For EPA’s Global Warming Rules, Will ‘Next Year’ Mean ‘Never’?

EPA is running out of time to craft carbon-emissions standards for industrial polluters beyond power plants.

RODEO, CA - JANUARY 25: Steam rises from stacks at the Conoco-Phillips refinery on January 25, 2011 in Rodeo, California. Gas prices continue to rise and have gone up 14% or $.39 a gallon over the past year. Crude oil is currently trading at just under $90 a barrell and some analysts speculate that it could skyrocket up above $150 a barrell in the coming year. 
National Journal
Ben Geman
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Ben Geman
March 11, 2014, 12:44 p.m.

EPA’s new budget plan says the agency hopes to make crit­ic­al — and con­tro­ver­sial — de­cisions about its ef­fort to reg­u­late green­house gases by the end of fisc­al 2015.

Spe­cific­ally, the budget says the agency hopes to de­term­ine wheth­er it should craft car­bon-emis­sions stand­ards for sev­er­al big in­dus­tri­al pol­lu­tion sources — not­ably re­finer­ies, but also pulp and pa­per fa­cil­it­ies, iron and steel pro­duc­tion, and few oth­er cat­egor­ies.

But if the pledges about ex­pand­ing cli­mate rules sounds fa­mil­i­ar to EPA-watch­ers, they should: The fisc­al 2014 plan said the same thing about a de­cision on the rules, and the fact that the agency has now moved these de­cisions to its 2015 budget sug­gests that de­term­in­a­tions in 2014 are prob­ably not in the cards.

Now, with the clock wind­ing down on the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion, ex­perts say it’s un­clear wheth­er EPA will craft car­bon-emis­sions stand­ards for any big sta­tion­ary pol­lu­tion sources bey­ond power plants — or even if it has enough time or re­sources left to do so.

“As a prac­tic­al mat­ter, they would prob­ably need to get star­ted on the rule­mak­ing by the end of this year if they want to get new [green­house-gas] reg­u­la­tions in place for re­finer­ies or any oth­er in­dustry sec­tor be­fore they leave of­fice,” said Jeff Holmstead, who was the top EPA air pol­lu­tion of­fi­cial un­der Pres­id­ent George W. Bush and is now a part­ner at Bracewell & Gi­uliani.

“I’m pretty con­fid­ent they’re not work­ing on any­thing yet,” he said.

Here’s spe­cific­ally what EPA’s fisc­al year 2015 plan says about po­ten­tial rules for re­finer­ies and a small hand­ful of oth­er in­dus­tri­al cat­egor­ies: The agency in 2015 will “per­form ana­lyses and plans to make de­term­in­a­tions to ad­dress wheth­er reg­u­la­tion of GHG emis­sions from such lis­ted source cat­egor­ies is war­ran­ted as re­sources al­low, in­clud­ing con­tinu­ation of activ­it­ies in­volving the elec­tri­city gen­er­at­ing sec­tor.”

But get­ting from “plans to make de­term­in­a­tions” to ac­tu­ally reg­u­lat­ing re­quires EPA to cov­er lots of ter­rain. Craft­ing Clean Air Act rules is a slow, re­source-in­tens­ive pro­cess.

Once the agency has de­term­ined it will craft a rule, the pro­cess of writ­ing and pro­pos­ing it, tak­ing com­ment, and com­plet­ing it can take years. And for ma­jor rules, court chal­lenges al­most in­ev­it­ably fol­low.

“I would be pretty sur­prised if they try to do an­oth­er [green­house-gas] rule be­fore they leave of­fice,” said Holmstead, whose firm lob­bies on be­half of power com­pan­ies, re­finers, and oth­er in­dus­tries.

Power plants are by far the biggest sta­tion­ary source of car­bon emis­sions. Re­finer­ies rank second.

EPA has been fo­cus­ing heav­ily on craft­ing stand­ards for ex­ist­ing power plants, which the agency in­tends to pro­pose in June and com­plete a year later. The agency is also work­ing to com­plete fi­nal emis­sions stand­ards for new power plants.

If Pres­id­ent Obama is suc­ceeded by a Re­pub­lic­an, that could very well shut the door for years on car­bon-emis­sions stand­ards for in­dus­tri­al sources be­sides power plants.

Holmstead es­tim­ates that EPA would need to com­plete a fi­nal re­finery rule by Oc­to­ber 2016 to avoid hav­ing a sub­sequent ad­min­is­tra­tion with­draw it. He also notes that EPA has oth­er big-tick­et items on its plate, such as the re­view of ozone stand­ards that’s man­dated by stat­ute.

In 2010, EPA reached a set­tle­ment with a num­ber of states and en­vir­on­ment­al groups to set stand­ards for power plants and re­finer­ies. The power plant rules are pro­ceed­ing, al­beit more slowly than EPA had ini­tially pledged.

But the re­finery rules have be­come a big ques­tion mark.

“We are talk­ing to all kinds of folks about what [the power-plant rule] might mean for oth­er sta­tion­ary sources, but, frankly, this [power-plant rule] is where my fo­cus is and will be,” said EPA Ad­min­is­trat­or Gina Mc­Carthy, speak­ing to re­port­ers at an en­ergy con­fer­ence in Hou­s­ton last week.

EPA, to be sure, is do­ing more on cli­mate in Obama’s second term than the power-plant rule. For in­stance, the agency is craft­ing the next round of emis­sions stand­ards for big trucks.

But when it comes to car­bon emis­sions stand­ards for big sta­tion­ary in­dus­tri­al pol­luters, power plants are the big show — and maybe the only one.

Mi­chael Liv­er­more of the In­sti­tute for Policy In­teg­rity, an en­vir­on­ment­al group af­fil­i­ated with New York Uni­versity’s law school, said the fact that the clock is run­ning out on emis­sions stand­ards bey­ond power plants is a “con­cern.”

But what’s cru­cial, he said, is for EPA to fo­cus on cre­at­ing car­bon emis­sions stand­ards for power plants that will with­stand chal­lenges in the courts and on Cap­it­ol Hill, and he noted that the power plant rules are a high pri­or­ity for en­vir­on­ment­al­ists.

Those EPA rules are a center­piece of Pres­id­ent Obama’s cli­mate agenda.

“My guess is they see the re­finer­ies … as icing on the cake,” said Liv­er­more, who was the found­ing ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or and is now seni­or ad­viser to the in­sti­tute. “But they mostly want to make sure the cake doesn’t fall apart.”

What We're Following See More »
THE PLAN ALL ALONG?
Manchin Drops Objections, Clearing Way for Spending Deal
1 days ago
THE LATEST

"The Senate standstill over a stopgap spending bill appeared headed toward a resolution on Friday night. Senators who were holding up the measure said votes are expected later in the evening. West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin had raised objections to the continuing resolution because it did not include a full year's extension of retired coal miners' health benefits," but Manchin "said he and other coal state Democrats agreed with Senate Democratic leaders during a caucus meeting Thursday that they would not block the continuing resolution, but rather use the shutdown threat as a way to highlight the health care and pension needs of the miners."

Source:
UNCLEAR WHAT CAUSED CHANGE OF HEART
Giuliani Out of Running For State
1 days ago
BREAKING

Donald Trump transition team announced Friday afternoon that top supporter Rudy Giuliani has taken himself out of the running to be in Trump's cabinet, though CNN previously reported that it was Trump who informed the former New York City mayor that he would not be receiving a slot. While the field had seemingly been narrowed last week, it appears to be wide open once again, with ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson the current favorite.

Source:
ALSO VICE-CHAIR OF TRUMP’S TRANSITION TEAM
Trump Taps Rep. McMorris Rodgers for Interior Secretary
1 days ago
BREAKING
SHUTDOWN LOOMING
House Approves Spending Bill
2 days ago
BREAKING

The House has completed it's business for 2016 by passing a spending bill which will keep the government funded through April 28. The final vote tally was 326-96. The bill's standing in the Senate is a bit tenuous at the moment, as a trio of Democratic Senators have pledged to block the bill unless coal miners get a permanent extension on retirement and health benefits. The government runs out of money on Friday night.

HEADS TO OBAMA
Senate Approves Defense Bill
2 days ago
THE LATEST

The Senate passed the National Defense Authorization Act today, sending the $618 billion measure to President Obama. The president vetoed the defense authorization bill a year ago, but both houses could override his disapproval this time around.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login