Transcript IDEM Update & Air Quality Overview NIRPC EMPC January 4, 2007 Thomas W.

IDEM Update & Air Quality Overview
NIRPC EMPC
January 4, 2007
Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., DEE, QEP
Commissioner
IN Department of Environmental Management
New State Laws impacting IDEM
from the 2006 Legislative Session
HB1110—Removal of Mercury Convenience
Switches from End of Life Motor Vehicles.
SB 234—Improving the rulemaking process
for wet weather discharges and authorizing
the Environmental Stewardship Program.
HB1117—Simplifying the solid waste statutes
and eliminating the groundwater task force.
SB 146—Removing the Property Transfer
Disclosure Form from Statute.
IDEM’s Environmental Goal
Increase the personal income of all Hoosiers
from the current $0.88/$1.00 of the national
average to at least $1.00/$1.00 of the national
average while maintaining and improving
Indiana’s Environmental Quality.
Pilot 2006 Environmental
Performance Index
Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy
Yale University
Center for International Earth Science Information
Network (CIESIN)
Columbia University
http://www.yale.edu/epi/
How Will IDEM Help Increase
Personal Income?
Clear, consistent and speedy decisions
Clear regulations
 Assistance first, enforcement second
 Timely resolution of enforcement actions
 Every regulated entity will have current valid
permits without unnecessary requirements
 Written Standard Operating Procedures
 Improved staff training and development

How Does IDEM Protect the
Environment?
Measure the air, water and land to determine the
existing state of the environment
Compare the measured values to levels that protect
human health and the environment



Ambient Air Quality Standards
Water Quality Standards
Safe soil and ground water clean up levels
Use modeling to determine how much of a
substance can be added to the environment
How Does IDEM Protect the
Environment?
Develop regulations and issue permits to
restrict discharges to the environment to safe
levels
Inspect and monitor permitted facilities to
ensure compliance with the permits
Enforce against people who exceed their
permit levels or violate regulations
Educate people on their environmental
responsibilities
IDEM Makes Environmental
Decisions, Not Land Use Decisions
When an entity applies for an IDEM permit, the
decision to approve or deny the permit is based
upon the question: “Does this project meet the
requirements designed to protect the
environment?”
This is different than deciding:
Is this the best use of this land? or
 Is this the best location for this project?

In Indiana, these are local land use decisions,
not State decisions
Types of Facilities IDEM Regulates
Livestock farms (CFO & CAFO)
Manufacturing facilities
Solid waste management facilities
including landfills and transfer stations
Sewage treatment plants
Dredging projects including disposal sites
Clean-up of contaminated property
Many projects are exempted from IDEM
review due to size, etc.
IDEM’s Decisions Often Impact
Land Use Decisions
IDEM regulates both public water supplies and
sewer districts—the provision of public water
and sewer service influences the future
potential use of certain land
IDEM regulates the preservation and mitigation
of wetlands which have land use impacts
IDEM permits major facilities that may impact
future land use decisions—e.g. Honda
IDEM’s Decisions Often Impact Land
Use Decisions
IDEM will permit “Locally Undesirable Land
Uses” if they meet the regulations required
to protect the environment
IDEM requires certain solid waste
management facilities to have proper local
land use approval prior to permitting
Removing obstacles to new development
(like air non-attainment designations)
impacts local development
IDEM’s Decisions Often Impact
Land Use Decisions
IDEM’s permits require that the applicant
also comply with all local requirements,
including land use restrictions—applicants
sometimes use IDEM’s permit to apply
leverage in obtaining local approval
IDEM does not consider:
Compatibility with adjacent land uses
 Potential impacts on property values
 Esthetic issues

Local Land Use Decisions Impact
IDEM’s Responsibilities
Land use patterns impact:

Transportation related air emissions from
Commuting
 Commercial activities

Quantity and quality of water runoff from
impervious and developed areas
 Generation of waste that must be properly
managed
 Public acceptance of or opposition to new
commercial facilities

Local Land Use Decisions Impact
IDEM’s Responsibilities
IDEM’s programs to address previously
contaminated properties impact future
development of the site:
Voluntary Remediation Program—covenant
not to sue
 Comfort Letters
 RCRA Corrective Action
 Superfund (CERCLA)
 State clean-up program

Performance Metrics
Quality of Hoosiers' Environment
Result
% of Hoosiers that live in counties that meet air quality standards
% of CSO Communities with approved programs to prevent the
release of untreated sewage
Target
Comments
81%
100%
80%
4 counties @ 1,178,770 of
6,271,973 failed
50%
100%
20%
75% by 2007 is goal
Permitting Efficiency
Total calendar days accumulated in issuing environmental permits, as determined by state statute
Land
93,916
37,430
86,864
208 permits
Air
337,792
207,731
385,000
699 permits
109,016
44,550
200,000
Water
82 permits
* Places emphasis on back logged permits
Compliance
Total percentage of compliance observations from regulated customers within acceptable compliance standards
Inspections
93.20%
97%
75%
Self reporting
95.55%
99%
95%
Continuous monitoring (COM)
99.91%
99.90%
98.95%
* Tracks observations and not just inspections
Organizational Transformation
Budgetary agency dollars spent on key outside contracts for core agency functions.
Dollars spent on outside services per year
$3,179,367
$0
$3,447,017
Will require increase in
head count to accomplish
Counties above AQ Standards
January 10, 2005











Allen--Ozone
Boone--Ozone
Clark—PM & Ozone
Dubois--PM
Elkhart--Ozone
Hamilton--Ozone
Hancock--Ozone
Madison--Ozone
Marion—PM & Ozone
Shelby--Ozone
St. Joseph--Ozone
October 1, 2006




Clark--PM
Dubois--PM
Marion--PM
Vanderburgh--PM
Ozone Attainment Status
PM2.5 Attainment Status
PM 2.5 Status
New 24 hour standard issued in
September—Annual standard retained
Designations will initially be based upon
2004-2006 air quality, but the process will
allow the use of data up to 2009
New nonattainment designations April 2010,
SIPS due 2013
SIPS for current nonattainment areas due
April, 2008—we may try redesignations
Daily Design Value
Proposed NAAQS Value = 35 ug/m3
V i go Dev aney Sc hool
Uni v of E v ans v i l l e
V andebur gh Ci v i c Cent er
T i ppec anoe 3401 Gr eenbus h St
Spenc er Dal e
St . J oes eph A ngel a & E ddy
Ogden Dunes
M ar i on E . M i c hi gan St .
M ar i on 7250 E . 75t h St
M ar i on E ngl i s h A v e
Site
M ann Road
LaP or t e
Hammond Rober t s dal e
Lak e Feder al B l dg
Lak e 650 M adi s on St
Gar y B ur r St .
E as t Chi c ago
K ok omo
New A l bany
J as per
J ef f er s onv i l l e
Cl ar k Spr i ng St
A l l en B eac on St
30
33
36
39
Design Value
42
45
Permitting
IDEM is still meeting
the statutory
deadlines for permit
issuance, as
reported in past
years
IDEM now tracks the
total calendar days
a permit is in house
and is applying a
deadline to permits
that traditionally do
not have a statutory
deadline; as a new
interpretation to the
intent of statutes
Total Permit Calendar Days
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
5
5
6
6
6
/200 /30/200 /31/2005 /31/200 /30/200 /30/200 /31/2006 GOAL
0
3
/
6
9
3
6
9
12
12
AL
INITI
Air
Water
Land
Air Permits for New Facilities
New Toyota Production at Lafayette
Subaru Facility
Louis Dreyfus Soy Biodiesel Plant—
Largest in the US
A dozen new Ethanol Production
Facilities with ten pending
Honda Greensburg NSR permit issued
in 94 days
Percent of Activities Meeting Regulations
100.00%
98.00%
96.00%
94.00%
92.00%
90.00%
88.00%
Inspections
5
5
6
6
6
006
200 30/200 1/2005 31/200 30/200 30/200
/
2
OAL Self Reporting
/
0
1
G
3
/
/
/
3
3
/
/
L
6/
9/
3
6
9
IA
12
12
INIT
Emission Monitoring
Office of Enforcement
2002-2006
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Referrals
887
607
467
547
591
Violation Letters
Notice of
Violations
Agreed Orders
Commissioner's
Orders
Dismissals
17
33
47
203
231
561
457
318
202
427
311
349
314
258
417
15
15
6
41
38
125
121
44
48
46
Major Regulatory Initiatives
Regulations to facilitate the proper
management of e-Scrap
Rulemaking to require the removal of
mercury convenience switches from
automobiles prior to crushing or shredding
Rulemaking to allow Performance Track
(Indiana Environmental Stewardship
Program)—Will be accepting applications in
September
Major Regulatory Initiatives
Outdoor Wood Fueled Boilers—EQSC Report
recommended waiting to proceed until EPA
issues its model rule—now late January
Utility NOx, SO2 and Mercury emission rules:
CAIR, which regulates NOx and SO2, was adopted
by the Air Pollution Control Board in November.
 CAMR, regulating mercury, was due to EPA on
November 17, but Indiana does not have a Final
Rule because there has been no resolution of
issues between Utilities which favor the federal
program and the Hoosier Environmental Council
which favors a 90% reduction—Second Notice

Advantages of Outdoor Wood
Fueled Boilers
Reducing or eliminating heating bills
Improving indoor air quality
Reducing the incidence of asthma or allergies
Benefiting the environment by reducing the
greenhouse emissions
Increasing safety of heating by removing the
heating unit from the building
Requiring less time to operate than other wood
burning devices
Reducing dependence on fossil fuels
Environmental Concerns With
Outdoor Wood Fueled Boilers
High air pollution emissions per unit of fuel due to
incomplete combustion because of:
 Starved air operation to extend the time before
refueling (not enough oxygen)
 Cool temperatures due to water wall design and
need to avoid dangerous high temperature steam
Higher exposure of people to concentrated
emissions (smoke) due to low stack heights
Emissions all year for water, hot tub and pool
heating, rather than just the heating season
1
OW
B1
0
NE
SC
AU
M
OW
B9
OW
B8
OW
B7
OW
B6
OW
B5
OW
B4
OW
B3
OW
B2
ur n
ace
O il
Fur
nac
e
Pel
let
S to
ve
EP
AC
ert
ifi. .
Pr e
199
0W
o..
NY
SA
GO
WB
OW
B
Ga
sF
Estimated PM Emissions (grams per hour)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Why is IDEM Concerned About
Incomplete Combustion?
The goal of complete combustion is to convert
every constituent to its oxidized state—typically to
carbon dioxide and water
Incomplete combustion generates:
 Carbon Monoxide—colorless, odorless, often
deadly
 Complex organics that are often carcinogens
including benzene, dioxins, furans
Why is IDEM Concerned About OWB
Particulate Matter Emissions?
PM2.5 monitoring indicates that Marion, Dubois, Clark
and Vanderburgh Counties exceed the current annual
PM2.5 Air Quality Standard.
PM2.5 monitoring indicates that these counties plus
Allen, Lake, Tippecanoe and Vigo Counties currently
exceed the new 24-hour PM2.5 Air Quality Standard.
Modeling and measurements indicate that people
living within a few hundred feet of an OWB are
exposed to air above the new 24-hour PM2.5 Air
Quality Standard.
Regulation of Outdoor Wood Fueled Boilers
Outdoor wood fueled Boilers are not currently regulated by
U.S. EPA:





On August 11, 2005 seven states (Connecticut, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Vermont)
petitioned EPA to regulate OWBs
EPA plans to release a “model state rule” and a “voluntary labeling
program” for OWBs in January 2007
The “voluntary labeling program” is expected to be implemented in
April 2007 and will give EPA recognition to OWBs meeting 0.6
lbs/mmbtu—this is about a 50% reduction
The “model state rule” would require units to meet 0.44 lbs/mmbtu
by 2008 and some lower value in 2010
The “model state rule” may also address stack height and
distance to neighboring residences
Regulation of Outdoor Wood
Fueled Boilers
Local ordinances have been adopted in some areas
of Indiana to ban new units:





Batesville
Evansville
Indianapolis (Marion County)
Loogootee
Petersburg
Many other local governments are considering
banning new units
Regulation of Outdoor Wood
Fueled Boilers
Some States have adopted their own
regulations focusing on stack heights and
distances to the nearest neighbor
These States report that these regulations
have not satisfactorily addressed the air
quality issues from these units in their
States
Status of IDEM’s Outdoor Wood
Fueled Boiler Rulemaking
First Notice of Rulemaking Published in the
Indiana Register December 15, 2005
Comment period closed March 3, 2006

1,600 Comments with 3,300 signatures opposing
Wood Smoke is no more harmful than other emissions
 Regulating OWBs will result in regulation of other forms of
wood burning
 The new rulemaking is for the benefit of gas companies
 Regulation of wood burning will cause economic hardship
for people unable to afford other heat

Rulemaking process was suspended until IDEM
made a presentation to the EQSC
Some Options for Consideration
Rules or Regulations:
 Define and limit smoke opacity.
 Define minimum stack height.
 Define performance specifications.
 Define and require dried wood fuel.
 Restrict use up to a certain distance from a neighbor’s house.
 Phase out the use of wood furnaces.
 Ban sale of outdoor wood furnaces completely.
 Consider a “grandfather clause” for existing units
 Wait for possible federal regulation
Outreach:
• Create an education/outreach campaign to promote regulation
at the local level.
Recommendation to EQSC
IDEM proceed with regulations focused on
keeping the problem from getting worse

Focus on ensuring that any new units are “clean”
and adequately spaced from neighbors
IDEM explore options to deal with problems
caused by some existing OWBs
These options would not require the forced
removal of existing units without compensation
 The options may require clean dry wood and
adequate stack heights

Major Regulatory Initiatives
Rulemaking to establish presumptive 8-1-6 VOC
BACT controls to streamline permitting:



Acid Scrubbers for foundry core making amines—
Withdrawn at Request of INCMA
Compliance with certain NESHAPs--Continuing
Ethanol Plant BACT—Final Adoption 12/6/2006
Possible statewide regulations on the formulation of
consumer products (i.e. air fresheners, deodorants,
etc.) and paint products to ensure continued
compliance with the Ozone standard and reduce our
impact on neighboring States—First Notice Soon
Adjustments to the Title V fees to fully fund the
program—Air Board Adoption 12/6/2006
IDEM Fees & Fund Balances
Title V Example
Significant Communication Challenge:
Auditor reports the “check book balance” for each
fund on June 30
 IDEM collects almost all of its Title V fees in the
2nd Quarter of each year.
 IDEM’s June 30 fee balance is similar to a
person’s check book balance right after
depositing their paycheck
 IDEM must pay all of its bills until the next pay
day (next June 30) without overdrawing

IDEM Fees & Fund Balances
Title V Example
For the last five years (FY 02-FY 06), Title V
fund expenditures have exceed revenues by
$5,771,277, yet the June 30, 2006 check
book balance was $10,039,779 which many
people believe is a healthy fund balance.
This fund balance is insufficient to cover the
estimated $10,587,184 in expenditures up to
the date of receipt of new funds in the 2nd
Quarter of 2007.
IDEM Fees & Fund Balances
Title V Example
The “payday checkbook balance” minus the
expenditures before the next pay day gives
the “minimum cash in the check book” which
is projected to be negative by $547,405
during FY 06.
The actuarial fund balance (assets less
contracted liabilities) is much worse because
the fund has $6,131,187 in contractual
obligations and its projected lowest net worth
is actually a debt of $6,678,592.
05-06 Available Cash by Month
FY 2006
7-31-2005
Available Cash Balance
5,160,120
8-31-2005
5,106,237
9-30-2005
2,670,495
10-31-2005
391,762
11-30-2005
(1,197,329)
12-31-2005
(1,170,121)
1-31-2006
2-28-2006
(2,876,751)
889,278
3-31-2006
5,464,556
4-30-2006
5-31-2006
4,763,721
4,182,213
6-30-2006
3,767,774
Available Cash Balance
6,000,000
$5,464,556
$5,106,237
5,000,000
$5,160,120
$4,763,721
4,000,000
$4,182,213
3,000,000
2,000,000
$2,670,495
1,000,000
$889,278
$391,762
0
(1,000,000)
(2,000,000)
(3,000,000)
(4,000,000)
($1,170,121)
($1,197,329)
($2,876,751)
$3,767,774
Possible Issues for
2007 Legislation
Possible 2007 Legislative Issues
Budget
Federal Funds continuing to decrease
 State General Funds fluctuate
 Dedicated Funds: Except for Title V, fees
collected for do not relate to program costs—
some programs like Methamphetamine Clean-up
and Mercury Switch Management completely
unfunded (Recently adjusted Title V fees)

Consider Prohibiting the Commissioner from
renewing a permit for a facility that was not
constructed or has not operated for the past 5
years
Environmental Crimes Task Force
Environmental Crimes Task Force
Created by SEA 195 (2005) has been
meeting since October, 2005.
Chaired by Senator Kenley then Rep
Walorski
Developing more specific environmental
criminal statutes.
Plan to develop legislation for
consideration in the 2007 session.
Possible 2007 Legislative Issues
Streamlined Rulemaking when adopting
Federal Requirements (including deadlines)
without change
Ask the 2007 EQSC to study Environmental
Rulemaking Process
Current Roles of Environmental Districts
Regional Water and Sewer Districts
 Solid Waste Management Districts

Questions?
Tom Easterly
100 N. Senate Ave. IGCN 1301
Indianapolis, IN 46204
(317) 232-8611
Fax (317) 233-6647
[email protected]