| 
          Court Rejects Effort 
          by States to Force Bush Administration to Regulate Greenhouse Gases
 July 18, 2005 — By John Heilprin, Associated Press
 WASHINGTON — States lost a bid Friday 
        to force the Bush administration to regulate heat-trapping industrial 
        gases that have been blamed for global warming. 
 A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
        Columbia said the Environmental Protection Agency acted properly when it 
        rejected a nonprofit group's petition. The group had asked EPA to impose 
        new controls on carbon dioxide and other automobile pollutants that 
        scientists say trap heat in the atmosphere like a greenhouse.
 
 Tom Reilly, the Massachusetts attorney general, said the states probably 
        would ask for the full appeals court to hear the case.
 
 "With each day of inaction, the problem of global warming worsens," 
        Reilly said. "We will continue to fight to compel the federal government 
        to use its legal authority to address this serious problem."
 
 After EPA rejected the group's petition, 12 states and several cities 
        argued that EPA should regulate those gases under the Clean Air Act and 
        hadn't justified its decision not to. The three federal appeals judges 
        ruled otherwise.
 
 Judge A. Raymond Randolph, writing for the panel, and Judge David 
        Santelle, who disagreed with Randolph on some of the issues in the case, 
        each sidestepped the larger question of whether EPA lacks authority to 
        order reductions in greenhouse gases.
 
 In August 2003, the EPA's top lawyer issued an opinion that the agency 
        lacked that authority, a reversal of a Clinton administration legal 
        opinion that the gases should be regulated.
 
 The Bush administration used that opinion to justify denying the request 
        from the nonprofit group, International Center for Technology 
        Assessment, and other groups seeking new federal controls on auto 
        emissions.
 
 Randolph said the court assumed for the sake of argument that EPA has 
        the authority to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants but that 
        "the question we address is whether EPA properly declined to exercise 
        that authority."
 
 Randolph said the court should defer to a federal agency's judgment in 
        policy questions that are "on the frontiers of scientific knowledge."
 
 Judge David Tatel also disagreed with Randolph on some of the issues. 
        Most notably, he found that greenhouse gases "plainly fall within the 
        meaning" of air pollutants that should be regulated.
 
 If the EPA administrator finds that the gases contribute to air 
        pollution that puts the public's health or welfare in danger, Tatel 
        wrote, "then EPA has authority -- indeed, the obligation -- to regulate 
        their emissions from motor vehicles."
 
 States challenging the EPA's rejection of that petition were California, 
        Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New 
        York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, along with the U.S. 
        territory of American Samoa and the cities Baltimore, New York and 
        Washington, D.C.
 
 Reilly said the states were disappointed by the ruling but "heartened" 
        that Tatel, the only judge to look at the issue of EPA's legal authority 
        on greenhouse gases, "firmly rejected EPA's claim."
 
 Source: Associated Press
 |