Questions regarding Hazardous Air Pollutants in the 1990 Amendments to US Clean Air Act.

Pages refer to book "Hazardous Air Pollutants", by Jeffrey W.    Bradstreet,  Noyes Publications  (1995)

1.    What is residual risk? 

       Health risk caused by HAP emissions after MACT control technology has been installed.  Page 48  Law states that if the residual risk is in excess of 1 in a million to the most exposed individual (MEI) will require EPA to promulgate residual risk emission standards (by 2001).

 

2.    How will residual risk be determined?

       Estimate HAP concentration in ambient air using dispersion models or measured HAP ambient air concentrations.  Then use unit risk factor (cancer) or other health risk numbers to calculate the health risk.      This is supposed to be done 8 years after MACT identified.  However, as of April 2004, residual risk calculation procedures appear to not yet been identified.

 

3.    What was the basis for the old EPA NESHAPs rule(National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants)?

       The basis was health risk based.   The standards were to provide ample margin of safety to protect human health.   Page 3

 

4.    Why did the old NESHAPs rule fail?  They had established only 8 HAPs in the old NEHSHAP.

       EPA was very slow in identifying health risks caused by HAPs so the process of identifying HAPs which would have National Emission Standards for HAPs was stalled.  Also, some HAPs are so toxic that there is no safe level and EPA tried to establish a safe level but Federal Court cases said this was not OK.

 

5.    What inspired the EPA to act on the vinyl chloride hazardous air pollutant issue?

 

       Court case based on incidence of cancer in workers at BF PVC Goodrich plant.  Oct. 1976 EPA set technology based standard based on cost.  Lawsuit said must have NESHAP standard based on human health (zero risk).  EPA took no action for 8 years.  Then EPA withdrew rule because it was too costly to control vinyl chloride.  Nat. Resources Defense Council sued EPA in 1985.  Court said not enough margin of safety.  In the cancer risk assessment business, there is no level of vinyl chloride which is safe so this is a dilemma.

 

6.    What is MACT?

 

       "Maximum achievable control technology" which is the control technology already installed on a specific HAP emission source category.       "Best of the Best"

 

7.    What does the "112" number refer to?

 

       Section 112 of Title I the old Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970.

 

8.    How is MACT for new sources determined?

       Best of the best installed on plants of the specific source category.

 

9.    How is MACT for existing sources determined?

       MACT "floor" is the average of the top 12% of that source category.  Page 37

 

10.  If the brilliant researchers at the Univ. of Wash. develop a great new air pollution control process that will reduce dioxin emissions from municipal refuse incinerators and hospital waste incinerators by 95% compared to the best dioxin controls on incinerators today, and the cost has been demonstrated to be 10% more than the cost of the best dioxin controls on incinerators today, explain how this brilliant new dioxin control technology fits into the "picture" according the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments.

 

       This new air pollution control process must be installed and working on a full scale municipal refuse incinerator in the US in order to qualify as MACT (i.e. "Best of the Best").

 

11.  What is the MACT Hammer?      EPA must have a MACT for everything by 2000.

 

       If EPA fails to set MACT standards within 18 months of the scheduled due date, major sources must submit permit applications and have MACT established on a case by case basis.  This was written into the 1990 CAAA by Congress to ensure that things happened because EPA has a history of being way behind schedule.

 

12.  What is the purpose of the MACT Hammer? 112j

       To ensure that something happens with regards to getting the MACT standards applied to the specific HAP sources, even if EPA is slow and does not get the MACT standards identified.

 

13.  Who gets hit with the "hammer" in the MACT Hammer?

 

       Major emission sources(i.e. industrial plants) who have to prepare and submit a permit to operate applications and have MACT determined on a case by case basis.  EPA might get hit by someone for failure to meet Congress established schedule.

 

14.  Why does it seem to be so difficult to get industry to control emissions of hazardous pollutants into the air compared to getting industry to reduce emissions of hazardous pollutants into water or onto land (soil)?

 

       Federal fines and criminal penalties are much greater for illegal disposal of hazardous pollutants into water or onto soil.  It has been relatively easy to emit HAPs into air because of lack of federal standards and lack of state standards (i.e. atmospheric air has a history of being a free place to dispose of wastes and there are no "air right" laws which are similar to "water right" and "property right laws"). 

 

15.  What is an offset?

       An industrial plant can increase the emission of one HAP if they decrease (offset) the emission of a more toxic HAP.

 

16.  What is a "major source" of Hazardous Air Pollutants?

       Greater than 10 tons/year of any one HAP.

       Greater than 25 tons/year of a combination of HAPs.

 

17.  What is a MACT Standard?

       Maximum achievable control technology applied to a specific emission source category.

 

18.  What is the goal of the Urban Area HAP Program?  (Section 112 k)

       To reduce human cancer incidence by 75% in Urban region by reducing emissions of HAPs from Area sources.

 

19.  What is a HAP area Source?

       Small HAP emission sources in urban areas such as chrome plating tanks, etc.

 

20.  Why did EPA select Dry Cleaners as one of the first HAP emission sources to establish controls (MACT?).

       Court case required EPA to act on this in specified time period.

 

21.  How is EPA identifying the 30 HAPs of most concern in Urban areas?

       HAPs with greatest threat to public health in urban areas.  Studies in Houston, Baltimore, & Chicago, etc. completed.  Monitoring, receptor modeling, health research, emission inventories.  Fed. Law required this to be completed by Nov. 15, 1995.  EPA said it could not do this because of many reasons including "risk assessments in urban areas will be uncertain" and "research to overcome or address the data limitations will likely be both expensive and time-consuming".  Sierra Club filed two lawsuits in US District court regarding this matter.  EPA published a notice of a proposed partial consent degree to address these two lawsuits.  EPA is supposedly actively engaged in working on the identification of the 30 or more worst HAPs and expects to propose strategy to control their emissions in urban areas by mid-1998.  Ref.  Page 23 2nd Report to Congress of the Hazardous Air Poll. Program under the Clean Air Act (Oct. 1997).

       Question:  Why do you think EPA delayed doing anything about the 30 or 33 HAPs of most concern in urban areas (i.e. the HAPs having greatest harm to human health)?

 

22.  EPA has had difficulties meeting the deadlines established by Congress regarding the Title III program on hazardous air pollutants.  From an EPA  video tape, what is your opinion regarding the reasons for not meeting the deadlines?

 

       Inexperienced EPA personnel, lack of funds and resources to get job done, slowness of Govt bureaucracy, etc.

 

23.  What is the specific pollutants or 7 pollutants program?  112 c6

       CAAA of 1990 identified alkylated lead, POM, hexachorobenzene, mercury, PCBs, dioxins, & furans.  Need to develop strategy, identify sources, reduce emissions.  Must use BACT (not GACT) to control emissions of these pollutants.  Congress specifically identified these 7 so that they could force EPA to get going on this HAPs.

 

24.  What is GACT?

       Generally available control technology.

 

25.  When is GACT used?

       Applied for control of the 30 HAPs identified in the Urban Area HAP Program.

 

26.  What is the toxic equivalent approach?

       There are many dioxin compounds and furan compounds so EPA is using a "toxic equivalent approach" to translate the health toxicity from the different dioxin compounds into a one category toxicity for dioxins and another category toxicity for Furans.

 

27.  MACT Schedule was published in Dec. 3, 1993.  What does this schedule show?

 

       NESHAP promulgated schedule for MACT standards for emission source categories.

 

28.  Where does the funding come from to finance the HAP Title 3 and Title 5 (Operating Permits) Programs at the State level?

 

       Emission sources pay fees for operating permits and permit to construct.

 

29.  Why is the permit to construct and permit to operate a HAP source open to the "public of significance"?

 

       Public can find out what the HAPs are being emitted into the air in their neighborhood.  Also, public can find out the HAPs which workers in that plant are being exposed to.  Industry has historically attempted to keep pollutant emissions from public. 

 

       SARA Title III requires industry to report annually emissions of pollutants into air, land, & water and this law was made because of the Union Carbide incidents in Bhopal, India and in West Virginia.  This info. is supposed to be readily available to public.  However, "Homeland Security" issues may be used to hide this information from the public supposedly to prevent terrorists from using the information.

 

30.  What were the National Academy of Sciences risk study objectives?

 

       Need to identify default procedures for calc. of health risk when we do not have sufficient information.  Need to develop a tiered approach for risk assessment.  Need to have an iterative approach to fill in data gaps.

 

31.  Why a special study on H2S?   What were the results of this study?   

 

       H2S is not on the EPA HAP list.  Main concern is accidental release. EPA found no threat from normal emissions.  EPA decided to do nothing about H2S.

 

32.  Why a special study on mercury?

 

       Mercury found in food, etc. and so concern (organic mercury compounds found in fish in great lakes by some grad student inspired interest in mercury in water and later studies identified mercury emissions into air are a significant portion of the injection of mercury into the environment) .  Mercury from all sources studied.  Public health and environmental effects, cost of control, etc. looked into.

 

33   What is the Great Waters study all about?  How does this study tie into 112d (Emission standards or MACT standards)?

 

       HAP deposition into water is a significant source of hazardous pollutants in water of Great Lakes and other waters in United States.  Study might recommend greater reductions of HAP emissions.