EPA to Review Technical Information on Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for New Power Plants

Press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEJuly 20, 2012
EPA to Review Technical Information on Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for New Power Plants
Routine review has no impact on cost or vital health benefits of first national standards for mercury pollution

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reviewing technical information that is focused on pollution limits for new power plants under the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, based on new information provided by industry stakeholders after the rule was finalized. This review, which is not an uncommon step for major standards, will have no impact on the sensible, achievable, and cost-effective standards already set for existing power plants, which will protect millions of families and, especially, children from air pollution. By moving quickly to review the new information, this action will provide greater certainty for five planned future facilities, in Georgia, Kansas, Texas, and Utah, that would be covered by the standards. This review will not change the expected costs or public health benefits of the rule.

EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, which take advantage of existing flexibilities, are the first national standards to protect American families from power plant emissions of mercury and toxic air pollution like arsenic, acid gas, nickel, selenium, and cyanide. By ensuring that existing power plants install widely available pollution control equipment, the standards will prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year. The standards will also help America’s children grow up healthier-- preventing 130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 6,300 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children each year.

EPA will review monitoring issues related to the mercury standards for new power plants and will address other technical issues on the acid gas and particle pollution standards for these plants. The agency’s review will not change the types of state-of-the-art pollution controls new power plants are expected to use to reduce this harmful pollution.

This type of review, known as a “reconsideration,” is a routine tool that EPA often uses to ensure that its standards incorporate all relevant information, in cases where information only becomes available after a rule is promulgated. The agency’s decision to reconsider the standards for new sources reflects its ongoing commitment to work with industry and other stakeholders to ensure that all of EPA’s standards protect public health while being achievable and cost-effective. The agency will follow an expedited, open and transparent process that includes public comment on any proposed changes. The agency will complete the rulemaking by March 2013 and will also use its Clean Air Act authority to stay the final standards for new power plants for three months during this review.

More information: http://epa.gov/mats/actions.html

R126

Portland chemical manufacturer failed to publicly disclose data on chemical use

Portland chemical manufacturer failed to publicly disclose data on chemical use

Contact: Hanady Kader, EPA Public Affairs, 206-553-0454, kader.hanady@epa.gov; Graham Kirn, EPA Toxics Release Inventory Program, 206-553-1603, kirn.graham@epa.gov

(Seattle—May 3, 2012) Kanto Corporation, a Portland, Oregon chemical manufacturer, failed to report the use of toxic chemicals at its facility in violation of community right-to-know laws, according to a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The company has agreed to correct violations of the federal Toxics Release Inventory Program and pay a fine.

“Companies that use toxic chemicals are required to report usage, releases, treatment and other activities so communities know what’s in their neighborhoods,” said Kelly Huynh, Manager of the Inspection and Enforcement Management Unit in EPA’s Seattle office. “We use this information to ensure the public has accurate and up-to-date information about chemicals across the country.”

Kanto Corporation is a chemical manufacturing company whose products are primarily used in the manufacture of semiconductors.

EPA found that the company used over 25,000 pounds each of ammonia, hydrogen fluoride and nitric acid in 2009 and failed to report information on its use of those chemicals. These toxic chemicals can affect the eyes, skin and respiratory system.

Under the terms of the settlement, the company has resolved the violations and will pay a penalty of $58,200.

Under the federal Toxics Release Inventory Program, companies that use certain toxic chemicals are required to report annually about releases, transfers and waste management activities involving toxic chemicals at their facilities.

The Toxics Release Inventory Program falls under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, which aims to inform communities and citizens of chemical hazards in their neighborhoods.

For more information on the Toxics Release Inventory Program, visit:

http://www.epa.gov/tri/

Jerome dairy processing facility failed to publicly disclose chemical use and disposal

Jerome dairy processing facility failed to publicly disclose chemical use and disposal

Contacts: Hanady Kader, EPA Public Affairs, 206-553-0454, kader.hanady@epa.gov

Graham Kirn, EPA Toxics Release Inventory Program, 206-553-1603, kirn.graham@epa.gov

(Seattle—April 26, 2012) Idaho Milk Products, Inc., a dairy processing facility in Jerome, Idaho, failed to publicly report the use and disposal of several hundred thousand pounds of toxic chemicals in violation of community right-to-know laws, according to a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The company has corrected the violations of the Toxics Release Inventory Program and will pay a fine.

“Communities have a right to know what chemicals companies are using and potentially releasing into the environment,” said Kelly Huynh, manager of the TRI program at EPA in Seattle. “Accurate and timely numbers from companies are the foundation of these rules so citizens have access to the most current information.”

Idaho Milk Products processes tens of millions of pounds of milk annually at its facility in Jerome.

The facility used several hundred thousand pounds of nitric acid as a cleaning agent in 2009. When treated, nitric acid produces nitrate compounds, which the company released to the local wastewater treatment plant. Idaho Milk Products is required under the Toxics Release Inventory to report toxic chemical releases. According to EPA, the company failed to report the treatment and disposal of nitric acid and nitrate compounds in 2009.

Nitric acid can harm the eyes, skin, respiratory system and teeth.

The company has submitted the required reports to EPA and the State of Idaho to resolve the violations and agreed to pay a penalty of $52,100.

Under the federal Toxics Release Inventory Program, companies that use certain toxic chemicals are required to report annually about releases, transfers and waste management activities involving toxic chemicals at their facilities. The Toxics Release Inventory Program falls under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, which aims to inform communities and citizens of chemical hazards in their neighborhoods.

Idaho Haz Waste Disposal Site Failed to Disclose Releases

Idaho hazardous waste disposal site failed to disclose chemical releases

Contacts: Hanady Kader, EPA Public Affairs, (206) 553-0454, kader.hanady@epa.gov
Graham Kirn, EPA Toxics Release Inventory Program, (206) 553-1603, kirn.graham@epa.gov

(Seattle—March 22, 2012) US Ecology Idaho, Inc., a hazardous waste disposal site in Grand View, Idaho, failed to report the on-site disposal of thousands of pounds of chemicals at its facility, according to a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The company has corrected the violations of the Toxics Release Inventory Program and will pay a fine.

 “Companies that handle toxic chemicals have a responsibility to be transparent about what they use and release into the environment,” said Kelly Huynh, manager of the Inspection and Enforcement Management Unit at EPA in Seattle. “Accurate, timely numbers from companies are critical for communities to have up-to-date information on chemical releases in their states.”

US Ecology Idaho, Inc. failed to report the on-site disposal of 20 chemicals and chemical categories during 2009.

As part of its hazardous waste disposal operations, the company disposed of more than 10,000 pounds each of aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper and copper compounds, diethanolamine, ethylene glycol, manganese, methyl isobutyl ketone, nickel, nitric acid, selenium, silver, thallium and zinc.

In addition, the company disposed of more than 100 pounds of lead and lead compounds and more than 10 pounds each of mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls.

Many of the chemicals disposed of at the facility have dangerous human health impacts and risks associated with them.

The company has submitted the required reports to the EPA and the State of Idaho to resolve the violations and agreed to pay a penalty of $184,400.

Under the federal Toxics Release Inventory Program, companies that use certain toxic chemicals are required to report annually about releases, transfers and waste management activities involving toxic chemicals at their facilities.

The Toxics Release Inventory Program falls under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, which aims to inform communities and citizens of chemical hazards in their neighborhoods.

For more information on the Toxics Release Inventory Program, visit: http://www.epa.gov/tri

Dry Sorbent Injection

From the Energy Information Agency:


March 16, 2012

Dry sorbent injection may serve as a key pollution control technology at power plants

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.

---

Dry sorbent injection (DSI) is a pollution control technology that may play a role in the United States' electric power sector's compliance with the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized the MATS rule in December 2011. The MATS rule requires that all U.S. coal- and oil-fired power plants greater than 25 megawatts meet emission limits consistent with the average performance of the top 12% of existing units —known as the maximum achievable control technology (MACT). The rule applies to three pollutants: mercury (Hg), hydrochloric acid (HCl), and filterable particulate matter (fPM) and has a compliance deadline in 2015 (with opportunities for additional compliance time depending upon case-by-case circumstances). While DSI systems do not control for mercury, they can, when combined with a particulate control filter, meet this standard for two of the three controlled pollutants.
DSI systems remove hydrogen chloride (HCl) and other acid gases through two basic steps.

• Step one. A powdered sorbent is injected into the flue gas—combustion exhaust gas exiting a power plant—where it reacts with the HCl. The sorbents most commonly associated with DSI are trona (sodium sesquicarbonate, a naturally occurring mineral mined in Wyoming), sodium bicarbonate, and hydrated lime.
• Step two. The compound is removed by a downstream particulate matter control device such as an electrostatic precipitator (ESP) or a fabric filter (FF), also referred to as a baghouse. Fabric filters are generally more effective (when combined with DSI) than ESPs, with respect to overall HCl reduction. For modeling purposes, EPA estimates a DSI system with a fabric filter is expected to achieve 90% removal of HCl, while an ESP only achieves 60% removal, although actual performance will vary by individual plant.

DSI and flue gas desulfurization (FGD) scrubbers (both wet and dry scrubbers) are the technologies that will allow plants to meet the MATS for HCl and other acid gases. As of 2010, 54% of U.S. electric generating capacity already have FGDs installed. A number of the remaining, uncontrolled plants will need to determine the effectiveness of installing an FGD scrubber or a DSI system to comply with MATS. Economic and engineering tradeoffs exist between the two technologies. FGD systems are large capital projects that require a significant upfront investment, but have relatively lower operating costs. DSI systems generally do not require significant capital expenses, but may rely on significant quantities of sorbent to operate effectively, which increases the operating costs. Waste disposal for DSI may also be a significant variable cost, while the waste products from an FGD system can be sold as feedstock for industrial processes. In addition, DSI's potential effectiveness is limited to certain types of plants. Because of the amount of sorbent needed, DSI will likely be implemented most often at plants that are 300 megawatts or less and burn low-sulfur coal.

DSI systems can also significantly reduce sulfur dioxide (SO₂) emissions through the same process as HCl removal. While the MATS rule does not specifically address SO₂, it has similar qualities to HCl and other acid gases that enable it to respond similarly in a DSI system. SO₂ is also regulated under the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). Therefore, installing a DSI or FGD system to comply with MATS may also help plants meet or even exceed their CSAPR emission limits.

While compliance with the MATS rule was not assumed in the Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (AEO2012) Early Release, it will be assumed in the AEO2012 full Reference case (to be released in Spring 2012), and DSI will be included as a compliance option for coal power plants.

EPA Announces TSCA Work Plan Chemicals - Lynn Bergeson - Pollution Engineering

EPA Announces TSCA Work Plan Chemicals - Lynn Bergeson - Pollution Engineering