[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 233 (Monday, December 7, 2009)]
[Unknown Section]
[Pages 64318-64339]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X09-181207]
[[Page 64318]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
Statement of Priorities
OVERVIEW
Established in 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency is the primary
federal agency responsible for protecting public health and the
environment by improving air, land and water quality. EPA Administrator
Lisa Jackson has embarked on an ambitious effort to restore momentum to
EPA's core programs while also tackling emerging challenges such as
climate change. Underlying this effort is the premise that
environmental protection and economic growth are mutually achievable -
that we can increase economic activity and create new jobs while we
reduce harmful emissions and the dependence on polluting sources of
energy. The Agency is dedicated to upholding the following values in
its efforts to maintain the strongest level of environmental
protection:
Scientific Integrity. The public health and environmental laws that
Congress has enacted depend on rigorous adherence to the best available
science. Scientific findings should be independent, using well-
established scientific methods, including peer review, to assure rigor,
accuracy, and impartiality.
Following the Rule of Law. EPA recognizes that respect for
Congressional mandates and judicial decisions is the hallmark of a
principled regulatory agency. Where EPA exercises discretion, it must
be conducted in good faith and in keeping with the directives of
Congress and the courts.
Transparency. EPA will apply the principles of transparency and
openness to the rulemaking process. Public trust in the Agency demands
that EPA reach out to all stakeholders fairly and impartially, that EPA
consider the views and data presented carefully and objectively, and
that EPA fully disclose the information that forms the bases for our
decisions.
Environmental Justice. For generations, pollution has been a
disproportionate problem in low-income and minority communities,
particularly for the children in those communities. EPA is initiating
major improvements with outreach and interaction with those who have
been historically underrepresented in agency decision making, including
the disenfranchised in cities and rural areas, communities of color,
native Americans, and people disproportionately impacted by pollution.
EPA will identify, where possible, the public health or environmental
impacts of policies, programs and activities on these communities and
take action, as appropriate, to address such impacts.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
Environmental protection and economic growth are complementary goals.
With its partners, EPA is overseeing investment from the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 in ``green jobs'' and a
healthier environment. To reach this goal, $7.22 billion has been
designated for projects and programs administered by EPA. To support a
green economy and a green environment, EPA lends support to innovation,
investment and technology in the following environmental areas:
Water Infrastructure Improvements for Communities: $4 billion
for state clean water funding and $2 billion for state
drinking water funding. This new infusion of money will
help states and local government finance many of the
overdue improvements to public waters and wastewater
systems that are essential to protecting public health and
assuring good water quality. 20 percent of this funding
will be targeted towards green infrastructure, water and
energy efficiency, and environmentally innovative projects.
Brownfield Restorations: $100 million for grants to clean up
and return former industrial and commercial sites to their
communities for productive use. $5 million dollars is set
aside for job training in the assessment and remediation of
these sites.
Diesel Emissions Reductions: $300 million for grants and loans
to help regional, state and local governments, tribes, and
non-profit organizations with projects that reduce harmful
diesel emissions from vehicles like school buses, garbage
trucks, construction equipment, marine vessels, and
locomotives. Reducing emissions helps to reduce the risk of
asthma, respiratory illnesses and premature deaths.
Accelerating Superfund Site Cleanups: $600 million for the
cleanup of hazardous wastes from sites. EPA will use this
funding to increase the pace of these cleanups already
underway, and return the sites to our communities for
productive use.
Accelerating Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanups: $200
million for the cleanup of petroleum leaks that occurred
from underground storage tanks. There are approximately
100,000 sites eligible for cleanup where leaks threaten
soil or water quality or result in fire or explosion
hazards.
Responsible Oversight: $20 million for the EPA Office of
Inspector General for audits, evaluations, investigations
and oversight of the Recovery Act funding to ensure that
every penny is spent on projects that benefit Americans.
EPA has a number of successes in fulfilling its obligations under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
In the first EPA-related award under the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, EPA devoted nearly $100 million in
environmental funding to be invested in Colorado. This
includes more than $65 million for improving drinking water
and wastewater infrastructure, $2.5 million for leaking
underground storage tanks and $2 million for revitalizing
Brownfield sites.
In the single largest grant in its history, EPA awarded more
than $430 million to the State of New York for wastewater
infrastructure projects that will create thousands of jobs,
jumpstart local economies and protect human health and the
environment across the state. The state will use the
Recovery Act grant to provide money to municipal and county
governments and wastewater utilities for projects to
protect lakes, ponds and streams in communities across New
York.
The Iron Mountain Mine Superfund site near Redding,
California, will receive between $10-25 million that will
make it possible to dredge, treat, and dispose of heavy-
metal contaminated sediments in the Spring Creek Arm of the
Kewich Reservoir in 18 months, rather than three years.
EPA's portion of the ARRA will encourage further growth in a greener
workforce by creating sustainable jobs that help produce cleaner
drinking water, purer air, environmentally friendly urban and rural re-
development, and reduced greenhouse gases. For new information on the
state-by-state distributions for EPA's ARRA funds, see http://
www.epa.gov/recovery.
[[Page 64319]]
HIGHLIGHTS OF EPA'S REGULATORY PLAN
In developing its agenda, five priorities form the core of EPA's
regulatory focus:
Climate Change
In the U.S., energy-related activities account for three-quarters of
human-generated greenhouse gas emissions, mostly in the form of carbon
dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels. More than half the energy-
related emissions come from large stationary sources such as power
plants, while about a third comes from transportation. Industrial
processes (such as the production of cement, steel, and aluminum),
agriculture, forestry, other land use, and waste management are also
important sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.
This year, EPA is taking the first Federal regulatory steps to address
the problem of global climate change.
New Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting. In the fall of 2009, EPA will
publish a final rule requiring mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas
emissions from targeted sectors of the economy. This rule, funds for
which were designated by the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act,
establishes monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements on
facilities that produce, import, or emit greenhouse gases above a
specific threshold in order to provide comprehensive and accurate data
to support a range of future climate policy options.
Recognition that Greenhouse Gases Pose a Danger to Public Health and
Welfare. On April 24, 2009, the Administrator proposed Endangerment and
Cause or Contribute Findings under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.
This action, in response to a 2007 Supreme Court decision, proposed to
find that the current and projected concentrations of the mix of six
key greenhouse gases - carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous
oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and
sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) - in the atmosphere endanger the public
health and welfare of current and future generations through climate
change. As part of this action, the Administrator further proposed to
find that the combined emissions of four of these six greenhouse gases
from new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines contribute to the
atmospheric concentrations of these key greenhouse gases and hence to
the threat of climate change.
Vehicle Emissions. In the fall of 2009, EPA will propose to set
national emissions standards under section 202 (a) of the Clean Air Act
to control greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from passenger cars and
light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, as part of a
joint rulemaking with National Highway Traffic and Safety
Administration (NHTSA). This joint rulemaking effort was announced by
President Obama on May 19, 2009. The GHG standards would significantly
reduce the GHG emissions from these light-duty vehicles.
Renewable Fuels Standard. In May of 2009, EPA proposed a rule that will
address climate change and energy security by increasing the nation's
use of renewable fuels. This rulemaking implements provisions in Title
II of the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) that amend
Section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act. The amendments revise the National
Renewable Fuels Standard Program in the United States, increasing the
national requirement to a total of 36 billion gallons of total
renewable fuel in 2022. The amendments also establish new eligibility
requirements for meeting the renewable fuel standards, including the
establishment of minimum lifecycle greenhouse gas reduction thresholds
for the various categories of renewable fuels.
For more information about these regulatory actions, as well as
information about other programs and activities related to climate
change, please visit http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ or http://
www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations.htm.
Improving Air Quality
The U.S. continues to face serious air pollution challenges, with large
areas of the country that still cannot meet federal air quality
standards and many communities still facing health threats from
exposure to toxics. While EPA has made tremendous progress toward
achieving clean, healthy air that is safe to breathe, air pollution
continues to be a great problem. The average adult breathes more than
3000 gallons of air every day, and children breathe more air per pound
of body weight. Air pollutants can remain in the environment for long
periods of time and can be carried by the wind hundreds of miles from
their origin.
Ambient Air Quality. This year's Regulatory Plan describes efforts to
review the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for oxides of
nitrogen, oxides of sulfur, ozone, and particulates. The Clean Air Act
requires EPA to review the NAAQS every 5 years for the primary (health-
based) and secondary (welfare-based) national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) and, if appropriate, revise these standards. Each
review consists of an exhaustive assessment of the current scientific
evidence detailing the health and welfare effects of exposure to the
pollutants, and a policy assessment of the policy implications of that
evidence. Each review will conclude with the EPA Administrator either
retaining or revising the standards, taking into consideration the
views of independent scientists and the public.
Reducing Harmful Emissions from Power Plants. Under the federal
structure set up by the Clean Air Act, it is the States who are
primarily responsible for bringing about the pollutant emission
reductions necessary to reach attainment with the NAAQS. However, EPA
does help achieve these reductions through national programs requiring
emission reductions from both mobile and stationary sources. This
Regulatory Plan describes one particularly significant such program --
the Clean Air Transport Rule -- which employs a market-based ``cap and
trade'' program to bring about broad reductions in sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen oxides from power plants in the eastern half of the United
States. This program is designed to reduce the amount of pollution that
is transported by the wind over long distances. This transported
pollution can be a large part of the total pollution in many eastern
cities, and controlling it nationally is a crucial complement to the
States' efforts to achieve clean air.
Cleaner Air from Improved Technology. EPA continues to address toxic
air pollution under authority of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
The centerpiece of this effort is the ``Maximum Achievable Control
Technology'' (MACT) program, which requires that all major sources of a
given type use emission controls that better reflect the current state
of the art. One of these efforts is by setting standards for
industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters.
For more information about these regulatory actions, as well as
information about other programs and activities related to air quality,
please visit http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/.
[[Page 64320]]
Management of Chemical Risks
EPA's Administrator has highlighted the need to strengthen EPA's
chemical management program as one of her priorities coming in to the
Agency. As part of this process, the Agency is evaluating its existing
chemicals program to determine how best to ramp up efforts to assess,
prioritize and take risk management action on chemicals of concern. EPA
intends to announce the specifics of this effort and will seek public
input.
Protection from Lead During and After Renovation. EPA is continuing its
efforts to implement the final Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting
Program Rule that was issued in 2008. As part of these efforts, EPA
will be developing revisions to the rule to address several issues
raised in litigation, including the universe of housing where lead-safe
work practices are required, the provision of additional information on
renovation activities to owners and occupants, and possibly additional
requirements to ensure that renovation work areas have been adequately
cleaned after renovation work has been finished and before the areas
are re-occupied.
For more information about these regulatory actions, as well as
information about other programs and activities related to the
management of chemical risks, please visit http://www.epa.gov/oppts/.
Cleaning up Hazardous Waste
EPA envisions communities where blighted properties are transformed
into safe and productive parcels, and threats to human health are
properly mitigated, leading to jobs and a reinvestment in land,
communities, and citizens. EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER) contributes to the Agency's overall mission of
protecting public health and the environment by focusing on, preparing
for, preventing and responding to chemical and oil spills, accidents,
and emergencies; enhancing homeland security; increasing the beneficial
use and recycling of secondary materials, the safe management of wastes
and cleaning up contaminated property and making it available for
reuse. Several regulatory priorities for the upcoming fiscal year will
promote stewardship and resource conservation and focus regulatory
efforts on risk reduction and statutory compliance.
Spill Prevention Control, and Countermeasures. EPA is considering
amending the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan
requirements issued on December 5, 2008 (73 FR 74236), based on
comments received on a February 2009 notice. The rule, when finalized,
will streamline and reduce the burden imposed on the regulated
community for complying with these SPCC requirements, while maintaining
protection of human health and the environment.
Financial Responsibility. Under Section 108(b) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), EPA
is to promulgate requirements that require certain classes of
facilities to establish and maintain evidence of financial
responsibility consistent with the degree and duration of risks from
the production, treatment, and transportation, storage or disposal of
CERCLA hazardous substances. Additionally, EPA is to publish a notice
of the classes of facilities for which financial responsibility
requirements will be first developed. To fulfill the notice
requirement, EPA identified the certain classes of facilities within
the hardrock mining industry as the classes of facilities for which the
Agency will first develop financial responsibility requirements under
CERCLA 108(b). In addition, the Agency plans to publish a notice by
December 2009 in which it will identify other possible classes of
facilities for which the Agency will consider developing financial
responsibility requirements.
Protection from Inadequate Management of Coal Waste. Coal Combustion
Residuals (CCRs) comprise one of the largest industrial waste streams.
To protect the public from human health risks and to prevent
environmental damage resulting from present disposal practices, EPA
expects to propose a rule by December 2009 for the management of CCRs
in landfills and surface impoundments. In developing the proposed rule,
the Agency will consider comments it received on its August 2007 notice
of data availability, plus any additional information that the Agency
has collected or has been provided regarding the management of these
residuals.
For more information about these regulatory actions, as well as
information about other programs and activities related to hazardous
waste, please visit http://www.epa.gov/oswer/.
Protecting America's Water
EPA will intensify its work to restore water quality protections in our
nation's streams, rivers, lakes, bays, oceans and aquifers. EPA will
make robust use of its authority to restore threatened treasures such
as the Great Lakes and the Chesapeake Bay, address neglected urban
rivers, strengthen drinking water safety programs, and reduce pollution
from industrial and non-industrial discharges. Three regulatory
priorities for the coming fiscal year will help achieve some of these
goals.
Improving Water Quality. EPA plans to address challenging water quality
problems in two rulemakings during Fiscal Year 2010. First, the Agency
will publish final standards to address erosion and sediment discharges
associated with construction and development activities. Later in the
fiscal year, EPA plans to solicit comment on proposed standards for
cooling water intakes for electric power plants and for other
manufacturers who use large amounts of cooling water. The goal of the
proposed rule will be to protect aquatic organisms from being killed or
injured through impingement or entrainment.
For more information about these regulatory actions, as well as
information about other programs and activities related to water,
please visit http://www.epa.gov/ow/.
Aggregate Costs and Benefits
EPA has calculated a combined aggregate estimate of the costs and
benefits of regulations included in the Regulatory Plan. For the fiscal
year 2009, EPA has been able to gather sufficient data on seven of the
twenty-two anticipated regulations to include them in an aggregate
estimate. For the remaining actions, costs and benefits have not yet
been calculated for various reasons. The regulations included in the
aggregate estimate of costs and benefits are:
Primary NAAQS for Nitrogen Dioxide (2060-AO19);
Control of Emissions from New Marine Compression-Ignition
Engines (2060-AO38);
EPA/NHTSA Joint Rulemaking for Light-Duty GHG Emission and
CAFE Standards (2060-AP58);
Combined Rulemaking for Industrial, Commercial, and
Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters at Major Sources
of HAP and Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional
Boilers at Area Sources (2060-AM44);
Revisions to the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
(SPCC) Rule, 40 CFR 112 (2050-AG16);
Standards for Cooling Water Intake Structures (2040-AE95); and
[[Page 64321]]
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the
Construction and Development (C&D) Point Source Category
(2040-AE91).
EPA obtained aggregate estimates of total costs and benefits assuming
both a three percent discount rate and a seven percent discount rate.
However, one of the regulations listed above (C&D) was not included in
the seven percent aggregation due to lack of data. Given a three
percent discount rate, benefits range from $114 billion to $360 billion
while the costs range from $17 billion to $30 billion. With a seven
percent discount rate, and omitting one rule, benefits range from $75
billion to $305 billion. Costs with a seven percent discount rate range
from $12 billion to $22 billion. In both cases, cost savings were
treated as benefits, and all values are converted to 2008 dollars using
a GDP deflator.
These results should be considered with caution. As with any aggregate
estimate of total costs and benefits, these estimates must be highly
qualified. First, there are significant gaps in data. In general, the
benefits estimates reported above do not include values for benefits
that have been quantified but not monetized and missing values for
qualitative benefits, such as some human health benefits and ecosystem
health improvements. Second, methodologies and types of costs/benefits
considered are inconsistent, as are the units of analysis. Some of the
costs/benefits are described as annualized values, while other values
are specific to one year. Third, problems with aggregation can arise
from differing baselines. Finally, the ranges presented do not reflect
the full range of uncertainty in the benefit and cost estimates for
these rules.
Rules Expected to Affect Small Entities
By better coordinating small business activities, EPA aims to improve
its technical assistance and outreach efforts, minimize burdens to
small businesses in its regulations, and simplify small businesses'
participation in its voluntary programs. A number of rules included in
this Plan might be of particular interest to small businesses
including:
Combined Rulemaking for Industrial, Commercial, and
Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters at Major Sources
of HAP and Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional
Boilers at Area Sources (2060-AM44);
Renewable Fuel Standard Program (2060-AO810).
CONCLUSION
EPA's Regulatory Plan is an important element of the Agency's strategy
for achieving environmental results within the framework described
above. Taken as a whole, the Agency's Regulatory Plan will ensure that
the Nation continues to achieve improvements in environmental quality
while at the same time promoting economic growth.
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
-----------
PRERULE STAGE
-----------
133. LEAD; RENOVATION, REPAIR, AND PAINTING PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC
AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major status under 5 USC 801 is undetermined.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
15 USC 2682(c)(3)
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 745
Legal Deadline:
Other, Judicial, April 22, 2010, Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
NPRM, Judicial, December 15, 2011.
Final, Judicial, July 15, 2013.
Abstract:
Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires
EPA to regulate renovation or remodeling activities in target housing
(most pre-1978 housing), pre-1978 public buildings, and commercial
buildings that create lead-based paint hazards. On April 22, 2008, EPA
issued a final rule to address lead-based paint hazards created by
these activities in target housing and child-occupied facilities built
before 1978. In this rule, child-occupied facilities are a subset of
public and commercial buildings or facilities where children under age
6 spend a great deal of time. The 2008 rule established requirements
for training renovators, other renovation workers, and dust sampling
technicians; for certifying renovators, dust sampling technicians, and
renovation firms; for accrediting providers of renovation and dust
sampling technician training; for renovation work practices; and for
recordkeeping. This new rulemaking will address renovation or
remodeling activities in the remaining buildings described in TSCA
section 402(c)(3): Public buildings built before 1978 and commercial
buildings that are not child-occupied facilities.
Statement of Need:
Statutory requirement.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires
EPA to regulate renovation or remodeling activities that create lead-
based paint hazards in target housing, which is defined by statute to
cover most pre-1978 housing, public buildings built before 1978, and
commercial buildings.
Alternatives:
Yet to be determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Yet to be determined.
Risks:
Yet to be determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
ANPRM 04/00/10
NPRM 12/00/11
Final Action 07/00/13
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Federalism:
Undetermined
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5381; N/A
URL For More Information:
http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm
[[Page 64322]]
Agency Contact:
Hans Scheifele
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
7404T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-1459
Email: scheifele.hans@epamail.epa.gov
Cindy Wheeler
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
7404T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-0484
Fax: 202 566-0471
Email: wheeler.cindy@epa.gov
RIN: 2070-AJ56
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
134. CERCLA 108(B) FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
42 USC 9608 (b)
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Section 108(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended,
establishes certain authorities concerning financial responsibility
requirements. The Agency has already identified classes of facilities
within the hardrock mining industry as those for which financial
responsibility requirements will be first developed. The Agency is
currently examining the following classes of facilities for possible
development of financial responsibility requirements under CERCLA
Section 108(b): hazardous waste generators, hazardous waste recyclers,
metal finishers, wood treatment facilities and chemical manufacturers.
This list may be revised as the Agency's evaluation proceeds. EPA is
scheduled to complete and publish in the Federal Register a notice
identifying potential categories of facilities by December 2009.
Statement of Need:
The Agency is currently examining various classes of facilities that
may produce, transport, treat, store or dispose of hazardous substances
for development of financial responsibility requirements under CERCLA
Section 108(b).
Summary of Legal Basis:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended.
Alternatives:
To be determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
To be determined.
Risks:
To be determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
Priority Notice 07/28/09 74 FR 37213
FR Notice 01/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5350; EPA publication information: Priority Notice - http://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WASTE/2009/July/Day-28/f16819.pdf; EPA Docket
information: EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0265
Agency Contact:
Ben Lesser
Environmental Protection Agency
Solid Waste and Emergency Response
5304P
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703 308-0314
Email: lesser.ben@epa.gov
Elaine Eby
Environmental Protection Agency
Solid Waste and Emergency Response
5304P
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703 308-8449
Email: eby.elaine@epa.gov
RIN: 2050-AG56
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
-----------
PROPOSED RULE STAGE
-----------
135. COMBINED RULEMAKING FOR INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL
BOILERS AND PROCESS HEATERS AT MAJOR SOURCES OF HAP AND INDUSTRIAL,
COMMERCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL BOILERS AT AREA SOURCES
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
This action may affect the private sector under PL 104-4.
Legal Authority:
Clean Air Act, sec 112
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 63
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, April 15, 2010, A 60 day extension for proposal was
granted on June 30, 2009.
Final, Judicial, December 16, 2010.
Abstract:
Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) outlines the statutory
requirements for EPA's stationary source air toxics program. Section
112 mandates that EPA develop standards for hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) for both major and area sources listed under section 112(c).
Section 112(k) requires development of standards for area sources which
account for 90% of the emissions in urban areas of the 30 urban (HAP)
listed in the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy. These area source
standards can require control levels which are equivalent to either
maximum achievable control technology (MACT) or generally available
control technology (GACT). The Integrated Air Toxics Strategy lists
industrial boilers and commercial/institutional boilers as area source
categories for regulation pursuant to section 112(c). Industrial
boilers and institutional/commercial boilers are on the list of section
112(c)(6) source categories. In this rulemaking, EPA will develop
standards for these source categories.
Statement of Need:
As a result of the vacatur of the Industrial Boiler MACT, the Agency
will develop another rulemaking under
[[Page 64323]]
CAA section 112 which will reduce hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
emissions from this source category. Recent court decisions on other
CAA section 112 rules will be considered in developing this regulation.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Clean Air Act, section 112.
Alternatives:
Not yet determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Not yet determined.
Risks:
Not yet determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 04/00/10
Final Action 12/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations
Government Levels Affected:
Local, State
Additional Information:
SAN No. 4884. This rulemaking combines the area source rulemaking for
boilers and the rulemaking for re-establishing the vacated NESHAP for
boilers and process heaters. EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-
0790
Agency Contact:
Jim Eddinger
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C439-01
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-5426
Email: eddinger.jim@epamail.epa.gov
Robert J. Wayland
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
D243-01
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-1045
Fax: 919 541-5450
Email: wayland.robertj@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AM44
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
136. REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
PARTICULATE MATTER
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 50
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to review and, if appropriate,
revise the air quality criteria for the primary (health-based) and
secondary (welfare-based) national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) every 5 years. On October 17, 2006, EPA published a final rule
to revise the primary and secondary NAAQS for particulate matter to
provide increased protection of public health and welfare. With regard
to the primary standard for fine particles (generally referring to
particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter, PM2.5),
EPA revised the level of the 24-hour PM2.5 standard to 35 micrograms
per cubic meter (ug/m3) and retained the level of the annual PM2.5
standard at 15 ug/m3. With regard to primary standards for particles
generally less than or equal to 1 micrometers in diameter (PM10), EPA
retained the 24-hour PM10 standard and revoked the annual PM10
standard. With regard to secondary PM standards, EPA made them
identical in all respects to the primary PM standards, as revised. EPA
initiated the current review in 2007 with a workshop to discuss key
policy-relevant issues around which EPA would structure the review.
This review includes the preparation of an Integrated Science
Assessment, Risk/Exposure Assessment, and a Policy Assessment Document
by EPA, with opportunities for review by EPA's Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee and the public. These documents inform the
Administrator's decision as to whether to retain or revise the
standards.
Statement of Need:
As established in the Clean Air Act, the national ambient air quality
standards for particulate matter are to be reviewed every five years.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7409) directs the
Administrator to propose and promulgate ``primary'' and ``secondary''
national ambient air quality standards for pollutants identified under
section 108 (the ``criteria'' pollutants). The ``primary'' standards
are established for the protection of public health, while
``secondary'' standards are to protect against public welfare or
ecosystem effects.
Alternatives:
The main alternatives for the Administrator's decision on the review of
the national ambient air quality standards for particulate matter are
whether to retain or revise the existing standards and, if revisions
are necessary, the forms and levels of the revised standards. Options
for these alternatives will be developed as the rulemaking proceeds.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The Clean Air Act makes clear that the economic and technical
feasibility of attaining standards are not to be considered in setting
or revising the NAAQS, although such factors may be considered in the
development of State plans to implement the standards. Accordingly, the
Agency prepares cost and benefit information in order to provide States
information that may be useful in considering different implementation
strategies for meeting proposed or final standards. Cost and benefit
information is not developed to support a NAAQS rulemaking until
sufficient policy and scientific information is available to narrow
potential options for the form and level associated with any potential
revisions to the standard. Therefore, work on developing the plan for
conducting the cost and benefit analysis will generally start 1 1/2 to
2 years following the start of a NAAQS review.
Risks:
During the course of this review, risk assessments will be conducted to
evaluate health risks associated with retention or revision of the
particulate matter standards.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 11/00/10
Final Action 07/00/11
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
[[Page 64324]]
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5169; ; EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0492
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/
Agency Contact:
Beth Hassett-Sipple
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-4605
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: hassett-sipple.beth@epa.gov
Karen Martin
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-5274
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: martin.karen@epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AO47
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
137. REVIEW OF THE PRIMARY NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD FOR
SULFUR DIOXIDE
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 50
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, November 16, 2009.
Final, Judicial, June 2, 2010.
Abstract:
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to review and, if appropriate,
revise the air quality criteria for the primary (health-based) and
secondary (welfare-based) national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) every 5 years. On May 22, 1996, EPA published a final decision
that revisions of the primary and secondary NAAQS for Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2) were not appropriate at that time, aside from several minor
technical changes. That action provided the Administrator's final
determination, after careful evaluation of comments received on the
November 1994 proposal, that significant revisions to the primary and
secondary NAAQS for SO2 would not be made at that time. In 2006, EPA's
Office of Research and Development initiated the current periodic
review of SO2 air quality criteria, the scientific basis for the NAAQS,
with a call for information in the Federal Register. Subsequently, the
decision was made to separate the reviews of the primary and secondary
SO2 standards, and to combine the SO2 secondary-standard review with
the secondary-standard review of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) due to their
linkage in terms of effects and atmospheric chemistry. That joint
review of the SO2 and NO2 secondary standards is part of a separate
regulatory action described elsewhere in this Regulatory Plan under the
identifying number (RIN) 2060-AO72. The regulatory action described
here is for the Agency's review of the primary SO2 NAAQS. This review
includes the preparation of an Integrated Science Assessment, Risk/
Exposure Assessment, and a Policy Assessment. These documents were
reviewed by EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee and the
public. These documents inform the Administrator's proposed decision as
to whether to retain or revise the standards.
Statement of Need:
As established in the Clean Air Act, the national ambient air quality
standards for SO2 are to be reviewed every five years.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7409) directs the
Administrator to propose and promulgate ``primary'' and ``secondary''
national ambient air quality standards for pollutants identified under
section 108 (the ``criteria'' pollutants). The ``primary'' standards
are established for the protection of public health, while
``secondary'' standards are to protect against public welfare or
ecosystem effects.
Alternatives:
The main alternatives for the Administrator's decision on the review of
the national ambient air quality standards for SO2 are whether to
retain or revise the existing standards.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The Clean Air Act makes clear that the economic and technical
feasibility of attaining standards are not to be considered in setting
or revising the NAAQS, although such factors may be considered in the
development of State plans to implement the standards. Accordingly, the
Agency prepares cost and benefit information in order to provide States
information that may be useful in considering different implementation
strategies for meeting proposed or final standards. Cost and benefit
information is not developed to support a NAAQS rulemaking until
sufficient policy and scientific information is available to narrow
potential options for the form and level associated with any potential
revisions to the standard. Therefore, work on the developing the plan
for conducting the cost and benefit analysis will generally start 1 1/2
to 2 years following the start of a NAAQS review.
Risks:
During the course of this review, risk assessments were conducted to
evaluate health risks associated with retention or revision of the SO2
standards.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 12/00/09
Final Action 06/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5163; ; EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0352
URL For More Information:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/s_so2_index.html
[[Page 64325]]
Agency Contact:
Michael Stewart
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-7524
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: stewart.michael@epa.gov
Karen Martin
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-5274
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: martin.karen@epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AO48
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
138. REVIEW OF THE SECONDARY NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
OXIDES OF NITROGEN AND OXIDES OF SULFUR
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 50
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, July 12, 2011.
Final, Judicial, March 20, 2012, No court schedule has been ordered for
this review as of yet. This date represents the date submitted by EPA
to the court.
Abstract:
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to review and, if appropriate,
revise the air quality criteria for the primary (health-based) and
secondary (welfare-based) national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) every 5 years. On October 11, 1995, EPA published a final rule
not to revise either the primary or secondary NAAQS for nitrogen
dioxide (NO2). On May 22, 1996, EPA published a final decision that
revisions of the primary and secondary NAAQS for sulfur dioxide (SO2)
were not appropriate at that time, aside from several minor technical
changes. On December 9, 2005, EPA's Office of Research and Development
(ORD) initiated the current periodic review of NO2 air quality criteria
with a call for information in the Federal Register (FR). On May 3,
2006, ORD initiated the current periodic review of SO2 air quality
criteria with a call for information in the FR. Subsequently, the
decision was made to review the oxides of nitrogen and the oxides of
sulfur together, rather than individually, with respect to a secondary
welfare standard for NO2 and SO2. This decision derives from the fact
that NO2, SO2, and their associated transformation products are linked
from an atmospheric chemistry perspective, as well as from an
environmental effects perspective, most notably in the case of
secondary aerosol formation and acidification in ecosystems. This
review includes the preparation of an Integrated Science Assessment,
Risk/Exposure Assessment, and a Policy Assessment Document by EPA, with
opportunities for review by EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee and the public. These documents inform the Administrator's
proposed decision as to whether to retain or revise the standards. It
should be noted that this review will be limited to only the secondary
standards; the primary standards for SO2 and NO2 are being reviewed
separately, as described elsewhere in this Regulatory Plan under the
identifying numbers RIN-2060-AO48 and RIN-2060-AO19, respectively.
Statement of Need:
As established in the Clean Air Act, the national ambient air quality
standards for oxides of nitrogen and oxides of sulfur are to be
reviewed every five years.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7409) directs the
Administrator to propose and promulgate ``primary'' and ``secondary''
national ambient air quality standards for pollutants identified under
section 108 (the ``criteria'' pollutants). The ``primary'' standards
are established for the protection of public health, while
``secondary'' standards are to protect against public welfare or
ecosystem effects.
Alternatives:
The main alternatives for the Administrator's decision on the review of
the national ambient air quality standards for oxides of nitrogen and
oxides of sulfur are whether to retain or revise the existing
standards.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The Clean Air Act makes clear that the economic and technical
feasibility of attaining standards are not to be considered in setting
or revising the NAAQS, although such factors may be considered in the
development of State plans to implement the standards. Accordingly, the
Agency prepares cost and benefit information in order to provide States
information that may be useful in considering different implementation
strategies for meeting proposed or final standards. Cost and benefit
information is not developed to support a NAAQS rulemaking until
sufficient policy and scientific information is available to narrow
potential options for the form and level associated with any potential
revisions to the standard. Therefore, work on the developing the plan
for conducting the cost and benefit analysis will generally start 1 1/2
to 2 years following the start of a NAAQS review.
Risks:
During the course of this review, risk assessments may be conducted to
evaluate public welfare risks associated with retention or revision of
the NOx/SOx secondary standards.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 02/00/10
Final Action 11/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5170; EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1145
Agency Contact:
Anne Rea
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C539-02
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-0053
Fax: 919 541-0905
Email: rea.anne@epa.gov
Ginger Tennant
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-4072
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: tennant.ginger@epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AO72
[[Page 64326]]
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
139. CLEAN AIR TRANSPORT RULE
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
Clean Air Act Title I
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
On May 12, 2005, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated
the Clean Air Interstate Rule, commonly known as CAIR (70 FR 25162).
The CAIR used a cap and trade approach to reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2)
and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions. On July 11, 2008, the D.C. Circuit
issued an opinion finding the CAIR unlawful and vacating the rule. On
December 23, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision on the petitions for
rehearing of the July 11 decision. The court granted EPA's petition for
rehearing to the extent that it remanded the cases without vacatur of
the CAIR. This ruling means that the CAIR remains in place, but that
EPA is obligated to promulgate another rule under Clean Air Act Section
110(a)(2)(D) consistent with the court's July 11 opinion. This action
is proposing to fulfill our obligation to develop a rule consistent
with the July 11, 2008 and December 23, 2008 D.C. Court decisions.
Statement of Need:
The Clean Air Transport Rule is necessary to help states address
interstate transport of pollutants from upwind states to downwind
nonattainment areas. Specifically, the rule is needed to respond to the
remand of the Clean Air Interstate Rule by the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The Clean Air Transport Rule is needed to help states address the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air Act. This
section requires States to prohibit emissions that contribute
significantly to downwind nonattainment with the national ambient air
quality standards, or which interfere with maintaining the standards in
those downwind states.
Alternatives:
To be determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
To be determined.
Risks:
To be determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 07/00/10
Final Action To Be Determined
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Federalism:
Undetermined
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5336; EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491
Agency Contact:
Tim Smith
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C539-04
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-4718
Fax: 919 541-5489
Email: smith.tim@epamail.epa.gov
Rhea Jones
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C539-04
RTP, NC 27709
Phone: 919 541-2940
Fax: 919 541-0824
Email: jones.rhea@epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AP50
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
140. REVISION TO PB AMBIENT AIR MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7403; 42 USC 7410; 42 USC 7601(a); 42 USC 7611; 42 USC 7619
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 58
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
On November 12, 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA revised
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for lead and
associated monitoring requirements. The finalized monitoring
requirements require state and local monitoring agencies to conduct Pb
monitoring near Pb sources emitting 1.0 tons per year (tpy) or more and
in large urban areas referred to as Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA)
with a population of 500,000 people or more. In January 2009, EPA
received a petition to reconsider the 1.0 tpy emission threshold from
the Missouri Coalition for the Environment Foundation, Natural
Resources Defense Council, the Coalition to End Childhood Poisoning,
and Physicians for Social Responsibility requesting EPA reconsider the
1.0 tpy emission threshold. EPA granted the petition to reconsider on
July 22, 2009. This action represents the results of the EPA's
reconsideration of the Pb monitoring requirements.
Statement of Need:
This action is in response to a petition to reconsider that the Agency
received and granted on the Pb monitoring requirements contained in the
revision to the Pb NAAQS (73 FR 66964).
Summary of Legal Basis:
Clean Air Act Title I
Alternatives:
To be determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
To be determined.
Risks:
To be determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 12/00/09
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Local, State
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5370; EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735
URL For More Information:
http://epa.gov/air/lead
[[Page 64327]]
Agency Contact:
Kevin Cavender
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C304-06
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-2364
Fax: 919 541-1903
Email: cavender.kevin@epamail.epa.gov
Lewis Weinstock
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C304-06
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-3661
Fax: 919 541-1903
Email: weinstock.lewis@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AP77
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
141. PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION/TITLE V
GREENHOUSE GAS TAILORING RULE
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
Clean Air Act Title I
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
In this rule, EPA will apply a tailored approach to the applicability
major source thresholds for greenhouse gases under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and title V programs of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) by temporarily raising those thresholds and setting a
PSD significance level for greenhouse gases. EPA is anticipating that
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions may soon be subject to regulation
pursuant to the CAA.
One consequence of our subjecting GHG emissions to regulatory controls
is that the requirements of existing air permit programs, namely the
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) preconstruction
permitting program for major stationary sources and the title V
operating permits program, would be triggered for GHG emission sources.
At the current applicability levels under the CAA, tens of thousands of
projects every year would need permits under the PSD program, and
millions of sources would become subject to the title V program. These
numbers of permits are orders of magnitude greater than the current
number of permits under these permitting programs and would vastly
exceed the administrative capacity of the permitting authorities. By
tailoring the applicability thresholds, we will allow actions to be
taken by EPA and states to build capacity and streamline permitting.
Statement of Need:
This action will implement a tailored approach to PSD and Title V
applicability for GHG sources when GHG emissions become subject to
regulation pursuant to the CAA. This will avoid the scenario where each
year tens of thousands of new sources and modifications would
potentially become subject to PSD review and millions of sources would
require title V operating permits, instead replacing it with a phased
approach that allows permitting authorities to manage or obtain the
necessary resources to handle the increased workload.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Doctrine of Administrative Necessity.
Alternatives:
Alternatives are being developed and will be presented in the preamble
to the proposed rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
EPA has not completed the necessary analytical work that supports
developing the regulatory relief costs savings associated with this
rule. Once the analysis plan/work is completed, the Agency will compile
and present the information.
Risks:
Not yet determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 12/00/09
Final Action 04/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Undetermined
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5192; EPA Docket information: EOPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/nsr
Agency Contact:
Joseph Mangino
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-03
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-9778
Fax: 919 685-3105
Email: mangino.joseph@epamail.epa.gov
Jennifer Snyder
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-05
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-3003
Fax: 919 541-5509
Email: snyder.jennifer@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AP86
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
142. RECONSIDERATION OF THE 2008 OZONE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR
QUALITY STANDARDS
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7409
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, December 21, 2009, Promised proposal to court by 12/21/
2009.
Abstract:
On March 12, 2008, EPA announced the final decision on the ozone
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Soon after that
decision was signed on 3/27/08 (73 FR 16436), the Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee (CASAC) held an unsolicited public meeting and
criticized EPA for setting primary and secondary standards that were
not consistent with advice provided by the CASAC during review of the
NAAQS. On 7/25/08, several environmental and industry petitioners, as
well as a number of States, sued EPA on the NAAQS decision, and the
Court set a briefing schedule for the consolidated cases on 12/23/08.
On 3/10/09, EPA requested that the Court vacate the briefing schedule
and hold the consolidated cases in abeyance for 180 days. This request
for extension was made to allow time for appropriate
[[Page 64328]]
EPA officials appointed by the new Administration to determine whether
the standards established in March 2008 should be maintained, modified
or otherwise reconsidered. Announcement of reconsideration of the March
2008 NAAQS decision occurred on 9/16/09. The current rulemaking
schedule calls for a NAAQS proposal (including a proposal to stay
implementation designations for the March 2008 NAAQS) to be signed by
12/15/09, with the final rule to be signed by 8/31/10. Reconsideration
of the NAAQS will be limited to information and supporting
documentation available to EPA and in the docket at the time of the
March 2008 decision.
Statement of Need:
As established in the Clean Air Act, the national ambient air quality
standards for ozone are to be reviewed every five years. As outlined in
the abstract of this Regulatory Plan entry, this reconsideration is in
response to actions by the courts regarding the last review in 2008.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7409) directs the
Administrator to propose and promulgate ``primary'' and ``secondary''
national ambient air quality standards for pollutants identified under
section 108 (the ``criteria'' pollutants). The ``primary'' standards
are established for the protection of public health, while
``secondary'' standards are to protect against public welfare or
ecosystem effects.
Alternatives:
The main alternatives for the Administrator's decision on the review of
the national ambient air quality standards for ozone are whether to
reaffirm or revise the existing standards. Decisions on these
alternatives will be summarized in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) is being prepared that presents the
costs and benefits associated with the proposed revised ozone standards
and potential alternative standards. This RIA will be made available
when the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is published.
Risks:
The current national ambient air quality standards for ozone are
intended to protect against public health risks associated with
morbidity and/or premature mortality and public welfare risks
associated with adverse vegetation and ecosystem effects. During the
course of this review, risk assessments will be conducted to evaluate
health and welfare risks associated with retention or revision of the
ozone standards.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 01/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
Agency Contact:
David McKee
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-5288
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: mckee.dave@epa.gov
Karen Martin
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-5274
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: martin.karen@epa.gov
Related RIN: Related to 2060-AN24
RIN: 2060-AP98
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
143. LEAD; CLEARANCE AND CLEARANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE RENOVATION, REPAIR, AND PAINTING PROGRAM
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
15 USC 2601(c); 15 USC 2682(c)(3); 15 USC 2684; 15 USC 2686; 15 USC
2687
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 745
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, April 22, 2010, Signature.
Final, Judicial, July 15, 2011, Signature.
Abstract:
EPA intends to propose several revisions to the 2008 Lead Renovation,
Repair, and Painting Program (RRP) rule that established accreditation,
training, certification, and recordkeeping requirements as well as work
practice standards for persons performing renovations for compensation
in most pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities. Current
requirements include training renovators, other renovation workers, and
dust sampling technicians; for certifying renovators, dust sampling
technicians, and renovation firms; for accrediting providers of
renovation and dust sampling technician training; for renovation work
practices; and for recordkeeping. EPA is particularly concerned about
dust lead hazards generated by renovations because children, especially
younger children, are at risk for high exposures of lead-based paint
dust via hand-to-mouth exposure. For this particular action, EPA will
consider whether to establish additional requirements to ensure that
renovation work areas are adequately cleaned after renovation work is
finished and before the areas are re-occupied. These additional
requirements may include dust wipe testing after renovations and
ensuring that renovation work areas meet clearance standards before re-
occupancy.
Statement of Need:
EPA is particularly concerned about dust lead hazards generated by
renovations because children, especially younger children, are at risk
for high exposures of lead-based paint dust via hand-to-mouth exposure.
This rulemaking revision is being considered in response to a
settlement agreement.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires
EPA to regulate renovation or remodeling activities that create lead-
based paint hazards in target housing, which is defined by statute to
cover most pre-1978 housing, public buildings built before 1978, and
commercial buildings.
Alternatives:
The additional requirements may include dust wipe testing after
[[Page 64329]]
renovations and ensuring that renovation work areas meet clearance
standards before re-occupancy.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Not yet determined.
Risks:
Not yet determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 04/00/10
Final Action 07/00/11
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5380
URL For More Information:
http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm
Agency Contact:
Cindy Wheeler
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
7404T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-0484
Fax: 202 566-0471
Email: wheeler.cindy@epa.gov
Michelle Price
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
7404T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-0744
Fax: 202 566-0471
Email: price.michelle@epa.gov
RIN: 2070-AJ57
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
144. STANDARDS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF COAL COMBUSTION RESIDUALS
GENERATED BY COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCERS
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
Not Yet Determined
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
This action is for the development of regulations for coal combustion
residuals (formerly coal combustion waste). The regulations will apply
to waste management units at facilities that manage coal combustion
residuals generated by steam electric power generators, i.e., electric
utilities and independent power producers. This action results from
EPA's regulatory determination for fossil fuel combustion wastes (see
65 FR 32214, May 22, 2000), which concluded that waste management
regulations under RCRA are appropriate for certain coal combustion
residuals (wastes). The intended benefits of this action will be to
prevent contamination or damage to ground waters and surface waters,
thereby avoiding risk to human health and the environment, including
ecological risks, while monitoring the benefits of beneficial use of
coal ash residues. The Agency issued on August 29, 2007, a Notice of
Data Availability (NODA) announcing the availability for public
inspection and comment of new information and data on the management of
coal combustion wastes that the Agency will consider in deciding next
steps in this effort. The comment period for this NODA closed on
February 11, 2008. EPA is currently preparing a proposed rule for the
regulation of coal combustion residuals.
Statement of Need:
There is a need to assess risks associated with the management of coal
combustion residuals and the most effective regulatory option to
address them.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Alternatives:
To be determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
To be determined.
Risks:
To be determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NODA 08/29/07 72 FR 49714
NPRM 12/00/09
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Undetermined
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Federalism:
This action may have federalism implications as defined in EO 13132.
Additional Information:
SAN No. 4470. EPA publication information: NODA - http://
frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/ cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi? WAISdocID=623368417775
+2+0+0& WAISaction=retrieve -- This effort will also affect Federal,
state, local or tribal governments that own coal-burning commercial
electric power generating facilities. EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2006-0796
Sectors Affected:
221112 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation
Agency Contact:
Alexander Livnat
Environmental Protection Agency
Solid Waste and Emergency Response
5304P
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703 308-7251
Fax: 703 605-0595
Email: livnat.alexander@epa.gov
Steve Souders
Environmental Protection Agency
Solid Waste and Emergency Response
5306P
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703 308-8431
Fax: 703 605-0595
Email: souders.steve@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2050-AE81
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
145. CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURES
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
This action may affect State, local or tribal governments and the
private sector.
Legal Authority:
CWA 101; CWA 301; CWA 304; CWA 308; CWA 316; CWA 401; CWA 402; CWA 501;
CWA 510
[[Page 64330]]
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 122; 40 CFR 123; 40 CFR 124; 40 CFR 125
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires EPA to ensure that
the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water
intake structures reflect the best technology available (BTA) for
minimizing adverse environmental impacts. In developing regulations to
implement section 316(b), EPA divided its effort into three rulemaking
phases. Phase II, for existing electric generating plants that use at
least 50 MGD of cooling water, was completed in July 2004. Industry and
environmental stakeholders challenged the Phase II regulations. On
review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit remanded
several key provisions. In July 2007, EPA suspended Phase II and has
now initiated a new 316(b) Phase II rulemaking. Following the decision
in the Second Circuit, several parties petitioned the U.S. Supreme
Court to review that decision, and the Supreme Court granted the
petitions, limited to the issue of whether the Clean Water Act
authorized EPA to consider the relationship of costs and benefits in
establishing section 316(b) standards. On April 1, 2009, the Supreme
Court reversed the Second Circuit, finding that the Agency may consider
cost-benefit analysis in its decision-making. This finding did not hold
that the Agency must consider costs and benefits in these decisions.
EPA issued the Phase III regulation, covering existing electric
generating plants using less than 50 MGD of cooling water, and all
existing manufacturing facilities, in June 2006. EPA will accept a
voluntary remand of the Phase III regulation for existing facilities,
in order to issue a regulation covering both Phase II and III
facilities, and to do so in a consistent manner. EPA expects this new
rulemaking will similarly apply to the approximately 900 existing
electric generating and manufacturing plants.
Statement of Need:
In the absence of national regulations, NPDES permit writers have
developed requirements to implement section 316(b) on a case-by-case
basis. This may result in a range of different requirements, and, in
some cases, delays in permit issuance or reissuance. This regulation
may have substantial ecological benefits.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The Clean Water Act requires EPA to establish best technology available
standards to minimize adverse environmental impacts from cooling water
intake structures. On February 16, 2004, EPA took final action on
regulations governing cooling water intake structures at certain
existing power producing facilities under section 316(b) of the Clean
Water Act (Phase II rule). 69 FR 41576 (July 9, 2004). These
regulations were challenged, and the Second Circuit remanded several
provisions of the Phase II rule on various grounds. Riverkeeper, Inc.
v. EPA, 475 F.3d 83, (2d Cir., 2007). EPA suspended most of the rule in
response to the remand. 72 FR 37107 (July 9, 2007). The remand of Phase
III does not change permitting requirements for these facilities. Until
the new rule is issued, permit directors continue to issue permits on a
case-by-case, Best Professional Judgment basis for Phase II facilities.
Alternatives:
This analysis will cover various sizes and types of potentially
regulated facilities, and control technologies. EPA is considering
whether to regulate on a national basis, by subcategory, or by broad
water body category.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The technologies under consideration in this rulemaking are similar to
the technologies considered for the original Phase II and Phase III
rules. Those costs evaluated for the Phase II remanded rule, in 2002
dollars, ranged from $389 million (the final rule option) to $440
million (the final rule option at proposal) to $1 billion to $3.5
billion (closed cycle cooling for facilities on certain waterbodies, or
at all facilities). The monetized benefits of the original final rule
were estimated to be $82 million. The monetized benefits include only
the use value associated with quantifiable increases in commercial and
recreational fisheries. Non-use benefits were not analyzed. The costs
and benefits of the Phase III option most closely aligned with the
Phase II option co-promulgated were $38.3 million and $2.3 million
respectively, in 2004 dollars. EPA will develop new costs and benefits
estimates for this new effort.
Risks:
Cooling water intake structures may pose significant risks for aquatic
ecosystems.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 09/00/10
Final Action 07/00/12
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, Local, State
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5210; EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0667
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/waterscience/316b
Agency Contact:
Paul Shriner
Environmental Protection Agency
Water
4303T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-1076
Email: shriner.paul@epamail.epa.gov
Jan Matuszko
Environmental Protection Agency
Water
4303T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-1035
Email: matuszko.jan@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2040-AE95
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
-----------
FINAL RULE STAGE
-----------
146. REVIEW OF THE PRIMARY NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD FOR
NITROGEN DIOXIDE
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 50
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, June 26, 2009.
Final, Judicial, January 22, 2010.
Abstract:
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to review and, if appropriate,
[[Page 64331]]
revise the air quality criteria for the primary (health-based) and
secondary (welfare-based) national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) every 5 years. On October 8, 1996, EPA published a final rule
not to revise either the primary or secondary NAAQS for nitrogen
dioxide (NO2). That action provided the Administrator's final
determination, after careful evaluation of comments received on the
October 1995 proposal, that revisions to neither the primary nor the
secondary NAAQS for NO2 were appropriate at that time. On December 9,
2005, EPA's Office of Research and Development initiated the current
periodic review of NO2 air quality criteria, the scientific basis for
the NAAQS, with a call for information in the Federal Register.
Subsequently, the decision was made to separate the reviews of the
primary and secondary NO2 standards, and to combine the NO2 secondary-
standard review with the secondary-standard review of Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2) due to their linkage in terms of effects and atmospheric
chemistry. That joint review of the SO2 and NO2 secondary standards is
part of a separate regulatory action described elsewhere in this
Regulatory Plan under the identifying number RIN-2060-AO72. The
regulatory action described here is for the Agency's review of the
primary NO2 NAAQS. This includes the preparation of an Integrated
Science Assessment, Risk/Exposure Assessment, and a Policy Assessment
Document by EPA, with opportunities for review by EPA's Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee and the public. These documents inform
the Administrator's proposed decision as to whether to retain or revise
the standards. On July 15, 2009, a proposed rule was published that
would establish a new, short-term (1-hour) standard in the range of 80
to 100 parts per billion. This action included a proposal to revise the
NO2 monitoring network to include monitors near major roadways.
Statement of Need:
As established in the Clean Air Act, the national ambient air quality
standards for NO2 are to be reviewed every five years.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7409) directs the
Administrator to propose and promulgate ``primary'' and ``secondary''
national ambient air quality standards for pollutants identified under
section 108 (the ``criteria'' pollutants). The ``primary'' standards
are established for the protection of public health, while
``secondary'' standards are to protect against public welfare or
ecosystem effects.
Alternatives:
The main alternatives for the Administrator's decision on the review of
the national ambient air quality standards for NO2 are whether to
retain or revise the existing standards.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The Clean Air Act makes clear that the economic and technical
feasibility of attaining standards are not to be considered in setting
or revising the NAAQS, although such factors may be considered in the
development of State plans to implement the standards. Accordingly, the
Agency prepares cost and benefit information in order to provide States
information that may be useful in considering different implementation
strategies for meeting proposed or final standards. Cost and benefit
information is not developed to support a NAAQS rulemaking until
sufficient policy and scientific information is available to narrow
potential options for the form and level associated with any potential
revisions to the standard. Therefore, work on the developing the plan
for conducting the cost and benefit analysis will generally start 1 1/2
to 2 years following the start of a NAAQS review.
Risks:
During the course of this review, risk assessments will be conducted to
evaluate health risks associated with retention or revision of the NO2
standards
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 07/15/09 74 FR 34403
Final Action 02/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, State, Local, Tribal
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5111; EPA publication information: NPRM - http://
edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-15944.pdf; EPA Docket information:
EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0922
URL For More Information:
http://www.epa.gov/air/nitrogenoxides/
Agency Contact:
Scott Jenkins
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C445-01
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-1167
Email: jenkins.scott@epa.gov
Karen Martin
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-06
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-5274
Fax: 919 541-0237
Email: martin.karen@epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AO19
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
147. CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW MARINE COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES
AT OR ABOVE 30 LITERS PER CYLINDER
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7545; 42 USC 7547
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 80; 40 CFR 94; 40 CFR 1042; 40 CFR 1065
Legal Deadline:
Final, Judicial, December 17, 2009.
Abstract:
Category 3 marine diesel engines (those with per cylinder displacement
greater than 30 liters) are very large engines that are used for
propulsion power in ocean-going vessels. Emissions from these engines
contribute significantly to unhealthful levels of ambient particulate
matter and ozone in many parts of the United States. These engines are
highly mobile and are not easily controlled at a state or local level.
EPA currently regulates emissions from Category 3 marine diesel engines
on ships flagged in the United States. This rulemaking will consider
long-term nitrogen oxides (NOx) standards for new Category 3 marine
diesel engines that would require the use of high efficiency
aftertreatment technology. We are considering standards equivalent to
the limits for NOx recently adopted by the International Maritime
Organization,
[[Page 64332]]
which are based on the position advanced by the United States
Government as part of the international negotiations. We are also
considering a revision to our diesel fuel program under the Act to
allow for the manufacture and sale of marine diesel fuel with a sulfur
content up to 1,000 ppm for use in Category 3 engines. The proposal
would be part of a coordinated strategy, the other components of which
would consist of the new amendments to MARPOL Annex VI that will extend
these standards to foreign vessels (through the Act to Prevent
Pollution from Ships) and pursuing Emission Control Area (ECA)
designation for U.S. coastal areas in accordance with MARPOL Annex VI.
Implementation of this coordinated strategy will ensure that all ships
that affect U.S. air quality meet stringent NOx and fuel sulfur
requirements. A recent D.C. Circuit decision (February 2009) upheld
EPA's deadline of 12/17/09 based on EPA's commitment in the regulation
to meet that deadline for the final Category 3 rule.
Statement of Need:
There is a need to reduce emissions from Category 3 marine diesel
engines to achieve significant public health benefits and help states
and localities attain and maintain PM and ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. These large diesel engines generate significant
emissions of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and
sulfur oxides (SOx), as well as hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide
(CO), and hazardous air pollutants or air toxics that are associated
with adverse health effects. Without further action, by 2030, NOx
emissions from ships are projected to more than double, growing to 2.1
million tons a year, while annual PM2.5 emissions are expected to
almost triple to 170,000 tons. By 2030, the coordinated strategy
described in this rule is expected to reduce annual emissions of NOx in
the United States by about 1.2 million tons and particulate matter (PM)
emissions by about 143,000 tons, and prevent between 13,000 and 32,000
premature deaths annually.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Authority for this regulatory action is granted to the Environmental
Protections Agency by sections 114, 203, 205, 206, 207, 208, 211, 213,
216, and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (42 U.S.C.
7414, 7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7545, 7547, 7550 and 7601(a)), and
by sections 1901-1915 of the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (33
USC 1909 et seq.).
The authority for the fuel requirements is provided in section 211 (c)
of the Clean Air Act, which allow EPA to regulate fuels that contribute
to air pollution which endangers public health or welfare (42 U.S.C.
7545 (c)). Additional support for the procedural and enforcement-
related aspects of the fuel controls in the proposed rule, including
the record keeping requirements, comes from sections 114 (a) and 301
(a) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. Sections 7414 (a) and 7601 (a)). The
authority for the engine requirements is provided in section 213(a)(3)
of the Clean Air Act, which directs the Administrator to set standards
regulating emissions of NOx, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), or CO
for classes or categories of engines, like marine diesel engines, that
contribute to ozone or carbon monoxide concentrations in more than one
nonattainment area. Section 208, which requires manufacturers and other
persons subject to Title II requirements to ``provide information the
Administrator may reasonably require . . . to otherwise carry out the
provisions of this part. . . '' provides authority for a PM measurement
requirement. The authority to implement and enforce the Category 3
marine diesel emission standard is provided in Section 213(d) which
specifies that the standards EPA adopts for marine diesel engines
``shall be subject to Sections 206, 207, 208, and 209 of the Clean Air
Act, with such modifications that the Administrator deems appropriate
to the regulations implementing these sections.'' In addition, the
marine standards ``shall be enforced in the same manner as [motor
vehicle] standards prescribed under section 202'' of the Act. Section
213 (d) also grants EPA authority to promulgate or revise regulations
as necessary to determine compliance with and enforce standards adopted
under section 213. Authority to implement MARPOL Annex VI is provided
in section 1903 of the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS).
Section 1903 gives the Administrator the authority to prescribe any
necessary or desired regulations to carry out the provisions of
Regulations 12 through 19 of Annex VI.
Alternatives:
Several alternatives were considered as part of this rulemaking,
including a mandatory cold ironing requirement; earlier adoption of the
Tier 3 NOx limits; and standards for existing engines, including a
mandatory remanufacture program, the MARPOL Annex VI program for
existing engines, and a Voluntary Marine Verification Program.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
A benefit-cost analysis was performed for the entire coordinated
strategy that involves this rulemaking and the international agreements
described above. Specifically, the estimated annual benefits of the
coordinated strategy range between $110 and $280 billion annually in
2030 using a three percent discount rate, or between $100 and $260
billion assuming a 7 percent discount rate, compared to estimated
social costs of approximately $3.1 billion in that same year. Though
there are a number of health and environmental effects associated with
the coordinated strategy that we are unable to quantify or monetize,
the projected benefits of the coordinated strategy far outweigh the
projected costs. Using a conservative benefits estimate, the 2030
benefits are expected to outweigh the costs by at least a factor of 32
and could be as much as a factor of 90.
Risks:
The failure to set new tiers of standards for Category 3 marine diesel
engines risks continued increases in exposure to elevated levels of
ambient ozone and particulate matter emissions, particularly for
populations in port areas and along coastal waterways but also for
populations located well inland. These elevated levels risk additional
premature mortality and other health and environmental impacts that
could otherwise be avoided.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
ANPRM 12/07/07 72 FR 69521
ANPRM Comment Period End 03/06/08
NPRM 08/28/09 74 FR 44441
NPRM Comment Period End 09/28/09
Final Action 12/00/09
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
Federal
[[Page 64333]]
International Impacts:
This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and
investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest.
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5129. EPA publication information: ANPRM - http://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/2007/December/Day-07/a23556.htm -- EPA Docket
information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0121
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm
Agency Contact:
Jean Revelt
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
OAR/OTAQ/ASD
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Phone: 734 214-4822
Fax: 734 214-4050
Email: revelt.jean-marie@epa.gov
Michael Samulski
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
OAR/OTAQ/ASD
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Phone: 734 214-4532
Fax: 734 214-4816
Email: samulski.michael@epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AO38
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
148. RENEWABLE FUELS STANDARD PROGRAM
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
This action may affect the private sector under PL 104-4.
Legal Authority:
Clean Air Act Section 211(o)
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 86; 40 CFR 80
Legal Deadline:
Final, Statutory, December 19, 2008.
Abstract:
This rulemaking will implement provisions in Title II of the 2007
Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) that amend Section 211(o)
of the Clean Air Act. The amendments revise the National Renewable
Fuels Standard Program in the United States, increasing the national
requirement to a total of 36 billion gallons of total renewable fuel in
2022. Application of the new standards now apply to diesel fuel
producers in addition to gasoline producers and to nonroad fuels in
addition to highway fuels. The new requirements also establish new
renewable fuel categories and specific volume standards for cellulosic
and advanced renewable fuels, biomass based diesel and total renewable
fuels. Further, the amendments establish new eligibility requirements
for meeting the renewable fuel standards including application of a
specific definition for biomass, restrictions on what land feedstocks
can come from and establish minimum lifecycle greenhouse gas reduction
thresholds for the various categories of renewable fuels.
Statement of Need:
This action is directed by the 2007 Energy Independence and Security
Act. It requires EPA to implement the amendments to Clean Air Act
Section 211(o) - The Renewable Fuels Standard Program.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Clean Air Act Section 211(o).
Alternatives:
A notice of proposed rulemaking was published in the Federal Register
on May 26, 2009. The proposal includes a number of proposed approaches
as well as alternative approaches to implement the new standards. The
public comment period will close on September 25, 2009.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The economic analyses that support the proposed rule do not reflect all
of the potentially quantifiable economic impacts. There are several key
impacts that remain incomplete as a result of time and resource
constraints necessary to complete the proposed rule, including the
economic impact analysis and the air quality and health impacts
analysis (see Section II.B.3). As a result, this proposal does not
combine economic impacts in an attempt to compare costs and benefits,
in order to avoid presenting an incomplete and potentially misleading
characterization. For the final rule, when the planned analyses are
complete and current analyses updated, we will provide a consistent
cost-benefit comparison. However, the following is offered in
reflection of some of the benefits and costs associated with certain
aspects of the proposed rule. Initial estimates indicate that the
expanded use of renewable fuels will result in a reduction of 6.8
billion tons of CO2 equivalent GHG emissions in 2022. This is
equivalent to removing about 24 million vehicles off the road. Also, 36
billion gallons of renewable fuel will displace about 15 billion
gallons of petroleum-based gasoline and diesel fuel, which represents
about 11% of annual gasoline and diesel consumption in 2022. Total
energy security benefits associated with a reduction of U.S. imported
oil is $12.38/barrel. Based upon the $12.38/barrel figure, total energy
security benefits associated with this proposal were calculated at $3.7
billion. Increases in gasoline and diesel fuel costs are equivalent to
$4 billion to $18 billion in 2022. Estimates on U.S. food costs would
increase by $10 per person per year by 2022 while net U.S. farm income
would increase by $7.1 billion dollars (10.6%).
Risks:
Analysis of criteria and toxic emission impacts is performed relative
to several different reference cases. Overall we project the proposed
program will result in significant increases in ethanol and
acetaldehyde emissions. We project more modest but still significant
increases in acrolein, NOx, formaldehyde and PM. However, we project
today's action will result in decreased ammonia emissions (due to
reductions in livestock agricultural activity), decreased CO emissions
(driven primarily by the impacts of ethanol on exhaust emissions from
vehicles and nonroad equipment), and decreased benzene emissions (due
to displacement of gasoline with ethanol in the fuel pool). Discussion
and a breakdown of these results by the fuel production / distribution
and vehicle and equipment emissions are presented in the NPRM. The
aggregate nationwide emission inventory impacts presented here will
likely lead to health impacts throughout the U.S. due to changes in
future-year ambient air quality. However, emissions changes alone are
not a good indication of local or regional air quality and health
impacts, as there may be highly localized impacts such as increased
emissions from ethanol plants and evaporative emissions from cars, and
decreased emissions from gasoline refineries. For the final rule, a
national-scale air quality modeling analysis will be performed to
analyze the impacts of the proposed standards. Further, as the
production of biofuels increases to meet the requirements of this
proposed rule, there may be adverse impacts on both
[[Page 64334]]
water quality and quantity. Increased production of biofuels may lead
to increased application of fertilizer and pesticides and increased
soil erosion, which could impact water quality.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 05/26/09 74 FR 24903
NPRM Comment Period End 07/27/09
NPRM Comment Period
Extended 07/07/09 74 FR 32091
NPRM Extended Comment
Period End 09/25/09
Final Action 12/00/09
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
None
International Impacts:
This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and
investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest.
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5250. EPA publication information: NPRM - http://
edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-10978.pdf -- EPA Docket information:
EPA--HQ-- OAR--2005--0161
URL For More Information:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/index.htmnotices
Agency Contact:
Paul Argyropoulos
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
6520J ARN
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-1123
Fax: 202 564-1686
Email: argyropoulos.paul@epa.gov
David Korotney
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
AAFC
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Phone: 734 214-4507
Email: korotney.david@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AO81
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
149. ENDANGERMENT AND CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE FINDINGS FOR GREENHOUSE GASES
UNDER SECTION 202(A) OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
42 USC 7521(a)
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
On April 24, 2009, the Administrator published a proposed Endangerment
Finding under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. This proposed
finding had two components. First, the Administrator proposed to find
that the current and projected concentrations of the mix of six key
greenhouse gases - carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide
(N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6) - in the atmosphere endanger the public health and
welfare of current and future generations through climate change. In
the second component of the proposal, known as the Cause or Contribute
Finding, the Administrator further proposed to find that the combined
emissions of four of these six greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles
and motor vehicle engines contribute to the atmospheric concentrations
of these key greenhouse gases and hence to the threat of climate
change. EPA has not proposed in this action any new regulation of motor
vehicle or motor vehicle emissions.
Statement of Need:
This action responds to the Supreme Court's decision in Massachusetts
v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), in which the court found that greenhouse
gases are air pollutants under the CAA. The Court held that the
Administrator must determine whether or not emissions of greenhouse
gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines cause or
contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too
uncertain to make a reasoned decision.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The legal basis is Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.
Alternatives:
Not yet determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
This action does not include any proposed standards and does not itself
impose any requirements on industry or other entities.
Risks:
The effects of climate change observed to date and projected to occur
in the future include, but are not limited to, more frequent and
intense heat waves, more severe wildfires, degraded air quality, more
heavy downpours and flooding, increased drought, greater sea level
rise, more intense storms, harm to water resources, harm to
agriculture, and harm to wildlife and ecosystems.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
Proposal 04/24/09 74 FR 18886
Final 12/00/09
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
Previously reported as RIN 2060-ZA14. SAN No. 5335; EPA publication
information: Proposal - http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/2009/April/
Day-24/a9339.pdf. EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html
Agency Contact:
Rona Birnbaum
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
6207J
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 343-9076
Fax: 202 565-2140
Email: birnbaum.rona@epamail.epa.gov
Ben DeAngelo
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
6207J
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 343-9107
Email: deangelo.ben@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AP55
[[Page 64335]]
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
150. EPA/NHTSA JOINT RULEMAKING TO ESTABLISH LIGHT-DUTY
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION STANDARDS AND CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY
STANDARDS
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
Undetermined
Legal Authority:
Clean Air Act Section 202(a)
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
EPA plans to set national emissions standards under section 202 (a) of
the Clean Air Act to control greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from
passenger cars and light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger
vehicles, as part of a joint rulemaking with National Highway Traffic
and Safety Administration (NHTSA). This joint rulemaking effort was
announced by President Obama on May 19, 2009. The GHG standards would
significantly reduce the GHG emissions from these light-duty vehicles.
The standards would be phased in beginning with the 2012 model year
through model year 2016. EPA and NHTSA expect to propose the rules by
late summer 2009. EPA's final action would only occur if EPA determines
that emissions of greenhouse gases may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare, and that emissions from new motor
vehicles and motor vehicle engines contribute to the atmospheric
concentrations of these greenhouse gases and hence to the threat of
climate change. EPA has already proposed these findings. (74 FR 18886;
April 24, 2009)
Statement of Need:
EPA recently proposed to find that emissions of greenhouse gases from
new motor vehicles and engines cause or contribute to air pollution
that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and
welfare. Therefore, there is a need to reduce GHG emissions from light-
duty vehicles to protect public health and welfare. The light-duty
vehicle sector, which includes passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and
medium-duty passenger vehicles, accounts for approximately 60% of all
U.S. transportation sector GHG emissions. This rulemaking would
significantly reduce GHG emissions from model year 2012 through 2016
light-duty vehicles. This rulemaking is also consistent with the
National Fuel Efficiency Policy announced by President Obama on May 19,
2009, responding to the country's critical need to address global
climate change and reduce oil consumption.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 202(a)(1) provides broad authority to regulate new ``motor
vehicles,'' which include light duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and
medium-duty passenger vehicles (hereafter light vehicles). While other
provisions of Title II address specific model years and emissions of
motor vehicles, section 202(a)(1) provides the authority that EPA would
use to regulate GHGs from new light vehicles. Section 202(a)(1) states
``the Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to
time revise). . . standards applicable to the emission of any air
pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles . . . , which
in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.'' Any
such standards ``shall be applicable to such vehicles . . . for their
useful life.'' Finalizing the light vehicle regulations would be
contingent upon EPA finalizing both the endangerment finding and cause
or contribute finding that emissions of GHGs from new motor vehicles
and motor vehicle engines cause or contribute to air pollution that may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare.
Alternatives:
The rulemaking proposal will include an evaluation of regulatory
alternatives that can be considered in addition to the Agency's primary
proposal. In addition, the proposal is expected to include tools such
as averaging, banking and trading of emissions credits as alternative
approaches for compliance with the proposed program.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
According to EPA's preliminary analysis, the standards under
consideration are projected to reduce GHGs by approximately 900 million
metric tons and save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the life of the
program for MY 2012 -- 2016 vehicles. The program would reduce GHG
emissions from the U.S. light-duty fleet by 19 percent by 2030. EPA
estimates an average increased cost of about $1,300 per vehicle in 2016
compared to today's vehicles. However, the typical driver would save
enough in lower fuel costs over the first three years to offset the
higher vehicle cost. Over the life of a vehicle, drivers would save
about $2,800 through the fuel savings that come from controlling GHG
emissions. Detailed analysis of economy-wide cost impacts, greenhouse
gas emission reductions, and societal benefits will be performed during
the rulemaking process.
Risks:
GHG emissions from light-duty vehicles are responsible for almost 60
percent of all U.S. transportation-related GHGs, and increase the risk
of unacceptable climate change impacts.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 09/28/09 74 FR 49454
NPRM Comment Period End 11/27/09
Final Action 03/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5344; EPA Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472
Agency Contact:
Robin Moran
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
ASD
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Phone: 734 214-4781
Fax: 734 214-4816
Email: moran.robin@epamail.epa.gov
Chris Lieske
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
ASD
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Phone: 734 214-4584
Fax: 734 214-4816
Email: lieske.christopher@epamail.epa.gov
Related RIN: Related to 2127-AK50
RIN: 2060-AP58
[[Page 64336]]
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
151. PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION (PSD):
RECONSIDERATION OF INTERPRETATION OF REGULATIONS THAT DETERMINE
POLLUTANTS COVERED BY THE FEDERAL PSD PERMIT PROGRAM
Priority:
Other Significant
Legal Authority:
Administrative Procedure Act sec 553(e)
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
This action concerns the EPA's interpretation of the regulatory phrase
``subject to regulation'' as it applies to the federal Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program (more specifically, in 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50)). At issue is a December 18, 2008, memorandum, titled
``EPA's Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants Covered
By Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit
Program,'' which specified that a pollutant is only ``subject to
regulation'' when its emissions are actually controlled or limited
under a provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA) or a final EPA rule issued
under the authority of the CAA. Following issuance of the memo, EPA
received a petition for reconsideration from the Sierra Club and
several other organizations. The petitioners argued that EPA's issuance
of the Memo violated the procedural requirements of the Administrative
Procedures Act and the CAA, and the Memo's interpretation conflicted
with prior agency actions. On February 17, 2009, the Administrator
granted reconsideration on the December 18, 2008, memorandum in order
to allow for public comment on the issues raised in the Memo and in a
related decision of the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB). Thus, EPA
will proceed with a reconsideration proceeding and conduct rulemaking
regarding the proper interpretation of this regulatory phrase.
Statement of Need:
This rulemaking is needed to ensure a common understanding of when a
new pollutant becomes ``subject to regulation'' and thereby subject to
PSD permitting requirements. In light of the petitioners' request, EPA
believes that soliciting comment on the December 18, 2008,
interpretation, as well as other feasible options, is warranted.
Summary of Legal Basis:
APA 553(e).
Alternatives:
Not yet determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Not yet determined.
Risks:
Not yet determined.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 10/07/09 74 FR 51535
Final Action 03/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5377
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/nsr
Agency Contact:
Dave Svendsgaard
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-03
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-2380
Fax: 919 685-3105
Email: svendsgaard.dave@epamail.epa.gov
Raj Rao
Environmental Protection Agency
Air and Radiation
C504-02
RTP, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-5344
Fax: 919 541-5509
Email: rao.raj@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2060-AP87
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
152. LEAD; AMENDMENT TO THE OPT-OUT AND RECORDKEEPING
PROVISIONS IN THE RENOVATION, REPAIR, AND PAINTING PROGRAM
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Unfunded Mandates:
This action may affect the private sector under PL 104-4.
Legal Authority:
15 USC 2601(c); 15 USC 2682(c)(3); 15 USC 2684; 15 USC 2686; 15 USC
2687
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 745
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, October 20, 2009, Signature.
Final, Judicial, April 22, 2010, Signature.
Abstract:
EPA intends to propose several revisions to the 2008 Lead Renovation,
Repair, and Painting Program (RRP) rule that established accreditation,
training, certification, and recordkeeping requirements as well as work
practice standards on persons performing renovations for compensation
in most pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities. This particular
action will involve proposing amendments to the opt-out provision that
currently exempts a renovator from the training and work practice
requirements of the rule where he or she obtains a certification from
the owner of a residence he or she occupies that no child under age 6
or pregnant women resides in the home and the home is not a child-
occupied facility. EPA will propose revisions that involve renovation
firms providing the owner with a copy of the records they are currently
required to maintain to demonstrate compliance with the training and
work practice requirements of the RRP rule and, if different, providing
the information to the occupant of the building being renovated or the
operator of the child-occupied facility. EPA will also propose various
minor amendments to the regulations concerning applications for
training provider accreditation, amending accreditations, course
completion certificates, recordkeeping, State and Tribal program
requirements, and grandfathering (i.e., taking a refresher training in
lieu of the initial training). In addition, the proposed amendments
intend to clarify that certain requirements apply to the RRP rule as
well as the Lead-based Paint Activities (abatement) regulations, that a
certified inspector or risk assessor can act as a dust sampling
technician, which hands-on training topics are required for renovator
and dust sampling technician courses, and
[[Page 64337]]
requirements for States and Tribes that apply to become authorized to
implement the RRP program.
Statement of Need:
This rulemaking revisions is being considered in response to a
settlement agreement.
Summary of Legal Basis:
Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires
EPA to regulate renovation or remodeling activities that create lead-
based paint hazards in target housing, which is defined by statute to
cover most pre-1978 housing, public buildings built before 1978, and
commercial buildings.
Alternatives:
The original proposal considered several options on these points. In
addition, EPA will identify other alternatives to evaluate. The
alternatives were not, however, available at the time that this form
was completed.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Under development and not available at the time that this form was
completed.
Risks:
Under development and not available at the time that this form was
completed.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 10/28/09 74 FR 55506
NPRM Comment Period End 11/27/09
Final Action 04/00/10
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
Yes
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses
Government Levels Affected:
None
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5379
URL For More Information:
http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm
Agency Contact:
Marc Edmonds
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
7404T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-0758
Fax: 202 566-0741
Email: edmonds.marc@epa.gov
Michelle Price
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
7404T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-0744
Fax: 202 566-0471
Email: price.michelle@epa.gov
RIN: 2070-AJ55
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
153. REVISIONS TO THE SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND COUNTERMEASURE
(SPCC) RULE
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
33 USC 1321
CFR Citation:
40 CFR 112
Legal Deadline:
None
Abstract:
On December 5, 2008, EPA amended the Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) rule to provide increased clarity with respect to
specific regulatory requirements, to tailor requirements to particular
industry sectors, and to streamline certain rule requirements. The
Agency subsequently delayed the effective date of these amendments to
January 14, 2010 to allow the Agency time to review the amendments to
ensure that they properly reflect consideration of all relevant facts.
EPA also requested public comment on the delay of the effective date
and its duration, and on the December 2008 amendments. EPA is reviewing
the record for the amendments and the additional comments to determine
if any changes are warranted.
Statement of Need:
The final rule is necessary to clarify the regulatory obligations of
SPCC facility owners and operators and to reduce the regulatory burden
where appropriate.
Summary of Legal Basis:
33 USC 1321 et seq.
Alternatives:
EPA considered alternative options for various aspects of this final
rule, following receipt of public comments.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The principal effect of the final amendments would be lower compliance
costs for owners and operators of certain types of facilities and
equipment. Preliminary cost savings for this rulemaking effort is
estimated to be between $92-100 million.
Risks:
In the absence of quantitative information on the change in risk
related to the specific proposed amendments, EPA conducted a
qualitative assessment, which suggests that the final amendments will
not lead to a significant increase in oil discharge risk.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice Clarifying Certain
Issues 05/25/04 69 FR 29728
NPRM 1-Year Compliance
Extension 06/17/04 69 FR 34014
Final 18 Months
Compliance Extension 08/11/04 69 FR 48794
NODA : Certain Facilities 09/20/04 69 FR 56184
NODA: Oil-Filled and
Process Equipment 09/20/04 69 FR 56182
NPRM 10/15/07 72 FR 58377
Final Action 12/05/08 73 FR 74236
Notice to Delay Effective
Date 02/03/09 74 FR 5900
Delay of Effective Date 04/01/09 74 FR 14736
Final Action 2 12/00/09
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
No
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Additional Information:
SAN No. 2634.2; EPA publication information: Notice Clarifying Certain
Issues - http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/ cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?
dbname=2004
[[Page 64338]]
--register &docid=fr25my04-49.pdf; Split from RIN 2050-AC62.; EPA
Docket information: EPA-HQ-OPA-2007-0584
URL For More Information:
www.epa.gov/oilspill/spcc.htm
Agency Contact:
Vanessa Principe
Environmental Protection Agency
Solid Waste and Emergency Response
5104A
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-7913
Fax: 202 564-2625
Email: principe.vanessa@epa.gov
RIN: 2050-AG16
_______________________________________________________________________
EPA
154. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
AND DEVELOPMENT POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
Priority:
Economically Significant. Major under 5 USC 801.
Legal Authority:
CWA 301; CWA 304; CWA 306; CWA 501
CFR Citation:
Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline:
NPRM, Judicial, December 1, 2008, FR Publication by 12/1/2008 as per
12/5/2006 Court Order.
Final, Judicial, December 1, 2009, FR Publication by 12/1/2009 as per
12/5/2006 Court Order.
Abstract:
In a November 28, 2008 proposed rulemaking, EPA proposed to establish
effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) and new source performance
standards (NSPSs) for the Construction and Development point source
category. This rulemaking and its schedule respond to a court order
that requires the Agency to publish final regulations by December 1,
2009. The ELGs and NSPSs would control the discharge of pollutants such
as sediment, turbidity, nutrients and metals in discharges from
construction activities and will be implemented through the issuance of
NPDES permits. EPA solicited comments on a range of erosion and
sediment control measures and pollution prevention measures. The
proposed requirements vary by size of the construction site and by
other factors, such as rainfall intensity and clay content of soil. The
proposed rule was intended to work in concert with existing state and
local programs, adding a technology-based ``floor'' that establishes
minimum requirements that would apply nationally. Once implemented,
these new requirements would significantly reduce the amount of
sediment, turbidity, and other pollutants discharged from construction
sites.
Statement of Need:
Despite substantial improvements in the nation's water quality since
the inception of the Clean Water Act, 45 percent of assessed river and
stream miles, 47 percent of assessed lake acres, and 32 percent of
assessed square miles of estuaries show impairments from a wide range
of sources. Improper control of stormwater discharges from construction
activity is among the many contributors to remaining water quality
problems throughout the United States. Sediment is one of the primary
pollutants that cause water quality impairment for streams and rivers.
Construction generates significantly higher loads of sediment per acre
than other sources. The rulemaking would constitute the nationally
applicable, technology-based ELGs and NSPS applicable to all
dischargers required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
Summary of Legal Basis:
The Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to establish ELGs and NSPS to limit
the pollutants discharged from point sources. In addition, EPA is bound
by the district court decision, in NRDC v. EPA, 437 F.Supp.2d 1137,
(C.D. Cal.2006), to propose ELGs and NSPS for the construction and
development industry by December 1, 2008 and to promulgate ELGs and
NSPS as soon as practicable, but in no event later than December 1,
2009.
Alternatives:
The Clean Water Act directs EPA to establish a technology basis for the
ELGs and NSPS, which are based on the performance of specific
technology levels, such as the best available technology economically
achievable. EPA is considering a range of pollution control approaches
and technologies, and is also considering waivers based on construction
site size, rainfall, and soil erosivity to reduce the impact on small
dischargers.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
The annualized social costs of the proposed rulemaking were estimated
to range from $141 million to $3.8 billion, and the annualized
monetized benefits were estimated to range from $11 million to $327
million. The costs include compliance costs, administrative costs, and
partial equilibrium estimates of quantity effects and deadweight loss
to society. The monetized benefit categories include avoided costs of
dredging for navigation and water storage, avoided costs of drinking
water treatment, and monetizable water quality benefits. These costs
may change in the final rule.
Risks:
Sediment is currently one of the primary pollutants that cause water
quality impairment for streams and rivers and present a risk to aquatic
life. The ELGs and NSPS are expected to result in a reduction of the
discharge of pollutants to surface waters, primarily as sediment and
turbidity.
Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action Date FR Cite
_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM 11/28/08 73 FR 72561
NPRM Comment Period End 02/26/09
Final Action 12/00/09
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required:
No
Small Entities Affected:
Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions
Government Levels Affected:
Federal, Local, State
Additional Information:
SAN No. 5119; EPA publication information: NPRM - http://
edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-27848.pdf; EPA Docket information:
EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0465
URL For More Information:
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide/construction/
[[Page 64339]]
Agency Contact:
Jesse Pritts
Environmental Protection Agency
Water
4303T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-1038
Fax: 202 566-1053
Email: pritts.jesse@epamail.epa.gov
Janet Goodwin
Environmental Protection Agency
Water
4303T
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-1060
Email: goodwin.janet@epamail.epa.gov
RIN: 2040-AE91
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S
