• Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

liskow_lewis_white_new

future-focused

  • Team
  • Practices
  • Insights
  • Perspectives
Blogs

EPA’s Shifting Guidance on Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Defenses in State Implementation Plans and Its Effect in Louisiana

10.14.21 | 5 minute read

 

 

On September 30, 2021, the EPA once again signaled a policy change on what provisions a state can include in its Clean Air Act State Implementation Plan (“SIP”) for exemptions and affirmative defenses during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction (“SSM”). This most recent action revokes the EPA guidance issued nearly a year earlier in October 2020, and it readopts the agency’s prior SSM policy for SIPs which was published on June 12, 2015. While this latest version marks a significant change from the 2020 guidance, it is unlikely to alter or impact Louisiana’s SIP.

I.  2015 SSM SIP Policy

Under the Obama Administration, EPA promulgated a final rule on June 12, 2015, entitled “State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA’s SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction,” (hereinafter, “2015 SSM SIP Policy”). 80 Fed. Reg. 33840 (June 12, 2015). While published as a final rule, the 2015 SSM SIP Policy was nonbinding. This Policy provided that blanket and automatic SSM exemption and affirmative defense provisions in SIPs were not consistent with Clean Air Act (“CAA”) requirements and not allowable in SIPs. The policy further explained that SIPs could include criteria and procedures for how an agency may use enforcement discretion for SSM events.

As part of its final action,  EPA issued a SIP Call for Louisiana, as well as 35 other states, to submit corrective SIP revisions regarding several air quality regulations, which EPA found to be “substantially inadequate to meet [CAA] requirements” because they provided “automatic exemptions” or “impermissible discretionary exemptions” from “otherwise applicable SIP emission limitations.” 80 Fed. Reg. at 33967-68.  In 2016, with EPA approval, Louisiana finalized its SIP revisions eliminating provisions that allowed for automatic and discretionary exemptions from emission limitations during startup, shutdown, maintenance, and malfunctions. 81 Fed. Reg. 4891. The 2015 SIP Call did not require Louisiana to eliminate its upset affirmative defense, which allows an owner or operator to assert an affirmative defense in an enforcement proceeding for “any situation arising from sudden and reasonably unforeseeable events beyond the control of the owner or operator…that causes the source to exceed a technology-based emissions limitation under the permit due to unavoidable increases in emissions attributable to the situation.” LAC 33:III.507.J.1.

II. 2020 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum

On October 9, 2020, during the Trump Administration, EPA modified its stance on SSM exemptions in SIPs, issuing a guidance memorandum entitled “Inclusion of provisions governing periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State Implementation Plans” (hereinafter, “2020 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum”), The memorandum outlined that certain exemptions and affirmative defenses for SSM periods may be permissible in SIPs. In the memorandum, EPA concluded that because SIPs contain numerous planning requirements that collectively protect the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”), a SIP could adequately provide for attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, even if the SIP allowed exemptions to specific emission limits for SSM events. The guidance also acknowledged that narrowly tailored affirmative defense provisions for malfunctions caused by circumstances beyond the control of the owner or operator could be permissible as protective of NAAQS. The 2020 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum was not issued as an agency final action and had no binding effects.

Because Louisiana had already modified its SIP based on the 2015 SSM SIP Policy, the 2020 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum had no effect on Louisiana’s SIP.

III. 2021 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum

Most recently, under the Biden Administration, the EPA has returned to the policy published under the Obama Administration.  On September 30, 2021, EPA issued a memorandum entitled “Withdrawal of the October 9, 2020, Memorandum Addressing Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State Implementation Plans and Implementation of the Prior Policy,” (hereinafter, “2021 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum”). The 2021 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum rescinds the 2020 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum and re-adopts the 2015 SSM SIP Policy. In its memorandum, EPA explained that it believed that the 2015 SSM SIP Policy was the better policy because:

  • It is consistent with the 2008 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals finding that SSM exemptions were impermissible under a sister provision of the CAA (Section 112, dealing with National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants), Sierra Club v. Johnson, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), and a 2014 decision, in which the D.C. Circuit held that EPA lacked authority to create affirmative defenses for SSM events, NRDC v. EPA, 749 F.3d 1055 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
  • It is better able to ensure that minority, low-income, and indigenous populations receive the full health and environmental protections provided by the CAA.
  • It better ensures that emission limitations are in place during all modes of operation.

The EPA also determined that reinstating the 2015 SSM SIP Policy would not be harmful, because the 2020 policy had been in place less than a year and no states had submitted SIP revisions pursuant to the policy.

The EPA intends to continue implementing pending SIP calls based on the 2015 SSM SIP Policy, and it intends to take additional action as needed. This additional action may include issuing additional SIP calls for North Carolina, Texas, and Iowa. In 2020, prior to issuing its 2020 SSM SIP Policy Memorandum, the EPA withdrew its SSM SIP call for these three states, essentially finding that the SSM provisions in these SIPs, which allowed SSM affirmative defenses and exemptions were permissible. Under the 2021 SSM SIP Policy, EPA will likely take a different stance.

EPA’s most recent SSM SIP Policy Memorandum is unlikely to affect Louisiana’s SIP. Louisiana revised its SIP based on the 2015 SSM SIP Policy, and this policy was re-adopted in the 2021 memorandum. Accordingly, it seems likely that Louisiana’s upset affirmative defense will remain in effect.

Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the law firm of Liskow & Lewis, APLC (“Liskow & Lewis”) and the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site for educational purposes and to give you general information and a general understanding of the law only, not to provide specific legal advice as to an identified problem or issue. By using this blog site you understand and acknowledge that there is no attorney client relationship formed between you and Liskow & Lewis and/or the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site by virtue of your using this site. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state regarding a particular matter.

Privacy Policy: By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry. Communications include firm news, insights, and events. To receive information from Liskow & Lewis, your information will be kept in a secured contact database. If at any time you would like to unsubscribe, please use the link located at the bottom of every email that you receive.

Primary Sidebar

Related Team

  • Media item displaying: Emily von Qualen

    Emily von Qualen

    Shareholder

    New Orleans
    504.556.4129504.556.4129
    995
  • Media item displaying: Lou E. Buatt

    Lou E. Buatt

    Shareholder

    Lafayette
    337.267.2343337.267.2343
    995
Liskow & Lewis, APLC
Arrow Icon

future-focused

  • Baton Rouge
  • Houston
  • Lafayette
  • New Orleans
  • New York City
  • © 2026 Liskow & Lewis, APLC
  • Sitemap
  • Disclaimer
  • Employee Login
Site by
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
Cookie SettingsAccept All
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT
  • Team
  • Practices
  • Insights
  • Perspectives
  • Offices
  • Pro Bono
  • About Us
  • Careers
  • DEI
  • The Energy Law Blog
  • Gulf Coast Business Law Blog
  • The Maritime Law Blog