Clean Air Act Implementation 

Updates including 

Recent Court Decisions

David B. Conroy

Air Programs Branch

EPA Region 1

NECA Conference on Environmental 

Issues July 24, 2014
Overview of Presentation 

 CPP

 CAIR/CSAPR

 MATS

 GHG Permitting 

 NAAQS Implementation 

 Ozone

 PM2.5

 SO2

2
On June 2, 2014, as part of the President’s Climate Action 

Plan EPA proposed a commonsense plan to cut carbon 

pollution from power plants. 

The proposed plan will: 

 By 2030, reduce nationwide carbon dioxide (CO2) 

emissions, from the power sector by approximately 30% 

from 2005 levels.

 Require a reasonable emission reduction glidepath starting in 

2020.

 Cut hundreds of thousands of tons of harmful particulate 

matter, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides as a co-benefit. 

 Lead to health and climate benefits worth an estimated 

$55 billion to $93 billion in 2030. 

Proposed Clean Power Plan (CPP)

3
This Proposal Deals With the Largest 

Source of GHG Emissions in the U.S.

4
Reducing Carbon Pollution 

from Power Plants

President’s Directive to EPA:

Develop carbon pollution standards, 

regulations or guidelines, as appropriate, for:

1. New power plants

 Proposed: January 8, 2014

2. Modified and reconstructed power plants

 Proposal: June 2014

 Final: June 2015

3. Existing power plants

 Proposed Guidelines: June 2014

 Final Guidelines: June 2015

 State Plans due: June 2016

5
 Section 111 establishes a mechanism for controlling air 

pollution from stationary sources

 Applies to sources for which the Administrator finds “causes, 

or contributes significantly to, air pollution which may 

reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or 

welfare”

 Can apply to new, existing, modified and reconstructed 

sources. 

 New sources under section 111(b) 

 Federal standards for new, modified and reconstructed 

sources

 Existing sources under section 111(d) 

 State programs for existing sources that are equivalent to 

federal guidelines

EPA’s Regulatory Approach

Clean Air Act Section 111

6
Key Factors in BSER Determination

 Feasibility

System of emission reductions must be technically feasible

 Costs 

Costs of the system are reasonable 

 Size of reductions 

EPA may consider the amount of emission reductions the 

system would generate

 Technology 

Designed to promote the implementation and further 

development of technology

Best System of Emissions Reduction 

(BSER) under CAA Section 111(b)

7
CAA Section 111(d) requires EPA to develop guidelines for 

states to address existing sources not addressed elsewhere in 

the CAA

 Section 111(d) – Federal Guidelines for States

 The Administrator shall “prescribe regulations . . . 

under which each State shall submit to the 

Administrator a plan which establishes standards of 

performance for any existing source for any air 

pollutant for which air quality criteria have not been 

issued . . . but to which a standard of performance 

under this section would apply if such existing source 

were a new source, and provides for the 

implementation and enforcement of such standards 

of performance.”

Clean Air Act Section 111(d) –

Existing Sources

8
Clean Air Act Section 111(d) for EGUs

Best System of Emission Reduction

• Previous EPA rules under this section of the Clean Air Act have 

considered “add-on” control technologies – like scrubbers --

that are technically feasible to deploy at virtually any facility. 

• In contrast, there are a wide variety of ways to reduce carbon 

pollution that are commercially available, technically feasible, 

and cost effective. 

• The opportunities vary from state to state, depending on how 

electricity is generated, energy infrastructure, and other factors. 

• In this proposal, EPA took an approach that viewed the Clean 

Air Act factors in determining Best System of Emission 

Reduction in light of the interconnected nature of power 

generation.

9
EPA Establishes a Goal 

for Every State

 EPA analyzed the practical and affordable strategies that states 

and utilities are already using to lower carbon pollution from the 

power sector. 

 Proposed goals are based on a consistent national formula, 

calculated with state and regional specific information. 

 The result of the equation is the state goal. 

 Each state goal is a rate – a statewide number for the future 

carbon intensity of covered existing fossil-fuel-fired power plants 

in a state expressed in lbs/MWhr.

 The state goal rate is calculated to account for the mix of power 

sources in each state and the application of the “building blocks” 

that make up the best system of emission reduction.

 States will need to meet an interim goal and a final goal.

10
Building Block Value Allocated in Goal-Setting Formula

1. Make fossil fuel-fired

power plants more 

efficient

Average heat rate improvement of 6% for coal 

steam electric generation units (EGUs)

2. Use lower-emitting 

power sources more

Dispatch to existing and under-construction natural 

gas combined cycle (NGCC) units to up to 70% 

capacity factor

3. Use more zero/lowemitting energy 

sources

Dispatch to new clean generation, including new 

nuclear generation under construction, moderate 

deployment of new renewable generation, and 

continued use of existing nuclear generation

4. Use electricity more 

efficiently

Increase demand-side energy efficiency to 1.5% 

annually

11
State performance goals 

(lbs/MWh)

State 2012 Fossil 

Emission Rate1

Interim Goal (2020 -

2029 average)2

Final Goal (2030 

and thereafter)2

Connecticut 844 597 540

Maine 873 393 378

Massachusetts 1,001 655 576

New Hampshire 1,119 546 486

Rhode Island 918 822 782

12

1 From Goal Computation Technical Support Document, Appendix 5 – 2012 Emissions Rate and Building Block 

Application, 

2 From Table 1 to Subpart UUUU of Part 60 – State Rate-Based CO2 Emission Performance Goals, Proposed
Flexibilities Available To States

 Timing: 

 Up to 15-year window in 

which to plan for and achieve 

reductions in carbon 

pollution. 

 Up to two or three years to 

submit final plans. 

 Form of goal: States can use 

either a rate-based or massbased goal.

 Single or multi-state plans: 

States can collaborate and 

develop plans on a multi-state 

basis.

 Selection of measures: 

 States will choose how to 

meet the goal through 

whatever collection of 

measures reflects its 

particular circumstances 

and policy objectives. 

 State measures may 

impact and, in fact may be 

explicitly designed to 

reduce, CO2 emissions 

from utilities on a regional 

basis.

 EPA would support building 

off existing reduction 

programs. 

13
Basis for state goal –

Potential emissions 

pathway reflecting 

EPA’s analysis

 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029

 

A state can choose any trajectory 

of emission improvement as long 

as the interim performance goal is 

met on average over 10 years, and 

the final goal is met by 2030

States Have Flexibility

Carbon emissions from affected power 

plants in an example state

Timing of Power Plant Emission Reductions

As an example, states could do less in the early years, and more in the 

later years, as long as on average it meets the goal

14
Benefits and Costs

 Nationwide, by 2030, this rule would help reduce CO2 emissions 

from the power sector by approximately 30% from 2005 levels.

 Also by 2030, reduce by over 25% pollutants that contribute to the soot 

and smog. 

 These reductions will lead to public health and climate benefits 

worth an estimated $55 billion to $93 billion in 2030. 

 Proposal will avoid an estimated 2,700 to 6,600 premature 

deaths and 140,000 to 150,000 asthma attacks in 2030.

 Health and climate benefits far outweigh the estimated annual 

costs of meeting the standards.

 Estimated at $7.3 billion to $8.8 billion in 2030. 

 Proposal protects children and other vulnerable Americans from 

the health threats posed by a range of pollutants.

 Move us toward a cleaner, more stable environment for future 

generations. 

 Ensures an ongoing supply of the reliable, affordable power 

needed for economic growth.

15
Next Steps

 The proposed rule, as well as information about how 

to comment and supporting technical information, are 

available online at: www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

 EPA will hold 4 public hearings the week of July 28th in 

Denver, Atlanta, Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C.

 There will be a 120-day public comment period on the 

proposal, closing October 16, 2014.

 Comments on the proposal should be identified by 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602. 

16
0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Total Generation (GWh)

Year

ISO New England Electricity Generation Mix by Fuel Type, 2000-

2012

Coal & Oil Natural Gas Nuclear Renewables & Hydro Total Generation (GWh)

New England Generation Mix

17

Data Sources: ISO New England Energy Sources, 2000-2013

http://www.iso-ne.com/nwsiss/grid_mkts/enrgy_srcs/
22%

12%

-20%

-71%

-93%

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

New England Economic Growth and ISO New England System 

Emissions, 1999-2012

New England GDP Total Generation CO2 Emissions NOx Emissions SO2 Emissions

Emissions, Generation and Economic Growth

18

Data Sources: 2012 ISO New England Electric Generator Air Emissions 

Report, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
http://www.rggi.org/market/tracking/allowance-allocation

Northeast states implement RGGI:

 2014 emissions cap: 91 million short tons

 2015 – 2020 emissions caps: annual 

2.5% reductions

 2020 emissions cap: 78 million short tons

 Auction proceeds invested in the region 

(EE, RE, direct bill assistance, GHG 

abatement, etc.)

Working with the RGGI states:

 EPA’s 111(d) proposal allows for states 

to demonstrate mass-based equivalency 

to the proposed rate-based goals and 

solicits comment on conversion methods 

 EPA’s 111(d) proposal allows states to 

submit multi-state plans

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative

19
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)

 Clean Air Act requires states to address emissions that “contribute 

significantly” to nonattainment or “interfere with maintenance” of NAAQS in 

downwind states.

 March 2005 - EPA issued Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) covering 27 

eastern states and DC. CAIR uses cap & trade program to reduce SO2 and 

NOx emissions from power plants to meet 1997 annual and 24-hour fine 

particle (PM2.5) and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

 CAIR was projected, at full implementation, to reduce power plant SO2

emissions in affected states to just 2.5 million tons, 73% below 2003 

emissions levels.

 For NOx, CAIR will reduce power plant NOx emissions by 2 million tons, 

achieving a regional emissions level of 1.3 million tons, a 61% reduction 

from 2003 levels.

 States were required to submit State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to EPA 

demonstrating compliance with their applicable SO2 and NOx EGU budgets.

20
States Covered by CAIR

21
CAIR Challenged in US Court of 

Appeals for the DC Circuit

 July 11, 2008 – Court issues decision to vacate 

CAIR

 Fall 2008 – Parties to the litigation submit 

requests for rehearing and other information 

including expected effects of a vacatur

 Dec 23, 2008 – Court amends decision and 

remands CAIR without vacatur

 Requires EPA to promulgate replacement rules to 

CAIR, consistent with the Court's July 11, 2008 ruling 

 Leaves CAIR in effect until replacement rules are 

promulgated

22
Cross State Air Pollution Rule 

(CSAPR)

 July 2011- EPA finalized CAIR replacement rule, the 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).

 CSAPR focused on attainment and maintenance of the 1997 

Ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS

 CSAPR was intended to cover emissions in 2012 and beyond.

 CSAPR implemented through a federal rule.

 CSAPR established new allowances for all programs.

 There is no carryover of Acid Rain Program, NOx SIP Call/NOx 

Budget Trading Program (NBP), or CAIR allowances. 

 By 2014, combined with other final state and EPA actions, the 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule was projected to reduce power 

plant SO2 emissions by 73 percent and NOx emissions by 54 

percent from 2005 levels in the CSAPR region.

23
States Covered by CSAPR

*This map includes states covered in the supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking.

• Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule includes 

separate requirements 

for:

• Annual SO2

reductions

• Annual NOx

reductions

• Ozone-season NOx

reductions

24
Litigation on CSAPR

 December 2011 - D.C. Circuit issued ruling to stay CSAPR 

pending judicial review.

 March 2012 - EPA filed brief defending CSAPR and reasons 

rule should be upheld. 

 August 2012 - D.C. Circuit issued decision to vacate CSAPR. 

 Orders EPA to “continue administering CAIR pending the promulgation of 

a valid replacement.”

 April 2014 - U.S. Supreme Court reversed D.C. Circuit opinion 

vacating CSAPR.

 June 26, 2014 – EPA filed motion with D.C. Circuit to lift stay of 

CSAPR and to allow it to go into effect beginning Jan 1

 If the court adopts EPA’s suggestion, phase 1 of the rule would begin in 

2015 and phase 2 would go into effect two years later, in 2017.

 While Court considers motion, CAIR remains in place.

More information at www.epa.gov/airtransport/CSAPR 25
CAIR and CSAPR 

in New England

 Connecticut and Massachusetts were included in 

ozone season CAIR program, but are not in 

CSAPR, because air quality modeling shows they 

no longer contribute significantly to nonattainment 

or maintenance of the 1997 and 2006 PM NAAQS 

or the 1997 ozone NAAQS in other states.

 CAIR is in each of these state’s SIPs and relied on 

to meet various Clean Air Act obligations for 

programs such as Regional Haze and ozone. 

 If CSAPR is implemented, EPA will work with these 

states to develop a replacement program to retain 

emission reductions achieved under CAIR.

26
Mercury and Air Toxics 

Standards (MATS)

• On Feb 16, 2012, EPA promulgated the Mercury and Air Toxics 

Standards (MATS), the first national standards to reduce emissions of 

mercury and other toxic air pollutants from new and existing coal- and 

oil-fired power plants

• Standards will reduce emissions of:

• Metals, including mercury (Hg), arsenic, chromium, and nickel

• Acid gases, including hydrogen chloride (HCl) and hydrogen 

fluoride (HF)

• Particulate matter

• Compliance required by April 14, 2015, with opportunity for 1-year 

extension

• On April 15, 2014, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit upheld the rule against challenges from industry groups

More information at www.epa.gov/mats 27
GHG Permitting Tailoring Rule

Implementation Schedule 

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

 Step 1: Sources already 

subject to PSD “anyway” and 

GHG emissions = or > than (tpy 

CO2e): 

New source: NA 

PSD Modification: 75,000

 Step 2: Step 1 plus sources 

with GHG emissions = or > than 

(tpy CO2e): 

New source: 100,000

PSD Modification: 75,000

 Step 3: Maintains the 

thresholds from Step 1 and 

Step 2. Establishes 

additional PAL provisions to 

streamline the permitting 

process

• 5-year study: To examine 

GHG permitting for smaller 

sources

• Step 4: Additional 

rulemaking based on 5-year 

study

Complete Study

1/2/11 begin permitting for “anyway” sources & modifications 

2016

Rule issued 6/29/12

Due 2016

7/1/11 begin including sources that would be major for GHG only

28
GHG Tailoring Rule Litigation

 On June 26, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals- D.C. Circuit upheld 

EPA's Endangerment Finding and greenhouse gas regulations 

issued under the Clean Air Act for passenger vehicles and CAA 

permitting for stationary sources.

 On Feb 24, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in 

the matter of UARG v. EPA where the Court had granted certiorari 

on the following question:

 Whether EPA permissibly determined that its regulation of greenhouse 

gas emissions from new motor vehicles triggered permitting 

requirements under the Clean Air Act for stationary sources that emit 

greenhouse gases.

 June 23, 2014: The Supreme Court issues its decision on permitting 

GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. The Decision states

 “The Act neither compels nor permits EPA to adopt an interpretation of 

the Act requiring a source to obtain a PSD or Title V permit on the sole 

basis of its potential greenhouse-gas emissions.”

 “EPA reasonably interpreted the Act to require sources that would need 

permits based on their emission of conventional pollutants to comply 

with BACT for greenhouse gases.” 

Future guidance will be posted www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgpermitting.html 29
NAAQS Reviews: Status Update

Ozone Lead Primary 

NO2

Primary 

SO2

Secondary

NO2 and SO2

PM CO

Last Review

Completed 

(final rule signed)

Mar 2008 Oct 2008 Jan 2010 Jun 2010 Mar 2012 Dec 2012 Aug 2011

 The Clean Air Act requires EPA to review National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) every 5 

years to determine whether they should be 

retained or revised.

30
2008 Ozone NAAQS 

Implementation

 Revised primary 8-hr Ozone standard in 2008 (75 ppb)

 EPA designations for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS effective on 

July 20, 2012

 2008 Ozone NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule

 Proposed May 29, 2013 (78 FR 34178)

 Anticipate final rule in late 2014

 RACT plans due July 20, 2014

 Attainment demonstrations due July 2015 (Moderate) or July 

2016 (Serious and above)

31
Morongo Tribe

Pechanga Tribe

Final designation Classifications and Area Counts

- EPA has not designated as nonattainment any areas outside the Continental U.S.

- Map reflects classifications following requests for voluntary bump-up.

Nonattainment Areas for 2008 Ozone NAAQS by Classification 

(Effective July 20, 2012)

32
Preliminary 2013 Ozone Design Values

3-Year average of 

the 4th high 

concentration for

2011, 2012, 2013

Unclassified

/Attainment

Nonattainment

76 - 84 ppb

> 84 ppb

71 - 75 ppb

< 71 ppb

Created by ME DEP
Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT)

 The 2008 Ozone NAAQS SIP 

Requirements Rule will cover RACT 

obligations for moderate and above 

nonattainment areas, and areas in the 

Ozone Transport Region (OTR).

 The 12 states and DC within the ozone 

transport region are required to submit a 

RACT SIP addressing NOx and VOC 

emissions by July 20, 2014.

 EPA is recommending that states review 

NOx emission limits for facilities with 

existing controls and update those limits 

where appropriate, consistent with past 

performance.

34
Current Ozone NAAQS Review

 Received court ruling on April 29, 2014

 Propose December 1, 2014

 Final October 1, 2015

 CASAC letter of June 26, 2014

 Primary standard

“there is adequate scientific evidence to recommend a range of 

levels for a revised primary ozone standard from 70 ppb to 60 

ppb. . . our policy advice is to set the level of the standard lower 

than 70 ppb within a range down to 60 ppb, taking into account 

your judgment regarding the desired margin of safety to protect 

public health, and taking into account that lower levels will provide 

incrementally greater margins of safety.” 

 Secondary standard: W126 within the range of 7 ppm-hrs

to 15 ppm-hrs

35
PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation

 EPA revised the annual primary PM2.5 NAAQS to 12 μg/m3from the 

previous level of 15 μg/m3 on Dec 14, 2012. 

 EPA retained daily PM2.5 standard of 35 μg/m3 set in 2006. 

 Status of Designations 

 State (and Tribal) recommendations were due to EPA by December 

13, 2013

 EPA received recommendations from 50 states, 2 territories, D.C. 

and 6 tribes 

 5 states (PA, OH, IL, IA and CA) recommended a total of 15 

nonattainment areas (including 39 whole or partial counties)

 Next Steps 

 EPA intends to notify states/tribes of intended modifications to 

recommendations in “120-day” letters by August 2014

 Final designations expected in December 2014 

36
37
2010 SO2 NAAQS 

Implementation 

 Revised primary SO2 standard: June 2010 (75 ppb/1-hr)

 Initial nonattainment area designations, based on violating 

monitors, were effective October 4, 2013

 29 areas in 16 states designated (In New England, only NH area)

 Attainment plans due April 2015

38
2010 SO2 NAAQS 

Implementation

 1-hr SO2 NAAQS Nonattainment SIP Elements Guidance 

 Objective is to provide assistance to areas developing their 

nonattainment area plans 

 Issued guidance on April 24, 2014 

 SO2 Data Requirements Rule

 Objective is to provide information to EPA in an orderly 

fashion to inform initial area designations for areas not 

designated in 2013

 Proposed on April 17, 2014

 Final scheduled for late 2014

39
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS

40