Industry watches closely as EPA converts the clean air act into regulation
The House, Senate, and President Bush all celebrated a year ago this month when the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were signed into law.
But the law must be interpreted and translated into rules and regulations, and although the Environmental Protection Agency has been hard at work at that, it still has far to go. The 50 states will then decide what shape the act takes.
The new law requires major air pollution sources to have operating permits, in a program to he administered by the states, which must follow minimum requirements set by EPA.
Manufacturing facilities will have to apply for permits based on capacity, production processes. and air emissions, and they will have to renew their permits at least every five years.
"The EPA permit program is supposed to pull together major elements of the act and provide a minimum basis for what states need to do," says T. Ted Cromwell, manager/air programs with the environmental division of Chemical Manufacturers Association.
CMA’s Kathy D. Bailey, senior assistant general counsel. says, "Lots of states have required permits to operate, but never the Clean Air Act; it’s a totally new requirement." She notes the new program centralizes the act’s control requirements. making them relatively easy to track and enforce.
Referring to EPA’s permit proposal, put out last April, Cromwell says.
"About 90% of what’s been written has not been argued with." The other 10%, though, has industry concerned— specifically minor Permit amendments and modifications. CMA says the proposed rule is not clear on whether companies must go through the entire permit application process to make such relatively minor changes as replacing equipment, making new installations, and enhancing efficiency.
For batch operators, who can produce a wide array of chemicals within a year, it is especially important that new permit amendments not be required every time they make a process change, says Mary James Legatski, director/government relations with the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association.
States are free to tighten any or all parts of the Clean Air Act, including operational flexibility, beyond EPA minimum requirements. Catherine Bilello. environmental specialist at Dow Chemicals Plaquemine, LA, plant, says, "We don’t currently have a lot of operational flexibility in our existing permit program." She notes that industry will likely have to deal with this issue on a stale-by-state basis.
David Graham, manager/environment department for Dow’s Texas operations, says that under Texas’s permit program minor operational changes can he performed with a "standard exemption." In some cases, a notice of the change must he filed with the state,
while in others, a notice can be kept at the facility for review by state inspectors. The Texas system "reduces the amount of formality and paperwork involved in making minor changes," Graham says. New Jersey, on the other hand, is considering having neighboring states review proposed permit changes and soliciting public comment, potentially causing delays that could "shut a business down," says Nancy Lawson, associate director of New Jersey’s Chemical Industry Council.
Cromwell and Bailey expect the final permit rule sometime between the November deadline and Christmas. Following the rule’s release, states will he required to submit proposed permit
Source : Chemical week, November 13, 1991
Recycling Point Dot Com
(C) 2000 All Rights Reserved