Texas has sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to block the implementation of new rules aimed at curbing air pollution.
State Attorney General Greg Abbott’s office filed a petition for review of the regulation — the Cross State Air Pollution Rule — at the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington. A request to bar its enforcement will be filed later today, said spokeswoman Lauren Bean. See the document below.
Abbott “is deeply concerned about these new federal regulations’ impact on the State of Texas, its electric grid and the Texans whose access to something as basic as electricity is threatened,” Bean said in an e-mailed statement.
“Although we won’t comment on the particulars of our legal strategy, Texans can rest assured that the Attorney General’s Office will pursue every available legal remedy to prevent the EPA from imposing this legally flawed rule, and the electricity disruptions and blackouts that state utility officials have said EPA’s rule will cause,” Bean said
The Attorney General’s Office has received referrals from the Public Utility Commission of Texas, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Texas General Land Office and the Texas Railroad Commission about the EPA’s cross-state air pollution rule, while Dallas-based power plant operator, Luminant, filed suit last week and Kansas filed suit today.
The EPA standards, issued in July, say 27 states must reduce power-plant emissions of sulfur dioxide, which forms the tiny particles known as soot, and nitrogen oxides, a component of ground-level ozone. The initial plan only required Texas to cut nitrogen oxide emissions during the smog season, but in July the final rules included sulfur dioxide cuts for Texas as well.
The suit says Texas’ inclusion for sulfur-dioxide reductions was based on changes in the EPA modeling that the state was not given the opportunity to comment on, including readings from just a single air quality monitoring station in Madison County, Ill.
Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is seeking the Republican Party nomination for president in the 2012 election, has criticized the rule as “heavy-handed and misguided.”
Wyn Hornbuckle, a spokesman for the U.S. Justice Department, declined to comment on today’s filing.
The EPA said in a statement that in Texas each year alone the rule will save 1,700 lives and bring $5.8 billion to $14 billion in health benefits.
Gina McCarthy, EPA’s top air-quality official, said last week utilities such as Luminant had plenty of notice and opportunity to comment on the rule and they have until March 2013, not this January, to fully comply. McCarthy also defended the agency’s inclusion of Texas in the rule as based on sound science.
The filing comes as the Obama administration on Wednesday threatened to veto a House Republican bill that would delay the cross-state rule and a mercury-pollution rule and require a new interagency committee to analyze the business and consumer impacts of those and other EPA rules.
The administration said Wednesday the bill would impede efforts to “reduce harmful air pollution that threatens public health, especially the health of the most vulnerable populations, including children and seniors.”
Both rules’ implementation would have to be delayed at least an additional six months after the Aug. 1, 2012, deadline for completing the analyses the bill requires.
The House will likely pass the bill, when it comes to a vote on Friday, but it faces a difficult future in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
Wonder how many millions this suit will cost the Texas taxpayers.
One of Obama’s whack-job czars must be running the EPA.
This administration is dangerous to American citizens and the American way of life.
Especially Texas’ way of life.
Great, we and our children can all be sick and unproductive due to being sick and generally not feeling well, but let’s by all means make sure we don’t “threaten the finances or jobs” in a few select industries…………….
Texas should be allowed to pollute all they want to? Perry needs to quit listening to his SPONSORS and start listening to the PEOPLE of Texas. Comply or pay the fines. Simple.
How many can remember when a President has been involved in so many suits, by the states and by him? Why would he be so directly against the wishes of the people?
I guess getting the taxpayers to pay for his campaign material is a pretty smart move.
Jimmy, the problem is the sheer magnitude and speed of the cuts. Texas has to have total 2012 emissions down by over 50% with less than 6-months notice The EPA outright lied when they said we had until March 2013 to comply, that is for Total Annual Emissions, so you have to reduce by January 2012 with a 3-month extension possible. It takes years to budget, plan, approve, and install scrubbers on power plants.
Plus there is the fact that the justification is that Texas power plants cause PM2.5 exceedances in a single county in Illinois (which, I might add, did not have PM2.5 exceedances last year). This ludicrous modeling was changed at the last minute and Texas was not given a chance to comment on the changes in blatant and outright violation of federal law and the basic principles of the “consent of the governed”, the foundation of our constitution.
Don’t believe me, read this statement by the TCEQ. Hard to call the GOVERNMENT OF TEXAS a bunch on industry shills.
http://www.tceq.texas.gov/news/releases/091511responsetoepa
Is everyone ready to pay more for electricity?
Without a better and more comprehensive explaination of these rules, it’s hard to tell who is in the right on this.
.
Personally, I’d like to see the majority of our power come from natural gas fueled power plants supplemented by wind farms.
Great! Down with air quaility!
Are there any water pollution rules we can fight while we’re at it??
When you refuse to comply with the law because you would rather Houston’s skyline resemble Hong Kong’s… sue. The a two fold win! You can make the air unbreathable, and facilitate reducing the average life expectancy here to 60 years, therefore eliminating Social Security at the same time!
Why would Texas sue to control pollution? I guess Texas wants to go against the wishes of the people. I want fresh air, not Texas pollution.
Since when is the will of the people to have polluted air. I am proud to live in Texas, but not proud of our record. Texas lags badly in education and it’s people’s health. However, we excel in the number of children and families in poverty. Now in the name of states rights we are trying to be first in pollution too. Can you imagine how Texas and the gulf coast would be without the EPA regulating pollution. It would be a nasty and smelly place to live. Go EPA!
Honestly, I live in Katy and air pollution is just not a problem here. Is it a problem in Deer Park or Pasadena? Of course but those are also plants that are refining fuels and chemicals which are the lifeblood of our economy. My wife jogs every morning with not a problem and the kids play outside with not one issue. Any new regulations that cost us more jobs and plant the government boot on our throats even more forcefully I oppose.
Folks, I don’t know about you, but I DO like to breathe. FYI, Texas has yet to comply with the previous regulations, that by itself makes complying with these even more difficult. And if you think about it, for those stuck in their ways, it’s easier to sue and tie all this up in court for years than it is to comply and change.
What good will freezing the debt be if we can’t live here anymore?
wasteing more of our tax dollars payng lawyers. just abide by the rules so we can breathe clean air and drink clean water. Fire all those lawyers!! TAX THE RICH!!!!!!
“So,if anybody wants to build a coal plant,they can-it’s just that it will bankrupt them” Barack Hussein Obama-San Francisco,2008. Wait,we can light up our homes with that 1/2 billion dollar solar plant.What the money was used for the Democrats and there is no plant. I’m shocked!
I guess Obama’s “laser focus” on jobs is meant to destroy them, and not create them. I’m just waiting for November 2012, so I can vote this clown out, along with his anti-American democrat allies… Ooops… sorry for the redundancy.
Luminant has unleashed a PR campaign and it looks like our Governor for Hire and siced the State boys on those rascals at EPA. The coal lobby has some deep pockets and Rick is deep in it. Business friendly doesn’t require pollution from coal-fired power plants.
It seems the people who have demonized smokers for the sake of “clean air” have no problem with air polution that is as unhealthy and dangerous as second hand smoke. Chemical plants and refineries have had for years complied with the EPA and some companies are proactive enough to stay one step ahead of proposed legislation. So why haven’t the energy sector kept up?
You don’t have to have pollution, unless it might cut into what you provide your investors, who don’t live anywhere near those plants. I think if you are going to insist on high levels of pollution, your board and investors should live several miles downwind from the plant. Then see what is critical and what isn’t.
EPA and DOE are just the tip of the iceberg that needs to be dissolved. I’d say 99.9% of all government agencies are a load of pelosi.
Texas pollution doesn’t cross state lines? The sooner we start to work with some level of coordinaiton and compromise the sooner we exit this malaise.
Wonder why the EPA doesn’t go after Mexico, who openly burns everything and pollutes the air and heads straight into Texas all the way to Illinois and Pa? I remember about 6 years ago Mexico was burning forests…and the smoke in Houston was so bad you would choke on it for 2 months. Instead, they went after Texas, saying it was from the refineries, and it wasn’t.
Amazing that the EPA can make rules that must be followed without any repercussions from the unwashed masses.
These rules are nothing more than Obama’s promise to “necessarily skyrocket” your electric rates.
Oh, and for all you ad hominem posters claiming people like me are against clean air and water, go pound sand. Case in point, foolishness like this: “Folks, I don’t know about you, but I DO like to breathe.” What, and I don’t? Dipwad. Do you really think getting rid of this ruling is going to change Houston’s air? Not one bit. Will our water get dirtier? No. Period. Just stop making things up.
The cross-state pollution rules were a punitive action against Texas. Period. It is past time to get rid of this thin-skinned Communist we have in the White House and toss out his legion of economy crushing lackies.
And we need to sue the Mexicans for all that smoke they send up here every Spring when they burn their fields.
Let’s see, 23 states are in compliance, 27 are not. Of the 27 not in compliance, 25 seem to have no problem solving their problem. Only 2, Kansas and Texas don’t wish to comply. Seems like we are out of step with 48 of the other states. Plus, only one utility here seems to have a problem. The others seem to think they can have their plants ready on time and with little extra cost. Seems to be a Greg Abbott and Luminant problem, not an EPA problem.
“Yessir, I promise to keep those pointy-headed federal bureaucrats from enforcing their mandates for race-mixing as long as I have a breath in my body.” New target, same tactic.
Texas stands up for pollution and spending money to defend its right to do so.
Texas industry owners should realize that by modernizing the factories they would increase efficiency, reduce pollution, create jobs, and probably make more money in the long run. But, it seems that greed makes a person blind and short-sighted, and as long as they don’t have to live near the plants and breath the “n-butyl-crap-tolene”, …
So, “sick” the EPA on them, fine their rears off, and throw them in jail if they don’t comply.
well, the oil fat cats live far away from the refineries, so who needs clean air ? as for the regular folk, hey, you need to work, and cancer should kill you swiftly as odds are you won’t have health insurance.