http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...ution_lawsuit_7

States, Cities Sue EPA Over New Air Rules
Mon Oct 27, 9:03 PM ET
By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Lawsuits filed Monday by 13 states and more than 20 cities, which seeks to block changes to the Clean Air Act, contend new rules from the Bush administration would weaken protections for the environment and public health.



The Environmental Protection Agency (news - web sites) regulation makes it easier to upgrade utilities, refineries and other industrial facilities without installing additional pollution controls.


The rule, proposed in December and signed by EPA's administrator in August, was made final Monday. It will take effect in two months, and states have up to three years to comply.


The agency said in a statement it does not believe the rule will result in significant changes in emissions, and it "preserves the public health protections" under law.


Attorneys general for 12 states — New York, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin — and legal officers for New York City, Washington, San Francisco, New Haven and a host of other cities in Connecticut complained of what they contend will be the regulations will weaken protections for the environment and public health that Congress put into the law.


Illinois filed a separate but similar claim, and other states, including California, are considering legal action. Their filings could be consolidated later with the 12-state suit.


They argued only Congress can make sweeping changes to such a bedrock law.


"We are not going to sit by quietly and allow the energy interests in this country to receive special treatment while so many of our children and elderly are needlessly suffering from respiratory problems that are, in essence, brought on by bad environmental policy," Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly said.


The rule broadens EPA's interpretation of routine maintenance for older plants. Before the rule change, operators who did anything more than routine maintenance were required to add more pollution-cutting devices.


Under the new rule, industrial facilities avoid paying for expensive emissions-cutting devices if the cost of improvements totals less than 20 percent of the plant's value.


New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer called the rule an attack on the Clean Air Act.


"The president is taking the nation in the wrong direction on environmental policy," Spitzer said.


Scott Segal, director of the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, a group of power companies that support the rule change, argued it would clarify regulations, and "no litigation from the Northeast attorneys general can produce anything but confusion."


The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. A similar group of states also filed suit in that court to challenge a previous batch of the administration's related changes to the Clean Air Act.



On the Net:

EPA: http://www.epa.gov/nsr