Comparison of the Clean Air Act and Bush's "Clear Skies" Initiative

We've all heard a lot about the Bush Administration's "Clear Skies" initiative. How does it really stack up to the current Clean Air Act? The table below compares the two.

1. U.S. EPA, "Discussion of Multi-Pollutant Strategy," Meeting with EEI, September 18, 2001; "Comparison of Requirements Under Business-as-Usual and the Straw Proposal," page 10. Available at http://www.cleartheair.org/currentstatus.pdf. EPA prepared this analysis for the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), a consortium of the nation's electric utilities. The analysis compares EPA's "straw" proposal for power plant cleanup with the level of cleanup that would occur if existing Clean Air Act programs were fully implemented (the so-called "business as usual" scenario).
   
   The existing programs that EPA analyzed for the business as usual scenario include the following: (1) nitrogen oxide (NOx) reductions that would occur under the Eastern U.S. ozone smog reduction program (the so-called "NOx SIP call"); (2) nitrogen oxide reductions that would occur in order to bring ozone smog levels down to levels mandated by the national ambient air quality standards ("NAAQS") (the so-called "Ozone NAAQS"); (3) sulfur dioxide reductions that would occur in order to bring fine particulate matter pollution (known as "PM 2.5") down to levels mandated by the national ambient air quality standards (the so-called "PM 2.5 NAAQS"); and (4) mercury (Hg) reductions that would occur at power plants in order to satisfy the "maximum achievable control technology" or "MACT" regulation currently under development at EPA (the so-called "Hg MACT"). EPA's straw proposal is not the same as what President Bush proposed in his "Clear Skies Initiative."
   
   EPA's straw proposal contains pollution caps and timeframes that are much more stringent than the plan that the President ultimately proposed. However EPA's analysis of the reductions that would be achieved under the "business as usual" implementation of the Clean Air Act is the best official estimate that currently exists of the reductions the current Clean Air Act will achieve.
   
   
2. Ibid, page 10. EPA projects that measures to implement the national ambient air quality standard ("NAAQS") for ground-level ozone will lead to a cap on power plant nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions of 1.09 million tons per year in the so-called "OTAG" region by 2010. "OTAG" is the "Ozone Transport Assessment Group" and covers 37 states in the Eastern half of the country. EPA's analysis does not calculate what the cap will be for the entire country. However, informal discussions with EPA air quality officials have indicated that the nationwide cap on power plant NOx emissions by 2010 will be 1.25 million tons per year. This number is consistent with the "Phase III" cap on NOx emissions that EPA chose for its straw proposal.
   
   
3. Ibid, page 10. Sulfur dioxide is the primary cause of fine particulate matter pollution. EPA projects that, in order to meet national ambient air quality standards for fine particulate matter (the "PM 2.5 NAAQS") by 2012, a 2 million ton per year cap on power plant sulfur dioxide emissions will be necessary.
   
   
4. Ibid, page 10. EPA's September 18 analysis does not state how many tons per year of mercury will result from business as usual implementation of the Clean Air Act. Instead, its analysis says that there will be a "70% facility-specific reduction requirement" for power plants by 2008 under EPA's "Hg MACT" regulation, which is currently under development. However, on December 4, 2001, EPA prepared another analysis for industry that shows EPA expects the electric utility industry to emit 5 tons of mercury per year following implementation of the Hg MACT. See, U.S. EPA presentation, pp. 4-6, where EPA states "If we did MACT now for coal and … if we subcategorized by coal type … this would result in … tons emitted under MACT … total ~ 5." http://www.cleartheair.org/epamercury.pdf.
   
   
5. See White House, "Fact Sheet: President Bush Announces Clear Skies & Global Climate Change Initiatives," available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/clearskies.html. The White House fact sheet accompanying it's Clear Skies announcement makes clear that the second phase of cuts will only occur if EPA decides to pursue them after analyzing several factors: "During the first phase, the EPA Administrator will review new scientific, technology and cost information and, if necessary, adjust the phase two targets." Id.
   
   
6. There will be increases in emissions under the Bush plan from emissions that would occur under the Clean Air Act "business as usual" scenario because the Bush plan replaces existing Clean Air Act programs rather than supplementing them. In his speech announcing the power plant cleanup plan, the President confirmed that "[t]he Clean Skies legislation . . . will replace a confusing, ineffective maze of regulations for power plants . . . ." : http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/20020214-5.html. In testimony before Congress in July 2001, EPA Administrator Whitman confirmed that the Administrations multipollutant program would replace rather than supplement existing Clean Air Act programs. See: http://www.senate.gov/~epw/whitman_0726.htm.

Up to Top

Sierra Club® and "Explore, enjoy and protect the planet."® are registered trademarks of the Sierra Club.
All content on this website is governed by a Creative Commons license.