Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

Welcome Clarity and Few Surprises in EPA’s Guidance on Greenhouse Gas Permitting

Last week the EPA released its “PSD and Title V Permitting Guidance For Greenhouse Gases.” This Guidance was designed to give the states direction in how to implement permitting requirements for new sources for other criteria pollutants that also produce greenhouse gases on January 2, 2011, and new sources of greenhouse gases following in May, 2011, under the Clean Air Act’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program.

The Guidance does an excellent job of summarizing and explaining how the EPA’s current PSD permitting program works (it is the best succinct and correct explanation I have seen), and explains how the procedure applies with the addition of greenhouse gases to the list. Importantly, it reaffirms the current five-step standard for determining what is “Best Available Control Technology” under the PSD program. The Guidance first advises permitting authorities in making an applicability determination based on whether there is an emissions increase under the complex regulatory formulae (and subject to the de minimis current requirements and the new ones for greenhouse gases). Then the Guidance moves on to the five-step process, which requires the permitting authority to evaluate what the best processes are for reduction, rank them in order, then evaluate them one by one for excessive environment, energy, or economic cost until one is deemed sufficient to implement for the BACT.

The Guidance goes on to suggest that energy efficiency is certainly likely to be the most promising BACT for most greenhouse gas producers. The EPA suggests that permitting authorities who require energy efficiency initiatives look at design features as well as end-of-pipe requirements, and favorably comments on more efficient boiler designs such as boilers with supercritical and ultra-supercritical steam pressures. Importantly, the agency does not endorse fuel switching as a BACT for coal fired power plants, though neither does it rule it out, leaving the possibility open for states to require it.

Moreover, while not endorsing it specifically, the Guidance suggests that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) be considered for coal-fired power plants.

A couple of other important points: first, the agency leaves open the possibility of excluding biomass-fired power from the permitting requirement entirely because life-cycle calculations can show no net increase of GHGs. Even if no biomass is not excluded, the Guidance notes that the very act of burning the bio-mass could be seen as BACT for such facilities, giving biomass facilities a way to propose BACT to the regulators that may not be very costly for them.

The other important point is that while EPA acknowledges the states’ primacy in setting BACT if the state is operating the program, the EPA still clearly asserts its authority pursuant to Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation v. EPA to overrule any determination of the state that it doesn’t agree with. Overall though, as long as the states play nice (pay attention, Texas), it seems that the EPA will let them operate with some flexibility.

Showing 2,824 results

Victor Flatt | November 17, 2010

Welcome Clarity and Few Surprises in EPA’s Guidance on Greenhouse Gas Permitting

Last week the EPA released its “PSD and Title V Permitting Guidance For Greenhouse Gases.” This Guidance was designed to give the states direction in how to implement permitting requirements for new sources for other criteria pollutants that also produce greenhouse gases on January 2, 2011, and new sources of greenhouse gases following in May, 2011, […]

Rena Steinzor | November 17, 2010

War on Regulation Coming to the States? Why IPI’s Plan For Centralized Regulatory Review Isn’t What We Need

One of the most powerful sleights of hand achieved by Republicans during the last election cycle was their renewed declaration of war on regulation. It’s no secret which of their interest groups are most passionate about this aspect of their agenda. Tuesday’s LATimes previewed a plan by the Chamber of Commerce, to be announced today, to further […]

Ben Somberg | November 15, 2010

EPA Moves Forward With Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Florida Waters; Plan Will Begin in 15 Months

The EPA announced this morning that it has finalized numeric nutrient criteria for Florida waters — specific limits on the amounts of nutrient pollutants allowed in the state’s water bodies. These criteria will in turn limit discharges by point and non-point sources. Currently, nutrient limits are set only by “narrative” water quality standards — which […]

James Goodwin | November 11, 2010

The Goose, the Gander, and an OIRA Checklist

Late last month, the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) posted on its website a document called Agency Checklist: Regulatory Impact Analysis, which, according to the document, is intended to assist federal regulatory agencies with Executive Order 12866-required cost-benefit analyses (CBAs). Such analyses have become a standard, if fatally flawed, stage in the […]

Matt Shudtz | November 10, 2010

OSHA’s High Hazard Industries – a Look at Some Data

Every year, OSHA mails a letter to about 15,000 employers who run high-hazard worksites, warning them that their most recent annual injury and illness rates were well above average. According to OSHA, For every 100 full-time workers, the 15,000 employers had 4.5 or more injuries or illnesses which resulted in days away from work, restricted work […]

Lena Pons | November 9, 2010

CPR White Paper Identifies Hundreds of Toxic Chemicals Insufficiently Studied by EPA

A new CPR white paper released today evaluates EPA’s performance in improving its database of human health information on toxic substances. The Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) contains “profiles” with bottom-line health effects information for 540 substances; federal regulators, as well as state and local governments and regulated industry itself, rely on the assessments to make […]

Ben Somberg | November 8, 2010

Measuring Health and Safety Success: By What Yardstick?

In a post the other week, Celeste Monforton at The Pump Handle gives a great example of health/safety protection being evaluated the wrong way (“Contractor racks up mine safety violations and unpaid penalties, also wins safety awards.”) Monforton points to a large construction company that seems to be collecting safety awards while simultaneously being cited […]

Yee Huang | November 4, 2010

CPR Submits Comments to States on Chesapeake Bay Restoration Plans

Today CPR President Rena Steinzor and I submitted comments to EPA and each Chesapeake Bay Watershed jurisdiction regarding their draft Phase I Watershed Implementation Plans. The states, we find, need to improve their plans significantly. After more than 20 years of haplessly stumbling toward restoration, often in fits and starts, EPA and the Bay jurisdictions—Delaware, […]

Rena Steinzor | November 4, 2010

Obama’s Path Forward: Impart a Sense of Urgency to Regulatory Agencies Protecting Health, Safety and the Environment

There’s a lot of punditry left to be committed about whether and how the GOP majority in the House and the enhanced GOP minority in the Senate will work with the Obama Administration. I’m not optimistic. But even if the President and House Republicans are able to find some small patch of common ground, the […]