The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), heads of state environmental agencies, and local and state air officials are working together to achieve stricter federal air rules to improve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) process.
Plans have been proposed with the hopes of reducing the burden on states to seek strict state-level emission rules. Some state officials are opposed to the approach because they believe calling for stricter rules is a 'substantive' issue and is irrelevant to accelerating the SIP process.
Representatives, including those from the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) and the EPA, are hoping their work can lead to a successful overhaul of the SIP process. Their plan includes initiatives by which states craft federally enforceable plans that outline the pollution control measures that will be taken to meet EPA national air quality standards.
States have been upset with certain aspects of the SIPs for some time, citing issues with the resources required to write plans, re-writing plans whenever the EPA updates air standards, and the extended period of time states wait attempting to get EPA approval of their plans.
The group is currently targeting three major reform areas:
-
Revising the SIP process without needing to amend the Clean Air Act,
- Developing a 'toolkit” for state and local officials on streamlining SIPs,
- Calling for stricter federal air rules that would reduce states' burden on regulating emission sources.
PAGE 2However, some states are concerned about these objectives, believing that "seeking stricter federal measures to cut ozone and PM (particulate matter) is beyond the scope of the work group's efforts.”
In response to these concerns, Janet McCabe, an EPA air official, says "that effort would simply identify new federal rules for industrial sectors that the EPA could issue, which would have a co-benefit of reducing states' SIP planning burdens because states would not have to craft state-specific rules for those sectors. The EPA rules would still have to go through notice-and-comment procedures.” McCabe has also told state environmental regulators that the California model – in which the EPA is responsible for partial work on air act permitting and a state or local agency is responsible for the remainder of the permit – might be applied and divided between states and the EPA for issuing greenhouse gas (GHG) permits.
The EPA is currently proposing its own Federal Implementation Program (FIP), allowing the agency to temporarily be responsible for issuing GHG permits in certain states if states cannot update their SIPs by Jan. 2, 2011. There has been backlash by certain states, including Texas, in response to the EPA's possible air permitting takeover. However, McCabe has stated that the EPA is aware of individual state concerns and will work with each one to find a resolution.
For additional information visit ASA's legislative website at www.TakingTheHill.com.
