WASHINGTON UPDATE January 16-22, 2021 www.4cleanair.org

In this week’s Washington Update: (1) NACAA Sends Biden-Harris Administration Recommendations on Clean Air, Climate Priorities (2) Far-Reaching Executive Orders Issued on Biden’s First Day (3) Biden Team Makes Key Agency Appointments and Names Early Acting Leadership Pending Political Nominations and Confirmations (4) D.C. Circuit Strikes Down Affordable Clean Energy Rule (5) Led by New York and California, States and Cities File Slew of Lawsuits Challenging Air-Related Trump Administration Rules (6) Environmental Groups Sue and Seek Reconsideration of “Major MACT to Area” Rule Rescinding “Once-In-Always-In” Policy (7) Amicus Briefs Challenging “SAFE” Rule Part 2 Filed in D.C. Circuit (8) Sale of Non-Compliant Residential Wood Heaters No Longer a “Low Enforcement Priority,” EPA Announces (9) Outgoing Administration Recommends Cuts to FY 2021 Funding for EPA Programs (10) EPA Reopens Comment Period on Proposed Amendments to Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Regulations

We also provide links to information about events of interest in the week ahead.

This Week in Review

(1) NACAA Sends Biden-Harris Administration Recommendations on Clean Air, Climate Priorities (January 15, 2020) – In advance of the inauguration of President Joseph R. Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, NACAA offered a set of recommendations to the new Administration for “Improving Our Nation’s Clean Air Program.” The state and local agencies in NACAA developed and sent this document to the transition team, with a primary message emphasizing that the Biden-Harris Administration should work closely with NACAA’s state and local clean air agencies. The letter sets forth a series of recommendations that fall under the following seven issues: 1) Center Environmental Justice; 2) Respect State and Local Authorities as a Pillar of the Clean Air Act; 3) Ensure Scientific and Technical Integrity for Core EPA Actions; 4) Advance New EPA Programs to Protect Public Health and the Environment and Address Climate Change; 5) Reset Permitting and Enforcement Priorities to Emphasize Public Health and Equity; 6) Improve Technical Assistance to State and Local Air Agencies; and 7) Address the Urgent Need for Significant Increases in Federal Funding. NACAA staff initially worked with board members and chairs of the NACAA committees to solicit input and identify potential issues to be included in the document. The NACAA board of directors and committee chairs met on December 15, 2020 to prioritize the input received from the members and to discuss a draft transition document that outlined seven key issues and developed its recommendations. The draft 2 document was refined and then circulated for review and feedback by the NACAA membership for three weeks. The NACAA officers reconvened on January 12-13, 2021 to create a final document, which was sent to the Biden-Harris Administration transition team on January 15, 2021. “We are ready to address these challenges together,” the letter reads. “We look forward to building a truly collaborative, peer- to-peer partnership between EPA and our state and local member agencies and hope that the Administration will create opportunities for intergovernmental conversations and projects to advance science-based air quality protections and climate change progress. We cannot overstate the significant mutual value of EPA reaching out to NACAA in the initial stages of any national air-quality- or climate-related rulemaking or guidance-development process and continuing to work cooperatively throughout the process.” For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/NACAA2021PresidentialTra nsitionDocument-01152021.pdf

(2) Far-Reaching Executive Orders Issued on Biden’s First Day (January 20, 2021) – In a barrage of executive actions signed on his first day in office, President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. took steps to rejoin the Paris Climate Accord, identify recent EPA regulatory actions related to air pollution and climate change for review and potential reversal, change federal regulatory review procedures and policies, block fossil fuel infrastructure and address racial justice issues raised by federal actions. The first of six Executive Orders pertinent to clean air agencies reads: “I, Joseph R. Biden Jr., President of the United States of America, having seen and considered the Paris Agreement, done at Paris on December 12, 2015, do hereby accept the said Agreement and every article and clause thereof on behalf of the United States of America.” A second , titled “Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis,” has profound impacts for agencies addressing clean air and climate change. It creates an interagency task force on the “Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases” to establish interim economic instruments for evaluation of the impacts of carbon, methane, and NOx within 30 days, and to promulgate final values by February 2022. The Executive Order also identifies a wide range of recent EPA actions taken between January 20, 2017 and January 20, 2021 to be targeted for reconsideration. These include reviews of the August 13, 2020 rule titled “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources Review”; the April 30,2020 “Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks” rolling back tailpipe carbon dioxide limits and the September 27, 2019 “Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program” revoking California’s special regulatory waiver by July 2021. In addition, the May 22, 2020 “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units—Reconsideration of Supplemental Finding and Residual Risk and Technology Review,” which found that mercury limits for power plants were not “appropriate and necessary,” will be reviewed by August 2021. Other rules targeted for reconsideration include the “Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Benefits and Costs in the Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process,” finalized December 23, 2020, and 3

“Strengthening Transparency in Pivotal Science Underlying Significant Regulatory Actions and Influential Scientific Information,” finalized January 6, 2021, with the reviews to be completed “as soon as possible.” The Executive Order also directs the heads of federal agencies to submit lists of federal actions to be undertaken by 2025 that affect air pollution, climate change and racial equity to the National Climate Advisor. It also directs the Administrator of EPA to consider proposing “new regulations to establish comprehensive standards of performance and emission guidelines for methane and volatile organic compound emissions from existing operations in the oil and gas sector.” It proposes that the Administrator initiate Federal Implementation Plans for California, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania and by January 2022 responding to EPA’s November 16, 2020 findings of failure to submit state plans. Finally, the Executive Order revokes the March 2019 Permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline. In a third action, a memorandum to the heads of federal agencies titled “Modernizing Regulatory Review,” President Biden directs changes in how interagency review is conducted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), including ensuring “that regulatory initiatives appropriately benefit and do not inappropriately burden disadvantaged, vulnerable, or marginalized communities.” In a fourth Executive Order titled “Revocation of Certain Executive Orders Concerning Federal Regulation,” President Biden revokes a number of orders signed by his predecessor that were influential for federal agencies undertaking rulemakings relating to clean air and climate change, including the Two-For-One rule (Executive Order 13771 of January 30, 2017, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), Executive Order 13777 of February 24, 2017 (“Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda”), Executive Order 13891 of October 9, 2019 (“Promoting the Rule of Law Through Improved Agency Guidance Documents”) and Executive Order 13892 of October 9, 2019 (“Promoting the Rule of Law Through Transparency and Fairness in Civil Administrative Enforcement and Adjudication”). A fifth Executive Order, titled “Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” identifies a number of mechanisms that federal agencies and actions can use to advance “equity, civil rights, racial justice, and equal opportunity.” It also revokes President Trump’s September 22, 2020 Executive Order 13950 (“Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping”) which had resulted in a number of federal programs addressing racial equity issues (including at EPA) being cancelled in 2020. A sixth action, a memorandum from Ronald Klain, President Biden’s Chief of Staff, titled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,” calls on OMB to issue no further regulations, immediately withdraw rules that are not yet effective, and add an additional 60 days to the effective dates of any rule published in the Federal Register but not yet effective, until after an agency head “appointed or designated by the President after noon on January 20, 2021, reviews and approves the rule.” During this 60-day review, acting agency heads are instructed to open “a 30-day comment period to allow interested parties to provide comments about issues of fact, law, and policy raised by those rules, and consider pending petitions for reconsideration involving such rules.” For further information: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements- releases/2021/01/20/paris-climate-agreement/ and 4 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential- actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-protecting-public-health-and-environment-and- restoring-science-to-tackle-climate-crisis/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential- actions/2021/01/20/modernizing-regulatory-review/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential- actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-revocation-of-certain-executive-orders- concerning-federal-regulation/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing- room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-advancing-racial-equity-and- support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government/.

(3) Biden Team Makes Key Agency Appointments and Names Early Acting Leadership Pending Political Nominations and Confirmations (January 21, 2020) – In its first days in office, the Biden Administration made a number of agency and departmental appointments, including individuals who will serve in an acting capacity until permanent leadership is confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Jane Nishida will serve as the Acting Administrator of EPA pending Senate confirmation of Michael Regan, the President’s nominee for the role. Ms. Nishida is currently the Acting Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of International and Tribal Affairs and previously worked with the World Bank and Chesapeake Bay Foundation; she was also Maryland’s Secretary of the Environment from 1995 to 2002. Joe Goffman has been named Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), an office he served in during the Obama Administration; for the last four years he has been the Director of the Energy and Environment program at Harvard Law School. Dan Utech, who was Deputy Assistant to President Obama for Energy and Climate Change, has taken the position of EPA’s Chief of Staff, and Vicki Arroyo, who has led Georgetown University’s Climate Center for twelve years, will be the Associate Administrator for Policy at EPA. Dr. Phillip Fine will be EPA’s Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Policy, joining EPA after a fifteen-year career at the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The White House also named David Huizenga, a career Department of Energy (DOE) employee who serves as Associate Principal Deputy Administrator the National Nuclear Safety Administration, to serve as Acting Secretary of Energy until Biden nominee Governor Jennifer Granholm is confirmed. Additionally, Kelly Speakes-Backman, a former Maryland Public Utilities Commissioner and currently Executive Director of the Energy Storage Association, will become the Assistant Secretary of Energy in DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. While the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation held a hearing today on Biden’s nominee for Secretary of Transportation Peter Buttigieg, the Administration announced that Steve Cliff, Deputy Director of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) will serve as the Acting Director of the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), and UCLA climate law professor Dr. Ann Carlson will be NHTSA's general counsel. The Biden Administration also announced that Commissioner Rich Glick was promoted immediately to Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). A former Hill staffer, Glick has served as a FERC Commissioner since 2017. For further information: 5 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements- releases/2021/01/20/president-joe-biden-announces-acting-federal-agency- leadership/ and https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-welcomes-members- biden-harris-leadership-team and https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2021/1/ni and https://www.ferc.gov/about/commission-members/chairman-glick

(4) D.C. Circuit Strikes Down Affordable Clean Energy Rule (January 19, 2021) – In a 147-page opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s 2019 Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule, the rule that rescinded and replaced the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan (CPP) regulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants. The court held, in a 2-1 panel decision, that the ACE Rule and its embedded repeal of the CPP hinged on a fundamental misconstruction of Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act: the erroneous legal premise that the statutory text expressly foreclosed consideration of GHG reduction measures other than those that apply at and to individual power plants. This interpretation “is simply not supported by the text, let alone plainly and unambiguously required by it,” the court determined. EPA solely relied on the contention that Section 111 is clear and unambiguous in constraining it to use only improvements at and to existing sources in its “best system of emission reduction”; as a result, the court did not decide the issue of whether that approach is a “permissible” reading of the statute as a matter of agency discretion. Because EPA “failed to rely on its own judgment and expertise, and instead based its decision on an erroenous view of the law,” the court held that it must vacate and remand the rule to the agency to “consider the issue afresh.” It wrote: “The EPA’s new reading of Section 7411 would atrophy the muscle that Congress deliberately built up. The EPA asserts it lacks authority to curb a pollutant that the Agency itself has repeatedly deemed a grave danger to health and welfare but that eludes effective control under other provisions of the Act. We do not believe that Congress drafted such an enfeebled gapfilling authority in Section 7411.” The court further held that regulation of power plants under CAA Section 111 is not precluded by the fact that they are already regulated under Section 112. It also vacated EPA’s amendments to the implementing regulations that extend the timeline for complying with Section 111(d) emission guidelines. The court’s opinion was issued by Judges Millett and Pillard. Judge Walker wrote a 38-page dissent in which he opined that EPA was required to repeal the CPP and wrong to replace it with the ACE Rule because Section 111 excludes from its scope power plants regulated under Section 112. For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACE%20decision.pdf

(5) Led by New York and California, States and Cities File Slew of Lawsuits Challenging Air-Related Trump Administration Rules (January 19, 2021) – Led by the attorneys general of New York and California, coalitions of states and cities filed lawsuits in federal court challenging an array of rules that were promulgated under the Clean Air Act and/or implicate future clean air regulations and finalized in the last few weeks of the Trump Administration. Attorney General Letitia James of New York and Attorney General Xavier Becerra of California 6 characterized the challenged rules as “rollback” regulations designed to benefit polluting industries or to hinder future efforts to regulate air pollution. New York is leading state and local government coalitions in lawsuits against the following rules: • “Science Transparency” Rule: Published on January 6, 2021, this rule limits EPA’s discretion to consider, in its regulatory decision-making, scientific research for which underlying data are not publicly available. The coalition challenging the rule includes the states of New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, , Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington and , King County, WA., and the cities of Chicago, Los Angeles and New York. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New- York_v_EPA_SD_NY_%20Complaint_1-19-21.pdf • Retention of the Ozone NAAQS: Published on December 31, 2020, this final action sets forth then-EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler’s decision to retain, without revision, the current 70-parts-per-billion National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone set in 2015. The coalition challenging the rule includes the states of New York, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, and the city of New York. The petition for review was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New- York_v_EPA_DC_Cir_Ozone_NAAQS_PFR_1-19-21.pdf • Cost-Benefit Rule for Clean Air Act Rulemaking: Published on December 9, 2020, this rule requires EPA to take new steps in three areas of the Clean Air Act rulemaking process. First, it requires the agency to prepare a benefit- cost analysis (BCA) document for all future CAA rules with economic impacts over $100 million or that disproportionately affect an industry, group, or area; or those that are novel or relevant for other policy reasons. Second, it requires that BCAs use “best practices” in economic, engineering, physical and biological sciences. Finally, to prevent co-mingling of “benefits” and “co- benefits” to justify a regulation, the rule requires that BCAs, in addition to presenting a proposed rule’s total costs and benefits, separately report the public health and welfare benefits attributable to the specific pollution- reduction or other objectives targeted by the CAA provisions under which the rule is promulgated. The coalition challenging the rule includes the states of New York, California (and the California Air Resources Board), Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, and the city of New York. Their petition for review was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/New- York_v_EPA_DC_Cir_Cost_Benefit_PFR_1-19-21.pdf 7

California is leading state and local government coalitions challenging the following rules: • Rule Setting 3% Contribution Threshold for Regulating Stationary- Source GHG Emissions Under CAA Section 111: Published on January 13, 2021, the rule establishes a threshold for determining whether a source category’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can be regulated under Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act and finalizes a “significant contribution” finding for electric generating units (EGUs). Under the new methodology, source categories may only be considered to contribute significantly to air pollution due to their GHG emissions, and thus subject to regulation under Section 111, if the amount of those emissions exceeds 3 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions. Source categories that emit below the 3-percent significance threshold will be considered “necessarily insignificant without consideration of any other factors.” The coalition challenging the rule includes the states of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, , New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, the cities of Boulder, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York and South Miami, and Broward County. The petition for review was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/California_v_EPA_DC_ Cir_GHG%20_Contribution_Threshold_PFR_1-19-21.pdf • “Major MACT to Area” Rule: Published on November 19, 2020, this rule codifies the rescission of EPA’s 1995 “Once-In-Always-In” policy. The rule allows a major source of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) to reclassify itself as an area source after it has limited its HAP emissions to below major-source thresholds. The coalition challenging the rule includes the states of California, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, and the cities of New York and Chicago. The petition for review was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/California_v_EPA_DC_ Cir_OIAI_Rescission_PFR_1-19-21.pdf For further information: https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2021/attorney-general- james-challenges-trump-administrations-last-ditch-efforts-harm, https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-becerra-leads-challenge- trump-administration-rule-blocking and https://oag.ca.gov/news/press- releases/attorney-general-becerra-leads-challenge-trump-administration-rule- relaxing

(6) Environmental Groups Sue and Seek Reconsideration of “Major MACT to Area” Rule Rescinding “Once-In-Always-In” Policy (January 15 and 18, 2021) – On January 15, 2021, a group of environmental organizations sued EPA over the November 19, 2020 rule that reversed EPA’s “Once-In-Always-In” (OIAI) policy for sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) (also known as the “Major MACT to 8

Area” rule). On January 18, 2021, the groups also petitioned EPA to reconsider the regulation, requesting that the agency stay the effectiveness of the rule during the reconsideration period. The petition for review was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (California Communities Against Toxics v. EPA). The long-standing OIAI policy, which EPA’s regulation rescinded, essentially determined that once a HAP source is deemed to be a major source under section 112 of the Clean Air Act, it remains major even if its emissions decrease below the major-source threshold. The groups argue that, among other things, the rule would allow sources currently subject to a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standard to escape the requirements by merely substituting a potential-to-emit limit at the major source threshold. They also note that many affected facilities are in environmental justice communities that already suffer disproportionate harm from HAPs. The organizations filing suit and requesting reconsideration include California Communities Against Toxics, Earthjustice, Downwinders at Risk, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Integrity Project, Hoosier Environmental Council, Bucket Brigade, Natural Resources Defense Council, Ohio Citizen Action, Sierra Club and Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services. A coalition of states and cities also filed a petition for review of the rule in the D.C. Circuit on January 19, 2021 (see related article above). For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/OIAI_Enviro_suit.pdf and http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/reconsideration1-18-21.pdf

(7) Amicus Briefs Challenging “SAFE” Rule Part 2 Filed in D.C. Circuit (January 20-21, 2021) – Eleven amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs were filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in support of petitioners challenging EPA’s and NHTSA’s April 30, 2020 “Safer Affordable Fuel- Efficient Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks” (“SAFE” Rule Part 2). The briefs offer various perspectives in support of petitioners who argue that the standards established by the rule are not stringent enough and should be overturned. The amicus briefs were filed by: 1) Professor Jason Bordoff (an expert in economics, energy and the environment); 2) the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and fifteen cities, towns, counties and mayors; 3) the American Thoracic Society, American Lung Association, American Medical Association, and Medical Society of the District of Columbia; 4) scientists and economists Andrew Dessler, Philip Duffy, Michael MacCracken, James McWilliams, Noelle Eckley Selin, Drew Shindell, James Stock, Kevin Trenberth and Gernot Wagner; 5) Professor Michael Greenstone (University of Chicago expert on the economic and social costs of climate change); 6) Senator Tom Carper, Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Representative Frank Pallone, Jr., Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce; 7) economists Benjamin Leard, Joshua Linn, Kenneth A. Small and James Stock; 8) Consumer Reports; 9) the Institute of Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law; 10) the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks, the National Parks Conservation Association and the New Mexico Wilderness Alliance; and 11) Ethanol Producers (Clean Fuels Development Coalition, National Farmers Union, Farmers Union Enterprises, Inc., 9

Governors’ Biofuels Coalition, Montana Farmers Union, North Dakota Farmers Union, Siouxland Ethanol, South Dakota Farmers Union and Urban Air Initiative (in support of the separate petitions filed by Public Interest Organization Petitioners and State and Local Government Petitioners regarding the Mid-Term Evaluation Final Determination). For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/SAFE_Rule_Pt_2_Amicus_ Briefs_DC_Cir.pdf (links to the eleven amicus briefs)

(8) Sale of Non-Compliant Residential Wood Heaters No Longer a “Low Enforcement Priority,” EPA Announces (January 19, 2021) – On the final full day of the Trump Administration, outgoing EPA Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Susan Parker Bodine sent a memorandum to the EPA Regional Administrators confirming that EPA will no longer consider the sale of non-compliant, “Step 1”-certified residential wood heating (RWH) devices to be a “low enforcement priority.” EPA’s 2015 New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces established a two-step compliance approach for RWHs, in which certain Step 1 standards became effective on May 15, 2015, and more stringent Step 2 standards would become effective on May 15, 2020. But in proposed NSPS amendments published on May 22, 2020, EPA proposed to allow retailers of RWHs to sell Step 1 devices until November 30, 2020 – an action the agency said was to help make up for “significant losses in retail sales” of RWHs due to COVID-19. In the preamble to the proposal, EPA stated that it would treat the sale of Step 1-certified devices as a low enforcement priority during the pendency of the rulemaking. “Given the fact that the date of the proposed extension has passed, EPA has determined that a statement of low enforcement priority is no long appropriate,” Bodine stated in her January 19 memorandum. Therefore, the statement is no longer in effect with respect to sales after January 19, 2021. For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Clarification_Regarding_Sal e_of_Step1-certified_Residential_Wood_Heating_Devices_1-19-21.pdf

(9) Outgoing Administration Recommends Cuts to FY 2021 Funding for EPA Programs (January 14-21, 2021) – On January 14, 2021, the outgoing Administration sent a list of 73 programs to Congress for which it recommended $27.4 billion in cuts – also known as rescissions – from the recently adopted FY 2021 federal appropriations legislation. The recommendations called for decreases to several EPA programs, such as cutting approximately half of the funds appropriated for state and local categorical grants (this account includes Section 103/105 funding) and reducing the $90 million appropriated for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) program to $10 million. Additionally, the list included cuts to EPA’s Office of Research and Development and the agency’s programs for environmental education and environmental justice. On January 20, 2021, House Appropriations Committee Chair Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Mike Quigley (D-IL) and House Budget Committee Chair John Yarmuth (D-KY) sent a letter to Neera Tanden, Director-designate of the Office of Management and 10

Budget (OMB), requesting that OMB retract the recission request “while moving to expeditiously approve full-year account-specific apportionments for all of the affected funds.” The previous Administration’s request could delay the distribution of the funds for up to 45 days (or until Congress acts on the proposal). For further information: http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Rescission_request.pdf and https://appropriations.house.gov/sites/democrats.appropriations.house.gov/files/do cuments/Letter%20Biden%20OMB%20Day1%202021.1.20.pdf

(10) EPA Reopens Comment Period on Proposed Amendments to Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Regulations (January 19, 2021) – EPA has announced the reopening of the public comment period for the proposed ‘‘National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Reconsideration” and will accept comments until February 8, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 5093). EPA originally published proposed amendments to the rule on November 9, 2021, with a comment deadline of January 8, 2021. The amendments were proposed in response to four petitions for reconsideration of the 2012 rule from industry and environmental groups. EPA’s proposed amendments would revise the process vent subcategory definitions and major source process vent emission limits; amend the major source vinyl chloride wastewater emission limits and remove the total non-vinyl chloride organic HAP (TOHAP) emission limits by justifying vinyl chloride as a surrogate; add an alternative standard after the resin stripper for major and area sources; clarify the pressure vessel leak requirements and add vapor balancing as a method to control emissions from storage vessels; and make technical corrections and remove all of the regulatory affirmative defense provisions. For further information: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-19/pdf/2021-00355.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/polyvinyl-chloride-and- copolymers-production-national-emission-0

The Week Ahead

• The United States Energy Association Webcast on "Uncovering Newly-Passed Omnibus Legislation and Finalized 45Q Regulations Affecting Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage" – January 25, 2021

• The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Webcast on "Last Mile Delivery and Electric Vehicles: Why Congress Should Support Logistics in the Next Infrastructure Bill" – January 26, 2021

• The Woodrow Wilson Center's Environmental Change and Security Program Webcast on a "The Value of Environmental Peacebuilding" – January 27, 2021

• The United States Energy Association Virtual 17th Annual State of the Energy Industry Forum – January 28, 2021 11

NACAA 1530 Wilson Blvd., Suite 320 Arlington, VA 22209 (571) 970-6678 [email protected]