- WEB EXCLUSIVE
- PE COFFEEHAUS
CAMR would have instituted the use of a cap-and-trade program for regulating mercury emissions from power plants. The court found a provision in the 2005 rule to remove power plants from the Clean Air Act’s list of toxic sources – replacing it with a cap and trade regulatory scheme – to be in violation of that act. The court then instructed the agency to come up with a much stricter rule.
The EPA is arguing that the decision "effectively divests the EPA of the discretion that Congress conferred on the agency to consider alternative regulatory approaches to combating air pollution from power plants." The EPA said it has the authority to pursue a different regulatory track, including economic-based solutions such as cap-and-trade, for reducing air pollution from power plants.
Some observers believe the Bush Administration is hoping the more conservative Supreme Court may be more likely to support the EPA's position. The Court has yet to accept the appeal.