EPA Sets Thresholds for Greenhouse Gas Permitting Requirements

Here's EPA's press release on the greenhouse gas tailoring rule. It's an attempt by EPA to sidestep the requirement of the Clean Air Act that all sources of regulated pollutants must have major source permits if they exceed 100 or 250 tons of emissions every year. If that had been applied to carbon dioxide, half the businesses in America would be getting Title V (large source) permits. The question is - will this rule survive a court challenge from business (no justification for regulating greenhouse gases) and environmentalists (no authority in the Clean Air Act to set higher permitting limits for greenhouse gases)?


WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced a final rule to address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the largest stationary sources, while shielding millions of small sources of GHGs from Clean Air Act permitting requirements. The phased-in, common-sense approach will address facilities like power plants and oil refineries that are responsible for 70 percent of the greenhouse gases from stationary sources that threaten American’s health and welfare.

“After extensive study, debate and hundreds of thousands of public comments, EPA has set common-sense thresholds for greenhouse gases that will spark clean technology innovation and protect small businesses and farms,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “There is no denying our responsibility to protect the planet for our children and grandchildren. It’s long past time we unleashed our American ingenuity and started building the efficient, prosperous clean energy economy of the future.”

EPA’s phased-in approach will start in January 2011, when Clean Air Act permitting requirements for GHGs will kick in for large facilities that are already obtaining Clean Air Act permits for other pollutants. Those facilities will be required to include GHGs in their permit if they increase these emissions by at least 75,000 tons per year (tpy).

In July 2011, Clean Air Act permitting requirements will expand to cover all new facilities with GHG emissions of at least 100,000 tpy and modifications at existing facilities that would increase GHG emissions by at least 75,000 tpy. These permits must demonstrate the use of best available control technologies to minimize GHG emission increases when facilities are constructed or significantly modified.

Under the new emissions thresholds for GHGs that begin in July 2011, EPA estimates approximately 900 additional permitting actions covering new sources and modifications to existing sources would be subject to review each year. In addition, 550 sources will need to obtain operating permits for the first time because of their GHG emissions.
In April 2010, EPA set the first national GHG tailpipe standards for passenger cars and light trucks. When GHG emissions limits for these vehicles go into effect in January 2011, EPA is also required to address GHG emissions from stationary sources under the Clean Air Act’s permitting programs, which it is doing in the plan outlined today.
The final rule addresses a group of six greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

EPA issued a proposed rule in October 2009 and held a 60-day public comment period. The agency received about 450,000 comments, which were carefully reviewed and considered during the development of this final rule

West Virginia DEP, Gov. Manchin Recognize Environmental Stewardship

Charleston, W.Va. – West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin and West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection Cabinet Secretary Randy Huffman recognized the environmental stewardship efforts of 40 recipients from around the state Monday at the 10th Environmental Awards Ceremony.

The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection’s Environmental Awards recognize the accomplishments of state industries, municipalities, educators and community leaders who strive to protect the environment, work to be good corporate neighbors, and educate the state’s citizens.

Businesses and municipalities that have demonstrated exemplary performance over the last two years, have compliance records that reflect no outstanding violations and have a record of cooperation with regulatory authorities are eligible to be nominated by DEP inspection staff.

Individuals are also nominated for the awards, including those who volunteer with local civic organizations, youth groups or watershed associations.

Award categories and recipients include: Underground Storage Tank (UST), Most Improved – Terra-Petro Development Inc., CC Marts; UST Class A Certified Worker – Dennis Huff, Sam Huff Contractors Inc.; UST Class B Certified Worker – Michael A. Miller, Miller Environmental Inc.; UST Class C Certified Worker – Edward Kubinsky Jr., Crompco LLC.; UST Class D Certified Worker – Phillip Stone, Superior Testing Services Inc.; UST Class E Certified Worker – Robert Howie, RHCP Services; UST – Holtzman Oil Co.; Prima Marketing, Prima Stores.

Hazardous Waste Corrective Action – Private Trucking Operations, Union Carbide Corp., Dow Chemical; Industry Greater than 100 Employees – Cytec Industries Inc., Willow Island; Industry Less than 100 Employees – C/O Consolidated Hydro Southeast Inc., Gauley River Power Partners; Municipal Landfill – S&S Landfill; Greenbrier County Landfill; Hazardous Waste Generators – Armstrong Hardwood Flooring, Beverly Plant; Sewage Treatment Plant Great than 400,000 GPD, Most Improved – Warm Springs PSD, Berkeley Springs Wastewater Plant; Red Sulphur PSD, Red Sulphur Wastewater Treatment Plant; Parkersburg Utility Board; Sewage Treatment Plant Greater than 400,000 GPD – Greenbrier PSD No. 2, Wastewater Treatment Plant; Crab Orchard MacArthur PSD; Sewage Treatment Plant Less than 400,000 GPD – Harpers Ferry/Bolivar PSD; Town of Capon Bridge, Capon Bridge Wastewater Plant.

Land Use Development – Kanawha Electric & Machine Co.; Environmental Stewardship – Barry Milam, Upper Guyandotte Watershed Association; Kanawha County Commission; Raleigh County Solid Waste Authority; Brownfields and Voluntary Program – City of Parkersburg, Bureau of Public Debt (former CSX depot); Education and Community Involvement – Melissa Stewart, West Virginia State University Extension Service; Bob Bennett, Greenbrier County Solid Waste Authority, Greenbrier Recycling Center; Amanda Sullivan, West Virginia Department of Agriculture; Environmental Volunteers of the Year – Abby Chapple, Friends of the Cacapon River; Patricia Spangler, Fayette County Schools; Teresa Nelson, Beaver Creek Beavers 4-H Club; Brenda Miller, Busy Bison 4-H Club; Eric Autenreith, Plateau Action Network; Safe Dams Award – Civil Tech Engineering Inc., Mark Pennington; Clean Energy Award – Coaltec Energy/Frye Poultry; Outstanding Litter Control Officer – Jimmy M. Stone, Raleigh County; Environmental Partnership – West Virginia University, Marshall University Brownfields Assistance Centers; DEP Cabinet Secretary Award – Elk River
Cleanup.

ORSANCO Releases Data Report on Emerging Contaminants

ORSANCO has released a final data report regarding the results of monitoring for emerging contaminants, such as hormones and endocrine disruptors. The following was taken from the Executive Summary. Unfortunately, I haven't located a link to the study in my quick look at the ORSANCO site.

Background: Recent improvements in analytical detection capabilities and the availability of these methods to researchers via commercial labs have now enabled water resource managers to conduct studies such as this on broader spatial scales and on a wider range of compounds. Analytes are now being detected and quantified in the part per trillion (ng/L) range. In 2002,ORSANCOfs Research Committee identified Contaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs) as a top research priority. Research has demonstrated there are many sources of CECs to the environment, including wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), confined animal feeding
operations (CAFOs), industrial discharges, etc. It has been shown that WWTPs are not currently designed to remove these chemicals to the very low levels, nor are they required by regulatory agencies to do so. Therefore, we anticipated finding detectable levels of CECs in the Ohio River at locations below possible sources and potentially at background areas.

To date, little information is available regarding possible human health risk, however, it is more generally accepted that risks have been demonstrated for aquatic species exposed to these compounds. Understanding possible ecological risks was considered a primary purpose for the Commissionfs research efforts on CECs. In 2005, ORSANCO collaborated with USEPA to conduct a pilot study on the Ohio River. This study targeted a limited list of endocrine disrupting chemicals which included steroid hormones and alkylphenolic compounds. Methods employed during the pilot study enabled researchers to detect the presence of steroid hormones, but
quantification was not possible. It was determined that future efforts should include a broader list of chemicals and provide reportable quantities.

Study Overview: In September and October, 2009, single grab samples were collected from 22 locations on the mainstem Ohio River and the lower reaches of tributaries. Target analytes included 158 compounds considered to be contaminants of emerging concern or emerging contaminants.

o 118 ] Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products (PPCPs)
o 27 ] Hormones and Sterols
o 13 ] Perfluorinated Compounds (PFCs)

Rockefeller Advocates Two Year Moratorium on EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases

A number of business organizations have been urging people to contact Senators Byrd and Rockefeller to urge them to vote in favor of Sen. Lisa Murkowki's resolution to take away responsibility for regulation of greenhouse gases from EPA. It looks like Sen. Rockefeller is on board, at least for a two year period. Given the ubiquitous nature of CO2 regulations, and the effect it is likely to have on energy usage and the economy, it probably makes sense to have Congress, rather than the agency, decide how GHGs will be regulated.

West Virginia DEP Still Accepting Junior Conservation Camp Applications

The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection’s Junior Conservation Camp is now full and has begun a waiting list, but for young people who are between the ages of 14 and 18, the West Virginia State Conservation Camp is still accepting applications.

The WVDEP is one of several sponsors of the annual State Conservation Camp and will provide staff instructors, as well as scholarships to the camp through Save Our Streams and the Youth Environmental Program.

Named one of “55 Good Things About West Virginia” by The State Journal, the State Conservation Camp takes place June

14-19 at Camp Caesar near Cowen, W.Va. It has had more than 16,000 young people attend since it first began in 1941, and according to Mike Hall, WVU Extension Agent and camp director, it is believed to be the oldest camp of its kind in the United States.

Last year marked 68 years of conservation education and the West Virginia State Conservation Camp received one of only four national “Honor Roll Awards” presented by the Izaak Walton League of America.

The focus of the camp is to teach young people about West Virginia’s natural resources and how to be responsible stewards of the environment.

Participants spend the week learning about West Virginia’s natural resources in a block-schedule format that provides a total of 12 hours of instruction by the week’s end.

Subject areas include: forestry, soil conservation, water resources, fish management, game and non-game wildlife management, natural resource and environmental law enforcement, parks and recreation, and youth environmental initiatives. Through hands-on experience as well as discussion, campers learn the techniques and fundamentals applied by professionals in the field. The staff instructors represent natural resource and environmental agencies from all over West Virginia and are trained and experienced in both their professional fields and youth

residential camps.

Campers have their choice of experiencing a wide variety of activities including trap shooting, archery, boating, outdoor cooking, rifle marksmanship, rappelling and fishing. They also get to witness a mock forest fire suppression and investigation, a trout stocking event, a turkey trapping exhibition and a firearms safety demonstration.

Of course, traditional camping experiences such as team sports and a campfire are included. Special awards to campers will be presented during the closing ceremony on Friday night.

Various agencies, businesses, clubs and individuals have provided scholarships for young people to attend the camp over the years. This year, the camp registration fee is $150. However, nearly all first-time attendees receive a scholarship. Previous campers are also welcome to attend if age requirements are met. Campers must be at least 14 years of age as of Jan. 1, 2010 but no older than 18 years of age

on the first day of camp.

For more information and to register for the 69th West Virginia Conservation Camp, contact Alan Miller, camp secretary/treasurer (phone: 304-358-3298; mail: HC 32 Box 33, Upper Tract, WV 26866) or visit the West Virginia State Conservation Camp Web site at:

http://wvconservationcamp.com

EP Releases Reanalysis of Dioxin Risk for Public Comment

Dioxin is one of those "ethyl methyl megadeath" substances that generates lots of fear in the public, perhaps out of proportion to the actual danger it poses. The Kanawha River and certain other waterbodies are listed as impaired for dioxin, although the water quality criterion is set at such a low level that even background levels could trigger a finding of impairment. It has been studied and restudied, most recently by the National Academy of Sciences, which completed its review in 2006. EPA reviewed that report and has now issued its own critique of the NAS conclusions. EPA's analysis is now available for public comment.

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reached a significant milestone toward the completion of the agency’s dioxin reassessment with the public release of its draft scientific report, EPA’s Reanalysis of Key Issues Related to Dioxin Toxicity and Response to NAS Comments. The draft dioxin report is EPA’s response to key comments and recommendations made by the National Academy of Sciences on the agency’s draft dioxin reassessment. EPA is moving forward with Administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s commitment to complete the long-awaited dioxin reassessment. This comprehensive human health and exposure risk assessment on dioxin, one of the most toxic environmental contaminants, aims to protect the health of the American public. The draft report will now undergo scientific peer review by independent, external experts as well as public review and comment.

EPA previously asked the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the science advisors to the nation, to review EPA’s 2003 draft dioxin reassessment. The NAS completed its review in 2006. The draft report released today contains the agency’s response to key comments and recommendations in the NAS’s 2006 report. EPA’s draft report also includes significant new analyses that relate to issues raised by the NAS, including potential cancer and non-cancer human health effects that may result from exposures to dioxins. Thus, this draft dioxin report includes an oral reference dose (RfD) for TCDD -- the most well-studied and considered to be among the most toxic of the dioxin-like compounds. An RfD was not in the 2003 draft dioxin reassessment.

As part of EPA’s commitment to scientific quality, integrity, and transparency, EPA’s draft scientific report will undergo external peer review by an expert panel of scientists convened by EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB) in July 2010. Public comments on this draft report are encouraged, and a Federal Register Notice published today provides details on how to submit comments. EPA will use the feedback and recommendations of the expert panel, as well as the public comments, to update and complete its draft dioxin reassessment.

Dioxin is a general term that describes a group of hundreds of chemicals that are highly persistent in the environment. Dioxins are formed during combustion or burning. Sources of dioxins include commercial or municipal waste incineration; the burning of fuels like wood, coal, or oil; and natural processes such as forest fires.

While dioxin levels in the United States environment have been declining for the last 30 years due to reductions in emissions from man-made sources, the chemicals break down so slowly that dioxins from past releases will still be in the environment for many years.

EPA and other federal agencies have updated a series of questions and answers to provide the public with general information on dioxins, including what they are, where they can be found, and major sources of dioxins. They also discuss possible effects of dioxin exposure in humans, include advice about consumption of food that might contain dioxins, and explain the review process for the dioxin reassessment. To view the questions and answers: http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/FoodContaminantsAdulteration/ChemicalContaminants/DioxinsPCBs/ucm077524.htm

To read the draft report: http://www.epa.gov/dioxin

Federal Register Notice with details on the public comment process: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-05-21/html/2010-12280.htm

EPA’s Risk Assessment Process: http://epa.gov/riskassessment/basicinformation.htm#arisk

EPA Schedules Meetings on Environmental Effects of Port of Huntington Tri-State Collaborative

PHILADELPHIA (May 25, 2010) - - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will hold two public meetings to discuss the Port of Huntington Tri-State Collaborative Geographic Initiative – an initiative that addresses the importance of environmental compliance for the area’s land, air and water resources.

To make sure citizens in the communities surrounding the Port area have an opportunity to comment on the collaborative goals and the overall strategies, EPA will host two public meetings:

7 p.m., June 1, 2010 - Tuesday

Marshall University Memorial Student Center

Fifth Avenue

Marshall University, Huntington, WVa

7 p.m., June 2, 2010 - Wednesday

Wilson University Student Union

West Virginia State University

Institute, WVa.

The Port Collaborative plan includes assessing the environmental impacts of the Port operations on the surrounding communities, reducing the amount of pollution being released into the environment, and building community skills to help ensure the long-term protection of the environment and public health.

For additional information about the Port of Huntington Tri-State Collaborative Geographic Initiative see: http://www.epa.gov/region03/oecej/initiatives.html.

EPA Proposes Alternatives for Coal Ash Regulation

EPA has proposed a rule to deal with coal ash and is seeking public comment. It provides two alternatives - one is to treat the coal ash as a hazardous waste, and would require liners at dry disposal facilities and eliminate surface impoundments, or wet storage, but would allow continued beneficial use of the ash. The other alternative would be handle it as a solid waste, with regulation by the States and through citizen suits. Here is a NY Times article discussing the proposal. What follows is the EPA's announcement.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today is proposing the first-ever national rules to ensure the safe disposal and management of coal ash from coal-fired power plants.

Coal combustion residuals, commonly known as coal ash, are byproducts of the combustion of coal at power plants and are disposed of in liquid form at large surface impoundments and in solid form at landfills. The residuals contain contaminants like mercury, cadmium and arsenic, which are associated with cancer and various other serious health effects. EPA’s risk assessment and damage cases demonstrate that, without proper protections, these contaminants can leach into groundwater and can migrate to drinking water sources, posing significant health public concerns.

Today’s action will ensure for the first time that protective controls, such as liners and groundwater monitoring, are in place at new landfills to protect groundwater and human health. Existing surface impoundments will also require liners, with strong incentives to close the impoundments and transition to safer landfills, which store coal ash in dry form. The proposed regulations will ensure stronger oversight of the structural integrity of impoundments in order to prevent accidents like the one at Kingston , Tennessee . Today’s action also will promote environmentally safe and desirable forms of recycling coal ash, known as beneficial uses.

The dangers associated with structurally unsafe coal ash impoundments came to national attention in 2008 when an impoundment holding disposed waste ash generated by the Tennessee Valley Authority broke open, creating a massive spill in Kingston that covered millions of cubic yards of land and river. The spill displaced residents, required hundreds of millions of dollars in cleanup costs and caused widespread environmental damage. Shortly afterwards, EPA began overseeing the cleanup, as well as investigating the structural integrity of impoundments where ash waste is stored.

“The time has come for common-sense national protections to ensure the safe disposal of coal ash,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “We’re proposing strong steps to address the serious risk of groundwater contamination and threats to drinking water and we’re also putting in place stronger safeguards against structural failures of coal ash impoundments. The health and the environment of all communities must be protected.”

The proposal opens a national dialogue by calling for public comment on two approaches for addressing the risks of coal ash management under the nation’s primary law for regulating solid waste, the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act (RCRA). One option is drawn from authorities available under Subtitle C, which creates a comprehensive program of federally enforceable requirements for waste management and disposal. The other option includes remedies under Subtitle D, which gives EPA authority to set performance standards for waste management facilities and would be enforced primarily through citizen suits. A chart comparing and contrasting the two approaches is available on EPA’s Web site.

Under both approaches proposed by EPA, the agency would leave in place the Bevill exemption for beneficial uses of coal ash in which coal combustion residuals are recycled as components of products instead of placed in impoundments or landfills. Large quantities of coal ash are used today in concrete, cement, wallboard and other contained applications that should not involve any exposure by the public to unsafe contaminants. These uses would not be impacted by today’s proposal.

“EPA supports the legitimate beneficial use of coal combustion residuals,” said Mathy Stanislaus, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, the agency office that will be responsible for implementing the proposals. “Environmentally sound beneficial uses of ash conserve resources, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, lessen the need for waste disposal units, and provide significant domestic economic benefits. This proposal will clearly differentiate these uses from coal ash disposal and assure that safe beneficial uses are not restricted and in fact are encouraged.”

EPA is seeking public comment on how to frame the continued exemption of beneficial uses from regulation and is focusing in particular on whether that exemption should exclude certain non-contained applications where contaminants in coal ash could pose risks to human health. The public comment period is 90 days from the date the rule is published in the Federal Register.

Coal combustion residual impoundments can be found in almost all states across America , most often on the properties of power plants. There are almost 900 landfills and surface impoundments nationwide. Since the spill at Kingston , EPA has been evaluating hundreds of coal ash impoundments throughout the country to ensure their structural integrity and to require improvements where necessary. The results of the assessments are on EPA’s Web site.

To view results of the impoundment assessments:

Large Quantity Water Users To Receive Forms From DEP

Large quantity water users will begin receiving water use certification forms in the mail this week [May 6].

A Large Quantity Water User is anyone who withdraws more than 750,000 gallons from state waters in any calendar month. A survey conducted in 2004 and 2005 identified and registered the state’s Large Quantity Water Users, who must now certify that their water use has not changed.

An amendment to the Water Resources Protection and Management Act in 2008 made completion of the forms mandatory. The forms must be returned to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection by June 1.

Large Quantity Water Users must register with the WV DEP.

Any business or individual that meets the criteria but has not registered must do so by completing a registration form found on the internet at:

http://www.dep.wv.gov/WWE/wateruse/Pages/AnnualCertification

-LargeQuantityUsers.aspx

The Water Use Section of the webpage has more information about the requirements, as well as instructions on how to complete the form. That page can be accessed at http://www.dep.wv.gov/WWE/wateruse/Pages/default.aspx.

Those with questions may also contact Wilma McKown at (304) 926-0499, extension 1280, or by e-mail:

wilma.j.mckown@wv.gov.

Atlanta Attorney Sends Notice Of Intent To Sue State Over Sewage Discharges

Vicki Smith of the Associated Press reports that an Atlanta attorney, William "Bo" Gray, has sent the DEP and Bureau of Public Health 60 day letters under the Clean Water Act, advising that he intends to sue West Virginia for allowing the direct discharge of sewage from homes into State waters. According to the story Mr. Gray represents a developer who was denied a sewage permit for some upscale housing, and then learned that there are thousands of "straight pipes" (those that run directly from someone's bathroom to a stream) in West Virginia. The State will have 60 days to commence an action of its own, or Mr. Gray may do so. If he's successful, he can recover attorneys fees.

A follow up AP report is found here

Kerry-Lieberman Climate Bill Introduced In Senate

The Kerry-Lieberman climate and energy bill (formerly the Kerry-Lieberman-Graham bill, until Graham got cold feet) is out and available for review. This is the companion legislation to the Waxman-Markey climate bill that barely made it out of the House last year. Here is a summary and comparison of the two bills offered by the Marten Law Group. Congressional Budget Office (a nonpartisan agency) estimates of the cost of the bills (both money and unemployment) can be found here. And here is an analysis of the amount of global warming that will be reduced by the bill, if it were passed. It works out to about .2 degrees F., but to be fair, it assumes no other country will impose like restrictions on CO2 emissions.

Not likely that much will happen with this bill, with elections coming and Democrats expected to see their majorities reduced somewhat.

Information for Those Attending the Spruce No. 1 Mine Public Hearing on May 18 in Charleston, West Virginia

PHILADELPHIA (May 12, 2010) – There is still time for advanced sign-up to attend and/or speak at the Environmental Protection Agency’s May 18 public hearing, which will be held at the Charleston Civic Center – South Hall, 200 Civic Center Drive, Charleston, W.Va.

People wishing to sign up in advance can do so over the internet by going to http://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/spruce1hearing.html and clicking on the link, or by calling 877-368-3552.

Advanced sign up is not required to attend or speak at the public hearing. However, because of the large turnout expected, EPA is recommending that people wishing to attend the public hearing, and especially those who wish to speak, sign up in advance. Those who sign-up in advance will have expedited entrance into the Civic Center and should look for that line when arriving. Photo identification will be required.

On-site registration will be available at the Civic Center beginning at 5 p.m. Advanced sign-up via the internet or phone will end at noon on May 18.

The hearing will begin at 7 p.m. and end no later than midnight due to a City of Charleston ordinance. In order to accommodate as many speakers as possible during that time, each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes and time will be strictly monitored. Those who have signed up to speak in advance will speak first.

Everyone entering the Civic Center will be required to show a photo I.D. and go through a metal detector. No large bags or backpacks will be permitted. Also, pocket knives, scissors or other objects that could be used as weapons are prohibited.

Posters or signs will not be allowed inside the Civic Center per facility rules. City ordinances prohibit loud speakers or other amplifying devices. Recording devices are also not permitted inside the Civic Center.

All oral comments provided at the public hearing will be recorded by a court stenographer. And all comments – both oral and written -- will be considered by the EPA in making its decision.

Written comments will also be accepted at the public hearing. Written comments can also be submitted until June 1 on the Spruce No. 1 Mine Proposed Determination, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OW-2009-0985, by one of the following four methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal (recommended method of comment submission): http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

2. E-mail: ow-docket@epamail.epa.gov. Include the docket number, EPA-R03-OW-2009-0985, in the subject line of the message.

3. Mail: ‘‘EPA-R03-OW-2009-0985, Spruce No. 1 Surface Mine,’’

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EPA Docket Center Water Docket, Mail Code 28221T

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

4. Hand Delivery or Courier:

Director, Office of Environmental Programs

Environmental Assessment and Innovation Division

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III (3EA30)

1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, PA19103

EPA Reaches Settlement in Chesapeake Bay Lawsuit

Here's a press release from EPA about its settlement of a lawsuit brought by environmental groups to require reductions of pollutant loadings into the Chesapeake Bay. Note that a TMDL will be finished by the end of 2010, and presumably implemented soon thereafter. Tomorrow the federal strategy for dealing with the Bay will be unveiled. Both will have implications for the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia.

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced today that it reached settlement with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, four former Maryland, Virginia and Washington,D.C. elected officials, and organizations representing watermen and sports fishermen in resolving a lawsuit filed in January 2009 claiming that EPA had failed to take adequate measures to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay. The lawsuit, Fowler v. EPA, is pending in federal district court for the District of Columbia.

The settlement agreement, negotiated with groups and individuals with a long history of advocating protection and restoration of the bay, tracks much of the comprehensive suite of strong regulatory and other actions that EPA has initiated or pledged to take under the Obama administration to restore water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. These actions include establishing the stringent Chesapeake Bay total maximum daily load (TMDL), putting in place an effective implementation framework, expanding its review of Chesapeake Bay watershed permits, and initiating rulemaking for new regulations for concentrated animal feeding operations and urban and suburban stormwater. The agreement also includes a commitment to establish a publicly accessible tracking and accounting system to monitor progress in reducing pollution through the TMDL and two-year milestones.

“Because EPA and the co-plaintiffs share the same goals of clean water in the Chesapeake Bay and the waterways flowing through communities in the region, we felt that a settlement building on our common goals was far more positive than defending a lawsuit filed in the Bush administration “ said EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe. “Through the executive order issued by President Obama, this administration is committed to making real progress in restoring water quality, and our strong actions and rigorous accountability system are evidence that EPA is serious about reducing pollution.”

By December 31, 2010, EPA will establish the Chesapeake Bay TMDL, a tool of the federal Clean Water Act, that sets a strict “pollution diet” to restore the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. The Chesapeake TMDL will be the largest and most complex ever developed in the nation, involving pollution sources throughout a 64,000-square-mile watershed that includes six states and the District of Columbia. In 2009, EPA announced that it expects the six watershed states and D.C. to provide detailed strategies for reducing pollutant loads to meet water quality standards. EPA also expects detailed schedules for implementing pollution controls and achieving pollution reductions. Progress will be measured through milestones every two years, and EPA may take action for inadequate plans or failure to meet the milestones.

Tomorrow, EPA will be announcing the final federal strategy for the Chesapeake Bay, implementing the president’s executive order. Many of the commitments in the settlement agreement will be reflected in the strategy.

More information about the TMDL is available at: http://www.epa.gov/chesapeakebaytmdl/

EPA Proposes Reducing Air Emissions of Mercury

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing proposals that would cut U.S. mercury emissions by more than half and would significantly cut other pollutants from boilers, process heaters and solid waste incinerators. These pollutants include several air toxics which are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health problems and environmental damage. The proposed rules are estimated to yield more than 5 dollars in public health benefits for every dollar spent.

“Strong cuts to mercury and other harmful emissions will have real benefits for our health and our environment, spur clean technology innovations and save American communities billions of dollars in avoided health costs,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “This is a cost-effective, commonsense way to protect our health and the health of our children, and get America moving into the clean economy of the future.”

Combined, these proposals would cut annual mercury emissions from about 200,000 industrial boilers process heaters and solid waste incinerators, slashing overall mercury emissions by more than 50 percent. Industrial boilers and process heaters are the second largest source of mercury emissions in the United States.

Mercury can damage children’s developing brains and nervous systems even before they are born. When emitted to the air, mercury eventually settles in water, where it can change into methylmercury, which builds up in ocean and freshwater fish and can be highly toxic to people who eat the fish. This sometimes leads to fish consumption advisories to protect public health.

When fully implemented, today’s proposal would yield combined health benefits estimated at $18 to $44 billion annually. These benefits include preventing between 2,000 and 5,200 premature deaths, and about 36,000 asthma attacks a year. Estimated annual costs of installing and operating pollution controls required under these rules would be $3.6 billion.

These actions cover emissions from two types of combustion units. The first type of unit, boilers and process heaters, burns fuel such as natural gas, coal, and oil to produce heat or electricity. These units can also burn non-hazardous secondary materials such as processed tires and used oil. Boilers are located at large industrial facilities and smaller facilities, including commercial buildings, hotels, and universities. The second type of unit, commercial and industrial solid waste incinerators, burns solid waste.

Large boilers and all incinerators would be required to meet emissions limits for mercury and other pollutants. Facilities with boilers would also be required to conduct energy audits to find cost effective ways to reduce fuel use and emissions. Smaller facilities, such as schools, with some of the smallest boilers, would not be included in these requirements, but they would be required to perform tune-ups every two years.

EPA is also proposing to identify which non-hazardous secondary materials would be considered solid waste and which would be considered fuel. This distinction would determine whether a material can be burned in a boiler or whether it must be burned in a solid waste incinerator. The agency is also soliciting comment on several other broader approaches that would identify additional non-hazardous secondary materials as solid waste when burned in combustion units.

EPA will take comment on these proposed rules for 45 days after they are published in the Federal Register. EPA will hold a public hearing on these rules soon after they are published in the Federal Register. For more information on the proposals and details on the pubic hearings: http://www.epa.gov/airquality/combustion

R137

EPA To Hold Greenhouse Gas Reporting Seminar June 2

Tom Boggs of the WV Chamber sent this notice along for those interested in learning more about EPA's Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rule:

On June 2, EPA is offering a half-day, in-person training session in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to provide participants with detailed information regarding EPA's Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rule. Industries and government agencies in Region 3 are encouraged to attend. The training session will begin at 8:30 am, and will cover:

• General rule requirements
• Stationary fuel combustion sources (including electricity generation)
• Muicipal solid waste landfills
• Questions and Answers

Click here to get the required pre-registration material.

If you have questions about this training or the Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rule, you may contact:

Jim Smith, PE, Ph.D.
Air Quality Analysis Branch
U. S. Environment Protection Agency, Region III
1650 Arch Street (3AP40)
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2023
Work: (215) 814-2197
Fax: (215) 814-2124

EPA and Climate Change

Several years ago those who fear global warming noticed that the warming was not increasing at a greater rate than it had in the past, so they started referring to "climate change" as the focus of their concern. That way, any change in the weather - heat, cold, drought, flood - could be attributed to the effects of carbon dixoide in the atmosphere. Here's the parade of horrors from EPA, telling us all the signs of incipient climate doom, such as higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and increased storm intensity.

When one looks at the data, though, it turns out there is no greater frequency of storms or drought or rise in sea level. Temperatures are apparently increasing, at the same rate as they have since the end of the Little Ice Age, around the end of the 18th century (and long before people were putting significant amounts of carbon in the air), but nowhere near the calamitous rate forecast by computer models.

Wall Street Journal Article on Shale Gas Plays

The Wall Street Journal has a great feature on shale gas plays and the effect they'll have on the world economy. We have seen the development of one of the larger shale gas formations, the Marcellus, in northern West Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York, and it appears that there are similar formations in Europe and elsewhere that can be recovered at a reasonable cost.

Exxon Valdez Lawyer Offers Thoughts on the Deepwater Horizon Spill

For those of you following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill fiasco in the Gulf, here is a retrospective of the Exxon Valdez litigation, provided by one of the attorneys involved in those lawsuits.


http://www.martenlaw.com/newsletter/20100505-deepwater-horizon-spill

WV DEP to Hold Water Quality Standards Meeting

This year the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection will conduct its triennial review of water quality standards. It will have a meeting to discuss the triennial review, and to give a preview of the matters that it will address, on May 19. The DEP's notice follows. The Department of Environmental Protection’s Water Quality Standards Program is having a public meeting to discuss issues related to the agency’s triennial review of the state’s water quality standards. Staff from the Water Quality Standards program will discuss proposed updates to 47CSR2 “Requirements Governing Water Quality Standards” which will include changes to the narrative criteria and the numeric criteria for iron, total dissolved solids and nutrients in the state’s waterways. Date/Time: Starts: 05/19/2010 1:30 PM Ends: 05/19/2010 3:30 PM Contact Information: Linda Keller 304-926-0499 ext. 1035 Linda.B.Keller@wv.gov Location: DEP Headquarters - Cooper's Rock Rooms 1203 & 1204 601 57th Street, SE Charleston, WV 25304