NJDEP Adopts New Rules for CO2 Budget Trading Program

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has adopted new rules at N.J.A.C. 7:27-22.28 and 7:27C and amendments to N.J.A.C. 7:27-22.1 and 22.16, and 7:27A-3.2, 3.5, and 3.10, which establish the New Jersey Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Budget Trading Program.  The CO2 Budget Trading Program is New Jersey’s commitment to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a regional, cooperative program to cap and reduce CO2 emissions from fossil fuel fired units producing 25 or more megawatts of power in the participating states to address the significant challenge of climate change.

The adoption was published in the New Jersey Register on June 17, 2019.  The operative date of the new rules and amendments is June 11, 2019.  A copy of the Department’s adoption is available on the Department’s website at: https://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/adoptions.html and https://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqes/rggi.html as well as LexisNexis free public access to the New Jersey Register,  https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lexisnexis.com_njoal&d=DwIFAg&c=4BTEw-1msHjOY4ITcFLmDM6JB8x6ZgbU2J24IH0HZLU&r=G2jsVVV4jFHeLEjPL09sH5Z1gSxJt54Oz5U9BS0lEidsmUHsZycJoAKJm7vit93B&m=R2uM3LiVNV5tQdBwElNdK6utpm1rEP8k50B5knCMltw&s=qL-wKUpoWVcWce1hThWUs-GilTRiSEJ-SaSqzZsVj7w&e=

Please note that consistent with newly adopted N.J.A.C. 7:27C-3.3, CO2 budget sources must be added to an operating permit by completing an application for a new, renewed, or modified operating permit.  The Department has developed “NJ03-APPLICATION FOR ADDING A CO2 BUDGET SOURCE IN OPERATING PERMIT,” which should be submitted along with the completed application for a new, renewed, or modified operating permit.  The new form may be downloaded from the Department’s website at https://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqes/rggi-who-is-regulated.html

Further information and additional forms related to the CO2 budget trading program compliance certification and compliance plans are also available on the Department’s website at https://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqes/rggi-who-is-regulated.html

The Department has developed two new listservs related to RGGI’s implementation – one specific to the RGGI regulated entities and the other for those interested in the development of the RGGI strategic funding plan.  You can join one or both of those listservs by submitting your email where indicated on the RGGI website at https://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqes/rggi.html.

Three Decades of Condensable Particulate Matter (CPM) Regulation

2017-03-17 Three Decades of CPM Regulation


Condensable Particulate Matter (CPM) is material that is in a vapor state at stack conditions, but condenses and/or reacts upon cooling and dilution in the ambient air to become solid or liquid Particulate Matter (PM) immediately after discharging from the stack.  All CPM is assumed to be in the PM2.5 size fraction.


1987  After promulgating the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) the EPA began recommending that, in certain circumstances, states consider including the condensable portion of PM10 emissions in the determination of total and fine PM emissions from major stationary sources.

1991  EPA Promulgated Method 202.  The original Method used wet impingers – in which sulfur dioxide was captured and formed sulfur trioxide and sulfuric acid artifacts. This caused captures to be biased high by improperly quantifying the sulfuric artifacts as condensable PM.

[Read more…]

Preparing Your Hot Mix Asphalt Plant for Air Permit Compliance Testing

The saying “Time flies” never seems more appropriate than when air permits need to be renewed for Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) plants.

If your plant’s permit is expiring soon (or even if it’s a bit down the road), it may benefit you to review the EPA-mandated testing required under your state-issued air permit.  With this in mind, allow us to provide a brief overview about air emissions testing for Hot Mix Asphalt plants.

Mobile Asphalt Plant by Wikisay (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

Mobile Asphalt Plant by Wikisay http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0

Why are Hot Mix Asphalt plants required to test air emissions?

In the past, HMA plants were notorious for generating noticeable levels of dust, smoke, odors, and noise.   In 1973, the EPA enacted New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), which required HMA producers to pass strict emission standards and install control systems to prevent the release of dust and smoke into the air. A facility must also meet stringent visible emissions tests in order to comply with regulations.  These NSPS rules have had a dramatic effect on the decreased levels of pollution emitted by HMA plants, and thus the testing continues to be a part of the regulations with which HMA plants must comply.

When do Hot Mix Asphalt plants need to test for air emissions?

The date by which an HMA plant must conduct compliance testing and submit a report to the state EPA office is outlined in each plant’s individual air permit.  In some cases, the air emissions test report may be due 12 months or more before the current permit expires.

It is important to note that new HMA plants are required to conduct performance testing within 60 days after achieving maximum production rate, but no later than 180 days after initial startup of the facility. (See 40 CFR 60 Subpart A §60.8)

Nearly all HMA plants operate on a limited calendar, with summer being the busiest season.  As a result, there are a limited number of days available to perform emissions testing.  It is best to plan testing so that it occurs earlier than the permit requires in case the weather causes a delay or cancellation of the intended testing.

How far in advance must Hot Mix Asphalt plants provide notice of testing to the state authorities?

NSPS rule 40 CFR 60 Subpart A §60.8 specifically requires owners to notify the state regulatory agency 30 days in advance of the anticipated test date.

The state authority may also require submission of protocols in advance of testing.  Check your individual air permit for your state’s test protocol submission rules.

What tests are required under NSPS 40 CFR 60 Subpart I – Standards of Performance for Hot Mix Asphalt Facilities?

 According to 40 CFR 60 Subpart I, the following EPA Methods are required for air compliance testing at Hot Mix Asphalt plants:

  • EPA Method 5 – Measures Filterable Particulate Matter (FPM)
  • EPA Method 9 – Measures Visible Emissions (VE)

Some states require additional particulate testing via EPA Method 202, although the NSPS does not require it.  Please check with your state regulatory agency for the requirements concerning your facility.

When are air emissions test reports due to the state regulatory office?

It depends.  For instance, South Carolina requires a hard copy in office (not just postmarked) by the 30th calendar day post-test, but North Carolina allows 60 days to submit the report.

However, we recommend that you consult your air permit for a specific answer.  Your state-issued air permit will outline all the specifics for your emissions compliance requirements.

Does ESS test air emissions at Hot Mix Asphalt plants?

Yes.  ESS currently conducts air emissions testing for Hot Mix Asphalt plants in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.

With some of the most experienced testing staff in the industry, ESS can meet all of your testing needs for a competitive price.  Our staff of professionals strives to provide courteous, timely service that exceeds client expectations.

Call us at 1-888-363-0039 or send an e-mail to [email protected] to discuss your specific air testing needs.  We will be happy to assist you.

NSHM Rule – Classification of Materials as Fuel or Waste for Combustion

Industrial PlantOn December 20, 2012, the US EPA promulgated several final rules for emissions standards for certain industrial boilers and incinerators. Also finalized at the same time was a rule that determines what standards apply to units that combust secondary materials, rather than traditional fuels. This rule is known as the Identification of Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste (NSHM Rule), and it is important because the EPA determination of a particular fuel as a waste has ramifications for the unit in question. If a unit is firing a fuel determined as a waste, then it will be required to meet the more stringent standards for Commercial/Industrial Incinerators (CISWI), rather than the standards applicable to boilers, known under as MACT standards.

However, the criteria by which the EPA would determine whether a fuel is waste or non-waste has been very opaque since the outset, and early attempts to distinguish between the two categories were even a primary reason for earlier MACT and CISWI rules to be invalidated and vacated entirely. In 2011 EPA attempted to resolve this with the first NSHM rule, but again failed to establish clear and legally sound criteria for distinguishing between the fuel types. This led to the rule being reopened in March of 2011, the publishing of proposed changes in December of that year, and the Final Rule being promulgated in December of 2012.

The regulatory structure is one where the burden of proof is on the unit operator or owner of a unit firing secondary material to demonstrate that the fuel is not a waste, by demonstrating that it meets certain criteria to be a legitimate fuel, rather than the disposal of waste. For materials combusted by the generator (of the material) as fuels, these legitimacy criteria are demonstrated by whether the materials are:

  • Managed as a valuable commodity
  • Have sufficient heating value
  • Contain pollutants at levels comparable to or lower than a traditional fuel for the unit

For materials combusted by third parties (not the generator of the material), the material must meet those legitimacy criteria, and in addition must be either processed into non-waste by removing contaminants, or must be approved by a petition to the EPA.

Some materials that are combusted might be materials in the manufacturing process, and are known as ingredients. These ingredients can be defined as non-waste fuels by meeting a different set of legitimacy criteria.

  • In lieu of heating values, consider the contribution made by the material to the production or manufacturing process.
  • In lieu of evaluating inputs, the contaminant comparison is made by comparing the product produced using the secondary materials to products made using virgin materials.

Ingredient materials meeting these legitimacy criteria can be combusted by both the generator and third parties without requirement for processing or a petition.

Another step taken in the December 2012 rule was the creation of an additional mechanism to identify non-waste fuels by categorical determination. Under this aspect, the EPA may consider any relevant factor, and can list a material as a non-waste fuel even when it does not meet one or more of the legitimacy criteria. These listed fuels can then be combusted without making individual determinations that the fuel is legitimate. However, this mechanism does not apply to materials used as ingredients.

There are already four (4) categories of materials that have been established to not be wastes when combusted, they are:

  • Scrap tires that are not discarded and are managed under established tire collection programs
  • Resinated wood
  • Coal refuse recovered from legacy piles and processed in the same manner as currently generated coal refuse
  • Dewatered pulp and paper sludges that are not discarded and are generated and burned on-site by pulp and paper mills

Future potential categorical listings may also include construction and demolition wood, paper recycling residuals, railroad ties, and treated wood.

The compliance deadline for Boilers is three years, and for CISWI units is five years. Regardless, it is important to make the determination of fuel classification in the immediate, to prepare strategies for compliance with these new emission limits. If an operator combusts a waste after the compliance deadline for the CISWI, even if the waste is burned inadvertently, or if process data is not maintained on secondary materials being burned, then the unit would immediately become a CISWI and be regulated as such for six (6) months. Due to the more stringent requirements, in practical terms this means that many units would have to be shut down for that period of time.

In all aspects of compliance with MACT and CISWI, and other EPA rules and regulations, ESS has experience and the network to facilitate any air-quality needs. For assistance with topics from emissions testing to control device strategies, we are here to assist.  Please call our experts at (910) 799-1055.

New RICE Rules for MACT Standards and Compliance

The new RICE NESHAP (National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) rules affect engines used for generators, pumps, compressors, and other common plant equipment, as part of the larger Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards. The requirements’ full compliance date is May 3, 2013, for diesel (CI) engines and October 19, 2013, for gasoline and natural gas (SI) engines. However, the startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) requirements have been applicable since the rule effective dates of May 3, 2010, and October 19, 2010, respectively.

The federal Clean Air Act has severe penalties for non-compliance, including costly fines and criminal penalties. Nearly 1 million existing, stationary diesel engines are affected by new federal air quality rules, in addition to more than 300,000 gasoline, propane, and natural gas engines.

Subpart ZZZZ establishes national emission limitations and operating limitations for hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emitted from stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) located at major and area sources of HAP emissions. This subpart also establishes requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission limitations and operating limitations.

  • Covers Reciprocal Internal Combustion Engines (RICE units)
  • Affected RICE units
    • Area source engines
    • Major source engines with site rating of less than 500 horsepower
  • New units MUST comply within 180 days of construction.
  • Compliance can be met in two ways
    • Certification from the manufacturer
    • Develop a maintenance plan and conduct emission testing
Check your applicability with this online tool: RICE RuleFor existing units, compliance dates can be variable, so we recommend that you download the excel sheet linked here: Compliance Dates for Various Sources


Environmental Source Samplers (ESS) specializes in stack testing and source testing for a wide range of industries and sources.  They are experienced in EPA test methodologies and stay up-to-date on new rules and compliance regulations.  Contact ESS today to learn more: (910) 799-1055 .

Stay up-to-date with EPA News & Articles

International Stack Testing – Challenges and Solutions

International Stack Testing

International Stack Testing

Source emission testing, or stack testing, is an established and understood part of a facility’s production requirements in the United States. The rules and methodologies are largely known and understood, and the potential challenges that can occur are generally recognized and expected. However, when conducting the same testing in an international venue, this is often not the case. There are, in addition to the standard challenges faced in the American environment, additional challenges that will often occur, and should be known, understood, and prepared for. Environmental Source Samplers has conducted many international stack testing projects, and recognizes a few of the common challenges that can be faced, and has solutions in place to deal with them as, or even before they occur.

The first challenge is one of logistics. Mobilization is always an aspect in testing, but when occurring internationally it is much more complex, and requires very careful preparation. Equipment that can be easily located in the USA is often much more difficult to obtain abroad, and foreign analysis laboratories are not necessarily equipped to properly analyze samples obtained during the project. This means that all required equipment must be shipped to the site, and that frequently all of your collected samples must also be shipped back to the United States. For dealing with customs for your necessary samples and equipment, a Carnet document is highly useful for easing the passage, but the real key to a successful international test is preparation, and project understanding. If you know exactly what you need, in regards to lab analysis and required equipment, and prepare for all of your needs beforehand, as well as any contingencies that may arise, it will eliminate any uncertainty, and the chance that you will be left without something you need, and no easy way to obtain it.

Another challenge is that the site staff in the international facility may not have the level of experience or awareness of regulations and approved EPA methods that you would expect in the States. Many countries developing their economies have not focused on the need for environmental protection and air quality, and the industry is still very much in development in the emerging economies. Rules are sometimes unenforced or underdeveloped, and very much a learning project on the part of the site workers. Many emerging countries, such as China or India, hire an American testing firm not just on the understanding that the project will be completed correctly and professionally, but also under the expectation of knowledge transfer, a learning process for themselves so, in the future, they can conduct the testing as well. This can lead to more observers, and thus a slower process than is typical in the USA. The key to managing this challenge is to know your own requirements. International testing projects require highly experienced team and project leads, that know and understand appropriate methods, requirements, and how to obtain correct results. They need to be flexible and adaptable to potential changes in scheduling, and should expect to answer more questions, even basic ones, than they are typically accustomed to.

A final, often overlooked challenge is maintaining appropriate communication channels with your home office. Projects taking place on the other side of the world can lead to many challenges with communications, as one person’s late morning is another’s midnight. This can open the door to the possibility of missed information and failure to follow through on matters promptly, and that must, and can be avoided. Again, preparedness is the key, on part of both the home office and the staff on the international site. Make your connections count, know what you need to have done before each call or virtual meeting, and know what is expected of you. Every person must make sure that they cover all necessary points during the meeting, who is responsible for what needs to be done, and that everybody understands and is on the same page by the time the meeting is over. If you are used to working synchronously, it is advised to make a ledger of points to be brought up, to lessen the chance of something getting missed, and delayed for another period of time.

Experience is the greatest benefit, and when you conduct an international stack testing project, your stack testing team should be one that has long experience, both domestically and internationally. With careful preparation and a knowledge of the challenges to be faced, problems can be remediated or even avoided altogether, leading to the conclusion of a successful stack-testing project.

Environmental Source Samplers has conducted international stack testing projects at Johnson Atoll, in the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Hong Kong, and various parts of Europe. If you need a team that will do your international job with efficiency and effectiveness, give us a call at (910) 799-1055.


Related Posts:

ESS Announces Successful Conclusion to Hungary Emissions Testing Project
International Stack Testing Project in Hong Kong Comes to a Successful Completion
Industrial Air Testing Project in Dominican Republic Completed by ESS