In the latest phase of the litigation over the Obama administration's four climate rules, states and industry groups last night filed briefs challenging two more of them.

Petitioners have already filed briefs challenging the "endangerment finding" that underpins the climate rules (Greenwire, May 23).

This time, challengers are focusing on two rules that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is considering together.

They are the "timing" rule that required that new controls of greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources to be triggered on Jan. 2 of this year and the "tailoring" rule that interprets the Clean Air Act in such a way that only major polluters are required to obtain permits for greenhouse gas emissions.

Legal experts say the tailoring is the most vulnerable of the rules because EPA was essentially forced to rewrite part of the Clean Air Act in order to avoid requiring small polluters -- like farms and schools -- to obtain permits.

There were two briefs filed last night, one by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott (R) on behalf of the states and one by the National Association of Manufacturers and other industry groups.

Both make similar arguments: that the tailoring rule, as the industry brief puts it is "inconsistent with basic principles of statutory interpretation" and that both rules are unlawful because, under Supreme Court precedent, it is not a reasonable interpretation of the law to apply the relevant provision of the Clean Air Act to greenhouse gases.

Last week, an environmental group, the Center for Biological Diversity, withdrew its challenge to the tailoring rule, which it said did not go far enough in curbing emissions (E&ENews PM, June 16).

Click here to read the non-state petitioners' brief.

Click here to read the state petitioners' brief.