Clean Air Act Requires Mandatory Action
On Global Warming, EPA Officials Say

The Clean Air Act requires mandatory action on climate change, several Environmental Protection Agency officials said April 2, but Congress has the opportunity to improve greenhouse gas regulation under the act.

Speaking at a conference on climate change policy held by the Air and Waste Management Association, Robert Brenner, director of EPA's Office of Policy Analysis and Review, said that under the Massachusetts v. EPA Supreme Court decision of April 2, 2007, greenhouse gas emissions regulation under the Clean Air Act is "no longer discretionary" (Massachusetts v. EPA, 127 S. Ct. 1438, 63 ERC 2057 (2007)).

The Clean Air Act includes a number of provisions that may require EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, Brenner said. These include provisions for new source performance standards, hazardous air pollutant emissions limits, addressing international impacts, and reducing threats to stratospheric ozone, Brenner said.

Congress will need to act if it wants to give EPA flexibility in dealing with greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources, Brenner said. Otherwise, the agency may be forced to impose regulations on large numbers of stationary sources. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved legislation (S. 2191) in 2007 to establish a nationwide emissions cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas emissions.

Brenner and other EPA officials spoke in the wake of EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson's announcement that EPA will seek public comment through an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on how to respond to the Supreme Court decision, which said that EPA must regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles or explain why it is not (60 DEN A-11, 3/28/08).

Steven Page, director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, later told reporters that EPA is currently planning to release the advance notice of proposed rulemaking in June. It will not include any proposals, he said, but it will ask for comment on various ideas for reducing emissions.

Johnson's announcement was denounced by congressional Democrats and environmental groups as a delaying tactic by an administration reluctant to comply with the Supreme Court ruling.

Johnson has said regulating vehicle emissions will have consequences that go beyond regulating vehicle emissions and will trigger new requirements for stationary sources.

'Train Wreck' Feared

Page said at the conference that regulation of greenhouse gas emissions has raised the specter of "nightmares of a train wreck" caused by imposing prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements on thousands of sources currently not subject to them. PSD requires major sources to install modern pollution controls when they make modifications that increase emissions. Because carbon dioxide is emitted in far larger amounts than other pollutants, sources such as apartment buildings and schools may fall under PSD jurisdiction.

Page told reporters later that there might be ways to soften the impact on smaller sources, such as through blanket PSD permits, efficiency standards, or delaying compliance requirements.

In addition, he said the prospect of EPA issuing national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for carbon dioxide "frightens a lot of people." Under NAAQS, nonattainment areas are required to impose pollution controls. Page said NAAQS could require new emissions controls for the whole country.

Emissions Reduction Opportunities Seen

Margo Oge, director of the Office of Transportation and Air Quality, said work her office has done "demonstrates that there are many opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector."

To "flatten" vehicle emissions by 2030, Oge said, 50 percent of cars would have to use advanced technology engines, and one-third of cars would have to be hybrids. She said improvements in air conditioning also could reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

Brian McLean, director of the Office of Atmospheric Programs, said emissions trading programs are effective, "but not the only instrument available" to address climate change.

McLean said a range of EPA programs have already resulted in emissions reductions, such as the Energy Star program to label energy-efficient appliances, and various programs to reduce methane emissions.

"We are facing one of the greatest environmental challenges of our time," Oge said. "History will judge us all on how we choose to meet the challenge."

Oge said "small timid steps" may get in the way of future policymakers and that "a grander vision" is needed to "meet the challenges we face."

By Steven D. Cook

Copyright © 2008 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Washington, DC
All Rights Reserved