Indiana Chamber of CommerceEnvironmental Outlook

January 30, 2013

Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP CommissionerIN Department of Environmental Management

1

Why is the Economy Important to the Environment?

2

Pilot 2006 Environmental Performance Index

Yale Center for Environmental Law & PolicyYale University

Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)Columbia University

http://www.yale.edu/epi/

3

4

• Wealth matters. • The Environmental Health scores, in particular, reveal a significant relationship with GDP per capita. • EPI scores more generally also correlate with wealth, although there is a diversity of performance within every level of economic development.

Policy Implications of the 2012 EPI

5

Ozone and Particulate Air Quality 2009-2011

Attains

Does Not Meet the PM Standards

Does Not Meet the Ozone standard

Does Not Meet the Ozone and PM

Location of the State Capitals

State Boundaries

7

Current Air Quality Status

• At the end of 2009, all of Indiana met every currently effective NAAQS for the first time since NAAQS were established in the 1970’s.

• IDEM has succeeded in working with U.S. EPA to have all of the state designated as attainment for those pollutants except:– Central Indiana PM2.5 – Clark and Floyd counties PM2.5

8

New Air Quality Standards

• Since the end of 2009, new air quality standards have resulted in U.S. EPA designating the following new nonattainment areas:– Lake and Porter Counties Ozone (2008 standard)– Lawrenceburg Township (Dearborn County) Ozone– City of Muncie Lead

• All monitors in Indiana currently meet the 100 ppb short term NOx standard established in 2010.

• A number of townships in seven counties will likely be designated as nonattainment for the 1-hour, 75 ppb SO2 standard established in 2010.

Fish Tissue Mercury

• At the end of 2010, U.S.EPA issued new guidance on the proper interpretation of the fish tissue data.

• U.S.EPA’s guidance indicates that a properly calculated average mercury value is the appropriate interpretation of the limit.

• IDEM has reevaluated its mercury data using the U.S.EPA guidance.

9

Fish Tissue Mercury(Note: Lake Data Does Not Include Lake Michigan)

Year Mercury Impaired Stream

Reaches

Mercury Impaired

Stream Miles

Mercury Impaired

Lakes

Mercury Impaired

Lake Acres

2010 272 1,689 37 44,5402012 42 417 15 14,582

Change -84% -75% -60% -67%

10

IDEM 2013 Legislative Issue(s)

• SB 586—Discontinuing Certified Mail Requirements.

• HB 1475—No More Stringent Than (NMST)

• Various Septic and RSD Bills

11

Benefits of NMST• Should allow a streamlined rulemaking

process—there would be little or no IDEM discretion, therefore no need for a lengthy public process.

• IDEM would not need to respond to any citizen concerns that do not relate to EPA requirements.

Possible Issues With NMST• Many Federal Requirements include

multiple options and a State must select the regulatory option that best fits it:– Meeting Air Quality Standards with “SIPs”– Meeting Water Quality Standards with

“TMDLs”

• Would IDEM or the legislature choose the Indiana regulatory options?

Possible Issues With NMST• The process of considering all regulatory

options leads to greater understanding of the costs and benefits of selected and rejected options—e.g. CAMR.

• It takes EPA a long time to address issues that may start out as issues in only a few states. In the interim, IDEM may not even be able to develop Indiana specific information about the issue.

Possible Issues With NMST• States that have NMST requirements often

spend a lot of energy lobbying EPA to develop national programs to address their local issues because they are prohibited from addressing the issues themselves.

• NMST is used by some in the regulated community to state that IDEM should not even request information that is not required to be provided to EPA, this makes it hard to address Indiana environmental problems.

Possible Issues With NMST• The Federal system is:

– Increase stringency of standards.– Declare areas out of compliance with the

standards.– Develop national technology based standards.– Severely restrict new development until

standards are met.– take three plus years to acknowledge that the

standards are met.– Repeat increase the stringency of standards.

Possible Issues With NMST• If Indiana uses up the environment’s

assimilative capacity with mediocre environmental protection, our air and water will not support new development.

• IDEM would not be able to respond to any citizen concerns that do not relate to minimum EPA requirements.

Current “Beyond Federal” Issues• Outdoor Wood Fueled Boilers (OHHs).

• Confined Feeding Operation Construction Standards—also nutrient application regulations (IDEM or OSIC).

• End of life motor vehicle mercury switch removal.

• Waste tire program.

• E-scrap management.

IDEM 2013 GOALS AND CHALLENGES

19

2013 Goals and Challenges

• Governor Pence has asked that IDEM find a way to be the clear leader in helping and cooperatively partnering with regulated entities to improve environmental quality.

• Develop Good to Great Plan to improve IDEM performance consistent with Governor Pence’s Roadmap.

20

2013 Goals and Challenges• Continue to work to ensure that all Hoosiers

have air to breathe that meets all health based standards and that U.S. EPA designates all of the State as attainment for all pollutants.

21

2013 Goals and Challenges• Continue to work to ensure that all Indiana

waters meet all water quality standards and that U.S. EPA delists impairments as water quality improvements are documented.

22

2013 Goals and Challenges• Continue to work to ensure that current

activities do not pollute Indiana lands and that previously contaminated lands are safe for future intended uses.

23

2013 Goals and Challenges

• Continue to pursue water program consolidation.

• Issue water general permits.

• Phosphorous in lakes rule.

• Develop plans and associated rules to meet new air quality standards.

24

2013 Goals and Challenges

• Continue process of easing burden of solid waste processing rules for activities with limited potential environmental impact.

• Transform rulemaking process to the new Environmental Rules Board.

• Update and improve the Virtual File Cabinet.

25

Questions?

Tom EasterlyCommissioner

Indiana Department of Environmental Management317-232-8611

teasterly@idem.in.gov

26