CRS Issue Statement on the Clean Air Act and Air Quality Standards

CRS Issue Statement on the Clean Air Act and Air Quality Standards

.

CRS Issue Statement on the Clean Air Act and
Air Quality Standards
James E. McCarthy, Coordinator
Specialist in Environmental Policy
January 4, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
IS40269
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
c11173008

.
CRS Issue Statement on the Clean Air Act and Air Quality Standards

road questions regarding the effectiveness of economic versus regulatory approaches to
controlling air pollution, the role of federal versus state governments in controlling
B emissions, and the respective role of existing EPA authority versus new legislation are the
underlying issues as the 111th Congress considers amendments to the Clean Air Act and conducts
oversight of EPA regulatory actions. Specific issues include what role the Clean Air Act will play
in the prospective regulation of greenhouse gas emissions; how to control emissions of a wide
range of pollutants from electric power plants, many of which operate without state-of-the-art
pollution controls; and whether existing standards for ambient air quality need strengthening.
The clean air debate overlaps to a large extent the debate regarding control of greenhouse gases
GHGs). Many of the bills introduced to cap GHG emissions would amend the Clean Air Act. The
leading approach—a national cap on emissions, with a trading system for emission allowances—
builds on the experience of the Clean Air Act’s acid precipitation program. As it considers
greenhouse gas legislation, Congress will need to decide not only whether to enact greenhouse
gas limits, but, if so, whether legislation will be based on a cap-and-trade system, carbon taxes,
emission standards for specific sectors, or some combination of the above, and the degree to
which federal controls will preempt state regulations, among many other issues.
In addition to Congress, EPA faces many decisions regarding GHGs, as the agency responds to
petitions for a new air quality standard to address ambient GHGs and for action on GHG
emissions from power plants, ships, aircraft, agricultural sources, cars, and trucks. The degree to
which Congress might preempt EPA decisions is an important issue.
Although climate change is expected to take the lion’s share of Congressional interest in clean air
issues, attention may also be paid to the regulation of conventional and toxic pollutants from
electric power plants. Many older power plants operate with few controls. When the Clean Air
Act was enacted in 1970, it was assumed that imposing controls on new plants and plants
undergoing modifications would eventually lead to controls at all plants; but today, four decades
later, hundreds of power plants are still operating with minimal pollution control equipment. In
2005, EPA promulgated cap-and-trade programs for power plant emissions, but the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated these regulations in 2008, in two separate, unanimous
decisions. Without new regulations of some sort, most Eastern states face a huge gap in their
emission control programs. Thus, EPA is at work crafting replacement regulations; Congress may
be asked to consider legislation addressing power plant emissions, as well. The costs and benefits
of various levels of control, the availability of control technology, and legal issues related to the
vacated standards are among the issues that Congress and EPA face.
Over the next 18 months, EPA also faces statutory and judicial deadlines to complete reviews of
five of the six existing National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Early indications are that most of
these standards will be strengthened, leading to a new round of tighter emission controls on many
air pollution sources. The health and environmental impacts as well as the economic impacts of
such a regulatory strengthening may lead to Congressional oversight of EPA’s decisions.
Congress may also wish to reexamine the process of setting such standards, which has been
controversial in recent years.

Congressional Research Service
1

.
CRS Issue Statement on the Clean Air Act and Air Quality Standards

Issue Team Members

James E. McCarthy, Coordinator
Larry Parker
Specialist in Environmental Policy
Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy
jmccarthy@crs.loc.gov, 7-7225
lparker@crs.loc.gov, 7-7238
Vanessa Cieslak
Beth A. Roberts
Information Research Specialist
Information Research Specialist
vcieslak@crs.loc.gov, 7-8978
eroberts@crs.loc.gov, 7-9090
Claudia Copeland
Linda-Jo Schierow
Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy
Specialist in Environmental Policy
ccopeland@crs.loc.gov, 7-7227
lschierow@crs.loc.gov, 7-7279
Robert Esworthy
Dana A. Shea
Specialist in Environmental Policy
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
resworthy@crs.loc.gov, 7-7236
dshea@crs.loc.gov, 7-6844
Robert Meltz
Brent D. Yacobucci
Legislative Attorney
Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy
rmeltz@crs.loc.gov, 7-7891
byacobucci@crs.loc.gov, 7-9662

Congressional Research Service
2