[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
PCB's, HCB & TCDD/F, & 4 more to be regulated, CAA sec. 112 HAP program
- To: CONS-EQ-HORMONE-MIMICS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: PCB's, HCB & TCDD/F, & 4 more to be regulated, CAA sec. 112 HAP program
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Tony Tweedale)
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 12:49:39 -0600
thanks to Sierra Club & SCLDF, EPA has been forced onto a schedule to begin
its CAA sec. 112(c)(6) mandated controlling sources of 7 *NEW FAMILIES* of
haz. air pollutants (HAP): alkylated Pb (only source is aviation fuel
'cause off-road vehicles are not in the HAP program), P.O.M., Hg, HCB,
PCB's, 2,3,7,8-TCDF and 2,3,7,8-TCDD. EPA must inventory sources until it
has found an estimated 90% of all sources for these HAP's.
[see 'Notice of draft source category listings for [7 new CAA] sec.
112...', published in F.R. ~ (sorry!) 25 june, you can find it at EPA's web
site, F.R. subpage. contact email@example.com for further
comments *must cite docket # A-97-05), by 21 july* "in dupl., if possible"
to US EPA 401 M St. SW, Wash. DC 20460; or by email:
firstname.lastname@example.org, in word perfect 5.1, 6.1, or ascii.]
while i am still new to the guts of the regulatory workings of the HAP
program and therefore may have missed the significance of parts of this
notice, it seems of major importance to Cl & toxics activists, despite that
it seems EPA is severly limiting its scope.
OF GREAT INTEREST, EPA says in this new phase of the HAP program they will
be using their discretionary authority under 112(d)(4) (and the legislative
history) to reduce emissions according to *health & environment based*
standards (as opposed to the m.a.c.t. technology based regs for the current
188 HAP's and their sources.
however, EPA is SEEKING COMMENT on its preliminary decision to 'give
credit', as to regulation of these 7 HAP, for their current regulation
under the current HAP program, *AND under any other regulations they may be
controlled under*, listing 4 such areas: electric utility steam generating
units, CAA sec. 129 solid & medical waste incinerator regs, the broader
iccr (industrial combustion coordinated rulemaking, i.e. bif's &
incinerators, incl. haz wate regulated) and stage II of gasoline
distribution (vapor recovery in ozone prone areas). it believes listing
these source categories for additional regulation under 112(c)(6) would
produce a redundant regulatory effort. EPA has also previoulsly
interpreted 112 regulation to exclude 3 other source categories. wild &
prescribed fires, residential fuel combustion & pesticide manufacturing as
sufficiently regulated elswhere or otherwise not subject to sec 112
regulation. further, most 112 regs only regulate major, not 'area'
after this excercise in exclusion, EPA concludes (table 2) that some
sources meet the requirements for 112(c)(6) (ie the 7 new HAP), and others
don't. most sources are already (or on schedule to be) regulated under
112(d)(2) (ie the exiting HAP program). alkyl Pb and POM need to have
further sources ID'd. EPA has ID'd *JUST 3 SOURCES*: OPEN BURNING OF SCRAP
TIRES, GASOLINE DISTRIBUTION OF AVIATION FUEL AND WOOD
TREATMENT/PRESERVATION for regulation of these 7 HAP (formal listing under
sec 112(c)(6). EPA will then perform further analysis on emissions &
control methods (WHEN DO THEY REVIEW WHAT'S EMISSIONS ARE ALLOWED TO
PROTECT HEALTH, AS THEY SAY THEY ARE GOING TO DO?). ie, even if listed as
112(c)(6) sources, no sec. 112 regulation of sources for these 7 HAP is
**TO IMPROVE THIS LIMITED RULEMAKING, THE CRITICAL POINT** seems to be that
EPA is "SEEKING BETTER & ADDITIONAL" DATA from its 1990 baseline emissions
inventory of HAP sources for these 7 HAP: "new data will be evaluated, and
if determined to constitute an improvement to the current inventory, will
be used to revise the inventory." [table 1 summarizes the current (ie
1990) source estimates for these 7 HAP]. I.E., THERE' S AN OPPORTUNITY TO
CONVINCE EPA TO REGULATE MORE SOURCES OF THESE 7 HAP, ESPECIALLY IF THEY
ARE DOING IT ON A HEALTH BASIS (eg the dioxin/co-planar PCBs reassesment,
which is going to say we already have enough of these compounds in us to
cause immune & reproductive effects).
an example of EPA's apparant political component to limit this proposal: in
their discussion of why it would be redundant to regulate solid waste
incinerator sources already regulated under sec. 129, under which PCBs &
HCB are NOT regulated(!), they claim that they'll be controlled by
controlling their surrogates because: 1. they are converted into "less
hazardous" compounds, and 2. they are remoced by the control eqpmnt.
required under sec. 129 ("eg, typically achieve more than 95% control."
(!!)). this all seems to me highly specualtive and contrary to some data i
have seen. definitly the data shows that pcdd/f are formed in the ~300-500
deg. C zone of the post combustion airflow, regardless of how much they
are destroyed to begin with.
this is not a proposed rule, only an EPA "housekeeping or maintenance