1 / 7

CAIR/CAMR Update

CAIR/CAMR Update. Presentation for CAIR and CAMR Training Mary Shellabarger Clean Air Markets Division U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation August 2007. States controlled for fine particles (annual SO 2 and NOx). States controlled for ozone (ozone season NOx).

alyson
Download Presentation

CAIR/CAMR Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CAIR/CAMR Update Presentation for CAIR and CAMR Training Mary Shellabarger Clean Air Markets Division U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation August 2007

  2. States controlled for fine particles (annual SO2 and NOx) States controlled for ozone (ozone season NOx) States controlled for both fine particles (annual SO2 and NOx) and ozone (ozone season NOx) States not covered by CAIR CAIR: Affected Region and Emission Caps Emission Caps* (million tons) 2009/20102015 Annual SO2 3.6 2.5 (2010) Annual NOx 1.5 1.3 (2009) Seasonal NOx .58 .48 (2009) *For the affected region.

  3. CAIR Implementation Timeline CSP Early Reductions (annual CAIR NOx) (‘07 and ‘08) CAIR NOx Programs Annual: Jan 1, 2009 Ozone: May 1, 2009 CAIR SO2 Program Jan 1, 2010 Petitioners’ briefs due March 5, 2007 SO2 Monitoring and Reporting Required (‘09) NOx Monitoring and Reporting Required (‘08) 08 09 07 10 Abbreviated SIPs due March 31, 2007 Record FIP or SIP* allocations September 30, 2007 EPA’s brief due June 13, 2007 *approved SIPs

  4. CAIR State Rule Development How does EPA expect States Meet the CAIR Requirements? • Positions in some States may change, but an April 2007 EPA survey indicates: • All 29 affected jurisdictions (28 States + DC) are expected to be part of the trading program • 6 States may impose tighter local controls • State Plan submissions by deadline • Sept ‘06: AL, IA, LA(SO2), NC, TN, TX, WV • Many other states have since submitted • Several states plan to remain under the FIP either temporarily or permanently Which States Met the CAIR SIP Submittal Deadline?

  5. CAMR Implementation Timeline CAMR Program: Phase I begins Jan. 1, 2010 Petitioner’s Briefs Due Jan 12, 2007 Hg Monitoring and Reporting Required (‘09) State Plans Due (Nov 17, 2006) EPA Briefs Due May 4, 2007 Finalize Federal Plan (tent.) 08 09 10 07 CAMR Federal Plan proposed CAMR model rule changes proposed Dec 22, 2006 Record allocations under approved State Plans or Federal Plan December 2007

  6. CAMR State Rule Development How does EPA expect States Meet the CAMR Requirements? • There are 53 jurisdictions affected (all 50 States, DC and 2 tribes) • Positions in some States may change, but an April 2007 EPA survey indicates: • 5 of 53 have no coal-fired units (zero emissions budgets) • For the 48 States with coal-fired units, about: • ~ Three-fourths (36 of 48) of these States are planning to have trading: • ~One-fourth of them plan or have tougher, direct local control requirements in addition to trading • ~ One-tenth of them will hold back part of emissions budget • Remaining will do CAMR “as-is” • ~One-fourth (13 of 48) will only have direct controls, no trading • Considering the levels of participation in the trading program, EPA believes there will be a viable trading program with reasonable allowance values relative to previously forecasted prices.

  7. CAMR State Rule Development (cont.) Which States Met the CAMR State Plan Submittal Deadline? • 21 States submitted plans for CAMR by the November 17th deadline • These States are: Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont, and West Virginia. • 3 of the plans came from States without existing coal-fired units • 18 of these submissions were from a State that has existing coal-fired power plants (47 States have existing coal-fired plants) Of these 18 CAMR submittals: • Roughly 10 use the trading program (7 use the CAMR trading program “as-is”, and 3 use the trading programs in conjunction with local controls) • 8 are direct control programs (mainly in the Northeast) • EPA continues to work with States as they develop their CAMR rules.

More Related