Group Against Smog and Pollution (GASP) again joined residents and fellow advocates to tell Allegheny County Council: You must get the long-sought air quality permit fee schedule changes on the agenda for a discussion and vote at the next possible meeting. Our executive director Patrick Campbell was among those who addressed the board. Here's what he told them: Good evening, Allegheny County Council. I'm Patrick Campbell, executive director of the Group Against Smog and Pollution, or GASP. We’ve been tirelessly working to improve our region’s air quality since 1969. Now that the important work of democracy finished yesterday, I hope we have the capacity to attend to the people’s business. One of which is protecting their health and wellbeing by putting ACHD’s permit fee increase proposal on the agenda for a discussion and vote. Your constituents have been turning out in droves, meeting after meeting, practically begging you to do something. Anything that meaningfully demonstrates where you are in this process! This isn't some abstract philosophical debate. The fee schedule changes are not punitive. They are administrative. The increased fees are based on what it costs ACHD to provide professional services to the companies that are seeking permits so they can do business here in Allegheny County. Those services include modeling our air quality, assessing health risks, and processing permits for major industrial facilities. And The Clean Air Act is quite clear: Allegheny County must have the resources and personnel to effectively manage these essential services and publish complete, effective permits. That means charging fees that actually cover the cost of administering the program. The proposal progressed efficiently through the established channels – that is, until it reached this body. And then, poof! It vanished into the procedural abyss. Despite our collective pleas, we still don’t have any idea why there is such opposition to the proposal. Your inaction has already come at a cost. Because it looks to the public like this body put politics above good governance, nearly a half million dollars that should have gone directly to community-led projects to improve public health instead will be used to cover the very administrative costs this fee increase was meant to address. While public shows of support for the Health Department are good and appropriate, providing them with the resources they need is far better. Please put the fee schedule changes on the next agenda for a discussion and vote. Thank you. Editor's Note: After the meeting concluded, Council President Pat Catena and Health and Human Services Committee Chair Paul Klein could be heard discussing the issue briefly, mulling a June vote. GASP continues to follow this issue closely and will keep you posted.

Yinz ready to rally? We hope so. Because for months, residents have waited for a vote on crucial air quality permit fee schedule changes. We need action on this proposal now. A rally and press conference will be held in the Allegheny County Courthouse Courtyard to call for leadership transparency on this issue. Here's what you need to know if you wanna go: WHAT? Press conference and rally before the Allegheny County Council meeting. WHEN? 4 p.m. tomorrow, Wednesday, May 21. We will walk to the Allegheny County Courthouse from PennFuture’s Office (at 200 First Ave, Pittsburgh PA 15222), where the rally and press conference will take place. WHO? GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell will be among six people to speak out on the need for a fully funded air quality program. WHY? There has been too much confusion and controversy about what these fees are and why they are necessary. These fees are NOT fines. They are the cost the county needs to operate the air quality program and keep it running efficiently. We hope to see you there! Need a little more background info? More info can be found here.

So, what are yinz doing at 7 p.m. May 27th? We know that’s a very specific question - here’s what’s going on: Many of you know our good friend, the incredibly talented local filmmaker Mark Dixon. Well, Mark is putting the finishing touches on his much-anticipated new documentary, "Inversion: The Unfinished Business of Pittsburgh's Air," and from what we've seen, it's really powerful stuff. Just recently, he shared some preview clips of "Inversion" at the Pittsburgh Documentary Salon, and Mark mentioned it was a GREAT time sharing and discussing the film with an eager audience.  He was grateful for all the encouraging comments, useful feedback, and the fantastic conversation that followed. We even heard there were a few tears shed – a true testament to the film's impact! So, what's "Inversion" all about? Mark's film dives deep into a subject close to all our hearts here in Southwestern Pennsylvania: our air quality.  It explores the ongoing struggle for clean air in the greater Pittsburgh region, a fight that became even more urgent after the catastrophic fire at U.S. Steel's Clairton Coke Works.  That event, as many of you painfully remember, took our already struggling air quality from bad to worse. "Inversion" highlights how decades of grassroots organizing are now coming to a head as our community stands up to assert its fundamental right to breathe clean air. For more than 50 years, GASP has been on the front lines, advocating, educating, and fighting for the right to clean air for everyone in our region and we truly believe a documentary like "Inversion” - created by a filmmaker who truly gets it - is an incredible way to bring these vital issues to an even wider audience.  It tells our  stories, our  struggles, and most importantly, our  enduring hope and determination. Hearing about the amazing response – the engaging discussions, the emotional reactions – just fuels our anticipation to see the full film. It’s clear that "Inversion" will be a significant conversation starter and a powerful tool for change. So, back to our question about what you all are doing at 7 p.m. May 27…Mark is hosting a Zoom event to share the same preview material. “This is a fantastic opportunity to get a sneak peek and be part of the conversation,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. So, if you’d like to join us for a sneak peek, here’s the registration link:   https://bluelens.zoom.us/meeting/register/VUOrUwnrT8GmZon-XHP_nA

This May - in observance of Asthma Awareness Month - the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) announced it is “deepening its commitment to addressing one of the region's most persistent public health challenges—asthma.” With a focus on education, prevention, and equitable care, ACHD is working alongside trusted partners to empower residents with the tools they need to breathe easier every day. ACHD said that through its Asthma Taskforce and the Allegheny County Asthma Control Program, ACHD delivers a wide range of resources and interventions, including: School Asthma Initiatives (SAIs) that equip educators and families with action plans and support Free home asthma assessments to identify and address environmental triggers Training programs for asthma management facilitators Clinical referrals and environmental education for families in need Residents are encouraged to explore free resources, educational materials, and local events by visiting the ACHD Asthma Program website.

Editor’s Note: The Allegheny County Health Department periodically updates its website to include documents related to air quality enforcement actions. As part of our watchdog work, GASP monitors this webpage, and reports on the air quality violations posted there.  The Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) in March issued U.S. Steel a demand for stipulated penalties in the amount of $238,675 for air quality violations that occurred at the Clairton Coke Works between July 1, 2023, and Sept. 30, 2023. While the demand was dated March 31, it was only recently posted to the ACHD enforcement docket. The demand letter details the various types of violations and includes myriad charts and graphs - you can check it out here. Per the terms of a 2019 settlement agreement between ACHD and the company, 90 percent of the fine ($214,807) will go to a Community Benefit Trust that you can read more about here. The remaining 10 percent ($25,867) will go to ACHD as a civil penalty. We also want to flag this detail in the document, which will become relevant when we tell you about another demand for stipulated penalties ACHD issued to U.S. Steel back in December: (ACHD and U.S. Steel) are in (negotiations) of previous demands and will address any remainder settlement credits through the dispute resolution process or future demand letters. That demand, dated Dec. 13 but just recently posted to ACHD’s enforcement docket, reflected penalties assessed for air quality violations that occurred at Clairton Coke Works from April 1, 2023, to June 30, 2023. While the original total for those violations was $170,950, that total was reduced to just $98,485 based on the terms of a settlement agreement reached between U.S. Steel and ACHD on Sept. 22, 2023, regarding previous demands. Ninety percent of those penalties will go to the Community Benefit Trust established by the 2019 settlement agreement we mentioned earlier, with the remaining 10 percent going to ACHD in the form of a civil penalty. ACHD also took enforcement action against: Allegheny Valley Joint Sewer Authority and F/K Industries Inc  for failing to properly notify ACHD before proceeding with asbestos abatement. The department issued a $1,485 civil penalty. Amari Painting & Lining LLC  for performing abrasive blasting without a permit. ACHD issued a $3,400 civil penalty. Century Townhomes  for failing to perform an asbestos survey prior to renovation activities. Tom Shernisky  for disturbing asbestos-containing material without certifications or licensing.  GASP continues to monitor the enforcement and appeals dockets and will keep you posted as new documents are made available.

We   blogged  last month about an invitation that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made to sources of hazardous air pollutants (or HAPS) to apply for Presidential exemptions from certain National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (or NESHAPs), as well as   the exemption that the President granted  to six coal-fired electric generating units from a 2024 NESHAPs that applies to them. How is that possible? To review, section 112(i)(4) of the Clean Air Act gives the President the power to exempt a source from the requirements of a NESHAPs if two conditions are met: “the technology to implement [the NESHAPs] is not available;” and  “it is in the national security interest of the United States” to grant the requested exemption. The President has already granted NESHAPs exemptions to all the coal-fired electric generating units that asked for them, including six in western Pennsylvania.   “And he did so in a wholly conclusory manner – the Executive Order that granted the exemptions to “ America’s beautiful clean coal industry ” did not explain why the technology to implement the NESHAPs was unavailable or how national security would be impacted were any one coal-fired electrical generating unit required to implement those controls,” GASP senior staff attorney John Baillie explained. In light of all this, we wanted to take a look at the other facilities in our region that requested exemptions to get a sense of whether those exemptions should be granted.   “Or perhaps more to the point, whether the exemptions that the President ultimately doles out rest on good grounds and will thus be able to withstand a legal challenge if one is brought,” Baillie said. As we go through our analysis, let’s assume that the President will contrive reasons to find that it is in the interest of national security to grant the request of the sources that applied for them, as he did with the requests made by coal-fired electric generating units.   And given that assumption, keep in mind that we should expect courts to defer to the President’s determinations regarding national security – judges are experts in the law, not national defense.  Generally speaking, what the President says goes in such matters.  Accordingly, we’ll assume that the President will deem every exemption request to meet section 112(i)(4)’s national security prong and focus instead on the second prong – the availability of the control technologies that are needed to comply with the revised NESHAPs – as we look at the remaining requests and offer our verdicts on whether exemptions that the President grants would survive a legal challenge. What’s the verdict likely to be for the other local sources’ requests to be exempted from the requirements of the revised NESHAPs that apply to them? Let’s take a look: American Contract Systems and Cosmed Group Inc.: NESHAPs for Facilities that Use Ethylene Oxide to Sterilize Medical Devices or Equipment American Contract Systems (ACS) of Zelienople and Cosmed Group Inc.of Erie are facilities that use ethylene oxide (EtO) to sterilize medical devices.   We   blogged  about the efforts by these sources to come into compliance with the Ethylene Oxide Emission Standards for Sterilization Facilities (or EtO NESHAPs for short) when that standard was first promulgated in April 2024.   Both ACS and Cosmed have requested exemptions from that standard. But both sources would seem to fail section 112(i)(4)’s first prong: We know the control technology to implement the EtO NESHAPs is available to them because they already have that control technology installed and implemented  – see   this  and   this  (under the heading Additional Details).  Accordingly, even if American Contract Systems, Cosmed Group, or the President can contrive a national security interest that would support granting one or both of them an exemption (who knows, maybe the medical devices they sterilize are used by the military, or could not be obtained from abroad if there were a war), the exemption would not seem to satisfy section 112(i)(4)’s requirement that the control technology needed to comply with the EtO NESHAPs is not available.  THE VERDICT : Any exemptions for these sources should not survive a legal challenge. U.S. Steel’s Mon Valley Works: NESHAPs for Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing Facilities The only remaining integrated iron and steel manufacturing facility in our region, U.S. Steel’s Mon Valley Works, applied for an exemption from the 2024 revisions to the NESHAPs for such facilities. The 2024 revisions to the NESHAPs for integrated iron and steel manufacturing facilities added a number of new emission limits and operating requirements: New or revised limits for the HAPs polycyclic organic compounds, dioxins and furans, carbonyl sulfide, CS2, mercury, hydrochloric acid, and hydrogen fluoride in sinter plants’ emissions; New opacity limits for emissions from planned and unplanned bleeder valve openings, slag pits, beaching, and bell leaks, as well as new work practice standards for those sources; New emission limits for the HAPs total hydrocarbons, hydrochloric acid, and dioxins and furans in emissions from blast furnace stoves and basic oxygen process furnaces, as well as new work practice requirements for basic oxygen process furnace shops; New limits for the HAPs total hydrocarbons and hydrochloric acid in blast furnaces’ emissions; and A fence line monitoring requirement for chromium. For the purpose of this analysis, the most interesting new NESHAPs requirements are the first, third, and fourth ones: The new limits for emissions of certain HAPs.   EPA is imposing these limits because in 2020 a federal Court of Appeals determined that section 112(d)(6) of the Act requires EPA to set limits for all  HAPs listed by EPA under section 112 of the Clean Air Act that are emitted by facilities subject to a particular NESHAPs when it revises that NESHAPs, not just the ones that the original NESHAPs regulated.  Although iron and steel manufacturing facilities are known to emit the HAPs subject to these new limits, the HAPs were not regulated by the original NESHAPs for the iron and steel manufacturing source category.   Consequently, not a lot of data about those emissions exists.   Thus, it seems that EPA may have based the new emission limits on less data than it would normally have before establishing them. It is also possible that EPA had no emissions data at all from some of the facilities that are subject to the NESHAPs. Indeed, EPA itself “acknowledge[d] that there are uncertainties because of the limited data.”   Due to those uncertainties, it is difficult to say for sure that there is available control technology for the newly regulated HAPs at each iron and steel manufacturing facility subject to the 2024 revisions to the NESHAPs. There very well might be, but it is not certain.   Accordingly, if U.S. Steel’s Mon Valley Works do receive an exemption from the 2024 revisions to the iron and steel NESHAPs, the exemption could conceivably survive a legal challenge. If it does so, it would be on factual grounds relating to the difficulty, expense, or impossibility of controlling the HAPs that were previously unregulated by the NESHAPs.  THE VERDICT : Sorry, the jury’s still out. We’ll have to wait and see how this develops if the President grants an exemption. U.S. Steel’s Clairton Works and Cleveland Cliffs’ Monessen Coke Plant: NESHAPs for Coke Ovens Both of the facilities in our region that operate coke ovens (U.S. Steel’s Clairton Works and Cleveland Cliffs’ Monessen Coke Plant) applied for exemptions from the 2024 revisions to the NESHAPs for coke ovens. The 2024 revisions to the NESHAPs for coke ovens added a number of new standards that apply to byproduct coke ovens like the ones at Clairton and Monessen: Continuous fence line monitoring for benzene, an action level for benzene, and a duty to determine the root cause of any exceedance of the benzene action level; Lower limits on the percentage of leaking coke oven doors, lids, and offtake piping; A new method for estimating emissions from leaking coke oven doors; and New emission limits for these HAPs:  acid gases, dioxins and furans, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide, mercury, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (“PAHs”), and volatile organic HAPs. As was the case with the revised 2024 NESHAPs for iron and steel manufacturing facilities, the most pertinent new NESHAPs requirements for coke ovens are under number four above, the new limits for HAPs that were not regulated by the coke oven NESHAPs before they were revised.   Like the new HAP emission limits in the 2024 revisions to the NESHAPs for iron and steel manufacturing, EPA imposed the new HAP emission limits for coke ovens to satisfy its obligations under section 112(d)(6) of the Clean Air Act.  And like the revised 2024 NESHAPs for iron and steel manufacturing facilities, commenters criticized the new emission limits because those limits were purportedly based on insufficient data. However, unlike with the 2024 revised NESHAPs for iron and steel manufacturing facilities, EPA does not appear to have conceded that there are “uncertainties” in the 2024 revised coke oven NESHAPs due to “limited data.”  An interesting side note about the 2024 revisions to the coke oven NESHAPs: So far as we can tell, the only time that regulated sources claimed that one of the revised NESHAPs for which EPA is offering exemptions impacted national security interests was in comments regarding the coke oven NESHAPs.  EPA did not give that claim much credit; it flatly disagreed with the sources’ claim that the 2024 revised NESHAPs would cause coke plants to be shut down. Nevertheless, what we’re faced with is diametrically opposed claims by industry and EPA regarding the sufficiency of the data that EPA used to promulgate the new HAP emission limits for coke ovens. We can’t say for sure that the factual record that EPA established regarding the availability of controls needed to comply with the new emission limits in the 2024 revised NESHAPs for coke ovens is so clear that a challenge to an exemption would necessarily hold up if challenged.  It might or might not, depending on the facts put forward.  THE VERDICT : The jury’s also still out here. Again, we’ll have to wait and see how this develops if the President grants exemptions.       Editor’s Note: GASP continues to follow this issue closely. Stay tuned - we will keep you posted.

Big news, folks: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Monday published notice of its approval of a request to designate Allegheny County as being in attainment for the 2010 one-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard for sulfur dioxide. Little background for yinz: The 2010 SO2 NAAQS is a one-hour average of 75 parts per billion. EPA’s approval is based on data from air quality monitors that demonstrate that all areas of Allegheny County attain the 2010 SO2 standard as well as its determination that the air pollution rules and regulations in effect are sufficient to ensure that it will continue to attain the standard going forward. “Allegheny County’s long-awaited attainment of the 2010 SO2 standard has been the product of years of work by the Allegheny County Health Department and many other stakeholders,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “While we still have work to do when it comes to our local air quality, getting sulfur dioxide levels to comply with the standard and keeping them there is a big victory for public health.”

The sweet scent of spring was truly in the air Monday afternoon as we explored the "hidden gem" known as Barking Slopes alongside GASP members and our partners at the Allegheny Land Trust ! And today, we want to send all who attended a heartfelt THANK YOU! It was inspiring to see so many of you come out to witness the resilience of nature at Barking Slopes. We truly enjoyed delving into the fascinating story of how land use and local industry have intertwined with the environment, shaping the landscape we see today. And wow, did spring put on a show! We were all snapping pics as vibrant wildflowers painted the slopes in breathtaking colors – a true feast for the eyes! It was a joy to share those moments of natural beauty with you all. Beyond the stunning scenery, we were also on the hunt for bio-sensitive, bio-indicative species – nature's own little air quality monitors. The timing of our hike couldn't have been more perfect, aligning with the global City Nature Challenge ! For those who embraced the iNaturalist app, your contributions are invaluable in documenting the incredible biodiversity of our region and connecting with a worldwide community of nature enthusiasts. Missed it? Stay tuned for more opportunities to explore and protect our environment with GASP!

We blogged earlier this month about an invitation the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued to sources of hazardous air pollutants to apply for Presidential exemptions from certain National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (or NESHAPs for short).   By way of background, section 112(i)(4) of the Clean Air Act empowers the President to exempt a source from the requirements of a NESHAPs for up to two years if he determines that two conditions are met: “the technology to implement [the NESHAPs] is not available;” and “it is in the national security interest of the United States” to grant the requested exemption. One more important point about section 112(i)(4): It allows exemptions to be made for sources, not entire categories or industries. We promised follow up on these exemption requests, and events transpired to make us bring you that follow up sooner than we thought.   On Earth Day (!!!) Tuesday, the Federal Register published an Executive Order that relies on section 112(i)(4) to exempt numerous coal-fired electric generating units from the NESHAPs for Coal- and Oil-Fired EGUs under section 112(i)(4), which was published on May 7, 2024, and went into effect on July 8, 2024. Those NESHAPs are referred to as the 2024 Mercury and Air Toxics Standard - or MATS Rule.   For coal-fired EGUs in western Pennsylvania, the most significant change made by the 2024 MATS Rule was a reduction in allowable emissions of filterable particulate matter, which serves as a surrogate for all emissions of metallic hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), excluding mercury.   The lower limit on filterable particulate matter emissions goes into effect in July 2027.  The 2024 MATS Rule left existing limits for coal-fired EGUs’ emissions of the other HAPs regulated by the Rule – hydrochloric acid and mercury – unchanged. So why the exemption?  In the order, the President determined the 2024 MATS Rule “requires compliance with standards that do not yet exist in a commercially viable form,” and thus that the rule’s compliance deadline “raises the unacceptable risk of the shutdown of many coal-fired power plants,” which purportedly would eliminate jobs, place the electrical grid at risk, and threaten “broader, harmful economic and energy security effects,” and in turn “undermine our national security.” Notwithstanding that, it may not come as a surprise that when EPA promulgated the 2024 MATS Rule, it did in fact determine that not only was the technology needed to implement the rule “available,” the “vast majority” of coal-fired EGUs already meet the Rule’s lower emission limit for filterable particulate matter. Further, at least in the comment/response section published in connection with the final 2024 MATS Rule, no one claimed that the rule would impact national security.   The President’s order exempted six coal-fired EGUs in western Pennsylvania from the 2024 MATS Rule for a period of two year s, presumably beginning when the Rule goes into effect in July 2027:   Colver Power Plant  in Cambria County;  Ebensburg Power Plant  in Cambria County;  Scrubgrass Power Plant  in Venango County;  Seward Power Plant in Indiana County (those four electric generating units burn waste coal);  Keystone Generating Station in Armstrong County; and  Conemaugh Generating Station  in Indiana County (the operators of Keystone and Conemaugh have announced that they plan to shut the plants down by the end of 2028, at the latest, in order to avoid having to comply with rules governing coal-fired EGUs’ wastewater discharges). It seems clear that the exemptions do not satisfy section 112(i)(4)’s requirements. Let us count the ways: First , the exemption was made on an industry-wide basis, not a source-by-source basis as section 112(i)(4) plainly requires.   Second , because of the lack of source-by-source determinations, it is impossible to know how the control technology needed to comply with the 2024 MATS Rule might not be “available” to a particular source – if the “vast majority” of coal-fired EGUs are already meeting the new filterable particulate matter emission limit, why (if at all) can’t the six western Pennsylvania electric generating units?   Third (and similarly), it is also impossible to determine how the continued operation of a particular electric generating unit might be claimed to be in the interest of national security – larger coal-fired electric generating units in our region than the six exempted (including the Bruce Mansfield plant and Homer City Station) without anyone claiming that those shutdowns adversely impacted national security.   “The justifications made in the President’s Executive Order are completely conclusory. It would not come as a surprise if the exemptions were challenged in court on any one or more of these bases,” said GASP Senior Attorney John Baillie. Because the exemptions given to coal-fired EGUs seem to be the first exemptions ever made by a President under section 112(i)(4), this is unprecedented stuff. We will continue to follow developments with the administration’s use of section 112(i)(4) and report on them.