James E. McCarthy Specialist in Environmental Policy
a direct result of the Environmental Protection Agency’s promulgation of an “endangerment finding”
for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in December 2009, and its subsequent promulgation
of GHG emission standards for new motor vehicles in 2010, the agency has proceeded
to control GHG emissions from new and modified stationary sources as
well. Stationary sources, including power plants, refineries,
manufacturing facilities, and others account for 69% of U.S. emissions of
greenhouse gases. If the United States is to reduce its total GHG
emissions, as President Obama has committed to do, it will be necessary to
reduce emissions from these sources.
EPA’s regulations limiting GHG emissions from new cars and light trucks
automatically triggered two Clean Air Act (CAA) provisions affecting
stationary sources of air pollution. First, since January 2, 2011, new or
modified major stationary sources must undergo New Source Review (NSR)
with respect to their GHGs in addition to any other pollutants subject to
regulation under the CAA that are emitted by the source. This review
requires affected sources to install Best Available Control Technology
(BACT) to address their GHG emissions. Second, major sources of GHGs
(existing and new) must now obtain permits under Title V of the CAA (or have
existing permits modified to include their GHG requirements).
Beyond these permitting requirements, EPA has begun the process of establishing
emission standards for large stationary sources of GHG emissions under the
act. In December 2010, EPA reached settlement agreements under which it
was required to promulgate final decisions on New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) for electric generating units (EGUs) by May 2012 and for petroleum
refineries by November 2012. These deadlines have not been met.
EPA shares congressional concerns about the potential scope of these
regulations, primarily because a literal reading of the act would have
required as many as 6 million stationary sources to obtain permits. To
avoid this result, on May 13, 2010, the agency finalized a “Tailoring Rule”
that focuses its resources on the largest emitters while deciding over a
six-year period what to do about smaller sources.
Many in Congress have suggested that EPA should delay taking action on any
stationary sources or should be prevented from doing so. There were at
least 10 bills introduced in the 112th Congress
that would have delayed or prevented EPA actions on greenhouse gas emissions.
In February 2011, the text of one bill, H.R. 153, was added to the
Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act (H.R. 1) during floor debate, on a
249-177 vote. H.R. 1 passed the House, February 19, but failed in the
Senate, March 9, 2011. On April 7, 2011, the House passed Representative
Upton’s H.R. 910, which would have repealed EPA’s endangerment finding, redefined
“air pollutants” to exclude greenhouse gases, and prohibited EPA from
promulgating any regulation to address climate change. In the Senate,
similar legislation failed to pass, April 6. Since then, EPA has taken no
final action on stationary source GHG standards, but final action on EGU
standards is expected in 2013. With that, congressional interest may be
This report discusses elements of this controversy, providing background on
stationary sources of GHG pollution and identifying options Congress has
at its disposal to address the issues, including (1) resolutions of
disapproval under the Congressional Review Act; (2) freestanding legislation;
(3) the use of appropriations bills as a vehicle to influence EPA activity; and
(4) amendments to the Clean Air Act, including legislation to establish a
new GHG control regime.
Date of Report: February 19, 2013
Number of Pages: 18 Order Number: R41212 Price: $29.95
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.