| Page 2 of 2 < |
EPA Chief Denies Calif. Limit on Auto Emissions
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Asked about his aides' recommendations, Johnson said, "My staff provided me a range of options, with a lot of pros and cons with each of these options."
Frank O'Donnell, who heads the advocacy group Clean Air Watch, noted that Johnson's announcement came shortly after yesterday's bipartisan celebration at the White House of the new energy law.
"Only hours after having a love fest over the energy bill, the Bush administration turned it into a hate fest for California and more than a dozen other states seeking to limit greenhouse gases from motor vehicles," O'Donnell said.
Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, vowed to scrutinize Johnson's ruling. The EPA has yet to produce the "decision documents" it customarily presents to outline its justification for a new ruling.
"EPA's decision ignores the law, science and common sense," Waxman said in a statement. "This is a policy dictated by politics and ideology, not facts. The committee will be investigating how and why this decision was made."
California, which is allowed under the Clean Air Act to set its own air pollution policies as long as it obtains an exemption from the federal government, had never been denied a waiver in the law's 37-year history.
William K. Reilly, who served as EPA administrator under President George H.W. Bush and approved nine California waivers during that time, questioned why the administration challenged the state's historical role as an innovator in air pollution policy.
"What I want to know from the [administration] is: What possible grounds would there possibly be to deny California this waiver?" asked Reilly, who co-chairs the bipartisan National Commission on Energy Policy, a group of energy experts. "There's every reason to defer to California in making these decisions."
In his telephone call with reporters, Johnson said this waiver decision was "different" because climate change affects the entire world.
"It is a global problem that requires a clear national solution," he said. When asked whether the energy law represents the administration's full response to the challenge of global warming, he replied, "Certainly for motor vehicles this is a comprehensive solution."
Staff researchers Karl Evanzz and Meg Smith contributed to this report.
