[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 131 (Tuesday, September 23, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1866]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            OPPOSING THE EPA'S FINAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW RULE

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. STEVEN R. ROTHMAN

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 23, 2003

  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the 
EPA's recent decision to gut the Clean Air Act--landmark legislation 
that protects the public from deadly air toxins.
  With one swift blow the Bush Administration has rolled back three 
decades of environmental protection by allowing some 20,000 of the 
oldest and dirtiest power plants, oil refineries, incinerators, 
chemical plants and industrial facilities that were exempted from the 
Clean Air Act to avoid installing the newest and best available 
pollution control technologies when they upgrade and modernize their 
facilities. It is a reckless act that will shower thousands of 
additional tons of smog and soot from dirty Midwest power plants onto 
the people and communities of New Jersey, endangering the public health 
most severely in densely-populated urban areas--such as those in my 
district--that already suffer the ill-effects of downwind industrial 
pollution.
  The New Source Review program had been the linchpin of our nation's 
clean air laws. Since the late 1980's--during successive Republican and 
Democratic Administrations--the EPA and the Department of Justice 
teamed up to investigate and sue polluters who refused to install 
``best-available'' pollution control technologies when they modernized 
their plants and increased emissions.
  Some 540 ``grandfathered'' coal-fired power plants nationwide cause 
98 percent of the soot emissions that lead to 30,000 premature deaths 
and 170,000 asthma attacks each year. Through the new source review 
process, DOJ has filed suit against 53 of these plants that are in 
violation of the Clean Air Act. Five of the 53 admitted wrongdoing and 
settled with the federal government--settlements that will result in 
393,000 less tons of sulfur dioxide, 175,000 less tons of nitrogen 
dioxide, and 10.7 million less tons of carbon dioxide being released 
into the air we breathe each year. Despite this success, in issuing 
this new rule, the Administration has cast doubt on the pending cases 
while announcing that it will no longer pursue those polluters who have 
broken the law for years.
  As a downwind state, New Jersey suffers disproportionately from power 
plants that refuse to clean up their act. New Jersey is hit by 
increased emissions in the form of acid rain and increased respiratory 
disorders. In fact, because of these out-of-state polluters, New Jersey 
has the worst air pollution and the sixth highest rate of asthma in the 
nation. The societal and economic costs of air pollution come in the 
form of missed school and work days, more emergency room visits, more 
heart attacks and strokes.
  Unfortunately, this Administration has turned a blind eye to 
environmental science, the written comments of over 300,000 Americans 
who opposed the New Source Review rule, and the enforcement successes 
of the NSR program in favor of its corporate polluter friends. This is 
a travesty. And at the same time that the Administration is rewriting 
the Clean Air Act, it has set about dismantling the EPA's criminal 
enforcement division. The President's current EPA budget proposal would 
eliminate 126 EPA enforcement positions over the last three years--a 60 
percent decline in civil enforcement and compliance monitoring. 
Further, a recent GAO report stated that EPA relied heavily on 
anecdotal evidence to build a case for the New Source Review rule--
something Jeffrey Holmstead, Assistant EPA Administrator for Air and 
Radiation, all but admitted in newspaper reports when he stated that 
the EPA ``wished it had better data.'' This perhaps explains why EPA 
tried to catch the American people off guard by signing the final rule 
two days before the traditional Labor Day holiday when many Americans 
were enjoying their last few days of summer rest with their families.
  Mr. Speaker, I share the view of countless Americans and over 350 
newspapers nationwide in calling the Bush Administration's actions an 
outrage and a devastating blow to public health. I urge all my 
colleagues in Congress--Republican and Democrat--to disapprove this 
rule and come together to craft new legislation that sets tough new 
standards for the dangerous toxic pollutants that will now cloud our 
air.

                          ____________________