CAIR/CAMR Update Presentation for CAIR and CAMR Training Beth Murray Clean Air Markets Division U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation March 15, 2007
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.
CAIR Implementation Timeline CSP Early Emission Reductions Start (annual CAIR NOx program) (‘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 allocations under approved SIP or FIP September 30, 2007 Abbr. SIP allocations due April 30, 2007 EPA’s brief due June 13, 2007
CAIR State Rule Development How does EPA expect States Meet the CAIR Requirements? • Positions in some States may change, but a February 2007 EPA survey indicates: • All 29 affected jurisdictions (28 States + DC) are expected to be part of the trading program • 5 States may impose tighter local controls • 6 States submitted plans by the September 2006 deadline • Alabama • Iowa • North Carolina • Tennessee • Texas • West Virginia Which States Met the CAIR SIP Submittal Deadline?
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 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
CAMR State Rule Development How does EPA expect States Meet the CAMR Requirements? • Positions in some States may change, but a February 2007 EPA survey indicates: • 5 of 53 jurisdictions covered (States, DC and 2 tribes) have no coal-fired units (zero emissions budgets) • For the 48 States with coal-fired units, about: • Two-thirds (34 of 48) of these States are planning to have trading: • A fifth of them plan or have tougher, direct local control requirements in addition to trading • A fifth of them will hold back part of emissions budget • Remaining three-fifths will do CAMR “as-is” • One-quarter (12 of 48) will only have more stringent direct controls, often with control waivers for special circumstances • Remaining States (2 of 48) provided no clear indication of plans • 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.
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.