![](https://www.4cleanair.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/nacaa-internal-banner-1024x210.jpeg)
May 13-19, 2023
In this week's issue:
- EPA Seeks Comment on Volume 3 of Integrated Review Plan for Lead NAAQS Review (May 15, 2023)
- House Oversight Subcommittee Holds Hearing on “Bad Policy” of EPA’s Proposed Rules for Light-, Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles (May 17, 2023)
- EPA Publishes Proposed Air Toxics Standards for Taconite Iron Ore Processing (May 15, 2023)
- EPA Publishes Proposed Standards for Plywood and Composite Wood Products (May 18, 2023)
This Week in Review
![](https://www.4cleanair.org/wp-content/uploads/Lincoln-Memorial-1-510x328.jpeg)
EPA published in the Federal Register (88 Fed. Reg. 30,966) a notice of availability of an external review draft of Volume 3 of the “Integrated Review Plan for the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards (IRP).” Development of an IRP, which reviews the science related to primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), is an early step in the NAAQS review process. For the lead NAAQS review, the IRP includes three volumes. Volume 1 includes contextual background material and the expected schedule for this current review of the lead NAAQS. Volume 2 identifies policy-relevant issues in the lead NAAQS and is EPA’s planning document for the forthcoming Integrated Science Assessment (ISA). Volume 3 is the planning document for quantitative exposure and risk analyses to be considered in the forthcoming Policy Assessment. The Lead Panel of EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee will meet on June 13 and 14 to peer review the draft ISA, released in March, and provide a consultation on the draft Volume 3 of the IRP. EPA will accept public comment on the draft Volume 3 until June 14, 2023.
For further information:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-05-15/pdf/2023-10313.pdf, https://casac.epa.gov/ords/sab/f?p=113:18:31975520267691:::RP,18:P18_ID:2638,
https://casac.epa.gov/ords/sab/f?p=113:19:31975520267691:::19:P19_ID:993
and
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-03-22/pdf/2023-05815.pdf
The House Oversight Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy, and Regulatory Affairs held a hearing, titled “Driving Bad Policy: Examining EPA’s Tailpipe Emissions Rules and the Realities of a Rapid Electric Vehicle Transition,” to hear testimony on two recent EPA proposals: 1) Phase 3 heavy-duty truck greenhouse gas emission standards; and 2) multipollutant light-duty and medium-duty vehicle emission standards. At the opening of the hearing Subcommittee Chairman Pat Fallon (R-TX) stated, “Let me be clear, Republicans are not anti-EV – my wife has one. It was the right choice for our family. Republicans are, however, deeply concerned by the Biden Administration’s apparent attempt to hijack the auto industry, strangle consumer choice, and determine what products are best for the American people by when… . We hope this hearing will sound an alarm about the costs these two rules would inflict on American consumers, American manufacturers, the American economy, and American national security.” Four invited witnesses then provided testimony on the rules. Steven G. Bradbury, Distinguished Fellow at The Heritage Foundation (testifying on behalf of himself), deemed the proposed rules “the products of a towering arrogance” and expressed his belief that they “far exceed” EPA’s authority under section 202 of the Clean Air Act and “clearly implicate the Supreme Court’s ‘Major Questions Doctrine’ under West Virginia v. EPA.” Josh Roe, Chief Executive Officer of Kansas Corn Growers Association, stated that “Increased public and private investment in an all-electric transportation system is being driven by the desire to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with lofty goals to achieve carbon neutrality. While we believe that electric vehicles will play a vital role in achieving these goals, other complementary alternatives, such as biofuels, have a key role to play but are being pushed aside.” In contrast, he testified, high-octane low-carbon fuels “offer a solution to air quality problems, combat inflation, do not require a publicly funded overhaul of our transportation infrastructure, or require consumers to purchase vehicles that may not be compatible with their way of life.” Next, Doug Kantor, General Counsel for the National Association of Convenience Stores, offered that, “By focusing on tailpipe emissions rather than overall, lifecycle emissions and choosing EVs as the preferred technology rather than other technologies – including internal combustion engines and potentially additional innovations in engines or liquid fuels – the EPA has reached conclusions that are not as effective as they should be for the economy or for the environment. We need policies in place that take a clear-eyed look at all emissions related to the transportation sector and that lead to emissions reductions from all vehicle technologies. Only by allowing different technologies to compete on emissions reductions as well as on their appeal to consumers will we get the best environmental and economic outcomes that we can achieve.” Finally, Shannon Baker-Branstetter, Senior Director of Domestic Climate and Energy Policy for the Center for American Progress, explained, “The world is moving to cleaner fuels and EVs, and the United States can be a leader in policy, technology development, and vehicle sales. Without strong climate, labor, and industrial policy that positions the United States to be a leader in EV technology and production, the United States will lose out to global competitors, especially China, which has been investing heavily in EV technology and manufacturing. The United States is now taking the necessary actions to catch up to the competition and make up for lost time through the combination of strong vehicle standards from the EPA; charging infrastructure investment from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the bipartisan infrastructure law; and the investments from the Inflation Reduction Act to onshore manufacturing and build a robust domestic supply chain.”
For further information:
and
EPA has published in the Federal Register proposed amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Taconite Iron Ore Processing Plants, which were previously amended in 2020 (88 Fed.Reg. 30,917). The proposal, which was announced on May 5, 2023, includes modifications to existing emission standards as well as new emission limits for mercury. The Taconite Ire Ore Processing source category includes any facility engaged in separating and concentrating iron ore from taconite, a low-grade iron ore, to produce taconite pellets. The source category includes, but is not limited to, the following processes: liberation of the iron ore by wet or dry crushing and grinding in gyratory crushers, cone crushers, rod mills and ball mills; pelletizing by wet tumbling with a balling drum or balling disc; induration using a straight grate or grate kiln indurating furnace; and finished pellet handling. The deadline for public comment is June 29, 2023.
For further information: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-05-15/pdf/2023-10068.pdf
and
EPA has published in the Federal Register proposed amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Plywood and Composite Wood Products source category that were announced on May 5, 2023 (88 Fed.Reg. 31,856). The proposal includes standards for processes with unregulated emissions of acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, propionaldehyde, non-mercury HAP metals, mercury, hydrogen chloride, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, dioxins and furans and methylene diphenyl diisocyanate. It also includes proposed emission limitations and work practices applicable to process units and lumber kilns. The deadline for public comment is July 3, 2023.
For further information: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-05-18/pdf/2023-10067.pdf
and