Senate Environmental Resources & Energy Committee Reports

 

Reports provided by PA Legislative Services

10-18-06

Senate Environmental Resources and Energy

HARRISBURG - (10/18/06, 9:30 a.m., Room 461, Main Capitol)

The Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee met to consider extending the deadline for consideration of a regulation.

The Committee unanimously approved a motion to extend the deadline to consider regulation #7-405: Mercury Emission Reduction Requirements for Electric Generating Units by two weeks to November 2nd.

Chairman Mary Jo White (R-Venango) noted IRRC is scheduled to consider the regulation on November 16th.

Senators Stewart Greenleaf (R-Montgomery) and Andrew Dinniman (D-Chester) each expressed support for the motion, remarking it is important to preserve the integrity of the committee process.

Kimberly Hess, PLS

10-16-06

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY COMMITTEE

Public hearing on hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund

10-16-06

By Nate Collins, PLS

 

The Committee held a public hearing on the Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund. Members in attendance included: Chairman Mary Jo White (R-Venango), Minority Chairman Raphael Musto (D-Luzerne) and Senator Andrew Dinniman (D-Chester).

 

Chairman White explained that the purpose of the meeting is to review the status of the Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund (HSCF). She noted that "stopgap" funding will expire at the end of June 2007, and she feels they should not wait until budget talks commence to deal with this funding issue. She suggested that they need to look at alternative funding sources.

 

DEP Secretary Kathleen McGinty agreed with the Chairman that HSCF needs funding. She thanked the Chairman for her leadership on this issue. The Secretary began by outlining the importance of dedicated funding sources for HSCF. She explained that the fund provides emergency funding for a variety of things including chemical spills. The Fund also provides money for fighting tire fires and providing clean drinking water when a water source is contaminated, Secretary McGinty explained. She also told the committee that HSCF helps the state meet its federal obligations with Superfund and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

 

The Secretary then outlined the events that led to HSCF's funding problems. She explained that because of a General Fund budget deficit in 2002, the automatic deposit from the Capital Stock and Franchise Tax into HSCF was shut off. She added that when she took office in 2003, the money problems with the Fund were brought to her attention. Secretary McGinty offered that she instituted a number of changes to extend the life of the money in the Fund. Those changes included: instituting a hiring freeze, placing a halt on new projects, "reeling in" existing projects to a minimum so they only protect public health, and stopping transfers out of HSCF, she explained. She said a hiring freeze has led to a 24% reduction in the number of employees since 1992.

 

Secretary McGinty then stated that Governor Rendell proposed a funding solution in Growing Greener II with the imposition of a 15 cent per pound fee on toxic releases. She added that the proposal also included taking $29 million "off the top" from Growing Greener II bond money. She noted that the Legislature would not support the toxic release fee so Growing Greener II provided $50 million over two years to HSCF, which expires next June.

 

She then offered that long-term dedicated funding for HSCF is important because the Fund relies on private contractors waiting on standby to help in emergencies. She opined that it is important to assure the contractors that the money is available. She also stressed the need for dedicated funding because remediation activities often expand beyond a single fiscal year. She reiterated earlier comments that HSCF helps the state meet its federal obligations. She concluded her arguments for dedicated funding by remarking that HSCF helps save lives.

 

Chairman White asked if there is a waiting list of projects. Secretary McGinty answered yes, explaining that they are ranked based on the risk of public danger. She said she could supply the committee with a list of projects. Chairman White then disputed part of the Secretary's written testimony. She said she does not remember a proposal to finance HSCF by redirecting money from the state's Recycling Fund. Secretary McGinty countered that the GreenPA proposal would have redirected recycling funds. She commented that the Rendell administration did not want to take funds from recycling because it provides 81,000 jobs and puts $18 billion into Pennsylvania's economy.

 

Chairman White then argued that money from a bond issue cannot be used for programs. She questioned how Growing Greener II funds have legally been given to HSCF. Secretary McGinty said the money given to HSCF came from redirecting the existing tipping fee. Chairman White said she wants clarification on the law and on the monetary transfer. The Secretary assured her she will find out about the money flow from Growing Greener II.

 

Minority Chairman Musto asked how much HSCF money is used for brownfields remediation. Secretary McGinty replied that it was $10 million a year but with Growing Greener II and the economic stimulus program, the money for brownfields remediation doesn't come from HSCF, but from the Business In Our Sites program. Minority Chairman Musto asked about existing brownfields projects. Secretary McGinty stated most, if not all, of the $300 million for these projects is currently invested. She told him DCED can provide the committee with details. Minority Chairman Musto then inquired how many sites have been cleaned, to which Secretary McGinty replied about 2,200 sites in the past 11 years. Minority Chairman Musto then asked how successful the state is with cost recovery from responsible parties. Secretary McGinty stated $18 million has been recovered from responsible parties at one site. She offered that it is important to note that the money recovered is dedicated to cleanup at that specific site.

 

Minority Chairman Musto then asked if HSCF money is used for grayfields cleanup. Secretary McGinty answered yes. Minority Chairman Musto asked if the money can be used to cleanup a site solely for economic development. Secretary McGinty explained that federal abandoned mine remediation funds cannot be used for economic development because they must be used for public health. She noted that the federal government must "sign off" on the state's abandoned mine reclamation projects. She added that under Growing Greener II, $60 million per year for six years has been designated for abandoned mine reclamation projects. Minority Chairman Musto then inquired if federal funds could be used for mine subsidence. Secretary McGinty replied that it depends on a number of factors. She expressed her belief that the funds cannot be used at active mining sites because federal money is dedicated for abandoned mining sites.

 

Chairman White asked if the Rendell administration can support the continued use of existing funds for HSCF. Secretary McGinty stated she believes they can but they have to look at other pieces of the entire "funding pie." Chairman White asked if it is true that HSCF will be phased out if there is no funding after June 2007. Secretary McGinty replied that is the case. She noted that the fund supports approximately 240 jobs, workers who have the right to 30 days notice before their job is terminated and they are able to take other positions within state government. Chairman White asked if the Secretary sent out furlough notices to the employees. Secretary McGinty said the notices have not been sent out yet but she did send out a warning last year to let the employees know that it is being considered. Chairman White asked if the Secretary will send the notices out. Secretary McGinty replied that the "wheels are starting to turn" and it may happen. Chairman White expressed concern that this may be a scare tactic. The Secretary assured her that this is not a scare tactic, adding that they are beginning the furlough process. She said they are trying to find dedicated funding beyond June 2007 but if that is not possible the notices will go out. Chairman White then asked if the Secretary will ask for funding for HSCF when she prepares next year's budget proposal. Secretary McGinty responded that she has been talking to the Governor about it, and she wants to find money that is not lapsing and is not dependent on annual transfers. Chairman White argued that dedicated funding is not set in stone. She questioned why the funding for HSCF must be from one source. Secretary McGinty replied that there must be funding source earmarked for HSCF to properly fund long-term projects.

 

Chairman White commented that ultimately if the brownfields remediation works, the number of projects will be reduced so annual dedicated funding is not necessary. Secretary McGinty agreed but cautioned that it is difficult to make a timeline of when projects will be completed. Chairman White then asked if the federal government could be persuaded to let the state clean up sites under its brownfields program. Secretary McGinty said the state could do it more efficiently than the federal government but only if a big pot of money is included.

 

Senator Dinniman questioned if the administration has a source of funding it wants the General Assembly to consider if the funding for HSCF is not going to come from the regular budget process. Secretary McGinty replied that she was told to reiterate the 15 cent per pound toxic release inventory fee. She recommended that the General Assembly talk to the contractors who work with the Department as to what they need to work with the state on remediation projects. Senator Dinniman then discussed hazardous waste collection points. He said they are very popular and people line up at the sites to properly dispose of hazardous material. Secretary McGinty replied that hazardous waste collection is part of HSCF. She said this issue is very important because hundreds of millions of cell phones and televisions containing hazardous materials are thrown out each year.

 

 

10-03-2006

HARRISBURG - (10/3/06, 1:30 p.m., Room 8E-B, East Wing)

The Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee met to consider House Bill 2042.

 HB 2042 Reichley - (PN 3962) Amends The Clean Streams Law further providing for penalties for violations of the law by adding that any person or municipality who intentionally or knowingly violates the act, any rule or regulation of the department, any order of the department, or any condition of any permit issued pursuant to the act is guilty of a third degree felony and would be subject to a fine of at least $5,000 and up to $50,000 for each separate offense or to imprisonment for up to seven years, or both. Also, the actions for criminal penalties under this act may be commenced at any time within a period of five years from the date the offense is discovered. The bill states that with respect to offenses of this section, it is the legislative purpose to impose liability on corporations as set forth in 18 PA.C.S. Sec. 307 (relating to liability of organizations and certain related persons). (Prior Printer Number: 2819) - The bill was unanimously reported as committed.

Chairman Mary Jo White (R-Venango) explained that this bill was brought to her attention by the Attorney General's Office. She explained that it increases penalties for violations of the Clean Streams Law.

Nate Collins, PLS 

09-27-2006

 

HARRISBURG - (9/27/06, 10:00 a.m., Room 8E-A, East Wing)

The Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee met to consider one bill.

 HB 1902 Rubley - (PN 3513) Amends the Municipal Waste Planning, Recycling and Waste Reduction Act removing the sunset date. Additionally, the legislation states that performance grants for municipal recycling programs will not be awarded unless it is demonstrated to the department's satisfaction that: (1) the application is complete and accurate; (2) the materials were actually marketed; (3) the materials have not been produced by a leaf or other organics composting facility; and (4) mandated curbside municipalities receiving more than $10,000 in funding have met certain performance requirements. If a municipality does not satisfy the performance requirements, the grant funds awarded to the municipality would be expended by the municipality to satisfy the requirements. If the requirements are satisfied by the municipality, the grant funds may be expended by the municipality on any expense as determined by the municipality. (Prior Printer Number: 2603, 2950) - The bill was unanimously reported as amended.

A09355 by M. J. White, extends the sunset date to 2012. The amendment was unanimously adopted.

Kimberly Hess, PLS

 

6-30-06

 

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY COMMITTEE

Public hearing on radiation levels at landfills

6-28-06

By Nate Collins, PLS

 

The Committee held a public hearing on radiation levels at landfills. Members in attendance included: Chairman Mary Jo White (R-Venango), Minority Chairman Raphael Musto (D-Luzerne) and Senator Edwin Erickson (R-Delaware). Note: Senators John Rafferty (R-Montgomery) and Bob Regola (R-Westmoreland) also attended the meeting.

 

David Allard, Director of DEP's Bureau of Radiation Protection, stated the Bureau has "one of the most respected radiation control programs in the country." In addition, the Bureau:

·                   Regulates and inspects some 11,000 registered x-ray facilities with 30,000 pieces of equipment

·                   Licenses 250 high energy accelerators and 460 radioactive material users

·                   Oversees several very complex decommissioning projects, and

·                   Certifies about 600 radon testers, mitigators and laboratories.

 

He then discussed methods for detection of contaminated waste at landfills. He commented that most radiation alarms that go off at landfills are the result of patient-contaminated waste. Patients who are treated for various medical problems with radioactive materials contaminate their household waste and it goes into the landfill, he explained. Allard told the committee that Pennsylvania leads the nation in radioactive waste monitoring, adding that our regulations are the national model for managing radioactive sources. He explained that most tritium comes from discarded EXIT signs. He said the disposal of the signs is regulated, because tritium is not detectable by radioactive waste monitoring. The department has a plan to deal with tritium and to prevent it from affecting drinking water supplies, he assured the committee. "I am very comfortable with the current situation," Allard concluded.

 

Chairman White asked if there is a treatment for tritium. Allard told her there is no treatment, but instead it must be diluted. He added that it can be removed at very high concentrations, like in nuclear reactors. Chairman White asked if tritium has been found in groundwater. Allard replied yes, adding that the Department will require more groundwater testing around landfill sites. Chairman White asked if the primary pathway for humans to be exposed to tritium is through drinking water. Allard confirmed this.

 

Senator Rafferty asked how a radiation alarm is triggered. Allard explained the trucks hauling waste drive through a detection system and when radioactive gamma rays interact with the system it sets off the alarm. The operator at the landfill then goes to the truck and uses a handheld device to determine what the radioactive material is, he stated. He added that occasionally the truck driver himself is contaminated. Senator Rafferty asked if any radioactive materials can slip into landfills undetected. Allard responded that tritium would not be detected because the gamma rays don't come out of the glass in the sign. He noted that when a sign is broken and the tritium is released, it can contaminate the landfill. Senator Rafferty asked what the "safe levels" are based on. Allard stated the standards are set on a factor of two, and based on an adult male. He noted that the drinking water standard is very low. Senator Rafferty questioned why the levels are based on adults, and if they would still be considered safe for a child. Allard said most materials are still safe for children at the base level, but it is different for iodine. Senator Rafferty asked what type of materials block gamma rays. Allard said anything can lessen the gamma rays. He added that the acceptable limits are very low to ensure the smallest amounts are detected.

 

Senator Regola asked who checks the calibration of the detection devices and how often they are checked. Allard explained there is a requirement for a daily spot check and an annual calibration. He noted that the Department checks the devices. Senator Regola asked if DEP takes random samples at landfills, to which Allard answered no. Senator Regola asked how residents are informed if radiation at landfills reaches a harmful level. Allard explained the trucks go to a designated area in the facilities so he doesn't think that could ever happen. He added that the concentration of materials drops off fast as the area grows. Senator Regola stated there is a landfill in his district near a school, and he asked if the levels are safe for children. Allard answered yes. He added that there is not a huge health issue with tritium, but more of an environmental issue. He acknowledged there is concern about contamination of drinking water. Moving forward, landfills will be required to do quarterly monitoring of leachate, he explained.

 

Diane D'Arrigo, Radioactive Waste Project Director for the Nuclear Information and Resource Service stated that ionizing radiation is of concern, even at so-called "legal" levels. She added that tritium (radioactive hydrogen) is also of concern. Pennsylvania's law requiring licensed control over human-made nuclear waste is not being fully enforced, she said. She told the committee that nuclear materials appear to be getting into and leaking out of places never designed or intended to isolate them. D'Arrigo suggested that the state investigate, learn from and correct the problems that led to radioactive contamination at sites such as Kiski Valley, Apollo and Parks Township and the Pottstown landfill, and the high levels at landfills across the state. She then expressed concern that large amounts of licensed radioactive waste could be systematically "deregulated," cleared, released from regulatory control or treated as if not radioactive. Radioactive material could get into the state municipal solid waste facilities from imported solid waste and, if the state law is not enforced, from in-state generators, she cautioned. D'Arrigo recommended enforcing the state law requiring specific nuclear regulatory control over radioactive wastes generated by licensed or government activities. She also said the state should more closely investigate apparent failures-to-enforce the law by holding additional hearings on local experiences and with local experts. Lastly, with regard to tritium, she opined that if it is coming from illegally dumped consumer goods, this is a warning to stop unnecessary use of radioactive materials to make unregulated items. She added that it should also serve as a caution that greater vigilance is needed to prevent the release of currently regulated, much larger sources of radioactive materials, like those at nuclear power, weapons and fuel chain facilities.

 

Chairman White, noting that D'Arrigo said it should not be the responsibility of landfills to check for radioactive waste, asked whose responsibility it should be. D'Arrigo replied it is the responsibility of the licensee to control the refuse they dispose of. Chairman White asked if radioactive materials are disposed of in municipal solid waste landfills. D'Arrigo stated she believes they are. She noted that there are case by case approvals for the release of the radioactive materials in landfills around the country.

 

Senator Rafferty asked if there is a difference in safe levels between adults and children. D'Arrigo answered that there are no safe amounts, but it is a greater risk to children because their cells are dividing more quickly, their immune systems may not be as strong and their bodies are smaller.

 

Senator Regola asked if property values will drop in areas near landfills with contamination. D'Arrigo replied that the potential is there. Senator Regola stated that in November 2005 a bid was rescinded at a landfill in his district to accept low-level radiation contaminated ash. He asked at what level this is a health risk. D'Arrigo commented that she believes she knows the landfill he is referring to, and if so it has a level of plutonium. There is no safe level of plutonium and it would be a violation if the material went to the landfill and not a regulated site, she concluded.

 

Tim O'Donnell, President and Bill Belanger, a consultant for the Pennsylvania Waste Industries Association were the last to testify. O'Donnell said the waste industry takes very seriously its responsibility to dispose of municipal waste in an efficient, economical and safe manner. He explained that the state amended the solid waste regulations in December 2000, requiring municipal waste landfills to develop approved radiation monitoring plans that include established procedures and the installation of equipment to detect and safely manage radioactive materials that might be present in the waste stream. O'Donnell assured the committee that the industry follows these procedures and interacts with DEP in a cooperative manner. Belanger noted that DEP recently studied Pennsylvania landfills for the presence of tritium and found that it occurs above background level in the leachate of nearly all such facilities. He explained that the challenge with tritium is that it emits the weakest form of beta radiation, which too weak to register on a landfill's radiation detector and therefore impossible to detect as the material passes by a landfill radiation monitor. He noted that during his job of "responding to hundreds of landfill radiation alarms," none has ever been triggered by a tritium source. "It is important to understand that external exposure to tritium does not pose a hazard because the weak radiation from it cannot even penetrate the dead outer layer of our skin," he told the committee. Belanger remarked that the potential for higher levels of tritium in the future gives reason to act today to "nip a potential problem in the bud." The only way we can effectively address the tritium issue is to take action before the material enters the waste stream, stated. Tritium is not a significant problem at this point, and with education and proper enforcement, it need not become one, he concluded.

 

Chairman White asked if the Legislature can ban tritium EXIT signs. Belanger said yes, noting that plug-in EXIT signs could be used if building owners are willing to run the wire. He added that batteries can be included with the signs as a backup if the power goes out.

 

Senator Rafferty asked how many landfills are in Pennsylvania. O'Donnell stated there are 54 permitted sites. Senator Rafferty then asked about the training of people at landfills who do radioactive material detection. O'Donnell explained that they get training in recognizing the alarm and how to use the handheld devices. He noted that training occurs on an annual basis and the devices are recalibrated annually as well. Senator Rafferty inquired if the machine makes the determination of radioactive material and not the person. Belanger confirmed this. Senator Rafferty then asked if landfills decontaminate trucks that set off the alarms. O'Donnell replied that the material does not contaminate the container. Belanger explained that landfills are required to wipe the truck to make sure there is no contamination, and then the trucks go through the screening again before they leave the site. Senator Rafferty asked if trucks can distort gamma rays. Belanger replied that anything can distort them, including trash in the truck. The threshold is set load to detect things that are shielded, he added. Senator Rafferty asked when tritium could become a problem. Belanger said tritium is a problem when drinking water exceeds the acceptable standard at the tap. He said there needs to be a lot of dilution to offset the tritium in an EXIT sign, and landfills do not want to rely on dilution.

 

Minority Chairman Musto noted that D'Arrigo testified there needs to better enforcement of the law and he inquired if there is a problem with DEP. Belanger stated he is not aware of any problems with the Department. Minority Chairman Musto asked where the failures occur that allow contamination. Belanger said there is an institutional failure, adding that building owners may not be aware of tritium EXIT signs and they just dispose of them in the trash. Errors happen and users of EXIT signs need to know that they need special handling, he stated. Minority Chairman Musto asked if there could be a disposal requirement before a demolition permit is issued. Belanger replied that is certainly a possibility.

 

 

6-26-06

 

The SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY COMMITTEE met to consider HB 1195 Yudichak - (PN 1401), which amends the Storage Tank & Spill Prevention Act by removing the provision that states that only fill pipes of underground storage tanks "which have not been upgraded" are eligible for sealing under the Underground Storage Tank Pollution Prevention Program. - The bill was unanimously reported as amended by A08530 (M. J. White), which expands the eligibility of storage tank cleanup with an additional $500,000 per occurrence. It also limits the total of all awards to no more than $3.5 million. Senator James Rhoades (R-Schuylkill) inquired as to how much the Underground Storage Tank Pollution Prevention Program would cost. Chairman Mary Jo White (R-Venango) indicated that there is a $3.5 million cap on the program. Senator Rhoades then asked Chairman White if she knew how many projects this program would affect. Chairman White acknowledged that she did not know at the present time. The Senate Appropriations Committee will propose an amendment to address this issue, Minority Chairman Raphael Musto (D-Luzerne) added.

 

 

 

 

4-25-06

The Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee met to consider Senate Resolution 259 and held a public hearing on mercury emission reduction.

Members in attendance included Chairman Mary Jo White (R-Venango), Minority Chairman Raphael Musto (D-Luzerne) and Senators Barry Stout (D-Washington), John Pippy (R-Allegheny), Edwin Erickson (R-Delaware), Anthony Williams (D- Philadelphia) and Don White (R-Indiana).

SR 259 Musto - (PN 1732) Resolution designating the week of May 7 through 13, 2006, as "Drinking Water Week" in Pennsylvania. - The resolution was unanimously reported as committed.

Chairman Mary Jo White (R-Venango) said a lot of misinformation has been disseminated about mercury. She noted there are differing opinions on how to reduce mercury emissions, and offered that the committee wants to discuss all opinions and proposals related to mercury emission reduction.

DEP Secretary Kathleen McGinty said the Rendell administration is developing a state-specific rule for regulating mercury emissions from new and existing coal-fired power plants in Pennsylvania. She offered that this decision was based on two concerns: 1) the rule developed by the federal government severely disadvantages Pennsylvania coal producers and 2) the federal rule puts people at risk of continued damaging exposure to mercury. Secretary McGinty suggested the claims that Pennsylvania will achieve an 86% reduction in mercury emissions by 2018 under the federal Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) are "overstated". The EPA has acknowledged that because of banking and trading, mercury reductions will be much smaller and come much later than projected, she argued. She added that EPA projects only a 69% decrease nationally, which will not be realized until 2026 or later. By contrast, she stated, the proposed state rule will reduce mercury emissions in Pennsylvania by 90% by 2015. The Secretary offered that technology to control mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants is readily available and "relatively inexpensive" compared to the scrubbers that have been required to meet acid rain requirements. She then explained that the state- specific plan:

·  Preserves market share for bituminous coal by presuming compliance for electric generating units that burn 100% bituminous with advanced air control technologies

·  Enables utilities to meet the state-specific standards without forcing them to use technology beyond what is used to meet other new federal air quality requirements. Mercury-specific controls are not mandated.

·  Achieves at least 90% mercury reduction by 2015.

·  Requires all facilities to meet a mercury emissions cap and prohibits system-wide and interstate mercury emissions trading that would create toxic "hot spots."

Lastly, Secretary McGinty said the Pennsylvania Coal Association (PCA) and United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) are arguing in federal court that CAMR will adversely affect bituminous coal and mine workers. She added that Governor Rendell feels strongly that the EPA rule adversely affects Pennsylvania.

Chairman White said the PCA and the UMWA support legislation, SB 1201, which would institute CAMR. She added that the organizations feel DEP's proposed rule is an incentive for companies to switch to another form of coal. Secretary McGinty disagreed, adding that the mercury content in coal found in southwestern Pennsylvania is low. She added that coal with low mercury content has almost been completely mined out of southern West Virginia. She suggested that the real problem with the federal rule is the impact on bituminous coal. Chairman White, noting that coal is sold in a worldwide marketplace, inquired if a state-specific rule can protect Pennsylvania. Secretary McGinty replied that the federal rule would devastate Pennsylvania's coal industry. She admitted that Pennsylvania is only one state but our market is important. Chairman White remarked that the U.S. is responsible for 1% of global mercury emissions. Secretary McGinty said that may be true but 75% of the mercury comes from power plants. "Once we have it we are stuck with it," she stated.

Chairman White expressed her belief that a large amount of mercury in Pennsylvania comes from Ohio, and she said the problem is mercury in water, not in the air. Secretary McGinty explained that when mercury from bituminous coal is oxidized, it becomes water-soluble. She added that mercury emitted into the atmosphere is a problem when it lands on a body of water.

Minority Chairman Musto asked when the federal rule will be in the effect. Secretary McGinty replied that it is a final rule, but it is being challenged in court. She added that Pennsylvania can adopt it or make its own stringent rule by November. Even though there is a court case against the rule, she said, the court has not delayed its implementation. Minority Chairman Musto then asked when DEP is releasing its proposed rule. Secretary McGinty stated they are presenting the rule in May. Minority Chairman Musto expressed concern because the rulemaking process takes a long time. Secretary McGinty agreed, adding that if the rule is presented in May, and followed by a 60-day comment period, a final proposed rule can be submitted to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) in September. Minority Chairman Musto expressed concern with the tight timetable. He asked what happens if the state takes no action, to which the Secretary replied that the EPA rule would be applied in Pennsylvania. Minority Chairman Musto asked if Pennsylvania needs its own rule. Secretary McGinty answered yes because of the way the rule negatively affects Pennsylvania.

Minority Chairman Musto inquired if the DEP rule will define "hot spot". The Secretary replied she does not believe so. He then asked if hot spots have been found in Pennsylvania. Secretary McGinty answered yes, adding that the Department has maps showing areas of high mercury concentration.

Chairman White asked if the DEP rule would eliminate mercury advisories in Pennsylvania. Secretary McGinty said the rule can help reduce them. Chairman White then said some areas of the state with high mercury concentration are not located near power plants. Secretary McGinty cited an EPA study that found 70% of mercury is emitted within 25 kilometers. Chairman White then suggested that the DEP rule destroys the incentive for power plants to overcomply, and she asked about differences between the two plans. The Secretary offered that DEP's proposal does not have a credit trading program, adding that each plant in Pennsylvania will have to institute controls for reductions.

Chairman White commented that waste coal plants cannot support the DEP proposal because they can't market credits. Secretary McGinty argued that they should look at the federal rule because requirements are most stringent for waste coal plants. Chairman White then said a disagreement exists about the costs of DEP's proposal, and asked about technology used to reduce mercury emissions. Secretary McGinty stated the proposal is based 100% on cleaners and scrubbers required under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). She added that DEP will not require mercury-specific technology.

Senator Stout offered that he has a waste coal plant in his district, and he thought they were less polluting. Secretary McGinty clarified that waste coal produces clean electricity but the federal rule "turns that on its head". She suggested that power plants can use western coal instead of eastern coal and they can meet federal requirements without doing anything else. She added that this will dramatically hurt waste coal. This is unprecedented in the Clean Air Act, she commented, adding that she is never seen different standards for different feedstocks. Senator Stout asked how a switch to sub-bituminous coal would hurt bituminous coal companies. Secretary McGinty replied that the PCA and UMWA argued in a court case that it would cost tens of thousands of jobs in the eastern part of the country.

Chairman White interjected that she is not sure the PCA and the UMWA would support DEP's rule just because they have concerns with the federal proposal. Secretary McGinty remarked that they should not support a rule with which they have problems, and added that they should be working through the Pennsylvania rulemaking process to help craft a rule they support. Chairman White then noted that the EPA may reconsider CAMR, including requirements on waste coal. Secretary McGinty replied that she hopes so, but the EPA has said waste coal plants need to comply with acid rain requirements. Under those requirements, waste coal plants have zero allowances for sulfur and nitrogen, she explained. She added that under CAIR if they are not allowed to sell sulfur credits they will go out of business. Chairman White then expressed concern that the absence of a credit trading program will hurt small energy generators. Secretary McGinty questioned the cost of CAIR and added that the DEP mercury rule is structured to use existing technology. Chairman White suggested that if the DEP rule becomes law, small energy plants would be put out of business, which would have an impact on energy prices. Secretary McGinty responded that nothing in the mercury proposal affects trading for sulfur or nitrogen.

Senator Erickson asked if the state-specific rule is based on a risk assessment rule. Secretary McGinty answered no, adding that it is based on a health-based assessment and a technology-based assessment. Senator Erickson said he would like to see risk-based data.

Robert Wayland from the EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards said the agency is concerned about mercury emissions. He noted that oxidized mercury is water- soluble and when it gets in bodies of water it affects fish and other animals. He said most people get their exposure to mercury from eating fish. Noting that mercury occurs naturally in the earth, Wayland stated the agency is attempting to deal with man-made mercury. He added that the U.S. does not control its destiny to reduce mercury because it only represents about 3% of the world's mercury emissions. He offered that approximately 500 coal-fired power plants in the U.S. will be required to use scrubbers to reduce mercury before it is emitted into the air. Wayland said a 1999 study showed that 75 tons of mercury went into power plants but only 48 tons came out. EPA determined that the loss of 27 tons come from the "co- benefit" of existing scrubbers. He suggested that mercury-specific technology can work, but it is not currently available. EPA's rule takes us into consideration and allows a few years for technology to be phased in, he explained. The design of the plan is for the largest power plants to overcomply and then trade credits with smaller plants to keep them viable, he said. Wayland suggested that in Pennsylvania, mercury emissions will be reduced from 6 tons to 1.5 tons under CAMR.

Senator Don White asked if Wayland believes EPA's reconsideration of the rule will address waste coal. Wayland said yes, adding that he cannot discuss the details of the reconsideration.

Minority Chairman Musto noted that Secretary McGinty testified that states are implementing state-specific plans. He asked how this would affect CAMR. Wayland said the EPA is looking closely at states that are considering not joining the credit trading program. He offered that about a half-dozen states may not be in the trading program, which won't affect it. He added that the agency is moving forward on its rule with or without all of the states. Minority Chairman Musto remarked that he hopes the EPA gives states' concerns some consideration.

Senator Williams asked for more information about states deciding not to opt in to the federal program. Wayland explained that states have the freedom to implement their own rule as long as it is at least as stringent as federal requirements. He added that the agency must approve all state- specific plans. Senator Williams asked how the plan would be affected if a number of eastern states don't implement the federal rule. Wayland replied that cannot be assessed at this time because of a lack of information. Senator Williams commented that this makes him suspicious when the agency says it does not know information about states that may opt-out. Chairman White interjected that if a state doesn't have coal-fired power plants and chooses to opt-out it won't make a difference, to which Wayland agreed.

Chairman White then noted that Secretary McGinty testified that technology is available to reduce mercury. Wayland acknowledged that some technologies have been around for several years but mercury-specific control technology is not readily available. Chairman White commented that Secretary McGinty is against the federal "cap and trade" program because she believes it creates hot spots. She asked Wayland if he agrees with the theory of hot spots. Wayland replied that EPA did not see any hot spots when it implemented its sulfur and nitrogen trading programs. He added that the agency did not find hot spots attributed to power plants with its modeling data. If hot spots are discovered, the EPA will address them, he concluded.

Douglas Biden, President of the Electric Power Generation Association (EPGA), emphasized that EPGA's members support the approach to reduce mercury emissions from power plants in SB 1201 because it will not only reduce mercury emissions from Pennsylvania power plants by 86%, but also gives power plants an incentive to overcomply. He said CAIR and CAMR "work in tandem to achieve emission reductions more cost-effectively than in the past". CAIR requires a 70% reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions, and more than 60% reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions, he noted. He added that because Pennsylvania coals have a higher mercury content than the national average, the state has more stringent requirements than the national average. Biden explained that the compliance deadline for CAMR is intentionally later than CAIR because of co-benefits from the scrubbers. Power plant owners will have sufficient time to determine how much they can reduce their mercury emissions via co-benefits under CAIR before meeting their final emission reduction requirements under CAMR, he offered. He suggested that because Pennsylvania power plants face the highest cost of compliance under CAMR, the state would be the greatest beneficiary of an interstate trading program. He commented that no information exists to support the contention that there are hot spots in Pennsylvania. EPGA opposes the DEP rule as currently drafted because it "will only compound the competitive disadvantages for Pennsylvania," he told the committee. Biden remarked that DEP has not presented any information to demonstrate that its proposed rule will result in any measurable, additional benefits over those from the federal regulations. He concluded that EPGA supports the market-based approach of CAMR and SB 1201.

Minority Chairman Musto asked how many states are in the PJM market and how many are considering state-specific mercury rules. Biden said there are 14 states in PJM, and a few states considering it. He added that EPGA opposes a state-specific rule because it will hurt Pennsylvania in the PJM market.

Chairman White asked about the real cost to power plants to comply with CAMR. Biden stated there is an assertion that power plants will overcomply with mercury requirements, but EPGA does not know what it will cost because they don't know what investments will be made. He offered that power plants cannot meet CAIR requirements without substantial investments that will have co-benefits related to mercury emissions. Chairman White said it seems DEP is concerned about a small percentage of mercury reduction that won't be met through the co-benefits of CAIR. Biden responded that he is not sure where DEP's estimate of 90% mercury emission reduction comes from, and he expressed his belief that if states adopt their own rules power plants will go out of business. Chairman White asked about technology for reducing mercury emissions. Biden said the mercury-specific technology does not currently exist.

Senator Stout inquired about the impact if energy generators switch from bituminous to sub-bituminous coal. Biden said he believes much of Pennsylvania's bituminous coal would be replaced. "We can trade emission allowances or we can trade coal," he cautioned. Senator Stout asked about the cost of a scrubber system. Biden replied they cost hundreds of millions of dollars depending on the plant's size.

Senator Don White asked what a state-specific plan would do to Pennsylvania's energy industry. Biden replied that EPGA has not done a cost analysis because it is difficult to get competitors to share information. He commented that he is not sure that Pennsylvania will be an importer of energy but he believes a number of coal-fired power plants will be retired.

Senator Williams stated he is sensitive to the issue of competitiveness and he understands that costs are high to add scrubbers, but we are talking about protecting people's lives. Biden responded that everything he has read on the subject indicates that exposure comes from consumption of fish. He suggested that most people eat mostly ocean fish, and not freshwater fish, so exposure to mercury is not high. He remarked that it is inaccurate to say CAMR will kill babies.

Nathan Wilcox from PennEnvironment testified that given the public health and environmental threats posed by mercury pollution from Pennsylvania's coal-fired power plants, "the Bush administration's weakening of the Clean Air Act's federal mercury pollution reduction requirements, and the availability of mercury pollution control technologies, PennEnvironment supports a state-level mercury rule requiring 90 percent mercury reductions from the state's coal- fired power plants". He added that PennEnvironment is supportive of DEP's state-level proposal to cut mercury pollution from Pennsylvania's coal- fired power plants, and opposes any legislative efforts to block implementation of the proposal. He suggested that reducing mercury from power plants is critical to reducing toxic mercury in the environment and in fish, and thus protecting public health. Trading mercury credits is risky and would likely contribute to mercury hot spots, he suggested. Wilcox then argued that claims that CAMR would reduce mercury emissions by 86% "is simply not true" because Pennsylvania power plants will have the ability to avoid reducing their mercury emissions by purchasing mercury credits from power plants in other states.

Chairman White noted that PennEnvironment put out a press release saying the Legislature has no right in this process, and she asked for clarification. Wilcox replied his organization feels the DEP rules process is the most open to allow public input. Chairman White argued that there are serious policy issues the Legislature should be able to discuss. Chairman White then stated that this is a nationwide issue, adding that Pennsylvania is downwind from other polluting states. She remarked that Pennsylvania will still get air from out-of-state even if the state adopts its own rule. Wilcox agreed, but suggested that reducing emissions in Pennsylvania will have a benefit.

Minority Chairman Musto inquired if hot spots will be created if states don't make state-specific rules. Wilcox answered yes, adding that if Ohio doesn't do anything the entire state of Pennsylvania could be a hot spot. He added that there is nothing the state can do about out-of-state plants but it can improve its own mercury emissions. Minority Chairman Musto remarked that advocates such as PennEnvironment never feel the state government does enough. He said the government is going to address the issue of mercury in the best way for Pennsylvania. He expressed his belief that PennEnvironment would not support than 80% reduction of mercury emissions. Wilcox said they would support in 80% reduction if the plan does not include a credit trading program.

Chairman White cited a study that found sources of mercury cannot be proven because wind moves it around. Wilcox disagreed, arguing that there are studies showing areas with high mercury concentration.

Senator Williams commented that Wilcox's testimony bashes the Bush administration but he never explains PennEnvironment's point of view. Wilcox replied that his organization is against CAMR because it is a rollback of the Clean Air Act. Senator Williams expressed displeasure with the fact that Wilcox accused the legislature of "derailing" something. He suggested that PennEnvironment should work with the legislature and not berate the members because "we are trying to make the best rule for Pennsylvania". Senator Williams then cautioned Wilcox about making judgments regarding hot spots because there is no data to support them. Wilcox responded by explaining that he used the term "derailed" because legislation introduced to implement CAMR does not acknowledge that state- specific proposals exist. On the issue of hot spots, Wilcox replied that all of the information he provided in his testimony is cited from studies.

Melody Zullinger, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs (PFSC), said her organization has been concerned about mercury contamination in Pennsylvania for many years. She stated they do not believe the final rule developed by the federal government goes far enough. She said this is an important issue because "hunting, fishing, and trapping are integral to our life and our economy". Anglers like to eat the fish they catch, she offered, adding that people with lower incomes rely more heavily on locally caught fish because it is a free source of food. "We want a guarantee that mercury pollution is going to go down significantly in our own backyards right here in Pennsylvania," Zullinger told the committee. She then argued that the federal rule will not guarantee reductions in Pennsylvania. She concluded by urging the legislature to work with the administration to craft a rule that works for all Pennsylvanians, and that guarantees reductions in mercury emissions from Pennsylvania's power companies.

Minority Chairman Musto inquired if Sportsmen's Clubs in other states are lobbying on this issue because work needs to be done to reduce mercury emissions in other states as well. Zullinger replied that her organization is only concerned about Pennsylvania, but she noted that national sportsmen's organizations are working on rules in other states. Minority Chairman Musto commented that PFSC seems to be against coal companies. Zullinger replied they are only trying to lower mercury emissions.

Chairman White questioned PFSC's concern that a trading program won't produce emission reductions. Zullinger stated that they want assurances there will be reductions from power plants. Chairman White noted that the EPA stated mercury-specific technology is not available. Zullinger agreed that specific technology is not available but existing scrubbers provide mercury reduction. Chairman White stated using scrubbers should guarantee a reduction. Zullinger replied that a reduction is projected but not guaranteed. Chairman White said the large power plants are going to install the required technology so the small plants are the ones PFSC is concerned about. She remarked that shutting down smaller plants will cause problems with Pennsylvania's electric supply. "It makes sense to me to let the big plants overcomply and then sell credits to smaller plants," she argued. Felice Stadler from the National Wildlife Federation said the issue is credit trading among states. She offered that they do not want to see Pennsylvania power plants trade credits to Ohio and then that state blows mercury back into Pennsylvania.

Senator Williams remarked that the outdoors are a strength for Pennsylvania, and the state needs to reduce mercury emissions but must be careful in how it achieves that goal. He expressed support for a credit trading system, opining that it can lead to major emissions reductions.

Chairman White concluded the meeting by noting that the committee will hold another hearing on this issue next Tuesday, May 2 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 8E-B, East Wing.

Nate Collins, PLS

 

 

 

 

4-5-06

 

Impact Gasoline Additives Have on Fuel Supplies & the Environment

The Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee held a public hearing 4-5-06 on the impact gasoline additives have on fuel supplies and the environment.

Members in attendance included Chair Mary Jo White (R-Venango), Minority Chair Raphael Musto (D-Luzerne) and Senators Edwin Erickson (R-Delaware), John Pippy (R-Allegheny), Barry Stout (D-Washington) and Anthony Williams (D-Philadelphia).

Daniel Desmond, DEP Deputy Secretary of the Office of Energy and Technology Deployment, explained that Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) is a synthetic, organic ether used as an octane enhancer as a replacement for lead. The 1990 federal Clean Air Act Amendments created the federal Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) program to improve air quality in the nation's worst ozone non- attainment areas, he stated. He noted that the RFG program requires specially formulated gasoline blends that provide reductions of ozone- forming pollution. RFG has reduced toxic pollution from gasoline by one- third and its use has lowered cancer risks and respiratory effects to people exposed to vehicle pollution, he indicated. Desmond then offered that there have been several incidents of drinking water and groundwater contamination and high remediation costs, which has led to 25 states enacting MTBE bans. He cited a U.S. Department of the Interior survey which found that 11% of over 350 "ambient" groundwater samples contained trace levels of MTBE. He then stated that the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 05) removed the oxygen content requirement for reformulated gasoline (RFG) and mandates a Renewable Fuels Standard including ethanol. He explained that federal law requires that gasoline used by motorists nationwide has lower volatility in the summer than in the winter, adding that the winter to summer RFG transition for 2006 may be different than in past years because of the repeal of the oxygenate requirement, the federal renewable fuels standard and perceptions of adverse liability due to the continued use of MTBE. With the voluntary removal of MTBE from RFG, refiners believe ethanol is the best alternative to replace the lost fuel and octane, he suggested. Desmond then offered that ethanol from corn will increase octane in gasoline and reduce greenhouse gases by 10-20% and ethanol from cellulose could cut greenhouse gases by 90%. He added that ethanol is less hazardous and easier to remediate than MTBE in the event of a spill. As far as energy balance, he said, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, for every one unit of energy available at the fuel pump, 1.23 units of fossil energy are used to produce gasoline, 0.74 of fossil energy are used to produce corn-based ethanol, and only 0.2 units of fossil energy are used to produce cellulosic ethanol. He acknowledged that some air quality concerns exist related to ethanol. He told the committee it appears Pennsylvania should have sufficient supplies of ethanol to meet the increased demand this driving season. He stated there are several ethanol plants proposed for Pennsylvania with a cumulative total of 290 million gallons per year. Desmond remarked that the use of ethanol in gasoline poses some challenges to the petroleum industry. When blended with gasoline, ethanol is corrosive to pipelines, attracts water, and it disproportionately increases volatility of the resultant fuel when added in even small amounts to gasoline, he explained. He also noted that ethanol is attracted to water, and consequently, storage tanks that have not had water completely removed before filling with an ethanol-blended product could sufficiently contaminate the entire batch of fuel. With proper tank and dispenser preparation, monitoring, and handling, these effects can be eliminated, he concluded.

Chair White asked about the cost of MTBE spills versus normal gas spills. Desmond said he doesn't have that information but he will check if it is available. He added that not all spills are the same as some evaporate and others are difficult to remove from groundwater. Chair White expressed concern about gas shortages and cost spikes, and asked if the market should determine the conversion to ethanol. Desmond replied that the observable marketplace (gas stations) appears to be fine with the conversion but there is concern about the costs of non-observable aspects, including commodity traders. He suggested that cost increases will be less attributable to ethanol as compared to commodities speculators. Chair White commented that it is hard for the state to control the cost of gas, to which Desmond agreed. Chair White then stated Wisconsin attempted to implement a 10% ethanol requirement but did not because of concerns it would worsen the state's ozone requirement. She asked if Pennsylvania should continue to allow the use of MTBE. Desmond clarified that MTBE is currently allowable in Pennsylvania and it can be used. He added that the department won't know the impacts of ethanol until it gets guidelines from the EPA.

Minority Chair Musto asked if DEP is assisting retailers in their efforts to get ready to receive ethanol. Tom Fidler, Deputy Secretary of Air, Recycling and Radiation Protection, replied that the department has not done formal outreach to tank owners or terminal operators. He added that it seems information is being shared across the industry, and it seems the market is taking care of it. Minority Chair Musto expressed concern about the cost to retailers. Fidler said DEP will attempt to determine if information is being shared and, if not, the department will consider providing information to retailers. Minority Chair Musto asked how long it would take for an ethanol plant to be up and running in Pennsylvania. Desmond answered at least 18 months, adding that no projects have broken ground yet.

Senator Pippy asked if the department is looking at early detection of storage tank leaks. Fidler said yes, adding that safeguards are in place, including regular monitoring. He said more can always be done but the program in place works.

Chair White asked about the effect of an ethanol spill. Fidler replied that ethanol is similar to MTBE in the fact that they "like" water. He added that ethanol goes deeper in the groundwater system so it is difficult to remove. Chair White then expressed concern about ethanol spills.

Senator Stout asked how much it will cost the industry to prepare to distribute gasoline with ethanol. Desmond answered that the department does not have that information, but will poll the industry to try to find out. Senator Stout inquired about the cost to build an ethanol plant. Desmond said a plant costs between $30 and $70 million. Senator Stout then asked where the feedstock comes from to create the ethanol. Desmond explained that if cereal grain is being used it comes from both in and out of the state, and if it is cellulose it can be a variety of forms of waste products. He offered that Pennsylvania has grown dramatically in biofuels and is now a biodiesel leader. He expressed confidence that Pennsylvania can be a leader in ethanol-based fuels, which will help reduce our reliance on imported fuel.

Senator Williams asked if the industry is prepared to handle the new technology. Desmond replied that the department is gathering information on readiness and has found that most in the industry are ready.

Rolf Hanson, Executive Director of Associated Petroleum Industries of Pennsylvania (APIP), noted that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 eliminates the reformulated gasoline (RFG) oxygen requirement and stated the industry has long supported its elimination. However, he added, this is a major fuel change that presents significant challenges to fuel providers. He indicated that ethanol requires special handling in transporting the substance to consumers. Because ethanol is highly water-soluble, and water and water vapor are present in storage tanks and petroleum pipelines, ethanol must be transported separately from gasoline, he explained. Hanson told the committee that over 99% of the ethanol produced in the U.S. is derived from corn, adding that it would require roughly half of the entire corn crop grown in the U.S. to provide enough ethanol to replace 10% of the gasoline across the nation. Ethanol must be blended with gasoline at product distribution terminals, he offered, noting that this requires changes to be made at distribution terminals to accept ethanol shipments by rail, truck or barge. Blending equipment at distribution terminals must be upgraded or replaced in order to blend ethanol with gasoline, he stated, adding that making these changes may require securing local, state and federal permits. He suggested that replacing the octane previously provided by MTBE is difficult and can reduce gasoline volume if the octane is made up by refining processes. He then cautioned that the availability of ethanol storage and transportation may be a greater challenge during the first half of 2006 than finding additional ethanol supply.

Senator Williams asked about the difference in cost between ethanol and MTBE. Hanson said based on prices last Friday, ethanol cost 25.8 cents more per gallon. The increased price is because demand outpaces supply, he explained. Senator Williams asked if the price will ever be equal, to which Hanson said it will eventually come down. Senator Williams then expressed concern that the use of corn to make ethanol can drive up the cost of food. Hanson stated his association has not studied that issue, but he offered that in states with increased ethanol use livestock owners have seen increased costs for feed.

Senator Stout asked how much a gallon of gas will increase as a result of the switchover to ethanol. Hanson replied that his organization does not predict prices. He reiterated that as of last Friday, ethanol cost almost 26 cents more per gallon. Senator Stout asked how much it will cost to meet requirements at refineries and distribution terminals. Hanson stated it depends on the size of the refinery or distribution terminal. He said he has received an estimate from one operator that it will cost $30 million for 13 distribution terminals. Senator Stout inquired about different fuel sources that can be used to make ethanol. Hanson replied that a move needs to be made away from corn to other products including waste. Senator Stout asked if Hanson supports creating a reserve of ethanol. Hanson replied that it may be a good thing to look into.

Chair White expressed concern about supply disruptions. She then asked about environmental benefits of ethanol. Hanson replied that it helps reduce carbon monoxide but it increases volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Chair White commented that there is no definitive information on the environmental benefits of ethanol.

Senator Pippy then asked about ethanol's affect on cars because of its corrosiveness. Hanson stated 97% of cars can handle a 10% blend of ethanol. He added that classic cars are exempted from this requirement in most states banning MTBE.

Joseph Lee, Vice President of the Lyondell Chemical Company, said his company is a major merchant supplier of MTBE and an ethanol-based product called ETBE. He offered that because of its excellent blending properties, MTBE has the ability to extend gasoline supplies by allowing other components to be blended into gasoline. He then argued against a Pennsylvania ban of MTBE because:

·  Congress did not ban MTBE in the newly adopted federal energy bill

·  Ban bills reduce critical supplies of gasoline when it is needed most