# Presentation: 674724

## AIR TOXICS PROGRAM

- SALLY SHAVER, DIRECTOR
- APRIL 14, 2004

## Slide 2

## CAA SECTION 112 PROGRAMS

- Toxics
- 10-yr MACT standards
- Utility MACT
- Section 129 rules
- Residual risk rules
- Urban Air Toxics
- Area Source Rules
- Community Assessment Projects

## MACT

## Slide 5

## MACT FOR DEFENSE LAND SYSTEMS AND MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT

- Separate surface coating standard to reduce toxic air emissions at DoD and NASA facilities
- Cover all surface coating operations at military installations that are major sources of air toxics emissions
- Working with DoD stakeholders to determine whether or not to cover some coating operations at military installations that emit below major source thresholds
- Proposal planned for late 2005

## UTILITY MACT

- Utility MACT proposed December 15, 2003; promulgation December 2004
- Interstate Air Quality Rule proposed December 17, 2003
- 3 Public Hearings held February 25-26, 2004 for both rules
- Supplemental Proposal for Utility signed February 24, 2004
- Public Hearing held March 31, 2004

## UTILITY MACT (CONTINUED)

- Three alternatives proposed
- Proposed Section 112 MACT requirements for utility units
- Reduces mercury emissions from 48 to 34 tons by 2007
- Proposed rule to address mercury from power sector under Section 111 (revising December 2000 determination to use Section 112 MACT requirements)
- Proposed cap-and-trade approach [under Section 112(n)(1)(A)]

## Federal rule for new sources – 111(b)
Includes new utility emission limits for mercury and nickel

Guidelines for State Implementation Plans – 111(d)
Sets emission rates for existing coal-fired utility units under a cap-and-trade program administered by States
Phase 1:	2010	(solicit comment on cap level)
Phase 2:	2018	Capped at 15 tons

Sets a limit for nickel emissions from oil-fired units to ensure adequate control in State plans

- Includes *new *utility emission limits for mercury and nickel
- Guidelines for State Implementation Plans – 111(d)
- Sets emission rates for *existing* coal-fired utility units under a cap-and-trade program administered by States
- Phase 1:	2010	(solicit comment on cap level)
- Phase 2:	2018	Capped at 15 tons
- Sets a limit for nickel emissions from oil-fired units to ensure adequate control in State plans

- UTILITY MACT - PROPOSED SECTION 111 ALTERNATIVE

## Mercury Contamination in Fish

**Currently 44 states have issued fish consumption advisories for some or all of their waters due to contamination from mercury.***

**States with Fish Advisories Due to Mercury**

***Note:** For more information about the relationship between fish advisories and human exposure to mercury, see the EPA Report “America's Children and the Environment: Measures of Contaminants, Body Burdens, and Illnesses”** **available at *http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/publications.htm*

## SECTION 129 COMBUSTION RULES

- Large MWC revision – proposal September 2005; promulgation April 2006
- Small MWC litigation – remanded February 2004
- Other Solid Waste Incinerators – promulgation by November 2005
- Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators – remanded in September 2001
- Medical Waste Incinerators – remanded in March 1999

## RESIDUAL RISK 

- Risk in MACT
- General Approach
- Risk assessment information has been used to reduce regulatory requirements for low-risk sources
- Two CAA provisions have been used:
- Delisting authority (112(c)(9))
- Health threshold provision (112(d)(4))

## RESIDUAL RISK (CONTINUED)

- Where we are now
- Risk Assessment Library almost complete
- All 20 of the two- and four-year MACT residual risk standards have been started
- Five of the 24 seven-year MACT projects have been initiated

## Slide 14

**Notes:**
The graph shows residual risk test results only for facilities in each category that are subject to MACT.  The focus here is on the maximum cancer risk at each facility due solely to the emissions associated with the source category.
The higher the bar, the more facilities were included in the RR test.
The higher the percentage in parentheses, the greater the proportion of MACT-affected facilities in the category were included in the RR test.
The bluer the bottom of the bar, the more facilities were low-risk.
The redder the top of the bar, the more facilities were high risk.
Petroleum refineries and marine vessel loading are most-assessed categories.  Risk from refineries is much more significant, with most facilities exceeding 1 in a million risk.
Categories with a substantial percentage of facilities above 10 in a million include coke ovens, EO sterilizers, HON, petroleum refineries, polymers & resins II and IV, secondary lead, and shipbuilding & repair.
For PCE dry cleaners, only one facility assessed, risk > 100 in a million; this is the largest emitter and likely the highest risk facility in that category.
For magnetic tape, only one facility currently assessed, risk less than 1 in a million.
Graph shows results for 17 source categories; a total of 707 facilities have been modeled to date; 352 of those show risks less than 1 in a million.

## Slide 15

**Notes:**
Same type of information as previous slide, but this time for noncancer.
Only polymers & resins IV and secondary lead have substantial percentage above HI of 10.
Only polymers & resins 1 has substantial percentage with HI between 1 and 10.
Graph shows results for 17 categories; a total of 707 modeled facilities; 618 of those show max HI values < 0.2, 689 with max HI values < 1.0.

## RESIDUAL RISK (CONTINUED)

- Complete current standards with court-ordered deadlines
- Coke ovens – final 2005
- Dry cleaning – final 2006
- HON – final 2006*
- Halogenated Solvents – final 2006*
- Complete 4 proposals of no further controls by end of 2005*
- Industrial cooling towers
- Magnetic tape
- Ethylene oxide sterilizers
- Gasoline distribution
- *dates under negotiation

## RESIDUAL RISK (CONTINUED)

- Challenges facing residual risk program
- Develop rules which target high-risk facilities in categories without impacting low-risk ones
- Process should be simple, efficient
- Process should be implementable by States
- Develop innovative ways to reduce risks where controls are not available
- MACT may have been effective, yet risks may still be high

## RESIDUAL RISK (CONTINUED)

- Develop “total facility low-risk demonstration (TFLRD)” rule
- Develop comprehensive residual risk rule
- Considering linking MACT review to this generic approach

## URBAN AIR TOXICS – Area Source Rules

- Develop strategy for addressing area source categories, including size cut-offs, geographical coverage, and combining multiple source categories into single rulemakings
- Looking to see where we would get criteria pollutant co-benefits with our area source rules
- Ongoing litigation/mediation
- 22 area source rules started (10 are top 20 toxicity weighted)
- Plan to start additional 8 (top 20 toxicity weighted)

## AREA SOURCE EMISSION REDUCTION INITIATIVE

- Objective of initiative is to work through trade associations or similar organizations to identify and develop voluntary emission reduction programs for source categories on the area source list
- Enforceable, self certifying program
- Coordinating with other EPA offices to identify similar programs
- Tentatively identified the following source categories to be considered as candidates:
- Autobody Refinishing – approximately 50,000-60,000 sources
- Welding (part of several metal finishing/fabricating source categories)
- Nickel plating (part of plating and polishing)
- Paint and Coating Manufacturing
- Industrial Boilers

## Slide 21

**Notes:**
This week there will be a competitive announcement on the OAR grants page for community-based projects
- Up to $600,000 is available for communities who want to obtain reductions in stationary or indoor air sources
 - Additional information is at the OAQPS community project booth in the hall.

## OTHER ACTIVITIES

- Disposal of mercury switches from automobiles
- Chlor-alkali facilities
- Poly Brominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDE)
- Heavy Metals Strategy
- Stationary Source Engines
- Comprehensive Environmental Reporting System (CERTS)
- Construction Sector
- Special Projects, e.g., Alyeska, Fort Worth, Region IV Pulp & Paper Projects

**Notes:**

PDBE – a class of chemicals widely used as flame-retardants and which are included in the class of chemicals “POM” –polycyclic organic material – which is on our HAP list
Heavy Metals –
Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium cobalt, coke oven emissions, cyanide, glycol ethers, lead, manganese, mercury, fine mineral fibers, nickel, polycylic organic matter, radionuclides, selenium

## OTHER ACTIVITIES (CONTINUED)

- Risk Assessment Forum – Agency wide group
- Cumulative Risk Assessment
- Steering Committee Aimed at Methods/Processes for Cancer & Non-Cancer Risk Assessment
- Peer review
- IRIS Development
- International
- Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP)
- Stockholm Convention, Expert Group on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), Expert Group on Heavy Metals