Tuesday, March 30, 2010 5:00 PM
EPA May Reverse Bush Permit Streamlining
By Darren Goode, NationalJournal.com
The EPA today proposed revoking Bush administration changes to the agency's New Source Review permitting rule.
The agency last February announced it would reconsider the Bush changes and address concerns raised by the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The Clean Air Act requires major polluters and regulators to combine related projects when determining whether modifications trigger NSR requirements. NSR requires facilities to install best available pollution controls when they make major modifications.
The Bush January 2009 "aggregation" policy for the EPA's pre-construction permitting program directed facilities and permit regulators to combine emissions from construction projects only when they are "substantially related." This in effect means activities have to be technically or economically interconnected.
Bush, who issued the rule days before his presidency ended, argued this would simplify and streamline the process for issuing NSR permits.
But the Obama EPA "is concerned that the changes made last year... would make the agency's New Source Review permitting program less effective, allowing facilities to increase emissions that may impact air quality without a thorough review," according to an agency release.
The EPA would go back to its original policy, which based permitting decisions on a broader range of factors. The EPA today is also proposing to extend the effective date of the Bush changes another six months "to give the agency time to complete the reconsideration," the release said. The EPA is taking public comments for 30 days on abandoning the Bush changes.
"The current decision to repeal the rule is unfortunate, but not surprising," said Scott Segal, an energy industry lobbyist who helps lead federal government relations and strategy at Bracewell & Giuliani. Segal said today's decision underscores that the EPA will again use the NSR program as a major environmental enforcement tool. "However, time and again experience has shown that litigation-heavy strategies do not produce significant environmental benefits," he argued.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Columnists
Energy Experts Blog
Our panel of insiders discusses key issues
- Boom and Bust: Renewable Energy's Future?
- The Nexus Between Biofuels, Energy, and Agriculture
- What More Can Be Done to Ensure Safe Offshore Drilling?
Resources
Guide to researching the energy & climate change debate
- 07/15/10--CBO: Using Biofuel Tax Credits to Achieve Energy and Environmental Policy Goals | related story
- 07/07/10--Letter to Energy Secretary Chu to stop moving forward on shuttering the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository site | see related story
- 07/06/10--Proposed EPA emissions "transport rule"
- 06/24/10--Rahall draft plan (PDF) | related story
- 06/10/10--Lugar Proposal
Energy Promise Audit
Tracking Obama's progress on campaign promises
- Increase Number Of Plug-In Hybrid Cars
Updated: August 09, 2010 - End American Dependence On Foreign Oil In Ten Years
Updated: August 09, 2010 - Double Fuel Economy Standards
Updated: May 24, 2010
Copenhagen Insider
Visit Copenhagen Insider for National Journal's coverage of the recent U.N. summit including reporting from Darren Goode and analysis from stakeholders in the climate change discussion.
