How do I Know if My Project Needs an Air Permit?

There is not a whole lot that is black and white about air quality permitting. It can sometimes be hard to determine whether you need to submit an air permit application for a project and if so, what kind. The goal of this article is to provide some concepts and questions to consider when you are developing projects so that you can reach out to your favorite air quality expert to help you determine if your project needs an air permit.

What is a Project?

You might not think what you are planning to do at your facility rises to the level of being an air permitting project, but you should consider the following questions to help you determine whether your project meets the criteria of an air permitting project:

• Are there capital costs associated with the project being considered?
• Does someone have to pick up a wrench, saw, screwdriver, or other tool that will come into contact with something that is on my air permit or serves something that is on my air permit?
• Are you going to install new equipment that has associated air emissions?
• Are you going to install equipment or make a change that will make existing equipment have more associated air emissions?
• Are you changing a process control system so that you will be able to make products more efficiently and increase throughput?
• Are you relieving a “bottleneck” in your process?
• Will your project result in reduced process down time?
• Are you proposing to do something that your air permit does not allow you to do now?

If the answer is yes to any of these, we need to dig a little deeper.

What if my Project Does not Require any Changes to my Permit?

Sometimes company staff charged with evaluating projects think that an air permit application is not required because no changes are necessary to the air permit (I’m not increasing emissions over my limits, why do I need to submit a permit application?). Even if your project does not contravene or conflict with any conditions in your air permit, you may still need to submit an air permit application. If you are making a “physical change” or a change in the way you are operating that will increase the air emissions the environment actually sees, you need to evaluate the possible need for air permitting. Simple example: Say you permitted your facility to emit 100 tons of emissions, but the environment has only ever seen 50 tons of emissions in the ten years that you have operated. If you are making a change that now allows you to achieve 100 tons of emissions, you will increase actual emissions as a result of your project and will need to evaluate the appropriate air permitting mechanisms. The right question to ask is whether the project increases the emissions that the environment actually sees, not whether the project increases emissions or throughput above my currently permitted levels.

What Questions Should I Consider when Evaluating my Project?

You should consider the following when evaluating project impacts. Will this project/action:

• Result in an actual production/throughput increase?
• Remove any existing production constraints or capacity restrictions?
• Result in greater available hours of operation/less downtime?
• Require a physical change to the process or process control system?
• Result in the use of new and/or greater quantities of fuel or raw materials?
• Result in process chemistry changes at the facility that impact emissions?

The question is whether your project will result in an actual increase in emissions of any regulated pollutant, not just whether it will increase potential emissions or capacity.

Are there Changes that are Exempt from Permitting?

The short answer is yes. If you can increase hours of operation at your facility without making any changes and your permit does not restrict you from doing so, that action is not likely to need air permitting. Your permitting agency may have a list or description of types of activities that do not need to be permitted (and air permitting requirements differ by location). Projects that are considered routine maintenance, repair, or replacement (RMRR) are not modifications. However, figuring out whether something qualifies as RMRR requires an evaluation of the nature and extent of the work; the purpose of the work; the typical frequency of the work; and the cost of the work. For example: changing the oil and replacing filters in your car is RMRR but replacing the engine is not. If you are replacing a unit with a bigger unit that will get you more throughput – that’s not RMRR. If you are replacing your old battered thing with a new shiny thing because the old thing is at the end of its useful life and you need to replace it to keep your plant running, that is not RMRR, it is a modification that likely needs to be permitted.

What does my Favorite Air Quality Expert need to Know to Tell me if my Project Needs an Air Permit?

If you think your project might need an air permit based on your consideration of the items above, it probably does. Here is what your favorite air quality expert needs to know to determine whether an air permit application is needed for sure, and what type:

• Are you installing new equipment?
• How big is it?
• What fuel does it burn to operate?
• Will it need steam and if so, how much steam will it need?
• Any emissions control equipment?
• Is there any vendor information for new equipment or replacement parts (e.g., burners)?
• How will this project affect the rest of the facility?
• What throughput/production level have we been at? (baseline)
• Where will throughput/production be at after the project? (projection/potential)
• Will we go over any permit limits?
• Will we have a new emission point to the atmosphere we didn’t before?

Even with all the relevant information (back to the black and white thought) you may still want to request a determination from your friendly neighborhood permit agency to make sure you are on the right track with respect to the right permitting path (or whether you need a permit modification at all). Regardless of what someone at the agency might say, liability regarding air permitting decisions (permit or no permit) falls on the facility.

Summary

Air permitting efforts can require a significant amount of information and resources and depending on your permitting agency’s requirements and the significance of the project air emissions impacts, it can take quite a bit of time before a final permit is issued and you can begin construction of your project. Therefore, it is best to engage your favorite air quality expert as early in the process as possible. Also note that a project that can be approved quickly in one state might take a long time in another state because public review, an environmental justice analysis, and possibly dispersion modeling, could be required for a permit modification. Effective communication and input from all stakeholders is critical to preparing a technically sound and complete evaluation (and permit application, if needed). Also remember to tell your air permitting team when something changes with the project so they can address the change as needed. If you have any questions, please reach out!

RY2024 Multimedia Compliance Reporting Tips And Tricks

Reporting Year 2024 (RY2024) Season has officially begun! There are a variety of federal and state reports due in the first half of 2025 that require data collection, analysis, and data entry. It can be overwhelming to keep track of all the different reporting websites, submittal instructions, due dates, and program updates for each year. Below is a list of tips and tricks for different reporting programs for RY2024, with a special focus on North Carolina and South Carolina.

U.S. Environmetal Protection Agency Central Data Exchange

Many federal reports are submitted through the U.S. Environmetal Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Central Data Exchange (CDX) website. One important update that became effective August 2, 2024, when using CDX, Login.gov is the new access. The new login process allows a safe and secure sign-in. Existing users will be automatically routed upon logging in to CDX to begin the process of obtaining a Login.gov if they have not already done so.

Ensure well in advance that the certifying or designated official for your report(s) is set up in CDX, has access and can view reports, and understands their responsibilities with submitting the report.

Air Emissions Inventory Reporting

Air emissions reporting requirements and deadlines vary by state and size of facility. Make sure you know your facility’s obligations on how often to report, when to report, what pollutants to report, and how to report. Some facilities report actual air emissions of each pollutant that is over a certain threshold every year, some facilities are required to enter allowable emissions for pollutants that have specific permit limits, while some facilities may only be required to report actual air emissions when it is time to renew the air permit. You should read your state’s emissions inventory instructions to understand if there are emissions units that are exempt from reporting and how the inventory is submitted and certified (e.g., online system or paper submittal). Here are some tips for reporting in the Carolinas that could apply to other states as well.

North Carolina Air Emissions Inventory Reporting in Air Emissions Reporting On-Line

Emissions inventory notification letters or emails for each Title V facility required to do an annual emissions inventory due by June 30 will normally be mailed from the appropriate regional office in late January each year. The notification letters will include the North Carolina Air Emissions Inventory (AEI) Reporting in Air Emissions Reporting On-Line (AERO) User ID and PIN. While there are no major updates to AERO for RY2024, it is important to remember a few key items when working in AERO:

• The AERO Certification Statement page needs to be signed using blue ink.
• Be mindful when working in AERO not to unintentionally submit a report while completing the validation.
• North Carolina AEIs are due June 30^th, 2025, for facilities required to do an annual emissions inventory.

South Carolina Air Emissions Inventory Reporting in the State and Local Emissions Inventory System (SLEIS)

South Carolina facilities are required to submit their emissions inventory (the Point Source Data Report) in South Carolina Air Emissions Inventory Reporting in the State and Local Emissions Inventory System (SLEIS).

A facility is required to submit an emissions inventory annually if they are a Type A Source. Title V sources with potential annual emissions greater than or equal to the emissions thresholds provided by South Carolina Department of Environmental Services’ (SC DES) are listed here. If your facility is not a newly permitted facility or is a Title V facility with potential annual emissions less than the Type A thresholds, an emissions inventory must be submitted every three years beginning with calendar year 2014 data.

Any newly permitted and constructed Title V sources that have obtained or are in the process of obtaining their Title V permit must submit an initial emissions inventory for the first partial calendar year of operation and the first full calendar year of operation.

If an existing source is determined subject to the Title V Operating Permit Program, and/or in a nonattainment area (NAA), an emissions inventory must be submitted to the Department for the previous calendar year within 90 days and the source must determine the schedule for future inventories based on Regulation 61-62.1.

If you are working with a facility for which you have not previously entered a report, you must request access to the facility in SLEIS by e-mailing ei_submittals@des.sc.gov. Access is granted based on the preparer’s role within the ePermitting system (SC DES) online platform for permitting and reporting), so make sure you have access in ePermitting as well.

SLEIS offers a spreadsheet template that can be downloaded from the ePermitting portal, completed, and used to upload emissions data instead of hard entering the data. If you are entering data manually, when possible, utilize emissions factors that you know will be consistent year by year within the system (e.g., AP-42). This will trim down the amount of time spent entering total emissions because only a throughput will be needed for future reports. Also, if an emissions unit did not operate for the whole reporting year, be sure to mark its operational status as “Did not operate.”

Greenhouse Gas Reporting

You should understand whether your facility is required to submit greenhouse gas (GHG) reports to U.S. EPA or to your state under a regulatory program. One important update for RY2024 GHG reporting is the update to the 40 CFR Part 98, Subpart A, Table A-1 Global Warming Potentials (GWPs) outlined in the table below. GWPs should be updated in your calculations to reflect the revised GWPs from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). More information on GHG Reporting can be found in a previous 4 The Record Article, Final Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Reporting Regulations.

Other Air-Related Reporting

Know how to submit reports required by air quality regulations or your air quality permit. Your state may have a certain way it wants to receive reports, and U.S. EPA may have another mechanism. Make sure you submit to both agencies, if required. For example, Clean Air Act (CAA) compliance reports, certifications, and notifications for facilities in U.S. EPA Region IV must be submitted electronically to U.S. EPA Region IV (e.g., Annual Title V Certifications, 502(b)(10) notifications, etc.). U.S. EPA Region IV is no longer accepting paper submittals and your state’s system does not transmit your reports to U.S. EPA. Documents can be submitted electronically via email at EPA_R4_CAA_Reports@epa.gov or in the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). For a list of reporting requirements and procedures by state, click here.

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)

Tier II Reporting

Tier II reports are required for any regulated facility that stores or handles more than 10,000 pounds of a hazardous chemical. A Tier II report is also required for a regulated facility that stores or handles any extremely hazardous substance (EHS) more than 500 pounds or its threshold planning quantity (TPQ), whichever is lower. The Consolidated Lists of Lists includes chemicals subject to Tier II reporting as well as other compliance reporting and can be found here. It is important to check the list every year for updates for the current reporting period.

Before you begin work on a Tier II report, make sure you have any new or updated safety data sheets (SDSs) for any chemicals stored at the facility. If you work on Tier II reports for multiple states, be mindful of which reporting program your State uses (e.g., North Carolina and South Carolina both use E-Plan). Make sure to log in well in advance of starting data entry to ensure you have full access to each facility you need.

Tier II reports are due March 1, 2025, which is a Saturday, so make sure to submit your report by Friday, February 28^th!

Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Reporting

TRI Reports are due July 1. If a facility meets the employee, industry sector, and chemical threshold criteria, it must report to the TRI Program. For more details about the reporting criteria, refer to the TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions page.

Prior to starting your annual TRI report this year, review the Reporting Changes for RY2024. A few noteworthy changes for RY2024 include the addition of seven new per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and the de minimis levels for some cobalt and antimony compounds, which are changing from 1.0% to 0.1%, among others.

Similarly to other reporting programs, it’s important to make sure you have logged into the reporting website, TRIMEweb, and assigned the appropriate Certifying Official well in advance of the deadline and confirmed with the individual that they have access and authority to submit the report.

While completing the TRI report, all applicable releases need to be quantified appropriately and accurately. It is important to ensure that the air emissions reported on the Facility AEI match the air emissions reported on the TRI. The TRI breaks out the emissions into stack/point and fugitive emissions, which may not always match the AEI depending on how the emissions are broken out. If this is the case for your facility, there is a designated location within TRIMEweb that allows you to make comments on any discrepancies. You can also use this comment section to provide explanations if you have a significant percentage change in releases from the prior year that may eliminate future questions from U.S. EPA during their review.

As you are preparing your annual reports check out our webpage for topical items such as webinars and articles. ALL4 can assist with your compliance reporting needs and help you navigate your state-specific requirements for completion and submittal. Please reach out to Lindsay Salvador at lsalvador@all4inc.com for assistance with your annual compliance reporting!

ICYMI: Navigating NPDES Wastewater Permitting: Best Practices, Watch Outs and Lookaheads

If you missed our webinar on Navigating National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permitting last week or need a written summary to refer back to, read along for a summary of best practices, watchouts, and lookaheads to consider in your next NPDES renewal or modification! This is an update to our original blog on the subject from 2020.

What is NPDES?

NPDES is a national program with the purpose of reducing pollutants in discharges to water of the U.S. (WOTUS), enforced through the Clean Water Act (CWA). If your facility discharges wastewater from an outfall to WOTUS, you very likely have an NPDES discharge permit (or need one), which must be renewed every five years.

Best Practices

When should I start working on my NPDES renewal application?

Generally speaking, the sooner the better! Renewal applications must be submitted at least six months prior to the expiration date of the permit (some states require even earlier – including Rhode Island). Depending on the complexity of the permit, whether changes are being requested, and the required sampling, ALL4 recommends getting started with a renewal application six months to a year prior to the due date.

What changes can I request in my NPDES renewal application?

With sufficient technical and/or regulatory justification, changes to permit limits, units (concentration vs. mass-based), monitoring frequencies, and pollutants monitored can all be requested in an NPDES renewal application. Think about changes you would like to make, which permit limits or conditions cause extra burden, and consider how you might justify a change. Resources like U.S. EPA’s 1996 Interim Guidance for Performance-Based Reductions of NDPES Permit Monitoring Frequencies (an oldie but a goodie) and the NPDES Permit Writer’s Manual are helpful in evaluating these requests.

Watch Outs

Sampling and Analysis

NPDES renewal applications normally require effluent sampling and analysis beyond the routine requirements of the permit. Be sure you understand state- or industry-specific requirements for the parameters to analyze, the number of sampling events, and the conditions of sampling events (this is a great topic to discuss during a pre-application meeting). Examples of some state-specific sampling nuances we’ve come across:

• Pennsylvania requires three rounds of sampling events.
• North Carolina requires facilities to submit documentation of any pollutant with a certified test method at 40 CFR 136 if their discharge is anticipated.
• Georgia and Mississippi require additional toxicity testing during renewal years.
• Some states (e.g., Kansas) require minimal sampling with the renewal application but may request additional data following submittal.

Technology Based Effluent Limits

If your facility is subject to one or more effluent limit guidelines (ELGs) at 40 CFR 405-471 and has Technology Based Effluent Limits (TBELs), production data provided in your renewal application will be used to re-assess TBELs for the upcoming permit term. Check your specific ELG(s) for any nuances but generally production values used for TBELs should reflect actual production during the previous permit term and anticipated changes in the upcoming permit term (for example, if your facility was slowed back during your previous permit term but anticipates ramping back up in the upcoming permit term or has a planned expansion project in the upcoming permit term). States may refuse to increase TBELs based on an increase in production unless certain criteria are met due to anti-backsliding.

Cooling Water Intake Structures and Best Professional Judgement

Cooling Water Intake Structures (CWIS) are defined as intake structures withdrawing at least two million gallons per day (MGD) of flow, 25% of which is used exclusively for cooling purposes. Facilities with cooling water intake structures are required to provide additional information in the NPDES renewal process and must implement one of seven options to reduce mortality to fish and other aquatic organisms. Many facilities have intake structures that do not meet the definition of a cooling water intake structure; however, ALL4 has seen an uptick in scrutiny of these seemingly exempt CWIS during the NPDES renewal process. The increased scrutiny is substantiated by U.S. EPA’s wide latitude afforded in 40 CFR 125.90(b), which states that CWIS not meeting the applicability thresholds of the rule “must meet requirements under section 316(b) of the CWA established by the Director on a case-by-case, best professional judgment (BPJ) basis.”

Lookahead

Here are a few updates on the horizon that may impact your next NPDES renewal:

• As of Fall 2024, U.S. EPA planned to revise its Form 2C for NPDES applications to include Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) sampling requirements. The pollutants list on Form 2C was last updated in 1987. This change is currently targeted for final rulemaking by the end of 2026.
• Some states are moving toward E. coli and/or enterococci rather than fecal coliform monitoring. States are also scrutinizing fecal indicator bacteria detected in effluent even for facilities that do not treat domestic waste, so be sure you are confident in the data you submit in your application!
• As part of the Preliminary Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 16, U.S. EPA has determined that detailed studies of the Battery Manufacturing Category, the Centralized Waste Treatment Category, the Oil and Gas Extraction Category, and PFAS processors (industrial facilities engaged in processing raw PFAS into commercial products) are warranted.
• We would be remiss to not acknowledge the current changes going on in the federal government that are likely to impact U.S. EPA and its funding in the near future. We may start to see states step up and take stronger leads with BPJ limits – for more on that subject, check out our blog Water Quality Compliance in the Trump Era.

If you have questions regarding NPDES permitting, please contact Lizzie Smith at lsmith@all4inc.com or at (770)-999-0269.

Proposed Amendments to Rules for the Cleveland 2015 Ozone Non-Attainment Areas

Currently in Public Notice, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA), Division of Air Pollution Control (DAPC) is working to amend three rules in the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) due to the change of the Cleveland ozone nonattainment area from the moderate nonattainment classification to a serious nonattainment classification.

If you own or operate a major stationary source in the Cleveland ozone nonattainment area (Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage, and Summit counties), the changes to these rules could impact your current and future business operations.

Why the Changes?

The Cleveland ozone nonattainment area was classified as moderate nonattainment for the 2015 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard. The area was required to meet the ozone standard by August 3, 2024. Based on certified ozone monitoring data, this area failed to meet the ozone standard by the required date and has been reclassified to serious nonattainment by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S EPA) in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA).

Reclassification to serious nonattainment triggers additional CAA requirements for major stationary sources located in the serious nonattainment area.

What are the Impacts?

There are three rules being addressed in the draft language:

• OAC Chapter 3745-21: Carbon Monoxide, Photochemically Reactive Materials, Hydrocarbons, and Related Materials Standards;
• OAC Chapter 3745-31: Permit-to-Install New Sources and Permit-to-Install and Operate Program; and
• OAC Chapter 3745-110: Nitrogen Oxides – Reasonably Available Control Technology.

In these rules there are three major changes that will impact future permit actions:

• The threshold for sources to be subject to Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements for volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NO_x) is lowered from 100 tons per year (tpy) to 50 tpy. (OAC Chapters 3745-110 and 3745-21)
• The major source threshold for Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permitting requirements is lowered from 100 tpy to 50 tpy of VOC or NO_x. (OAC Chapter 3745-31)
• The threshold for triggering a major modification under NNSR is lowered from 40 tpy to 25 tpy of VOC or NO_x. (OAC Chapter 3745-31)

In addition, redesignation to a serious nonattainment area changes the NNSR offset ratio from 1.15 : 1 to 1.2 : 1 and lowers the Title V major source permitting threshold to 50 tpy of NO_x or VOC.

Who is Impacted and When?

If you own or operate a major stationary source in the aforementioned Cleveland area counties and have affected sources as defined in the OAC Chapters, these changes in thresholds can impact air permitting at your facility.

If your facility triggers Title V major source permitting you will need to submit an application for a Title V permit within one year of the effective date of the reclassification, or by January 16, 2026. Facilities that want to take emissions limits to remain below the Title V threshold should apply for a synthetic minor permit as soon as possible. Ohio EPA would like to issue any synthetic minor permits needed to avoid Title V applicability as final by the January 16, 2026 Title V application deadline.

The rules are currently in the public comment period and will continue in the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review (JCARR) process.

How Can ALL4 Help?

ALL4 will continue to follow these regulatory updates and publish any significant changes to the current proposed language. ALL4 has an extensive background in air permit strategy, RACT review and development, and Title V and NSR permitting, and can help your organization understand, strategize for, and implement changes required for rule compliance. We can also help you strategize around how to permit modifications in a serious nonattainment area. Please contact me (mstrain@all4inc.com) or your ALL4 contact for more information about meeting these new standards.

Proposed Revisions to North Carolina’s Permit Review Timeline Rule

On February 4, 2025, the North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NC DAQ) hosted a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed Permit Review Timeline Rule revisions. NC DAQ has proposed revisions to their construction and operating permit rules and Title V procedures to change review timelines for air permit modification applications in accordance with Session Law (S.L.) 2023-134, Section 12.11. (a)-(c), which resulted from the 2023 Appropriations Act for North Carolina (passed in October of 2023). Section 12.11.(a) of the S.L. revises General Statue (G.S.) § 143-215.108, Subparagraph (d)(2) to specify maximum periods for NC DAQ to review and process air permit modification applications.

Revisions to this Statute specify the following timelines for review: 90 calendar days for review of a minor air permit modification and 270 calendar days for review of a major air permit modification. These timelines are contingent upon the receipt of an administratively complete application. Review timelines under S.L. 2023-134, Section 12.11.(a) only impact permit modifications; therefore, the proposed revisions do not affect the review processes for all other types of permit actions (e.g., an air permit application for a greenfield site).

A key emphasis of these revisions is the updates made to the definitions of specific terms found in G.S. § 143-213. Newly created subdivision 1a now includes a definition for the term administratively complete which is “that all information required by statute, regulation, or application form has been submitted to the Department for the purpose of processing a permit application.” The minimum processing elements for permit modification applications are outlined in 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02Q .0305 or 15A NCAC 02Q .0505 and .0507.

Under 15A NCAC 02Q .0300, once a permit modification application not requiring Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) or case-by-case maximum achievable control technology (MACT) review is submitted, NC DAQ will send the applicant an acknowledgment letter that the application was received and whether it was accepted for processing within 10 days of receipt of the application. If an application is accepted for processing, the timeline for review begins from the receipt date of the permit modification application and not the date on which the acknowledgement letter was issued. If the permit modification is not accepted for processing, the acknowledgement letter will list the application elements of 15A NCAC 02Q .0305 that are missing from the application package. For applications accepted for processing under 15A NCAC 02Q .0300, NC DAQ will review the application to determine whether it is complete or incomplete within 45 days of receiving the permit modification application. NC DAQ will notify the applicant in writing specifying either a completeness date, request of additional information, or request that the applicant rewrite and re-submit the application.

Similar to the aforementioned proposed revisions for standard construction and operating permit modification applications (those outlined in 15A NCAC 02Q .0300), revisions to the permitting timeline for Title V permit modification applications (those outlined in 15A NCAC 02Q .0500) have been proposed as well. The processing timeline for Title V permit modification applications is the same as those outlined for 15A NCAC 02Q .0300, with minimum application elements being specified in 15A NCAC 02Q .0505 and .0507. A slight difference in this rule is that NC DAQ will review the application to determine whether it is complete or incomplete within 60 days of receiving the Title V permit application. NC DAQ will still notify the applicant in writing to specify either a completeness date, request for additional information, or request that the applicant rewrite and re-submit the application.

For all permit types, NC DAQ may still request additional information during the review process. It is important to note that if the applicant does not address additional information requests by the date requested, NC DAQ will cease processing the application.

A completeness determination is not necessary for Title V minor modification applications. Within 90 days of receiving an application for a minor modification that is accepted by NC DAQ for processing, one of the following actions will be taken:

• The permit modification will be issued and transmittal of the proposed permit to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) will take place. U.S. EPA will have a 45-day period for review. The effective date of the modified permit will be 60 days after the issuance date unless U.S. EPA objects in writing to the modified permit.
• The permit modification application will be denied.
• The requested modification application will be determined to not qualify for the procedures set by 15A NCAC 02Q .0515 and should therefore be processed in accordance with 15A NCAC 02Q .0516.

For Title V major permit modifications, 15A NCAC 02Q .0525(b)(2) states that NC DAQ shall complete the technical review of the major permit modification received in accordance with 15A NCAC 02Q .0516 in accordance with 40 CFR 70.7(e)(4)(ii) within 270 calendar days of receipt of a complete application. From this point, NC DAQ will then complete a review of the application and either issue the modified permit, deny the modified permit, or publish the modified permit for public notice and comment. If a permit revision is not deemed a minor modification in accordance with 15A NCAC 02Q .0515 or a significant modification pursuant to 15A NCAC 02Q .0516, the application is then to be reviewed in accordance with 15A NCAC 02Q .0514 or .0517 as applicable.

The public comment period for these rule revisions ends March 3, 2025, and NC DAQ is required to submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) amendment to U.S. EPA by July 1, 2025. Approximately 60 days after U.S. EPA approves the changes, the amended rules will become effective and the changes will apply to applications received on or after the effective date. According to a recent NC DAQ presentation, these revisions will provide increased certainty due to a more defined review time but may reduce flexibilities DAQ can afford to applicants (e.g., less consolidation of applications) and could lead to more withdrawn applications. Application fees are non-refundable, so applicants that withdraw and re-submit applications would pay the application fee again upon resubmittal.

ALL4 can help your facility with environmental permitting projects and can assist in driving timelines to achieve optimal efficiency with your air quality permitting projects. For any assistance or further questions regarding the proposed revisions to North Carolina’s permit review timeline rule or compliance with North Carolina air regulations, please contact Thomas Timms at ttimms@all4inc.com or 919-694-7541.

Calling All Desert Storm-Chasers! The New Arizona Multi-Sector General Permit Has Arrived!

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Water Quality Division (WQD) has issued the Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) 2024 Industrial Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Non-Mining and Mining Industries. Following collaboration with stakeholders during the public comment period, ADEQ signed the final versions of the MSGPs on January 13, 2025. The permits replace the expired 2019 AZPDES MSGPs and are effective as of January 16, 2025.

Summary of changes to the 2024 Mining and Non-Mining MSGPs:

• Consideration of Major Storm Events – ADEQ has added new requirements for Mining and Non-Mining permittees to consider enhanced and more resilient pollution prevention measures during major storm events. The MSGPs include several control measures to review including improvements to infrastructure and elevated storage locations during flooding. Similar requirements have been added to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) MSGP and other state MSGPs in recent years; for more information about resiliency planning in stormwater permitting, check out our 2025 lookahead article.
• ADEQ added Additional Implementation Measures (AIM) to the Non-Mining MSGP, which includes a three-level response approach to action level exceedances. The response requirements become more rigorous with each level in effort to bring the facility back to baseline status. There are exceptions to the AIM requirements, including if the action level exceedance can be attributed to background pollutant levels, run-on from a neighboring source, an abnormal event, or demonstrated not to result in an exceedance of a surface water quality standard. It should be noted that regardless of if an exemption applies, the permit holder must still review the control measures, the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and on-site activities to determine if other modifications are necessary.
• ADEQ updated the action level formulas for hardness-dependent metals to include the default metal translator factors from U.S. EPA The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total Recoverable Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion. The metal translator converts the dissolved metal criteria to a total recoverable basis to create action levels.
• ADEQ added action levels for metal parameters in the Mining MSGP. These action levels are protected surface water dependent (PSWD) and must be included in the Notice of Intent for coverage (NOI) process based on the surface water’s lowest applicable designated use.
• ADEQ updated Part 7.2 of the Mining MSGP that requires the permittee to submit a Control Measure Assessment Report following receipt of an action level exceedance.
• A 30-calendar day period has been established for the submittal of a corrective action report following a corrective action trigger in Part 3.1.1. of the MSGP. This is in response to public comments regarding the vague “as soon as possible” in previous permits.
• ADEQ clarified the coordinates listed in the NOI must be the central location of the facility in Footnote 2 of Table 1-2 in the MSGPs. It is important to check the historical coordinates before submitting a new NOI, as a discharge is not authorized if the NOI is incorrect.
• ADEQ removed the action level for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) for Sector G and J (metal mining and non-metallic mineral mining and dressing, respectively) in the Mining MSGP. These sectors are still required to monitor and report the results.

Summary of items NOT changing in the 2024 Mining and Non-Mining MSGPs:

• Monitoring Frequency – ADEQ believes that sampling twice per year (once per rainy season) provides the best dataset and will not be implementing more frequent sampling.
• Emerging Contaminant Research – ADEQ has decided to not include per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) or microplastic monitoring in the 2024 MSGPs. ADEQ has stated they are paying close attention to U.S. EPA recommendations regarding approved monitoring methods for microplastics and are partnering with wastewater treatment facilities to screen for PFAS.
• AIM for the Mining MSGP – ADEQ has decided not to include AIM requirements in the Mining MSGP, as ADEQ will give permittees time to understand if existing control measures are sufficient to meeting the action levels.

What are my next steps?

To seek coverage under the new MSGP, each facility must submit an NOI and updated SWPPP through the MyDEQ online portal by April 16, 2025. If you have any questions regarding the updates to the AZPDES 2024 MSGP or what actions your facility needs to take to get coverage, please don’t hesitate to reach out to me at akelley@all4inc.com.

The Life-Saving Importance Of CPR During American Heart Month

February is American Heart Month, a month dedicated to raising awareness about cardiovascular health and the importance of heart disease prevention. One of the most crucial life-saving skills related to heart health is cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). CPR is performed when someone is either unresponsive and not breathing or is gasping for air. It is used to help save a life during cardiac arrest when the heart stops beating or is beating too ineffectively to circulate blood to vital organs. Sudden cardiac arrest is one of the leading causes of death in the United States and knowing how to perform CPR can significantly increase survival rates.

OSHA Requirements

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) requirements for CPR and first aid vary based on industry and workplace hazards. The General Industry Standard for Medical and First Aid (29 CFR 1910.151) requires workplaces to have trained first-aid providers if medical facilities are not nearby, adequate first-aid supplies readily available, and CPR training is strongly recommended but not explicitly required. OSHA’s Construction Industry Standard for Medical Services and First Aid (29 CFR 1926.50) is slightly more stringent, requiring at least one trained first-aid provider must be available on-site, first-aid supplies must be easily accessible and comply with ANSI standards, and emergency medical services must be available within reasonable proximity. In specific high-risk industries such as Logging, Electric Power, and Confined Spaces, CPR and first-aid training are mandatory due to high-risk environments. Finally, workers providing first aid may require training on bloodborne pathogens and proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) use, as required by 29 CFR 1910.1030. Employers should conduct hazard assessments to determine the need for CPR/first-aid training and ensure compliance with OSHA standards.

Why is CPR Important During American Heart Month?

American Heart Month serves as a reminder of how serious heart disease and cardiac emergencies are. As stated previously, heart disease remains the leading cause of death in the U.S., and many cases involve sudden cardiac arrest. Each year, more than 350,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occur in the U.S., with nearly 90% of them being fatal if CPR is not administered immediately¹.

CPR can mean the difference between life and death for a loved one or coworker. CPR keeps blood and oxygen flowing to the brain and vital organs until emergency responders arrive, improving survival rates significantly.

How CPR Saves Lives

1. Increases Survival Chances

When a person suffers cardiac arrest, their heart suddenly stops beating. Performing CPR within the first few minutes can double or triple survival rates, giving the victim a fighting chance until paramedics arrive.

2. Prevents Brain Damage

Without oxygen, the brain starts suffering damage within four to six minutes. CPR keeps the brain active, reducing the risk of long-term disabilities or death.

3. Empowers Anyone to Help

With hands-only CPR, even bystanders with no medical training can perform chest compressions to keep blood circulating. Learning this skill can turn an everyday person into a lifesaver.

How to Perform Hands-Only CPR

1. Call 911 – If a person collapses and is unresponsive, call for emergency help immediately.
2. Start Chest Compressions – Place both hands in the center of the chest and push hard and fast at a rate of 100–120 beats per minute (roughly to the beat of “Stayin’ Alive” by the Bee Gees).
3. Continue Until Help Arrives – Don’t stop compressions until professional medical assistance takes over.

Encouraging CPR Training During Heart Month

American Heart Month is the perfect time to take a CPR certification course. Organizations like the American Heart Association (AHA) and Red Cross offer classes that teach both hands-only CPR and full CPR with rescue breaths. Many workplaces, schools, and community centers provide CPR training programs in February to promote heart health awareness. By learning CPR and spreading awareness, we can take action against sudden cardiac arrest and save more lives.

This American Heart Month, commit to making a difference. Whether by learning CPR, spreading awareness, or encouraging others to get trained, every action counts toward saving lives from heart-related emergencies. When seconds matter, performing CPR can be the ultimate act of love and care for someone in need.

If you have any questions about CPR, First Aid, or Emergency Response and how to address specific concerns at your facility to meet OSHA regulations, please contact Victoria Sparks at 859.447.9156 or vsparks@all4inc.com.

¹ American Red Cross Association, CPR Facts and Statistics (October 2, 2024).

U.S. EPA Extends Comment Period for MSGP

On December 13, 2024, the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) published the proposed 2026 Multisector General Permit (MSGP) in the Federal Register for public comment. The MSGP is a general permit that covers stormwater discharges ─ see ALL4’s previous article for more information. While the original comment period was set for the conventional 60 days, intending to end on February 11 2025, on February 3 U.S. EPA extended this comment period an additional 52 days to April 4 2025. U.S. EPA did not give a detailed reason for the extension, citing the desire to give interested parties additional time to thoroughly review and analyze how the new MSGP may affect them.

Comment Period

The proposed MSGP’s notable changes include quarterly “report-only” indicator analytical monitoring for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), in addition to storm water resiliency planning requirements. Stakeholders will have additional time to review these changes along with other updates and make comments to U.S. EPA. Comments can include support, suggested revisions, clarification, or concerns with the proposed MSGP.

What This Means

The 52-day extension of the comment period gives stakeholders more time to review the MSGP and give further consideration to the proposed permit. Comments already made to U.S. EPA need not to be resubmitted.

Only four states adopt the U.S. EPA MSGP in full and are directly affected (Idaho, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Massachusetts) but many states will subsequently adopt the same or similar language into their own state-issued general permits.

If you need assistance determining how the new MSGP may impact your facility operations, determining compliance strategies, or drafting and submitting public comments, please reach out to Evan Mia at emia@all4inc.com for assistance.

U.S. EPA’s Preliminary Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 16

On December 18, 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) published in the Federal Register the Preliminary Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 16 (Preliminary Plan 16). The comment period ended January 17, 2025. Preliminary Plan 16 addresses U.S. EPA’s latest efforts to develop and refine limits surrounding industrial wastewater discharges including effluent limitation guidelines (ELGs). ELGs are technology-based limits intended to regulate industrial wastewater discharges from certain industries directly into waters of the U.S. or indirectly to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). The purpose of ELGs is to achieve economically feasible control on pollutants from industrial discharges.

Trump’s Regulatory Freeze Pending Review Executive Order

It is notable that President Donald Trump enacted an Executive Order titled Regulatory Freeze Pending Review. In layman’s terms, proposed regulations such as Plan 16 are postponed from publication until reviewed by the Trump administration or a designated official. The administration could choose to amend Plan 16 and open it up for public comment again.

Preliminary Plan 16

Under the Clean Water Act, Section 304(m), U.S. EPA is required to publish biennial plan ELGs. Preliminary Plan 16 builds on this commitment, following the Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 15 (Plan 15) published on January 31, 2023 (See ALL4’s article on Plan 15). Plan 15 continued U.S. EPA’s scrutiny on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and Preliminary Plan 16 is no exception to that. Highlights of the components of Plan 16 are included in the following sections.

New Studies

U.S. EPA conduct preliminary studies for industries based on recent rulemakings, public comments, and ranking in U.S. EPA’s ranking analysis. U.S. EPA has identified the following industrial categories for detailed studies, including:

• Battery Manufacturing – focusing on industrial processes used for electric vehicles
• Centralized Waste Treatment – focusing on PFAS
• Oil and Gas Extraction – focusing on treatment technologies that can reduce the discharge of pollutants from the agricultural and wildlife water use
• PFAS Processors (facilities that process raw PFAS into commercial products) – developing a more complete understanding of facilities that receive PFAS feedstocks

Updates to Ongoing Studies

Preliminary Plan 16 also provides updates on the following ongoing U.S. EPA studies:

• Steam Electric Power Generating (40 CFR Part 423):
  • Zero discharge limits established for flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater, bottom ash (BA) transport water, and combustion residual leachate (CRL)
    • Zero discharge is the absence of pollutants
  • Non-zero numeric limits established for mercury and arsenic for specific CRL discharges, and new limits on legacy wastewater
    • Non-zero numerical is numerical limit above 0
    • Legacy wastewater is the wastewater that has accumulated over time from previous coal combustion processes before regulations were enacted over that specific wastewater
  • Introduces a subcategory for units ceasing coal combustion by 2034

• Meat and Poultry Products (40 CFR Part 432):
  • U.S. EPA proposed stricter effluent limits on nitrogen, phosphorus, chlorides, and E. coli, plus new pretreatment standards for indirect dischargers to POTWs with nutrient removal
  • Public comments closed on March 25, 2024, and final action is expected by August 2025

• Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers (40 CFR Part 414):
  • U.S. EPA intended to publish a proposed rule in fall of 2024
    • While this date has come and gone, U.S. EPA continues to explore ELGs in this sector, specifically to address wastewater discharges of PFAS

• Metal Finishing and Electroplating (40 CFR Parts 433 and 413):
  • U.S. EPA has learned that:
    • It is possible to successfully mitigate hexavalent chromium emissions using commercially available chemical fume suppressants that do not contain any PFAS
    • Trivalent chromium, which does not require the use of chemical fume suppressants
    • Granular activated carbon can be used to treat perfluoro octane sulfonic acid (PFOS) in wastewater and PFAS in metal finishing and electroplating wastewater
    • Membranes, ion exchange, and PFAS destruction techniques may be able to treat PFAS in wastewater from chromium finishing facilities, including membranes, ion exchange, and PFAS destruction techniques
  • U.S. EPA intends to publish a proposed rule by the spring of 2026

• Landfills (40 CFR Part 445):
  • PFAS identified in over 95% of landfills evaluated
  • U.S. EPA plans to propose revised ELGs in 2027

Facilities which operate in the industries provided in Preliminary Plan 16 should review publications in the Federal Register to see how it could affect you. Keep an eye out for ALL4’s article when the final plan is published.

ALL4 has extensive experience with the Clean Water Act, tracking regulatory developments, permitting strategy, and ELG applicability and compliance. If you have any questions or would like to discuss how ALL4 can help you with the items above, please reach out to Evan Mia at emia@all4inc.com.

Clearing up the Unclear – Business Rules for Compliance Calendar Tasks in Environmental Digital Solutions

A compliance calendar is a tool that includes tasks to maintain compliance with permits or regulations along with the appropriate due dates and associated people responsible for those tasks. Compliance calendars are usually created by determining requirements from permits or regulations. When documenting environmental compliance requirements in a digital compliance calendar, one of the key tools to ensure consistency and accuracy is business rules. Using business rules can help ensure that ambiguous requirements are treated similarly even if they are not written identically or addressed by the same person.

Business rules are essential decisions that ensure consistency across various operations, particularly when creating compliance task content for multiple permits and regulations. These rules address specific topics and gray areas that often arise during the creation of compliance tasks. In this blog article, I will discuss several situations in which business rules can streamline processes, reduce the burden of maintaining compliance content, and ensure that all regulatory obligations are met efficiently. Below I describe various unclear situations and the recommended business rule approach to address each situation.

Non-Actionable Requirements

All permits and regulations include sections such as definitions or descriptions that do not drive any compliance tasks. A specific example would be a requirement that is only duplicative, such as the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) ZZZZ’s requirement. This requirement indicates certain engine types comply with MACT ZZZZ by complying with New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) IIII or NSPS JJJJ as applicable.

Recommendation – Do not include non-actionable requirements in the compliance task content. While it might seem attractive to include every piece of a permit or regulation for completeness, in practice this approach creates additional content which needs to be updated and maintained without adding additional compliance value.

Requirements Involving Physical Changes at Site

Certain permit requirements, such as routing sources to control systems, necessitate physical modifications to equipment. These changes should ideally trigger a Management of Change (MOC) review. To ensure compliance and consistency, it is essential to establish a business rule that specifies the frequency of reviews for these requirements.

Recommendation – One approach is to perform infrequent verifications at different intervals such as annually to confirm no changes have occurred since the last check. Another approach is to do a onetime check with the expectation that any changes after the initial check would be captured by the MOC process.

Unpredictable Event Requirements

There are some requirements which outline actions to take in response to unpredictable events, such as spills or unexpected emissions. For instance, many state agencies require notifications when these events occur. However, because they cannot be anticipated, establishing recurring tasks based on their potential frequency is impractical.

Recommendation – Use a task to look back over a previous period and verify that if the event occurred, the associated compliance requirements were met. Train compliance personnel on the emissions release reporting requirements in their area of responsibility.

Very Frequent Requirements

Some compliance requirements, such as operator rounds, observations, and sampling have fixed frequencies and are required to be conducted daily or weekly.

Recommendation – Use a monthly task to confirm that the more frequent tasks occurred correctly. Weekly tasks can seem manageable in theory, but in practice the high volume of tasks per year associated with a weekly task can be overwhelming for users.

Requirements without a Specific Frequency

Many permit requirements do not have a specified frequency. A specific example of this type of requirement in Texas is that opacity be limited without specifying how frequently observations be performed. Other requirements are required by the permit or regulatory language to be done continuously, including the NSPS 60.18 requirement that flare pilot lights operate continuously when gases may be vented to the flare. Compliance tasks cannot be set to recur continuously, so a different approach must be used.

Recommendation -Implement a task to retrospectively verify that compliance requirements were met over a specified period. For example, environmental personnel at a site might conduct monthly checks to verify opacity levels were not exceeded during the previous month and that the flare pilot light was lit any time the flare might be controlling gases.

When the requirement does not have a specific frequency, consider the following questions to establish an appropriate frequency for the verification task.

• Current Frequency: Assess whether existing compliance checks are being conducted at an acceptable frequency. For example, if environmental personnel are checking the flare pilot monthly for permit deviation purposes, maintaining this frequency can streamline efforts and minimize changes. However, multiple environmental personnel may not be performing checks on consistent intervals, so matching current practice may not provide the desired consistency.
• Risk vs. Workload: Another consideration where consistency is valued above matching existing practice is the level of risk associated with a longer interval between execution of a task and overwhelming environmental personnel. For example, it is not generally feasible to set every task as a monthly task as this would result in a significant number of compliance tasks due every month and an overwhelming amount of work. It can also be a problem to set all tasks to annual because if a compliance issue is detected, it may have been out of compliance for up to a year before the issue is realized and corrected.

The ALL4 Digital Solutions team has experience supporting content generation from permits and regulatory requirements as well as loading content into tools. If you want to learn more about any part of this, please contact Julie Taccino at jtaccino@all4inc.com or 281-201-1247.