GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee

on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property,

and Nuclear Safety, Committee on

Environment and Public Works, U.S.

Senate

May 2000 AIR POLLUTION

Emission Sources

Regulated by Multiple

Clean Air Act

Provisions

GAO/RCED-00-155

Page 1 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

Resources, Community, and

Economic Development Division

B-285320 Letr

May 31, 2000

The Honorable James M. Inhofe

Chairman, Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands,

Private Property, and Nuclear Safety

Committee on Environment and Public Works

United States Senate

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Each year industrial operations emit nearly 100 million tons of pollutants

into the nation’s air. These pollutants can make breathing difficult, form

urban smog, impair visibility and can, in some situations, cause cancer or

other serious health effects. To address these problems, the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 19901 authorized a number of regulatory programs targeted

at specific pollutants and/or specific sources of pollution. Large industrial

facilities such as petroleum refineries, chemical production plants, and

electric power plants release multiple pollutants with a variety of health

and environmental effects, and some facilities have hundreds of emission

points. Consequently, the facilities may be subject to multiple pollutantspecific and/or source-specific programs. Each regulation under these

statutory programs may have its own emission control requirements as

well as monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

Against this backdrop and with reauthorization of the Clean Air Act

pending, you asked us to provide (1) examples of emission sources subject

to regulation under more than one program authorized by the act and (2)

information on the status of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)

efforts to facilitate compliance for such sources.

Results in Brief The large industrial complexes operated by the petrochemical and refinery,

chemical manufacturing, and electric power industries are prime examples

of sources that are regulated under multiple programs of the act. For

example, emissions of nitrogen oxide from electric power plants are

1 42 U.S.C. 7401-7626. Unless otherwise stated in this report, “the act” refers to the Clean Air

Act Amendments of 1990.
B-285320

Page 2 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

controlled under six programs, including those for controlling acid rain,

ground-level ozone, and fine particles and for improving visibility. In

addition, petrochemical refineries are regulated under five different titles

of the act. Similarly, individual chemical plants could be regulated by as

many as seven different statutorily authorized programs. Specifically,

emissions are controlled under programs for reducing ozone (e. g., through

control of volatile organic compounds) and under one or more programs

for limiting emissions of toxic air pollutants (those known or suspected of

causing cancer or other serious health effects). Additional state and local

regulatory requirements can also apply to the same industrial emission

sources.

EPA has embarked on a number of initiatives to reduce the regulatory

workload and facilitate compliance for such facilities. These include two

industry-specific efforts and several other generic approaches, such as

establishing total plant-wide emission limits, that are intended to introduce

more flexibility in the overall regulatory rulemaking and permitting

processes. Two of EPA’s industry-specific efforts are the Consolidated Air

Rule and a dialogue with utilities about an integrated strategy for reducing

emissions of multiple pollutants. The proposed Consolidated Air Rule is

intended to incorporate all federal air regulations that affect the synthetic

organic chemical manufacturing industry into a single set of regulations.

This proposed rule, currently pending approval by the Office of

Management and Budget, would reduce the regulatory burden and make

compliance easier by having one set of emission controls and monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The utility dialogue began in

1995 when EPA initiated the Clean Air Power Initiative to discuss with

utilities an integrated strategy for reducing air pollution. According to EPA

and industry officials, efforts on this initiative were suspended in 1996

because of disagreement within the industry as well as with EPA over the

appropriate level for proposed sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide

reductions. However, additional dialogue about an integrated approach for

utilities took place in 1998 and 1999.

Background The Clean Air Act is a lengthy and complex statute that addresses

emissions of air pollutants from both mobile sources (such as automobiles

and trucks) and stationary sources (such as commercial and industrial

facilities, factories, and powerplants). The 11 titles of the Clean Air Act

address different aspects of the nation’s challenging and complicated air

pollution problems. The 1990 amendments established new programs and

made major changes in how industrial sources of air pollution are
B-285320

Page 3 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

controlled.2 Among the specific problems addressed by individual titles of

the act are ground level ozone, particulate matter, acid rain, toxic air

pollution, stratospheric ozone depletion, and visibility impairment. The

titles of the 1990 amendments most applicable to large industrial facilities

are:

• Title I authorizes EPA to set national ambient air quality standards to

protect human health and requires states and EPA to implement

programs to meet the standards.

• Title II contains provisions for controlling air pollution from mobile

sources, including requirements for reformulated and oxygenated fuels

that impact the operation of petroleum refineries.

• Title III establishes a new regulatory program to reduce the emissions of

hazardous air pollutants (toxic air pollutants). The statute requires EPA

to promulgate emission standards, called maximum achievable control

technology standards, which affected sources must meet.

• Title IV creates the acid deposition program to reduce the adverse

effects of acid rain by reducing emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen

oxides.

• Title V establishes a national operating permit program, intended to

consolidate all air pollution control requirements into a single,

comprehensive permit that covers all aspects of a source’s air pollution

activities.

EPA has promulgated a series of regulations to implement these

requirements. Because the act is structured to address different aspects of

the nation’s air pollution problems, some sources are regulated by more

than one statutorily required program.

To comply with air quality regulations, affected industrial sources of

pollution have made changes to their processes, deployed new pollution

control technology, and upgraded old equipment. These measures have

been successful in reducing emissions and improving the nation’s air

quality. For example, from 1970 to 1998, carbon monoxide emissions

dropped 31 percent, sulfur dioxide emissions 37 percent, and lead

emissions 98 percent. Emissions of toxic air pollution are expected to

decrease by more than 1.5 million tons a year. Although changes in the

2 We recently reported on the implementation of requirements added by the amendments.

See Air Pollution: Status of Implementation and Issues of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 (GAO/RCED-00-72, Apr. 17, 2000).
B-285320

Page 4 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

economy and other factors can affect emission trends, according to EPA air

pollution levels would be much higher without the act.

Examples of Sources

Subject to Multiple

1990 Amendments

Regulatory Programs

Industrial emission sources such as petroleum refineries, chemical

manufacturing facilities, and electric power plants are regulated under

multiple provisions of the act and numerous federal air regulations. Each

regulation has its own emission control requirements as well as

monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. Although the

regulations were developed for different purposes and under different titles

of the act, they may impose the same or similar requirements on industrial

emission sources.

Regulations Affecting the

Petrochemical and Refinery

Industry

Petrochemical and refinery facilities are regulated under five titles of the

1990 amendments and a multitude of EPA regulations designed to

implement the legislative provisions. In addition to the large number of

existing air regulations, the industry is faced with planning and

implementing measures to comply with a host of new and expected

requirements beginning in the year 2000.

Tier II Gasoline Sulfur − In December 1999, EPA announced a final

regulation to provide new Tier II motor vehicle emission and gasoline

sulfur standards. The Tier II national gasoline sulfur standard is set at 30

parts per million, beginning in 2004 with full compliance by 2007. Some

smaller refiners will be given an additional 1 to 3 years to comply.

Regional Haze − In July 1999, EPA published a final regulation requiring

states to establish goals for improving visibility in 156 national parks and

wilderness areas. States must develop strategies and plans for reducing

emissions of particle matter and other air pollutants that contribute to poor

visibility in these areas.

Off-Road and On-Road Diesel Fuel − In May 1999, EPA announced plans

to propose a rulemaking to establish new national standards to further

reduce the sulfur content of diesel fuel used by these vehicles. EPA has

revised its schedule and now plans to issue the proposal in 2001.

Gasoline Air Toxics − As required by the Clean Air Act, EPA will consider

regulatory action to control mobile source toxic emissions, including at a

minimum emissions of benzene and formaldehyde. Under terms of a court-
B-285320

Page 5 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

ordered settlement, EPA will complete this rulemaking by December 29,

2000.

Refinery Maximum Achievable Control Technology II − In September

1998, EPA proposed National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants from Petroleum Refinery Vents. The regulation is expected to be

finalized by September 2000.

Section 126 Petitions −The act gives a state the authority to petition EPA

to set emission limits for specific sources of pollution in other states that

contribute to its ozone nonattainment problems. In January 2000, EPA took

final action on the petitions filed by the states of Connecticut,

Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania. This action will require 392

facilities, including refineries and petrochemical plants, to reduce nitrogen

oxide emissions.

Urban Air Toxics Strategy − In July 1999, EPA released its Integrated

Urban Air Toxics Strategy for reducing air emissions and health risks from

toxic air pollution in urban areas. EPA identified 33 toxic air pollutants as

posing the highest risks and targeted 13 new smaller industrial and

commercial sources, including gasoline distribution and oil and natural gas

production facilities, for new national standards.

Residual Risk −The act requires EPA to assess the residual risk posed to

public health and environment after implementing technology-based

Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards for major industrial

sources, including refineries and petrochemical plants, that emit toxic air

pollutants. After this assessment, EPA may promulgate additional

regulations and require additional emission reductions for these sources.

In addition to the potential difficulty of complying with multiple

regulations, efforts to comply with one program by controlling emissions of

a pollutant from a single facility can have the unintended effect of

increasing emissions of other pollutants from elsewhere in the same

facility. For example, EPA regulations issued under the authority of title II

of the act require the petroleum industry to reduce sulfur levels in gasoline

to help produce cleaner fuels for motor vehicles. Producing these cleaner

fuels, however, requires changes in the refining process that may

potentially increase emissions of volatile organic compounds, including

such hazardous air pollutants as benzene and formaldehyde.
B-285320

Page 6 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

EPA officials told us that while they expect most refineries to work to avoid

net emissions increases through pollution prevention or other means,

increases could occur at some of them. However, agency officials said that

the overall effect on toxic emissions will be beneficial—even in virtually all

the counties where the refineries are located—in light of the larger

reductions in toxic emissions from vehicles using low sulfur gasoline.

According to EPA officials, this case illustrates how separate sets of act

requirements can serve different, but equally important purposes. The lowsulfur gasoline requirements (title II) will help to improve air quality

nationwide. On the other hand, stationary source controls on an individual

facility’s emissions reduce local air quality problems.

Regulations Affecting the

Chemical Manufacturing

Industry

The chemical manufacturing industry is regulated under multiple

provisions of the act and EPA regulations. Individual emission sources may

be subject to four or five different regulatory programs. At any given

facility, all or part of the following may apply: (1) meeting requirements for

new source construction permitting, (2) reducing emissions of hazardous

air pollutants, (3) meeting new source performance standards, and (4)

complying with visibility protection requirements.

According to industry officials, the act’s regulatory process is an especially

complex system that has overlaid a multitude of new requirements on top

of existing ones, and it is not always clear which emission reduction

requirements are applicable to a specific source. For example, some

pollutants known as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), emissions of

which are subject to regulation under title I , are also considered to be

hazardous air pollutants, which are regulated under title III.3 The same

facility thus may be subject to meeting regulatory requirements associated

with each title. According to industry officials, in some cases EPA has

recognized the title III requirement (under which the source must meet

emission levels associated with maximum achievable control technology

standards) as the most stringent, and so the VOC emission control

requirements are considered to be satisfied through compliance with the

technology standards. According to an industry official, however, EPA has,

in some situations, required that facilities report or demonstrate

compliance with both emission-reduction requirements. EPA officials said

that while facilities are subject to both requirements, they have allowed

3 Volatile organic compounds are precursors to the formation of ozone, a criteria pollutant.
B-285320

Page 7 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

some facilities to consolidate their monitoring, recordkeeping, and

reporting requirements.

Regulations Affecting the

Electric Power Industry

The electric power industry is also subject to multiple provisions of the act

and its associated regulations. Electric power generating facilities may be

subject to more than a dozen federal air regulations and initiatives that

have different objectives, timeframes, and compliance requirements. For

example, emissions of nitrogen oxides from power plants are subject to

regulation under several title I programs, including: the national ambient

air quality standards program, both as a criteria pollutant and as a

precursor to ground-level ozone, another criteria pollutant;4 the new source

review program for minimizing air pollution from large new stationary

sources; and the visibility improvement program. Nitrogen oxide emissions

are also controlled under the title IV acid deposition program, which is

targeted at specific electric utility plants. Programs for controlling

emissions from electric generating facilities (including emissions of

nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and particulates) all of which can affect

specific power plants are listed below.

Permitting Requirements:

• Title V Operating Permits − Consolidate all of the air pollution control

requirements into a single, comprehensive operating permit that covers

all aspects of a source’s year-to-year air pollution activities.

• Prevention of Significant Deterioration and New Source Review Permits

− Case by case reviews for major new or modified sources. These

permits are required to ensure that large new emissions do not cause

significant health or environmental threats and that new pollution

sources are well controlled.

Acid Deposition Requirements:

• Continuous Emissions Monitors − Measures pollutants released by

power plants sources under the acid rain program through 24-hour

monitoring.

4 The six criteria pollutants are ozone, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide,

nitrogen dioxide, and lead. They are called criteria pollutants because the agency set

permissible levels for them on the basis of “criteria” or information on the effects on public

health or welfare that may be expected from the presence of such pollutants.
B-285320

Page 8 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

• Phase I and II Sulfur Dioxide and Nitrogen Oxide Control − Reduce the

annual emission of sulfur dioxide by 10 million tons from the 1980 levels

by the year 2010 and reduce nitrogen oxides by 2 million tons.

New Source Performance Standards − Sets minimum control

requirements for new sources nationwide.

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards Implementation:

• Nitrogen Oxide Reasonable Available Control Technology − Equipment,

process, or actions that are reasonably available for controlling or

reducing nitrogen oxide emissions.

• Northeast Ozone Transport Commission − Memorandum of

understanding developed by the Commission and rules adopted by 11

northeastern states and the District of Columbia to achieve regionwide

reductions in nitrogen oxide emissions in 1999 and further reductions in

2003.

• Nitrogen Oxide State Implementation Plan Call − A requirement set by

EPA for a state to submit a revised plan for controlling nitrogen oxide

emissions.

• Section 126 Petitions − A section of the act that gives states the

authority to petition EPA to set emission limits on pollutants in other

states that contribute to the petitioning state’s ozone nonattainment

problems.

• Ozone Attainment Plans − States must submit control plans to attain the

ozone national ambient air quality standards.

Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Implementation − Establishes policies and procedures for states and

industry control of sulfur dioxide emissions.

Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Implementation:

• New Fine Particle Standards — States must meet the standards by

regulating emissions of fine air borne particles that are smaller than 2.5

microns and gaseous precursors to those particles.

Visibility Protection:

Regional Haze/Best Available Retrofit Technology Limits — States

must develop long-term strategies to achieve reasonable progress towards
B-285320

Page 9 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

natural background visibility protection for local visibility problems (1980

EPA rules) and regional haze (1999 EPA rules). States must require Best

Available Retrofit Technology for certain sources’ (including utility boilers

built between 1962 and 1977) contribution to visibility impairment, taking

into account the availability of control technologies, compliance costs,

energy impact of compliance, existing control equipment being used, and

the improvement in visibility anticipated.

According to industry officials, some of the above programs affect the

same emission sources and can make it difficult for the industry to

accurately determine the applicability of each of the requirements and to

develop effective emission control strategies.

EPA Efforts to Address

Sources Affected by

Multiple 1990

Amendments

Requirements

Recognizing that individual facilities are regulated under multiple

programs, EPA has undertaken initiatives to reduce the regulatory

workload and facilitate compliance for such facilities. These include two

industry-specific efforts—the Consolidated Air Rule and the Clean Air

Power Initiative and several crosscutting initiatives to introduce more

flexibility and stakeholder involvement in rulemaking and permitting

processes.

Consolidated Air Rule EPA selected the synthetic organic chemicals manufacturing industry for

its pilot study of the feasibility of consolidating and streamlining all federal

air quality requirements for an industry into a single set of regulations. The

resulting rule, which incorporates all of the applicable requirements for 16

different federal air regulations that apply to the synthetic organic

chemicals manufacturing industry, is referred to as the Consolidated Air

Rule .5 Participation in the consolidated rule by synthetic organic chemistry

manufacturing industry facilities will be voluntary; facilities may choose to

continue being regulated under the 16 regulations or the consolidated rule.

EPA’s objectives are to (1) reduce the regulatory burden, (2) facilitate

implementation and compliance, and (3) ensure continued environmental

protection and enforceability of the regulations. Proposed by EPA in

October 1998, the Consolidated Air Rule is currently being reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget.

5 The synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry is involved in refinery processes

and agricultural, pharmaceutical, and specialty chemical production.
B-285320

Page 10 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

The synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry was selected for

the pilot because of the large number of federal air regulations that apply to

the industry’s facilities and the similarity in many of the requirements in the

existing regulations. The industry is subject to air quality standards that are

mandated by the act for both criteria and toxic air pollutants. According to

chemical industry representatives, some requirements for controlling or

reducing emissions, monitoring, keeping records, and reporting under the

16 existing regulations are duplicative, overlapping, unclear, or

inconsistent.

EPA officials said that consolidating requirements into one set of

regulations would benefit the industry and governmental enforcement

agencies by improving compliance and enforceability and also reducing

resource needs. EPA contends that the consolidated regulations are

intended to (1) provide clear guidance on the specific requirements that

have been consolidated into the new regulation; (2) provide consistent

requirements for similar and identical facilities; (3) reorganize

requirements to be more consistent with facilities’ operating processes; (4)

lessen the costs of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting; and (5)

eliminate differences among the regulatory requirements. EPA intends that

facilities that elect to use the Consolidated Air Rule will incur no net costs

(greater than current compliance costs) and expects that the reduced

compliance burden may actually result in less cost for some facilities.

Furthermore, the consolidated rule is expected to facilitate the

implementation of and compliance with the act by making the

requirements easier to understand and also incorporating compliance

approaches that are easier to meet.

The Consolidated Air Rule is intended to maintain the current levels of

health and environmental protection benefits currently afforded by the 16

existing regulations and also ensure the same or greater degree of emission

control as the existing regulations do. However, the level of human health

and environmental protection may be greater, in some instances, because

the rule will require some facilities (that choose the consolidated rule to

meet more stringent emission reductions or requirements. For example:

• The consolidated rule will require upgraded fittings for certain storage

tanks.

• Some of the older, separate regulations have standards that permit

leakage concentrations up to 10,000 parts per million per valve, but

under the consolidated rule, all participating facilities will have to meet
B-285320

Page 11 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

more stringent standards that permit leakage concentrations of only 500

parts per million per valve.

Because of the potential for reducing monitoring, reporting, and other

regulatory requirements, some facilities are expected to elect to comply

with the consolidated rule despite the more stringent requirements.

However, according to EPA officials, some of the synthetic organic

chemical manufacturing facilities may decline to participate because the

consolidated rule will require them to achieve larger emission reductions

than they currently have to achieve. EPA officials acknowledge that

progress towards implementing the program has been slower than

expected because of difficulties in identifying a workable approach and the

unanticipated amount of work necessary to consolidate 16 regulations.

Clean Air Power Initiative EPA’s and the electric power industry’s concerns about the costs to control

multiple pollutants under several provisions of the 1990 amendments

prompted EPA to initiate the Clean Air Power Initiative. In consultation

with the electric power industry, EPA developed an integrated regulatory

strategy for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides emitted from power plants.

The purpose of this collaborative effort was to seek new approaches to

pollution control that would improve public health and the environment,

cost less, rely on market mechanisms, and reduce the number and

complexity of current and expected requirements. EPA began the Clean Air

Power Initiative in 1995 by meeting with interested stakeholders to discuss

more cost-effective alternatives to pollution control and developing a

model that could analyze the costs and emissions implications of different

reduction scenarios for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.
B-285320

Page 12 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

The lack of complete support among the electric power industry ended the

initial program effort in late 1996 without agreement, according to EPA

officials. Although EPA believed that the best time to discuss integrated

multipollutant reduction strategies was prior to issuing new requirements,

some stakeholders believed that it would be premature or inappropriate to

discuss strategies for achieving reductions not yet in proposed or final

regulatory requirements, according to an EPA official. According to

officials at Edison Electric Institute,6 the initiative ended because (1) there

was substantial disagreement over the science underlying EPA’s proposed

new controls for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides and (2) EPA could not

provide the industry any regulatory certainty without the act being

amended, which neither industry nor EPA wanted to pursue.

In late 1998 and throughout 1999, EPA staff participated in the Edison

Electric Institute Air Quality Integration Dialogue at which EPA and

industry staff explored an integrated approach for controlling pollution

from the electric power industry. The dialogue had broad industry

participation as well as EPA staff participation. The White House Climate

Change Task Force also attended these meetings. The dialogue was

intended to promote a free exchange of ideas and analysis at a staff level

concerning new or potentially upcoming regulatory actions to address air

emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, and mercury.

At one dialogue meeting, EPA presented the results of a study that it had

recently completed on hypothetical options for controlling the four

pollutants. EPA’s analysis showed that having advanced knowledge of

potential requirements for all four pollutants could allow industry to

pursue different and less costly compliance strategies than they would if

the pollutants were addressed one by one.

EPA continues to believe that over the next several years it will be

necessary for the power industry to achieve large reductions of sulfur

dioxide and nitrogen oxides. According to agency officials, there continues

to be considerable interest by EPA and the industry in developing an

integrated approach to address cost-effective strategies for implementing

multiple air regulations. EPA has had a number of follow up discussions

and expects to continue interactions with industry representatives on this

topic.

6 Edison Electric Institute is the association of U. S. shareholder-owned electric companies,

international affiliates, and industry associates worldwide.
B-285320

Page 13 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

Other Initiatives to

Address Multiple

Regulation Issues

In addition to the Consolidated Air Rule and Clean Air Power Initiative,

EPA has developed other regulatory approaches to provide industry more

flexibility to achieve the necessary reductions in air pollution, while still

providing accountability for the results. For example, in implementing air

quality standards, EPA guidance for state programs allows facilities to

average the emissions from multiple emission points and to use trading

programs in order to provide more flexibility in how and where an

industrial facility chooses to reduce its air emissions. Also, based on the

results of the acid rain emission trading program and the Northeast Ozone

Transport Commission’s nitrogen oxide emissions allowance trading

program, EPA has recently developed a model trading program to assist

states in achieving regional nitrogen oxide emissions reductions.7 In some

cases, EPA has worked with states to set plant-wide limits that control total

emissions that are allowed to be released from an individual plant, but

allows the plant flexibility in choosing how and where to reduce emissions.

Since 1990, EPA has increased stakeholders’ involvement, including

affected industries, in developing regulatory requirements and establishing

implementation strategies. According to EPA, this involvement has resulted

in better-coordinated programs and requirements. EPA cited its

development of integrated strategies for implementing the ozone and

particulate matter national air quality standards and the regional haze

program as examples of increased stakeholder involvement. EPA has also

worked with individual industries to eliminate duplicating or overlapping

regulatory requirements. For example, EPA has worked with industry

organizations—such as the those for the aerospace and shipbuilding

industries—to set equivalent emission limits for VOCs and toxic air

pollutants and with the pharmaceutical industry to ensure that storage tank

provisions in the toxic air pollutant standard are equivalent to similar

provisions in the new source performance standard.

7 For a discussion of the acid rain program, see Acid Rain: Emissions Trends and Effects in

the Eastern United States (GAO/RCED-00-47, Mar. 9, 2000)
B-285320

Page 14 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

Furthermore, EPA and various stakeholders began, in 1993, to identify

opportunities for developing “cleaner, cheaper, smarter” environmental

protection strategies that would consider the unique circumstances of

different industries. EPA, along with states, environmental and public

interest groups, worked with six industries—petroleum refining, printing,

iron and steel, computer and electronics, metal finishing, and auto

manufacturing—to find better ways to manage environmental

responsibilities. With the completion of the Common Sense Initiative —

one of EPA’s efforts to “reinvent” environmental regulation—EPA is

applying the lessons learned in new sector work.8

According to EPA, the title V operating permit program was designed to

make it easier for industry sources to understand and comply with

emission control requirements of the 1990 amendments. The program

allows facilities to consolidate all of the air pollution control requirements

of the act into a single document called an operating permit. EPA has

helped facilitate the issuance of permits in California and Oklahoma that

cover the regulatory requirements of the act, such as air toxic emission

standards, new source performance standards, and state implementation

plans. According to EPA, these streamlined permits result in reduced

compliance costs associated with monitoring, record keeping, and

reporting for industries.

Agency Comments We provided EPA with a draft of this report for review and comment. EPA

commented that the report (1) correctly points out that industries such as

utilities and petroleum refiners must comply with emission reduction

requirements under more than one Clean Air Act program and (2) notes the

agency’s efforts to explore ways to consolidate or coordinate multiple

requirements with a variety of industry sectors.

However, EPA said that our report’s focus on two industry-specific

initiatives does not give a full picture of other ways in which EPA is

working closely with industries that are affected by multiple regulatory

requirements. According to EPA, the agency has helped industries

8 We have reported on EPA’s efforts to provide more flexibility and “reinvent” environmental

regulation; for example, Environmental Protection: Challenges Facing EPA’s Efforts to

Reinvent Environmental Regulation (GAO/RCED-97-155, July 2, 1997) and Environmental

Protection: EPA’s and States’ Efforts to Focus State Enforcement Programs on Results

(GAO/RCED-98-113, May 27, 1998).
B-285320

Page 15 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

impacted by the multiple regulatory requirements by (1) providing

increased flexibility in meeting regulatory requirements, (2) involving

stakeholders in developing integrated strategies and new rules, and (3)

conducting other industry-specific initiatives. For example, EPA cited its

efforts to develop integrated strategies for implementing the ozone and

particulate matter national air quality standards and the regional haze

program as examples of increased stakeholder involvement. We

emphasized industry-specific efforts because specific industries were the

focus of our objectives. However, we agree that other EPA efforts can help

address compliance issues faced by industries with facilities that emit

pollutants regulated by multiple Clean Air Act provisions. Accordingly, we

have incorporated additional details in the report on EPA’s efforts to

increase flexibility and stakeholder involvement.

The agency suggested a number of editorial and technical changes and

provided additional information clarifying why industries are subject to

multiple regulatory programs and detailing EPA’s efforts to help reduce the

regulatory burden for these industries. We incorporated these changes and

additional information in the report where appropriate. Appendix I

contains EPA’s written comments.

Scope and

Methodology

To obtain information on examples of emission sources subject to

regulation under more than one program authorized by the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990, we interviewed and received information from

representatives of selected industrial associations, including the Chemical

Manufacturers Association, the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners, the

American Forest & Paper Association, the National Petrochemical and

Refiners Association, and the Edison Electric Institute. EPA agreed that

these associations represented a good cross section of large industrial

groups that are regulated under multiple provisions of the act. We asked

representatives from the industry groups to provide examples of industrial

facilities being regulated under multiple provisions of the act, and the

difficulties or challenges associated with them. In some cases, the industry

representatives provided examples.

To obtain information on the status of EPA’s efforts to reduce the regulatory

workload and facilitate compliance for such sources, we held discussions

with EPA officials responsible for preparing and implementing many of the

regulations affecting large industrial emission sources and for developing

initiatives to increase flexibility and industry involvement in the regulatory

process. We also asked EPA officials to comment on some of the issues
B-285320

Page 16 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

raised by the industry representatives. We also interviewed industry

officials to get their perspective on EPA’s efforts to address the problems

caused by multiple regulations through pilot projects or initiatives such as

the Consolidated Air Regulation and the Clean Air Power Initiative. We

focused on these two efforts because they are the agency’s only industryspecific efforts to address issues associated with multiple regulations.

We performed our work from September 1999 through May 2000 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

As arranged with your office, unless you announce its contents earlier, we

plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from the date of this

report. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Honorable

Carol M. Browner, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, and

other interested parties. We will make copies available to others on request.

If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-

6111 or William F. McGee at (919) 899-3781. Key contributors to this report

were Harry C. Everett; Joseph L. Turlington, James B. Hayward; and

DeAndrea Michelle Leach.

Sincerely yours,

David G. Wood

Associate Director,

Environmental Protection Issues
Page 17 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions
Page 18 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions

Appendix I

Comments From the Environmental Apendxies

Protection Agency ApendxiI
Appendix I

Comments From the Environmental

Protection Agency

Page 19 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions
Appendix I

Comments From the Environmental

Protection Agency

Page 20 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions
Appendix I

Comments From the Environmental

Protection Agency

(160501) Letr Page 21 GAO/RCED-00-155 Clean Air Act Provisions
Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of

reports are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out to

the Superintendent of Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit

cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list

from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone

phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain

these lists.

Orders by Internet:

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet,

send an e-mail message with “info” in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

To Report Fraud,

Waste, or Abuse in

Federal Programs

Contact one:

• Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

• e-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)

United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00