Federal judges rejected a conservative group’s request for them to consider evidence that the group says shows how environmental organizations colluded with the Environmental Protection Agency in developing the Obama administration’s landmark climate rules for power plants.
The Energy and Environment Law Institute, or E&E Legal, said Monday it was “extremely disappointed” that the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to include its evidence that collusion took place as part of a lawsuit opposing the Clean Power Plan, the centerpiece of the Obama administration’s climate change agenda.
E&E Legal said a “three judge-panel refused to consider whether the EPA was improperly influenced by so called ‘green’ groups when the agency put forth the Clean Power Plan that intended to ‘bankrupt’ coal power plants and eliminate coal miners jobs throughout the country.”
The group argued in its brief to the court that the climate rule “is invalid because undisclosed ex-parte communications with environmental groups formed the basis of agency action.” It says the EPA did not include the communications in its public docket for the rule, although the final Clean Power Plan was “carefully calibrated to shut down existing coal power plants” in line with the policy positions of the groups it had discussions with, the brief reads.
The federal court did not say why it rejected the group’s brief.
The ex-parte discussions between the EPA and groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council have been a key criticism often raised by congressional Republicans, who have released reports documenting meetings and emails documenting the discussions. E&E Legal said it retrieved its evidence from filing public access requests.
The group said Monday it “painstakingly gathered evidence of improper ex-parte contact between these outside groups and key EPA employees while the rule was being drafted, yet the court has decided not to look at it in this case.”
E&E Legal General Counsel David Schnare said he spent 30 years working for the EPA “and never witnessed the level of illegal collusion and outside influence that occurred with the drafting and release of the [Clean Power Plan].”
He added that the EPA plan “is tainted from the beginning” and must be sent back to the agency for “a do-over.” Schnare said his group “will not stop pursuing this line of argument until a court hears it.”
The group added that it has submitted a petition directly to the EPA for it to reconsider the regulation and will “sue to enforce the EPA’s obligations under the Clean Air Act.”
