Smog is "exacting a much greater toll than previously known" on developing fetuses, according to a new study by researchers at the University of California-Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Times reports. The study, which was published in the December 28, 2001 issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology, for the first time links air pollution with birth defects in Southern California, the Times reports.
UCLA researchers examined "thousands of pregnant women" living in the Los Angeles area between 1987
and 1993 and compared pregnancy outcomes for women living in areas with "relatively dirty air" to women living in areas with "cleaner" air. Researchers determined that pregnant women who were exposed to high levels of ozone and carbon monoxide were three times more likely than other women to give birth to babies with cleft lips, cleft palates and defective heart valves. The greatest risk to fetuses occurred during the second month of pregnancy, when the fetus develops most of its major organs and much of its facial structure, the study found.
More Research, Reaction........
More than 12 other studies in the United States, Brazil, Europe, Mexico, South Korea and Taiwan have established links between air pollutants and low birthweight, premature birth, stillbirth and infant death, the Times reports. For instance, a team of U.S. and Swedish researchers reported earlier this year that pregnant women in several U.S. cities who were exposed to elevated carbon monoxide levels during their third trimester were 31% more likely than other women to give birth to underweight babies.
Another study by UCLA researchers published last year found that pregnant women exposed to elevated levels of microscopic particles during the final six weeks of pregnancy were 20% more likely to deliver a baby prematurely than women whose pollutant exposure levels were lower. In addition, a 1998 study by Brazilian researchers found that pregnant women exposed to high levels of nitrogen and sulfur oxides were 18% more likely than other women to have their pregnancies end in stillbirth. Researchers in that study also found evidence of carbon monoxide in the umbilical cords of nonsmokers, suggesting that air pollutants can reach fetuses through the umbilical cord. Carbon monoxide can cut off oxygen to a fetus, resulting in death, the Times reports.
Dana Loomis, a University of North Carolina epidemiologist and co-author of a study on pollution and pregnancy, said, "There really is evidence that levels of air pollution encountered in large cities worldwide may be hazardous to the fetus. This is something that has not been recognized before. It was always assumed the fetus was isolated in the womb from things in the environment." Tracey Woodruff, a senior scientist at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and an author of one of the studies, added, "The research is suggestive, but preliminary. It's something to be concerned about, but nothing to panic about. It's something we need to pay attention to."
EPA officials have said that before federal limits for ozone and microscopic particles can be strengthened to prevent harm to fetuses, additional research is necessary to determine what pollutants are harmful and at which stages of pregnancy they are most damaging to fetal development. In California, state officials are using the recent studies to back up a recommendation that the state Air Resources Board lower the statewide standard for airborne particle pollution by 33 percent (Polakovic, Los Angeles Times, 12/16).
Ahad, 30 September 2007
Jumaat, 28 September 2007
Sabah to boost Serasi scheme
By RUBEN SARIO
Newsdesk@thestar.com.my
KOTA KINABALU: The Sabah government is keen for all schools to become environmental-friendly places by adopting the Sekolah Rakan Alam Sekitar (Serasi) programme.
Tourism, Culture and Environment Minister Datuk Masidi Manjun said the programme would create more environmental awareness among students.
“We hope to meet with the State Education Director and discuss in which ways and means we can expand the programme and make it compulsory in all schools,” he said at SMK Datuk Peter Mojuntin in Penampang recently.
Resourceful: Benschop (left) and Masidi admiring paper lamps shaped from discarded newspapers – a project by students of SMK Datuk Peter Mojuntin in Kota Kinabalu recently.
Earlier, Masidi received an RM80,000 cheque from Shell Malaysia Gas and Power vice president Dick Benschop for the Serasi programme to run until next year.
The programme, aimed at spreading environmental awareness and protection among primary and secondary schools in Sabah, is now in its fifth year.
Serasi, an environmental education programme and an incentive scheme, is jointly organised by the state Environmental Protection Department, the Department of Environment, Forestry Department, Education Department, Science and Technology Unit, Shell Malaysia Gas and Power, the Environmental Action Committee and the Kota Kinabalu Wetland Centre.
Apart from the funding by Shell Malaysia Gas & Power, the remaining cost of RM70,000 will be funded by the Environment Protection Department, Department of Environment and the Science and Technology Unit.
Sabah Education Department will fund the transportation and lodging costs of headmasters, principals and district education officers to attend Serasi workshops and roadshows throughout the state
Display: Students showing recyled products to Masidi (right) and Benschop.
Likewise, Sabah Forestry Department is bearing the total cost of its staff visiting more than 200 schools in the Second Level Evaluation.
Other Serasi organisers such as the Environmental Action Committee and Kota Kinabalu Wetland Centre are actively assisting the implementation of Serasi in kind and expertise.
Benschop said that Shell was proud to support Serasi as it involved the promotion of environmental education in schools.
“We are very happy to see how the programme has grown over the last four years and the impact is has made on students,” said Benschop.
Shell planned to use the programme to educate teachers and students on issues such as climate change, he said.
Bush: Climate change progress must be measurable
By Jeff Mason and Deborah Zabarenko
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush on Friday called for a "strong and transparent" way for nations to measure progress on fighting climate change but said each country should set its own approach.
In a speech to a U.S.-sponsored conference of major emitting countries, Bush also called for the creation of a global fund to promote clean technology that would be led by U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
U.S. President George W. Bush speaks before he signs legislation expanding Pell Grants to help make college affordable for students, H.R. 2669, The College Cost Reduction and Access Act, while in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, September 27, 2007. (REUTERS/Larry Downing)
A long-term goal for reducing global warming was needed, Bush said, but added "each nation will design its own separate strategies for making progress toward achieving this."
Bush, who has been under pressure from the world's major economies to accept binding limits on emissions of greenhouse gases, continued to emphasize voluntary approaches to tackling climate change as he kicked off the closing day of the conference.
Bush called the meeting as a precursor to United Nations talks in Bali in December, which will aim to launch a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that set limits on industrial nations' emissions.
Environmentalists said the conference had produced nothing new and was an attempt to circumvent U.N. efforts on climate change, a charge Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice denied.
German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel said the fact that Bush was speaking showed the White House would not return to its previous skepticism about the seriousness of the issue.
"This is a big step," he told reporters. "The more you have official discussions about climate change ... the more difficult it is to go backwards."
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush on Friday called for a "strong and transparent" way for nations to measure progress on fighting climate change but said each country should set its own approach.
In a speech to a U.S.-sponsored conference of major emitting countries, Bush also called for the creation of a global fund to promote clean technology that would be led by U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
U.S. President George W. Bush speaks before he signs legislation expanding Pell Grants to help make college affordable for students, H.R. 2669, The College Cost Reduction and Access Act, while in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, September 27, 2007. (REUTERS/Larry Downing)
A long-term goal for reducing global warming was needed, Bush said, but added "each nation will design its own separate strategies for making progress toward achieving this."
Bush, who has been under pressure from the world's major economies to accept binding limits on emissions of greenhouse gases, continued to emphasize voluntary approaches to tackling climate change as he kicked off the closing day of the conference.
Bush called the meeting as a precursor to United Nations talks in Bali in December, which will aim to launch a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that set limits on industrial nations' emissions.
Environmentalists said the conference had produced nothing new and was an attempt to circumvent U.N. efforts on climate change, a charge Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice denied.
German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel said the fact that Bush was speaking showed the White House would not return to its previous skepticism about the seriousness of the issue.
"This is a big step," he told reporters. "The more you have official discussions about climate change ... the more difficult it is to go backwards."
Tobacco smoke a major cause for air pollution
Special Correspondent
A study shows that air pollution from vehicle emission has reduced while the contribution from tobacco smoke has gone up to 8 p.c.
Bangalore: Smokers may be harming more than their own health. A recent study conducted in the city shows tobacco smoke may be contributing up to 7.9 per cent to atmospheric pollution. It was about 6 per cent a decade ago, the study says.
The study was conducted by H. Paramesh, a Director of Lakeside Medical Centre and Chairman, Technical Advisory Committee of Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB). The study, which used data compiled over the past few years, showed that though the number of vehicles in the city has steadily increased, air pollution from vehicular emissions has actually come down.
Though still above safe levels, air pollution from vehicle exhausts has come down because of measures such as banning heavy vehicles from the central business district and introduction of one-ways. Stringent emission checks on vehicles may have also contributed to this factor along with reduced emission levels made mandatory for new models of cars. Many new models even better these levels.
According to the KSPCB, concentration of sulphur dioxide in the air has come down to one fourth of the level prevailing in 1999, which should be considered significant. The amount of "respirable suspended particles" and "total suspended particles" in the air have also come down by 15 per cent to 22 per cent while only the percentage of oxides of nitrogen has gone up from 31 units to 54 units.
Tobacco smoke has negated the efforts to make the air cleaner, according to the study. There were indications that the number of smokers had increased in the younger age group despite statutory warnings on cigarette packets and intensive anti-smoking campaigns. The effect can be serious in the case of unborn children of parents who may be smokers or pregnant women regularly exposed to tobacco smoke. Unlike vehicle emissions, which are outdoors, tobacco smoke may be regularly present indoors.
Air pollution has resulted in the increase of ailments related to respiratory infections such as bronchitis, lung diseases, acute respiratory distress syndrome and respiratory allergies, including attacks of severe asthma. Increased air pollution has also caused cases of "middle ear infections" leading to hearing impairment in various degrees. Statistics collated from city hospitals show that an increase in sudden infant deaths, occurring within a few hours of birth, may be related to air pollution.
The study shows that respiratory disease related to air pollution or tobacco smoke is relatively lower among the highest income groups who have become aware of the risks of smoking. It is higher among the lower income groups, partly because of the fact they use firewood or dried dung for cooking and their houses lack proper ventilation for the smoke to escape.
Printer friendly page
RADON
Should I test my home for radon?
Yes! Radon is a known human carcinogen and the second leading cause of lung cancer in the U.S. Since radon is a colorless and odorless gas, the only way to know for sure how much you and your family are exposed to in your home is to test. Testing for radon is easy and inexpensive.
How do I test for radon in my home?
It's easy. You can either do it yourself or hire a home measurement service. If you do it yourself, test kits can be purchased at retail outlets or directly from laboratories providing radon measurement services. Follow the instructions that come with your test kit. The test kit should be placed in the lowest lived-in space in your home (the basement if it is frequently occupied, otherwise the first floor). You should place the kit at least 20 inches above the floor and away from exterior walls. Indoor radon levels can be elevated by unusually high winds and storms so avoid testing during these periods. Be sure to send your radon kit to the lab specified on the package right away for the most accurate results. You should receive your test results in a few weeks. For a list of certified home measurement service providers, contact your State Radon Program or see the Region 10 website for a list of labs (link to PDF)
What do my radon test results mean?
Radon is measured in picocuries per liter of air (pCi/L). The average indoor radon level in homes across the country is about 1.3 pCi/L. The average outdoor radon level is about 0.4 pCi/L. Exposure to radon increases the risk of lung cancer incidence; the higher the concentration, the higher the risk. EPA recommends taking action against radon at levels of 4 pCi/L and higher.
What do I do if my radon test results are 4 pCi/L or higher?
Test again to confirm these results. EPA recommends that, if your initial short-term test results are 4 pCi/L or higher, you consider performing a second test to verify the results. The higher your initial short-term test results are, the more reason you have to choose a short-term follow-up test over a longer-term follow-up test. If your second round of test results are still at or above 4 pCi/L, EPA recommends taking action against radon.
How do I take action against radon in my home?
No. Radon comes from the natural decay of uranium in the soil. Even though the amount of radon in the soil might be similar throughout a neighborhood, the amount of radon that actually gets into your house may differ from the amount that gets into your neighbor's house. Radon enters your home through cracks, joints and pipe penetrations in the foundation and walls, exposed soil (like in a crawl space), water and building materials. Radon levels in your home are also affected by ventilation, pressure differences and temperature differences with the outside air. Since all houses are built a little differently, they can have very different indoor radon concentrations, despite similar soil concentrations. Nearly 1 in 15 homes in the U.S. is estimated to have elevated radon levels. Again, the only way to know for sure what the radon levels are in your home is to test.
Should I worry about radon in my water supply?
In comparison to radon that enters your house from the soil, radon that enters your house from water is, in most situations, a small source of risk. A general rule-of-thumb is every 10,000 pCi/L of radon in the water supply will cause an incremental increase of 1 pCi/L of radon in the indoor air. Radon in water can enter your home only through groundwater supplies that come directly from wells. Water treatment and storage at public water supplies typically result in very low radon concentrations entering the distribution system. Therefore, Region 8 recommends testing of all private well water supplies concurrent with an indoor air radon test. If your water supply comes from a private well, you can contact a certified testing lab to have your water tested for radon.
What is the BIER VI report by the National Academy of Sciences?
The NAS has prepared its latest analysis of health research on radon, the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR VI) Report. This is the most comprehensive review effort to
date. The Committee was charged with:
reviewing all current miner and residential data, as well as all existing cellular-biological data,
comparing the dose per unit exposure effects of radon in mines and homes,
examining interactions between radon exposure and smoking, and
Examining any exposure-rate effect (alteration of effect by intensity of exposure). The report confirms that radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the U.S. and that it is a serious public health problem. The study fully supports EPA estimates that radon causes about 15,000 lung cancer deaths per year. You can read a summary of the report at http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/beirvi.html
Yes! Radon is a known human carcinogen and the second leading cause of lung cancer in the U.S. Since radon is a colorless and odorless gas, the only way to know for sure how much you and your family are exposed to in your home is to test. Testing for radon is easy and inexpensive.
How do I test for radon in my home?
It's easy. You can either do it yourself or hire a home measurement service. If you do it yourself, test kits can be purchased at retail outlets or directly from laboratories providing radon measurement services. Follow the instructions that come with your test kit. The test kit should be placed in the lowest lived-in space in your home (the basement if it is frequently occupied, otherwise the first floor). You should place the kit at least 20 inches above the floor and away from exterior walls. Indoor radon levels can be elevated by unusually high winds and storms so avoid testing during these periods. Be sure to send your radon kit to the lab specified on the package right away for the most accurate results. You should receive your test results in a few weeks. For a list of certified home measurement service providers, contact your State Radon Program or see the Region 10 website for a list of labs (link to PDF)
What do my radon test results mean?
Radon is measured in picocuries per liter of air (pCi/L). The average indoor radon level in homes across the country is about 1.3 pCi/L. The average outdoor radon level is about 0.4 pCi/L. Exposure to radon increases the risk of lung cancer incidence; the higher the concentration, the higher the risk. EPA recommends taking action against radon at levels of 4 pCi/L and higher.
What do I do if my radon test results are 4 pCi/L or higher?
Test again to confirm these results. EPA recommends that, if your initial short-term test results are 4 pCi/L or higher, you consider performing a second test to verify the results. The higher your initial short-term test results are, the more reason you have to choose a short-term follow-up test over a longer-term follow-up test. If your second round of test results are still at or above 4 pCi/L, EPA recommends taking action against radon.
How do I take action against radon in my home?
No. Radon comes from the natural decay of uranium in the soil. Even though the amount of radon in the soil might be similar throughout a neighborhood, the amount of radon that actually gets into your house may differ from the amount that gets into your neighbor's house. Radon enters your home through cracks, joints and pipe penetrations in the foundation and walls, exposed soil (like in a crawl space), water and building materials. Radon levels in your home are also affected by ventilation, pressure differences and temperature differences with the outside air. Since all houses are built a little differently, they can have very different indoor radon concentrations, despite similar soil concentrations. Nearly 1 in 15 homes in the U.S. is estimated to have elevated radon levels. Again, the only way to know for sure what the radon levels are in your home is to test.
Should I worry about radon in my water supply?
In comparison to radon that enters your house from the soil, radon that enters your house from water is, in most situations, a small source of risk. A general rule-of-thumb is every 10,000 pCi/L of radon in the water supply will cause an incremental increase of 1 pCi/L of radon in the indoor air. Radon in water can enter your home only through groundwater supplies that come directly from wells. Water treatment and storage at public water supplies typically result in very low radon concentrations entering the distribution system. Therefore, Region 8 recommends testing of all private well water supplies concurrent with an indoor air radon test. If your water supply comes from a private well, you can contact a certified testing lab to have your water tested for radon.
What is the BIER VI report by the National Academy of Sciences?
The NAS has prepared its latest analysis of health research on radon, the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR VI) Report. This is the most comprehensive review effort to
date. The Committee was charged with:
reviewing all current miner and residential data, as well as all existing cellular-biological data,
comparing the dose per unit exposure effects of radon in mines and homes,
examining interactions between radon exposure and smoking, and
Examining any exposure-rate effect (alteration of effect by intensity of exposure). The report confirms that radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the U.S. and that it is a serious public health problem. The study fully supports EPA estimates that radon causes about 15,000 lung cancer deaths per year. You can read a summary of the report at http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/beirvi.html
Q&A that is frequently asked
NESHAP/MACT Part 61/Part 63
What are the National Emissions Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants?
The general provisions to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) in 40 CFR Parts 60 and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) in 40 CFR Parts 61 and 63, under the Clean Air Act, provide that a source owner or operator may request a determination of whether certain intended actions constitute the commencement of construction, reconstruction, or modification. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed applicability determinations.
The NSPS and NESHAP also allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or recordkeeping which is different from the promulgated requirements. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed alternative monitoring decisions.
Further, EPA responds to written inquiries about the broad range of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory requirements as they pertain to a specific source. These inquiries question whether a regulation applies to a specific source, or may relate to the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping or reporting requirements contained in the regulation as it applies to a specific source.
The EPA currently issues approximately 100 memoranda per year pertaining to NSPS and NESHAP applicability determinations and alternative monitoring decisions, and handles countless telephone and electronic mail requests from the regulated community and from State and Local Agencies implementing the NSPS and the NESHAP programs.
Who do I contact for more information about NESHAP in Region 10?
For Technical Information Contact Madonna Narvaez at (206) 553-2117. For delegation requests contact Lucita Valiere at (206) 553-8087
What is a MACT?
A maximum achievable control technology is the best available technology to abate a toxic pollutant from a given source. There are currently 35 MACT source categories regulated in the Pacific Northwest region. Sources of the same category report what works for them to economically achieve their NESHAP standards. A MACT is imposed when it is found to be the best economically achievable way to regulate a hazardous air pollutant.
Where can I find affected source lists for some of the newer MACTs that are coming out?
For all of the affected source lists that are available, they are posted on-line. Go to http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/eparules.htmlclick on the Tables of Completed or Tables of Proposed Regulations, and then click on the MACT in question to see if the affected source lists are available. For some of the newer MACTs, EPA is still working on collecting or cleaning up that information.
There is also a general document posted on-line, with instructions for locating affected sources. It's posted at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/gp/gppg.html#IMP. It was written in 1996, and is called, "Source Identification Procedures for Sources Subject to Regulations under Section 111(d) of the CAA as Amended in 1990.
Additional information on the upcoming MACTs is temporarily available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/112j/info/112(j)-table2.html
How do I get a listing of the sources subject to MACT in my area?
Follow this step by step approach to find MACT sources in any region:
1) go to http://www.epa.gov/idea/mact/ and select Alaska as a region.
2) use the default options and click 'submit'. This will take you to a large spreadsheet with the relevant Macts and how many facilities are in your state. Keep in mind however, that these numbers are grossly inflated. Some of the facilities are closed and the database is a bit out of date.
3) If you click on the 'view' button to the left of the spreadsheet a list of the facilities with names and addresses will pop up. Notice that many of the facilities are duplicates. I'm not quite sure the reason for this, but basically it means you should count the different OPEN facilities and not just rely on the number listed in the internet spreadsheet.
For Questions Contact
Madonna Narvaez
(206)553-2117
Where can I find information about the facilities subject to a MACT in my region?
1) go to http://www.epa.gov/idea/mact/ and select the state or region of choice.
2) use the default options and click 'submit'. This will take you to a large spreadsheet with the relevant Macts and how many facilities are in your state or region. Keep in mind however, that these numbers are somewhat inflated. Some of the facilities listed are non-operational.
3) If you click on the 'view' button to the left of the spreadsheet a list of the facilities with names and addresses will pop up. Notice that many of the facilities are duplicates. I'm not quite sure the reason for this, but basically it means you should count the different OPEN facilities and not just rely on the number listed in the internet spreadsheet. To view a detailed report about the facility, click on 'facility report'.
NSPS Part 60/Part62
What are New Source Performance Standards?
The general provisions to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) in 40 CFR Parts 60 and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) in 40 CFR Parts 61 and 63, under the Clean Air Act, provide that a source owner or operator may request a determination of whether certain intended actions constitute the commencement of construction, reconstruction, or modification. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed applicability determinations.
The NSPS and NESHAP also allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or recordkeeping which is different from the promulgated requirements. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed alternative monitoring decisions.
Further, EPA responds to written inquiries about the broad range of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory requirements as they pertain to a specific source. These inquiries question whether a regulation applies to a specific source, or may relate to the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping or reporting requirements contained in the regulation as it applies to a specific source.
The EPA currently issues approximately 100 memoranda per year pertaining to NSPS and NESHAP applicability determinations and alternative monitoring decisions, and handles countless telephone and electronic mail requests from the regulated community and from State and Local Agencies implementing the NSPS and the NESHAP programs.
Who do I contact for more information about NSPS in Region 10?
For Technical Information Contact Madonna Narvaez at (206) 553-2117. For delegation requests contact Lucita Valiere at (206) 553-8087.
Residual Risk/Risk Assessment
What is residual Risk for Air Toxics?
Section 112(f) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to complete a Report to Congress that includes a discussion of methods the EPA would use to evaluate the risks remaining after the application of maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards. These are known as residual risks. EPA published the Residual Risk Report to Congress in March 1999. The CAA also directs the EPA to conduct risk assessments on each source category subject to MACT standards, and to determine if additional standards are needed to reduce residual risks.
What are the National Emissions Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants?
The general provisions to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) in 40 CFR Parts 60 and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) in 40 CFR Parts 61 and 63, under the Clean Air Act, provide that a source owner or operator may request a determination of whether certain intended actions constitute the commencement of construction, reconstruction, or modification. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed applicability determinations.
The NSPS and NESHAP also allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or recordkeeping which is different from the promulgated requirements. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed alternative monitoring decisions.
Further, EPA responds to written inquiries about the broad range of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory requirements as they pertain to a specific source. These inquiries question whether a regulation applies to a specific source, or may relate to the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping or reporting requirements contained in the regulation as it applies to a specific source.
The EPA currently issues approximately 100 memoranda per year pertaining to NSPS and NESHAP applicability determinations and alternative monitoring decisions, and handles countless telephone and electronic mail requests from the regulated community and from State and Local Agencies implementing the NSPS and the NESHAP programs.
Who do I contact for more information about NESHAP in Region 10?
For Technical Information Contact Madonna Narvaez at (206) 553-2117. For delegation requests contact Lucita Valiere at (206) 553-8087
What is a MACT?
A maximum achievable control technology is the best available technology to abate a toxic pollutant from a given source. There are currently 35 MACT source categories regulated in the Pacific Northwest region. Sources of the same category report what works for them to economically achieve their NESHAP standards. A MACT is imposed when it is found to be the best economically achievable way to regulate a hazardous air pollutant.
Where can I find affected source lists for some of the newer MACTs that are coming out?
For all of the affected source lists that are available, they are posted on-line. Go to http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/eparules.htmlclick on the Tables of Completed or Tables of Proposed Regulations, and then click on the MACT in question to see if the affected source lists are available. For some of the newer MACTs, EPA is still working on collecting or cleaning up that information.
There is also a general document posted on-line, with instructions for locating affected sources. It's posted at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/gp/gppg.html#IMP. It was written in 1996, and is called, "Source Identification Procedures for Sources Subject to Regulations under Section 111(d) of the CAA as Amended in 1990.
Additional information on the upcoming MACTs is temporarily available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/112j/info/112(j)-table2.html
How do I get a listing of the sources subject to MACT in my area?
Follow this step by step approach to find MACT sources in any region:
1) go to http://www.epa.gov/idea/mact/ and select Alaska as a region.
2) use the default options and click 'submit'. This will take you to a large spreadsheet with the relevant Macts and how many facilities are in your state. Keep in mind however, that these numbers are grossly inflated. Some of the facilities are closed and the database is a bit out of date.
3) If you click on the 'view' button to the left of the spreadsheet a list of the facilities with names and addresses will pop up. Notice that many of the facilities are duplicates. I'm not quite sure the reason for this, but basically it means you should count the different OPEN facilities and not just rely on the number listed in the internet spreadsheet.
For Questions Contact
Madonna Narvaez
(206)553-2117
Where can I find information about the facilities subject to a MACT in my region?
1) go to http://www.epa.gov/idea/mact/ and select the state or region of choice.
2) use the default options and click 'submit'. This will take you to a large spreadsheet with the relevant Macts and how many facilities are in your state or region. Keep in mind however, that these numbers are somewhat inflated. Some of the facilities listed are non-operational.
3) If you click on the 'view' button to the left of the spreadsheet a list of the facilities with names and addresses will pop up. Notice that many of the facilities are duplicates. I'm not quite sure the reason for this, but basically it means you should count the different OPEN facilities and not just rely on the number listed in the internet spreadsheet. To view a detailed report about the facility, click on 'facility report'.
NSPS Part 60/Part62
What are New Source Performance Standards?
The general provisions to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) in 40 CFR Parts 60 and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) in 40 CFR Parts 61 and 63, under the Clean Air Act, provide that a source owner or operator may request a determination of whether certain intended actions constitute the commencement of construction, reconstruction, or modification. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed applicability determinations.
The NSPS and NESHAP also allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or recordkeeping which is different from the promulgated requirements. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed alternative monitoring decisions.
Further, EPA responds to written inquiries about the broad range of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory requirements as they pertain to a specific source. These inquiries question whether a regulation applies to a specific source, or may relate to the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping or reporting requirements contained in the regulation as it applies to a specific source.
The EPA currently issues approximately 100 memoranda per year pertaining to NSPS and NESHAP applicability determinations and alternative monitoring decisions, and handles countless telephone and electronic mail requests from the regulated community and from State and Local Agencies implementing the NSPS and the NESHAP programs.
Who do I contact for more information about NSPS in Region 10?
For Technical Information Contact Madonna Narvaez at (206) 553-2117. For delegation requests contact Lucita Valiere at (206) 553-8087.
Residual Risk/Risk Assessment
What is residual Risk for Air Toxics?
Section 112(f) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to complete a Report to Congress that includes a discussion of methods the EPA would use to evaluate the risks remaining after the application of maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards. These are known as residual risks. EPA published the Residual Risk Report to Congress in March 1999. The CAA also directs the EPA to conduct risk assessments on each source category subject to MACT standards, and to determine if additional standards are needed to reduce residual risks.
Rabu, 26 September 2007
Langgan:
Catatan (Atom)
