Abby L. Harvey
GHG Monitor
7/11/2014
Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee this week called on the Environmental Protection Agency to provide documents related to the EPA’s proposed new source performance standards (NSPS) for new-build coal-fired power plants, issuing a veiled threat that they would seek to subpoena the EPA if the request was not met. The proposed regulations would largely mandate the use of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology on all new-build coal-fired power plants. Challenging the EPA’s claim that CCS is a technically feasible means to reduce CO2 emissions, Republican committee members have requested the EPA provide documents and information relating to the agency’s consideration of CCS technology when developing the NSPS standards. ”Should EPA fail either to produce the documents or provide a suitable log by July 23, 2014, this committee will seek to compel their production,” the Republican members wrote in a July 9 letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy.
The Republican committee members first requested information from the EPA in March. According to this week’s letter, the EPA has only provided only one document not already publicly available. The letter also says that committee staff has met with EPA staff to discuss the request but that the EPA has “been wholly unresponsive to the committee.” A spokesperson from the EPA told GHG Monitor that the agency will respond to the letter but did not specify when that response could be expected.
The Republican committee members also released this week a response they received from the EPA in May to their initial request, which said the timing of that request made it difficult to provide documents as the proposed regulations have not yet been finalized. “As you are aware, your request is related to an ongoing regulatory action, a status that raises particular concerns regarding the independence and integrity of ongoing Agency deliberations,” the response says. “Disclosure of pre-decisional information at this stage of the deliberations could raise questions about whether the Agency’s decisions are being made or influenced by proceedings in a legislative or public forum rather than through the established administrative process, which is ongoing. In addition, disclosure of such information could compromise the ability of Agency employees to provide candid advice and recommendations during the Agency’s ongoing deliberative processes. It could also chill the candor of future Executive Branch deliberations making the rulemaking process less robust and limiting the Agency’s ability to carry out its mission.”
