Supreme Court Overturns EPA Limits on Power Plants

On June 29, the United States Supreme Court nixed the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s 2012 Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, limiting emissions of mercury and other pollutants from power plants. The challengers argued that the $9.6 billion cost of complying with the standard outweighed the benefit of its application, and that EPA impermissibly failed to consider cost in deciding whether to regulate toxic emissions from power plants.

The Supreme Court held that EPA abused its discretion by ignoring cost, even under the deferential standard established in Chevron USA Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. The Court held that in directing EPA to regulate power plants if it “finds such regulation is appropriate and necessary,” Section 112 of the Clean Air Act requires “at least some attention to cost.” Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia said, “One would not say that it is even rational, never mind ‘appropriate,’ to impose billions of dollars in economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits.”

EPA argued that it is not required to consider cost in the initial decision regarding whether to regulate power plants because it can consider cost when deciding on the extent of regulation. The Court rejected this argument, finding that “[c]ost may become relevant again at a later stage of the regulatory process, but that possibility does not establish its irrelevance at this stage.” The majority found that cost must be considered, but went on to say that it is within the agency’s discretion to consider how to evaluate costs, and even what constitutes a “cost.” The Court stated that cost “includes more than the expense of complying with regulations; any disadvantage could be termed a cost.”

--Kathryn Oehlschlager

For more information, contact Kathryn Oehlschlager at klo@bcltlaw.com or (415) 228-5458.

D.C. Circuit Upholds Power Plant Mercury and Air Toxics Standards

The D.C. Circuit has upheld a 2012 EPA rule limiting air toxics emissions from coal- and oil-fired power plants.  The rule, commonly known as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, or “MATS,” requires new and existing coal- and oil-fired power plants to reduce emissions of mercury, arsenic, chromium, and other toxic air pollutants.

In a 2-1 decision, the D.C. Circuit rejected a variety of challenges from industry and environmental groups, including a challenge to EPA’s conclusion that it was not required to consider costs in determining whether regulation of electric utilities is “appropriate and necessary” under Clean Air Act § 112(n)(1)(A).  While acknowledging that cost of compliance plays an explicit role in setting “beyond-the-floor” MACT standards and indirectly influences the determination of MACT floors, the majority deferred to the EPA’s determination that it is reasonable to make the initial decision to list the utilities as sources of hazardous air pollutants without taking cost into consideration.

In his dissenting opinion, Judge Kavanaugh argued that the term “appropriate” necessarily implied that costs should be taken into account in making the listing decision, citing EPA’s own regulatory impact analysis, which estimated the cost of implementing the rule at $9.6 billion.

The lead case is White Stallion Energy Center, LLC v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, D.C. Circuit Case No. 12-1100.

-- Chris Jensen

For more information, please contact Chris Jensen at cdj@bcltlaw.com or (415) 228-5411.