -Point
source com-
pliance
problem
S0? -Power
plant
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
""Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
232
-------
INDIANA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*067. Metropolitan Chicago
(111.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
076. East CeTi'tral Indiana
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*077. Evansville-Owensboro-
Henderson (Ky.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*078. Louisville (Ky.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
29
25
11
3
3
6
4
0
0
0
11
5
4
1
1
6
5
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
32
28
3
0
0
7
4
0
0
0
12
1
1
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
20
18
0
-
-
3
0
0
-
-
7
1
0
-
.
0
1
0
-
1973
Minimum
data
36
30
4
0
1
11
9
0
0
0
8
4
1
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
19
18
1
-
-
3
1
0
-
-
5
0
1
-
_
0
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data
34
3
28
0
0
10
0
6
0
0
7
6
7
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
24
20
3
-
-
4
4
0
-
-
2
1
2
-
_
2
2
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
233
-------
INDIANA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*079. Metropolitan Cinci-
nnati (Ky.,0hio)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
080. Metropolitan Indian-
apolis
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
081. Northeast Indiana
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*082. South Bend-El khart-
Benton Harbor (Mich.
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
3
1
0
0
25
18
8
2
2
4
3
1
0
0
17
14
3
1
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
1
0
0
0
0
17
12
4
1
1
2
1
0
0
0
18
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
16
11
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
10
4
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
1
1
0
0
0
18
12
6
1
1
2
2
0
0 .
0
15
5
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
_
15
10
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
8
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
2
0
2
0
0
16
4
12
0
6
2
0
2
0
0
15
0
7
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
15
1
1
-
_
0
1
0
-
_
11
3
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
234
-------
INDIANA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
083. Southern Indiana
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
084. Wabash Valley
JSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
8
5
1
0
0
15
7
2
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
4
2
0
0
0
15
1
0
1
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
„
13
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data
4
4
0
0
0
17
6
0
0
0
•
Valid
annual
average
2
1
0'
-
_
8
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
4
0
4
0
0
14
0
5
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
3
0
-
_
7
4
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
235
-------
INDIANA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Evansville Interstate
(Indiana portion)
Illinois- Indiana-Wisconsin
Interstate (Indiana
portion)
Indianapolis
Louisville Interstate
(Indiana portion) .
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
X
CO
°x
X
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
EPA promulgations (May 14, 1973, and
February 6, 1974) are in effect.
EPA promulgation (April 5, 1974) is in effect
for Metropolitan Indianapolis AQCR, but
limited progress is being made toward imple-
mentation.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
236
-------
INDIANA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
176
159
103 Dollars
2120
2729
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
187
86
132
99
177
46
349
88
854
258
n
149
18
299
242
75
16
329
250
488
6
28
5
4,192
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
237
-------
INDIANA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SO?)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
398
29
31
11
31
14
13
27
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
301
10
22
7
15
8
27
In
violation
76
19
6
Unknown
status
21
3
4
16
6
13
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
251
687
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
938
no data for
local agencies
38
37
7
82
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
238
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Indiana,
Chesterfield
Indiana,
Derby
Indiana,
East Chicago
Indiana,
East Chicago
Bethlehem Steel
Corp., Burns Harbor
Plant
Steel plant
Mulzer Crushed Stone
Company
Quarry
Atlantic Richfield
Corp.
Refinery
Blaw-Knox Foundry
Foundry
Indiana, Inland Steel Co.
East Chicago
Steel Mill
Indiana, Mobil Oil Corp.
East Chicago
Refinery
Indiana, Youngstown Sheet
East Chicago and Tube Co.
Steel Mill
Violation of par-
ticulate (opacity
and process weight
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate matter and
opacity standards.
Violation of sul-
fur oxide stds.
Open hearth furn-
ace violates parti-
culate stds.
Violation of opaci-
ty emission stand-
ard.
Violation of opa-
city S sulfur oxide
limitations.
Violation of parti-
culate and opacity
standards.
Notice of violation
issued 7/H/-73
Coke ovens placed on satisfactory
state schedule. Other points of
emission in comrliance or under
investigation by regional office.
Notice of violation is- Presently in compliance
sued 2/7/7H.
Notice of violation
issued 9/10/^3.
Notice of violation
issued 1/21/70. Admin-
istrative order is-
sued U/15/7U.
Notice of violation is-
sued "7/18/73.
Notice of violation
issued 9/10/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 7/18/73.
Source in compliance.
Presently in comnliance with
terms of order.
Source in compliance.
On enforceable State orr'er.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Indiana,
Gary
Indiana,
Hammond
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
U. S. Steel Corp.
Gary Steel Works
Stauffer Chem.
Company
Sulfuric acid
Manufacturer
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Tin Mill boiler house
in violation of sulfur
dioxide std.; sinter
plant, Q-BOP and BOF
in violation of parti-
culate and visible
emissions stds.
Violation of sulfur
dioxide emission
stds .
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 5/16/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/10/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Final compliance be evaluated.
Indiana,
Indianapolis
Indiana,
Indianopolis
Indiana,
Indianapolis
Indiana,
Indianapolis
Indiana,
LaPorte
Nat'l Starch S Chem.
Corp.
Industrial Boiler
RCA Corp.
Electronics
Manufacturer
Rock Island
Refining Corp.
Refinery
Union Carbide Corp.
Industrial Boiler
Teledyne Casting
Service
Foundry
Violation of parti-
culate matter and
sulfur oxide emis-
sion standard.
Violation of hydro-
carbon emission
standard.
Violation of hydro-
carbon and carbon
monoxide emission
standards.
Violation of par-
ticulate matter
emission standard.
Cupola violates
particulate matter
emission standard.
Notice of violation is-
sued 11/19/73 admin.
order issued 2/13/74.
Notice of violation is-
sued 7/1/74.
Notice of violation
issued 3/13/74.
Notice of violation
issued 5/29/74.
Notice of violation is-
sued 3/6/74.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order. SO2 status
under re-examination.
In compliance with
local order.
In compliance with State
enforcement order.
On enforceable State Schedule
SO2 status being investicratefl.
In compliance with terms
of order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Indiana, Indiana & Mich.
Lawrenceburg Elec. Co. Tanners
Creek Generating
Station
Indiana,
Muncie
Indiana,
Munster
Magaw Construction
Inc.
Asphalt Plant
American Brick Co.
Brick Kiln 6
Crusher
Power plant in viola-
tion of sulfur oxides
std.
Violation of opac-
ty and particulate
matter emission
standards.
Violation of parti-
culate and opacity
Notice of violation
issued 3/10/75.
Notice of violation is- Presently in compliance
sued 12/19/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 1/21/7H.
Indiana,
Newburgh
Indiana,
Newburgh
Indiana,
New burg
Southern Indiana
Gas and Elec. Co.
Culley & Warrick
Generating Station.
Aluminum Company of
America
3/U of Warrick
station owns
ALCOA
Aluminum Smelter
Power plant in viola-
tion of sulfur dioxide
standard.
Power plant in viola-
tion of sulfur dioxide
standard.
Violation of parti-
culate stds.
Notice of violation
issued 5/27/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/27/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/U/7H.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RES ULTS/STATUS
ro
-P>
ro
Indiana,
Noblesville
Indiana,
Richmond
Indiana,
Richmond
Indiana,
Sellersburg
Indiana,
Terre Haute
Indiana,
Terre Haute
Indiana,
Whiting
Hamilton Cty.
Asphalt, Inc.
Asphaltic
Concrete
Johns-Manville Corp.
Glass Mfg.
Magaw Construction
Inc.
Asphalt Plant
Sellersburg Stone
Company
Rock Crushing
C.F. Industries
Ammonium Nitrate
Process.
J.W. Davis Co.
Boilers
American Oil Co.
Oil Refinery
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Forming lines
violate parti-
culate std.
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
matter emission
standards.
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
matter emission
standards.
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standards.
Violation of parti-
culate matter and
opacity emission
standards.
Violation of sulfur
oxide and opacity
standards.
Notice of violation is-
issued 11/19/73. Admin.
order issued 1/28/7U.
Notice of violation is-
sued 6/26/7U. Notice of
violation issued
9/16/7U. Enforcement
Order issued 3/31/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 12/19/73.
Notice of violation
issued 1/10/7U.
Order issued t/2/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 10/9/73, Admin.
order issued 1/31/7H.
Notice of violation is-
sued U/26/7H; Admin.
order issued 6/15/7(|.
Notice of violation
issued 9/10/73.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Modification of existing
order under consideration
Presently in compliance
Achieved compliance with
regulations.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
In compliance.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY/TYPE
yrATE/CITY OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Indiana,
Cayuga
Colonial Brick Corp.
Brick Mfg.
Indiana, International
Indianapolis Harvest Co.
ro
.Ł»
GJ
Indiana,
Marion
Indiana,
Mt. Summit
Indiana,
Richmond
Indust. Boiler
Foster Forbes
Glass Co.
Glass Mfg.
Indust. Boilers
Magaw Construction
Inc.
Asphalt Plant
Dana Corp.
Foundry
Violation of parti-
culate emission
standard.
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Source refused info.
requested in sec-
tion 11« letter.
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
matter emission
standards.
Cupolas violate op-
acity and partic-
ulate stds.
Notice of violation is-
sued 12/4/73. Order
issued 2/26/7H.
Notice of Violation
issued 10/26/73.
Admin, order issued
11/21/73.
Notice of violation
issued 1/2/7H.
Notice of violation is-
sued 12/19/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 10/30/73.
SO2 status under investigation.
In compliance with particulate
regs.
On State schedule.
Presently in compliance.
Presently in compliance.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Indiana
Cannelton
COMPANY/TYPt
OF SOURCE
Can-Tex Industries,
Inc.
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti
culate matter emis
sion standard.
Indiana
Indianapolis
Indiana
Largo
Indiana
Terre Haute
Indiana,
Petersburg
Rock Crushing
Central Soya Co.
Indust. Boilers
Celotex Corporation
Indust. Boilers
Public Service Co.
of Ind. Wabash Sta.
Power Plant
Indiana Rural Elec.
Coop., Inc.
Power Plant
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Violation of sulfur
oxide emission
standard.
Violation of opac-
ity and particula-
te standards.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation is-
sued 10/17/73 Admin.
order issued 1/2U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 10/11/73.
Notice of violation
issued 1/23/7U. Admin.
order issued 3/26/7U.
Notice of violation
sued 9/13/73.
Consent order is-
sued 7/10/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
On State schedule.
Stack tests currently
beina evaluated.
Revision of Indiana
SO2 req. delayina enforce-
ment.
In compliance with terms
of consent order.
Indiana,
Bloomington
Indiana,
Bloomington
Bloomington
Crushed Stone
Co.
Quarry
Indiana University
Power Plant
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
matter emission
standards.
Violation of parti-
culate standard.
Notice of violation is-
sued 10/31/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 10/24/73 admin.
Order issued 1/8/74.
Presently in compliance with
requlation
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Indiana,
Wabash
Indiana,
Wabash
Container Corp. of
America
Industrial
Boilers
Wabash Smelting
Corp.
Aluminum
Plant
Violation of parti-
culate and sulfur
oxide stds.
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
matter stds.
Notice of violation is- In compliance.
sued 10/9/73.
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/73. Second
NOV issued 6/27/7U .
Order issued 5/30/73.
Criminal action filed;
defendant pled nolo con-
tendere on 7/16/75; pre-
sently in compliance
with probation terms.
-------
MICHIGAN
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*082. South Bend-Elkhart-Benton
Harbor Interstate (Ind.)
122. Central Michigan
123. Metropolitan Detroit-
Port Huron
*124. Metropolitan Toledo
Interstate (Ohio)
125. South Central Michigan
126. Upper Michigan
SO,
TSPL
TSP
TSP1
TSP
S0? -Power
plant
TSP
S02 - Com-
pliance
problem
S0? -Power
plant
TSP
Point
source
compliance
problem
S00 -
Power
plant
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
^Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
246
-------
MICHIGAN
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*082. South Bend-El khart-
Benton Harbor (Ind. )
TSP
SO-,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
122. Central Michigan
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
123. Metropolitan Detroit-
Port Huron
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*124. Metropolitan Toledo
(Ohio)
TSP
S0?
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
1
1
0
0
42
n
5
3
1
42
13
17
7
4
6
2
3
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
5
1
0
0
0
35
9
3
0
0
42
8
16
3
1
4
2
2
0
0
Valid ,
annual
average
5
1
0
-
.
26
5
2
-
.
42
7
7
-
.
3
1
1
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
5
1
0
0
0
42
13
5
2
0
44
9
16
5
1
4
2
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
1
0
-
.
35
7
2
-
.
38
5
4
-
.
3
1
2
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
5
1
1
0
0
44
7
11
2
0
42
16
9
5
1
4
2
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and G-
247
-------
MICHIGAN (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
125. South Central Michi-
gan
TSP
SO-
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
126. Upper. Michigan
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
10
4
1
0
0
21
5
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
7
2
1
0
0
15
2
0
0
0
Valid .
annual
average
6
2
0
-
_
12
2
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
12
2
2
0
0
18
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
8
1
1
-
_
13
4
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
14
2
2
• 0
0
19
0
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and DX.
248
-------
MICHIGAN
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Detroit
Toledo Interstate (Michigan
portion)
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
EPA promulgation (October 28, 1972) is
in effect.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
249
-------
MICHIGAN
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
220
169
103 Dollars
4534
4426
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the .
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
204
154
167
11
57
27
323
23
8
79
2
179
39
5
142
37
4
186
0
98
1
14
17
1,777
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
250
-------
MICHIGAN
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SO?)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
*
No applicable emission limitation-
Total
number
identified
216
30
1*
17
1
4
11
5
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
188
22
13
1
3
10
5
In
violation
22
8
Unknown
status
6
4
1
1
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
Not applicable
677
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
677
no data
not applicable
no data
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
251
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY OFSOURCE POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION RESULTS/STATUS
Michigan, Hillsdale Foundry violation of parti- Notice of violation State legal action has been
Hillsdale culate matter emis- issued U/9/74. initiated to enforce schedule.
sion standard.
-------
MINNESOTA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
127.
*128.
*129.
*130.
131.
132.
133.
Central Minnesota
Southeast Minnesota-La
Crosse Interstate
(Wise.)
Duluth-Superior Inter-
state (Wise.)
Metropolitan Fargo-
Moorhead Interstate
(N.D.)
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Northwest Minnesota
Southwest Minnesota
Probably
will
attain
TSP
so2
so2
SO,
L-
TSP
S09
C-
so,
L
so2
C.
Probably
will not
attain
TSPb
TSPb
TSP
S02 -Power
plant
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total sus'pended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
3Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
253
-------
MINNESOTA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
GY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
127. Central Minnesota
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*128. Southeast Minnesota-
La Crosse (Wise.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*129. Duluth-Superior
(Wise.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*130. Metropolitan Fargo-
Moorhead (N.D.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
7
1
0
0
0
10
3
- 1
0
0
16
4
1
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
No. monitors repo/ting
1972
Minimum
data0
10
2
0
0
0
10
3
1
0
0
21
1
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
_
9
1
0
-
_
12
1
0
-
_
1
0
0
_
-
1973
Minimum
data"
8
1
0
0
0
12
4
1
0
0
28
6
1
1
0
4
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
7
1
0
-
_
7
2
1
-
_
13
0
1
-
_
2
0
0
_
-
1974
Minimum
data0
5
0
1
0
0
9
1
3
0
0
17
2
5
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
_
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox<
254
-------
MINNESOTA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
131. Minneapolis-St. Paul
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
132. Northwest Minn.
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
133. Southwest Minn.
TSP
SO-
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
24
9
10
4
5
4
1
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
28
10
7
3
1
6
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
Valid .
annualc
average
19
9
2
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
4
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
33
18
8
4
2
5
1
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
23
9
3
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
30
9
24
5
2
4
0
1
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
1
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
255
-------
MINNESOTA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Duluth
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
X
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. Minneapolis and St. Paul are in the pro-
cess of setting up a system of park-and-
ride lots.
2. A traffic management system for the Min-
neapolis central business district is due
to start up in 1975.
3. Highway I-35W is being completed across
the Mississippi River to divert traffic
from the central business district.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
E56
-------
MINNESOTA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
106
48
103 Dollars
1105
1333
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal -fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
94
34
27
27
150
2
237
15
879
19
3
22
2
29
98
25
22
55
0
67
0
14
1
1,822
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
257
-------
MINNESOTA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES13
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
203
30
7
2
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
179
30
2
In
violation
21
4
Unknown
status
3
3
II.
ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations....
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
TOTAL
1,225
1,244
2,469
0
0
0
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
258
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Minnesota,
Brainerd
Minnesota,
Buhl
Minnesota,
City of
Two Harbors
Burlington Northern
Inc.
Ind. Boilers
Public Utilities
Commission
Power Plant
Two Harbors
Water & Light
Plant
Power Plant
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Violation of
particulate
stds.
Boiler #2
violates parti-
culate stds.
Notice of violation
issued 2/20/7(».
Notice of violation
issued 7/25/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 11/5/74.
State order issued 6/26/71*.
Meeting State order
increments.
City working in fun^ino
for controls
Minnesota,
Collegeville
Minnesota,
Duluth
St. John's Univ.
Industrial Boiler
U.S. Steel-
South Works
Violation of parti-
culate emission
standard.
Coke ovens violate
particulate stds.
Notice of violation is- In compliance with State order.
sued 2/20/71*.
Notice of violation
issued 5/2/711.
State litigating. Further
federal action deferred.
Minnesota,
International
Falls
Minnesota,
Minneapolis
Boise Cascade Corp.
Kraft, pulp and
paper mill, re-
covery boiler &
bark boiler
Northern States
Power Co.
Black Dog Station
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion std.
Violation of sul-
fur oxides stds.
Recovery boiler notice
of violation issued
U/18/71*. Consent
order issued on
5/20/71*. Bark boiler
notice of violation
issued 1/2/75.
Consent order is-
sued 2/5/75.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Power Plant
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
ro
en
O
STATE/CITY
Minnesota,
Minneapolis
Minnesota,
Red Wing
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
L. Dreyfus Corp.
Margrette Elevator
Corp.
Grain Handling
Conwed Corp.
Foundry
COMPANY
POLLUTIBN PROBLEM
Grain evaluator,
rail, dump, storage
bins violate parti-
culate and visible
emissions stds.
Cupola 6 blow
chambers violate
particulate stds.
TYPE OF ACTION •
Notice of violation
issued 8/8/7U.
Enforcement order
issued 11/15/74.
Notice of violation
issued 2/20/71*.
RESULTS/STATUS
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Meeting State orfler
increments.
Minnesota,
Springfield
Public Utilities
Commission
Violation of par-
ticulate stds.
Notice of violation
issued 9/H/1H.
Awaiting State permit action.
Power Plants
-------
OHIO
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
*079. Metropolitan Cincinnati
Interstate (Ind., Ky.)
*103. Huntington-Ashland-Ports-
mouth-Ironton Interstate
(Ky., W.Va.)
*124. Metropolitan Toledo
Interstate (Mich.)
173. Dayton
174. Greater Metropolitan
Cleveland
175. Mansfield-Marion
176. Metropolitan Columbus
177. Northwest Ohio
Probably
will
attain
TSP
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
S02 -Power
plant
TSPb
TSPb -
Point and
non-point
sources
S02 - Com-
pliance
problem
TSP
TSP -Area
sources
SOp -Power
plant
TSP
TSP
Attainment
status
uncertain
S0pb -Power
c plant
SOp - Power
plant
so2
S02 - Power
plant
,so2
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
261
-------
OHIO (con't)
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*178. Northwest Pennsylvania-
Youngstown Interstate
(Pa.)
*179. Parkersburg-Marietta
Interstate (W. Va.)
180. Sandusky
*181. Steubenvilie-Weirton-
Wheeling Interstate
(W. Va.)
182. Wilmington-Chillicothe-
Logan
183. Zanesvilie-Cambridge
so
TSP -Point
and non-
point
sources
S02 -Power
plant
TSPb
TSP -Point
and non-
point
sources
TSP -Point
sources
S02 -Power
plant
S0
-Power
plant
TSP
so2
TSP
S02 -Power
plant
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
DEstimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
262
-------
OHIO
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*079. Metropolitan Cincin-
nati (Ind., Ky.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*103. Huntington-Ashland-
Portsmouth- Iron ton
(Ky., W.Va.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*124. Metropolitan Toledo
(Mich.)
TSP
SO-,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
173. Dayton
TSP
S09
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
41
16
8
9
9
19
3
2
0
0
16
5
7
2
2
27
18
5
4
3
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
32
13
1
1
2
2
0
0
0
0
12
1
4
2
0
23
13
0
1
0
Valid •
annual
average
32
2
0
-
-
2
0
0
-
_
11
1
0
-
.
16
5
0
-
—
1973
Minimum
dataD
41
14
2
1
3
22
4
0
0
0
18
2
5
2
0
28
16
5
2
4
Valid
annual
average
36
10
0
-
-
13
4
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
17
4
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
40
]
14
1
3
26
0
2
0
0
18
7
6
3
0
35
7
17
5
7
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
- . .
-
15
3
0
-
.
9
0
0
-
19
12
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAO = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
263
-------
OHIO (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
174. Greater Metropolitan
Cleveland
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
175. Mansfield-Marion
TSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
176. Metropolitan Columbus
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
177. Northwest Ohio
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
82
22
6
6
6
3
3
1
0
0
11
6
3
3
4
4
5
2
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
55
36
3
5
1
6
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
Valid •
annual
average
30
19
0
-
.
3
1
0
-
.
2
1
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
83
48
4
2
3
11
1
0
0
0
14
1 '
1
2
1
3
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
62
36
0
-
.
2
1
0
-
.
3
0
0
-
0
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
83
"5
48
1
1
7
0
0
0
0
11
1
3
2
1
6
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
30
18
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
_
7
0
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX>
264
-------
OHIO (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*178. Northwest Pa.-
Youngstown (Pa.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*179. Parkersburg-Marietta
(W.Va.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
180. Sandusky
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*181. Steubenvi lie-Wei rton-
Wheeling (W.Va.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
15
6
2
0
0
5
1
4
0
0
6
2
0
0
0
17
5
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
dataD
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
1
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
-
0
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
3
3
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
23
9
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
-
16
2
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
18
2
6
0
2
5
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
24
0
7
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
-
19
4
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
265
-------
OHIO (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
182. Wilmington-Chillicothe'
Logan
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
183. ZanesviTTe-Cambridge
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
1
1
0
0
5
1
4
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
2
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
266
-------
OHIO
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Akron-Canton
Cincinnati Interstate (Ohio
portion)
Cleveland
Columbus
Dayton
Mansfield
Steubenville
Toledo Interstate (Ohio
portion)
Youngstown
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
X
X
CO
°x
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
EPA promulgation (April 15, 1974) is in
effect.
1. Cincinnati and Norwood began a mandatory
inspection/maintenance program in
January 1975.
2. Hamilton County began operating inspec-
tion lanes in August. '
1. SO, control strategy was disapproved
April 15, 1974. EPA intends to pro-
pose SO, regulation by end of October
1975. *
2. Plan was disapproved on November 8, 1973,
for photochemical oxidant (HC) standard
in the Metropolitan Cincinnati AQCR.
3. State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
267
-------
OHIO
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
497
445
103 Dollars
8131
9429
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
270
210
218
58
46
61
615
229
187
247
14
224
39
6
623
69
11
620
17
119
7
263
65
4,218
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
268
-------
OHIO
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
*Th
to
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (502)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
ere are no SIP emission limitatior
promulgate standards
Total
number
identified
491
47*
1
46
20
75
30
14
48
s for S02 in
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
307
1
8
3
28
14
4
30
Dhio at pres
In
violation
75
20
11
17
4
6
jnt; EPA is
Unknown
status
9
18
6
30
12
4
IT
1
prepari
ng
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries..., Not applicable
2. Field investigations no data
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
Not applicable
Not applicable
2
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
269
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Ohio,
Rittman
Ohio,
Rittam
Ohio,
Shawnee-
Township
Ohio,
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Morton Salt Co.,
Industrial
Boilers
Packaging Corp of
America
Industrial
Boiler
Vistron Corp.
Urea Prill Tower
Wheelinq-Pitts.
Steubenville Steel Corp.
Steel Mfg.
Ohio,
Federal Paperboard
Steubenville Co.
Ohio,
warren
Ohio,
Woodvilie
Copperweld Specialty
Steel Co.
Steel Mfg.
Ohio Lime Co.
Rotary Kilns
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of parti-
culate and visible
emission stds.
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
EOF shop in violation
of particulate and
visible emissions
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Teeming aisle and
35" mill scarfer in
violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Violation of visible
emissions and parti-
culate matter stds.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 2/5/75.
Notice of violation
issued 2/3/75.
Notice of violation
issued U/11/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/21/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/18/75.
Consent order is-
sued 7/7/75.
Notice of violation
issued a/15/75.
Consent order is-
sued 7/8/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
April 30, 1975 conference
stack test to be conducted
by July 31,
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Ohio,
Lancaster
Ohio,
Norwalk
Ohio,
Norwalk
Ohio,
Painesville
Ohio,
Parma
Ohio,
Philo
Ohio,
Portsmouth
Loroco Indust.
Indust.
Boilers
Ohio Liquid Dispos-
al, Inc.
Incinerator
Ohio Liquid Dispos-
al, Inc.
Incinerator
Uniroyal, Inc.
Uniroyal Chem. Plant
City of Parma
Incinerator
Ohio Ferro-Alloys
Corps.
Foundry
Empire-Detroit Steel
Div. Cyclops Corp.
Steel Mfg.
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Violation of parti-
culate std.
Violation of parti-
culate std.
Industrial Boilers in
violation of parti-
culate matter stds.
Violation of incinera-
tor particulate matter
standard.
Notice of violation
issued 6/18/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/6/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 9/6/71.
Notice of violation
issued 1/16/75. Con-
sent order issued
7/7/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/19/75.
Submerged arc-furnaces Notice of violation
in violation of visible issued 3/19/75.
emissions and particulate
standards.
State initiated action; Co.
now out of business.
State initiated action; Co.
now out of business.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Open hearth furnace
violate particulate
and visible emis-
sion std.
Notice of violation
issued 11/1/7U.
Negotiating terms of consent
order with company.
Final stages of negotiating
consent order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Ohio,
Lancaster
Ohio,
Lorain
Ohio,
Mansfield
Ohio,
Mansfield
Ohio,
Maplegrove
Ohio,
Massillon
Ohio,
Massillon
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Anchor Hocking Corp.
Boroslicate Blast
Furnace
United States Steel
Corp. Lorain works
Steel Mfg.
Empire-Detroit Steel
Division - Cyclops
Corp.
Steel Mfg.
Ohio Brass Co.
Cupolas
Basic Refractories
Div. of Basic Inc.,
Brick Making Process
Republic Steel Corp.
Coke ovens
Republic Steel Corp.
Coke ovens
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of visible
emissions and parti-
culate stds.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 3/6/75. Consent
order issued 6/26/75.
Coke batteries, sinter
plant, and hot scarfer
in violation of parti-
culate and visible emis-
sions stds.
Open hearth furnaces
in violation of parti-
culate and visible
emission stds.
Notice of violation is-
sued 1/15/75.
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Coke Batteries vio-
late particulate
stds.
Coke Batteries vio-
late particulate
stds.
Notice of violation
issued 1/9/75.
Notice of violation
issued 4/15/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/18/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/27/7U.
Notice of violation
RESULTS/STATUS
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
U.S. Court of Appeals
for the 6th Circuit stayed
EPA enforcement pending
resolution of 8307 challenge
in Buckeye II.
Company voluntarily closed
down furnaces.
Enforcement stayed pending
resolution of s307 challenge
in Buckeye II.
Enforcement stayed pendiriq
resolution of S307 challenge
in Buckeye II.
Ohio,
Middlebranch
The Flintkote Co.
Diamond-Kosmos
Cement Fivision
Portland Cement Kilns
in violation of parti-
culate and visible
emissions stds.
Notice of violation
issued 2/10/75.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Ohio,
Cleveland
Ohio,
Euclid
Ohio,
Gypsum
Ohio,
Hamilton
Ohio,
Hamilton
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Republic Steel Corp.
Steel Mfg.
City of Euclid
Refuse
Incinerator
United States Gypsum
Co.
Industrial
Boilers
Armco Steel Corp.
Hamilton Plant
Coke Batteries
Gray Iron Foundry
Corp.
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Sinter Plant, EOF,
OHF, 6 Coke Batter-
ies violate parti-
culate stds.
Violation of incinera-
tor particulate matter
std.
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Coke batteries viola-
ted particulate stds.
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 9/27/71.
Notice of violation
issued 3/20/75. Order
issued 5/22/75.
Consent order is-
sued 7/7/75.
Consent order is-
sued 1/2/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/6/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Enforcement stayed pendina
resolution of S307 challenge
in Buckeye II.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Presently in compliance with
with terms of order.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Ohio,
Hannibal
Ohio,
Ironton
Cupolas
ORMET Corp.
Aluminum Reduction
Facility
Violation of parti-
culate matter std.
Dayton Malleable Inc. Cupola in violation
of particulateand
visible emissions
standards.
Consent order issued
1/23/75.
Consent order issued
3/5/75.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Ohio,
Alliance
Ohio,
Canton
Ohio,
Chillicothe
Ohio,
Cleveland
Ohio,
Cleveland
Ohio,
Cleveland
Transue 6 wms.
Steel Forging
Foundry
Indust. Boilers
Republic Steel Corp.
Steel Mfg.
The Mead Corp.
Industrial
Boilers and
Recovery Furnaces
Jones & Laughlin
Steel Corp.
Steel Mfg.
Republic Steel Corp.
Steel Mfg.
Aluminum Co.
of America
Industrial
Boilers
Forging Operation
6 boilers violate
particulate stds.
Elec arc furnace
violation particulate
stds.
Violation of parti-
culate matter stds.
Sinter plant viola-
tes particulate
stds.
Sinter Plant, EOF,
OHF, 6 Coke Batter-
ies violate parti-
culate stds.
Violation of parti-
culate matter stds.
Notice of violation
issued 8/15/7U. Order
issued 2/18/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/27/7U.
Consent order issued
2/5/75.
Notice of violation
issued 11/29/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 9/29/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 1/1 a/75.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Enforcement stayed pendina
resolution of sSO"7 challenge
in Buckeye II.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
conference held 12/2/7H.
Enforcement stayed centring
resolution of s"<07 challenge
in Buckeye II.
-------
WISCONSIN
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*068.
*073.
*128.
*129.
237.
238.
239.
240.
Metropolitan Dubuque
Interstate (111., Iowa)
Rockf ord- Janesvi 1 1 e-
Beloit Interstate (111.)
Southeast Minnesota-La
Crosse Interstate
(Minn.)
Duluth-Superior Inter-
state (Minn.)
Lake Michigan
North Central Wisconsin
Southeastern Wisconsin
Southern Wisconsin
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
so2
SO b
L
TSPb
S09
L.
TSPb
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
S0? -Power
L plant
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSPb - Com-
pliance
problem
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
-------
WISCONSIN
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*068. Metropolitan Dubuque
(111., Iowa)
TSP
S0?
Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*073. Rockfort-Janesville-
Beloit (111.)
TSP
so2
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*128. Southeast Minnesota-
La Crosse (Minn.)
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*129. Duluth-Superior
(Minn.)
TSP
so2
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
2
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
7
5
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
1973
Minimum
data0
2
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
6
3
0
0
0
6
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
-
0
1
0
-
-
4
1
0
-
-
3
0
0
-
-
1974
Minimum
data0
2
o
1
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
6
' 0
3
0
0
8
0
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q^.
276
-------
WISCONSIN (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
237. Lake Michigan
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
238. North Central Wis-
consin-
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
239. Southeastern Wisconsin
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
240. Southern Wisconsin
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
15
8
0
0
1
5
2
0
0
1
32
7
9
9
9
6
6
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
1
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
3
1
3
-
_
1
1
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
18
9
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
31
5
5
4
3
10
8
0
0
1
Valid
annual
average
11
3
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
19
0
2
-
_
7
6
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
14
0
8
0
0
8
0
4
0
0
31
5
4
7
5
12
1
7
2
2
Valid
annualc
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
4
-
_
1
0
0
-
.
*-= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
277
-------
WISCONSIN
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Illi noi s- Indi ana-Wi scons i n
Interstate (Wisconsin
portion)
Lake Michigan Subregion
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
278
-------
WISCONSIN
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
84
83
103 Dollars
1956
1770
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5..
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps • ?
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
145
68
81
73
98
23
356
10
67
12
0
88
16
16
66
3
67
37
0
40
1
15
36
1318
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
279 -
-------
WISCONSIN
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SO?)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
143
17
4
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
136
17
In
violation
7
4
Unknown
status
0
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF"COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
no data
no data
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued....
3. Civil/criminal,proceedings initiated..
no data
no data
no data
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division., June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
280
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
ro
00
Wisconsin,
Hixton
Wisconsin,
Milwaukee
Wisconsin,
Milwaukee
Wisconsin,
Milwaukee
Husky Industries,
Inc.
Charcoal Mfr.
Milwaukee Solvay
Coke Co.
Coke Ovens
Pabst Brewing Co.
Brewery
Inryco, Inc.
Roller Coating
Operation
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Violation of parti-
culate matter opa-
city and hydrocarbon
emission standards.
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion standard.
Violation of hydro-
carbon std.
Notice of violation is-
sued U/3/7U.
Notice of violation is-
sued 1/9/7H.
State order issued 6/28/7(4.
In compliance.
State order complied with;EPA
will evaluate source to deter-
mine if in compliance
with SIP.
Notice of violation is- State order issued 6/20/7u.
sued U/3/71*.
Notice of violation is-
sued 7/2/75.
Wisconsin,
Milwaukee
Wisconsin,
Whitewater
Miller Brewing Co.
Brewery
Alpha-Cast, Inc.
Foundry
Violation of parti-
culate matter emis-
sion. Federal com-
pliance schedule
for hydrocarbon
emission standard.
Violation of parti-
culate stds.
Notice of violation
sued U/3/7U.
sent order issued
8/15/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 9/25/7U.
In compliance with terms
of consent order.
in mid-December.
-------
EPA REGION VI
ARKANSAS
LOUISIANA
NEW MEXICO
OKLAHOMA
TEXAS
-------
ARKANSAS
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
016.
*017.
*018.
*019.
02C.
021.
*022.
Central Arkansas
Metropolitan Ft. Smith
Interstate (Okla.)
Metropolitan Memphis
Interstate (Tenn.)
Monroe-El Dorado
Interstate (La.)
Northeast Arkansas
Northwest Arkansas
Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler Interstate
(La. , Okla. .Texas)
Probably
will
attain
so2
c.
S09
L.
S09
c.
S09
L.
S09
c.
TSP
so2
TSPb
S00
c.
Probably
will not
attain
TSP - Fugi-
tive dust
area
TSPb -
Fugitive
dust area
TSPb -
Fugitive
dust area
TSPb -
Fugitive
dust area
TSP - Fugi-
tive dust
area and
point
sources
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
DEstimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
282
-------
ARKANSAS
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
016. Central Arkansas
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*017. Metropolitan Ft. Smitf
(Okla.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*018. Metropolitan Memphis
(Miss., Tenn.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*019. Monroe-El Dorado
(La.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
10
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data6
11
1
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0'
3
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
dataD
10
2
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
6
3
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
9
0
0
-
_.
3
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
18
0
9
0
0
10
0
2
0
0
6
0
3
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
10
1
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
4
3
0
-
_
3
2
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
283
-------
ARKANSAS (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
020. Northeast Arkansas
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
021 . Northwest Arkansas
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*022. Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler (La., Okla.,
Texas )
TSP
S02
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
4
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
23
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
3
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
22
0
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
1
0
-
-
2
1
0
-
-
3
1
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
284
-------
ARKANSAS
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Little Rock
Pollutant
TSP
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants
285
-------
ARKANSAS
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
56
35
103 Dollars
1085
516
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
X
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
19
6
0
65
10
0
85
42
176
2
93
15
7
19
101
36
69
29
0
17
21
74
3
889
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
286
-------
ARKANSAS
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
185
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
117
In
violation
45
Unknown
status
23
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY8 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
0
119
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
119
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
287
-------
LOUISIANA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
wi 11 not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*019. Monroe-El Dorado Inter-
state (Arkansas)
*022. Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler Interstate (Ark.,
Okla., Texas)
*106. Southern Louisiana-
Southeast Texas Inter-
state (Texas)
TSP1
so2
S00
so.
TSPU
Point
sources
TSPU
Point and
non-point
sources.
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
288
-------
LOUISIANA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*019. Monroe-El Dorado
(Ark.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*022. Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler (Ark.,0kla.,
Texas)
TSP
SO,
"Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*106. Southern Louisiana-
Southeast Texas
(Texas)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
3
11
6
0
6
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
3
1
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
7
14
0
3
3
Valid
annual
average
3
1
0
-
_
2
2
0
-
_
6
10
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
3
1
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
8
13
4
1
1
Valid
annual
average
1
1
0
-
_
0
2
0
-
_
3
10
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
3
0
1
0
0
6
0
2
0
0
14
• 5
15
2
1
Valid
annual
average
2
1
0
-
_
2
2
0
-
_
6
13
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
289
-------
LOUISIANA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Shreveport
Pollutant
TSP
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
290
-------
LOUISIANA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
56
25
103 Dollars
928
715
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
34
56
0
62
11
0
438
438
43
0
55
15
16
3
94
400
54
117
46
57
0
56
7
2,002
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
291
-------
LOUISIANA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES5
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
. 3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
315
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
192
In
violation
09
Unknown
status
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
0
238
238
9
0
0
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
292
-------
STATE/CITY
Louisiana,
Sterlington
Louisiana,
Sterlington
Louisiana,
Tallulah
Louisiana,
Ville Platte
Louisiana,
West Monroe
Louisiana,
Winnfield
Louisiana,
Woodworth
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Commercial Solvents Violation of nitrogen
Corp., Pace Lake Pit. oxides regulation.
nitric acid produc-
tion units.
Commercial Solvents Violation of nitrogen
Corp., Dixie Chemical oxides regulation.
Plant-nitric acid
production units.
Chicago Mill &
Lumber Co.
Wood waste Boiler
Cabot Corp., Ville
Platte plant-carbon
black incinerator.
Olinkraft, Inc.
Container Plant-
conical wood waste
burner.
Carla Charcoal, Inc.
afterburner on
charcoal furnace.
L.H. Bossier, Inc.
asphalt batch plant.
Violation of parti-
culate matter regs.
Violation of incin-
erator regulation.
Violation of opacity
regulation.
Violation of opacity
regulation 6 pollution
control equipment use
requirement.
Violation of fugitive
dust regulation &
process weight
regulation for parti-
culate matter.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 1/8/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/8/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 11/21/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 1/31/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/2H/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/27/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/25/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Conference held 2/13/75.
Negotiations on consent
order are in progress
Conference held 2/13/75.
Negotiations on consent
order are in proaress.
Boilers in violation no longer
being operated.
Company reports viola-
tive unit removed 6 new
incinerator installed.
Verification inspection
to be scheduled.
Conference held 8/7 6
8/8/75. Company reports
modifications to burner.
Inspection required to verify
compliance status.
Conference held 7/9/75.
Conference held 7/29/75.
company has installed
controls; stack test
completed; evaluation
pending.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Louisiana
Bastrop
Louisiana
Dubach,
Louisiana
Pine Grove
Louisiana
Sinunesport
Louisiana
West Monroe
Louisiana
Winnfield,
Louisiana
Winnfield
Louisiana,
Larose
Internation Paper
Co., Louisiana Mill-
pulp 6 paper mill.
Kerr Mcgee Corp-
oration storage
tanks 6 tank
truck loading
facility
Edward Hines Lumber
Co. of Louisiana
Georgia Pacific
Corp.
Chip mill -- conical
wood waste burner
Olinkraft, Inc. Pulp
6 Paper Div. pulp 6
paper mill.
American Creosote
Works, Inc.,
conical wood
waste burner
Violation of opacity
6 particulate matter
regulations.
violation of
regulations requiring
vapor collection
6 disposal systems.
Violation of opacity
and pariculate
matter regulations.
Violation of opacity
regulation
Violation of opacity
6 particulate matter
regulations.
Violation of opacity
regulation
Winnfield Veneer Co. Violation of opacity
conical wood waste
burner.
LaFourche Parish
Police Jury
Open burning
regulation.
Violaton of open
burning reg.
Notice of violation
issued 7/31/75.
Notice of viola-
tion 2/14/75.
Order issued
6/25/75.
Notice of Violation
12/27/75.
Order issued
6/25/75.
Notice of violation
Order issued 6/25/75.
Order issued 6/25/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/U/75.
Notice of violation
3/18/75
Order issued 6/25/75.
Notice of violation
issued 4/21/75.
Notice of violation
issued 10/3/7«.
Conference scheduled for
9/10/75.
Conference held P/"7 6
8/8/75. Company reports
on consent order are in
progress.
Conference held 6/U/7?.
Conference waived, source
reports compliance, inspection
to be conducted
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STftTE/CITY
Louisiana,
Lillie
Louisiana,
Meraux
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Olinkraft, Inc.m
Pariculeboard Plant-
wood waste boiler.
Murphy Oil Corp.-
truck 6 Barge
loading facilities
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of opacity
regulation.
Violation of regula-
tions requiring vapor
collection 6 disposal
systems.
Louisiana, Willamette Industries violation of opacity
Natchintoches Inc., Natchitoches regulation
Div.-wood waste
boiler.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 3/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/21/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/29/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Conference held 8/7 6 8/8/"?c.
Company reports modifications
to boiler. Inspection re-
quired to verify
compliance status.
Conference held 5/5/75.
Meeting held 6/20/75.
Louisiana,
Pollock
Louisiana,
Roanoke
Louisiana,
Shreveport
Louisiana,
Shreveport
Carroll W. Maxwell
Co., Inc.
Conical Wood
Waste burner
Roanoke Rice Co-op-
incinerator.
Bird & Son Inc.
asphalt roofina
process
Violation of opaci-
ty regs.
Violation of opacity
regulation.
Violation of
fugitive dust reg.
City of Shreveport- violation of incinera-
municipal incinerator tor regulations.
Notice of violation is-
sued 11/29/74.
Order issued 6/25/75
Notice of violation
issued 1/22/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 11/11/7U.
New notice of violation
issued 7/31/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/25/75.
Inspection required to
determine continuina
violation.
Conference held
Required stack test pending.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Louisiana,
Elizabeth
Louisiana,
Erwinville
Louisiana,
Fisher
Louisiana,
Florien
Louisiana,
Geismar
Louisiana,
Dodson
Louisiana,
Dodson
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Calcasieu Paper Co.
Inc.
pulp and paper mill
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
matter regs.
Big River Industries, Violation of process
Inc.-rotary kiln. weight regulation for
particulate matter
Vancouver Plywood
Co., Inc., Softwood
Lumber Div. wood
waste boiler.
Vancover Plywood
Co., Inc.,Florien
Plywood
Conical
Incinerator
Borden, Inc. Borden
Chemical Div.-urea
prill tower.
Hunt Lumber Co.,
Inc.
Conical wood waste
burner and wood
waste boiler
Willamette Ind.,
Inc., Louisiana
Plywood Corp.
Conical
Incinerator
Violation of opacity
6 Pariculate matter
regulations.
Violation of opaci-
ty and incinera-
tor regs .
Violation of process
weight regulation for
particulate matter.
Violaton of opacity
particulate matter
and open burning
regulations.
Violation of opaci-
ty, incinerator,
and open burning
regs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 11/11/74.
Notice of violation
issued 12/26/70.
Notice of violation
issued 12/23/7U.
Consent Order
issued 7/9/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/30/7U.
Order issued
6/25/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/6/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 6/27/7U.
Consent Order issued
12/3/7H
Notice of violation
issued 9/30/7H.
Consent Order issued
1/20/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Company reports compli-
ance; verification inspection
to be scheduled.
Final compliance is due
2/28/76. Company is ahead
of schedule according to
letter of 8/18/7";.
Conference held 3/7/75.
Company has taken action
to modify violative process.
Stack tests oending.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Louisiana,
Alexandria
Louisiana,
Amelia
Louisiana,
Amite
Louisiana,
Bastrop
Louisiana,
Baton Rouge
Louisiana,
Bogalusa
Louisiana,
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Mid-State Sand &
Gravel Co., Inc.-
asphalt batch plant.
St. Mary Parish
Police Jury-solid
waste dump
Dibert, Bancroft 6
Ross Co., Ltd.-
foundry; electric
arc furnaces.
International Paper
Co., Bastrop Mill-
wood waste boiler.
Ideal Cement
Cement Kilns
Crown Zellerbach
Corp., Bogalusa
Mill-pulp 6 paper
mill.
Cotton Valley Sol-
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of process
weight regulation
for particulate matter.
Violation of open
burning regulation.
Violation of fugitive
dust regulation 6 pro-
cess weight regulation
for particualte matter.
Violation of paricu-
matter regulation.
Violation of parti-
culate matter regs.
Violation of opacity
and particulate matter
regulations.
Cotton Valley vents Co. truck load-
ing facility.
Louisiana,
DeRidder
International Paper
Co., DeRidder wood
treating plant-
conical wood waste
burner.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 6/30/75.
Notice of violation.
issued 3/31/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/30/75.
Notice of viola-
issued 1/31/75.
Notice of violation
issued 8/12/7U.
Notice of viola-
issued 2/12/75.
Violation of regulation Notice of violation
requiring vapor collec- issued 7/21/75.
tion & disposal system.
Violation of opacity
regulation.
Notice of violation
issued 12/26/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Conference held 7/29/75.
Company has installed
controls; stack tests pending.
Deferred to State of
Louisiana for action
Meeting held 8/6/7?
30 day grace period
granted
Conference held U/2/75.
Plant closed
3/31/75.
Conference held 7/25 6
7/28/75. Negotiations on
consent order are in progress.
Conference held 8/15/75.
Company reports compli-
ance; verification inspection
to be scheduled.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Lousiana
Shreveport,
Louisiana,
Springhill
Louisiana,
Sterlington
Atlas Processing
Co., storage tanks
and tank truck
facility
International Paper
Co., Springhill Mill-
pulp & paper mill.
Failure to provide
vapor recovery and
systems for tank
truck loading
Violation of opacity
& Particulate matter
regulations.
Commercial Solvents Violation of process
Corp., Thermatomic weight regulation
Carbon Co.-carbon for particulate matter.
black recovery dryers.
Notice of Violation
12/31/7H
Order issued 6/25/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/25/^5.
Notice of violation
issued 7/31/75.
Conference held a/30/75.
Conference scheduled for
9/9/75.
-------
NEW MEXICO
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
*012. Arizona-New Mexico-
Southern Border Inter-
state (Arizona)
*014. Four Corners Interstate
(Ariz., Colo., Utah)
152. Albuquerque-Mid Rio
*153. El Paso-Las Cruces-
Alamogordo Interstate
(Texas)
154. Northeastern Plains
155. Pecos-Permian Basin
156. Southwestern Mountains-
Augustine Plains
157. Upper Rio Grande Valley
Probably
will
attain
so2b
so2
so2
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
so2
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
S0« -Point
sources
TSPb
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area;
Point
sources
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
299
-------
NEW MEXICO
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*012. Arizona-New Mexico
Southern Border
(Ariz.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
o-
X
*014. Four Corners (Ariz.,
Colo., Utah)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
152. Albuquerque-Mid Rio
Grande
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*153. El Paso-Las Cruces-
Alamogordo (Texas)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
5
2
0
0
8
5
2
0
0
12
2
0
2
2
7
3
1
1
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
12
1
0
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
• -
.
0
0
0
-
.
1
1
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
10
10
2
0
0
7
5
3
0
0
9
1
0
6
6
8
5
0
3
0
Valid
annual
average
8
7
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
5
0
0
-
_
5
3
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
dataD
8
2
8
0
0
12
4
7
0
0
12
0
1
6
4
8
1
5
2
2
Valid
annual
average
6
6
1
-
.
7
3
3
-
.
10
1
0
-
_
8
4
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
300
-------
NEW MEXICO (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD*
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
154. Northeastern Plains
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
155. Pecos-Permian Basin
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
156. Southwestern Mts.-
Augustine Plains
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
157. Upper Rio Grande
Valley
TSP
SO,
2Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
1
0
0
0
6
4
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
7
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
1
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
2
1
0
0
0
7
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
9
2
0
5
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1
0
.0
-
...
3
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
3
0
1
0
0
11
_,
2
8
0
0
7
0
1
0
0
7
0
1
1
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
301
-------
NEW MEXICO
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Albuquerque
Four Corners
Las Cruces
Roswell
Santa Fe
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
CO
X
X
X
X
X
°x
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in' the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission Limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
1. EPA promulgation (March 21, 1974) is
in effect for S02 in the Four Corners
and Southern Boraer AQCRs.
2. State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
302
-------
NEW MEXICO
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
55
49
103 Dollars
1033
781
See the discussion of terms used .in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
35
5
0
4
2
0
709
19
12
2
59
0
6
106
210
137
0
22
135
1
1
14
0
1,479
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
303
-------
NEW MEXICO
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
*
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
^capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (502)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
SIP disapproved for secondary air qu
Total
number
identified
162
2
1*
al ity standar
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compl iance
104
2
Js, EPA prop
In
violation
13
ised new sta
Unknown
status
45
ndards 5/75
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY5 (7/1/74.to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
6
204
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
210
20
10
1
TOTAL
31
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
304
-------
OKLAHOMA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
*017. Metropolitan Ft. Smith
Interstate (Ark.)
"022. Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler Interstate (Ark.,
La., Texas)
184. Central Oklahoma
185. North Central Oklahoma
186. Northeastern Oklahoma
187. Northwestern Oklahoma
188. Southeastern Oklahoma
189. Southwestern Oklahoma
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
so2
TSPb
so2
L
SO,
c.
TSP
so2
S09
L.
S09
L.
TSP
so2
SO,
c.
Probably
will not
attain
TSP -
Point and
non-point
sources
TSP -
Point and
non-point
sources
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
*'= Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
305
-------
OKLAHOMA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*017. Metropolitan Ft. Smith
(Ark.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*022. Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler (Ark., La.,
Texas)
TSP
so2
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
184. Central Oklahoma
TSP
so2
'Dally
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
185. North Central Okla-
homa
TSP
so2
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
29
1
1
2
2
5
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data6
4
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
28
10
0
2
1
4
2
0
0
0
Valid •
annual
average
1
1
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
8
1
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data
5
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
29
10
0
3
2
5
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
1
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
_
18
8
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
-
1974
Minimum
data0
3
0
0
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
40
0
17
1
2
5
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
8
3
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
306
-------
OKLAHOMA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
186. Northeastern Oklahoma
TSP
SO-
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
187. Northwestern Oklahoma
*tSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
188. Southeastern Oklahoma
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
189. Southwestern Oklahoma
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
24
3
1
2
2
8
1
0
0
0
12
4
1
0
0
13
3
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
25
6
0
1
1
5
1
0
0
0
12
2
0
0
0
12
3
0
0
0
Valid •
annual
average
13
3
0
-
.
1
1
0
-
_
3
1
0
-
.
5
3
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
26
7
0
1
1
6
2
0
0
0
13
2
0
0
0
12
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
verage
16
2
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
4
1
0
-
_
7
1
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
34
0
11
3
1
6
0
1
0
0
13
0
3
0
0
11
0
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
7
2
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
4
1
0
-
_
5
1
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
307
-------
OKLAHOMA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Central Oklahoma
Tulsa
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
CO
°x
X
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
308
-------
OKLAHOMA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
102
76
TO3 Dollars
1383
1027
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
. 4
0
0
2
1
0
299
23
24
0
39
10
12
56
99
263
26
130
101
22
1
2
1
1,115
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
309
-------
OKLAHOMA •
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
*No
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
{capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES'5 •
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SO?)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
SIP emission limitation applicab'
Total
number
identified
223
1*
e
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
' In
compliance
196
In
violation
15
Unknown
status
12
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
346
185
531
24
7
2
TOTAL
33
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
310
-------
TEXAS
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*022.
*106.
*153.
210.
211.
212.
213.
214.
Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler Interstate (Ark.,
La., Okla.)
Southern Louisiana-
Southeast Texas
Interstate (La.)
El Paso-Las Cruces-
Alamogordo Interstate
(New Mexico)
Abilene-Wi chita Falls
Amarillo-Lubbock
Austin-Waco
Brownsville-Laredo
Corpus Christi -Victori a
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
so2
Ł_
TSPb
S09
2
S00
2
S09
L.
so2
L
TSP
so2
S09
L.
so2
L.
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area I
non-point
sources
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
311
-------
TEXAS (con't.)
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
215. Metropolitan Dallas-Fort
Worth
216. Metropolitan Houston-
Gal veston
SO
217. Metropolitan San Antonio
218. Midland-Odessa-San
Angelo
TSP
SOo
TSP -
ton-point
sources
TSP -
ton-point
sources
Point
ources
TSP
(Fugitive
lust area
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
DEstimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
312
-------
TEXAS
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*022. Shreveport-Texarkana-
Tyler (Ark.,La.,Okla
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*106. Southern Louisiana-
Southeast Texas (La.
TSP
S02
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*153. El Paso-Las Cruces-
Alamogordo (N.M.)
TSP
S0?
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
210. Abilene-Wichita Falls
TSP
S02
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
8
8
3
3
3
10
11
6
6
6
13
8
6
6
6
10
11
3
3
3
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
2
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
1
17
1
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
-
2
1
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
2
1
0
. -
1973
Minimum
data0
3
2
0
0
0
12
4
1
0
1
24
7
1
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
-
8.
1
0
-
-
17
1
0
-
-
2
2
0
-
"
1974
Minimum
dataD
3
0
3
0
0
6
2
6
0
2
24
1
10
0
2
4
0
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
2
2
0
-
-
0
1
0
-
~
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors. ,
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are,not available for CO and D-
313
-------
TEXAS (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
211. AmaHl lo-Lubbock
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
212. Austin-Waco
JSP
so2
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
213. Brownsville-Laredo
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
214. Corpus Christi-Vic-
toria
TSP
so2
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
12
9
3
4
4
13
13
2
5
5
10
6
2
3
3
24
17
6
7
7
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
23
7
0
0
0
10
4
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
13
5
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
18
2
0
-
-
5
1
0
-
-
7
0
0
-
-
12
4
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
20
7
0
0
0
12
7
0
0
2
4
0
0
0
0
18
6
1
0
1
Valid
annualc
average
2
2
0
-
-
7
2
.0
-
-
3
0
0
-
-
7
3
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
5
0
5
0
0
12
1
7
0
1
5
0
1
0
0
15
1
8
0
2
Valid
annual
average
0
1
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
d
0
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
314
-------
TEXAS (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
215. Metropolitan Dallas-
Ft. Worth
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
216. Metropolitan Houston-
Gal veston
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
217. Metropolitan San
Antonio
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
218. Midland-Odessa-San
Angelo
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
37
18
2
13
13
60
51
21
19
21
16
10
3
6
6
8
9
4
4
4
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
35
9
0
0
0
49
36
0
0
1
9
6
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
28
5
0
-
_
28
21
0
-
.
7
4
0
-
.
4
3
0
-
-
1973
Minimum
data0
44
10
1
0
2
60
45
1
0
2
12
6
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
25
5
0
-
_
51
30
0
-
.
11
3
0
-
.
3
3
0
-
-
1974
Minimum
data0
40
1
11
0
3
59
5
49
1
4
11
1
7
0
1
5
0
5
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
1
0
-
_
1
3
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
-
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0 .
A
315
-------
TEXAS
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Beaumont
Corpus Christi
Dallas-Perth Worth
Galveston
Houston
San Antonio
El Paso
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X
X
X
X
X
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. EPA regional office will shortly pro-
pose control strategies for the major
Texas cities.
2. Dallas has been expanding its bus fleet
and has established an exclusive bus
lane.
1. EPA promulgations (November 6, 1973)
are in effect for HC in the El-Paso-
Las Cruces-Alamagordo Interstate,
Austin-Waco Interstate, Metropolitan
Houston-Galveston Intrastate, Metro-
politan Dallas-Ft. Worth Intrastate,
Metropolitan San Antonio Intrastate,
Southern Louisiana-Southeast Texas
Interstate, and Corpus Christi-
Victoria AQCRs.
2. State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
316
-------
TEXAS
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75d
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man -years
739
473
103 Dollars
14,219
8,293
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage'
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
70
3
0
13
1
0
1263
593
76
41
71
56
25
51
121
1472
35
201
251
160
0
42
3
4548
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
317
-------
TEXAS
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES'3
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
*SIP requirements inadequate for one
Total
number
identified
1,121
3*
2
smelter, revi
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
804
2
;ion underwa
In
violation
85
Unknown
status
232
2
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
CO
1,458
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
1,458
202
4
TOTAL
214
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
5Survey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
318
-------
EPA REGION VII
IOWA
KANSAS
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
-------
IOWA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*065. Burlington-Keokuk
Interstate (111.)
*068. Metropolitan Dubuque
Interstate (111., Wise.)
*069. Metropolitan Quad Cities
Interstate (111.)
*085. Metropolitan Omaha-
Council Bluffs Inter-
state (Neb.)
*086. Metropolitan Sioux City
Interstate (Neb., S.D.)
*087. Metropolitan Sioux Falls
Interstate (S.D.)
088. Northeast Iowa
089. North Central Iowa
Probably
will
attain
so2b
so2
so2
so2
so2
so2
so2
so2
Probably
wi 1 1 not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSPb
Fugitive
dust area
TSPb
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSPb
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
Bust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
319
-------
IOWA (con't)
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
090. Northwest Iowa
091. Southeast Iowa
092. South Central Iowa
093. Southwest Iowa
Probably
will
attain
S00
C.
S09
c.
so2
c.
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
320
-------
IOWA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAO3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*065. Burlington-Keokuk
(111.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*068. MetropoJ-itan Dubuque
(111., Wise.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*069. Metropolitan Quad
Cities (111.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*085. Metropolitan Omaha-
Council Bluffs
(Neb.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
2
1
1
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
—
1
1
0
-
.
3
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data"
2
1
1
0
0
3
2
1
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
.
3
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
2
1
1
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
6
1
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
1
1
-
_
2
1
0
-
_
5
1
0
-
_
2
1
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
321
-------
IOWA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*086. Metropolitan Sioux
City (Neb., S.D.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*087. Metropolitan Sioux
Falls (S.D.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
088. Northeast Iowa
•TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
089. North Central Iowa
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
12
0
2
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
11
1
1
1
1
4
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
6
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
12
3
1
1
2
4
0
1
0
0
Valid
annualc
average
1
1
0
-
.
1
1
0
-
_
7
1
1
-
-
4
1
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
322
-------
IOWA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
090. Northwest Iowa
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
091 . Southeast Iowa
TSP
so2
Daily
Hourly
CO
ov
X
092. South Central Iowa
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
093. Southwest Iowa
TSP
so2
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
13
2
0
1
2
1
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
8
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
.
6
1
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
2
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
15
9
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
-
2
0
0
-
.
14
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
2
0
1
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
15
0
9
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
-
2
1
0
-
_
15
4
0
-
-
1
1
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
323
-------
IOWA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Cedar Rapids
Des Moines
Dubuque
Omaha-Council Bluffs Inter-
state (Iowa portion)
Davenport
Waterloo
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
so2
CO
X
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
324
-------
IOWA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
63
38
103 Dollars
1056
832
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table f. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and. miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
132
43
15
16
110
3
865
212
1,250
11
3
303
46
8
130
0
15
222
10
52
0
28
6
3,480
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
325
-------
IOWA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr\ of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1 . COAL-TIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
294
18
1
5
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
245
18
1
3
In
violation
19
2
Unknown
status
30
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY5 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
31
5,152
5,183
854
3
2
TOTAL
859
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
. Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
. and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
326
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Iowa
Bloomfield
Bloomfield Foundry Cupolas
Iowa Iowa Electric
Boone 6 Light S Power
Marshalltown, Co., Boone and
Sutherland Stations
power plants
Iowa
Burlington
Iowa
Cedar Rapids
Iowa
Clinton
Iowa
Council
Bluffs
Iowa Army Ammuni-
tion Plant
ammunition Plant
Central Iowa Power
Cooperative Power
Plant
Clinton Corn
Processing Co.
Grain Dryers
Cargill, Inc.
grain processor
Violation of partic
matter standards
Order issued 5/8/75
Order issued
a/1/75
Complying with or^er
Violation of particu- Memorandum of understanding
late matter and opacity signed 1/10/75
standards
Particulates
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
standard
Violation of part-
iculate matter and
opacity standards
Order issued 7/29/75
Notice of violation
issued 6/3/7U. En-
forcement order issued
7/31/7U.
Order issued
6/18/75
Complying with Order
Presently complying with
terms of order.
Complying with
terms of order.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
LJ
PO
00
Iowa
Des Monies
Iowa
Durant
Iowa
Keokuk
Iowa
Mason City
Iowa
Salix
Iowa
Stockton
Iowa,
Ft. Dodge
Can-Tex Industries Process weight Opacity Order issued 6/2U/75
Russelloy Foundry
Foote Mineral Co.
ferroalloy plant
Mason City Foundry
Inc. foundry
Iowa Public Service
Co., George Neal
Station power plant
Quality Foundry Co.
foundry
Georgia Pacific
Corp.
wallboard Mfg.
Cupolas emissions
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Order issued 5/8/75
Order issued
11/13/7U
Violation of particu- Order issued
late matter standards 5/13/75
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Violation of par-
ticulate and
opacity regs.
Order issued
1/31/75.
Consent order signed
5/23/75
Notice of violation
issued 7/11/7H.
Enforcement order
issued 10/21/7U.
Complying with order
Complying with order
Source presently in com-
pliance with terms of
order.
-------
KANSAS
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
*094. Metropolitan Kansas City
Interstate (Mo.)
095. Northeast Kansas
096. North Central Kansas
097. Northwest Kansas
098. Southeast Kansas
099. South Central Kansas
100. Southwest Kansas
Probably
will
attain
so2
so2
L.
S09
L.
so2
c.
so2
c.
so2
c
so?
c.
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
bEstimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portiori of this interstate AQCR.
329
-------
KANSAS
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*094. Metropolitan Kansas
City (Mo.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
095. Northeast Kansas
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
096. North Central Kansas
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
097. Northwest Kansas
TSP
S0?
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
14
6
2
2
2
9
8
0
1
1
6
2
0
0
0
5
3
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
14
7
2
1
1
9
7
1
1
0
6
2
0
0
0
5
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
11
5
0
-
-
5
2
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
14
7
4
4
3
9
8
2
1
1
6
2
1
1
1
5
3
1
1
0
Valid
annual
average
12
6
2
-
-
7
7
0
-
_
3
1
0
-
_
2
2
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
16
3
8
3
2
13
3
11
1
1
6
0
2
0
0
5
2
3
2
1
Valid
annual
average
11
7
2
-
-
8
7
.1
-
_
5
2
0
-
_
4
2
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX.
330
-------
KANSAS (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
098. Southeast Kansas
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
099. South Central Kansas
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
100. Southwest Kansas
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
3
0
0
0
14
12
0
2
2
5
2
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
6
3
0
0
0
15
6
0
2
1
3
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
5
1
0
-
.
2
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
6
3
0
0
0
14
12
2
2
2
5
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
1
0
-
_
12
3
1
-
.
3
2
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
7
0
3
0
0
14
3
12
5
4
5
0
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
2
0
-
_
12
11
1
-
_
4
2
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR.
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O<
331
-------
KANSAS
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Kansas City Interstate
(Kansas portion)
Pollutant
TSP
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
332
-------
KANSAS
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
51
45
103 Dollars
851
796
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
95
16
0
108
67
0
655
106
4,246
34
1
123
25
266
307
393
9
918
168
74
0
26
5
7,642
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
333
-------
KANSAS
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SO?)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
640
6
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
449
6
In
violation
Unknown
status
187
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
20
19,029
19,049
180
161
2
TOTAL
343
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
334
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Kansas
Tice and
Deerfield
Kansas
Wichita
Western Alfalfa Corp. Violation of particu-
grain processor late matter standards
Western Iron and
Foundry
foundry
Violation of opacity
standards
Orders issued
3/19/75
Orders issued
3/7/75
Kansas,
Kansas City
Kansas
Chanute
Kansas
Hutchinson
Topeka
Kansas
Hutchinson
Kansas
Kanorado
Kansas
La Cygne
Kansas
Parsons
Erman Corp.
Railroad Car
Salvage
Pence Food Centers
incinerator
Continental Grain
Co. grain elevator
Far-Mar Co., Inc.
grain elevator
Reid Grain, Inc.
grain elevator
Kansas City Power 6
Light Co.
power plant
Kansas Army Ammuni-
tion Plant
Violation of open
burning (particu-
late matter) reg.
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Violation of opacity
standards
Violation of opacity
standards
Violation of opacity
standards
Violation of opacity
standards
Open burning
Notice of violation
issued 5/3/7U
Order issued
2/19/75
Order issued
3/31/75
Order issued
3/18/75
Order issued
6/3/75
Order issed
a/10/75
Notice of violation
signed 6/6/75
Open burninq ceased, source
now in compliance.
Complying with order
-------
MISSOURI
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*070. Metropolitan St. Louis
Interstate (111.)
*094. Metropolitan Kansas City
Interstate (Kansas)
137. Northern Missouri
138. Southeast Missouri
139. Southwest Missouri
SO,
SO,
TSP
SO
TSP
SO,
TSP
so2
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
336
-------
MISSOURI
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*070. Metropolitan St.
Louis (111.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0Y
X
*094. Metropolitan Kansas
City (Kans.)
TSP
so2
'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
137. Northern Missouri
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
138. Southeast Missouri
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
25
2
10
10
10
23
3
1
3
3
9
0
0
0
0
8
1
0
0
0
No. monitors repo/ting
1972
Minimum
dataD
21
2
9
9
7
23
1
2
1
0
9
0
0
0
0
8
0
2
0
0
Valid
annual
average
19
1
0
-
_
18
0
0
-
_
8
0
0
-
-
8
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
27
2
13
12
13
19
5
2
2
2
9
0
0
0
0
10
0
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
20
1
5
-
.
12
4
1
-
.
4
0
0
-
-
4
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
23
6
2
10
12
21
5
6
3
3
9
0
0
0
0
5
3
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
10
1
1
-
.
5
4
0
-
_
8
0
0
-
-
3
0
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q^.
337
-------
MISSOURI (continued)
c>
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAKOADa
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
139. Southwest Missouri
TSP
so2
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
10
0
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data6
11
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
8
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data
11
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
1
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data
17
0
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
8
2
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox-
338
-------
MISSOURI
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Kansas City Interstate
(Missouri portion)
St. Louis Interstate
(Missouri portion)
_ . . . ...
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
Plan is required for St. Louis; submittal
is due October 31, 1975.
State plan is approved for all pollutants
339
-------
MISSOURI
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
184
108
103 Dollars
3617
2015
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal -fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
81
42
10
26
63
7
312
124
324
6
13
58
28
432
192
11
11
181
77
264
3
84
17
2,366
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
340
-------
MISSOURI
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
*SIP may be inadequa te for one smelt
Total
number
identified
272
13
3
2
4
er - plan is
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
264
10
3*
2
under study.
In
violation
7
3
4
Unknown
status
1
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
232
16,351
16,583
597
93
82
TOTAL
772
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
341
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATT7S
Missouri
Kansas City
Missouri
Kansas City
Missouri
Kansas City
Missouri
Springfield
Missouri
St. Louis
Missouri
St. Louis
Missouri
Sugar Creek,
Missouri,
Affton
Missouri,
Glover
Centropolis Crusher
Inc.
Rock Crushing
Gibson-Homas Paint
MFG.
Armco Steel
City Utilities of
Springfield
power plant
Alpha Portland
Cement
Portland cement
Missouri Portland
Cement Co.
Portland cement
Missouri Portland
Cement Co.
Portland cement
Alpha Portland
Cement
Cement Mf g.
Asarco
Lead Smelter
Co. refused to
submit data
required by sec-
tion 114 letter.
NESHAPS-asbestos
Opacity
Admin, order
issued 6/6/73.
Order issued 6/13/75.
Order issued 3/2U/75
Violation of particu- NOV issued - 3/18/75
late matter and opacity Order issued - 4/25/75
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Clinker cooler
violates particu-
late reg.
Violation of
sulfur oxides emis-
sion standard
Order issued
4/24/75
Order issued
4/10/75
Order issued
2/7/75
Notice of violation
issued 9/28/73.
Notice of violation
issued 6/2/73. Admin.
order issued 10/23/73.
Company complied with or^er.
Complying with orders
Complying with orders
Source is now meeting tprms
of EPA approved State com-
pliance schedule, further
EPA action deferred.
Order has been rescinded
mooting present litigation.
Entering into stipulation with
company to resolve case.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Missouri,
Hannibal
Missouri,
Jefferson
Citv
Missouri,
Lebanon
Missouri,
Louisiana
Missouri,
N. Kansas
City
Missouri,
Parkville
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Marion County
Milling
Grain Dryers
Central Electric
Pwr Co-op.
Power Plant.
Independent Stave
Co., Inc.
Industrial
Boilers
Hercules, Inc.
Fertilizer Mfr.
ADM Millino Co.
Grain Mill
Mid-Continent
Asphalt and
Pavinq Co.
Asphalt Mfq.
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of opaci-
tv standard
Co. refused to
submit data
required by section
110 letter.
Violation of par-.
ticulate matter
(process emissions)
and opacity regs.
In violation of
particulate matter
emissions recis.
Violation of par-
ticulate emission
standard.
Violation of opaci-
ty standard
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 6/16/7U.
Admin. order is-
sued 5/2/7?.
Notices of violation
issued 7/9/73 and
10/10/7?. Enforce-
ment order issued
10/18/"7?. Criminal
conviction returned
on 11/20/"7" for
Violation order.
Notice of violation
issued 5/16/"1?.
Order issued 10/15/7?.
Notice of violation
issued 1/1U/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 10/19/7?.
Admin, order issued
U/2VU .
RESULTS/STATUS
Source oresently complvinr
with acceptable state
compliance schedule
Company complied with orr'er.
New trial oranted.
Presently in compliance with
terms of orr'er.
Source i? now me^tino
tern? of EF.a approved
compliance schedule.
Source has
installation of control
equipment and i? in
compliance .
-------
NEBRASKA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*085. Metropolitan Omaha-
Council Bluffs Inter-
state (Iowa)
*086. Metropolitan Sioux City
Interstate (Iowa, S.D.)
145. Lincoln-Beatrice-
Fa irbury
146. Nebraska
Probably
will
attain
so2
so2
S0?
c.
S09
L.
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
344
-------
NEBRASKA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*085. Metropolitan Omaha-
Council Bluffs (Iowa
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
*086. Metropolitan Sioux
City (Iowa, S.D.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
145: Lincoln-Beatrice-
Fairbury
TSP
so2
Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
146. Nebraska
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Oy
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
12
3
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
7
1
0
0
0
9
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
12
1
0
1
3
1
0
0
0
0
8
1
0
0
0
15
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
11
1
0
-
-
1
0
0
.-
-
8
1
0
-
-
7
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
11
5
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
12
1
0
1
0
17
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
8
2
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
8
0
0
-
-
10
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
11
0
7
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
13
0
1
1
0
18
0
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
11
6
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
13
1
0
-
-
11
1
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
345
-------
NEBRASKA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Omaha-Council Bluffs Inter-
state (Nebraska portion)
Pollutant
TSP
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
346
-------
NEBRASKA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
47
32
103 Dollars
832
536
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
50
15
3
62
129
0
872
9
2,123
0
0
58
5
95
83
1
0
12
10
19
8
134
44
3,732
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
347
-------
NEBRASKA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES'3
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SO?)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
436
2
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
352
2
In
violation
41
Unknown
status
43
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
1,172
5,334
6,506
205
31
0
TOTAL
236
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
348
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
GO
-t*
10
Nebraska,
Bellevue
Nebraska
Hallam
Nebraska,
Beatrice
Nebraska Public
Power Kramer
Station
Power Plant
Nebraska Public
Power District,
Sheldon Station
power plant
Dempster Industries
Inc.
Foundry
Violation of emis-
sion limitations
for particulates
Violation of particu-
late matter standards
Cupola violates
EPA promulgated
particulate matter
emission Std.
Notice of violation
issued 2/U/71I.
order issued 3/l«/75.
Order revised 6/25/75.
Order issued
12/13/7U Order revised
7/9/75.
Admin, order issued
1/2/1H Order
Amended U/25/75
Source complying with
terms of order.
Company meeting reouirements
of order.
-------
EPA REGION VIII
COLORADO
MONTANA
NORTH DAKOTA
SOUTH DAKOTA
UTAH
WYOMING
-------
COLORADO
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
*014. Four Corners Interstate
(Ariz., N.Mex., Utah)
034. Comanche
035. Grand Mesa
036. Metropolitan Denver
037. Pawnee
038. San Isabel
039. San Luis
040. Yampa
Probably
will
attain
TSPb
so2b
TSP
so2
so2
so2
Ł.
so2
L.
SO,
L
TSP
so2
S09
L.
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
350
-------
COLORADO
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*014. Four Corners (Ariz.,
N. Mex., Utah)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
034. Comanche.
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
035. Grand Mesa
TSP
S0?
"tlaily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
036. Metropolitan Denver
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
1
1
0
0
2
1
.0
0
0
10
1
0
0
0
21
0
6
6
6
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
7
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
23
2
1
1
2
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
-
2
0
0
-
_
7
0
0
-
_
20
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
6
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
23
2
8
7
8
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
-
2
0
0
-
.
9
0
0
-
_
21
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
5
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
22
7
2
6
6
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox<
351
-------
COLORADO (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
037. Pawnee
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
038. San Isabel
-TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
039. San Luis
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
040. Yampa
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°v
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
9
1
0
0
0
8
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
8
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
11
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
7
0
0
-
• _
8
0
0
-
_
5
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
13
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
10
0
0
-
_
8
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
12
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Valid
annualc
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
352
-------
COLORADO
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Colorado Springs
Colorado-Utah Oil Shale
Interstate (Colorado
portion)
Metropolitan Denver
North Central Colorado
Pueblo
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
CO
X
X
X
X
X
°x
X
X
X
N02
X
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. Denver has an on-going carpool program,
2. Several experimental bus/carpool lanes
are in operation as part of an overall
Denver transit improvement program.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
353
-------
COLORADO
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
106
115
103 Dollars
2042
2183
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
39
23
3
2
24
0
105
12
49
6
8
6
7
26
154
19
1
89
18
45
0
27
2
665
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
354
-------
COLORADO
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOe)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
131
3
1
1
2
4
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
127
In
violation
4
Unknown
status
0
3
1
1
2
4
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
1
725
726
10
1
3
TOTAL
14
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
355
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Colorado,
Pueblo
CF&I Steel Corp.
Steel Mill
Violation of
opacity reg.
Notices of violation
issued 5/8,15,17 and
6/6/70. Orders issued
8/27/7U and 10/17/74.
Company complying with
terms of order.
u>
in
CTi
-------
MONTANA
Table A • ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
140. Billings
141. Great Falls
142. Helena
143. Miles City
144. Missoula
Probably
will
attain
TSP
so2
so2
L
TSP
so2
SO,
t.
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area;
Point
sources
so2
TSP
Fugitive
dust area;
Point
sources
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
357
-------
MONTANA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
140. Billings
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
141. Great Falls
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
142. Helena
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
143. Miles City
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
3
1
0
0
1
3
1
0
0
3
3
2
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
10
0
0
0
0
4
1
2
0
0
16
0
7
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
Valid .
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
2
1
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
7
0
0
0
0
5
1
1
0
0
6
6
5
0
0
8
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
6
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
„
2
0
1
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
-
1974
Minimum
data0
7
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
10
1
6
0
0
10
1
3
1
1
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
0
4
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
358
-------
MONTANA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
144. Missoula
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
dataD
10
0
0
0
0
Valid ,
annual
average
6
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
13
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data
9
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
359
-------
MONTANA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Anaconda-Butte
Billings
Helena
Kali spell
Missoula
Southeastern Montana Coal
Resource
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
X
X
CO
X
X
°x
N02
3AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
1. Notice of proposed rulemaking published
July 3, 1975, provides S02 regulation
for ASARCO smelter.
2. State plan is in effect for other pollutants,
360
-------
MONTANA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
30
22
103 Dollars
585
540
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
3
6
0
29
17
0
84
21
19
0
13
2
6
27
35
86
47
30
57
0
0
54
0
536
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
361
-------
MONTANA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
^capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOg)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
*National air quality standards beinq
Total
number
identified
47
2*
violated; SI
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compl iance
36
' is disappr
In
violation
11
wed; EPA ap
Unknown
status
0
Droval of
^ T_P
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
0
103
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
103
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
362
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQ.CR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*130. Metropolitan Fargo-Moor-
head Interstate (Minn.)
172. North Dakota
TSP
so2
TSP
S00
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
363
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*130. Metropolitan Fargo-
Moorhead (Minn.)
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
172. North Dakota
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
1
0
0
0
-
12
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data5
3
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
Valid •
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
11
0
0
_
1973
Minimum
data0
3
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
11
0
0
-.
-
1974
Minimum
data0
3
0
1
0
0
24
1
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
364
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Cass
McLean-Mercer-01 iver
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
X
CO
°x
X
N02
X
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants
365
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
15
8
103 Dollars
175
127b
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
'includes one non-grant related state assignee.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
29
4
3
19
9
3
27
154
2,064
0
0
1
0
23
24
29
0
72
2
0
0
0
0
2,463
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
366
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces '
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
52
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
45
In
violation
7
Unknown
status
0
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries.
2. Field investigations
11
11
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
22
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
367
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*086. Metropolitan Sioux City
Interstate (Iowa, Neb.)
"087. Metropolitan Sioux Falls
Interstate (Iowa)
205. Black Hills - Rapid City
206. South Dakota
Probably
will
attain
so2
TSPb
so2
so2
TSP
so2
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area;
Point
sources
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
^Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
368
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*086. Metropolitan Sioux
City (Iowa, Neb.)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*087. Metropolitan Sioux
Falls (Iowa)
TSP
SO-
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
205. Black Hills-Rapid
City
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
206. South Dakota
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
Valid
annualc
average
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
-
1974
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
7
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
°Can be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and DX-
369
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMA3
Sioux Falls
Black Hills
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
370
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
10
6
103 Dollars
155
96b
a
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Includes two non-arant related state assignees.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATE60RIESa
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal -fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
19
3
0
9
8
1
30
70
1331
2
0
0
2
44
102
0
0
176
43
0
286
14
0
2140
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
371
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
:ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
90
87
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES6
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued.—
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
TOTAL
34
677
711
12
0
0
12
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
372
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
South Dakota
Mobridge
South Dakota
Rapid City
South Dakota
Rapid City
South Dakota
Rapid City
South Dakota,
Sturghs
Montana-Dakota
Utilities Company
Mobridge Power Plant
Black Hills Power
and Light Co.
Ben French Station
Light Aggregates,
Inc.
rotary kiln
Department of
Transportation
Division of
Highways
portable asphalt
concrete hot mix plant
plant
Department of Trans-
portation Division
of Highways
portable asphalt
concrete hot mix
olant
Power Plant in viola-
tion of pariculate
matter reg.
Power Plant in
violation of
particulate matter
reg.
Violation of particu-
late matter std
Notice of violation
issued 2/28/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/2H/75.
Administrative order
issued 5/6/75
Notice of violation
issued 6/19/75
Violation of particu- Notice of violation
late matter and visible issued 7/9/75.
emissions regs.
Violation of particu-
late matter stds
Notice of violation
issued 7/9/75.
-------
UTAH
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
*014. Four Corners Interstate
(Ariz., Colo., N.M.)
219. Utah
220. Wasatch Front
TSP
TSP
SO,
No data avail'
able
TSP
Fugitive
dust area;
Point
sources
SOo
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
374
-------
UTAH
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*014. Four Corners (Ariz.,
Colo., N.M.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
219. Utah
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
220. Wasatch Front
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
!o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
5
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
11
9
6
5
5
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
1
5
4
4
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
8
1
5
-
_
1973
Minimum
data
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
4
8
4
4
Valid
annualc
average
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
7
0
4
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
4
4
4
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
_
0
3
0
-
.
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox<
375
-------
UTAH
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Colorado-Utah Oil Shale
Interstate (Utah portion)
Northcentral Utah
Provo
Salt Lake City
Southeastern Utah Coal
Resource
Southwestern Utah Coal
Resource
Wayne County Coal Resource
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
. S02
X
X
X
X
X
X
CO
°x
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved except for particulate
matter in Wasatch Front AQCR.
EPA promulgation (November 27, 1973) is in
effect for Wasatch Front AQCR. Revised state
transportation control plan was subject of a
public hearing September 19, 1975.
1. EPA SO regulations for Kennecott smelter
were 10-18-74. (Final rulemaking
is awaiting headquarters approval. SO-
emission regulations for Kennecott smefter
were adopted by the State June 26, 1975.
EPA proposed to disapprove the June 26,
1975, state submittal on September 19, 1975.
2. EPA promulgated particulate matter regula-
tions for Wasatch Front AQCR on May 14,
1973, and September 5, 1974.
376
-------
UTAH
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
35
18
103 Dollars
533
362
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
16
10
1
13
22
1
71
14
3
23
4
11
5
12
67
43
0
81
15
0
0
5
2
419
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
377
-------
UTAH
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
( capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
a-orr, * f- Blast furnaces
*SIP for smelters disapproved. Corre
shortly.
Total
number
identified
54
1
1*
4
2
10
3
ctive SIP pro
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
50
1
2
3
3osed 10/74,
In
violation
4
10
promulgatio
Unknown
status
0
4
i anticipated
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
23
184
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued,
2. Administrative orders issued .,
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
207
9
1
0
TOTAL
10
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
378
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Utah
Grantsville
Utah
Or em
Utah
Rowley
Utah
Salt Lake
City.
Utah,
Salt Lake
City
Utah,
Salt Lake
City
Marblehead
Lime Co.
rotary calciner
United States Steel
Corp.
Steel MFG.
boiler houses #'s
2-6
NL Industries
Magnesium Division
melt cell-reactor
system Gas Turbine
Exhaust-Spray Dryer
Exhaust System t3, #2,
and # 1
W.B. Garner
Violation of particu-
late matter and
visible emissions regs.
Violation of particu-
late matter stds
Violations of particu-
late matter regs.
Concrete Products
Co.
Cement Mfg.
Granite Mill and
Fixture Co.
Rock Crushing
Notice of violation
issued 6/27/75
Notice of violation
issued 6/23/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/7/75.
Violation of
opacity reg.
Violation of
opacity std
Violation of
opacity standard.
Notice of violation
issued 8/6/7H.
Notice of violation
issued 8/26/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 6/20/74.
Presently in
compliance.
In compliance. Ceased
operation.
Presently in comoliance
-------
CO
oo
o
STATE/CITY
Utah,
Salt Lake
City
Utah.
Salt Lake
City
Utah,
Moods Cross
Utah,
Woods Cross
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Utah Sand 6 Gravel
Rock Crushing
Western States
Engineering E
Milling
Crown Refining Co.
Refinery
Lloyd A. Fry Roof-
ing Co.
Roofing Mfg.
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION
Violation of
opacity reg.
Violation of
opacity standard
Violation of SIP
new source review.
Violation of
opacity reg.
Notice of violation
issued 6/20/74.
Notice of violation
issued 8/6/7H.
Notice of violation
issued 5/6/7U. Order
issued 7/26/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 1/23/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Conference held 8/7/7U.
No further violations noted.
Requesting improvement of
O6M Plan.
In compliance.
Complying with order
Plant production unit
closed.
EPA action pending out-
come of State adminis-
trative hearing deter-
mination.
-------
WYOMING
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
241. Casper
242. Metropolitan Cheyenne
243. Wyoming
TSP
SO
TSP
SO
SO,
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
381
-------
WYOMING
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
241. Casper
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
242. Metropolitan Cheyenne
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
243. Wyoming
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
1
2
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
1
1
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
3
2
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
6
2
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
1
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
.
3
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
4
0
3
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
7
1
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
.
*•= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
382
-------
WYOMING
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Powder River Basin
Sweetwater
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
S09
L
X
CO
ov
X
X
NO
2
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
383
-------
WYOMING
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
19
16
103 Dollars
354
253
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
24
14
0
0
9
1
58
38
11
7
6
0
1
40
50
66
0
12
34
0
0
13
0
384
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
384
-------
WYOMING
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
>tatus with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
{capable of emitting TOO+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
70
68
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SO?)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
10
654
664
5
0
0
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
385
-------
EPA REGION IX
AMERICAN SAMOA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
GUAM
HAWAII
NEVADA
-------
STATE/CITY
Wyoming,
Sundance
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Roberts Construction
Company
Quarry
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION
Violation of
ambient air std
for total sus-
pended particulates
as provided in
Wyoming SIP.
Notice of violation
issued 8/16/73.
Order issued 9/26/73.
RESULTS/STATUS
Presently in comnliance with
terms of order.
00
Ol
-------
AMERICAN SAMOA
Table A- ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
245. American Samoa
TSP
so2
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
387
-------
AMERICAN SAMOA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
245. American Samoa
TSP
S0?
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
1
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annualc
average
0
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual,.
average""
0
0
0
-
.
*•= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q.
388
-------
AMERICAN SAMOA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants,
389
-------
AMERICAN SAMOA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
No data available.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES
No data available.
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
NO DATA AVAILABLE
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
390
-------
ARIZONA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*012. Arizona-New Mexico-
Southern Border
Interstate (N.M.)
*013. Clark-Mohave Interstate
(Nevada)
*014. Four Corners Interstate
(Colo.,N.Mex., Utah)
015. Phoenix-Tucson
Probably
will
attain
so?b
c.
S09b
2
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSPb
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
S09b
2
SO -
Fuel switching
may cause vio-
lations
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
SOp (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
391
-------
ARIZONA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*012. Arizona-New Mexico
Southern Border
(N.M.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
.. X
*013. Clark-Mohave (Nev.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*014. Four Corners (Colo.,
N. M., Utah)
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
015. Phoenix-Tucson
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
6
0
3
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
5
1
1
0
0
22
3
8
4
3
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
3
0
3
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
10
2
0
0
0
16
2
8
3
1
Valid .
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
3
1
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
9
1
1
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
4
7
7
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
7
2
0
0
0
32
17
12
4
2
Valid
annual
average
0
0
1
-
_
3
1
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
12
0
3
-
„
1974
Minimum
data0
8
7
7
0
0
4
0
2
0
0
8
0
2
0
0
46
14
18
11
2
Valid
annual
average
0
7
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
„
14
10
1
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and O-
392
-------
ARIZONA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Phoenix SMSA
Tucson SMSA
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
CO
X
°x
X
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved except in part for
Maricopa and Pima Counties.
1. Ninth Circuit Court invalidated EPA's
requirements for implementation of
state TCP.
2. The State has committed itself to
establishing an inspection/maintenance
program for Phoenix and Tucson begin-
ning next year.
1. EPA disapproved state regulations for
SO, emissions from copper smelters in
Arizona-New Mexico Southern Border and
Phoenix-Tucson AQCRs. (EPA will pro-
pose replacement regulations.
2. EPA promulgation is in effect for S0«
in Four Corners Interstate AQCR (March
3, 1974) and for TSP in Phoenix-Tucson
Intrastate AQCR (May 14, 1973).
3. State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
393
-------
ARIZONA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
125
118
103 Dollars
1871
2179
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
31
4
0
1
4
0
80
8
685
0
27
11
23
62
137
0
1
52
47
16
3
7
1
1,200
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
394
-------
ARIZONA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES'5
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
SIP disapproved, EPA proposed regula
Total
number
identified
419
2
7*
3
ions in prep
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
391
1
ration
In
violation
/
1
Unknown
status
11
1
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
10
20,794
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
20,804
75
7
45
TOTAL
127
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
396
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Arizona,
Page
Arizona,
Payson
Arizona,
Sahuarita
Arizona,
San Manuel
Arizona,
Snowflake
Arizona,
Snowflake
Salt River Project
Navajo Station
Power Plant
Kaibab Industries
Incinerators
Duval Sierrita Corp.
Molybdenum
concentrate,
roaster,
roasting
Magma Cooper Co.
Smelter
Western Moulding Co.
Inc.
Incinerator
western Pine
Industries
Incinerators
Violation of Feder-
ally promulgated
compliance sched-
matter.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of sulfur
oxides emission
regs.
Violation of Federally
promulgated schedule
for particulate matter.
Violation of opaci-
ty regs.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Notice of violation is-
sued 6/10/7H. Order
issued 9/18/74.
ule for particulate
Notice of violation is-
sued 7/2U/73. Admin.
order issued 9/26/73.
Notice of viola-
tion issued 10/7/7U
Consent order issued
3/7/75.
Notice of violation
issued 7/24/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 7/24/73.
In violation of terms of
order. Case under review.
Achieved compliance
1/10/7U.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Placed on State schedule.
Final compliance verified
5/8/7U.
Placed on state compliance
schedule. Achieved final
compliance 8/26/7U.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Arizona
Benson
Arizona,
Douglas
Arizona,
Hayden
Arizona,
Kingman
Apache Powder Co.
Nitric acid
plant and
open burning.
Phelps Dodge Corp.
Copper Smelter
American Smelting
and Refining Co.
Smelter
Duval Corp.
Roaster, Molybdenum
concentrate
Violation of opaci-
ty, open burning,
and nitrogen oxide
emission regs.
Violation of opac-
ity 8 particulate
matter emission
reg.
Violation of Fed-
erally promulgated
compliance schedule
for particulate
matter.
Violation of sulfur
oxides emissions and
particualte matter
regs.
Notice of violation is-
sued 11/13/73. Order
issued 2/13/74.
Notice of violation is-
sued 3/27/74; Admin.
order issued 8/6/74,
ammended 11/12/74.
Notice of violation
issued 4/3/75.
Admin, order issued
6/19/75.
Notice of violation
issued 10/7/7U.
Order issued 8/12/75.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
In violation of terms
of order. Case under review for
further enforcement action.
Not in compliance with terms
of order. Case under review.
-------
CALIFORNIA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
023. Great Basin Valley
024. Metropolitan Los Angeles
025. North Central Coast
026. North Coast
027. Northeast Plateau
028. Sacramento Valley
029. San Diego
030. San Francisco Bay Area
Probably
will
attain
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
so2
TSP
Probably
will not
attain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Non-point
sources
Attainment
status
uncertain
so2
No data
available
so2 -
Fuel switch-
ing may cause
violations
so2
Fuel switch-
ing may cause
violations
so2
Fuel switch-
ing may cause
violations
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
398
-------
CALIFORNIA (con't.)
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
031. San Joaquin Valley
032. South Central Coast
033. Southeast Desert
SO,
TSP
so2
SO*
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
399
-------
CALIFORNIA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
023. Great Basin Valley
TSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
024. Metropolitan Los
Angeles
TSP
S0?
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
025. North Central Coast
TSP
S0?
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
026. North Coast
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
0
0
0
0
25
8
17
24
27
5
0
0
1
4
15
1
0
1
1
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
23
8
13
19
19
4
0
0
1
4
2
1
0
0
1
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
20
6
11
-
-
4
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
27
8
20
26
27
4
0
0
2
4
1
0
0
0
1
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
16
0
11
-
-
4
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
31
21
8
26
37
5
0
0
2
4
7
0
0
1
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
-
24
7
0
-
-
4
0
0
-
-
4
0
0
-
* Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox-
400
-------
CALIFORNIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
027. Northeast Plateau
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
028. Sacramento Valley
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
029. San Diego
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
030. San Francisco Bay
Area
TSP
S0?
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
3
0
0
0
0
8
1
0
4
6
3
1
0
2
7
15
4
6
15
20
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
0
4
6
1
1
1
1
6
17
4
2
13
15
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
5
0
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
9
3
1
-
_
1973
"linimum
data"
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
0
4
5
4
2
2
3
6
18
5
7
15
22
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
_
3
0
0
-
_
14
0
1
-
—
1974
Minimum
data0
4
0
0
0
0
8
0
1
4
5
7
3
1
1
6
17
10
3
15
22
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
6
1
0
-
—
1
1
0
-
_
17
2
0
-
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and DX-
401
-------
CALIFORNIA (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
031. San Joaquin Valley
TSP
S0?
Daily
Hourly
CO
Oy
X
032. South Central Coast
TSP
S0?
Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
033. Southeast Desert
TSP
so2
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
No. monitors
prooosed
in SIP
for 1974
16
2
0
7
8
2
0
0
1
2
7
0
0
2
6
No. monitors reporting
19 2
Minimum
dataD
7
1
0
7
8
1
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
3
6
Valid
annualc
average
7
0
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
9
1
1
7
7
1
0
0
1
2
1
0
0
6
4
Valid
annual
average
7
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
15
1
1
7
6
1
0
0
1
2
3
0
0
5
5
Valid
annual
average
10
1
0
-
.
1
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
GCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox-
402
-------
CALIFORNIA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Sacramento Valley Area
San Diego Air Basin
San Francisco Bay Area
San Joaquin and Stanislaus
Counties
Fresno County
Kern County
Tulare County
South Coast Air Basin
Southeast Desert
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
so2
X
X
CO
X
X
X
X
°x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N02
X
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
403
-------
CALIFORNIA
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
EPA promulgation (May 14, 1973) is in
effect in all counties except Butte, Colusa,
Imperial, San Luis Obispo, Yuba, Lake,
Tehama, Del Norte, and Trinity Counties and
Bay Area AQCR.
1. Pilot inspection/maintenance program
will begin in Riverside this fall, and
program for entire South Coast Air
Basin is planned for fall 1976.
2. Preferential bus/carpool lanes are in
effect in Los Angeles and San Fran-
cisco.
3. State and Cal Trans are running car-
pool programs.
4. San Diego is currently circulating to
the local jurisdictions a draft com-
prehensive air strategy program involv-
ing parking controls, mass transit
improvements, carpooling, and stationary
source controls. Adoption is expected
by end of this year.
5. At least four jurisdictions in the Los
Angeles area -- City of Los Angeles,
City of Brea, City of Long Beach, County
of San Bernadino -- are developing
parking management plans.
6. Sacramento and jurisdictions in the Bay
area are also developing parking manage-
ment plans.
7. San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge changed
its fare structure to encourage carpools.
8. Ninth Circuit Court invalidated EPA's
requirements for implementation of the
state TCP.
(Table continued on next page.)
404
-------
California (continued)
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Emission limitations
1. EPA proposals are in effect for TSP in
Metropolitan Los Angeles, San Joaquin
Valley and Southeast Desert AQCRs.
2. EPA promulgations for HC controls are in
effect in Sacramento Valley, San Fran-
cisco Bay, San Joaquin Valley, and Los
Angeles Metropolitan AQCRs.
3. State plan is inadequate for N0? control
in Los Angeles, but no EPA control
strategy or regulations have been pro-
mulgated to provide for attainment of NO.
standard.
4. Excessive CO levels exist in Los Angeles
San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Valley,
and San Francisco, but no additional
stationary source controls are deemed
possible.
5. State plan is approved for other pol-
lutants.
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
1221
1118b
103 Dollars
31,140
28,868C
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Does not include 263 man-years available for air pollution
control work in other State agencies such as Bureau of Auto
Repair, Department of Transportation and Department of Health;
and in research and mobile source control activities carried
on by California Air Resources Board.
Does not include approximately $3,450,958 provided by-other
State agencies, $2,352,000 approved by California Air Resources
Board for inspection/maintenance program, $1,714,000 designated
by California Air Resources Board for research studies.
(Actual resources include $4,600,000 of state subvention funds.)
405
-------
CALIFORNIA
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES9
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal -fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal -fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
150
44
0
97
431
0
767
377
507
64
22
271
119
263
1,013
492
218
1,029
413
2,297
224
308
19
9,125
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
406
-------
CALIFORNIA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
1 ,517
7
2
16
17
3
1
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
,441
7
2
8
3
In
violation
54
8
-\
I
Unknown
status
oo
dd
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY5 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
2,956
337,104
340,060
2,593
9
687
TOTAL
3,289
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
407
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
California
Santa Fe
Springs
California
Tulare
California,
Richmond
California,
South Gate
California,
Ukiah
California,
Vernon
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Gulf Oil Corp.
Santa Fe Springs
Refinery
Dairyman's
Cooperative
Creamery Asso.
whey drier
Allied Chem. Corp,
Sulfuric Acid
Plant
General Motors Corp.
Auto Mfr.
Redwood Coast
Lumber Co.
Incinerator
Fibreboard Corp.
Printing plant
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Sulfur recovery plant
in violation of sulfur
oxides reg.
Violation of particu-
late matter reg.
Violation of sulfur
oxide emission reg
Failure to submit
a compliance
schedule for hydro-
carbon emissions.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg
Violation of
hydrocarbon reg.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 3/26/75.
Admin, order issued
6/2U/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/25/75.
Administrative order
Notice of violation is-
sued 7/18/7U.
Consent order
issued 6/6/74.
RESULTS/STATUS
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
EPA has proposed disapproval
of existing reg.
Achieved final compliance
8/5/7H.
Notice of violation is- Achieved final compliance
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
order issued
12/21/73.
Notice of violation is- Achieved final compliance
sued 3/11/73.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
California,
Los Angeles
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Uniroyal, Inc.
Rubber Mfr.
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Failure to submit
approvable com-
pliance schedule
pursuant to Fed-
erally promulgated
regulation.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation is-
sued 3/11/74; consent
order issued 6/18/74.
RESULTS/STATUS
Source certified final
compliance.
California,
Martinez
California,
Martinez
California,
Monrovia
California,
Monolith
California,
North Holly-
wood
California,
Richmond
Phillips Petro.
Co. - Avon Plant
Refinery
Monsanto-Avon
Plant
Indust. Boilers
Avery Label Co.
Printing
Monolith Portland
Cement Plant
Cement Kilns
ALCO Gravure
Printing Co.
Standard Oil of
California
Violation of sulfur
oxide emission reg.
Violation of sulfur
oxides emissions
reg.
Violation of hydro-
carbon reg.
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
emission reg.
Violation of Hydro-
carbon emission reg.
Violation of sulfur
oxides emission
reg.
Notice of violation is-
sued 7/18/7H.
Notice of violation
issued 7/18/7U.
Consent order is-
sued 8/30/74.
Notice of violation is-
sued 11/20/73; admin.
order issued 5/10/74.
Notice of violation is-
sued
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY,
California,
El Segundo
California,
Fontana
California,
Fort Bragg
California,
Fort Bragg
California,
Visalia
California,
Long Beach
California,
Los Angeles
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Standard Oil of
Calif.
Oil Refinery
Kaiser Steel Corp.
Steel Mill
Georgia Pacific
Corp.
Incinerator
Louisiana Pacific
Co.
Incinerator
Stauffer Chemical
Corp.
whey drier
Dept. of Water 8
Power, City of Los
Angeles, Haynes
Steam Plant
Gravure W. Printing
Co.
Printing
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of EPA
review of new
sources and mod-
ifications regs.
Violation of opaci-
ty, sulfur oxides
emission regs
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of parti-
culate matter reg.
Violation of nitro-
gen oxide emissions
reg.
Violation of incre-
ments of progress
of schedule to meet
hydrocarbon emis-
sion regs.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation is-
sued 1/31/7U. Admin
order issued 3/5/7H.
Notice of violation is-
sued 8/3/73;consent
order issued 7/12/7U,
revised 11/11/7U.
RESULTS/STATUS
Achieved final compliance
8/12/74.
In violation of
consent order. Case has been
referred to U.S. Attorney.
Notice of violation is- Achieved final compliance
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
order issued 12/20/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
order issued 12/20/73.
Notice of violation
issued 6/18/75.
Consent order issued
7/9/7U.
Notice of violation is-
sued 5/10/7U. Order
issued 10/16/74.
In violation of terms
of order. Region to inspect.
Achieved final compliance.
Source requested extension
of terms of order
to 9/30/^5.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
California,
Cloverdale
California,
Cloverdale
California,
Covelo
California
Carson
California
El Centro
California
Fremont
California
San Jose
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
GSR Lumber Co.
Incinerator
Masonite Corp.
Incinerator
Louisiana Pacific
Corp.
Atlantic Richfield
Co. Refinery
Valley Nitrogen
Produces, Inc.
Urea Prill Tower
General Motors
Auto Assembly Plant
Ford Motor Co.
San Jose Assembly
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Sulfur recovery pit.
in violation of sulfur
oxides reg.; FCCU in
violation of particu-
late reg.; and sulfur
plant incinerator in
violation of sulfur
oxides reg.
Violation of particu-
late matter reg.
Violation of hydro-
carbon reg.
Violation of hydro-
carbon reg.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation is-
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
order issued 12/20/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
order issued 12/20/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
Notice of violation
issued 3/27/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Achieved final compliance.
Region will inspect to verify.
Achieved final compliance
6/27/7U.
Achieved final compliance
5/1/7H.
Notice of violation
issued 6/11/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/27/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/8/75.
EPA in process of disapproving
proposed revision to EP? reg. sub
mitted by APCD.
EPA in process of disapproving
proposed revision to EPA reg. sub
mitted by APCD.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
California,
Anderson
California,
Boron
California,
Brawley
California,
Calpella
California,
Carson
California,
Cloverdale
Simpson Lee
Paper Co.
Boiler
U.S. Borox and
Chemical
Fusing lines
Batley-Janss
Enterprise
Alfalfa Mill
Masonite Corp.,
Incinerator
Texaco, Inc.
Sulfur Re-
covery Plant
Cloverdale Plywood
Co. (Fibreboard
Corp)
Incinerator
Violation of opaci-
ty particulate and
sulfur oxide (TRS)
emission standard.
Violation of opac-
ity req.
Violation of parti-
culate and opaci-
ty emission
reg.
Violation of opaci-
ty reg.
Violation of sulfur
oxide emission req.
Violation of opaci-
ty regs.
issued 5/19/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 3/21/7U. Admin.
order issued tt/9/74.
Notice of violation
issued 10/10/7H.
Admin, order issued
6/9/75.
Notice of violation is-
sued 12/1U/73
Presently in compliance
with terms of order.
In compliance with terms of
order.
In compliance (source shut-
down) .
Notice of violation is- Achieved final compliance
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
orders issued 12/20/73.
Notice of violation is-
sued 2/22/7H; admin.
order issued 5/9/74;
order revised 10/9/7U.
Source certified final
compliance.
Notice of violation is- Achieved final compliance
sued 8/10/73. Admin.
order issued 12/21/73
-------
GUAM
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
246. Guam
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
SO.
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0« (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
413
-------
GUAM
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
246. Guam
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
'Jo. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
2
3
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
9
6
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
0
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
8
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
4
0
5
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
1
0
-
*•= Interstate AQCR'
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q-
414
-------
GUAM
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
None required
State plan is -pproved for all pollutants
415
-------
GUAM
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
8
8
103 Dollars
108
130
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES9
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
2
0
0
13
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
18
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
416
-------
GUAM
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
NO DATA AVAILABLE
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NO ACTIONS TAKEN
417
-------
HAWAII
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
060. Hawaii
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
SO,
-Power
plant
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0« (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
3Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
418
-------
HAWAII
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
060. Hawaii
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
12
8
1
2
2
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data6
15
13
0
1
1
Valid
annual
average
11
6
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
16
14
0
1
1
Valid
annual
average
11
6
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
16
0
14
1
1
Valid
annual
average
8
7
0
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Q.
419
-------
HAWAII
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved,
None required.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
However, revisions for S0? were requested
in May 1975.
420
-------
HAWAII
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
26
17
103 Dollars
400
399
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
31
23
0
48
42
0
39
1
6
1
0
2
4
29
33
21
0
12
484
0
0
0
3
779
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
421
-------
HAWAII
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOg)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
68
1
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
23
In
violation
21
Unknown
status
24
1
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations.
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
0
38
38
10
2
0
TOTAL
12
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
422
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Hawaii,
Honolulu
Hawaii,
Honolulu
Hawaii,
Papaaloa
Hawaii,
Puuinene
Hawaii
pepeeked
Hawaii,
Ewa
Hawaii,
Halaula
Hawaii,
Honolulu
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
City and County of Violation of particu-
Honolulu, Kewalo late matter reg. and
Municipal Incinerator Fed. approved State
schedule.
City and County of
Honolulu, Waipaho
Municipal Incinerator
Laupa Hoekoe Sugar
Sugar Processing
Plant
Violation of particu-
late matter reg. and
Fed. approved State
compliance schedule.
Violation of visible
emission and parti-
culate matter regs.
Violation of visible
emissions reg.
Hawaiian Bitumuls
Paving Co., LTD
Asphalt concrete
Batching Plant
Hilo Coast Processing Violation of visible
Co. Wainaku Factory emissions and parti-
Sugar Processing culate matter regs.
Plant
Hawaiian Western
Steel LTD.
steel Mfg.
Kohala Corp.
Sugar Mill
Industrial
Boiler
Electric arc Furnaces
in violation of
visible emissions reg.
Violation of opaci-
ty and particulate
matter emission
reg.
City and County of Violation of particu-
Honolulu, Kapalama late matter reg. and
Municipal Incinerator Fed. approved State
com-
pliance schedule.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 1/7/75. Admin.
order issued 6/6/75.
Notice of violation
issued 1/7/75. Admin.
order issued 6/6/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/13/75
Notice of violation
issued 5/13/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/1U/75.
Notice of violation
issued 6/20/75
Consent order is-
sued 7/16/74.
Notice of violation
issued 1/7/75. Admin.
order issued 6/6/75.
RESULTS/STATUS
Not in compliance with terms
of order; source requested
extension; region to deny
request and require immediate
compliance with order.
Not in compliance with terms
extension; region to deny
request and reauire immediate
compliance with order.
In compliance with terms
of order.
Not in compliance with terms
of order; source requested
extension; region to deny
request and require immediate
compliance with order.
-------
NEVADA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
*013. Clark-Mohave Interstate
(Arizona)
147. Nevada
148. Northwest Nevada
Probably
will
attain
SO,
L.
Probably
will not
attain
S09 -Power
^ plant
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
so2
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
424
-------
NEVADA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-7.4
AQCR/Pollutant
*013. Clark-Mohave (Ariz.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
147. Nevada
TSP
SO,,
**UO
"'Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
148. Northwest Nevada
TSP
S00
w w rt
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
15
2
1
2
2
7
3
1
0
0
12
1
0
0
1
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
17
0
0
0
1
9
3
0
0
0
15
0
0
1
0
Valid .
annual
average
14
0
0
-
_
.8
0
0
-
_
14
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
17
0
0
1
2
9
6
3
0
0
15
0
0
1
0
Valid
annual
average
14
0
0
-
-
6
3
0
-
-
13
o.
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
20
0
0
2
2
12
2
3
0
0
16
0
0
1
1
Valid
annual
average
9
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
-
-
1
0
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and QX-
425
-------
NEVADA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Las Vegas
Reno
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
so2
CO
X
°x
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
EPA promulgation (May 14, 1973) is in effect
for Washoe County.
None required.
1. EPA regulation for S0? was promulgated
February 6, 1975, for^the McGill smelter.
2. State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
426
-------
NEVADA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
34
28
103 Dollars
507
518
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES9
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal -fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
15
3
0
0
3
0
42
9
3
1
50
0
17
6
172
0
2
45
68
2
0
0
4
442
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
427
-------
NEVADA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
85
2
1
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
79
2
In
violation
4
1
Unknown
status
2
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
16
18,527
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
18,543
129
13
52
TOTAL
194
a"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
428
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY C()FP SOURCE^ POLLUTION PROBLEM TYPE OF ACTION RESULTS/STATUS
Nevada, Jack N. Tedford, Violation of Notice of violation
Fallen Inc. Hot asphalt visible emission issued 12/31/7i».
batch plant regs.
Nevada, Basic Industries Violation of parti- Notice of violation is- New req. proposed in Fed. Req.
Gabbs culate & opacity sued 5/2/74. 8/17/75. State adopted revised
Magnesium Factory emission regs. reg. and placed source on complia
schedule.
Nevada, Southern California Violation opacity Notice of violation Inviolation of terms .
Mohave Edison Co. and sulfur oxides issued 7/9/73;order of order; case under
Mohave Power Plant emission regs. issued 11/1/73; review.
amended order issued
9/18/7U.
-------
EPA REGION X
ALASKA
IDAHO
OREGON
WASHINGTON
-------
ALASKA
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
008. Cook Inlet
009. Northern Alaska
010. South Central Alaska
Oil. Southeastern Alaska
so2
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
so2
TSP
Fugitive dust
area
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
430
-------
ALASKA
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
008. Cook Inlet
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
009. Northern Alaska
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
010. South Central Alaska
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
Oil. Southeastern Alaska
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
10
1
0
0
0
9
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
8
3
1
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
9
0
0
0
0
9
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
Valid .
annualc
average
4
0
0
-
_
1
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
10
0
0
1
0
11
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
4
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
2
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
data0
10
0
1
1
0
10
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
4
0
0
Valid
annual
average
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
431
-------
ALASKA
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
EPA promulgation (November 27, 1973) is in
effect for Northern Alaska Intrastate AQCR.
Enforcement of the TCP was stayed by the
Ninth Circuit Court on August 15, 1975.
The Court has remanded the plan to EPA for
reevaluation of air quality.
1. State plan is disapproved for CO in
Northern Alaska AQCR.
2. State plan is approved for all pollutants.
432
-------
ALASKA
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
15
15
103 Dollars
580
329
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
5
12
0
43
4
6
103
1
0
0
0
0
0
6
19
16
1
23
131
4
13
16
7
410
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
433
-------
ALASKA
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
Total
number
identified
>tatus with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
ompliance
In
violation
Unknown
status
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS9
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
71
64
7
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth" furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY5 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
TOTAL
0
106
106
0
4
0
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
434
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RES ULTS/STATUS
Alaska,
Haines
Alaska,
Ketchikan
Schnabel
Lumber Co.
Teepee burner
Herring Box
Lumber
Teepee burner
Failure to bring teepee Notice of violation
burner into compliance issued 12/23/71.
with schedule.
Failure to bring teepee Notice of violation
burner into compliance issued 12/23/7U.
-------
IDAHO
Table A • ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
061. Eastern Idaho
*062. Eastern Washington-
Northern Idaho Inter-
state (Wash.)
063. Idaho
064. Metropolitan Boise
SO,
SO,
TSP
Fugitive
dust area &
industrial
emissions
S0?
Point
sources
TSP
Fugitive
dust area &
industrial
emissions
S02D - 2-yr
extension
from attain
ment date
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP
Fugitive dust
area
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
^Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
436
-------
IDAHO
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROADa
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
061. Eastern Idaho
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
*062. Eastern Washington-
Northern Idaho
(Wash'.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
063. Idaho
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
064. Metropolitan Boise
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
12
3 ,
1
0
0
10
3
2
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
8
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
10
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
_
6
0
0
-
_
'2
0
0
-
6
0
0
_
_
1973
Minimum
data0
7
0
0
0
0
8
4
3
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
2
0
0
-
.
4
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
6
0
0
_
..
1974
Minimum
data0
6
0
0
0
0
12
0
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
4
0
0
-
_
4
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
4
0
0
_
_
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric.Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox-
437
-------
Table C.
IDAHO
DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
None
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is in effect.
None required.
Proposed disapproval of Regulation S
for control of S09 emissions was pub-
lished April 10, T975.
EPA proposed disapproval of Regulation
R and proposed replacement regulations
on August 20, 1975.
State plan is approved for other
pollutants.
438
-------
IDAHO
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
27
18
103 Dollars
680
412
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
1
10
1
49
5
0
23
42
194
0
34
0
1
18
95
0
10
47
12
1
1
86
0
630
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
439
-------
IDAHO
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCESb
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (SOz)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (SOz)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
SIP is disapproved, EPA proposed rec
Total
number
identified
82
1*
ulations 10/7
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
64
4, promulgat
In
violation
18
ion expectec
Unknown
status
0
soon
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
1
241
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated.,
242
2
1
0
TOTAL
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
440
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Idaho
Lewiston
Idaho
Pocatello
Idaho.
Osburn
Idaho,
Con da
Idaho,
Don
Idaho,
Don
Potlatch Corp.
Kraft Pulp Mill
Indust. Boilers
FMC Corp.
Phosphorus Mfg.
Pack River Co.
Wigwam burner
Beker Industries
Corp.
Sulfuric acid plant
J.R. Simplot Co.
Phosphate plant
J.R. Simplot Co.
Nitric Acid Plant
Violation of Notice of violation
opacity and particulate issued 2/8/74.
emission regs. Administrative order
issued U/8/7«.
Presently in compliance with
terms of order.
Coolers #1 and #2 vio-
late particulate regs.
Violation of visible
emission std.
Violation of
NSPS regulations
for sulfuric acid
plants.
Violation of Fugi-
tive dust and particu-
late matter stds.
Violation of NSPS
regs for nitric acid
plants.
Notice of violation
issued 3/8/7H and
11/21/7U.
Notice of violation
issued H/28/75.
Order issued 7/14/75.
Notice of violation
issued 5/20/75.
Consent order issued
6/27/75
Notice of violation
issued 12/2U/75.
Source in compliance
with terms of order.
Source in compliance
Source in compliance
with terms of order.
Consent order sent
to source for sicmature
7/16/75.
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Idaho,
Idaho Falls
Idaho,
Kellogg
Idaho,
Nampa
Idaho,
Rupert
Idaho,
TwinFalls
Kennaday Paving Co.
Mobile asphalt plant
Bunker Hill Company
Lead Smelter
Amalgamated Sugar Co.
Sugar Mfg.
Amalgamted Sugar Co.
Sugar Mfg.
Amalgamated Sugar Co.
Sugar Mfg.
Violation of
NSPS regulations
for asphalt plants.
Violation of Fugi-
tive emissions std.
Violation of particu-
late matter std.
Violation of particu-
late matter stds.
Violation of particu-
late matter stds.
Notice of violation
issued 2/6/75.
Administrative order
issued 6/2/75.
Notice of Violation
issued 6/17/75.
Administrative order
issued 12/2U/7H.
Consent order issued
12/2U/75.
Consent order issued
12/2U/75.
Source complied with
terms of order.
Source in compliance
with terms of order.
Source in compliance
with terms of order.
Source in compliance
with terms of order.
-------
OREGON
Table A. ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION3
AQCR
Probably
will
attain
Probably
will not
attain
Attainment
status
uncertain
190. Central Oregon
191. Eastern Oregon
192. Northwest Oregon
*193. Portland Interstate
(Wash.)
194. Southwest Oregon
SO,
SO,
TSP
so2
SOo
so.
TSP
TSP
Fugitive dust
area
TSP1
TSP
Point
sources
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S02 (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
443
-------
OREGON
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
190. Central Oregon
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
191 . Eastern Oregon
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
192. Northwest Oregon
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*193. Portland (Wash.)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
4
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
14
3
1.
4
3
No. monitors reporting
19^2
Minimum
data0
4
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
34
1
2
2
1
Valid •
annual
average0
0
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
_
0
0
0
-
_
1
1
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
5
1
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
Q
1
1
0
0
0
33
5
2
4
3
Valid
annual
average
3
0
0
-
3
0
0
-
.
0
0
0
-
.
29
0
2
-
—
1974
Minimum
data0
4
0
1
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
33
2
5
5
5
Valid
annual
average
4
1
0
-
_
3
1
0
-
.
1
1
0
-
.
29
5
1
-
.
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and 0.
444
-------
OREGON (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
194. Southwest Oregon
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
°x
to. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
5
1
0
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
6
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
1
0
0
-
1973
Minimum
data0
6
1
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
0
0
-
1974
Minimum
data0
6
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
5
1
0
-
* = Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
DAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
445
-------
OREGON
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Portland-Vancouver Inter-
state (Oregon portion)
Eugene-Springfield
Medford-Ashland
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
X
CO
X
°x
X
N02
aAQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. A mandatory inspection/maintenance program
was implemented in Portland on July 1,
1975.
2. City of Portland has adopted a parking
plan which places a ban on downtown park-
ing. City has also changed zoning laws
to allow only a maximum number of parking
spaces with new facilities rather than
the previous system of specifying a
minimum number of parking spaces.
State plan is approved for all pollutants.
446
-------
OREGON
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
191
109
103 Dollars
3712
2429
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
Table f. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
2
11
1
133
36
0
96
23
38
0
0
37
8
10
27
7
1,387
90
42
13
6
88
7
2,062
Data available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
447
-------
OREGON
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A. ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
B. NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES13
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter lines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
219
8
Status with respect to emission
limits and/or schedules
In
compliance
155
In
violation
43
Unknown
status
21
1
8
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY3 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations....
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
0
703
703
304
146
5
TOTAL
455
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
448
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
TYPE OF ACTION
RESULTS/STATUS
Oregon,
Baker
Oregon,
Coos Bay
Oregon,
Lime
Ellingson Lumber
Wigwan wasteburner
Georgia Pacific Corp.
Hog-fuel boilers
Oregon Portland
Cement Co.
Cement plant
Violation of particu- Notice of violation
late matter and visible issued 6/27/75.
emissions stds.
Violation of particu-
late and visible
emissions stds.
Violation of particu-
late matter and
visible emissions stds.
Notice of violation
issued 4/7/75.
Notice of violation
issued 3/21/75.
Administrative order
issued 6/27/75.
Company in compliance
with terms of order.
-------
WASHINGTON
Table A . ESTIMATED ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL TSP AND
S02 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
BY AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION9
AQCR
062. Eastern Washington-
Northern Idaho Inter-
state (Idaho)
193. Portland Interstate
(Oregon)
227. Northern Washington
228. Olympia-Northwest
Washington
229. Puget Sound
230. South Central Washington
Probably
will
attain
so/
TSPb
so2
so2
TSP
so2
so2
S09
L.
Probably
will not
attain .
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
TSP -Point
sources
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
Attainment
status
uncertain
TSP
Fugitive
dust area
* = Interstate AQCR
Attainment is based on most recent air quality data available;
these do not, in all cases, reflect final compliance. Estimated
attainment status for both TSP (total suspended particulate) and
S0? (sulfur dioxide) is based on annual and/or 24-hour averages.
Comments noting factors that prevent attainment are occasionally
included in the last two columns; these comments, like the attain-
ment status, are best estimates and/or judgments.
""Estimated attainment status for this pollutant is different in
another State portion of this interstate AQCR.
450
-------
WASHINGTON
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
*062. Eastern Washington-
Northern Idaho
(Idaho)
TSP
SO,
''Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
*193. Portland (Ore.)
TSP
SO,
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
227. Northern Washington
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
Ov
X
228. Olympia-Northern
Washington
TSP
S0?
^Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
o. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
14
1
1
2
2
7
0
3
2
1
6
1
0
0
0
13
1
3
0
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
^inimum
data0
13
1
1
2
0
6
0
2
2
0
5
0
0
0
0
9
0
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average0
10
1
1
-
_
4
0
1
-
.
3
0
0
-
.
7
0
0
-
.
1973
Minimum
data0
11
3
1
3
0
7
0
2
1
0
3
1
0
0
0
9
1
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
8
0
1
-
.
6
0
0
-
3
0
0
-
.
6
0
0
-
.
1974
Minimum
dataD
9
1
3
4
0
6
2
1
1
1
3
0
1
0
0
3
3
3
0
0
Valid
annual
average
9
2
0
-
.
6
0
0
-
_
3
1
0
-
.
2
1
0
-
_
*.= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and Ox-
451
-------
WASHINGTON (continued)
Table B. AIR QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITY
REPORTED TO SAROAD3
CY 1972-74
AQCR/Pollutant
229. Puget Sound
TSP
SO,
'Daily
Hourly
CO
0
X
230. South Central Wash-
ington
TSP
SO,
Daily
Hourly
CO ,
0
X
No. monitors
proposed
in SIP
for 1974
24
0
14
4
4
8
1
0
1
0
No. monitors reporting
1972
Minimum
data0
24
3
3
4
0
9
0
0
0
0
Valid
annual
average
21
2
2
-
_
5
0
0
-
_
1973
Minimum
data0
23
3
4
6
1
5
1
0
0
0
Valid
annualc
average
19
0
3
-
_
5
0
0
-
_
1974
Minimum
data0
18
3
3
5
8
6
6
1
0
0
Valid
annual
average
13
3
1
-
_
5
1
0
-
-
*,= Interstate AQCR
aSAROAD = Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data. This table includes only data that have
been reported according to the system's specifications. In some cases, other data may exist
but may not have been properly reported or verified.
°At least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors or 400 hourly values for contin-
uous monitors.
cCan be calculated if four consecutive quarters (a calendar year) of statistically valid
data are available. Valid annual averages are not available for CO and D-
452
-------
WASHINGTON
Table C. DESIGNATED AIR QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AREAS
AQMAa
Puget Sound
Spokane
Portland-Vancouver Inter-
state (Washington portion^
Pollutant
TSP
X
X
X
so2
X
CO
X
°x
X
N02
AQMAs are designated by central city, district, descriptive
name, etc.; specific boundaries are given in the Federal
Register.
Table D. STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS OF THE
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SIP portion
Status
Review of new
stationary sources
Transportation control
plans
Emission limitations
State plan is approved.
1. City of Seattle is implementing a carpool
program.
2. Seattle is improving its mass transit
system -- Blue Streak express service,
exclusive bus lanes, free fare zone in
the downtown area.
3. Seattle City Council has approved a reso-
lution favoring a program to manage the
supply and location of parking facilities,
emphasizing park-and-ride lots.
1. State plan is disapproved for CO in the
Washington portion of the Eastern Washing-
ton-Northern Idaho interstate AQCR, and
for 0 in Puget Sound AQCR.
J\
2. State plan is approved for other pollut-
ants.
T
453
-------
WASHINGTON
Table E. COMPARISON OF PROJECTED AND
ACTUAL RESOURCES FOR FY 75a
Resources
Resource needs projected for
FY 75 in SIP (revised)
Actual resources available
FY 75
Man-years
252
120
103 Dollars
8908b
2743
See the discussion of terms used in this table in the
introduction to the State Profile section.
bEstimate includes the capital expenditures for Inspection/
Maintenance program.
Table F. NUMBER OF EMISSION-PRODUCING PROCESSES
IN SELECTED SOURCE CATEGORIES3
Source category
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16,
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Electric power plant boilers over 10 million Btu/hr
Coal- or residual oil-fired boilers over 100 million
Btu/hr
Coal-fired industrial boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired commercial/institutional boilers, 10-100
million Btu/hr
Residual oil-fired boilers, 10-100 million Btu/hr
Coal-fired boilers less than 10 million Btu/hr
Small and miscellaneous boilers
Chemical manufacture
Food and agricultural
Iron and steel industry
Primary non-ferrous metallurgy
Secondary metallurgy
Portland cement manufacture
Stone quarrying
Other mineral products
Petroleum processing
Wood products
Other industry
Petroleum storage
Other evaporative HC sources
Open-burning dumps
Industrial incineration
Other incineration
Total
Number
20
67
4
152
111
3
233
50
150
3
49
67
11
43
197
84
274
204
107
88
- 8
190
14
2129
aData available from National Emissions Data System as of August 30, 1975.
454
-------
WASHINGTON
Table G. SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (June 30, 1975)
I. COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
Type of source
A.
B.
ALL MAJOR INSTALLATIONS3
(capable of emitting 100+
tons/yr. of a pollutant)
NATIONAL PRIORITY SOURCES'3
1. COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS (S02)
2. NON-FERROUS SMELTERS (S02)
3. STEEL PROCESSES (TSP)
a. Coke batteries
b. Sinter 1 ines
c. Open hearth furnaces
d. Electric arc furnaces
e. Basic oxygen furnaces
f. Blast furnaces
Total
number
identified
225
1
6
Status with respect to emission
imits and/or schedules
In
compliance
196
1
4
In
violation
28
Unknown
status
1
2
II. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY9 (7/1/74 to 6/30/75)
A. INVESTIGATIONS OF COMPLIANCE STATUS
1. Formal written inquiries,
2. Field investigations
TOTAL
B. CASE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
1. Notices/citations of violation issued.
2. Administrative orders issued
3. Civil/criminal proceedings initiated..
0
394
394
942
129
191
TOTAL
1,262
"Formal Reporting System - State Activity Report," EPA Office of Planning and
Management, Program Reporting Division, June 30, 1975. Numbers represent state
and local enforcement activity.
bSurvey of Regional Offices by DSSE (8/30/75).
455
-------
Table H. SUMMARY OF EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
STATE/CITY
Washington,
Connell
Washington,
Dayton
Washington,
Lament
Washington,
Long Beach
Washington,
Oaksdale
Washington,
Port Angeles
Washington,
Whitman
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Connell, City of
Open burning
Dayton, City of
Open burning
Lament, City of
Open burning
Peninsula Sani-
tation Service
Open burning
Oaksdale, City of
Open burning
Peninsula
Plywood Corp.
Hog-fuel boilers
Whitman County
Open burning
COMPANY
POLLUTION PROBLEM
Violation of open
burning (Particu-
late) Stds.
Violation of open
burning (Particu-
late) regs.
Violation of open
burning (partic-
ulate) regs.
Violation of open
burning (particu-
late) stds.
Violation of open
burnina fParticu-
late) stds.
Violation of paritcu-
late matter and
visible emissions stds.
Violation of open
burning (particu-
late) stds.
TYPE OF ACTION
Notice of violation
issued 9/21/73.
Admin, order issued
12/11/73. Amended
order issued 9/19/7U.
Notice of violation
issued 9/21/73. Admin.
order issued 12/12/73.
Notice of violation
issued 9/21/73.order.
Admin. order
issued 12/12/73.
Notice of violation
issued 10/17/73.
Notice of violation
i ssnprl 9/71/73. Rflmin.
order issued 12/12/73.
Consent order issued
6/6/75.
Notice of violation
issued 9/21/73. Admin.
order issued 12/12/73.
RESULTS/STATUS
In compliance with order.
Presently complying
with order
Presently complying with
Comoliance status being
reverified.
Presently complies
with
Source in compliance
with terms of order.
In technical violation
of order, county
taking action.
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on (he reverse before completing)
ERPA°4W2-75-008
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
•). TITLE AND SUBTITLE
State Air Pollution Implementation Plan Progress Report,
January 1 to June 30, 1975
5. REPORT DATE . -__
September 1975
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHORISI
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air &
Waste Management, Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, N.C., and Office of
Enforcement, Washington, D.C.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air & Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Progress. 1/1 to 6/30/75
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
ThTsSTreport presents for each state data on the attainment status by Air Quality Con-
trol Region (AQCR) for total suspended particulate (TSP) and sulfur dioxide (S02),
ambient air quality monitoring, air quality maintenance areas, status of selected
portions of the State Implementation Plans, resources (manpower and funding), compliant
status of selected source categories, and enforcement actions. Over 53 and 73 percent
of the AQCRs are considered likely to attain,respectively, primary TSP and S02 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards by the statutory date. Sin.ce the last report in this
series (EPA-450/2-75-003, April 1975), the number of major emitters identified has
increased to 19,360; 84 percent of these are now in compliance with either an emission
standard or an acceptable compliance schedule, an increase of over 2600 sources since
December 1974.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI l-'icld/Croup
Air pollution
Air Quality Maintenance Areas
Air quality monitoring
Air quality standards
State Implementation Plans
Enforcement
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
457
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page}
Unclassified
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
457
------- |