US states accuse EPA of "dragging its feet" on car emissions rules
Group of 18 states return to court in attempt to get Bush administration to
respond to last year's Supreme Court ruling confirming it has power to impose
vehicle emission rules
A group of 18 US states yesterday announced they are to sue the Bush
administration in an attempt to force it to accelerate the development of
legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.
Last April, in a case brought against the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by the
state of Massachusetts, the Supreme Court ruled the EPA has the authority to
regulate emissions from new cars and trucks under the
Clean Air Act, and said the reasons the
EPA gave for declining to do so were insufficient.
Advertisement
However, since then the federal agency has not acted on the court's ruling,
instead claiming it needs to undertake a public consultation before proposing
fresh regulations. It has also consistently blocked attempts by individual
states, led by California, to set their own regulations governing car emissions,
arguing that the matter is a federal issue.
The EPA's inaction has infuriated the group of 18 states, including
Massachusetts, California and New York, who are now accusing the EPA of
deliberately "dragging its feet" on the issue.
In a petition filed yesterday, they claim that last year's Supreme Court
ruling requires the EPA to decide whether to regulate emissions from vehicles
and call upon the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to
require the EPA to act within 60 days.
"The EPA's failure to act in the face of these incontestable dangers is a
shameful dereliction of duty," said Massachusetts attorney general Martha
Coakley, the lead plaintiff.
Speaking to Associated Press, EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar said
the Supreme Court required the agency to evaluate how it would regulate
greenhouse gas emissions from cars and other vehicles but set no deadline. He
added that the evaluation would form part of a work to develop a broader
regulatory framework that would cover emissions from all sources, not just motor
vehicles.
"We want to set a good foundation to build a strong climate policy of
potential regulation and laws we can work toward and actually see some success,
" Shradar said.
Environmental groups accused the EPA of delaying tactics, arguing that it was
in violation of the Supreme Court ruling.
David Hawkins, climate centre director for the Natural Resources Defense
Council, said the EPA appeared committed to delaying any real action to reduce
global warming pollution "for as long as possible and certainly until the next
administration", while Friends of the Earth called for EPA administrator Stephen
Johnson to resign over his continued "inaction on global warming a full year
after the groundbreaking Supreme Court decision".
Comments
Have your say on this article