By STEPHEN POWER
WASHINGTON—A federal judge on Thursday rejected the Obama administration's request to delay by more than a year controversial new regulations targeting emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants from industrial boilers.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman is a setback for the White House, which is trying to demonstrate to business leaders that it is prepared to moderate the pace of new regulation.
The Environmental Protection Agency, which sought the delay, said it was disappointed by the ruling giving it just an additional 30 days to issue the rules. The EPA in a statement that it would move to issue rules "significantly different" than the ones the agency proposed in April 2010.
Industrial boilers are used to generate steam or heat water used in manufacturing. The EPA proposal to curb emissions from the facilities has drawn fire from manufacturers and other industry groups concerned that the high costs of new pollution-control technology could force them to close operations and cut jobs.
In response to the industry concerns, the EPA last month asked the court for permission to take until April 2012 to issue the final regulations, rather than this month, as an earlier court order had required. The agency said in a statement at the time that comments it had received from the public in response to the proposed rules "shed new light on a number of key areas" and warrant "a revised proposal."
On Thursday, Judge Friedman sided with environmental groups who argued that the agency has had sufficient time to make a decision on the matter. The judge's opinion notes that a 1990 federal law originally established a deadline of November 2000 to issue the rules.
"EPA itself has not actually asserted that its proposed rules are flawed or inadequate," the judge wrote. "Instead, EPA has simply expressed the concern that there is a risk these rules will be challenged."
The proposed regulations are intended to cut emissions of mercury, soot and other pollutants that the EPA says are linked with developmental disabilities in children, asthma and heart attacks. Industry groups will have three years to get their operations in compliance once the regulations are finalized.
"We are extremely disappointed with the court's decision," the American Forest and Paper Association, one of several industry groups critical of the EPA's proposed regulation, said in a statement. "Today's decision invites more litigation, and ultimately everyone loses as a result of this short-sighted decision."
I find this development quite intersting - particualry in light of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation's (NERC) assessment highlighting the retirement that would result from such proposed legislation. Is it possible then, to have a "phase in" approach to allow lead time for other generation to be built? I find it dissapointing that the EPA is going to go forward with "significantly different" rules - but am somewhat hopeful by the fact that it is doing so on legal grounds rather than finding flaws in its proposal.
ReplyDeleteInformation about NERC's special assessment:
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) released a special assessment, “Potential Resource Adequacy Impacts of U.S. Environmental Regulations” finding that four of the rules proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could lead to the retirement of many fossil-fuel fired plants. These include: section 316b of the Clean Water Act on cooling water intake structures, the Clean Air Act provision for the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) which sets national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (the proposed mercury standard would have the largest financial impact), the Clean Air Transport Rule and Coal Combustion Residuals Disposal Regulations (coal ash regulations). The assessment identified 78GW of coal-, oil- and gas-fired generating capacity that would retire in the assessment’s combined EPA regulation scenario. The assessment asserts that without additional power production or demand-side resources beyond those in current regional plans, more resources would be needed in most regions of the country to maintain reliability. The report finds the Southeast and Midwest regions most severely impacted. For further information,report can be found here: http://www.nerc.com/files/EPA_Scenario_Final.pdf