{ "id": "R44744", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R44744", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 584109, "date": "2018-08-13", "retrieved": "2019-12-20T21:01:32.758442", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "Review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, has been the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in the 115th Congress and in the executive and judicial branches in 2017 and 2018. Of particular interest are the ambient air quality standards for ozone promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 2015; EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector; and emission standards for three groups of sources: brick kilns, wood stoves and heaters, and power plants that burn waste coal. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but the specifics remain controversial and subject to debate in Congress, the Trump Administration, and the courts. \nThe Clean Power Plan (CPP), which would limit GHG emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants, has been a frequent subject of debate. Implementation of the CPP has been stayed by the Supreme Court since February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Prior to the stay, challenges to the rule had been filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. The Trump Administration\u2019s EPA has proposed to repeal the CPP and has asked for public input on what should replace it. The D.C. Circuit has stayed the litigation during EPA\u2019s review of the CPP.\nMore broadly, on March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, to require the review of regulations and policies that burden the development or use of domestically produced energy. The E.O. directed EPA to review the Clean Power Plan and several other regulations for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to \u201csuspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.\u201d GHG rules for cars and trucks and for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry, in addition to the CPP, are subject to the executive order and are under review at EPA, as well as being challenged in the courts. \nCongress could, of course, short-circuit the EPA and judicial processes, through legislation overturning or modifying any of these regulations. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nAn EPA rule that has been the subject of action in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA revised in October 2015. Under the revised NAAQS, EPA was to have designated areas that have not attained the standard in October 2017, setting in motion tighter emission requirements for a multitude of industrial, commercial, and mobile sources of pollution. On May 1 and July 17, 2018, the agency took action, identifying 52 areas in 22 states and the District of Columbia as being in nonattainment of the revised standard. \nOn July 18, 2017, the House passed H.R. 806, which would have delayed designation of the nonattainment areas until 2025 and would require future reviews of the NAAQS every 10 years instead of every 5, among other provisions. The House has also passed legislation to delay emission standards for brick kilns and wood heaters (both in H.R. 1917) and to exempt coal-refuse-fired electric generating units (EGUs) from certain emission standards that apply to other coal-fired EGUs (H.R. 1119). All of the House-passed bills await action in the Senate.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "8f2041eb40eef44067af30b080ca365a1929348d", "filename": "files/20180813_R44744_8f2041eb40eef44067af30b080ca365a1929348d.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44744_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180813_R44744_images_3e9db619d2720a87392b12eb5ccdefbbd7799423.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "0124b902161675797342344fc964b8457456b938", "filename": "files/20180813_R44744_0124b902161675797342344fc964b8457456b938.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 580914, "date": "2018-05-01", "retrieved": "2018-05-10T10:12:03.827637", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "Review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, has been the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in the 115th Congress and in the executive and judicial branches in 2017 and 2018. Of particular interest are the ambient air quality standards for ozone promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 2015; EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector; and emission standards for three groups of sources: brick kilns, wood stoves and heaters, and power plants that burn waste coal. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but the specifics remain controversial and subject to debate in Congress, the Trump Administration, and the courts. \nThe Clean Power Plan (CPP), which would limit GHG emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants, has been a frequent subject of debate. Implementation of the CPP has been stayed by the Supreme Court since February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Prior to the stay, challenges to the rule had been filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. The Trump Administration\u2019s EPA has proposed to repeal the CPP and has asked for public input on what should replace it. The D.C. Circuit has stayed the litigation during EPA\u2019s review of the CPP.\nMore broadly, on March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, to require the review of regulations and policies that burden the development or use of domestically produced energy. The E.O. directed EPA to review the Clean Power Plan and several other regulations for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to \u201csuspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.\u201d GHG rules for cars and trucks and for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry, in addition to the CPP, are subject to the executive order and are under review at EPA, as well as being challenged in the courts. \nCongress could, of course, short-circuit the EPA and judicial processes, through legislation overturning or modifying any of these regulations. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nAn EPA rule that has been the subject of action in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA revised in October 2015. Under the revised NAAQS, EPA was to have designated areas that have not attained the standard in October 2017, setting in motion tighter emission requirements for a multitude of industrial, commercial, and mobile sources of pollution. On April 30, 2018, the agency took action, identifying 51 areas in 22 states and the District of Columbia as being in nonattainment of the revised standard. \nOn July 18, 2017, the House passed H.R. 806, which would have delayed designation of the nonattainment areas until 2025 and require future reviews of the NAAQS every 10 years instead of every 5, among other provisions. The House has also passed legislation to delay emission standards for brick kilns and wood heaters (both in H.R. 1917) and to exempt coal-refuse-fired electric generating units (EGUs) from certain emission standards that apply to other coal-fired EGUs (H.R. 1119). All of the House-passed bills await action in the Senate.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "7748ff87440e78edc3221d1050d9a4c5a3ddb648", "filename": "files/20180501_R44744_7748ff87440e78edc3221d1050d9a4c5a3ddb648.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44744_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180501_R44744_images_4aea2396f4e77069f6e1de4b25ffa0ce1d4983b8.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "dc4f07b55e1b30f591bc6b4d6412084ac402e024", "filename": "files/20180501_R44744_dc4f07b55e1b30f591bc6b4d6412084ac402e024.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 579218, "date": "2018-03-12", "retrieved": "2018-04-03T13:44:14.346017", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "Review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, has been the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in the 115th Congress and in the executive and judicial branches in 2017 and 2018. Of particular interest are the ambient air quality standards for ozone promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 2015; EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector; and emission standards for three groups of sources: brick kilns, wood stoves and heaters, and power plants that burn waste coal. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but the specifics remain controversial and subject to debate in Congress, the Trump Administration, and the courts. \nThe Clean Power Plan (CPP), which would limit GHG emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants, has been a frequent subject of debate. Implementation of the CPP has been stayed by the Supreme Court since February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Prior to the stay, challenges to the rule had been filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. EPA, under new leadership, has proposed to repeal the CPP and has asked for public input on what should replace it. The D.C. Circuit has stayed the litigation during EPA\u2019s review of the CPP.\nMore broadly, on March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, to require the review of regulations and policies that burden the development or use of domestically produced energy. The E.O. directed EPA to review the Clean Power Plan and several other regulations for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to \u201csuspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.\u201d GHG rules for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry and from cars and trucks, in addition to the CPP, are subject to the executive order and are under review at EPA, as well as being challenged in the courts. \nCongress could, of course, short-circuit the EPA and judicial processes, through legislation overturning or modifying any of these regulations. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nAn EPA rule that has been the subject of action in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA revised in October 2015. Under the revised NAAQS, EPA was to have designated areas that have not attained the standard in October 2017, setting in motion tighter emission requirements for a multitude of industrial, commercial, and mobile sources of pollution. As of March 2018, nonattainment areas have not been identified. On July 18, 2017, the House passed H.R. 806, which would delay designation of the nonattainment areas until 2025 and require future reviews of the NAAQS every 10 years instead of every 5, among other provisions. \nThe House has also passed legislation to delay emission standards for brick kilns and wood heaters (both in H.R. 1917) and to exempt coal-refuse-fired electric generating units (EGUs) from certain emission standards that apply to other coal-fired EGUs (H.R. 1119). All of the House-passed bills await action in the Senate.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "d3c16689b6912bface25a50a0f4d695a3e502c40", "filename": "files/20180312_R44744_d3c16689b6912bface25a50a0f4d695a3e502c40.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44744_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180312_R44744_images_4aea2396f4e77069f6e1de4b25ffa0ce1d4983b8.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "46167bbebb177c1ee101fc05e4a481db08dd8770", "filename": "files/20180312_R44744_46167bbebb177c1ee101fc05e4a481db08dd8770.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 577377, "date": "2018-01-03", "retrieved": "2018-01-05T14:21:40.842236", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "In the 115th Congress, and in the executive and judicial branches, review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, was the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in 2017. 2018 may see more of the same. Of particular interest are the ambient air quality standards for ozone promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 2015 and various EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but the specifics remain controversial and subject to debate in Congress, the Trump Administration, and the courts. \nThe Clean Power Plan (CPP), which would limit GHG emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants, has been a frequent subject of debate. Implementation of the CPP has been stayed by the Supreme Court since February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Challenges to the rule had been filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. EPA, under new leadership, has proposed to repeal the CPP and has asked for public input on what should replace it. The D.C. Circuit has stayed the litigation during EPA\u2019s review of the CPP.\nMore broadly, on March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, to require the review of regulations and policies that burden the development or use of domestically produced energy. The E.O. directed EPA to review the Clean Power Plan and several other regulations for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to \u201csuspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.\u201d Other GHG rules, for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry and for GHG emissions from cars and trucks, are also subject to the executive order and are under review at EPA, as well as being challenged in the courts. \nCongress could, of course, short-circuit the EPA and judicial processes, through legislation overturning or modifying the regulations. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nAn EPA rule that has been the subject of action in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA revised in October 2015. Under the revised NAAQS, EPA was to have designated areas that have not attained the standard in October 2017, setting in motion tighter emission requirements for a multitude of industrial, commercial, and mobile sources of pollution. As of early 2018, nonattainment areas have not been identified. On July 18, 2017, the House passed H.R. 806, which would delay designation of the nonattainment areas until 2025 and require future reviews of the NAAQS every 10 years instead of every 5, among other provisions.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "1ea3dfee8abf3c08abc715fdd2f928ce7b87990c", "filename": "files/20180103_R44744_1ea3dfee8abf3c08abc715fdd2f928ce7b87990c.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44744_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180103_R44744_images_4aea2396f4e77069f6e1de4b25ffa0ce1d4983b8.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "c3a39c785dbe7024297c9d1f673a639aef8202df", "filename": "files/20180103_R44744_c3a39c785dbe7024297c9d1f673a639aef8202df.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 463343, "date": "2017-08-16", "retrieved": "2017-08-21T14:18:26.735223", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "In the 115th Congress, and in the executive and judicial branches, review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, has been the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in 2017. Of particular interest are the ambient air quality standards for ozone promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 2015 and various EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress and among Cabinet appointees of the Trump Administration. \nThe Clean Power Plan (CPP), which would limit GHG emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants, was a frequent topic in articles earlier this year discussing the 115th Congress\u2019s priorities; in the near term, however, the courts and EPA seem the more likely venues for action. Implementation of the CPP has been stayed by the Supreme Court since February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Challenges to the rule had been filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. \nEPA, under new leadership, now appears a more likely venue to modify the CPP. On March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, to require the review of regulations and policies that burden the development or use of domestically produced energy. The E.O. directed EPA to review the Clean Power Plan (and several other regulations) for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to \u201csuspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.\u201d Other GHG rules, for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry and for GHG emissions from cars and trucks, are also subject to the executive order and are under review at EPA, as well as being challenged in the courts. Congress could, of course, short-circuit the EPA and judicial processes, through legislation overturning or modifying the regulations. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nAn EPA rule that has been the subject of action in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA revised in October 2015. Under the revised NAAQS, EPA is to designate areas that have not attained the standard in October 2017, setting in motion tighter emission requirements for a multitude of industrial, commercial, and mobile sources of pollution. On July 18, 2017, the House passed H.R. 806, which would delay designation of the nonattainment areas until 2025 and require future reviews of the NAAQS every 10 years instead of every 5, among other provisions. \nBy contrast to the ozone and GHG standards discussed above, six other Clean Air Act rules might have been overturned by Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA established a special set of procedures under which Congress may consider legislation to overturn regulations following their promulgation and submission to Congress. The special procedures, which include a prohibition of filibusters and other fast-track procedures in the Senate, are available only during a limited period of time. Rules received by Congress on or after June 13, 2016, including GHG emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, an update to EPA\u2019s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, and methane standards for landfills, were among the rules potentially eligible for CRA review. The fast-track Senate procedures for overturning these rules expired on May 11, 2017, without the Senate taking action.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "b5b239fd7596e1495fc710cc16cb477c059cc12e", "filename": "files/20170816_R44744_b5b239fd7596e1495fc710cc16cb477c059cc12e.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44744_files&id=/0.png": "files/20170816_R44744_images_48b583e3d7c8852718dc9cdfb9f69c9dcba90ff4.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "235ab656329f2686b9afa77f1fae4328ffb7809b", "filename": "files/20170816_R44744_235ab656329f2686b9afa77f1fae4328ffb7809b.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 462999, "date": "2017-07-31", "retrieved": "2017-08-16T15:39:15.823940", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "In the 115th Congress, and in the executive and judicial branches, review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, has been the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues in 2017. Of particular interest are the ambient air quality standards for ozone promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 2015 and various EPA rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress and among Cabinet appointees of the Trump Administration. \nThe Clean Power Plan (CPP), which would limit GHG emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants, was a frequent topic in articles earlier this year discussing the 115th Congress\u2019s priorities; in the near term, however, the courts and EPA seem the more likely venues for action. Implementation of the CPP has been stayed by the Supreme Court since February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Challenges to the rule had been filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. \nEPA, under new leadership, now appears a more likely venue to modify the CPP. On March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, to require the review of regulations and policies that burden the development or use of domestically produced energy. The E.O. directed EPA to review the Clean Power Plan (and several other regulations) for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to \u201csuspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.\u201d Other GHG rules, for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry and for GHG emissions from cars and trucks, are also subject to the executive order and are under review at EPA, as well as being challenged in the courts. Congress could, of course, short-circuit the EPA and judicial processes, through legislation overturning or modifying the regulations. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nAn EPA rule that has been the subject of action in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA revised in October 2015. Under the revised NAAQS, EPA is to designate areas that have not attained the standard in October 2018, setting in motion tighter emission requirements for a multitude of industrial, commercial, and mobile sources of pollution. On July 18, 2017, the House passed H.R. 806, which would delay designation of the nonattainment areas until 2025 and require future reviews of the NAAQS every 10 years instead of every 5, among other provisions. \nBy contrast to the ozone and GHG standards discussed above, six other Clean Air Act rules might have been overturned by Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA established a special set of procedures under which Congress may consider legislation to overturn regulations following their promulgation and submission to Congress. The special procedures, which include a prohibition of filibusters and other fast-track procedures in the Senate, are available only during a limited period of time. Rules received by Congress on or after June 13, 2016, including GHG emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, an update to EPA\u2019s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, and methane standards for landfills, were among the rules potentially eligible for CRA review. The fast-track Senate procedures for overturning these rules expired on May 11, 2017, without the Senate taking action.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "130c08a86f496f08502938e78e0bcbc379f41d02", "filename": "files/20170731_R44744_130c08a86f496f08502938e78e0bcbc379f41d02.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "038c5eb986f46385fd7d5214bdb5d79f24fdcca4", "filename": "files/20170731_R44744_038c5eb986f46385fd7d5214bdb5d79f24fdcca4.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 461808, "date": "2017-06-07", "retrieved": "2017-06-16T16:03:56.643769", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "In the 115th Congress, and in the executive and judicial branches, review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, has been the main focus of interest on Clean Air Act issues so far in 2017. Of particular interest are the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and related Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, promulgated on August 3, 2015. Other GHG emission standards affecting cars and light trucks, and the oil and gas sector have also received attention. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress and among Cabinet appointees of the Trump Administration. With key figures in Congress and the new Administration having expressed opposition to GHG regulations, major changes in the GHG regulatory structure are possible. \nThe CPP has been a frequent topic in articles discussing the 115th Congress\u2019s priorities; in the near term, however, the courts and EPA seem the more likely venues for action. Implementation of the CPP was stayed by the Supreme Court in February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Challenges to the rule had been filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. These challenges have been consolidated into a single case, West Virginia v. EPA. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. There is general agreement that whatever decision the court hands down would be appealed to the Supreme Court, adding more time before completion of the judicial process. \nEPA, under new leadership, now appears the more likely venue to modify the CPP. On March 28, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, to require the review of regulations and policies that burden the development or use of domestically produced energy. The E.O. directed EPA to review the Clean Power Plan (and several other regulations) for consistency with policies that the E.O. enumerates, and as soon as practicable, to \u201csuspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.\u201d Like judicial review, this route could be time-consuming. Modifying the rule would likely require the agency to follow the administrative steps involved in proposing and promulgating a new rule. Following promulgation, the new rule would itself be subject to judicial review. A large group of stakeholders, including some states, will likely oppose major changes to the CPP.\nThe EPA and judicial processes could be short-circuited by Congress, through legislation overturning or modifying the CPP. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nBy contrast, six other Clean Air Act rules might have been more easily overturned by Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA established a special set of procedures, including fast-track procedures in the Senate available during a limited period of time, under which Congress may consider legislation to overturn regulations following their promulgation and submission to Congress. Rules received by Congress on or after June 13, 2016, including GHG emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, an update to EPA\u2019s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, and methane standards for landfills, were among the rules potentially eligible for CRA review. The fast-track Senate procedures for overturning these rules expired on May 11, 2017, without the Senate taking action.\nIn addition to GHG rules and rules subject to the CRA, another EPA rule that could see renewed interest in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA promulgated in October 2015. As of mid-May, four bills had been introduced to delay implementation of the ozone rule. On June 6, 2017, EPA Administrator Pruitt announced a one-year delay in designating nonattainment areas under the revised NAAQS.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "7f6166ffd128dfa4a8177a8a8839e020d5a2bffb", "filename": "files/20170607_R44744_7f6166ffd128dfa4a8177a8a8839e020d5a2bffb.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "ae02696f652d38f5f1c5bd254ccd03761366bd8b", "filename": "files/20170607_R44744_ae02696f652d38f5f1c5bd254ccd03761366bd8b.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 458840, "date": "2017-02-07", "retrieved": "2017-02-10T18:22:07.088245", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "In the new Congress, review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, is expected to be a main focus of Congressional action on Clean Air Act issues. Of particular interest are the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and related Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, promulgated on August 3, 2015. Other GHG emission standards affecting cars, trucks, and the oil and gas sector may also be reviewed. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress and among Cabinet appointees of the Trump Administration. With key figures in Congress and the new Administration having expressed opposition to GHG regulations, major changes in the GHG regulatory structure are possible. \nThe CPP has been a frequent topic in articles discussing the new Congress\u2019s priorities; in the near term, however, the courts seem the more likely venue for action. Implementation of the CPP was stayed by the Supreme Court in February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Challenges to the rule had been filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. These challenges have been consolidated into a single case, West Virginia v. EPA. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. There is general agreement that whatever decision the court hands down will be appealed to the Supreme Court, adding more time before completion of the judicial process. \nEPA, under new leadership, could also take steps to modify the CPP. Like judicial review, this route could be time-consuming. Modifying the rule would likely require the agency to follow the administrative steps involved in proposing and promulgating a new rule. Following promulgation, the new rule would itself be subject to judicial review. A large group of stakeholders, including some states, might oppose major changes to the CPP.\nThe EPA and judicial processes could be short-circuited by Congress, through legislation overturning or modifying the CPP. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nBy contrast, six other Clean Air Act rules might be more easily overturned by Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA established a special set of procedures, including fast-track procedures in the Senate available during a limited period of time, under which Congress may consider legislation to overturn regulations following their promulgation and submission to Congress. Rules received by Congress on or after June 13, 2016, including GHG emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, an update to EPA\u2019s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, and methane standards for landfills, are among the rules potentially eligible for review. If Congress passes a joint resolution disapproving a rule under procedures provided by the CRA, and the resolution becomes law, the rule cannot take effect or continue in effect. Also, the agency may not reissue either that rule or any substantially similar one, except under authority of a subsequently enacted law.\nIn addition to GHG rules and rules subject to the CRA, another EPA rule that could see renewed interest in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA promulgated in October 2015. Like the CPP, the ozone NAAQS is reported to be a rule that President Trump has identified for repeal. As of early February, two bills had been introduced to delay implementation of the ozone rule and modify future NAAQS reviews.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "7827f2ee4f105c17fd1a12d45f9c7613c6742b77", "filename": "files/20170207_R44744_7827f2ee4f105c17fd1a12d45f9c7613c6742b77.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "223c346da73f8e9b7a464b9af0cb60879af328a6", "filename": "files/20170207_R44744_223c346da73f8e9b7a464b9af0cb60879af328a6.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 458399, "date": "2017-01-24", "retrieved": "2017-02-03T19:13:24.289290", "title": "Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief", "summary": "In the new Congress, review of regulations issued under the Obama Administration, with the possibility of their modification or repeal, is expected to be a main focus of Congressional action on Clean Air Act issues. Of particular interest are the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and related Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants, promulgated on August 3, 2015. Other GHG emission standards affecting cars, trucks, and the oil and gas sector may also be reviewed. \nReducing GHG emissions to address climate change was a major goal of President Obama, but, for a variety of reasons, many in Congress have been opposed to it. In the absence of congressional action, President Obama directed EPA to promulgate GHG emission standards using existing Clean Air Act authority. This authority has been upheld on three occasions by the Supreme Court, but it remains controversial in Congress and among Cabinet appointees of the Trump Administration. With key figures in Congress and the new Administration having expressed opposition to GHG regulations, major changes in the GHG regulatory structure are possible. \nThe CPP has been a frequent topic in articles discussing the new Congress\u2019s priorities; in the near term, however, the courts seem the more likely venue for action. Implementation of the CPP was stayed by the Supreme Court in February 2016, pending the completion of judicial review. Challenges to the rule had been filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals by more than 100 parties, including 27 states. These challenges have been consolidated into a single case, West Virginia v. EPA. The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in September 2016; as of this writing, the court has not issued a decision. There is general agreement that whatever decision the court hands down will be appealed to the Supreme Court, adding more time before completion of the judicial process. \nEPA, under new leadership, could also take steps to modify the CPP. Like judicial review, this route could be time-consuming. Modifying the rule would likely require the agency to follow the administrative steps involved in proposing and promulgating a new rule. Following promulgation, the new rule would itself be subject to judicial review. A large group of stakeholders, including some states, might oppose major changes to the CPP.\nThe EPA and judicial processes could be short-circuited by Congress, through legislation overturning or modifying the CPP. The threat of a filibuster, requiring 60 votes to proceed, might prevent Senate action, however.\nBy contrast, four other Clean Air Act rules might be more easily overturned by Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA established a special set of procedures, including fast-track procedures in the Senate available during a limited period of time, under which Congress may consider legislation to overturn regulations following their promulgation and submission to Congress. Rules received by Congress on or after June 13, 2016, including GHG emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, an update to EPA\u2019s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, and methane standards for landfills, are potentially eligible for review. If Congress passes a joint resolution disapproving a rule under procedures provided by the CRA, and the resolution becomes law, the rule cannot take effect or continue in effect. Also, the agency may not reissue either that rule or any substantially similar one, except under authority of a subsequently enacted law.\nIn addition to GHG rules, another EPA rule that could be subject to renewed interest in the 115th Congress is the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone, which EPA promulgated in October 2015. Like the CPP, the ozone standard is reported to be a rule that President Trump has identified for repeal. More than a dozen bills to modify the rule or delay its implementation were introduced in the 114th Congress, two of which passed the House.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44744", "sha1": "56acecf40f313641f1266cc64fdbacbd0da88502", "filename": "files/20170124_R44744_56acecf40f313641f1266cc64fdbacbd0da88502.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44744", "sha1": "6bff4d56b4012e57cb8fb15e7d0c403d4df1e8cd", "filename": "files/20170124_R44744_6bff4d56b4012e57cb8fb15e7d0c403d4df1e8cd.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4750, "name": "Air Quality" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Environmental Policy" ] }