Can he change the geographic lines of the different AQCRs so as to attract more industry? How?
It is the responsibility of the states to designate the location of the AQRCs after confirming with the national government. In perspective, I would advise the newly elected governor to petition EPA to relocate and redraw the geographic lines of AQCRs. The directions of this proceeding must, however, align with the requirements of the federal government, which implies that due consultations must be made before placing the modifications. Usually, revisions of the placements are approved to SIP depending on its estimated effects and results expected from the new locations. In this case, the governor wishes to relocate in order to attract further industrial investments. With rotational workable plan that do not affect the standards, he may present the case informing on the reason for changes and promotes industrial concerns after relocations. The answers to the questions of pollutions within the industrial region must be checked as well as the influence of the new AQCRs in their new sites. Such sites can be expected to cause positive effects near the areas that they are located. Furthermore, the locations where they were initially situated must be examined in order to tell whether they still need the AQCRs more than other places within the region.
List the criteria pollutants for his state. He is concern about regulation on carbon dioxide could restrict new industry. Is he correct in his concern?
The criteria pollutants for the governor’s state include;
Particulate matter
Sulfur dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides
Ozone
Lead
In essence, most of the prevailing hydrocarbons within the regions are known as the precursors of the ozone. The natural and induced carbon dioxide has not been included among the criteria pollutants as its model of regulation does not fall under criteria pollutant (Gulia, Nagendra, & Khare, 2015). Carbon dioxide can be regulated via standard industry standards where carbon dioxide being released to the atmosphere is reduced significantly to levels that cannot affect the people. In this perspective, its control is a requirement with all industries that may otherwise emit carbon dioxide in large quantities. However, the carbon monoxide is one other state’s criteria pollutants which include the non-toxic pollutants of air. The toxic substances within the atmosphere are not included within the criteria category of pollutants.
Do the NAAQS vary for different AQCRs?
All the NAAQS are not varied. They are all uniform in the eyes of the federal control. In essence, the NAAQS cannot vary in distinct AQCRs. This implies that the state governance does not have any specific mandate over the control of NAAQS. The states, therefore, abide to the federally set NAAQS unless a national amendment is made at the level of the national level. In case the state wish to make changes of the NAAQS, it has to use the national governance and political influences to makes such amendments for the whole countries. This aspect implies that the changes happen to all the states of the country. In most cases, making such national changes may take years to accomplish which implies that a state cannot directly rely on its immediate modification. The AQCRs were initially designation in areas where they attain the NAAQS in order to provide the authority to national government. This attribute of changing the statute, thus, reduces the autonomy of the state.
References
Gulia, S., Nagendra, S., & Khare, M. (2015). Comparative Evaluation of Air Quality Dispersion Models for PM2.5 at Air Quality Control Regions in Indian and UK Cities. Mapan, 30(4), 249-260. doi:10.1007/s12647-015-0149-x
