Air Quality Regulations, Research Paper Example

Regulation and Agency Review

The below essay will examine the potential risks and benefits of introducing the proposed rule of the Clean Power Act. Administrator McCarty, from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed in 2014 that new regulations would be introduced regarding power plants regarding CO2 emission. It would be a rule under the Clean Air Act (1970) that states that all stationary and mobile sources of CO2 need to comply with National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The act regulates the emission of dangerous pollutants.

Impact of the Proposal

The proposed change would – according to McCarthy – would improve air quality and “nationwide, by 2030, this rule would achieve CO 2 emission reductions from the power sector of approximately 30 percent from CO 2 emission levels in 2005” (Federal Register, 2014). The authority of regulation will be the responsibility of the Environmental Protection Agency. Administrator McCarthy (2014) states that the new regulation would apply to power plants only, as she explains: “power plants are the largest source of carbon pollution in the U.S., accounting for roughly one-third of all domestic greenhouse gas emissions” (McCarthy, 2014, p. 1)

Public Comment

The public comment I would write regarding the proposed change, due by the 1^st of December, prepared for the public consultation session on November 12th and 17^th in the D.C. Metro Area are as follows:

I welcome the initiative to regulate power plants in the United States, and the background research data, as well as the predictions clearly indicate that the public would benefit from the new rule. Submitting my comment through the online service of the EPA website, and I understand that the future generations would benefit from the new regulation. The proposal has been long awaited in America, and I believe that by producing electricity from renewable sources, we do not only make the air cleaner, but can reduce the impact of global warming, including floods, droughts, and earthquakes.  I truly hope that the EPA will start consultation with power plant representatives soon, so they can come to an agreement, and industrial lobbying will not be able to stop the new rule from getting accepted by the Congress. My only concern is that electricity firms would potentially be able to pass on the cost of green developments to the public, therefore, vulnerable population would be disadvantaged.

After the Comment Submitted

After this comment is made and the proposal has been submitted, I will still be able to seek authorization for arbitration, so will the power supply companies.  Under the Administrative Procedure Act, I interested parties are entitled to be involved in the rule-making process and prepare written documents, as well as oral presentation of opposing views, which need to be considered and ruled upon for a period of 30 days. The agency needs to provide rationale for accepting or rejecting each comment.

Grounds for Legal Challenge at Court

One of the main reasons why the regulation could be overturned or challenged in the future is because industry leaders and individuals could question the authority of EPA to regulate and monitor air quality in the United States. This means that the challenge can be based on the statement that the agency is acting “beyond its powers”. A similar challenge has been made in 2012, when the greenhouse rules were challenged (Volcovici, 2012).

The next ground of challenging the decision is based on the assumption that the regulation is unconstitutional. Providing authority for EPA to monitor the activities of companies could be found to harm the interest of companies.

The third way that interested parties can use to challenge the regulation can be used if the agency did not comply with APA (Administrative Procedure Act) regulations regarding public consultation and notices, deadline publications.

Further, opposing parties can state that there is not enough or unreliable supporting evidence that the ruling is based on. Some groups, for example could bring up research that shows that global warming is not a consequence of pollution, or state that the CO2 emission reduction predictions are not valid.

Finally, interested parties can state that the rule is violating another rule, and therefore is capricious. The agency needs to provide evidence that the new rule is beneficial and does not violate other laws.

In my opinion, the most effective way of challenging the regulation would be based on the assumption that the agency is acting “beyond its powers” when regulating the power industry.

References

EPA. Clean Air Act. (1970) 42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq. Retrieved from http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-air-act

Clean Power Plan (2014) Proposed Rule Retrieved from http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/regulatory-actions

McCarthy, Gina (2014) Our Clean Power Plan will spur innovation and strengthen the economy. Blog Post. Retrieved from http://blog.epa.gov/epaconnect/2014/06/our-clean-power-plan-will-spur-innovation-and-strengthen-the-economy/

Volcovici, V. (2012) E.P.A. greenhouse gas rules face new legal challenges. Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/27/us-usa-epa-court-idUSTRE81Q1Y120120227