By Bryan Thompson, KPR

TOPEKA — A battle over air pollution from power plants is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Kansas and 20 other states contend the Environmental Protection Agency should have considered the costs of a 2011 rule, which requires coal-fired power plants to install new equipment to remove mercury and other toxins from their exhaust.

An appeals court held that the EPA didn’t have to consider the cost. The lower court ruling includes the following finding:

“EPA has explained why it concluded costs were not part of the ‘appropriate and necessary’ determination, and given Congress’s choice to leave the factors entering into that determination to EPA, petitioners, and our dissenting colleague, fail to demonstrate that EPA’s considered judgment about the factors to be considered was unlawful … and EPA did all that Congress required of it.”

However, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the states’ challenge.

During a teleconference last week, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said it’s a very narrow challenge, and one the agency expects to win.

“Next year is when the compliance comes around,” McCarthy said. “Folks are already actively working on that, and we certainly don’t expect those reductions to be delayed in any way.”

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt said the regulation will lead to higher costs for electricity.

“The EPA just flat ignored the cost of its new regulation,” Schmidt said. “In the real world, where Kansas homeowners and businesses live, the cost of electricity is always a relevant part of making decisions. The EPA cannot possibly have concluded that the benefits of its new regulation outweigh the costs, since it didn’t weigh the costs at all. I’m encouraged that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the states’ arguments that the EPA’s actions were unlawful.”

The case under appeal is Michigan v. EPA. Schmidt said oral arguments will be scheduled later this term, with a decision expected by June.