The NewStandard ceased publishing on April 27, 2007.

EPA rigged mercury findings to please White House, inspector finds

by NewStandard Staff

Feb. 7, 2005 – An internal investigation of the Environmental Protection Agency found that the EPA based its recent draft mercury regulations not on scientific evidence, but on a predetermined, politically motivated outcome. According to the Agency’s inspector general, EPA administrators decided on a final mercury emission standard and then worked backwards to develop rules that would lead to that outcome.

Toolbox
Email to a Friend
Print-friendly Version
Add to My Morning Paper

The inspector further said that the standards were based on the Bush administration’s Clear Skies initiative, environmental legislation meant to undermine the landmark 1970 Clean Air Act.

EPA officials denied that their draft standards were influenced by political considerations or anything other than science. Nevertheless, two EPA staff members, who spoke to the Washington Post on condition of anonymity, said that they had experienced strong political pressure to come out with standards that would fit the administration’s desired outcome.

"I don't think anyone has ever seen as much political influence in the development of a rule as we saw in this rule," one of the whistleblowers told the Post. "Everything about this rule was decided at a political level… The political level made the decisions, and the staff did what they were told."

The other added: "Maybe we would have come to the same conclusion [anyway], but we didn't necessarily look at the other options… We were driven by one option."

The inspector general’s report found that the only two possibilities considered by the Agency in developing the rules were slanted in order to make the "cap-and-trade" approach to regulation look better than placing emissions caps on every plant. The cap-and-trade method -- which sets industry-wide goals and then allows low-polluting companies to sell pollution credits to high polluting firms -- has been heavily condemned by environmentalists because it neglects to cut down pollution in all geographical areas.

Send to Friends Respond to Editors or Reporter

The NewStandard ceased publishing on April 27, 2007.


Recent contributions by NewStandard Staff:
more