USEPA REGULATORY INITIATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS OF RECENT AIR TRENDS RESULTS Presented by: David M. Flannery Jackson Kelly PLLC Panel Title: State’s Clean.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EPA’s Clean Power Plan Proposed Rules for Reducing GHG Emissions from Power Plants Presentation to ACPAC June 16,
Advertisements

National and State Trends for Natural Gas and Electricity Prices Talina R. Mathews Department for Energy Development and Independence.
1. 2 RegulationStatus First phase GHG regulation (endangerment finding, GHG permitting) Rules adopted. Affirmed on appeal. Petitions for rehearing pending.
1 26 th Annual Kentucky Professional Engineers in Mining Lesly A.R. Davis Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, LLP 250 West Main Street, Suite 1600 Lexington, KY
The West` Washington Idaho 1 Montana Oregon California 3 4 Nevada Utah
Emissions Reductions Beyond the Clean Smokestacks Act (CSA) Emissions Reductions Beyond the Clean Smokestacks Act (CSA) Environmental Management Commission.
State of New Jersey v. EPA A Case Study in Politics v. Statutory Language Mary Ellen Hogan Holme Roberts & Owen LLP Los Angeles, California.
GREENHOUSE GAS POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR KENTUCKY’S ENERGY FUTURE Presented by John S. Lyons Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet March 13,
1 MIDWEST OZONE GROUP Preliminary Comments on the CAIR Replacement Rule April 17, 2009 David M. Flannery Jackson Kelly PLLC Charleston, West Virginia.
Recent EPA Regulation Development Presented by Bill Luthans to the 56 th Meeting of the Joint Advisory Committee Meeting for the Improvement of Air Quality.
MCIC Workshop 2012 Complying with NC Air Quality Regulations Boiler MACT/GACT and 112j Steve Schliesser Division of Air Quality Environmental Engineer.
Boiler MACT and Other Air Developments 2011 Southern Section AWMA Conference Callaway Gardens, GA Boiler MACT and Other Air Developments 2011 Southern.
Division of Air Quality Update on EPA Boiler MACT Rules Steve Schliesser Environmental Engineer March 2012.
1 Year in Review: Clean Air Act Presented by: Tom Wood Stoel Rives LLP October 8, 2010 Things Are Getting Really Complicated.
Revisiting the Impact of Judicial Review on Agency Rulemakings: An Empirical Investigation Wendy Wagner University of Texas School of Law.
1 National Association of Clean Air Agencies Spring Membership Meeting 2008 Steve Page, Director Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) Office.
Clean Air Act Section 111(d) Indiana Energy Association September 11, 2014 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE Commissioner IN Department of Environmental Management.
New Source Review Reform Vera S. Kornylak, Associate Regional Counsel EPA Region 4 Office of Regional Counsel and Gregg Worley, Chief, Air Permits Section,
Texas Lignite Industry. Texas Lignite  Because >95% of lignite mining operations in Texas are in support of electric generation…..whatever impacts the.
STATE LAW RESOURCES, INC. FALL 2012 MEETING PANEL DISCUSSION: “The Future of Coal” Alexander Macia, Member Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC P.O. Box 273 Charleston,
December 4, Utility MACT Air & Waste Management Association/EPA Information Exchange December 4, 2002 William H. Maxwell Combustion Group/ESD.
Robert L. Burns, Jr., Esq. Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC August 1, 2013 Impact of Environmental Regulation on Coal Combustion for Electrical.
Change picture on Slide Master New EPA Challenges for Coal-Fired Plants SNL Energy June 10, 2010 PRESENTED BY Peter Glaser Troutman Sanders LLP th.
Air Pollution Control Board October 1, 2008 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., DEE, QEP Commissioner, Indiana Department of Environmental Management We Protect.
EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Anne Arnold, EPA Region 1 MA SIP Steering Committee Boston, MA August 10, 2011.
Air Quality Beyond Ozone and PM2.5 Sheila Holman North Carolina Division of Air Quality 6 th Annual Unifour Air Quality Conference June 15, 2012.
Indiana Energy Association Environmental Issues Impacting Coal Fired Power Plants September 12, 2013 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, Commissioner IN Department.
Star Symposium 2013 The Changing Reality of Energy Development Jeffery LaFleur, Vice President Generation Assets APCO/KYPCO October 22, 2013.
American Legislative Exchange Council America’s Clean Air Success Story and the Implications of Overregulation November 28, 2012 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E.,
Chart 6. 12: Impact of Community Hospitals on U. S
Air Toxics in Region 4 A&WMA Annual Conference August 6, 2008 Lee Page Air Toxics Assessment and Implementation Section EPA, Region 4 Atlanta, Georgia.
Since May 2013 Select Clean Air Act Cases. U.S. v. Homer City U.S. v. Midwest Generation, LLC U.S. v. United States Steel CAA Enforcement Cases.
GA EPD Air Protection Branch AWMA Southern Section August 2015.
Final Amendments to the Regional Haze Rule: BART Rule Making June 16, 2005.
Map Review. California Kentucky Alabama.
Change picture on Slide Master EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases Industrial Energy Consumers of America November 16, 2009 PRESENTED BY Peter Glaserargaret.
Clean Air Update GA AWMA REGULATORY UPDATE CONFERENCE Tuesday, April 16, 2013 Beverly Banister Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division U.S. Environmental.
Mississippi Air Update Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality September 12, 2012.
Indiana Update 2013 Tri-State Electric Utility Environmental Meeting May 15, 2013 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental.
2011 IEA Energy Conference Environmental Panel September 16, 2011 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP Commissioner, Indiana Department of Environmental.
Directions: Label Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia--- then color.
1 Potential Impacts of a National SO 2 Program WRAP Forum June 3, 2004.
Clean Air Act Section 111(d) Indiana State Bar Association Utility Law Section September 4, 2014 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE Commissioner IN Department.
Assessment of Mercury Rules for Electric Generators in North Carolina September 9, 2015 Presented to the Environmental Management Commission – Air Quality.
Natural Gas Fuel Switching Consequences for Public Power Utilities Theresa Pugh April 14, 2010 APPA CEO Climate Change Task Force.
Joelle Burleson Planning Section, Rules Development Branch Division of Air Quality Status of Periodic Review and Expiration of Existing Rules per Regulatory.
The Role of Interstate Transport of Air Pollutants in Achieving Ozone NAAQS Attainment David M. Flannery Steptoe & Johnson PLLC for the Midwest Ozone Group.
Clean Power Plan – Now What? OCTOBER 16, 2015 FALL PR-MR & MARKETING MEETING.
1 Consideration of Final Rulemaking Clean Air Interstate Rule Environmental Quality Board Meeting Harrisburg, PA December 18, 2007 Joyce E. Epps Director,
Update on EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Rulemakings Norman W. Fichthorn Hunton & Williams LLP 2010 American Public Power Association Energy and Air Quality Task.
Study Cards The East (12) Study Cards The East (12) New Hampshire New York Massachusetts Delaware Connecticut New Jersey Rhode Island Rhode Island Maryland.
25 Years of Environmental Progress CITES 41 st Annual Environmental Symposium April 20, 2012 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP Commissioner IN Department.
US MAP TEST Practice
Air Pollution Challenges Kentucky Coal Association April 29, 2013 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
Is There Need for a 75 ppb Ozone Transport Rule? Gregory Stella Alpine Geophysics, LLC 1 David Flannery Steptoe & Johnson PLLC Prepared For The Midwest.
Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard For New Power Plants Presented by Kevin Culligan Office of Air Quality Planning And Standards Office of Air and Radiation.
Interstate Transport National Tribal Forum Air Quality Track April 30,
IDEM Leaders Communication Meeting May 31, 2012 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, QEP Commissioner IN Department of Environmental Management 1.
DEP Presentation on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Proposed Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS Citizens Advisory.
Jerry Beasley, Ph.D., P.E. Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality MMA Environmental & Safety Conference and Expo October 16, 2015.
Assessment of International Transport and Improved Ozone Air Quality
Clean Air Act Litigation Update State Air Director Meeting May 2015
EVVE Implementation – August 2013 Northern Mariana Islands
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
REAL ID Briefing for NEBTA
CAIR Replacement Rule and Regional Haze
Bill Harnett USEPA NACAA Membership Meeting October 21, 2008
Department of Environmental Quality
Supplementary Data Tables, Utilization and Volume
WASHINGTON MAINE MONTANA VERMONT NORTH DAKOTA MINNESOTA MICHIGAN
Presentation transcript:

USEPA REGULATORY INITIATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS OF RECENT AIR TRENDS RESULTS Presented by: David M. Flannery Jackson Kelly PLLC Panel Title: State’s Clean Air Success Story and Implications for Overregulation American Legislative Exchange Council Washington, D.C. November 28, 2012

2 Remarkable Times Broad based attack by USEPA on all fossil fuels Particular attention being directed at coal burning power plants (CSAPR; MATS; GHG-NSPS) Significant judicial challenges are being directed at finalized rules: CSAPR and MATS New Source CO 2 rule is not yet final USEPA erroneously claims that the cost of its rules can be justified by air quality benefits … but hold on …

3 Current Air Programs Are Working Already dramatic reductions in air emissions Already dramatic improvement in air quality Additional improvements in air quality will occur without new regulations In those few areas where problems remain, additional controls are the responsibility of local sources

4 This presentation will review … The threat that CSAPR, MATS and CO 2 -NSPS present to electric power generation The status of litigation related to CSAPR and MATS Historical emission reductions and air quality trends Projected air quality improvements related to existing regulations

CSAPR Litigation Imposed additional NO x and SO 2 controls on power plants at a cost of $800 million per year. 08/21/12 – D.C. Circuit decision –Vacates and remands CSAPR and the CSAPR FIPs –Directs EPA to continue administering CAIR pending completion of a remand rulemaking to replace CSAPR with a valid rule. –CSAPR “exceeds [EPA’s] statutory authority in two independent respects” by a.Requiring upwind states “to reduce emissions by more than their own significant contributions to a downwind State’s nonattainment,” and b.Failing to allow States the “initial opportunity” to implement, through SIPs, the emission reductions required by EPA in CSAPR 5

CSAPR Decision “Red Lines” Guidance by Court to be applied to the development of an alternative rule: - 1% Floor: Once EPA determines what is an insignificant contribution, “it may not force any upwind State to reduce more than its own contribution to that downwind State minus the insignificant amount.” - Proportionality Requirement: “EPA … must factor in the downwind State's own contribution, alongside those of the various upwind States.” - Unnecessary Over-Control: “EPA may not require upwind States to do more than necessary for the downwind States to achieve the NAAQS.” 6

CSAPR: What’s next? Possible rehearing en banc. Possible petitions for writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court? Additional transport rule to address the hour PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2008 ozone NAAQS, both of which post-dated CAIR and CSAPR. 7

MATS: Background 1990 – Clean Air Act Amendments to study whether to issue air toxics standards for power plants – EPA submits Utility Toxics Study Report to Congress – Listing Determination – De-listing rule – D.C. Circuit vacates de-listing rule and CAMR – EPA is obligated under consent decree to propose air toxics standards for power plants by March 16, 2011, and promulgate final standards by December16, /16/12 – Final MATS rule is published. 77 FR /16/12 – MATS took effect (annual cost $9.6 billion) 04/08/13 – Final briefing on appeal 8

Petitioners White Stallion Energy Center, LLC Utility Air Regulatory Group Midwest Ozone Group Peabody Energy Corporation West Virginia Chamber of Commerce (plus 13 others) United Mine Workers of America States: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming Others Source: White Stallion’s Certificate of Parties, Rulings and Related Cases. 9

MATS Appeal Issues EPA failed to consider the impact of the MATS rule on the reliability of the electricity supply; EPA failed to consider the costs and economic impact of the MATS rule; EPA ignored conditions affecting individual sources and instead based emission limits on a combination of different HAP pollutant emission levels achieved at different sources in different states EPA’s compliance deadline for existing EGUs cannot be achieved by some plants EPA’s limit for new sources is not achievable Others 10

11 MATS Timelines Inadequate flue-gas desulfurization ( FGD) retrofit time even with 4 th year Non-reliability-critical units need not apply for 5 th year

12 New Source Mercury UMACT UMACT Limit for Existing Sources lb/GWh UMACT Limit for New Sources lb/GWh Source: Derived from AEP UMACT Comments to U.S. EPA (2011). Mercury UMACT vs. Current Air Permit Limits* (*most stringent permit limits identified by analysis of new coal units build since 2001)

CO 2 - NSPS Proposed rule: March 27, 2012 Exempts application to existing sources Output based standard (1,000 lbs CO 2 / MWh) Achievable by: 1. natural gas combined cycle 2. coal fired united with CCS CCS not commercially viable 30 year compliance period Effectively prohibit new coal power plants 13

EPA CAIR Projections Compared to Actual and CSAPR 14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21 Residual Non-Attainment in East PM2.5 Annual – none PM hour – Liberty-Clairton, PA –It is well-established that the Liberty-Clairton area is significantly affected by local emissions from a sizable coke production facility and other nearby sources. See _4.0_4.3_4.3.3_r03_PA_2.pdf. (“High concentrations of organic carbon indicate the unique local problem for this location.”) _4.0_4.3_4.3.3_r03_PA_2.pdf Ozone (85 ppb) – Harford, MD*

22 *

23 Conclusion EPA must develop an alternative to CSAPR using “red lines” guidance MATS rule is subject to judicial challenge with many sources needing additional compliance time Proposed CO 2 -NSPS would preclude new coal fired power plants Overall significant decreases in emissions of ozone/PM forming pollutants Air quality concentration continue to improve in response to emission reductions Residual non-attainment is mostly related to local sources

24 CONTACT INFORMATION David M. Flannery Jackson Kelly PLLC 1600 Laidley Tower P.O. Box 553 Charleston, WV Telephone: (304)