Indiana homeowners can receive up to 100% funding to replace their old outdoor wood boilers (OWBs) with new solar, geothermal, or geothermal/solar combination systems, swapping out neighborhood scourges for zero-emission, renewable solutions.

The “It’s Doable, Go Renewable” program is overseen by the Hoosier Environmental Council, administered by the American Lung Association of the Upper Midwest, and supported by the Environmental Law & Policy Center, Citizens Action Coalition, Indiana Wildlife Federation, and Sierra Club.

There are around 8,000 Outdoor Wood Boilers throughout Indiana. When these devices are poorly constructed or operated, OWBs can make it very difficult for people to breathe who live downwind from them. We’re thrilled by a $500,000 grant opportunity that will allow for the replacement of the dirtiest soot-producing OWBs with clean, renewable energy. Everyone benefits here: the OWB owner gets a brand-new, clean source of energy. Neighbors no longer suffer from OWB smoke. And we help support Hoosier homegrown solar & geothermal entrepreneurs. — Jesse Kharbanda, Executive Director of the Hoosier Environmental Council

Factsheet: What’s The Deal With Outdoor Wood Boilers?

The program application period runs from October 14, 2015 to December 31, 2015. Eligible applicants must meet the following criteria:

  1. Homeowners with an Indiana address.
  2. Currently operate an OWB to meet their home heating needs.
  3. Willing to replace their OWB with a zero-emission solar photovoltaic, geothermal, or combination system.

Please visit Citizens for Clean Air-No on Proposition 1 on Facebook:


Preliminary data from EPA shows Fairbanks, AK likely had the highest daily PM2.5 in the nation during 2012 to 2014.

On May 1, EPA will finalize sampling data for 2014. 2012 and 2013 have already been finalized. A three-year average is used to calculate nonattainment.

Fairbanks data from air pollution monitor sites, operated by the Fairbanks North Star Borough, are provided to the State of Alaska and submitted to EPA. A review of final and preliminary EPA data show that the three-year average of Fairbanks daily PM2.5 for 2012 to 2014 will be double that of Bakersfield, CA. EPA currently lists Bakersfield as having the highest daily PM2.5 for 2011 to 2013.

Table: 98th Percentile 24-hour PM2.5 2012-2014, preliminary

*EPA to finalize 2014 monitor data May 1, 2015.
Monitor Location, Site ID 2012 2013 2014* 3-year Average*
Hurst Rd, FNSB, 020900035 158.4 121.6 138 139
Bakersfield, Kern, 060290014 56.4 71.8 80 69

In fact, the astonishingly high monitor concentrations recorded at the Hurst Road residential neighborhood in 2012 and 2013 make it mathematically impossible for Bakersfield to hold on to its #1 ranking as worst 24-hour PM2.5 polluted community in the US. Bakersfield, get ready to move over for Fairbanks.

Data Sources:


Key question still being overlooked:

Would an ordinance weaker than state regulations (including the final SIP) risk termination of the local control program and state funding per AS 46.14.400, AS 46.14.410, and 18 AAC 50.015?

Instead of addressing this question, coverage in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner is limited to reporting on opinions from three North Pole City Council members. North Pole leaders offer differing opinions on borough air quality plan 2/26/2015.

Link  to previous post: Assembly Proposal for Weak Controls Risks Termination of Local Control

During recent public hearings on development of a new air quality ordinance, 2015-01, there was no mention that the new ordinance needed to be at least as stringent as the new plan approved by the State or the Borough risks losing local control.

The Assembly went so far as to amend into the draft ordinance a control zone, in effect shrinking the boundaries of the designated PM2.5 nonattainment area by removing the northern third of the nonattainment area. The revised control zone excludes part or all of Chena Ridge, Sheep Creek, Goldstream, Fox, and Gilmore Dome neighborhoods, view proposed “Air Quality Control Zone” map. Not only is there no data to support shrinking the nonattainment area, to do so violates State and Federal law. The idea that air quality must be a compromise seems to have thrown the Assembly off track. Like it or not, long-delayed deadlines and controls take effect Feb. 28, 2015. Opportunities to develop a local plan were squandered years ago. The Assembly holds only these options: follow the State program, strengthen it, or get out of the way. Weakening controls established by the State risks termination of local control and funding granted to the Borough for the program.

Legal substantiation:

  1. The latest version of ordinance 2015-01 appears to include an error in the “whereas” statements. The last statement on page 2 refers to “draft regulations” issued by DEC that are “intended to be part of the State Implementation Plan as required by the EPA.” The regulations issued by DEC are no longer in “draft” form. They are FINAL regulations that have been fully adopted by DEC (and signed by the Lieutenant Governor) and they constitute state regulatory law beginning Feb. 28, 2015. DEC’s website makes plain that the regulations are final.
  2. The draft Borough ordinance also notes on page 2 that the Borough has been authorized by DEC to operate an air quality control program “in lieu of and consistent with the State’s air quality program.” This is accurate, although the key word is “CONSISTENT.” Any local air quality control program must operate in a manner that is “consistent” with DEC requirements. This is specified in the statutory provision that allows for the existence of the Borough’s local air quality control program. Per AS 46.14.400(a): “With the approval of the department, a municipality may establish and administer within its jurisdiction a local air quality control program that operates in lieu of and is consistent with all or part of the department’s air quality program as established under this chapter.” (emphasis added).
  3. By Alaska statute, to be “consistent,” the Borough’s local air quality control program MUST implement DEC regulations. This is specified in AS 46.14.400(f):  “A municipality or a local air quality district administering a program under this section shall administer its local air quality control program according to this chapter, regulations adopted under those sections, and its cooperative agreement under (d) of this section.” (emphasis added).
  4. The only exception to the statutory requirement that a local air quality control program administer state regulations is for “more stringent” local requirements, which may be adopted with DEC approval. See AS 46.14.400(f).
  5. A local air quality control program may only operate if approved by DEC. See AS 46.14.400(a). If a local air quality control program is NOT administered in a manner that is consistent with legal requirements, DEC can revoke approval and terminate the program. See AS 46.14.410.
  6. The boundaries of the nonattainment area are set by EPA, whose delineation constitutes federal regulatory law. The boundaries of the nonattainment area are further codified in DEC’s regulations, which incorporate by reference the delineation of the EPA administrator.  See 18 AAC 50.015.
  7. In light of the foregoing, it would be UNLAWFUL, DISRUPTIVE, and ultimately POINTLESS for the Borough to adopt less restrictive air quality regulations.

Additional points:

  • Because state law requirements govern no matter what the Borough decides, inconsistent local measures risk unnecessary confusion and the potential that residents might face enforcement consequences for violation of state regulations—which they must obey no matter what the Borough says. (NOTE: Page 4 of the DEC-Borough MOU specifies that a violation of a DEC regulation will be handled by DEC.) Adoption of inconsistent local regulations risks termination of the Borough’s local air quality control program by DEC and funding provided for this program by state and federal agencies.
  • The adoption of inconsistent regulations by the Borough—and the attendant confusion and uncertainty about the extent to which state regulations are in force—likely would undermine the chances that EPA will approve the SIP submitted by DEC in January. If DEC’s SIP submission is not approved by EPA, the clock will start running on potential sanctions for Fairbanks, including stricter permit requirements for new major source, the loss of highway funds, and imposition of restrictions by EPA.

Note on Data Gap: In 2008, Mayor Jim Whitaker requested a time extension on the nonattainment boundary decision, insisting it was not “to delay addressing the problem,” but to resolve the “significant gaps” in the data used to set the nonattainment boundary. Link to source. (Whitaker is now chief of staff for Governor Bill Walker.) CAF encourages readers who are data driven to review the data used in 2008 to successfully press EPA to shrink the size of the nonattainment area. Link to ADEC nonattainment documents.

Update: Success! A week after this post, the Borough fixed the Near-real Time site. No explanation why it took years. Thank you to all who pressed the Borough to correct this problem.

UNHEALTHY in Fairbanks and North Pole again today.

Fairbanks North Star Borough advises it is UNHEALTHY but has only voluntary recommendations.

EPA says local air pollution is highest in the nation today. 155 AQI converts to PM2.5 of 62.3 µg/m3. EPA AQI to Concentration Calculator.

Nation's Highest AQI 1/27/2015  http://www.airnow.gov

Nation’s Highest AQI 1/27/2015 http://www.airnow.gov

But, oops! The State forgot to issue an Air Quality Advisory until noon.

Eventually, an Air Quality Advisory was declared as UNHEALTHY for Fairbanks and North Pole AQA #2015-09. However, it failed to mention the State’s new opacity rule — at 24-hour concentrations over 30 µg/m3, State regulations prohibit smoke opacity greater than 20% for any wood heating appliance in the FNSB nonattainment area. Submitted to EPA: Final SIP, 12/24/2014, III.D.5.7-8, III.D.5.11-6. The State told EPA but why don’t they tell local burners about the new opacity rules?

2015-01-27 BAC Moderate 68

1/27/2015 at 1 pm BAC USG  http://co.fairbanks.ak.us/airquality/AQNearRealTime.aspx

Borough “Near-real Time” hourly warnings show yellow for MODERATE when hourly PM2.5 was 68.

Then, as current air conditions worsened, “Near-real Time” became orange for UNHEALTHY FOR SENSITIVE GROUPS when hourly PM2.5 was 83.

The “Near-real Time” site confuses the public by failing to provide current hourly PM2.5 information based on 24-hour exposure at that level. Table: EPA Air Quality Index for 24-hour PM2.5. The FNSB hourly site has underreported health danger since its inception.

When will FNSB listen to Dermot?

The borough reporting system does not follow the national pattern. But it should.

The borough includes this disclaimer, “When calculating Air Quality Index Level on Near-Real-Time Data, the average PM2.5 for a one hour time frame is used. Since the EPA doesn’t have index levels for the average one hour time frame, the levels indicated on this web page are calculated as if the one hour average PM2.5 were the peak value in an average 24 hour period with normally distributed emissions.”

The problem is that the hourly reports are not necessarily the daily peak levels.

While it is true that EPA does not have a one-hour standard, it is also true that cities across the country are reporting the one-hour figures and making a statement about air quality and health based on 24-hour exposure at that level.

I have asked borough officials and state officials to address this problem and adopt the reporting system that is in use in the rest of the nation.” Dermot Cole, FDNM 12/1/2012.

Report: Preventable Deaths from PM2.5 Air Pollution in Fairbanks, AK, 2014

According to a recent study, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) air pollution is associated with an 11.5 to 23.5 percent increased number of deaths in Fairbanks, Alaska. The higher end of the range applies to areas with higher PM2.5 concentrations, such as North Pole, Alaska. Each year, an estimated 50 to 101 deaths in the Fairbanks North Star Borough are associated with PM2.5 air pollution. Reducing ambient PM2.5 concentrations and ambient exposure would prevent these premature deaths.

This study is the first to associate PM2.5 with increased mortalities for the Fairbanks area.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68 other followers

%d bloggers like this: