On September 20, 2013 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the New Source Performance Standard, a proposed regulation for controlling greenhouse gas emissions from coal-based power plants that generate 40 percent of the nation's electricity.

May 8, 2014 - NMA Comments: Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

The new rule would force new coal-based plants to meet an emissions standard that cannot be achieved with even the most advanced, cleaner coal technologies currently commercially available. The potential high cost for such theoretical systems would not only be passed along to the American consumer in the form of higher electric bills, but would discourage the construction of new low-emission coal-based plants that provide the country with the affordable and reliable electricity it needs to drive economic growth.

The rule has raised dramatic concerns among members of the mining industry across the country, energy intensive manufacturers and electric utilities. It has caused great concern on Capitol Hill about the potentially destructive impact on the U.S. economy and jobs. NMA has collected statements, press releases and other commentary from both industry and members of Congress, which appear below.

For more on EPA's power plant rule, please click here -http://www.multivu.com/mnr/63063-national-mining-association-nma-epa-new-source-performance-standard

To add your statement, please contact: Greg Bilodeau at  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Industry Perspectives:

September 20, 2013 - Hal Quinn, President & CEO, NMA

"The regulation announced today by EPA effectively bans coal from America's power portfolio, leaving new power plants equipped with even the most efficient and environmentally advanced technologies out in the cold.

"By forcing power plants to abandon the use of the nation's largest and most reliable source of affordable electricity, EPA is recklessly gambling with the nation's energy and economic future. The risk will be raised if this new source standard is applied to existing power plants next year. The result will be a risky reliance on less diverse and more volatile sources of electricity, leading eventually to higher utility bills for households and businesses and significant job losses for American workers.

"EPA has also set a dangerous and far-reaching precedent for the broader economy by failing to base environmental standards on reliable technology. Although today's story is about coal and affordable electricity, tomorrow the story will be about other industries forced to comply with arbitrary standards based on unproven technologies.

"The more responsible course for the administration is to base standards on the best-in-class technology available today. This would ensure the reliability of electricity supply by allowing power companies to replace older, less efficient plants with newer, more efficient ones.

"It would be the genuine, all-of-the-above energy policy that enjoys bi-partisan support in Congress and broad support throughout the country."

NMA's Hal Quinn was also quoted on CNN Politics regarding the issue.

September 20, 2013 - Arch Coal, Inc.

The coal-based generation industry has made tremendous progress in reducing emissions in recent years – with non-greenhouse-gas emissions per unit of coal consumed down 90 percent since 1970.  The newest coal plants far exceed even those reductions, and also have lower greenhouse gas emissions due to their higher efficiency levels.

We believe that coal plants with near-zero greenhouse gas emissions will be achievable in time, but such technology is simply not available today.  The Administration's proposal goes way too far, way too fast – and threatens to arrest rather than spur technology advances.  With the world's fastest growing economies continuing to build their economies on coal, it makes no sense for the United States – which possesses the world's largest coal reserves – to erect barrier after barrier to coal use.  In doing so, we are ensuring America higher power prices, lower economic growth and reduced international competitiveness – and effectively foreclosing on our ability to use this affordable, secure and reliable fuel in the future.

September 20, 2013 - Cecil E. Roberts, International President, United Mine Workers of America

"The draft regulations issued today by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) dealing with emissions from newly constructed power plants, give lie to the "all-of-the-above" approach to electricity generation in the United States. Clearly, the administration has made the determination that it wants to cut our nation's most abundant source of fuel, coal, out of the mix.

"Under this proposed set of regulations, there will be no more coal-fired power plants built in the United States. That's just a fact. People can say all they want about the possibility of using carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology on new plants, but the reality is that absent significant support from the government, no utility will make the commitment to spend billions to add unproven CCS capability to their new power plant.

"These regulations lay the groundwork for a future of significantly higher electricity bills for American ratepayers, especially those who live in states where a majority of the electricity is generated from coal. The current low price of natural gas will not last long, especially in a marketplace where it becomes the dominant fuel. This will be a double whammy on people who live in states where coal is both produced and used as a fuel, like West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Pennsylvania and others.

"For the UMWA, there is no issue of greater importance. This is about whether or not our members have a future working in an industry that provides steady employment. It is about whether or not our members can continue to earn good wages, provide for their families and be the main economic drivers of the communities where they live. It is also about whether the more than 100,000 UMWA retirees, their dependents and widows who currently receive health care and pension benefits will find those benefits at risk.

"As we ask, 'What is the future of electricity generation in America?' we must also ask, 'What kind of future do we want for America?' If the answer to that question is one that addresses long-term economic and energy security, then coal must be part of that future. If the answer to that question is one that promotes continued high-paying jobs in rural America, then coal must be part of that future. And if the answer to that question is one that addresses environmental challenges and leaves the world a better place for our children and grandchildren, then we believe coal is part of that future as well.

"We will make that case to EPA in our comments on this proposed regulation. I can only hope that they listen."

September 23, 2013 - Edwin D. Hill, President, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

"The draft regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency regarding emissions from newly-constructed power plants threaten economic growth and America's energy future.

"The new rules would in effect stop the construction of new coal-fired power plants in the United States by enforcing emission-reduction goals that just aren't realistic using today's technology for carbon capture and sequestration.

"The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers remains strong supporters of clean coal technology and federal and industry investment to make it a realistic option for the energy industry. But in mandating new coal plants use technology that is not even commercially available or affordable, the EPA is unfairly singling out the coal industry and setting back efforts to grow the economy and promote energy independence.

"This means higher electricity bills for consumers and layoffs and economic slowdown for tens of thousands of working families that rely on the coal industry for employment.

"The EPA itself has estimated that mandating carbon capture and storage technology that still has not been deemed commercially viable would raise the cost of electricity by 80 percent.

"President Obama has always said he supports an 'all-of-the-above' energy policy that values a diverse energy portfolio, including coal.  But by effectively banning the construction of new coal-fired plants, the EPA is forcing America into heavy reliance on the volatile natural gas market, abandoning our nation's largest fossil fuel base and large parts of coal-producing America along with it.

"Strong job growth and energy independence cannot be achieved without coal, a key part of our energy mix."

Congressional Prespectives:

September 20, 2013 - via Politico

West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin lamented today that the EPA's proposed power plant rule will hold "coal and gas emissions to nearly the same standards," something that "will have devastating impacts to the coal industry and our economy."

"Today's announcement of the EPA's new source performance standard is direct evidence that this Administration is trying to hold the coal industry to impossible standards," he said. "Never before has the federal government forced an industry to do something that is technologically impossible."

Manchin added: "If these regulations go into effect, American jobs will be lost, electricity prices will soar, and economic uncertainty will grow. We need the federal government to work as a partner, not an adversary, and to invest in America's energy future. I will continue to fight EPA overreach, just as I did as governor, to protect the reliable, affordable energy and the good-paying jobs that coal-fired power plants provide in West Virginia and across this country."

September 20, 2013 - via Politico

EPA hasn’t proven that cutting carbon pollution will have a measurable effect on climate change, Rep. Mike Pompeo said today in response to EPA’s announcement that new power plants will have limits on carbon emissions.

At a recent hearing, Pompeo said, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy “admitted… that that the agency doesn't — and cannot — measure whether any of the regulations it promulgates are effective in combating climate change. Making policy on guesswork and ideology over science and basic common sense will only hurt American families. We will fight this, because America deserves better." 

September 20, 2013 - via Politico

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is promising to wield a usually unsuccessful legislative tool to try to roll back EPA's proposed power plant rule.

"The President's decision today is an escalation of the War on Coal and what that really means for Kentucky families is an escalation of his War on Jobs and the Kentucky economy," McConnell said in a statement. "This is another attempt by the President to fulfill his long-term commitment to shut down our nation's coal mines."

McConnell said he will file a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act "to ensure a vote to stop this devastating EPA rule."

The CRA allows Congress to essentially veto recently completed agency regulations. A CRA challenge only needs majority support and can't be filibustered — but Congress can use it only against finalized rules, and the one that came out today is just proposed.

September 20, 2013 - via Politico

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton is promising a hearing on EPA's proposed rule for power plants.

"The committee will soon hold a hearing on this latest regulatory grab as part of our ongoing effort to protect Americans and jobs from unnecessary and costly red tape," Upton said in a statement on today's rule.

Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield added he will "intend to hold hearings to examine every aspect of this regulation." He added: "If it is as bad as we think it's going to be, I, along with other Republicans and Democrats in the United States Congress, will take every step possible to prevent this regulation from taking effect."

Whitfield told POLITICO recently he was preparing a bill that would require EPA to approve new coal-fired power plants that meet certain emission requirements that the legislation would dictate. He said at the time that those details were still being worked on. It's a narrower attack on the agency than past GOP-backed efforts to thwart EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases altogether.

September 20, 2013 - Sen. Murkowski (R-Alaska) Statement

"I'm very disappointed by this latest rulemaking from the EPA," Murkowski said. "Despite opposition, the administration has charged ahead with command-and-control regulations that will drive up energy costs for all Americans. And today we find that they are even willing to mandate the use of technologies that don't exist on a commercial scale. This is the wrong way to advance our energy and environmental objectives.

"The administration does not have the ability to will technologies into existence by sheer force of the rules it imposes on American energy producers. Instead, a longer-term commitment to basic, scientific research is required for the technological breakthroughs that we all seek and support.

"Today's rulemaking also doubles down on a plan to circumvent elected representatives in Congress, even as we debate an energy efficiency bill on the floor of the Senate. That legislation represents a smarter strategy for job creation, economic growth, and environmental progress.

"The President has said he can't wait for Congress, but these rules show that he was never serious about working with us in the first place."

The new regulations issued today by EPA will disproportionately affect fossil fuel-based electric power plants, which have been and remain a foundation for reliable and affordable energy in America.

Murkowski and Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, wrote to President Obama earlier this week requesting that he work with Congress prior to imposing these new regulations. The full letter can be found here.

September 20, 2013 - via Politico

Sen. Joe Donnelly added his voice to the chorus of criticism from coal-state Democrats today to EPA's proposed power plant rule.

"We can all agree that we need clean, affordable energy in this country, but I continue to be frustrated by the EPA's extreme proposals that fail to recognize the impact these regulations will have on Hoosier families and businesses," the Indiana Democrat said in a statement.

He said carbon capture and sequestration technology is unproven in industry and that carbon dioxide emissions can be reduced without "excessive burdening" of consumers and businesses. "The regulations proposed today fail to meet this basic, common-sense objective," he said. Coal plants would have to use CCS technology, while natural gas plants can use existing technology, he argued.

Donnelly and Sen. Roy Blunt filed an amendment to bipartisan energy efficiency legislation "that would ensure that EPA efforts to regulate carbon dioxide emissions are reflective of existing technology and do not negatively impact our economy," Donnelly said.

September 20, 2013 - Rep. Enyart (D-IL) Statement

"The EPA must understand that coal continues to be the single largest source for America's electricity supply.  While coal emissions are lower than ever before, the standards unveiled today are impractical because the technology is neither affordable nor commercially available at this time.

"Instead of penalizing the coal industry, we must instead work to improve clean coal technology and bring costs down.  As we do this, coal will become even more environmentally friendly.

"I am opposed to today's EPA proposal.  I've spoken to coal operators and Illinois industry leaders in the last week, and it's clear to me that the proposed standards would make it virtually impossible to construct a new coal-fired power plant in America.  With 40% of our electricity generated by coal, we can't turn the lights out on America.

"Today I have joined in support of a House Resolution stating the EPA's rule would be harmful to America's economy and energy independence. As the co-chair of the Congressional Coal Caucus, I'm going to be working with like-minded legislators of both parties to prevent implementation of these unduly burdensome regulations.

"We have abundant coal resources in Southern Illinois that can help power our nation for decades to come.  And in these uncertain economic times, we must ensure that our nation's energy supply is reliable and affordable as well as environmentally friendly.  America simply cannot afford a massive spike in energy prices."

September 20, 2013 - via Politico

Sens. Mary Landrieu and Heidi Heitkamp are two more red-state Democrats lambasting EPA's proposed power plant rule, adding possible bipartisan flavor to any upcoming congressional challenge.

"The [Obama] administration's decision is a direct attack on coal-fired power plants and detrimental to the future for coal as an energy resource," Heitkamp said.

The North Dakota Democrat said she plans to meet with EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy during the upcoming 60-day public comment period "to strongly explain how these regulations are completely unachievable based on current technology and are cost prohibitive."

Heitkamp also said that "whether or not this regulation becomes final, I have already started to work with other senators on a legislative solution that stops pushing coal to the wayside, and instead seeks ways for coal to remain the valuable source of energy that it currently is."

Landrieu dismissed the proposed rule as "not practical," as well.

"If these overzealous regulations take hold, we will lose ground on the progress we have made in energy independence, increased manufacturing and economic growth," the Louisiana Democrat said.

Other Democrats like Sens. Joe Manchin and Joe Donnelly and Rep. Nick Rahall have also come out against EPA's proposal.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — who like Landrieu and Rahall is being closely watched in his reelection bid — is promising to bring a resolution to the Senate floor disapproving of EPA's rule.