Deadline for states to intervene in EPA revised ruling is Friday

By Rose Hooper

Nine northeastern states are suing the EPA for its revision of the New Source Review provision that requires power plants to upgrade their emissions controls along with any plant upgrades.

On the last day of 2002, the EPA ruled that power companies could renovate on a new pollution baseline. Rather than using the average of the previous two yearsı emissions levels, the changes allow companies to use the average of the highest emissions levels of any two consecutive years in the preceding 10-year period.

What this means, said Canary Coalition Executive Director Avram Friedman of Sylva, is that "a company that installed clean equipment three years ago will no longer be required to use its current, cleaner emissions as a baseline. That company can choose a dirtier baseline that is no longer applicable, increasing its capacity and emissions, and reverting to higher pollution levels. This could increase emissions by hundreds of tons at a single plant site."

Within hours of the EPA decision, the nine statesı attorneys general announced they would litigate, claiming that the changes are illegal under the Clean Air Act.

"We are trying to get North Carolina to join in the suit," said Friedman, whose group feels the EPA action "threatens to undermine the N.C. Clean Smokestacks Act."

In view of Fridayıs deadline, Friedman has issued an appeal to all North Carolinians to contact Gov. Mike Easley and the N.C. Attorney Generalıs office today (Thursday).

Much of North Carolinaıs air pollution is transported from other states. The N.C. Clean Smokestacks Act was adopted to set an example for other states and the federal government to follow, Friedman said.

"The impetus for the public utilities in North Carolina to negotiate the Clean Smokestacks Act was the EPAıs lawsuits against public utilities in other states using the NSR provision," Friedman said. "That incentive has now been removed by this EPA decision. With the gutting of NSR, other states are unlikely to follow North Carolinaıs example."

Back to Archive: 01/30/03.