em • feature
by Gina McCarthy
Gina McCarthy is Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation at the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made significant progress reducing harmful pollution, protecting public health, and cleaning up our nation’s air. Last year ended with two important actions that will significantly reduce toxic air pollution from power plants, industrial boilers, and solid waste incinerators.
MATS and Boiler Rules
Practical, Data-Driven Standards
These actions, issued under the U.S. Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 112 (129 for the incinerator rule), are data-driven and rely on proven, widely avail- able pollution control technologies to cut harmful emissions of mercury, arsenic, chromium, nickel, acid gases, particle pollution, and sulfur dioxide.
Sections 112 and 129 of the CAA require EPA to set technology-based standards for specific air pollutants from certain industrial categories, at levels that reflect those already achieved by the best performing sources and using the best available data. Together, these actions provide billions of dollars in health benefits for the Ameri- can people and thousands of opportunities for American workers to install and operate pollution controls.
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
On December 16, 2011, EPA finalized the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS)—a rule that has been 20 years in the making. MATS is the first national rule to set standards for emissions of toxic air pollutants from new and existing coal- and oil- fired power plants. MATS will help remove toxic pollution like mercury, arsenic, and acid gases from the air we breathe, prevent premature deaths, and reduce the number of cases of aggravated asthma among children. The estimated value of the health benefits from these standards total $37 – $90 billion each year. The estimated annual costs of this final rule are $9.6 billion, which means that for every dollar spent to meet the standards, Americans will see up to $9 in public health benefits.
Table 1. Emission limitations for coal-fired and solid oil-derived fuel-fired electricity generating units (EGUs).
Subcategory Filterable Particulate Matter Hydrogen Chloride Mercury
Existing unit designed for 0.030 lb/MMBtu 0.0020 lb/MMBtu 1.2 lb/TBtu
not low rank virgin coal (0.30 lb/MWh) (0.020 lb/MWh) (0.0130 lb/GWh)
Existing unit designed for 0.030 lb/MMBtu 0.0020 lb/MMBtu 4.0 lb/TBtua
low rank virgin coal (0.30 lb/MWh) (0.020 lb/MWh) (0.040 lb/GWha)
Existing – integrated gasification 0.040 lb/MMBtu 0.00050 lb/MMBtu 2.5 lb/TBtu
combined cycle (IGCC) (0.40 lb/MWh) (0.0050 lb/MWh) (0.030 lb/GWh)
Existing – Solid oil-derived 0.0080 lb/MMBtu 0.0050 lb/MMBtu 0.20 lb/TBtu
(0.090 lb/MWh) (0.080 lb/MWh) (0.0020 lb/GWh)
New unit designed for not low 0.0070 lb/MWh 0.00040 lb/MWh 0.00020 lb/GWh
rank virgin coal
New unit designed for coal low 0.0070 lb/MWh 0.00040 lb/MWh 0.040 lb/GWh
rank virgin coal
New – IGCC 0.070 lb/MWhb 0.0020 lb/MWhd 0.0030 lb/GWhe
0.090 lb/MWhc
New – Solid oil-derived 0.020 lb/MWh 0.00040 lb/MWh 0.0020 lb/GWh
Notes: In some cases, affected units may comply with either an input-based standard or an output-based standard, shown in parentheses below the input-based standard.
lb/MMBtu = pounds pollutant per million British thermal units fuel input; lb/TBtu = pounds pollutant per trillion British thermal units fuel input; lb/MWh = pounds pollutant per megawatt-hour electric output (gross); lb/GWh = pounds pollutant per gigawatt-hour electric output (gross)
aBeyond-the-floor limit. The MACT floor for this subcategory is 11.0 lb/TBtu (0.20 lb/GWh); bDuct burners on syngas; based on permit levels in comments received; cDuct burners on natural gas; based on permit levels in comments received; dBased on best-performing similar source; eBased on permit levels in comments received
That Protect Public Health
MATS applies to coal- and oil-fired power plants that are larger than 25 megawatts that sell power distributed through the national grid to the public.
This covers approximately 1,400 existing units—
1,100 coal-fired units and 300 oil-fired units at about 600 power plants. EPA expects most facilities will comply with this rule through a range of proven and cost-effective strategies, including the use of existing emission controls, upgrading emis- sion controls, installing new pollution controls, and switching fuels.
Practical Standards Power Plants Can Meet MATS sets numeric emissions limits for most toxic air pollutants and work practice standards for organic air toxics. In some cases, the standards are “surrogates” for other pollutants (e.g., an hy- drogen chloride emissions limit to control all acid
gases). Where appropriate, sources have flexibility to choose whether a primary standard or an alter- nate standard is best for them. The final MATS rule also sets separate mercury requirements for two subcategories of coal units: mine-mouth units designed for and burning low rank, virgin coal with a calorific value less than 8,300 Btu/lb; and all other coal-fired units. The rule sets separate standards for three subcategories of oil-fired electric generating units: limited-use, non-continental, and all other units (see Tables 1 and 2).
After EPA considered the information and addi- tional data from more than 900,000 public com- ments on the proposed rule, the agency adjusted some aspects of the rule. As a result, though the approach and methodology remain the same, the agencyadjusted some emissions limits, including History of Power Plants and Air Toxics
1990 Congress amended the U.S. Clean Air Act (CAA). The amendments required EPA to issue stan- dards to reduce emissions of air toxics, also called hazardous air pollutants, from many sources, and to study whether to do so for power plants.
1998 EPA sent the results of that study in a report to Congress.
2000 EPA listed power plants for regulation under the air toxics provisions of CAA Section 112, which addresses the National Emission Stan- dards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) programs, among others. EPA determined it was “appropriate and necessary” to regulate emissions of air toxics from power plants, triggering CAA requirements.
2005 EPA reversed its earlier power plant air toxics determination and issued the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), which regulated mercury from power plants through a cap-and-trade program under CAA Section 111, the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) program.
2008 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated EPA’s action removing power plants from the Section 112(c) air toxics source category list and vacated CAMR.
2011 Under consent decree, EPA proposed the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) under Section 112 on March 16, and signed the final MATS on December 16.
2012 The final MATS rules are published in the Federal Register on February 16.
Table 2. Emission limitations for liquid oil-fired EGUs.
Subcategory Filterable PM Hydrogen Chloride Hydrogen Fluoride
Existing – Liquid oil-continental 0.030 lb/MMBtu 0.0020 lb/MMBtu 0.00040 lb/MMBtu
(0.30 lb/MWh) (0.010 lb/MWh) (0.0040 lb/MWh)
Existing – Liquid oil-non-continental 0.030 lb/MMBtu 0.00020 lb/MMBtu 0.000060 lb/MMBtu
(0.30 lb/MWh) (0.0020 lb/MWh) (0.00050 lb/MWh)
New – Liquid oil – continental 0.070 lb/MWh 0.00040 lb/MWh 0.00040 lb/MWh
New – Liquid oil – non-continental 0.20 lb/MWh 0.0020 lb/MWh 0.00050 lb/MWh
Notes: In some cases, affected units may comply with either an input-based standard or an output-based standard, shown in parentheses below the input-based standard.
using filterable particulate matter as a surrogate for the metal toxics limit; clarified definitions for subcategories; simplified and improved monitoring provisions for clarity, consistency, and increased flexibility; and provided an alternative compliance option for sources that plan to comply by averaging across multiple units within the same facility.
Facilities will have up to four years to meet the stan- dards, providing affected plants with enough time to install health-protective controls while continu- ing to meet the nation’s needs for reliable, afford- able energy. If localized reliability issues arise, EPA has also issued an enforcement policy that provides a well-defined path for units to obtain a schedule to achieve compliance within an additional year if they are shown to be necessary to maintain electric reliability.
Utilities strive to provide reliable and affordable electricity to all Americans. We share this same goal, as I discussed in greater detail in EM last fall (EM, October 2011, p. 6). For 40 years, EPA has ensured clean air to the American public without impacting electric reliability. MATS will not change that. EPA’s analysis, as well as other analyses,
including one from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), show that the rule is unlikely to have any significant effect on electricity reliability.
Boiler MACT and Incinerator Rules
On December 2, 2011, EPA proposed changes to CAA standards for boilers and certain incinerators that EPA had issued in March 2011. When EPA issued those final standards in March, the agency also announced it intended to reconsider the stan- dards to seek additional public review and comment and ensure full transparency. In December 2011, as a result of our reconsideration, EPA proposed updated standards that are based on extensive analysis, review, and consideration of data and input from states, environmental groups, industry, lawmakers, and the public, and would achieve significant reductions in toxic air pollutants. The newly proposed standards maintain significant health benefits, are based on the best available data and methodologies, provide additional flexi- bility as data warrants and the law allows, andcut the cost of implementation by nearly 50% from the original 2010 proposed rules.
The proposed reconsidered standards would cut
A&WMA’s Annual Conference & Exhibition offers the most up to date information on shale oil and gas exploration and production.
This four day conference offers a variety of technical sessions that address technical and policy issues associated with air, water, and waste in connection with shale oil and gas exploration and production.
Don’t miss this opportunity to hear from top industry experts!
register today http://ace2012.awma.org/
105TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE
www.awma.org
Shale Oil and Gas
Exploration and Production Topics
June 19-22, 2012
Join the Air & Waste Management Association and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers for an in-depth look at recent air emissions permitting and compliance strategies.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012 12:00 - 1:30 P.M. Eastern
This 90-minute webinar is designed to help shale gas developers respond to stricter government regulations, permitting policies, best practices and more public participation in the administration process.
Hear directly from leading industry consultants and, counsel and pose questions via electronic chat.
Deanne Hughes, P.E. of Cardinal Engineering Mary Ellen Ternes, B.E. ChE, J.D. of McAfee & Taft, PC Moderated by Dan Mueller, P.E. of Zephyr Environmental Corporation
Please visit our website for more details and registration information: www.awma.org
A&WMA and AIChE Member Rate: $129 Non-Member Rate: $179
Student Rate: $29
Shale Development:
Air Quality Permitting Challenges and Compliance Strategies Webinar Compliance St
Air Quality Permit Shale De
trategies Webinar tting Challenges and evelopment:
d
emissions of harmful pollutants, including mercury, particle pollution, sulfur dioxide, dioxin, lead, and nitrogen oxides. The standards would prevent thousands of premature deaths, heart attacks, and cases of aggravated asthma each year. Bene- fits from the rules would total $28 – 68 billion each year, far outweighing annual costs of $2.3 billion.
There are approximately 1.5 million boilers in the United States. The vast majority—1.3 million—are located at small facilities and emit too little to be covered by these standards. That leaves just over 200,000 sources covered under the boiler pro- posals. Of the 200,000, almost 195,000 boilers would be required to follow work practice stan- dards to limit emissions. This leaves only 5,500—
less than 1% of all boilers—that are expected to need pollution controls to limit their emissions. That means more than 99% of boilers in the country are either clean enough that they are not covered by these standards or will only need to conduct work practice standards to comply, including routine maintenance and tune-ups.
The Right Standards for the Right Boilers Because of the diverse and complex nature of these sources, EPA has worked extensively with stake- holders to develop these strong standards. This input has helped EPA better understand these sources, so that the right standards are applied to the right boilers. This doesn’t mean that the standards are weaker, but it does mean that this real-world data has helped us propose affordable, practical regulations that provide vital health benefits.
Some of the December 2011 proposed changes for major source boilers (the reconsidered Boiler MACT) include:
• Creating new subcategories for light and heavy industrial liquids;
• Setting new emissions limits for particulate matter that are different for each design-based subcategory;
• Setting new emissions limits for carbon monoxide;
• Allowing alternative total selective metals emis- sion limits to regulate metallic air toxics instead of using particulate matter as a surrogate;
• Implementing work practice standards to reflect limitations of method detection levels for dioxin;
• Increasing flexibility in certain compliance monitoring situations;
• Revising emissions limits for units located out- side the continental United States; and
• Continuing to allow units burning clean gases to qualify for work practice standards instead of numeric emissions limits.
In Spring 2011, shortly after issuing the March final standards for major source boilers and certain incinerators, EPA issued an administrative stay of their effective dates, which a federal court vacated in January 2012. To address resulting concerns of the regulated community, EPA has informed sources that the agency will not enforce certain notification requirements in the March 2011 rules.
2012 and Beyond
The progress we made in 2011 lays the ground- work for realizing the important public health pro- tections of these actions. This spring, EPA will take steps to finalize the changes to the boiler and incinerator standards. EPA will continue to work with all interested stakeholders and other agencies to design strategies and tools that will ensure smooth implementation and help owners and operators understand the standards and their cost- and energy- saving features. For example, EPA recently has been addressing concerns about reliability with a range of stakeholders, including the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), regional transmission organizations, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
For the boiler rules, EPA also has been working with DOE and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to pro- vide technical assistance to help boilers burn more cleanly and more efficiently. Together, these standards provide a common-sense approach to improving air quality and protecting public health. em
To Learn More
• The final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) rule is available at 77 Fed. Regist. 9304 and online at www.epa.gov/mats.
• More information regarding resource adequacy and reliability analyses is available online at www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/utility/revised_resource_adequacy_tsd.pdf.
• The MATS Enforcement Response Policy is available online at http://cfpub.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/civil/erp/.
• The reconsideration proposals for the Boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT), boiler area source and commercial and industrial solid waste incinerator rules are available at 76 Fed. Regist. 80598, 76 Fed. Regist.
80532, and 76 Fed. Regist. 80452, respectively, and online at www.epa.gov/airquality/combustion/.
