As the final weeks of the 110th Congress wind down, air pollution regulation is again taking center stage.  Republican Senators Inhofe and Voinovich introduced a bill yesterday that would reinstate the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), an EPA-promulgated rule that was struck down by the DC Circuit Court in July.  The Inhofe-Voinovich proposal would “implement the Clean Air Interstate Rule and the rule establishing Federal Implementation Plans for the Clean Air Interstate Rule as promulgated and modified by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

In the House, Democratic Representatives Dingell and Boucher are working to reinstate only the first phase, which goes into effect in 2009 for NOx and 2010 for SOx emissions.  Under this type of proposal, CAIR would be enacted, but would sunset after a few years, giving future Congresses the opportunity to debate long-term solutions without the time pressures inherent in end-of-session negotiations.

The Bush administration supports reinstating CAIR in full, as the program was a centerpiece of the administration’s pollution prevention efforts.  The major fear is that if CAIR is not brought back, states that are struggling to remain in compliance with Clean Air Act standards will sue electricity generators in upwind states in an attempt to make the facilities install costly air pollution prevention technologies.  By resurrecting CAIR, however, producers will have a cap-and-trade program to use to facilitate less-costly emission reduction efforts.

Many environmental groups, however, are wary of bringing back CAIR in its entirety, arguing that its requirements are not stringent enough to adequately protect human health.  They also fear that enacting only the first phase and putting off making a determination about long term pollution reductions is the wrong approach, as there is no guarantee that future Congresses will return to deal with the remaining issues.

Congress is now faced with the challenge of quickly finding a way to balance all of the competing interests at play, and crafting a solution that both protects people from dangerous air pollution while providing regulatory certainty to power generators.  Otherwise, we may be left with, as one energy industry executive stated, a “truly chaotic” situation of uncertainty and protracted litigation.

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.