EPA Review of

Key Regulatory Updates

29th Annual Regional Phosphate Conference

October 8, 2014

Beverly Banister, Director

Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division 

U.S. EPA; Atlanta, GA
•Meeting the Challenges Ahead

•Regulatory Updates

o Clean Air

o Action on Climate Change

o Waters of the U.S. 

Proposed Rule

o Executive Order on 

Improving Chemical 

Facility Safety and Security

Outline
1. Making a Visible Difference in 

Communities Across the Country

2. Addressing Climate Change and 

Improving Air Quality

3. Taking Action on Toxics and 

Chemical Safety

4. Protecting Water: A Precious, 

Limited Resource

5. Launching a New Era of State, 

Tribal, and Local Partnerships

6. Embracing EPA as a High Performing 

Organization

7. Working Toward a Sustainable Future

EPA: Meeting the Challenges Ahead

Administrator 

Gina McCarthy
4

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

• The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set two types of NAAQS for 

common air pollutants (“criteria pollutants”):

• Primary standards to protect public health, including the health of sensitive 

populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly, with an adequate 

margin of safety; and 

• Secondary standards to protect public welfare, including effects on soils, water, 

crops, vegetation, manmade materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility and 

climate

• 6 criteria pollutants:

• Ground-level ozone (smog) (O3) – Lead (Pb)

• Particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) – Sulfur dioxide (SO2)

• Carbon monoxide (CO) – Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
5

• EPA required to review (and revise 

if appropriate) each NAAQS on a 5-

year cycle, with input from the 

Clean Air Act Scientific Advisory 

Committee (CASAC)

• Different considerations apply to 

setting NAAQS than to achieving 

them

• Setting NAAQS: health and 

environmental effects

• Achieving NAAQS: account for cost, 

technical feasibility, time needed to 

attain

NAAQS

http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
5-Year NAAQS Review Process

Integrated Review Plan

Integrated Science Assessment:

Risk/Exposure Assessment

Workshop on 

science-policy 

issues

Public hearings

and comments on 

proposal

FINAL 

RULE Interagency 

review

Interagency 

review

Agency decision 

making and draft 

proposal notice

Agency decision 

making and draft final 

notice

CASAC review and 

public comment

CASAC review and public comment POLICY 

ASSESSMENT

PROPOSED 

RULE

Peer-reviewed 

scientific 

studies

SCIENCE ASSESSMENT

RULEMAKING
NAAQS Reviews: Status Update

(as of September 10, 2014)

Ozone Lead Primary

NO2

Primary 

SO2

Secondary

NO2 and 

SO2

PM CO

Last Review

Completed 

(final rule 

signed)

Mar 2008 Oct 2008 Jan 2010 Jun 2010 Mar 2012 Dec 2012 Aug 2011

Recent or 

Upcoming 

Major 

Milestone(s)1

August 2014

Final REAs

Final PA

Dec 1, 2014 2

Proposed rule

Oct 1, 2015 2

Final rule

May 2014

Final PA

2014

Proposed 

rule

June 2014

Final IRP

Fall 2014

2

nd Draft ISA 

REA 

Planning 

Document

Summer 

2014

Final IRP

Fall 2014

Draft IRP

Kickoff 

workshop 

for next 

review 

targeted

for early 

2015

TBD3

1

IRP – Integrated Review Plan; ISA – Integrated Science Assessment; REA – Risk and Exposure Assessment; PA – Policy 

Assessment

2 Bold and underlined dates indicate court-ordered or settlement agreement deadlines

3 TBD = to be determined

Additional information regarding current and previous NAAQS reviews is available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs 7
8

• After a new or revised standard is finalized, EPA embarks on a 

multi-year process to:

• Figure out which areas are not meeting the standard (based on 

monitoring data)

• Designate “nonattainment” areas

• Require states to submit plans to show how they will meet the 

standards via controls on key emissions sources

• Require states to come into attainment with the standards within 

specific timeframe (usually ~5-10 years, but sometimes longer if air 

quality problems are really severe)

Implementing the NAAQSs
9

State Implementation Plans 

• States must develop a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for each 

nonattainment area

• SIP lays out controls that will be applied to sources to reduce emissions and 

bring area into attainment 

• EPA must approve each SIP

• States must monitor progress and reach attainment by deadlines

• Penalties imposed for failure to attain

• Each time new National Ambient Air Quality Standards are set, 

State must develop new SIP (every 5-10 years)
10

Federal Programs Help

• Federal measures assist states 

in reaching attainment

• Key programs include:

• Mobile source emissions/fuel 

requirements

• Regional programs to reduce 

transported pollution 

• Emissions control requirements 

for stationary sources

http://epa.gov/oaqps001/urbanair/sipstatus/overview.html
In Summary -- Air Quality Management Cycle

WHAT REDUCTIONS 

ARE NECESSARY?

HOW TO 

ACHIEVE

IMPLEMENT

EVALUATE

RESULTS

ESTABLISH

GOALS

-- National Rules

-- State Plans

-- Controls on Sources 

-- Limits on new sources

-- Compliance & Enforcement

--Monitoring

--Modeling

--Benefits Analysis

-- Using science 

to set standards

-- Monitoring

-- Inventories

-- Modeling
•Ozone

• PM2.5

• SO2

12

NAAQS Schedules and Implementation

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ 
2015 Ozone NAAQS Review

• April 29, 2014 court issued ruling on schedule

• Propose December 1, 2014

• Final October 1, 2015

• The EPA staff conclusions for the 

primary and secondary standards 

are based on consideration of: 

• The scientific evidence discussed in 

the Integrated Science Assessment

• Estimates of Ozone exposures and 

risks estimated in the Health Risk 

and Exposure Assessment 

• Advice received from CASAC

• Consideration of public comments received as CASAC meetings

13

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html
2015 Ozone NAAQS Review

• EPA staff conclude available health evidence and 

exposure/risk information call into question the 

adequacy of the public health protection provided by 

the current primary standard 

• EPA staff concluded it is appropriate to consider revising the 

level within the range of 70 ppb to 60 ppb

• EPA staff conclude available vegetation and ecosystem 

effects evidence and exposure/risk calls into question 

the adequacy of the public welfare protection 

provided by the current secondary standard

• EPA staff concluded it is appropriate to consider a range of 

levels from 17 to 7 ppm-hrs, expressed in terms of the W126 

index

14

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html
• 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS Designations 

• 8/19/14: 120-day letters to States and Tribes

• 10/29/14: State/Tribal comments due on EPA's intended 

designations

• 12/14: Final area designations for most areas*

• 2015 and beyond: Near-road monitors installed and 

producing data

15

PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation

* Designations for some areas are deferred. Final designations for deferred areas expected no later than December 2015.

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/particlepollution/ 
• 2010 SO2 NAAQS Implementation 

• SO2 area designation and implementation strategy, guidance, and assistance documents available 

(see http://www.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/implement.html) 

• SO2Strategy provides for three rounds of designations:

• First round of designations 

• Promulgated on August 5, 2013 (effective October 2013) 

• Attainment SIPs due April 2015

• Attainment date October 2018

• Second round BASED ON MODELING by December 2017 

(effective by February 2018)

• Attainment SIPs due August 2019

• Attainment date February 2023

• Third round BASED ON MONITORING by December 2020 

(effective by February 2021)

• Attainment SIPs due August 2022

• Attainment date February 2026

• Proposed consent decree between U.S. and SC/NRDC could result in additional 

round of designations for source areas

16

2010 SO2 NAAQS Implementation
17

Comparative Trends since 1980
• The “Risk and Technology Review” (RTR) for Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing (40 

CFR 63, Subpart AA) and Phosphate Fertilizers Production (Subpart BB) and the 

technology reviews for 40 CFR 60 Subparts T, U, V, W, and X are expected to be 

proposed on 10/21/14 and promulgated by 7/21/15

• There will be one package which will cover all of these various subparts

• There are a total of 13 facilities nationwide subject to this rulemaking

• In 2010, EPA sent out information request letters 

(CAA Section 114 letters) to all facilities for emissions 

data and requested additional information from select

facilities in 2014

• EPA has worked closely with industry on this effort 

and options for addressing fugitive emissions from 

gypsum dewatering stacks

• Mercury and hydrogen fluoride emissions from 

calciners were previously unregulated; those emissions 

are being evaluated in this current proposal

18

Phosphate Industry-Specific Rules

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html and http://www.epa.gov/oecaerth/monitoring/programs/caa/newsource.html
Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction (SSM) SIP Call

• 6/30/11: Sierra Club petitioned EPA for rulemaking regarding SSM provisions 

in State Implementation Plans (SIPs)

• Nationally - 39 states & 7 locals noted in the petition - Includes all 8 Southeastern States & 4 

locals

• 2/12/13 Proposed rule: 

• 36 states submit their revised state plans to the Agency

• EPA ‘s proposed rule would ensure states have plans in place that require industrial facilities 

across the country to follow air pollution rules during times when the facility is starting up or 

shutting down, or when a malfunction occurs 

• 9/5/14 Supplemental Proposal on Affirmative Defense Provisions: 

• Proposes to revise the 2/12/13 proposal to reflect a recent court opinion regarding 

affirmative defense provisions 

• Public hearing held October 7, 2014; comments accepted until November 6, 2014

• Re-negotiated signature deadline for the final notice is May 22, 2015

• States will have 18 months to submit SIPs following effective date of the final rule

www.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus
EPA Actions to Reduce Carbon Pollution

• Building a 21st century transportation 

sector

• Cutting energy waste in homes, 

businesses, and factories

• Reducing methane and HFCs

• Preparing the U.S. for the impacts of 

climate change

• Helping lead international efforts to 

address global climate change

• Reducing carbon pollution from power 

plants (e.g., EPA’s “Clean Power Plan”)

20
President’s June 2013 Directive to EPA:

Develop carbon pollution standards, regulations or guidelines, as 

appropriate, for:

1. New power plants

• Proposed January 8, 2014

2. Modified and reconstructed power plants

• Proposed June 2014

• Final June 2015

3. Existing power plants

• Proposed Guidelines June 2014

• Final Guidelines June 2015

• State Plans due June 2016

GHG NSPS Requirements for Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants

http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

15
This proposal will: 

• Reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants, for which there are currently no 

national limits

• Maintain an affordable, reliable energy system and will help move us toward a cleaner, 

more stable environment for future generations

• By 2030, reduce nationwide carbon dioxide emissions, from the power sector by 

approximately 30% from 2005 levels, with significant reductions to begin by 2020

• Cut hundreds of thousands of tons of harmful particle pollution, sulfur dioxide and 

nitrogen oxides as a co-benefit

• Proposal will avoid an estimated 2,700 to 6,600 premature deaths and 140,000 to 150,000 asthma 

attacks in 2030

• Provide important health protections to the most vulnerable, such as children and older 

Americans

• Lead to health and climate benefits worth an estimated $55 billion to $93 billion in 

2030

• From soot and smog reductions alone, for every dollar invested through the Clean 

Power Plan - - American families will see up to $7 in health benefits 

22

Summary - 111(d) Existing Power Plant Proposal
Next Steps

• The proposed rule, as well as information about how to 

comment and supporting technical information, are available 

online at: http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

• EPA held 4 public hearings the week of July 28th in Denver, 

Atlanta, Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C. – over 2,700 people 

attended

• Comments are due December 1, 2014

• Comments on the proposal should be identified by Docket ID 

Number: 

EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602

23
2010 SO2 NAAQS

• Clarifying protection for streams and wetlands under the Clean Water Act

• Rulemaking was requested by many 

stakeholders

• Supported by peer-reviewed science

• Provides more benefits to the public 

than costs

• Input is Important

• Outreach is underway across 

the country

• Comment period is open until 

October 20, 2014

Waters of the U.S. Proposed Rule

www.epa.gov/uswaters
2010 SO2 NAAQS

• On August 1, 2013, the Executive 

Order on Improving Chemical 

Facility Safety and Security 

directed the Federal Government 

to:

• Improve operational coordination 

with state and local partners 

• Enhance Federal agency 

coordination and information 

sharing 

• Modernize policies, regulations and 

standards

• Work with stakeholders to identify 

best practices. 

EO on Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security

https://www.osha.gov/chemicalexecutiveorder/index.html
Questions?

26