WASHINGTON (Nov. 22) - The Bush administration relaxed air pollution regulations and proposed other changes Friday to make it easier for older factories, refineries and power plants to modernize without having to install expensive new anti-pollution equipment.

The long-awaited regulatory changes by the Environmental Protection Agency touched off a firestorm of criticism from environmentalists, Democrats and state air quality regulators, and a courtroom challenge from nine Northeastern states affected by power plant pollution.

The agency also proposed a new definition for what constitutes ''routine maintenance, repair and replacement'' at aging coal-burning power plants. It will allow them to make major modifications without forfeiting their exemption from tougher standards imposed on plants built in the past 25 years.

EPA Administrator Christie Whitman said in a statement the changes will ''encourage emission reductions'' by providing manufacturers, utilities and refinery operators new flexibility when considering operational changes and expansion. The old New Source Review program has ''deterred companies from implementing projects that would increase energy efficiency and decrease air pollution,'' she said.

Potentially affected are hundreds of power plants, refineries, paper mills, chemical plants and factories built before 1977, when Congress amended the Clean Air Act requiring state-of-the-art controls on any new sources of pollution.

The older plants were exempted from being treated as new sources of pollution. But as companies started replacing outdated equipment to improve their efficiency, the Clinton administration began treating improvements as new pollution sources, requiring the expensive, state-of-the-art controls.

It pursued vigorous enforcement actions against companies reluctant to make the new anti-pollution investments, targeting in particular 43 power plants owned by nine utilities. Two of the utilities have settled, agreeing to install millions of dollars in new pollution controls at their plants.

Neither the new final rule or the proposed maintenance definition diminishes the agency's willingness to pursue those cases, said John Peter Suarez, EPA's assistant administrator for enforcement issues. ''We are continuing to press ahead with the enforcement cases,'' he said.

Whitman, however, suggested in testimony before a Senate committee in March that a prudent utility executive would await the results of a federal appeals court legal challenge to the existing regulations before settling with the government.

Jeff Holmstead, EPA's assistant administrator in charge of air quality, insisted Friday that the new regulations will produce reductions in total pollution from the plants. ''There will be emissions reductions as a result of the rules we are adopting today,'' he said.

Critics predicted just the opposite.

''More than 30,000 Americans die every year from power plant air pollution alone, and crippling the standards will only make things worse,'' said John Walke, director of Natural Resources Defense Council's clean air program.

A group of Northeastern states, led by New York and Connecticut, said they planned to file suit challenging the changes. In New York, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer accused the administration of attacking the Clean Air Act with rules that would further degrade air quality in Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states downwind from industrial plants.

''The Bush administration is again putting the financial interests of the oil, gas and coal companies above the public's right to breathe clean air,'' Spitzer said.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., called on Whitman to resign in protest, saying her advice had been repeatedly overruled by a Bush White House intent on gutting environmental protections.

''Out of principle and protest, she should step down,'' he said. ''All this rule will do is extend the life of the dirtiest industrial plants and worsen the lives of citizens that breathe the pollution from their smokestacks every day.''

The rule changes, a priority of the White House, will:

-Establish a plantwide ceiling on pollution rather than a limit on what is allowed for each piece of equipment. A plant, for example, could install a more polluting boiler as long as there is a corresponding reduction in pollution from another part of the operation.

-Allow refineries, paper mills, chemical plants and factories to use the two consecutive years of their greatest pollution over the past decade as a reference ceiling, meaning they won't have to install new controls unless their emissions exceed that two-year high.

-Exempt plants from having to update pollution controls if the existing ones have been reviewed by the government during the past 10 years.

The agency also proposed allowing power plants, factories and refineries to treat as maintenance - exempt from new pollution controls - the replacement of equipment or other capital investment up to 20 percent of the plant's total value.

The changes were sought by the utility, coal and oil industries, and were the subject of months of review at the White House. The electric utility and coal industries were both major donors to Republicans for the 2002 and 2000 elections.

AP-NY-11-22-02 2004EST

Copyright 2002 The Associated Press.
__________________________________

Nice to know that $ > health.

But, how many of those 30,000 people smoked, drank alcohol, ate fatty foods, were obese, or otherwise unhealty?

Also, the data was as is; no means of telling of there were any further health defects from other activities; however, pollution is pollution is pollution. How long until the Earth is Venus?

*sniffs the lovely clean air and looks at the lovely clean rivers and the tosic free land*

god i love it here.

Over here every party is green, the labour party, the socialist party, even our small group of communists are green... even the neo nazis are green... we are too much like the swiss sometimes!

"''More than 30,000 Americans die every year from power plant air pollution alone, and crippling the standards will only make things worse,'' said John Walke, director of Natural Resources Defense Council's clean air program."


I find this estimation to be highly dubious.

Still bush is the slave of the industrialists.

I think the figure is off too, but still...thats only one small point in a much larger thing. Everything else in there is still alarming.

Though I can't say that I'm suprised.

You lot just wait until the oil runs out... then you'll have to change your wasteful ways.

Yeah...if only fusion power was viable...

I know Toyota is developing something that runs off of hydrogen or something like that...though who knows if the oil corporations will ever let that come out.

Does "you" refer to the entire First World in this case, Keeper?

Most of it, we've already changed to using a type of fuel that doesn't requie oil cracking, only problem is its very expensive to make.

And all our juice comes from wind and hydro electricy we have 60,000 lakes so we have a lot of juice. We stoped using coal in the 50s.. we're in the top 3 cleanest developed nations though we still use oil.

And there are 28 patents for fusion power, all have never been fully investigated.

They've already built the hydrogen car.. well the engine and it works, only problem is looks like 50 mph will be your top speed... and of course no smoking...

Yeah, but that'll work better with time. If I don't have to go on the highway, then 50 mph isn't a problem...I'm sure they could do like they do for the gas/electric hybrids and switch over to something else for assistance with higher speeds.

How about a car pulled by fat people, just dangle a steak infront of them or a bowl of ice cream and away they go

Dangle McDonald's in front...that'd work better. I happen to like steak, and I'm not fat...heh

Big Food needs to fall, just like Big Tobacco...

McDonald's and Burger King and the like are all killing us...just not always as visibly...even the not-overweight can have cholesterol problems from all this shit that we shovel into our selves. I guarntee that if people really knew how the animals were raised for this and how the food was prepared in the factories, no one would want to even think about eating it anymore.

Another eason why i hate capitalism escpecially fast food..

Whatever happened to the nice dining experence of eating at a small cafe or soemthing watch the world go by and well pass time...???

i like steak too.. how about a big fat dripping burger covered in lard with extra fattening lard on the side with a lard coke... mmm fattening!

Yeah, what happened to the small-town diner? Or the truck stop? Or the good, little places? There are a few of those in Pittsburgh...Primanti's being my favorite. Their sandwiches are sort of fatty, but with everything thats on it, you get at least one serving, if not more, from each major food group...

Your meat of choice
Cole Slaw
French Fries
Lettuce
Tomato
Onion
Cheese

All between two slices of Italian bread...so thats 2 veggies, 2 bread/starch, 1 meat, 1 dairy, 1 fruit...I'd say thats a nice balanced meal.

I live on a diet of potatoes, dried reindeer meat, alcohol and tinned pineapple and beetroot... it isn't great but its all we have up here... oh and fruit cocktail .... yuk!

I like the finnish breakfast,

Reindeer meat, two beef sausages (grilled) two poached eggs, 3 peices of toast, beens, a glass of orange juice, 2 shots of vodka, bacon, mushrooms and assorted jams and sauces.... mmmm oh and you can have the fish version which is everything aboce but instead of the meats you have herring and cod instead.