What the Clean Air Mercury Rule and Clean Air Interstate

Rules Will Mean to You

Jenna Glahn & Christine HeathARIPPA Technical SymposiumGettysburg, PA – July 27, 2005

trinityconsultants.com

Clean Air Mercury Rule

1. Why Mercury and Why You?2. Background on CAMR Rule3. NSPS & Cap-and-Trade Program4. Monitoring and Controlling Hg

Emissions5. Challenges and Lawsuits

Clean Air Mercury Rule(CAMR)

1. Why Mercury and Why You?

Mercury Contamination Persistent toxic that accumulates

in food chain Linked to neurological and

developmental problems In 2000, more than 600,000

newborns exposed to elevated mercury levels

Currently 44 states have issued fish consumption advisories

Mercury Cycle

Source: Mason et. al, 1994

Source Contribution Coal-fired power plants – 48 tons

of Hg emitted each year Total U.S. emissions – 3% of global

Hg

2. Background on CAMR Rule

Clean Air Rules Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule Clean Air Ozone Rules

8-hour ozone Clean Air Fine Particulate Rules

8-hour PM2.5

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) Market-Based, Cap & Trade Program for

SO2 and NOx in Eastern U.S.

Rule Updates Utility units delisted from Section

112(c) list Not appropriate and necessary No public health hazard

Standards of Performance for New and Existing Sources

3. NSPS & Cap-and-Trade Program

Applicable Sources Hg Budget Units

Any fossil fuel-fired combustion unit of > 25 MWe that serves a generator that produces electricity for sale, including cogeneration utility units which supply > 1/3 electric output capacity to the power distribution system

Coal-fired Definitions consistent with Acid Rain

Program and CAIR

Hg New Source Provisions

Revision to 40 CFR 60, Subpart Da Sources constructed after January

30, 2004 Meet performance standards

5 subcategories based on coal rank and process type

Inability to control Hg equally from all ranks

New Source Performance Standards

Subcategory Hg (10-6 lb/MWh)1

Bituminous-fired 21

Subbituminous-fired 42 (Wet FGD)78 (Dry FGD)

Lignite-fired 145

IGCC 20

Coal refuse-fired 1.4

1 – Based on a 12-month rolling average

Note: Standards for new sources only.

Fuel Blending Coal Blending

Unit classified by the predominate coal burned during the compliance period

Unit classified by a “weighted emission limit” based on the proportion of energy output (in Btu) contributed by each coal rank burned during the compliance period

If non-regulated fuels are used (e.g., pet coke,TDF), compliance calculation include:

Energy output (in Btu) of all fuels Hg emissions considered would be all measured by the stack

monitor However, the blended emission limitation is based only on

the regulated fuels

Cap-and-Trade Program

New and Existing Sources Codified in 40 CFR 60, Subpart

HHHH Managed by EPA

National Hg Allowances

2010 – Phase I Cap of 38 tpy of Hg Co-benefit reductions under CAIR

2018 – Phase II Cap of 15 tpy of Hg Hg-specific controls commercially

available

State Hg Allowances Based on proportionate share of

state’s baseline heat input to the total heat input from all affected sources Adjustment factors to reflect coal rank PA’s Phase I Allocation – 1.78 tpy

(2010) PA’s Phase II Allocation – 0.702 tpy

(2018)

Source Hg Allowances

State allocates Hg allowances to sources Allocations set three years in

advance May set aside allowances for new

sources Banking of unused allowances

Cap-and-Trade Requirements Each State must submit a plan that

demonstrates it will meet its assigned statewide Hg budget by October, 31, 2006 States may join the trading program by

adopting or referencing the model trading rule in state regulations; or, adopting regulations that mirror the necessary components of the model trading rule

States can choose not to join the federal trading program and meet their budget through intra-state trading or no trading

States can choose to implement more stringent Hg emissions requirements

4. Monitoring and Controlling Hg Emissions

Monitoring Hg Emissions (1 of 3) Added Subpart I to 40 CFR 75

Options for Hg Monitoring 2 Monitoring Options:

Hg CEMS Sorbent trap monitoring systems

Low Mass Emitters < 29 lb Hg per year Periodic Hg emissions testing

Monitoring Hg Emissions (2 of 3) All Continuous Monitoring Systems Must

Be Certified Submit unit specific monitoring plan 45

days before commencing certification tests CEMS meet PS 12-A or 40 CFR 75 Sorbent trap meet 40 CFR 75.15 and App.

K CEMS - Calibration Drift and Quarterly

RATA and 3 Error Tests (App. F or B) Sorbent Trap - Annual RATA and App. K

Monitoring Hg Emissions (3 of 3) Resemble current monitoring of

SO2 and NOx under the Acid Rain and NOx SIP Call programs

Comprehensive QA/QC program Commensurate with CAIR cap-and-

trade programs Flexibility of using alternate

monitoring Accurate, certain, and consistent

quantification of emissions

Controlling Hg Emissions (1 of 2) Co-Benefits of Existing Controls and

Controls Installed under CAIR Dependent on Hg speciation Dependent on control type and coal rank

FFs and ESPs – PM-Hg removed effectively FGD scrubbers – Adsorb Hg+2

Spray dryer absorbers – Hg0 and Hg+2 removal NOx controls may enhance ability to capture

Hg Better capture for higher rank coals

Controlling Hg Emissions (2 of 2) Hg-Specific Control Technologies

Adequately Demonstrated for Sufficient Use by 2018 Required to meet Phase II cap Sorbent injection (ACI or halogenated

ACI) available for commercial application after 2010 ACI – Hg removal 60-90% Optimized multipollutant controls –90-

95%

Compliance Deadlines January 1, 2009 - Hg Budget Unit

that Commences Commercial Operation Before 1/1/08

Later of January 1, 2009 or 90 unit operating days or 180 calendar days (whichever comes first) after start of operation – Hg Budget Unit that Commences Commercial Operation on or after 1/1/08

5. Challenges and Lawsuits

PA Opposition PA included in at least 2 lawsuits

March 31 – Appropriate and necessary to regulate Hg

May 18 – Cap and trade not appropriate for Hg Hot spots and downwind increases 90% reduction and earlier compliance

date under MACT

Bias towards western coal

Congressional Opposition EPA Inspector General - Hg limits pre-

selected to conform w/ CAIR Snowe(R)-Leahy(D) Bill – “Omnibus

Hg Emissions Reduction Act” Coal and oil fired power plants MWCs, commercial and industrial

boilers, chlor-alkali plants, and cement plants

Require labeling of Hg containing products

90% reduction in Hg emissions

What’s Next?

PA likely to regulate Hg! Per PennFuture lawsuit:

Conduct residual risk assessment Report results and basis for rulemaking

in August Program similar to NJ and include

other sources?

CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule

OrWhy should you CARE about

CAIR?

CAIR

March 10, 2005, EPA issued CAIR (May 12, 2005 FR)

Previously known as Interstate Air Quality Rule (IAQR)

Addresses PM2.5 and ozone non-attainment from upwind sources

“Cap and Trade” program for SO2 and NOX from utilities

Alternative to Bush’s “Clear Skies” initiative

CAIR - Applicability

CAIR - Applicability

28 States NOX and SO2 only Aimed at electrical generating

units (EGU), but states may choose to implement differently

CAIR - Applicability Implementation options

EGU interstate cap and trade EGU caps without emissions trading Combination of caps on EGU and other

sources to meet caps EPA did not include non-EGU sources because

No cost effective controls for large emitters Many sources already regulated by NOX SIP Call or

ozone nonattainment

Given short timeline and limited options, states will likely follow EPA recommendations

CAIR - Applicability

Electric Generating Unit Definition A stationary fossil fuel fired boiler or

combustion turbine serving a generator with a nameplate capacity greater than 25 MWe, or

A cogeneration unit serving a generator with a nameplate capacity greater than 25 MWe and supplying in any calendar year more than 1/3 of the unit’s output capacity or 219,000 MWh, whichever is greater, to a utility power distribution system for sale

CAIR - Timeline

Affected states submit revised SIP within 18 months of rule (September 2006)

Rapid timeline Allows for upwind controls to be

used in downwind (Ozone/PM2.5 NAAQS) compliance demonstrations

Addresses 3-year regulatory timeline (from 1997) and lawsuits

CAIR - Timeline

Reductions Phase I: January 1, 2009 (NOX)

January 1, 2010 (SO2) Phase II: January 1, 2015 (NOX & SO2)

Incentives for early reductions Allows 2-3 years for installation of

controls Ozone attainment date June 2009 PM2.5 attainment date April 2010

CAIR - Controls NOX Reductions

0.15 lb/MMBtu system average by 2009 0.125 lb/MMBtu system average by 2015 Tonnage based on historical heat inputs Allowances allocated by state

SO2 reductions 50% reduction from Acid Rain allowances

by 2010 65% reduction from Acid Rain allowances

by 2015

CAIR - Controls CAIR rule assumes

NOX controlled by SCR SO2 controlled by FGD

Projected controls for CAIR

CAIR - Impacts

CAIR - ImpactsProjected Nonattainment Areas in 2010 after Reductions from

CAIR and Existing Clean Air Act Programs (Diesel Rules, Tier II Vehicle Rule, NOX SIP Call)

CAIR - ImpactsProjected Nonattainment Areas in 2015 after Reductions from

CAIR and Existing Clean Air Act Programs (Diesel Rules, Tier II Vehicle Rule, NOX SIP Call)

CAIR – Pennsylvania SO2 Budget

PA 2003 SO2

Emissions (tons)

PA SO2 Budget 2010 (tons)

PA SO2 Budget 2015 (tons)

Percent Reduction (%)

967,000 275,990 193,193 80%

CAIR – Pennsylvania NOx Budget

PA 2003 NOx Emissions

(tons)

PA NOx Budget 2009

(tons)

PA NOx Budget 2015

(tons)Percent

Reduction (%)174,000 99,049 82,541 53%

ARIPPA’s Comments on CAIR

Due to Congress’ exemption of certain IPPs from the Title IV Acid Rain Program, sources originally exempted under Title IV should not be subject to the SO2 control requirements of CAIR

EPA Response: EPA has determined that emissions reductions from EGUs are highly cost effective. States can choose to implement the trading program or control sources

ARIPPA’s Comments on CAIR

If sources originally exempted under Title IV are subject to the SO2 provisions CAIR, allocations of SO2 allowances to such sources should reflect current SO2 emission levels;

EPA Response: CAIR allocations will be based on existing Title IV program. Sources without allowances shall obtain them from the market or the Title IV Auction

ARIPPA’s Comments on CAIR

Waste coal-fired CFB boilers should not be required to comply with both NOx and SO2 reduction requirements in CAIR, because of the interrelationship of NOx and SO2 emission controls within boilers

EPA Response: The EPA does not agree that the SO2 reduction capability of a CFB boiler already equipped with limestone injection cannot be improved further (e.g., increased limestone injection and spray dryer adsorber)

ARIPPA’s Comments on CAIR

If waste coal fired CFB units are subject to NOx reduction requirements in CAIR, complete and accurate baseline heat input data reflecting all regulated sources must be used in the allocation process

EPA Response: EPA revised its determination of State NOx budgets by supplementing Acid Rain Program data with annual heat input data from US Energy Information Administration

ARIPPA’s Comments on CAIR

Implementation of CAIR should not result in the imposition of any additional burden on waste coal fired CFB sources, in the form of additional monitoring, recordkeeping or reporting requirements for non-acid rain sources

EPA Response: Part 75 monitoring and reporting requirements entail the appropriate monitoring approach for a program that is relied upon by numerous States to ensure that interstate transport of pollutants is reduced

CAIR Current Status

ARIPPA filed an appeal on CAIR Main concern – cost of SO2

allowances ARIPPA met with PADEP 7/25/05 to

discuss a motion to intervene EPA projects that PA sources will

sell allowances

CAIR - Summary

NOX and SO2 cap and trade program for EGU’s in 28 eastern states

SCR and FGD Controls Implemented by 2009/2010 with

further reductions by 2015 Will assist with ozone/PM2.5

nonattainment in PA Reduce PM2.5 NAA Counties from 23 to 1 Reduce ozone NAA Counties from 37 to 5

Questions?