November 29, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have drafted a letter commenting on two EPA residual risk proposals related to Magnetic Tape Manufacturing and Cooling Towers.  They were proposed in the Federal Register on October 24, 2005.  The comment deadline is December 8, 2005.  Please send any comments on the letter to Mary Sullivan Douglas of STAPPA/ALAPCO at mdouglas@4cleanair.org by COB, December 5, 2005.  The final versions will be split into a separate letter for each source category.

November 18, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration�s (NHTSA�s) proposed rule on average fuel economy standards for light trucks, MYs 2008 through 2011.  In the comments, the associations note that our nation�s fuel economy standards have remained almost static for nearly 20 years and express disappointment that in its proposal, NHTSA fails to take appropriate advantage of the current opportunity for meaningful strides in CAFE improvements.  The main recommendations STAPPA and ALAPCO make to NHTSA are 1) to increase and harmonize current CAFE standards for cars (currently 27.5 mpg) and light trucks (currently 20.7 mpg) to a single, far more aggressive near-term level than what has been proposed, 2) to build upon such a standard in the final rule by also including progressively tighter standards to be implemented over a longer horizon than that envisioned in the proposal, 3) to extend the applicability of these more aggressive, harmonized standards to all vehicles up to 10,000 pounds GVWR and 4) to eliminate erroneous language in the preamble asserting that a state law that seeks to reduce motor vehicle CO2 emissions is preempted.  To view the comments, click here.

November 16, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted the associations� recently released mercury model rule in lieu of in-person testimony at EPA�s hearing regarding the reconsideration of the Clean Air Mercury Rule and the delisting of utilities from the list of covered sources under Section 112.  The hearing was held in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina on November 17, 2005.  In the letter transmitting the associations� model rule � Mercury from Power Plants: A Model Rule for States and Localities � STAPPA and ALAPCO indicated that the model rule more accurately reflects the intent of the Clean Air Act with respect to controlling mercury from electric utilities than EPA�s rules do.  While the model rule is primarily designed to help state and local agencies develop their own programs, it outlines an approach � consistent with the mandates of the law � that EPA should consider adopting to regulate mercury emissions from utilities.  Click here to view STAPPA/ALAPCO�s letter.  Click here to view STAPPA/ALAPCO�s mercury model rule.

November 14, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have developed a model rule entitled, Mercury from Power Plants:  A Model Rule for States and Localities in response to concern that EPA's Clean Air Mercury Rule was inconsistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act and would not result in adequate reductions in emissions of mercury from coal-fired power plants to protect public health.  The STAPPA/ALAPCO model rule provides state and local governments with the tools needed to obtain reductions in mercury emissions necessary to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act.  Specifically, the model describes two options for state and local governments that wish to develop utility mercury rules that are more protective of public health and the environment than EPA's regulation and contains model rule language for both.  To view the document, click here. To view the press release announcing the Model Rule, click here. To view ICAC' s press release on the Model Rule, click here. To view a one-page comparison of EPA's Mercury Rule and STAPPA/ALAPCO's Model Rule, click here.

November 10, 2005

During the STAPPA/ALAPCO Fall Membership Meeting, STAPPA/ALAPCO provided a summary of its document, Mercury from Power Plants:  A Model Rule for States and Localities that is under development.  There was strong support for the document and many agencies expressed their intent to use it in their deliberations.  The document will be released to the public next week, perhaps as early as Sunday or Monday.  However, it is available here for state and local agencies to view the final draft before it is publicly released.  Please note that this document is still a draft.  While substantive changes are not anticipated, please do not share it outside of your agency.   STAPPA and ALAPCO have received expressions of support from the Institute of Clean Air Companies (ICAC), who are the control equipment vendors, and are working on obtaining expressions of support from some utilities. To view the draft, click here.

November 9, 2005

EPA released the final Phase 2 Ozone Implementation Rule, which covers issues not addressed in the Phase 1 rule, including attainment demonstrations and modeling, NSR, RACT, RACM, RFP and RFG requirements.  Click here for a press release.  Click here for a fact sheet.

October 31, 2005

Today, STAPPA and ALAPCO sent a comment letter to EPA on the agency's Performance Track Program. The associations recommended that EPA publish in the Federal Register for public comment an overview of this voluntary program, which currently rewards 370 facilities that go beyond environmental compliance.  The associations recommended publishing for comment the specific provisions of the program before it is expanded by EPA,  including how facilities become members, what benefits members receive, and what benefits�or �incentives��are currently under consideration by EPA.  The associations suggested that EPA raise the bar for admission, and that EPA reconsider the incentive that eliminates inspections for these facilities. 

October 28, 2005

STAPPA/ALAPCO Fall Membership Presentations

October 27, 2005

EPA released legislative and regulatory analyses comparing different cap-and-trade schemes for reducing air pollution.  Click here for a comparison of the six scenarios and click here for a table summarizing key provisions of all six scenarios.  Click here for an analysis of the Clean Air Planning Act, introduced by Senator Carper.  Click here for an analysis of the Clean Power Act, introduced by Senator Jeffords.  Click here for an analysis of the Clear Skies Act of 2005 (S.131), introduced by Senator Inhofe.  Click here for an analysis of the Clear Skies Act of 2003 as proposed by the Bush Administration.  Click here for an analysis of the Clear Skies Manager's Mark (of S.131).  Click here for an analysis of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) and Clean Air Visibility Rule (CAVR).  Click here for a web site with technical support information.

October 21, 2005

EPA has announced that it will reconsider aspects of its two mercury utility rules issued on March 15, 2005.  The rules implemented a cap-and-trade program under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act to address emissions of mercury from power plants and removed coal- and oil-fired electric steam generating units from the air toxics source category list under Section 112.  EPA is planning to reconsider only certain elements of each of the rules and is not requesting comment on other provisions.  With respect to the delisting rule, EPA is reconsidering legal issues underlying the decision and the methodology used to assess the mercury levels in fish tissue attributable to utilities and the public health implications of those levels.  With respect to the cap-and-trade rule, EPA is reconsidering the following seven aspects:  1) the method used to apportion the national caps to individual states; 2) the definition of "designated pollutant;" 3) EPA's subcategorization for new subbituminous coal-fired units subject to New Source Performance standards (NSPS); 4) the statistical analysis used for the NSPS; 5) the highest annual average mercury content used to derive the NSPS; 6) the definition of covered units as including municipal waste combustors; and 7) the definition of covered units as including some industrial boilers.  There will be a 45-day public comment period, beginning on the date the reconsideration announcements are published in the Federal Register.  EPA will hold a public hearing on the reconsideration on November 17, 2005 in Research Triangle Park, NC.  For additional information, click here.

October 14, 2005

EPA has released its proposed rule that would revise the emissions test for existing electric generating units (EGU�s) that are subject to regulations governing prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and nonattainment major NSR.  EPA states in the proposal that the actual annual emissions test would be replaced:  �For existing EGUs, [EPA is] proposing to compare the maximum hourly emissions achievable at that unit during the past 5 years to the maximum hourly emissions achievable at that unit after the change to determine whether an emissions increase would occur.�  Alternatives to this test are also described in the rule, and comments on all three alternatives are sought by the agency.  EPA�s fact sheet states that the proposed changes will make the NSR program compatible with programs that permanently cap power plant emissions, presumably the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR).  Furthermore, the agency notes, the proposed rule will achieve nationwide uniformity by bringing 45 states into line with the 5 states in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. On June 14, 2005, the Fourth Circuit ruled in the Duke Energy NSR enforcement case that the NSR test for increases in emissions should be the same as that for NSPS.  The proposed rule is at http://www.epa.gov/nsr.

October 11, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments on EPA�s Proposed Decision related to the Residual Risk Standard for Gasoline Distribution Facilities, which was published in the Federal Register on August 10, 2005.  EPA had decided that residual risk controls on those sources are not necessary.  STAPPA and ALAPCO expressed concern about the methodology EPA used in arriving at that decision, especially due to the precedent-setting nature of the agency�s process.  Specifically, STAPPA and ALAPCO opposed EPA�s use of estimates of exposure to census-block centroids to assess cancer risks to the population, rather than the more traditional property-line concentration.  Additionally, the associations questioned EPA�s use of actual reported emissions, rather than potential emissions, in evaluating residual risk.  To view the STAPPA/ALAPCO comment letter, click here.

October 7, 2005

Yesterday, in a letter to the House of Representatives, STAPPA and ALAPCO urged that House Members vote against H.R. 3893, the �Gasoline for America�s Security Act� (GAS Act), when the bill is taken up today on the House floor.  Subsequent to that time, Chairman Barton released a Manager�s Amendment to the bill.  Although the Manager�s Amendment appropriately strikes problematic changes to the NSR program, it fails to address other fundamentally flawed provisions of the bill, including those that eliminate states� abilities to adopt clean fuel programs; potentially undermine the federal clean diesel fuel program; preempt state and local agencies� permitting authority; and extend ozone attainment dates.  Therefore, this morning, STAPPA and ALAPCO wrote to House Members once again (click here), advising them that the associations continue to oppose H.R. 3893, as revised by the Manager�s Amendment, and urging Representatives to do so as well. To view a letter of opposition from the National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, National Association of Counties and National Conference of State Legislatures, click here.

September 27, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO sent a letter to Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) and Ranking Member John Dingell (D-MI) of the House Energy and Commerce Committee urging that they reject H.R. 3983, the �Gasoline for America�s Security Act of 2005,� introduced this week by Chairman Barton.  Citing Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the bill�s stated purpose is �to expedite the construction of new refining capacity in the United States [and] provide reliable and affordable energy for the American people.�  However, as STAPPA and ALAPCO note in their letter, H.R. 3983 seeks sweeping and permanent changes to critically important national Clean Air Act programs.  Not only do the associations have very serious concerns with these changes, they also believe the bill does not provide any near-term solutions to the urgent health and environmental problems that areas devastated by the hurricanes face right now.  STAPPA and ALAPCO are especially concerned by changes related to New Source Review, ozone attainment dates, refinery permitting and fuel blends, and believe these provisions are inappropriate, since there is no evidence that environmental requirements, particularly those related to air pollution, have prevented or impeded the construction of new refineries or the major modifications of existing refineries.  The associations urge in the letter that the Committee reject the bill and instead focus on appropriately targeted flexibilities and variances to assist directly the affected Gulf states in rebuilding healthy, livable communities.  The Energy and Commerce Committee is scheduled to mark up H.R. 3983 on Wednesday morning, September 28, 2005.

September 19, 2005 

STAPPA and ALAPCO are pleased to announce the availability of the document, Alternative NOx Allowance Allocation Language for the Clean Air Interstate Rule.  Under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), EPA provides flexibility to states in how they allocate NOx allowances.  This options memo provides states with alternative regulatory language for NO_x allocation that can provide opportunities to promote clean technologies. The options include: 1) fuel-neutral allocation; 2) updating the allocation baseline each time allowances are reallocated; 3) reduced allocation lead time to bring new units in more quickly; 4) improved treatment of combined heat and power (CHP); 5) increased new source set-aside; 6) energy efficiency/renewable set-aside; 7) direct allocation to renewables/energy efficiency; 8) output-based allocation; and 9) reduction of NO_x cap.  Specific regulatory language is included.  These options have not been reviewed or approved by the EPA.  Click here for the document.

September 13, 2005

The Senate voted 51-47 against S. J. Resolution 20, which is a resolution to disapprove EPA�s rule that delists power plants as a source of hazardous air pollutants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act.  The delisting rule was the first of the two regulations that EPA issued as part of its cap-and-trade strategy to address mercury emissions from power plants.  On June 29, 2005, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), along with 31 other senators, introduced S.J. Res. 20 under the Congressional Review Act, which is a little-used provision that allows Congress to overturn a regulation after it has been submitted to Congress.  A companion resolution was also introduced in the House at that time.  No action has been taken on the House version.  To view S.J. Res. 20, click here.

September 13, 2005

STAPPA/ALAPCO filed a comment  with EPA on September 12^th opposing elimination of the requirement to implement Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Plans and also opposing limiting public access to these plans. The comment urged that this reconsideration not be finalized for many reasons, including the illogic in requiring development�but not implementation�of plans; the necessity for compliance inspectors to have SSM plans as benchmarks for evaluating compliance with the general duty provisions; the benefit of maintaining a system that currently works reasonably well for many programs; and the importance of supplementing, rather than diminishing, regulations relating to emissions from malfunctions, or �upsets.� 

September 12, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments to EPA in response to the agency�s reconsideration of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) for Plywood and Composite Wood Products.  The standard was issued on July 30, 2004 and contained risk-based exemptions that STAPPA and ALAPCO had opposed during the comment period (the exemptions would allow sources to escape MACT requirements if they make a demonstration of low risk).  Several environmental groups sued EPA in opposition to the rule (with STAPPA and ALAPCO signing on as amicus curiae, or �friends of the court,� in support of the environmental groups� suit) and also petitioned EPA to reconsider the rule.  In response, EPA issued a notice of reconsideration and a proposed rule on July 29, 2005 (70 Federal Register 43826 and 44012, respectively) and requested comment.  In the comment letter, STAPPA and ALAPCO reiterate their opposition to the risk-based exemptions, stating that they are, among other things, counter to the Clean Air Act�s technology-based MACT program and would impose a burden on state and local air agencies.  Additionally, the associations express concerns about the manner in which EPA plans to implement the exemptions.  To view STAPPA/ALAPCO�s comment letter, click here.

September 9, 2005 

EPA released its proposed rule describing the implementation framework and requirements that state and local governments must meet in developing PM_2.5 SIPs.  The proposed rule covers attainment demonstration and modeling, reasonably available control measures, reasonably availably control technology, EPA�s policy on PM_2.5 and precursors and NSR requirements.  EPA will accept comment on the proposal for 60 days following its publication in the Federal Register.  EPA will hold a public hearing during the comment period, though the notice does not specify the time, date or location.  Click here for a fact sheet.

September 8, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have drafted comments on EPA�s proposed reconsideration of the regulatory requirements for startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plans.  The associations oppose EPA�s proposal to eliminate the requirement that SSM plans need to be implemented--leaving only the requirement that they be developed.  The associations also oppose EPA�s elimination of public access to the plans in accord with existing procedures, whereby individuals or groups making specific and reasonable requests for these plans to state and local agencies can obtain them after the agency obtains them from the source.  The comments will be filed by close of business September 12 unless an extension for states affected by hurricane Katrina is obtained (in which case, an email will be sent to the relevant committees).

September 1, 2005

EPA is developing a proposal that would limit new source review (NSR) applicability for coal-fired power plants by reinterpreting new source review (NSR) applicability in accord with the opinion of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in the June 15 Duke Energy decision. EPA�s proposal would require NSR permitting and installation of pollution control equipment only when modification of a process unit resulted in an increase in the maximum hourly rate of emissions.  Currently, NSR is triggered when there is a modification that results in a significant annual increase in emissions.  Natural Resources Defense Council has published an analysis of the proposal at www.nrdc.org

September 1, 2005

EPA Administrator, Stephen L. Johnson, exercised his authority under the emergency provisions of the Clean Air Act to temporarily allow supply and distribution of noncompliant fuel in the wake of hurricane Katrina.  On August 30, Mr. Johnson notified the governors in the States of Florida, Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi that he had determined that an extreme and unusual fuel supply circumstance exists in those States and that he was, accordingly, waiving the requirements for sale of low volatility �summertime� fuel in those states.  On August 31, Mr. Johnson extended the waiver to the rest of the country, stating �[a]s we are all well aware, we are seeing increasingly serious impacts from the hurricane in a number of fuel markets around the United States�[s]o today, I�m sending letters to the governors of the remaining 46 states and territories providing temporary relief from volatility and sulfur standards.�  The full text of the Administrator�s statement and further information is at: http://www.epa.gov/katrina/index.html

September 1, 2005 

EPA has released interim guidance that encourages states to consider recent scientific information on VOC reactivity and how it may be incorporated into the development of ozone control measures.  Using reactivity information, states may be able to improve the effectiveness of their VOC control policies, according to the guidance.  The guidance also provides that EPA will continue its policy of granting VOC exemptions for compounds that are negligibly reactive.  The policy will become effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

August 31, 2005

The Quicksilver Caucus, which is a coalition of state organizations including STAPPA/ALAPCO, has published Removing Mercury Switches from Vehicles:  A Pollution Prevention Opportunity for States.  The document describes the problems related to mercury-containing switches in vehicles that, when present in cars that are being demolished, can release emissions of mercury into the environment.  The document provides summaries of state programs to reduce the number of switches that remain in the demolished autos, including whether states have relied on existing authorities or have developed special legislation.  The report also describes how mercury-containing switches are removed.  Click here to view the report.

August 31, 2005

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has denied EPA�s request for a hearing by the full panel of judges or, alternatively, a rehearing by the same panel that rendered the decision. This leaves standing the decision by the Court that new source review requirements are triggered only when there is an increase in the hourly rate of emissions, rather than an increase in actual annual emissions. Click here to view the order.

August 30, 2005

On August 29, the Southern District Court in Indiana specifically disagreed with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals� interpretation of what constitutes a modification for purposes of new source review (NSR), holding that significant actual annual increases in emissions necessitate NSR requirements of permitting and installation of pollution controls. The opinion denied Cinergy�s summary judgment motion, filed by the company following the Duke decision.

August 24, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have prepared a draft letter commenting on the Plywood MACT reconsideration and proposal, both of which were published in the Federal Register on July 29, 2005.  The draft comments focus primarily on the associations� opposition to the risk-based exemptions contained in the rule.  Please review this draft letter and provide comments to Mary Sullivan Douglas of STAPPA/ALAPCO at mdouglas@4cleanair.org by the close of business on Tuesday, September 6, 2005.  The comment deadline is September 12, 2005.  To view the draft letter, click here.

August 23, 2005

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has proposed a modest increase in fuel economy standards for light-duty trucks, some sport utility vehicles (SUVs) and minivans; DOT says these chances are expected to cut nationwide fuel consumption by 10 billion gallons over the lifetime of vehicles sold during the 2008 through 2011 model years.  This proposal does not affect the passenger car standard of 27.5 miles per gallon (mpg) or extend standards to vehicles weighing between 8,500 and 10,000 pounds, a category that includes the Hummer H2, Ford Excursion and the Chevy Suburban.  The proposal would divide light-duty trucks and SUVs below 8,500 pounds into six categories based on the vehicle footprint.  Under the current system, light duty truck manufacturers are required to meet a CAFE standard of 21 mpg increasing to 22.2 mpg in 2007.  Under the proposed reformed CAFE approach, fuel economy for the lightest category of vehicles would increase to 28.4 mpg by 2011, while the fuel economy for the heaviest category would be set at 21.2 mpg.  During the phase-in period 2008-2010, manufacturers may choose to meet the existing unreformed CAFE standard which divides vehicle fleets into two categories � passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks or they may choose to adopt the reformed CAFE approach.  By 2011, all vehicle manufacturers will be required to use the reformed CAFE approach.  The Administration also includes the following language in the proposed rulemaking relevant to states� green house gas rules, �We affirm our view that a state may not impose a legal requirement relating to fuel economy, whether by statute, regulation or otherwise, that conflicts with this rule.  A state law that seeks to reduce motor vehicle carbon dioxide emissions is both expressly and impliedly preempted.�  Comments on the proposed rulemaking should be submitted to DOT by November 22, 2005.  Click here to view the proposed rulemaking.

August 23, 2005

EPA has made available for state, local and tribal review the information contained on the Agency�s 1999 National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment web site.  Instructions for accessing the web site have been sent to STAPPA and ALAPCO members.  This information is for our review only and should not be shared with any other groups or parties.  Comments on the data contained in this web site should be sent directly to EPA by Thursday, September 22, 2005.

August 11, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments to EPA in response to the agency�s reconsideration of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) for Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Boilers.  The standard was issued on September 13, 2004 and contained risk-based exemptions that STAPPA and ALAPCO had opposed during the comment period (the exemptions would allow sources to escape MACT requirements if they make a demonstration of low risk).  Several environmental groups sued EPA in opposition to the rule (with STAPPA/ALAPCO signing on as amicus curae or �friends of the court� in support of the environmental group�s suit) and also petitioned EPA to reconsider the rule.  In response, EPA issued a notice of reconsideration on June 27, 2005 (70 Federal Register 36907) and requested comment on certain elements of the rule.  In the comment letter, STAPPA and ALAPCO reiterated their opposition to the risk-based exemptions, stating that they are, among other things, counter to the Clean Air Act�s technology-based MACT program and that they would pose a burden on state and local air agencies.  Additionally, the associations expressed concerns about the manner in which EPA planned to implement of the exemptions. To view the STAPPA/ALAPCO letter, click here.

August 11, 2005

EPA requested that the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reconsider its rulings on the Clean Unit provision and clarify the ruling made in the Court�s opinion of June 24, 2005 regarding Pollution Control Projects (PCPs).  The Court upheld three of the NSR Reforms in deciding New York v. EPA, but struck down the provisions for Clean Units and PCPs as unlawful under the Act. EPA now argues that it should have the discretion to apply an allowable or potential test to increases in Clean Unit emissions, as in the December 2002 rule.  With regard to PCPs, EPA seeks clarification on whether the Court�s ruling applies only prospectively, or retroactively as well, arguing that it would be inequitable to penalize sources that had installed PCPs �based on their good-faith reliance on EPA�s regulations and guidance.� Click here to view EPA's petition.

August 8, 2005

STAPPA/ALAPCO has drafted comments on EPA's reconsideration of the Boiler MACT.  The associations' comments focus on the risk-based exemptions included in the rule, which STAPPA/ALAPCO oppose.  The Boiler MACT was published in the Federal Register on September 13, 2004 and EPA's reconsideration was published on June 27, 2005.  Please provide any comments on the draft to Mary Sullivan Douglas of STAPPA/ALAPCO by noon (Eastern time) on Wednesday, August 10, 2005.  The comment deadline is August 11, 2005.

August 5, 2005

STAPPA/ALAPCO submitted comments to EPA on Volume 3 of the agency�s Air Toxics Risk Assessment Library.  Volume 3 focuses on community-scale assessments and will be added to the previously published Volume 1 (air toxics risk assessment and management) and Volume 2 (single-facility risk assessment).  The library is designed for federal, state and local officials, as well as industry and public groups interested in risk assessment.  STAPPA/ALAPCO�s comments consisted largely of corrections, clarifications and suggestions for making the document more understandable and consistent.  EPA plans to issue the document in final form in September 2005, following an official peer review.  To view STAPPA/ALAPCO�s comments, click here.

August 2, 2005 

EPA issued its proposed Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR).  As part of this action, EPA also proposed to deny North Carolina�s petition requesting that power plants in certain upwind states reduce their contribution to North Carolina�s fine particle pollution. EPA is basing the proposed denial on issuance of the CAIR FIP: EPA believes that emissions reductions required by the proposed FIP will satisfy North Carolina�s petition.  EPA will accept public comment for 60 days following publication this proposal in the Federal Register.  EPA will hold public hearings on this proposal on September 14, 2005, at EPA's offices in Research Triangle Park, N.C. and September 15, 2005 at EPA's offices in Washington, D.C; more information on these hearings is in the preamble at pages 12-14. Click here for the preamble.  Click here for the proposed regulatory text.  Click here for a fact sheet.

July 27, 2005

Conferees filed their energy bill conference report (the Domenici-Barton Energy Policy Act of 2005) this morning (July 27, 2005).  To view the 1,725-page report, click here.  The House will vote on the report tomorrow (Thursday) and the Senate on Friday.

July 26, 2005

Beginning yesterday afternoon and working into the early hours of this morning, House and Senate conferees completed work on the energy bill.  Notably absent from the bill are two provisions opposed by STAPPA and ALAPCO: 1) ozone �bump-up� language, which would have extended attainment dates for downwind ozone subpart 2 nonattainment areas and 2) �refinery revitalization� language, which would have superceded state and local air agencies� authority to permit sources of air pollution by transferring to DOE authority for permitting refineries located in areas designated as �refinery revitalization zones.�  The ozone bump-up language, originally added to the House energy bill by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), was rejected by Senate conferees, while the refinery revitalization language was never offered as an amendment by House conferees in conference.  Among other actions taken overnight were conferees� rejection of Senator Jeff Bingaman�s (D-NM) proposed 10-percent renewable portfolio standard by 2030; and acceptance of House bill language limiting the number of �boutique fuels� that states can adopt to the total number that were approved in SIPs as of September 1, 2004, and also authorizing the EPA Administrator to temporarily waive fuel or fuel additive requirements due to �extreme and unusual� supply circumstances (STAPPA and ALAPCO opposed the �boutique fuel� language of the House bill).  In addition, lawmakers are working to finish an accompanying tax package to incentivize such things as oil and gas production, gas distribution, electricity liability, electricity/renewable energy, coal, alternative vehicles and fuels and efficiency and conservation.  Conferees are expected to sign the final conference report today; votes on the report are anticipated in the House tomorrow (Wednesday) and in the Senate on Friday.  To view a press release from Conference Chairman Joe Barton, click here.

July 25, 2005

July 21, 2005

EPA has issued proposed requirements for an emissions trading program as part of its Regional Haze Rule. These changes would apply to the process used by a state or tribal government to show that an emissions trading program could be used as an alternative to applying Best Available Retrofit Technology Requirements or BART.  Click here for a fact sheet. Click here for the proposed preamble.  Click here for the proposed regulatory text.  EPA will accept comments on the proposal for 45 days after its publication in the Federal Register.

July 20, 2005 

In a letter to President George Bush, EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation Jeff Holmstead submitted his resignation, effective August 30, 2005.

July 19, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO sent a letter to the National Research Council Committee on State Practices in Setting Mobile Source Emissions Standards urging that the Committee�s final recommendations �include an endorsement of existing state authorities and not include recommendations to diminish these authorities or establish additional hurdles to their use.�  The associations explain in their letter that the process by which a state adopts a California motor vehicle emission standard is extremely robust, with at least three distinct, comprehensive analyses: that conducted by California when is develops its regulations; that conducted by EPA pursuant to California�s request for a waiver of federal preemption (for onroad sources) or authorization to enforce (for nonroad sources); and that conducted by any other state that evaluates potential adoption of California�s standards.  Citing the significant contribution of mobile source emissions to critical air pollution and environmental problems, and the forthcoming efforts of states and localities �to design individual plans for achieving and sustaining health-based air quality standards and otherwise seek to realize clean air and environmental goals,� the associations explain that states and localities will need to have at their disposal �a full array of �tools in the toolbox� so that strategies can be tailored to best meet the needs and circumstances of each particular area.  The existing state authorities for adopting mobile source and fuel programs are among these tools.�  To view STAPPA and ALAPCO�s letter, click here.

July 15, 2005

July 12, 2005

North Carolina�s attorney general is challenging EPA�s recently promulgated Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), saying loopholes in the rule will result in continuing pollution transport affecting North Carolina.  The attorney general filed a petition for reconsideration with EPA and a petition for review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.  Click here for a press release from the attorney general. Massachusetts also filed a petition requesting that EPA reconsider the treatment of municipal waste combustors (MWCs) under CAIR; Massachusetts is concerned that CAIR�s definition of electric generating units is broad enough to include MWCs and thus MWCs would be covered by the caps set for EGUs. Several industry and environmental groups have also filed challenges.  Click here for a petition for review by Natural Resources Defense Council, the National Parks Conservation Association and other environmental groups.  Click here for a petition filed by Xcel Energy and the city of Amarillo, Texas.  Click here for a petition filed by Duke Energy.

July 7, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO sent a letter to conferees on the Energy Bill informing them of the associations� opposition to provisions in the House version of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that would extend attainment deadlines for downwind ozone nonattainment areas.  The letter notes that some states experience problems with overwhelming transport and that existing provisions of the Clean Air Act do not adequately address such areas, and so the associations would welcome the opportunity to work with the authorizing committees on an expedited basis to craft an alternative approach.

July 1, 2005

EPA took final action on a petition filed to reconsider EPA�s treatment of NSR in the phase one implementation rule for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA did not change any of the anti-backsliding requirements it announced in phase one with respect to NSR: 1) NSR requirements applying to large sources in nonattainment areas for the 8-hour standard are based on the area�s classification for the 8-hour standard, not on the area�s classification under the revoked 1-hour standard; and 2) states may remove 1-hour major NSR programs from their SIPs and replace them with an NSR program that is applicable to 8-hour standard.  Click here for a fact sheet.

July 1, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have launched two websites that will provide the public with valuable information about air pollution control programs and agencies.  The first site, the STAPPA/ALAPCO Public Site at www.4cleanair.org, offers a wealth of information for the general public about air quality topics as well as contact information for the associations� members � state and local air pollution control programs across the United States.  The STAPPA/ALAPCO Public Site also contains the associations� policies, positions, publications and other documents and links to related websites.  The second site, Clean Air World at www.cleanairworld.org, was first launched in 2002, but has been updated and redesigned to allow better navigation.  It provides contact information for governmental air quality agencies around the world, at the national and local levels.  The site offers an easy way for air quality regulators around the world to learn about each other�s programs and to communicate more easily.  Additionally, it presents the public with a tool for learning about air quality efforts around the globe.  Clean Air World also includes background information about a variety of air-pollution-related topics and relevant links.  Both sites are sponsored and maintained by STAPPA and ALAPCO, headquartered in Washington, DC.

July 1, 2005
 

EPA released its final staff paper with recommendations for strengthening the PM_2.5 standard and creating an indicator for coarse particles in urban areas.  Click here for a fact sheet.  Click here for the final staff paper.

June 29, 2005
 

Appropriations Committee opposing an amendment that was drafted for inclusion in the FY 2006 Interior and Related Agencies appropriations bill (H.R. 2361). Others, including ECOS, also expressed their opposition to the amendment. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), who introduced the amendment, subsequently withdrew it. The amendment called for grants to national associations that represent state, tribal and local governments to be subject to a competitive process. In their letter, STAPPA and ALAPCO stated that, consistent with EPA policy, national organizations that represent state, tribal and local governments should be exempt from the requirements for grant competition because they represent the interests of co-regulators or co-implementors (state, tribal or local governments) in the execution of national or regional environmental programs. Due to the unique status of these national organizations, the requirements for competitive grant awards should not apply. Click here to view STAPPA/ALAPCO's letter.
 

June 23, 2005

The Senate voted down the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act by a vote of 60-38.  The Act, sponsored by Senators McCain and Lieberman, would have created a mandatory cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from major sectors in the U.S.  The Senate did approve a sense of the Senate resolution on global warming and amendments to the Energy Bill sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel that provide incentives for development and deployment of technology that reduces GHG emissions.

June 7, 2005
 

On June 7, 2005, the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies approved legislation that includes EPA�s FY 2006 budget.  The bill calls for a total of $7.88 billion for EPA�s budget, which is $310 million above the President�s request, but $140 million less than the amount appropriated in FY 2005.  The House�s FY 2006 bill calls for $7.71 billion.  Like the House legislation (adopted on May 19, 2005), the Senate Subcommittee�s bill calls for $223.55 million in grants for state and local air pollution control agencies under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act.  This is $350 million more than the amount appropriated in FY 2005 and is equal to the amount requested by the President for FY 2006 (and it includes shifting $5 million out of the funds for the Regional Planning Organizations into other state and local air grant activities).  The bill the Subcommittee approved includes a rider inserted by Senator Christopher Bond (R-MO) calling for a study before EPA can issue a rule on small nonroad engines.  The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee is scheduled to meet on Thursday, June 9 at 2:00 p.m. to mark up the bill.

June 6, 2005

EPA has concluded its reconsideration of the Equipment Replacement Rule with a determination that �the ERP should be maintained as adopted in 2003.�  EPA�s press release states, �EPA continues to believe that the October 2003 ERP rulemaking is fully justified and will provide much needed clarification to the NSR program while still ensuring environmental protection.�  The press release further states that the ERP preserves public health protections in conjunction with other programs such as the Clean Air Interstate Rule, the Acid Rain Program, and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Click here to view EPA's press release.

June 6, 2005

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama handed the government a defeat in its case against Alabama Power Company, one of the original new source review (NSR) enforcement cases filed in 1999.  Siding with the reasoning of the Duke Energy decision, the court held that the modifications made by Alabama Power were not subject to NSR provisions for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permitting and installation of best available control technology because they constituted �routine maintenance.�  The court held that the routine maintenance exclusion applies to projects that are routine within the industry, and further held that emission increases, for purposes of NSR/PSD analysis, are calculated only on the basis of �maximum hourly emission rates,� not �annual actual emissions. Click here to view the court's decision.

June 2, 2005 

California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced targets for reducing the state�s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.  The governor signed an executive order establishing the following GHG reduction targets for California: by 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels; by 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and by 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.  Click here for a press release.

June 1, 2005

STAPPA/ALAPCO Spring Membership Meeting Presentations

May 18, 2005
 

EPA has published in the Federal Register the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) to control emissions of mercury from electric utilities under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act.  EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson had signed the rule by the court-ordered deadline of March 15, 2005, at which time the details of the regulation were made public.  Now that the rule is published in the Federal Register and those parties wishing to litigate can formally file their lawsuits, a group of 11 states, led by New Jersey�s Attorney General, has filed its legal challenge to the rule.  Other states joining in the suit include California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Wisconsin.  A related mercury rule, which rescinded EPA�s findings made in 2000 supporting a requirement that utilities should install the maximum achievable control technology, or MACT, was published in the Federal Register on March 29, 2005.  At that time, a group of states filed suit on that element of EPA�s mercury rule.  On March 17, 12 environmental organizations filed suit on the March 29 rule.  It is unclear when the environmental groups will file suit on the CAMR published on May 18, 2005.  Click here to view EPA�s Federal Register notice.

May 16, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO transmitted letters to Congress opposing two provisions under consideration.  In a letter to the Senate, the associations urge opposition to amendment #646 to the Senate highway bill being debated on the floor.  The amendment, proposed by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), would cut the CMAQ program by $4 billion (as currently drafted, the Senate highway bill would fund CMAQ at about $10.4 billion over five years); the amendment also cuts similar small programs that provide for transmit and trails.  To view the associations� letter opposing amendment #646 to the Senate highway bill, click here.  In a letter to the leaders of the House Armed Services Committee (ASC) and Environment and Public Works Committee, the associations urge opposition to a DOD-proposed amendment to the DOD authorization bill to be marked up by the ASC later this week.  The amendment would provide right of removal to federal court of any CAA case brought under Section 118 (regarding the control of pollution from federal facilities) and would extend not just to DOD, but to any federal agency.  To view the letter on right of removal, click here.  (Last week the associations transmitted letters to Congress opposing other exemptions from the CAA sought by DOD.)

May 12, 2005 

The final Clean Air Interstate Rule was published in the Federal Register.  It will become effective on July 11, 2005, except for provisions relating to the Acid Rain Program, which are effective July 1, 2006.  States covered by CAIR must submit SIPs by September 11, 2006.

May 11, 2005

EPA has issued its final national program guidance for FY 2006, which includes the preliminary allocation figures for Section 105 and 103 grants by region and activity.  The allocation is based on the amount of money the President requested for state and local air grants ($223.6 million) and will remain preliminary until Congress has adopted a final appropriation.  Since the final amount could change, the allocation may also change.  On March 29, STAPPA and ALAPCO commented on the draft allocation; the final allocation reflects some of the associations� recommendations.  For example, STAPPA and ALAPCO urged EPA not to set aside $1 million in PAMS funding for several special activities EPA wished to fund.  In the final document, EPA has reinstated those funds to PAMS.  With respect to training, EPA has included a placeholder amount in the allocation, pending further recommendations from STAPPA/ALAPCO on the final amount to be set aside.  To read the guidance and allocation, click here.

May 11, 2005

EPA has made public the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) for 2003.  It includes information on releases, emissions and disposal of 650 chemicals from over 23,000 facilities.  According to the agency, toxic chemicals released into the environment (by reporting facilities) has declined by 42 percent between 1998 and 2003 and by 6 percent from 2002 to 2003.  Air emissions from 2002 to 2003 decreased by 48 million pounds, which is 3 percent.  The TRI data show that the total disposal or other releases of mercury and mercury compounds increased from 2002 to 2003 by 41 percent, although the figure is adjusted to 13 percent after accounting for a facility data error.  However, air emissions of mercury and mercury compounds decreased by 1 percent during that time.  Data on the 2003 TRI, along with summaries and related information, are available on EPA's website.  Click here to view EPA's TRI webpage.

May 10, 2005

The House Appropriations Committee approved a bill containing funding for EPA for FY 2006.  The bill is consistent with one the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies approved on May 4, 2005.  The bill would provide EPA with $7.71 billion, which is an increase of $187 million over the President�s request for EPA and a decrease of $318 million from FY 2005 levels.  The bill approved by the Committee retained the President�s recommended budget for Section 103 and 105 air grants to state and local air agencies at $223.6 million (a decrease of $5 million in funding for the regional planning organizations from the FY 2005 request).  The Committee also retained the $10 million recommended by the Administration for the Clean School Bus Program in FY 2006. The bill will go to the House floor for a vote, currently scheduled for May 19.  The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies has not yet scheduled its mark-up. 

May 9, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO transmitted letters to the leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees and Readiness Subcommittees, as well as the leaders Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and House Energy and Commerce Committee, urging that they oppose any statutory changes that would exempt the U.S. Department of Defense from provisions of the Clean Air Act.  For the fourth year in a row, DOD is seeking amendments to various environmental and public health statutes � including the CAA � via the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006.  The CAA amendments sought by DOD (click here � see Sec. 313, pp. 20-22)  would allow military readiness activities to escape provisions of Section 176 of the CAA, requiring that these activities not cause or contribute to violations of health-based NAAQS, increase the frequency or severity of such violations or delay timely attainment of the standards or interim milestones.  STAPPA and ALAPCO opposed similar exemptions unsuccessfully proposed by DOD in the past three years.  To view the letters, click here (Senate) and click here (House).  To view ECOS� letter of opposition, click here.  To view the National Conference of State Legislatures� letter of opposition, click here.

May 4, 2005

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies marked up FY 2006 appropriations legislation, calling for an increase of $187 million over the President�s request for the Environmental Protection Agency.  The total recommended by the Subcommittee, $7.71 billion, would be a decrease of $318 million from FY 2005 levels.  The Subcommittee retained the President�s recommended budget level for state and local air grants under Sections 103 and 105 at $223.6 million, which is a decrease of $5 million from the FY 2005 request (the decrease coming entirely from the set-aside for the regional planning organizations).  When compared to the amount actually appropriated in FY 2005, which included an across-the-board rescission, the House level is $350,000 above FY 2005.  The Subcommittee retained the $10 million recommended by the Administration for the Clean School Bus Program in FY 2006. The bill must now go to full committee for mark-up.  The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies has not yet scheduled its mark-up.

April 29, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments urging EPA to set a tighter New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) for nitrogen oxides (NO_x) and sulfur dioxide (SO₂) emissions from utility boilers.  EPA�s proposed Boilers NSPS would amend the emission limits for NO_x, sulfur dioxide SO₂, and particulate matter (PM) from electric utility boilers and the PM emission limit for industrial-commercial-institutional boilers for which construction, modification, or reconstruction began after February 28, 2005.  STAPPA and ALAPCO also recommend that the PM NSPS for boilers include condensable PM and not just filterable PM.   In addition, since large industrial-commercial-institutional (ICI) boilers � those 250 million Btu/hr or above � are similar in size and emissions to electric utility boilers, the same emission limits should apply to ICI boilers of this size as apply to electric utility boilers.

April 27, 2005

Speaking at the Small Business Administration�s (SBA�s) National Small Business Week Conference in Washington, DC, President Bush outlined his vision for promoting greater energy independence and announced five new energy policy initiatives under which he will 1) direct DOE to reduce uncertainty in the licensing process for new nuclear power plants and to provide federal risk insurance to mitigate the additional cost of unforeseen delays; 2) direct EPA to simplify regulations to encourage the expansion of refining capacity, and federal agencies will work with states and local communities to encourage the construction of new refineries on closed military sites; 3) call on Congress to make clear federal authority over siting of new Liquefied Natural Gas terminals to increase supply and reduce prices; 4) support the extension of his proposed tax credits for energy-efficient hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles to include clean-diesel vehicles; and 5) encourage the deployment of new and clean energy technologies in the developing world at the G-8 Summit in July.  To view a White House fact sheet on the President�s announcement, click here.  To view the text of the President�s remarks at the SBA conference, click here.

April 27, 2005

April 26, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have teamed with the California Air Resources Board to publish an informational brochure providing background on the historic role of state and local air pollution control agencies in cleaning up our nation�s air and the need to protect the ability of states and localities to continue to protect air quality and public health.  Don�t Take Away a State�s Right to Protect Its Citizens from Dirty Air is intended to serve as a resource to members of STAPPA and ALAPCO and others with in an interest in maintaining these critical states� rights.  Please feel free to use this brochure as an educational tool and to share it widely.  We are mailing copies of the brochure to each state and local air agency.  To receive additional copies of the brochure (at no charge), please contact STAPPA/ALAPCO at 4clnair@4cleanair.org or (202) 624-7864.

April 25, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO Submit Comments on Proposed Rule on PSD NO_x  Increments

April 19, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted written testimony to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies regarding the FY 2006 budget, especially grants for state and local air agencies under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act.  The associations requested an increase of $100 million above the President�s request of $223.6 million for federal grants to state and local air agencies, for a total of $323.6 million.  STAPPA/ALAPCO submitted identical testimony to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies on March 18, 2005.  Neither the House nor the Senate subcommittees held in-person hearings for public witnesses this year but both accepted written testimony.  Click here to view STAPPA and ALAPCO�s Senate testimony.

April 18, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments on EPA�s proposed New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for turbines.

April 11, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO transmitted a letter to House Energy and Commerce (E&C) Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) and Ranking Committee Member John Dingell (D-MI) opposing two provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 currently being marked up by the E&C Committee: the �Refinery Revitalization Act of 2005,� found in Subtitle D of Title III of the bill, and provisions for �reducing the proliferation of boutique fuels,� found in Subtitle C of Title XV.  The letter, (to view it, click here) is based largely on letters of opposition sent last year when the House considered similar provisions as part of House Energy Week (a letter opposing a the �Refinery Revitalization Act of 2004� was sent on June 14, 2004 and a letter opposing the �Gasoline Price Reduction Act of 2004� was sent on June 15, 2004 � these letters are available on the Mobile Sources and Fuels and Permitting Committee pages of Air Web, respectively).  The Committee mark of the 2005 House energy bill is available at http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/energy_pdfs_2.htm; the E&C Committee reconvenes today at 2:00 pm Eastern to continue mark up and is expected to meet tomorrow as well.  To watch the webcast of mark up, go to http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/Markups/04122005markup1473.htm.

March 31, 2005

EPA issued the first Residual Risk standard under Section 112(f) of the Clean Air Act, requiring controls on emissions of hazardous air pollutants from coke ovens.  The rule amends the MACT standard that was issued in October 1993 and calls for additional reductions in coke oven emissions from nine batteries of coke ovens at five coke plants across the country.  There are 14 other coke oven plants that are not affected by the rule because they installed more stringent controls than MACT (Lowest Achievable Emissions Reductions) in 1993.  Those plants need not comply with the Residual Risk standards until 2020.  Residual Risk standards under Section 112(f) are intended to further reduce emissions of hazardous air pollutants beyond those required by MACT.  While MACT standards are technology-based, the residual risk standards are intended to address the risk that remains after the imposition of MACT.  The Coke Oven Residual Risk standard will be published in the Federal Register shortly. For more information, see www.epa.gov/airlinks/airlinks3.html#cokeovensfinal.

March 31, 2005

A lawsuit was filed by nine states in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia challenging EPA�s cap-and-trade approach to regulating mercury emissions from electric utilities.  The states that are seeking judicial review of the rule are: California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont. EPA�s rule rescinds the findings made in 2000 on mercury that supported a requirement that utilities should install the maximum achievable control technology, or MACT, defined under the Clean Air Act as the average of the best-performing 12 per cent of sources in an industry category.  Instead, the current rule states, �[B]y this action, we are revising the December 2000 appropriate and necessary finding and concluding that it is neither appropriate nor necessary to regulate coal- and oil-fired Utility Units under section 112.�  EPA final Mercury Rule was published Wednesday, March 15. Click here to view it.

March 29, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments to EPA on the agency�s draft National Program and Grant Guidance for FY 2006, which included a proposed allocation for Sections 103 and 105 grants.  STAPPA and ALAPCO expressed opposition to EPA�s proposal to redirect $1 million of the grant funds previously used for Photochemical Assessment Measurement Stations (PAMS) to quality assurance and data analysis projects.  The associations stated that EPA should support those projects from its own budget and not use Section 105 grants for them.  Also with respect to monitoring, STAPPA and ALAPCO reiterated that they have concerns about EPA�s use of competitive grants for a portion of the air toxics monitoring funds and expressed the hope that fine particulate matter monitoring funding levels will remain steady in the future.  The associations� comments also touched on training funds, grant flexibility, the regional distribution of the grants and the need for state and local concurrence when EPA wishes to withhold Section 103 or 105 funds for use at the national level (�off-the-top�).  Click here to view STAPPA and ALAPCO�s letter.

March 17, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted written testimony to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies regarding the FY 2006 budget, especially grants for state and local air agencies under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act.  The associations requested an increase of $100 million above the President�s request of $223.6 million for federal grants to state and local air agencies, for a total of $323.6 million.  The increase is needed to make up for funding deficits that have existed, as well as to support a variety of programs, including significant additional activities related to attainment and maintenance of the new, more stringent NAAQS for ozone and fine particulate matter.  Jurisdiction over EPA�s budget was shifted in recent weeks from the former House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies (which have been disbanded) to the Interior subcommittees.  Neither the House nor the Senate subcommittee will hold in-person hearings for public witnesses but both are accepting written testimony.  STAPPA and ALAPCO plan to submit the same testimony to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies.  Click here to view STAPPA and ALAPCO�s testimony.

March 16, 2005

EPA has provided STAPPA and ALAPCO with a copy of the Office of Air and Radiation's FY 2006 Draft National Program and Grant Guidance and is seeking the associations' comments.  This document contains EPA's proposed allocation of FY 2006 state and local air grants.  According to EPA staff, the draft allocation is generally the same as last year's proposed allocation except for two major changes:  1) EPA is recommending changes with respect to monitoring funds (these are described in the draft), and 2) the amount set aside for the regional haze RPOs is cut from $10 million to $5 million (which was specified in the President's budget request).  The amounts in the proposed allocation are a little higher than what was ultimately allocated for FY 2005 because the FY 2005 amount included a $5.35-million reduction from what EPA had originally proposed for FY 2005.  Of course, the FY 2006 proposed allocation is based on the President's request, which may differ from what Congress ultimately appropriates.  Please provide any comments on the draft allocation to Mary Sullivan Douglas of STAPPA/ALAPCO at mdouglas@4cleanair.org by March 25, 2005.  Click here to view the draft allocation.

March 15, 2005

EPA issued a cap-and-trade rule to regulate emissions of mercury from electric utilities, which calls for an interim cap of 38 tons per year of mercury emissions by 2010 and a second-phase cap of 15 tons per year by 2018 (current emissions are approximately 48 tons per year).  The proposal, published on January 30, 2004, contained an interim cap of 34 tons per year, but the increase was made to bring the mercury rule in line with projected reductions from the Clean Air Interstate Rule, announced on March 10, 2005.  In a related action, EPA is rescinding a previous regulatory determination calling for mercury reductions from power plants under Section 112 of the Clean air Act (MACT).  Rescinding that regulatory determination allows EPA to issue the mercury rule under Section 111 instead of Section 112, thus, permitting utilities to employ a cap-and-trade program to meet the requirements.  The rule also regulates emissions of nickel from utilities, but does not contain requirements for other hazardous air pollutants.  Although the U.S. Government Accountability Office and EPA�s Inspector General both recently criticized EPA�s development of the mercury rule, EPA did not make substantive changes in the final rule to address those criticisms.  It is expected that the rule will be subject to litigation from various parties. Click here for STAPPA/ALAPCO�s press release on the rule.  Click here for EPA�s website where the final rule and related information are posted.  

March 14, 2005

Final EPA Cap and Trade Mercury Rule

March 14, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have drafted a testimony to submit to the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies regarding EPA's proposed budget for FY 2006 (focusing on federal grants to state and local air agencies).  The associations are recommending an increase of $100 million to the President�s request (for a total of $323.6 million for state and local air grants).  Please provide any comments on the draft to Mary Sullivan Douglas of STAPPA/ALACO by 12:00 noon (Eastern time) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005.  Comments should be submitted to mdouglas@4cleanair.org or (202) 624-7863 (fax) or (202) 624-7864 (phone).

March 10, 2005

March 9, 2005

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report identifying four major shortcomings in the economic analysis that EPA used in developing its proposed utility (mercury) MACT rule.  GAO indicated that these shortcomings limit the usefulness of the analysis for decision-makers who are evaluating the costs and benefits of the options.  The four shortcomings are that EPA did not consistently analyze the options or provide estimates of the total costs and benefits of each option; EPA did not document some of its analysis or supply information on how changes in mercury controls would affect cost and benefits under the technology option; EPA did not estimate the value of the health benefits directly related to decreased mercury emissions; and EPA did not analyze some of the key uncertainties underlying its cost-benefit estimates.  GAO recommended that EPA address the identified shortcoming in the cost-benefit analysis prior to issuing a final rule.  EPA indicated that it will largely address GAO�s recommendations.  Click here for more information. 

March 9, 2005

This morning, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee deadlocked over the Clear Skies bill, which failed to clear the Committee by a vote of 9-9.

March 8, 2005

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, and the State of Illinois announced settlement of the alleged new source review (NSR) violations of Illinois Power Company and its successor, Dynegy Midwest Generation.  Initiated in 1999 as one of the original cases based on allegations that modifications had been made without an NSR permit or installation of best available pollution control technology (BACT), the settlement requires reductions of SO2 and NOX by 54,000 tons each year through new installation of flue gas desulfurization devices, or �scrubbers,�  baghouses, and year-round operation of existing control equipment, including selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems.  Five power plants, located in the Illinois cities of Baldwin, Havana, Hennepin, Oakwood, and Alton, are subject to the settlement.  In addition, according to EPA�s press release, �Dynegy Midwest Generation will pay a $9 million civil penalty and spend $15 million in projects to mitigate the harm caused by unlawful emissions." Click here to view the press release.

March 2, 2005

March 2, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality at a hearing on the air quality provisions of H.R. 3, the �Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users.�  Annette Liebe, Manager of Air Quality Planning for the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, provided STAPPA and ALAPCO�s perspectives on proposed legislative changes to transportation conformity and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program under the Clean Air Act. Click here to view the testimony.

February 22, 2005

EPA has provided STAPPA/ALAPCO with its final decision regarding the allocation of reductions to FY 2005 air grants under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act.  The allocation will apportion the $5.35 million in reductions that Congress included in the final FY 2005 Consolidated Appropriations Bill in a pro-rata fashion to each of four major components of the grant program:  continuing programs, fine particle monitoring, Sections 103 and 105 air toxics monitoring and regional haze.  EPA will eliminate the mobile source outreach program ($548,782) from the continuing programs budget and then make the remaining reduction to continuing programs through a pro-rata cut to the region-by-region allocation.  This is the approach EPA proposed in its December 23, 2004, letter to STAPPA/ALAPCO in which the agency requested the associations' input.  STAPPA/ALAPCO responded to EPA's letter on January 26, 2005, by recommending that EPA make the reductions through a pro-rata decrease to all state and local air agencies without first dividing the cuts among the four program areas.  STAPPA/ALAPCO felt this would allow state and local air agencies greater flexibility to determine where the cuts could best be accommodated.  EPA decided to use its original approach, however, citing constraints in how the agency implements the Congressional reductions that the agency believes would preclude use of the STAPPA/ALAPCO recommendation.  Click here to view EPA's letter to ALAPCO President Dennis McLerran (an identical letter was sent to STAPPA President Nancy Seidman).  Click here to view the final region-by-region allocation spreadsheet.

February 16, 2005

February 15, 2005

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will be marking up the S.131 tomorrow. The sponsors of the bill have developed a substitute. Click here to view it.

February 11, 2005

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) has revised S. 131 � the Clear Skies bill he introduced on January 24, 2005 � and released it as a �Chairman�s Mark.�  The Senate EPW Committee is planning to mark-up this bill on February 16, 2005.  To view the Chairman�s Mark of S. 131, click here.

February 11, 2005

February 7, 2005

The President announced his proposed budget for FY 2006, which includes $7.57 billion for EPA.  This represents a reduction of $450 million from the amount the agency received in FY 2005 and $219 million less than the President requested for FY 2005.  With respect to state and local air grants under Sections 103 and 105, the budget calls for $223.55 million, which is $5 million less than requested last year and $350,000 more than the amount ultimately appropriated for FY 2005.  The reduction of $5 million is due to the fact that EPA is requesting only $5 million for the Regional Planning Organizations, rather than the $10 million that was requested last year.  The proposed budget also includes $10-million grant program for the Clean School Bus USA Initiative (this amount is over and above the $223.55 million).  Click here to review the proposed budget. 

February 1, 2005 

Senator George Voinovich, Chair of the Senate EPW Clean Air Subcommittee, has responded to STAPPA and ALAPCO�s January 26, 2005 testimony on the need for multi-emissions legislation with an analysis of the associations� testimony.  To view the analysis, click here.  At the conclusion of the hearing, the Senator told ALAPCO Vice-President John Paul (Dayton, OH), who represented the associations at the hearing, that he would welcome STAPPA and ALAPCO�s response to his analysis.  The associations are working to draft a response.

February 1, 2005

January 27, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted to EPA comments on the agency�s supplemental proposed transportation conformity rule amendments for PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ hot-spot analyses (December 13, 2004, 69 Federal Register 72140).  The associations� key messages include 1) EPA should adopt requirements for hot-spot analyses for PM_2.5 and maintain hot-spot analyses for PM₁₀ because there is sufficient evidence of the potential for higher localized emissions for PM_2.5 concentrations near transportation projects and the agency EPA is obligated by the Clean Air Act to require hot-spot analyses in PM areas; 2) projects proposed to be funded or approved before submittal of the PM_2.5 or PM₁₀ SIP should be subject to a hot-spot analysis to determine conformity; 3) EPA should apply existing PM₁₀ hot-spot requirements, with some key modifications, in all PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ nonattainment and maintenance areas; 4) quantitative analysis should not be deferred until EPA issues guidance; and 5) EPA should not cede to FHWA authority for establishing criteria and procedures for making categorical conformity determinations for PM_2.5 and PM₁₀.  To view the associations� comments, click here.

January 26, 2005

This morning, ALAPCO Vice President John Paul testified on behalf of STAPPA and ALAPCO before the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety at a hearing on the Need for Multi-Emissions Legislation.  Others testifying included Bob Young, Mayor of Augusta, Georgia, on behalf of the U.S. Conference of Mayors; Beverly Gard, Chair of the Indiana State Senate Energy and Environment Committee; Ronald R. Harper, CEO and General Manager of Basin Electric Power Cooperative; Conrad G. Schneider, Advocacy Director for the Clean Air Task Force; and Fred Parady, Manager of Environmental Services for OCI Wyoming, on behalf of the National Association of Manufacturers.  Proceedings of the hearing, including Subcommittee members� opening statements and the witnesses� written testimony are available on the EPW Committee page (click here).  A video of the hearing should eventually be made available on this site as well.

January 26, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO responded to an EPA request for input on how best to address Congress� reductions to Section 103/105 grants in FY 2005.  Congress adopted an appropriations bill for the FY 2005 budget that included a reduction of $5.35 million to state and local air grants under Sections 103 and 105 (lowering the total air grant amount to $223.2 million).  EPA sent a letter to STAPPA and ALAPCO suggesting several approaches for distributing the reductions and requesting the associations� input.  Based on discussions of the STAPPA and ALAPCO Program Funding Committee (which consists of the STAPPA/ALAPCO Boards of Directors and Committee Chairs), the associations recommended that the reduction be distributed to state and local air agencies in a pro-rata fashion.  Individual state and local agencies, working with the EPA regional offices, would have flexibility to determine which specific programs should be reduced, based upon the priorities of the area.  Click here to view the STAPPA/ALAPCO letter.

January 25, 2005

Yesterday, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Senator George Voinovich (R-OH), Chairman of the EPW Clean Air, Wetlands, and Climate Change Subcommittee, introduced S. 131, the �Clear Skies Act of 2005�.  To view an EPW press release and fact sheet on the bill, click here.  Today, Senator Jim Jeffords (I-VT), Ranking Member of the Senate EPW Committee, Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) and Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) introduced S. 150, the �Clean Power Act of 2005.�  Although we have not yet obtained legislative language for the bill, to view a press release and summary of the bill, click here.

January 25, 2005

Tomorrow (January 26, 2005), STAPPA and ALAPCO will testify before the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands and Climate Change at hearing on the Need for Multi-Emissions Legislation.  On behalf of the associations, ALAPCO Vice President John Paul (Dayton, OH) will report that although there has been significant progress to date in cleaning up our air, significant challenges remain and electric utilities are the largest remaining stationary source of pollution in the U.S.  John will then articulate the associations� position in support of the concept of a comprehensive national strategy to reduce emissions of multiple pollutants from electric utilities, overview the associations� May 2002 multi-pollutant principles and explain that the associations� have used their adopted principles to evaluate S. 1844, the Chairman�s Mark of the Administration�s Clear Skies proposal, introduced November 10, 2003.  He will testify that �After careful study, we have concluded that the proposal fails on every one of our associations� core principles.  The deadlines are too protracted, and well beyond those by which we must, and should, meet health-based air quality standards.  The caps are simply not protective enough, and there is no minimum level of control required of each existing power plant.  And we have tremendous concerns with the fact that this proposal strips away many of our most essential Clean Air Act tools and authorities. Accordingly, STAPPA and ALAPCO can not support this proposal.�  He will also note that based a preliminary review of S. 131, the �Clear Skies Act of 2005�, just introduced this week, it appears the associations� concerns have not been resolved.  To view STAPPA and ALAPCO�s complete written testimony, click here.

January 24, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO submitted comments to EPA on the agency�s request (November 15, 2004, 69 FR 65594) for comments on California�s July 2004 request for a waiver of federal preemption for its 2007 onroad diesel rule.  In an attempt to balance the general rule that environmental protection is best addressed by state and local government with the need of the automobile industry to avoid dozens of potentially conflicting requirements for motor vehicles, Congress provided a general prohibition against state regulation of emissions from new motor vehicles, except by California, which continues to lead the nation in developing and implementing motor vehicle programs; under the CAA, however, other states may adopt and enforce California�s vehicle emission standards.   In cases where California chooses to exercise its authority to adopt a motor vehicle program, EPA must approve the state�s request for a waiver of federal preemption of state regulation, unless EPA can make one of the following determinations: 1) California acted in an arbitrary and capricious matter when it determined that its motor vehicle emissions program standards [as a group] �will be as protective of the public health and welfare as applicable federal standards�; 2) California does not need its motor vehicle emissions program standards [as a group] to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions; or 3) the California standards [as a group] are not �consistent with� the requirements of section 202(a) of the Act.  STAPPA and ALAPCO have reviewed the Administrative Record made available by EPA for California�s waiver request and concluded that the record does not contain sufficient information to rebut the presumption of regularity that is to be afforded the actions of a state acting in its regulatory capacity.  Accordingly, in STAPPA and ALAPCO�s judgment, EPA does not have the discretion to deny California�s request for a waiver.  To view the associations� comments on the waiver request, click here.  To view the letter transmitting the comments, click here.

January 21, 2005

STAPPA and ALAPCO have drafted a letter to EPA regarding the allocation of grant reductions to the FY 2005 Sections 103 and 105 grants.  The letter reflects an approach suggested by the STAPPA and ALAPCO Boards of Directors and Committee Chairs, whereby the $5.35-million reduction would be distributed to state and local air agencies in a pro-rata fashion.  Please provide any comments on the draft to Mary Sullivan Douglas at mdouglas@4cleanair.org or (202) 624-7864 by January 25, 2005 at noon (Eastern time).  Click here to view the draft.  

January 13, 2005

The National Academy of Sciences today released its Interim Report on the new source review (NSR) reforms that were promulgated on December 31, 2002 and October 27, 2003.  The Committee on Changes in New Source Review Programs for Stationary Sources states, �As it carries out its charge, the Committee is considering a number of relevant scientific and technical documents prepared by EPA, other federal agencies, industry, environmental and nongovernmental organizations. The Committee expects to provide its perspective on several of these documents in its final report.�  The final report will be published in late 2005. Meanwhile, the Committee concludes (page 17) that �[I]n general NSR provides more stringent emission limitations for new and modified major sources than do the EPA programs [CAIR and Clear Skies].�  The Committee notes that it heard testimony from many witnesses in hearings held in May, including William Becker representing STAPPA and ALAPCO.

January 5, 2005

The U.S. Senate has issued the Committee membership roster for the 109^th Congress.  To view the roster, click here.

January 5, 2005

January 3, 2005

STAPPA/ALAPCO submitted comments on EPA�s Notice of Data Availability (NODA) related to the proposed MACT for electric utilities, which was published in the Federal Register on December 1, 2004.  The NODA included summaries of comments and modeling the agency received during the public comment period and sought comments on the information.  STAPPA/ALAPCO�s comments reiterated the recommendations that the associations made in their June 29, 2004 comments on the proposed regulation.  Additionally, STAPPA/ALAPCO stated that the information in the NODA does not portray the tremendous advances in control technology that have taken place recently.  Further, the focus on cost estimates in the modeling distracts from the fact that the Clean Air Act calls for technology-based controls reflecting well-controlled sources.  Finally, EPA�s analysis did not adequately calculate the benefits that would result from a good MACT standard for electric utilities.

December 15, 2004

STAPPA and ALAPCO transmitted a letter to Margo Oge, Director of EPA�s Office of Transportation and Air Quality, urging the agency take to �swift and certain action to implement an enforceable nationwide program to reflash all diesel engines eligible for NOx reflash under the heavy-duty diesel consent decrees.�  The letter was prompted by the associations� serious concern regarding the ongoing operation of heavy-duty diesel engines equipped with �defeat devices.�  The devices were installed by a group of engine makers on 1.3 million HDD engines during most of the 1990s to circumvent pollution controls during in-use highway driving and resulted in over 15 million tons of excess NOx emissions.  Under consent decrees reached by EPA and the seven offending engine makers in 1998, a low-NOx rebuild program was established to recoup a portion (about 3 million tons) of the excess emissions; the program required engine makers to provide �reflash� kits to be installed at the time a defeat-device-equipped engine is rebuilt.  However, according to EPA, only about 10 percent of the affected engines have been reflashed, either at the time or rebuild or under nationwide incentives programs.  Given the poor results of this important program, STAPPA and ALAPCO are urging EPA to take action to ensure that the affected engines are reflashed to reduce the emission levels associated with the defeat devices.  To view the associations� letter, click here.

December 13, 2004

December 8, 2004

The National Commission on Energy Policy today released a consensus strategy for addressing long-term energy challenges.  According to the Commission, the key recommendations included in Ending the Energy Stalemate: A Bipartisan Strategy to Meet America�s Energy Challenges are intended to enhance oil security; reduce risks from climate change; increase energy efficiency; ensure affordable, reliable energy supplies; strengthen essential energy systems; and develop energy technologies for the future.  The 16-member, bipartisan Commission includes representatives of industry, government, labor, academic, environmental and consumer groups.  To review the strategy and related materials, click here.

December 8, 2004

Yesterday, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) � which represents BMW, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, General Motors, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota and Volkswagen � joined with several automobile dealerships in California to file a suit challenging California�s motor vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards.  In their suit, AAM claims, among other things, that the California Air Resources Board�s regulations regulate fuel economy, and only the federal government has the authority to set fuel economy standards for vehicles.  To view AAM�s press release, click here.

December 1, 2004

STAPPA and ALAPACO filed an unopposed motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia seeking leave to file an amicus brief in a case filed against EPA by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club.  Plaintiffs allege�and STAPPA and ALAPCO will support�that EPA�s MACT standard for the plywood industry unlawfully violates core principles of the Clean Air Act by establishing a risk-based approach to MACT rather than requiring installation of pollution control technology that is utilized by the top�most protective�12 per cent of the industrial category.

November 30, 2004

EPA issued a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) related to the proposed MACT for Electric Utilities issued on January 30, 2004 (with a supplemental notice on March 16, 2004).  The information that is available pursuant to this notice includes summaries of comments that were received during the public comment period, along with modeling analyses that were submitted by various commenters, and summaries of EPA�s proposed benefits methodology, which has been revised since the rule was first proposed.  EPA is soliciting comments on the inputs and assumptions used in the modeling analyses it received during the comment period, as well as on the agency�s benefits methodology.  EPA is also requesting input on the forms or species of mercury emitted by coal-fired power plants (e.g.,. elemental, ionic or oxidized,, and particulate).  EPA�s NODA does not include additional new modeling from EPA.  EPA will accept comment on the information contained in the NODA for 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, which is expected shortly.  For information on the NODA, see www.epa.gov/mercury/control_emissions/noda.htm.

November 23, 2004

STAPPA and ALAPCO transmitted a letter to EPA Assistant Administrator Jeff Holmstead and Federal Aviation Administration Assistant Administrator Sharon Pinkerton, to formally notify them of the associations� decision to withdraw from the EPA/FAA stakeholder process to develop a voluntary emission reduction program for the aviation sector.  In the letter, the associations express their disappointment that the five-year-long process had not resulted in any progress concerning the primary objective � reducing aircraft emissions.  Instead, the sole product of this effort was a proposed memorandum of understanding � presented this summer � focusing only on NO_x emissions from airport ground service equipment (GSE).  In withdrawing from the stakeholder process, STAPPA and ALAPCO also formally rejected the proposed GSE agreement, which they found was not only inadequate in scope and stringency, but also placed unacceptable constraints on state and local air agencies� abilities to protect the public from the adverse health impacts associated with aviation-related pollution.  To view STAPPA and ALAPCO�s letter, click here.

November 20, 2004

The House and Senate conferees adopted omnibus appropriations legislation that includes EPA�s FY 2005 budget, along with many other federal departments, agencies and programs.  The adopted legislation eliminated language that had been included in the report accompanying the Senate appropriations bill that was troubling to STAPPA/ALAPCO.  The language would have called for associations receiving grant funds from EPA to first obtain written approval from member states before receiving those funds.  Additionally, the language described how EPA should calculate how much grant money should be withheld from the associations and, instead, provided to states not wishing to participate in state associations.   In the manager�s explanatory language accompanying the final bill, the conferees stated:  �The conferees have not included language that directed EPA to deduct from grants to state associations for a state that does not wish to participate in the association, as proposed by the Senate.  The conferees believe that current recipients of such grants have administratively addressed this issue.�  With respect to funding levels, the adopted legislation includes $225 million for state and local air grants, which is $3.5 million less than the President�s request.  Most grant programs under the State and Tribal Assistance Grants portion of the EPA budget, for various environmental media, were reduced from the amount the Administration had requested.  To view the conference committee�s report language, click here (see pages 145-146 of pdf file).

November 12, 2004

STAPPA and ALAPCO sent a letter to the leadership of the Senate Appropriations Committee and Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies recommending the removal of language regarding grant funds for state associations, which is contained in the report accompanying the FY 2005 Senate appropriations bill.  As previously reported, the language would call for associations receiving grant funds from EPA to first obtain written approval from member states before receiving those funds.  Additionally, the language described how EPA should calculate how much grant money should be withheld from the associations and, instead, provided to states not wishing to participate in state associations.  During the recent STAPPA/ALAPCO Fall Membership Meeting, the members discussed their concerns about the language and recommended that the associations send a letter requesting that it be removed.  In their letter to the Committee leadership, STAPPA and ALAPCO noted that, while the associations have a system in place that complies with the requirements of the language, it could still be troublesome.  Because it is vague, it could be subject to future interpretation that could be cumbersome and problematic (e.g., Who must provide written approval? How are direct-funded local agency contributions maintained if a state withdraws?).  STAPPA and ALAPCO members with Senators and Representatives on the Senate and House Appropriations Committees are encouraged to express their concerns with their delegations.  Click here to view the STAPPA/ALAPCO letter.  Click here to view talking points outlining this issue.  Click here to view the policy document on funding for the Secretariat.  Click here to view a list of the Congressional Appropriations Committees' members.