WASHINGTON, DC – Ahead of oral arguments scheduled for June over the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed Clean Power Plan, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) joined over 200 current and former members of Congress in filing an amicus brief supporting the CPP, which represents our first major national effort to curb carbon emissions.  The CPP seeks to improve public health, reduce energy bills for families and businesses, and create jobs in the clean energy sector. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will consider a challenge to the Clean Power Plan led by coal-heavy states such as West Virginia in the case of West Virginia et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency. These states contend that the EPA overstepped its bounds in crafting the CPP, which regulates power plant emissions under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. 

Proposed by President Obama last August after exhaustive scientific analysis, the Clean Power Plan (CPP) would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 and is the cornerstone of the Obama Administration’s Climate Action Plan.  The CPP would help save consumers an estimated $155 billion and prevent 90,000 childhood asthma attacks, while also creating green jobs and putting the United States at the forefront of addressing global climate change.  In 2015, there were 10 weather and climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion each across the United States, according to NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI).

“We need to make clean air a priority and the CPP is clearly within the bounds of the EPA’s pollution regulatory authority,” stated Reed.  “Rhode Island is ahead of the curve with its commitment to reducing carbon emissions, but the rest of the country and the federal government must do their part to address the true costs of carbon pollution.  The CPP offers a sensible, cost-effective strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and tackling climate change.  The Court should uphold the CPP and recognize the EPA’s legal rulemaking authority.”

The amicus brief argues that the CPP rule is consistent with the text, structure, and legislative history of the Clean Air Act (CAA).  Further, it argues that the rule is consistent with the goal of the CAA to “protect the Nation’s air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its population.”  Indeed, according to the brief, the U.S. Supreme Court has already affirmed that the EPA has clear authority to combat carbon pollution and regulate greenhouse gasses under Massachusetts v. EPA and American Electric Power v. Connecticut.

In addition to support from current and former lawmakers, two former Republican EPA Administrators – William D. Ruckelshaus, who helmed the EPA under Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, and William K. Reilly, who was the top official at the EPA during the George H.W. Bush Administration – filed similar briefs and announced their support for the Clean Power Plan as a “pragmatic, flexible, and cost-effective pollution control program” that respects the authority of states.  Additionally, a broad coalition of business, environmental, and health groups have also submitted their own briefs supporting the CPP, including Apple, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft.

Reed noted: “Under this plan, Rhode Island will have flexibility to meet carbon reduction targets by using the energy sources that work best for our state.  Rhode Island has long been a leader in the fight against climate change, and through commonsense measures already in place like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) and smart investments in green energy production, we have managed to reduce our power sector carbon pollution by five percent since 2008.”

He continued: “Because of Rhode Island’s leadership on this issue, our state is well-positioned to meet the targets laid out in the Clean Power Plan, and could take advantage of the plan’s incentives for continued clean energy investments.  As the state’s green energy industry continues to develop and grow, our economy, our health, and our environment will reap the benefits.”

The D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the case on June 2 in Washington, DC.

-end-