EPA has begun a regulations blitz

As it tries to build momentum for the summer release of its rules to cut greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and prepares for international climate talks, the EPA has finalized, proposed or called for a bunch of new regulations in rapid succession over the past several weeks.

The moves have garnered cheers from allies who say President Obama is acting alone because the Republican-led Congress won’t honor what they say are obligations in federal law to crack down on greenhouse gas emissions, smog and the like.

But critics call the effort an “unprecedented” attack on industries. They also question whether the Clean Air Act, the federal law the administration says it is trying to implement, actually calls for the main course on Obama’s climate menu — proposed carbon emissions limits on power plants, which are due for finalization in August.

“If you ask the environmental community they would say these are long overdue,” Jeff Holmstead, an energy industry lawyer and former EPA air chief under President George W. Bush, told the Washington Examiner. “My own view is somewhat different. I think this administration has really used the Clean Air Act as a very aggressive tool to go after industries.”

The White House is rushing to get a suite of rules out the door because the Obama administration wants to defend the regulations against any legal challenges, as Obama is increasingly viewing climate change as his legacy. Getting the power plant rule finalized soon is also key to Obama staking his claim as an international climate leader heading into United Nations negotiations in Paris in late November.

The EPA sent the power plant rule to the White House for review earlier this month. Lobbyists who both oppose and support the rule have a few weeks to try to shape the final outcome of the regulation that, in its draft form, calls for cutting electricity emissions 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.

Environmental groups had long asked Obama to use the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, which had never been done before. They say greenhouse gas emissions that most scientists blame for warming the planet must be cut to avoid irreversible effects of climate change.

“Climate change is a clear and present danger that we must tackle now. Our opponents will keep attacking, but we’ll be in court to defend the Clean Power Plan. And we’ll keep pressing for the strongest carbon pollution standards to combat climate change,” David Doniger, director of the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, wrote in a blog post last week following a federal court decision to reject a lawsuit against the proposed rule.

The EPA has had a busy month issuing other rules, too.

• The agency in late May finalized its “Waters of the U.S.” rule that would expand jurisdiction over waterways that connect to sources that could flow into drinking supplies. Opponents in agriculture, real estate and mining contend it could stop development near waterways, but the EPA said it clarifies and even expands permitting exemptions.

• The same week, the EPA released three years worth of blending requirements for biofuels. The move angered the renewable fuels industry because it reduced the amount of their product refiners must mix into gasoline. But the auto industry wasn’t happy, either, because it thought the blending levels from 2014 through 2016 were too high.

• Last week, the EPA also signaled it would call for regulating greenhouse gas emissions from airplanes. That was more of a formality — the EPA participates in the International Civil Aviation Organization and, as expected, signaled it was likely to adopt those standards.

• And as early as next week, the EPA is likely to issue its second phase of emissions standards for big rig trucks. It was supposed to come earlier, but the EPA pumped the brakes after heated responses to the biofuel and water rules.

• Other rules that have yet to be finalized include the power plant rule, potentially tighter standards on smog that the industry contends could be the most expensive regulation ever and possible methane regulations on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, operations.

The EPA, for its part, has said climate change and other regulations could be a boon for the economy by sparking innovation in clean energy technology and other high-skilled jobs. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told a San Francisco event last month that the regulations present chances “to take actions that turn the challenge of climate change into economic opportunity,” according to a GreenBiz.com story.

But businesses say they are having a hard time adjusting to the scattershot of regulations that have just come out, said Karen Kerrigan, president of the Center for Regulatory Solutions, a project of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council.

“Since the Obama administration assumed office, the federal regulatory burden has increased dramatically. The scope of EPA regulation is unprecedented,” Kerrigan said in a statement to the Examiner.