New Jersey recently joined 23 other states in challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan, also known as the 111(d) Rule. The suit maintains that the EPA’s plan to reduce greenhouse gases unlawfully exceeds its authority.
What’s the EPA’s plan?
As previously detailed on this blog, the EPA rule establishes interim and final carbon dioxide (CO2) emission performance rates for two subcategories of fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs) — fossil fuel-fired electric steam generating units and natural gas-fired combined cycle generating units. The overall goal of the Clean Power Plan is to lower national electricity sector emissions by an estimated 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The EPA’s plan also requires states to develop, submit and implement plans that reflect the CO2 emission performance rates, either directly by means of source-specific emission standards or other requirements, or through measures that achieve equivalent CO2 reductions from the same group of EGUs.
In adopting the new environmental regulations, the EPA relied on its broad authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA). However, the agency has faced intense pushback since the rule was first proposed in 2014. While the carbon pollution rule was still in draft form, a coalition of energy companies and 15 states, including New Jersey, filed suit to block the rule, arguing that the CAA does not allow the EPA to regulate a pollutant at a plant that is already subject to emissions rules.
NJ vs. EPA
The EPA’s final rule was published in the Federal Register on October 23, 2015. The state of New Jersey filed its lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on the same day. In announcing the legal challenge, Gov. Chris Christie characterized the Clean Power Plan as “fundamentally flawed” and an “unlawful overreach of authority.”
In a declaration filed with the court, Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bob Martin highlighted that New Jersey’s existing power plants must comply with more stringent limits than EPA has set for new power plants. He further stated:
Between 2001 and 2012, New Jersey had already reduced carbon dioxide emissions from its power sector by 33 percent, which is more than the 32 percent reduction goal that EPA has set for the entire nation to reach by 2030,” Commissioner Martin said. “New Jersey’s prior reductions are not given credit under the 111(d) Rule. The Clean Power Plan also fails to credit renewable energy sources and increases in nuclear power plant capacity developed before 2013.
In its defense, the EPA maintains that the Clean Power Plan is legal. “The Clean Power Plan has strong scientific and legal foundations, provides states with broad flexibilities to design and implement plans, and is clearly within EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act,” U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in a statement.
Support for EPA’s plan
The agency also has the support of at least 15 states, which plan to intervene in defense of the Clean Power Plan. “Significant reductions in these emissions must occur to prevent increases in the frequency, magnitude and scale of the adverse impacts of climate change,” wrote New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman argued in support of the rule.
The plaintiffs have asked the federal court to “immediately stop its implementation,” while the legal challenge to the Clean Power Plan plays out. We will continue to monitor the status of this high-profile environmental litigation and will provide updates accordingly.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
New Jersey Joins Legal Challenge to EPA’s Clean Power Plan
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The EPA Clean Power Plan
New Jersey recently joined 23 other states in challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan, also known as the 111(d) Rule. The suit maintains that the EPA’s plan to reduce greenhouse gases unlawfully exceeds its authority.
What’s the EPA’s plan?
As previously detailed on this blog, the EPA rule establishes interim and final carbon dioxide (CO2) emission performance rates for two subcategories of fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs) — fossil fuel-fired electric steam generating units and natural gas-fired combined cycle generating units. The overall goal of the Clean Power Plan is to lower national electricity sector emissions by an estimated 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The EPA’s plan also requires states to develop, submit and implement plans that reflect the CO2 emission performance rates, either directly by means of source-specific emission standards or other requirements, or through measures that achieve equivalent CO2 reductions from the same group of EGUs.
In adopting the new environmental regulations, the EPA relied on its broad authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA). However, the agency has faced intense pushback since the rule was first proposed in 2014. While the carbon pollution rule was still in draft form, a coalition of energy companies and 15 states, including New Jersey, filed suit to block the rule, arguing that the CAA does not allow the EPA to regulate a pollutant at a plant that is already subject to emissions rules.
NJ vs. EPA
The EPA’s final rule was published in the Federal Register on October 23, 2015. The state of New Jersey filed its lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on the same day. In announcing the legal challenge, Gov. Chris Christie characterized the Clean Power Plan as “fundamentally flawed” and an “unlawful overreach of authority.”
In a declaration filed with the court, Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bob Martin highlighted that New Jersey’s existing power plants must comply with more stringent limits than EPA has set for new power plants. He further stated:
Between 2001 and 2012, New Jersey had already reduced carbon dioxide emissions from its power sector by 33 percent, which is more than the 32 percent reduction goal that EPA has set for the entire nation to reach by 2030,” Commissioner Martin said. “New Jersey’s prior reductions are not given credit under the 111(d) Rule. The Clean Power Plan also fails to credit renewable energy sources and increases in nuclear power plant capacity developed before 2013.
In its defense, the EPA maintains that the Clean Power Plan is legal. “The Clean Power Plan has strong scientific and legal foundations, provides states with broad flexibilities to design and implement plans, and is clearly within EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act,” U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in a statement.
Support for EPA’s plan
The agency also has the support of at least 15 states, which plan to intervene in defense of the Clean Power Plan. “Significant reductions in these emissions must occur to prevent increases in the frequency, magnitude and scale of the adverse impacts of climate change,” wrote New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman argued in support of the rule.
The plaintiffs have asked the federal court to “immediately stop its implementation,” while the legal challenge to the Clean Power Plan plays out. We will continue to monitor the status of this high-profile environmental litigation and will provide updates accordingly.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
