PROGRESS IN THE PREVENTION AND
      CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION
               IN 1975
           ANNUAL REPORT
              OF THE
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
         PROTECTION AGENCY
                 TO
 THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
        IN COMPLIANCE WITH
   THE CLEAN AIR ACT AS AMENDED

-------
   PROGRESS IN THE PREVENTION AND
      CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION
               IN 1975
           ANNUAL REPORT
              OF THE
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
         PROTECTION AGENCY
                 TO
 THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
        IN COMPLIANCE WITH
   THE CLEAN AIR ACT AS AMENDED

-------
                               CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES	111

LIST OF FIGURES	iv

PREFACE  	   v

I.  INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 	   1

    Attainment 	   1
    Air Quality Trends 	   2
    State Implementation Plan Issues 	   2
    Stationary Source Regulations  	   3
    Mobile Source Regulations  	   4
    Stationary Source Enforcement  	   4
    Mobile Source Enforcement  	   5
    Litigation 	   6
    Research   	   6
    Control  Agency Support 	   6

II.  THE STATUS OF STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN APPROVALS,
     DISAPPROVALS, AND PROMULGATIONS, AND PROGRESS TOWARD
     ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL STANDARDS  	   8

     Attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards  ....   8
     Revisions to State Implementation Plans 	  11
     SIP Developments	15
     Approval/Disapproval  Status of Implementation Plans 	  25

III.  DEVELOPMENT OF AIR QUALITY CRITERIA AND RECOMMENDED
      EMISSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS  	  34

      National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 	  34
      New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)  	  34
      National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
       Pollutants (NESHAPs)  	  41
      Health Effects Research  	  41

IV.  STANDARDS SET OR UNDER CONSIDERATION PURSUANT TO
     TITLE II   	51

     Motorcycle Regulations  	  51
     Revised Light Duty Truck Regulations ".	  .  .  5?
     Interim Heavy Duty Vehicle Emission Regulations 	  53
     Sulfuric Acid Emission Standard 	  53
     Revised Evaporative Emission Regulations  	  54
     Non-Methane Hydrocarbon Exhaust Emission Standards  	  55
     Aircraft Emissions Regulatory Actions .	  5fi

-------
                          CONTENTS (continued)
 V.  CONTROL OF MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS AND RELATED
     RESEARCH EFFORTS .......................    57

     Measures Taken to Implement Mandated Title II
       Emission Standards .....................    57
     Assessment of Mobile Source Technology ............    62
     Additional Activities in the Mobile Source Area  ......  !    65

 VI.  THE STATUS OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES   ...........    74

      Stationary Source Enforcement ................    74
      Mobile Source Enforcement ..................    87
      Compliance by Federal  Activities  ..............    94
      Summary of Litigation  in 1975 ................
•VII.  STATUS OF AIR MONITORING AND TRENDS IN AIR QUALITY .....    106

       Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data  ............    115
       Trends in Air Quality, 1970-1974 ..............    117
       Monitoring Implications of the Energy Supply and
         Environmental  Coordination Act (ESECA)  ..........    120


 VIII.   THE DEVELOPMENT OF INSTRUMENTATION TO MONITOR EMISSIONS
        AND AIR QUALITY ..................  ....    121

        Monitoring Developments ..................    122
        Quality Control  ......................    123


 IX.   DEVELOPMENT OF NEW AND IMPROVED AIR  POLLUTION CONTROL
      TECHNIQUES FOR STATIONARY SOURCES ..............    125

      Sulfur Oxides      ......................    126
      Nitrogen Oxides (NO )  ....................    128
      Particulates  .  .  .x ...................  ]  ]    129
      Other Pollutants   ..................  .'.'.'.'    130


 X.   STATUS OF STATE,  INTERSTATE, AND LOCAL  POLLUTION  CONTROL
     PROGRAMS ESTABLISHED UNDER AND ASSISTED BY THIS ACT   .....    132

     Federal  Financial Assistance to Air Pollution  Control
       Agencies  ..........................    135
     Progress of State and Local Air Pollution Control  Programs  .  !    135

 XI.  REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT'S AIR
     QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD   ...................    144

 APPENDIX    ............................    145
                                     11

-------
                               LIST OF TABLES


 Table                                                                  Page

 II-l.   Monitoring  Requirements  for Existing Sources  Subject  to
          Emission  Limitations  as  Part of  an Approved Implementation
          Plan	    20

 11-2.   Status  of Selected Portions of the State  Implementation  Plans.    27

III-l.   Status  of Standards  of  Performance 	    37

111-2.   Regulatory  Actions Related to Sections  111  and 112	    40

  V-l.   Emission Standards for.Motor  Vehicle Classes  	    60

 VI-1.   Compliance  Status of Major Steel Processes  vs all Major
          Stationary Installations 	    82

VII-1.   National Summary of Air Monitoring Stations Reporting 1974
          Data  to the National  Aerometric  Data  Bank by September 1975.   108

VII-2.   National Summary of 1974 AQCR Attainment  Status By  Pollutant,
          As Reported to the National Aerometric  Data Bank	   109

VII-3.   Growth  in Number of Monitoring  Instruments, 1970-1974  ....   110

  X-l.   Organizational Location of State  and  Local  Control  Agencies
          Receiving Federal  Funds in  1975   	   133

  X-2.   Distribution of Funds By Jurisdictional Areas of State and
          Local Control Agencies 	   134

  X-3.   Summary of Federal Support to State and Local Air Pollution
          Control Agencies By State  	   136

  X-4.   Estimated Man-Years of Effort Employed  By State and Local
          Air Pollution Control Agencies   	   141

  X-5.   Estimated Percentage of Resources  Devoted to Air Pollution
          Control Activities of National   Priority By State  and Local
          Control Agencies in FY 75	    143
                                   m

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES


                                                                      Page

VII-1.  Distribution of AQCRs Reporting Second High 24-Hour
          Values for Particulates 	  Ill

VI1-2.  Distribution of AQCRs Reporting Maximum Annual  Mean
          Values for Particulates 	  Ill

VII-3.  Distribution of AQCRs Reporting Second High 24-Hour
          Values for Sulfur Dioxide 	  112

VI1-4.  Distribution of AQCRs Reporting Maximum Annual  Mean
          Values for Sulfur Dioxide	  112

VII-5.  Distribution of AQCRs Reporting Second High 1-Hour
          Values for Carbon Monoxide  	  113

VII-6.  Distribution of AQCRs Reporting Second High 8-Hour
          Values for Carbon Monoxide  	  113

VII-7.  Distribution of AQCRs Reporting Second High 1-Hour
          Values for Oxidants	  114
                                    iv

-------
                              PREFACE


     The Clean Air Act,  as amended,  authorizes  a  national  program of

air pollution research,  regulation,  and enforcement  activities.  This

program is directed at the Federal  level  by the U. S.  Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA).   However,  primary responsibility  for  the prevention

and control of air pollution at its  source rests  with  state  and  local

governments.  EPA's role is to conduct research and  development  programs,

set national goals (via  standards  and regulations),  provide  technical  and

financial  assistance to  the states,  and,  where  necessary,  supplement state

implementation and enforcement programs.

     Section 313 of the  Clean Air  Act requires  the Administrator to

report yearly on measures taken toward implementing  the  purpose  and intent

of the Act.  Section 313 reads as  follows:

          "Not later than six months after the  effective
          date of this section and not later than January
          10 of each calendar year beginning after such  date,
          the Administrator shall  report  to the Congress on
          measures taken toward implementing the  purpose and
          intent of this Act including, but not limited  to,
          (1) the progress and problems associated with
          control of automotive exhaust emissions and  the
          research efforts related thereto; (2) the  develop-
          ment of air quality criteria and recommended emission
          control requirements; (3)  the status  of enforcement
          actions taken  pursuant to  this  Act; (4) the  status
          of State ambient air standards  setting, including
          such plans for implementation and enforcement  as
          have been developed; (5)  the extent of  development
          and expansion  of air pollution  monitoring  systems;
          (6) progress and problems  related to  development
          of new and improved control techniques; (7)  the
          development of quantitative and qualitative  in-
          strumentation  to monitor emissions and  air quality;
          (8) standards  set or under consideration pursuant
          to title II of this Act;  (9) the status of State,
          interstate, and local  pollution control programs
          established pursuant to  and assisted  by this Act;
          and (10) the reports and recommendations made  by
          the President's Air Quality Advisory  Board."

-------
This report covers the period January 1  to December 31, 1975, and



describes the issues involved in the prevention and control  of air



pollution and the major elements of progress toward that goal that



have been made by EPA since the last report.
                                   vi

-------
                      I.   INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY








     This report reviews  the progress that the U.S.  Environmental  Protection



Agency (EPA) has made during the year 1975 in the control  and prevention



of air pollution.  Chapter headings are taken from the topics listed in



section 313 of the Clean  Air Act, and additional  measures  of progress have



been added where appropriate.  The major events which took place during



1975 are briefly summarized here, grouped by topic,  and are discussed more



fully in the text of the  report.





ATTAINMENT



     0  Of the 247 Air Quality Control Regions (AQCRs), 115 (47 percent)



        are judged likely to attain the primary National Ambient Air



        Quality Standard  (NAAQS) for total suspended particulate (TSP)



        by the statutory  date.  Major factors contributing to non-



        attainment have been identified for many of these  AQCRs, including



        fugitive dust (67 AQCRs), point sources (19 AQCRs), and smaller



        sources  (14 AQCRs).  It should be noted that some  AQCRs have a



        combination of these problems.



     0  For sulfur dioxide (S02), 212 AQCRs (86 percent) are judged likely to



        attain the primary NAAQS by the statutory date. For the 35 AQCRs



        that are not expected to attain the standard, analysis shows



        the problem to be primarily emissions from large point sources;

-------
         further enforcement of existing regulations  is expected  to
         result in attainment of the SCL standard.
      0  Current data show that in a number of AQCRs  the  carbon
         monoxide (CO) standard is not being attained.  When  the
         Federal  Motor Vehicle Emission Standards  are fully implemented,
         however, the CO  standard is expected to  be  attained in  all  but
         a few areas of the nation.
      0  The oxidant standard continues to be violated in many AQCRs,
         urban as well as rural.  Research to better  characterize the
         transport problems associated with oxidant is being  emphasized
         along with the implementation of reasonably  available control
         technology.
AIR QUALITY TRENDS
      o  Based on composite annual average data from 1096 TSP monitoring
                                                                     3
         sites, the ambient concentrations have declined  from 80 yg/m  to
         66 yg/m3 for the period 1970-1974.
      0  Based on composite annual average data from 258  SOp monitoring
                                                                     3
         sites, the ambient concentrations have declined  from 38 yg/m  in
         1970 to 26 yg/m3 in 1974.
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ISSUES
      o  For all  non-attainment areas, the efforts  of EPA and state/local
         agencies will focus on the control of emissions  from existing
         sources  in high-pollution AQCRs.   Future  action  will be  based
         on an analysis of the adequacy of the State  Implementation  Plan
         (SIP) and an emphasis on enforcement activities.

-------
      0  Final  designation  of 168 Air Quality Maintenance  Areas  was
         published in  1975.
      0  EPA suspended indefinitely  those  portions  of the  indirect
         source regulations  requiring pre-construction  review  of
         parking-related facilities.
      0  EPA's  activities under ESECA -- review  of  coal  conversion
         submittals and a review of  State  Implementation Plans --
         were completed.
STATIONARY SOURCE REGULATIONS
     0   New Source Performance  Standards (NSPS)  for electric arc furnaces
        and five phosphate  fetrilizer processes  were  promulgated in
        1975.   NSPS for five more categories  were promulgated  in January
        1976:   primary copper,  lead,  and zinc smelters;  coal cleaning
        plants; and primary  aluminum reduction plants.
     0   In 1975 EPA promulgated regulations  to implement section lll(d)
        covering emissions  from existing sources of "designated"
        pollutants, i.e., those for  which  New Source  Performance
        Standards have been  set but  for which National  Ambient Air
        Quality Standards or National Emission Standards for Hazardous
        Air Pollutants do not exist.
      0  EPA promulgated revisions to the  National  Emission Standards
         for Hazardous Air  Pollutants (NESHAPs)  for asbestos and
         mercury, modifying  the scope of regulations  and amending the
         test methods.
      0  Vinyl  chloride was  added to the list of hazardous air
         pollutants,and emission regulations  were proposed on
         December 24,  1975.
                                    3

-------
      0  Continuous monitoring regulations were promulgated October 6, 1975.



      0  Modification regulations were promulgated December 16, 1975.



      0  Revisions to the Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery regulations



         were proposed October 9, 1975.





 MOBILE SOURCE REGULATIONS



      0  EPA imposed interim standards of 1.5 grams/mile (g/mi)



         hydrocarbons (HC) and 15 g/mi CO for 1977 automobile emissions.



      0  EPA waived Federal preemption for 1977 California State Motor



         Vehicle Pollution Control Standards of 0.41  g/mi  HC, 9 g/mi  CO,



         and 1.5 g/mi nitrogen oxides.



      0  During 1975 the certification of most 1976 model  year light



         duty vehicles and light duty trucks was completed, and



         certification of 1977 models began.



      0  Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to control emissions from new



         motorcycles was published in October 1975.




      °   Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to set more stringent standards



         for evaporative emissions from light duty passenger vehicles



         and light duty  trucks  was published in  December 1975.   If  the



         standards are promulgated at the proposed level,  evaporative



         emissions will  be reduced in 1990 by 3,350,000  tons/year.





STATIONARY SOURCE ENFORCEMENT



      o   During 1975, nearly 600  enforcement actions  were  initiated



         against stationary sources,  bringing the total  number since



         1972 to about 1000.

-------
      °  Of the approximately 20,000 identified  major  sources,  82  percent
         now comply with applicable  emission  limits  or are  meeting
         compliance schedules, an  increase  of almost 2700 over  1974.
      o  As of October 1975, 246 sources  have been  found subject to  NSPS,
         and compliance levels of   89   percent have  been  achieved.
      o  Regulations were promulgated April  16,  1975,  requiring compliance
         with both air and water standards  by facilities involved  in
         Federal procurement activities.
MOBILE SOURCE ENFORCEMENT
      0  EPA conducted approximately 18,500  inspections of  service
         stations to ensure compliance with  the  unleaded fuel regulations.
         Of the 15,000 samples taken, only  160 were  found to  be contam-
         inated with lead.  Approximately 3500 warnings and 260 complaints
         have been issued, and about $31,000  in  penalties were  collected
         in 1975.
      0  Four motor vehicle tampering cases  have been  successfully
         prosecuted in 1975, resulting in civil  penalties of  $4,950.
         Enforcement personnel conducted  56 inspections of  domestic  and
         foreign motor vehicle manufacturers  and referred one investiga-
         tion to the Justice Department for enforcement action.
      0  EPA monitored 1,185,768 vehicles voluntarily  recalled  by
         automobile manufactures for emission-related  defects.
         Two cases were referred to  the Department  of  Justice for
         alleged violation of motor  vehicle  import  regulations.

-------
LITIGATION
      o  The Supreme Court upheld EPA's policy on variances and has been
         petitioned to review Transportation Control Plans and feasibility
         issues related to State Implementation Plan development.
      o  Various Circuit Court decisions upheld EPA's positions on three
         major issues:  the technical and economic analysis of the New
         Source Performance Standard for Portland cement kilns, the issue
         of dispersion technology vs constant controls, and the right for
         state and Federal enforcement actions to be brought against a
         polluter simultaneously.
RESEARCH
      o  The emphasis of health effects research during 1975 has been
         on pollutants which may result from energy sources other than
         petroleum.
      °  Epidemiologic studies of pollutants not subject to ambient air
         quality standards have been intensified.  The pollutants include
         sulfates, nitrates, acid aerosols, and respirable particulates.
      o  Approximately $58 million was devoted to the development and
         demonstration of control technology for stationary source air
         pollution.
CONTROL AGENCY SUPPORT
      0  In 1975, 55  state and territorial agencies and 236 local agencies,
         working in coordination with states, expended approximately
         $148 million and 7000 man-years to carry out the major portions
         of the regulatory and enforcement aspects of the national air
         pollution control effort.

-------
In FY 75,  state and local  funds for air pollution  programs
increased  20 percent ($17  million)  over FY 74 levels,  and
Federal  support during this period  increased by 2  percent
($1.6 million).

-------
            II.  THE STATUS OF STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
           APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS, AND PROMULGATIONS, AND
          PROGRESS TOWARD ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL STANDARDS
ATTAINMENT OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

      The attainment date for primary standards in most states was May 31, 1975,
Analysis is underway to determine the attainment status of each Air Quality
Control Region (AQCR).  Where National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
are computed as annual averages, it is necessary to have a complete calendar
year's data to determine final attainment status.  Therefore, until 1976
data become available, there will be no final determinations regarding
annual NAAQS.  However, analyses are being made of available data for each
AQCR.  Preliminary judgments have been made for each AQCR, but these will
be subject to change as more data become available.
      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
ror 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.
      Despite the very significant progress being made in improving air
quality and reducing emissions, a number of AQCRs are not expected to
attain one or more standards.
                                    8

-------
Total Suspended Particulate (TSP)
     It is currently anticipated that 132 AQCRs (53 percent of all AQCRs)
probably will not attain the TSP standard.  A major problem in attaining
the TSP standard is fugitive dust (discussed in the "SIP Developments"
section of this chapter).  Current analysis indicates that at least 67
AQCRs may not attain standards partly because of fugitive dust problems.
Problems with major point sources are major contributing factors to
probable non-attainment in approximately 19 AQCRs.  EPA has also identi-
fied non-point sources as contributing to violation of the TSP standards
in at least 14 AQCRs.  Non-point sources are smaller sources which emit
less than 100 tons per year of TSP.
     It is important to note that in a given AQCR a number of factors, in
combination, may be causing non-attainment of standards.  Much of the
analysis currently underway is directed at determining the causes of non-
attainment and the extent to which each type of source contributes to
non-attainment.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO?)
      Considerable progress has been made in attaining sulfur dioxide standards.
On the basis of data  currently available, EPA estimates that only 35 AQCRs
(14 percent) will  probably not attain.   Of these 35 AQCRs,  28 are also not
expected to attain the TSP standard.  For the most part, the AQCRs which
are experiencing problems in attaining  the S02 standards have emissions
from large point sources.  In some 26 AQCRs major fossil fuel-burning power
plants have been identified as contributing to the problem.   In  an additional
three AQCRs, non-ferrous  smelters are contributing to the problem.   In most
of these cases,  the Agency believes  that further enforcement of  existing
regulations will  ensure attainment of the national  S02 standards.

-------
Carbon Monoxide and Photochemical Oxidants (CO and Ox)
      The attainment of standards for carbon monoxide and photochemical
oxidants in urban areas is in large part related to the control of trans-
portation sources.  A detailed discussion of EPA's efforts to control mobile
source emissions is presented in Chapter V.  Under the SIP process, trans-
portation control measures have been promulgated in 27 cities to meet the
oxidant standard, while transportation measures were promulgated in 26
urban centers for CO.  An analysis conducted in the spring of 1975 indicated
that the major urban areas in 79 AQCRs (32 percent) are reporting violations
of the NAAQS for photochemical oxidants.  The same review showed reported
violations of the CO standard in 69 AQCRs (28 percent).
     The carbon monoxide problem is associated almost entirely with
motor vehicle emissions.   It should be pointed out that,  because of both
administrative and legislative actions,  the auto emission reductions
originally required in the Clean Air Act have been deferred.   Once
Federal  Motor Vehicle Emission Standards are fully implemented, the CO
standard is expected to be attained in all  but a few areas of the nation.
      The photochemical oxidant problem is more complex and  is  a stationary
source problem as well as a mobile source problem.  Moreover, recent  studies
have  found oxidant  levels as  much  as  twice the  national standard in
rural areas.  Although oxidants can be formed from emissions from natural
sources (e.g., coniferous forests), these recent studies indicate
that oxidants, or their precursors, are advected into the rural areas from
urban centers over a hundred miles distant.  These studies provide preliminary
evidence that, to attain the Ox standard,.control of hydrocarbon stationary
sources (i.e., petroleum refineries, coating operations, etc.)  over wide
                                    10

-------
 areas  surrounding  cities may  be  needed  in addition  to controls  in urban
 centers.   Research in  this  area  is continuing  in order to better character-
 ize  the transport  of oxiHants and their  formation.
 Nitrogen  Dioxide (N02)
       Judgments concerning  the attainment of the N02 national standards
 have been  complicated  by the discovery in 1973 that the ambient sampling
 method for this pollutant was faulty.  The method that had been in use
 generally  showed higher than actual levels of N02.  An analysis of available
 data in the spring  of  1975  indicated that only 16 AQCRs (6 percent) have N02
 concentrations at  or above  NAAQS.  It is important to note that this is a
 preliminary assessment which will be revised as more data become available.
      Three alternative methods for measuring N02 were proposed on June 8, 1973
 Since then further  research has been conducted on each method.  EPA now
 expects to promulgate a final reference method for N(L by mid-1976.

 REVISIONS  TO STATE  IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
      On April 30,  1971, EPA promulgated National Ambient Air Quality
 Standards  (NAAQS)  for five  pollutants - sulfur dioxide, total suspended
 particulate, carbon monoxide, photochemical  oxidants and nitrogen dioxide.
 Subsequent to that  action, all states plus the four territories anrt thP
 District of Columbia were required to submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
 to EPA which described the control actions to be taken to reduce ambient
 concentrations for each pollutant to levels  at or below NAAQS.  In  most
cases,  the SIPs were required to demonstrate attainment of standards by
May 31, 1975.   Analysis is now underway to determine the final attainment
status  of each Air Quality Control  Region (AQCR).   Where the  NAAQS  are
computed as annual  averages, it  is EPA's policy to  determine  attainment
                                   11

-------
  on  the  basis of a  full calendar year of air quality data.  This means that
  final determinations cannot be made until CY 1976 data are available.  EPA
  is  and  will be directing particular attention to those AQCRs which have not
  attained standards.
       The passage of the May 31, 1975, attainment date for most areas marked
 a significant milestone in EPA's efforts to implement section 110 of the
 Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970.  The initial  efforts of EPA and the states
 were directed at the development of the SIPs and then their implementation.
 In the period from the first SIP approval/disapproval  in 1972 until  1975,
 major emphasis was given to implementing the SIPs.   In many states,  particular
 sections of the SIP were revised by the state or EPA promulgated regulations
 to correct specific deficiencies.  With the exception of the  transportation
 measures, the majority of the revisions and promulgations addressed  deficiencies
 in SIP elements other than  the basic control  strategies  and emission limitations,
 and were intended  to correct specific  problems.   With  very few  exceptions, there
 were no fundamental  reassessments that  led  to major  SIP  revisions.
       With  the  passage  of the  May 31 date,  however,  the states  and EPA began
 an  appraisal of the  adequacy of all  SIPs to attain and maintain  standards.
 As  a  result of this  appraisal, many  SIPs will be  revised  in FY  1977 to make
 better provision for attainment and maintenance.  These revisions will tend
 to  be more comprehensive than those  in the past.  Although the  revisions for
 attainment and for maintenance are related and in many cases will be handled
 together, the two concepts need to be differentiated.
      A SIP revision for attainment of NAAQS is  undertaken to  make the SIP
 -emulations stringent enough to bring ambient concentrations down to  standards.
 In the majority of AQCRs where SIP revisions for attainment will be needed,
the revisions  will  involve more restrictive  emission  limitations on presently
                                   12

-------
regulated sources and/or the addition of new emission limits for sources
not currently regulated.  The actual  emission limits will  be based on a
revised control  strategy and will  include all measures which it is reason-
able to anticipate will  be achievable within a reasonable  period.   If the
revised emission limits  are not sufficient to attain standards, additional
measures such as transportation control  will be required.   However, the
major emphasis in attainment planning will be on the control of emissions
from existing sources that are contributing to violations  of ambient
standards.  It should be noted that in an AQCR where the SIP is now sub-
stantially inadequate, SIP revisions for attainment will be made for the
pollutant(s) for which a NAAQS is being violated.  More specific consider-
ations relative to attainment revisions are discussed in the section on
"SIP Developments" in this chapter.
     SIP revisions for maintenance of NAAQS will be considered in all areas
where attainment revisions are necessary.  In addition, maintenance revi-
sions will be called for in designated Air Quality Maintenance Areas (AQMAs)
where standards are being met, but where growth projections indicate that
violations will occur within the next 10 years.  Plan revisions for main-
tenance in most areas will deal primarily with the projected impact of
growth and development pf air quality.  To maintain standards, the SIP
revisions will not only need to address the basic control  strategy and
emission limits, but also may have to consider the review of new and modi-
fied sources, transportation controls, and land use.  In addition, the
establishment of solid working relations between air pollution control
agencies and planning agencies, such as housing, transportation, Coastal
Zone Management, etc., is being emphasized.  The maintenance revisions to
SIPs will be designed to prevent future violations of specific NAAQS which
are projected to occur if control measures are not taken.
                                   13

-------
       Regardless of whether violations are projected over the next 10 years,
 all SIPs must be adequate to provide for maintenance of standards in all areas
 and thus must contain provisions to ensure that unexpected growth does not
 cause violations.  The primary mechanism to do this is the new source review
 procedure which includes an air quality analysis to decide whether a
 violation will occur.  If the analysis indicates that the construction of a
 new source would cause a violation, the construction can be prohibited.
 However, maintenance (and attainment)  of standards is not solely dependent
 on the SIPs developed under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.   In addition
 to SIP procedures,  certain Federal  emission standards will  help to ensure
 maintenance.   In particular, New Source Performance Standards  and Federal
 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards are  expected to  contribute  significantly
 to the maintenance  of NAAQS.
       In summary, the efforts  of EPA and  the states in non-attainment areas
 will  focus on the control  of emissions  from existing sources  in high-pollution
 AQCRs.   SIP revisions for attainment will  be developed with a  primary
 emphasis on control  strategies  and  emission limits  to solve current  problems.
 in maintenance,  EPA  and  the  states  will focus  on the management of growth
 to minimize any  future adverse  impact on air quality.   SIP revisions  for
 maintenance will  be  developed with  a primary emphasis  on methods  for
 avoiding  future  problems  from growth.   In areas requiring SIP revisions for
 attainment, the  attainment revisions will in most cases be followed by
 maintenance revisions.   In both cases, attainment/maintenance revision
 areas and maintenance revision areas alone, the revisions will probably
 be more comprehensive in nature than those of the past three years.  Finally,
 it should be noted that in both cases EPA is calling for revisions to the
SIPs and not for new and separate plans.
                                   14

-------
      Discussed below are the major national issues currently having an
impact on the development of SIPs.  Where possible, the issues are related
to overall categories of attainment and maintenance.

SIP DEVELOPMENTS
Non-Attainment of NAAQS
      Non-attainment of standards may result from one of two categories of
causes.  In the first place, non-attainment may be the result of incomplete
implementation of the current SIP.  In some non-attainment AQCRs, abatement
work is still underway and there is a reasonable expectation that NAAQS
will be achieved once it is completed.  In such AQCRs, the emphasis for
attainment is on continued compliance and enforcement work to ensure that
current SIP regulations are fully implemented.  A second category of cause
for non-attainment is an inadequate SIP.  In a number of non-attainment AQCRs,
existing SIP regulations have been fully implemented and future improvements
in air quality cannot be expected.  In such AQCRs, it will be necessary to
revise the SIP for attainment.  To determine into which of the two categories
above each AQCR falls, the states and EPA are currently conducting detailed
reviews of the situation in each AQCR expected to show violations.
      If SIP revisions for non-attainment are clearly necessary, EPA will
issue a request for such revisions to the states by July 1976.  The request
will be as specific as possible in suggesting what new or revised regulations
are needed.   In most cases, the request will also call for SIP revisions
for maintenance of NAAQS.   The states will  be asked to give priority to
revising, within one year, the existing emission limitations as needed.
The revisions are to demonstrate attainment of standards as expeditiously
as practicable.  If other measures, such as transportation control
measures, are needed to attain and maintain NAAQS, they will be submitted
within two years of the initial  call  for revisions.
                                     15

-------
      To avoid interrupting compliance activities in the preparation of the
 revisions, adding regulations to cover new sources  not affected by present
 regulations is preferred over revising existing regulations.   EPA is making
 every effort to ensure that the impact of attainment revisions  on on-going
 abatement will be minimal.
 Maintenance of NAAQS
      As a result of a 1973  court decision,  EPA reviewed each  SIP regarding
 the maintenance of NAAQS and found  that no  plan adequately  provided for  the
 maintenance of standards past 1975-77.   EPA then promulgated  in the June 18,
 1973,  Federal  Register (38  FR 15834)  requirements that  each implementation
 plan provide for the long-term maintenance  of  standards,  including  the
 requirement that the plans  list potential problem areas where standards
 were or,  because of projected growth,  could be exceeded.  The Federal
 Register  notice required that the SIPs  be revised in  the  potential  problem
 areas  (AQMAs)  by June 18, 1975,  to  provide  for maintenance  of standards
 for the following 10 years.   In  Federal  Register actions  of June  19,  1975
 (40 FR  25814),  and  October  20,  1975 (40  FR  49048),  the  date for submission
 and the planning  period  requirements were revised.   Instead of  requiring
 uniform dates  and planning  periods, the  new proposed  regulations allow
 the Administrator some flexibility  in tailoring  the requirements to an
 area's  needs.
     Whereas the  original SIP  revisions  for maintenance were to have pro-
 vided for a  period  of 10 years, the requirements now allow  the Administrator
 to  specify the  period of time  over which the revisions must demonstrate
maintenance.  Most  plan revisions will probably cover 10 years, but they
must address the  same period as other Federally sponsored plans when such
plans address different planning horizons.
                                   16

-------
      Flexibility has also been introduced in the dates for AQMA plan revision
submission.  The initial analysis of the problems in the AQMA are due by
April 1, 1976, but the Administrator can modify that date.  The dates for
final plan revision submission will vary.  However, the regulations require
that they be submitted "as expeditiously as practicable" for areas that will
fail to maintain NAAQS in the near future.  For areas where maintenance is
a longer term problem, the maintenance revisions will generally be required
a number of years before they are to be implemented.
      In a series of three Federal Register actions to date, the Administrator
has identified a total of 168 AQMAs for at least one pollutant.  Of these,
159 were identified for total suspended paniculate, 61 for sulfur dioxide,
24 for carbon monoxide, 49 for photochemical  oxidants, and 5 for nitrogen
dioxide.  Under the proposed regulations no additional areas will be
formally identified.  However, the states would still have to reassess all
areas periodically to determine if any areas need revisions.
Fugitive Emissions
      During the development of the original  SIPs, control strategies for
total suspended particulates (TSP) focused on the control  of emissions from
the primary exhaust systems of point sources.  Since that time, EPA and the
states have become increasingly aware that the attainment and maintenance
of the TSP standard may be adversely affected by both fugitive emissions
and fugitive dust emissions.  Fugitive emissions are generated from industrial
operations and are released to the atmosphere through windows, doors, roof
vents, etc., but not through the primary exhaust system.   On the other hand,
fugitive dust emissions result from the force of the wind  or man's activity
on the land.  This latter category includes windblown particulate from
crop land, unpaved roads, and exposed areas at construction sites, as well
                                   17

-------
 as  particulate  reentrained  from  streets  by automobiles, tilling of crop
 land,  etc.   Both  types  of emission  are very difficult  to quantify and, as
 a result,  the relative  magnitude of the  problem can only be estimated.
 However,  some 67  AQCRs, primarily in the West, are estimated to have
 problems  in  attaining the TSP  standard because of fugitive dust.
     In the current  round of revisions for attainment/maintenance, some
 SIPs may  be  revised  to  include regulations for fugitive emissions.  It is
 possible  to  specify  equipment  standards  for fugitive emissions from some
 industrial sources.  In addition, a visible emission regulation can be used
 to  force  fugitive emission  reductions.   Although some  controls for fugitive
 dust emissions  are available,  NAAQS are  probably not attainable in areas
 where  the principal  problem is natural dust storms.  Therefore, a number of
 AQCRs  will continue  to  experience violations of the standard because of
 fugitive  dust emissions.
 Continuous Emission  Monitoring
    When  the SIPs were  first developed,  it was EPA's position that
 continuous in-stack  emission monitoring  systems were not sufficiently
 reliable  to warrant  their inclusion  as an SIP requirement.  However, the
 states were required to have the  legal authority to require them.   Since then,
 the technology  of in-stack  monitoring has advanced sufficiently for EPA
 to define realistic  performance specifications for continuous monitors for
 certain sources.  In the Federal  Register of October 6, 1975 (40 CFR 46240),
 the Agency promulgated  two  regulatory actions that require the continuous
monitoring of emissions from a number of specified sources.   One regulation
required continuous monitoring for certain new sources  under EPA's  New Source
 Performance Standards program.  The second regulatory action required  the
 states to adopt regulations  to require emission  monitoring on some existing
sources whose emissions are  limited by regulations included as part of an
                                 18

-------
approved SIP.  The source operators will be required to report excess
emissions,  their cause and any downtime in the continuous monitoring
system.  Once the state submits such regulations and has them approved by
EPA,  sources will have up to 18 months to acquire, install and begin to
operate the required monitoring systems.  Table II-l lists the sources
that  will be affected if they are covered by emission standards which are
part  of an approved SIP.
Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality
      In accordance with a court order resulting from a suit filed by the
Sierra Club, EPA has disapproved all SIPs with respect to significant
deterioration of air quality and has promulgated regulations applicable
nationwide.  The regulations require the preconstruction review of any new
or modified source in 19 major source categories commencing construction
after June 1, 1975, to ensure that best available control  technology is
installed and to ensure that specified air quality increments will not be
exceeded.  The Class I increments would permit very little change in air
quality, Class II would permit changes consistent with moderate, well-
controlled growth, and Class III would permit deterioration up to but not
exceeding the most restrictive national standards.   All  areas of the country
were  designated Class II initially, with provisions for states, Federal  Land
Managers, or Indian Governing Bodies to initiate ^classifications for land
under their control.
      Generally, the states have not initiated action to  reclassify areas
from  Class II to Class I or III, have not requested authority to carry out
EPA's regulations, and have not submitted their own plans  to prevent signi-
ficant deterioration.   Therefore,  EPA is presently  implementing its own
regulations on a nationwide basis.   The states would prefer to wait for
Congressional  action  on  this  issue  before taking any steps  or action.
                                    19

-------
  Table II-I.  MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING SOURCES SUBJECT TO

                   EMISSION LIMITATIONS AS PART OF AN APPROVED

                               IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
          Source category
        Monitor required
Fossil fuel-fired steam generators
> 250 x 10  Btu/hr heat input and
>  30 percent annual capacity factor

Sulfuric acid plants
> 300 tons/day (100 percent acid)

Nitric acid plants
> 300 tons/day (100 percent acid)

Petroleum refineries
  catalyst regenerators
  > 20,000 bbls/day
  fresh feed to fluid catalytic
   cracker
Opacity,3 S02,b N0x,c  0? or C02d
SO,
Opacity
   Only solid fuel-fired or liquid fuel-fired with a record of violation
   of the opacity standard in the applicable plan.

   Only for units using flue gas desulfurization equipment.

  "Only for units > 1000 x 10  Btu/hr heat input in AQCRs where EPA has
   determined that a control strategy for N0? is necessary.
  d
   Op or COp monitors are required only if needed to convert NO  or S0?
   Jata to the uni*s of the standard.                           x      i
  Q
   Only in AQCRs  where EPA has determined that a control  strategy for
   NOp is necessary.
                                   20

-------
      Sixteen  separate suits  have  been  filed  on  EPA's  promulgated  regula-
 tions (one environmental  group, one  state, and  fourteen  industrial
 petitioners).   These  have all  been consolidated in  the U.S.  Court of
 Appeals  for the District  of  Columbia Circuit.   Briefs for  both  sides  have
 been  filed and  a decision is expected  1n  1976.
 Indirect Sources
      On  June  30, 1975,  EPA suspended indefinitely those  portions  of the
 indirect source regulations  requiring  pre-construction review of  parking-
 related  facilities, as  required by the FY 1975  appropriation act  for the
 Agency.   Not  affected were those  provisions  pertaining to  highways and
 airports.   Indirect source reviews are similar  in purpose  to other new
 source reviews.   They are  conducted to prevent  the  violation of a NAAQS
 by emissions  caused by  a  new source.  As such,  indirect  source reviews are
 part  of  the overall maintenance effort.
      The  Congress  is presently considering the matter of indirect source
 review,  and the  Agency  expects guidance on this and other matters in the
 form  of  amendments to the  Clean Air Act.
      Technical  guidance for  developing indirect source plans has been made
 available  to control agencies in Guideline for Air Quality Maintenance
 Planning and Analysis,  Volume 9:  Evaluating Indirect Sources (EPA 450/4-
 75-001).
      Seventeen states/territories  have submitted plans for regulation of
 indirect sources.  Plans have been approved for Alabama,  Florida,  Guam,
 Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska, Nevada, New York,  North Carolina, Virgin  Islands,
and West Virginia.  Plans  are under review for Connecticut, Delaware,  New
Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania (Philadelphia only), and  Virginia.
                                   21

-------
 Tall Stacks
      Tall stacks and the related issue, supplementary control systems, are
 control strategies which reduce the impact of emissions from combustion
 sources on air quality at ground level.  Neither technique directly
 involves the use of control  equipment.   Instead, both techniques  rely upon
 atmospheric dispersion to reduce the atmospheric concentrations of pollu-
 tants,  and both do little to reduce actual  emissions.   The use of tall
 stacks  relies  on stack height increases to  aid  the  dispersion of  pollutants,
thereby reducing ground level concentrations, in some cases below the
level needed to attain NAAQS.  Supplementary control systems  involve
restrictions or modification to source operations during periods  of poor
atmospheric dispersio.n so as to reduce emissions.
      On February 8, 1974, a  U.S.  Court  of Appeals opinion  stated  that
 dispersion techniques could  not be  employed as  substitutes for available
 emission controls.   The Agency has  since prepared guidance setting  forth a
 uniform policy on  the use of stack  height increases  by  emitters.  This
 policy  is  applicable  to a wide  variety  of sources and will  give greater
 assurance  that NAAQS  will  be attained and maintained.   The general  philos-
 ophy of the  policy  is  that stack  height  increases are acceptable  interim
control  strategies  on  existing  sources  only  after on-line  installation of
all reasonably  available  control  technology.  Stack  height augmentation will
not allow  for  any process operation modifications which would increase
emission levels at a  source.
     The policy guideline addresses the application of stack  height
increases to both new and existing sources.  Tfm guidance provide*- a
syst?^ in which air quality and existing stack height are factors  for
determining compliance in any future control strategy demonstrations.
                                    22

-------
Supplementary Control Systems
     Development continues on control plans that would permit the temporary
use of supplementary control systems for SO  on existing non-ferrous smelters
                                           /\
in several western states where the use of all reasonably available emis-
sion controls is inadequate to attain ambient standards.  EPA has proposed
and promulgated such regulations for Idaho and Nevada and proposed regula-
tions for Arizona and New Mexico.
     Under these regulations, smelters are allowed to restrict or to modify
operations as necessary to permit adequate dispersion of pollutants as long
as reasonably available control technology is applied and the source accepts
responsibility for any violations of ambient standards within its desig-
nated liability area.
     The strategy preferred by EPA for attaining and maintaining NAAQS is
one of constant emission limitation.  The regulations state that supple-
mentary controls may be used only as a temporary measure to augment constant
control techniques, where the alternatives would be permanent curtailment
or cessation of production or delays in attaining air quality standards.
     The final regulation in Nevada was challenged in court by an
affected emitter wishing to use SCS as a permanent control  measure.  How-
ever, EPA's regulation was found valid, and the Agency is continuing to
develop regulations for the states involved.
Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act (ESECA)
     EPA's activities under ESECA were of two major types in 1975 --
review of coal conversion submittals and a review of State  Implementation
Plans.
     Review of Coal Conversion Submittals -- As of November 3, 1975, EPA
was involved in actions on 32 power plants in six EPA Regions.  The air
pollution requirements fall  into two general categories:
                                   23

-------
            (1)   The  emission-limiting regulations  of an  applicable  SIP.   If
                 the  source is  located in  an  AQCR where  the  primary  NAAQS  for
                 a pollutant is not being  met,  then the  SIP  regulation  for
                 that pollutant must be met at  the  time  the  source converts to
                 coal.   This situation existed  for  five  plants  for both TSP
                 and  S02 and 21  plants for TSP  only,  as of November  3,  1975.
            (2)   Primary standard  conditions.   If the  SIP regulation need  not
                 be met  at  the  time of conversion,  EPA may specify interim
                 requirements,  called  primary standard conditions, to assure
                 that primary NAAQS are not violated.  SIP requirements must
                 be met  as  soon  as  practicable  but  not later than January  1, 1979.
                 As of November 3,  1975, two plants for TSP and possibly 11
                 plants  for SC^  are eligible for  operation under primary
                 standard conditions.
       In either  case, the  source  cannot proceed  to convert to coal until  EPA
 approves a  source-submitted schedule  for  complying with SIP regulations as
 soon as practicable, but no later  than January 1,  1979.
 State  Implementation Plan  Reviews
       In compliance with section 4 of  ESECA, EPA completed (in March 1975) a
  ^view of each State Implementation Plan  to determine if emission-limiting
 regulations for  stationary  fuel-combustion sources could be revised without
 jeopardizing the attainment and maintenance of any NAAQS.  The main objective
 of the reviews was to stimulate a change of regulations that generate unnecessa /
 demands for clean  fuels or  other control techniques.
      Fifty-five states and territories (encompassing all  247  AQCRs) were
 evaluated for both TSP and  S02.  Also, regulations  for the  control  of N0?
werp evaluated for a  limited number of AQCRs  in New York,  Maryland,
                                   24

-------
 Illinois, California, and Utah.  Hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide regulations
 were not addressed in the reviews because they do not -- with regard to
 stationary fuel combustion sources -- constitute a major part of the strategy
 to attain and maintain NAAQS or pose a roadblock to fuel use.
      The reviews found that emission-limiting regulations for NCL are
 necessary and are not unduly restrictive in the context of section 4 of ESECA.
 The reviews found little indication that emission-limiting regulations for TSP
 are overly restrictive.  Of 247 AQCRs, 30 were found to be good candidates
 for possible revision of TSP regulations and the remaining 217 were found to
 be marginal or poor candidates.  With regard to the limitations placed on
 S02 emissions, the reviews found that the EPA's clean fuels policy of en-
 couraging states to revise unnecessarily restrictive regulations had already
 reduced much of the "overcleaning" required by the original SIPs.  Only four
 states were found to have some (very limited) potential for S02 regulation
 revisions; these states had not initiated SIP revisions at the time of the study.
 APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
     Each  state  has  submitted a SIP for  EPA  approval as  required  by  the
 Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970.  Under the Act, EPA has authority to
 propose and promulgate regulations to overcome regulatory deficiencies
 in each SIP.  Under this authority, the Agency has maintained an on-going
 review of SIPs to identify regulatory deficiencies.  Identified deficiencies
 can arise from a number of different factors.  A major factor has been the
 better air quality and emission data now available on which to base control
 strategies.  Other major factors  have been the court rulings and interpretations
which have necessitated a number  of revisions to the original  SIPs.   The
 introduction of new control  technology has also necessitated revisions.
                                 25

-------
 As a result of all  these factors,  SIPs have been evolving and changing to
 meet new situations.   The SIP should be seen as  a process and not a static
 plan.
       Table II-2 reports the approval/disapproval  status  of each  SIP for
 three key sections.   The New Source Review section of  a SIP is  especially
 important as EPA and  the states  begin to move into a maintenance  mode.
 The pre-construction  review required under New Source  Review includes both
 a  review against emission limits and a review for air  quality impact.
 These reviews  will  help  to maintain standards.   The transportation  measures
 included in some SIPs  are a part of overall  control strategies  for  0  and
                                                                     A
 CO.   The measures listed in Table  11-2 are,  primarily, those  needed  to
 control  and manage emissions  from  mobile sources.   Additional control measures
 for  Ox and  CO  are contained in the emission  limitation section  of each SIP.
 These are measures to  control emissions  from  stationary sources.  Emission
 limitations  for  each criteria pollutant  are a  part  of each  SIP.  These
 limitations  are  designed  to reduce emissions  and bring ambient  concentrations
 down  to  NAAQS.   Emission  limitations  apply to  existing sources  of pollution,
 but  they are also used,  as  noted above,  as one part of a  review of proposed
 new  sources.   Regarding  emission limitations,  it should be  noted that in
 many  cases  the deficiency  listed in Table  II-2 applies to only one AQCR.
 Additional  detail can  be  found in  the State Air Pollution Implementation
 Plan  Progress  Report,  January 1 to June  30, 1975 (EPA-450/2-75-008,
 September 1975).
      Finally, it should be pointed out  that this table reports the status
if SIPs  before the calls for attainment and maintenance revisions.  Calls
for these revisions  will  be made  before June 1976 and  will result  in new
control  strategy proposals being  listed in the next report.
                                   26

-------
                Table II-2.   STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS

                   OF THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
  Region/state
New source
  review
 Transportation
    measures
 Emission
limitations
Region I

  Connecticut
Approved
  Maine

  Massachusetts
Approved

Approved
  New Hampshire
Approved
 Measures  are  re-
 quired  for Hartford
 New Haven-Spring-
 field AQCR and  New
 York-New  Jersey-
 Conn. AQCR

 None required

 Boston  transpor-
 tation  controls
 promulgated
 6/12/75
 None  required
Approved
  Rhode Island


  Vermont
Approved


Approved
 Measures  required;
 hearing 11/75

 None  required
Approved

Promulgation for
SO? (12/75-
suTfur content
of fuel),
Approved for
other pollu-
tants

Promulgation
for TSP
(11/75),
approved for
other pollu-
tants

Approved
Approved
Region II

  New Jersey
Approved
  New York
Approved
 9/15/75
 Measures  promul-
 gated  for Phil-
 adelphia  and  New
 York,  New Jersey
 and  Conn.  AQCRs
TCP measures needed
for New York-New
Jersey-Conn. AQCR,
Gennessee-Finger
Lakes AQCR, and
Central New York
AQCR
EPA promul-
gation (7/73)
for HC,
approved for
other pollu-
tants

Rulemaking
for S02 (6/75),
approved for
other pollu-
tants
                                  27

-------
           Table II-2 (continued).  STATUS OF SF.I.ECTFn PORTIONS

                    OF THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
   Region/state
 New source
   review
   Transportation
      measures
  Emission
 1 imitations
 Region II cont.
   Puerto Rico
 Approved
   U.S.  Virgin
     Islands
 Approved for
 all  except
 public com-
 ment pro-
 visions
 (9/10/75)
 None required
                                                                     2
 None required
 Deficient in
 part for SO
 (9/75),
 approved for
 other pollu-
 tants

 Approved
 Region  III
   Delaware
  District of
   Columbia
  Maryland
 Approved


 Approved




 Approved
 None  required
Measures promul-
gated for National
Capital AQCR
Measures promul-
gated for
Baltimore and
National Capital
AQCRs
Pennsylvania
Approved
Measures promul-
gated for Phil-
adelphia and
Southwest Pennsy-
lvania AQCRs
                                                          Approved
 Approved
TSP limita-
tions proposed
(10/6/75); S0?
regulation
amended to
delete reduc-
tion from 1.0
to 0.5% sulfur
fuel for all
AQCRs except
Baltimore where
0.5% is effective
for 1  year
(12/5/75);
approved for
other pollutants

State
proposals for
TSP and S0?;
approved for
other pollu-
tants
                                   28

-------
          Table  II-2  (continued).  STATUS OF SELECTED PORTIONS

                   OF THE STATE  IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
  Region/state
New source
   review
  Transportation
     measures
  Emission
 limitations
Region III cont.
  Virginia
  West Virginia
Approved
Approved
(11/10/75)
EPA promulgation
for National
Capital AQCR

None required
Approved
Approved
Region IV
  Alabama
  Florida
  Georgia
  Kentucky

  Mississippi

  North Carolina
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved

Approved

Approved
None required
None required
None required
None required

None required

None required
Proposal for
S02 (9/75,1/76).
promulgations
for TSP (5/75,
8/75), proposal
for TSP (7/75),
approved for
other pollu-
tants

Promulgation
for S02 (10/75),
Approved for
other pollu-
tants

Promulgation
for TSP
(10/75), pro-
mulgation for
N02 (5/75),
Approved for
all other
pollutants

Approved

Approved

Approved
                                  29

-------
Table 11-2 (continued).  STATUS OF SFLECTFP PORTIONS
         OF THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Region/state
Region IV cont.
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V
Illinois

Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI
Arkansas
Louisiana
New source
review

Approved
Approved

Approved

EPA promul-
gations
(5/73 & 2/74)
EPA promul-
gation (10/72)
Approved
EPA promul-
gation (4/74)
Approved

Approved
Approved
Transportation
measures

None required
None required

Measures promul-
gated for Chicago
AQCR

EPA promulgation
(4/74) for
Indianapolis AQCR
None required
Measures for
Minneapolis-
St. Paul AQCR
Measures promul-
gated for
Cincinnati AQCR
!
None required

None required
None required
Emission
limitations

Approved
Approved

CO strategy
disapproved
6/73; approved
for other
pollutants
Approved
Approved
Approved
HC strategy
disapproved,
SOp strategy
proposed
(11/75),
approved for
other pollu-
tants
Approved

Approved
Approved
                       30

-------
Table 11-2 (continued).   STATUS OF SELECTFP PORTIONS
         OF THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Region/state
Region VI cont.
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Region VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
Region VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
New source
review

Approved
Approved
Approved

Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved

Approved
Approved
Approved
Transportation
measures

None required
None required
Measures being
prepared for
Austin-Waco,
Corpus Christi ,
Houston-
Gal veston,
Dallas, San
Antonio, El Paso

None required
None required
Measures submitted
for St. Louis AQCR
None required

Measures promul-
gated for Denver
AQCR
None required
None required
Emission
limitations

Revocation
of EPA promul-
gation for S02
proposed 11/75,
approved for
other pollu-
tants
Approved
EPA promul-
gations for
HC (11/73);
approved for
other pollu-
tants

Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved

Approved
Proposal for
S02 (10/75),
approved for
other pollu-
tants
Approved
                        31

-------
Table 11-2 (continued).  STATUS OF SFLECTEn PORTIONS
         OF THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Region/state
Region VIII cont.
South Dakota
Utah








Wyoming
Region IX
American Samoa
Arizona





California






Guam
Hawaii
New source
review

Approved
Disapproved
for TSP in
Wasatch
Front AQCR,
other sec-
tions
approved



Approved

Approved
Approved,
except for
Pima County



EPA promul-
gation (4/73)
for part of
state



Approved
Approved
Transportation
measures

None required
EPA promulgation
for Wasatch Front
AQCR (11/73)






None required

None required
Measures in effect
for Phoenix-
Tucson AQCR


i
Measures promul-
gated for San
Francisco, Los
Angeles, San
Diego, Fresno,
and Sacramento
AQCRs
None required
None required
Emission
limitations

Approved
EPA promul-
gations for
SO, and TSP
( 10/74 and
9/74), TSP pro-
mulgation
(smelter) 11/75,
approved for
other pollu-
tants
Approved

Approved
EPA promul-
gations for
SOn (3/73 and
3/74), TSP (5/73),
proposal for SC-2
from smelters (10/75)
apoTO!dntsfor other
EPA proposals
for TSP and
promulgation
for HC,
approved for
other pollu-
tants
Approved
Approved
                       32

-------
          Table II-2 (continued).  STATUS OF SELECTFP PORTIONS

                   OF THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
  Region/state
New source
  review
  Transportation
     measures
 Emission
limitations
Region IX cont.
  Nevada
EPA promul-
gation (4/73)
for Washoe
County
None required
EPA promul-
gation for
S02 (2/75),
disapproved
for TSP (no
promulgation
to date),
approved for
other pollu-
tants
Region X

  Alaska
  Idaho
  Oregon

  Washington
Approved
Approved
EPA promulgation
for Northern
Alaska AQCR
None required
Approved

Approved
None required

Promulgations
for Seattle
and Spokane
AQCRs
Revisions
needed for
CO, approved
for other
pollutants

Promulgation
for S02 (11/75),
approved for
other pollu-
tants

Approved

Approved
                                    33

-------
                  III.   DEVELOPMENT OF AIR QUALITY CRITERIA
               AND  RECOMMENDED  EMISSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
 NATIONAL AMBIENT  AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NAAQS)
      EPA has a continuing program for reviewing the existing scientific
 data  base for the criteria pollutants (those for which NAAQS have been
 established) and  for assessing  the need for establishing new air quality
 standards for other pollutants.  Updates of the scientific data bases for
 standards for carbon monoxide,  oxidants and related hydrocarbons, and
 oxides of nitrogen were initiated during 1975.  In addition, four scien-
 tific and technical assessment  reports were published during the year:
 Manganese, Cadmium, Particulate Polycyclic Organic Matter, and Vinyl
 Chloride and Polyvinyl Chloride.  Vanadium, Lead from Stationary Sources,
 and Nickel are in the final clearance stage.  Nitrosamines and Arsenic
 are in various stages of preparation.
 NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NSPS)
     New source performance standards (NSPS) were promulgated in 1971 for
 five categories and in 1974 for seven more categories.  Twelve additional
 source categories were proposed in 1974.   Half of these (electric arc
 furnaces and five phosphate fertilizer processes) were promulgated in 1975,
 NSPS for primary copper, zinc,  and lead smelters, coal cleaning plants,
 and primary aluminum reduction  plants were promulgated in January 1976.
Seven additional  promulgations  (ferroalloy production, grain terminals,
by-product coke ovens,  coal-refuse combustion  in steam generators, carbon
black, lignite-fired steam generators,  and crushed stone) are expected
                                    34

-------
during 1976.  In addition, 15 source categories are scheduled for pro-
mulgation in 1977-78, and many more categories are being studied for
possible promulgation.
     Significant issues were raised during the year concerning control
costs, continuous monitoring, modification provisions, and application of
section lll(d) of the Act.  Resolution of these policy and technical
questions has required considerable effort, as has the decision to include
environmental and inflation impact statements in the standard support
documents.
     Continuous monitoring regulations were promulgated on October 6, 1975.
These establish a procedure whereby continuous emission monitors are checked
against manual performance tests required of new sources.  Performance
specifications for acceptable monitors are included in the regulations.
     On November 17, 1975, regulations to implement section lll(d) of the
Clean Air Act were promulgated.  Under section lll(d) states are required
to submit plans for the control of designated pollutants (i.e., those
pollutants  for which no National Ambient Air Quality Standards or National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants have been established) from
existing sources after the Agency promulgates NSPS for that source category.
Modification regulations, proposed in 1974, were promulgated December 16,
1975.  These provisions limit application of NSPS to those situations in
which the modification requires a significant capital expenditure.
     Eight  AQCRs received assistance in the form of NSPS-type technical
studies and specific test methodology when the Agency proposed revisions
to the Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery regulations on October 9, 1975.
     A strategy has been established for setting additional NSPS to
minimize projected increases in nationwide emissions.  Over the next  15

                                     35

-------
years, up to 400 pollutant/source combinations of NSPS will  be promul-


gated.  The effect of these standards will  be to maintain particulate, SO ,
                                                                         A

HC and CO emission levels at or below present levels despite projected


industry production increases.
                                   36

-------
Table III-l.   STATUS OF STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
Source
Steam generators
[>250 million
Btu/hr]
Municipal incin-
erators [>50
tons per day]
Portland cement
plants
Nitric acid
plants
Sulfuric acid
plants
Asphalt con-
crete plants
Petroleum
refineries
Petroleum
storage
Secondary lead
smelters and
refineries
Secondary brass
and bronze
refining
facilities
Iron and steel
mi 1 1 s
Affected facility
Coal-, oil-, and gas-
fired boilers
Incinerator
Kiln, clinker cooler
Process equipment
Process equipment
Process equipment
Process gas
combustion
Catalytic
regenerators
Gasoline, crude
oil , and dis-
tillate storage
tanks >65,000
gallons capacity
Blast and rever-
berate ry
furnaces
Reverberatory
furnaces
Basic oxygen
furnace
Pollutant
Particulate
S0x
N0x
Particulate
Particulate
NOX
S0x
Actd mist
Particulate
S0x
Particulate
CO
Hydrocarbons
Particulate
Particulate
Particulate
Promulgation
date
12/23/71
12/23/71
12/23/71
12/23/71
12/23/71
12/23/71
3/8/74
3/8/74
3/8/74
3/8/74
3/8/74
3/8/74
3/8/74
3/8/74
Remarks
Under remand

Judicial
review
decided in
favor of
EPA-5/22/75

Under remand
Undergoing
judicial
review





                       37

-------
Table Ill-l (continued).  STATUS OF STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
Source
Sewage treatment
plants
Primary copper
smelters
Primary zinc
smelters
Primary lead
smelters

Primary aluminum
reduction
plants
Coal cleaning
plants
Phosphate
fertilizer
plant
Affected falility
Sludge incinerators
Roaster, smelting
furnace, converter
Dryer
Roaster
Sintering machine
Sintering machine,
electric smelting
furnace, converter
Blast or rever-
beratory furnace,
sintering machine
Pot line
Anode bake plant
Air tables
Thermal dryers
Wet process
phosphoric acid
Superphosphoric
acid
Di ammonium
phosphate
Triple super-
phosphate
Triple super-
Phosphate
storage
Pollutant
Particulate
S0x
Particulate
S0x
Pafticulate
S0x
Particulate
Fluorides
Fluorides
Particulate
Particulate
Fluorides
Fluorides
Fluorides
Fluorides
Fluorides
Promulgation
date
3/8/74
1/15/76
1/15/76
1/15/76

1/26/76
1/15/76
8/6/75
8/6/75
8/6/75
8/6/75
8/6/75
Remarks








                            38

-------
             Table III-l  (continued).   STATUS OF STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
    Source
 Affected facility
 Pollutant
Promulgation
    date
Remarks
Iron and steel
  mills

Ferroalloy
  production
Electric arc
  furnaces

Specific furnaces
Particulate


Particulate

CO
   9/23/75
                  Proposed
                   10/21/74
                  Promulgation
                   scheduled
                   for mid-
                   1976
                                          39

-------
Table II1-2.   REGULATORY ACTIONS RELATED TO SECTIONS 111  AND 112
Subject of
regulation
Continuous moni-
toring
Section lll(d)
regulations
Modification
Revision to
hazardous
pollutant
regulations
Vinyl chlo-
ride
Affected facility




Process equipment
Pollutant



Asbestos
and mer-
cury
Vinyl
chloride
Promulgation
date
10/6/75
11/17/75
12/16/75
10/14/75

Remarks




Proposed
12/24/75
                            40

-------
NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS  (NESHAPs)
     On October 14,  1975, the Agency promulgated revisions to the asbestos
and mercury National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAPs).  These revisions modify the scope of the regulations and amend
the test methods.  For asbestos, manufacture of shotgun shells, manufac-
ture of asphalt concrete, and asbestos waste disposal were added to the
list of nine source categories covered by the regulations.  Asbestos fab-
rication operations  are excluded,  and changes have been made in prevent-
ing emissions during demolition and renovation.   Sewage sludge incinerators
were added as a source of mercury emission covered by NESHAPs.
     On December 24, 1975, EPA added vinyl choloride to the list of
hazardous air pollutants and proposed a standard for vinyl chloride
emissions from ethylene dichloride/vinyl chloride and polyvinyl chloride
plants.

HEALTH EFFECTS RESEARCH
     Research on health effects is fundamental to the Agency's responsi-
bility and ability to develop criteria and to promulgate and enforce
standards and guidelines.  The effort is specifically designed to identify
pollutants which may pose a risk to health, to quantify the relationships
between exposure to those pollutants and their effects on health, and to
document the benefits of reducing or eliminating human exposure through
pollution control.   In the health effects program, data bases are developed
for determining whether restricting exposure to  particular pollutants is
necessary to protect public health and,  if so, to what degree exposure
should be restricted.   To do this, a combination of research approaches is
                                   41

-------
 used:   toxicological  studies which utilize animal  models,  human clinical
 studies,  and epidemic-logical studies  of human  populations  in  their actual
 environmental  settings.
      The  health effects  research  program is basically  divided into four
 pollutant areas:   studies  on criteria pollutants,  non-criteria  pollutants,
 pollutants associated with transportation  activities,  and  non-pesticide
 organic and inorganic substances.
 Criteria  Pollutants
     Criteria  pollutants are those  for which National  Ambient Air  Quality
 Standards  (NAAQS)  have been  set:  carbon monoxide, sulfur  dioxide,  nitrogen
 dioxide,  particulates, hydrocarbons,  and oxidants.  The Agency  is  con-
 tinuing to obtain  health effects  information on these  pollutants in
 several areas,  such as exposure averaging  times -- that is, short-term,
 high-concentration exposure  versus  long-term, low-level exposure -- the
 adequacy of existing  safety  margins,  the health benefits of meeting the
 standards,  and  the health  risks of  exceeding the standards.   Thus, the
 research in  this area is basically  directed toward expanding  the health
 data base  for those pollutants for  which NAAQS have been promulgated and
 refining the criteria on which those  standards are based.   Any evaluation
 and adjustment of the standards which may prove to be necessary will be
 influenced  substantially by  these data.
     Studies are also being conducted  in the criteria pollutant area to
 identify populations most at risk,  to refine exposure-effects  data for
 such populations, and to determine the effects  of exposure to  combinations
of the criteria pollutants.
                                   42

-------
Non-Criteria Pollutants
     Non-criteria pollutants are those for which no NAAQS have been
established.  Health effects research is also directed toward develop-
ing data on these pollutants, e.g., sulfates, nitrates, and respirable
particulates.  Some existing evidence associates these pollutants with
harmful effects on human health.  Questions being posed in this regard
include determination of exposure-response relationships for these
pollutants, both by themselves and in combination with other pollutants.
     During this year, the Agency reoriented the air epidemiology program
into targeted population studies designed to test hypotheses developed
from the earlier Community Health and Environmental Surveillance System
(CHESS).  Specific studies on sulfate and nitrate aerosols are part of
the series.  For example, studies were begun in the South Coast Air Basin
of California, where a special  problem may emerge as the use of fuels con-
taining higher proportions of sulfur is increased in an area of high
oxidant levels.  Studies have been planned in the Northwestern Inter-
mountain Region where  high sulfate levels occur in conjunction with
smelter operations.  Further studies are designed for  the highly indus-
trialized areas east of the Mississippi and  south of the Great Lakes
where  the potential exists for  large, regional  sulfate problems arising
from long-term transformation and  long-range transportation of sulfur
oxides emitted largely from  stationary  sources.
Transportation-Associated Pol 1utants
     A specially  identified  area of  research in air pollution relates to
transportation.  The purpose of this program is to develop comprehensive
                                    43

-------
toxicological and epidemiological data bases on the public health con-
sequences of pollutants stemming from transportation sources.  We are
conducting a series of studies to ascertain health risks associated with
emission products such as sulfuric acid, sulfates, carbon disulfide,
hydrogen sulfide, palladium, platinum and aluminum oxide from vehicles
equipped with catalytic converters.  The effects of substances used as
fuel additives are also being investigated, and plans to begin work on
possible biological effects of diesel emissions have also been made.
     The annual Catalyst Research Program Report represents a comprehen-
sive compilation of information obtained by a research program on mobile
source emissions.  The work includes data on emission characterization,
atmospheric chemistry, and physics of mobile emission products with con-
sideration given to meteorology and other atmospheric factors; air
quality modeling; animal toxicology; and human population effects.  Pol-
lutants of concern include acid sulfates, platinum, and palladium.  The
data obtained is being provided to appropriate sectors of the Agency to
indicate the public health implications of non-regulated mobile source
pollutants so that prudent determinations can be derived with respect to
regulatory needs.
Inorganic and Organic Substances
     Non-pesticide inorganic and organic substances are also topics of
investigation in the air program area.   The health program addresses a
number of trace metals, including cadmium, copper, zinc, arsenic and lead.
Lead, for example, is a ubiquitous pollutant which may be found in the
air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat,  and dust that
children sometimes ingest.   In assessing the health implications of
                                   44

-------
exposure  to such pollutants, two important questions being examined are
the  relative contribution of the various possible routes of exposure to
observed  health effects and the exposure-response relationships exhibited
by these  substances.  Examples include population studies which were
initiated in 1975 on the health impact of these metals in communities
near primary smelters, and the development of screening systems for rapid
assessment of potentially hazardous biochemical activity.
Terrestrial Ecology Effects Research
     The  Agency's ecological research activities which deal with the effects
of air pollutants on 'land life other than man has proceeded along two broad
program fronts.  The primary program thrust relates directly to strengthening
the scientific basis for air pollution control strategies mandated by the
definition of "welfare" effects in the Clean Air Act.  The second major pro-
gram comprises a newly initiated effort in "energy" research to assess the
terrestrial impact of a representative coal-fired power plant located at
Colstrip, Montana.
     Vegetation growing near a source of sulfur dioxide (S02) experiences
continuous but varying pollutant concentrations.   Very high concentrations
occur infrequently but can be anticipated fairly accurately if adequate
historical data are available.   A more realistic research approach to deter-
mine S02 and photochemical  oxidant effects on plant growth and crop yield has
been initiated during the past year.   Simulations of random variation in
pollutant concentration based on published national  air quality data from
selected sites are  applied under field conditions.   Preliminary results show
pronounced effects  on growth response curves  for selected crops.   These data
are being used to develop damage functions for economic loss  assessments.
     Vast areas  of  the United States  receive  precipitation  which  is consis-
tently  10 to  100 times  more  acidic  than  the geologic average.   The problem
                                   45

-------
 is  increasing  in  area  as well  as  in  severity, primarily because of the  impact
 of  man's  activities.   Research  is  underway to determine the effects of  acidic
 rain  on nutrient  cycling and plant-soil processes over a three-year period.
 Simulated rain treatments  representing a range of averages (from the acid
 content in  the northeastern United States to an average for the entire  United
 States and, finally, a value representing a possible increase in acidity)
 are applied for 3 to 4 hours for three days each week.  Sulfates in rain
 that  result in the formation of sulfuric acid appear to be major contributors
 to  the acidic reaction, so the various pH values are controlled by adding
 sulfuric  acid.  Responses being measured include nutrient leaching from
 plant foliage and soil, decomposition of organic matter, nitrogen fixation
 and nutrient uptake, and effects on productivity through foliar damage.
 Results from this work will provide a sounder basis for future sulfate air
 pollution control strategies on a regional level.
     The  conversion of atmospheric nitrogen to an organic form by legumes,
 such as alfalfa and soybeans, is an essential  natural  process whereby
 nitrogen  fertilizer is added to the environment.   Studies have been under-
 taken to determine the influence of polluted air on the nitrogen conversion
 properties of a legume.  Alfalfa plants have been exposed to low levels of
 ozone and sulfur dioxide throughout the growing season.   The nitrogen content
 of the plants was determined as a measure of the nitrogen fixation.   Ozone
 treatment reduced the nitrogen  fixation by 40  percent.   The ozone concentra-
 tion was  less than the present  National  Ambient Air Quality Standard  for
 photochemical  oxidants.  The presence of sulfur dioxide  also  significantly
 reduced nitrogen fixation when  the median  concentration  exceeded 0.06 parts
per million (ppm).  This work indicates  that natural nitrogen  fixation  is
                                   46

-------
severely limited by atmospheric contaminants, an effect_whjch heretofore has
been unrecognized.
     The measurement of air pollutant effects on plants generally has been
based on visual observations of injury.   However, experience has shown that
these measurements  are not sensitive and cannot be standardized.  One tech-
nique developed to  solve this problem measures plant production of stress
ethylene when exposed to ambient pollutants.   Although ethylene production
increases when visible injury occurs, it also increases when the injury can-
not be seen and thus is useful  in determining injury before it is visible.
The test to measure ethylene production  is more sensitive that visual obser-
vation and can be used as a standardized quantitative method by all  researchers.
     Further research is in progress to  delineate mechanisms and dose-response
relationships for cadmium compounds.  These compounds include cadmium oxides,
chlorides, sulfates, sulfides and phosphates, which are toxic to many plants
and animals.  The sources of these compounds  include automobile exhausts,
tire residues, coal-fired power plants and parent rock material from which
phosphate fertilizers are produced.   Cadmium  is a ubiquitous element in the
earth's crust with  no known nutritional  value.  A small amount of cadmium
can be extracted from most plants regardless  of location; larger quantities
have been found to  inhibit plant growth.  Results of research on the nitrogen
fixation in the roots of red alder trees indicate that this vital process
is inhibited by cadmium.  The effect may occur directly within the nitrogen
fixation system and/or through the effects on other processes within the
plant.
     Research is also underway on the effects of pollutant stressors on soil
litter decomposition.  Soil litter decomposition is a process whereby dead
                                   47

-------
  organic  matter  is mineralized  for  plant  use.  This  is an essential  biological
  process  without which  life on  the  planet would cease.  Research thus far has
  shown  that  cadmium and selenium are two  common polluting agents which affect
  the  rate of soil decomposition.  Preliminary studies also indicate  that some
  decomposer  organisms such as mites may be forced to migrate from their normal
  litter habitat when subjected to sulfur dioxide.   Data indicate that ozone
  is capable  of reducing ammonia nitrogen, thus decreasing  the nitrogen pool
  in some  forest soils, and possibly affecting tree growth.   Further studies
 are necessary in this area.
      The broad objective  of the energy study on coal-fired  power  plants  is
 to develop a set of  guidelines  which  planners can use  in  predicting  the  im-
 pact of power plants  on a grassland ecosystem.  The  study is  concerned not
 only with the  stability of ecosystem organization in relation  to ambient
 conditions,  but  also  with the predictability and  reproducibility of  changes
 that  occur.   Insight  into the mechanisms  of  responses of ecosystem components
 to  air  pollution challenge is sought.  Of special  concern is the identifica-
 tion  of subsystem functions and mechanisms that contribute to ecosystem regu-
 lation.   The investigation is an effort to characterize the impact of air
 pollutants on a total ecosystem.  Included are the investigation of  the
 effects of coal-fired power plant emissions upon plant and animal  community
 structure; production, consumers and decomposers;  plant and  animal  diseases;
both beneficial and harmful insects; indicators and predictors of  pollution;
population biology;  and health  of vertebrate  animals.   This  research  project
is scheduled to be  concluded  in  1978.
                                  48

-------
International Activities
      International support in air pollution is provided through three main
areas:  international organizations, international cooperative agreements,
and international contracts and grants.
      Among the international  organizations collaborated with by EPA,
assistance is currently being provided for the following:  World Health
Organization (WHO), Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), Commission of the European Communities (CEC), Pan American Health
Organization (PAHO), Pan American Medical Association (PAMA), and Economic
Commission for Europe (ECE).  Pollutant survey documents, air criteria and
guideline documents, and annotated bibliographies prepared by EPA are
provided to WHO, and one individual acts as an advisor to a Task Group
reviewing element pollutants.   The Chairman of the Air Management Sector
Group for OECD was a staff member of the Health Effects Research Laboratory.
Research personnel are continuing to provide support to CEC on standardi-
zation for epidemiological studies as well as for assisting in a collabo-
rative study of analysis of lead, mercury and cadmium in blood and urine
samples.  Advice has been provided to PAHO for epidemiological studies in
a UN/Mexico project in studies of carboxyhemoglobin levels and studies on
heavy metals in man.  Personnel are involved directly with the PAMA Section
on Environmental Health Sciences, and the Secretary of the Section is an
EPA employee.  Preparation for presentation of a paper on "The Health and
Welfare Effects of Increasing Sulfur Oxides Emissions" has been completed
for a U.S.-sponsored ECE seminar on desulfurization of fuels and combustion
gases.
                                   49

-------
     The United States has Individual  international  cooperative agree-
ments with five nations:  Federal  Republic of Germany (FRG), Israel, Japan,
Spain and the U.S.S.R.  Each of these, in part, addresses health effects
to some degree.  Cooperation with FRG includes provisions of copies of .
assessment studies of air pollutants,  and continued  cooperation in the
fields of carcinogenesis and mobile source emission  studies.  Health
effects researchers act as consultants to Israeli scientists on their
programs and are collaborating on such studies as a  comparative study of
asthmatic populations in the two countries and a study on "Chronic Toxicity
Caused by Air Pollution and Its Effect on the Health and Productivity of
Domestic and Farm Animals."  Cooperation with Japan  includes:  estimation of
environmental exposure to cadmium, evaluation of body burdens, establishment
of tissue banks, study of biological half-life, study of high-exposure
human populations, development of laboratory procedures and development of
field methodological exposures.  Consultation is also provided in a 3-year
study comparing chronic illnesses in comparable executive populations in
New York and Tokyo.  Direct health effects are not currently being pursued
under the Spanish agreement.  The major health effect cooperation with the
U.S.S.R. lies in the specific fields of mutagenesis, heavy metals and
epidemiology.
      Under International Contracts and Grants there are eleven active
research projects in Health Effects, funded under Public Law 480.  Three of
these projects are in Egypt, one in India, five in Yugoslavia, and two
in Sweden.  Two projects are under study in Poland.

-------
            IV.  STANDARDS SET OR UNDER CONSIDERATION PURSUANT
                                 TO TITLE II
MOTORCYCLE REGULATIONS
     A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to control  emissions from new motor-
cycles was published in October 1975.
     Motorcycles are one of many small but significant sources of emissions.
The average uncontrolled motorcycle presently emits about twice as much car-
bon monoxide (CO) and about six times as much hydrocarbon (HC) as a new 1976
automobile, emissions from which have been reduced 85 percent over uncon-
trolled levels.  When statutory standards for automobiles are met (90 percent
reduction over uncontrolled levels), uncontrolled CO emissions will be 10
times as high and HC over 20 times as high for the motorcycle as for the
automobile.  As automobiles account for proportionately less of the CO and
HC problem, control of motorcycle emissions becomes an increasingly signifi-
cant factor in the further abatement  of these pollutants.
     All regions of the United States that are not meeting air quality
standards for CO and photochemical oxidants (0 ) will benefit in some way
                                              /\
from these control standards since they will serve as one of many strategies
to help reduce overall emissions of HC and CO and thereby improve air quality.
About one-third of the U.S. population (68 million people) lives in areas
which are projected to have problems meeting these air quality standards in
1985.
                                   51

-------
      Interim and long-term emission  standards  for  motorcycles  designed  for
 street use are proposed.   The  1978  interim  standard  for  HC exhaust emissions
 is  dependent on  engine  displacement, requiring control to 5 grams per
 kilometer  (g/km)  for motorcycles between 50 and 170  cubic centimeters (cc)
 displacement.  The standard  increases proportionately with displacement
 from  5  g/km  at 170 cc to 14  g/km at  750 cc and above.  CO emissions are
 limited to  17  g/km, and nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions are limited to 1.2
 g/km  for 1978.  The 1978 standards also propose a prohibition on crankcase
 HC  emissions.  These standards, if met throughout the life of the motorcycle,
 will  decrease  average motorcycle emissions of HC by 30 percent and CO emis-
 sions by 22  percent.  Nitrogen oxide emissions, which are inherently quite
 low,  will increase somewhat as HC and CO are controlled.

 REVISED LIGHT  DUTY TRUCK REGULATIONS
      Notice  of Proposed Rulemaking is expected to be published early in 1976 to
 enlarge the  definition of the light duty truck (LOT) class to an 8500 pound gross
 vehicle weight limit rather than the present 6000 pound limit.  It also
 proposes reduction in HC, CO, and NOX emissions to reflect application of
 the same technology and degree of stringency that will be required of light
 duty  vehicles  (LDV) under 1978 Federal  standards.   The proposed regulations
would be applicable to 1978 and subsequent model  year light duty trucks.
     The need for stricter standards has  developed because,  as increasingly
stringent controls are placed on passenger cars,  the percentage of total
vehicular pollution caused by trucks  increases.   Air quality  analyses  fore-
cast that if no further controls are  placed  on  light duty trucks used  in
urban areas and if current statutory control  of light duty vehicles  is
effected, CO and  N0x emissions  from  LDTs  will  equal  LDV emissions  by  1985.
                                  52

-------
INTERIM HEAVY DUTY VEHICLE EMISSION REGULATIONS
     In early 1976 a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will  be published for
more stringent control of gaseous exhaust emissions from heavy duty gaso-
line and diesel powered vehicles.  A more stringent standard will  also be
proposed for further control of peak smoke opacity from diesel engines.
     Stricter emission standards for heavy duty vehicles are necessitated
by the inability of some Air Quality Control  Regions to meet national am-
bient air quality standards without further control of HC, CO, and NOV.
                                                                     A
Although the heavy duty vehicle population accounts for only approximately
5 percent of all registered motor vehicles, the levels of HC, CO,  and NOX
that they emit are significant.  It is estimated that without further con-
trols, emissions from heavy duty vehicles by 1990 will exceed those of
light duty vehicles controlled at statutory standards.
     The proposed interim standards represent a significant step towards
alleviating excessive heavy duty vehicle emissions.  Primarily because of
industry lead time requirements, the standards are projected to be effec-
tive as of the 1978 model year.

SULFURIC ACID EMISSION STANDARD
     The need for control of automotive sulfuric acid emissions stems from
the great increase in their production by catalyst-equipped vehicles.  In
addition to more restrictive California standards for HC and CO which have
led to the use of catalyst  systems on nearly all automobiles sold in
California, many manufacturers have switched to production of catalyst-
equipped vehicles outside of California because they offer fuel economy
                                   53

-------
 advantages.  Catalyst-equipped vehicles comprise over 70 percent of 1975
 model year vehicles and are expected to comprise over 85 percent of 1976
 model year vehicles.
      In an effort to prevent further increases in sulfuric acid emissions,
 a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is currently expected to be issued in the
 second quarter of 1976.  Intensive study continues  toward development of
 an adequate test procedure and accurate assessment  of acceptable sulfuric
 acid emission levels.   Primarily  because of industry  lead time  requirements,
 these standards would  be effective as  of the 1979 model  year.

 REVISED EVAPORATIVE EMISSION REGULATIONS
      A  Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to set more  stringent  standards  for
 evaporative emissions  from light  duty  passenger vehicles  and light  duty
 trucks  was  published in December  1975.   The most  significant change in the
 regulations is  the  new  evaporative  emission  test  procedure.  The  present
 test  procedure  has  been found  to  give  unrealistically  low test  results,
 thereby passing  vehicles which  actually  grossly exceed the  level  intended
 by the  present  evaporative  standard.  The proposed standard of  2  g/test for
 1979  and later  model years,  as  measured  by  the new test procedure, will re-
 duce  HC  emissions from  light duty vehicles and light duty trucks  from 1.76
 g/n-iile  to 0.15 g/mile at an  estimated retail cost of only $11.00  per vehicle.
 For the  1978 model year only, due to lead time constraints, a 6 g/test stan-
 dard  is  proposed.  This is the same level that California was authorized  to
 enforce  for the 1978 model year.
      If standards are promulgated at the proposed  Bevels, evaporative  emis-
sions will  be reduced in 1990 by 3.35 x 106 tons/year.   For comparison,
going from the current  HC exhaust  emission standard  for light duty passenger
                                   54

-------
vehicles to the statutory standard will  result in a  reduction  of 900,000
tons/year.

NON-METHANE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS
     In 1974, an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published for
conversion of current standards for motor vehicle hydrocarbon  exhaust emis-
sions to a non-methane basis (39 FR 6904).   This action was in response to
a formal petition by Ford Motor Company stating that catalyst-equipped
vehicles tended to have a greater proportion of methane (a non-reactive
and thus non-polluting hydrocarbon) in the exhaust than current vehicles.
Therefore an emission standard based on all hydrocarbons, including methane,
penalized vehicles with catalysts.
     At this time, the analysis of the Advance Notice of Proposed Rule-
making comments is complete and results indicate that there would be little
benefit in either air quality or emission controls by requiring such a con-
version.  Conversion would also result in considerable cost increase.
Accordingly, further work in this area has been assigned a low priority.

AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS REGULATORY ACTIONS
     In 1974 EPA published Notice of Proposed Rulemaking applying to emis-
sions from engines powering supersonic aircraft.  This followed up a commit-
ment made in the preamble to the basic EPA aircraft regulations promulgated
in 1973.  This preamble stated that separate standards would be published
for supersonic aircraft because specialized technological constraints limit
their ability to meet standards applicable to subsonic aircraft.
     The regulations proposed reflect the same types of combustor design
technology but make allowances for the less efficient engine cycles used
for propulsion of aircraft designed for supersonic flight speeds.  Public

                                    55

-------
hearings were held concerning this  Notice of Proposed  Rulemaking  in  Boston,



Massachusetts, on November 19, 1974,  and in  Los  Angeles,  California,  on



November 26, 1974.



     Comments and testimony have been analyzed and  final  standards have



been set, subject to EPA review procedures.   Promulgation is  currently



expected by spring 1976.
                                   56

-------
               V.   CONTROL OF MOBILE SOURCE  EMISSIONS  AND
                        RELATED RESEARCH EFFORTS

     Title II of the Clean Air Act mandated at least 90 percent reductions
in carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), and oxides  of nitrogen (NOX)
emissions from light-duty vehicles and engines and gave the Administrator
authority to prescribe certain other emission standards for automobiles,
trucks, and planes.
MEASURES TAKEN TO IMPLEMENT MANDATED TITLE II EMISSION  STANDARDS
     As a result of Title II of the Act, standards of 0.41 gram per mile
(g/mi) HC, 3.4 g/mi CO and 0.4 g/mi NO  were  promulgated as the ultimate
                                      A
statutory standards for those pollutants.
     The 1970 amendments also provided that motor vehicle manufacturers could
apply for a one-year suspension of these standards.  Application was made in
March 1972 to suspend the HC and CO standards.  After an initial denial,  the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia required EPA reconsidera-
tion and on April 11, 1973, a suspension was  granted for the 1975 model year.
At this time interim standards of 1.5 g/mi HC and 15 g/mi CO were established.
     The Administrator also took action which resulted in emission standards
applicable in California of 0.9 g/mi HC, 9.0 g/mi CO, and 2.0 g/mi NO  for the
                                                                    1 rN
1975 model year.  The state standards waiver provision (Clean Air Act Section
209(b)) allows California, because it was the only state to adopt emission
standards prior to March 30, 1966, to set standards more strict than those

                                     57

-------
 of the  Federal government unless the Administrator of EPA, after notice and
 opportunity for hearing, finds either that California has not adopted more
 stringent standards "to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions" or
 that the "standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are not consist-
 ent with section 202(a)" of the Act.
      Further action was taken on July 30, 1973, when the 1976 model year
 statutory N0x standard of 0.4 g/mi  was suspended for one year and an interim
 standard of 2.0 g/mi was established.
      In June 1974 the passage of the Energy Supply and Environmental
 Coordination Act (ESECA) provided that (1)  the 1975 Federal  and  California
 interim standards would also be applicable  to  the 1976 model  year,  (2)  the
 original statutory standards for HC and  CO  of  0.41  and 3.4  g/mi  respectively
 would be applicable tc the  1977 and subsequent model  years,  (3)  the interim
 N0x  standard  of 2.0 g/mi would be  applicable  to the  1977 model  year,  (4)  the
 original statutory N0x standard of  0.4 g/mi would be  applicable  to  the  1978
 and  subsequent model years,  and (5)  any motor  vehicle manufacturer  could,  at
 any  time after January 1, 1975,  apply for a one-year  suspension  of  the
 imposition of  the  statutory  HC  and  CO standards  to the 1977 model year.
 -:''spension of  the  HC and CO  Emission Standards for 1977 Model Year  Vehicles
      On  March  5, 1975,  the EPA Administrator granted  the request of Ford
 Motor Company, General  Motors Corporation, and Chrysler Corporation  for a
 one-year  suspension of  the 1977 motor vehicle emission standards.
     Although effective control technology was  available, the Administrator
 determined that the sulfuric acid problem caused by the conversion of sulfur
 in gasoline to sulfuric acid was a potential risk to public  health in
heavily traveled areas and that this risk could be minimized by  retaining
1975  interim  standards and promulgating a  sulfuric acid standard.
                                  58

-------
     Accordingly, the Administrator imposed 1.5 g/mi  HC and 15 g/mi  CO
as interim standards for 1977 and recommended to Congress that the Clean
Air Act be amended to retain these standards through  the 1979 model  year.
     The rationale for the suspension and the Administrator's recommenda-
tion was that interim standards could be met using catalytic converters with-
out air pumps.  It has been shown that the increased  oxygen concentration
in the catalytic converter, caused by air pumps, results in much higher
emission levels of sulfuric acid.
Waiver of Federal Preemption of California State Motor Vehicle Pollution
Control.Standards
     On May 20, 1975, the EPA Administrator granted a request from the
State of California for a waiver of Federal preemption for 1977 California
standards of 0.41 g/mi HC, 9 g/mi CO, and 1.5 g/mi NOX.  Data presented led
the Administrator to a determination that compelling and extraordinary
conditions persist in California and that technology and adequate lead time
exist  for manufacturers to meet the requested California 1977 standards.
The Administrator further determined that any assessment of either the
magnitude of  the sulfuric acid risk or the measures needed to deal with it
is  a matter of California's judgment.
     Current  standards  reflecting  ESECA provisions and  EPA promulgation are
summarized in Table V-l.

Certification Testing
     Certification of new  passenger cars  for compliance with  Federal emission
standards began  with  1968 model year vehicles.  The program  includes testing
of  prototype  vehicles that  represent all  new motor vehicles  sold  in the
United States.
                                   59

-------
                               Table V-i.  EMISSION STANDARDS FOR MOTOR VEHICLE CLASSES
Motor vehicle class
Light duty passenger
(Emissions expressed in
grams per mile)
National
California
Light duty trucks
(Emission expressed in
grams per mile)
National
California
Heavy duty vehicles3
(Emissions expressed in
grams per horsepower-hour)
National
California
1976
HC CO NOX
1.5 15.0 3.1
0.9 9.0 2.0
HC CO NOX
2.0 20.0 3.1
0.9 17.0 2.0
HC + NOX CO Smoke
16 40 15/20/50b
10 30
1977
HC CO
1.5 15.0
0.41 9.0
HC CO
2.0 20.0
0.9 17.0
HC + NOY CO
A
16 40
1C 25
NOX
2.0
1.5
NOX
3.1
2.0
Smoke
15/20/50b
7.5C
1978
HC CO NOV
A
0.41 3.4 0.4
HC CO NOV
A
0.9 17.0 2.0
HC + NOX CO Smoke

 Gasoline and diesel have same standards but are tested under different procedures.
 Diesel only; lugging/acceleration/peak.
cOPtion available for combined HC and N0x standard  of 5 grams/brake  horsepower/hour.

-------
     The manufacturer is required by EPA to submit data from two tests
which evaluate vehicle conformance to Federal  emission standards.  First,
through the Durability Fleet Test, fleets are tested at 5000 mile intervals
up to 50,000 miles to determine the deterioration of the emission control
system.  Second, through the Emissions Fleet Test, prototype fleets are
tested at 4000 miles to determine their emissions at close to the "break in"
point.  To check manufacturers' data, EPA requires that a vehicle being
tested by the manufacturer for durability be brought to the EPA laboratory
in Ann Arbor, Michigan, for confirming tests.  All emission data vehicles
are tested in the EPA laboratory.
     During the past year, certification of most 1976 model year light duty
vehicles and light duty trucks was completed and certification of 1977 models
began.  The certification program for the 1976 model year involved monitoring
the test programs of approximately 50 manufacturers, reviewing durability
data from approximately 300 vehicles and engines, and reviewing emission
data from 1100  vehicles and engines.  To reach this level of certification,
EPA conducted approximately 2000 emission tests on 1976 light duty vehicles.
     To prevent possible unauthorized and unreported maintenance practices,
EPA inspectors  perform checks  of manufacturers' facilities and records to
ensure that established test procedures are followed and  investigate  reports
of possible violations of regulations.   In-depth  inspections of major manu-
facturers' programs are made annually.
      In addition  to the requirements  for certification of motor  vehicles and
engines prior to  mass production,  EPA has  regulations  governing  changes  to
vehicles and engines  during production.  Approximately 600 tests were con-
ducted during the past  calendar year  to  determine emission compliance of
modified versions of  certified vehicles.

                                    61

-------
       Since  the 1971  model  year,  emission  test  results  have  been  published
  in  tne  Federal  Register.   Beginning  with  the 1973 model year,  fuel  consump-
  tion  during the emission  test  has  also  been determined and  published  in  the
  Federal  Register as  well  as  in a booklet  for consumer use.   Fuel economy
  labels were posted on  new  cars by  manufacturers participating  in the  EPA/
  FEA-sponsored  fuel economy labeling  program.   Fuel economy  for 1973 and  1974
  model year  vehicles  was based on the cold-start city test,  representative of
  typical city driving.  A highway fuel economy  test procedure was added in
  the 1975 model year  and, to provide additional  fuel  economy information, a
  combined city-highway mileage figure is presented for 1976 model  year
  vehicles.   EPA  is thus able to provide emission test results and a broad
  picture of  fuel economy test results for consumers who are concerned with
 both air quality and fuel  economy.
 ASSESSMENT OF MOBILE SOURCE TECHNOLOGY
 Motor Vehicles
      The number of vehicles equipped with  catalysts  has  continued to increase,
 now comprising more than 85 percent of 1976 model  year vehicles.   Approxi-
 mately 70 percent of  1975  model year vehicles were catalyst  equipped.   The
 49-state  interim standards  for  the  1976  model year (excluding  California)
 permit manufacturers  to choose  between catalyst and  noncatalyst systems.
 The  greater  use of catalysts  for  the  1976  model year results  from the  addi-
 tional fuel  economy advantage they  offer.
     The  sales-weighted  fuel economy  of  the 1976 model year  fleet is 12.8
 percent better  than the  1975 fleet, according to EPA test data.  This  repre-
 sents a 26.6 percent  average fuel economy  improvement for 1976  over 1974
cars.  This gain is well over half of the President's goal  of a voluntary

                                    62

-------
40 percent fuel economy improvement by 1980.  Changes in carburetion, weight
reductions, improved transmissions, lower axle ratios,  and electronic ignition
systems should also continue to contribute to improved  fuel  economy within
present emissions standards.
     In meeting past emission standards, most manufacturers used the same
basic approach of engine modification (i.e., spark retard, intake manifold
preheating, and faster acting chokes) and exhaust gas recirculation.  The
1976 models continue utilization of a greater variety of  control approaches
that began in  1975.  Saab,  for example, uses fuel injection and no catalyst
to meet both Federal and California standards.  Mazda uses a thermal  reactor
and Honda  uses its  compound vortex controlled combustion  (CVCC) stratified
charge engine  to meet  the California  standards.
     EPA's technical staff  has analyzed extensive information provided by
automobile manufacturers under the provisions of section  202(b)(4)  concern-
ing  their  progress  toward meeting  the Federal emission  standards.   The
paragraphs which  follow  represent  the collective judgment of EPA engineers
directly  responsible for the interpretation and analysis  of the information.
     There is  doubt that manufacturers  will be able  to  meet the 0.4 g/mi
 NO  standard  in  1978.  The  most  promising technologies  for meeting this
   n
 standard,  dual catalysts and three-way  (single bed)  catalysts,  still have
 unresolved problems.   The  present  generation of  dual catalysts  have shown
 poor durability.   There  are also concerns about  potentially hazardous
 unregulated  emissions  that require further study before such  devices are
 allowed to be used on  a  widespread basis,  Several  problems are associated
 with meeting the 0.4 NOX standard  with  three-way catalysts.   First, the  three-
 way catalyst is extremely  sensitive to  oxygen concentrations  and  conventional
 carburetors   cannot provide the control of air/fuel  ratio required for their
proper operation.   Lead time for the production of the  number  of electronic
                                    63

-------
  fuel  injection systems or other advanced  fuel  metering  systems  required  of
  the entire auto industry is  considered  to be about  3  to 5 years.   Second,
  the N0x  reducing activity of the three-way catalyst is  too  low  to  permit
  large cars to  comply with the 0.4  g/mi  N0x standard.  Third, the durability
  of three-way catalysts is not yet  proven.   Also, there  may  be a shift in
  the air/fuel ratio control point as the catalyst sensor ages.
       Depending on advances made beyond  present system designs,  it  is expected
  that achieving 0.4 g/mi N0x  for Federal emission  standards  will  result  in a
  fuel  economy penalty.   If 1979 is  the first year  attainment of  statutory NOX
  Is required, the fuel  economy penalty compared to 1976  levels could  be as
                    .  Further advances 1n  technology would be expected to
 decrease penalties to approximately 5 percent in 1980, relative to 1976.
 Aircraft
      Studies have continued 1n support of the regulations which EPA has
 promulgated limiting the emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons,  nitrogen
 oxides, and smoke in commercial and private aircraft.   Current efforts are
 concentrated in the following areas:   (1) improvement  of the precision of the
 emission sampling and measurement techniques specified in the EPA  regulations;
 (2)  assessment  of progress  by private  industry and  other  government agencies
 in development  of techniques  for  reducing emissions from  turbine-powered
 aircraft;  (3) assessment  of progress by private  industry  and  other govern-
 ment  agencies in  development of techniques for reducing emissions from  piston
 engine-powered  general aviation aircraft; and (4) development of final  stand-
 ards  applicable to engines  that power supersonic transport aircraft.
      In conducting the above programs, maximum advantage  is taken of ongoing
 efforts by other Federal  agencies active in the aircraft emission area.  These
are principally the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,  the
United States Air Force,  and the Federal  Aviation Administration.   In
                                    64

-------
addition, the Department of Transportation has completed a Climatic Impact
Assessment Program, and EPA is studying its findings to ascertain whether
the EPA aircraft regulations already promulgated require modification to
respond to upper atmosphere problems.
ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES IN THE MOBILE SOURCE AREA
Emission Factor Program
     The Emission Factor Program is an ongoing series of studies designed
to obtain current data on emissions of in-use vehicles for the use of State
and local agencies, Federal air pollution officials, engine and vehicle
manufacturers, and concerned citizens.
Light Duty Vehicles - The most recent study, the third in the series, con-
sisted of exhaust emission tests of over one thousand 1966 to 1974 model
year in-use light duty vehicles.  As in the earlier studies, the general
downward trend in HC, CO and NO  levels continued.  Comparing the results of
                               ^
the first three programs reveals a general tendency for HC and CO levels
to increase with vehicle age and mileage, probably because older vehicles
may not  be maintained in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations.
This third study was also the first program in which the effects of air con-
ditioning and vehicle loading upon emissions and fuel economy were measured
for in-use vehicles.  Results indicated that the operation of air condi-
tioners  had an adverse effect on both fuel economy and emission  levels, as
did increased load weight of more than 500 pounds.
     The fourth program  (FY 74), in progress at this time, is the performance
of tests on approximately 2000 catalyst-equipped vehicles from around the
country.  It will  provide the first large-scale results of emission levels
of catalyst-equipped vehicles in use.
                                   65

-------
  Heavy Duty Vehicles  - Present Federal  test procedures  for heavy duty vehicles
  (HDVs)  involve  emission  measurements  during a  nine-mode  test for gasoline
  engines  and a thirteen-mode test for  diesel  engines  using an engine  dynamometer.
  These tests provide  accurate measurement of inter-city emission levels  but
  may not  accurately  represent emission  levels from all  pollutants in  city
  driving.   Therefore,  test  procedures  are under development which will employ
  a  chassis  dynamometer and  a driving cycle representative  of  truck operation
  in urban areas.   These tests and driving cycles may  form  the basis for  pro-
  posing new heavy  duty standards  and test procedures  in the future.
      The  most recent  study  in this area has centered  around the  measurement
 of  emissions from  heavy duty trucks operated  on a  road  course and the corre-
 lation of the results  with  those  obtained on  a  chassis  dynamometer.   Chassis
 dynamometer test results  using  the nine-mode  and thirteen-mode Federal
 test procedures correlated  reasonably well  with road  course emission  measure-
 ments.  Results generally indicated that  road test emission levels were
 slightly higher than those  attained in  the  chassis dynamometer test for
 hydrocarbons  and carbon monoxide  and slightly lower for oxides of nitrogen
 emissions.
     The results from  these  programs will  improve the accuracy of  HDV
 emission factor estimation and provide data for evaluation  of potential
 improvements  in certification test methods.
Auto Fuel  Economy Labeling Program
     In the President's Energy Message to Congress of April 16, 1973,  EPA
was assigned, in cooperation  with the Department of Commerce  and the
Council on Environmental Quality,  the  responsibility for developing a  program
to inform the public  of the  fuel economy characteristics of new automobiles.
                                66

-------
EPA instituted a voluntary fuel economy labeling program in 1975 and 1976,
co-sponsored by the Federal Energy Administration.
     Of all cars sold in the United States, 99 percent are now covered by
the voluntary labeling program.  Usually these cars bear a label which gives
a sales-weighted average fuel economy for all cars tested by EPA which
represent cars of that same manufacturer, engine size, transmission, and car
line.  In some cases, the label may also specify that the fuel economy results
are representative of cars of the same weight and axle ratio.   Each label now
bears three fuel economy figures—one determined by a city driving test, one
by a highway test, and a calculated composite of the two.  The city fuel
economy figure is derived from the EPA emission certification  test and the
highway fuel economy figure is derived from a special highway  driving cycle
test performed on all certification cars tested by EPA.   The composite is
calculated from a "harmonic averaging" of the two test results based on
Federal Highway Administration statistics indicating that the  average
vehicle is driven 55 percent  in city conditions and 45  percent in highway
conditions.
     The results of EPA tests are also used to achieve uniformity in adver-
tising.  The Federal Trade Commission issued voluntary guidelines effective
October 15, 1975, suggesting that any auto advertisement making miles-per-
gallon claims use EPA figures.  Both highway and city figures  should be
given and the characteristic vehicle information (engine size, number of
cylinders, fuel system, and transmission) should also be mentioned.  Guide-
lines also suggest that advertisements mention that EPA  figures are no
guarantee of a specific fuel economy value under all conditions or for all
drivers.
                                67

-------
      EPA has again published, in cooperation with the Federal Energy
Administration, The 1976 Gas Mileage Guide for New Car Buyers, listing fuel
economy results for all 1976 model year passenger cars and light trucks.  Two
added  improvements to the 1976 guide are the separate MPG listings for all
vehicles offering manual versus automatic transmissions and the listing of
the mileage at which the catalytic converter should be replaced on those
cars  that need such replacement.  The pamphlet also describes the concept of
fuel  economy and stresses its importance as a purchase criterion for new car
buyers.
Characterization of Currently Unregulated Emissions
     Studies involving unregulated pollutants from both regulated sources and
fuels have continued through EPA contracts and in-house testing.   In prior
years the emphasis involved characterization of reactive hydrocarbons,
aldehydes, polycyclic organic matter (POM),  and particulate emissions.
Recently, additional  unregulated pollutants  such as platinum, nickel  compounds
(nickel carbonyl), and sulfur compounds (HUS, COS, CSp) are being measured.
     Sulfates are the only currently unregulated mobile source pollutant for
which regulations are being developed.   However, measurement of the full
range of pollutants continues on advanced prototype vehicles sent to EPA for
testing as well  as on catalyst-equipped vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-
powered vehicles, and aircraft.
     Additional  studies are continuing  in an attempt to characterize unregu-
lated emissions  resulting from the presence  of scavengers  used with lead  in
leaded fuel  and  from manganese and other octane-boosting fuel  additives.
                                     68

-------
Sulfuric Acid Emissions from Catalyst-Equipped Vehicles
     During the past year increased concern over sulfuric acid emissions
from catalysts has been responsible for intensive study by EPA's Office of
Air and Waste Management and Office of Research and Development.  Primary
considerations include methods of measuring and controlling such emissions
and the estimated impact of sulfuric acid emissions on air quality and
public health.
     EPA papers have been written reassessing the public health problems,
tests have compared the levels of catalyst sulfuric acid emissions with
those of non-catalyst vehicles, and public hearings have been held.  These
were all instrumental in the March 1975 decision to suspend the 1977 model
year standards for HC and CO.  The stricter 1977 standards were replaced by
a continuation of 1975 interim standards for these pollutants.
     Measurement has established that the sulfuric acid emissions of a non-
catalyst car with a conventional internal combustion engine are approximately
0.001 gram per mile.  Catalyst cars without air injection generally yield
somewhat higher results, but with air injection test results have generally
demonstrated much higher levels of sulfuric acid emission.  It is important
to note, however, that large variations in test data exist.
     Because long periods of time are required to complete new studies of
the risk that sulfuric acid concentrations pose to health, there remains
uncertainty  as to the concentrations of sulfuric acid in the atmosphere
which would pose a threat to public health.  However, limited test results
indicated that the risk was sufficient to warrant suspension of the more
stringent HC and CO standards that could only be met by the Installation of
air pumps.  Air pumps would increase the levels of oxygen in the catalyst
and result in greater emission of sulfuric acid.  By retaining the national

                                 69

-------
  interim  standards,  the Administrator concluded,  the  potential of a sulfuric
  acid problem would  be considerably decreased.  Indications demonstrated that
  interim  standards could be met by some non-catalyst  cars and those using
  catalysts which would not necessitate air pumps.
      The March 1975 suspension decision announced EPA's intent to establish
  a sulfuric acid emission standard applicable to the  1979 model year.   EPA
  has worked closely with industry and held public meetings in relation to
  this goal.  Intensive study of emission data, catalyst technology,  and test
  procedures continues, and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for sulfuric  acid
 emissions is expected in mid-1976 (see Chapter IV),
      A new driving cycle closely resembling crowded  freeway conditions has
 been developed for measuring sulfate emissions.   Various  techniques for
 reduction of sulfate emissions from  catalysts such as a three-way catalyst
 and  sulfate traps  are being  explored,  as  well as  the  feasibility of gas
 desulfurization.   EPA also continues  to monitor  research  toward achieving
 standards for  regulated  pollutants without  the use of catalysts.
 Alternative Automotive Fuels
      EPA  has initiated investigations of  automotive fuel alternatives  to
 conventional gasoline and distillate fuels from petroleum.  Earlier investi-
 gations determined that methanol  from coal and distillate-like fuels from
 coal and  oil shale were the most  economically feasible  alternative fuels for
 the years 1980 to 2000.  In 1974, several programs were initiated to charac-
 terize the physical and engine operational properties of methanol  and
 gasoline-methanol blends; this work is continuing.
     In 1975 a program was initiated to evaluate the  potential  emissions from
engines using gasoline-like fuels derived from coal  and oil  shale.   Potential
emission?  to be considered include trace metals,  sulfur and  nitrogen
                                 70

-------
 compounds,  aldehydes,  particulates,  acids,  polycyclic organic matter,
 alcohols  and  odors,  both  from  the  fuel  itself and  from  its combustion
 products.
 Low  Emission  Vehicle Certification Board  (LEVCB)
      Section  212 of  the 1970 Amendments to  the Clean Air Act provides for a
 Low  Emission  Vehicle Certification Board  (LEVCB).  The  Board has the
 responsibility for certifying  vehicles which EPA has determined to have
 emissions substantially lower  than existing Federal standards.  If certified,
the vehicle qualifies for preferential purchase  at up to double  the market
value by agencies of the Federal Government.  The vehicle,  to be certified,
must meet all  the requirements  of some existing  class of vehicles  used  in
Federal service.   To date no candidate vehicle submitted has  accomplished
this.
      As the likelihood of achieving  the objectives envisioned by this section's
 drafters  is very small, the Administrator of EPA has recommended to the
 Subcommittee  on Environmental  Pollution, Committee on Public Works, U.S.
 Senate, that  the following alternatives be considered:  (1) eliminate
 section 212 from the Clean Air Act,or (2) substitute a less cumbersome pro-
 gram  than that set up under section  212--perhaps one simply authorizing funds
 for the General Services Administration and other Federal  agencies to cover
 the added costs of procuring electrically powered vehicles.
 Federal Clean Car Incentive Program  (FCCIP)
      The Federal  Clean Car Incentive Program was designed in 1971  to foster
 the development of new types of low-emission vehicles capable of meeting
statutory standards.  When the  program began, twenty proposals were received;
seven of these were accepted for more detailed study.  In May 1973 the
Advisory Committee on Alternative Automotive Power Systems  advised EPA  to
                                 71

-------
phase out the FCCIP.  Since that recommendation, no new candidates have been
accepted.  Of the seven candidates accepted for study, two vehicles entered
the testing phase.  The first candidate was rejected in 1974 because of
unacceptable emission degradation performance and the second was rejected in
May 1975 because of the failure to demonstrate compliance with FCCIP entry
requirements for NO  and fuel economy.
                   /\
Research and Development on Automotive Emissions
     On January 19, 1975, the President signed legislation creating the
Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA).  The bill included
the transfer of the research, development, and demonstration sections of
the Advanced Automotive Power Systems Program (AAPS) from the Environmental
Protection Agency to ERDA.   Assessment, monitoring, and low emission
vehicle certification activities of AAPS were retained by EPA to ensure that
EPA remained abreast of technical advances in the field.   The research and
development function of AAPS, however, is now coordinated by ERDA.
Transportation Control  Plans
     Progress has been  made in implementing all  of the transportation control
measures.  For example, motor vehicle emission inspection and maintenance
programs are being implemented in New Jersey, Cincinnati, Chicago,  and Los
Angeles, with other areas planning to begin programs this year.   Five
California cities as well as Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, Washington,
are developing parking  management plans.  Several  cities, such as
Philadelphia, are inaugurating new bus lanes to  provide better mass transit
service, while other cities, such as Newark and  Seattle,  are instituting
"parking freeze areas"  to discourage the use of  automobiles in center city
areas.   Still other cities, such as San Diego, are well  advanced toward full
                                72

-------
implementation of gasoline vapor recovery regulations.   In  areas  where
employer mass transit incentive regulations  are in effect,  numerous  large
industries have submitted information describing the company's  plans for
reducing single occupancy auto commuter trips by their  employees.
                                   73

-------
                  VI.   STATUS OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

STATIONARY SOURCE ENFORCEMENT
     The Clean Air Act amendments of 1970 approached the task of protecting
health and welfare from the effects of air pollution from stationary sources
in three key sections.
          0  §110, State Implementation Plans (SIPs) - which  provide
             for establishing state air pollution  limitations designed
             to achieve health related (primary  standards)  and welfare
             related  (secondary standards) air quality goals.
          0  §111. New Source Performance Standards  fNSPS)  -  which
             require  EPA to develop emission limitations  for  newly  con-
             structed  or modified major emitters,  based  on  best  available
             control  technology and cost;  these  standards are to be a
             major factor in the maintenance of  acceptable  air quality
             achieved  under section 110.   After  their promulgation,
             states are encouraged to  assume responsibility for  the
             enforcement of these  standards.
          0  §112, National  Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
             Pollutants  (NESHAPs)  - which  require EPA to develoo emission
             limitations  for especially  toxic pollutants for which air
             quality standards  cannot  be adequately established.   As
             under section  111,  states may request delegation of these
             standards.
                                    74

-------
     While the Act placed the primary responsibility for attainment and
maintenance of air quality standards upon the states, EPA's enforcement
authority was also greatly strengthened under the 1970 amendments.
Section 114 of the Act authorizes EPA to make inspections, require reports
and recordkeeping, and require sources to sample their emissions in order
to verify compliance with the emission limitations established above.
Section 113 of the Act authorizes EPA to actively enforce against sources
violating requirements established under sections 110, 111, 112, and 114
by issuing an order to comply or by commencing civil or criminal action.
     The Clean Air Act was further modified in 1974 with the addition of
section 119, "Energy-Related Authority," which defines EPA's role in the
implementation of the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act of
1974.  Under section 119, the Administrator is given the responsibility for
ensuring that attainment and maintenance of the ambient air quality stand-
ards is not endangered by any stationary fuel-burning source shifting from
oil to coal.  This is to be accomplished through specific conditions and
limitations laid out in a compliance schedule for each source prohibited
by the Federal Energy Administration from burning oil, and is to be enforced
via the powers in sections 113,  114,  and 119.
     In accordance with the intent of the Act, it is EPA's policy to defer
to state enforcement where effective progress is being made.  EPA enforce-
ment actions to ensure compliance with emission limitations established
under the State Implementation Plan are therefore undertaken to stimulate
or assist state enforcement programs, and states are encouraged to request
delegations of the enforcement of NESHAPs and NSPS.   Much of EPA's stationary
source air enforcement program to bolster state efforts is carried out through
the provision of technical and legal  assistance, provision of specialized
skills or expertise, special  contractual efforts, and control  agency grants.
                                    75

-------
     The effectiveness of EPA and state enforcement efforts under each of
the above sections of the Act over the past year is addressed separately
below.
§110, State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
     The Act established a stringent timetable for EPA and states to abate
air pollution.  In accordance with this schedule, EPA promulgated ambient
air quality standards on April 30, 1971, for five air pollutants:
particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide,
            -—•  '.
and photochemTcal oxidants.  Under the Act, the states then had just 9
months to develop comprehensive implementation plans (which included enforce-
able emission limitations) designed to achieve these ambient standards, and
EPA was allotted 4 months for the review and approval or disapproval of
these plans.  These deadlines were substantively met when EPA approved most
portions of the SIPs in May 1972.  With a few notable exceptions (e.g.,
sulfur oxide emission limitations in the State of Ohio), all states now have
fully enforceable  emission limitations affecting stationary sources.   The
Act allows 3 years from the date of state plan approval  for EPA and the
state to reduce pollution levels to the health-related ambient air quality
standards.  Except for portions of 16 states, where an extension of up to
2 years has been granted for one or more pollutants, these primary ambient
air quality standards were to be met by May 31, 1975.
     Of a total of 247 Air Quality Control  Regions (AQCRs), however, it is
currently estimated that 132 are not achieving primary standards for partic-
ulates, and 35 AQCRs are not attaining primary standards for sulfur oxides.
The reasons for non-attainment differ in each AQCR, but  the most common
causes, each contributing in varying amounts to air pollution problems,
                                    76

-------
 are:   non-compliance  by major and minor stationary sources, deficient SIPs,
 and  high  background levels of fugitive dust.  State and Federal programs
 have  faced  an  immense task in achieving compliance since there are estimated
 to be over  200,000 stationary sources subject to SIP emission standards.
 Approximately  20,000 of these sources 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 emitted
 by stationary  sources.  Accordingly, EPA and state enforcement programs
 have  focused through 1975 on ensuring compliance by this class of emitters
 in order  to have the greatest impact on pollution abatement.  From approval
 of most SIPs in May 1972 until May 1973, EPA and the states had investigated
 only  about 7,000 of these sources.   By January 1975,  19,175 of these major
 emitters  had been identified and investigated, and to date state and Federal
 programs have  located and inspected about 19,958 facilities, nearly all  of
 the estimated  20,000 major sources.
      As reported in the last review of EPA enforcement under the Clean.Air
Act,  only six enforcement actions had been taken against stationary sources
 in 1972.   In 1973, the number of EPA enforcement actions increased to 112,
and in 1974 EPA took 271  enforcement actions.   With  the addition of nearly
600 enforcement actions  to date, the cumulative number of actions  brought
now approaches 1,000.   A summary of these  actions, current through  June  1975,
is contained in the Appendix.  As shown  in the Appendix, state action for
many of these sources  has been stimulated  by EPA initiation of enforcement.
The actions also represent the results of  a  major effort on the part  of  EPA
to establish the compliance status  of sources  subject  to SIP emission limita-
tions.  In 1972 only about 100 compliance  investigations were  made under the
authority of section 114  of the  Act;  in  1973 the number of field actions
                                 77

-------
 Increased to 2,000; In 1974 about 3,600 such investigations were completed;
 and this year EPA completed over 6,000 field investigations.  This increase
 in enforcement activity was mirrored by the state enforcement programs,
 resulting in a great increase in the number of major sources brought into
 compliance.
     Of the 19,958 identified major sources mentioned above, a total of
 16,271 (82 percent) now comply with applicable emission limits or are meet-
 ing compliance schedules, an increase of almost 2,700 over the number known
 to comply a year ago.  Of the 16,271 in compliance, 14,826 are in final
 compliance with all requirements, and 1,445 are meeting increments in their
 compliance schedules.  About 6,500 major sources had yet to be identified
 or investigated at the beginning of 1974; as of October 1975, very few
 major sources are thought to remain outside state and EPA inventories, and
 1,200 of the identified major sources are the targets of EPA and state
 investigations to complete determinations of compliance status.  Some 2,460
 major sources (12 percent) are known to violate emission limitations or
 compliance schedules at the present time; these sources are the subject of
 current EPA and state case development programs.
     Despite this progress in SIP enforcement, several categories of major
 sources still pose large compliance problems, and the problems presented by
large  numbers of non-complying  "minor"  sources  (i.e.,  those emitting under
 100 tons/year of a pollutant) are just now beginning to be addressed.
 Although state and Federal agencies do not yet have adequate inventories of
minor air pollution sources, it is estimated that about 200,000 minor sources
 exist that are subject to SIP emission limitations, and that a large pro-
 portion of these are contributing to failures to attain the primary

-------
standards.  EPA and states are now assessing the reasons for non-attainment
In each AQCR where primary standards are not being met and will  in 1976
develop and begin to implement action plans based on these analyses.   These
action plans will establish priorities for enforcement efforts to achieve
the greatest improvements in air quality as quickly as possible by identi-
fying, on a source-by-source basis, those non-complying major and minor sources
that are contributing to non-attainment problems.  It is becoming evident,
as more major sources are brought into compliance, that although large
strides have been made in improving air quality, primary standards will not
be attained until vast numbers of smaller emitters comply with emission limits-
Although all the data are not yet collected and evaluated, it is likelvjtha.t   „
the analyses will identify 130,000 such sources as possible  targets for
enforcement attention.
     Several notable categories of major polluters, however, remain under
close scrutiny by states and EPA.  Nationwide programs are now being carried
out to bring about compliance as quickly as possible by coal-fired power
plants, iron and steel  manufacturing plants, and smelters.
Coal-Fired Power Plants - Control of emissions from power plants is essential
to the attainment of the health-related air quality standards for sulfur
oxides in many areas of the U.S.  As a class, coal-fired steam electric
plants emit about 60 percent of the total sulfur oxides produced by all
sources.  During the summer of 1973, it became increasingly apparent to EPA
that progress to meet applicable State-adopted sulfur oxide emission limi-
tations by this sector of industry was severely lagging.  New supplies of
low-sulfur-content coal, the favored approach to reducing sulfur oxide
emissions, were becoming increasingly scarce and utilities were extremely
reluctant to use flue gas desulfurization (FGD) systems (scrubbers) to
remove sulfur oxides from the stack after high-sulfur-content coal  has
                                    79

-------
  been  burned.  EPA held national public hearings in the fall of 1973 to
  review the status of power plant compliance with sulfur oxide emission
  limitations and to determine whether FGD offered an available control
  alternative to the use of cleaner fuels.  On the basis of testimony by
  utilities, FGD vendors, and other authorities on the subject, the hearing
  panel concluded that the basic technological  problems associated with FGD
  raised by the utilities had been solved or were within the scope of current
  engineering and that FGD could be applied at reasonable cost.
      In  light  of these  recommendations,  a special enforcement  program  for
 power plants was implemented  and significant  progress  has  been made  since the
 hearings.   Approximately 400  coal-fired  power plants  in the U.S.  (excluding
 Ohio)  together provide  about  150,000 megawatts  of generating capacity.  About
 three-quarters of these plants,  representing  only half of  the  generating
 capacity,  are  in final  compliance with applicable SIP requirements.  A total
 of  102 power plants with 73,795  megawatts of  coal-fired capacity currently is
 not  in compliance.  In addition, 46 plants in Ohio with a  combined generating
 capacity of 21,600 megawatts are not yet  covered by promulgated S02 regula-
 tions.  (Regulations have been proposed and public hearings are underway.)
 Ahout  40 of these 102 plants that are not meeting final SIP emission limita-
 tions  have firm plans for achieving compliance, leaving some 60 plants,
 totalling 45,339 megawatts of generating capacity, out of compliance and
 subjects of EPA enforcement actions—most of which will need substantial
 control (FGD or low-sulfur coal)  to achieve  compliance.
     Another measure of the effectiveness of EPA's power plant efforts  is  the
 rise in use of FGD control  devices.   As  of January  1976, 22 FGD installa-
tions were  in  operation  and  20 were  under construction.  An additional  67
                                   80

-------
units are in various stages of planning or consideration.   These  109
units represent slightly more than half of the coal-fired  capacity that
will need FGD systems by the end of 1980.   The number of units now on-line
has more than doubled — from 10 to 27 —  and three additional systems are
scheduled for startup in 1975.  EPA estimates that approximately 90,000
megawatts of coal-fired generating capacity will need to install these
systems by the end of 1980.
      Increasingly high  reliability factors  (in  the 80 to 90 percent range
and  up) are  being evidenced,  and  several companies have purchased systems
to  treat sludge  by-products from  nonregenerable scrubber systems.  In
addition to  the  three units anticipated to  be operable by the end of  1975,
11 more are  expected by the end of 1976 and  20  more by the end  of 1977,
bringing the total  number  of  on-line  systems to 62 by the end of 1977.  The
rest of the  units are scheduled for startup  between 1978 and  1983, and some
startup dates are unknown  because installation  is tied to the startup dates
of  new plants.
      Although much  progress has been  made,  full nationwide compliance by
coal-fired  power plants has not yet been achieved and much work remains.
Sulfur oxide emissions  from the remaining  large power plants  out of com-
pliance continue to have a major  impact on  achieving the primary ambient  air
quality standards.   Compliance  by power plants  therefore remains a high
priority for state  and  Federal  programs, and EPA  is continuing  to bring
pressure on this industry  to  comply.
Iron and Steel  Facilities - The iron and steel industry presents one of the
most difficult compliance problems confronting state and Federal air pol-
lution enforcement programs.  There are nearly 200 of these installations in
                                    81

-------
the United States which produce Iron and steel  or solely coke to be used in
the metallurgical industry.   Within these installations are a number of
major emitting processes, each of which presents tough technological problems
to control.  The complex nature of the industry has also made it difficult
for control agencies to establish the degree with which various processes
within the facility do or do not comply with applicable air pollution laws.
When iron and steel facilities are compared to all stationary installations
capable of emitting more than 100 tons/year of a pollutant, it is apparent
that abatement of air pollution in the steel industry is far behind that in
most other stationary sources.

                  Table VI-1.   COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR
                       STEEL PROCESSES VS ALL MAJOR
                         STATIONARY INSTALLATIONS


Sources
All major steel
processes (8/31/75)
All major stationary
installations
(9/30/75)


Number

1,177


19,958

Percent
complying

38


82

Percent in
violation

26


12
Percent
unknown
status

36


6
       As indicated in Table VI-1,  the  steel  industry  is  characterized  by
  less than half the degree of compliance of  all  other major  sources, more
  than double the violations, and a need  for  a  great deal  of  investigation
  of compliance status.   It is important  to note  that  in  this comparison the
  compliance status of individual processes within  steel  facilities  is  being
                                 82

-------
 compared  to  the  status  of  total  installations with major potential air pol-
 lution problems.   (The  source  of the  stationary  source compliance  figures
 is  the EPA formal  reporting  system  for  September 30,  1975;  under this
 system a  facility  having several  processes,  only one  of which  is in  viola-
 tion or of unknown status, must  be  classified as in violation  or unknown as
 a whole.)  Of a  total  of 1,177 such processes, 857 had been identified and
 investigated to  some extent  by EPA  and  states by the  end of August 1975.
 Of the 857 processes investigated,  449  (52 percent) were found to  comply
 with emission limitations  or compliance schedules; 301  (35  percent)  were in
 violation of the emission  limitations without schedules or  violating
 schedules to achieve compliance; and 107 (13 percent) were  under study by
EPA and state agencies to  determine  their compliance status. Of the  six
major steel processes addressed in this  summary,  by-product  coke batteries
were most often in violation  of applicable standards - reflecting a
national controversy over  the feasibility of controlling these  types  of
sources.
     To date, EPA has taken a total  of 54 enforcement  actions at 33 iron and
steel facilities  (32 notices  of violation, 18 enforcement orders, and 4
referrals to Justice Department for civil/criminal prosecution), up from 8
such actions in 1973 and 25 actions  in 1974.  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 involved in suits under  section 307,
            further enforcement action stayed.
                               83

-------
     Although much remains to be accomplished in bringing steel  mills and
coke plants into compliance, it is anticipated that the current enforcement
program will continue to yield results and that in 1976 most of the country's
iron and steel mills will be subjects of EPA enforcement actions leading to
firm compliance schedules.
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
compliance 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 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards  unless the smelters were controlled.  Regulations have been pro-
mulgated 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 develop-
ment program to hasten  the development of such technology.  The one regula-
tion 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 responding
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 operations in May 1975, pursuant
to a state order.
                                84

-------
     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 dead-
lines are, for the most part, now nearing compliance.
Summary  - In summary,  significant progress is being made in the enforcement
of SIP emission standards.  Most national average concentrations for the
five criteria pollutants show a general, but distinct, downward trend from
the 1960's into the 1970's, especially  in those areas having the worst
pollution problems.  However, much remains to be accomplished in the next
several years as enforcement efforts are concentrated on the remaining major
hard-core polluters and on the vast number of minor polluters across the
country.  While the health-related air  quality goals have not yet been
attained in many areas, the progress being made in enforcement of SIPs will
ensure attainment as quickly as possible.
§111, New Source Performance Standards  (NSPS)
     New source performance standards (NSPS) were first promulgated on
December 23, 1971, for five categories  of major emitters (steam electric
power plants, municipal incinerators, nitric and sulfuric acid plants, and
Portland cement plants).  A second group of NSPS covering an additional 7
source categories was promulgated on March 8, 1974.  NSPS for five categories
of the phosphate fertilizer industry were promulgated on August 6, 1975,
and NSPS for electric arc furnaces were promulgated on September 23, 1975.
NSPS for six other categories have been proposed and should be promulgated

                                   85

-------
 very soon.  As of October 1975, 246 sources have been found subject to
 promulgated provisions, and compliance levels of 89 percent have been
 achieved.
      Because these are primarily standards for new sources, relatively
 little enforcement activity has developed to date from their promulgation.
 However, sources starting up in 1976 are expected to result in a great
 increase in enforcement.  The importance of these standards as a means of
 maintaining the improving air quality will also increase in years to come.
 §112,  National  Emission Standards  for Hazardous  A1r Pollutants  (NESHAPs)
     On  April  6,  1973, EPA promulgated regulations  limiting emissions  from
 certain  sources of three air pollutants deemed  hazardous  to human health
 under  the Clean Air Act provisions  establishing  National  Emission Standards
 for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs).  The pollutants were asbestos, beryl•
 Hum,  and mercury,  and the regulations required  that  certain categories of
 sources  of these  pollutants  be  brought into compliance within 90  days, be
 shut down,  or be  placed on EPA-approved schedules bringing  them into com-
 pliance  by April  1975.   EPA  determined that only 620  of 13,000  potential
 sources  were actually  covered by the  regulations, and has to date brought
 95  percent  of these  sources  into compliance.
     NESHAPs provisions also cover two stationary, but temporary, sources
 of  asbestos:  spraying  of  asbestos  insulation and demolition of asbestos-
 containing  buildings.   EPA estimates  that at least 30,000 spraying and
 demolition  operations occur  each year.  Because  of the transitory nature of
 these sources,  enforcement at the Federal level  is difficult; the controls
 can  best  be imposed at  the state and  local levels.  Therefore,  EPA is
 making every effort to  delegate responsibility for these efforts to the
states.
                                    86

-------
 §119,  Energy-Related Authority
     The  Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act  (ESECA) of 1974
 was enacted to maximize scarce-fuel savings, consistent with existing
 commitments to protect and improve the environment.  Under ESECA, the
 Federal Energy Administration is empowered to prohibit the use of
 petroleum products and natural gas at power plants and other major fuel-
 burning installations in order to further the primary goal of fuel savings.
 In recognition of the increase in emissions which will result from conver-
 sions  to coal, EPA is provided an integral role in the ESECA process to
 ensure that primary standards are not exceeded while the FEA prohibition
 order  is in effect and to ensure expeditious compliance with applicable
 SIP requirements.  By December 1975, 74 generating units at 32 power
 plants had been issued prohibition orders, and EPA is now completing
 requisite analyses and drafting Federal Register proposals in order to
 certify to FEA the date on which FEA's orders become effective.
MOBILE SOURCE ENFORCEMENT
     The mobile source enforcement program is directed primarily toward
achieving compliance with vehicle emission standards and fuel  regulations
promulgated by EPA under provisions of the Clean Air Act.   Activities of the
program include preventing introduction of uncertified new domestic and
imported vehicles into commerce;  auditing certification procedures of domes-
tic and foreign automobile manufacturers; enforcing vehicle assembly line
emission test activity and the recall, warranty, and tampering provisions
of the Act;  developing and enforcing Federal  regulations on the availability
of regulated fuels;  and ensuring  compliance with mobile source aspects  of
the State Implementation Plans.

                                    87

-------
Certification and Surveillance Procedures
Inspection/Investigation Programs - Under section 206(c) of the Clean Air
Act, EPA is entrusted with enforcement of requirements for "new" motor
vehicles or engines --i.e., motor vehicles or engines which have not yet
been sold to the ultimate purchaser.
     Since January 1, 1975, mobile source enforcement personnel have con-
ducted 56 inspections of domestic and foreign motor vehicle manufacturers.
Such inspections include detailed audits of procedures and records, and
visual inspection of facilities and vehicles in order to determine whether
manufacturers are and have been acting in compliance with the Clean Air
Act and its regulations.
     A total of eight vehicle manufacturer.investigations have also been
conducted since January 1, 1975; some of these arose from the inspections.
These investigations consist of a search of vehicle manufacturer records
and documents and interrogation of individuals to determine whether viola-
tions of the Clean Air Act and its regulations have occurred.  Issuance
of orders for production of information pursuant to section 208 of the Act
frequently accompany such investigations, and such orders have recently
been expanded to include requiring the manufacturer to develop emission test
data where technical  violations may be accompanied by effects on emission
performance.   Since January 1, 1975, five section 208 letters have been
issued.
     Out of the eight investigations,  one case was referred to the
Department of Justice for enforcement  action.   That referral  dealt with
Chrysler Corporation's introduction into commerce of several  hundred
                                   88

-------
 vehicles  with  incorrect  emission  components.   Settlement  and  negotiation  is
 presently in progress  among EPA,  Chrysler and  Justice.  However,  litigation
 remains  an alternative.
Selective Enforcement Audit Program - A new part of the EPA Mobile Source
Enforcement program concerns the development of an assembly line test
program.   Called the Selective Enforcement Audit (SEA) program, this involves
the testing --  pursuant to an administrative order and in  accordance with  the
Federal Test Procedure -- of a statistically representative sample of pro-
duction vehicles from a specified configuration.  If non-conformity is
established, EPA may revoke the certificate of conformity.
     In December 1974,  EPA proposed regulations concerning the implementation
of the Selective Enforcement Audit program and conducted a public hearing
on the proposed regulations in July.
 Provisions  for  In-Use  Motor Vehicles
 Anti-Tampering  Program -  Section  203(a)(3) makes  it a prohibited  act  for  any
 manufacturer or dealer knowingly  to remove or  render  inoperative  a  vehicle's
 emission  control  system  after sale  of  the  vehicle  to  the  ultimate purchaser.
 Since  January  1,  1975, approximately 15  investigations  have been  conducted.
 Further,  the Regional  Offices responded  to many alleged violations  of the
 tampering prohibition  during the  same  period.   Three  cases were referred  to
 the  Department  of Justice for action.  Since January  1, 1975,  four tampering
 cases  have been successfully prosecuted,  resulting  in civil penalties
 totaling  $4,950.
 Recall Program - Section 207(c)  of  the Clean Air  Act  authorizes  EPA to
 order  recall of vehicles if they  do not  conform to emission standards.
                                   89

-------
 Approximately 185,768 vehicles  have  been  voluntarily  recalled  by  manu-
 facturers  for correction  of emission-related  problems.   EPA  is monitoring
 these recalls in  addition to two  recall campaigns  begun  in 1974 involving
 approximately 1 million vehicles.
      Since January  1975,  EPA has  conducted  22 investigations of possible
 recalls  and is currently  conducting  investigations  involving General Motors,
 Ford,  Chrysler, AMC,  Volvo,  Toyota,  and Volkswagen  of America for possible
 recalls.
 Warranties  and Aftermarket  Parts  Program  -  The warranty  provisions of the
 Clean  Air  Act are designed  to help assure that manufacturers develop and
 produce  vehicles that meet  emission  standards throughout their useful lives.
 The production warranty provision in section  207(a) of the Clean Air Act
 requires that the manufacturers warrant that  the vehicle or engine meets
 applicable  emission standards at the time of  sale, and is free from defects
 which, during the useful  life, may cause the  vehicle or engine to fail to
 comply with the emission  standards.  Although this provision has been in
 effect since  the 1972 model year, it has proved of little utility to con-
 sumers experiencing difficulties with their vehicle's emission control
 system.  The Agency believes that this is because consumers do not know with
 any precision what components and failures are covered by the section 207(a)
warranty and, when they do make claims, are unable to sustain the  burden
of establishing that the failure is indeed a defect causing the emissions
 to exceed Federal  standards, as section 207(a) is generally interpreted to
 require.   To overcome these difficulties and to make section  207(a)  useful
to consumers  with legitimate claims, the  Agency intends  ultimately  to
                                     90

-------
promulgate regulations defining the coverage of this  provision.   Major
activities since January 1, 1975, in support of this  long-range  goal  include
the development of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking.   To provide
technical support for this program, the relationship  of defective vehicle
components to emissions is being investigated under contract.   EPA also
continued to review owners' manuals to see that the section 207(a) warranty
is provided to consumers in language which adequately reflects the
statutory intent.
     The  performance warranty provision in section 207(b) of the Clean Air
Act, when implemented, will require that a manufacturer warrant that
properly  maintained and used vehicles and engines comply throughout their
useful lives with emission standards when in actual use.  This provision has
not been  implemented because of  the technical difficulty of identifying
relatively quick and inexpensive emission tests which "are reasonably
capable of being correlated" with the sophisticated test used on prototype
vehicles, as section 207(b) requires.  Major enforcement activities in this
area since January 1,  1975, Include the continued analysis of correlation
data to attempt  to identify correctable short tests and the response to a
Congressional  report recommending that section 207(b) be substantially
repealed.  This  response was provided to the House Small Business Sub-
committee on June 26,  1975, and  reiterated EPA's general support for section
207(b) as it is  presently written.
     In support  of the warranty  programs, and to protect against any possible
anti-competitive effects in the  automobile aftermarket, EPA has endorsed an
industry-led voluntary self-certification program for certain automotive
aftermarket parts.  The potential anti-competitive problems were the reason
                                    91

-------
  for  the House Report recommending substantial repeal of section 207(b),
  discussed  above.  Major efforts  in  this area  since  January  1,  1975,  include
  continued  supervision of  the  industry'-s efforts to  develop  performance
  standards  for emission-related parts; an Agency report summarizing the com-
  ments on the Federal Register Notice of November 14, 1974,  outlining the
  self-certification program; and the letting of a contract intended to
  investigate the relationship between parts and vehicle emissions.
  Imports Program - Sections 203(a)(l) and 203(b)(2) give EPA responsibility
  for enforcing compliance of imported motor vehicles with emission standards.
  In conjunction with the Bureau of Customs, EPA has monitored importation of
 an estimated 2 million commercial and privately owned vehicles since
 January 1,  1975.   Through  that program,  259 noncomplying vehicles imported
 under bond  have been modified pursuant to  administrative orders.   In
 addition,  71  nonconforming vehicles  have been exported  pursuant to adminis-
 trative  orders.   A total of 173 bond forfeitures  have been  assessed through
 Customs  for noncompliance  with the regulations.
      EPA has  conducted  26  investigations of alleged  illegal  importations.
 Two cases were  referred to Justice Department  for prosecution.
 Fuels  Enforcement  Program  -  EPA has  responsibility for enforcing  section
 211(c)(l) of  the Clean. Air Act relating to  the regulation of fuels  and fuel
 additives.  On January 10, 1973, EPA promulgated regulations requiring the
 general availability of unleaded gasoline by July 1,  1974, for use  in 1975
 and later model cars equipped with catalytic emission control systems.
     EPA has established a nationwide Fuels Enforcement Program for ensuring
 that affected retail outlets are in compliance with these regulations.  This
program entails sampling of the fuel  at retail outlets by Regional EPA
Field  Inspectors,  through  the use  of  a mobile  van test facility.
                                    92

-------
      From January 1  of this  year,  EPA has  conducted  approximately 18,500
 Inspections of service stations  to ensure  compliance with  the  unleaded
 fuel  regulations.  Approximately 15,000  gasoline  samples were  taken,  of
 which about 160 were found to  be contaminated with lead.   Approximately
 6900  minor violations were also  found during  this  period.  Because many of
      r.	
 the stations  contained multiple  violations, the number of  stations out of
 compliance is estimated at 3000.   Enforcement has  issued approximately 3500
 warnings  and  260 complaints, and has  collected close  to $31,000  in penalties
 during this period.
      Generally,  warnings are issued for minor violations,  and  penalties
 are assessed  for contamination,  deliberate violations, repeated  violations,
 and failure to  respond  to warnings.   The warning generally allows the
 violator  to come into compliance 1n a  reasonable time.  When a contamination
 is found,  a complaint is usually issued against both  the retailer and his
 supplier,  with each  given an opportunity to show that he is not  responsible.
 Inspection/Maintenance  and Transportation Control  Plans
      During the  past year, EPA has taken efforts to assure the implementa-
 tion  of state  Inspection/Maintenance programs.  Establishment of these
 programs will reduce emissions from vehicles in use and will  help assure
 that  National Ambient Air Quality Standards for carbon monoxide and photo-
 chemical oxidants are achieved in certain Air Quality Control Regions.
 During the  past year, EPA has issued eight notices of violation under
 section 113 for failing to implement Inspection/Maintenance programs.   Two
enforcement orders under section 113 of the Clean  Air Act  were  issued to
New York and Chicago.
                                 93

-------
      In relation to Transportation Control  Measures,  EPA has issued two
 Notices of Violation and two section 113 orders to Chicago,  13 notices  of
 violation and seven section 113 orders to the City of New York,  and 90
 Notices of Violation to employers  in New Jersey for failure  to implement
 employer carpool  control  measures.
      While Title  I  gives  EPA the authority  to ensure  enforcement of
 Transportation Control  Plans,  recent Circuit  Court decisions  relating to
 enforcement of Transportation  Control  Plans and Inspection/Maintenance  have
 taken opposing views  on the issue  of whether  EPA has  the  authority  to take
 enforcement actions  directed at governmental  bodies.  The courts  have,
 however,  unanimously  upheld EPA's  authority to  take enforcement  actions
 against  individual  sources.

 COMPLIANCE  BY  FEDERAL FACILITIES

     EPA's  policy on  Federal facilities, as expressed in Executive Order
 11752 (December 17, 1973),  is based  on the belief  that Federal facilities
 should provide leadership in the prevention, control,  and abatement of
 pollution by complying with substantive standards  and limitations of Federal,
 State, and  local laws, just as any person must comply with such standards
 and limitations.  To help facilitate compliance, certain responsibilities
of the Administrator and the heads  of Federal  agencies were established  by
the Executive Order.  The Administrator has three main duties with regard to
coordination and cooperation between Federal  agencies  and State and local
pollution control  agencies:
     1.   Issue regulations and guidelines to expedite  compliance.
     2.   Provide liaison to coordinate Federal  agency  action  with State
         and local  programs  for pollution control.
                                    94

-------
     3.  Mediate conflicts between Federal  agencies and State and local
       *>
         agencies in matters of compliance.
     The heads of Federal  agencies also have three main duties to assure
cooperation with the Administrator and State and local  agencies:
     1.  Comply with the regulations and guidelines issued by the Admini-
         strator.
     2.  Provide information to the Administrator and cooperate with the
         State and local agencies to help determine compliance with applica-
         ble standards.
     3.  Consult, when appropriate, with the Administrator and State and
         local agencies concerning the best techniques  for solving pollution
         problems.
     Although the Executive Order clearly expresses the policy that Federal
facilities are required to comply with substantive standards and limitations,
it also states that it is not the policy of the Executive Branch to require
Federal facilities to comply with State and local administrative procedures
with respect to pollution control.  This distinction between substantive
standards and procedural requirements is the main issue in two conflicting
court cases - Kentucky^ v.  Ruckelshaus in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals,
and Alabama v. Seeber in the Fifth Circuit.   In the earlier case, Kentucky
v. Ruckelshaus, the court held that Federal  facilities  were not compelled
to apply for State operating permits, as such permits were considered pro-
cedural rather than substantive requirements.  In so holding, the court
reasoned that subjection of Federal facilities to State and local permit
requirements was not intended by Congress in its plan to prevent and control
air pollution.
     The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Alabama v. Seeber, however,
reached a contrary decision.  In that case the Court relied on section 118
                                    95

-------
of the Clean Air Act to conclude that Congress did intend that Federal
facilities be required to obtain State permits by quoting language that
such facilities are subject to the same State requirements as any person.
The substantive/procedural distinction that was upheld in the Kentucky
case was rejected in this case, despite the existence of Executive Order
11752, which, according to the Court, cannot modify the Clean Air Act.
     Contrary to the Seeber case it remains the position of EPA to
continue to follow the policy guidance of Executive Order 11752, and the
opinion in the Kentucky v. Ruckelshaus case.  Since the parties in that
case have appealed to the Supreme Court, it is highly probable, especially
in the face of two conflicting Circuit Court decisions, that the case will
be heard soon.

Compliance through Federal Procurement Activities
Legal Authority and Background—Section 306, "Federal  Procurement," was
designed to utilize the Federal contract, grant and loan processes as a
means of encouraging compliance with the Clean Air Act.  Section 306(a)
prohibits  any Federal  agency from contracting to perform at any facility
giving rise to a criminal conviction under section 113 of the Act.  Section
306(c) empowers  the President to issue an Executive Order requiring each
Federal Agency to use the contract, grant, and loan processes to implement
these provisions of the Act and to set forth procedures, sanctions, penalties,
and such other provisions as the President determines necessary to carry
out the section.  Section 306(d) empowers  the President to exempt any
contract, loan or grant from the provisions of the section on the basis of
paramount national  interest.  This section is comparable to the language of
section 508 of the Federal Water Pollution Control  Act of 1972, as amended
(33 U.S.C.  1251 et seq).
                                      96

-------
     Executive Order 11602, issued under the  Clean  Air  Act  to  implement
section 306, was superseded by Executive Order 11738,  issued on  September  10,
1973.  The Order used the same language as E.O.  11602  but  made  its  provisions
applicable to both the Air and Water Acts.
     Section 5 of Executive Order 11738 requires the  Administrator  of
EPA to issue implementing rules and regulations.  Regulations implementing
the air requirements were promulgated in the Federal  Register on December 27,
1973 (40 CFR Part 15, 38 FR 35310).  On April 16,  1975,  EPA  promulgated
regulations to revise the previously promulgated air  regulations and to
incorporate appropriate provisions of sections 306 and 508 and Executive
Order 11738.  These regulations essentially repeat the requirements of
the  December 27, 1973, air regulations but make them  applicable to  both the
Air  and Water Acts.  The regulations provide for the  establishment  of a
List of Violating Facilities which will show those facilities ineligible
for  use in  a Federal contract, grant or loan.
     The most controversial issue  surrounding the regulations concerned
whether EPA had the legal authority to go beyond a Federal criminal convic-
tion as a  potential basis for  listing a facility.  Pursuant to section 306(c)
of the Clean Air Act and sections  1,4, 5, and  7 of the Executive Order,  EPA
has  such  authority.  Section  306(c) is independent of section 306(a) in that
it vests  broad  authority  in the  President to set forth "procedures, sanctions,
penalties,  and  other provisions	" to carry out the purposes of the section.
Section 306(a)  refers only  to  one,  "non-discretionary" basis for listing,
i.e.,  Federal-criminal  conviction,  and pertains only  to Government  contracts.
The  Executive  Order supports  this  interpretation.  Section 1 defines the broad
purposes  of Section 306,  i.e., "to assure that  each Federal   agency  ... shall
undertake procurement and  assistance activities in a  manner  that will  result
                                     97

-------
 in effective enforcement of the Air (and Water) Acts."  Section 5 directs
 the EPA Administrator "to issue rules and regulations as he deems necessary
 and appropriate to carry out the purposes of the Order."  Section 7 vests
 futher discretion in the Administrator to take "appropriate action" in
 cases of noncompliance.  Thus, EPA's reliance on section 306(c) of the Act
 and section 5 of the Executive Order in issuing its regulations indicates
 that the Administrator has exercised his discretion in going beyond the one
 "mandatory" basis for listing (Federal criminal conviction) in order to meet
 the goals of the Act.
 Description of Program—The program established in the regulations published
 on April 16, 1975, affects contract, grant and loan activities
 of all Federal agencies as of July 1, 1975.   It is facility-oriented, not
 company-oriented, so that only the specific facilities placed on the EPA
 list will be ineligible for use in a Federal contract, grant, or loan.
 Facilities will be listed upon a determination by EPA of continuing or
 recurring noncompliance with clean air (or water) standards.  However,
 Federal criminal convictions require an automatic listing.  When Federal
 criminal conviction is the basis for listing, removal will not occur until
 the Administrator certifies that the condition which gave rise to the con-
 viction has been completely corrected.  State and local  criminal convictions
 and Federal, state, or local civil adjudications or administrative findings
 that such facility is in noncompliance with clean air (or water) standards
also may serve as a basis for listing.   In those cases removal  from the
 list will not occur until EPA enters into an approved plan of compliance
which will  ensure that the condition which gave rise to  the listing will
be corrected.   In cases where a facility has been subject  to state or local
civil  adjudications or administrative findings, EPA shall  only  consider
listing at  the request of the Governor.
                                98

-------
     The program will  apply to any contract,  subcontract,  grant,  subgrant,
loan, or subloan in excess of $100,000 as  well  as  to  any contract of a
lesser amount involving a facility listed  on  the basis  of  a  Federal
criminal conviction.
     In order to ensure due process, no facility will be listed until its
representatives have been afforded an opportunity to confer and present
information to the Director, Office of Federal  Activities, EPA (this is
called  a Listing Proceeding).  If, in turn, a request to be removed from
the  list is denied, representatives of the facility will be afforded a
hearing before an EPA hearing officer with fair opportunity to present
evidence and to cross-examine.
     It must be emphasized that the program is  an  additional arm of the EPA
enforcement effort and is primarily designed to encourage  voluntary compliance
and  not to penalize a facility.
Implementation Within the Federal Establishment—Pursuant  to section 4  of
the  Executive Order, each Agency of the Executive Branch is obligated to
implement the listing program through its contract, grant, and loan activities
Implementation involves amending the Federal  Procurement Regulations (FPR),
the  Armed Services Procurement Regulations (ASPR), and any supplemental or
comparable regulations as well as close coordination with  EPA to ensure
that requirements of the program are fully carried out.  The ASPR, FPR
(which  guides civilian agencies), and NASA and ERDA procurement regulations
have been amended.  Also, agency grant and loan provisions have been amended.
     EPA will publish the List of Violating Facilities periodically in  the
Federal Register.  In addition, contact points  within each Federal agency have
been identified to receive EPA's List of Violating Facilities every time a
new  facility is added to ensure prompt implementation.
                               99

-------
     Under the contract provisions each bidder must certify when bidding on
a particular contract that he is not on EPA's List of Violating Facilities
and that he will promptly notify the contract officer of the receipt of any
communication that he is under consideration for listing.   If a particular
basis for listing has been identified against a facility but the facility
is not on the EPA list, the Director, Office of Federal  Activities, EPA,
may request that an award of a particular contract be withheld for a
period not exceeding 15 days pending completion of an investigation.
     It is also required that contractual provisions be inserted in every
non-exempt Federal contract.  The contractor must agree that no portion of
the work will be performed at a facility on the EPA list;  that he will
comply with the clean air (and water) standards issued prior to the contract
award and the requirements of records and inspection under the Air and Water
Acts; that he will use his best efforts to comply with clean air (and water)
standards where the facility has not been listed prior to  award; and that
the contractor will  insert these same requirements in any  non-exempt sub-
contract.  This last provision illustrates the reach of the program to
cover all sub-contractors.
     These same requirements have been inserted in agency  regulations
covering grants and loans.
     It is emphasized that the awarding agency must determine whether the
solicitation and contract provisions are being followed and that each agency
can assist in the effectiveness of the program by encouraging contractors
to comply  with clean air (and water) standards.   Also,  the head of each
agency has a responsibility to ensure that all officers  and employees of
his agency involved in the contract, grant, or loan process be familiar
with the regulations.  To further assist EPA in implementation, the head
of each agency has responsibility to promptly report to EPA any condition
in a facility which may involve noncompliance with air (or water) standards.
                                  100

-------
SUMMARY OF LITIGATION IN 1975
Transportation Control Plans
     By far the largest legal issue arising out of the extensive litigation
concerning transportation control plans has concerned the extent to which,
under the Clean Air Act and the Constitution, EPA may require states to
implement programs to reduce pollution from private vehicles using public
roads.
     One court has sustained EPA in full on this issue, reasoning that any
other approach would be impractical and that the states may Constitutionally
be regulated when they engage in activities affecting commerce.  Two others
have taken a different position, holding that an attempt to make a state
administer and enforce programs  to control pollution by its citizens is not
                                                  2
authorized by  the Act and may be unconstitutional.   Finally, a fourth case
has  held  that  EPA may compel such  implementation, but only  as to programs
very closely  related to  the  actual operation of  the  state-owned roads  them-
                                                                       3
 selves and  only  so  long  as  EPA does not compel the state  to legislate.
 With the circuits  in disagreement  on  the interpretation of  the  Clean Air
 Act as it pertains  to EPA's  authority, EPA has requested  the  Solicitor
 General to  appeal  the last  three decisions to  the  Supreme Court.
Lead Additives in Gasoline
     Petitions for  review were filed  by Ethyl Corporation and other
companies challenging EPA's  regulations providing for a 65  percent reduction
in  the use of  lead  additives in  gasoline by  1979 on  the ground  that lead
emissions from motor vehicles endanger public health.  On December 20, 1974,
a panel  of  the  District of  Columbia  Court of Appeals set aside the
regulations in a 2-1  decision holding that EPA had misconstrued the
                                   101

-------
"endangennent" test of section 211 of the Clean Air Act and that the evidence
did not show a hazard to health.   On March 17, 1975, the full  Court voted
6-3 to grant EPA's petition for rehearing en bane and vacated  the original
panel decision.  The case was reargued on May 30, 1975.  A decision is
                     4
expected at any time.
New Source Performance Standards
     The first final decision of  any of EPA's new source performance stand-
ards promulgated under section 111 of the Clean Air Act was issued in 1975.
That decision  upheld EPA's standards for Portland cement kilns and the
economic and technical analysis supporting those standards.  In mid-December
the Supreme Court refused to review the lower court's decision.  Thus, EPA's
basic approach to new source performance standards has been approved.
Variances
      In the only Supreme Court decision to interpret the Clean Air Act
since the Sierra Club decision, the Court held that state-issued variances
may be treated by EPA as SIP revisions and do not have to satisfy the
rigorous requirements of section 110(f) unless the variance adversely impacts
attainment or maintenance of ambient air quality standards.  In addition to
upholding the Agency's position on variances, the decision is significant
because of its extensive discussion of other Clean Air Act matters.
Review of SIPs
      Several circuit courts decided cases involving the question whether
EPA must, as a prerequisite to approval of an SIP or revision thereof,
determine that 1t 1s economically and technologically feasible.  Two of
these cases were decided by the Third Circuit.   In both cases, the Court
                                    102

-------
reiterated  its original position that feasibility issues had to be
                                       8
addressed at the time of plan approval.   Moreover, this court held that
in the course of such review EPA must, among other things, assess the impact
of the plan on the profitability of the companies challenging the plan and,
should the Agency determine that a plan is infeasible, it must disapprove
it.  EPA has petitioned for Supreme Court review of both cases (St. Joe
Minerals vs EPA and Duquesne Light Company vs EPA), and has asked that the
court defer consideration of these cases pending a decision by the court
                           g
in the Union Electric case.
     The remaining courts to address the feasibility review issue arrived
at decisions contrary to Third Circuit.   One held that challenge to the
feasibility of a plan may be raised at the state level during the develop-
ment of a plan or in Federal (or state)  court at the time the plan is
being enforced,  but not in Federal  court at the time the plan is being
approved.   Another court ruled that EPA cannot consider anything other
than the eight requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the Act at the time
                   9
it approves a plan.     A third decision  stated that disputes involving
technical infeasibility are to be resolved at the State level.^
Dispersion Technology vs Constant Controls
     In a significant decision,  the Sixth  Circuit aligned itself with  the
             12
Fifth Circuit   and, citing Train vs NRDC  et a!., supra,  for authority,  held
that dispersion  technology such as  tall  stacks or intermittent controls may
not be utilized  to meet emission limitations unless constant controls  such
as scrubbers are demonstrated  to be unavailable.13  A similar decision was
recently reached by the Ninth  Circuit.14
                                   103

-------
Enforcement

     In a recent decision, the Third Circuit has held that grand jury pro-

ceedings convened by the Federal government to investigate possible criminal

violations of the Clean Air Act may not be interrupted solely because the

source in question is challenging the feasibility of the subject regulations
                                                        15
in a civil contempt proceeding at the state court level.    This case tends

to confirm statements in prior court decisions indicating that state and

Federal enforcement actions may be simultaneously brought against a

polluter.


REFERENCES


1.  Pennsylvania vs EPA. 500 F.2d.  246 (3d. Cir. 1974).

2.  Brown vs EPA. 9th. Cir. No. 73-3306 (decided August 15, 1975);
    State of Maryland vs EPA. 4th Cir. No. 74-1007 (decided September
    19, 1975).

3.  District of Columbia vs Train, D.C.  Cir. No. 74-1013 (decided
    October 28, 1975).

4.  Ethyl Corporation ys EPA, No. 73-2205 and related cases (D.C. Cir.,
    filed December 6, 1973; reargued May 30, 1975.

5.  Portland Cement Association vs EPA. 513 F.2d 506 (D.C.  Cir.  1975).

6.  NRDC vs Train, 421 U.S. 60 (1975).

7.  St. Joe Minerals vs EPA. 508 F.2d 743 (CA 3, 1975) and  Duquesne Light
    Company et al.. No.  72-1542 (opinion issued August 21,  1975).

8.  Duquesne Light Company et al. vs EPA. 481 F.2d  1  (CA 3, 1973).

9.  Union Electric Company vs.  EPA.  515 F.2d 206 (CA 8,  1975); petition
    for certiorari granted October 6, 1975.

10.  Indiana & Michigan Electric Company et al.  vs EPA, 509  F.2d  839
    (CA 7, 1975).

11.  Buckeye Power Company et al.  vs  EPA. No.  72-1513 (.CA 6  opinion  issued
    October 24,  1975) (relying  on Trafn" vs NRDC supra).

12.  NRDC et al.  vs EPA.  489 F.2d 390 (CA 5,  1974).
                                  104

-------
13.   Big Rivers et alI.  vs  EPA and  TVA  vs  EPA,  8  ERC  1092, Nos. 74-2015
     and 74-2020 (opinion  issued September  4,  1975).

14.   Kennecott Copper Corp.  vs Train,  No. 75-1335  (CA  9, opinion  issued
     November 28, 1975).

15.   In Re:  Grand Jury Proceedings, Nos. 75-1450  and  75-1456  (CA 3,
     opinion issued September 3, 1975).
                                   105

-------
         VII.  STATUS OF AIR MONITORING AND TRENDS IN AIR QUALITY

     The state air pollution control agencies have been delegated the
responsibility to install adequate air monitoring networks for criteria
pollutants (those pollutants for which ambient air quality standards have
been set) as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) process.  EPA bases
its assessments of national  air quality to a major extent on the data sub-
mitted from these networks.   The states submit their data to EPA's data
storage and retrieval system.  Summaries are then compiled of both the
status of air quality with respect to Federal standards and the current
scope of the composite national monitoring effort.  In addition, companion
computer files of data on point source and area emissions, plus meteorologi-
cal data, afford researchers within EPA and outside a sophisticated tool  for
investigating these complex  influences on air quality.
     Before the formal status of compliance with a standard can be deter-
mined for an Air Quality Control  Region (AQCR), a reasonable history of data
(at least one year) must be  compiled from a representative network of moni-
tors.  A single station reporting a second high value over the short-term
standard is sufficient to document a violation of that standard; similarly,
a single station reporting an annual average of values that exceeds the
annual standard is enough to document a violation of that standard.   Compli-
ance must usually be demonstrated by more extensive evidence from a
                                  106

-------
multi-station network.  The target date for completing these networks was,
in most cases, July 1974.  Table VII-1 summarizes the progress made by the
states through 1974 in completing the networks proposed in their SIPs.  The
number of AQCRs reporting violations of standards is summarized in Table
VI1-2.  (This number of AQCRs reporting violations is different from the
number of AQCRs listed in Chapter II as being unlikely to attain standards
by the statutory date because the assessment in Chapter II is based on a
number of factors, only one of which is air quality data.)
     The diagrams in Figures VII-1 through Vli-7 portray the distribution
of the AQCRs above and below each of the standards.   These analyses are
based on data from the station(s) in each AQCR that report the highest
second maximum daily value or highest annual mean.  Information on nitrogen
dioxide networks is not included 1n these tables and figures because the
Federal reference method has been rescinded, and N02 monitoring cannot be
required until a new method is designated.
     If a comparison were to be made with similar tables and figures in
last year's report (Progress in the Prevention and Control of Air Pollution
in 1974:  Report to Congress), it would appear that the number of AQCRs
violating standards for each pollutant has  increased this year.  However,
these AQCR totals are not yet a reliable measure of changes in air quality
because the coverage of monitoring networks is still  expanding and improving.
More stations reported data in 1974 than in 1973 (see Table VII-3); still
more can be expected when the 1975 summaries are complete.  It can also be
expected that some of these additional  stations may  reveal additional
violations in areas not previously monitored.
                                  107

-------
        Table VII-1.   NATIONAL SUMMARY OF AIR MONITORING
          STATIONS REPORTING 1974 DATA TO THE NATIONAL
             AEROMETRIC DATA BANK BY SEPTEMBER 1975
Air monitoring stations
No. proposed for 1974a
No. reporting minimum data
No. reporting valid annual data0
TSP
3,510
3,788
2,004
so2
2,132
2,241
1,030
CO
457
377
-
Ox
458
343
.-
aNumber of stations proposed by  states  in  their  SIPs  to  be  operating
 in 1974.

 At least  three 24-hour values for  intermittent  monitors or 400
 hourly values for continuous monitors.

cFour consecutive quarters  (a calendar year)  of  statistically valid
 data.
                            108

-------
           Table VII-2.  NATIONAL SUMMARY OF 1974 AQCR
           ATTAINMENT STATUS BY POLLUTANT, AS REPORTED
              TO THE NATIONAL AEROMETRIC DATA BANK
Air Quality Control
Regions (AQCRs)a
No. reporting minimal data
No. exceeding 24-hour primary
standard0
No. exceeding annual primary
standard0
No. exceeding 1-hour standard0
No. exceeding 8-hour standardc
TSP
236
99
111
—
--
so2
210
22
11
—
--
CO
92
	
_ _
13
58
°x
86
	
_ _
76
—
aTotal  number of AQCRs = 247.

bAt least three 24-hour values for intermittent monitors  or  400 hourly
 values for continuous monitors.

 An AQCR must have all reported stations  showing no  violations  to be
 considered an "attainment AQCR."   If a single  station  in an AQCR
 reports a violation, the entire AQCR is  considered  a  "non-attainment
 AQCR."
                             109

-------
 Table VI1-3.  GROWTH IN NUMBER OF MONITORING
            INSTRUMENTS,a 1970-1974
Year
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
Parti cul ate
1283
2044
2975
3762
3788
SO?
403
729
1311
2008
2241
CO
73
133
191
299
377
Ox
51
82
162
265
343
aBased on stations reporting at least  minimal
 data to EPA; some are not yet reporting
 comprehensive data.
                   110

-------



•a
(0
-o
c
(O
•M
CO


0
(O
a:


2.
2.
1.
1.

1.

1.

1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
51-3
01-2
71-2
41-1

21-1

11-1

01-1
91-1
81-0
61-0
31-0
3 0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.7
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.3
15
16
ho
17
20
18
114
|9
|22
25
|45
|41
l«
24-hour Primary
Standar^
260 yg/m
                         Number of AQCRs
Figure VII - 1.  Distribution of AQCRs reporting second-high
             24-hour values for particulates (no data available
             for 11  AQCRs).
Ratio to Standard
>3.0
2.51-3.0
2.01-2.5
1.71-2.0
1.41-1.7
1.21-1.4
1.11-1.2
1.01-1.1
0.91-1.0
0.81-0.9
0.61-0.8
0.31-0.6
^0.3
i
H .
|12
|23
|28
|17
123
|28
|23
J25
111
3
Primary Annual
Mean Standard
75 yg/m
                         Number  of  AQCRs

Figure VII - 2. Distribution of AQCRs reporting maximum annual
             mean values for particulates (no data available for
             49 AQCRs).
                               Ill

-------
 $-
 (O
 t/>
 o
 to
ce.
•o
S-
na
T3
c:
2.51-3.
2.01-2.
1.61-2.
1.31-1
1.11-1,
1.01-1,
0.91-1.
0.81-0.
0.61-0.
0.31-0.
.0
.0
.5
.0
.6
.3
.1
.0
.9
.8
.6
.3
0
0
~^
h
J4
|s
12
_J7
4
h5
46 1
tf !1K






?4-





24-hour Primary
    Standard,,
    365 ug/m°
                              Number  of AQCRs
     Figure  VII  -  3.  Distribution of AQCRs reporting second-high
                  24-hour values for sulfur dioxide (no data available
                  for 37 AQCRs).
X3.0
2.01-3.0
1.71-2.0
1.41-1.7
1.21-1.4
1.11-1.2
1.01-1.1
0.91-1.0
0.81-0.9
0.61-0.8
0.31-0.6
-0.3
b
h
[i
J3
J2
0
]z
^
114
131
jEr 93






Primary Annual
Mean Standard
80 ug/m3
                             Number of AQCRs
    Figure  VII  -  4.   Distribution  of AQCRs  reporting maximum annual
                 mean values  for sulfur dioxide (no data available
                 for  92  AQCRs).
                                    112

-------
•o
(tJ
•0
C
00
o
o
(O
on
-o
ro
t3
C
fO
00
5
o
-l->
1.21-1.5
1.01-1.2
0.81-1.0
0.61-0.8
0.31-0.6
^0.3
Figure VI]
2.01-3.0
1.51-2.0
1.21-1.5
1.01-1.2
0.81-1.0
0.61-0.8
0.31-0.6
£0.3
_ 3
3
7
10
\7
|36

1-hour
40 rag/m
Number of AQCRS
[ - 5. Distribution of AQCRs reporting second-high
one-hour values for carbon monoxide (no data
available for 155 AQCRs).
6
10
16
16
10
10
10
8
8-hour
Standarc
10 mg/m3
Figure VII  -
            Number  of  AQCRs

6.  Distribution of AQCRs reporting second-high
8-hour values for carbon monoxide (no data available
for 157 AQCRs).
                  113

-------
IO
ID
C
ro
-M
to

o
rO
3.01-4.


2.01-3.


1.51-2.


1.21-1.


1.01-1.


0.81-1.


0.61-0.


0.31-0.


   <= 0.
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
8
6
3


10
9


Il3

8


19
17

r
i
1-hour
btanaarcu
160 pg/m
Figure VII -
                              Number of AQCRs
                  7.   Distribution of AQCRs reporting second high
                  1-hour values for oxldants (no data available for
                  161  AQCRs).
                                    114

-------
SUMMARY OF AMBIENT AIR QUALITY DATA
     The status of air quality in the United States in 1974 was in many
respects similar to that reported for 1973.  Approximately the same percentage
of  reporting stations are still exceeding air quality standards, with one
exception:  an evident decline in the proportion of stations exceeding the
8-hour carbon monoxide standard.
     All 247 AQCRs are required to be reporting at least one monitoring
station for total suspended particulate (TSP).  Of these, 198 AQCRs had at
least one sampler station reporting enough data to compute a yearly average
(four consecutive quarters of statistically valid data) for the primary
annual TSP standard.  Of the 2004 monitoring stations reporting a valid
year's data, 1537 (77 percent) reported values achieving the annual standard.
The 460 stations that had readings exceeding the standard were located in 111
of  the 198 AQCRs reporting data sufficient to compute a yearly average.
     All  but 11  AQCRs reported minimal   data for the  primary 24-hour TSP
standard.   Of the 3788 monitoring stations in these 236 AQCRs,  3462 (90  percent;
reported values  achieving the standard.   The 326 stations that  had readings
exceeding the standard were located in  99 of the 236  AQCRs submitting minimal
data.
     As with particulates, all 247 AQCRs are required to be operating at
least one sulfur dioxide (S02) monitoring station.   Of these, 155 AQCRs
reported a valid year's data for at least one station.  Of the 1030 monitoring
stations reporting a valid year's data, 999 (97 percent) reported values
achieving the primary annual S02 standard.  The 31  stations that reported
values exceeding the standard were located in 11 of the 155 AQCRs submitting
data sufficient to compute a yearly average.
*
 At least three 24-hour samples  from a  hi-vol  or  a  bubbler;  or  400  hourly
 values from a continuous monitor.
                                    115

-------
     All but 37 AQCRs reported minimal data for the primary 24-hour SCL  .
standard.  Of the 2241 reporting stations in these 210 AQCRs, 2142 (over 95
percent) reported  values achieving the standard.  The 99 stations that had read-
ings exceeding the standard were located in 22 of the 210 AQCRs submitting data.
     Carbon monoxide (CO) data were reported from 377 stations in 92 AQCRs.
(Not all AQCRs are required to have CO monitors.)  The 1-hour CO standard
was achieved by 350 stations (93 percent) in 13 AQCRs; the 8-hour CO standard
was achieved by 166 stations (44 percent) in 58 AQCRs.
     Oxidant/ozone (0 /Oz) data were reported from 343 stations in 86 AQCRs.
(Not all AQCRs are required to have Ov/0z monitors.)  The 1-hour standard
                                     /\
was achieved by 70 of those stations (20 percent) representing 76 AQCRs.
     Nitrogen dioxide (NOp) measurement methods are still being reviewed for
the purpose of redesignating a Federal reference method.   Valid annual data
for NOp were reported from 582 stations using methods that are deemed candi-
dates for the status of reference or equivalent methods.   These stations
are located in 101 AQCRs.  Only 18 stations in four AQCRs exceeded the
currently defined annual  standard for N0_.
     Although data reporting is improving, some difficulties persist in
acquiring or reporting a  full year's data for many monitoring stations.  This
situation continues to handicap the evaluation of the nation's air quality.
From the preceding paragraphs it can be deduced that of the 3788 TSP moni-
toring stations and 2241  SO  monitoring stations reporting minimal data in
1974, only 53 percent and 46 percent, respectively, reported data sufficiently
complete to permit calculating a valid annual mean.  This not only means that
the annual standards for these pollutants can only be evaluated at about half
the existing stations, but also that the incidence of 24-hour standard viola-
tions is inconclusive wherever the data record is incomplete.  Thus, expediting
the flow of data from the state and local monitoring agencies to EPA's national
data bank is being given increased emphasis.
                                    116

-------
TRENDS IN AIR QUALITY, 1970-1974



     Historical trends in air quality levels afford a convenient guide to



determining progress in the control of air pollution.  For some pollutants,



lack of historical data on a national basis limits the inferences that may



be made.  However, the recent expansion of air pollution monitoring networks



is providing data that will serve as a baseline for future trend assessment.



Currently, a good historical data base on the national level is available



for total suspended particulate and sulfur dioxide primarily in urbanized



areas.  For oxidant, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide, historical data



are limited and the geographical distribution is very sparse.   Therefore,



trends for these three pollutants are considered as a series of special



cases.  The present status of historical data reflects the evolution of air



pollution monitoring efforts.   For the most part, initial efforts were con-



centrated on the assessment of total suspended particulate and sulfur



dioxide in center city areas.



     Based on composite averages from 1096 sites, TSP levels have improved



from 1970 to 1974.  During this period, the composite annual average declined



from 80 to 66 jug/m .  This is  an overall decrease of 17 percent, or slightly



less than 5 percent per year.   This improvement was generally  reflected



throughout the nation but specific localities are still experiencing TSP



levels in excess of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.  The princi-



pal control problems are fugitive dust and urban background.  During this



period, the estimated reduction in particulate emissions was 29 percent.



     Sulfur dioxide levels have declined from an annual composite average



of 38 jjg/m  in 1970 to 26 jjg/m3 in 1974.  These averages are based on data



from 258 sites and represent an overall  decrease of 32 percent, or approxi-



mately 9 percent per year.  However, over 90 percent of these  sites are
                                   117

-------
 located  in urbanized areas and caution must be used in generalizing these
 results.  During this period, the decrease in estimated emissions was 8 per-
 cent.  The much greater reduction in ambient S02 levels may reflect the
 shift  in S02 emissions away from center city areas.  Thus, the overall
 decline  in S02 levels may be the combined result of emission reductions and
 redistribution of emission patterns.  The data for 1975 are expected to show
 some additional decline in S02 in response to the mid-1975 compliance
 deadline.
     Carbon monoxide trends in the few cities having historical data suggest
 general improvement.  This is consistent with the automobile emission reduc-
 tions during this period.   Data from the States of California, New Jersey,
 New York, and Washington show reductions in the percent of time the 8-hour
 CO standard is exceeded.  The peak hourly values have been relatively stable,
 but in the majority of urban areas the 8-hour standard is the more serious
 problem and this is where improvement is being shown.   Los Angeles and New
 Jersey monitoring data indicate that the percent of time the 8-hour CO
 standard was exceeded was  reduced by approximately 50 percent from 1970-1971
 to 1973-1974 (roughly 12 percent to 6 percent).   The State of Washington
 showed consistent progress during the 1971-1973 period.and New York State
 and San Francisco data showed that less than 0.5 percent of the 8-hour values
were above the standard.  On a national basis, the number of CO monitoring
 sites increased consistently during 1970-1974, with more  than  a 400  percent
 increase in 1974 over 1970 and a 25 percent increase in  1974 over 1973.
     Oxidant trends in California continue to show long-term improvement.
Data in the Los Angeles  and San  Francisco  areas  show  20  to 50  percent
 decreases in the number of times the 1-hour oxidant standard was  exceeded.
 However, an important characteristic of the oxidant problem is the recognition
                                   118

-------
of the wide spatial distribution of high oxidant levels.  Recent studies have
focused attention on oxidant as an area-wide phenomenon extending even  to
rural areas.  The number of oxidant or ozone monitors has increased nationally
by almost 600 percent between 1970 and 1974 with a 30 percent increase
in 1974 over 1973.  As these sites continue to report data, it will become
possible to examine oxidant trends on a much broader basis.
     Measurements of oxidants at rural stations from Ohio into Maryland and
Pennsylvania through the summer of 1974 have confirmed earlier reports of
high oxidant concentrations remote from urban areas.  The history of air
masses, plus the presence of distinctive man-made pollutants in the air
masses, strongly suggests that the observed oxidant concentrations are the
product of man-made ingredients received by the air masses in passing over
an urban area.  These ingredients continue to react, forming photochemical
oxidants, as the air masses move across the countryside.
     Nitroqen oxide emissions have increased nationally since 1970 and
upward trends in N02 have been seen in Los Angeles and Philadelphia.  Because
of recent changes in measurement methodology for monitoring nitrogen dioxide,
very few areas have sufficient historical data to assess N02 trends during
the 1970-1974 period.  However, between 1973 and 1974, the number of stations
reporting a complete year of acceptable N0? data increased by almost 800
percent so that future reports should be able to more accurately assess
national trends in N02 levels.
     Nationwide estimates of pollutant emissions from 1970 through 1974 show
steady declines in the tonnages of particulates and carbon monoxide being
dumped into our air.   Emissions of sulfur oxides and hydrocarbons  evidence
only slight declines.  Nitrogen oxides show a slight increase in total
emissions.
                                   119

-------
MONITORING  IMPLICATIONS OF THE ENERGY SUPPLY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COORDINATION ACT  (ESECA)
      Fossil fuel-fired electric generating plants and other major fossil
fuel  users  are being encouraged, where feasible, to convert from oil or gas
to coal.  Adaptability of the equipment is, of course, an essential element
of this feasibility.  The Act provides that air quality in the area shall
also  be a guiding determinant of whether the fuel conversion should be made
and,  if so, the nature of the emission control equipment that may be
required.   EPA is requiring the owners or operators of those facilities that
are granted compliance extensions to install  sulfur dioxide monitors (and,
in some cases, monitors for TSP and sulfates) around such facilities and
to report the resulting data to EPA.  These data will  supplement the state
and local  monitoring network data in EPA's evaluations of compliance,  pro-
gress toward compliance,  and potential deterioration of air quality.
                                  120

-------
           VIII.   THE DEVELOPMENT OF INSTRUMENTATION  TO  MONITOR
                         EMISSIONS AND AIR QUALITY
      Methods  for the quantitative  detection  of  pollutants  in  air  are essen-
 tial  to EPA's  abatement  and  control  program.  Initially, methods  are needed
 to  determine  the extent  and  causes of a pollution problem  and to  investigate
 the health  and welfare effects of  the pollutants.  When standards are pro-
 mulgated, reference  or compliance  methods must  also be promulgated for
 determining achievement  and  maintenance of the  standards.  Furthermore,
 implementation plans  call  for determining ambient air quality levels and
 stationary  and mobile source emission levels.   For these applications, the
 methods  and associated devices employed must be low cost, reliable, and
 capable  of  unattended operation or use by relatively untrained personnel.
      In  the area of air quality measurements technology, the major problems
 relate to the  separation of particulate matter into fine and coarse frac-
 tions and a measurement of specific chemical  entities, such as sulfates,
 which are found  in the fine particle fraction.   Also,  research is  being car-
 ried out to provide measurement technology for  specific toxic  materials,
 such as  vinyl  chloride, nitrosamines, and  aerocarcinogens,  that  are  present
 in the air near sources of these  materials.   For source emissions, the  major
 problem is that of the proper interfacing  of  instruments with  the  source  to
allow  representative samples  to  reach the  instrument.   There is  also  the
time-consuming and expensive  problem  of  evaluation of  all relevant sources
                                   121

-------
 because interfering substances and conditions  vary from source to source.
 Source emission measurement technology has  advanced for many types of
 sources, but for other sources it is  still  in  a developmental  stage.
 MONITORING DEVELOPMENTS

 Source Emission Measurement
      Researchers made  further advances  in the  technology of  source emission
 measurement during  1975.   Research activities  concerning analytical tech-
 niques for use  in implementing stationary source emission standards included:
 (1)  developing  monitors for S02 (including  in  situ, extractive, and remote
 methods)  and  sulfuric  acid mist;  and  (2) evaluating previously developed in
 situ  and  remote  S02 monitors,  two  methods for  measuring  ammonia emissions,
 and  the  use of  a  transmissometer  as a particle mass monitor  for several
 source categories including  coal-fired power plants.  Other  significant
 advances  included developing  a  prototype transpiration probe for quantita-
 tive  sampling and preconditioning  of particle emissions; establishing the
 feasibility of a  portable  lidar instrument for remote measurement of plume
 opacity;  demonstrating  the use of  a new x-ray diffraction method as a rapid
 screening  technique for asbestos analysis; and designing and constructing
 a compact  x-ray analyzer for on-site monitoring of emissions of potentially
 hazardous  trace elements.
     Mobile source emission measurement research resulted in the development
of a colorimetric procedure to measure sulfate emissions from automobiles
and the automation of the procedure for routine use in testing 1975 produc-
tion vehicles.  The  procedure will be  used to implement  a forthcoming  sul-
fate emission standard.  Other research efforts deomonstrated that an  infrared
spectrometer based on  the gas filter correlation principle could  be used
                                   122

-------
effectively for analyzing several  gaseous pollutants (e.g., formaldehyde,
methane, CO, and CO.) in automotive exhausts.

Ambient Air Measurement
     Several important developments occurred during 1975 concerning instru-
ments and techniques to measure ambient air pollutants.   Researchers devel-
oped and field-tested a dichotomous sampler for particulate matter.  Sampler
operates on automatically programmed sampling periods of a few hours, and
segregates the collected particles into two size ranges--respirable and
non-respirable.  It also rejects very large particles, thus eliminating
the undue influence they exert on mass values.  The dichotomous sampler
overcomes the major shortomings of high-volume samplers, namely, the
inability to sample meaningfully for periods of less than 24 hours and to
discriminate fine particles.
     Two unique instruments have been developed and are presently in the
field-testing stage.  One is an instrument to measure vinyl chloride.
The instrument uses a detector operating on chemiluminescence principles
in combination with an automated gas chromatograph possessing the required
specificity and sensitivity for vinyl chloride.  The other instrument is a
device  to measure low levels of airborne sulfuric acid mist.  The device
captures droplets of mist on an inert filter, then conveys the collected
acid to a sensitive sulfur-specific detector.  It is capable of sampling
and analyzing cyclically every hour.

QUALITY CONTROL
     A  quality control strategy was adopted by the Environmental Protection
Agency  in February 1973.  Its goal is to improve and document the quality of
all environmental measurements, ensuring that data collected by EPA,
                                123

-------
contractors, or state and local  agencies have the highest validity.   The
program incorporates five major functions:   1) standardization of measure-
ment methods, 2) distribution of standard reference materials, 3) publica-
tion of procedures and guidelines, 4) evaluation of on-going monitoring
activities, and 5) training and technical assistance.
     Standard measurement methods have been established for all of the
regulated ambient air pollutants except  N02, and testing of systems  required
for measuring source emissions has progressed on schedule.  Respositories
of standard reference materials have been established.  A number of quality
control guidelines manuals are now available for air measurement.  Training
in the use of quality control guidelines and calibration standards is pro-
ceeding on schedule.  Inter-laboratory performance testing programs  have
been initiated for air pollutant measurements.  On-site evaluations  of all
EPA monitoring laboratories were initiated  in April 1974, and 10 Regional
laboratories have been evaluated.   Procedures are being developed to
evaluate any field monitoring laboratory, and the feasibility of a certi-
fication system for environmental  monitoring laboratories is under study.
                                    124

-------
           IX.  DEVELOPMENT OF NEW AND IMPROVED AIR POLLUTION
                  CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR STATIONARY SOURCES
     The development and demonstration of control  technology for stationary
source air pollution is one of EPA's largest tasks.   Approximately $58
million was devoted to this effort in Fiscal Year  1975.   These funds sup-
ported both on-going studies to demonstrate control  methods  for sulfur and
nitrogen oxides, particulates and other pollutants,  and  expanded programs
addressing the environmental aspects of accelerated  energy resource develop-
ment in the United States.
     EPA's goal  in stationary source air pollution control development is
fourfold:
          •  To describe at least one method for control  of  each
             major source of pollution;
          •  To provide a technical  base for the Agency's enforcement
             activities;
          •  To establish technical  and economic data to  support New
             Source Performance Standards (NSPS);  and
          •  To provide information  required to make environmentally
             sound decisions on energy development policy.
                                   125

-------
SULFUR OXIDES
     Much of the Agency's research and development effort in sulfur dioxide
(S02) control has been directed toward the demonstration of flue gas desul-
furization (FGD) technology.  This emphasis has been dictated by FGD's
economic feasibility and by its availability for near-term application as
compared to other S02 control options.  EPA has funded, either totally or
partially, a number of major projects over the past several  years.  Included
in these projects are the following large-scale, electric utility-oriented
projects:
          •  Pilot work (at Research Triangle Park, N.  C.) and
             prototype systems (at the TVA Shawnee Steam Plant)
             for development, demonstration and optimization of
             lime and limestone scrubbing technology.
          t  Magnesium oxide scrubbing demonstrations  at Boston
             Edison Company and Potomac Electric Power Company.
          0  Catalytic-oxidation scrubber demonstration at Illinois
             Power Company.
          0  Sodium sulfite/bisulfate scrubbing (Wellman-Lord
             Process) at Northern Indiana Public Service Company.
     Control  techniques suited for smaller industrial  and commercial combus-
tion sources  are being examined through full-scale test programs at a General
Motors Double Alkali installation and a U.S.  Air Force installation using the
Bahco lime scrubbing process.
     The major demonstration projects are supported and supplemented by
other full-scale testing, numerous engineering studies  and smaller-scale
hardware projects.   The commercial economics  of FGD by-product marketing
and disposal  options, and the evaluation of new processes and process
                               126

-------
improvements are the subjects of continuing engineering efforts.  A major



effort underway in technology transfer will promote use of the best and



most reliable techniques and equipment for future FGD installations.



     A second method of reducing sulfur oxide (SOX) emissions is to remove



sulfur and other contaminants from the fuel prior to combustion.  This pre-



treatment method of control is appropriate to SOV sources smaller than
                                                f\


electric utility size, e.g., boilers and fuel-burning equipment.  EPA is



supporting programs for research, development and environmental  assessment



of several approaches for removing pollutants from fuels.  One technique--



coal cleaning—involves methods of physically and/or chemically cleaning



coal of moderate sulfur content so that it can be burned in conformance with



clean air standards.   EPA's objectives in this area are to develop commer-



cially available processes for removing inorganic sulfur and ash from medium-



sulfur coal, while rendering the coal-cleaning wastes suitable for reclama-



tion or disposal in an environmentally acceptable manner.  Another EPA



program area involves clean synthetic fuels (high- and low-Btu gasified coal



and liquefied coal).   The major objectives are to determine the potential



environmental impacts of synthetic fuel processing, and to develop control



technology to minimize the negative effects of these environmental impacts.



     A third method for controlling SO  involves modification of the combus-
                                      A


tion process.  Fluidized bed combustion (FBC) is the primary approach under



consideration.   As part of the National Fluidized Bed Combustion Program



coordinated by the Energy Research and Development Agency (ERDA), EPA is con-



ducting research to determine potential environmental  problems arising from



alternative designs and uses of fluidized bed combustors.  EPA's participa-



tion in the interagency program consists of conducting environmental assess-



ments of FBC systems; optimizing control of S02, NOX,  fine particulates and






                                127

-------
other pollutants; and continued testing of EPA's small (0.63 megawatt)
FBC mini-pilot plant.
     In addition to combustion sources, industrial processes make a signif-
icant contribution to the ambient SOV problem.  An effort is underway to
                                    /\
evaluate and demonstrate SOV control by a commercial molecular sieve process
                           A
(PuraSiv S) on tail gases from sulfuric acid production.   The evaluation
shows that the molecular sieve process is capable of limiting the SOX con-
centration to 100 parts per million (ppm) in tail gases for most sulfuric
acid plants.  Work has also been initiated to identify alternative technol-
ogies for reducing petroleum refinery SO  emissions to 80-90 percent below
                                        /\
1974 levels.

NITROGEN OXIDES (NOJ
                   A
     Combustion modification is the primary existing control technique for
preventing or minimizing N0y emissions from fossil-fuel burning.  EPA-
supported and directed efforts have shown that recirculating flue gas is a
most effective technique for controlling NOX emissions originating from
thermal fixation of atmospheric nitrogen during the combustion of clean
fuels (natural gas and distillate oils).  Staged combustion (often combined
with low excess air) is a most effective method for controlling NOV emis-
                                                                  A
sions derived both from the thermal fixation of nitrogen  emissions in the
combustion air and from the conversion of nitrogen atoms  chemically bound
in the fuel (heavy oils and coal).   Additional EPA research and development
efforts are aimed at redesigning burner/combustor systems, investigating
novel combustion modification approaches (such as catalytic combustion,
advanced power cycles, and alternative fuels) for emission reduction, and
providing a basic understanding of the physical  and chemical factors
                                128

-------
influencing the formation and degradation of pollutants through fundamental



combustion research.



     NOX flue gas treatment (FGT) is a relatively new control  technique



under investigation for its potential  in accomplishing high-efficiency con-



trol of large stationary sources.  A program eventually leading to a demon-



stration of the technique on large coal-fired sources is in direct response



to increasing evidence that high-level control  may be required to meet



future NO  standards.
         X


      Finally,  in the  industrial  area, EPA is currently supporting a project



to  evaluate and demonstrate NO   control by a commercial molecular sieve pro-
                              ^


cess  (PuraSiv  N) on tail gases from nitric acid plants.  The evaluation



demonstrates that the molecular  sieve process is capable of economically



limiting NO  concentrations to at least 100 ppm, and quite possibly to 50
           X


ppm,  on tail gases from  absorbers in  nitric acid production.





PARTICULATES



      Control technology  for large particulates has been fairly well estab-



lished, and EPA's efforts  now are mainly concerned with development of



techniques for the control of fine  particulates  (defined as that  fraction



of  the  particulate emission smaller than 3 microns).  These small particles



remain  suspended in the  atmosphere  and>are easily respirable and  absorbable



by  the  body.   Fine particulates  may contain toxic trace metals and  sulfates,



i)0th  of which  have considerable  impact on health.  One current program seeks



to  better define the  physical and chemical character of fine particulates.




Control technology for fine particulates is still seriously deficient.  The



Agency's present efforts center  on developing adequate detection and measure-



ment  methods and on development  and field testing of control methods.  Addi-
                                   129

-------
 tionally, EPA is working to improve and demonstrate existing collection
 capability for fine particulate control and to identify and ultimately to
 demonstrate novel techniques which will offer both economic and performance
 advantages over current methods.

 OTHER POLLUTANTS
      "Other" pollutants are both  those pollutants  for which no  ambient air
 quality standards have been established and those  three pollutants  (asbestos,
 mercury, and beryllium) for which National  Emissions  Standards  for  Hazardous
 Air Pollutants (NESHAPs)  now exist.   Control  technology research  efforts  are
 underway for a number of  these  pollutants,  including  trace  metals,  polycyclic
 organic matter (POM)  and  miscellaneous  hydrocarbons,  fluorides, and odors.
      To assess the emission of  these   pollutants,  several tasks are being
 funded  for the field  testing of coal-fired  utility and industrial boilers,
 and for limited  source characterization of  gas- and oil-fired units.   A
 field testing program is  also planned  for residential  and commercial heating
 un i ts.
      Source  assessment has  also been started  for certain chemical processing
 industries.   The  objective  of this program  is  to assess  the environmental
 impact  of  sources  of  toxic  and  potentially  hazardous  emissions from the
 organic  materials,  inorganic materials,  combustion  and  open source categories
 and  to determine  the  need for control technology development for given source
 types.   Sources under  assessment  include petroleum  refining, acrylonitrile,
 asphalt  paving, solvent evaporation operations, rubber  and plastic processing,
 phthalic anhydride, polyvinyl chloride, glass manufacturing, barium  chemi-
 cals, fertilizer mixing plants,  brick kilns, lead  storage batteries, and
ammonium nitrate.
                                   130

-------
     Control  technology for the ferrous metallurgical  industries is under



extensive development.   Included in this area are emissions  from cokemaking,



sintering, iron-making  in the blast furnace,  and steel-making in the basic



oxygen furnace.   Additional programs are underway to assess  and characterize



fugitive emissions from integrated iron and steel plants and from the mining,



beneficiation and pelletization of iron ores.



     Efforts are underway to establish control techniques both for open



sources and for selected closed sources of asbestos.  The key sources include



mining, milling, and manufacturing sites; the latter source  tends to be
         ^


located predominantly in urban areas and thus substantially  increases human



exposures to asbestos.   The objectives here are to develop and demonstrate



control technology for handling, unloading, and disposal operations and,



in addition, to demonstrate a specific methodology for controlling closed



sources of asbestos in manufacturing operations.  Completed  programs include



a study to identify the sources of asbestos in the mining industry and a



project to identify the optimum operating mode for maximum efficiency of



baghouses for control of asbestos fibers.  This work is undertaken to



permit quantification of the existing  NESHAPs for asbestos,  thus allowing



control effectiveness of the standard  to be evaluated.



      EPA  is  continuing development  at  the pilot  plant level  for the following



sources:  glass manufacturing  plants,  asphalt roofing plants, ethylene



dichloride plants,  coating operations  for metal  cans, hydrocarbon  control



for  gasoline distribution  systems,  and odor  control for the  rendering  industry
                                   131

-------
                   X.  STATUS OF STATE, INTERSTATE, AND LOCAL
                       POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS ESTABLISHED
                           UNDER AND ASSISTED BY THIS ACT
     A primary role of the EPA and the EPA Regional  Offices has been to
continue to improve the partnership between the Federal  Government and the
state and local control programs responsible for administering the provi-
sions of the Clean Air Act.  The Clean Air Act of 1970,  as amended, in re-
quiring State Implementation Plans places emphasis on the responsibility-
sharing between the Federal, state, and local government units to achieve
effective control programs.  In 1975, 55 state and territorial agencies
and 236 local agencies, working in coordination with states, expended
approximately $148 million and 7000 man-years to carry out the major por-
tions of the regulatory and enforcement aspects of the national air pollution
control effort.
     In meeting the obligations imposed by the Clean Air Act, many state
agencies have continued to rely heavily on local expertise and resources.
Historically, Federal  support has been used to stimulate local agency growth
and to encourage a regional or statewide approach to air pollution control.
Tables X-l  and X-2 illustrate the extent of this Federal support to state
and local  agencies by organizational  location of the agency within the state
and local  governmental structures and by jurisdictional  areas served by
these agencies.
                                  132

-------
                 Table Xrl.   ORGANIZATIONAL LOCATION OF
        STATE AND LOCAL CONTROL AGENCIES  RECEIVING FEDERAL  FUNDS
                                 IN 1975
Principal
organization
type
Environmental
Health
Air pollution
Natural resources
Other
Total
State
Total
22
18
6
7
2
55
Number receiving
Federal funds
22
17
6
7
2
54
Local
Total
21
114
88
13
236
Number receiving
Federal funds
Direct
12
68
38
10
128
Indirect*3
1
19
14
34
aThrough specified provisions  in grants  to states
                                 133

-------
       Table X-2.  DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS BY JURISDICTION AREAS OF

                    STATE AND LOCAL CONTROL AGENCIES3
                      (ESTIMATED 1975 EXPENDITURES)
Jurisdictional
category
Local
Cities
Counties
Multi -county
Subtotal local
State0
Subtotal state
Total
Number of
agencies

44
91
27
162

54
216
Federal $

$ 5,900,000
10,400,000
3,100,000
19,400,000

33,200,000
$52,600,000
State/local $

$14,300,000
24,000,000
9,300,000
47,600,000

47,800,000
$95,400,000
Total

$ 20,200,000
34,400,000
12,400,000
67,000,000

81,000,000
$148,000,000
 Total number of agencies receiving Federal  monies for air pollution control
 work either directly or by designation in grant to state agency.   Direct
 grants approximate 182 for 1975.

blncludes agencies that are combination city-county agencies,  county agencies
that service large metropolitan areas, and city agencies serving more than
one county.  Many county agencies  cover a large metropolitan area;  for
example, Los Angeles County, California; Wayne County, Michigan (Detroit);
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh).

cStates include District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands and Guam.
American Samoa did not receive grant funds in 1975.
                              134

-------
FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCIES
     In 1975 EPA provided financial assistance to 54 state agencies (all
except American Samoa) and 128 local  agencies.  In addition,  34 local
agencies received Federal monies through specified provisions of state
grants.  The total expenditures of these 216 agencies represented approxi-
mately 96 percent of all  expenditures for the 291 agencies having some air
pollution control responsibilities.  The support provided to  the agencies
was in the form of grants for planning, developing, establishing, improving
or maintaining control programs.  This support also included  special  con-
tractual assistance and demonstration grants to assist the agencies in
meeting deadlines imposed for the submittal, revision, and preparation of
their implementation plans and for technical aspects of the enforcement and
revisions associated with the regulatory and monitoring provisions of the
local control strategies.  The Federal support provided to states for Fiscal
Years 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, and 1976 (estimated) is summarized in
Table X-3.

PROGRESS OF STATE AND LOCAL AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
     Total expenditures  (Federal, state, local) for the support of air pol-
lution have grown at an average annual rate of approximately 28 percent,
from $13 million  in Fiscal Year 1965  (FY 65) to an estimated $148 million
in FY 74.  The growth rate in FY 75 was approximately 14 percent over the
FY 74 level.
     The increase in the number of employees of state and local control
agencies is an indicator of the nation's growing commitment to controlling
air pollution.  Table .X-4 shows that control agency staff has tripled in
                                   135

-------
                           Table X-3.   SUMMARY OF FEDERAL SUPPORT3 TO STATE AND LOCAL

                                     AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCIES BY STATE
State or territory
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
FY 1972
$ 527,324
69,775
207,049
Arkansas 208,527
California
Colorado
3,690,260
900,784
Connecticut . 1,355,796
Delaware , 189
D. C. 225,000
Florida 885,741
Georgia 630,218
Hawaii 96,445
Idaho ! 81 ,687
1 1 1 i no i s
Indiana
2,423,520
826,034
FY 1973
$ 786,059
183,240
718,104
280,295
3,637,559
595,626
1,014,406
388,454
80,823
1,153,204
600,366
175,400
148,237
2,897,780
772,809
FY 1974
$1 443,312
165,100
658,761
407,000
3,611 ,240
646,333
1,240,972
256,069
334,134
924,493
684,250
189,435
205,100
2,914,358
1,183,822
FY 1975
Prel iminary
$1,286,686
162,623
590,408
355,716
4,205,275
625,374
1,671,935
327,500
340,000
949,491
757,031
131,749
227,051
3,172,853
1,073,245
FY 1976 .
Estimated
$1,000,000
190,000
640,000
365,000
4,230,000
700,000
1,300,000
300,000
220,000
1,400,000
800,000
150,000
265,000
3,400,000
1 ,250,000
oo
CT)

-------
                      Table  X-3 (continued).   SUMMARY  OF FEDERAL  SUPPORT3 TO STATE AND LOCAL
                                     AIR POLLUTION  CONTROL  AGENCIES BY STATE
State or territory
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
FY 1972
$ 559,243
335,761
159,028
175,000
-0-
987,000
794,385
1,613,510
365,669
421,724
717,574
231,460
231,929
245,702
185,409
FY 1973
$ 645,258
596,319
1,115,903
349,959
245,349
1,206,184
1,247,799
1,999,772
661,174
269,852
1 ,145,850
265,000
247,116
247,956
227,609
FY 1973
$ 579,780
476,293
953,267
807,200
106,000
1 ,365,901
1,116,982
1,999,424
674,098
392,875
1 ,090,698
326,000
408,642
293,311
172,546
FY 1975
Preliminary
$ 523,822
486,173
883,103
377,021
174,981
1,754,624
1 ,215,434
2,030,848
462,330
384,000
1,143,366
341,936
334,790
268,789
174,324
FY 1976 ,
Estimated
$ 675,000
575,000
900,000
500,000
200,000
1,300,000
1,200,000
2,100,000
1 ,250,000
450,000
1,120,000
400,000
385,000
290,000
200,000
OJ

-------
                       Table X-3 (continued).   SUMMARY OF FEDERAL SUPPORT3 TO STATE AND LOCAL

                                      AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCIES BY STATE
State or territory
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
FY 1972
$2,135,581
706,440
3,967,790
1,489,039
45,000
1,798,153
484,906
486,828
2,080,700
133,899
111,783
32,025
703,614
2,603,299
-0-
FY 1973
$1,837,292
302,543
4,748,350
1 ,157,038
61,950
2,450,000
481 ,408
567,060
2,559,125
197,117
773,546
32,000
1,165,570
2,789,526
164,100
FY 1973
$2,178,144
328,800
4,849,997
1,361,523
69,000
2,605,619
471,600
668,400
2,689,400
265,000
493,967
27,667
884,317
2,398,800
150,000
FY 1975
Preliminary
$2,314,964
510,500
4,926,479
1,403,056
84,000
2,581,495
520,437
651,296
3,026,440
202,026
567,364
113,826
1,135,232
2,600,908
153,780
FY 1976 .
Estimated
$2,550,000
590,000
4,750,000
1,750,000
100,000
2,600,000
590,000
720,000
3,195,000
235,000
600,000
80 ,000
1,150,000
3,000,000
250,000
to
co

-------
                       Table X-3  (continued).  SUMMARY OF FEDERAL SUPPORT3 TO STATE AND LOCAL
                                      AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCIES BY STATE
State or territory
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
American Samoa
Guam
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Subtotal
Special support0
Multi regional
projects
Total
FY 1972
$ 224,426
1,062,000
1,129,910
317,620
965,448
68,133
-0-
54,774
464,417
100,043
$40,317,581


$40,317,581
FY 1973
$ 173,669
1,005,674
1,209,263
586,935
883,700
88,824
-0-
-0-
691 ,552
72,806
$47,882,510
2,964,259

$50,846,769
FY 1974
150,000
991,381
1,083,400
700,470
824,170
100,000
-fl-
ee, 150
226,124
77,735
$49,289,060
2,915,999

$52,205,059
FY 1975
Preliminary
164,640
1,268,129
1,165,274
840,000
966,191
100,000
-0-
70,000
399,667
79,000
$52,277,182

340,043
$52,617,225
FY 1976 b
Estimated
230,000
1,260,000
1,100,000
450,000
1,050,000
120,000
-0-
70,000
350,000
50,000
$54,595,000

673,000.
$55*268,000
u>

-------
                        Table  X-3  (continued).  SUMMARY OF FEDERAL SUPPORT  TO STATE AND LOCAL
                                      AIR  POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCIES BY STATE
o
State or territory
Federal fiscal
year budget
FY 1972

FY 1973
$50,804,800
FY 1974
$51,518,000
FY 1975
Preliminary
$52,693,000
FY 1976 ,
Estimated
$55,268,000
aFederal support amounts are related to Federal  fiscal  year and include grants,  State Assignees,
 and special assistance (contracts, demonstration  grants).   For most  states,  dollars  do not relate
 to budgets for the state's fiscal  year.

"Estimated amounts for FY 76 include grants,  State Assignee,  and special  assistance monies
 (contractor assistance and demonstration  grants).   These  amounts are for planning  purposes
 only and each state's final amount will differ  and will be provided  the  individual state by
 the EPA Regional  Office.

cSpecial support monies shown for FYs 75 and  76  are multiregional/contractor  and demonstration
 grant assistance benefitting several states.  The majority of special  support monies for FYs 75
 and 76 (approximately $2.8 million) are shown within  the  appropriate state's total.   In FY 72
 special support funds were not considered as being part of control agency support  funds.

-------
         Table  X-4.   ESTIMATED  MAN-YEARS  OF  EFFORT  EMPLOYED  BY
            STATE  AND LOCAL  AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCIES3
Fiscal
year
1969
1971
1973
1974
1975C
State
Positions
1000
1540
2930
3970
4360
nan-
years
920b
1420b
2770
3490
3800
Local
Positions
1840
2630
3270
3270
3680
Man-
years
1660b
2370b
2870
3000
3200
Total state/local
Positions
2840b
4170b
6200
7240
8040
Man-
years
2580
3790
5640
6490
7000
 All  figures  involve  estimating  full-  and  part-time  positions  either  from
 manpower surveys  or  budgets  provided  in grant awards.

""Estimated from position  information using verified  man-year/position ratios
 from 1973 and  1974.

'1975 estimates based on  preliminary information.
                                   141

-------
 the  last six years.  The 1975 on-board positions represent approximately
 7000 equivalent full-time man-years of effort.
     Resources increased by approximately 500 man-years and $18 million
 between June 1974 and July 1975.  These increases were approximately the
 same as the previous year's.  Resources improved principally because state
 and  local funds increased approximately 20 percent ($17 million) over FY 74
 levels.  Federal support to these agencies increased by approximately 2
 percent ($1.6 million).
     The focus of Federal support to state and local  control  agencies has
 been on the achievement of State Implementation Plans and national priori-
 ties.  In FY 75 the agencies gave highest priority to the enforcement
 actions necessary for attaining total  suspended particulate and sulfur
 dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards and improvements to
monitoring networks required for continual  assessment of pollutant concen-
 trations.   The estimated percentage of resources committed to various
aspects of these national efforts to attain standards is shown in
Table X-5.
                                142

-------
    Table  X-5.   ESTIMATED  PERCENTAGE OF RESOURCES DEVOTED TO
      AIR  POLLUTION  CONTROL ACTIVITIES OF NATIONAL PRIORITY
          BY  STATE AND  LOCAL CONTROL AGENCIES  IN FY 75
              Activity
Estimated percentage
   of resources
Compliance with State Implementation Plan
  regulations

State Implementation Plan revisions and
  completion

Transportation Control  Plans and mobile
  source inspection and investigation

Air monitoring network operation and
  completion

Supportive tasks (management, data and
  policy review, environmental  impact
  statements, training, etc.)
         44


          6


          7


         18


         25



        100
                            143

-------
               XI.  REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
                PRESIDENT'S AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD

      The President's Air Quality Advisory Board was abolished on
January 5, 1975, under the provisions of the Public Advisory Committee
Act of 1972 and therefore there are no reports or recommendations to
report.
                                    144

-------
                                     APPENDIX.   SUMMARY OF EPA  ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
                                       SECTION  110 - STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
                                                JULY - DECEMBER  31,  1975
 STATE/CITY


 Alabama,
    Birmingham

 Alabama,
    Denopolis
 Alabama,
   Parish
Alabama,
   Wilsonville
Alabama,
   Bucks
Alabama,
   Gadsden
Alabama,
   Bridgeport


Alabama,
   Eufaula
Alabama,
   Scottsboro
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
 U.S. Gypsum


 Alabama Power Co.

 Power Plant

 Alabama Power Co.-Gorgas

 Power Plant

 Alabama Power Co.-B.C. Gaston

 Power Plant

 Alabama Power Co.-Barry

 Power Plant

Alabama Power Co.-Gadsden

 Power Plant

Tennessee Alloys/ferro-Alloys Corp.

Power Plant

A.P. Green Refineries

Bauxite Mining

Revere Copper £  Brass,  Inc.

Primary aluminum plant
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
 Particulate matter
 Particulate
 Particualte
Particulate
Particulate
Particulate
Particulate
Particulate
Particulate
TYPE OF ACTION


Consent order issued
8/9/75

NOV 11/5/75
                         NOV 11/5/75
                         NOV 11/5/75
                         NOV 11/5/75
                         NOV 11/5/75
                         NOV 11/21/75
                         NOV  12/8/75
                         NOV 1/12/75
NOV = Notice of violation.

-------
    STAIF/CITY
    2
    Alabama,
       Sheffield
    Alabama,
       Alexander
       City

    Alabama,
       Holt
    Alabama,
       Talladega


    Alabama,
       Sheffield
    Alabama,
       Axis
-
cr>  Alabama,
       Woodward
   Alabama,
       Fairfield
    Alabama,
       Tarrant
   Alabama,
       Bessemer
   Alabama,
      Leeds

   Alabama,
COMPANY/TYPE
CF SOURCE
Reynolds Metals Co.
Listerhill Reduction Plant
Primary Aluminum Plant

Russell Corp./Textile Mill

Industrial boilers

The Central Foundry

Gray Ircn Foundry

Newbury Mfg. Co.

Grey Ircn Foundry

Martin Industries

Gray Iron Foundry

Stauffer Chemical Co.

Sulfuric Acid Plant

Alabama Alloy, Inc.

ferro-alloy furnace

W.J. Bullock, Inc.

Non-ferros secondary smelting
(zinc, aluminum, etc.)

Clew Corp.

Gray Ircn Foundry  (Pipes)

Jones Foundry Co.

Gray Ircn Fcundry

Universal Atlas Cement, Div.
U.s.s.c./Portland cement Plant

AMOCO Chemicals Corp./Chem. Plant
POLLUTION PROBLEM


Participate


Particulate


Particulate


Particulate


Particulate


S02


Particulate


Particulate



Particulate


Particulate


Particulate


Particulate
TYPE OF ACTION



NOV 12/8/75



NOV 11/21/75



NOV 11/21/75


NOV 11/21/75



NOV 11/21/75



NOV 11/21/75



NOV 12/17/75



NOV 12/17/75




NOV 12/17/75



NOV 12/17/75



NOV 12/17/75


NOV 12/17/75

-------
 STATE/CITY
 3
 COMPANY/IYPE
 OF  SOURCE
   Decater


Alabama,
   Ragland
Alabama,
   Eufanla
Alabama,
   Mobile
Alaska
   Ketchinken

Arizona
   Kingman

   Aurora
 Industrial  incinerators

 National  Cement Co.

 Portland  cement plant

 Harbison-Walker Refractories

 Refract,  bricks

 International Paper Co,

 Pulp  e paper mill

 Herring Bay Lumber Co.
 Teepee burner

 Duval Corp.
 Mineral Park molybdenum
 concentrate roaster
Arizona
   Sahuarita

Arizona
   Scottsdale

Arizona
   Benson
Duval Sierrita Corp.
molybdenum concentrate roaster

Industrial Asphalt
hot mix plant

Apache Power Company
nitric acid plant
California
   Crockett

California
   Visalia

California
   Fresno

California
California and Hawaii Sugar Co.
char dust collection stacks

Stauffer Chemical Co.
whey drier

Johns -Manville Sales Corp.
reverbatory furnace stack

Atlantic Richfield Co.
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
Participate
                         NOV  12/17/75
Particulate
NOV 12/17/75
Particulate
                         NOV 12/31/75
particulate matter
order 9/24/75
violation opacity,
particulate matter and
sulfur compounds

compounds emission
stds.

Violation of particulate
matter std

violation of NSPS
test procedure

violation opacity,
open burning, and NOx
emission stds.

violation opacity std.
Admin, order  8/12/75
Admin, order 8/11/75
Admin, order 10/23/75
modification of order
violation of particulate
matter std.

violation of visible
emission std

violation of sulfur
NOV 8/12/75
Admin, order 9/30/75

Admin, order 9/3/75
NOV 10/2/75
Admin, order 12/16/75

Admin, order 10/28/75

-------
   STATE/CITY
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
     Carson
                    Watson Refinery
  California
     Long Beach
Edgington Oil Co.
oil storage tanks
  California
      Wilmington


  California
      Los Angeles
  Connecticut,
     Naugatuck

  Connecticut,
_,   Middletown
co
  Connecticut,
     Waterbury
  Connecticut,
     Croton

  Connecticut,
     Plainfield
  Delaware
     Wilmington

  District or
     Columbia

  Florida,
     Piney Poi^nt
Wilmington Liquid Bulk
Terminals, Inc.
oil storage tanks

City of Los Angeles Dept.
of Water and Power Haynes
steam plant and the Fuel
Cil Operations Marine Tank
Farm
Cil storage tanks

Oniroyal Chemical/Rubber
Reclaim Facility

Feldspar Corp.

Feldspar kiln

Waterbury Rolling Mills, Inc.

Metal casting facility

General Dynamics/solvent spray
operation

Pervel Industries

Casting ovens, rotary
process 6 screen printers

Delmarva P6L
utility boilers

GSA-West Heating plant/toilers


Borden Chemical
                                                                   POLLUTION  PROBLEM
                                                                                            TYPE OF ACTION
dioxide and particulate
matter std.

violation Federally
promulgated State new
source review regulation

violation of Federally
promulgated State new
source review regulation

violation of Federally
promulgated State new
source review regulation
NOV 11/21/75
NOV 12/12/75
NOV 12/30/75
Hydrocarbon mass
emi ssi on

Particulate mass
emission
Order 7/7/75
Amendment to Order 8/27/75

Order 8/27/75
Particulate mass
emission
order 8/20/75

Photochemical solvents
mass emission

Organic compounds
NOV 8/8/75
Amendment to 2/14/74


Order 12/30/75


NOV 11/17/75
particulate matter
mass emission

particulate mass
emission

SOX emissions
order 9/15/75
consent agreement 8/15/75
                                                                        consent order issued
                                                                        8/28/75

-------
STftTE/CITY
5
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
Florida,
   Tampa

Florida,
   Bartow

Florida,
   Pace
Florida,
   S. Pierce
Florida,
   Jacksonville
Florida,
   Titusville


Florida.
   Mulberry


Florida,
   Tampa


Florida,
   Ft. Lauderdale


Florida
   Plant City


Georgia,
   Jessup


Georgia,
   Riceboro
Kaiser Agricultural Chemicals


C.F. Industries, Inc.


Air Products C Chem.

Nitric Acid Plants

Agrico Chemical Co.

Sulfuric Acid Plants

C.I. Capps Co.

Gray Iron Cupola

Orlando Utilities Commission

Power Plant

Royster Company

Sulfuric Acid Plant

Tampa Municipal Incinerator

Incincerator

City of Ft. Lauderdale

Incinerator

Eorden Chemical

Defluronation Plant

ITT Rayonier
 3-power  boilers
 (back  fired)

Interstate Paper

 recovery  boiler
                                               POLLUTION PROBLP1
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
NOx emissions
SOX emissions
                                                                NOV
SO?
Participate
Particulate
Consent order  issued
9/8/75

Consent order  issued
11/1U/75
NOV  12/11/75


NOV  12/11/75



NOV  12/11/75


NOV  12/11/75
SO?
Particulate
NOV 17/11/75
NOV 12/11/75
Particulate
Particulate
Particulate
Particulates'
NOV 12/11/75


NOV 12/11/75



NOV 12/10/75



NOV 12/10/75

-------
     S"1A-IK/CITY
     6
                  COMPANY/TYPE
                  CF SOURCE
                                                                 POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                              TYPE OF ACTION
Oi
O
     Georgia,
        St.  Marys

     Georgia,
        Carrollton
    Georgia,
       Savannah
    Georgia,
       Sandersville
Guam
   Agana

Hawaii
   Wai pah u

Hawaii
   Honolulu
    Hawaii
       Ewa

    Hawaii
       Wainaku
    Idaho
       Priest  River

    Idaho
       McCall

    Idaho
 Gilman Paper
 1-power boiler
 (tack fired)

 Southwire Copper
 an ode furnace and
 copper connector

 National Gypsum

 7 Kettles,  rotary dryer

 Thiele Kaolin

 Spray dryer

 Guam  Power Authority
 Cabras Station  power  plant

 Oahu  Sugar Co.,  Ltd.
 bagasse  and oil-fired toiler

 Standard Oil Co. of California
 (Western Operations, Inc.)
 Hawaiian Refinery fluid Catalytic
Cracker Unit.

 Hawaiian western Steel Ltd
electric arc furnace

Hilo Coast Processing Co.
bagasse and oil firde boilers
                 Mearitt Brothers
                 Lumber Co.
                 Wigwam turner

                 Boise  Cascade
                 Wigwam burner

                 Pack River  Co.
                                                                Participate
                                                                Participate
                                                                Participate
                                                                Particulate
                                                                                          NOV  12/10/75
                                                                                         NOV  12/10/75
                                                                                         NOV  12/10/75
                                                                                         NOV 12/10/75
violation NSPS for power Admin, order  9/15/75
Plant                    Civil complaint  filed
                         1/21/76

Violation of particulate NOV 7/11/75
matter and V/E std       Admin, order  12/23/75

violation of particulate NOV 8/25/75
matter std.
                                                                violation of sulfur      Admin, order 10/30/75
                                                                emission std

                                                                violation of Federally   Admin, order 12/18/75
                                                                promulgated compliance
                                                                schedule and visible
                                                                emission standards
                                               V/E



                                               V/E


                                               V/E
                         consent order 8/7/75


                         NOV 9/11/75


                         order 9/15/75

-------
STATE/CITY
7
                 COMPANY/TYPE
                 CF SOURCE
   Osburn

Idaho
   Pocatello

Idaho
   Dun

Idaho
   Post Falls

Idaho
   Twin Falls

Idaho
   Kellogg

Illinois
   Chicago

Illinois
   Cahokia

Illinois
   Stickney

Illinois
   Sterling

Illinois
   Mascoutah

Illinois
   Chicago

Illinois
   Pekin

Illinois
   Peoria

Illinois
   Springfield
Wigwam Burner

FMC Corporation
Ore crusher

J.R. Simplot Co.
Nitric Acid Plant

Louisiana Pacific
Wigwam burner

Protein Processors
Animal Feed Mfg.

Bunker Hill Co.
lead & zinc smelter

Abitibi Corporation
painting process

Union Electric Co./Cahokia
Plant - power plant

Incinerator, Inc.
incinerator

Northwestern Steel 6 Wire Co.
electric arc furnaces

City of Mascoutah
municipal  power  plant

Abitibi Corp.
painting process

Commonwealth Edison
Powerton station f5

CILCO
Cuck Creek Power Stn.

City water.  Light  C  Power Dept.
City Generating Stn.  (toilers)
 Illinois
                  Commonwealth Edison
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF  ACTION
particulate matter


Failure to complete
NSPS Testing

particulate matter V/E   NOV 10/28/75
NOV 12/2U/75


consent order 10/1/75
NOV 10/1/75
particulate matter
particulate matter
(fugitive emission)

hydrocarbon
SOx
particulate
particulate
 particulate  & SOx
 hydrocarbon
 SOx
 NSPS for  SOx
 NSPS for SOx
                                                                 SOx
NOV 10/29/75


order 9/22/75


NOV 8/1/75


consent order  8/15/75


consent order  10/3/75


consent order  10/6/75


NOV 10/20/75


Consent order  10/22/75


NOV 10/28/75


NOV 10/30/75


NOV 11/13/74


NOV 11/26/75

-------
en
ro
    STATE/CITY
    d
   Chicago
    (Pekin)

Illinois
   Rochelle

.Illinois
   Peoria

Illinois
   East Peoria.
   Morton.
   Vansant

Indiana
   Terre Haute

Indiana
   East Chicago

Indiana
   Richmond

Indiana
   Crawfords-
   ville

Indiana
   Plainfield
    (Mt. Carmel)

Indiana
   East Chicago

Indiana
   East Chicago

Iowa
   Xiddletown
                 COMPANY/TYPE
                 OF .SOURCE
                     Powerton Gen. Stn. *6
                     City of Rochelle/Rochelle
                     Steam Plant - Coal fired boilers

                     Celotex
                     coal fired boilers

                     Caterpillar
                     Tractor
C.F. Industries
ammonium nitrate mfg.

Inland Steel/Indiana Harbor
Works

Johns-Mansville Corp. •
melting furnaces

Crawfordsville Electric
Light e Power Company


Public Service Co. of Indiana
Gibson Generating Stn.


Inland Steel Co.
EOF Shop

Inland Steel
coke batteries

Iowa Army Airmunicion
Plant (Eept. of Army)
                                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                         TYPE OF ACTION
    Iowa             Wilson 6 Co. Inc.
       Cdear Rapids
    Iowa
                     Gra-lron Foundry Corp.
particulate


particulate & SOx


SOx



particulate


particulate & V/E


particulate


particulate


NSPS for sox


partculate 6 V/E


particulate


particulate


particulate


particulate
NOV 12/10/75


MOV 12/22/75


NOV 10/7/75




consent order 8/4/75


consent order 9/12/75


consent order 10/22/75


NOV 10/28/75



NOV 11/19/75



NOV 12/12/75


NOV 12/22/75
Memorandum of
understanding  (MOD)
11/3/75

order 10/14/75
                                                                                             order 8/21/75

-------
STATE/CITY
9
Marshalltown
Iowa
Clinton
Iowa
Cedar Rapids
Iowa
Keokuk
Iowa
Davenport
Iowa
Marion
Iowa
Des Moines
Iowa
Charles City
Cedar Rapids
Iowa
Newton
Iowa
Centerville
Iowa
Centerville
Iowa
Dutuque
Iowa
Salix
Iowa
Sioux City
Iowa
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE

Hawkeye Chemical Co.
Penick 6 Ford, Ltd.
Midwest Carbide Corp.
Kelsey-Hayes, French
C Hect Division
Central Iowa Power Cooperative
Mid-American Dairymen, Inc.
. - spray dryer
White Farm Equipment Co.
Cargill, Inc. Blast Plant
Newton Foundry Co.
The Carter- Waters Corp.
L. Benac C Sons, Inc.
Interstate Power Co.
Iowa Public Service Co.
(George Neal Station)
launderville Construction Co.
McKee Buttons
POLLUTION PROBLEM

V/E
particulate
particulate 6 V/E
particulate
particulate
particulate/process wt.
particulate/process wt.
V/E
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
TYPE OF ACTION

order 8/22/75
order 8/1U/75 - 8/1/75
order 8/18/75
order 8/15/75
order 7/29/75
order 7/29/75
amended 7/30/75
order 8/7/75
order 8/7/75
order 8/1/75
order 8/1/75
order 7/31/75
order 8/1/75
Revised order 8/5/75
draft order 12/10/75
issued 1/76
order 12/23/75

-------
STATE/CITY
10
Miscati
Iowa
Mason City
Iowa
Independence
Iowa
Waterloo
Iowa
Muscatine
Iowa
Arlington
Iowa
Des Monies
Iowa
Durant
Iowa
Superior
Iowa
ilaquoketa
Kansas
Lawrence
Kansas
Fort Scott
Kansas
Independence
Kansas
Riverton
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE

Farmers Grain Dealers Asso.
Wapsie Valley Creamery Inc.
Bath Packing Co.
Grain Processing Corp.
Associated Milk
Producers, Inc.
Inland Mills Company
Busselloy Foundry
Superior Cooperative
Elevator Company
Clinton Engines Corp.
Cooperative Farm
Chemicals Assoc.
Tower Metals Products
Universal Atlas Cement
Empire-District Elec. Co.
POLLUTION P]

participate
participate
parti cul ate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
particulate
opacity
opacity
opacity
particulate
Kansas
   Pittsburgh

Kentucky,
Gulf Oil Chemicals Co.
American Standard
                                               particulate
                                                               particulate matter
                                                                                         TYPE OF ACTION




                                                                                         order 12/23/75


                                                                                         order 12/22/75


                                                                                         order 12/27/75


                                                                                         order 12/23/75


                                                                                         order 9/9/75


                                                                                         order 8/6/75


                                                                                         Revised order 11/17/75


                                                                                         order 8/1H/75


                                                                                         order 8/13/75


                                                                                         order 10/15/75


                                                                                         order 8/13/75


                                                                                         order 9/12/75
NOV 7/22/75
order 12/23/75

order 8/1/75
                                                                       Consent order  issued

-------
    STATE/CITY
    11
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOUHCE
       Louisville

    Kentucky,
       Louisville

    Kentucky,
       Louisville

    Kentucky,
       Louisville

    Kentucky,
       Louisville

    Kentucky,
       Louisville

    Kentucky,
       Louisville

    Kentucky,
       Louisville
en Kentucky,
       Louisville
   Kentucky,
       Louisville

   Kentucky,
       Louisville
   Kentucky,
      Louisville

   Louisiana
      Bastrop


   Louisiana
      Cotton
      Valley
Anderson Mood Products


B.F. Goodrich


Falls City Brewing Co.


Fawcett Printing Corp. ;


City of Louisville


International Harvester


Henry Vogt Machine co.


Louisville Gas 6 Electric Co.
(3 facilities)

Louisville Gas 6 Elec. Co.
Lan Run U, 5 6 6

General Electric Co.

Appliance Park

Louisville Gas £ Elec. Co.
Mill Creek Units 162

International Paper Co.
(Louisiana Mill)
wood pulping mill

Cotton Valley Solvents Co.
Truck loading facility
   Louisiana
                    Commercial Solvents Co.,
                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
Particulate matter
Participate matter
Particulate matter
Hydrocarbon emissions
Particulate natter
Hydrocarbon emissions
Particulate matter
3ulfur oxide emissions
11/5/75

S02
7/23/75

Consent order issued
8/29/75

Consent order issued
7/11/75

Consent order issued
8/29/75

Consent order i.ssued
8/29/75

Consent order issued
8/29/75

Consent order issued
1/23/75

Consent order issued
11/24/75

Consent order issued
                         NOV 9/29/75
Pt/Hc
NOV 12/9/75
S02
                         NOV 12/19/75
                         particulate, V/E
                         Order 12/12/75
Hydrocarbons
NOV 7/21/75
order 10/30/75
                                               particulate
                         NOV 7/31/75

-------
    STATE/CITY
    12
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
       Sterlington
    Louisiana
       Shreveport
    Louisiana
       Belle Chasse
    Louisiana
       Burnside

    Louisiana
       Franklin


    Louisiana
       Holden
__,  Louisiana
en     Lake Charles
Louisiana
   Belle Chasse

Louisiana
   Shreveport

Louisiana
   Baton Rouge


Louisiana
   Joyce

Louisiana
   Fisher
    Louisiana
       Bogalusa
Thermatomic Carbon, Co.
carbon black recovery dryers

Bird 6 son. Inc.
asphalt roofing process


Gulf Oil Co. - U.S.,
Alliance Refinery- sulfur
recovery unit incinerator

Crmet Corp.-
calcining kilns

Cities Services Oil Co.
Columbian Oiv.
landfill

U.S. Plywood Co., Division
of Champion International -
conical wood waste turner

Cities Services Oil Co.
(refinery) fluid catalytic cracking
unit regenerator-sulfuric acid

Chevron Chemical Co.
incinerators

Kroehler Mfg. Co.
wood waste boiler

Allied Chemical Corp.
Eaten Rouge Polyolefins Plant
Specialty Chemicals Division

Crown Zellerbach-Joyce Hood
Products Plant - wood waste boiler

Vancover Plywood Co.
Inc., softwood Lumber Div.
wood waste boiler

Crown Zellerbach Corp.
(Bogalusa Mill)
                                                                particulate,
                                                                fugitive dust
                                                                S02
                                                                particulate, process
                                                                wt.

                                                                particulate (open
                                                                burning)
                                                                particulate V/E
                                                                particulate, SO2
                                                                    particulate, SO2
                                                                    particulate V/E
                                                                    hydrocarbons
                                                                    particulate, V/E
                                                                    particulate, V/E
                                                                particulate, V/E
Termination of NOV
12/10/75

NOV 7/31/75
Termination of NOV
12/3/75

NOV 8/29/75
NOV 8/29/75


NOV 8/29/75



NOV 9/5/75



NOV 9/26/75



NOV 9/30/75


NOV 9/30/75


NOV 11/19/75



NOV 11/21/75


order 7/9/75



order ll/a/75

-------
   STATE/CITY
   13
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
   Louisiana
      Springhill


   Louisiana
      Bastrop


   Louisiana
      Larose

   Louisiana
      Florien
  Louisiana
     DeRider

  Louisiana
	,    Roanoke
on
 ' Louisiana
     Winnfield

  Maine,
     Winslow
  Maine,
     Jay
  Maine,
     Auburn
  Maine,
     Auburn
  Maine,
wood pulping mill

International Paper Co.
 (Springhill Mill}
wood pulping mill

International Paper Co.
 (Eastrop Mill)
wood pulping mill

Lafourche Parish Police
Jury-solid waste dump

Vancouver Plywood Co.,
Inc., Florien Plywood
Plant - conical wood waste
turner 6 sander dust turner

International Paper Co., wood treating
plant - conical wood waste burner

Roanoke Rice Coop
incinerator

Winnfield Veneer Co.
conical wood waste turner

Scott Paper Co.

Sulfite pulp mill

International Paper Co.
Androscoggin Mill/kraft

Recovery boiler

Androscoggin Foundry/Grey

Iron cupola

G.A. Peterson Co.

Asphalt batching operation

Premoid Corp.
particulate, V/E
particulate, V/E
particulate  (open
burning)

particulate V/E
particulate V/E


particulate V/E


particulate V/E


S02 mass emission
Particulate matter
mass emission
order 12/12/75
order 12/12/75
Termination of NOV
9/19/75

Termination of NOV
11/12/75
Termination of NOV
12/3/75

Termination of 'NOV
12/3/75

Termination of NOV
12/3/75

order
NOV 8/13/75
Order 11/5/75
Particulate matter mass  Order 11/17/75
emission


Particulate matter       NOV 12/15/75
mass emission & opacity
Particulate-mass
NOV 12/30/75

-------
 STATE/CITY
 14
 COMPANY/TYPE
 CF SOURCE
    Lincoln
 Maine.
    Woodland
 Maine,
    Millinocket
 Maine,
    Rumford
Maryland
   Baltimore

Maryland
   Dickerson

Massachusetts,
   Chelsea
Massachusetts,
   Canton

Massachusetts,
   Mattapan
Massachusetts,
   Newton
Massachusetts,
   Lowell
Ma s sa ch u se tts,
   Danvers
 Lime kiln

 Georgia-Pacific Corp.

 Woodland Div./boiler

 Great Northern Paper Co.

 Sludge incinerator 6 dryer

 Oxford Paper Co.

 Kraft Pulp Mill


 J.J.  Lacey Foundry


 PEPCO-Dickerson Station


 Texaco

 Gas loading  terndnal

 Plymouth  Rubber Co.


 Stedfast  Rubber Co.

 Spray  operation

 City of Newton

 Municipal incinerator

City of Lowell

Municipal Incinerator

GTE Sylvania

Spray paint operation
                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                          TYPE OF ACTION
                                                                 emission
 Participate mass
 emission
 Particulate mass
 emission
 NOV 10/3/75
 Order 12/16/75
 NOV 9/5/75
 Order 11/5/75
 Particulate emissions    NOV 7/7/75
                                                                particulate matter  mass   NOV 8/14/75
                                                                emission
 particulate mass
 emission

 Organic  material
 installation of  vapor
 recovery  system

 Particulate  V/E
Oraanic material
emission
 order 11/14/75


 Consent  order 7/9/75



 order  8/510/75


 NOV 8/7/75
Particulate mass
emission
                                                                                             7/21/75
                                                                                         Order 8/29/75
Particulate mass
emission

Organic material

mass emission.
irrler 7/28/75


NOV 6/26/75

Order 9/8/75

-------
     STATE/CITY
     15
 COMPANY/TYPE
 OF SOURCE
    Massachusetts,
       Lynn
    Massachusetts,
       Framingham
    Massachusetts,
       Lawrence
    Massachusetts,
       Winchester
    Massachusetts
       Quincy


    Massachusetts,
       Weymouth
en
 North  American  Philips  Lighting

 Corp./spray  paint  operation

 Dennison  Mfg. Co.

 Spray  Operation

 Maiden Mills

 Textiles

 City of Winchester

 Municipal incinerator

 General Dynamics

 Eoiler

 Town of Weymouth


 Municipal incinerator
    Massachusetts,
       Revere
    Massachusetts,
       Chelsea
    Mew Jersey,
       Little Falls

    Michigan
       Detroit

    Mississippi,
       Laural

    Mississippi,
       Louisville
Sun Oil Co.

Gas loading terminal

Gulf Oil Co.,

Gas loading terminal

North Jersey Foundry Co. Inc.
Detroit Public Lighting Dept.
Mistersky stn.

Masonite, Corp.
Louisville Asphalt Co.
                                                POLLUTION  PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
Organic material mass    NOV  6/26/75
emission                 Order 8/29/75


Organic material mass    Consent order 7/7/75
emission
Particulate mass
emission
order  9/26/75
Particulate mass
emission
NOV  10/2/75
Order 12/5/75
Particulate mass
emission
NOV 7/31/75
Order 10/30/75
Particulate emissions
Hydrocarbons
Order  7/7/75; civil action
instituted; consent
decree lodged

with court on 1/9/7

Consent order 6/13/75
Hydrocarbons
NOV 6/27/75
Particulate


particulate
                                                                        Consent order 8/22/75
NOV 9/16/75
                                               Particulate matter
                                               Failed to resoonrt to
                                               S114 request for
                         Consent order issued
                         12/12/75

                         Consent order issued
                         9/9/75

-------
 STATE/CITY
 16
 COMPANY/TYPE
 OKSOUKCt
 Mississippi,
    Gulfport
 Capital Asphalt Co
 Mississippi,
    Laurel

 Missouri
    Knob Noster

 Missouri
    Grandview

 Missouri
    North Kansas
    City

 Montana
    Bonner
Montana
   Missoula

Montana
   Great Falls

Nevada
   KcGill
 Masonite Corp.


 Whiteman Air Force Base
 (Dcpt of Air Force)

 Richards -  Gebaur  A.F.  Base
 Fry Roofing Co.
 U.S.  Plywood—Main  Boiler
 3  Dutch oven  boilers, veneer
 dryer

 Intermountain Company
 Hog fueled burner

 Superlite Products
 Rotary Kiln

 Kennecott Copper Corp., Nevada
 Mines Division copper smelter
New York,        Garden City Incinerator
   Garden City
New York,
   Lawrence


New York,
   Long Beach
Sanitary District

*1 incincerator

Long Beach Incinerator
                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                          TYPE OF ACTION
 process  &  emission
 information.

 Failed  to  respond  to
 3114  request  for
 process  and emis-
 sion  information

 Particulate matter
 particulate
                                                opacity
                                                particulate  V/E
                                                                         Consent order issued
                                                                         11/21/75
 NOV  6/19/75


 MOD  8/29/75


 MOD  8/14/75



 NOV  9/25/75
violation of both
particulate emission
std and visitle emission
NOV 8/5/75
violation of particulate NOV 8/5/75
emission std

violation of particulate NOV 9/12/75
emission std

violation of Federally   NOV 9/23/75
promulgated sulfur oxides
and particulate matter std.
Particulate


Particulate
Order 7/28/75
Amended 10/14/75

order 7/28/75
                                               Particulate
                                                                        Order 7/28/75

-------
STATE/CITY
17
COMPANY/TYPE
CF SOURCE
New York.
   Valley Stream

New Jersey,
   Irvington

New Jersey,
   Medford

New Jersey,
   Linden

New York,
   Green Island

New Jersey,
   Bogota

New Jersey,
   Jersey City

New Jersey,
   Newark

New York,
   Plum Island

New York,
   Buffalo

New York,
   Brooklyn

New York,
   Buffalo
Valley Stream Incinerator
Barnett Foundry £ Machine Co.
Lafferty Asphalt Co., Inc.
Public Service Elec. 6 Gas Co.
Bendix Corp.
Friction Mat'l Div.

Winston Mills
Woodward Metal Processing Corp.


Flockhart Foundry Co.


Plum Island Animal Disease
Center  (Dept. of Agriculture)

Buffalo Municipal Incinerator


Detecto Scales, Inc.


Conner Hanna Coke Corp.
New York,
   Freeport

New York,
   Utica

New York,
   Syracuse .
Freeport Incinerator
Dunlop Tire & Rubber
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                         TYPE OF ACTION
Particulate
Order 7/28/75
Particulate


NSPS-notif ication
performance tests

Opacity
NOV 7/8/75
Consent order 8/28/75

NOV & order 12/9/75
Consent order 7/18/75
NESHAPS-Asbestos
NOV & Order 7/28/75
Opaci ty
NOV 10/31/75
Particulate
Particulate  V/E
NOV 11/11/75


NOV 11/17/75
Particulate
Consent agreement 11/19/75
Particulate
Order 8/20/75
Hydrocarbons
Order 7/30/75
Failure to respond to    Order 8/20/75
Section 114 request for
information
Parti culate
Order 7/28/75
Particulate emissions    NOV 9/2/75
Sulfur content in fuel   NOV 7/31/75
particulate emissions

-------
    STATE/CITY
    13
COMPANV/TYPE
OF  SOURCE
    North Carolina,
       Lenoir

    North Carolina,
       Roxboro

    North Carolina,
       Goldsboro

    North Carolina,
       Moncure

    North Carolina
       Glen  Raven
    North  Carolina,
       Rockingham
_, North Carolina,
0}     Statesville
   North Carolina,
      Walnut Cove
   North Carolina,
      Whiteville
   North Carolina
      Aulander
   North Carolina,
      Aquadale
 Eernhardt Industries, Inc.


 Carolina Power 6 Light Co.
 Roxboro Plant Unit  63

 Carolina Power C Light Co.
 H.F. Lee Plant Unit #3

 Carolina Power & Light Co.
 Cape Fear Plant Units 3 & 4

 Glen Kaven Mills

 Tenter-frame

 Standard Coundry

 Cupola

 Troutman Foundry

 Cupola

 R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

 Tobacco Processing Line "A"

 Georgia-Pacific Corp.

 Eark Boiler

 Planters Paanuts

 Conical Burner

 Carolina Solite Corp.

 8 Rotary Kilns
   Ohio
      Cleveland.
Highland View Hospital
toilers
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
visible emissions

Particulate matter


Particulate


Particulate


Particulate


Visible emission
Consent order issued
8/28/75

NOV 11/21/75
NOV 11/21/75


NOV 11/21/75


NOV 11/21/75
Particulate
NOV 11/21/75
Particulate
NOV 11/21/75
Particulate
                         NOV 11/21/75
Particulate
NOV 11/21/75
Visible Emissions
NOV 11/21/75
Particulate & SO,
NOV 11/21/75
particulate
consent order 7/10/75

-------
     STAT £/CITY
     19
                 COMPANY/TYPE
                 OF SOURCE
                                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                         TYPE OF ACTION
cn
oo
Ohio
   Youngstown
Ohio
   Struthers
Ohio
   Hillsboro
Ohio
   Quincy
Ohio
   Philo
Ohio
   Painesville
Ohio
   Gypsum
Ohio
   Warren
Ohio
   Ironton
Ohio
   Mansfield
Ohio
   Portsmouth
Ohio
   Hamilton
Ohio
   Middleiiranch
Ohio
   Woodville
Ohio
   Lancaster.
                      Youngstown  Sheet  6 Tube
                      Eriar  Hill  Steel  Works
                      Youngstown  Sheet  6 Tute
                      Campbell  Steel Works
                      Emerson Electric
                     Bell  and Quincy Foundry

                     Ohio  Ferro Alloys
                     Corporation, submerged arc furnace
                     Uniroyal, Inc.

                     U.S.  Gypsum Co.

                     Copperveld Spec. Steel
                     Allied Chem/Semet-Solvay Div.
                     coke batteries
                     Ohio Brass Co.
                     Cupolas
                     Detroit Steel Corp/Empire-Detroit Steel Div.
                     open hearth furnaces
                     Gray Ircn Foundry Corporation
                     cupolas
                     Flintkote Co./Diamond Kosmos Cement Div.
                     cement kilns
                     Ohio Lime Co.
                     Loroco Industries
particulate and V/E

particulate and V/E

particulate and V/E

particulate and V/E

particulate and V/E

particulate

particulate

particulate

particulate £ V/E

particulate

particulate & V/E

particulate

particulate & V/E

particulate

particulate
consent order 7/25/75
consent order 7/25/75
                                                                                             consent order 7/23/75
consent order 7/23/75
consent order 7/31/75
order 7/7/75
order 7/7/75
                                                                                             order 7/7/75
NOV 8/6/75
consent order 8/6/75
order 8/11/75
consent order 8/11/75
consent order 8/11/75
                                                                                             order 7/8/75
                                                                                             order 10/9/75

-------
      STATF./CITY
                 CCMFANY/TYPE
                 C? SOURCE
                                                                      POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                               TYPE OF ACTION
Cfi
Ohio
   Steubenville

Ohio
   Middlebranch

Ohio
   Parma

Ohio
   Cuyahoga
   Heights
    (Cleveland)

Ohio
   Lima
    (Shawnee
   Township)

Ohio
   Cakhill

Ohio
   Cuyahoga

Ohio
   Gypsum

Ohio
   Warren

Ohio
   Cleveland

Ohio
   Painesville

Ohio
   Cleveland

Ohio
   Hillsboro
   6 Quincy
                       Federal Paperboard
                       Flintkote Co./Diamond Kosmos
                       cement kilns

                       City of Parma
                       refuse incinerator

                       Chemetron Corp./Ohio Chemical
                       Plant - boliers
                       Vistron Corp. /subs of SOHIO
                       urea prill tower
Victory Charcoal Inc.
beehive kilns

McGean Chemical Co.
boilers

U.S. Gypsum
                       Copperweld Steel


                       Highland View Hospital


                       City of Painesville
                       Municipal Light Plant (toilers)

                       City of Cleveland/Lake Road
                       Gen. Stn. Coal fired toilers

                       Emerson Electric
particulate


particulate 6 V/E


particulate


particulate



particulate



particulate


particulate


particulate


particulate


particulate


NSPS for SOx


particulate


particulate
order 10/15/75


consent order 9/5/75


order 9/5/75


consent order 9/8/75




consent order 9/16/75




NOV 9/25/75


NOV 9/25/75


NOV 7/7/75


NOV 7/7/75


NOV 7/10/75


NOV 11/21/75


NOV 12/10/75


NOV 7/23/75

-------
     STATE/CITY
     21
                      COMPANY/TYPE
                      CF SOURCE
en
     Ohio
        Struthers
        Youngtown

     Oregon
        Toledo

     Oregon
        Roseburg

     Oregon
        Springfield

     Oregon
        Portland

     Oregon
        Tillmook
Oregon
   Portland

Oregon
   Troutdale

Oregon
   Porcland

Oregon
   Portland

Oregon
   Dillard

Oregon
   Baker

Oregon
   Uines

Oregon
   Tillamook
                 Youngston Sheet 6 Tube Co.
                 Erien Hills 6 Campbell works
Georgia Pacific
Corporation pulp mill

S.O. Spencer fi Sons
Asphalt plant

Weyerhauser Co.
Lime Kilns

Nicolai Co.
Cyclones

Louisiana Pacific
Corp
Kigwam Eurner

Cargill Inc.
grain elevator

Reynold, Aluminum Co.
                      Louis Dreyfus Co.
                      grain elevator

                      Eunge Corporation
                      grain elevator

                      Permaneer Corporation
                      Particle board plant

                      Ellingson Lumber Co.
                      wigwam Waste Burner

                      Edward Hines Lumber
                      Hog Fuel toilers

                      Louisiana Pacific
                      wigwam burner
     Oregon
                      Nicolus Co.
                                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                         TYPE OF ACTION
                                               particulate
                                                                                              NOV 7/25/75
                                                                V/E


                                                                violation of NSPS
                                                                reporting

                                                                particulate matter


                                                                particulate matter


                                                                V/E
                                                                                         NOV 10/7/75
                         NOV 10/8/75
                         consent order 8/1/75
                         consent order 8/1/75
                         order 12/18/75
V/E


Opacity


Particulate matter


Particulate matter


Particulate matter
and opacity

particulate matter
V/E

particulate matter


V/E


particulate matter
Consent order 11/17/75


NOV 10/1/75


Consent order 11/26/75


order 9/26/75


NOV ll/U/75


order 11/4/75


NOV 9/22/75


NOV 11/10/75


consent order 8/1/75

-------
    STATE/CITY
    22
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
       Portland

    Oregon
       Springfield

    Oregon
       Valsetz

    Oregon
       Tigard

    Pennsylvania
       Templeton

    Pennsylvania
       Lebanon

    Pennsylvania
       Media

    Pennsylvania
       Marietta

01  Pennsylvania
O"1     Pittsburgh

    Pennsylvania
       Youngwood

    Pennsylvania
       Pittsburgh

    Pennsylvaina
       Monessen

    Pennsylvania
       Philadelphia

    Pennsylvdnia
       Avonmore

    Pennsylvania
       Newell
door manufacturing plant

Keyerhauser Co.
Draft Pulp Mill

Boise Cascade
hog fuel toilers

Western Foundry Co.
Iron £ Steel Foundry

Sharon Steel Corp.
Lebanon Chemical Corp.


Delaware County Dept. of Public
Works/municipal incinerator

U.S. Aluminum Corp.
Shenango Inc.
Steel facility

SwanJc/Dickerson/road construction
J.6 L. Steel Corp
wheeling-Pittsburgh steel Co.
Phila Heard of Education
toilers

General Steel Ind.
Allied Chemical Corp.
industrial Chemical Plant
particulate matter
particulate matter
particulate matter
consent order 8/1/75
consent order 8/1/75
consent order 8/1/75
failure to respond to    order 8/5/75
Section 114 request

Failure to respond to    order 8/1/75
Section 114 request

particulate matter mass  order 10/16/75
emission

particulate matter mass  NOV 7/7/75
emission                 order 12/75
particulate 6 SO2
particulate fugitive
dust

Particulate visible 6
SOx emission

Particulate visible 6
SOx emission

SOx sulfur content
particulate matter
mass emission

NSPS
NOV 7/3/75
NOV 7/22/75
order 9/19/75

order 10/8/75
                                                                        NOV 10/17/75
                         consent order 7/23/75
                                                                        order 7/31/75
                         order 7/21/75
   Pennsylvania
Metro Edison Co.
                                                                   particulate matter
                                                                        order 7/9/75

-------
STATE/CITY
.23
CC.VPANY/TYPE
CF SOURCE
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
   Middletown    Crawford Station
Pennsylvania
   Meadville

Pennsylvania
   Potter
   Township

Pennsylvania
   -Kermett
   Square

Pennsylvania
   Farrell
Pennsylvaaia
   Youngstown

Pennsylvania
   Palmerton
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania
   Butler Co.

Pennsylvania
   Meadville

Pennsylvania
   Chambers-
   burg

Pennsylvania
   Sinking
   Spring

Pennsylvania
   Elrama
Abex Corp.
Engineering products

ARCO Polymers
plastic production
NVF. CO.
Sharon Steel Corp.
Youngstown
Pneumatic Concrete
New Jersey Zinc
Penn DOT (1-95)
Armco Steel
electric arc furnace

Dayton Malleable Inc.
toiler

Eorough of Chambersturg
Electric Power plant utility boiler
Sinking Spring Foundry Co.
grey iron cupola
Duquesne Light Co.
Elrama Station/utility toiler
mass emission

particulate matter
mass emission

SOx mass emission
Failure to respond to
Section 114 reguest


Failure to respond to
Section 114 request
                                               visible emission
emission

visible emissions 6
particulates

particulate matter
fugitive
order 7/25/75
order 7/25/75
                                                                        order 8/5/75
order 8/5/75
                         NOV 7/11/75
                         Amend, order 9/15/75
Particulate 6 visible    NOV 12/16/75
NOV 7/11/75


consent order 10/29/75
particulate matter mass  consent order 10/3/75
emission

particulate matter mass  consent order 11/13/75
emission
particulate fugitives 6  consent order 11/28/75
opacity


particulte mass emission NOV 12/15/75
Pennsylvania     Aluminum Co. of America
                                               particulate mass
                         consent order 10/31/75

-------
    STATE/CITY
    24
                 COMPANY/TYPE
                 OF SOURCE
       Pittsburgh    toilers
cn
00
Pennsylvania
   Washington
   Co.

Puerto Rico,
   Bayamon

Puerto Rico,
   Catano

Puerto Rico,
   Guayanilla

Puerto Rico,
   San Juan

Puerto Rico,
   Catano

Puerto Rico,
   San Juan

Rhode Island,
   Providence
    Rhode Island,
       Providence
    South Carolina,
       Hartsville

    South Dakota
       Sapid City

    South Dakota
       Sturgis

    South Dakota
       Rapid City
                     Climax Molybdenum Co.
                     Herreschoff roaster


                     Betteroads Asphalt
                     Corp.  plant S3

                     Molinos de Puerto Rico,  Inc,
                     Puerto Rico Water Resources
                     Authority

                     San Juan Cement
Puerto Rico Glass


Carribean Gulf
Refining Corp.

Tivian Labs.

Chemical lab

City of Providence

Sludge incinerator

Sonoco Products Co.
                 Division of Highways
                 portable aspnalt batch plant

                 Division of Highways
                 portable asphalt batch plant

                 Pete Lien and Sons,  Inc.
                 Rotary Kiln and Vertical  Kiln
    South Dakota
                     Light  Aggregates,  Inc.
                                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
                                               emission

                                               SOx mass emisssion
                                                                        consent order 10/21/75
                                               NESHAPS-notificatlon     NOV order 8/15/75
                                               testing
                                               Particulate
                                                                                             Consent order 7/3/75
                                               SOx sulfur fuel content  Consent order 10/20/75
                                                                    NSPS-Portland
                                                                    Cement Plant

                                                                    Opaci ty
Visible emission and
organic compounds

PCB's mass emission
NOV 9/22/75


Order 12/31/75


Order 9/12/75
                                                                                             Order to comply with
                                                                                             3114 letter 12/18/75
                                                                Particulate V/E
                         NOV 11/3/75
                         Order 12/29/75
                                                                Particulate matter
                                                                        Consent order issued
                                                                        6/30/75
                                               violation of participate NOV 7/9/75
                                               emission std

                                               violation of particulate NOV 7/9/75
                                               emission std

                                               violation of particulate NOV 7/16/75
                                                                violation  of  particulate NOV 7/16/75

-------
     STATE/CITY
     25
                 COMPANY/TYPE
                 CF SOURCE
                                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                         TYPE OF ACTION
crv
UD
   Rapid City

Utah
   Magna

Utah
   Rowley

Utah
   Lehi

Utah
   Lehi

Utah
   Lehi

Utah
   Lehi

Utah
   Ogden

Utah
   Cgden

Utah
   Geneva

Vermont,
   Burlington
     Vermont,
        Hyde Park

     Virgin Islands,
        St. Croix

     Virgin Islands,
        St. Thomas
Hercules, Inc.
Coal-Fired Industrial Boiler

NL Industries,  Magnesium Div.
Spray Dryer Exhaust Systems

Mountain States Lime, Inc.
4 vertical lime kilns

Mountain States Lime, Inc.
Hydrator Stack

Mountain States Lime, Inc.
Secondary Crusher C, Screening System

Mountain states Lime, Inc.
Rock Pulverizer Stack

Weber County Corp. Municipal
Incinerator Unit *2

Weber County Corp. Municipal
Incinerators $2 and #3

U.S. steel
Power Plant

City of Burlington

Eciler

Vermont Asbestos,
Inc.

Martin Marietta Corp.
(St. Croix Facility)

St.  Thomas Paving Co., Ltd.
violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

violation of particulate
emission std

Particulate mass
emission V/E
                                                                Asbestos visible
                                                                emissions
NOV 11/17/75


order 10/21/75


NOV 7/17/75


NOV 7/17/75


NOV. 7/17/75


NOV 7/17/75


NOV 7/14/75


Order 10/22/75


Order 9/29/75


Order 7/7/75



Order 10/10/75
                                                                SOX sulfur fuel  content  NOV 10/23/75
                                                                Operating w/o complying  NOV 9/26/75
                                                                w/ new source review
                                                                requirements 40 CFR
                                                                52.2775(b)
     Virginia
                 PEPCO-Fotamac River Station
                                               Particulate matter mass  order 8/27/75

-------
 STATE/CITY
 26
CCMPANY/TYPE
Of SOURCE
   Alexandria

 Virginia
   Vansant

 Virginia
   Danville

 Washington
   Hoguiam

 Washington
   Port Angeles
Washington
   Port Tounsend
Washington-
   Shelton

Washington
   Rock Island

Washington
   Vancouver

Washington
   Seattle

Washington
   Peshastin

Washington
   Koguiam

Washington
   Shelton

Washington
   Pasco

West Virginia
   Weirton .
utility boiler

Jewell Coal & Coke Company


Dan River, Inc.


City of Hoguiam


Crown Zellerback
Corporation
Hog fuel boilers

Crown Zellerback
Corporation
Hog fuel boilers

Simpson Timber Co.
Hog Fuel toilers

Banna Mining Co.
ferro Alloy Plant

Carbonundum Co.


Center Oozing, Inc.


Feshastin Forest Products
ITT Rayonier
Hog Fuel boilers

Simpson Timber Co.
Hog Fuel Boilers

L.W. Vail, Inc.
Asphalt plant

National Steel/Steel facility
                                               POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                        TYPE OF ACTION
emission

Particulate 6 visible
emission

particulates
NOV 11/2U/75
consent order 10/3/75
open burning
NOV 10/7/75
particulate matter
consent order  8/15/75
particulate matter
consent order  8/27/75
particulate matter
consent order 8/1/75
visible and particulate  consent order  9/30/75
matter
particulate matter
V/E

NESHAPS violation
NOV 12/18/75


NOV 11/25/75
                                               Opacity
                         NOV 11/25/75
particulate matter
                         Consent order 8/1/75
particulate matter
consent order 8/1/75
opacity violation of
NSPS
NOV 7/28/75
particulate 6 SOx mass   NOV 8/25/75
emission & opacity

-------
STATE/CITY
27
COMPANY/TYPE
OF SOURCE
West Virgina
   Follanbee

Wisconsin
   Milwaukee

Wisconsin
   Kenosha

Wisconsin
   Kenosha

Wisconsin
   Mosinee

Wisconsin
   Milwaukee

Wisconsin
   Milwaukee
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Co.


Amercian Motors Corporation
auto mfg.

American Motors corporation
auto mfg.  (main plant)

American Motors Corporation
auto mfg.  (main front plant)

Mosinee Papper Co.
Kraft Pulp/paper mill

Inryco Inc.
coil ccating operation

Lnryco, Inc.
Coil coating operation
                                                                POLLUTION PROBLEM
                                                                                         TYPE OF ACTION
Particulate 6 visible
SOx emission

hydrocarbon and
particulate

hydrocarbon
hydrocarbon


particulate


hydrocarbon


hydrocarbon
order 10/7/75


NOV 7/16/75


NOV 7/16/75


NOV 7/28/75


NOV 9/23/75


consent order 9/23/75


NOV 7/2/75

-------