Clean Interstate Rule: Review and Analysis (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (23 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
May 20, 2005 |
| Report Number |
RL32927 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Larry Parker, Resources, Science, and Industry Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
On March 10, 2005, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its final rule to address
the
effects of interstate transport of air pollutants on nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulates (PM2.5) and ozone (specifically, the 8-hour standard). The
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) was first proposed as the Interstate Air Quality (IAQ) rule and
appeared in the Federal Register January 30, 2004. For PM2.5, CAIR finds that the
interstate
transport of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) from 23 states and the District of
Columbia contributes significantly to downwind nonattainment; for ozone, CAIR finds that interstate
transport of NOx from 25 states and the District of Columbia contributes significantly to downwind
nonattainment of the 8-hour standard. This result differs some from the proposed rule because of
improved modeling.
EPA decided in CAIR to create three emissions caps: Two are annual emissions caps that
address the interstate contribution of SO2 and NOx to PM2.5 nonattainment; the third cap is a
seasonal
cap to address interstate contribution of NOx to ozone nonattainment. The three caps are
implemented in two phases: Phase 1 begins in 2009 for the NOx caps and 2010 for the SO2 cap.
Improved modeling and other considerations resulted in some changes in the final rule from the
proposed IAQ. For example, in CAIR, EPA added a fuel-type adjustment factor to the NOx
allocation formula that provides significantly more NOx allowances to states that have coal-fired
electric generation compared with those with natural gas-fired generation.
Although changes to the proposed rule may be important in specific cases, they do not represent
a major shift in the thrust and scope of CAIR. That CAIR has not had the visibility of the
contemporaneous mercury (Hg) rule should not be interpreted to mean that the underlying issue of
PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone compliance has been solved. EPA is currently reviewing the stringency of
the PM2.5 NAAQS, a process that may result in a more stringent standard. Given CAIR's lengthy
schedule, it seems likely that if the PM2.5 NAAQS is strengthened, efforts to revise CAIR would
occur.
Likewise, CAIR does not address the most potent environmental issue surrounding
fossil-fuel-fired electric generating facilities -- global warming and the possibility of carbon dioxide
reductions. Movement on that issue over the next decade could result in a modification of CAIR,
or a new multi-pollutant control regime. Bills have been introduced in Congress to create such a
system.
Finally, CAIR raises questions about the future of the Bush Administration's legislative
initiative -- Clear Skies. Clear Skies represents a complete rewrite of Title IV of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and would impose a comprehensive cap-and-trade system on utility SO2, NOx, and Hg
emissions. In addition, Clear Skies would alter, delete, or hold in abeyance for some time existing
sections of the CAA with respect to affected electric facilities and industrial sources that chose to
opt into the program. With the promulgation of CAIR that achieves NOx and SO2 emissions
reductions from most of the country's electricity generating facilities, and of the final Hg rule, it is
unclear what impetus remains for Clear Skies. This report will not be updated.
