Court Rejects EPA Limits on Air Pollution Monitoring

[Guest guest]

Court Rejects EPA Limits on Air Pollution Monitoring

 

October 10, 2005 — By John Heilprin, Associated Press

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court Friday rejected what it called a Bush

administration attempt to " pull a surprise switcheroo " by weakening the

government's authority to monitor air pollution from power plants, refineries

and factories.

 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia annulled the

Environmental Protection Agency's revisions of air pollution monitoring

requirements last year. The court's action returns for the time-being a

stricter, Clinton-era standard that allows EPA and states to require more

monitoring from plants when they renew their operating permits every five years.

 

Writing for a three-judge panel, Judge David Sentelle said an EPA settlement

last year with the utility and other industry groups on monitoring requirements

contradicted the agency's 2002 interpretation of the Clean Air Act.

 

" The upshot of EPA's final interpretation ... is that state permitting

authorities are now prohibited from adding new monitoring requirements, " wrote

Sentelle, who was appointed to the court by President Ronald Reagan. " This

flip-flop complies with the (law) only if preceded by adequate notice and

opportunity for public comment. "

 

EPA spokeswoman Eryn Witcher said the agency was " pleased that the court is

allowing EPA to address the procedural flaw in the rule, by providing an

opportunity for additional public comment on the agency's approach to monitoring

requirements. "

 

The court's ruling was in a suit brought by three environmental groups -- the

Environmental Integrity Project, the Natural Resources Defense Council and

Earthjustice -- challenging EPA's new interpretation.

 

Eric Schaeffer, a former EPA civil enforcement chief who heads the Environmental

Integrity Project, said the Bush administration had " abandoned the authority "

that federal and state agencies had to require improved monitoring to find

pollution that often escapes detection.

 

He said the court's restores citizens' right to demand constant monitoring of

pollution from local power plants, refineries and factories " that allows you to

know whether they're complying with the law. "

 

" If you can't tell whether someone's violating the Clean Air Act, then what good

is the law? " Schaeffer said. " It's as if you put a cop on the road every 5 years

to see if people are speeding -- it's that big of a problem. "

 

Representatives for industry groups with knowledge of last year's settlement

with EPA couldn't be reached immediately for comment.

 

Sentelle said the court can't allow EPA to justify limited public input by

claiming its final regulations merely were a " logical outgrowth " of an earlier

rulemaking process.

 

" Thus, we have refused to allow agencies to use the rulemaking process to pull a

surprise switcheroo on regulated entities, " he wrote.

 

Source: Associated Press

 

 

The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain

other

sets of people are human: Aldous Huxley