Project at a Glance
Project Status: complete
Title: Further studies of innovative and more effective state air pollution control strategies
Principal Investigator / Author(s): Schwartz, Jeffrey H.
Contractor: Schwartz & Connolly, Inc.
Contract Number: A8-169-10
Research Program Area: Economic Analysis
This report is prepared and presented by Schwartz & Connolly, Inc. in accordance with California Air Resources Board Agreement Number A8-169-10. That contract calls for the performance of four tasks, the first of which is as follows:
1. a. Survey state and local agencies (e.g. air pollution control, transportation, councils of government) to determine which propose implementing control measures more effective than the EPA New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM), or found in the Control Technology Guidelines (CTG).
b. Collate list of more effective controls, the agency responsible, and agency contact for further information.
c. Provide report with respect to this task.
In accordance with subsequent conversations with the CARB Executive Officer and Project Officer, this task was interpreted to include the compilation of information regarding innovative transportation control measures, air quality maintenance plans, land use requirements, ambient air standards, permit conditions or requirements and other pertinent strategies for control of pollutants to which national ambient air quality standards are applicable. In addition, while emphasis was not to be placed on this objective, if information could be developed on the regulation of non-criteria pollutants without undue time or expense, that was to be included in the Task I report.
Thus, as required by the contract and by subsequent oral interpretation, Schwartz & Connolly, Inc. undertook a survey of the activities of a number of state and local air pollution agencies to identify the control strategies or regulations which officials considered more innovative, more effective or more restrictive than federal requirements. In this regard, it should be noted that no effort was made at this stage to verify the accuracy of the officials' perceptions regarding the relative stringency of their regulations and federal requirements. A total of fifteen states, two localities (Houston and New York), two public interest groups, EPA head-quarters and a number of EPA regional offices have been contacted thus far. Only Iowa and New York State turned out not to have any regulations which they believed to be more restrictive than federal requirements. This report summarizes the results of this survey to date.
The main text of the report is divided into three sections. In the first section, the survey results are grouped into ten key issue areas which facilitate discussion and state-by-state comparisons. The second section gives a state-by-state summary which highlights each state's innovative or particularly stringent activities, and explores the topics discussed in Section I in greater depth. Also in this section is the name and telephone number of each person contacted. In the third section, areas for additional investigation and analysis are suggested. Appendix A provides a survey of state ambient air quality standards for TSP, NO2 and SO2. Appendix B provides a comparative table of federal and state standards for coal fired power plants.
The fifteen states are Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Wyoming.
For questions regarding research reports, contact: Heather Choi at (916) 322-3893
Stay involved, sign up with ARB's Research Email Listserver