Did you hear? The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the availability of $115 million in grant funding for projects that cut harmful pollution from the nation's existing fleet of older diesel engines - and GASP is encouraging local communities to apply for a cut of the money. Here’s the skinny: Under the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) grant funding competition, EPA anticipates making four to 10 awards in each of EPA's 10 regions to eligible applicants. EPA is soliciting applications nationwide for projects “that significantly reduce diesel emissions and exposure, especially from fleets operating at goods movement facilities in areas designated as having poor air quality.” Applicants may request funding to upgrade or replace older diesel-powered buses, trucks, marine engines, locomotives, and nonroad equipment with newer, cleaner technologies. Priority for funding will also be given to projects that engage and benefit the health of local communities already overburdened by air pollution, protect grant-funded investments from severe weather events caused by climate change, and applicants that demonstrate their ability to promote and continue efforts to reduce emissions after the project has ended. EPA is seeking cost-effective diesel emission reduction projects that maximize health benefits, reduce diesel exposure for those facing poor air quality, and/or employ community-based inclusive and collaborative approaches to reduce harmful emissions. By way of background: Diesel-powered engines move most of the nation's freight tonnage, and today nearly all highway freight trucks, locomotives, and commercial marine vessels are powered by diesel engines. Smog- and soot-forming diesel exhaust impair air quality, threatening the health of people in nearby communities. Exposure to this pollution can lead to disruptive and costly asthma attacks, illnesses, lost days of school and work, and emergency room visits. These adverse health effects have been shown to disproportionately impact children, older adults, those with heart or lung conditions, and low-income and minority communities. DERA enables EPA to offer funding to accelerate the upgrade and turnover of legacy diesel fleets. Funding opportunities for diesel reduction projects are provided through an annual appropriation by Congress to DERA. DERA prioritizes funding projects in areas facing the largest air quality issues. Many of these projects fund cleaner engines that operate in low socio-economic areas whose residents suffer from higher-than-average instances of asthma, heart, and lung diseases. More than 73,700 engines, vehicles, or other pieces of equipment were replaced or retrofitted to run cleaner with DERA funds during fiscal years 2008 to 2018, according to the DERA 5th Report to Congress . The grant funding opportunity is open until Friday, Dec. 1. For any questions on the application, applicants should email written questions to: dera@epa.gov . For any technical issues with grants.gov, please contact grants.gov for assistance at 1-800-518-4726 or support@grants.gov . More information, including applicant eligibility and regional funding breakdowns, can be found at the DERA website .

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has selected Allegheny County's Targeted Airshed Grant for funding, awarding money to directly address environmental and health inequities in the Mon Valley by replacing diesel buses with new ones zero-emission vehicles for Pittsburgh Regional Transit (PRT). In a press release Monday, officials said that the $10 million in additional funding from the EPA will allow Allegheny County to lower the emissions PRT buses produce in the Mon Valley. The grant will get the agency closer to the goal of a zero-emissions bus fleet by 2045. The $10 million grant will be utilized by PRT to replace four 40-foot diesel transit buses. These new buses will serve riders in the Mon Valley area. The grant will also support the purchase and installation of two electric chargers along with the necessary infrastructure in the garage to which the buses would be assigned. The new zero-emission buses are anticipated to be purchased and put into service in 2026. Zero-emission buses have been shown to contribute to healthier communities, especially communities that are classified as in high need by environmental justice indexes, like EJScreen or the environmental justice index developed by the Allegheny County Health Department. The Mon Valley is a major travel corridor. Pittsburgh Regional Transit operates 23 bus routes serving the Mon Valley carrying 52,400 riders on an average weekday. Seven routes operate on PRT's Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway, reducing trip times for riders traveling between Mon Valley communities, Pittsburgh's Oakland neighborhood, and downtown. Based on data collected and analyzed by the ACHD, PM2.5 emissions from vehicles contribute about 25% of all air pollution in Allegheny County, according to the release. “This is great news,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “Our neighbors in the Mon Valley grapple with poor air quality more than most, so all efforts to help combat diesel and other emissions can only help improve quality of life for those folks.”

Calling all Westmoreland County residents: The time to weigh in on the long-awaited Title V operating permit for the Tenaska Westmoreland Generating Station is NOW.   But how we got here and what’s in that permit will take a little bit of explaining…   How We Got Here   A couple of years ago, we blogged  about testing issues at the Tenaska Westmoreland Generating Station in South Huntingdon Township, Westmoreland County. For the uninitiated: Tenaska is a 940-megawatt, natural gas-fired power plant with two large turbines.    The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued a Plan Approval to authorize the plant’s construction in April 2015, and the plant began operating under the terms of that Plan Approval in December 2018.     In the regular course, once a major source of air pollution like Tenaska begins normal operations, it conducts a round of performance tests to establish proper operating limits and then must apply to DEP for a Title V Operating Permit that will incorporate those limits.    However, in January 2019, during one of the final performance tests at Tenaska, a malfunction with the testing equipment caused an invalid reading that prevented the plant’s operator from applying for a Title V Operating Permit.    Investigating the cause of the malfunction took some time (months) and then the plant’s operator and DEP could not agree on a new testing protocol. In the meantime, Tenaska continued to operate under its Plan Approval.   About Tenaska’s Title V Operating Permit   We’re pleased to report that Tenaska and DEP seem to have resolved those issues: This past  July, Tenaska submitted its application for a Title V Operating Permit, and in the Oct. 5 edition of the Pennsylvania Bulletin, DEP announced that it has prepared a draft Title V Operating Permit for the plant.    That draft Title V Operating Permit, DEP’s Review Memo, and Tenaska’s Permit Application are available here , here , and here .   What Pollution Tenaska Will Be Permitted to Emit   Here’s the interesting part: In the years Tenaska has operated the facility under its Plan Approval, the regulations governing natural gas-fired power plants’ emissions have become more stringent.    Consequently, the  limitations on some pollutants - including ozone-forming oxides of nitrogen (NO x ) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) - in the proposed Title V Operating Permit are significantly less than they were under the Plan Approval:   Pollutant Plan Approval Limit (Tons Per Year) Draft Title V Operating Permit Limit (Tons Per Year) Decrease (Tons Per Year) NO X 372 303 69 Carbon Monoxide (“CO”) 2309 657 1,652 VOCs 1251 222 1,029 Formaldehyde (“HCHO”) 8 8 0 All Hazardous Air Pollutants (“Total HAPs”) 22 22 0 Total Particulate Matter (“PM”) 92 95 (3) Coarse Particulate Matter (“PM 10 ”) 92 92 0 Fine Particulate Matter (“PM 2.5 ”) 89 89 0 Sulfur Dioxide (“SO 2 ”) 23 23 0 Sulfuric Acid (“H 2 SO 4 ”) 15 15 0 Ammonium (“NH 4 ”) 194 194 0 Greenhouse Gases (expressed in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent) 3,827,574 3,827,574 0     The reductions in NO X , CO, and VOC emission limits are due to Best Available Control Technology, Reasonably Available Control Technology, and Lowest Available Emission Rate requirements imposed by the Clean Air Act becoming stricter since the Plan Approval was issued in 2015.    To satisfy those requirements today, the plant must meet lower emission limits for NO X  (that were imposed by regulation) and run an oxidation catalyst for CO and VOCs, whereas in 2015 (at least arguably) it did not need to.   What It Means & How to Submit a Public Comment “This shows how the Clean Air Act works in the background to drive improvements in air quality,” GASP Senior Attorney John Baillie explained. “When there is a lag like this between an initial Plan Approval and an initial operating permit, the improvements can seem sudden and significant.”   That draft is available for public comment through Nov. 3.  You can submit written comments to:    Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Southwest Regional Office 400 Waterfront Drive Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Attn:  Nick Waryanka, P.E., Air Quality Engineer If you submit comments, they should reference permit number TV-65-00990.

At GASP we don’t just monitor air quality issues and push back against industrial polluters’ illegal emissions – we also try to hold air quality regulators accountable for doing their jobs and fulfilling the duties that air pollution laws impose on them.   This includes tracking how efficiently Pennsylvania regulators – specifically, the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) and state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) – process permit applications for sources of air pollution (more on the significance of those permits below).    Since 2018 we’ve reported on the backlogs that exist at ACHD as well as DEP’s six regional offices for processing applications for Title V Operating Permits - permits the Clean Air Act requires the largest sources of air pollution to obtain.    “The backlogs have indeed improved over the years,” said GASP Senior Attorney John Baillie said. “Unfortunately, there are still trouble spots.”   In short: The backlog of permit applications at DEP’s Northwest Regional Office has grown over the last couple of years, while the backlogs of applications at ACHD and DEP’s Northeast Regional Office unfortunately increased this year following several years of improvement.   Here’s what our review turned up this year and what you need to know about those permits.   Title V Operating Permits: What They Are, Who Needs Them & How They’re Issued   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 operating requirements that air pollution laws impose on the facility.   This helps facilitate compliance with those requirements. Why? Because both regulators and the public can use a facility’s Title V Operating Permit to determine what requirements it has and whether the facility is complying with them.   A major source must apply for a Title V Operating Permit once it begins normal operations, and the permitting authority gives it notice that it must submit a permit application. A Title V Operating Permit is good for five years, and sources must apply to renew their Title V Operating Permits before their old ones expire.   The Clean Air Act, as well as Pennsylvania’s and Allegheny County’s air pollution control regulations, all require that the agency responsible for issuing Title V Operating Permits finish 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 do business pending the responsible agency’s final approval of the application - even if agency approval takes years.   The Clean Air Act also requires 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.   About Our Investigative Report… We first blogged about the backlogs of applications for new and renewed operating permits for major sources of air pollution that existed in DEP’s Southwest Regional Office and in Allegheny County (where Title V sources are regulated by ACHD) 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 have updated that  research every year since.  About the Backlog at the Allegheny County Health Department   There are now 26 major sources operating in Allegheny County.    One of those facilities has applied for, but has never been issued, a Title V Operating Permit – ATI Flat-Rolled Products (which was formerly known as Allegheny Ludlum Brackenridge Works) - although ACHD did  published a draft permit for the facility last fall.    ACHD has failed to act on renewal applications for seven of the 26 major sources in Allegheny County within 18 months  as its regulations require: About the Backlog at DEP’s Southwest Regional Office   For purposes of air quality permitting, DEP’s Southwest Regional Office includes sources in Beaver, Cambria, Fayette, Greene, Somerset, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties.    Responsibility for administering the Title V permitting program for sources in Armstrong and Indiana Counties was transferred to DEP’s Northwest Regional Office in early 2019.  We currently count 54 major sources under the jurisdiction of the Southwest Regional Office. There are a lot of different things going on with the permitting of major sources in the Southwest Region.   Three major sources in the Southwest Region do not have Title V Operating Permits in place but have applied for such permits within the last 18 months:    the Brunner Landfill in Beaver County (which has had issues with its air pollution permits , and has never had a Title V Operating Permit) Hunter Panels in Fayette County (which was once permitted as a major source, was reclassified as a minor source, and then recently reclassified back to a major source), and Hill Top Energy Center in Greene County (which is newly constructed)   Here’s what’s going on with the other facilities:   Holcim Solutions in Westmoreland County, was (like Hunter Panels) recently reclassified as a major source but has not yet submitted an application for a Title V Operating Permit;   The Tenaska Westmoreland Generating Station in Westmoreland County, has been constructed and has operated for many years under it preconstruction permit, but has not yet applied for a Title V Operating Permit;  Markwest Liberty Midstream & Resource’s Houston Gas Plant has had applications pending at one time or another for both a minor source operating permit and a Title V Operating Permit. The facility appears to have neither an operating permit (of any kind) currently in place nor an application for such a permit currently pending. At least from the information available on DEP’s eFACTS website, it not clear whether DEP has classified this source as a major source subject to Title V or a minor source.   Despite all of that, only one major source in the Southwest Region has had an application for its Title V Operating Permit pending for more than the 18 months allowed by the Clean Air Act:   About the Backlog at DEP’s Northwest Regional Office DEP’s Northwest Region 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 63 active major sources of air pollution in the Northwest Region.    Two of those sources – Hickory Run Energy in North Beaver Township, Lawrence County and the Tri-County Landfill near Grove City, Mercer County – are new, and either still have an application for an initial Title V Operating Permit still pending (Hickory Run Energy) or are still operating under a Plan Approval from DEP and have not yet applied for a Title V Operating Permit (Tri-County Landfill).    Another facility, Webco Industries in Oil City, Venango County, was newly reclassified as a major source and still has its application for its first Title V Operating Permit pending.    Including Hickory Run Energy and Webco Industries, eight of the 68 facilities in the Northwest Region have had renewal applications for their Title V Operating Permit pending for more than 18 months:   About the Backlog at DEP’s Northcentral Regional Office   DEP’s Northcentral Region includes Bradford, Cameron, Centre, Clearfield, Clinton, Columbia, Lycoming, Montour, Northumberland, Potter, Snyder, Sullivan, Tioga, and Union Counties.  We counted 49 major sources of air pollution in the Northcentral Region.  One facility in the Northcentral Region has had an application to renew its Title V Operating Permit pending for more than 18 months:   About the Backlog at DEP’s Southcentral Regional Office   DEP’s Southcentral Region includes Adams, Bedford, Berks, Blair, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Fulton, Huntington, Juniata, Lancaster, Lebanon, Mifflin, Perry, and York counties.    We counted 95 active major sources of air pollution in these counties.    Only one source in the Southcentral Region has had a renewal application for a Title V Operating Permit pending for more than 18 months: About the Backlog at DEP’s Northeast Regional Office DEP’s Northeast Region includes Carbon, Lackawanna, Lehigh, Luzerne, Monroe, Northampton, Pike, Schuylkill, Susquehanna, Wayne, and Wyoming Counties.    We have counted 53 major active sources of air pollution in those counties, five of which have had applications to renew their Title V Operating Permits pending for more than 18 months: Worth noting: DEP’s eFACTS website (which tracks the status of facility permits) does not show that the Chrinergy Power facility has an application to renew its operating permit pending as of June 9; a source violates the air pollution laws if it continues to operate without submitting a timely application to renew or replace its operating permit. The facility does, however, have a plan approval from DEP in place and could be operating legally pursuant to that.   About the Backlog at DEP’s Southeast Regional Office   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 71 active major sources of air pollution in the Southeast Region, two of which have had renewal applications for Title V Operating Permits pending for more than 18 months: To help better illustrate the trends, we created this visual of what the permit backlogs at ACHD and DEP’s regional offices have looked like since 2018:                 The Bottom Line   "The permit backlogs at ACHD, the Northwest Regional Office, and the Northeast Regional Office should spur the people at those offices to take a look at what they can do to process permit applications in a timelier manner," Baillie said. "Title V Operating Permits are a valuable tool for assuring compliance with Clean Air Act requirements — having up-to-date permits available helps to provide the public with cleaner air to breathe as the law guarantees."

A Connecticut engineering firm retained by U.S. Steel to investigate the deadly Aug. 11 explosion at its Clairton Coke Works facility today released preliminary findings. The firm, Engineering Design & Testing Corp., issued the following information on its website Thursday: The explosion took place in the 13-14 Coke Battery transfer area when an 18-inch cast iron valve ruptured, releasing flammable coke oven gas, which subsequently exploded. The valve was originally manufactured in 1953 and underwent refurbishment approximately ten years ago. Damage to other valves at 13-14 Coke Battery was determined to have resulted from the explosion. At the time that the valve ruptured, U. S. Steel employees and employees of MPW Industrial Services were opening and closing the valve to ensure proper operation in advance of planned maintenance activities. As part of the valve opening and closing work, water at a high pressure was introduced into the valve in order to flush accumulated deposits. A sealed cavity inside the body of the valve filled with high-pressure flush water in excess of the pressure rating of the valve. This resulted in a sudden and complete rupture of the valve body, releasing combustible coke oven gas. The coke oven gas accumulated in the transfer area basement and exploded when it reached an ignition source at the adjacent 14 Battery. Among the findings? The firm determined that U. S. Steel did not have a specific procedure addressing the use of high-pressure water to flush valves.  “U. S. Steel does have an established Management of Change procedure that should have been used to evaluate the change from low pressure steam to high pressure water,” the report stated. U.S. Steel Thursday morning announced the findings on its social media platforms and issued a statement that read in part: “These initial findings are consistent with our own, and we remain committed to working closely with all parties involved in investigations—including the Chemical Safety Board, OSHA, and EDT—to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the event. In parallel, we continue our investigation, and we’ve already strengthened several safety protocols based on what we’ve learned.” Editor’s Note: Stay tuned. GASP continues to follow this issue closely and will keep you posted. Please check out our Clairton Explosion resource page  for the latest developments, documents obtained through public records requests, and a timeline of events.

Fellow Breathers, some congratulations are in order: Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) Director Dr. Iulia Vann has been named one of the de Beaumont Foundation's 40 Under 40 in Public Health - a national recognition honoring her exceptional leadership and enduring commitment to improving lives, advancing health equity, and transforming public health systems to serve all communities more effectively.  The de Beaumont Foundation announced the program's Class of 2025 today after reviewing nominations from hundreds of public health leaders across the country.   A distinguished panel of professionals selected the honorees based on their leadership, innovation, and contributions to the health of their communities. Here are the details, courtesy of an Allegheny County news release issued Tuesday: Vann is a distinguished public health leader dedicated to advancing health equity, innovative policy development, and systemic change. As the Public Health Director for Allegheny County, she leads the strategic implementation of the Health Department's priorities including Plan for a Healthier Allegheny , a comprehensive community health initiative addressing physical health, behavioral health, and environmental health. "I am truly honored to be recognized among the De Beaumont Foundation's 40 Under 40 in Public Health. This recognition represents more than my professional journey - it reflects a lifelong commitment to advancing health equity, uplifting communities, and ensuring that every person has the opportunity to live a healthy, dignified life." said Dr. Vann. "Public health is my passion and purpose, and I am inspired every day by the resilience, brilliance, and compassion of those who dedicate themselves to building a healthier, more just world." With an extensive background in public health administration, Dr. Vann oversees multimillion-dollar budgets and large-scale public health operations, ensuring that data-driven, equity-focused policies drive community health improvements. Her expertise spans social justice, health disparities, and federal, state, and local health policy. She has played a pivotal role in addressing emerging health threats, including serving as a Public Health Incident Commander during the COVID-19 response. Dr. Vann holds a Master of Public Health from East Carolina University and a Doctor of Medicine from the University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila. She is a champion of community engagement, workforce development, and collaborative public health interventions, ensuring that all residents, particularly the most vulnerable, have the opportunity to lead healthy lives. “Huge congrats to Dr. Vann from all of us at GASP,” our Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “We appreciate her fresh approach to leadership and public engagement and look forward to continuing to work with her and her team to help improve public health here in Allegheny County.”

We need to start with a little science lesson so we can drive home an air quality issue that probably isn’t on your radar. The subject? Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which are a family of chemicals used mostly in refrigerators and air conditioners.   For such uses, they have replaced chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which were phased out worldwide by the so-called Montreal Protocol, an international agreement struck in 1989. CFCs damage the stratospheric ozone layer, which protects us from harmful ultraviolet rays.  HFCs, on the other hand, do not affect the ozone layer, but (and this is a big but) due to their potency as greenhouse gases are themselves subject to an international phase-down agreement, the Kigali Amendment, which was reached in 2016, and ratified by the United States in 2022. How potent are they, you ask? They can be hundreds – and in some cases thousands – of times as potent as carbon dioxide (CO2). Although HFCs are a potent greenhouse gas, they linger in the atmosphere for a much shorter time than CO 2  so reducing emissions of HFCs could have a relatively immediate and significant impact on global warming.   They are, so to speak, low-hanging fruit (which is where we come in). Here’s what’s going on: Just before the federal government shut down on Oct. 1, the EPA   proposed a rule  that would relax and delay limits on the production and consumption of HFCs used for refrigeration in transport, cold storage warehouses, and retail food stores, as well as in semiconductor manufacture, based on industry petitions that claimed that the original deadlines and limits were either impossible or impractical.   Those original limits were set by   regulations that EPA promulgated in 2023  (known as the Hydrofluorocarbon Technology Transitions Rule) under authority of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020 . That Act requires that the production and consumption of HFCs in the United States be reduced by 85 percent (relative to 2011-13 levels) by 2036. “EPA estimated that the 2023 regulations would result in a cumulative reduction in emissions of HFCs of between 83 and 876 million tons of CO 2  equivalent between 2025 and 2050,” GASP Senior Attorney John Baillie said. “Should the recently-proposed changes become effective, EPA estimates that the regulations would result in a smaller cumulative reduction, of between 82.59 and 710.42 million tons of CO 2  equivalent between 2025 and 2050.  As you will note, there is a lot of wiggle room in both of those estimates.”  EPA is accepting comments on its proposed revisions to the Hydrofluorocarbon Technology Transitions Rule through Nov. 17.  You can submit comments at   https://www.regulations.gov  under   Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0001 .

Now for something completely different - some GOOD news out of the EPA:   The agency signaled in an Oct. 3 notice its intent to kill an interim final rule that would have delayed the full implementation of the revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for coke ovens like the ones operated at U.S. Steel’s Mon Valley Works facility.   Basically, the withdrawal means the EPA is reinstituting the compliance deadlines set forth in the 2024 final rule revising NESHAP ’ s. EPA now says that the data that it received from the coke industry regarding its rates of compliance with the final rule showed that compliance is indeed currently possible.     But you can read the entire notice here .   We first told you about the disastrous proposal back in August , when we implored you to join GASP in speaking out on the issue…to let the EPA know that delaying the compliance deadline was bad for the environment AND our public health.   So many of you did just that: You submitted public comments expressing your vehement opposition to the proposed rollback, you signed up to testify at one of the public hearings, and you shared our newsletters and social media posts with your networks, encouraging folks to join us in the fight.   And it mattered.   The EPA even acknowledged that part of its decision to change course on the issue was directly because of the robust public opposition to the rollback.   “Thank you to everyone who spoke out,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “This might be a small win, but it sends a huge message: Our voices - especially when we raise them together - make a difference and can absolutely move the needle, even in this political environment.”   Please note: It’s not official-official yet. It will be once its published in the Federal Register. Stay tuned, we’ll let you know when it’s official-official.   In the meantime, if you appreciate the advocacy and watchdog work that GASP has done on this and so many other air quality issues, we humbly ask for your support.   If you aren’t a member yet, we’d love to have you on the team. If you’ve donated in the past but have been wanting to refresh your membership, why not do that today? Here’s how.

The gang at GASP wants to send a huge THANK YOU to everyone who attended our recent panel event, “The Air We Breathe: Health, Cancer, and Our Community.” It was truly a great night. “Your presence and engagement made the event a powerful conversation about the critical link between air quality and public health,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “We were so inspired to see so many community members come together, eager to learn and ready to act.” We also extend our heartfelt appreciation to our partners, and for our distinguished panel of experts who shared their valuable knowledge with us - thank you, thank you. GASP truly believes that informed communities are empowered communities when it comes to advocating for cleaner air.  “The conversation last night underscored the direct impact that the air we breathe has on our well-being,” Campbell said. “From understanding the science behind local pollution to learning practical ways to protect ourselves and our families, the panel provided essential tools and knowledge. Stay tuned! We will have video soon thanks to our friend Mark Dixon, a local air quality activist and filmmaker who recorded our event (thanks, Mark!). And we would be remiss if we didn't give a huge shoutout to our amazing event partners: Cancer & Environment Network of SWPA  - Connect Cancer Bridges  - Become a Member

Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) this week published a proposed rule  to eliminate greenhouse gas reporting requirements for most of the sources subject to them.    For one source category – petroleum and natural gas delivery systems – the proposed rule would suspend greenhouse gas reporting requirements until 2034.    Little bit of background: EPA began requiring certain stationary sources to determine and report their greenhouse gas emissions in 2009.  According to the rule proposed on Sept. 16, there are currently 47 source categories (other than petroleum and natural gas delivery systems) that have greenhouse gas reporting obligations.    However (and other than for petroleum and natural gas delivery systems), EPA has determined there is no statutory basis in the Clean Air Act (or elsewhere) to require sources to report their greenhouse gas emissions, which is the reason EPA is proposing to eliminate reporting requirement for those source categories.    Abysmal news for sure, but: It also bears mentioning that we are not aware of any source (at least in western Pennsylvania) that is subject to limits on its emissions of greenhouse gases.   That’s not so with Sources in the petroleum and natural gas delivery systems category. Here’s why: Section 136 of the Clean Air Act does  specifically require those sources to  report their greenhouse gas emissions for the purpose of calculating a waste emissions charge on methane emissions imposed by that section. We wrote about that last year , if you need a little more details on that one.   However, the One Big Beautiful Act, amended section 136 so the waste emissions charge will not be collected until 2034. Accordingly, EPA determined there is currently no statutory purpose to be served by requiring sources in that category to report their greenhouse gas emissions and suspended their greenhouse gas reporting obligation until 2034, when EPA should begin collecting the waste emission” charge pursuant to section 136.   The kicker?   EPA estimates that between now and 2034, the elimination (and suspension) of the greenhouse gas reporting requirement will save the entities that are subject to it a little less than $302.7 million per year in compliance costs.    “The proposed rule did not attempt to calculate the value of any losses that might be suffered as a result of the elimination of greenhouse gas emissions reports, nor did it identify how those reports are used to further the purposes spelled out in the Clean Air Act,” GASP Senior Attorney John Baillie said. Our Executive Director Patrick Campbell called this latest proposed rule “just another in a series of moves to systemically dismantle environmental regulations created to protect public for corporate convenience.”   EPA is accepting comments on the proposed rule through Nov. 3 and will hold a virtual public hearing on the proposed rule on Oct. 1.  You can submit comments at www.regulations.gov , identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0186.   Editor’s Note: Stay tuned – we’ll be sharing more guidance on how