HARRISBURG, Pa., May 30, 2006 /PRNewswire

 

Pennsylvania's state-specific proposal to control mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants passes the key test for determining whether a measure violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

"Pennsylvania's rule is legally sound and scientifically proven," Environmental Protection Secretary Kathleen A. McGinty said.

For a measure to be suspect under the U.S. Commerce Clause, it must impose disparate treatment for enterprises within a state, as compared to out-of- state enterprises.

Pennsylvania's state-specific rule ensures equal treatment, requiring electric generating units to meet the very same performance standards regardless of whether they use bituminous or sub-bituminous coal in their operations.

The state-specific rule presumes compliance for units that burn 100 percent bituminous coal with advanced air control technologies. But that presumption of compliance has nothing to do with setting an easier standard for bituminous coal. In fact, the state rule establishes the same standard for bituminous and sub-bituminous coals.

The presumption of compliance only recognizes the established fact that mercury is removed with vastly greater efficiency from scrubbed plants burning bituminous coal than from scrubbed plants burning sub-bituminous coal. Bituminous coal contains more mercury than sub-bituminous coal. But it also contains more chlorine, which enhances the removal efficiency of mercury control technology.

Technical analysis shows that units burning 100 percent bituminous coal and controlling emissions with a wet flue gas desulfurization and selective catalytic reduction capture 90 percent of mercury emissions. In contrast, units that burn 100 percent sub-bituminous coal and control emissions with the same technologies capture only 16 percent of mercury emissions.

Pennsylvania's state-specific proposal further is demonstrably even-handed by requiring all plants, whether they use bituminous or sub-bituminous coal, to meet their specified mercury emission cap.

In contrast to the state proposal, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's rule is quite suspect. The federal rule explicitly sets different standards for different coal types, with the effect that waste coal and bituminous coal are severely and unfairly disadvantaged.

EPA's rule requires little or no reductions from units using sub- bituminous coal mined in the West and places the most stringent requirements on coal mined in states like Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Virginia and West Virginia.

To appreciate the degree to which the federal rule unjustifiably harms bituminous coal interests, current court filings by the Pennsylvania Coal Association and United Mine Workers of America are instructive.

In ongoing legal proceedings in federal court, PCA and UMWA are claiming EPA's rule will "result in a vast wealth transfer from bituminous coal users to sub-bituminous and lignite users," and further will have "adverse and irreversible impacts on the Bituminous Coal Coalition member operations, mine production, mine workers and local economies dependent upon coal mining operations."

Moreover, PCA and UMWA characterize EPA's rule as illegal, arbitrary and capricious, wholly unwarranted and flawed, and advise the court that EPA's Clean Air Mercury Rule will harm "producers of bituminous coal, workers in bituminous coal mines and local economies supported by bituminous coal mining."

Opponents who question the constitutionality of Pennsylvania's state- specific rule point to a case where the Illinois Coal Act was overturned as a violation of the Commerce Clause. But that proposal aimed to force the use of Illinois-mined coal, cutting off suppliers from other states.

The act required utilities to formulate compliance plans that had to be approved by the Illinois Commerce Commission, which took into account the effect of the local coal industry when approving those plans. It also required the four largest plants in Illinois burning Illinois coal to include the installation of specific technology in their compliance plans so that could continue to burn Illinois coal. In addition, the state's Commerce Commission had to approve any 10 percent or greater decrease in the use of Illinois coal by a utility.

EDITOR'S NOTE: This release is the 10th in a series to address key issues regarding Pennsylvania's state-specific mercury reduction proposal. Visit the department's Web site at http://www.depweb.state.pa.us for releases and related articles. Click on "Mercury Reduction Plan."

CONTACT: Kurt M. Knaus, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, +1-717-787-1323.

SOURCE Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

News Provided By