Beyond Federal Standards Nevada Mercury Emissions Control Program

1
Beyond Federal StandardsNevada Mercury Emissions
Control Program

• Colleen Cripps
• Nevada Division of Environmental Protection
• September 22, 2005

2
Nevada Mercury Emissions Program Overview

• Situation in 2000
• Voluntary Mercury Reduction Program
• Program review in 2005
• Enhanced Nevada Mercury Emissions Program

3
Situation Analysis

• 1998 Metal mining industry required to submit
  mercury emissions with Toxic Release Inventory
  (TRI)
• 2000 TRI numbers for 1998 releasedFour largest
  mines report 98 of the 21,098 pounds of mercury
  emissions
• 2001 EPA site tours to analyze sources and
  controls
• 2002 EPA and NDEP develop Voluntary Mercury
  Reduction Program with four largest metal mines

4
Objectives of Nevada Mercury Reduction Program

• Through the Voluntary Mercury Reduction Program
  (VMRP)
• Achieve significant, permanent and rapid
  reductions in mercury air emissions from gold
  mining operations
• Achieve reductions through approaches that are
  most suitable for each individual mining facility
• Voluntary partnership encourages flexibility in
  technology innovation and greater reductions per
  transaction cost

5
Measurable goals set

• 33 reduction in mercury air emissions by the end
  of 2003
• 50 reduction by the end of 2005
• Reduction measured using baseline emissions of
  21,098 pounds of mercury air emissions reported
  in 2001

6
Nevada approach versus MACT

• Had a regulatory approach been pursued in the
  case of the gold mines, it would have taken at
  least four years for the rules to be developed
  and another two years to allow companies to
  install MACT air emission controls.

7
Nevada program realized rapid mercury emissions
reductions
8
Targeted and process specific approach

• Examples of MACT equivalent VMRP emissions
  controls include
• Wet Venturi Scrubber/Carbon Filtration installed
  at Barrick Goldstrike Mine in March 2002
• Gas Quench Scrubber installed at Queenstake
  Jerritt Canyon West Roaster in 2002
• Baghouses and SO2 Scrubber installed at the
  Newmont Gold Quarry Operations Area Ore
  Preheaters before 2001

9
2005 Program review

• A scheduled summer 2005 review of the VMRP
  program was accelerated
• Greater involvement from other mining operations
• Improved reporting, record keeping and testing
• ICL notice of intent to sue
• Ability to formalize the original VMRP
  commitments
• Evaluate the need for additional controls

10
A brave new world

• Need for broader coordination
• Increased national focus on Hg
• Three states, three EPA regional offices and
  three media (water, waste and air) are involved
  in Nevada mercury program
• Research is needed, but
• NDEP does not have a research arm
• Impacts from data collection and research

11
NDEP focused on controls

• NDEP determined that the most critical function
  of the agency is to focus on controlling mercury
  emissions

• NDEP Deputy Administrator Colleen Cripps said,
  regardless of where the impact occurs, whether
  globally, regionally or locally, were doing
  everything that we can to control mercury air
  emissions in Nevada.

12
Conclusion

• Original program exceeded our expectations
• Significant reductions were achieved
• Reductions were realized better, faster and
  cheaper with the VMRP program
• Now moving into a new phase with the Nevada
  Mercury Control Program

13
Enhanced Nevada Mercury Control Program

• NDEP is committed to
• Increased involvement in the Nevada Mercury
  Control Program
• Improved consistency of monitoring, record
  keeping and reporting
• Evaluation of the need for additional mercury
  emissions controls
• Continued work with industry to develop
  innovative controls
• Development of a program that will formalize the
  commitments made by the industry