EPA staff to administrator: We'll lose lawsuit
EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson's legal staff warned him that the environmental agency would likely be sued and lose the lawsuit if he tried to block "Clean Cars" laws enacted by California, Maryland and a dozen other states, according to a report in today's San Francisco Chronicle.
In the end, Johnson -- who was appointed by President Bush -- ignored his staff's advice that California and the other states had good reasons to enact global warming pollution limits stronger than the federal rules. And Johnson denied a waiver required for the states to move forward with their emission control programs. Maryland recently joined a lawsuit by California and the other states challenging that denial.
Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley is joining other governors in testifying this morning before a U.S. Senate committee that is investigating why the Bush administration blocked these state global warming pollution control programs. More than 40 times over the previous three decades -- every time it was asked -- the EPA granted California permission to enact air pollution control standards tougher than the national standards.
In a presentation to Johnson last year, EPA staffers wrote that California could clearly demonstrate the "compelling and extraordinary conditions" needed under the Clean Air Act for the EPA to approve regulations set by the state, according to the Chronicle report.
"California continues to have compelling and extraordinary conditions in general (geography, climatic, human and motor vehicle populations - many such conditions are vulnerable to climate change conditions) as confirmed by several recent EPA decisions," the staff told Johnson, according to the newspaper.
In a PowerPoint slide titled "If We Grant" the waiver, the staffers predicted a "likely suit by manufacturers," meaning the automakers, who have long opposed California's rules. They concluded: "EPA is almost certain to win such a suit."
The next slide was labeled "If We Deny" the waiver, which predicted that there would be an "almost certain lawsuit by California." The agency's lawyers wrote: EPA is "likely to lose suit," according to the Chronicle.
So why did Johnson move ahead with blocking a global warming pollution control program that would affect about half of American drivers? That's the question the hearing today is exploring.
Here is the essence of what Gov. O'Malley told the committee, according to a press release from the governor's office:
"In Maryland, we have worked hard to protect our natural environment and restore the health of the Chesapeake Bay, but we have tremendous challenges ahead,” said Governor O’Malley. “The EPA must allow states like Maryland and California to make choices and create policies that promote sustainability, enhance our quality of life, and protect our natural environment.”
The Maryland clean cars law would allow Maryland to join 16 other states, including California, in imposing stricter automobile emission standards on what amounts to 45 percent of the Nation’s registered automobiles.
According to the governor's office:
A recent analysis published by the California Air Resources Board indicates that California’s standards are 85% more effective than federal CAFE standards alone. The CAFÉ standard, or Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard, is a federal mandate that determines the minimum average miles per gallon for vehicles sold in this country. Analysis results show that if these cleaner cars in the 20 states will reduce 682 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, or equivalent to taking more than 135 million cars off the road. The federal CAFE standards alone would reduce just 367 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions – 85% less effective at reducing the pollution that is worsening global warming.States that have adopted, or have committed to adopting, California’s strict automobile emissions standards are: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Washington.
In addition to testifying before congress today, Governor O’Malley is proposing legislation that would enhance Maryland’s Critical Areas Law, so that so massive developments like the Four Seasons project on Kent Island are prohibited at the first step in the process, not the last.
Governor O’Malley is also developing a long-term plan for energy generation, distribution and conservation, to meet the EmPOWER Maryland goal of decreasing energy consumption 15% by 2015 and to reverse the effects of global warming.
In his first year in office, Maryland joined the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), working with 9 other states to reduce emissions and fight global warming.
Comments
THIS IS FOOLISH FOR THE PERSON OF THE EPA TO BLOCK THEIR STANDARDS, AS I LIVED FROM 1962 TO 2003 BEFORE MOVING TO TENN.WHEN I WENT TO CALIF IN 1962 ,MOST OF THE DAYS WERE LIKE A CLOUD HANGING OVER THE LOS ANGLES BASIN AND THE STATE IS ONE OF THE CLEANEST AMONG MOST BECAUSE OF THE EPA STANDARDS.
SIGNED JIMMY NELSON
Posted by: JIMMY C NELSON | January 24, 2008 1:55 PM
The EPA Head Tyrant's financials should be checked to see if he has been bribed by automakers or their special interests
Posted by: Jay | January 24, 2008 3:51 PM
Here's a question we need to ask of Mr. Johnson:
Question: What kind of EPA head would block a state from RAISING its environmental standards?
Answer: An arrogant Bush Administration appointee. Just how obvious does the corruption in this country need to be? And California already killed the Electric Cars...
Posted by: Scott Foulk | January 24, 2008 5:38 PM
Its at moments like these when i just want to say "Gee Thanks Ralph Nader for thinking there was NO difference between Al Gore and George Bush"
Posted by: Jimi Damon | January 24, 2008 11:51 PM