Background: On January 14, 1997, EPA published a notice of additional information (NAI) under Section 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) establishing new source performance standards and emission guidelines for new and existing solid waste incineration units including units that incinerate municipal sewage sludge. Section 129 requires EPA to promulgate standards and guidelines, for new and existing sources, which include numerical emission limitations for the following substances: particulate matter, opacity, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead, cadmium, mercury, and dioxins and dibenzofurans. In addition, the standards and guidelines are to include requirements for emissions and parameter monitoring and provisions for operator training and certification. On March 17, 1997, AMSA submitted comments in opposition to EPA’s Office of Air & Radiation proposal to subject SSIs to the same regulations as solid waste incinerators.

Status: Over the past year, AMSA has worked closely with EPA to encourage them to consider AMSA’s opposition to regulate SSIs under Section 129. In response to the January 1997 NAI, EPA has gathered data on SSIs from the permit compliance system (PCS) database, information from the regions on Part 503 permits, source test data from 97 incinerators and, along with AMSA representatives, visited several test sites in PA and NJ to assess various controls in place at both multiple hearth and fluidized bed incinerators. EPA stated that it will most likely use a technology approach to establish emission levels based on performance of the top 12 percent of control devices in place to determine the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standard for SSIs under Section 129. Some form of integration with the risk-based approach of Part 503 will be conducted later for each of the eleven pollutants under section 129. EPA’s Offices of Air and Water held an internal meeting on March 18, 1998 to finalize plans for addressing SSIs. EPA is currently in the process of developing a work plan and will meet with AMSA in May. In March, EPA requested the identity of several AMSA member agencies that submitted dioxin data as part of the 1994 Dioxin Assessment Peer Review. Those agencies were contacted and most have given the National Office permission to release their names to EPA at this time. AMSA plans to meet with EPA in September to review EPA’s work plan based on data gathering efforts, potential MACT standards, training and certification requirements, and potential sites where EPA plans to conduct additional incinerator emissions testing later this year. In April, EPA released the "Inventory of Sources of Dioxin in the United States." To order a copy of this report, contact the ORD Publications Agency at 513/569-7562. CONTACT: Sam Hadeed, AMSA 202/833-4655, or Gene Crumpler, EPA 919/541-0881.

Background: On July 16, 1992, as required by the Clean Air Amendments of 1990, EPA published a list of industrial source categories that emit one or more of listed hazardous air pollutants. For listed industrial categories of "major" sources (those that have the potential to emit 10 tons/year or more of a listed pollutant or 25 tons/year or more of a combination of pollutants), EPA is required to develop standards for these sources that will require the application of stringent controls, known as maximum achievable control technology (MACT). The promulgation date for the MACT Standards was established for May 1999.

Status: In October 1996, EPA signaled plans to exclude POTWs as a source category under Clean Air Act maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standard development. EPA has cited difficulty in defining a MACT floor for existing POTWs, as relatively few facilities meet the definition of a major source under Section 112. AMSA members should be aware that it remains possible that POTWs may still face regulation as area sources under an urban area air emission control mechanism. In late 1997, AMSA’s Air Quality Committee Leadership reviewed a draft copy of the proposed rule and submitted a preliminary analysis outlining AMSA’s comments and concerns to Bruce Jordan, Director of EPA’s Emissions Standards Division. AMSA’s Air Quality Committee Leadership and the National Office met with EPA in Research Triangle Park, NC on February 23 to review AMSA’s comments on the draft proposal. Based on new information provided by AMSA, in March, the Agency withdrew the rule from Office of Management & Budget in order to incorporate revisions before the rule is issued in later this summer. EPA has indicated that the MACT floor for existing POTWs will not have any controls, while the new source MACT will likely include capture and vent to carbon for the headworks. On June 26, EPA resubmitted the proposed rule to OMB for approval; a copy was forwarded to the Air Quality Committee leadership for review. Following review by the Air Quality Committee, it was determined that the proposed standard is generally favorable to POTWs in that MACT was defined as "no-control" for existing non-industrial POTWs. The Air Quality Committee received Technical Action Fund support from AMSA’s Board of Directors to conduct a thorough review of the latest version of the WATER8 emissions model to examine changes on estimating POTW air toxic emissions and prepare source testing protocols for submission to EPA to potentially allow direct emissions testing by POTWs for determining major source status. A notice is expected in the Federal Register sometime in mid-summer; a 60-day comment period is expected. CONTACT: Sam Hadeed, AMSA 202/833-4655, or Bob Lucas, EPA 919/541-0884.

Background: EPA is developing National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for certain combustion sources under the Industrial Combustion Coordinated Rulemaking (ICCR) process using an advisory committee consisting of a Coordinating Committee and various workgroups. The ICCR process includes several types of combustion devices operated by AMSA members which utilize digester gas including boilers, Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICES), Combustion Turbines (CTs), and very likely waste gas flares (under the heading of incineration). Members of AMSA’s Air Quality Committee are represented on the Coordinating Committee and work groups for boilers, RICES, CTs, incinerators and the source testing workgroup.

Status: In the summer of 1997, EPA conducted a limited data gathering survey to support development of regulations for the combustion devices. The basis for control of combustion devices will be the average of the top performing 12% of the sources within the category. Due to concerns that the combustion devices operating at POTWs will be considered with all similar combustion categories, AMSA’s Board of Directors approved funding support to conduct a survey of the membership to collect both data inventory and emission data for combustion devices. A major concern was that combustion control devices applicable for burning of natural gas may get applied to the combustion of digester gas, which past experience at several POTWs has shown to be either technically infeasible or not cost-effective. The National Office distributed the survey forms to the membership via Regulatory Alerts RA97-12 and RA97-12a. The results, which indicate that very few AMSA member agencies have conducted emissions testing for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and criteria pollutants and will most likely need to conduct such source testing in the future if required by EPA, were submitted to EPA in late September 1997. Due to data compatibility problems with EPA’s database, in May, AMSA’s Board of Directors approved the use of $5,000 in Technical Action Funds to have the survey consultant reformat the AMSA data to meet EPA’s requirements as it evaluates MACT controls for engines fueled by digester gas. The reformatted data was submitted to EPA in June. The ICCR FACA met July 28-29 in Long Beach, CA. The next ICCR FACA meeting will be held in mid-September. There are strong indications from EPA that the ICCR FACA charter will not be renewed and future MACT rulemaking will be developed and prioritized by internal EPA review. EPA has developed an ICCR Web Site at http://www.epa.gov/ttniccr1/ to provide information on the development of regulations, full workgroup meeting summaries, and workgroup membership lists. A proposed rulemaking is anticipated by November 2000. CONTACT: Sam Hadeed, AMSA 202/833-4655, or Fred Porter, EPA 919/541-5251.

EPA TO RELEASE MODEL RMP IN AUGUST

As required under Section 112(r)(7) of the Clean Air Act, on June 20, 1996, EPA promulgated a final Risk Management Plan (RMP) regulation which requires the owner or operator of stationary sources at which a regulated substance is present to prepare and implement a RMP that must include both a hazard assessment that evaluates the potential effects of an accidental release of any regulated substance and a five-year accident release history. Regulated sources have until June 21, 1999 to comply with the RMP requirements. For more information on the RMP regulation, please visit EPA’s RMP Web Site at http://www.epa.gov/swercepp. AMSA and EPA’s Chemical Emergency Preparedness & Prevention Office are developing a model RMP to help wastewater facilities comply with the June 1999 compliance deadline to implement the CAA’s Section 112(r)(7) requirements. Following a peer review, the final document is expected for general release by EPA in late August 1998. The model RMP provides compliance guidance for regulated chemicals with the highest potential to exceed the threshold quantity and which are most commonly used at wastewater facilities, including: chlorine, ammonia (anhydrous and aqueous), sulfur dioxide, digester gas and propane. The model RMP also covers: 1) developing a five-year accident history; 2) performing a hazard assessment; 3) developing a management system to oversee the implementation of the RMP elements; 4) defining boundaries of processes for which you are implementing prevention and response programs; 5) developing a prevention program; and, 6) implementing an emergency response program.

EPA has decided to continue using the 25-mile maximum value included in the reference tables in the RMP Offsite Consequence Analysis (OCA) Guidance (May 1996) for the distance to endpoint. EPA recently received several comments that a 10-mile maximum would be more appropriate, noting that 10 miles is the maximum specific number used for distance to endpoint in the Technical Guidance for Hazardous Analysis. Various stakeholders also commented that the off-site consequence analysis distances are not intended for planning and response purposes, but can be used to establish priorities among various facilities in a community when local emergency planning committees and other local agencies determine how to address accident prevention and preparedness. CONTACT: Sam Hadeed, AMSA 202/833-4655.

YOU ARE CURRENTLY ON THE ARCHIVE SITE, which was last updated on July 31, 2007.
Please click here for the current NACWA website.

National Association of Clean Water Agencies | 1816 Jefferson Place, NW Washington D.C. 20036 | 202.833.2672 | Fax 202.833.4657 | info@nacwa.org