IN THIS ISSUE                                      

BOILER RULE DEADLINE GETS SMALL EXTENSION

by Seth Fisher
January 25, 2011 

The EPA's request to delay its boiler rule has been granted but only barely. The subject of PE coverage in early December (use link), the agency was seeking permission from the D.C. District Court to put off implementation of its court-ordered rule in order to sort through and respond to over 5,000 comments received from the industry. The agency wanted the deadline moved to April 2012, but a federal judge on Thursday, Jan. 20, decided to extend the deadline by only 30 days, meaning the agency has to issue its rule by mid-February of this year (original deadline was Jan. 16, 2011). 

The EPA said its standards will be significantly different than what EPA proposed in April 2010. It is expected that the agency will release something by Feb. 15 of this year, and continue to make changes afterward. The agency said its hope is that the rules will be practical to implement. According to an agency press release, the EPA isn't giving up, and plans to consider all other options for addressing these issues before the rules would become effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

There was a perception that putting off the rule, which is unpopular among the regulated community and in the current political environment looks like a badly timed economic burden. Requested at the same time as a delay for the agency's ozone NAAQS, and right after a pro-Republican mid-term election, there is an appearance that the delay was more political than necessary. However, many in industry agree that more time is needed, and that a year (and change)'s delay is less important than fielding a regulation that makes sense. See PE's blog entry on the ozone NAAQs.

The EPA announced in the Jan. 20, 2011, Federal Register its proposal to amend the new source performance standards for electric utility steam generating units and industrial-commercial-institutional steam generating units. The action would amend the testing requirements for owners/operators of steam generating units that elect to install particulate matter continuous emission monitoring systems. It would also amend the opacity monitoring requirements for owners/operators of affected facilities subject to an opacity standard that are exempt from the requirement to install a continuous opacity monitoring system. In addition, this action would correct several editorial errors identified from previous rulemakings.
Fossil fuel-fired electric utilities, both private and government-owned, are the primary targets of the regulations. The oil industry, lumber industry, pulp & paper mills, chemical manufacturers, refineries, steel works, electroplating, and many other industries will be affected.

On Jan. 28, 2009, the EPA promulgated amendments to the performance standards for steam generating units to add compliance, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for owners and operators of certain affected facilities. Subsequently, the agency received a petition for reconsideration, which it granted. The petitioner that submitted the petition for reconsideration also filed a petition for review with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In this action, the EPA is proposing to amend specific provisions in the performance standards for steam generating units to resolve specific issues and questions raised in the petition for review, but not in the petition for reconsideration, and to address one issue raised in the petition for reconsideration.
Written comments must be received on or before Feb. 22, 2011, unless a public hearing is requested by Jan. 31. Since it almost certainly will be, the hearing will be held on Feb. 4, 2011 and written comments would be due before March 7, 2011.
SOURCE: Federal Register   http://www.pollutionengineering.com/Articles/Industry_News/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000985214

EPA  AWARDS $25M TO SUPPORT  HEI  RESEARCH ON AIR QUALITY

The Health Effects Institute will develops tools to examine the combined effects of air pollution exposures on public health and the relationship between air quality and climate change.        

Jan 26, 2011 

Over the course of five years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is awarding $25 million to the Health Effects Institute (HEI) to help address the latest challenges to improving air quality and protecting health. With the funding, HEI will develop the next generation of tools and scientific information to examine the combined effects of air pollution exposures on people’s health and the relationship between air quality and climate change. “This grant continues a long and fruitful partnership to address air quality issues,” said Paul Anastas, Ph.D., assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Research and Development. “The scientific contributions by HEI complement and augment EPA’s extensive clean air research program, which is providing the critical science needed to improve air quality.” HEI has funded more than 250 studies in North America, Europe, and Asia that have: 

·                         produced important research on the effects of particulate matter, ·                         initiated new research to track health outcomes of air quality improvements, ·                        conducted special scientific reviews on air toxics from mobile sources. 

On Jan.12, 2011, the EPA announced its plan to defer for three years greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting requirements for CO2 emissions from biomass-fired and other biogenic sources. The agency stated that it intends to use the additional time to seek further independent scientific analysis of this complex issue and then to develop a rulemaking on how these emissions should be treated in determining whether a Clean Air Act permit is required. By July 2011, the EPA intends to complete a rulemaking that will defer permitting requirements for CO2 emissions from biomass-fired and other biogenic sources for three years. During the three-year period, the agency will seek input on scientific issues from its partners within the federal government and from outside scientists who have relevant expertise. Before the end of the three-year period, the EPA intends to issue a second rulemaking that determines how these emissions should be treated or counted under GHG permitting requirements.
The EPA stated that it intends to issue guidance that will provide a basis that state or local permitting authorities may use to conclude that the use of biomass as fuel is the best available control technology for GHG emissions until the agency can complete action on the three-year deferral in July.

_______________________________________________________________________
JAY SAYS

Dear reader,

ENERGY TRADING LIMITS WON'T HELP PREVENT PRICE SWINGS, ICE SAYS:
Regulators in the US and Europe are considering capping positions that can be held by trades in derivatives markets in order to curb speculation.  Last month, the US commodity Futures Trading Commission voted to seek comments on a proposal that will constrain the number of contracts one firm can hold.

"As far as reducing price volatility is concerned, we simply do not believe that the imposition of position limits would have any effect," David Peniket, ICE Futures Europe's president and COO, said today at the International Petroleum Week conference in London. 

Oil prices surged to a record $147.27 a barrel in New York in July 2008 and then plunged to $32 in December of that year.  In July 2009, the UK and France called on the Group of Eight nations to improve transparency and regulation in oil markets.

ICE operates the biggest trading platform for Brent crude, the North Sea benchmark used to price two-thirds of the world's oil supply. 

Brent, normally cheaper than the US benchmark West Texas Intermediate traded on the NY Mercantile Exchange, surged to a record premium of $16.51 a barrel over WTI on Feb 17 as excessive supplies at a delivery point for WTI in Oklahoma fanned doubts about its ability to reflect global market conditions. http://www.bloomberg.com/

Best regards,
Jay Klaus
JKlaus@KlausEquipment.com
Klaus Equipment Company, Inc.
President