Multi-industry letter to EPA Administrator Jackson on regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act
April 1, 2009
The Honorable Lisa Perez Jackson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Administrator Jackson:
The undersigned organizations write to express our continuing concern about the prospect of EPA regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and to request a meeting with you on the subject. Together, we represent a large cross-section of the American economy. We are all greatly concerned that regulation of greenhouse gases (GHG) under the CAA will trigger uncontrollable and unintended consequences that may significantly impair the prospect for economic recovery in this country without materially affecting GHG concentrations in the atmosphere.
We understand that EPA must take action in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. EPA's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) was a first step in that direction. As you are undoubtedly aware, EPA's notice generated an extremely large number of comments, indicative of the broad impact EPA regulation of GHGs under the CAA would have and the numerous, highly complicated issues such regulation poses. We urge you to carefully consider those comments as you contemplate the next step.
We are particularly concerned with the prospect that EPA regulation of GHGs under the CAA will lead to regulation of hundreds of thousands, if not more than a million, small sources under the New Source Review/Prevention of Significant Deterioration program, under the Title V program, and even possibly under the Section 111 Hazardous Air Pollutants program. We are equally concerned with the prospect of regulation under the NAAQS program, a program that is ill-suited to addressing GHG emissions and which could put the economy into a regulatory straightjacket.
We know that portions of the ANPR and the comments of some parties held out the prospect that the most serious consequences of GHG regulation under the CAA could be avoided through creative statutory interpretation and through prioritization. On the other hand, many comments, including those by environmental organizations, cast doubt on EPA's ability under the statute to control the regulatory reach of CAA regulation of GHGs. EPA needs to carefully weigh how certain it is that CAA regulation of GHGs can be limited with the hugely negative consequences that could ensue if the full panoply of CAA programs are applied to GHG emissions. It is likely that President Obama's economic recovery plan would be severely undercut.
The undersigned organizations thank you for considering this letter and are available to meet at your convenience. If you have any questions, please contact William L. Kovacs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce at (202) 463-5457 or email@example.com.
American Forest & Paper Association
Farm Bureau Federation
National Federation of Independent Businesses
National Mining Association
The Aluminum Association
The American Coke & Coal Chemicals Institute
The American Iron and Steel Institute
The Associated General Contractors of America
The National Oilseed Processors Association
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
U.S. Chamber of Commerce