WASHINGTON – U.S. Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and Greg Walden, R-Ore., today asked Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson to explain how four rules, including the greenhouse as endangerment finding, would affect job losses in the United States.

“Given the billions of dollars in compliance costs, complexity of the reporting and permitting requirements, potential enforcement actions, potential fines and penalties, and threats of citizen suits and other third-party litigation, we have serious concerns that the administration and EPA’s proposed global warming regulations will cumulatively result in job losses, and contribute to the flight of U.S. manufacturing and other businesses overseas – stifling future economic growth,” Barton and Walden wrote. “Before EPA makes a positive endangerment finding and proceeds with regulation, we believe Congress and the American public should know the potential employment impacts in the United States of EPA’s proposed regulatory actions.”

Four rules – the proposed endangerment finding, Final Mandatory Reporting Rule, Proposed Light-Duty Vehicles Rule and Proposed Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule – could affect millions of facilities and sources and would cumulatively require hundreds of millions of dollars a year in reporting and compliance costs.

The Final Mandatory Reporting Rule, which will affect up to 30,000 facilities, would cost covered entities $132 million for the first year and $89 million annually. The Light-Duty Vehicle Rule is expected to cost $368 per vehicle when implemented, increasing to $1,060 per vehicle by 2016. For the Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, a rule that could affect more than 6 million entities if challenged, there appears to be no overall cost estimates associated with the regulation of the program, or estimates of potential costs to the economy.

The lawmakers asked Jackson to respond to the following questions:

1.    What overall job losses and/or shifts in employment in the United States does EPA estimate will occur if the agency issues a final positive endangerment finding and moves forward with the full range of greenhouse gas regulations the Administration and EPA believe can be issued under the Clean Air Act? 

a.    Please identify both near-term and longer term job losses in the United States that may result from regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

b.    Please also identify when, in what regions of the country, and in what employment sectors such job losses would be expected to occur.

2.    What evaluations, if any, has EPA prepared of potential loss or shifts in employment which may result from implementing the proposed light-duty vehicle standard program? Please describe and provide copies of all such evaluations.

3.    What evaluations, if any, has EPA prepared of potential loss or shifts of employment which may result from regulation of greenhouse gases under the PSD program? Please describe and provide copies of all such evaluations.

4.    What evaluations, if any, has EPA prepared of potential loss or shifts of employment which may result from regulation of greenhouse gases under the title V program? Please describe and provide copies of all such evaluations.

5.    What evaluations, if any, has EPA prepared of overall potential loss or shifts of employment which may result if the proposed Tailoring Rule is not upheld? Please describe and provide copies of all such evaluations.

6.    To the extent not already provided above, how many job losses, if any, does EPA estimate may occur in the United States as a result of regulating greenhouse gas emissions under (i) the light-duty vehicle program; (ii) the PSD program; and (iii) the title V program?

a.    To the extent not already provided above, please identify both near-term and long-term potential job losses in the United States that may result from proposed regulation of greenhouse gases under these specific programs.

b.    To the extent not already provided above, please also identify when, in what regions of the country, and in what employment sectors such job losses would be expected to occur.

7.    With regard to Section 321 of the Clean Air Act, does EPA comply with this provision? If yes, how does EPA comply? If no, please explain.

8.    With regard to the Mandatory Reporting Rule, EPA denied apparently reasonable requests for a one-year delay of the reporting requirements to allow adequate time for reporting entities to review the final rule and install monitoring equipment. EPA declined all such requests on the grounds that this would mean the first annual reports would not be received until 2012, “which would likely be too late for many ongoing GHG policy and program development needs.” (Preamble, 74 Fed. Reg. at 56,274 (October 30, 2009))

a.    Is it feasible for up to 30,000 entities affected by this rule, many of which have not previously been subject to similar reporting requirements, to review such a complex rule, announced by EPA on September 22, 2009 but not formally published in the Federal Register until October 30, 2009, to evaluate those requirements and if necessary begin monitoring and data collection by January 1, 2010?   

b.    What are the “ongoing GHG policy and program development needs” referred to in the preamble?  Was the denial of the requests for a one-year delay based on statutory requirements or was this a policy determination?

9.    What are the potential penalties, including but not limited to monetary penalties and other civil or criminal sanctions, for violations of the (i) Mandatory Reporting Rule; (ii) Proposed Light-Duty Vehicles Standards program; (iii) PSD program; and (iv)  title V program?  Please provide a separate response for each item, including maximum monetary penalties.

10.    Are citizens suits authorized for alleged violations of the (i) Mandatory Reporting Rule; (ii) Proposed Light-Duty Vehicles Standards program; (iii) PSD program; and/or (iv) title V program?  Please provide a separate response for each item.

11.    What additional rulemakings or programs relating to regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is EPA currently considering?  Please identify specifically all such potential rulemakings or programs.

12.    Can you provide any assurances that EPA’s proposed regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act will not result in significant near or long-term job losses or shifts in employment in the United States? 

A copy of the letter can be found here.