First CAMR, Now CAIR - The EPA Leaves Us Unprotected Again

Just as the Clean Air Mercury Rule or CAMR was vacated by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals back in February, the Clean Air Interstate Rule has bitten the dust. Everyone knew CAMR was flawed establishing a cap-and-trade system to handle a toxin, and excusing EGUs from HAPs legislation, but most people, environmentalists included felt the CAIR had merit and was a program on the right track. Problem is the EPA didn't follow the correct procedure for rule-making of this kind.

In a statement by Eric Schaeffer of the Environmental Integrity Project carried by PRNewswire-USNewswire and printed on MarketWatch.com;

"Today, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which would have required significant reductions of sulfur dioxide and other pollutants in eastern states. The CAIR rule would have established an emissions trading program, which the court found to be illegal because it failed to require each state to analyze its own contribution to poor air quality: 'The trading program is unlawful, because it does not connect state emission reductions to any measure of their own significant contributions.'

"The court's decision will leave millions of Americans exposed to unhealthy levels of air pollution from dirty power plants while the Agency goes back to the drawing board to redraft emission standards. For seven years, the Bush Administration has tried to weaken or eliminate Clean Air Act emission standards for power plants and other industries, while promising that its CAIR rule would make up the difference. That promise has proved to be hollow. The DC Circuit's decision today is only the latest in a series of rulings that have roundly rejected the Bush Administration's creative interpretations of the Clean Air Act.

"As of today, EPA is still toiling away to weaken air quality standards for national parks, and to make it easier for the oldest and dirtiest power plants to increase emissions without pollution controls. Elimination of the CAIR rule makes it even more important for Congress to step in and stop these rollbacks. Since this Administration has proved incapable of reading or following the law, Congress and the next President will have to write the standards that we need to protect the public health from air pollution."

The CAIR had the potential to be very, very beneficial to the public welfare, especially in the eastern half of the country. While EPA got its hands slapped in the CAMR case for not doing enough, this rebuke, in the eyes of the judges, says EPA went too far, or interpreted its authority to write rules beyond the scope of their actual power. It is too bad in this case because the rule was not that bad. But EPA has stringent criteria they must follow to create rules and cutting corners is not going to fly. A brief piece from Grist.org and the AP says it well;

Court strikes down clean-air rule that would actually clean air

One of the rare Bush administration clean-air policies favored by enviros has been struck down by a federal appeals court. The Clean Air Interstate Rule would have required 28 Eastern states to reduce soot-causing, smog-forming emissions that easily spread on the wind. The U.S. EPA estimated that the rule would prevent 17,000 premature deaths per year, tens of thousands of nonfatal heart attacks, millions of lost work and school days, and up to $100 billion in health-care costs. But ruling in favor of electric-power producers, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the EPA overstepped its authority in instituting the rule and that the regulation contained "more than several fatal flaws." Says Frank O'Donnell of advocacy group Clean Air Watch, "This is without a doubt the worst news of the year when it comes to air pollution."

Sometimes you just can't win for losing.