WASHINGTON, D.C. — State Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and four others testified before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works’ Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee Tuesday on the “Legal Implications of the Clean Power Plan.”
Morrisey said the proposed regulations will have a severe impact on West Virginia.
“This proposed rule is actually causing real tangible harm in the states and also it’s affecting power plant operations, currently,” he said.
The hearing, chaired by U.S. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, was aimed at persuading Washington leaders on the negative effects of the Obama Administration’s plan to reduce coal usage. The EPA could finalize the plan this summer.
Morrisey argued the administration is not particularly interested in whether the rule is finalized, as long as the market place moves away.
“If coal-fire power plants have to be retired much quicker than base line, then they’re going to accomplish their goal even if this regulation is never upheld in the courts,” he said.
West Virginia is leading a bipartisan coalition of states in a lawsuit against the EPA, questioning the legality of the rule—which calls for states to reduce carbon dioxide emission by 30 percent in 15 years.
Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt was also against the proposed regulations. Pruitt said with this rule, the agencies are being used to “pick winners and losers” in the energy market by lifting removal power at the expense of fossil fuels.
“No state should comply with the Clean Power Plan if it means surrendering decision-making authority to the EPA,” he said.
Pruitt claimed states will be forced to rework their energy generation market to make up for the loss of coal fire, forced into changing their energy mix in favor of removals, and also forced to alter existing framework which would threaten energy affordability and reliability for consumers, industry, and energy producers.
Georgetown University professor Lisa Heinzerling, an advocate of the plan, claimed the EPA’s amendments state the agency “may not regulate the same hazardous air pollutants from the same sources.”
“This interpretation makes perfect sense and respects the larger structure of the Clean Air Act, which pervasively leaves room for regulation in the event new threats from air pollution come,” said Heinzerling.
Capito, in a statement, said, “When the federal government works with the states as partners, we can, and have, improved air quality and protected our economy and our electricity grid at the same time. However, the Clean Power does none of this.”
Capito said she will be introducing greenhouse gas legislation next week to help ensure reliable and affordable electricity, protection of jobs, and the economy.