ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, November 28, 1996 TAG: 9611290028
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A1 EDITION: HOLIDAY
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
SOURCE: STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
MEMO: ***CORRECTION***
Published correction ran on December 3, 1996.
A story Thursday about new air pollution standards from the
Environmental Protection Agency incorrectly referred to chemical air
pollutants that play a role in the formation of ozone. The correct
reference to the pollutants, which are common to automobiles and power
plants, is nitrogen oxide.
The Environmental Protection Agency Wednesday proposed tough new air quality standards that could force more than 100 cities to find costly new ways to control smog and force Americans to make significant lifestyle changes.
The regulations are sure to face scrutiny as Congress prepares to rewrite the Clean Air Act next year.
``Today, EPA takes an important step for protecting public health and our environment from the harmful effect of air pollution,'' said the agency's administrator, Carol Browner.
The new EPA rules would tighten pollution limits that many cities already are failing to meet and for the first time regulate the tiny particles spewed by industrial smokestacks.
Having reviewed more than 200 studies - its most extensive scientific peer review ever - the agency concluded that current standards do not adequately protect public health - especially for children, Browner said.
The agency acknowledged it could cost cities and counties nationwide a total of $6.5 billion to $8.5 billion a year to make changes to meet the air standards.
Yet, Browner said: ``We believe that the vast majority of areas will be able to meet the tougher standards.''
Roanoke apparently will be the only metropolitan area in Virginia that will not be affected by the EPA's proposed new ozone standards, according to state environmental officials.
"Roanoke is going to do just fine with the new standard, we think," said Bob Saunders, of the Department of Environmental Quality's local office.
The DEQ has already taken a preliminary look at how the new EPA ozone standard would affect the state. The Roanoke region's air quality appears to meet the new standard, but the Richmond and Hampton Roads areas - which have lowered ozone levels enough to comply with current regulations - would not be in compliance with the new ones, said Brian Mannix, the state's deputy secretary of natural resources.
The new standards would cut permissible ozone levels by one third to 0.08 parts per million cubic feet of air from 0.12 ppm, the current standard.
The agency also wants to regulate tiny particles of dust down to 2.5 microns in diameter. It would take about 28 microns to equal the width of a human hair. Current standards apply only to particles of 10 microns or larger.
Health experts argue the minuscule particles - many of which come from industrial or utility smokestacks - cause the most harm because they lodge deep in the lungs.
As a way of reminding the EPA that Virginia has been making progress in cleaning up its air, Gov. George Allen wrote Tuesday to the EPA's Browner to remind her that Hampton Roads and Richmond have complied with the present ozone regulations, Mannix said. Allen reminded Browner that the state is still waiting for the EPA to classify those areas as having complied.
Despite the region's apparent clean bill of health from the EPA, two major Roanoke companies have been cautious about direct effects of the new standards.
Joe Crawford, an assistant vice president at Roanoke Electric Steel Corp., said his company has been keeping an eye on the EPA's proposal through the Virginia Manufacturers' Association and steel manufacturing groups. The company is concerned about the potential effect of emissions from its steel making business, he said.
American Electric Power Co. also will be on guard to the potential impact of the standard on its business, said Pat DalPorto, an AEP environmental official.
AEP's power plants emit nitrous oxide, which reacts in the atmosphere to create ground level ozone, considered harmful to human and plant health. Ozone higher in the atmosphere protects the earth from harmful ultraviolet light.
Automobiles are the largest source of nitrous oxide, and the only way to control ozone is to cut their emissions as well as those from utilities and industrial plants.
The potential cost to AEP depends on how much it is required to cut nitrous oxide emissions, DalPorto said. A 75 percent reduction could cost AEP as much as $1.6 billion, he said.
AEP could also be affected by the particulate rule, although the company already aggressively controls its particulate emissions, DalPorto said. Gases such as sulfur dioxide, which AEP emits from its stacks, eventually form into tiny particles in the air and it is those the company thinks the EPA may be targeting in its new particulate rule, he said.
Wednesday's announcement will begin a public comment period, with the EPA expected to make the rules, proposed earlier by its technical staff, permanent by June.
Staff writer Greg Edwards contributed information to this story.
LENGTH: Medium: 96 linesby CNB