email a friend	|	printer friendly version

EPA Proposes Relaxing Powerplant Clean Air Regs

(enr.construction.com - 6/17/02 issue)

By Sherie Winston

After months of delays, the Environmental Protection Agency has proposed long-anticipated changes to Clean Air Act requirements that will make it easier for utilities and manufacturers to repair, upgrade and expand powerplants and industrial facilities . EPA contends that the relaxed "New Source Review" rules--some of which must still be written and could take years to become final--will lead to more work for design and construction firms that do environmental work at powerplants and factories.

	EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman. Photo courtesy of EPA)

The New Source Review program requires utilities and other industries to install the best available technology when a major plant modification increases air pollution. A central issue has been how large a modification triggers the technology requirement. The current NSR program contains "regulatory roadblocks," EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman said in announcing the plan on June 13. EPA claims the comprehensive changes will increase energy efficiency and reduce air pollution.

Under the new plan, EPA will move to finalize four provisions that were first proposed in 1996 and propose three new reforms. The 1996 provisions include creating a simplified process for companies that undertake environmentally beneficial projects, and a site-wide emissions cap program that will allow flexibility for a facility to modernize without increasing air pollution overall. EPA also will give plants that install "clean units" operational flexibility if they continue to operate within permitted limits. These clean units must have an NSR permit or other regulatory limit that requires the use of the best air pollution control technologies. The proposal will establish an actual emissions baseline rather than the current practice of calculating what a plant would emit if operated 24 hours a day.

The three new proposals will go through a standard rulemaking process and public comment period. They could take anywhere from 18 months to three years to become law, says Whitman. The changes include clarifying the definition of routine maintenance, repair and replacement. At present, NSR excludes activities that are "routine," but a complex analysis must be used to determine what repairs meet that standard. That has deterred many companies from making needed repairs. EPA also will propose a rule to clarify how NSR applies when a company modifies one part of a facility so production can increase in other parts of the same facility. In addition, the plan will also establish criteria for determining when multiple projects implemented in a short duration should be treated separately or together.

Under the existing NSR program, companies must complete a lengthy--and utilities contend, overly costly--permit process before making upgrades or expanding facilities. During the Clinton administration several lawsuits were filed against utilities that made changes without completing the NSR process. Some of those lawsuits are still pending and will continue to be litigated, Bush administration officials claim.

Jeffrey R. Holmstead, EPA's assistant administrator for air and radiation, insists that when implemented the proposed changes will "significantly reduce emissions." But he says that EPA has not completed an analysis to provide specific details.

EPA was attacked on Capitol Hill and by environmental groups even before the changes were unveiled. But Whitman asserts, "We are not rolling back the Clean Air Act." Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman James M. Jeffords (I-Vt.) disagrees. "This administration is intent on undoing more than 25 years of progress on clean air," Jeffords said. "This decision is a victory for outdated polluting powerplants and a devastating defeat for public health and our environment." He said that EPA has refused to supply emissions information and other data that it used to formulate this proposal. Jeffords vowed to use the committee's subpoena powers to get the requested information. The panel is considering a multi-pollutant emission reduction bill that Jeffords says will be acted on June 27.

The proposal is "designed to pander to special interests," charged Buck Parker, executive director of Earthjustice. But the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, a group of power generating companies, praised the plan as a step in the right direction. But there are still important issues to be clarified, says Scott Segal, ERCC spokesman.