50 likes | 172 Views
CAIR Update. WESTAR October 2, 2008. Eastern urban/rural fine particles. 30. 25. 20. ug/m3. 15. 10. 5. 0. Indy/LIVO. Bronx/BRIG. Atlanta/2 Sites. Charlotte/LIGO. Richmond/JARI. St.Louis/3 Sites. Baltimore/DOSO. Birmingham/SIP. Cleveland/MKGO. Urban Contribution.
E N D
CAIR Update WESTAR October 2, 2008
Eastern urban/rural fine particles 30 25 20 ug/m3 15 10 5 0 Indy/LIVO Bronx/BRIG Atlanta/2 Sites Charlotte/LIGO Richmond/JARI St.Louis/3 Sites Baltimore/DOSO Birmingham/SIP Cleveland/MKGO Urban Contribution Regional Contribution What Is the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)? • CAIR is EPA’s strategy to reduce interstate transport of emissions contributing to nonattainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particles (PM2.5) and ozone in the eastern U.S. • Uses an optional set of 3 interstate trading programs to achieve highly cost-effective emission reductions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) • Not intended to be an air quality panacea, but a valuable aid to state-led efforts to attain the NAAQS, as well as reduce acid rain and regional haze • EPA successfully addressed a similar ozone problem in the 1990s by developing the NOx Budget Trading Program under the NOx SIP Call 1997 Standard annual standard 12-month average PM2.5 mass from speciation samplers Reference: 2002 EPA Trends Report http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/chem_spec_of_pm2.5_b.pdf
D.C. Circuit Decision on CAIR • EPA’s regional approach failed to appropriately factor in each state’s individual contribution. • EPA did not have authority under 110(a)(2)(D) to require the surrender of Title IV allowances for compliance with CAIR. • EPA did not establish that the 2015 compliance deadline is consistent with states’ attainment deadlines. • The state SO2 and NOx budgets were not adequately based on the objectives of 110(a)(2)(D) • EPA must address emissions that “interfere with maintenance” of NAAQS not just those which “significantly contribute to nonattainment.”
What Are the Consequences of the Court’s Decision? • Disruption/delay of industry plans for installation and operation of pollution abatement equipment • Lost health and environmental benefits • Increased administrative costs to government and industry • Questions of future cap and trade program viability
Decisions needed • How will we deal with SIPs approvability issues? • Do we proceed with findings of failure to submit for Regional Haze and PM? • How do we deal with clocks for findings for ozone and Section 110(a)2(d)(i)?