EPA Proposes Stronger Particulate Matter Regulations

Dec 20, 2005 - - EPA is proposing revisions to its national air quality standards for fine particle pollution (also called fine particulate matter) and from some coarse particles. Particulate matter is a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets. Particulate matter can be directly emitted, as in smoke from a fire, or it can form in the atmosphere from reactions of gases such as sulfur dioxide. EPA is basing its proposal on an extensive review of thousands of scientific studies on the risks associated with exposure to particle pollution. The agency will also conduct an assessment of significant new studies before this rule is finalized. The proposed revisions will address two categories of particulate matter: fine particles which are particles 2.5 micrometers in diameter and smaller; and "inhalable coarse" particles, which are particles between 2.5 and 10 micrometers (PM10-2.5). Numerous studies have associated fine particulate matter with a variety of respiratory and cardiovascular problems, ranging from aggravated asthma, to irregular heartbeats, heart attacks, and early death in people with heart or lung disease.

>EPA has had national air quality standards for fine particles since 1997 and for coarse particles 10 micrometers and smaller (PM10) since 1987. Particle pollution can also contribute to visibility impairment. The proposed revisions include the significant strengthening -- by nearly 50 percent -- of EPA's standards to protect the public from short-term exposure to high levels of fine particles. For fine particles, EPA is also taking comment on a range of annual and 24-hour standards, including strengthening these standards as well as retaining the standards at their present levels. In addition, EPA is proposing a standard for reducing inhalable coarse particles, or PM10-2.5. For these particles, EPA is proposing a 24-hour standard of 70 micrograms per cubic meter. 

The standard would apply to airborne mixes of coarse particles that come from sources such as high-density traffic on paved roads and industry. The proposed standard would not apply to mixes of coarse particles that do not pose much risk to public health, such as windblown dust and soils and agricultural and mining sources. Reducing fine particles is a central element of the administration's comprehensive national clean air strategy. The Bush Administration has proposed Clear Skies legislation and issued a number of rules that will make significant strides toward reducing particles regionally and nationally -- the Clean Air Interstate Rule to reduce emissions from power plants in the eastern United States; the Clean Diesel Program to reduce emissions from highway, non-road and stationary diesel engines across the country; and the Clean Air Visibility Rule to reduce emissions near national parks.

In a separate but related action, EPA is proposing amendments to its national air quality monitoring requirements, including those for monitoring particle pollution. The changes will help EPA, states and local air quality agencies in their efforts to improve public health protection and inform the public about air quality in their communities, and they will allow air quality regulators to take advantage of improvements in monitoring technology. EPA is seeking comments on a number of alternative levels for the PM standards, including retaining the current standards. The agency will take public comment for 90 days following publication of the proposal in the Federal Register and will hold three public hearings.

The Clean Air Interstate Rule requires EPA to periodically review air quality standards to ensure they provide adequate health and environmental protection and to update those standards if necessary. EPA last updated the particle standards in 1997. This proposed rule covers only the air quality standards for particle pollution. It does not address all of the issues involved in implementing a new standard, such as designating what areas are or are not attaining any new standard, and determining the best and most cost-effective implementation strategies. EPA and the states will address those in later actions. For additional information on today's action, visit EPAs website at:

http://www.epa.gov/air/particles/actions.html

For information on particle pollution, visit: http://www.epa.gov/air/particles

John Millett, 202-564-4355 /

Landmark Clean Air Interstate Rule to Take Effect

The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) (CAIR) takes effect on May 12, 2005 with its publication in the Federal Register. On March 10, EPA Administrator Steve Johnson signed the (Clean Air Interstate Rule). CAIR helps states help other states downwind by controlling airborne emissions at their source. Publication of the rule starts a timeline for coal-fired power plants in the eastern United States to make steep air pollution cuts, benefiting millions of Americans.

The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will reduce air pollution that moves across state boundaries in 28 eastern states. CAIR will help over 450 counties in the eastern United States protect people's health by meeting stringent new air quality standards. By 2015, CAIR will provide health and environmental benefits valued at over 25 times the cost of compliance, and those benefits will continue to grow. The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will permanently cap emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the eastern United States. When fully implemented, the (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will reduce SO2 emissions in 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia by more than 70 percent and NOx emissions by more than 60 percent from 2003 levels. This will result in more than $100 billion in health and visibility benefits per year by 2015 and will substantially reduce premature mortality in the eastern United States, and these benefits will continue to grow each year with further implementation.

The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) is an important component of the Bush Administration's plan to help states in the eastern United States meet the national health-based air quality standards. These pollution reductions, along with other federal air quality programs, will allow the vast majority of nonattainment areas in the eastern United States to meet the new air quality standards. The President's Clear Skies legislation would give more certainty and nationwide emission reduction. The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will mandate the largest reduction in air pollution since the reductions set by the Acid Rain Program under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Under the (Clean Air Interstate Rule), states will achieve the required emissions reductions using one of two options for compliance: 1) require power plants to participate in an EPA-administered interstate cap and trade system that caps emissions in two stages, or 2) meet an individual state air emission limits through measures of the state's choosing. By addressing air pollutants in a cost effective fashion, EPA and the states will protect public health and the environment without interfering with the steady flow of affordable energy for American consumers and businesses. For more information, go to: http://www.epa.gov/cair/ . Contact:  John Millett, 202-564-4355 / millett.john@epa.gov

EPA Announces Clean Air Interstate Rule

March 10, 2005 -- EPA has issued the final (Clean Air Interstate Rule) (CAIR), which will permanently cap emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the eastern United States. When fully implemented, the (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will reduce SO2 emissions in 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia by over 70 percent and NOx emissions by over 60 percent from 2003 levels. EPA states that CAIR will result in more than $100 billion in health and visibility benefits per year by 2015 and will substantially reduce premature mortality in the eastern United States, and these benefits will continue to grow each year with further implementation. The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) is an important component of the Bush Administration's plan to help states in the eastern United States meet the national health-based air quality standards. These pollution reductions, along with other federal air quality programs, will allow the vast majority of nonattainment areas in the eastern United States to meet the new air quality standards.

EPA is also scheduled to issue the first-ever requirement for coal-fired power plants to control mercury emissions in March 2005. That action, plus today's (Clean Air Interstate Rule), puts multi-pollutant controls in place for many of the largest sources of air pollution in the country.

The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will mandate the largest reduction in air pollution since the reductions set by the Acid Rain Program under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Under the (Clean Air Interstate Rule), states will achieve the required emissions reductions using one of two options for compliance:

1) Require power plants to participate in an EPA-administered interstate cap and trade system that caps emissions in two stages, or

2) Meet an individual state air emission limits through measures of the state's choosing. By addressing air pollutants in a cost effective fashion, EPA and the states will protect public health and the environment without interfering with the steady flow of affordable energy for American consumers and businesses.

For more information, go to:  http://www.epa.gov/cair/ .

Fact Sheet

CLEAN AIR INTERSTATE RULE (CAIR)

2) and nitrogen oxides (NO_x) emissions and is a powerful component of the Administrations plan to help over 450 counties in the eastern U.S. meet EPA’s protective air quality standards for ozone or fine particles.

SO₂ and NO_x contribute to the formation of fine particles and NOx contributes to the formation of ground-level ozone. Fine particles and ozone are associated with thousands of premature deaths and illnesses each year. Additionally, these pollutants reduce visibility and damage sensitive ecosystems.

According to EPA, by the year 2015, the (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will result in: 

According to EPA, by the year 2015, the Clean Air Interstate Rule will result in: 

• Nearly $100 billion in annual health benefits, annually preventing 17,000 premature deaths, millions of lost work and school days, and tens of thousands of non-fatal heart attacks and hospital admissions. 
• Nearly $2 billion in annual visibility benefits in southeastern national parks, such as Great Smoky Mountains and Shenandoah.
• Significant regional reductions in sulfur and nitrogen deposition, reducing the number of acidic lakes and streams in the eastern U.S. 

CAIR covers 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia. In this rule, EPA finds that SO₂ and NO_x emissions from 23 states and the District of Columbia contribute to unhealthy levels of fine particles in downwind states. In addition, NO_x emissions in 25 eastern states and the District of Columbia contribute to unhealthy levels of 8-hour ozone in other downwind states. (See list of affected states below.)

Based on an assessment of the emissions contributing to interstate transport of air pollution and available control measures, EPA has determined that achieving required reductions in the identified states by controlling emissions from power plants is highly cost effective. 

States must achieve the required emission reductions using one of two compliance options: 1) meet the state’s emission budget by requiring power plants to participate in an EPA-administered interstate cap and trade system that caps emissions in two stages, or 2) meet an individual state emissions budget through measures of the state’s choosing.

The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) provides a Federal framework requiring states to reduce emissions of SO₂ and NO_x. EPA anticipates that states will achieve this primarily by reducing emissions from the power generation sector. These reductions will be substantial and cost-effective, so in many areas, the reductions are large enough to meet the air quality standards. The Clean Air Act requires that states meet the new national, health-based air quality standards for ozone and PM_2.5 standards by requiring reductions from many types of sources. Some areas may need to take additional local actions. The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) reductions will lessen the need for additional local controls.

This final rule provides cleaner air while allowing for continued economic growth. By enabling states to address air pollutants from power plants in a cost effective fashion, this rule will protect public health and the environment without interfering with the steady flow of affordable energy for American consumers and businesses. 

If states choose to meet their emissions reductions requirements by controlling power plant emissions through an interstate cap and trade program, EPA’s modeling shows that:

In 2010, the (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will reduce SO₂ emissions by 4.3 million tons -- 45% lower than 2003 levels, across states covered by the rule. By 2015, CAIR will reduce SO₂ emissions by 5.4 million tons, or 57%, from 2003 levels in these states. At full implementation, the (Clean Air Interstate Rule) will reduce power plant SO₂ emissions in affected states to just 2.5 million tons, 73% below 2003 emissions levels.

The (Clean Air Interstate Rule) also will achieve significant NO_x reductions across states covered by the rule. In 2009, CAIR will reduce NO_x emissions by 1.7 million tons or 53% from 2003 levels. In 2015, CAIR will reduce power plant NO_x emissions by 2 million tons, achieving a regional emissions level of 1.3 million tons, a 61% reduction from 2003 levels.

In 1990, national SO₂ emissions from power plants were 15.7 million tons compared to 3.5 million tons that will be achieved with the (Clean Air Interstate Rule). In 1990, national NO_x emissions from power plants were 6.7 million tons, compared to 2.2 million tons that will be achieved with CAIR.

In upcoming but closely related action, EPA will impose the first ever federally-mandated requirements that coal-fired electric utilities reduce their emissions of mercury. Together the Clean Air Mercury Rule and the (Clean Air Interstate Rule) create a multi-pollutant strategy to reduce emissions throughout the United States.

The Bush Administration continues to believe that the President’s Clear Skies legislation is a more efficient, effective, long-term mechanism to achieve large-scale national reductions. Clear Skies legislation applies nationwide and is modeled on the highly successful Acid Rain Program. The Agency remains committed to working with Congress to pass legislation.

States listed are required to control for both fine particle pollution and ozone transport unless otherwise noted

1. Alabama
2. Arkansas (ozone only)
3. Connecticut (ozone only)
4. Florida
5. Delaware (ozone only)
6. Georgia (fine particle pollution only)
7. Illinois
8. Indiana
9. Iowa
10. Kentucky
11. Louisiana
12. Maryland
13. Massachusetts (ozone only)
14. Michigan
15. Minnesota (fine particle pollution only)
16. Mississippi
17. Missouri
18. New York
19. New Jersey (ozone only)
20. North Carolina
21. Ohio
22. Pennsylvania
23. South Carolina
24. Tennessee
25. Texas (fine particle pollution only)
26. Virginia
27. West Virginia
28. Wisconsin &

District of Columbia

Source: EPA

Report Says Indoor Air Cleaners Produce Ozone

The nonprofit Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports, describes in is May 2005 issue how portable indoor air filters expose people to ozone, a component of smog. Allowing large quantities of ozone produced indoors can be harmful to asthmatics. According to the report, about 80 percent of people who buy air cleaners have allergies or asthma. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, about 18.2 million adults had hay fever in 2002 and about 21.9 million had asthma. 

Sharper Image, whose Ionic Breeze cleaner ($400) leads the ionizer market, drew particular criticism in the report. Manufacturers whose products did poorly in the report found fault with the study methods and the findings. The two main types of filters are:

1.      Ionizing air cleaners or electrostatic precipitators, work by electrically charging airborne particles and trapping them on oppositely charged metal plates. A super-charged oxygen molecule (O₃) is a byproduct of this process. Air ionizers make up about 25 percent of the $410 million-a-year air cleaner market.

2.      High-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter, which traps most particles and removes odors while producing much lower amounts of ozone.

Ionizers are typically sleek and slender and have quieter motors than other types of portable air cleaners. Air ionizers give off a deceptively "fresh air" smell, similar to the scent just after a thunderstorm. Buyers think that this is a good smell and that without it they think the ionizer isn't cleaning the air. What they smell is actually ozone.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standard limits ozone emissions from medical devices at 50-parts-per-billion. The agency doesn't consider air cleaners medical devices.  The EPA neither certifies nor recommends air cleaners.

While all air ionizers create ozone, some give off more than others. All five other ionizers were giving failing grades because of "poor performance, some with relatively high ozone. The report recommended only two air cleaners:

1.      An ionizing air cleaner -- the Friedrich C-90A ($450 -- negligible ozone.

2.      A HEPA device, the Whirlpool 45030 ($250),

CU evaluated the cleaners in a sealed room, where testers measured ozone amounts two inches from the machines, and in an "open, well-ventilated lab," where testers took measurements two inches and three feet from the machines, according to the report. The Whirlpool and Friedrich models earned a mix of "excellent" and "very good" ratings for ridding the air of particles containing dust, cigarette smoke and pollen; both got only fair ratings for noise. The Ionic Breeze earned an "excellent" noise rating.

Any air cleaner that produced ozone amounts exceeding the FDA's 50 ppb ozone limit failed CU's tests. Only the Whirlpool and the Friedrich models passed the sealed-room test. These two recommended cleaners emitted far less ozone than the others. In the open lab, the Whirlpool produced 2 ppb of ozone at two inches away; the Friedrich emitted 5 ppb. At three feet away, the Whirlpool produced 1 ppb, and the Friedrich emitted 4 ppb.

Some allergists said that they have long recommended HEPA cleaners over ionizers because of fears about ozone output.

Additional Resources:

·        The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (www.aham.org)

        Consumer Reports. www.consumerreports.org;

        American Lung Association air cleaners information. www.lungusa.org;