Frothing and foaming in this forum does nothing more that demonstrate an inability to think clearly. Do a little research on the subject and look more carefully at what the agency is proposing, then make official comments at [www.regulations.gov], as I mentioned above.

For starters, EPA has made the proposal and most of the information that backs it up public at their web site. See: [www2.epa.gov]. Among other things, that's where the original poster here found the spreadsheet that produced that astounding emission reduction number for WA. If there's something wrong with how they developed the number, they need to know what it is.

Since this is a formal regulatory proceeding, there will be an official notice published in the Federal Register that establishes a comment period (probably 30-60 days) - use that regulations site to submit them. I worked with (not for) EPA for many years, and have found many times that a well-reasoned, supported (by data and legal analysis) comment or suggestion DOES have the ability to change things. You might see something in the proposal that they did not, being too close to it and working on deadline. A substantive comment must and will be responded to when developing the final rule (probably to be published some time next year). Simply dismissing the proposal as Unamerican or generally frothing does nothing - they will dismiss the comment as having no relevance or substance. EPA operates under certain laws, and you need to show how they're violating those laws, if you want to go that route, in a way that can (eventually) convince a Judge, or at least Agency Counsel.

And believe it or not, even though most big companies hire lawyers and lobbyists to prepare this stuff, you don't have to be one (a lawyer or a lobbyist). Simply an intelligent human with brain engaged can usually come up with something relevant. You might even have a better chance, since you won't have the CEO breathing down your back or emailing/phoning constantly to derail your train of thought.

Cheers!