Congressional Review Act: Joint Resolutions Introduced

Earlier this week, joint resolutions were introduced in the House and the Senate that would block the Clean Power Plan and the New Source Performance Standards from going into effect under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which we discussed earlier here.  Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) introduced S.J. Res. 23 on the NSPS, and Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) and Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) introduced S.J. Res. 24 on the CPP.  On the House side, Representative Ed Whitfield (R-KY) introduced H.J. Res. 71 (NSPS) and H.J. Res. 72 (CPP). Even if passed by the House and Senate, these resolutions are subject to White House veto; as an override of the veto is unlikely, the resolutions are symbolic, with no compliance implications.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Congressional Review Act: Joint Resolutions Introduced

More Time Please: EPA Issues Guidance For States Seeking Extension

The CPP requires states with affected Electric Generating Units to file by September 6, 2016 either a final State Implementation Plan (SIP) or an initial submittal requesting a two-year extension of time to submit the final state plan.  On October 22, 2015, EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards released a memorandum providing states with further information about seeking such an extension.

The memorandum covers who should submit the request (the governor or governor’s approved delegate), and what happens once the request is submitted (it is deemed granted unless the EPA notifies the state in writing within 90 days of submittal that the request is not granted).

The memo also provides further information about the three topics that the CPP requires states to address in their initial submittals:

  • An identification of the final plan approach or approaches under consideration by the state and a description of progress made to date on the final plan components.
    The memo encourages states to explain whether it is “considering a single or multi-state plan, a plan that meets the carbon dioxide (CO2) emission performance rates or state CO2 rate or mass emission goal, and/or an emission standards or state measures plan type” and to provide a narrative description of the steps it has already taken for plan development.  It further provides that “[s]tates need not include technical data or quantitative analyses of the plan approaches under consideration in order to satisfy this component.”
  • An explanation of why the state requires additional time to submit a final plan.
    Per the memo “[t]his component is intended to be easily achievable by the state, rather than a detailed, in-depth analysis of why the state is unable to [timely] complete each final plan component.”  The memo then provides a list of example activities that States could discuss as the bases for requesting the extension such as the need to work with other states and stakeholders to address issues related to multi-state cooperation or the need for new state regulatory actions, including the length of time required for the state’s administrative processes.
  • A demonstration or description of the opportunity for public comment the state has provided on the initial submittal and opportunities for meaningful engagement with stakeholders, including vulnerable communities, during preparation of the initial submittal, and plans for public engagement during development of the final plan.
    The memo notes that “the Clean Power Plan does not prescribe a specific number of hearings, meetings, webinars or outreach for this component,” but that states must both engage the public prior to submission of the extension request and provide a plan for public engagement during development of the final plan.  As to the outreach on the initial submittal, the memo notes that “[a]s a first step . . . states need to identify vulnerable communities in their state.”  However, states need not have a specific SIP proposal on which comment must be sought nor do they need to develop responses to the comments received.
Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , | Comments Off on More Time Please: EPA Issues Guidance For States Seeking Extension

Stopping the Clock on the Clean Power Plan

UPDATED 9.1.2016 with additional information about amicus parties;
UPDATED 1.28.2016 with additional information about the parties;
UPDATED 12.29.2015 with additional information about the petitions and parties;
UPDATED 12.7.2015 with additional information about the petitions and parties;
UPDATED 11.4.2015 with additional motions to stay and petitions for review, and list of parties that have moved to intervene;
UPDATED 10.29.2015 to add briefing schedule on motions for stay.

On Monday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order consolidating the cases challenging the Clean Power Plan under the caption State of West Virginia, et al. v. EPA.

As the challenges to EPA’s Clean Power Plan mount, so do the requests for a stay of the rule. Parties are seeking a stay because the mere act of bringing a challenge to the EPA’s rulemaking does not stop the clock on the rule’s deadline.  Rather, parties must request, and the agency or court must grant, a stay pending the court’s review.

The parties making these motions bear a heavy burden. Pursuant to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ Rules of Procedure, a party seeking a stay from the court must file a motion discussing whether it requested relief from the EPA and address the following factors: (i) the likelihood that the moving party will prevail on the merits; (ii) the prospect of irreparable injury to the moving party if relief is withheld; (iii) the possibility of harm to other parties if relief is granted; and (iv) the public interest. The bar is high, and courts rarely grant such relief.

EPA’s (and intervenors’) responses are due by November 2, 2015— unless the court decides to act sooner (unlikely) or to change the response date. Given the number of motions filed, EPA will likely file a request to extend the response date.  Replies will be due 7 days after the response(s) are filed.  Because this is a contentious issue (and the court previously briefed and held oral argument in Murray Energy Corp. et al. v. EPA, the cases that unsuccessfully challenged EPA’s proposed Clean Power Plan) it would not be surprising if the court decides to hold oral argument before issuing an order on the motions for stay of the final rule.

On October 29, 2015, the court issued an order consolidating the motions for stay for purposes of briefing, and setting a briefing schedule.  Any further motions for stay must be filed by Nov. 5, 2015; EPA has until Dec. 3, 2015 to file a consolidated response; intervenors in support of EPA have until Dec. 8, 2015 to file their response; and the parties that originally filed the motions have until Dec. 23, 2014 to file their replies.

Below are a list of the currently filed motions for stay (with information on which petitioners joined which motion), and a table of the petitions that have been filed to date.

Motions for Stay:

Petitions for Review:

Party(ies) Case No.
(LEAD CASE)

The States of West Virginia, Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming; the Commonwealth of Kentucky;  the Attorney General for the State of Michigan; the State of Arizona Corporation Commission, and the Departments of Environmental Quality of the states of Louisiana and North Carolina

15-1363
The State of Oklahoma and Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 15-1364
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, AFL-CIO 15-1365
Murray Energy Corporation 15-1366
National Mining Association 15-1367
American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity 15-1368
Utility Air Regulatory Group and American Public Power Association 15-1370
Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, and Mississippi Power Company 15-1371
CO2 Task Force of the Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group, Inc. 15-1372
Montana-Dakota Utilities Co., a Division of MDU Resources Group, Inc. 15-1373
Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association, Inc. 15-1374
United Mine Workers of America 15-1375
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association; Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Big Rivers Electric Corporation; Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; Buckeye Power, Inc.; Central Montana Electric Power Cooperative; Central Power Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Corn Belt Power Cooperative; Dairyland Power Cooperative; Deseret Generation & Transmission Cooperative; East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc.; East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Georgia Transmission Corporation; Golden Spread Electrical Cooperative, Inc.; Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; Minnkota Power Cooperative, Inc.; North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation; Northeast Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Northwest Iowa Power Cooperative; Oglethorpe Power Corporation; PowerSouth Energy Cooperative; Prairie Power, Inc.; Rushmore Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; Sam Rayburn G&T Electric Cooperative, Inc.; San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc.; South Mississippi Electric Power Association; South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Southern Illinois Power Cooperative; Sunflower Electric Power Corporation; Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.; Upper Missouri G. & T. Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc.; Western Farmers Electric Cooperative; and Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc. 15-1376
Westar Energy, Inc. 15-1377
NorthWestern Corporation d/b/a NorthWestern Energy 15-1378
National Association of Home Builders 15-1379
State of North Dakota 15-1380
Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, National Association of Manufacturers, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, National Federation of Independent Business, American Chemistry Council, American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute, American Foundry Society, American Forest & Paper Association, American Iron & Steel Institute, American Wood Council, Brick Industry Association, Electricity Consumers Resource Council, Lignite Energy Council, National Lime Association, National Oilseed Processors Association, and Portland Cement Association 15-1382
Association of American Railroads 15-1383
Luminant Generation Company, LLC, Oak Grove Management Company, LLC, Big Brown Power Company, LLC, Sandow Power Company, LLC, Big Brown Lignite Company, LLC, Luminant Mining Company, LLC, and Luminant Big Brown Mining Company, LLC 15-1386

 

Basin Electric Power Cooperative 15-1393
Energy & Environment Legal Institute 15-1398
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality 15-1409
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO 15-1410
Entergy Corporation 15-1413
LG&E and KU Energy, LLLC 15-1418
West Virginia Coal Association 15-1422
Newmont Nevada Energy Investment, LLC and Newmont USA Limited 15-1432
The Kansas City Board of Public Utilities- Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas 15-1442
The North American Coal Corporation 15-1451
Indiana Utility Group 15-1459
Louisiana Public Service Commission 15-1464
Gen-On Mid-Atlantic, LLC, Indian River Power LLC, Louisiana Generating LLC, Midwest Generation LLC, NRG Chalk Point LLC, NRG Power Midwest LP, NRG Rema LLC, NRG Texas Power LLC, NRG Wholesale Generation LP, and Vienna Power LLC
15-1470
Prairie State Generating Company
15-1472
Minnesota Power 15-1474
Denbury Onshore, LLC
15-1475
The Energy-Intensive Manufacturers Working Group on Greenhouse Gas Regulation 15-1477
Local Government Coalition for Renewable Energy 15-1483
The Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, the Independence Institute, the Rio Grande Foundation, the Sutherland Institute, Klaus J. Christoph, Samuel R. Damewood, Catherine C. Dellin, Joseph W. Luquire, Lisa R. Markham, Patrick T. Peterson, and Kristi Rosenquist  15-1488

Note: On January 21, 2015 the court issued an order severing from West Virginia v. EPA, Case Nos.  15-1478 (National Alliance of Forest Owners), 15-1479 (Biogenic CO2 Coalition), 15-1485 (American Forest & Paper Association, Inc. and American Wood Council), which seek review of issues related to CO2 emissions from the biomass combustion (“biogenic emissions”). The petitions have been consolidated under the case name American Forest & Paper Association et al. v. EPA and are being held in abeyance pending EPA’s decision on the parties’ petitions for reconsideration.

Amici Curiae:

In Support of Petitioners: In Support of Respondent-EPA:
166 State and Local Business Associations

60Plus Association, Federalism in Action, Hispanic Leadership Fund, Independent Women’s Forum, National Taxpayers Union, and Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Consumers’ Research

Former State Public Utility Commissioners: Congressman Kevin Cramer, David Armstrong, Randall Bynum, Charles Davidson, Jeff Davis, Mark David Goss, Robert Hix, Terry Jarrett, Larry Landis, Jon McKinney, Carl Miller, Polly Page, Anthony Rachal III, Dr. Edward Salmon, Joan Smith, Jim Sullivan, David Wright, and Tom Wright

Joseph S. D’Aleo, Dr. Harold H. Doiron, Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Dr. Theodore R. Eck, Dr. Gordon J. Fulks, Dr. William M. Gray, Dr. Craig D. Idso, Dr. Richard A. Keen, Dr. Anthony R. Lupo, Dr. Thomas P. Sheahen, Dr. S. Fred Singer, Dr. James P. Wallace III

Landmark Legal Foundation

Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia

Pacific Legal Foundation, Texas Public Policy Foundation, Morning Star Packing Company, Merit Oil Company, Loggers Association of Northern California, and Norman R. “Skip” Brown

Pedernales Electric Cooperative, Inc.

Philip Zoebisch

Select Members of Congress

Southeastern Legal Foundation

State of Nevada and Consumers’ Research

Adobe, Inc., Mars, Incorporated, IKEA North America Services LLC, and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Inc.

Amazon.com, Inc., Apple Inc., Google Inc., and Microsoft Corp.

American Thoracic Society, American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, National Medical Association, American College of Preventive Medicine, American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, National Association for Medical Direction of Respiratory Care, and American Public Health Association

Benjamin F. Hobbs, Brendan Kirby, Kenneth J. Lutz, James D. McCalley, and Brian Parsons

Catholic Climate Covenant et al.

Citizens Utility Board, Consumers Union, and Public Citizen, Inc

David Battisti, Marshall Burke, Ken Caldiera, Noah Diffenbaugh, William E. Easterling III, Christopher Field, John Harte, Jessica Hellmann, Daniel Kirk-Davidoff, David Lobell, Pamela Matson, Katherine Mach, James C. Mcwilliams, Mario J. Molina, Michael Oppenheimer, Jonathan Overpeck, Scott R. Saleska, Noelle Eckley Selin, Drew Shindell, and Steven Wofsy

Dominion Resources, Inc.

Former State Energy and Environment Officials: Matt Baker, Janet Gail Besser, Ron Binz, Michael H. Dworkin, Jeanne Fox, Dian Grueneich, Roger Hamilton, Paul Hibbard, Karl Rábago, Barbara Roberts, Cheryl Roberto, Jim Roth, Kelly Speakes-Backman, Larry Soward, Sue Tierney, Jon Wellinghoff, and Kathy Watson

Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law

Leon G. Billings and Thomas C. Jorling, former members of Senate staff

National League of Cities; the U.S. Conference of Mayors; Ann Arbor, MI; Arlington County, VA; Aurora, IL; Baltimore, MD; Bellingham, WA; Berkeley, CA; Bloomington, IN; Boise, ID; Boston, MA; Boulder County, CO; Carmel, IN; Clarkston, GA; Coral Gables, FL; Cutler Bay, FL; Elgin, IL; Eugene, OR; Evanston, IL; Fort Collins, CO; Grand Rapids, MI; Henderson, NV; Highland Park, IL; Hoboken, NJ; Houston, TX; Jersey City, NJ; King County, WA; Los Angeles, CA; Madison, WI; Miami, FL; Miami Beach, FL; Milwaukie, OR; Minneapolis, MN; Missoula, MT; Newburgh Heights, OH; Oakland, CA; Pinecrest, FL; Pittsburgh, PA; Portland, ME; Portland, OR; Providence, RI; Reno, NV; Rochester, NY; Salt Lake City, UT; San Francisco, CA; Tucson, AZ; Washburn, WI; West Chester, PA; West Hollywood, CA; West Palm Beach, FL; and the Mayors of Dallas, TX and Knoxville, TN, and Orlando, FL

Madeline K. Albright, Secretary of State (1997-2001); Leon E. Panetta, Secretary of Defense (2011-2013), Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2009-2011); William J. Burns, Deputy Secretary of State (2001-2014), U.S. Ambassador to Russia (2005-2008)

Select Current Members of Congress and Select Bipartisan Former Members of Congress

Service Employees International Union

Sustainable Business Associations

Union of Concerned Scientists

William D. Ruckelshaus and William K. Reilly, former EPA Administrators

 

Intervenors in Support of Petitioners:

Dixon Bros., Inc.
Gulf Coast Lignite Coalition
Joy Global Inc.
Nelson Bros., Inc.
Norfolk Southern Corporation
Peabody Energy Corporation
Wesco International, Inc.

Intervenors in Support of Respondent-EPA:

Advanced Energy Economy
American Lung Association
American Wind Energy Association
Broward County, Florida
Calpine Corporation
Center for Biological Diversity
City of Austin, d/b/a Austin Energy

City of Boulder
City of Chicago
City of New York
City of Philadelphia
City of Seattle

City of South Miami
Clean Air Council
Clean Wisconsin
Coal River Mountain Watch

Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Commonwealth of Virginia
Conservation Law Foundation
District of Columbia
Environmental Defense Fund
Kanawha Forest Coalition
Keepers of the Mountains Foundation
Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition
National Grid Generation, LLC
Natural Resources Defense Council
Nextera Energy, Inc.
Ohio Environmental Council

Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Sierra Club
Solar Energy Industries Association
State of California
State of Connecticut
State of Delaware
State of Hawaii
State of Illinois
State of Iowa
State of Maine
State of Maryland
State of Minnesota
State of New Hampshire
State of New Mexico
State of New York
State of Oregon
State of Rhode Island
State of Vermont
State of Washington
West Virginia Highlands Conservancy


Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Stopping the Clock on the Clean Power Plan

EPA to Hold Public Hearings on FIP and Model Trading Rules

EPA plans to hold four public hearings on the proposed federal implementation plan and model trading rules. In a notice scheduled to be published in the Federal Register tomorrow, EPA states that it will hold two-day hearings in: Pittsburgh (Nov. 12-13); Denver (Nov. 16-17); Washington, DC (Nov. 18-19); and Atlanta (Nov. 19-20).  EPA will accept speaker registration requests in advance.

Update: The published notice is available at 80 Fed. Reg. 65,979 (Oct. 28, 2015).

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on EPA to Hold Public Hearings on FIP and Model Trading Rules

Road Maps for the Published Rules

Although Federal Register printing shortens the rules considerably, it may still be difficult to navigate the published versions. We have created annotated tables of contents for the rules that include a list of the contents and the hyperlinks to the specific page numbers for each heading, subheading, and table.

Rule Annotated Table of Contents
Clean Power Plan CPP table of contents
New Source Performance Standards NSPS table of contents
Proposed FIP & Model Rule FIP table of contents
Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Road Maps for the Published Rules