Statement of Senator Baucus
Senate Committee on the Judiciary and
Senate Committee on Environment and Public
Works
Joint hearing on the Clean Air Act=s
New Source Review program, policy,
regulations, and enforcement activities
10:00 am
Chairman Leahy and Chairman Jeffords, I apologize for being unable to
attend this hearing today. I had to
chair a hearing in the Senate Finance Committee and attend another hearing in
the Senate Agriculture Committee. I
just couldn’t be in three places at once.
Thank you for allowing me to submit this statement for the record.
The debate over New Source Review (NSR) has become increasingly
intense, confusing and complex. I
applaud you both, Chairman Leahy and Chairman Jeffords, for holding this
hearing to help us clarify what is truly at issue in this debate, and to better
understand EPA=s proposed NSR reforms and how those reforms
could impact public health and the environment.
I think we all can agree with the ultimate goals of the NSR program,
which put simply, are to encourage the continuous evolution of pollution
control technology, and to make sure that as older power plants reach the end
of their useful life, they are gradually replaced by plants with the newest,
and most up to date pollution control technology. This has obvious benefits for the environment and public health,
as harmful emissions are theoretically reduced over time. It also attempts to level the playing field
for new plants, while giving older plants some flexibility in complying with
stricter pollution control requirements that involve significant capital
investments.
However, it does seem pretty clear that many folks believe the
administration of the NSR program could be improved, that currently, the
program is complex and difficult for state agencies to administer. Industry also claims the current program
blocks them from making necessary environmental or energy efficiency
improvements at their plants.
Therefore, maybe it is time for Congress to take a look at the effectiveness
of the current NSR program, and consider whether it should direct EPA to make
any changes. But, let me very clear, if
any changes to the NSR program are necessary, they should relate to reducing
the administrative burden on states and industry, in order to make the program
operate more efficiently and effectively.
In no way should administrative changes to NSR lessen the impact of the
NSR program on reducing harmful air emissions over time. In no way should NSR “reforms” relieve
industry of the basic obligation to install the most up-to-date pollution
controls if they modify their operations and increase their emissions.
I know that the devil is in the details. But, I am concerned that the Administration=s proposed NSR reforms go too far and will
negate Congress’ intent in crafting New Source Review. Therefore, I am pleased we will have this
hearing record to better understand what the Administration believes the
impacts of its proposed NSR reforms will be on public health and the
environment and on current NSR enforcement actions, and how states, industry
and public interest groups view the impacts of those reforms.
Thank-you again, Chairman Leahy and Chairman Jeffords, for holding this
hearing and allowing me to submit this statement for the record.