Clean Power Plan Repealed and Replaced

The Trump administration Wednesday finalized a rule to repeal and replace a capstone Obama-era carbon pollution regulation that they argue exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority.

The new replacement rule to the Clean Power Plan (CPP), deemed the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, aims to give states more time and authority to decide how to implement the best new technology to ease net emissions from coal-fired plants.

“Under the CPP, the EPA Obama administration went beyond implementing best technology,” said a senior EPA official on a call with reporters Wednesday. “Under the CPP the Obama administration actually imposed emissions reductions on each and every state. We don’t believe that’s an EPA role or authority under the [Clean Air Act.]”

The result of the relaxed rule, the official said, could mean individual coal plants might increase their overall emissions. But, the official said, across the board the agency expects emissions to drop.

Read more coverage here.

Preparing for Your Upcoming Stack Test

Source Emissions testing, or stack testing, is mandated by the Clean Air Act of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which sets forth guidelines and requirements that must be met to determine a facility’s compliance with emission limits.  Any and all plants, factories, and facilities that utilize a stack as part of manufacturing or production operations are required to undergo stack testing in order to demonstrate compliance with current EPA standards.  There is more to stack testing than simple compliance, however.  A properly-executed testing plan gives you the diagnostic tools to help optimize your operations and improve energy efficiency — quality incentives for voluntary stack testing that is not simply driven by EPA requirements.  With careful preparation for stack-testing compliance and the proper execution of the test plan, a company can save money, protect workers, and effectively streamline their operations.

As a company prepares their facility for an upcoming stack test, reviewing the state-approved test plan is the best way to ensure that you understand all of the testing requirements.  Doing so is your greatest insurance that the stack testing results will show proper compliance with all relevant EPA air emission standards.  However, in many cases technical or legal jargon may make a portion or the entirety of the test plan difficult to understand, and it may not contain all of the required information necessary to conduct a successful test.  To assist you with this, we have put together the following Stack Testing Preparation Checklist to help you make sure that your company is properly prepared for your upcoming testing.  All items on this checklist should be reviewed with your qualified stack-testing team.

  1. What Load you will test at – This information is typically in your air permit, and/or determined by applicable federal/state  regulations.
  2. What Fuel you will burn – Different fuel types can have vastly different emission limits
  3. OSHA compliant platforms – How will the stack test team reach the sampling plane?
  4. Power Requirements – Do you have enough circuits?
  5. Safety/Insurance Concerns- What are your facility requirements?  Does your stack test company meet these requirements?
  6. Are your Test Ports free from blockage and EPA Method 1 Compliant?
  7. What Process Data are you required to document, and how will that data be logged?

Here at Environmental Source Samplers Inc., we’re familiar with the pitfalls a company can experience when faced with an upcoming test.  Advance preparation, with these guidelines in mind, will provide your company the ability to address any issues or questions prior to the stack testing date. Saving your company the time, hassle, and money that late revisions and changes inevitably cause.  These guidelines are also helpful in maintaining high levels of safety and compliance regardless of having a scheduled stack test or not, benefitting the overall operations and their environmental impact.

Choosing a stack testing company that has the appropriate background and experience for your industry will help ensure that your stack test will be successful.  The stack testing company should have the capability to execute the testing types and methodologies that govern your specific operations, while using equipment that is well-maintained and up-to-date.  Just as importantly, they should be current and informed on the changes and revisions to existing testing methodologies, since the EPA air emission limits and standards are subject to change as the Agency sees fit.

Stack testing is required and performed for the health and safety of the plant, the workers, and the environment.   It is also a diagnostic tool that provides insight into the efficiency of your operations.  However, whether you are testing for compliance or diagnostic purposes, careful preparation is the key to ensuring that your stack testing project gives you the data that you can use effectively.

Please contact the experts at Environmental Source Samplers (ESS) to learn more about their stack testing services:

Phone: 910-799-1055
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.ESSKnowsAir.com

Three Decades of Condensable Particulate Matter (CPM) Regulation

2017-03-17 Three Decades of CPM Regulation

WHAT IS CONDENSABLE PARTICULATE MATTER?

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.

HOW DID EPA CPM REGULATIONS DEVELOP?

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…]

EPA News: For the First Time in 40 Years EPA to Put in Place a Process to Evaluate Chemicals that May Pose Risk

2017-01-13 First Time 40 Years Chemical Review

WASHINGTON–The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is moving swiftly to propose how it will prioritize and evaluate chemicals, given that the final processes must be in place within the first year of the new law’s enactment, or before June 22, 2017.

“After 40 years we can finally address chemicals currently in the marketplace,” said Jim Jones, EPA’s Assistant Administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “Today’s action will set into motion a process to quickly evaluate chemicals and meet deadlines required under, and essential to, implementing the new law.”

When the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) was enacted in 1976, it grandfathered in thousands of unevaluated chemicals that were in commerce at the time. The old law failed to provide EPA with the tools to evaluate chemicals and to require companies to generate and provide data on chemicals they produced.

[Read more…]

EPA News: EPA Names First Chemicals for Review Under New TSCA Legislation

EPA News: 10 Chemicals Under TSCA Review

WASHINGTON – Today, EPA is announcing the first ten chemicals it will evaluate for potential risks to human health and the environment under TSCA reform.

“Under the new law, we now have the power to require safety reviews of all chemicals in the marketplace.” said Jim Jones, assistant administrator of the of Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “We can ensure the public that we will deliver on the promise to better protect public health and the environment.”

The first ten chemicals to be evaluated are:

  • 1,4-Dioxane
  • 1-Bromopropane
  • Asbestos
  • Carbon Tetrachloride
  • Cyclic Aliphatic Bromide Cluster
  • Methylene Chloride
  • N-methylpyrrolidone
  • Pigment Violet 29
  • Tetrachloroethylene, also known as perchloroethylene
  • Trichloroethylene

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, requires EPA to publish this list by December 19, 2016. These chemicals were drawn from EPA’s 2014 TSCA Work Plan, a list of 90 chemicals selected based on their potential for high hazard and exposure as well as other considerations.

When the list is published in the Federal Register it will trigger a statutory deadline to complete risk evaluations for these chemicals within three years.  This evaluation will determine whether the chemicals present an unreasonable risk to humans and the environment. If it is determined that a chemical presents an unreasonable risk, EPA must mitigate that risk within two years.

Under the newly amended law, EPA must release a scoping document within six months for each chemical. This will include the hazard(s), exposure(s), conditions of use, and the potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation(s) the agency plans to consider for the evaluation.

Additional chemicals will be designated for evaluation, and all of the remaining Work Plan chemicals will be reviewed for their potential hazard and exposure. For each risk evaluation that EPA completes, TSCA requires that EPA begin another. By the end of 2019, EPA must have at least 20 chemical risk valuations ongoing at any given time.

For more on the chemicals listed and additional information: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/evaluating-risk-existing-chemicals-under-tsca

###

EPA MEDIA CONTACT:

Cathy Mibourn

[email protected]

(202)-564-7849

 

Supreme Court Halts MATS Rule

Late Tuesday it was announced that the U.S. Supreme Court has halted the implementation of the Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule.  This is the first time in recent memory that the U.S. Supreme Court has put a rule on hold before the lower court review.  Rulings from the lower court are expected over the summer.

Here are some other articles discussing the Supreme Court’s decision to put the MATS rule on hold:

Supreme Court To EPA: Fool Me Once

Carbon pollution controls put on hold

Supreme Court Puts White House’s Carbon Pollution Limits On Hold

 

Bitnami