Overview
Title
Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: Revisions to Annual Emissions Reporting
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The EPA decided it's okay for some places in North Carolina to stop counting how much pollution they make each year since they are now cleaner, but they still need to keep counting if they have to follow newer rules from 2008.
Summary AI
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved changes to North Carolina's State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on July 10, 2019. This approval removes the need for certain facilities to report annual emissions in areas now meeting older ozone standards but keeps the reporting requirement in place for the 2008 ozone standards. The adjustments update the start year for emissions reporting and make minor edits to the regulation. EPA's decision is based on these changes meeting the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality (DAQ), on July 10, 2019. The SIP revision modifies the State's annual emissions reporting regulation by removing the annual emissions reporting requirement for certain non- Title V facilities in geographic areas that have been redesignated to attainment for the 1979 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards ("NAAQS" or "standards") and in the areas listed in the rule that have been redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, with the exception of the geographic areas that have been redesignated to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The SIP revision also makes minor changes that do not significantly alter the meaning of the regulation. EPA is approving this revision pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document in question pertains to a decision by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding changes to North Carolina's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality management, specifically concerning the reporting of annual emissions by certain facilities.
General Summary
The EPA has approved modifications to North Carolina's SIP, initially submitted in July 2019, which alters the state's approach to annual emissions reporting. This rule change means that some facilities, specifically those not covered under the Title V operating permit program, will no longer need to report their emissions annually if they are located in areas that meet the older ozone standards (1979 1-hour and 1997 8-hour standards). However, this exemption does not apply to areas that still must meet the 2008 8-hour ozone standards. The revision also updates the starting year for emissions reporting from 2007 to 2017 and includes several minor editorial updates.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One significant concern arising from this regulation is the complexity of the legal and procedural discussions within the document. The references to various statutes and the legal terminology might pose comprehension challenges to those not well-versed in environmental law or public policy. Additionally, the response to the public comment received during the proposal phase seems dismissive and lacks a thorough explanation, leading to potential perceptions of insensitivity to public concerns, especially during a political administration change.
Public Impact
Broadly, this regulatory change reflects the EPA's interpretation of environmental statutes, which could affect how emissions data is managed and perceived. For the general public, the significant takeaway is that in certain areas of North Carolina, some emissions data that was previously reported annually may no longer be so. This change could lead to concerns about the transparency and comprehensiveness of data tracking regarding air pollution.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Environmental Advocacy Groups: These groups may view the removal of reporting requirements for certain facilities as a step backward in emissions transparency, potentially undermining efforts to track and manage air pollution comprehensively.
Non-Title V Facility Owners: Facility owners who fall under this revised criterion might view the changes positively, as it reduces the administrative burden associated with annual emissions reporting. This could result in cost savings and reduced regulatory compliance costs.
State and Federal Regulators: For regulatory authorities, the change necessitates adaptations in how they monitor and enforce air quality standards. While it could streamline processes for areas meeting older standards, it may also require enhanced vigilance to ensure compliance with current and updated standards.
Overall, while the EPA's decision aligns with broader regulatory trends of easing administrative burdens where compliance with past standards is confirmed, it presents a nuanced conversation about environmental responsibility and the oversight needed to maintain air quality standards in dynamic conditions.
Issues
• The document includes complex regulatory and statutory references, which may be difficult for laypersons to understand.
• The lengthy legal and procedural explanations could be simplified for clarity.
• The response to the public comment could be seen as dismissive and does not provide sufficient explanation for the decision to proceed with the regulation notwithstanding the political transition.
• There is a lack of detailed explanation regarding the specific environmental or economic impacts of the SIP revision beyond compliance with existing standards.
• The document does not explicitly address any potential negative effects of removing the annual emissions reporting requirement for certain areas, which might be a concern for environmental advocacy groups.