Industry Challenges EPA's Greenhouse Gas Rules In High Court The case focuses on the Clean Air Act permitting required of companies that want to build or modify facilities expected to emit a lot of gases. Critics call the requirement costly and time-consuming.

Industry Challenges EPA's Greenhouse Gas Rules In High Court

  • Download
  • <iframe src="" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript


For the first time, the Environmental Protection Agency is forcing big factories and power plants to limit their greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. The industry is fighting back, though some facilities say the new rules aren't so bad. Today, the Supreme Court will hear that argument. NPR's Elizabeth Shogren has more.

ELIZABETH SHOGREN, BYLINE: What the EPA is doing is making companies get greenhouse gas permits whenever they build, say, a chemical plant or a refinery. Even if they just modify their big plant, they need to get a permit.

JEFFREY HOLMSTEAD: It's added cost. It certainly has added some delays. It does add additional time for the process.

SHOGREN: Industry lawyer Jeffrey Holmstead says companies are taking the EPA to court because these delays can even derail a project. They also think the EPA has contorted the law, the Clean Air Act, to make it fit greenhouse gases.

HOLMSTEAD: The law passed by Congress said that anyone who emits more than 250 tons a year of a pollutant needs a permit, and EPA said, well, that would be absurd, that would lead to an absurd result.

SHOGREN: Even a small building can pump out 250 tons of greenhouse gases in a year. So, basically the EPA modified the law so that it applies only to big factories. Industry wasn't satisfied with that. Neither were some states. Lawyer Boyden Gray represents some of them in this case. He says EPA's misusing the law.

BOYDEN GRAY: If it's that absurd that you have to go through that many somersaults to make the thing remotely rational, then maybe you've interpreted the statute wrong to begin with.

SHOGREN: Gray says the states worry the EPA will eventually require smaller facilities to get permits, and in time, even churches and apartment houses might need them.

GRAY: Eventually the nightmare will unfold.

SHOGREN: But some companies say hold on - they've gotten these permits and it's no big deal. Calpine Corporation has gotten six of these greenhouse gas permits for power plants in California, Texas and Delaware.

DEREK FURSTENWERTH: We haven't found this permitting program to be overly cumbersome or expensive. We haven't seen any significant increase in permitting times, really.

SHOGREN: Derek Furstenwerth is the company's senior director for environmental services. Calpine actually filed a legal brief with the Supreme Court defending the program. The way Calpine sees it, the company hasn't had to buy expensive new pollution control equipment. Furstenwerth says it's just had to build plants that will get the most electricity out of the fuel they burn.

FURSTENWERTH: So, it winds up that the permitting process and our economic interests in building the plants are pretty well aligned.

SHOGREN: So far, the EPA says, 141 facilities have gotten permits. The EPA declined requests for an interview. In an email, it said the permit program is working smoothly and most companies comply by making their facilities more energy efficient. The agency says it currently has no plans to require permits from smaller facilities, but the agency would have to revisit this in a couple of years. Vickie Patton is general counsel for Environmental Defense Fund. She says the industry's challenge ignores the fact that the Supreme Court generally gives the EPA wide deference to interpret the law.

VICKIE PATTON: It's a very legalist argument that's designed to prevent EPA from protecting America's families and communities from climate pollution.

SHOGREN: But Patton says what's really crucial about this case is that it doesn't threaten what's most important.

PATTON: This case is not about EPA's authority to address climate pollution under the nation's clean air laws.

SHOGREN: Industry lawyer Jeffrey Holmstead actually agrees.

HOLMSTEAD: This is a very narrow case. I think the outcome won't really have much of an impact, one way or another, on EPA's ability to regulate carbon.

SHOGREN: That's because this is only one small part of the EPA's strategy for fighting global warming. Still to come are more ambitious rules to bring down emissions, even further, for new and existing power plants. Elizabeth Shogren, NPR News, Washington.

Copyright © 2014 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.