en
Written by John Egan for Industrial Info Resources (Sugar Land, Texas)--U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt on Tuesday released a formal notification of his agency's proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan (CPP) enacted by the Obama administration to lower power-plant emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). The agency's proposed repeal of the CPP could save up to $33 billion in compliance costs in 2030, the EPA estimated.
The October 10 statement from the EPA (Washington, D.C.) makes no reference to what the agency wants to do beyond repealing the CPP. An agency official said if the EPA succeeded at repealing the rule, a replacement would be the next step.
"The Obama administration pushed the bounds of their authority so far with the CPP that the Supreme Court issued a historic stay of the rule, preventing its devastating effects to be imposed on the American people while the rule is being challenged in court," Pruitt noted. "We are committed to righting the wrongs of the Obama administration by cleaning the regulatory slate. Any replacement rule will be done carefully, properly, and with humility by listening to all those affected by the rule.
"EPA will respect the limits of statutory authority," the EPA chief continued. "The CPP ignored states' concerns and eroded long-standing and important partnerships that are a necessary part of achieving positive environmental outcomes. We can now assess whether further regulatory action is warranted; and, if so, what is the most appropriate path forward, consistent with the Clean Air Act and principles of cooperative federalism."
The EPA will send its notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to The Federal Register for publication. Interested parties will have 60 days from publication of the NOPR to file comments. The agency said its repeal package would include a summary of the cost-benefit analysis of the proposed repeal and an in-depth cost-benefit technical analysis of its proposal.
In comments at an event Monday, Pruitt reportedly said: "The war on coal is over. The Clean Power Plan wasn't about regulating to make things regular. It was truly about regulating to pick winners and losers." He added that no administration should ever use its power to "declare war on any sector of our economy. It's Congress that passes legislation that gives us direction, that gives us our orders as far as how we administer the statute. The last administration simply made it up."
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) joined Pruitt at Monday's event. News reports quoted the Senate leader as saying: "The past administration was unapologetic. They were using every bit of power [and] authority to use the EPA to pick winners and losers on how we generate electricity in this country. That is wrong." The event was held at a mining and construction-equipment business in eastern Kentucky, a state hard-hit by the declining use of coal.
McConnell was also quoted as saying the following about the CPP: "A lot of damage has been done. This (rollback) doesn't immediately bring everything back, but we think it stops further decline of coal-fired plants in the United States, and that means there will still be some market here."
As finalized, the CPP was designed to reduce CO2 emissions from power plants by 32% by 2030 compared with the 2005 baseline. The rule has been a political flashpoint since a draft was released in mid-2014. Finalized in the summer of 2015, the rule was stayed in early 2016 by the U.S. Supreme Court, which remanded it to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. That court held a full day of oral arguments on the rule in September 2016, after which it gave the EPA time to propose changes to or a repeal of the rule. For more on the CPP, see Industrial Info's August 5, 2015, article - Obama Unveils Final Clean Power Plan, But Will it Survive Court Challenge?; February 16, 2016, article - Unprecedented Stay by Supreme Court Casts Long Shadow Over Clean Power Plan; and March 29, 2017, article - Trump Begins Process of Undoing Obama's Climate Change Measures.
Both as a presidential candidate and as president, Donald Trump has been sharply critical of the CPP, alleging it kills jobs and unfairly constrains U.S. energy firms. And while coal-mining companies have welcomed the administration's targeting of the rule, the president's stance has not convinced coal-burning utilities to resume their longtime reliance on coal in their long-term generation plans. For more on that, see Industrial Info's April 20, 2017, article - Trump, Utilities Disagree Over the Future of Coal-Fired Generation.
The road ahead is murky and fraught with uncertainties for the Trump administration. The Administrative Procedures Act requires that the revocation or significant revision of a finalized rule by an executive-level agency must go through the same process that was used to enact it. Thus to repeal the CPP, the EPA will be required to publicly detail its reasoning, including the science that supports its decision; circulate its findings for public comment; respond to public comments; and then finalize it. It is unclear how long it could take to repeal the CPP. Legal challenges would extend the timeline to repealing the rule.
The EPA statement was silent on whether the agency intended to attack the legal basis of the EPA's ability to regulate power-plant CO2 emissions. In a 2007 ruling, Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court found that greenhouse-gas emissions were a pollutant that could be regulated by the EPA under the Clean Air Act. The court also required the agency to determine if CO2 contributed to air pollution and could or did threaten public health. Subsequently, the EPA concluded it did, issuing its so-called "endangerment" finding in 2009.
What to do about the endangerment finding is said to have split the administration and the industries that would be affected by any such attack.
The EPA's announcement drew a predictable full-throated roar from opponents and supporters of the CPP.
Hal Quinn, president and chief executive of the National Mining Association (NMA) (Washington, D.C.), said the move was a "decisive break with past policies that have used regulation of doubtful legality to circumvent the will of Congress, usurp states' authority and raise costs on American consumers.
"Repealing this Obama-era rule would close a chapter of regulatory overreach that set standards without regard to the steep costs or availability of technology necessary to meet them," Quinn continued. "The Clean Power Plan represented an unlawful attempt to transform the nation's power grid. It would have destroyed additional baseload power assets, leaving our economy more vulnerable to reliability concerns and higher costs with trivial environmental benefits."
The NMA chief said repealing the CPP would "spare further loss of high-wage employment" among coal miners and save an estimated 240 million tons of annual coal production. Repealing the rule would protect over 27,000 mining jobs and almost 100,000 additional jobs throughout the coal supply chain."
Quin Shea, vice president, environment, for the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) (Washington, D.C.), issued the following statement: "As EPA moves to repeal the Clean Power Plan, we also encourage the agency to move forward with a replacement rule that provides states with compliance flexibility, and that allows the electric power industry to continue its fleet transition. As of 2016, the industry's carbon-dioxide emissions have been reduced 25% from 2005 levels, and this trajectory is expected to continue over the long term. Electric companies are focused on ensuring that they can continue to provide reliable, affordable and increasingly clean energy for all customers, and we look forward to working with EPA, states and other stakeholders throughout this process."
Environmental organizations, public-health advocates and state attorneys general have been critical of efforts to repeal or revise the CPP.
In remarks reported by The Hill newspaper, Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund (New York, New York), said: "If administrator Pruitt plans to repeal the Clean Power Plan, it would be a complete abdication of EPA's legal responsibility to protect our children's lungs from dangerous smokestack pollution and their homes from climate-destabilizing extreme weather."
Numerous state attorneys general also vowed to contest efforts to repeal the rule. In a Monday statement, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said: "The Trump administration's persistent and indefensible denial of climate change--and their continued assault on actions essential to stemming its increasing devastation-- is reprehensible, and I will use every available legal tool to fight their dangerous agenda."
Public health groups also have criticized efforts to undo the CPP. In a September 2016 statement, as the D.C. Circuit court was set to hear oral arguments on the rule, American Lung Association national president and CEO Harold P. Wimmer said: "Cutting carbon pollution from power plants will help limit the health impacts of climate change, including asthma attacks and premature deaths as a result of worsened ozone pollution from heat and increased particle pollution from droughts and wildfires. The (CPP) is projected to prevent up to 3,600 premature deaths, 90,000 asthma attacks and 300,000 missed work and school days per year by 2030."
Industrial Info Resources (IIR), with global headquarters in Sugar Land, Texas, six offices in North America and 12 international offices, is the leading provider of global market intelligence specializing in the industrial process, heavy manufacturing and energy markets. Industrial Info's quality-assurance philosophy, the Living Forward Reporting Principle TM, provides up-to-the-minute intelligence on what's happening now, while constantly keeping track of future opportunities. Follow IIR on: Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn. For more information on our coverage, send inquiries to info@industrialinfo.com or visit us online at http://www.industrialinfo.com.
The October 10 statement from the EPA (Washington, D.C.) makes no reference to what the agency wants to do beyond repealing the CPP. An agency official said if the EPA succeeded at repealing the rule, a replacement would be the next step.
"The Obama administration pushed the bounds of their authority so far with the CPP that the Supreme Court issued a historic stay of the rule, preventing its devastating effects to be imposed on the American people while the rule is being challenged in court," Pruitt noted. "We are committed to righting the wrongs of the Obama administration by cleaning the regulatory slate. Any replacement rule will be done carefully, properly, and with humility by listening to all those affected by the rule.
"EPA will respect the limits of statutory authority," the EPA chief continued. "The CPP ignored states' concerns and eroded long-standing and important partnerships that are a necessary part of achieving positive environmental outcomes. We can now assess whether further regulatory action is warranted; and, if so, what is the most appropriate path forward, consistent with the Clean Air Act and principles of cooperative federalism."
The EPA will send its notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to The Federal Register for publication. Interested parties will have 60 days from publication of the NOPR to file comments. The agency said its repeal package would include a summary of the cost-benefit analysis of the proposed repeal and an in-depth cost-benefit technical analysis of its proposal.
In comments at an event Monday, Pruitt reportedly said: "The war on coal is over. The Clean Power Plan wasn't about regulating to make things regular. It was truly about regulating to pick winners and losers." He added that no administration should ever use its power to "declare war on any sector of our economy. It's Congress that passes legislation that gives us direction, that gives us our orders as far as how we administer the statute. The last administration simply made it up."
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) joined Pruitt at Monday's event. News reports quoted the Senate leader as saying: "The past administration was unapologetic. They were using every bit of power [and] authority to use the EPA to pick winners and losers on how we generate electricity in this country. That is wrong." The event was held at a mining and construction-equipment business in eastern Kentucky, a state hard-hit by the declining use of coal.
McConnell was also quoted as saying the following about the CPP: "A lot of damage has been done. This (rollback) doesn't immediately bring everything back, but we think it stops further decline of coal-fired plants in the United States, and that means there will still be some market here."
As finalized, the CPP was designed to reduce CO2 emissions from power plants by 32% by 2030 compared with the 2005 baseline. The rule has been a political flashpoint since a draft was released in mid-2014. Finalized in the summer of 2015, the rule was stayed in early 2016 by the U.S. Supreme Court, which remanded it to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. That court held a full day of oral arguments on the rule in September 2016, after which it gave the EPA time to propose changes to or a repeal of the rule. For more on the CPP, see Industrial Info's August 5, 2015, article - Obama Unveils Final Clean Power Plan, But Will it Survive Court Challenge?; February 16, 2016, article - Unprecedented Stay by Supreme Court Casts Long Shadow Over Clean Power Plan; and March 29, 2017, article - Trump Begins Process of Undoing Obama's Climate Change Measures.
Both as a presidential candidate and as president, Donald Trump has been sharply critical of the CPP, alleging it kills jobs and unfairly constrains U.S. energy firms. And while coal-mining companies have welcomed the administration's targeting of the rule, the president's stance has not convinced coal-burning utilities to resume their longtime reliance on coal in their long-term generation plans. For more on that, see Industrial Info's April 20, 2017, article - Trump, Utilities Disagree Over the Future of Coal-Fired Generation.
The road ahead is murky and fraught with uncertainties for the Trump administration. The Administrative Procedures Act requires that the revocation or significant revision of a finalized rule by an executive-level agency must go through the same process that was used to enact it. Thus to repeal the CPP, the EPA will be required to publicly detail its reasoning, including the science that supports its decision; circulate its findings for public comment; respond to public comments; and then finalize it. It is unclear how long it could take to repeal the CPP. Legal challenges would extend the timeline to repealing the rule.
The EPA statement was silent on whether the agency intended to attack the legal basis of the EPA's ability to regulate power-plant CO2 emissions. In a 2007 ruling, Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court found that greenhouse-gas emissions were a pollutant that could be regulated by the EPA under the Clean Air Act. The court also required the agency to determine if CO2 contributed to air pollution and could or did threaten public health. Subsequently, the EPA concluded it did, issuing its so-called "endangerment" finding in 2009.
What to do about the endangerment finding is said to have split the administration and the industries that would be affected by any such attack.
The EPA's announcement drew a predictable full-throated roar from opponents and supporters of the CPP.
Hal Quinn, president and chief executive of the National Mining Association (NMA) (Washington, D.C.), said the move was a "decisive break with past policies that have used regulation of doubtful legality to circumvent the will of Congress, usurp states' authority and raise costs on American consumers.
"Repealing this Obama-era rule would close a chapter of regulatory overreach that set standards without regard to the steep costs or availability of technology necessary to meet them," Quinn continued. "The Clean Power Plan represented an unlawful attempt to transform the nation's power grid. It would have destroyed additional baseload power assets, leaving our economy more vulnerable to reliability concerns and higher costs with trivial environmental benefits."
The NMA chief said repealing the CPP would "spare further loss of high-wage employment" among coal miners and save an estimated 240 million tons of annual coal production. Repealing the rule would protect over 27,000 mining jobs and almost 100,000 additional jobs throughout the coal supply chain."
Quin Shea, vice president, environment, for the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) (Washington, D.C.), issued the following statement: "As EPA moves to repeal the Clean Power Plan, we also encourage the agency to move forward with a replacement rule that provides states with compliance flexibility, and that allows the electric power industry to continue its fleet transition. As of 2016, the industry's carbon-dioxide emissions have been reduced 25% from 2005 levels, and this trajectory is expected to continue over the long term. Electric companies are focused on ensuring that they can continue to provide reliable, affordable and increasingly clean energy for all customers, and we look forward to working with EPA, states and other stakeholders throughout this process."
Environmental organizations, public-health advocates and state attorneys general have been critical of efforts to repeal or revise the CPP.
In remarks reported by The Hill newspaper, Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund (New York, New York), said: "If administrator Pruitt plans to repeal the Clean Power Plan, it would be a complete abdication of EPA's legal responsibility to protect our children's lungs from dangerous smokestack pollution and their homes from climate-destabilizing extreme weather."
Numerous state attorneys general also vowed to contest efforts to repeal the rule. In a Monday statement, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said: "The Trump administration's persistent and indefensible denial of climate change--and their continued assault on actions essential to stemming its increasing devastation-- is reprehensible, and I will use every available legal tool to fight their dangerous agenda."
Public health groups also have criticized efforts to undo the CPP. In a September 2016 statement, as the D.C. Circuit court was set to hear oral arguments on the rule, American Lung Association national president and CEO Harold P. Wimmer said: "Cutting carbon pollution from power plants will help limit the health impacts of climate change, including asthma attacks and premature deaths as a result of worsened ozone pollution from heat and increased particle pollution from droughts and wildfires. The (CPP) is projected to prevent up to 3,600 premature deaths, 90,000 asthma attacks and 300,000 missed work and school days per year by 2030."
Industrial Info Resources (IIR), with global headquarters in Sugar Land, Texas, six offices in North America and 12 international offices, is the leading provider of global market intelligence specializing in the industrial process, heavy manufacturing and energy markets. Industrial Info's quality-assurance philosophy, the Living Forward Reporting Principle TM, provides up-to-the-minute intelligence on what's happening now, while constantly keeping track of future opportunities. Follow IIR on: Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn. For more information on our coverage, send inquiries to info@industrialinfo.com or visit us online at http://www.industrialinfo.com.
