Background

Congress has not yet passed federal legislation to close the giant loophole created by the 1970 Clean Air Act. It is up to the individual states to pass clean energy legislation.

The last major bill was the Clean Air Act of 1990. A primary goal of the Clean Air Act is to reduce urban smog and other common air pollutants to safe levels. To achieve this goal, the act requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set health-based “National Ambient Air Quality Standards.” The states are then required to develop plans for meeting these standards. The Clean Air Act is complicated because it addresses diverse air pollution problems: urban smog, hazardous air pollution, acid rain, and the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer. Since 1970, however, the core of the act has been a set of standards called the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). NAAQS are said to be “health-based” standards because they are set by EPA at a level adequate to protect public health, including the health of sensitive groups such as children and the elderly.

The NAAQS are the nation’s air quality goals. States are required to develop plans that will allow them to control air pollution and attain compliance with these standards. Over the last 25 years, EPA has set standards for six air pollutants: ozone, nitrogen dioxides (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), lead, and particulate matter (PM). The states have developed plans to reach these standards and are currently implementing them.

The Clean Air Act requires EPA to review the standards every five years to evaluate the current science and determine if the standards are adequately protecting the public’s health. EPA’s most recent review of the science on particulates and ozone showed that exposure to air pollutants at the current standards is more dangerous than previously believed. This new finding caused EPA to propose more stringent standards in November 1996. These standards are being challenged as scientifically unjustified and too expensive by a coalition of polluting industries.

Other Recent Federal Legislative Attempts

On September 21, 1999, Representative Waxman introduced the “Clean Smokestacks Act of 1999,” HR 2900. This bipartisan legislation is designed to finally clean up the nation’s most polluting, outdated power plants. The Clean Smokestacks Act would dramatically cut aggregate power plant emissions of the four major power plant pollutants by 2005. Both NOx and SO2 emissions would be cut by 75 percent from 1997 levels, mercury emissions would be cut by 90 percent from 1997 levels, and CO2 emissions would be cut to 1990 levels. The NOx, SO2, and mercury reductions are set at levels that are known to be cost-effective with today’s available technology. The last update to the status of the Clean Smokestacks Act was on October 8, 1999, when it was referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment. Waxman has since introduced a second bill (HR 2042 on May 5, 2003) that aims to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce emissions from electric powerplants.

On April 9, 2003, Sen. Carper of Delaware introduced S 843 to amend the Clean Air Act to establish a national uniform multiple air pollutant regulatory program for the electric generating sector. Carper’s proposal imposes mandatory emissions limits on all four of the major greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide.

Other recent attempts at creating clean air bills at the federal level have included the following:

• Rep. Sweeny (R-NY), Acid Rain Control Act (H 25) / Sen. Schumer (D-NY), Acid Rain Control Act (S 588); Sweeny has since introduced a second bill (HR 203 on January, 7, 2003) on the topic of acid deposition.
• Rep. Allen (D-ME), Clean Power Act of 2001 (H 1335)
• Sen. Leahy (D-VT), Clean Power Plant and Modernization Act of 2001 (S 1131)
• Sen. Jeffords (I-VT), Clean Smokestacks Act (S 556)
• Sen. Carper (D-DE), Four-Pollutant Bill (S 3135)

The status of these bills may be viewed by going to the Library of Congress’ THOMAS website.

The Bush Administration and the Clean Air Act

The information in this section is courtesy of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

The Bush administration has built a dismal record on clean air issues. It has moved to cut the heart out of the Clean Air Act’s “new source review” program – the fundamental bargain in the original law that requires old pollution sources to modernize their pollution controls when they update their facilities. And, the administration’s “clear skies” proposal would undercut current safeguards to protect local air quality, weaken measures to curb pollution from upwind states, undermine efforts to restore visibility in our national parks, and do nothing to curb power plants’ growing emissions of carbon dioxide, the main cause of global warming. For a review of the administration’s actions, see NRDC’s “The Bush Administration’s Air Pollution Policies.”

New Source Review

In 1977, Congress amended the Clean Air Act to strengthen pollution controls, but did not require plants already in existence to meet the new standards, expecting that these plants would soon be retired and replaced with newer, cleaner plants. As a safeguard, however, the law included the New Source Review provision, which requires that, if an older plant undergoes changes that increase its emissions, it must also install modern air pollution controls. Without New Source Review, much of the nation’s industrial base – power plants, chemical plants, incinerators, iron and steel foundries, paper mills, cement plants, and a broad array of manufacturing facilities – would be excluded from modern clean air requirements.

On December 31, 2002, the Bush administration announced its intention to weaken a key Clean Air Act safeguard to the point where it will be meaningless. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed two new gaping loopholes to the Clean Air Act’s “new source review” rules that would allow owners of the country’s oldest and dirtiest power plants, oil refineries, and factories to significantly increase air pollution without having to clean up. State governments would lose vital tools to control smog, soot, and toxic pollution. National park managers would lose their ability to protect our most prized natural treasures from haze and acid rain. The public would lose its right to ensure that industrial polluters in their communities protect local air quality. See NRDC’s “The EPA’s Changes to New Source Review”
for more information.

Clear Skies Initiative

The Bush administration developed a plan called the Clear Skies Initiative and submitted it to Congress in February 2003 as a proposal to amend the Clean Air Act, which is the primary federal law governing air quality. But “Clear Skies” is a clear misnomer because, if Congress passes the Clear Skies bill, the result will be to weaken and delay health protections already required under the law.

The Clear Skies legislation sets new targets for emissions of sulfur dioxide, mercury, and nitrogen oxides from U.S. power plants. But these targets are weaker than those that would be put in place if the Bush administration simply implemented and enforced the existing law! Compared to current law, the Clear Skies plan would allow three times more toxic mercury emissions, 50 percent more sulfur emissions, and hundreds of thousands more tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides. It would also delay cleaning up this pollution by up to a decade compared to current law, and force residents of heavily-polluted areas to wait years longer for clean air compared to the existing Clean Air Act.

Clean Energy in the States

SERC’s “Clean Power Act” is a state version of the Clean Energy Act recently introduced in the U.S. Senate by Jim Jeffords (I-VT) and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), which has been “placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders” since November 19, 2002.

Often described as a “four-pollutant” bill, the Clean Power Act establishes a new, integrated approach to power plant cleanup. It cuts nitrogen oxide (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions (the sources of smog, lung-clogging particulates, and acid rain) 75 percent; slashes mercury output 90 percent; and, cuts carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions roughly 25 percent, reducing them to 1990 levels.

At the same time, the Clean Power Act attacks pollution from the demand side by requiring robust energy efficiency programs and by providing new incentives for renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power – steps that would cut electric bills for businesses and consumers alike.

See SERC’s State Activity page for more information on states that have introduced “four pollutant” bills.