September 14-20, 2019
In this week's issue:
- EPA and DOT Revoke California’s Waivers of Federal Preemption for Vehicle GHG Standards and ZEV Program (September 19, 2019)
- California Leads Coalition of State AGs and Cities Challenging Administration’s “One National Program Rule” (September 20, 2019)
- House Adopts Continuing Resolution to Temporarily Extend Federal Funding into New Fiscal Year (September 19, 2019)
- EPA Administrator Testifies Before House Science Committee (September 19, 2019)
- D.C. Circuit Cancels Oral Argument over CSAPR Close-Out Rule (September 18)
- D.C Circuit Dismisses Clean Power Plan Litigation (September 17, 2019)
- EPA Provides Update on Ethylene Oxide Regulatory Activities (September 13, 2019)
- EPA Announces Public Hearing on Proposed Oil and Gas Sector New Source Performance Standards (September 20, 2019)
- House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Reducing Industrial Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions (September 18, 2019)
- House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Reducing Building Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions (September 20, 2019)
- Youth Climate Activists Testify at Joint House Committee Hearing (September 18, 2019)
- Acadia Center Report Evaluates the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative’s Impacts During the Program’s First Decade (September 17, 2019)
- EPA Publishes Two Proposed Air Toxics Standards, Seeks Comment (September 16 and 19, 2019)
- EPA Proposes RTR Standard for Iron and Steel Foundries (September 13, 2019)
This Week in Review
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Elaine Chao and EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler held a press event to announce their final action – the One National Program Rule – which revokes the waivers of federal preemption issued to California under Clean Air Act Section 209 for the state’s light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) program. This action finalizes one of two parts of a rule proposed last year by DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and EPA, the so-called “SAFE Vehicles Rule.” In the One National Program Rule, NHTSA and EPA “make clear” that the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) preempts state and local fuel economy standards, and allege that California’s GHG emission standards and ZEV program amount to setting fuel economy standards and are, therefore, preempted. Based on that contention, EPA has withdrawn the statutorily issued GHG and ZEV waivers. NHTSA and EPA have stated that this action does not affect California’s ability to enforce its Low Emission Vehicle program. The two agencies also announced that they will continue to work in the coming weeks to finalize the remainder of the SAFE Vehicles Rule rolling back federal GHG and fuel economy standards set in 2012. The day before DOT and EPA made their official announcement, the President signaled the forthcoming final action in a series of three tweets that read, “The Trump Administration is revoking California’s Federal Waiver on emissions in order to produce far less expensive cars for the consumer, while at the same time making the cars substantially SAFER. This will lead to more production because of this pricing and safety……… advantage, and also due to the fact that older, highly polluting cars, will be replaced by new, extremely environmentally friendly cars. There will be very little difference in emissions between the California Standard and the new U.S. Standard, but the cars will be…….far safer and much less expensive. Many more cars will be produced under the new and uniform standard, meaning significantly more JOBS, JOBS, JOBS! Automakers should seize this opportunity because without this alternative to California, you will be out of business.” In a press statement issued following the tweets, in anticipation of the official DOT-EPA announcement, Mary D. Nichols, Chair of the California Air Resources Board, said, “For the first time in its 50-year history, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is trying to stop states from taking reasonable actions to cut smog. Shame on the Trump Administration for putting the health of millions of its citizens at risk for absolutely no reason.” In the same statement, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said, “As President Trump arrives in California to rake in campaign cash, his Administration is preparing to announce his desperate plan to rob our state of its long-standing authority to set vehicle emission standards. To those who claim to support states’ rights – don’t trample on ours. In California, we can’t afford to backslide to the days of dirty air and unregulated emissions. For us, this is about survival. Our communities are screaming for help to address the new normal of devastating droughts and superstorms, wildfires and mudslides. Unlike the Trump Administration, we won’t run scared from global warming. And when you endanger our people, our economy, or our planet, we rise with the full force of the law behind us.” Numerous organizations, agencies and officials across the nation also issued press statements condemning the forthcoming final action telegraphed by the President, among them, NACAA: “The Administration’s forthcoming final action revoking California’s waivers of federal preemption for its light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards and Zero-Emission Vehicle program is an attack on states across our country. It disregards EPA’s duty to protect our environment and the health and welfare of Americans, and flies in the face of the plain language of the Clean Air Act authorizing California (under Section 209) to adopt and enforce motor vehicle standards more stringent than those of the federal government, and providing other states (under Section 177) the right to adopt and enforce California’s standards. NACAA adamantly opposes this action.”
For further information: https://youtu.be/da70BwSzePQ (video of DOT-EPA 9/19/19 press event); https://www.epa.gov/home/live (EPA press event video page); https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-09/documents/safe-vehicles-fr-part1-2019-09-19.pdf (One National Program Rule); https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-one-national-program-federal-preemption-state (One National Program Rule webpage); https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/trump-administration-announces-one-national-program-rule-federal-preemption-state-fuel (EPA-DOT 9/19/19 press statement); https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1174342164983107584 (President’s 9/18/19 tweets); https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-becerra-governor-newsom-and-carb-chair-nichols-blast-trump (California’s 9/18/19 press statement); http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/NACAA_Statement_on_Administration_Rule_Revoking_CA_Motor_Vehicle_Waivers-Sept2019.pdf (NACAA’s 9/18/19 press statement)
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, with California Governor Gavin Newsom and the California Air Resources Board, led a coalition of 23 other state attorneys general and two cities to challenge the One National Program Rule announced yesterday by U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Elaine Chao and EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler (see related article above). The rule – issued jointly by DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and EPA – is intended to preempt California’s light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) standards, which received waivers of federal preemption from EPA in 2013 under Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 209 and which were adopted, in whole or in part, by 13 other states and the District of Columbia under Section 177 of the CAA. In the rule, EPA announces its decision to withdraw California’s light-duty vehicle GHG and ZEV waivers and NHTSA finalizes regulatory text contending that California’s GHG and ZEV standards are preempted by NHTSA’s statutory authority under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to set nationally applicable fuel economy standards. State of California, et al., v. Elaine Chao, et al. – which names Chao in her capacity as Secretary of DOT, James C. Owens in his capacity as Acting Administrator of NHTSA, DOT, NHTSA and the United States as the defendants – was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In the complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, the plaintiffs ask the court to strike down the One National Program Rule as unlawful “because it exceeds NHTSA’s authority, contravenes Congressional intent, and is arbitrary and capricious, and because NHTSA has failed to conduct the analysis required under the National Environmental Policy Act.” In a press release, the office of California Attorney General Becerra explains, “Through its unlawful Preemption Rule, NHTSA is attempting to declare the California greenhouse gas and ZEV standards as preempted under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), based on arguments repeatedly rejected by multiple courts. In doing so, NHTSA oversteps the authority granted to it by Congress and ignores Congress’s careful and repeated preservation of California’s authority.” Those joining California in this legal challenge are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, as well as the cities of Los Angeles and New York.
For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Litigation-One_Natl_Prog_Rule-CA+22_states_others-Complaint_for_Declaratory_and_Injunctive_Relief-092019.pdf and https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-becerra-files-lawsuit-challenging-trump-administration%E2%80%99s
The House of Representatives voted 301 to 123 to adopt H.R. 4378, the “Continuing Appropriations Act, 2020, and Health Extenders Act of 2019,” which would extend, until November 21, 2019, funding for the federal government at FY 2019 levels. Since Congress will not have time to complete consideration of appropriations legislation to fund the federal government for FY 2020 before the fiscal year ends on September 30, 2019, a continuing resolution (CR) is necessary to avoid a shutdown of the federal government. The Senate is expected to adopt the CR next week and then the President would need to sign it for it to become final. At the same time, the Senate is moving forward with appropriations legislation containing federal funding for all of FY 2020; the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies is expected to mark up a bill in the next two weeks that will contain funding for EPA. The House adopted its version of appropriations legislation for FY 2020 on June 25, 2019.
For further information: https://appropriations.house.gov/news/press-releases/house-passes-continuing-resolution
EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler appeared before the House Science Committee to testify on the topic of “science and technology at the Environmental Protection Agency.” In her opening statement, Committee Chairwomen Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) said, “It is profoundly disturbing to see the actions EPA has taken to dismantle many of its own standards and regulations that were established primarily to protect public health. This Administration’s push to deregulate seems to be led by political ideologues, with limited input from scientific experts,” noting that some of EPA’s recent efforts to rollback regulations have been met with opposition even from the regulated community. Johnson went on to say, “Let me be clear, gutting the role of science in EPA’s regulatory and decision-making processes will not make our air safer to breathe, or our water safer to drink.” In his testimony, Administrator Wheeler said he relies on the work and expertise of EPA’s scientists and is “always impressed with the rigor, integrity, and dedication of our career scientists and staff.” He then went on to discuss the ways EPA “is supporting and advancing their efforts,” stating that “[w]e are promoting science at the Agency more than it has been in years. And these efforts are leading to groundbreaking advancements in environmental science.” As examples, the Administrator highlighted the agency’s work on PFAS, reducing childhood lead exposure, reducing animal testing and restructuring its Office of Research and Development. He also stated, “Finally, we are committed to the highest-quality science. Good science is science that can be replicated and independently validated; science that holds up to scrutiny. That is why we are moving forward to ensure that the science supporting Agency decisions is transparent and available for evaluation by the public and stakeholders.” Among the issues raised during the approximately two hours of Q&A that followed was the Administration’s initiatives to rollback light-duty vehicle GHG and fuel economy standards and revoke California’s waivers of federal preemption for the state’s GHG and Zero Emission Vehicle programs; during an exchange with a Committee member Wheeler stated that California Air Resources Board Chair Mary D. Nichols did not negotiate with EPA in good faith. Other issues discussed included the Affordable Clean Energy Rule; ethylene oxide; the Paris Climate Accord; ethanol; methane; the status of EPA’s April 2018 proposed rule on strengthening transparency in regulatory science, for which, the Administrator said, the agency will issue a supplemental proposed rule early next year to allow for more public comment; the status of the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS reviews; and EPA’s 2018 proposed cost-benefit rule.
For further information: https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/CJohnson%20OS%20S&T%20at%20the%20EPA.pdf, https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/9.19.19%20Wheeler%20Testimony.pdf and https://science.house.gov/hearings/science-and-technology-at-the-environmental-protection-agency
Responding to a motion by EPA, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit cancelled oral arguments that were scheduled to take place on September 20 in consolidated cases challenging EPA’s so-called “CSAPR Close-Out” Rule (New York v. EPA, No. 19-1019 et al.). Subsequently, the court on its own motion determined that it will dispose of the petitions for review without oral argument on the basis of the briefs and appendix that have been submitted by the parties. In the December 2018 CSAPR Close-Out Rule, EPA determined that the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) fully addresses the interstate pollution transport obligations of the 20 states covered by CSAPR under the good-neighbor provision of the Clean Air Act. Last week, however, the D.C Circuit ruled in Wisconsin v. EPA that the CSAPR Update Rule is unlawful to the extent that it allows upwind states to continue their significant contributions to downwind air quality problems beyond the statutory deadlines by which downwind states must demonstrate their attainment of air quality standards. It remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur so the agency can correct it. Following the Wisconsin decision, the court ordered the parties in the cases challenging the CSAPR Close-Out Rule to file supplemental briefs addressing the effect of the ruling on the Close-Out litigation. EPA included in its supplemental brief a motion requesting that the case be removed from the oral argument calendar while the agency considers whether to file a petition for reconsideration of the Wisconsin decision. Similarly, Industry Respondent-Intervenors agreed that EPA and other parties in the CSAPR Update Rule litigation should have the opportunity to evaluate whether to file petitions for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc; if no one petitions, they argue that the court should remand the record of the Close-Out Rule so EPA can determine whether it comports or conflicts with the rulings in Wisconsin and make any necessary adjustments. Citizen and State Petitioners challenging the CSAPR Close-Out Rule argued in their supplemental brief that Wisconsin controls the disposition of this case and requires the Close-Out Rule to be vacated. Finally, Respondent-Intervenors Texas and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality asserted that the Wisconsin decision has no effect on the Close-Out Rule litigation as it applies to Texas. Any rehearing petitions in Wisconsin v. EPA must be filed by October 28, 2019.
For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New_York_v_EPA-EPA_supplemental_brief_9-17-19.pdf (EPA’s supplemental brief); http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New_York_v_EPA-Industry_Resp-Int_supplemental_brief_9-18-19.pdf (Industry Respondent-Intervenors’ supplemental brief); http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New_York_v_EPA-Pets_supplemental_brief_9-18-19.pdf (Citizen and State Petitioners’ supplemental brief); http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New_York_v_EPA-Texas_supplemental_brief_9-17-19.pdf (Texas and TCEQ’s supplemental brief); http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New_York_v_EPA-Order_9-18-19.pdf (order removing case from September 20 oral argument calendar); http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New_York_v_EPA-Order_9-20-19.pdf (order announcing that court will decide petitions without oral argument)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed as moot cases challenging EPA’s 2015 Clean Power Plan (CPP) rule. An en banc panel of the D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in West Virginia v. EPA (No. 15-1363) et al. in September 2016 but subsequently agreed to pause the litigation before issuing a decision as EPA developed a rule to repeal and replace the CPP. EPA successfully argued in its motion to dismiss that the finalization of the Affordable Clean Energy rule rendered the CPP legal challenge moot. Along with the cases challenging the CPP, the D.C. Circuit dismissed North Dakota v. EPA (No. 17-1014) and consolidated cases, which challenged EPA’s denial of administrative petitions to reconsider the CPP.
For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/2019-09-17_Order_of_Dismissal.pdf
EPA issued an update on its work related to emissions of ethylene oxide (EtO) – specifically, on the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for two source categories: Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON) and EtO Commercial Sterilizers. The agency’s review of these rules is part of a two-pronged approach EPA is taking to address EtO emissions. Currently, the proposed MON is under review at the Office of Management and Budget and is expected to be released for public comment shortly. Per a court order, the final MON standard must be issued by March 13, 2020. With respect to the EtO Commercial Sterilizers proposal, EPA has been compiling information on control options and costs for the possibly affected facilities (over 100 sterilizers) and plans to take two actions in October 2019 to gather additional information: 1) issuance of an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) that will describe possible approaches and available technologies and solicit comment and data from the public and 2) requests for information, including data on facilities, control devices, work practices and costs associated with controls, from several commercial sterilization companies (under the authority of Section 114 of the Clean Air Act). Since nearly a third of the affected sterilizers are small businesses, EPA may also convene a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel. The agency may soon request nominations for small entity representatives to serve on such a panel. EPA plans to issue a proposed rule for EtO commercial sterilizers “in the coming months.”
For further information: https://www.epa.gov/hazardous-air-pollutants-ethylene-oxide/ethylene-oxide-updates
EPA announced in the Federal Register (84 Fed. Reg. 49,497) that it will host a public hearing on October 17, 2019 in Dallas, Texas to collect public comments on its proposed changes to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for sources in the oil and natural gas sector. Details about the hearing, including instructions for registering as a speaker, are included in the hearing notice. EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler signed the proposed oil and gas NSPS rule on August 28 but it has not yet been published in the Federal Register. It will be open to public comment for 60 days when published.
For further information: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-09-20/pdf/2019-20242.pdf
The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change held a hearing on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the industrial sector, the first in a series of hearings exploring pathways to net zero U.S. GHG emissions by 2050. Committee members and witnesses repeatedly referenced the significant contribution of industrial sources to U.S and global GHG emissions, cited projections that industrial emissions are anticipated to increase in the near future, and emphasized that the sector’s complex nature frustrates an obvious reduction strategy. Julio Friedmann, a senior research scholar at the Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy, was the hearing’s first witness. His testimony further explained the challenges of reducing industrial GHG emissions, noting that there are few viable substitutes to many key industrial products such as steel, glass and cement; that critical manufacturing equipment is long-lived and not frequently replaced; and that even when there is an opportunity to replace aging equipment, there are few new technology options to significantly reduce emissions. At the same time, however, Freidman identified a handful of technologies and policies that could be utilized to reduce GHG emissions from the industrial sector, citing carbon capture and utilization technology, the use of hydrogen as a low-carbon heating source, and large research investments in clean energy technologies, among other suggestions. Testimony from Jason Walsh, executive director of BlueGreen Alliance, mapped out a similar set of recommendations to decarbonize the sector but also emphasized the importance of protecting and creating jobs while pursuing emission reductions. Additional hearing witnesses included Gaurav Sant, professor and Henry Samueli fellow at the UCLA Samueli School of Engineering; Bob Perciasepe, president of Center for Climate and Energy Solutions; Jeremy Gregory, executive director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Concrete Sustainability Hub; and Ross Eisenberg, vice president of energy and resources policy at the National Association of Manufacturers.
For further information: https://energycommerce.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/hearing-on-building-a-100-percent-clean-economy-pathways-to-net-zero
The Subcommittee on Energy of the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the building sector, the second in a series of hearings exploring pathways to net zero U.S. GHG emissions by 2050. Earlier in the week, the Committee’s Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change held a hearing on reducing industrial sector GHG emissions (see related Washington Update article). Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Rush (D-IL) noted in his opening remarks that buildings account for around 40 percent of U.S. energy consumption as well as the same percentage of total GHG emissions. “Yet, there are enormous opportunities for reducing these emissions through technological advances, efficiency initiatives, and innovative programs, such as Energy Star, smart metering, and others,” he stated. “Additionally, there are tremendous employment opportunities for putting people to work, in my district and in communities nationwide, in good paying, quality retrofitting jobs that cannot be exported.” Hearing witnesses included Carl Elefante, president of the American Institute of Architects; Elizabeth Beardsley, senior policy counsel with the U.S. Green Building Counsel; Steven Nadel, executive director of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy; Timothy Keane, international vice president at large of the International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators Allied Workers; Curtis Zimmerman, manager of the government liaison at BASF Corporation; and Arn McIntyre on behalf of the National Association of Home Builders.
For further information: https://energycommerce.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/hearing-on-building-a-100-percent-clean-economy-solutions-for-the-us
The House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis held a joint hearing with the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, Energy, and the Environment to hear from four youth climate activists. Greta Thunberg, the founder of Fridays for Future, offered short remarks urging lawmakers to review the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C. The report was released in late 2018 and describes impacts of global warming above 1.5 °C as well as emissions and policy pathways to limit warming and avoid those impacts. “I am submitting this report as my testimony because I don’t want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to the scientists. And I want you to unite behind the science. And then I want you to take action,” said Thunberg. Jamie Margolin, co-founder of This Is Zero Hour, pressed repeatedly on the urgent need for climate action: “By 2030, I will be old enough to run for Congress and be seated where you are right now. By then we need to have already achieved net zero greenhouse gas emissions and be rapidly on the path to climate recovery.” Vic Barrett, a fellow at the Alliance for Climate Education and one of 21 lead plaintiffs in Juliana v. United States, submitted written testimony describing the Juliana litigation, including the plaintiffs’ request for an immediate injunction halting all coal extraction-related activities on federal lands, oil and gas extraction activities on the Outer Continental Shelf and the development of new fossil fuel infrastructure. Benji Backer, president and founder of the conservative American Conservation Coalition, argued for the importance of climate action and outlined a set of principle and policy recommendations, including deploying carbon capture technologies, and increasing nuclear and hydropower generation alongside wind and solar.
For further information: https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearings?ID=206DAC73-8EAB-41CA-96F7-2C2FD5B47E46
A report from the Acadia Center found that states that have participated continuously in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) from 2008 to 2018 reduced their power sector greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 47 percent, saw power prices fall by 5.7 percent, and experienced economic growth of 47 percent. All three metrics outperformed averages for all non-RGGI states excluding California, with GHG reductions that were 90 percent larger, a reduction in power costs compared to an average 8.6 percent increase in non-RGGI states, and overall economic growth 31 percent higher than rest of the country. The report further notes that for the first half of 2019, RGGI’s power sector emissions were the lowest in the program’s history and that full-year data for 2019 is anticipated to continue a multi-year declining emissions trend. At the same time, Acadia pointed to the persistently low price of RGGI’s allowances as an indicator that the program could be made more stringent. The findings for RGGI states apply to Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont. Data for New Jersey, which left RGGI in 2011 but is expected to rejoin in 2020, were not included.
For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Acadia-Center_RGGI_10-Years-in-Review_2019-09-17.pdf
EPA published two proposed Risk and Technology Review (RTR) standards in the Federal Register and is requesting public comment on both. The Lime Manufacturing RTR proposal was issued on September 16, 2019 and has a comment deadline of October 31, 2019 (84 Fed. Reg. 48,708). The Paper and Other Web Coating proposal was issued on September 19, 2019 and has a comment deadline of November 4, 2019 (84 Fed. Reg. 49,382). Both proposals would determine that the risks remaining after the implementation of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard are acceptable and that there are no new developments in control technologies or practices that would warrant additional requirements. EPA is proposing minor amendments, however, including to clarify that the standards are applicable during periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction and require electronic reporting of data submissions.
For further information: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-09-16/pdf/2019-18485.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/lime-manufacturing-plants-national-emission-standards-hazardous-air (Lime Manufacturing); https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-09-19/pdf/2019-19101.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/paper-and-other-web-coating-national-emission-standards-hazardous-0 (Paper and Other Web Coating)
EPA proposed a Risk and Technology Review (RTR) standard for the Iron and Steel Foundries source category. The agency has determined that the risks from this source category that remain after the implementation of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard are acceptable and no additional controls are warranted. Additionally, EPA did not identify any new developments in practices, processes or control technologies that would further reduce emissions of hazardous air pollutants. The agency is proposing minor amendments to the existing regulations for both major and area sources designed to clarify that the standards apply during startup, shutdown and malfunction and require electronic reporting of performance test results. There will be a 45-day public comment period beginning with publication of the proposal in the Federal Register.
For further information: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/proposed-risk-and-technology-review-amendments-air-toxics-standards