Texas andGreenhouse

Gas Emissions History of the GHG

Permitting Processin Texas

Presented by

This is a short history of greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting requirements in Texas.

This is a short history of greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting requirements in Texas.

Month Year

We’ll do this more or less chronologically. Look here for the timestamp as we go along.

Greenhouse Gases are…1. carbon dioxide (CO2)2. nitrous oxide (N2O)3. methane (CH4)4. hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)5. perfluorocarbons (PFCs)6. sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act.

Seven years ago…

April 2007

EPA established that the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V permitting programs would apply to GHGs

May 2010

Three years later…

For any pollutant, the trigger levels for the PSD and Title V programs were set at (potential) emissions of 100 and 250 tpy, respectively…

But there was a problem…

…these levels are peanuts for GHGs, which are typically in the hundreds of thousands of TPY.

To avoid having almost every source trigger PSD and Title V, EPA created the GHG Tailoring Rule…

June 2010

…it was billed as a “common sense approach to permitting GHGs under PSD and Title V”.

The intent was to permit the sources that contribute 70% of the GHG emissions first.

Then worry about the rest later.

It was a multi-step method to “tailor” the PSD and Title V applicability criteria.

Regulate so-called “anyway sources”, i.e., they would be a major source even without GHG emissions.Typically power plants, industrial boilers, cement plants, and oil refineries.

STEP 1

Regulate sources considered major due to GHG emissions only, regardless of emission levels of other pollutants.

STEP 2

The PSD/Title V trigger criteria for Step 2 was set to 100,000/75,000 TPY, respectively

STEP 2

A third step was promised by July 2012. It would potentially lower the Step 2 criteria if EPA thought the states could handle the extra sources needing permitted.

STEP 3

EPA decided the states weren’t ready, so the 100k/75k limits stood.

July 2012

Flash-forward two years…

EPA decided that 13 states, including Texas, did not have State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that addressed the GHG requirements to the letter of the law.

December 2010

Meanwhile, in 2010…

December 2010

So they issued a “SIP call” that required these states to re-issue their plans.

Texas refused.

December 2010

To avoid interruption of GHG permitting in Texas, EPA took over the process for them on an interim basis.

December 2010

At the end of the interim period, EPA decided that they would continue permitting GHGs in Texas and issued a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for doing so.

April 2011

Several months later…

The FIP would be in force until Texas revised their SIP to regulate GHGs in accordance with the CAA

TX House Bill 788 authorized TCEQto permit for GHG emissions…

June 2013

Two years later…

June 2013

“to the extent required by federal law.”

TX House Bill 788 authorized TCEQto permit for GHG emissions…

Two years later…

HB 788 required rewriting several chapters of the Texas Administrative Code, which would take some time

Until then, EPA remained the permitting authority for GHGs under the FIP.

EPA and Texas come to agreement…EPA grants GHG permitting authority to Texas.

February 2014

Eight months later…

TCEQ rules for GHGs adopted(effective April 17, 2014)

March 2014

And finally…

June 2014

In UARG versus EPA, Supreme Court rules that EPA cannot treat GHGs as “pollutants”.

But then…

June 2014

The Tailoring Rule collapses…A source cannot be classified as MAJOR solely by virtue of GHG emissions

June 2014

But PSD/Title V limitations for GHGs still stand if a source is considered major due to emissions levels of other pollutants.

Implementation of this ruling now awaits guidance from the D.C. Circuit court. Until then, nothing is certain. However…

EPA recently issued a memorandum stating their preliminary views on how things may proceed

July 2014

The Step 1 “anyway sources” may still have to comply with any PSD Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirements for GHGs

Whether PSD BACT requirements for Step 2 sources are upheld is an open question for now.

Meanwhile, EPA has asked each of the states to review their GHG permitting requirements in light of the court ruling.

TCEQ says they’re looking into it.

Stay tuned…

For more information on GHG measurements and

reporting, contact CleanAir today.800-991-3300

contact@cleanair.com

Thanks for your time!

Clean Air Engineering provides a full spectrum of global environmental solutions. Our specialties include emissions measurements, power generation optimization, rental and

manufacturing of measurement and monitoring equipment.

Find out more at cleanair.com