SENATOR COLLINS PRESSES EPA ADMINISTRATOR TO RESPOND TO HER CONCERNS ABOUT NEW MERCURY RULE

Washington, DC – Senator Susan Collins has requested that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Acting Administrator respond to her concerns about the agency's new mercury rules. Senator Collins has expressed concern that the EPA's current proposal on mercury falls far short of what the law requires and fails to protect the health of children and the environment.

"The EPA rule is far too weak to pass as sound policy for our environment and for the health of our children," said Senator Collins. "The EPA rule would place a first phase cap on utility mercury emission of 38 tons by 2010. By way of comparison, the legislation that I introduced with Senators Jeffords and Lieberman, the Clean Power Act, would reduce mercury emissions to 5 tons by 2009."

In a letter to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, Senator Collins also expresses concern that important data on the benefits of controlling mercury emissions was withheld from the rulemaking process. She requests a meeting with Johnson in order to address these issues. "I am very concerned that, in developing the Clean Air Mercury Rule, the EPA failed to live up to the high standards required of an agency so vital to the well-being of our health and environment," wrote Senator Collins.

The following is the full text of Senator Collins' letter:

Dear Acting Administrator Johnson:

I am writing to request a meeting to discuss my concerns regarding the Clean Air Mercury Rule and the February 3, 2005 EPA Inspector General report relating to this rule.

On March 7, 2005, I joined 30 of my colleagues in writing to the EPA to express grave concerns regarding the EPA''s proposed mercury rule and the findings of the Inspector General report. We asked that the EPA act on the Inspector General''s recommendations to perform additional analysis and correct a number of problems with the proposed rule. Nevertheless, it appears that the final Clean Air Mercury Rule, issued on March 15, 2005, largely ignored both our letter and the Inspector General report.

In addition to the Inspector General''s report, I am troubled by recent news reports suggesting that important data on the benefits of controlling mercury emissions was withheld from the rulemaking process. I fail to see how the EPA can possibly maintain the appearance of propriety when a Harvard University study allegedly paid for and peer-reviewed by the EPA, and demonstrating a much higher level of health benefits than EPA''s official estimates, was apparently not even considered in the rulemaking process.

I am very concerned that, in developing the Clean Air Mercury Rule, the EPA failed to live up to the high standards required of an agency so vital to the well-being of our health and environment. I look forward to meeting with you at your earliest convenience to discuss this matter.