Spotlights
Introduction to Environmental Justice
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines environmental justice as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or policies. Meaningful involvement means that people have an opportunity to participate in decisions about activities that may affect their environment and/or health; the public’s contribution can influence the regulatory agency’s decision; community concerns will be considered in the decision-making process; and decision makers will seek out and facilitate the involvement of those potentially affected.
US EPA - EJ Programs
The US EPA has introduced EJ policy initiatives that have been used to drive business continuity and planning for new developments or expansions in many manufacturing sectors. States have actively utilized these EPA initiatives to enhance regulatory framework, promote community engagement, and implement advanced monitoring and reporting.
In December 2022, the US EPA issued a memorandum titled “Principles for Addressing Environmental Justice in Air Permitting”. The memorandum, and attachment, provides principles for an interim operating framework for identifying, analyzing, and addressing EJ concerns in context of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The goal in applying the principles is to provide consistency and fair treatment for all stages of the permitting process. The policy provides the following eight principles for region and state guidance.
Identify communities with potential EJ concerns.
Engage early in the permitting process to promote meaningful participation and fair treatment.
Enhance public involvement throughout the permitting process.
Conduct a “fit for purpose” EJ analysis.
Minimize and mitigate disproportionately high and adverse effects associated with the permit action.
Provide federal support throughout the air permitting process.
Enhance transparency throughout the air permitting process.
Build capacity to enhance the consideration of EJ in the air permitting process.
State - EJ Programs
State policymakers have taken action to create laws to protect communities that are disproportionately affected by the effects of pollution and other environmental hazards. This includes developing policies and tools to identify demographic indicators.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) provides a good template for a state-level EJ program related to requirements for permitting applications. The state law requires the NJDEP to evaluate the environmental and public health impacts of the following types of facilities on overburdened communities when reviewing specific types of permit applications. These industries are typical for active EJ programs:
Major sources of air pollution (i.e., chemical plants, foundry, gas fired power plants and cogeneration facilities)
Resource recovery facilities or incinerators; sludge processing facilities
Sewage treatment plants with a capacity of more than 50-million gallons per day
Transfer stations or solid waste facilities
Recycling facilities that receive at least 100 tons of recyclable material per day
Scrap metal facilities
Landfills
Medical waste incinerators, with exceptions
The NJDEP law defines an overburdened community as any census block group, as determined in accordance with the most recent United States Census, in which:
at least 35% of the households qualify as low-income households,
at least 40% of the residents identify as minority or as members of a State recognized tribal community, or
at least 40% of the households have limited English proficiency.
NJDEP developed their EJ mapping tool called the New Jersey Environment Justice Mapping Assessment, and Protection (EJMAP) tool that will be updated every two years.
If the EJ rules are applicable to a project, all permitting clocks are stopped until the completion of the agency’s EJ review process. As part of the EJ process, an applicant must hold an in-person public hearing in the host overburdened community to present the proposed project and hold meaningful public participation. Meaningful public participation includes a minimum 60-day public comment and applicants must respond to all public comments in writing. If the facility cannot avoid a disproportionate impact to the overburdened community, the agency can deny the permit application.
Other States with EJ legislation, rules and policies include California, Colorado, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Washington state. Many other states have pending regulations. States may have significant differences in EJ definitions, tools, thresholds, public engagement, and impact determination.
Local Impacts - Chicago Area – EJ and Air Permitting
Metropolitan areas are also taking a stance on EJ issues. The following articles highlight air permitting activity in the Chicago area with one site denied an air permit because of EJ concerns.
Pilsen metal shredder Sims Metal Management could become next big environmental battle in Chicago - Chicago Sun-Times
‘Sham process’ on General Iron has shocked business community - Chicago Sun-Times
For air permitting in an EJ area in Chicago or other overburdened areas, added permitting requirements may include the following:
For major source air permit renewals, maintain the current emissions profile with no net increase in permitted emissions limits, no change in pollutants or no increase in production.
For existing facilities proposing new projects/emission sources, maintain the current facility-wide emission profiles with no net increase by finding offset from other existing emission sources. Otherwise, air modeling may be required to evaluate the impacts of the emission increases.
Loss of air emissions from shutdown emissions units.
Anticipate a longer permit review period due to EJ notification and a possible public comment period. All projects in the EJ area require EJ notification, regardless of the applicability of public notice requirements.
Air modeling may be required for impacts from primary pollutants, hazardous air pollutants, air toxics, as well as fugitive sources and may include accumulated modeled impacts from surrounding areas.
Conduct EJ Review to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed air permit for the expansion on nearby communities.
Community engagement may include public meetings or residential surveys.
Identify mitigating measures which may include added emissions control, emissions monitoring (e.g., continuous emissions monitors (CEMS), baghouse leak detection systems), added reporting, or investment in community programs.
EJ Screening and Mapping Tools
USEPA’s EJ screening tool is used to identify potential environmental burdens at the community level by estimating impacts from multiple facilities in an area. This approach uses ambient monitoring data, modeling, and publicly available reports. Other federal and state level mapping tools help to identify if facilities or projects are in overburdened areas. In April 2024, the USEPA introduced an online collection of EJ resources.
Aeterra’s Experience
Aeterra can assist with air permitting in EJ areas and projects that may require a formal EJ Review. Our experienced staff have worked on air permitting projects influenced by EJ requirements, ensuring compliance and addressing community concerns.
A Major Source Title V Permit Renewal for powder-based product facility was submitted with no changes to operations. The facility produces powder-based products, with particulate matter (PM) being the primary pollutant. The facility maintains filter and baghouse controls to reduce emissions. During public review of the permit, a local public interest group provided extensive comments aimed at mitigating risks. A repeated request was for all filter and baghouse systems to be equipped with electronic leak detection systems and alarms, in addition to the existing pressure gauges. The final strategy for the permit included increased frequency or monitoring of existing gauges, recordkeeping and added maintenance recordkeeping requirements.
A bakery plant, a major source of volatile organic compounds (VOC), proposed installing a new baking line. The proposed baking line was estimated to emit more than 6 tons of VOC per year, including hazardous air pollutants (acetaldehyde). Under the normal EJ process, the project could potentially be required to install a control device and go through a lengthy EJ review and public notification and comments period. However, by working with the bakery’s production, business, and marketing team, an acceptable and practical emission reduction was identified for another baking line, resulting in a facility-wide “zero” net emission increase. The agency accepted the proposed permitting strategies and the permit application, and a final permit was issued within 30 days from the time of submittal.
A bulk gasoline/jet fuel terminal, a major source of VOCs, proposed installing a new loading arm at its loading rack. Although the VOC emissions from the proposed loading arm were low (less than 2 tpy), the aggregated VOC emissions from all the projects at the facility from the five-year look-back window exceeded the major modification thresholds, which would trigger not only EJ review but also non-attainment new source review (NNSR). However, by working with the terminal operating team, the corporate business decision team, and reviewing the monthly loading rack throughput data, emissions, and other technical data, several permitting strategies were recommended to the terminal to revise the previous calculations using more accurate technical data, reduce the permitted gasoline throughput (based on the market demand), and lower the aggregated VOC emissions below the major modification threshold, which not only satisfied EJ review, but also avoided NNSR review. The agency accepted the proposed permitting strategies and the permit application, and a final permit was issued timely to meet the business demand.
Additional Insights
