Reconsidering the Clean Power Plan (CRS Report for Congress)
Release Date |
Revised Oct. 25, 2017 |
Report Number |
R44992 |
Report Type |
Report |
Authors |
McCarthy, James E. |
Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Older Revisions |
-
Premium Oct. 5, 2017 (9 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
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.
The CPP has not gone into effect: In February 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed its
implementation pending the completion of judicial review. Even had it not been stayed, the rule’s
limits on CO2 emissions were not scheduled to begin taking effect until 2022. The Court’s action
delayed various planning requirements that would have determined how states intended to
structure compliance with the rule’s overall objectives.
Unlike the suspension of the CPP that is currently in place due to the Supreme Court’s stay,
repealing a promulgated rule requires that the promulgating agency go through the same steps as
the original rulemaking, a process governed in this case by Section 307(d) of the Clean Air Act.
The first step in the repeal process is a 60-day comment period following publication of the
proposed repeal in the Federal Register. Ultimately, EPA will need to address all significant
comments and criticisms that it receives during the public comment period when it promulgates a
final decision on the proposed repeal. The agency’s decision could then be subject to judicial
review.
Although the agency is proposing to repeal the CPP, it did not propose repeal of the GHG
“endangerment finding,” the 2009 agency finding that emissions of CO2 and other GHGs
endanger public health and welfare. Without addressing the finding, the agency appears to have a
continuing obligation to limit emissions of CO2 from power plants. Thus, in addition to the
proposed repeal of the CPP, EPA has prepared and sent for interagency review an Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to solicit information on systems of emission reduction that it
might require in a future rule to replace the CPP.
The net effect of EPA’s repeal and the ANPRM may be a continuing period of regulatory
uncertainty for the states and industry. In the meantime, the electric power industry is changing
rapidly as a result of several factors, including market forces, state and federal regulations,
technological innovation, and federal tax incentives. Many coal-fired power plants are being
retired, and the new electric generation replacing those plants is overwhelmingly powered by
natural gas or renewable power. Because coal-fired plants emit far more CO2 per unit of power
than their replacements, total emissions of CO2 from electric power generation declined almost
25% between 2005 and 2016, while gross domestic product grew and the amount of power
generated remained essentially unchanged. This observed decline in annual CO2 emissions from
the electric power sector is 77% of the reductions that EPA projected would occur as a result of
the CPP.
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.