Letter to Gina McCarthy, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - Implementation of the New Boiler MACT Regulations

Letter

Dear Administrator McCarthy:

We write to express our serious concerns regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) implementation of the Boiler MACT regulations, specifically as they apply to paper mills. Despite our continued opposition to the Boiler MACT regulations as a whole, as implementation moves forward, we respectfully request that the EPA follow its own regulatory language and not deviate unpredictably from the clear intent of the aforementioned rules.

In our respective congressional districts, paper mills provide high-wage jobs to thousands of hard-working constituents. During the past several years, paper mills in our districts have worked diligently to comply with the Boiler MACT regulations. However, increasing costs, forced three major mills in Maine to close last year, resulting in the layoff of nearly one thousand workers who now struggle to care for their families. The success of the papermaking industry depends, in part, on fair, consistent and predictable environmental regulations administered by your Agency.

Unfortunately, the EPA has chosen to expand the rules beyond their original scope and without notice. Current Boiler MACT regulations require the measurement of particulate matter - the primary source of airborne emissions from paper mills and the standard for compliance. The biomass boilers used at the two mills in Maine and South Carolina emit particulate matter below the EPA's required limits. However, because of the unique paper manufacturing process which varies boiler load, fuel quality, and moisture content, the mills at times measure above the 10 percent opacity operating parameter.

Our reading of the current regulations demonstrates a difference between the particulate emissions standards and the opacity operation limits. We do not see any intent in the regulations for treating these standards the same, and question recent actions by the EPA indicating an intention to do so. At least one paper mill in Maine's 2nd Congressional District has worked diligently to pursue a thoughtful and effective solution with the regional and state offices. Unfortunately, the EPA headquarters, which you oversee, denied approval of the alternative after eight months of costly delay and consideration. Instead, your agency decided to adopt a lengthy rulemaking process for opacity emissions rather than for an alternative monitoring solution. This appears to us to be a clear contradiction of your agency's own regulations. This decision has proved burdensome and costly for this Maine mill, and will likely cause it to exceed EPA compliance deadlines at a time when it can little afford additional uncertainty and regulatory expense.

This shift in position imposes unfair and unplanned costs on the entire industry. We are told these planned rules would require the two mills in Maine and South Carolina to spend millions of dollars on additional compliance that could otherwise be invested in efficiency, safety, and job creation in our home states and across the country. We therefore ask that the EPA follow its own regulations and not hold opacity to the same standards as particulate matter in measuring the allowable levels of emissions for paper mills. At the same time, any additional regulation in this area must include proper notice and comment, allowing input from the industry and the assessment of the economic impact resulting from such changes.

When the Boiler MACT rules were finalized, the EPA assured Congress that its regulations included the flexibility to work with manufacturers to solve reasonable compliance problems. To that end, we respectfully and strongly request that the EPA abide by its commitment to Congress and to our constituents, and that it provide flexibility for alternative opacity monitoring parameters for paper mills before compliance deadlines are reached. Furthermore, to avoid any future re-interpretation of your regulations, we ask the EPA to clearly state that opacity measurement adjustments are allowed through administrative means as per the Boiler MACT rules.

Thank you for the careful consideration of our request. We look forward to your timely response.

Source