State air quality agencies apparently would appreciate better implementation direction from the US Environmental Protection Agency if it reduces allowable ground-level ozone limits from 75 ppb to a proposed 65-70 ppb range.
That was what the Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies in Lexington, Ky., found when it examined 44 state air regulators' comments submitted to EPA on the proposal, which could become final in early October. Oil and gas and other business groups have said the rules potentially could be the most expensive in US history. State regulators' concerns matter because EPA usually hands off the problem of actually making its new rules work to them.
"There's been a drumbeat on this and other national ambient air quality issues," AAPCA Executive Director Clint Woods said on Sept. 28. "States, regardless of their political stripes, have frequently and increasingly called for more robust implementation direction from EPA."
In the ozone context, states did not have a final implementation plan from EPA for the 2008 standards until early in 2015, he told OGJ. "That's a very long timeframe," Woods observed. "States across the country have made clear that they need that information sooner rather than later."
Of the 44 responses, roughly three-quarters said they were concerned about timely implementation rules from EPA under a revised standard. Referring to delays for 2008 rules' implementation instructions and truncated requirements for state and local agencies, many states also recommended a timeline for EPA implementation rules and guidance.
Among states commenting on when the agency should issue proposed implementation rules and guidance for a revised ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, more than 90% recommended that EPA do so at the time the final NAAQS is promulgated.
Finalizing instructions
When it came to the time implementation rules and guidance under a revised NAAQS should be finalized, more than half the state air regulators said it should be within a year. Roughly a quarter recommended finalizing with final area designations, AAPCA said.
It has not taken a position on where the primary or second ozone NAAQS should be set. AAPCA noted, however, that E&E News reported on Apr. 23 that EPA Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation Janet McCabe said at a Clean Air Act Advisory Committee meeting, "I'm not sure that we can meet everybody's, or some people's, expectations that we have an implementation rule ready when the final rule goes out.
"There's just a lot of reasons why that just is very, very difficult, and may not even be appropriate to do," she said. "We are trying to provide guidance and rules in as timely a way as possible."