…but fishermen might still have cause for concern:
A flurry of protests followed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s notice on August 24 that it would accept comments on a petition requesting that it ban lead in bullets and shot, as well as in fishing tackle (e.g., lead sinkers). As quickly as the clamor rose, it subsided, when EPA today denied the part of the petition calling for a ban on the production and distribution of lead hunting ammunition. The EPA letter explaining its denial can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemtest/pubs/sect21.html.
EPA determined that the agency could not act on the requested ban on lead ammunition because it does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) – and stated that it is not seeking such authority.
(more…)
On July 29, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) denied 10 petitions challenging its 2009 determination that
- climate change is real,
- it is occurring due to emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities, and
- it threatens human health and the environment.
EPA’s decision rejected claims that climate science cannot be trusted and that collusion (dare we say, a “conspiracy”?) among members of leading research bodies to suppress conflicting data and hide errors or gaps in their own research invalidates the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, and the U.S. Global Change Research Program. Having given “months of serious consideration” to the petitions and to the state of climate change science, EPA found no evidence to support these claims. In fact, EPA has determined that climate science is credible, compelling, and growing stronger!
EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson blamed the petitions on “defenders of the status quo [who] will try to slow our efforts to get America running on clean energy,” and called on petitioners “to join the vast majority of the American people who want to see more green jobs, more clean energy innovation and an end to the oil addiction that pollutes our planet and jeopardizes our national security.”
The basic assertions by the petitioners and EPA responses follow.
(more…)
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed to extend the compliance date for some facilities subject to the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Rule amendments.
Drilling, production or workover facilities that are offshore or onshore facilities required to have and submit facility response plans (FRPs) will not be eligible for the proposed extension, and must prepare or update their SPCC Plans in accordance with the rule amendments by November 10 of this year. Other facilities, including onshore oil production facilities, farms, utilities, various manufacturers, petroleum bulk storage and retail, transportation and commercial operations may put off their plan and facility updates until November 10, 2011.
Provided, of course, that facilities that were in operation and subject to SPCC regulations before August 16, 2002, maintain and continue to implement their existing SPCC Plans in accordance with the regulations that were then in effect.
More information on SPCC requirements can be found at this page. Please comment below or contact T. Cozzie Consulting if you have questions or concerns about how these requirements affect your facility.
On May 13, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its final “GHG Tailoring” rule to address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from stationary sources. The phased-in approach will initially address large facilities like power plants and oil refineries that emit most of the greenhouse gases from stationary sources. The regulated GHGs include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride.
Starting in January 2011, Clean Air Act permitting requirements for GHGs will apply to large facilities that are already obtaining Clean Air Act permits for other pollutants. Those facilities will be required to include GHGs in their permit if they increase their GHG emissions by 75,000 tons per year (tpy). In July 2011, permitting requirements will expand to cover all new facilities with GHG emissions of at least 100,000 tpy and modifications at existing facilities that would increase GHG emissions by at least 75,000 tpy. The permits must demonstrate the use of best available control technologies to minimize GHG emission increases when facilities are constructed or significantly modified. EPA estimates approximately 900 additional permitting actions covering new sources and modifications to existing sources would be subject to review each year. In addition, 550 sources will need to obtain operating permits for the first time because of their GHG emissions.
Permitting requirements for smaller sources will await the findings of a 5-year study of the effects of GHG permitting of these sources, slated for completion in 2015.
According to the EPA press release announcing the final rule, the agency received about 450,000 (!) comments within the 60-day public comment period that followed issuance of the proposed rule in October 2009.
More information on the GHG Tailoring Rule and its implementation schedule can be found at http://www.epa.gov/nsr/actions.html.
What do you think? Has EPA struck the proper balance between regulating a significant threat to health and the environment and providing relief to small businesses and farms?
Comments Off
On April 29, 2010, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed three rules to regulate hazardous air emissions from commercial, institutional and industrial boilers, process heaters and incinerators at major and area sources.
One of the proposed rules addresses boilers at area sources – facilities that potentially emit less than 10 tons per year (tpy) of any single hazardous air pollutant or 25 tpy of combined air toxics. The rule will apply to facilities with boilers that burn coal, oil or biomass (i.e., wood), but not waste materials. New boilers that burn coal would need to meet emission standards for mercury, particulates and carbon monoxide. New boilers burning oil or biomass will need to meet emission limits for particulates and carbon monoxide. Existing large boilers (heat input of 10 million Btu/hr or greater) that burn coal will be required to meet emission limits for mercury and carbon monoxide; existing large boilers that are oil or biomass-fired will have an emission limit for carbon monoxide, only. The rule requires that all facilities with large boilers conduct an energy assessment to identify practicable conservation measures. Facilities with small boilers will be required only to conduct a boiler tune-up at least once every two years.
The second rule applies to boilers and process heaters at major source facilities. The rule will apply to boilers that burn natural gas, fuel oil, coal, biomass or other gas, but not waste, and to process heaters (which heat raw or intermediate materials in an industrial process).
(more…)
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI) Form R or Form A reports are due by July 1! If your facility:
- has 10 or more employees;
- is included among certain covered industrial categories, including manufacturers that correspond to SIC Codes 20 through 39; some mining operations; utilities that burn coal or oil for commercial electrical generation; chemical wholesalers; petroleum bulk storage terminals; and waste treatment, disposal and recovery facilities; and
- manufactured, imported, processed or otherwise used listed toxic chemicals above threshold reporting quantities,
Then you are likely required to report your releases and off-site transfers of the toxic chemicals. More information on these requirements is linked at www.tcozzie.com/compliance/tri-2009.htm. You can visit the Environmental Protection Agency’s TRI reporting materials page by clicking on the image at right.
Does your facility need to comply? Are you ready to meet this requirement? As always, feel free to contact T. Cozzie Consulting for further information or assistance.
Comments Off
