Boiler MACT


1.       What is a boiler?   A boiler is a furnace that is used to provide building or process heat usually by heating water into steam, i.e. it boils the water into steam.

2.       What types of industries use boilers?  Hundreds of industries from steel to paper to chemicals to plywood mills use boilers to provide process heat or steam.   Also most types of commercial and large residential buildings – like schools, apartment buildings, prisons, hospitals – use boilers for facility or campus heat. 

3.       What is the difference between burning something in a boiler versus burning something in an incinerator?  A boiler is designed to burn a fuel and recover the heat.  In other words, its main function is to generate heat for re-use.   An incinerator burns materials simply to get rid of them.  It is a waste “disposal” device. 

4.       What is a MACT?  MACT stands for Maximum Achievable Control Technology.  A MACT establishes the degree of emission reduction that the EPA determines to be achievable for a particular source category and the level of control technology that an emissions sources -- such a s a factory or refinery -- must install in order to control toxic air pollutants.

5.       Why does the EPA have to write a new MACT for boilers? The EPA issues separate MACT standards for different kinds of toxic air pollutants.  For example, there are separate standards for cement kilns, plywood mills, etc.   The EPA is currently under court order to issue regulations for boilers as a result of lawsuits filed against the original version of the regulations issued in 2004.

6.       Why does the EPA say it needs more time to issue its Boiler MACT? The court gave the EPA a deadline of January 21, 2011 to issue a final revised Boiler MACT.  After the EPA issued its draft of the Boiler MACT in April 2010 it received more than 4,800 individual comments on the proposal, including letters from Members of Congress, like Senator Wyden, expressing concerns that the standards were not achievable for certain industries.  In December of 2010, the EPA asked the court for 15 additional months to address the comments it had received and gather and analyze additional emissions data to ensure that it got the MACT right before it was finalized. 

7.       Why is it important that EPA get its Boiler MACT right?  Thousands of factories and other facilities use boilers.  If EPA issues standards that are not widely achievable -- because the technology is not available or is too costly to install -- those factories or facilities will be forced to shut down and put their employees out of work. The American Forest and Paper Association has said that under these rules as many 36 mills across the country and more than 20,000 pulp and paper jobs would be at risk.

8.      Why does Congress have to pass legislation to give the EPA the additional time it requested to get the rules right?  Courts are bound by current law and do not have the discretion to issue rulings based on the need to promote good policy or keep U.S. industries afloat.  Because the Plaintiff in the lawsuit against EPA objected to the EPA's request for additional time, the Court had no legal basis to grant the EPA's request.  Congress however can take policy factors into account and pass a law giving the EPA the legal authority to supersede the court’s original deadline and take the additional time it says it need to get Boiler MACT right.

9.       Is it true that giving the EPA additional time to issue its Boiler MACT means that the EPA might never have to issue new boiler rules?    No. The bipartisan legislation Senator Wyden is sponsoring specifically requires the EPA to reissue the regulations in final form pursuant to the Clean Air Act.  If Senator Wyden's legislation passes and the EPA fails to issue a finalized Boiler MACT, the EPA will be in violation of the statutory requirements of the legislation.  It is not Senator Wyden's intent, nor EPA’s intent, to exempt boilers from regulation.  

10.   Why did Senator Wyden insist on creating a list specifying what materials may be burned in boilers?  Senator Wyden believes that the public has a right to know what materials can be burned in a boiler and that industry has a right to know -- for certain -- which materials can be used as boiler fuel.  Creating a list makes this type of transparency and certainty possible while providing additional opportunities for oversight and debate.   

11.   Did Senator Wyden determine what materials were put on the list?  No. The list represents materials that have traditionally been burned in boilers and is open for both debate and amendment. 

12.   Why are tires on the list?   Tires are a widely used boiler fuel and were approved as a boiler fuel by EPA in its current regulations. 

13.   If EPA issued its proposed rule tomorrow would tires continue to be burned in boilers?   Yes, tires were allowed to be used a boiler fuel in EPA’s current regulations.

14.   If the EPA changed its proposed rule to say that tires could no longer be used as boiler fuel, would that mean that it would be illegal to burn tires?   No, tires could still be burned in an incinerator as well as other types of furnaces, such as cement kilns.  Eliminating tires from the list of materials that can be used as boiler fuel would only mean that tires can no longer be discarded in a way that creates heat and energy for certain industries, which also means more tires for incinerators and landfills.

15.   If a material is on the list does that mean that it can be burned free from Clean Air Act regulation?  The list is NOT a list of materials that are exempt from the Clean Air Act.  It is a list of things that can be burned in a boiler.  Boiler emissions are still subject to Clean Air Act regulations for air toxics including MACT controls.

16.   But doesn’t Wyden’s legislation just create a perverse incentive for companies to burn hazardous materials at their smallest plants?   No hazardous wastes, which are regulated under RCRA, can be burned in a boiler and this legislation does not change that.   EPA has set somewhat different standards for small boilers than for larger boilers.   As a general rule, smaller boilers are less able to handle secondary materials like tires.   By specifically listing the materials that can be burned in all boilers, EPA will need to take that into account when it issues the final version of the Clean Air Act standards for both sets of boilers – large and small. With the additional time provided by the bill for EPA to craft a new rule, EPA can ensure that there is no perverse incentive to burn hazardous materials at smaller plants.

17.   Then why did I hear that Senator Wyden’s legislation would make Portland’s air quality worse?    The legislation will not make Portland’s air quality worse because it does not exempt any current or future sources from regulation.  All boilers in the Portland area would still be subject to final EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act.

18.   Is Senator Wyden doing anything about Oregon’s air quality?   The Senator was instrumental in requiring oil companies to reduce the amount of a major toxic air pollutant – benzene – from gasoline supplied in Oregon.  The Environmental Protection Agency only imposed regulation of benzene in regions of the country with already low air quality meaning that the benzene produced in the Northwest was going unregulated. This caused enormously high levels of the carcinogen linked to leukemia. Wyden worked to protect Oregonians by pushing for benzene regulation. He continues to support air pollution regulation.

19.   What is biomass?   Biomass is any material that originates from plants or animals.  It can be anything from paper, which is produced from trees, to manure from dairy farms. Plant products such as switchgrass, corn, poplar and sugarcane are popular biomass resources used to create energy.

20.   Why is biomass important to Oregon? Oregon has large amounts of biomass from its paper, forest products and agricultural industries that could be used as a substitute for coal, oil, and natural gas --- all of which Oregonians have to buy from out-of-state sources.   Using biomass produced in Oregon will keep those dollars here in Oregon's economy and because people will be needed to collect biomass and turn it into fuel, it represents an opportunity to create jobs for Oregonians.  Using biomass for fuel will also reduce the amount of biomass that ends up in Oregon's landfills.

21.   How does biomass energy production affect the environment?   When Biomass is burned or processed it releases greenhouse gases and other waste products, which is why it is subject to environmental controls.  But because trees and plants are re-grown to produce future sources of biomass the greenhouse gases like CO2 are recaptured by the new growth.  So, unlike coal combustion, a biomass is renewable and creates an energy cycle that reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

22.   Why is Senator Wyden concerned that the EPA’s proposed Boiler MACT rule could hurt the emerging biomass industry?   Biomass energy plants that use biomass as a fuel would be subject to the boiler standards.   Sen. Wyden wants to be sure that the EPA standards do not impose standards that do not allow biomass to be used because of the unique characteristics of biomass, for instance biomass burns at a lower temperature than many conventional fuels. The EPA rules would also prohibit certain kinds of biomass that have long been used as fuel, such as scrap wood from plywood mills or door and window  manufacturing from being used in a biomass fired boiler.

23.   Senator Wyden's proposed legislation also gives industry additional time to implement the new rules once they are finalized.  Why should industry be given time to implement the new rules?    The EPA rule would impact thousands and thousands of individual boilers and the companies that own and operate them.   EPA estimated the total universe of boilers covered by the rule was over 13,840 large boilers and 187,000 small boilers at 92,000 facilities.  While many will likely not require major upgrades, thousands still will.  The boiler industry and pollution control firms will need adequate time to develop, manufacture, and install this equipment at a time when several other major sources such as the electric utility industry and the cement industry will also need to upgrade their facilities to meet the new MACT requirements that EPA is issuing for those sources.   We give industry extra time --- 2 extra years – to bring boilers into compliance because all of this work needs to be done at the same time by many of the same boiler and environmental pollution control manufacturers and engineers. 

24.   If the proposed rule went into effect tomorrow, how much would it cost operators to comply with the proposed rule?   EPA estimated that it would cost the owners of large boilers $1.4 billion a year to install and maintain the proposed controls and a half a billion dollars a year for the smaller boilers or roughly $15 billion over ten years.   These estimates may be low since the forest products industry estimated that it would cost $600 million dollars a year to buy replacement fuel and send the wood waste they had been using as boiler fuel to landfills.

25.   If the proposed rule went into effect tomorrow what impact would it have on Oregon employment?  A job analysis has not been done for the state of Oregon, but the biggest impact appears to be that several dozen paper and wood products mills in the state would be required to shutdown or reduce operations.  

26.    What exactly would Wyden’s proposed legislation with Senator Collins do?   The bill blocks EPA from implementing its current proposed rule for all four inter-related sets of regulations for boilers and incinerators.  It then directs EPA to issue new regulations 15 months from the date of enactment for all four, which would give EPA the time it says it needs to get the rules right.  The legislation also creates a public list of secondary materials like plywood mill scrap and tires that EPA would allow to be burned in boilers and directs the EPA to establish MACT standards for boilers based on that list.   

27.   How does the Collins-Wyden bill differ from Boiler MACT legislation introduced in the House of Representatives?   The House bill does not include the requirement that there be a specific list of approved boiler fuels.

28.   Did Senator Wyden share his concerns about the proposed Boiler MACT rule before introducing legislation with Senator Collins?   Sen. Wyden has written to EPA several times, separately and with other Senators, beginning in April 2010 before the most recent rule was proposed urging the agency to carefully consider the impact of the rule on biomass-fired boilers.   He also met with EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and the assistant administrators for air and solid waste to discuss his concerns and his hope that EPA could resolve these issues.  The Senators letters were widely reported and discussed at public and private meetings in Oregon and DC.

29.   Has Senator Wyden met with environmental groups to discuss his concerns about the proposed Boiler MACT?  The Senator’s staff in both DC and Oregon have met with numerous environmental and public health groups to understand and discuss their concerns.

30.   Is Senator Wyden considering alternatives to his legislation with Senator Collins?   The Senator is interested in making sure that EPA has the time and direction it needs to ensure that the final Boiler MACT standards are technically sound and can be implemented by industry without sacrificing jobs.  He is open to making changes to the bill or other approaches as long as they accomplish these goals.

Latest