acid-rain

[xt_go_advt_1]
TitleActionFR DocPublishedAgencyAgency NameExcerptsAbstractHTMLPDF
TitleActionFR DocPublishedAgencyAgency NameExcerptsAbstractHTMLPDF
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozone NAAQSRule2016-2224026/10/2016ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyThe Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the original Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (original CSAPR) on August 8, 2011, to address interstate transport of ozone pollution under the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and … "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the original Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (original CSAPR) on August 8, 2011, to address interstate transport of ozone pollution under the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and interstate transport of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) pollution under the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA is finalizing this Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update (CSAPR Update) to address interstate transport of ozone pollution with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This final rule will benefit human health and welfare by reducing ground-level ozone pollution. In particular, it will reduce ozone season emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in 22 eastern states that can be transported downwind as NOX or, after transformation in the atmosphere, as ozone, and can negatively affect air quality and public health in downwind areas. For these 22 eastern states, the EPA is issuing Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) that generally provide updated CSAPR NOX ozone season emission budgets for the electric generating units (EGUs) within these states, and that implement these budgets via modifications to the CSAPR NOX ozone season allowance trading program that was established under the original CSAPR. The EPA is finalizing these new or revised FIP requirements only for certain states that have failed to submit an approvable State Implementation Plan (SIP) addressing interstate emission transport for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The FIPs require affected EGUs in each covered state to reduce emissions to comply with program requirements beginning with the 2017 ozone season (May 1 through September 30). This final rule partially addresses the EPA's obligation under the Clean Air Act to promulgate FIPs to address interstate emission transport for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. In conjunction with other federal and state actions to reduce ozone pollution, these requirements will assist downwind states in the eastern United States with attaining and maintaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This CSAPR Update also is intended to address the July 28, 2015 remand by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit of certain states' original CSAPR phase 2 ozone season NOX emission budgets. In addition, this rule updates the status of certain states' outstanding interstate ozone transport obligations with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, for which the original CSAPR provided a partial remedy.cross-state-air-pollution-rule-update-for-the-2008-ozone-naaqs2016-22240
Protocol Gas Verification Program and Minimum Competency Requirements for Air Emission Testing; CorrectionsRule2011-2045112/08/2011ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is taking direct final action on corrections to the Protocol Gas Verification Program and Minimum Competency Requirements for Air Emission Testing final rule, which was published in the Federal Register of March 28, 2011 (76 FR 17288). The final rule … "EPA is taking direct final action on corrections to the Protocol Gas Verification Program and Minimum Competency Requirements for Air Emission Testing final rule, which was published in the Federal Register of March 28, 2011 (76 FR 17288). The final rule also made a number of other changes to the regulations. After the final rule was published, it was brought to our attention that there are some incorrect and incomplete statements in the preamble, some potentially confusing statements in a paragraph of the rule text, and the title of Appendix D to Part 75 was inadvertently changed and is incorrect.protocol-gas-verification-program-and-minimum-competency-requirements-for-air-emission-testing2011-20451
Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP ApprovalsRule2011-1760008/08/2011ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyIn this action, EPA is limiting the interstate transport of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) that contribute to harmful levels of fine particle matter (PM2.5) and ozone in downwind states. EPA is … "In this action, EPA is limiting the interstate transport of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) that contribute to harmful levels of fine particle matter (PM2.5) and ozone in downwind states. EPA is identifying emissions within 27 states in the eastern United States that significantly affect the ability of downwind states to attain and maintain compliance with the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Also, EPA is limiting these emissions through Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) that regulate electric generating units (EGUs) in the 27 states. This action will substantially reduce adverse air quality impacts in downwind states from emissions transported across state lines. In conjunction with other federal and state actions, it will help assure that all but a handful of areas in the eastern part of the country achieve compliance with the current ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS by the deadlines established in the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). The FIPs may not fully eliminate the prohibited emissions from certain states with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS for two remaining downwind areas and EPA is committed to identifying any additional required upwind emission reductions and taking any necessary action in a future rulemaking. In this action, EPA is also modifying its prior approvals of certain State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions to rescind any statements that the submissions in question satisfy the interstate transport requirements of the CAA or that EPA's approval of the SIPs affects our authority to issue interstate transport FIPs with respect to the 1997 fine particulate and 1997 ozone standards for 22 states. EPA is also issuing a supplemental proposal to request comment on its conclusion that six additional states significantly affect downwind states' ability to attain and maintain compliance with the 1997 ozone NAAQS.federal-implementation-plans-interstate-transport-of-fine-particulate-matter-and-ozone-and2011-17600
Protocol Gas Verification Program and Minimum Competency Requirements for Air Emission TestingRule2011-621628/03/2011ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is finalizing rule revisions that modify existing requirements for sources affected by the federally administered emission trading programs including the NOX Budget Trading Program, the Acid Rain Program, and the Clean Air Interstate Rule. … "EPA is finalizing rule revisions that modify existing requirements for sources affected by the federally administered emission trading programs including the NOX Budget Trading Program, the Acid Rain Program, and the Clean Air Interstate Rule. EPA is amending its Protocol Gas Verification Program (PGVP) and the minimum competency requirements for air emission testing (formerly air emission testing body requirements) to improve the accuracy of emissions data. EPA is also amending other sections of the Acid Rain Program continuous emission monitoring system regulations by adding and clarifying certain recordkeeping and reporting requirements, removing the provisions pertaining to mercury monitoring and reporting, removing certain requirements associated with a class-approved alternative monitoring system, disallowing the use of a particular quality assurance option in EPA Reference Method 7E, adding two incorporation by references that were inadvertently left out of the January 24, 2008 final rule, adding two new definitions, revising certain compliance dates, and clarifying the language and applicability of certain provisions.protocol-gas-verification-program-and-minimum-competency-requirements-for-air-emission-testing2011-6216
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases: Injection and Geologic Sequestration of Carbon DioxideRule2010-2993401/12/2010ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is promulgating a regulation to require greenhouse gas monitoring and reporting from facilities that conduct geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide and all other facilities that conduct injection of carbon dioxide. This rule does not require control … "EPA is promulgating a regulation to require greenhouse gas monitoring and reporting from facilities that conduct geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide and all other facilities that conduct injection of carbon dioxide. This rule does not require control of greenhouse gases, rather it requires only monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gases.mandatory-reporting-of-greenhouse-gases-injection-and-geologic-sequestration-of-carbon-dioxide2010-29934
Federal Implementation Plans To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone; CorrectionProposed Rule2010-2285114/09/2010ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyThe preamble to the proposed Transport Rule contains minor, technical errors that EPA is correcting in this action. In the portion of the preamble discussing in detail the proposed trading programs, EPA states clearly that it is proposing provisions that … "The preamble to the proposed Transport Rule contains minor, technical errors that EPA is correcting in this action. In the portion of the preamble discussing in detail the proposed trading programs, EPA states clearly that it is proposing provisions that allow units to opt into these trading programs. Moreover, the proposed rule text for the Transport Rule includes detailed opt-in provisions for each proposed trading program. However, two sentences in other portions of the Transport Rule preamble erroneously state that the proposed trading programs do not allow units to opt in. In this proposed rule, EPA is correcting these technical errors.federal-implementation-plans-to-reduce-interstate-transport-of-fine-particulate-matter-and-ozone2010-22851
Federal Implementation Plans To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and OzoneProposed Rule2010-1700702/08/2010ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is proposing to limit the interstate transport of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2). In this action, EPA is proposing to both identify and limit emissions within 32 states in the eastern United States … "EPA is proposing to limit the interstate transport of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2). In this action, EPA is proposing to both identify and limit emissions within 32 states in the eastern United States that affect the ability of downwind states to attain and maintain compliance with the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and the 1997 ozone NAAQS. EPA is proposing to limit these emissions through Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) that regulate electric generating units (EGUs) in the 32 states. This action will substantially reduce the impact of transported emissions on downwind states. In conjunction with other federal and state actions, it helps assure that all but a handful of areas in the eastern part of the country will be in compliance with the current ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS by 2014 or earlier. To the extent the proposed FIPs do not fully address all significant transport, EPA is committed to assuring that any additional reductions needed are addressed quickly. EPA takes comments on ways this proposal could achieve additional NOX reductions and additional actions including other rulemakings that EPA could undertake to achieve any additional reductions needed.federal-implementation-plans-to-reduce-interstate-transport-of-fine-particulate-matter-and-ozone2010-17007
Amendments to the Protocol Gas Verification Program and Minimum Competency Requirements for Air Emission TestingProposed Rule2010-1095511/06/2010ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyRecent EPA gas audit results indicate that some gas cylinders used to calibrate continuous emission monitoring systems on stationary sources do not meet EPA's performance specification. Reviews of stack test reports in recent years indicate that some … "Recent EPA gas audit results indicate that some gas cylinders used to calibrate continuous emission monitoring systems on stationary sources do not meet EPA's performance specification. Reviews of stack test reports in recent years indicate that some stack testers do not properly follow EPA test methods or do not correctly calculate test method results. Therefore, EPA is proposing to amend its Protocol Gas Verification Program (PGVP) and the minimum competency requirements for air emission testing (formerly air emission testing body requirements) to improve the accuracy of emissions data. EPA is also proposing to amend other sections of the Acid Rain Program continuous emission monitoring system regulations by adding and clarifying certain recordkeeping and reporting requirements, removing the provisions pertaining to mercury monitoring and reporting, removing certain requirements associated with a class-approved alternative monitoring system, disallowing the use of a particular quality assurance option in EPA Reference Method 7E, adding an incorporation by reference that was inadvertently left out of the January 24, 2008 final rule, and clarifying the language and applicability of certain provisions.amendments-to-the-protocol-gas-verification-program-and-minimum-competency-requirements-for-air2010-10955
Rulemaking To Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid Rain Program RulesRuleE9-1386012/06/2009ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyIn this action, EPA is reaffirming the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules. These revisions have been in effect since mid-2006. Most of them are crucial to the ongoing operation of the Acid Rain Program, and the rest of them … "In this action, EPA is reaffirming the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules. These revisions have been in effect since mid-2006. Most of them are crucial to the ongoing operation of the Acid Rain Program, and the rest of them streamline and clarify requirements of the program, which has achieved significant, cost-effective reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from utility sources since its commencement in 1995. These rule revisions were finalized in the Federal Register notices that also finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the final Federal Implementation Plans for CAIR (CAIR FIPs). On July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision vacating and remanding CAIR and the CAIR FIPs. On December 23, 2008, in response to petitions for rehearing, the Court modified its July 11, 2008 decision and remanded CAIR and the CAIR FIPs but without a vacatur. These revisions to the Acid Rain Program rules were not addressed by, or involved in any of the issues raised by, any parties in the proceeding or the Court. EPA believes it is reasonable to view these revisions as unaffected by the Court's decision. However, EPA is treating the Court's remand as covering these revisions and, in response to the remand, is finalizing the rule reaffirming--pursuant to its authority under Title IV of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and CAA section 301--the promulgation of these revisions on their merits and in order to remove any uncertainty about their regulatory status. With this action, the existing Acid Rain regulations continue in effect, and the Acid Rain Program continues to operate, unchanged and uninterrupted.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2009/06/12/E9-13860/rulemaking-to-reaffirm-the-promulgation-of-revisions-of-the-acid-rain-program-rulesE9-13860
Rulemaking To Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid Rain Program RulesRuleE9-676426/03/2009ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyBecause EPA received an adverse comment, EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule for ``Rulemaking to Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid Rain Program Rules,'' which was published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2008."Because EPA received an adverse comment, EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule for ``Rulemaking to Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid Rain Program Rules,'' which was published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2008.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2009/03/26/E9-6764/rulemaking-to-reaffirm-the-promulgation-of-revisions-of-the-acid-rain-program-rulesE9-6764
Rulemaking To Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid Rain Program RulesRuleE8-2938915/12/2008ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is taking direct final action to reaffirm the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules in order to prevent disruption of this program, which has achieved significant, cost- effective reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2… "EPA is taking direct final action to reaffirm the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules in order to prevent disruption of this program, which has achieved significant, cost- effective reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from utility sources since its commencement in 1995. These rule revisions were finalized in the Federal Register notices that also finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the Federal Implementation Plans for CAIR (CAIR FIPs). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently issued a decision vacating and remanding CAIR and the CAIR FIPs. EPA and other parties have petitioned for rehearing, and the Court has not yet issued a mandate in the case. These revisions to the Acid Rain Program rules were not addressed by, or involved in any of the issues raised by, any parties in the proceeding or the Court. EPA believes it is reasonable to view these revisions as unaffected by the Court's decision. However, EPA is reaffirming-- pursuant to its authority under Title IV of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and CAA section 301--the promulgation of these revisions in this direct final rule in order to remove any uncertainty about their legal status because they have been in effect since mid-2006, most of them are crucial to the ongoing operation of the Acid Rain Program, and the rest of them streamline and clarify requirements of the program.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/12/15/E8-29389/rulemaking-to-reaffirm-the-promulgation-of-revisions-of-the-acid-rain-program-rulesE8-29389
Rulemaking To Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid Rain Program RulesRuleE8-2938215/12/2008ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is taking interim final action to reaffirm the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules in order to prevent disruption of this program, which has achieved significant, cost-effective reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2… "EPA is taking interim final action to reaffirm the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules in order to prevent disruption of this program, which has achieved significant, cost-effective reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from utility sources since its commencement in 1995. These rule revisions were finalized in the Federal Register notices that also finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the Federal Implementation Plans for CAIR (CAIR FIPs). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently issued a decision vacating and remanding CAIR and the CAIR FIPs. EPA and other parties have petitioned for rehearing, and the Court has not yet issued a mandate in the case. These revisions to the Acid Rain Program rules were not addressed by, or involved in any of the issues raised by, any parties in the proceeding or the Court. EPA believes it is reasonable to view these revisions as unaffected by the Court's decision. However, EPA is reaffirming--pursuant to its authority under Title IV of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and CAA section 301--the promulgation of these revisions in this interim final rule in order to remove any uncertainty about their legal status because they have been in effect since mid- 2006, most of them are crucial to the ongoing operation of the Acid Rain Program, and the rest of them streamline and clarify requirements of the program.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/12/15/E8-29382/rulemaking-to-reaffirm-the-promulgation-of-revisions-of-the-acid-rain-program-rulesE8-29382
Rulemaking To Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid Rain Program RulesProposed RuleE8-2938615/12/2008ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is proposing to reaffirm the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules in order to prevent disruption of the program, which has achieved significant, cost-effective reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from … "EPA is proposing to reaffirm the promulgation of certain revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules in order to prevent disruption of the program, which has achieved significant, cost-effective reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from utility sources since its commencement in 1995. These rule revisions were finalized in the Federal Register notices that also finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the final Federal Implementation Plans for CAIR (CAIR FIPs). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently issued a decision vacating and remanding CAIR and the CAIR FIPs. EPA and other parties have petitioned for rehearing, and the Court has not yet issued a mandate in the case. These revisions to the Acid Rain Program rules were not addressed by, or involved in any of the issues raised by, any parties in the proceeding or the Court. EPA believes it is reasonable to view these revisions as unaffected by the Court's decision. However, EPA is proposing to reaffirm--pursuant to its authority under Title IV of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and CAA section 301--the promulgation of these revisions in order to remove any uncertainty about their regulatory status because they have been in effect since mid-2006, most of them are crucial to the ongoing operation of the Acid Rain Program, and the rest of them streamline and clarify requirements of the program.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/12/15/E8-29386/rulemaking-to-reaffirm-the-promulgation-of-revisions-of-the-acid-rain-program-rulesE8-29386
Stay of the Effectiveness of Requirements for Air Emission Testing BodiesRuleE8-2626404/11/2008ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is taking final action to stay the effectiveness of requirements for air emission testing bodies. On January 24, 2008, final amendments to regulations on competency requirements for air emission testing bodies (AETBs) were published in the Federal … "EPA is taking final action to stay the effectiveness of requirements for air emission testing bodies. On January 24, 2008, final amendments to regulations on competency requirements for air emission testing bodies (AETBs) were published in the Federal Register. The AETB provision generally requires stack testers and stack testing companies to meet certain minimum competency requirements described in ASTM D 7036 by January 1, 2009. On March 25, 2008, the Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) filed a Petition for Review primarily claiming that EPA could not by the AETB requirement hold utilities responsible for something they cannot control. While EPA is considering revisions to the requirements to address UARG's concerns, it cannot propose and complete any such revision through notice and comment rulemaking before the compliance date contained in the existing rule, thus necessitating this action. EPA needs to complete this action staying effectiveness of the AETB requirements in order to secure an extension of an Order Granting Abeyance of Further Proceedings which expires on October 29, 2008, when the Agency must file Motions to Govern Further Proceedings.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/11/04/E8-26264/stay-of-the-effectiveness-of-requirements-for-air-emission-testing-bodiesE8-26264
Revisions to the Continuous Emissions Monitoring Rule for the Acid Rain Program, NOXRuleE7-2507124/01/2008ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is finalizing rule revisions that modify existing requirements for sources affected by the federally administered emission trading programs including the NOX Budget Trading Program, the Acid Rain Program, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, and … "EPA is finalizing rule revisions that modify existing requirements for sources affected by the federally administered emission trading programs including the NOX Budget Trading Program, the Acid Rain Program, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, and the Clean Air Mercury Rule. The revisions are prompted primarily by changes being implemented by EPA's Clean Air Markets Division in its data systems in order to utilize the latest modern technology for the submittal of data by affected sources. Other revisions address issues that have been raised during program implementation, fix specific inconsistencies in rule provisions, or update sources incorporated by reference. These revisions do not impose significant new requirements upon sources with regard to monitoring or quality assurance activities.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/01/24/E7-25071/revisions-to-the-continuous-emissions-monitoring-rule-for-the-acid-rain-program-noxE7-25071
Revisions to Definition of Cogeneration Unit in Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), CAIR Federal Implementation Plans, Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR); and Technical Corrections to CAIR, CAIR FIPs, CAMR, and Acid Rain Program RulesRuleE7-2044719/10/2007ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyThe Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), CAIR Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs), and Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) each include an exemption for cogeneration units that meet certain criteria. In light of information concerning biomass-fired cogeneration … "The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), CAIR Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs), and Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) each include an exemption for cogeneration units that meet certain criteria. In light of information concerning biomass-fired cogeneration units that may not qualify for the exemption due to their particular combination of fuel and technical design characteristics, EPA is changing the cogeneration unit definition in CAIR, the CAIR model cap- and-trade rules, the CAIR FIPs, CAMR, and the CAMR model cap-and-trade rule. Specifically, EPA is revising the calculation methodology for the efficiency standard in the cogeneration unit definition to exclude energy input from biomass making it more likely that units co-firing biomass will be able to meet the efficiency standard and qualify for exemption. Because this change will only affect a small number of relatively low emitting units, it will have little effect on the projected emissions reductions and the environmental benefits of these rules. If EPA finalizes the proposed CAMR Federal Plan, it intends to make the definitions in that rule conform to the CAMR model cap-and- trade rule and thus, with today's action. This action also clarifies the term ``total energy input'' used in the efficiency calculation and makes minor technical corrections to CAIR, the CAIR FIPs, CAMR, and the Acid Rain Program rules.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2007/10/19/E7-20447/revisions-to-definition-of-cogeneration-unit-in-clean-air-interstate-rule-cair-cair-federalE7-20447
Petition for Reconsideration and Proposal for Withdrawal of Findings of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Georgia for Purposes of Reducing Ozone Interstate TransportProposed RuleE7-1103608/06/2007ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyIn this action, we are requesting comments on EPA's response to a Petition for Reconsideration regarding a final rule we issued under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) related to the interstate transport of nitrogen oxides (NOX). On April … "In this action, we are requesting comments on EPA's response to a Petition for Reconsideration regarding a final rule we issued under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) related to the interstate transport of nitrogen oxides (NOX). On April 21, 2004, we issued a final rule (Phase II NOX SIP Call Rule) that required the State of Georgia to submit revisions to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) that prohibit specified amounts of NOX emissions--one of the precursors to ozone (smog) pollution--for the purposes of reducing NOX and ozone transport across State boundaries in the eastern half of the United States. This rule became effective on June 21, 2004. Subsequently, the Georgia Coalition for Sound Environmental Policy (GCSEP or Petitioners) filed a Petition for Reconsideration requesting that EPA reconsider the applicability of the NOX SIP Call Rule to the State of Georgia. In response to this Petition, and based upon review of additional available information, EPA is proposing to remove Georgia from the NOX SIP call region. Specifically, EPA proposes to rescind the applicability of the requirements of the Phase II NOX SIP Call Rule to the State of Georgia, only.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2007/06/08/E7-11036/petition-for-reconsideration-and-proposal-for-withdrawal-of-findings-of-significant-contribution-andE7-11036
Revisions to Definition of Cogeneration Unit in Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), CAIR Federal Implementation Plan, Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), and CAMR Proposed Federal Plan; Revision to National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters; and Technical Corrections to CAIR and Acid Rain Program RulesProposed RuleE7-753625/04/2007ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyIn 2005, EPA finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to address emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) and the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) to establish standards of performance for mercury (Hg) for coal- … "In 2005, EPA finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to address emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) and the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) to establish standards of performance for mercury (Hg) for coal-fired electric utility steam generating units. Both CAIR and CAMR include model cap-and-trade rules that states may adopt to meet the applicable requirements. In 2006, EPA finalized the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for CAIR and also proposed a Federal Plan for CAMR. All four rules include an exemption for certain cogeneration units. To qualify for this exemption, a unit must, among other things, meet an efficiency standard included in the cogeneration unit definition. Today, in light of information concerning existing biomass-fired cogeneration units that may not qualify for the exemption, EPA is proposing a change in the cogeneration unit definition in CAIR, the CAIR model cap-and-trade rules, the CAIR FIP, CAMR, and the CAMR model cap-and-trade rule, and the proposed CAMR Federal Plan. Specifically, EPA is proposing to revise the efficiency standard in the cogeneration unit definition so that the standard would apply, with regard to certain units, only to the fossil fuel portion of a unit's energy input. This change to the CAIR model cap-and-trade rules, CAIR FIP, CAMR, and proposed CAMR Federal Plan would likely make it possible for some additional units to qualify for the cogeneration unit exemption in these rules. Because it would only affect a small number of relatively low emitting units, this would have little effect on the projected emissions reductions and the environmental benefits of these rules. EPA is also considering revisions to the definition of ``total energy input,'' a term used in the efficiency standard. This action also proposes minor technical corrections to CAIR and the Acid Rain Program rules. Finally, this action proposes minor revisions to National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters (``boiler MACT'').https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2007/04/25/E7-7536/revisions-to-definition-of-cogeneration-unit-in-clean-air-interstate-rule-cair-cair-federalE7-7536
Revisions of Standards of Performance for New and Existing Stationary Sources; Electric Utility Steam Generating Units; Federal Plan Requirements for Clean Air Mercury Rule; and Revisions of Acid Rain Program RulesProposed RuleE6-2157322/12/2006ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyIn this action, EPA proposes a Federal Plan to implement Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111 mercury (Hg) standards of performance for new and existing coal-fired electric utility steam generating units (Utility Unit or EGU) located in States or Indian … "In this action, EPA proposes a Federal Plan to implement Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111 mercury (Hg) standards of performance for new and existing coal-fired electric utility steam generating units (Utility Unit or EGU) located in States or Indian Country covered by the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) which do not have EPA approved and currently effective State plans. The EPA will not take final action on the proposed Federal Plan until EPA either finds that a State has failed to timely submit a plan or disapproves a submitted plan. Any final Federal Plan is expected to serve primarily to temporarily fill a regulatory gap in circumstances where either a State fails to timely submit a plan or EPA disapproves a submitted plan as, in either case, States will be free to submit an approvable plan after promulgation of the Federal Plan and upon approval of the State Plan by EPA, the Federal Plan will no longer apply to coal-fired Utility Units covered by the State Plan. This action also proposes certain revisions to both the CAMR State Plan model cap-and-trade rule (in order to make it compatible with the Federal Plan cap-and-trade rule and to make technical corrections) and the Acid Rain Program regulations (in order to simplify the provision concerning alternate designated representatives and to make the administrative appeals process applicable to the decisions of the Administrator under the State Plan and Federal Plan cap-and-trade rules).https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2006/12/22/E6-21573/revisions-of-standards-of-performance-for-new-and-existing-stationary-sources-electric-utility-steamE6-21573
Revisions to the Continuous Emissions Monitoring Rule for the Acid Rain Program, NOXProposed Rule06-681922/08/2006ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYEnvironmental Protection AgencyEPA is proposing rule revisions that would modify existing requirements for sources affected by the federally administered emission trading programs including the NOX Budget Trading Program, the Acid Rain Program, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, … "EPA is proposing rule revisions that would modify existing requirements for sources affected by the federally administered emission trading programs including the NOX Budget Trading Program, the Acid Rain Program, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, and the Clean Air Mercury Rule. The proposed revisions are prompted primarily by changes being implemented by EPA's Clean Air Markets Division in its data systems in order to utilize the latest modern technology for the submittal of data by affected sources. Other revisions address issues that have been raised during program implementation, fix specific inconsistencies in rule provisions, or update sources incorporated by reference. These revisions would not impose significant new requirements upon sources with regard to monitoring or quality assurance activities.https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2006/08/22/06-6819/revisions-to-the-continuous-emissions-monitoring-rule-for-the-acid-rain-program-nox06-6819
[xt_go_advt_2]
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *