Pennsylvania’s road to entering the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) was a rocky one. We kept you posted on the drama, most recently blogging about how the carbon-capture program in the Keystone State was subject to a challenge in court, preventing them from going into effect. Now we’re happy to tell you that this particular soap opera has a happy ending (for now): The regulations went into effect Saturday, April 23, when they were finally published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. “For anyone keeping score at home, the Commonwealth Court stayed publication of the regulations in an ex parte proceeding in early April. Because no hearing was ever held on the stay, it was dissolved by operation of Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1531(d) after five days,” GASP senior attorney John Baillie explained. “The dissolution of the stay also effectively discontinued the state Department of Environmental Protection’s appeal of the stay to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, so challenges to the legality of the regulations are back before the Commonwealth Court, at least for the time being.” We break down everything you need to know about RGGI in a previous post, but in a nutshell: Beginning on July 1, the regulations will cap carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from electric generating units generating capacity of at least 25 megawatts. Additionally, those facilities will be required to purchase carbon dioxide emission allowances, which they can trade with other facilities subject to the regulations. Facilities subject to the regulations will also be subject to additional emission limits and monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The best part? The proceeds from the purchase of allowances will be used to fund energy efficiency projects. For those who want to get into the nitty-gritty: The regs cap carbon dioxide emissions from Energy Generating Units in the state to 40.7 million tons for the second half of 2022, and 75.5 million tons for the full 2023 calendar year. The cap decreases every year thereafter until 2030, when it reaches (and will remain at) 58 million tons. “Note, however, that this year’s cap might not force any actual, immediate emission reductions,” Baillie said. “ In 2018 – the latest year included in the DEP’s Pennsylvania Greenhouse Gas Inventory – the total carbon dioxide emissions was reported to be about 73 million tons. Because carbon dioxide emissions from energy generating units have been trending steadily lower for years, they are likely to be somewhat lower in 2022 than they were in 2018.” #RegionalGreenhouseGasInitiative #RGGI #CarbonDioxideemissions #emissions #DEP

The Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) on Tuesday announced that it is seeking written public comment on its draft 2023 Air Monitoring Network Plan, an annual report that provides a detailed description of how and where air pollution is monitored in Allegheny County. Little background: Air Monitoring Network Plans are required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They provide the specific location of each monitoring station, siting criteria, monitoring methods and objectives, frequency of sampling, pollutants measured at each station, and aerial photographs showing their physical locations. The 2023 plan is substantially similar to the 2022 Air Monitoring Network Plan except for the proposed move to the air monitoring station from the Clack Campus in Lawrenceville to Fulton Street on the Northside. For inquiring minds that want to learn more specifics, a summary of all proposed changes may be found in the Executive Summary of the draft plan, beginning on page six. The county’s air monitoring network includes nine locations: Avalon, Clairton, Flag Plaza, Glassport, Harrison, Lawrenceville, Liberty, North Braddock, Parkway East (Wilkinsburg), and South Fayette. One or more of the following pollutants is measured at each site: sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, total reactive nitrogen, ozone, PM10, PM2.5, and air toxics. Comments will be accepted until 4:30 p.m. on June 9 and may be submitted via e-mail to david.good@alleghenycounty.us or by mail to: Allegheny County Health Department Attention: David D. Good Air Quality Program 301 39th Street Pittsburgh, PA 15201 All correspondence must include first and last names and a complete mailing address. GASP staff is reviewing the plan and will be offering public comments. We’ll keep you posted so stay tuned. #airqualitymonitors #AlleghenyCounty #AlleghenyCountyHealthDepartment #ACHD #2023AirMonitoringNetworkPlan

GASP joined residents and fellow clean air advocates at a public hearing in Clairton Wednesday night to tell the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) that its revised coke oven regulations must do more to protect the community from emissions emanating from U.S. Steel’s Mon Valley Works operations. In his testimony, GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell would have homed in on the Mon Valley’s hydrogen sulfide (H2S) problem and encouraged health officials to take advantage of this opportunity to make meaningful changes to the revised regulations. We said “would have” because, despite registering to speak via the ACHD website well before the deadline, GASP was not called on to testify. We get that technical glitches do happen and have reached out to ACHD to get answers and prevent such issues from happening in the future – the department’s IT department is looking into it. “We showed up not only to provide comments on the coke oven regulations but to also support and help buoy the voices and experiences of the Mon Valley residents who have bravely spoken out at public hearings despite jeering bullies like the ones we saw in full force last night,” Patrick said. “So while it was disappointing not being able to testify, we’re glad we were able to be there to support our friends.” So here’s what we *would* have said if GASP was provided the opportunity to comment – HUGE shoutout to our friend Mark Dixon, a local filmmaker and activist, who kindly filmed Patrick following last night’s meeting. We highly recommend you check out the trailer for his upcoming documentary, “Inversion: The Unfinished Business of Pittsburgh’s Air” here. Stay tuned – we’ll keep you posted as the process continues and more information on the coke oven regulations becomes available. #H2Sexceedances #cokeovenregulations #H2S #cokeovenrules #airpollution #USSteelMonValleyWorks #hydrogensulfide #LibertyMonitor #hydrogensulfideexceedance #AlleghenyCountyHealthDepartment #cokeovenemissions #cokeovenregulation #ACHD #USSteelClairtonCokeWorks #airquality

BIG NEWS: U.S. Steel will pay a $1.5 million penalty and make extensive improvements at its Edgar Thomson facility in Braddock Borough as part of a settlement announced Tuesday with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) for longstanding air pollution violations. The consent decree addresses numerous Clean Air Act violations dating back to 2016 at the Edgar Thomson Works. The one-mile radius around the facility is an area of potential environmental justice concern, exceeding the state average for the percentage of low-income populations and for minority populations. Here’s what a release issued by the EPA said: “Everyone has the right to clean air and the Allegheny County Health Department continues to work to ensure that right for all residents,” said ACHD Director Dr. Debra Bogen, Director of the Allegheny County Health Department. “This settlement is another step toward that goal in Braddock and surrounding communities, many of which are designated environmental justice communities. We are pleased that a large portion of the Health Department’s share of the civil penalty will directly benefit Braddock and other Mon Valley communities that experience a disproportionate share of the environmental impact of the pollution this consent decree concerns.” Under the settlement, U.S. Steel is required to make numerous improvements in training, monitoring and work practices to increase compliance and timely response to air pollution. Additionally, the company is tasked with conducting studies on potential improvements to its pollution control systems. The primary pollutant of concern is particulate matter, including PM 2.5. Particulate matter contains microscopic solids or liquid droplets that are so small that they can be inhaled and cause serious health problems. Some particles less than 10 micrometers in diameter can get deep into your lungs and some may even get into your bloodstream. Particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5) pose the greatest risk to health, including susceptibility to respiratory diseases, including acute respiratory distress, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and lung cancer. Although the Pittsburgh area – which includes Braddock – continues to be plagued by air quality issues that face many metropolitan areas, the ACHD announced in April that for the second year in a row, Allegheny County has met federal air quality standards for PM2.5 at the eight air quality monitors that it monitors around the city. The settlement announced today also includes a supplemental environmental project solely credited against ACHD’s share of the penalty in which U.S. Steel would provide funding to the Allegheny County Department of Economic Development for a specific environmental project. Specifically, U.S. Steel will provide $750,000 in funding to the Allegheny County Department of Economic Development in support of the creation of a multimodal connection trail for hikers and bicyclists that links the Great Allegheny Passage in Rankin Borough to the Westmoreland Heritage Trail in Trafford Borough through the Turtle Creek Valley. The project will create another multimodal connection to communities near U.S. Steel Edgar Thomson Work, including Rankin, Braddock, North Braddock, East Pittsburgh, Turtle Creek, Wilmerding, Monroeville, Pitcairn, and Trafford, North Versailles, East McKeesport and Wall. ACHD, the co-plaintiff with EPA, is the local governmental entity charged with enforcement of Allegheny County’s air pollution control regulations. ACHD has participated fully in the collection of evidence, and the negotiation of the consent decree. For an overview of the Clean Air Act and more information about air pollution, visit: https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview GASP has been demanding answers for YEARS about exactly when – and how – U.S. Steel’s Edgar Thomson facility was being forced to comply with clean air laws since a 2017 joint enforcement order from ACHD and EPA. “U.S. Steel’s Edgar Thomson plant has harmed the health and quality of life of Mon Valley residents for too long. They deserve answers and they deserve action,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “Our attorneys are sifting through the more than 150-page consent decree and will likely be submitted public comments when the time comes.” GASP continues to follow this issue closely. Stay tuned, we’ll keep you posted. #airqualityviolations #EdgarThomson #USSteel #emissions #AlleghenyCountyHealthDepartment #ACHD #EPA #EdgarThomsoncomplianceplan #MonValleyWorks

They say life is a game of inches. We think environmental advocacy is, too. For us, the fight for cleaner air started back in 1969 in our founder’s living room, and with your help, we’ve been growing and scrapping ever since. While the wheels of progress move more slowly than any of us would like,  it’s crucial to stop every once in a while and assess just how far all those inches have brought us. Now is one of those times. Over the past year, we’ve seen those wheels move just a little faster, slowly gaining momentum.  And if there’s one thing that we’ve learned over the past 53 years, it’s that momentum matters. Case in point: Hydrogen sulfide (or H2S for short). If you live within smelling distance of the Mon Valley, you know the tell-tale H2S stench of rotten eggs all too well. You know how it seeps into your home, how it can be so overpowering that it wakes you from sleep, how it can irritate your eyes, nose, and throat. GASP intensified our work on H2S  over the past year, demanding that the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) get to the bottom of what was causing regular exceedances of the H2S standard in the Mon Valley as well as develop a plan to remedy the problem. Many of you reading this joined us at public hearings and spoke up at Board of Health meetings to send the message to our county about air quality: we deserve more from our public health leaders. They’re starting to listen. The ACHD announced in March that it had conducted a comprehensive study analyzing the potential sources of H2S driving exceedances of Pennsylvania’s 24-hour average standard at its Liberty Borough air quality monitor – exactly the sort of in-depth study GASP has advocated for over the past few years. The study found – and we’re quoting directly: “Based on all available data and resources, H2S exceedances that occurred at the Liberty site during the period of Jan. 1, 2020, through March 1, 2022, can be attributed entirely to emissions originating at US Steel’s Clairton coking facility.” That mic drop was followed days later by the announcement of a $1.8 million enforcement action against U.S. Steel for a spate of H2S violations at its Clairton Coke Works. A few days after, the ACHD issued yet another multi-million dollar fine against the steel-making giant for even more air quality violations at the coke facility. Just this month came some very good news: approval of a $30,000 Clean Air Fund request to finance the development of a research study to measure the impact of hydrogen sulfide and other airborne pollutants on the health of Allegheny County residents. To us, these actions exemplify how much can be accomplished when watchdog organizations like us team up with people like you – people who aren’t afraid to say, “We deserve better. Now we’re demanding better.” Over the past few months, GASP has welcomed new board members and expanded the scope of our watchdog work. We’ve embarked on a new era of education and activism and hope you’ll join us for the ride. You really have been the best co-pilot. We promise it will be worth it. Right now, there are many exciting programs in the works. This summer, we’ll begin our Air Quality Ambassador work with the ACHD, helping to educate the community about the Mon Valley Air Pollution Episode Rule and ensuring they are armed with the best information and signed up for public health alerts. GASP will also be starting a brand new “boot camp” for local elected officials to help them understand all things air quality, and what they can do to be better public health stewards. Given all this positive change, we thought it would be fitting to announce something else that’ll be different about GASP moving forward: our logo (check out that image above). While we loved our colorful, ‘70s-era emblem, it’s time for us to show outwardly what we’ve known to be true for quite a while; we’ve evolved. With your support, we’ll continue to evolve. When you make a donation, know we greatly appreciate the support and will put that money to good use. You can donate by check or via our website here. If you prefer, our member services manager Kathy Lawson can also process credit card donations over the phone – just email her at kathy@gasp-pgh.org. Let’s work together to keep the momentum and the wheels of progress moving. Yours For Clean Air, Patrick Campbell, Executive Director Jonathan Nadle, President

Climate change is more and more evident around the world, from storms and floods to droughts and wildfires. Pennsylvania is particularly problematic. The Keystone State remains among the heaviest fossil carbon emitters in the nation, and after a brief pandemic dip, our emissions are ticking up again. Sadly, the majority of Pennsylvania lawmakers are not taking climate change seriously, and this June activists from across the Commonwealth – GASP included – will converge on Harrisburg to call them to account for their inaction. This is where you come in. One of the things we’ll be taking with us to Harrisburg is a petition demanding aggressive Climate Action. Here are five reasons we think you’ll want to join us in signing it: Reason #1. Fracking and Climate Change: How Emissions from the Oil & Gas Industry Are Fueling the Climate Crisis Pennsylvania was the epicenter of the start of Marcellus Shale drilling boom, and all these years later state residents – especially those living in frontline fracking communities – know its impact on environmental and human health. But how does the fracking industry impact the burgeoning climate crisis? Our friends at Food and Water Watch counted the ways in its blog, “9 Ways Fracking Is the Worst – Climate Change is Top of the List.” Here’s an excerpt we found particularly relevant: Natural gas consists mostly of the potent greenhouse gas methane, which traps about 86 times more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. Methane leaks from oil and gas operations, including pipelines, are the number one source of human-caused methane pollution in the country. This means that the greenhouse gas footprint of fracked natural gas is actually worse than coal and oil because methane traps more heat in the atmosphere. Scientists warn that if our planet heats up 2° Celsius more, it could cause irreversibly destructive climate change. Fracked gas is no “bridge fuel” to renewables, it simply substitutes one dirty fuel (coal) for another (fracked gas), making climate change even more costly and destructive in the coming decades. Reason #2: Coal & Climate Change: How Use of this Dirty Fossil Fuel Impacts the Climate Crisis Transforming coal into coke, an ingredient in steelmaking is a dirty process; just ask anyone who lives in the vicinity of a facility like U.S. Steel’s Clairton Coke Works. Local residents know that exposure to coke oven emissions is linked to myriad health problems such as respiratory and cardiovascular ailments and increased cancer risk. For all those reasons and more, GASP has ramped up its outreach and educational efforts over the past several years to ensure southwestern Pennsylvania residents understand how emissions from coke production impact our region’s public health, focusing mostly on fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S). The human and environmental impacts of coke oven gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane can’t be ignored and their role in the climate crisis shouldn’t be, either. Indeed, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) found fossil fuel emissions are the dominant cause of global warming. Consider this: In 2018, a whopping 89 percent of CO2 emissions in the United States emanated from fossil fuels and industry. It’s been estimated that fossil fuel emissions are responsible for one-third of the global average temperature increase that’s occurred so far. That makes it the single greatest source of global temperature rise. For all these reasons, environmental advocates at all levels are pushing for more stringent regulation of coke ovens. In fact, the Allegheny County Health Department is in the midst of updating its coke oven regulations right now. You can read the latest on those revisions, and GASP’s take on them, here. Reason #3: Methane & Climate Change: How this Super-Potent Air Pollutant is Accelerating the Climate Crisis Experts estimate that at least a quarter of today’s global warming is being driven by methane produced by human activity from the energy, industry, agriculture, land use, and waste management sectors. Over the past year, GASP has shone a spotlight on one of the leading sources of methane in the United States: food waste. Nationally, one-sixth of our methane emissions stem from wasted food decomposing in landfills. The good news is that over the past few years, a local nonprofit has championed this issue and helped our area more efficiently tackle the food waste problem. Since its inception, our friends at 412 Food Rescue have rescued has redirected more than 20 million pounds of food in the western Pennsylvania region, equating to 18 million meals and mitigating 11 million pounds of CO2 emissions in the process. #4: Plastic & Climate Change: How Plastics Propel Climate Change You might not realize it, but when you reach into the convenience store cooler for a beverage or other product packaged in single-use plastic, you’re indirectly playing into our air pollution problem. That’s because pollution abounds at every step of the plastic life cycle. Most plastics are made from fossil fuels, which produce numerous emissions when they are extracted from the earth. Some plastics contain phthalates, a class of chemicals used to soften plastics and convey other desirable characteristics. Unfortunately, these chemicals are also known as endocrine disrupters and human exposure, through ingestion, inhalation, and absorption. Exposure is associated with a range of health problems, ranging from infertility to cancer. Then there’s disposal to consider. While many consumers believe that plastics that can be recycled are recycled when they drop them in the weekly collection bin, that isn’t always the case. Here’s why: Many common types of plastic can’t be handled by typical recycling equipment.  Sometimes these recyclable plastics are incinerated or simply landfilled instead, or wind up in waterways and ultimately the oceans, where they are often lethal to marine life. Only about 9 percent of all the plastic ever made has been recycled. Speaking of incineration… Plastic decomposes at an extremely slow rate and is quickly filling up our landfills. However, more than 40 percent of the world’s garbage (including plastic) is incinerated instead of being shipped to dumps, resulting in dangerous chemicals being released into the air environment air, negatively impacting human health, and contributing to climate change. Reason #5: Petrochemicals & Climate Change: Cracker Plants’ Role in the Climate Crisis The extraction, production, transportation, and use of petrochemicals worldwide drive the climate crisis, while also polluting and degrading air, land, and water. The Shell ethane cracker plant in Beaver County will emit half as much CO2 as the entire City of Pittsburgh. The plant is expected to produce as much as 1.6 million tons of polyethylene pellets known as “nurdles” – much of which will be transformed into wasteful single-use plastics. Studies predict cracker plants’ voracious appetite for natural gas will require more than 1000 new gas wells every three to five years, each emitting climate-disrupting air pollutants like CO2 and methane into the ambient air. So, have you heard enough? Ready to sign? Here’s the petition – just fill in your info and we’ll take care of the rest! Easy peasy. Editor's Note: The deadline to sign the petition has passed. Thank you to everyone who joined us in demanding climate action!

One of the cornerstones of GASP’s clean air advocacy is watchdog work. We keep a close eye on more than just air quality data and emissions emanating from industrial polluters – we also work to keep air quality regulators accountable. Here in Allegheny County, that means keeping track of how efficiently our air local quality regulator, the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD), is managing the issuance of new air quality permits and the renewal of old ones. GASP’s legal team first sounded the alarm about a backlog of applications for new or renewed Title V Operating Permits for major sources of air pollution in Allegheny County way back in 2016. Since then, we’ve provided periodic updates about ACHD’s efforts to whittle down that backlog, and even expanded our watchdog work to include information regarding the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) permit backlog. “Yes, strides have been made by the county and state level to reduce the backlog. But there are still too many major sources of air pollution currently operating under an expired permit – and amazingly some that are operating without any operating permit at all,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “It’s clear that more must be done.” Here’s what our research uncovered: First, a little bit of background info: Operating permits for major sources of air pollution are required by Title V of the Clean Air Act and are commonly called Title V Operating Permits. A Title V Operating Permit for a particular facility must contain all of the operating requirements that air pollution laws impose on it. This helps facilitate compliance with those requirements – both regulators and the public can use a facility’s Title V Operating Permit to see what requirements it has to help determine whether the facility is complying with them. A major source must apply for a Title V Operating Permit once it begins normal operations. Good for five years, sources must apply to renew their Title V Operating Permits before their old ones expire. The Clean Air Act, Pennsylvania’s air pollution control rules, and local air pollution control regulations require ACHD complete its review of any complete permit application within 18 months. Notably, the Clean Air Act allows a source that has submitted a complete application for a Title V Operating Permit to continue to operate pending the responsible agency’s final approval of the application, even if agency approval takes years. The Clean Air Act also requires that the operations of the state and local programs that administer Title V Operating Permits be funded entirely from the emissions and permit fees paid by the sources subject to the requirements of Title V. We first blogged about the backlogs of applications for new and renewed operating permits for major sources of air pollution that existed in Allegheny County, where such sources are regulated by ACHD and DEP’s Southwest Regional Office (SWRO) in September 2016. In April 2018, we updated that research and expanded it to include sources permitted by DEP’s other five regional offices. We updated  that research again in 2019, 2020, and 2021. Notably, the fees that DEP charges for permit applications were increased in early 2021.  The old fee structure was purportedly insufficient to fund the operations of DEP’s Air Quality Bureau and the increased fees are purportedly sufficient to allow the Air Quality Bureau to fulfill its mission.  ACHD also revised its fee schedule to track DEP’s in 2021. “This is really the first year that we would hope to see if the fee increases are having a positive effect on turnaround times for Title V Operating Permits but, in fact, it looks like the fee increases, unfortunately, have had little positive impact,” GASP senior attorney John Baillie said. Here’s where things stand now: There are now 23 major sources operating in Allegheny County and two of those facilities have applied for, but have never been issued, Title V Operating Permits: ATI Flat-Rolled Products (which was formerly known as Allegheny Ludlum Brackenridge Works) and Eastman Chemicals & Resins. Although ACHD published a draft Title V Operating Permit for Allegheny Ludlum’s Brackenridge Works in 2016, that draft revealed problems with the way proposed emission limits for the facility were determined and those problems have yet to be resolved, further delaying issuance of the Title V Operating Permit. Eastman Chemical is subject to a 2011 federal and state Consent Decree that has a direct impact on its air quality permits and that effectively precluded the issuance of a Title V Operating Permit until it has been satisfied (which has yet to occur). Eastman Chemical finally submitted its application for a Title V Operating Permit earlier this year. Then there are the facilities with expired permits. ACHD has failed to act on renewal applications for another three of those 23 major sources within 18 months as its regulations require: Now let’s pivot to DEP’s permit backlog, which we will examine by region. DEP’s Southwest Region For purposes of air quality permitting, the region includes sources in Beaver, Cambria, Greene, Somerset, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties. Responsibility for administering the Title V permitting program for sources in Armstrong and Indiana Counties was transferred from the SWRO to DEP’s Northwest Regional Office in early 2019. We currently count 51 major sources in the Southwest Region. One of those facilities, the Brunner Landfill in Beaver County, has applied for, but never been issued, a Title V Operating Permit. Another six sources in the SWRO have renewal applications for operating permits that have been pending for more than 18 months. DEP’s Northwest Region The Northwest Regional Office includes Armstrong and Indiana Counties for Title V permitting purposes, as well as Butler, Clarion, Crawford, Elk, Erie, Forest, Jefferson, Lawrence, McKean, Mercer, and Venango Counties.  We count 65 active major sources of air pollution in the Northwest Region. One of those 65 facilities has had a renewal application for its Title V Operating Permit pending for more than 18 months: DEP’s Northcentral Region DEP’s Northcentral Region includes Bradford, Cameron, Centre, Clearfield, Clinton, Columbia, Lycoming, Montour, Northumberland, Potter, Snyder, Sullivan, Tioga, and Union Counties. We counted 53 major sources of air pollution in the Northcentral Region. None of them have a renewal application that has been pending for more than 18 months. All sites in the region either have a current Title V Operating Permit or submitted an application for a renewal within the last 18 months. DEP’s Southcentral Region DEP’s Southcentral Region includes Adams, Bedford, Berks, Blair, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Fulton, Huntington, Juniata, Lancaster, Lebanon, Mifflin, Perry, and York Counties.  We counted 111 active major sources of air pollution in these counties, none of which have had a renewal application for a Title V Operating Permit pending for more than eighteen months. All major sources in DEP’s Southcentral Region either have a current Title V Operating Permit or submitted a renewal application within the last 18 months. DEP’s Northeast Region DEP’s Northeast Region includes Carbon, Lackawanna, Lehigh, Luzerne, Monroe, Northampton, Pike, Schuykill, Susquehanna, Wayne, and Wyoming Counties. We counted 60 active major sources of air pollution in those counties, four of which have had applications for their Title V Operating Permits pending for at least 18 months. The American Zinc Recycling facility is subject to a proposed Consent Decree with the United States and DEP that involves violations of the air pollution laws; presumably, the Title V Operating Permit for that facility will not be renewed until the facility has fully complied with that Consent Decree and its terms can be incorporated into the permit. Also worth noting: DEP’s eFACTS website (which tracks the status of facility permits) does not show that Keystone Recovery has applied to renew or replace its operating permit as of May 25, 2022; a source violates the air pollution laws if it continues to operate without submitting a timely application to renew or replace its operating permit. DEP’s Southeast Region DEP’s Southeast Region includes Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery Counties for purposes of permitting sources of air pollution (Philadelphia’s Air Management Services administers the Title V permitting program for facilities located in Philadelphia). We counted 86 active major sources of air pollution in the Southeast Region, three of which have had renewal applications for Title V Operating Permits pending for more than 18 months. Here’s a summary of what the permit backlogs at ACHD and DEP’s regional offices have looked like since 2018: “The results of this year’s investigation are really a mixed bag,” Baillie said.  “It is encouraging to see how the agencies have improved their performance in recent years, but discouraging to see that some agencies still lag behind even after they increased permitting fees.”

Fellow breathers, your help is needed today at the intersection of art and air pollution. A local artist reached out to GASP to help get the word out about an upcoming art exhibition in Ohio. Here’s what our friend Erin Mallea sent us: I’m looking for folks to lend their expertise related to industrial and pollution smells in the region. I’m gathering information to help create perfumes that mimic regional pollution scents as part of an exhibition at the Cleveland Sculpture Center. I also hope to use the perfumes to support clean-air education and advocacy.If you are interested in lending your expertise, please fill out this form. After gathering your smell descriptions (in addition to data compiled by SmellPGH), I will be working with a perfumer to create a few samples (it can take a few months). At that point, I will need your help to smell samples and provide feedback so they can be more accurate. Perfume samples will be carcinogen free, sulfate free, paraben free, vegan and meet international health and safety standards (more specific information can be provided).Thanks and I’m looking forward to connecting with you! Please feel free to reach out.

By now, the news has been widely reported: County and federal air quality regulators have entered into a proposed consent decree with U.S. Steel to settle years of air quality violations at its Edgar Thomson Plant. The proposed decree – signed and sealed by the Mon Valley’s most egregious air polluter, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) – calls for U.S. Steel to pay a $1.5 million civil penalty and make numerous improvements to the North Braddock facility. But the devil, as they say, is in the details, and there are a lot of details. The proposed consent decree is the end result of a joint enforcement action (EPA and ACHD cooperating) against the company that began in 2017 and is a whopping 157 pages long. It includes complex and technical information that details everything from recent maintenance and operations improvements made at Edgar Thomson and required future compliance initiatives to how the public can weigh in on the proposed decree. Yes, our continued use of the proposed prefix is very purposeful. While most news media reports largely framed the consent decree as a done deal, end story, move on, we’re here to tell you that just ain’t so. Here’s what the draft decree has to say about public participation: This Consent Decree shall be lodged with the Court for a period of not less than 30 Days for public notice and comment . . . The United States reserves the right to withdraw or withhold its consent if the comments regarding the Consent Decree disclose facts or considerations indicating that the Consent Decree is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. In our humble opinion, the proposed settlement is in some ways inappropriate, improper, and inadequate. We hope you’ll help us seize the opportunity to demand better. Step one? Understanding the elements of the proposed deal. We hope to provide just that in the next thousand or so words. The GASP team has poured over the consent decree and boiled down 157 pages of information into this handy-dandy guide. Ready to get your learn on? Good. Here’s what you need to know… The Edgar Thomson facility produces molten iron (or “pig iron”) in its blast furnaces and then turns iron into steel by way of the basic oxygen process (BOP) in a part of the mill aptly named the “BOP Shop.” The process of collecting pig iron for transfer to the BOP Shop occurs in the blast furnace “casthouse.” These locations will come up again later, a lot. Way back in November 2017, ACHD and EPA issued a joint notice of violation against U.S. Steel for myriad violations of county and federal rules covering blast furnace and BOP Shop operations – among other things – at Edgar Thomson from 2016 through July 2017. An ACHD press release regarding the NOV explained, “The nature of the violations includes excessive visible emissions, failure to maintain equipment and failure to certify compliance with the plant’s Title V operating permit.” Via open records requests, GASP determined that 2015 and 2017 site inspections showed several blast furnace equipment deficiencies. You can view six examples here. As for EPA’s role, ACHD explained: “To enhance the Health Department’s enforcement efforts, ACHD has actively engaged the EPA over the course of the last nine months. The EPA brings an expanded level of federal expertise, as well as additional enforcement capacity that will support stronger action by utilizing the Department of Justice and EPA’s capacity to enact more stringent penalties.” You might wonder: With all that added expertise and capacity, what took so long? We honestly don’t know. Officials stayed mum about their progress until just two weeks ago and in the interim, officials repeatedly told the public they could not comment on pending legal matters. Given the lack of updates, the announcement of the proposed consent decree came as a shock to advocates and residents who have been waiting more than four years for information on when – and how – U.S. Steel would be forced to get into compliance with applicable air pollution rules. The consent decree finally provided some answers. The proposed consent decree lists pre-settlement remedial measures U.S. Steel undertook at the Edgar Thomson Plant since the 2017 notice of violation was initially lodged. Those measures include upgrades to its pollution control systems in the blast furnace casthouse and BOP Shop as well as additional tweaking of its operating procedure for certain pieces of equipment. U.S. Steel also retrained employees, crafted a new operations and maintenance plan, and hired new third-party contractors. It’s all well and good to know U.S. Steel was doing something to address the issues at Edgar Thomson over the past four years but it’s not clear if these measures had an effect or why measures that didn’t fix the problem were even mentioned. The proposed decree mandates that U.S. Steel hire third-party contractors to conduct studies of key pieces of emissions-control equipment in order to “ensure continued compliance with ACHD Rules and Regulations.” The proposed consent decree includes extensive details related to the selection and hiring of those third-party contractors (ex: they were subject to EPA approval). It also sets a schedule of deadlines associated with those studies: The studies must be completed within 120 days of the agreement’s effective date. U.S. Steel must submit copies of the completed studies within 90 days of their completion. Along with the studies, U.S. Steel is required to submit for EPA approval a report that details improvements recommended by the third-party contractor and reasons why they should or should not be considered, cost estimates for proposed projects, and a schedule to complete the projects. After the EPA reviews and approves the plan, U.S. Steel “shall implement the proposed actions” laid out in the schedule. U.S. Steel must then submit to EPA and ACHD a notice of completion certifying that the actions were implemented in accordance with the approved plans. Specifically, the three studies will cover: The casthouse baghouse system BOP Shop roof ventilation The BOP Shop scrubber system Missing, though, from the proposed consent decree is language that would guarantee that the approved projects will result in meaningful emissions reductions at the Edgar Thomson facility. Even worse, U.S. Steel might not have to do much of anything under these terms in the decree. As far as we can tell, if the studies show few or no good options, U.S. Steel would meet the terms of the proposed consent decree by simply implementing those few – if any – recommendations. Yes, the studies are aimed at identifying changes leading to compliance, and, yes, U.S. Steel must implement the studies’ recommendations, but after four and a half years the fact that they still need to study the issues at all is troubling. The proposed decree requires that U.S. Steel install and maintain a video camera system at the Edgar Thomson plant aimed at the problematic sources of visible emissions including its blast furnace stove stacks, casthouse roof monitors and baghouse, BOP Shop roof monitor and scrubber stacks, and two staging areas for torpedo cars, (which are specialized rail cars that transport molten iron to the BOP Shop). The cameras will be a tool to help address problems but – unfortunately – not a way for regulators to determine compliance with clean air laws. Here’s how it’s worded in the agreement: U.S. Steel shall use the video camera system as a tool to minimize emissions by ensuring that processes are optimized and allowing its operators to monitor the applicable areas so as to recognize and react to potentially non-compliant Visible Emissions by taking corrective actions to minimize or eliminate any such emissions as expeditiously as possible. Here are some specifics of what the EPA is requiring of the camera monitoring system: It must consist of at least seven permanently installed and “strategically placed” cameras that run during daylight hours. The recordings must be time-stamped and in a digital format of no less than one frame per second. The recordings must be in a labeled, chronologically ordered system for a period of at least 30 rolling days and be made available to ACHD during site visits. U. S. Steel must train its operators to use the video camera system within 120 Days of its installation and maintain it per the manufacturer’s recommendations. In addition to the camera system, within 30 days of the effective date of the proposed consent decree, U.S. Steel must ensure a third-party observer – trained and certified in accordance with EPA Method 9 – conducts visible emissions readings covering the Casthouse Roof Monitors, BOP Shop Roof Monitor, and BOP Shop Scrubber Stacks. The agreement requires U.S. Steel to provide information weekly on when and where the visible emissions readings will be taken, to allow ACHD staff members or contractors the opportunity to be present during the readings “and, as necessary, perform ACHD’s own observations to verify compliance.” The Method 9 reading requirements come with some additional reporting mandates, as well: U.S. Steel must submit to EPA and ACHD quarterly reports of its compiled Method 9 Visible Emissions observation identifying any deviation(s) from the applicable opacity standards, the likely cause, corrective measure(s) taken to address the deviation(s), and the effectiveness of those corrective measures “as can be determined at the time of the report.” Finally, the proposed consent decree has additional monitoring requirements for our old nemeses: H2S and SO2. U.S. Steel personnel must inspect the blast furnace slag pit spray systems every shift and document the condition of the slag prior to load-out. U.S. Steel must also install, operate, and maintain a continuous SO2 monitor for emissions from the Plant’s Riley Boilers (these boilers burn blast furnace gas, coke oven gas, and natural gas to generate steam, heat, and electricity for the plant). There are also additional reporting, record-keeping, and data-sharing requirements for both monitoring schemes. Aside from the sulfurous compound monitoring, these efforts are largely related to assisting or assessing the studies discussed above. Any additional monitoring is a good start but without knowing the details of the studies, it is difficult to gauge the sufficiency of the monitoring scheme. One unexpected bright spot is a requirement that within 60 days of the effective date of the consent decree, U.S. Steel must begin “feeding an oxidizing chemical additive or additives such as, but not limited to, potassium permanganate or hydrogen peroxide into the Slag Pit quench water spray system, to enhance suppression of H2S emissions.” The company is also required to submit to the EPA and ACHD for approval of written procedures for the slag pit that detail actions being taken to “minimize or prevent the evolution of H2S.” While the Clairton Coke Works has – rightfully – received the most attention for H2S emissions, we’ve all known for a while now that something stinks at Edgar Thomson. Of course, we’re happy to see ACHD finally acknowledge Edgar Thomson as a source of vile H2S odors but it’s long overdue and some additional assurances of the effectiveness of this step would help. The terms of the proposed decree call for U.S. Steel to hire a third-party contractor to conduct a maintenance practices audit – an action item that has already been completed. The document reads: U.S. Steel shall bear all costs associated with the Maintenance Practices Auditor, cooperate fully with the Maintenance Practices Auditor, and provide the Maintenance Practices Auditor with access to all records, employees, contractors, and areas of the Facility that the Maintenance Practices Auditor deems reasonably necessary. The scope of the third-party audit is also detailed: U.S. Steel shall direct the Maintenance Practices Auditor to perform an audit to analyze operation and maintenance practices for emissions controls, including the adequacy of the effective (Operations and Maintenance) Plan and U. S. Steel’s implementation of the plan.” The emissions controls to be covered by the Maintenance Practices Audit will include: the Casthouse Baghouse the BOP Shop Fugitive Baghouse the BOP Shop Mixer Baghouse the BOP Shop Ladle Metallurgy Furnace Baghouse the BOP Shop Primary Emissions System/BOP Shop Scrubber and Slag Pits Then, within 180 days of the settlement agreement’s effective date, U.S. Steel must direct the auditor to submit a report that includes: a summary of the audit process, including any obstacles encountered detailed audit findings, including the basis for each finding and each area of concern related to the adequacy of Edgar Thomson’s operations and maintenance plan for ensuring current and continued future functioning of emissions controls and compliance with applicable emission limitations Information about whether requirements, targets, objectives, or other benchmarks are being achieved; whether there are examples of noncompliance with the operations and maintenance plan; and “recommendations for resolving areas of concern or otherwise achieving compliance with the operations and maintenance A certification by the third-party contractor and U. S. Steel that the audit was performed in accordance with the proposed consent decree. After that, U.S. Steel has 60 days to submit a report to the EPA and ACHD that includes a copy of that report as well as a plan for approval which includes a proposal for implementing any recommendations in the report. The agreement reads: U.S. Steel shall thereafter implement the proposed actions in accordance with the schedule in the approved plan, and shall ensure that its employees are properly trained to implement the proposed actions. In addition to the third-party audit, U.S. Steel will be required to undergo self-audits every 12-months and submit plans to EPA and ACHD for approval detailing everything from obstacles encountered to the adequacy of the operations and maintenance plan to whether required objectives and benchmarks are being met. After that? “U. S. Steel shall thereafter implement the proposed actions in accordance with the schedule in the approved report,” according to the proposed decree. While GASP is glad to see U.S. Steel is being tasked with studying the feasibility of future improvements and sets an aggressive timeline for completion of both the studies and associated projects, we have transparency concerns. Specifically, there is nothing in the document to require EPA and/or ACHD to provide the public with updates related to those projects, audits, and deadlines. We strongly believe that it is the responsibility of those agencies to create a public clearinghouse so residents can review everything from documents to deadlines. “It would be a nightmare for residents and the agencies alike if ACHD and EPA required members of the public who want to keep tabs on this process by submitting formal state Right to Know or Federal Freedom of Information Requests,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “Residents went more than four years without an update from their air quality regulators on what was being done to protect them from illegal emissions. We believe EPA and ACHD should develop an accessible webpage containing all the necessary documents for the residents to stay well informed.” While the consent decree gives no details about how much money U.S. Steel has spent on improvements to date and provides zero estimates of how much cash the company is likely to dole out for future projects identified in various studies and audits, it is very specific on stipulated penalties and that $1.5 million fine. First a quick note: Stipulated penalties are fines assessed for violations of the terms of the consent decree. A violation includes U.S. Steel’s failure to perform any required obligations including any approved work plan or schedule according to all applicable requirements and within the specified time schedules established. While the decree goes into great specificity regarding the stipulated penalties, here’s the long and the short of it: The decree details daily fines for various infractions that range from $500 to $4,500 per violation per day. The terms of the decree call for U.S. Steel to remit payment for any stipulated penalties within 30 days of a written demand. All stipulated penalties will be split evenly between the EPA and ACHD – with the county’s portion payable to the Clean Air Fund. We want to note this line, though, which raised our eyebrows: Either Plaintiff may in the unreviewable exercise of its discretion, reduce or waive stipulated penalties otherwise due it under this Consent Decree. Then there’s the $1.5 million fine and what the consent decree has to say about how that money will be utilized. It, too, will be split evenly between ACHD and EPA – but it’s how the county wants to spend its share that concerns us most: U.S. Steel shall provide $750,000 in funding to the Allegheny County Department of Economic Development in support of the creation of a multimodal connection that links the Great Allegheny Passage in Rankin Borough to the Westmoreland Heritage Trail in Trafford Borough through the Turtle Creek Valley. The purpose of the project will be to provide funding for a multimodal connection to communities near U. S. Steel Edgar Thomson Plant (namely Rankin, Braddock, North Braddock, East Pittsburgh, Turtle Creek, Wilmerding, Monroeville, Pitcairn, and Trafford, North Versailles, East McKeesport, and Wall) and that the funding would go toward providing a link from the GAP in Rankin Borough to the WHT in Trafford Borough through the Turtle Creek Valley. Initiatives like this are known as Supplemental Environmental Projects or SEPs. The ACHD Air Quality Program Civil Penalty Policy defines a SEP as “a project or activity that improves, protects, or reduces the risk to public health or the environment, and that is not otherwise required by law.” Per EPA guidance, “(t)he primary purpose of the SEP Policy is to encourage and obtain environmental and public health protection and benefits that may not otherwise have occurred in the settlement of an enforcement action.” Generally, GASP supports both SEPs and multi-modal trail access that helps improve a community’s access to alternative forms of transportation like walking and biking. HOWEVER, the SEP contained in this consent decree is concerning for several reasons. First, we’re not aware of ACHD, EPA, or U.S. Steel reaching out to local community groups to gauge their interest in this or any SEP – not once in four and a half years. That is plainly insulting to people who’ve suffered FOR YEARS from emissions belched out by the Edgar Thomson plant. Second, the SEP contribution amount is $750,000, which offsets 100 percent of the $750,000 fine, but that percentage could be less. ACHD’s SEP policy states, “(g)enerally, for settlements that include a SEP, the Department will require the violator to pay a monetary penalty amount as part of the settlement.” Ironically, and sadly, one of the six factors ACHD must consider when setting the percentage offset is the degree to which “(t)he SEP was developed with active solicitation and consideration of community input.” The SEP policy goes on to state, “the Department has the discretion to allow a 100 percent mitigation of the penalty amount if the SEP will provide an exceptional public health or environmental benefit.” Even considering all six criteria, we cannot possibly define this SEP as exceptional. Finally, we strongly question the wisdom and adequacy of contributing what amounts to peanuts to a project that a January 2022 study of the Turtle Creek Connector noted would be “lengthy, difficult, and expensive” to implement. Specifically, that study lists three different alternate routes with estimated costs of $9.3 million, $27.8 million, and $25.6 million, which “assume a 20-year design life and do not include expenses associated with maintenance, utility relocation, right-of-way acquisition, erosion and sedimentation control, traffic control, traffic signals, lighting, signage, and pavement marking, and parking lots.” We accept that $750,000 won’t change the world but dropping it into a fund for a project that could take years to complete strikes us as a deeply flawed approach. Using the cash for a project that will have a more immediate and meaningful impact on community health (i.e.: upgrading HVAC systems to help improve indoor air quality in public spaces or starting a Clean School Bus Pilot Project). Looking desperately for silver linings, at least there’s verbiage in the consent decree that will make it difficult for U.S. Steel to use the SEP as a public relations tool or a tax write-off. The decree states: U.S. Steel has not received and will not receive credit for the ACHD-Only SEP in any other enforcement action. U. S. Steel will not receive reimbursement for any portion of the ACHD-Only SEP from another person or entity. Any public statement, oral or written in print, film, or other media, made by U. S. Steel making reference to the ACHD-Only SEP under this Consent Decree from the date of its execution shall include the following language: “This project was undertaken in connection with the settlement of an enforcement action, United States et al. v. U. S. Steel, taken on behalf of ACHD to enforce federal and state laws.” As we said earlier, we’re glad to see that EPA is seeking input from community members about the proposed consent decree and we want to be sure you know the clock is ticking: A 30-day public comment period opened May 24. You can find everything you need to know about commenting by email or snail mail here. Not sure what exactly to say? No worries – GASP has your back. We have sample language outlining concerns with the agreement and opportunities to make it stronger, as well as a simple form that automatically routes your comments to the Assistant Attorney General of the Environment and Natural Resources Division for review. Stay tuned! GASP continues to follow this issue closely and will keep you updated as the process continues.

What if we told you there was a way for local municipal officials to receive FREE training to conduct inventories of local greenhouse gas emissions and develop plans to reduce emissions and mitigate climate change risk in their communities? Because that opportunity currently exists and the deadline for communities to express their interest is coming up FAST. We’re talking, of course, about the DEP Local Climate Action Program. Initiated in 2019, it has provided training to 53 entities, representing approximately 380 municipalities across Pennsylvania. Here’s how it works: The DEP Local Climate Action Program pairs municipalities with ICLEI, a national nonprofit that fosters sustainable development, and with college students to perform inventories of greenhouse gas emissions from local buildings, transportation, waste management, and other sectors. The teams also identify the particular climate-related vulnerabilities in their communities, such as flooding from extreme rainfall and public health impacts from extreme heat, and disproportionate impacts on residents who live in environmental justice areas. After reviewing recommendations in the Pennsylvania Climate Action Plan, teams use a template to draft local climate action plans to lower emissions and increase resilience to climate change impacts. Once they complete their plans, municipalities are eligible for free services from an energy management consultant, coordinated by DEP, to determine the most effective first steps to reduce emissions. The unfortunate news is that just three local communities took advantage of the training program this past year – Carnegie and Swissvale boroughs and O’Hara Township, all in Allegheny County. The great news is that local officials have until June 30 to let the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection know their communities are interested in participating in this year’s program, which begins later this summer. If you need a little inspiration, here’s what Swissvale Borough Councilman Shawn Alfonso had to say about the training: “Swissvale knows that the future gets made now. Planning and preparing for the future with sustainability and environmental health in mind will make our borough and families stronger. With cleaner air and more sustainability, we not only improve our own environment, but also have an impact on areas around us, and pretty soon these small changes add up to make a big difference.” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell agreed. “This program is a great example of small steps our local elected leaders can take to put sustainability on the forefront and ensure their communities are doing all they can to tackle the Climate Crisis in their corner of the universe,” he said. “GASP strongly encourages communities in and around Allegheny County to consider applying for the training – especially frontline communities already dealing with major air pollution issues in their neighborhoods.” Already all in? DEP invites applications for year four of the Local Climate Action Program, which begins later this summer. Please contact Christopher Nafe at chnafe@pa.gov or 717-783-9722 to sign up.