Jun 27 - Record, The; Bergen County, N.J.
A federal court ruling on air pollution rules has left environmentalists and polluting industries arguing about which side won.
"For New Jersey, it's a mixed and disappointing decision, but we did
gain some ground against the administration's rollback of clean- air
protection," state Environmental Commissioner Bradley Campbell said.
"And parts of the ruling are encouraging in terms of our challenge to
the more sweeping Bush rollbacks, which are still pending before the court.
Unfortunately, the court upheld critical parts of the Bush administration's
effort to let lawbreaking polluters off the hook."
Other state officials were more optimistic.
"We think overall it's a victory for clean air," said Peter
Aseltine, a spokesman for the state Attorney General's Office.
But an industry spokesman said utilities had won some necessary reforms to
the Clean Air Act.
"It really is a significant loss" for the states that sued, said
Frank Maisano, a spokesman for the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, an
industry group.
New Jersey has filed a number of lawsuits in a battle to prevent air
pollution that drifts into the state from the Midwest, especially from
coal-fired plants in Ohio.
The lawsuit decided Friday was filed in October 2003. New Jersey was joined
by California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.
In the states' favor, the court struck down some 2002 regulations by the EPA
that would have allowed polluting factories and plants to use pollution controls
that increased one type of pollutant while cutting another. It also ruled
against the so-called "clean unit" designation, which would have given
a 10-year pass on emissions controls to certain plants.
The court sent back to the EPA a rule that would have released plants from
the obligation to record pollution data after certain plant upgrades. It ordered
the EPA to justify or modify the rule.
Industry claimed victories in the judgment because the court allowed some of
the 2002 EPA rules to stand. Among them was a "look back" allowing
companies to look back 10 years in choosing a 24- month period of high pollution
as a baseline against which current emissions would be judged. Another rule
allows big factories to get EPA permits establishing emissions limits for entire
complexes, rather than for individual pieces of equipment.
"I think, in all fairness, it's a split decision," said Frank
O'Donnell, president of the advocacy group Clean Air Watch in Washington, D.C.
"I believe the court decided the Bush administration had gone too far in
cutting breaks for polluting industries."
O'Donnell said the EPA rules in question affect about 19,000 "smokestack
industries" - sites that emit more than 100 tons of pollution annually,
including power plants, refineries, steel mills and pharmaceutical factories.
Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Chapter of the Sierra Club, did not
find much to celebrate in the mixed decision.
"It could have been worse, and some things were struck down," he
said. "But at the end of the day will our air get cleaner from this
decision? The answer is no.
"The [EPA] loopholes they've upheld are enough to allow more
pollution," he said.
"It's a bad day for our lungs."
* * *
E-mail: feibel@northjersey.com
* * *