EPA supporters pan bill to delay GHG deadlines

OREANDA-NEWS. April 14, 2015. Federal legislation to extend compliance deadlines under the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) greenhouse gas rules for existing power plants could allow states to stall indefinitely or opt out of federal plans wholesale, supporters of the EPA plan said today.

The Ratepayer Protection Act, introduced by House Energy and Power subcommittee chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Kentucky) last month, would encourage critics of the rules to keep litigation going as long as possible in order to delay action, EPA supporters said. "The Whitfield bill basically says you do not have to do anything while litigation is pending," representative Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said ahead of a subcommittee hearing on the bill tomorrow. "This basically adds a provision giving polluters an incentive to run the clock on litigation."

Under the Whitfield bill, litigation could inhibit progress well into the proposed Clean Power Plan's interim compliance deadlines, which begin in 2020.

"It could be up to easily five years or longer, and even if the rule is upheld, states could still opt out of their state and federal implementation plans," Natural Resources Defense Council Climate and Clean Air Program director David Doniger said.

The delays would contribute to a lower likelihood of regional or multi-state compliance efforts, former Department of Energy adviser Lauren Azar said

"The 'just say no' states are painting themselves into a corner," she said. "This will undermine the players looking at regional compliance, and jeopardizes states' ability to take a regional approach."

A similar proposal in the Senate, floated by senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio), would give states the right to opt out of the Clean Power Plan if they conclude it will raise electricity rates or hurt their economy. Portman offered the proposal during last month's debate on a Senate budget resolution, but it did not come up for a vote.

If either the Whitfield or Portman bills ever got to President Barack Obama, he would almost certainly veto it, although the White House has not formally announced that.