GHG Tailoring Rule

The rule (via the preamble only) will allow Step 1 "anyway" sources to commence construction after January 2, 2011 without considering GHG emissions as long as their permit was issued before that date. But Step 2 sources (those who become major after July 1, 2011 due solely to GHG emissions) must "begin actual construction" before 7/1/11. If they have a final permit but don't begin actual construction--which does not include the consideration of having entered into binding contracts--they will have to reopen the permit to include consideration of GHGs. See 75 FR 31527. A discussion of reasoning behind this begins on 75 FR 31593.

The rule establishes a "subject to regulation" definition for GHGs that contains the 100K and 75K tpy thresholds for CO2e. Once these thresholds are surpassed, then the source must determine major source/modification status based on the mass emissions of combined GHGs relative to the standard 100/250 tpy thresholds. In this case, the source may not be major if it has low CO2 emissions and moderate emissions of a high GWP pollutant such as N2O (because each GHG is added based on its mass only, without multiplying by its GWP).

This "subject to regulation" approach somehow facilitates adoption by SIP-approved states such that the rule becomes effective in all states at the same time.

It appears that, in Step 2, a major modification must 1) result in a net CO2e increase greater than 75k tpy and 2) occur at a facility with a CO2e PTE of >100k tpy. CONFIRM

Highwood Generating Station nears last hurdle

Forest Service NEPA Handbook

Handbook Chapters

New Transmission Siting and Permitting

Three 2009 Marten Law articles

March
Battle Over Transmission Siting: Congress Considers Federalizing Permit Process, While Fourth Circuit Upholds States’ Right to Control It

May
Sparks Fly as Agencies, Courts, States, and Congress Battle Over Who Is In Charge of Transmission Lines

December
Federal Agencies Issue MOU to Speed Siting of Electric Transmission Lines on Federal Land; Congress Still Debating Siting Legislation

NEPA & Climate Change

Two Marten Law articles:

Ninth Circuit Requires Climate Change Analysis under NEPA; 11/2007

CEQ Marks 40th Anniversary of NEPA With New Guidance on Greenhouse Gas Impacts, Mitigation and Categorical Exclusions; 2/2010

_______________________________________________
Excerpts from 2/2010 Draft guidance from the CEQ:

"NEPA demands informed, realistic governmental decision making. CEQ proposes to advise Federal agencies to consider, in scoping their NEPA analyses, whether analysis of the direct and indirect GHG emissions from their proposed actions may provide meaningful information to decision makers and the public. Specifically, if a proposed action would be reasonably anticipated to cause direct emissions of 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2-equivalent GHG emissions on an annual basis, agencies should consider this an indicator that a quantitative and qualitative assessment may be meaningful to decision makers and the public. For long-term actions that have annual direct emissions of less than 25,000 metric tons of CO2-equivalent, CEQ encourages Federal agencies to consider whether the action’s long-term emissions should receive similar analysis. CEQ does not propose this as an indicator of a threshold of significant effects, but rather as an indicator of a minimum level of GHG emissions that may warrant some description in the appropriate NEPA analysis for agency actions involving direct emissions of GHGs."

"With regards to the effects of climate change on the design of a proposed action and alternatives, Federal agencies must ensure the scientific and professional integrity of their assessment of the ways in which climate change is affecting or could affect environmental effects of the proposed action. 40 CFR 1502.24. Under this proposed guidance, agencies should use the scoping process to set reasonable spatial and temporal boundaries for this assessment and focus on aspects of climate change that may lead to changes in the impacts, sustainability, vulnerability and design of the proposed action and alternative courses of action. At the same time, agencies should recognize the scientific limits of their ability to accurately predict climate change effects, especially of a short-term nature, and not devote effort to analyzing wholly speculative effects. Agencies can use the NEPA process to reduce vulnerability to climate change impacts, adapt to changes in our environment, and mitigate the impacts of Federal agency actions that are exacerbated by climate change."

_________________________________________________

Climate Change Impacts Report; 6/2009

From the report home page:

"This web page will introduce and lead you through the content of the most comprehensive and authoritative report of its kind. The report summarizes the science and the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future. It focuses on climate change impacts in different regions of the U.S. and on various aspects of society and the economy such as energy, water, agriculture, and health."

"In addition to discussing the impacts of climate change in the U.S., the report also highlights the choices we face in response to human-induced climate change. It is clear that impacts in the United States are already occurring and are projected to increase in the future, particularly if the concentration of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continues to rise. So, choices about how we manage greenhouse gas emissions will have far-reaching consequences for climate change impacts. Similarly, there are choices to be made about adaptation strategies that can help to reduce or avoid some of the undesirable impacts of climate change. This report provides many of the scientific underpinnings for effective decisions to be made – at the national and at the regional level."

King County, WA, Climate change worksheet

"King County is the first local government in the nation to officially add greenhouse gas emissions to the environmental review of construction projects. King County's policy covers projects undergoing environmental review mandated by the SEPA and applies to the County's own developments as well as projects where the County is the lead permitting agency.

 

"GHG emissions associated with development come from multiple sources:

• The extraction, processing, transportation, construction and disposal of building materials
• Landscape disturbance
• Energy demands created by the development after it is completed 

"Transportation demands created by the development after it is completed.
King County has developed a GHG emissions worksheet that can assist applicants in answering the SEPA checklist question relating to GHG emissions. The worksheet is available as a fill-in Excel spreadsheet** or in PDF** format."

The SEPA GHG emissions worksheet estimates all GHG emissions that will be created over the life span of a building project. This includes emissions associated with obtaining construction materials, fuel used during construction, energy consumed during the buildings operation, and transportation by building occupants."

 

Dept. of Development and Environmental Services Climate Change Home Page

North Dakota Air Toxics Policy Revision

Primarily a significant increase in the unit risk factor for formaldehyde and case-specific option for use of screening model other than ISC Screen3.

Memo