Download - Air Toxic Overview
![Page 1: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Paul KovalDecember 6, 2011
Air Toxic Overview
![Page 2: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
• Ohio Air Toxic Update
• Project updates– East Liverpool– National Air Toxic Assessment (NATA)
Overview– ATU Updates
Air Toxics Overview
![Page 3: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Total Cancer Risk Estimates Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
![Page 4: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Total Cancer Risk Estimates Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Butler (00 - 1
0)
Cuyahoga-St. Theo.(06-10)
Cuyahoga-F.S. #11 (04 - 10)
Cuyahoga-F.S. #22 (04 - 10)
Jefferson (04 - 1
0)0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Average Total Risk Per County (2000 - 2010)
County
Risk
(10
E -0
5)
Current Sites
![Page 5: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Total Cancer Risk Estimates Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Butler
Cuyahoga-St. Theo.
Cuyahoga-F.S. #11
Cuyahoga-F.S. #22
Jefferson
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Average Total Risk Per County (2000 - 2010)
Updated Average (00-10)Reported (00-09)
Current Sites
County
![Page 6: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Jefferson County Average Risk
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20100
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Jefferson County Average Risk (04-10)
Year
Risk
(10
E -0
5)
![Page 7: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Total Cancer Risk Estimates Heavy Metals
Butler/O
hio Bell
Columbiana/M
arylan
d Ave
Columbiana/P
ort Authorit
y
Columbiana /
Wate
r Plan
t
Cuyahoga/
Ferro
"A"&
B
Cuyahoga
/Asphalt
Plant A
Cuyahoga
/St. T
heodosiu
s Church
Cuyahoga/
Fire "
4A", "4B"
Frankli
n/Ann, W
oodrow
Fulto
n
Loga
n/Bell
efontai
ne
Ottawa/B
rush
Well
man 32
Washingto
n/Care
er Cen
ter0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35Average Total Non-Cancer Risk
Reported (00-09) Updated (00-10)
Haz
ard
Inde
x
County
![Page 8: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
East Liverpool/ Heavy Metals
![Page 9: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
• Ohio EPA determined that S.H. Bell is the major source contributing to elevated Mn concentrations.
• Director issued 2 sets of Findings & Orders
requiring immediate control measures:– enclosing some storage piles and screening
operations, tarping trucks, paving roads, and using water trucks, sweepers and other means to minimize dust.
Summary of Risk Management Decisions
![Page 10: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
East Liverpool Annual Average Manganese Con-centrations
Note: 2011 values represent January through JulyCo
ncen
trati
on- µ
g/m
³
![Page 11: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
High Risk Sources • NATA (the National Air Toxics Assessment) is a prioritization
tool used to identify geographic areas, pollutants and emission sources that should be evaluated further to gain a better understanding of health risks posed by air toxics.
• NATA provides broad estimates of health risks over geographic areas of the country, not definitive risks to specific individuals. This is because NATA uses models to estimate risks.
• U.S. EPA has provided Ohio EPA with a list of Ohio’s “High Risk Point Sources” [HRPS], derived from the most recent NATA study. This list contained 147 facilities.
NATA Overview
![Page 12: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
NATA Overview
High Risk Sources
• Facilities were classified as high risk sources when there is a risk of greater than 10 in a million (1 x 10-5) or a hazard index (HI) greater than 1.
• Ohio EPA discovered many errors within the list. Problems ranged from incomplete and inaccurate emission inventories, mischaracterization of chromium emissions, and many facilities being out-of-business.
• DAPC investigated the accuracy of the Ohio list.
![Page 13: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Method • U.S. EPA clarified the risk that results in activity by Region V. In
general, action is necessary when cancer risks are greater than 100 in a million (1 x 10-4) and / or the non-cancer hazard index is greater than five (5.0).
STEPS:• The initial list of 147 HRPS was first narrowed down to the
facilities that met these criteria. • Secondly, staff determined if a listed facility is still operating.• If facility is operating, then we examined NATA data to investigate
source of emission(s) data.
HRPS Project
![Page 14: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
HRPS Project Method Cont.
• Compared NATA emissions data to TRI 2005 data• Compare NATA emissions data to most current Stars 2 data,
or, if not available, compared to TRI 2009 data.• In the case of chromium emissions, we contacted you
(DO/LAAs) to determine if Cr compound(s) have been correctly identified, if emission data appears correct, and if there have been any changes to the facility’s emission profile.
• Facilities were then placed in one of three categories: high risk point source, low risk point source, and shut down.
![Page 15: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
• From the 147 facilities on the original list, 32 facilities were considered above the U.S. EPA action level.
• Of these 32 facilities, 4 facilities closed. • 16 facilities were re-categorized in the low risk point
source category (below action levels).• 8 facilities remained in the high risk point source
category.• We are still awaiting verification of 4 facility’s status.
Results
![Page 16: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Results Cont.
SHUTDOWN
GE LIGHTING INC.
TRW INC VALVE DIV
TRI PALM INTERNATIONAL LLC
FAURECIA EXHAUST SYS INC TROY FACILITY
LRPS
WHEMCO-OHIO FOUNDRY INC ENERFAB CORP
EVERTZ TECHNOLOGY SERVICES XTEK, INC.
AK STEEL-COSHOCTON WORKS
MODERN WELDING CO OF OHIO INC
ALCON INDS INCREPUBLIC ENGINEERED PRODUCTS, INC
AMERICAN SPRING WIRE CORP.
BWX TECHNOLOGIES INC
ISG CLEVELAND INC. ERAMET MARIETTA, INC.
FMC FOODTECH STEIN-DSI GLOBE METALLURGICAL INC.
CRANE PERFORMANCE SIDING LLC - NORTH
PREMIUM BUILDING PRODUCTS
HRPS
PENTAIR PUMP INC
VON ROLL AMERICA INC
Quaker City Castings
A-BRITE PLATING CO
PLASTIC PLATERS INC
COLUMBUS STEEL CASTINGS
BARIUM & CHEMICALS INC
SAFETY-KLEEN SYSTEMS INC
![Page 17: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Low Risk Point SourcesSummary
• The majority of these facilities were on the original list due to Cr+6 emissions.
• However, upon verification, most of the facilities did not use Cr+6 in their production processes, but used Cr+3. This discovery caused their re-categorization in the low risk point source category.
• Reduced production levels since 2005 and / or over-estimation of emissions in the 2005 TRI also caused facilities to be moved to the LRPS category.
![Page 18: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
ATU MACT Information
• MACT Position: not scheduled to be filled yet, on docket to be examined for future hiring.
• ATU assisting with filing and distributing Initial Notification and compliance information to Feds and DO/LAAs.
• Specific engineering questions should now be directed to Permitting Section contact in CO working on the source category.
![Page 19: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
ATU GACT Information
• GACT Delegation of Authority: Ohio EPA has not applied for or received delegation of authority for the Area Source MACTs (GACTs).
• Questions need to be directed to U.S. EPA contact for the rule.
![Page 20: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
ATU GACT Information
• All paperwork needs to be sent to U.S. EPA.– Each DO/LAA can keep copy of paperwork if
desired, but not required.– No T & C’s put in Permits, just notification that
area source GACT may apply to source by U.S. EPA.
– No inspection of GACT requirements to be conducted during site visits.
![Page 21: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Asbestos Update 1
• 5-year Rule Review: Asbestos rules undergoing rule review currently.
• The following rules needed changes.• OAC 3745-20-01(B), Definitions and incorporation by
reference and OAC 3745-20-05(A), Standard for asbestos waste handling.
• The definitions of "Facility"; "Friable asbestos material"; and the addition of new definition "Residential exempt structure", for clarification purposes only.
![Page 22: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Asbestos Update 2
• The amendment to 3745-20-05(A) will allow only Category I non-friable ACM that is not RACM to go to a CD&D landfill. The amendment will make this rule consistent with the federal asbestos NESHAP regulations at 40 CFR Part 61.154(b).
• Clarifying changes were made regarding referenced items in rules 3745-20-07; 08; 09; 12; 13; and 15.
• The DAPC has reviewed asbestos emission control rules in OAC rules 3745-20-02; 03; 04, 06, 10, 11 and 14 and found them to be necessary but without need for changes:
![Page 23: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Asbestos Update 3
• DAPC’s “interested parties” comment period began October 7th , 2011 for the first 30-day review. Comments were addressed and a responsive summary prepared. A copy of the summary can be obtained on our web-site.
• The public hearing on these rule changes will be conducted on Monday, January 9th , 2012 at 10:00 AM.
![Page 24: Air Toxic Overview](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070500/5681686a550346895dded6cc/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Comments / Questions
• Comments / Easy questions?