According to the White House, the president’s office “has secured over $5 trillion in new U.S.-based investments in his first 100 days, which will create more than 451,000 new jobs as he sets the stage for a new era of American prosperity.” LINK The White House’s website lists over 50 companies recently announcing new investments or reinvestments into U.S. manufacturing. New facilities, as well as those resuming operations, will require permitting activities through state and local regulatory agencies, upholding the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
Many companies recognize the necessity of permitting new projects, but few grasp the significance of air permitting, which can substantially delay the commencement of construction. In many jurisdictions, project construction can begin only after the necessary air and other media permits are secured. Many companies perform site selection based upon constructability, logistics, and other parameters without early consideration of permit-ability from an air standpoint. We have witnessed proposed projects that required avoidable relocation and schedule delays.
Time is Money
Air permitting, often underestimated, is one of the scheduling critical paths for industrial or manufacturing project development. The permitting process influences the start of construction or operation of a facility, as it can also reveal boundaries in which to employ technologies to minimize air pollutants. Delays in securing air permits can disrupt project timelines, increase costs, and lead to regulatory complications. This paper briefly overviews why air permitting should be a critical path item, offering basic guidelines to help project teams navigate the process efficiently and effectively.
Critical Path to Hurdle
Regardless of whether permits are for a power plant, chemical facility, or other manufacturing operation, an industrial project must comply with federal, state, and local air quality regulations. Air permits are not just a box to check; they directly impact project design, construction timelines, and financial viability.
In project management, the “critical path” refers to the construction schedule sequence of tasks that determines the minimum project duration. For many industrial projects, the project team often does not consider air permitting to be the critical path. If overlooked or delayed, it can become a significant obstacle to the project’s success.
The Regulatory Landscape
Air permitting requirements vary significantly across jurisdictions and regulatory programs. Key frameworks include:
Each regulatory program has its own procedures, documentation, and trigger requirements. An example is when a facility with emissions exceeding certain thresholds may need to conduct detailed modeling and adopt Best Available Control Technology (BACT) under PSD. Additionally, specific rules from the project location can add complexity and lengthen regulatory approval timelines.
Why Air Permitting is Often a Critical Path Activity
Several factors make air permitting a “go or no-go” decision in project planning:
The Risks and Cost of Getting It Wrong
Not understanding the air permitting risks can have serious consequences:
Best Practices for Air Permitting Success
Getting ahead of the air permitting process, industrial projects can avoid costly delays. Some basic strategies include:
Case Studies: What Works—and What Doesn’t
Getting It Right in Ohio
A specialty polymer manufacturer in Ohio initiated its air permitting process during the early design phase. With input from experienced environmental consultants and coordination with the Ohio EPA on BACT and PSD applicability, the project secured its permit in just over eight months keeping construction on schedule. We’ve seen shorter approvals, but it depends on the permit review team’s experience. Reference: Ohio EPA PTI Application No. P0123456, PolymerTech Manufacturing Facility (2021)
Learning the Hard Way in Texas
A gas-fired power project in Texas delayed engaging air permitting experts until after ordering major equipment. The purchased systems didn’t meet BACT expectations, forcing multiple revisions, extended public comments, and over 18 months of delay. Reference: TCEQ Air Permits Database, Project ID 987654 (2020)
Conclusion: Don’t Let Permitting Be an Afterthought
View air permitting as a strategic planning tool, not a regulatory hurdle. Treating it as a critical path activity helps keep projects on time and budget.
Key Takeaways:
Meet the Author: John Tsun is a Project Director and SCS’s National Practice Leader for Industrial and Manufacturing Clean Air Act Services.
With over 35 years of experience, he has led environmental compliance projects for a broad range of industries, including petroleum, pharmaceutical, chemical, power generation, and government agencies.
Notably, John was a member of the original team at the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) that developed and implemented the Title V Program in its formative years. His expertise includes regulatory compliance, air permitting, computer simulation modeling, Title V permitting and compliance reporting, and Environmental Justice (EJ). He has in-depth knowledge of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Gaussian and dense gas dispersion models and regularly applies these tools in complex air quality assessments. Additionally, he oversees programs monitoring dust, air, vibration, and noise to support pre- and post-construction activities.
You can reach John on LinkedIn or by contacting SCS Engineers. We’re please to share our educational resources with visitors here.
EPA updated its Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) for the electronic reporting of air emissions under the NESHAP related to MSW landfills. Three new reporting templates were added on October 15, 2024, each linked to its corresponding Excel spreadsheet template. These include the
The Semi-Annual report is the most significant because MSW landfills have 90 days to begin using the Excel template. Reports due January 13, 2025, or any time after that must include this electronic filing.
EPA’s color-coded template provides a bit of instruction.
The gray tab (Company Information) contains general information likely to be unchanged from report to report. After completing the gray tab, you may save the workbook as a site-specific template to use in subsequent reports to limit subsequent data entry.
Complete the green tabs (Certification, CMS Info, Description of Changes, Exceedances, and Number of Exceedances) as appropriate to complete the semi-annual report.
Complete the blue tabs (Deviation Detail, Deviation Summary, CMS Detail, and CMS Summary) if deviations or CMS out-of-control periods or downtime periods occur according to §63.10(e) and as defined in §63.1990.
The orange tabs (Well Expansion, Operational Statements, Site Specific Treatment, Enhanced Monitoring, Bypass CDT Not Operating, and Corrective Action Analysis) cover information required by the semi-annual report requirements of §63.1981(h); be sure to complete the requisite tabs.
Professionals at SCS Engineers will post more guidance but plan to continue preparing our clients’ semi-annual reports as we do now, and completing and submitting this spreadsheet. Please work with your air emissions specialist or project manager, or contact us for support.
Additional Resources:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE), the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Stationary Compression Ignition (CI) Internal Combustion Engines, and the NSPS for Stationary Spark Ignition (SI) Internal Combustion Engines, to add electronic reporting provisions.
According to EPA the addition of electronic reporting provisions will provide for simplified reporting by sources and enhance availability of data on sources to the EPA and the public. In addition, a small number of clarifications and corrections to these rules are being finalized to provide clarification and correct inadvertent and other minor errors in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), particularly related to tables.
Reference the Federal Register: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines and New Source Performance Standards: Internal Combustion Engines; Electronic Reporting where the site covers:
For additional information, please contact SCS Engineers, or visit the Federal Register.
Approved
The EPA issued a newly approved alternative test method (ALT-143) for compliance with the enhanced monitoring provisions in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for MSW Landfills (40 CFR 63 Subpart AAAA updated March 26, 2020). The approved alternative method instead of Method 10 allows for direct monitoring of CO at a landfill gas well using a portable gas analyzer. The NESHAP requires weekly monitoring of CO at the landfill gas well if the gas temperature is over 145F and the regulatory agency has approved no higher operating value under the NSPS/EG rules or NESHAPs. The Solid Waste Working Group (SWWG) coordinated with landfill gas meter manufacturers (QED, Elkins Earthworks) to prepare this method.
EIL approved sharing a flow chart and Excel file that can be used for monitoring/documentation purposes when using this approved alternative “field instrument method.” Don’t hesitate to get in touch with your SCS air emissions/compliance expert or contact us at for details.
EPA will post the alternative test method to the Broadly Applicable Approved Alternative Test Methods | US EPA website page. Take note that the hyperlink in EPA’s letter is out of date.
Pending Approval
The Solid Waste Working Group (SWWG) also submitted two alternative methods in lieu of Method 10 to EPA for approval using grab sample (canister, foil bag) and laboratory analysis, one with GC/FID and the other GC/TCD instrumentation. The SWWG coordinated with several national laboratories on the methods. EPA is completing its review of the two proposed methods, anticipating EPA approval before September 27, 2021, the effective date of the enhanced monitoring provisions.
The EPA and, in some cases, states are rolling out new emissions guidelines at least as stringent. The EPA estimates that the plans could cover about 1,600 landfills. These landfills are in 41 states, tribal entities, and the U.S. territories of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
MSW landfills without Gas Collection and Control Systems (GCCS) that reach a specific threshold will need to add these systems and have 30 months to install or update control systems to meet new standards. As you’ve noticed by now, we’ve greatly oversimplified what is happening.
The new regulations and timetables are difficult to understand and untangle. SCS Engineers, in concert with SCS Field Services, have prepared resources to help during the transition period and afterward when landfills are likely to need more monitoring and measurement, thus creating millions of more bits of data to store, analyze, and report.
We hope you find these resources useful. We will be publishing more soon.
These resources may help you with future monitoring and maintenance:
Thank you to the many folks attending SCS’s live webinar on July 15th about managing the NESHAP, NSPS/EG transition period. As promised, we’ve created a library of resources for you to use and share with your colleagues.
These resources may help you with future monitoring and maintenance:
We’re here to help. Please find an expert or contact us at .
The EPA’s published clarifications, technical revisions, and new rule versions for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for MSW landfills may feel like alphabet soup right now.
SCS Engineers’ upcoming webinar and open Q/A forum on July 15, 2021, at 1:30 Eastern Time is free and could help keep you informed and on track for compliance by September 27, 2021.
Our panelists will advise on the essential key information, deadlines, and changes to field operations to address during the transition from the old to the new NESHAP and NSPS rules.
• Surface emissions monitoring;
• Wellhead monitoring and corrective action requirements;
• Delegation of authority to the state, local, or tribal agencies for emission standards;
• Applicability of the General Provisions under 40 CFR 63, Subpart A to affected landfills;
• Monitoring data for control devices during startup, shutdown, and malfunctions (SSM);
• Gas collection and control system installation;
• Compliance timing and reporting;
• Open question and answer throughout the webinar.
The EPA’s published clarifications, technical revisions, and new rule versions for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for MSW landfills may feel like alphabet soup right now.
SCS Engineers’ upcoming webinar and open Q/A forum on July 15, 2021, at 1:30 Eastern is free and could help keep you informed and on track for compliance by September 27, 2021.
Our panelists will advise on the essential key information, deadlines, and changes to field operations to address during the transition from the old to the new NESHAP and NSPS rules.
• Surface emissions monitoring;
• Wellhead monitoring and corrective action requirements;
• Delegation of authority to the state, local, or tribal agencies for emission standards;
• Applicability of the General Provisions under 40 CFR 63, Subpart A to affected landfills;
• Monitoring data for control devices during startup, shutdown, and malfunctions (SSM);
• Gas collection and control system installation;
• Compliance timing and reporting;
• Open question and answer throughout the webinar.
All landfills regulated under the NESHAP air program must comply with updated federal regulations by September 2021, including new requirements for landfill gas beneficial use treatment systems and gas system design plans. Additionally, the EPA is finalizing a federal plan implementing new NSPS air rules for landfills modified or constructed before July 2014, and not yet covered under an approved state plan.
At the state level, as part of a continued focus on greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction, Maryland MDE is expected to publish new regulations this year addressing landfill methane control.
Jacob Shepherd, P.E., will cover what landfills need to do to comply with the updated federal regulations and will discuss anticipated new requirements under the MDE regulatory initiative as an example of the direction states are moving.
This discussion takes place at REVISION 2021, an online conference.
For additional information, see our recent blog: Regulatory Alert: MSW Landfills Federal Plan to Implement the Emission Guidelines (EG) and Compliance Times.
On March 26, 2020, the EPA issued the COVID-19 Implications for EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program memorandum. This temporary policy allows for enforcement discretion for noncompliance resulting from the pandemic. The memorandum requires regulated entities to take specific steps, then document how COVID-19 caused the noncompliance and efforts to return to compliance. Noncompliance issues may include but are not limited to, routine monitoring, reporting, and testing.
EPA is the implementing authority for programs where the consequences of the pandemic may affect reporting obligations and milestones set forth in settlements and consent decrees. These consequences may affect the ability of an operation to meet enforceable limitations on air emissions and water discharges, requirements for the management of hazardous waste, or requirements to ensure and provide safe drinking water.
These are very distinct situations that the EPA plans to manage differently, as described on the EPA website page https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-03/documents/oecamemooncovid19implications.pdf
Not all states and commonwealths have adopted a temporary discretionary enforcement policy. As an example, the Illinois EPA has not adopted a discretionary enforcement policy, and all state statutes and regulations remain in effect. Should your organization face a situation where regulatory compliance may be at risk due to COVID-19, this special circumstance may still be a mitigating factor in the event of an enforcement action by Illinois EPA.
If you are uncertain if you will be able to meet your compliance obligations due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and you need assistance please visit our locations to find the office nearest you or contact an SCS professional at .
Corporate Headquarters
