Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "McCarthy, James E." in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Clean Air Act: A Summary of the Act and Its Major Requirements [Updated January 19, 2022]
From the Summary: "This report summarizes the Clean Air Act and its major regulatory requirements. The principal statute addressing air quality concerns, the Clean Air Act was first enacted in 1955, with major revisions in 1970, 1977, and 1990. The act [1] requires EPA to set health-based standards for ambient air quality; [2] sets deadlines for the achievement of those standards by state and local governments; [3] requires EPA to set national emission standards for large or ubiquitous sources of air pollution, including motor vehicles, power plants, and other industrial sources; [4] mandates emission controls for sources of 187 hazardous air pollutants; [5] establishes a cap-and-trade program to limit acid rain; [6] requires the prevention of significant deterioration of air quality in areas with clean air; [7] requires a program to restore visibility impaired by regional haze in national parks and wilderness areas; and [8] implements the Montreal Protocol to phase out most ozone-depleting chemicals. This report describes the act's major provisions and provides tables listing all major amendments, with the year of enactment and Public Law number, and cross-referencing sections of the act with the major U.S. Code sections of the codified statute."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shouse, Kate C.; Lattanzio, Richard K.; McCarthy, James E. . . .
2022-01-19
-
Clean Air Act: A Summary of the Act and Its Major Requirements [Updated February 25, 2020]
From the Summary: "This report summarizes the Clean Air Act and its major regulatory requirements. The principal statute addressing air quality concerns, the Clean Air Act was first enacted in 1955, with major revisions in 1970, 1977, and 1990. [...] This report describes the act's major provisions and provides tables listing all major amendments, with the year of enactment and Public Law number, and cross-referencing sections of the act with the major U.S. Code sections of the codified statute."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shouse, Kate C.; Lattanzio, Richard K.; McCarthy, James E. . . .
2020-02-25
-
Clean Air Act Issues in the 116th Congress [Updated April 18, 2019]
From the Introduction: "Review of Clean Air Act regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, has been a major focus of the Trump Administration since it took office in 2017. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has conducted these reviews as part of the Trump Administration's 'regulatory reform' initiative under which the Administration has directed federal agencies to evaluate existing regulations and identify those that should be considered for replacement, repeal, or modification. In addition, Executive Order (E.O.) 13783 has directed EPA and other federal agencies to review existing regulations and policies that 'potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources' for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to 'suspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.' EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector have been of particular interest."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Shouse, Kate C.; Lattannzio, Richard K.
2019-04-18
-
Clean Air Act Issues in the 116th Congress [January 3, 2019]
"Review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, was the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in the 115th Congress and in the executive and judicial branches in 2017 and 2018. This will likely continue in the 116th Congress--although with a different emphasis, given the new majority in the House. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector have been of particular interest."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Shouse, Kate C.; Lattanzio, Richard K.
2019-01-03
-
Implementing EPA's 2015 Ozone Air Quality Standards [August 16, 2018]
"Implementation of revised ozone standards by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is now moving forward, after the agency designated 52 areas with just over 200 counties or partial counties and two tribal areas as 'nonattainment' for the standards. The standards-- formally known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone-- are standards for outdoor (ambient) air. In 2015, EPA tightened both the primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) standards from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb after concluding that protecting public health and welfare requires lower concentrations of ozone than were previously judged to be safe. Ozone aggravates heart and lung diseases and may contribute to premature death; the primary standard addresses these concerns. Ozone can also have negative effects on forests and crop yields, which the secondary NAAQS is intended to protect."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Shouse, Kate C.
2018-08-16
-
Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief [August 13, 2018]
"Review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal,has been the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in the 115th Congress and in the executive and judicial branches in 2017 and 2018. Of particular interest are the ambient air quality standards for ozone promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 2015; EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector; and emission standards for three groups of sources: brick kilns, wood stoves and heaters, and power plants that burn waste coal."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2018-08-13
-
Implementing EPA's 2015 Ozone Air Quality Standards [April 17, 2018]
"Implementation of revised ozone standards by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in limbo. EPA finalized the revised standards--formally known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone--in October 2015. Under a statutory deadline, the agency was to have identified areas that exceed the standards by October 1, 2017. The agency did not do so. Missing such a deadline is not unusual: EPA has frequently missed such deadlines under both Republican and Democratic Administrations. But the agency has displayed a notable degree of uncertainty as it has delayed implementation of the 2015 standards over the past year. In April 2017, EPA announced that it would reconsider the standards but gave no schedule for doing so. In June, it announced that it would delay the designation of nonattainment areas for a year, only to reverse course two months later. In November, EPA released a list of 2,646 counties that it was designating as 'attainment/unclassifiable,' but it took no action regarding 493 counties that include those most likely to be in nonattainment of the standards. Most recently, a court has imposed an April 2018 deadline for completing the designation process."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Shouse, Kate C.
2018-04-17
-
Reconsidering the Clean Power Plan [October 25, 2017]
"On October 10, 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed to repeal the Clean Power Plan (CPP), an Obama Administration rule that would limit carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from existing fossil-fuel-fired power plants. Because power plant CO2 emissions account for about 30% of total U.S. anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), the CPP has been seen as the most important U.S. regulation addressing climate change. [...] Members of Congress may have an interest--for legislative and oversight purposes, as potential commenters, and in responding to constituents--in understanding what it is that EPA has proposed to do with regard to the CPP. This report provides background on the CPP and its proposed repeal, describes the administrative steps that are required to repeal or amend a rule, and discusses how the CPP and its proposed repeal fit into the context of recent and projected power sector evolution."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2017-10-25
-
Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief [August 16, 2017]
"Congressional actions on air quality issues have been dominated since 2011 by efforts-- particularly in the House--to change the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) authority to promulgate or implement new emission control requirements. Often under court order, the Obama Administration's EPA used authorities Congress gave EPA in the Clean Air Act amendments of 1970, 1977, and 1990 to address long-standing issues posed by emissions from various sources. EPA's regulations on greenhouse gas emissions from electric power plants and from oil and gas industry sources have been of particular interest, as have the agency's efforts to revise ambient air quality standards for ozone. The 115th Congress, and a new Administration that includes frequent critics of EPA regulations, have begun to review a number of these regulations, with the possibility of their modification or repeal."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2017-08-16
-
EPA's 2015 Ozone Air Quality Standards [August 15, 2017]
"On October 1, 2015, under the authority of Sections 108 and 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone from the then-current level of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb. The revision of the standards has set in motion a process in which states and EPA identify areas that do not meet the standards ('nonattainment areas') and the states prepare implementation plans to demonstrate how emissions will be lowered sufficiently to reach attainment in those areas. Using monitoring data and recommendations submitted by the states, the Obama Administration's EPA said it expected to designate nonattainment areas for the revised ozone NAAQS by October 2017. On June 28, 2017, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt published a Federal Register notice delaying the designations until October 2018, but the notice was withdrawn on August 2, effectively reinstating the October 2017 deadline."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Lattanzio, Richard K.
2017-08-15
-
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track? [December 30, 2016]
"[Since] 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations to implement the pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. [...] Some, both within Congress and outside of it, have accused the agency of reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts and overestimating the benefits of proposed and promulgated rules. [...] Environmental groups and other supporters of the agency disagree that EPA has overreached. Many of them believe that the agency has, in fact, moved in the right direction, including taking action on significant issues that had been long delayed or ignored in the past. [...] EPA has stated that critics' focus on the cost of controls obscured the benefits of new regulations, which, it estimates, far exceed the costs. [...] This report provides background information on EPA regulatory activity during the Obama Administration to help address these issues. It examines major or controversial regulatory actions taken by or under development at EPA from January 2009 to late 2016, providing details on the regulatory action itself, presenting an estimated timeline for completion of rules not yet promulgated [...] [and] providing EPA's estimates of costs and benefits, where available. The report also discusses factors that affect the time frame in which regulations take effect, including statutory and judicial deadlines, public comment periods, judicial review, and permitting procedures, the net results of which are that existing facilities are likely to have several years before being required to comply with most of the regulatory actions under discussion."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Copeland, Claudia
2016-12-30
-
Clean Air Issues in the 114th Congress [September 21, 2016]
"Oversight of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory actions has received significant attention in the 114th Congress. Of particular interest have been two air quality issues: EPA's Clean Power Plan (CPP) and related rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, which were promulgated on August 3, 2015; and a revision of the ambient air quality standard for ozone, which was promulgated on October 1, 2015. Reducing GHG emissions to address climate change is a major goal of President Obama, but many in Congress have been less enthusiastic about it. In the absence of congressional action to reduce emissions, the President has directed EPA to promulgate GHG standards using existing authority under the Clean Air Act. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress. [...] Besides addressing climate change, EPA has taken action on a number of other air pollution regulations affecting power plants and other sources, often in response to court actions remanding previous rules or setting deadlines for actions that are non-discretionary under the Clean Air Act. Remanded rules included the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and Clean Air Mercury Rule--rules designed to control the long-range transport of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury from power plants through cap-and-trade programs."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2016-09-21
-
EPA's Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants: Frequently Asked Questions [June 15, 2016]
"[…] In June 2013, the President released a Climate Action Plan and directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to propose standards for 'carbon pollution' (i.e., carbon dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas (GHG)) from existing power plants by June 2014 and to finalize the standards a year later. EPA proposed the standards on June 2, 2014, and finalized them on August 3, 2015. The rule, known as the Clean Power Plan, sets individual state targets for average emissions from existing power plants--interim targets for the period 2022-2029 and final targets to be met by 2030. The rule set a deadline of September 6, 2016, for states to submit implementation plans to EPA detailing how they will meet these targets. However, the rule is the subject of ongoing litigation in which a number of states and other entities have challenged the rule, while other states and entities have intervened in support of the rule. On February 9, 2016, the Supreme Court stayed the rule for the duration of the litigation. The rule therefore currently lacks enforceability or legal effect, and if the rule is ultimately upheld, at least some of the deadlines would have to be delayed. This report summarizes the Clean Power Plan rule as it was finalized on August 3, 2015, before discussing how the ongoing litigation may potentially impact the rule and its deadlines."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Ramseur, Jonathan L.; Leggett, Jane A. . . .
2016-06-15
-
EPA's Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants: Frequently Asked Questions [May 19, 2016]
"This report summarizes the Clean Power Plan rule as it was finalized on August 3, 2015, before discussing how the ongoing litigation may potentially impact the rule and its deadlines." The report continues with the addressing several key questions that range from reduction in emissions to compliance strategies. Finally, "This report describes how EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] answered these and other questions. In addition to discussing details of the rule, the report addresses EPA's authority under Section 111 of the CAA [Clean Air Act], EPA's previous experience using that authority, and other background questions. The report discusses the ongoing litigation, including the stay granted by the Supreme Court. It also discusses challenges to the rule under the Congressional Review Act and other options that Congress has to influence EPA's action."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Dolan, Alissa M.; Wyatt, Alexandra M.; Leggett, Jane A. . . .
2016-05-23
-
EPA's Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants: Frequently Asked Questions [April 5, 2016]
"Taking action to address climate change by reducing U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) is among President Obama's major goals. At an international conference in Copenhagen in 2009, he committed the United States to reducing emissions of GHGs 17% by 2020, as compared to 2005 levels. At the time, 85 other nations also committed to reductions. In November 2014, the President set a further goal: a 26% to 28% reduction from 2005 levels to be achieved by 2025--jointly announced with China's Xi Jinping, who set a goal for China's emissions to peak by 2030. Since U.S. GHG emissions peaked in 2007, a variety of factors--some economic, some the effect of government policies at all levels--have brought the United States more than halfway to reaching the 2020 goal. […] The rule relies on authority asserted by EPA in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). This section has been infrequently used and never interpreted by the courts, so a number of questions have arisen regarding the extent of EPA's authority and the mechanisms of implementation. The rule sets emission rate goals for each state based on its unique circumstances. The goal for each state was derived from a formula based on three 'building blocks'--broad categories that describe different reduction measures; in general, however, the policies to be adopted to reach these goals would be determined by the states, not EPA. Each state can reach its goal however it chooses, without needing to 'comply' with the assumptions in its building blocks."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Ramseur, Jonathan L.; Leggett, Jane A. . . .
2016-04-05
-
Cars, Trucks, and Climate: EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases from Mobile Sources [March 16, 2016]
"On July 13, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed a second round of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and fuel economy standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The standards, which will affect trucks beginning with the 2021 model year, are expected to be finalized in July 2016. The standards will be the fourth set of GHG emission standards for mobile sources. Under standards promulgated in October 2012, GHG emissions from new cars and light trucks (i.e., SUVs, minivans, and most pickup trucks) will be phased in, beginning with model year (MY) 2017. When fully phased in (2025), emissions will be reduced about 50% compared to 2010, and average fuel economy (CAFE) standards will rise to nearly 50 miles per gallon. EPA had previously set GHG emission standards for MY2012-2016 cars and light trucks and for MY2014-MY2018 medium- and heavy-duty trucks. These steps have been taken as the Congress (particularly the House) and the Administration have reached an impasse over climate issues. The Administration has made clear that its preference would be for Congress to address the climate issue through new legislation. Nevertheless, in the wake of a 2007 Supreme Court decision, it has moved forward on several fronts to define how the Clean Air Act (CAA) will be used, and to promulgate regulations. The key to using the CAA's authority to control greenhouse gases was for the EPA Administrator to find that GHG emissions are air pollutants that endanger public health or welfare."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Yacobucci, Brent D.
2016-03-16
-
EPA's Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants: Frequently Asked Questions [JMarch 9, 2016]
"Taking action to address climate change by reducing U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) is among President Obama's major goals. At an international conference in Copenhagen in 2009, he committed the United States to reducing emissions of GHGs 17% by 2020, as compared to 2005 levels. At the time, 85 other nations also committed to reductions. In November 2014, the President set a further goal: a 26% to 28% reduction from 2005 levels to be achieved by 2025--jointly announced with China's Xi Jinping, who set a goal for China's emissions to peak by 2030. Since U.S. GHG emissions peaked in 2007, a variety of factors--some economic, some the effect of government policies at all levels--have brought the United States more than halfway to reaching the 2020 goal. Getting the rest of the way and reducing emissions further by 2025 would likely depend, to some degree, on continued GHG emission reductions from electric power plants, which are the largest source of U.S. emissions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Ramseur, Jonathan L.; Leggett, Jane A. . . .
2016-03-09
-
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track? [February 9, 2016]
"Since Barack Obama was sworn in as President in 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations to implement the pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. Critics have reacted strongly. Many, both within Congress and outside of it, have accused the agency of reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts of proposed and promulgated rules. The House conducted vigorous oversight of the agency in the 112th and 113th Congresses, and approved several bills that would overturn specific regulations or limit the agency's authority. Particular attention has been paid to the Clean Air Act, but there has also been congressional scrutiny on other environmental statutes and regulations implemented by EPA. With Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, the 114th Congress has accelerated oversight of the Administration's initiatives and renewed efforts to rein in EPA. […] This report provides background information on EPA regulatory activity during the Obama Administration to help address these issues. It examines major or controversial regulatory actions taken by or under development at EPA since January 2009, providing details on the regulatory action itself, presenting an estimated timeline for completion of rules not yet promulgated (including identification of related court or statutory deadlines), and, in general, providing EPA's estimates of costs and benefits, where available. The report includes tables showing which rules remain under development, and an Appendix describing major or controversial rules finalized since 2009."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Copeland, Claudia
2016-02-09
-
Ozone Air Quality Standards: EPA's 2015 Revision [January 25, 2016]
From the Summary: "On October 1, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. The rule sets more stringent standards, lowering both the primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) standards from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb. This report discusses the standard-setting process, the specifics of the most recent reviews, and issues raised by the final rulemaking."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Lattanzio, Richard K.
2016-01-25
-
EPA's Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants: Frequently Asked Questions [January 13, 2016]
"Taking action to address climate change by reducing U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) is among President Obama's major goals. [...] In June 2013, the President released a Climate Action Plan and directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to propose standards for 'carbon pollution' (i.e., carbon dioxide, the principal GHG) from existing power plants by June 2014 and to finalize the standards a year later. EPA proposed the standards on June 2, 2014, and finalized them on August 3, 2015. The rule, known as the Clean Power Plan, sets individual state targets for average emissions from existing power plants-interim targets for the period 2022-2029 and final targets to be met by 2030. [...] This report summarizes the final rule and describes how EPA answered these and other questions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Ramseur, Jonathan L.; Leggett, Jane A. . . .
2016-01-13
-
EPA's New Ozone Standards: A Few Thoughts [September 29, 2015]
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is under a court order to finalize its review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone by October 1, 2015. After several years of analysis, compiling information from more than 1,000 studies on health effects, exposure, and environmental impacts, EPA proposed more stringent standards last November. This began a public comment period, leading toward the final decision. The proposal brought forth a familiar set of arguments. On one side, public health advocates stated that the proposal, which would lower both the primary and secondary standard from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to somewhere in the range of 65 to 70 ppb, wasn't strong enough. On the other side, potentially affected industries argued that meeting standards in the range EPA proposed would devastate the economy."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2015-09-29
-
EPA's Clean Power Plan: Highlights of the Final Rule [August 14, 2015]
"On August 3, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a prepublication version of the final rule known as the Clean Power Plan (CPP). The CPP final rule requires states to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions or emission rates--measured in pounds of CO2 emissions per megawatt-hour of electricity generation--from existing fossil fuel electricity generating units. EPA estimates that in 2030, the CPP will result in CO2 emission levels from the electric power sector that are 32% below 2005 levels. This report provides an initial analysis of EPA's final rule. The 2015 final rule is substantially different from the rule EPA proposed on June 18, 2014. For example, a major change in EPA's final rule is EPA's establishment of uniform national CO2 emission performance rates for each of the two subcategories of electricity generating units--fossil-fuel-fired electric steam generating units (whether coal, oil, or natural gas) and stationary combustion turbines (natural gas combined cycle)--affected by the rule. These standards are the underpinnings for the state-specific emission rate and mass-based targets."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Ramseur, Jonathan L.; McCarthy, James E.
2015-08-14
-
Transportation Conformity Under the Clean Air Act [May 21, 2015]
"Under the Clean Air Act, areas that have not attained one or more of the six National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAAQS] (currently more than 100 areas with a combined population of 143 million) must develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs) providing for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. The act requires that, in these areas, federal agencies not engage in, approve, permit, or provide financial support for activities that do not 'conform' to the area's SIP. Although a wide range of federal funding and programs is subject to conformity, it is transportation planning (and ultimately highway funding) that is most commonly affected. Before a new transportation plan or transportation improvement program (TIP) can be approved by the Federal Highway Administration or Federal Transit Administration or a new non-exempt project can receive federal funding in a nonattainment area, a regional emissions analysis must generally demonstrate that the projected emissions from the entire transportation system, including the new projects, are consistent with the emissions ceilings established in the SIP. While some express concern at the potential impact of these conformity determinations in delaying or altering new highway projects, others note that the process simply obligates the federal government to support rather than undermine the legally adopted state plans for achieving air quality. […] This report explains the statutory conformity requirements, reviews the recent history of their implementation, and examines how conformity requirements might affect areas designated nonattainment for a revised ozone air quality standard."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2015-05-21
-
Clean Air Issues in the 114th Congress: An Overview [May 12, 2015]
"Oversight of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory actions has received significant attention in the early weeks of the 114th Congress. Of particular interest are two air quality issues: EPA's proposed regulations on the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from power plants, and a proposed revision of the ambient air quality standard for ozone. Reducing GHG emissions to address climate change is a major goal of President Obama, but many in Congress have been less enthusiastic about it. In the absence of congressional action to reduce emissions, the President has directed EPA to promulgate GHG standards using existing authority under the Clean Air Act. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress. In 2014, EPA proposed regulations to reduce GHG emissions from fossil-fueled (coal, oil, and natural gas) power plants, which EPA refers to as electric generating units (EGUs). The agency proposed standards for new EGUs in January 2014 and for existing units five months later. It expects to finalize these rules in mid-summer 2015. EGUs are the source of one-third of the nation's GHG emissions, so it is difficult to envision a regulatory scheme that reduces the nation's GHG emissions without addressing their contribution. At the same time, affordable and reliable electric power is central to the nation's economy and to the health and well-being of the population."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2015-05-12
-
EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases: Congressional Responses and Options [February 5, 2015]
"Because of the importance of electric power to the economy and its significance as a source of GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions, the EPA standards have generated substantial interest. The economy and the health, safety, and well-being of the nation are affected by the availability of a reliable and affordable power supply. Many contend that that supply would be adversely impacted by controls on GHG emissions. At the same time, an overwhelming scientific consensus has formed around the need to slow long-term global climate change. The United States is the second largest emitter of greenhouse gases, behind only China, and power plants are the source of about one-third of the nation's anthropogenic GHG emissions. If the United States is to reduce its total GHG emissions, as the President has committed to do, it will be important to reduce emissions from these sources. Leaders of both the House and Senate in the 114th Congress have stated their opposition to the proposed standards, so Congress is likely to consider legislation to prevent EPA from finalizing or implementing the proposed rules. Such legislation could take one of several forms: (1) a resolution (or resolutions) of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act; (2) freestanding legislation; (3) the use of appropriations bills as a vehicle to influence EPA activity; or (4) amendments to the Clean Air Act. […] This report discusses elements of the GHG controversy, providing background on stationary sources of GHG emissions and providing information regarding the options Congress has at its disposal to address GHG issues."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2015-02-05
-
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track? [January 8, 2015]
"Since Barack Obama was sworn in as President in 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations implementing the pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. Critics have reacted strongly. Many, both within Congress and outside of it, have accused the agency of reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts of proposed and promulgated rules. The House conducted vigorous oversight of the agency in the 112th and 113th Congresses, and approved several bills that would overturn specific regulations or limit the agency's authority. Particular attention has been paid to the Clean Air Act, but there has also been congressional scrutiny on other environmental statutes and regulations implemented by EPA. With Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, the 114th Congress is expected to accelerate oversight activities of the Administration's initiatives and renew efforts to rein in EPA. Environmental groups and other supporters of the agency disagree that EPA has overreached. Many of them believe that the agency is, in fact, moving in the right direction, including taking action on significant issues that had been long delayed or ignored in the past. In several cases, environmental advocates would like the regulatory actions to be stronger. EPA states that critics' focus on the cost of controls obscures the benefits of new regulations, which, it estimates, far exceed the costs. It maintains that pollution control is an important source of economic activity, exports, and American jobs, as well. Further, the agency and its supporters say that EPA is carrying out the mandates detailed by Congress in the federal environmental statutes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Copeland, Claudia
2015-01-08
-
Clean Air Issues in the 113th Congress: An Overview [January 6, 2015]
"Oversight of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory actions was the main focus of interest as the 113th Congress considered air quality issues. Of particular interest were EPA's proposed regulations on the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from power plants. Reducing GHG emissions to address climate change is a major goal of President Obama, but Congress has been less enthusiastic about it. In the absence of congressional action, the President has directed EPA to promulgate GHG standards using existing authority under the Clean Air Act. This authority has been upheld on at least three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress. EPA's most recent GHG actions have involved fossil-fueled (coal, oil, and natural gas) power plants, which EPA refers to as electric generating units (EGUs). On June 18, 2014, the agency proposed GHG emission standards for existing EGUs. These plants are the source of one-third of the nation's GHG emissions, so it is difficult to envision a regulatory scheme that reduces the nation's GHG emissions without addressing their contribution. At the same time, affordable and reliable electric power is central to the nation's economy and to the health and well-being of the population. Thus, the effects of the proposed rule on the electric power system are of considerable interest. Even before proposal of the existing power plant standards, the House had passed legislation (H.R. 3826) that would effectively have prohibited EPA from promulgating or implementing power plant GHG emission standards. On September 18, 2014, the House passed the same language a second time, in H.R. 2. The Senate did not consider either bill."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2015-01-06
-
Ozone Air Quality Standards: EPA's 2015 Revision [January 5, 2015]
"On November 26, 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced proposed revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. If finalized, the proposal would set more stringent standards, lowering both the primary (healthbased) and secondary (welfare-based) standards from the current 75 parts per billion (ppb) to somewhere in a range of 65 to 70 ppb. This report discusses the standard-setting process, the specifics of the current and past reviews, and issues raised by the proposal. NAAQS are standards for outdoor (ambient) air that are intended to protect public health and welfare from harmful concentrations of pollution. If EPA changes the primary standard for ozone to a lower level, it would be concluding that protecting public health requires lower concentrations of ozone pollution than were previously judged to be safe. In high enough concentrations, ozone aggravates heart and lung diseases and may contribute to premature death. Ozone also can have negative effects on forests and crop yields, which the secondary (welfarebased) NAAQS is intended to protect. NAAQS do not directly limit emissions of a pollutant; rather, they set in motion a long process in which states and EPA identify areas that do not meet the standards, and states prepare implementation plans to demonstrate how emissions will be lowered sufficiently to reach attainment."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2015-01-05
-
Clean Air Issues in the 113th Congress: An Overview [October 21, 2014]
"As the 113th Congress has considered air quality issues, oversight of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory actions has been the main focus. Of particular interest has been EPA's Clean Air Act regulations on emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Reducing GHG emissions to address climate change is a major goal of President Obama, but Congress has been less enthusiastic about it. In the absence of congressional action, the President has directed EPA to promulgate GHG standards using existing authority under the Clean Air Act. This authority has been upheld on at least three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress. EPA's most recent GHG actions have involved power plants. On June 2, 2014, the agency proposed GHG emission standards for existing fossil-fueled (coal, oil, and natural gas) power plants. These plants are the source of one-third of the nation's GHG emissions, so it is difficult to envision a regulatory scheme that reduces the nation's GHG emissions without addressing their contribution. At the same time, affordable and reliable electric power is central to the nation's economy and to the health and well-being of the population."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2014-10-21
-
EPA's Upcoming Ozone Standard: How Much Will Compliance Cost? [October 15, 2014]
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is under a court order to complete a review of its ambient air quality standard for ozone (the 'ozone NAAQS' [National Ambient Air Quality Standards]) by October 1, 2015. The agency must propose any change to the standard by December 1 of this year. A NAAQS is essentially EPA's definition of what constitutes clean air in the case of six of the most common pollutants. The agency conducts an exhaustive review of the published research on the health effects of these pollutants before determining the levels that (in the Clean Air Act's words) 'are requisite to protect the public health,' allowing an adequate margin of safety. If an area has monitor readings higher than the ozone NAAQS when averaged over a three-year period, the area is in 'non-attainment' of the standard. The NAAQS does not directly impose emission controls on industry or other pollution sources, but it sets in motion a process under which non-attainment areas are identified and states submit implementation plans to EPA to demonstrate how they will bring the areas into compliance."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2014-10-15
