President Obama’s Climate Action Plan
Jane A. Leggett, Coordinator
Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy
January 14, 2014
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43120


President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Summary
On June 25, 2013, President Obama announced a Climate Action Plan (CAP) to reduce emissions
of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHG), and to encourage adaptation to
expected climate change. The President affirmed his 2009 pledge to reduce U.S. GHG emissions
by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 if all other major economies agreed to limit their emissions as
well. In 2011, U.S. gross GHG emissions were approximately 7% below 2005 levels.
The President stated willingness to work with Congress toward enacting a bipartisan, market-
based scheme to reduce GHG emissions. He also said that he would take executive branch actions
in the absence of congressional support. His CAP identifies measures in three categories:
• Cut carbon pollution in America.
• Prepare the United States for the impacts of climate change.
• Lead international efforts to address global climate change.
Many measures in the CAP have been under way. The plan specifies few timelines or metrics for
evaluating progress of individual measures.
A Presidential Memorandum, also of June 25, directs EPA to issue two rules to curtail CO2
emissions from new and existing power plants. First, it instructs EPA to re-propose standards
under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for GHG emissions from newly constructed electric generating
units (EGU), and to issue the final rule “in a timely fashion” after comments. This proposal was
published in the Federal Register on January 8, 2014, opening a 60-day comment period. Second,
and more significantly, the Presidential Memorandum directs EPA to issue standards, regulations,
or guidelines for CO2 emissions applicable to modified, reconstructed, and existing power plants,
building on states’ efforts to reduce power plant emissions. The Memorandum included neither
specific levels of EGU emissions performance nor target-sectoral GHG reductions. The
Memorandum requests the proposed rules for existing EGU by June 1, 2014, and final rules by
June 1, 2015. Further, the Memorandum requests that the guidelines require states to submit to
EPA their implementation plans, required under Section 111(d) of the CAA, and their
implementing regulations by June 30, 2016. The language of the announcement and
Memorandum suggest that the new standards and guidelines might be written to allow innovative,
potentially cost-cutting flexibilities to states and regulated entities.
The CAP additionally announces regulatory actions to
• reduce GHG emissions including fuel efficiency standards for heavy-duty
vehicles post-2018;
• tighten efficiency standards for federal buildings; and
• require a transition away from chemicals that contribute to global climate change
that were introduced as alternatives to stratospheric ozone-depleting chemicals.
President Obama referred to the pending Presidential Permit for the Keystone XL pipeline to
carry Canadian oil sands across the U.S. border. He stated, “The net effects of the pipeline’s
impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to
go forward.”
Congressional Research Service

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

A host of administrative actions would promote GHG emission reduction, energy efficiency, and
increased electricity generation by renewable energy in federal facilities, on federal lands, and by
private, state, and local partners of federal agencies. The President’s FY2014 budget proposed
funding for some related actions.
To promote adaptation to climate change by the federal government and states and localities, the
CAP mostly continues existing programs. Executive Order 13653, issued November 1, 2013,
Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change, expounds on efforts federal
agencies should undertake to enhance climate preparedness and resilience.
The CAP includes international initiatives to promote global reductions of GHG emissions and
adaptation. One would end U.S. support for public financing of new coal-fired power plants
overseas except those employing advanced efficiency or carbon capture and sequestration
technology.
Notably, the CAP does not quantify whether it would meet the President’s commitment to reduce
GHG emissions by 17% from 2005 levels by 2020. Nor does it say how the United States would
produce its share of a 2009 international pledge of $100 billion annually to assist developing
countries to mitigate GHG emissions and adapt to climate change.

Congressional Research Service

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Contents
Presidential Announcement ............................................................................................................. 1
Pledged Actions and Timing ............................................................................................................ 1
Cut Carbon Pollution ................................................................................................................. 2
Prepare the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change .................................................. 6
International Leadership ............................................................................................................ 9
Possible Issues for Congress .......................................................................................................... 11
Selected CRS Reports Relating to the Obama Proposal ................................................................ 12

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 13

Congressional Research Service

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Presidential Announcement
On June 25, 2013, President Obama announced a national plan to reduce emissions of carbon
dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHG), as well as to encourage adaptation to expected
climate change.1 The President stated a willingness to work with Congress on a bipartisan,
market-based scheme to reduce GHG emissions. However, the President had earlier stipulated
that the set of actions he announced would not require congressional approval. This
announcement followed up on his vow in the 2013 State of the Union Address:
I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the
one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress
won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with
executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our
communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more
sustainable sources of energy.2
The President had been under increasing pressure from environmental allies to exercise greater
leadership on the climate change issue, after the Congress did not enact “Waxman-Markey” (H.R.
2454 in 2009) or other comprehensive bills to reduce GHG emissions. Also, some states and non-
governmental organizations gave notice that they would file suit when the Environmental
Protection Agency proposed but did not finalize greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards for
new power plants by April 2013.3 The President’s plan is accompanied by a White House
“infographic” covering extreme weather events, U.S. GHG emissions, and elements of the
President’s plan.4
Members of Congress continue to be divided in their views on whether climate change risks merit
raising current costs to the economy in exchange for benefits that would mostly accrue to future
generations, people in other countries, and stability of Earth systems. The prospect of continued
congressional divisions in part has prompted the President’s use of existing executive branch
authorities.
Pledged Actions and Timing
The President affirmed his commitment to his 2009 policy pledge to reduce U.S. GHG emissions
by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 if all other major economies agreed to limit their emissions as
well.5 In 2011, the United States’ gross GHG emissions6 were approximately 7% below their

1 Executive Office of the President (EOP). The President’s Climate Action Plan. June 2013. Available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf.
2 White House, Remarks by the President in the State of the Union Address. Washington DC. February 12, 2013.
3 The House passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act (the “Waxman-Markey” bill), the 111th Congress’s
H.R. 2454, but no corresponding bill cleared the Senate. For further information, see CRS Report R40643, Greenhouse
Gas Legislation: Summary and Analysis of H.R. 2454 as Passed by the House of Representatives
, coordinated by Mark
Holt and Gene Whitney.
4 White House. President Obama’s Plan to Fight Climate Change. http://www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate-action-
plan.
5 President Obama separately set a goal to double U.S. energy productivity (i.e., energy consumption per unit of
economic activity, such as Gross Domestic Product) by 2030 compared with 2010 levels.
Congressional Research Service
1

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

2005 levels.7 One study estimated in late 2012 that the United States is on a path to reduce its
emissions to 16% below 2005 levels in 2020, under current policies including effects of the New
Source Performance Standards for CO2 emissions from power plants that the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) proposed in 2012 (more below).8 The researchers cite assumptions
about promulgated and proposed standards, trends in the relative prices of coal and natural gas,
and state and local GHG mitigation programs as main drivers of the projected reductions.
To fill the gap between the President’s pledge and the current emissions trajectory, President
Obama identified a series of actions to abate GHG emissions and to facilitate resilience to the
effects of climate change. These are outlined below in three broad categories from the President’s
plan, which describes his three “pillars” as
1. cut carbon pollution in America;
2. prepare the United States for the impacts of climate change;
3. lead international efforts to combat global climate change and prepare for its
impacts.
This summary emphasizes the incremental additions in the plan announced June 25, 2013,
beyond programs and other executive branch actions already under way. Few of the listed
measures specify the timing of executive branch actions, or the quantitative GHG reductions that
should be achieved.
Cut Carbon Pollution
GHG Standards for Electricity Generation
The centerpiece of the President’s announcement arguably is a Presidential Memorandum,9 also
issued June 25, that directs EPA to issue two types of rules to curtail carbon dioxide emissions
from new and existing power plants before the end of his term.10 Specifically, the Presidential
Memorandum first instructs EPA to issue, as planned, a new proposal under the Clean Air Act
(CAA), by September 20, 2013, for GHG emissions from newly constructed electric generating
units (EGU), and to issue the final rule “in a timely fashion” after comments. This rule was
proposed in the Federal Register on January 8, 2014, opening a 60-day comment period.11 The
proposal would set an emissions limit of 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) per megawatt-

(...continued)
6 Of the six gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol, excluding hydrofluorocarbons, nitrogen hexafluoride and other newer
GHG, and excluding removals of CO2 from the atmosphere by “sinks”, such as uptake by expanding forests.
7 CRS calculations from data in Environmental Protection Agency. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emission and
Sinks: 1990-2011
. Washington DC, April 2013. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/
usinventoryreport.html.
8 Burtraw, Dallas, and Matt Woerman. US Status on Climate Change Mitigation. Washington DC: Resources for the
Future, October 2012. http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-12-48.pdf.
9 White House. “Memorandum for the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency: Power Sector Carbon
Pollution Standards.” June 25, 2013.
10 For more information on these rules, see CRS Report R43127, EPA Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from
Power Plants: Many Questions, Some Answers
, by James E. McCarthy.
11 Federal Register. 79 FR 1429. January 8, 2014. https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/01/08/2013-28668/
standards-of-performance-for-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-new-stationary-sources-electric-utility.
Congressional Research Service
2

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

hour (MWh) of electricity generated by new coal-fired EGUs, and a standard of either 1,000 or
1,100 lbs/MWh (depending on size) for new natural gas-fired EGUs.12 To meet the standard, coal-
fired plants are assumed to require carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) of about 40% of the
CO2 from their fuel.13 EPA assumed CCS technology in its Regulatory Impact Analysis of the
proposal.14
Second, and more significantly, the Presidential Memorandum directs EPA also to issue
standards, regulations, or guidelines for CO2 emissions applicable to modified, reconstructed and
existing power plants, building on states’ efforts to reduce power plant emissions. The
Memorandum included neither specific levels of EGU emissions performance nor target-sectoral
GHG reductions. The Memorandum requests the proposed rules for existing EGU by June 1,
2014, and final rules by June 1, 2015. Further, the Memorandum requests that the guidelines
require states to submit to EPA their implementation plans, required under Section 111(d) of the
CAA, and their implementing regulations by June 30, 2016. The Memorandum states that
• states and nongovernmental leaders should be directly engaged in the process;
• regulations and guidelines should be tailored to reduce costs;
• approaches should allow use of market-based instruments, performance
standards, and other flexibilities;
• standards should be consistent with maintaining reliable and affordable power;
and
• EPA should work with states and other agencies to promote electricity from
cleaner and more efficient technologies, including appliance efficiencies.
The President also directed EPA to work with state and local governments, industry, non-
governmental organizations, tribal officials and others in designing the programs, and to use
market-based elements where possible. These instructions might be consistent with new standards
and guidelines that take innovative forms, such as proposals put forward by policy analysts.15
Some call for state-specific guidelines for existing power plants with flexibilities in state
implementation plans to allow compliance in flexible ways, including use of generator and
consumer efficiency, renewable mechanisms, rate averaging, and additional options. The
President’s announcement specifically indicated that the EPA standards should “provide
flexibility to different states with different needs, and build on the leadership that many states,
and cities, and companies have already shown.”
Electricity Generation from Renewable Energy. The President set a goal to double electricity
generation from wind, solar, and geothermal energy from current levels by 2020. Electricity
generation produced from wind, solar, and geothermal increased 80% from 2009 to 2011, from 90

12 For more on the proposed standards, see CRS Report R43127, EPA Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from
Power Plants: Many Questions, Some Answers
, by James E. McCarthy.
13 For more on CCS, see CRS Report R42532, Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS): A Primer, by Peter Folger.
14 EPA. EPA-452/R-13-003. September 2013. See also CRS Report R43127, EPA Standards for Greenhouse Gas
Emissions from Power Plants: Many Questions, Some Answers
, by James E. McCarthy.
15 See, for example, Tarr, Jeremy et al., Regulating CO2 under Section 111(d): Options, Limits, and Impacts. Nicholas
Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University. January 2013; and Lashof, Daniel A., et al. Closing the
Power Plant Carbon Pollution Loophole: Smart Ways the Clean Air Act Can Clean Up America’s Biggest Climate
Polluters
. Natural Resources Defense Council. 2012.
Congressional Research Service
3

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

million megawatt-hours to 161 million megawatt-hours.16 Including biomass fuels, the increase of
non-hydro renewable electricity was 52% from 2009 to 2011, from 144 million megawatt-hours
to 219 million megawatt-hours. The President proposes to accomplish the doubling goal by
• instructing the Department of Interior to issue permits for 10 gigawatts (GW) of
renewable electric capacity on public lands by 2020;
• encouraging expansion of hydropower generation at existing dams, including the
Red Rock Hydroelectric Plant on the Des Moines River in Iowa as a high priority
permitting project.
• deploying 3 GW of renewable capacity on military installations by 2025;
• aiming to install 100 MW of renewable capacity for federally subsidized housing
stock by 2020; and
• directing federal agencies, through a June 2013 Presidential Memorandum, to
streamline siting, permitting, and review of electricity transmission projects
across federal, state, and tribal government processes.
Consider Climate Impacts in the National Interests of Keystone XL. The State Department
faces a pending decision of whether to grant a Presidential Permit for the proposed Keystone XL
pipeline. Keystone XL would transport oil sands crude from Canada to a market hub in Nebraska
for further delivery to Gulf Coast refineries.17 Some environmental groups called this decision the
“line in the sand” for U.S. climate change policy18 and urged the President to deny the permit. On
June 25, 2013, the President stated in his speech that “[our] national interest will be served only if
this project does not significantly exacerbate the impacts of carbon pollution. The net effects of
the pipeline’s impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project
can go forward.”19 In April 2013 comments on the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the permit application, EPA recommended that the State Department include in the final EIS
monetized estimates of the social cost of the GHG emissions from a barrel of oil sands crude
compared to average U.S. crude. It is not clear whether the State Department will include in the
final EIS the additional emissions data recommended by EPA. If those data are included, it is not
yet known how it may inform the State Department’s assessment of the “net effects” of the
pipeline project on the climate.
Eliminate Tax Incentives Benefiting U.S. Fossil Fuels. The President proposed phasing out tax
provisions that benefit fossil fuels in his FY2014 budget proposal.20 (He links this proposal to
seeking a global phase-out of similar incentives for fossil fuels.) The President proposed similar
phase-outs in previous budget requests.

16 Energy Information Administration. Net Generation by Other Renewable Sources: Total (All Sectors), 2003-April
2013. Extracted June 25, 2013. Data available at http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=
epmt_1_01_a.
17 See CRS Report R41668, Keystone XL Pipeline Project: Key Issues, by Paul W. Parfomak et al.
18 For analysis of the emissions implications of the Keystone pipelines, see CRS Report R42611, Oil Sands and the
Keystone XL Pipeline: Background and Selected Environmental Issues
, coordinated by Jonathan L. Ramseur.
19 White House. Remarks by the President on Climate Change. (transcript) Georgetown University, Washington DC.
June 25, 2013. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/25/remarks-president-climate-change.
20 For more on this topic in the FY2013 budget proposal, see CRS Report R42374, Oil and Natural Gas Industry Tax
Issues in the FY2014 Budget Proposal
, by Robert Pirog.
Congressional Research Service
4

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Technology Development. The President’s FY2014 budget proposes approximately $7.9 billion,
a 30% increase of funding across agencies, for research, development, and deployment of “clean
energy” technologies.
• The Department of Energy (DOE) plans to issue a Notice in the Federal Register
announcing a draft solicitation to use up to $8 billion in “Section 1703” loan
guarantee authority21 for advanced fossil fuel energy projects that can “cost-
effectively meet financial and policy goals, including the avoidance, reduction, or
sequestration of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases.”22 The draft
solicitation will be open for public comment, with an aim to issue the final
solicitation in the fall of 2013.
• Conduct a Federal Quadrennial Energy Review, led by the White House
Domestic Policy Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, to
assess energy infrastructure challenges, identify threats, risks, and opportunities
for U.S. energy and climate security in order to translate policy goals into
sequenced actions and proposed investments over four-year planning horizons.
Increasing Fuel Economy Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles for the post-2018 Model
Years.
No levels of performance or GHG reductions are specified in the plan. Model Year 2014-
2018 standards have been promulgated. Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles are the second-largest
component of transportation-sector CO2 emissions, after light-duty vehicles (passenger cars and
light trucks), while transportation emissions are 33% of U.S. CO2 emissions and 28% of all U.S.
GHG emissions.23
Developing and Deploying Next-Generation Energy Sources for Transportation. Continuing
to support the Renewable Fuels Standard,24 the Administration will invest in research and
development on advanced biofuels, advanced batteries, and fuel cells in every mode of
transportation. The Department of Transportation (DOT) will work with other agencies to explore
how to integrate alternative fuel vessels into the U.S. flag fleet. DOT, the Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD), and the EPA will work with states, cities, and towns to improve
transportation options and lower transportation costs while protecting the environment.
New Goal for Energy Efficiency Standards. The President set a goal for efficiency standards
for appliances and federal buildings, promulgated during his tenure, to reduce carbon emissions
by at least 3 billion metric tons cumulatively by 2030 while also reducing household energy bills.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Financing of Rural Energy Efficiency. USDA’s Rural
Utilities Service Energy Efficiency and Conservation Loan Program would provide up to $250
million for rural electric utilities to finance energy efficiency investments by businesses and
households. The existing Rural Energy for America program would streamline grants and loan
guarantees for efficiency and renewable energy investments by agricultural producers and rural
small businesses.

21 Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005, Title XVII, §1703.
22 EOP, op. cit., p. 7.
23 EPA, op. cit. Also see CRS Report R40506, Cars, Trucks, and Climate: EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases from
Mobile Sources
, by James E. McCarthy and Brent D. Yacobucci.
24 See CRS Report R40155, Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS): Overview and Issues, by Randy Schnepf and Brent D.
Yacobucci.
Congressional Research Service
5

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Explore New Incentives for Residential Energy Efficiency. HUD’s Multifamily Energy
Innovation Fund would continue to provide $23 million to test new approaches to achieve cost-
effective residential energy. The Federal Housing Administration with stakeholders will explore
incentives in mortgage underwriting and appraisal that would factor energy efficiency into sales
and refinancing of homes.
Expand DOE’s Voluntary Better Buildings Challenge to Include Multifamily Housing. This
program, which supports commercial and industrial building owners to improve energy efficiency
by providing technical assistance and matching partners with allied suppliers, will expand to
building owners and public housing agencies to cover multifamily housing efficiency as well.
Phase-Down Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) Emissions. EPA will use its authority under the
Significant New Alternatives Policy Program to identify and approve “climate-friendly”
chemicals as alternatives to HFC and to chemicals that deplete the stratospheric ozone layer, and
to prohibit certain uses of the most harmful chemicals. The Administration will purchase safer
alternatives to HFC where feasible and transition to alternatives over time.
Develop an Interagency Methane Strategy. EPA, USDA, DOE, Department of Interior (DOI),
Department of Labor (DOL), and DOT will assess best technologies and practices, and will
identify existing authorities and incentives to reduce methane emissions.
Pursue Collaboration to Reduce Methane Emissions. The Administration will continue
agencies’ efforts with states, industrial sectors, and others, to reduce emissions, building on
lessons learned from previous methane initiatives of former Administrations.25 The plan
specifically mentions support for production of oil and gas while reducing venting and flaring of
methane.
Protecting Carbon Removals by U.S. Resources and Landscapes. Related to measures to
adapt to climate change, conservation and land management will seek to protect and restore
forests, grasslands, wetlands, and other resources. In the context of a changing climate, these
measures aim to help ensure that vegetation continues to remove carbon from the atmosphere,
along with providing other services.
Continue to Carry Out Executive Order 13514. Agencies will continue to enter into
performance-based contracts that promote energy savings26 and take additional actions to promote
energy efficiency. The plan indicates that agencies will synchronize building codes for federally
owned and supported buildings, and take additional measures to meet the GHG emission
reduction directives under E.O. 13514 (with adaptation plans discussed below).27
Prepare the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change
On October 5, 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in
Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance
. The E.O. called for

25 See CRS Report R40813, Methane Capture: Options for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction, by Kelsi Bracmort et
al.
26 Directed by Presidential Memorandum, “Implementation of Energy Savings Projects and Performance-Based
Contracting for Energy Savings.” December 2, 2011.
27 http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/sustainability.
Congressional Research Service
6

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

• federal agencies to participate actively to develop “approaches through which the
policies and practices of the agencies can be made compatible with and
reinforce” a national climate change adaptation strategy; and
• the Council on Environmental Quality to report to the President on progress on
agency actions and recommendations for further measures.
Agencies were instructed by CEQ to include initial adaptation plans in their 2012 Strategic
Sustainability Performance Plans (SSPPs), required of every agency under E.O. 13514. Agencies’
SSPPs are available using sustainability.performance.gov. In many cases, the climate change
adaptation plans are stand-alone reports appended to the SSPPs. The first adaptation plans were
officially released on February 7, 2013, for a 60-day public comment period.
The June 2013 Climate Action Plan calls for a series of actions that may be—but are not
clearly—incremental to what agencies were already undertaking pursuant to E.O. 13514. The
plan includes
• Directing agencies to identify and remove barriers to making climate-resilient
investments; identify and remove counterproductive policies that increase
vulnerabilities; and support more resilient investments through agency grants,
technical assistance, and other mechanisms. Climate risk management is to be
fully integrated into federal infrastructure and natural resource management
planning,28 the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds,29 grants
for brownfields cleanup, and HUD grants to assist in recovery following
Superstorm Sandy.
• Establishing a State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate
Preparedness,30 to provide recommendations to remove barriers to appropriate
investments, modify grant and loan programs, and develop better information and
tools to support communities that seek to become more resilient to a changing
climate.
• Requiring that existing federal programs continue to provide targeted assistance
to communities to prepare for the impacts of climate change, including through
the Federal Highway Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and annual
federal “Environmental Justice Progress Reports.”
• Boosting resilience of buildings and infrastructure by developing a framework
and guidelines for safe buildings and infrastructure through a panel to be
convened by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The
President’s FY2014 budget proposal included $200 million for Climate Ready
Infrastructure through the Transportation Leadership Awards program of DOT.
• Enhancing resilience in rebuilding following Hurricane Sandy through federal
relief programs. Programs that provide financial assistance include the Federal

28 See GAO. Climate Change: Various Adaptation Efforts Are Under Way at Key Natural Resource Management
Agencies
, May 31, 2013. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-253.
29 For more about these funds, see CRS Report RL31116, Water Infrastructure Needs and Investment: Review and
Analysis of Key Issues
, by Claudia Copeland and Mary Tiemann.
30 See GAO. Climate Change: Future Federal Adaptation Efforts Could Better Support Local Infrastructure Decision
Makers
, April 12, 2013. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-242.
Congressional Research Service
7

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Transit Administration ($1.3 billion to locally prioritized projects to make transit
systems more resilient to future disasters); DOI ($100 million in competitive
grants to promote resilient natural systems and $250 million in support projects
for coastal restoration and resilience); and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
($20 million to study reducing the vulnerability of Sandy-affected coastal
communities to future large-scale flood and storm events).31
• Identifying and taking actions in specific sectors, including energy production,
healthcare, insurance, land and water resource conservation and management,
agriculture, forestry, and others. Among these efforts would be launch of a new
National Drought Resilience Partnership, and expansion of forest- and rangeland-
restoration to reduce those areas’ vulnerability to catastrophic fire.
• Focusing on “usable knowledge” in continuing global change research and
completing the third National Climate Assessment (NCA). The expected release
date for the NCA is now spring of 2014.
• Launching a Climate Data Initiative consistent with the President’s May 9, 2013,
executive order, Making Open and Machine Readable the New Default for
Government Information
.32 It is intended to make government data more freely
available.
• Providing a Toolkit for Climate Resilience that centralizes access to various
federal agencies’ related tools, services, and best practices.
Following up, Executive Order 13653, Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate
Change
, was issued November 1, 2013. It expounds upon efforts federal agencies should
undertake to enhance climate preparedness and resilience.33 It calls for intergovernmental
partnerships, risk-informed decision making, adaptive learning, and preparedness planning. The
executive order establishes a Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience (Council) to
replace the Inter-Agency Climate Change Task Force. It also establishes a State, Local, and Tribal
Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience (Task Force) to support
intergovernmental partnerships (including tribes). The Task Force shall provide recommendations
to the Council by November 1, 2014, and shall terminate no later than six months after submitting
its recommendations.
E.O. 13653 builds on previous executive orders and policies requiring agencies to develop
climate change action plans and timelines. It charges numerous interagency task forces with
ensuring that climate change-related risks are taken into account in federal permitting and other
decisions.34 The executive order increases reporting from agencies on how they are meeting their
requirements, including their assessments of changes to policies, programs, and regulations to
make natural resource managements more resilient to climate change. It also calls for a web-

31 EOP, op. cit., p. 14.
32 White House. Making Open and Machine Readable the New Default for Government Information. May 9, 2013
33 Executive Office of the President. Executive Order 13653: Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate
Change
. Federal Register, November 1, 2013. https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/11/06/2013-26785/
preparing-the-united-states-for-the-impacts-of-climate-change.
34 Task forces changed explicitly by E.O. 13653 include the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting
and Review Process Improvement; the Task Force on Ports; the Interagency Working Group on Coordination of
Domestic Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska; and the Federal Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice.
Congressional Research Service
8

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

based portal on “data.gov” to improve access to data and tools relevant to climate issues and
decision making.
International Leadership
When the United States ratified the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC), it agreed to the objective of
stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent
dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be
achieved with a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate
change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development
to proceed in a sustainable manner.35
Although the United States signed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC, the agreement was
never submitted to the Senate for consent to its ratification.36 Congressional opposition was
strong to a treaty, in part because it did not include all major emitting countries, such as China,
and that it would impose costs on the U.S. economy.37 The United States has no quantitative,
legally binding obligations to reduce its GHG emissions under the UNFCCC, although it is
currently negotiating towards an agreement to abate GHG emissions globally, due in 2015 and to
take effect by 2020.
After President Obama took office, in conjunction with the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, he pledged
a policy to reduce U.S. GHG emissions by 17% compared with 2005 levels. Without rules to
reduce power plant emissions, the United States would not be on track to meet this pledge, a fact
that increases pressure and arguably undermines U.S. leadership (though not necessarily
leverage) in the international negotiations.
New in the President’s announcement is a call to end U.S. support for public financing of new
coal-fired power plants overseas. This would exempt the most efficient coal technology available
in the world’s poorest countries and power plants that employ emerging carbon capture and
sequestration technology.
The President’s Climate Action Plan includes several efforts in motion prior to the June 2013
announcements. Among the bilateral and multilateral programs are the following:
• A “major initiative” in 2013 in conjunction with the Major Economies Forum on
Energy and Climate38 to promote energy efficiency gains in buildings.
• Bilateral cooperation with key major emerging economies. Existing initiatives
include the U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center, the U.S.-India Partnership
to Advance Clean Energy, and the Strategic Energy Dialogue with Brazil. The
President cites as an example an agreement between the United States and China

35 UNFCCC Article 2, Objective. 1992.
36 For more information on the international negotiations on climate change, see CRS Report R40001, A U.S.-Centric
Chronology of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
, by Jane A. Leggett.
37 The Senate had stated this clearly, in July 2007 prior to the Kyoto negotiations, in S.Res. 98, passed on a vote of 95-
0.
38 http://www.state.gov/e/oes/climate/mem/index.htm.
Congressional Research Service
9

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

in June 2013 to phase down production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons
(HFC) globally under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer.39
• A call to phase out subsidies for fossil fuels globally. G-20 leaders committed to
this goal in 2009. President Obama proposes in his FY2014 budget, as in
previous budgets, to eliminate U.S. tax provisions that benefit fossil fuel supply.
• Negotiating a global free trade agreement on environmental goods and services
under the World Trade Organization (WTO). The President said such a global
agreement would build on the 2011 agreement under the Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) economies to reduce tariffs to 5% or less by 2015 on a
negotiated list of 54 environmental goods. The plan calls for negotiation at the
WTO of a plurilateral agreement to eliminate tariffs on environmental goods with
countries that account for 90% of global trade in environmental goods. It also
calls for inclusion of environmental services in the ongoing plurilateral Trade in
International Services agreement. These talks seek to supplant the thus far
unsuccessful multilateral negotiations on environmental goods and services at the
WTO Doha Round.
• Supporting reduction of emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
(REDD) globally. The Agency for International Development (AID) works
bilaterally and multilaterally through the Forest Investment Program, the Forest
Carbon Partnership Facility, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the
Tropical Forest Alliance 2020.
• Supporting international cooperation to reduce so-called “super-pollutants,”
gases and aerosol pollutants that are highly potent but short-lived once emitted
to, or formed from emissions in, the atmosphere. The Climate and Clean Air
Coalition to Reduce Short-Lived Climate Pollution was formed among a group of
like-minded countries in February 2012 to promote reduction of methane, black
carbon, HFC, and other pollutants with potent influence on the climate.
In cooperation under the UNFCCC, the Obama Administration pledged to help mobilize $30
billion of financing during 2010-2012 to assist developing countries mitigate GHG emissions and
adapt to climate change. The $30 billion was intended as a publicly funded “fast start” toward
stimulating financing—both public and private—of $100 billion annually by 2020. The President
stated the United States met its pledge for the 2010-2012 “fast-start” financing with
approximately $7.5 billion in that three-year period.40 The June 2013 Plan speaks to the pledge
for 2020 financing in general terms only.41

39 White House, United States and China Agree to Work Together on Phase Down of HFCs, press release, June 8,
2013. For more information on the Montreal Protocol, see United Nations Environment Programme, Ozone Secretariat.
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.
40 The State Department’s calculation is available at http://www.state.gov/e/oes/climate/faststart/index.htm.
41 EOP, op. cit., p. 20.
Congressional Research Service
10

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Possible Issues for Congress
The President’s plan mostly envisions actions that do not require further authority from Congress
to accomplish, although some would rely on appropriations of funds to specific programs. An
initial review of the Climate Action Plan raises a few initial questions some in Congress may wish
to explore.
1. The cumulative impacts of existing measures and the President’s announced plan
have not been assessed, in terms of accomplishments in reducing GHG emissions
or in terms of costs and savings that may result. In addition to net costs or
benefits, distributional impacts across regions, sectors, and segments of the
population may be of interest.
Some in Congress and, more generally, in the American public oppose regulation
of GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. Some legislators have proposed
resolutions or bills to curtail executive authority in advance of EPA finalization
of rules. Once a rule is finalized, Congress may use the Congressional Review
Act (CRA, 5 U.S.C. §§801 et seq.)42 to overturn the rule by enacting a joint
resolution of disapproval. The CRA allows for the use of expedited procedures
when considering such a joint resolution, and, if the joint resolution were to be
enacted, the rule would no longer have force or effect. However, the resolution of
disapproval would require the signature of the President, who would be unlikely
to sign a bill overturning his own agency’s rule. A two-thirds vote in both House
and Senate could overcome a presidential veto.
In May 2013, the Administration released an updated range for the “social costs
of carbon” (SCC)—dollar values representing the benefits of avoiding damages
of climate change, expressed as dollars per ton of CO2 released in particular
years.43 These SCC estimates have been, and will be used, to compare the
benefits with the costs of prospective regulations,44 though cost-benefit analysis
has not typically been a determinative factor in regulatory choices. While the
interagency group that developed the SCC acknowledged the difficulties of
providing such values, the 9th Circuit Court ruled in 2007 that estimating the
benefits of rules without including such values for climate damages is “arbitrary
and capricious.”45 Some observers have expressed concern that the new SCC
values could be used to justify tighter standards, while others have criticized the
methods for understating the SCC. Congress may wish to consider the process by
which the SCC have been developed, the role of public and congressional input,
and how the SCC may affect future actions.
2. Some in Congress may seek to enact a more cohesive alternative to EPA
regulation of GHG emissions and the assortment of Administration measures in

42 CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulemaking Process: An Overview, coordinated by Maeve P. Carey.
43 Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon. Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the Social
Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866
. Washington DC: U.S. Government,
May 2013. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/
social_cost_of_carbon_for_ria_2013_update.pdf.
44 CRS Report R41974, Cost-Benefit and Other Analysis Requirements in the Rulemaking Process, by Maeve P. Carey
45 Center for Biological Diversity v. National Highway Traffic Safety Admin., 508 F.3d 508, 519 (9th Cir. 2007).
Congressional Research Service
11

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

the Obama plan. Some policy makers have proposed that fees on GHG emissions
(e.g., “carbon taxes”) would be a preferable alternative, while others oppose this
option. The Keystone XL pipeline, to transport Canadian oil sands crude across
the U.S. border, requires a Presidential Permit from the President. While many
support approval of the pipeline, some environmental proponents have called the
project the “line in the sand” on climate change and urge the President to deny
the permit. Pursuant to the President’s statement that “[our] national interest will
be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the impacts of
carbon pollution,” Congress may wish to examine systematically the trade-offs to
national interest of the project.
Selected CRS Reports Relating to the
Obama Proposal

A number of CRS reports are available with background relating to some of President Obama’s
announced policies on climate change. Additional reports are available at http://www.crs.gov, and
at the CRS Climate Change Science, Technology, and Policy web page.
CRS Report R43127, EPA Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Power Plants: Many
Questions, Some Answers
, by James E. McCarthy.
CRS Report R42613, Climate Change and Existing Law: A Survey of Legal Issues Past, Present,
and Future
, by Robert Meltz.
CRS Report R41561, EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track?, by James E.
McCarthy and Claudia Copeland.
CRS Report R42532, Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS): A Primer, by Peter Folger.
CRS Report R41103, Federal Agency Actions Following the Supreme Court’s Climate Change
Decision in Massachusetts v. EPA: A Chronology
, by Robert Meltz.
CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulemaking Process: An Overview, coordinated by Maeve P.
Carey.
CRS Report R40913, Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Incentives: A Summary of
Federal Programs
, by Lynn J. Cunningham and Beth Cook.
CRS Report R40806, Energy Projects on Federal Lands: Leasing and Authorization, by Adam
Vann.
CRS Report R43011, U.S. and World Coal Production, Federal Taxes, and Incentives,
coordinated by Marc Humphries.
CRS Report R42986, Air Quality Issues in Natural Gas Systems: In Brief, by Richard K.
Lattanzio.
CRS Report R40506, Cars, Trucks, and Climate: EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases from
Mobile Sources
, by James E. McCarthy and Brent D. Yacobucci.
Congressional Research Service
12

President Obama’s Climate Action Plan

CRS Report R42721, Automobile and Truck Fuel Economy (CAFE) and Greenhouse Gas
Standards
, by Brent D. Yacobucci, Bill Canis, and Richard K. Lattanzio.
CRS Report R40155, Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS): Overview and Issues, by Randy Schnepf
and Brent D. Yacobucci.
CRS Report R41985, Renewable Energy Programs and the Farm Bill: Status and Issues, by
Randy Schnepf.
CRS Report R40813, Methane Capture: Options for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction, by
Kelsi Bracmort et al.
CRS Report R42611, Oil Sands and the Keystone XL Pipeline: Background and Selected
Environmental Issues
, coordinated by Jonathan L. Ramseur.
CRS Report R42537, Canadian Oil Sands: Life-Cycle Assessments of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
, by Richard K. Lattanzio.
CRS Report R40001, A U.S.-Centric Chronology of the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change
, by Jane A. Leggett.
CRS Report R41845, The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI): Budget Authority and
Request, FY2010-FY2014
, by Richard K. Lattanzio.
CRS Report R41302, International Climate Change Financing: The Climate Investment Funds
(CIFs)
, by Richard K. Lattanzio.

Author Contact Information

Jane A. Leggett, Coordinator

Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy
jaleggett@crs.loc.gov, 7-9525


Congressional Research Service
13