American Lung Assn. Statement on EPA's Release of Rule on Prevention of Significant Deterioration and New Source Review

8/27/2003

From: Michelle Sawatka of the American Lung Association, 212-315-8727; Web site: http://www.lungusa.org

NEW YORK, Aug. 27 -- Following is a statement from John L. Kirkwood, president and chief executive officer of the American Lung Association, on the EPA's release of the Rule on Prevention of Significant Deterioration and New Source Review: Routine Maintenance, Repair and Replacement:

"The American Lung Association strongly opposes the rule issued today by the Environmental Protection Agency that will roll back key provisions of the Clean Air Act, called New Source Review. The Environmental Protection Agency's decision is the latest in a series of steps that undermine large parts of the most effective environmental law in the United States.

"The American Lung Association has already joined with other organizations concerned about air quality in this country in taking legal action to challenge previous EPA decisions that roll back provisions of the Clean Air Act. We will take legal action to challenge this decision also.

"Under the existing provisions of the Clean Air Act, industry must clean up its pollution if changes are made to any facility that increases emissions. By establishing a new loophole that says a company doesn't have to clean up as long as it doesn't spend too much-regardless of how much additional pollution it spews-EPA is granting a license to pollute. This is unacceptable.

"EPA is throwing in the towel to industry just as its own enforcement of the existing rules has proven successful in the courts, as evidenced by the decision this month to require Ohio Edison to clean up its plants for violating the same rules EPA would now relax. EPA should not retreat in the face of such victory. Instead, the Administration has based its rollbacks on what the General Accounting Office itself reported days ago were mere "anecdotes" from the polluters complaining that the effect of the existing law was too harsh. EPA policy should be based on protecting public health, not bolstering industry profits.

"Reams of scientific studies have shown conclusively that air pollution, such as the pollution these industries produce, causes increased asthma attacks, emergency room visits, hospital admissions, and increased risk of death. A study conducted three years ago estimated that tens of thousands of Americans are dying prematurely each year because of our failure to clean up these facilities. Emerging research is linking pollution to lung cancer, birth defects, strokes, and heart attacks. We have more than enough evidence to require industry to clean up the existing plants today.

"What is lacking is the commitment of this Administration to clean air and the health of Americans."