Printer
Friendly Version
Senators Hail EPA Inspector
General's Decision to Review Administration's Mercury Rule
May 13, 2004
WASHINGTON, DC -- U.S. Sens.
Jim Jeffords, I -Vt., Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., Joe Lieberman,
D-Ct., Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-NY., Barbara Boxer, D-Ca., Tom
Carper, D-De., and Ron Wyden, D-Or., today hailed the decision
by the EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley to review the process
in which EPA formulated its December proposed rule to regulate
mercury emissions from electric utilities.
In an April 12 letter, the seven
Senators asked the Inspector General to examine serious concerns
with how the EPA prepared its proposed rule, including: 1) agency
failure to perform an analysis on a range of regulatory options,
which is required by a standing Executive Order; 2) the appearance
of language scrubbing by interagency reviewer(s) that downplays
the scientific evidence about the hazards of mercury pollution;
and 3) the use of verbatim or very similar language seen in industry
documents.
Jeffords, the ranking member
of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee said, "I
expect the Inspector General's review will be comprehensive and
will help us understand how and why this proposed rule came to
look as it does. Congress and the public need to know whether
EPA's rulemaking process can be trusted to put the public's health
first. We must be able to rely on the federal government to serve
and protect the public, not just the special interests."
Leahy said, "This review is a major breakthrough that can
help us put the public's interest back into this equation. It
will help us comb through the rhetoric and sort through the spin
the Administration uses in trying to sell its watered-down mercury
proposal. The key questions are how and why the Administration
ignored its own science to let the biggest polluters ghostwrite
its mercury plan."
Lieberman said, "I am very
encouraged that the Inspector General has undertaken an inquiry
into the mercury rule. Every time there has been a new revelation
about this mercury rule, the odor surrounding it gets stronger.
Something seems to have gone very wrong at the top of EPA's air
division, and it is the Inspector General's responsibility to
dig out the truth."
Clinton said, "The public
deserves to know how and why the Bush Administration apparently
ignored science and gave industry undue influence in developing
a rule that does not protect public health. I am pleased the inspector
general has agreed to review this very serious matter."
Boxer said, "I regret that
we had to go to the Inspector General to get answers, but the
Administration has repeatedly stalled when it comes to regulating
mercury emissions. We need to know if the EPA cut corners, ignored
science or otherwise catered to special interests in industry
to weaken protections against mercury poisoning."
Carper said, "The questions
we raised about how the Bush administration devised its flawed
mercury rule deserve a comprehensive internal inquiry, and that's
what the EPA's inspector general has decided to do. If the rule
was unduly influenced by outside interests, the American people
need to know. My hope is that this review - whatever its findings
- will help lead us eventually to lower levels of mercury and
fewer women and children being put at risk."
Wyden said, ""Withholding
information from Congress, and using inside industry information
to shape policies critical to public health and the environment,
is dangerous to the American people. The EPA needs to be more
accountable to Congress and to all Americans. This review by the
Inspector General is a positive first step toward restoring full
credibility of the Environmental Protection Agency."
###