Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the

110th Congress

-name redactedSpecialist in Energy and Environmental Policy

-name redactedSpecialist in Environmental Policy

February 11, 2008

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

RL34018

CRS Report for Congress

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

Summary

With the prospect of new layers of complexity being added to air pollution controls, and with

electricity restructuring putting a premium on economic efficiency, interest is being expressed

in finding mechanisms to achieve health and environmental goals in simpler, more costeffective ways. The electric utility industry is a major source of air pollution, particularly

sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and mercury (Hg), as well as unregulated

greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2). At issue is whether a new approach to

environmental protection could achieve the nation’s air quality goals more cost-effectively than

the current system.

One approach being proposed is a “multi-pollutant” strategy—a framework based on a consistent

set of emissions caps, implemented through emissions trading. Just how the proposed approach

would fit with the current (and proposed) diverse regulatory regimes remains to be worked out;

they might be replaced to the greatest extent feasible, or they might be overlaid by the framework

of emissions caps.

In February 2002, the Bush Administration announced two air quality initiatives. The first, “Clear

Skies,” would amend the Clean Air Act to place emission caps on electric utility emissions of

SO2, NOx, and Hg. Implemented through a tradeable allowance program, the emissions caps

would generally be imposed in two phases: 2008 and 2018. “Clear Skies” was re-introduced in

the 109th Congress as S. 131. The second initiative begins a voluntary greenhouse gas reduction

program. This plan, rather than capping CO2 emissions, focuses on improving the carbon

efficiency of the economy, reducing 2002 emissions of 183 metric tons per million dollars of

GDP to 151 metric tons per million dollars of GDP in 2012.

In the 110th Congress, five bills have been introduced that would impose multi-pollutant controls

on utilities. They are all four-pollutant proposals that include carbon dioxide. S. 1168 and S. 1177

are revised versions of S. 2724, introduced in the 109th Congress. S. 1201 and S. 1554 are

expanded and revised versions of S. 150, introduced in the 109th Congress, while H.R. 3989 is a

new proposal. All of these bills involve some form of emission caps, beginning in the 2009-2012

time frame, with all but S. 1554 including a second phase in 2013-2015 (CO2 only for H.R.

3989). They would employ a tradeable credit program to implement the SO2, NOx, and CO2 caps;

all but H.R. 3989 permit plant-wide averaging in complying with the Hg requirements. The

provisions concerning SO2, NOx, and Hg in the 110th Congress bills are generally more stringent

than the comparable provisions of S. 131 of the 109th Congress. It is difficult to compare the CO2

caps contained in these bills with the Administration’s proposal concerning CO2—both because

the Administration’s proposal is voluntary rather than mandatory and because it is broader

(covering all greenhouse gas emissions rather than just utility CO2 emissions).

Congressional Research Service

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................1

The Bush Administration’s Proposals ..........................................................................................2

Proposed Legislation and Legislative Action in the 110th Congress ..............................................3

Allowance Allocations for SO2, NOx, and CO2......................................................................3

Hg Controls ..........................................................................................................................4

CO2 Reduction Requirements................................................................................................4

Related Regulatory Provisions ..............................................................................................4

Tables

Table 1. Emissions from U.S. Fossil-Fuel Electric Generating Plants ...........................................1

Appendixes

Appendix. Comparison of Multi-Pollutant Control Proposals ......................................................6

Contacts

Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 11

Congressional Research Service

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

Introduction

Electric utility generating facilities are a major source of air pollution. The combustion of fossil

fuels (petroleum, natural gas, and coal), which accounts for about two-thirds of U.S. electricity

generation, results in the emission of a stream of gases. These gases include several pollutants

that directly pose risks to human health and welfare, including particulate matter (PM),1 sulfur

dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and mercury (Hg). Particulate matter, SO2, and NOx are

currently regulated under the Clean Air Act (CAA), and the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) has promulgated rules to regulate mercury beginning in 2010. Other gases may pose

indirect risks, notably carbon dioxide (CO2), which contributes to global warming.2 Table 1

provides estimates of SO2, NOx, and CO2 emissions from electric generating facilities. Annual

emissions of Hg from utility facilities are more uncertain; current estimates indicate about 48

tons. Utilities are subject to an array of environmental regulations, which affect in different ways

both the cost of operating existing generating facilities and the cost of constructing new ones.

Table 1. Emissions from U.S. Fossil-Fuel Electric Generating Plants

(thousands of metric tons)

Emissions

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

SO2

11,297

11,174

10,881

10,646

10,309

10,340

NOx

5,380

5,290

5,194

4,532

4,143

3,961

CO2

2,429,394

2,389,745

2,395,048

2,415,680

2,456,934

2,513,609

Source: Energy Information Administration.

Note: Includes emissions from combined-heat-and-power plants.

The evolution of air pollution controls over time and as a result of growing scientific

understanding of health and environmental impacts has led to a multilayered and interlocking

patchwork of controls. Moreover, additional controls are in the process of development,

particularly with respect to NOx as a precursor to ozone, to both NOx and SO2 as contributors to

PM2.5, and to Hg as a toxic air pollutant. Also, under the United Nations Framework Convention

on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the United States agreed to voluntary limits on CO2 emissions.

The current Bush Administration has rejected the Kyoto Protocol, which would impose

mandatory limits, in favor of a voluntary reduction program. In contrast to the Administration’s

position, in June 2005, the Senate passed a Sense of the Senate calling for mandatory controls on

greenhouse gases that would be designed not to impose significant harm on the economy.3

For many years, the complexity of the air quality control regime has caused some observers to

call for a simplified approach. Now, with the potential both for additional control programs on

SO2 and NOx and for new controls directed at Hg and CO2 intersecting with the technological

1

Particulate matter is regulated depending on the particle size; current regulations address particles less than 10

microns in diameter (PM10); the EPA has promulgated regulations for particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter

(PM2.5) that are in the process of being implemented. SO2 and NOx emissions would be affected by regulations

of PM2.5.

2

In addition, steam-electric utilities produce minor amounts of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide

(CO), and lead—on the order of 2% or less of all sources.

3

S.Amdt. 866 to H.R. 6, The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (June 22, 2005).

Congressional Research Service

1

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

and policy changes affecting the electric utility industry, such calls for simplification have

become more numerous and insistent. One focus of this effort is the “multi-pollutant” or “fourpollutant” approach. This approach involves a mix of regulatory and economic mechanisms that

would apply to utility emissions of up to four pollutants in various proposals—SO2, NOx, Hg,

and CO2. The objective would be to balance the environmental goal of effective controls across

the pollutants covered with the industry goal of a stable regulatory regime for a period of years.

The Bush Administration’s Proposals

In February 2002, the Bush Administration announced two air quality proposals to address the

control of emissions of SO2, NOx, Hg, and CO2.4 The first proposal, called “Clear Skies,” would

amend the Clean Air Act to place emission caps on electric utility emissions of SO2, NOx, and

Hg. Implemented through a tradeable allowance program, the emissions caps would be imposed

in two phases: 2010 (2008 in the case of NOx) and 2018. As part of a complete rewrite of Title IV

of the Clean Air Act, the Administration’s proposal was introduced in the 108th Congress as H.R.

999 and S. 485. Revised versions of Clear Skies legislation were introduced in the 109th Congress

as H.R. 227 and S. 131.5 The proposal has not been reintroduced in the 110th Congress.

The second Administration proposal initiates a new voluntary greenhouse gas reduction program,

similar to ones introduced by the earlier George H. W. Bush and Clinton Administrations. 6

Developed in response to the U.S. ratification of the 1992 UNFCCC, these previous plans

projected U.S. compliance, or near compliance, with the UNFCCC goal of stabilizing greenhouse

gas emissions at their 1990 levels by the year 2000 through voluntary measures. The Bush

Administration proposal does not make that claim, projecting only a 100 million metric ton

reduction in emissions from what would occur otherwise in the year 2012. Total emissions would

continue to rise. Instead, the plan focuses on improving the carbon efficiency of the economy,

reducing 2002 emissions of 183 metric tons per million dollars of GDP to 151 metric tons per

million dollars of GDP in 2012. It proposes several voluntary initiatives, along with increased

spending and tax incentives, to achieve this goal. The Administration notes that the new

initiatives would achieve about one-quarter of the objective, while three-quarters of the projected

reduction is seen as occurring through existing efforts.

4

Papers outlining the Administration’s proposals are available from the White House website:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/clearskies.html for the three pollutant proposal, and

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/climatechange.html for the climate change initiative.

5

For a further discussion of the Administration’s Clear Skies proposal, see CRS Report RL32782, Clear Skies and the

Clean Air Act: What’s the Difference?, by (name redacted) and (name redacted), and CRS Report RL33165, Costs and

Benefits of Clear Skies: EPA’s Analysis of Multi-Pollutant Clean Air Bills, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).

Although H.R. 227 adopted the SO2 and NOx emission caps of the Administration’s Clear Skies proposal, it did not

include many other provisions, including regulatory changes.

6

For a discussion of those previous plans, see CRS Report 94-404, Climate Change Action Plans, by (name redacted) and

(name redacted) (out of print, available from the authors).

Congressional Research Service

2

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

Proposed Legislation and Legislative Action in the

110th Congress

In the 110th Congress, five bills have been introduced that would impose multi-pollutant controls

on utilities. They are all four-pollutant proposals that include carbon dioxide. S. 1168, introduced

by Senator Alexander, and S. 1177, introduced by Senator Carper, are revised versions of S. 2724,

introduced in the 109th Congress. S. 1201, introduced by Senator Sanders, and S. 1554,

introduced by Senator Collins, are similar but revised versions of S. 150, introduced in the 109th

Congress.7 In contrast, H.R. 3989, introduced by Representative McHugh, represents a new

proposal. All of these bills involve some form of emission caps, beginning in 2009-2012 time

frame. S. 1168, S. 1177, and S. 1201 include a second phase beginning in 2013-2015; H.R. 3989

includes a multi-phase program for CO2 only. They would employ a tradeable credit program to

implement the SO2, NOx, and CO2 caps while all but H.R. 3989 permit plant-wide averaging in

complying with the Hg requirements. The provisions concerning SO2, NOx, and Hg in the five

bills are generally more stringent than the comparable provisions of S. 131 of the 109th Congress.

It is difficult to compare the CO2 caps contained in these bills with the Administration’s proposal

concerning CO2—both because the Administration’s proposal is voluntary rather than mandatory

and because it is broader (covering all greenhouse gas emissions rather than just utility CO2

emissions).

The five bills are summarized in the Appendix. Each of these bills generally builds on the SO2

allowance trading scheme contained in Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments

(CAAA). 8 Under this program, utilities are given a specific allocation of permitted emissions

(allowances) and may choose to use those allowances at their own facilities, or, if they do not use

their full quota, to bank them for future use or to sell them to other utilities needing additional

allowances.

Allowance Allocations for SO2, NOx, and CO2

All five bills introduced in the 110th Congress provide for a tradeable allowance scheme to

implement their emission caps on SO2, NOx, and CO2. However, allowance allocation schemes in

the bills differ, with S. 1201 and S. 1554 containing detailed provisions for allocating SO2, NOx,

and CO2 allowances to various economic sectors and interests. In most cases, these interests (or

their trustees in the case of households and dislocated workers and communities) would auction

off (or otherwise sell) their allowances to the affected utilities and use the collected funds for their

own purposes. In addition, S. 1201 requires the increasing use of auctions, mandating 100% of

the annual allowance allocation be auctioned within 15 years of enactment.

In contrast, S. 1168 bases its allowance formulas on fuel usage adjusted by factors specified in the

bill, along with a requirement that 25% of the allowances be auctioned.

7

Besides its multi-pollutant control provisions for electric utilities, S. 1554 contains separate titles on transportation

fuel efficiency, renewable fuels, elimination of certain tax provisions for the oil industry, and research on abrupt

climate change.

8

P.L. 101-549.

Congressional Research Service

3

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

S. 1177 specifies CO2 and NOx limitations based on electricity output, and SO2 limitations based

on the current Title IV program. The bill sets a schedule for increasing the percentage of the

annual allowance allocation that is to be auctioned with 100% required in 2036 and thereafter.

Finally, H.R. 3989 auctions 100% of its CO2 allowances while providing discretion to EPA to

allocate SO2 and NOx allowances.

Hg Controls

On mercury, all five bills focus on achieving a 90% reduction by 2011 (S. 1554 and H.R. 3989),

2013 (S. 1201) or 2015 (S. 1168 and S. 1177). In contrast, the emissions goal of S. 131 of the

109th Congress would have allowed about three times more emissions and three to five more

years for compliance. In addition, all but H.R. 3989 restrict Hg credit trading to plant-wide

averaging of emissions, in contrast with the cap-and-trade program of S. 131. H.R. 3989 is even

more stringent, imposing the emissions rate limitation on a unit-by-unit basis.

CO2 Reduction Requirements

The bills currently introduced in the 110th Congress specify CO2 reductions. In contrast, the

Administration’s CO2 proposal relies on various voluntary programs and incentives to encourage

reductions in greenhouse gases from diverse sources, including CO2 emissions from electric

generation. These voluntary reductions should not be taken as a given, as neither the George H.

W. Bush Administration’s nor the Clinton Administration’s voluntary programs achieved their

stated goals. Thus, in one sense, comparing a mandatory reduction program such as that proposed

by S. 1168, S. 1177, S. 1201, and S. 1554 with the Administration’s voluntary program is

comparing apples to oranges. The first is legally binding, the second has been criticized as merely

an exhortation.

The CO2 reduction requirements of S. 1168, S. 1201, and S. 1554 are similar, except that S. 1201

and S. 1554 requires affected sources also offset CO2 emissions from small electric generating

units. In contrast, S. 1177 imposes a cap that starts out slightly higher than the other two bills and

declines on a slower schedule. Finally, H.R. 3989 has the most detailed reduction scheme with

substantial reductions from coal-fired facilities scheduled through 2050.

All but H.R. 3989 have provisions to create offsets and facilitate sequestration efforts. Among its

titles, S. 1168 has extensive provisions providing for greenhouse gas offsets from landfill

methane (CH4), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) projects, afforestation or reforestation, energy

efficiency, agricultural practices (manure management), and biomass. The provisions in S. 1177

include allowance allocations for incremental nuclear capacity, clean coal technology, and

renewable energy, along with programs to encourage sequestration. Likewise, S. 1554 includes

allowance allocations to encourage renewable energy, energy efficiency, and sequestration.

Finally, S. 1201 requires the EPA to develop standards for providing allowances for geologic and

biological sequestration.

Related Regulatory Provisions

In addition to emissions caps, S. 131 of the 109th Congress would have substantially modified or

eliminated several provisions in the Clean Air Act with respect to electric generating facilities.

Congressional Research Service

4

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

The bill would have eliminated New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) (Section 111) and

replaced them with statutory standards for SO2, NOx, particulate matter, and Hg for new sources.

Modified sources could have also opted to comply with these new statutory standards and be

exempted from the applicable Best Available Control Technology (BACT) determinations under

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) provisions (CAA, Part C) or Lowest Achievable

Emissions Rate (LAER) determinations under non-attainment provisions (CAA, Part D).

Compliance with these provisions would have exempted such facilities from New Source Review

(NSR), PSD-BACT requirements, visibility Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART)

requirements, Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) requirements for Hg, and nonattainment LAER and offset requirements. The exemption would not have applied to PSD-BACT

requirements if facilities were within 50 km of a PSD Class 1 area. Existing sources could have

also received these exemptions if they agreed to meet a particulate matter standard specified in

the bill along with good combustion practices to minimize carbon monoxide emissions within

three years of enactment. In addition, S. 131 would have provided these exemptions for industrial

sources that choose to opt into the Clear Skies program. S. 131 also would have included an

exemption for steam electric generating facilities from Hg regulation under Section 112 of the

CAA (including the residual risk provisions), and relief from enforcement of any Section 126

petition (with respect to reducing interstate transportation of pollution) before December 31,

2014.

The five bills in the 110th Congress generally omit the regulatory changes of S. 131, while

introducing new provisions. All five bills would revise the current New Source Review (NSR)

program to require affected electric generating units 40 years or older (30 years old in the case of

H.R. 3989) to meet more stringent SO2 and NOx performance standard by either 2015 (S. 1201),

2016 (S. 1554), 2020 (S. 1168 and S. 1177), or five years after enactment (H.R. 3989). All except

S. 1554 and H.R. 3989 contain provisions establishing a new performance standard for CO2. S.

1168 and S. 1177 would also eliminate the annual NOx and SO2 caps contained in the recently

promulgated Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR).

In addition to the above, S. 1201 and S. 1554 would create several new regulatory programs and

standards, including an Efficiency Performance Standard, and a Renewable Portfolio Standard.

These programs would be implemented through a credit trading program.

Congressional Research Service

5

Appendix. Comparison of Multi-Pollutant Control Proposals

S. 131 (Inhofe)

(109th Congress)

S. 1168

(Alexander)

S. 1177

(Carper)

S. 1201

(Sanders)

S. 1554

(Collins)

Emissions

cap on

NOx

1.473603 million tons in

the East in 2008,

declining to 1.07603

million tons in 2018.

0.714794 in the West

beginning in 2008.

1.45 million tons in the

East in 2009, declining

to 1.3 million tons in

2015. 0.32 million ton

in the West beginning

in 2015.

1.39 million tons in the

East in 2012, declining

to 1.3 million tons in

2015. 0.40 million tons

in the West in 2012,

declining to 0.32 million

tons in 2015.

1.51 million tons in

2010, declining to 0.9

million tons in 2013.

Additional reductions

may be required for O3

NAAQS compliance.

1.51 million tons in

2012, reduced annually

by emission emitted by

small electric generating

facilities. Additional

reductions may be

required if necessary to

protect public health or

welfare or the

environment.

Estimated at 1.51

million tons in 2010.

Emissions

cap on SO2

4.5 million tons in 2010,

declining to 3.0 million

tons in 2018.

3.5 million tons in the

East in 2010, declining

to 2.0 million tons in

the 48 contiguous

states in 2015.

3.5 million tons in 2012,

declining to 2.0 million

tons in 2015.

1.9755 million tons in

the East in 2010,

declining to 1.1414

million tons in 2013.

0.2745 million tons in

the West in 2010,

declining to 0.1586

million tons in 2013.

1.975 million tons in

the East and 0.275

million tons in the

West in 2012, reduced

annually by emission

emitted by small

electric generating

facilities. Additional

reductions may be

required if necessary to

protect public health or

welfare or the

environment.

Estimated at 2.225

million tons in 2010.

Not covered.

2.3 billion metric tons

(tonnes) in 2011,

declining to 2.1 billion

tonnes in 2015, 1.8

billion tonnes in 2020,

and 1.5 billion tonnes in

2025.

Estimated at 2.47 billion

metric tonnes in 2012,

declining to 2.39 billion

tonnes in 2015,

declining by 1% annually

beginning in 2016, and

by 1.5% beginning in

2020.

2.3 billion metric

tonnes in 2011,

declining to 2.1 billion

tonnes in 2015,

declining to 1.803

billion tonnes in 2020,

and finally declining to

1.5 billion tonnes in

2025. Further

reductions required

after 2025. Cap also

reduced by emissions

from small electric

generation facilities.

2.05 billion metric

tonnes in 2022,

reduced annually by

emission emitted by

small electric generating

facilities. Additional

reductions may be

required if necessary to

protect public health or

welfare or the

environment.

Estimated at 1.94 billion

metric tonnes in 2015,

declining to 1.46 billion

tonnes in 2020,

declining to 0.97 billion

tonnes in 2030,

declining to 0.68 billion

tonnes in 2040, and

finally declining to 0.39

billion tonnes in 2050.

Provisions

Emission

cap on CO2

CRS-6

H.R. 3989

(McHugh)

Additional reductions

may be required if

necessary to protect

public health or

welfare.

Additional reductions

may be required if

necessary to protect

public health or

welfare.

Provisions

S. 131 (Inhofe)

(109th Congress)

S. 1168

(Alexander)

S. 1177

(Carper)

S. 1201

(Sanders)

S. 1554

(Collins)

H.R. 3989

(McHugh)

Emissions

cap on

mercury

34 tons in 2010,

declining to 15 tons in

2018.

Less stringent of 60%

reduction or 0.02

lb./Gwh four years after

enactment, declining to

the lesser of 90%

reduction or 0.0060

lb./Gwh in 2015. One

year extension available

to install equipment.

Less stringent of 60%

reduction or 0.02

lb./Gwh in 2012,

declining to the lesser

of 90% reduction or

0.0060 lb./Gwh in 2015.

Subject to EPA review.

5 tons and, to the

extent practicable,

achieve a 90%

reduction on a facilityspecific basis by 2013.

2.48 grams of Hg per

Gwh on a facility

specific basis by 2011.

Emission rate limit set

at 0.6 lb. per trillion Btu

for new (2009) and

existing (2011) coalfired units. (Roughly

equivalent to 0.0060

lb./Gwh.)

Scope

50 states, DC, and

territories.

48 contiguous states

and DC.

50 states and DC.

50 states and DC.

50 states and DC.

50 states and DC.

Affected

units

Existing electric

generating facilities 25

Mw or greater (coalfired only for Hg); cogeneration sources

exempted.

Electric generating

facilities greater than 25

Mw for CO2 , fossil

fuel-fired electric

generating facilities for

NOx and SO2 (coalfired only for Hg).

Electric generating

facilities greater than 25

Mw, including

incremental nuclear

capacity for CO2, fossilfuel-fired electric

generating facilities for

NOx, Title IV definition

for SO2, coal-fired only

for Hg.

Electric generating

facilities 25 Mw or

greater (coal-fired only

for Hg).

Electric generating

facilities 15 Mw or

greater (coal-fired only

for Hg).

Electric generating

facilities 25 Mw or

greater (coal-fired only

for Hg and CO2).

Penalties

for noncompliance

NOx, SO2, Hg: reduces

the excess emissions

penalties under CAA,

title IV to the EPA

auction clearing price

for allowances plus

one-for-one offset from

future emission

allocations, if paid

within 30 days.

Otherwise, the number

of excess emissions is

multiplied by 1.5 for

penalty purposes.

NOx, SO2 and CO2:

two-for-one offset from

future emission

allocations, plus an

excess emissions

penalty.

NOx: Twice the

average annual price in

the appropriate zone

per excess ton plus at

least an one-for-one

offset from future

emission allocations.

NOx , SO2 and CO2

same as CAA, title IV,

except excess emission

penalty is three times

the average market

price for allowances.

NOx , SO2 and CO2

same as CAA, title IV,

except excess emission

penalty is three times

the average market

price for allowances.

NOx and SO2 same as

CAA, title IV.

Hg: three times the

average Hg control

costs per gram of

excess emission.

Hg: three times the

average Hg control

costs per gram of

excess emission.

Hg: $50,000 per excess

pound, indexed to

inflation.

SO2: Twice the average

annual price per excess

ton plus at least an onefor-one offset from

future emission

allocations.

Hg: $50,000 per excess

pound emitted.

CO2: Twice the two-

CRS-7

Hg: $10,000 per ounce

of excess emissions.

CO2 : $150 per ton,

adjusted for inflation.

Provisions

S. 131 (Inhofe)

(109th Congress)

S. 1168

(Alexander)

S. 1177

(Carper)

S. 1201

(Sanders)

S. 1554

(Collins)

H.R. 3989

(McHugh)

Beginning 5 years after

enactment, all

powerplants 30 years

or older must meet

most recent NSPS, Part

C (PSD) and Part D

(non-attainment)

requirements under the

Act.

year average price plus

at least an one-for-one

offset from future

emissions allocations.

Special

provisions

New performance

standards for new

sources replace current

NSPS for new sources.

Compliance with bill’s

provisions exempts

facilities from New

Source Review (NSR),

PSD-BACT

requirements, visibility

BART requirements,

and non-attainment

LAER and offset

requirements. The

exemption does not

apply to PSD-BACT

requirements if facility

is within 50 Km of

Class 1 area. Existing

sources can opt in by

meeting a particulate

standard.

Exempts utility units

from Hg regulation

under CAA, Section

112, including residual

risk provisions.

Prevents EPA from

enforcing Section 126

petitions before

December 31, 2014.

CRS-8

Revises NSR program

to require affected

electric generating units

40 years or older to

meet specific SO2 and

NOx performance

standards beginning in

2020.

Revises NSR program

to require affected

electric generating units

40 years or older to

meet specific SO2 and

NOx performance

standards beginning in

2020.

Beginning in 2015, all

powerplants 40 years

or older must meet

emission limitations

based on current best

available control

technology for a new

major source.

Beginning in 2016, all

powerplants 40 years

or older must meet

emission limitations

based on current best

available control

technology for a new

major source.

Beginning in 2015, New

NSPS established for

CO2.

Beginning in 2015, New

NSPS established for

CO2. More stringent

NSPS begins in 2025.

New CO2 emissions

standard for baseload

powerplants that

commerce operation

after 2011. Standard

would be based on the

emission rate of a new

combined cycle natural

gas generating plant.

EPA may increase the

stringency to at least

90% by 2030. All

baseload plants must

meet New CO2

emission standard by

2031, if feasible.

Creates a new

Efficiency Performance

Standard and credit

program beginning in

2007.

Annual SO2 and NOx

caps under CAIR

eliminated in 2015.

Extensive provisions

providing for

greenhouse gas offsets

from landfill CH4, SF6

projects, afforestation

or reforestation, energy

efficiency, agricultural

practices (manure

management), and

biomass.

CO2 program includes

allowance allocations

for clean coal

technology under a

Climate Champions

Program.

Annual NOx cap under

CAIR eliminated in the

later of 2012 or

effective date of NOx

regulations.

CO2 program includes

allowance allocations

for incremental nuclear

capacity, clean coal

technology, and

renewable energy,

along with

sequestration and early

action provisions.

New minimum Hg

standard for new

sources established as

of the date of

enactment.

Creates a new LowCarbon Generation

Requirement and credit

trading program

beginning in 2015.

Creates a Renewable

Portfolio Standard and

credit program,

beginning in 2009.

Contains separate titles

on transportation fuel

efficiency, renewable

fuels, elimination of

certain tax provisions

for the oil industry, and

research on abrupt

climate change.

Revenues from CO2

auctions to fund

research and

development of

renewable energy

projects.

Appropriations

authorized for several

monitoring networks.

Provisions

S. 131 (Inhofe)

(109th Congress)

S. 1168

(Alexander)

S. 1177

(Carper)

S. 1201

(Sanders)

S. 1554

(Collins)

H.R. 3989

(McHugh)

Tradeable allowance

system for SO2, NOx

and CO2. Allowances

allocated to various

sectors and interests,

including households,

dislocated workers and

communities, electricity

intensive industries,

energy efficiency and

renewable energy

activities, sequestration

activities, and

ecosystem restoration.

Tradeable allowance

system for SO2, NOx

and CO2.

Creates new Energy

Efficiency Performance

Standard and credit

program beginning in

2008.

Creates a Renewable

Portfolio Standard and

credit program,

beginning in 2008

Requires standards for

geological CO2 disposal

within 6 years of

enactment and

biological sequestration

within 2 years of

enactment.

Implementation

strategy

Tradeable allowance

system for SO2, NOx,

and Hg. Allocation

formulas based on

historic fuel usage

adjusted by factors

specified in the bill.

Special reserves for

new units provided for

SO2, NOx and Hg.

Tradeable allowance

system for NOx, SO2

and CO2. For NOx,

and CO2, allocations

based on historic heat

input adjusted for each

fuel’s generally

applicable emissions

rate for that pollutant.

For SO2 current Title

IV allocations are

revised and adjusted for

newer units.

Special reserves for

new units provided for

CO2 and SO2

Beginning in 2011, 25%

of CO2 allowances to

be auctioned with

proceeds going to

electricity consumers

CRS-9

Tradeable allowance

system for NOx, SO2

and CO2. For NOx,

and CO2, allocations

based on historic

electricity output.

For SO2 current Title

IV allocations are

revised and adjusted for

newer units.

Special reserves for

new units provided for

NOx, CO2, and SO2.

Beginning in 2012, 18%

of CO2 allowances to

be auctioned, a

percentage increased 3

percentage points

annually until 2030

when the rate is

increased to 5

Tradeable allowance

system for SO2, NOx

and CO2. Allocations to

be based on economic,

equity, and international

competitiveness criteria

specified in the bill.

Allowances allocated to

various sectors and

interests, including

households, dislocated

workers and

communities, electricity

intensive industries,

energy efficiency and

renewable energy

activities, sequestration

activities, and

ecosystem restoration.

Beginning in 2010, at

least 50% of CO2

allowances to be

auctioned, with

For Hg, plant-wide

averaging is permitted.

SO2, and NOx

allocations left to EPA

discretion.

CO2 allowances are

100% auctioned.

Hg emissions rate limits

are on a unit-by-unit

basis.

Provisions

S. 1168

(Alexander)

S. 1177

(Carper)

S. 1201

(Sanders)

and energy-intensive

industries.

percentage points until

2036 when 100% is

auctioned. Revenues

from the resulting

Climate Action Trust

Fund shall be used for

innovative low- and

zero emitting carbon

technologies program,

clean coal technologies

program, and research

and analysis, and an

energy efficiency

technology program.

Other funded activities

includes worker and

community impact

assistance, adaptation

assistance, and

protecting fish and

wildlife habitat.

successive increasing to

raise it to 100% within

15 years of the date of

enactment.

S. 131 (Inhofe)

(109th Congress)

For Hg, plant-wide

averaging is permitted.

For Hg, facility-wide

averaging is permitted.

Source: Congressional Research Service.

CRS-10

For Hg, plant-wide

averaging is permitted.

S. 1554

(Collins)

H.R. 3989

(McHugh)

Air Quality: Multi-Pollutant Legislation in the 110th Congress

Author Contact Information

(name redacted)

Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy

/redacted/@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Congressional Research Service

(name redacted)

Specialist in Environmental Policy

/redacted/@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

11

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in

the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without

permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a

third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public

understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in

connection with CRS' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

copyright on any CRS report we have republished.