WASHINGTON - In a long-sought victory for the energy industry, the Bush administration announced yesterday sweeping changes to clean-air rules that it contends will help industrial plants make necessary renovations to reduce pollution.
The decision, perhaps the most significant environmental action to date by the Bush administration, was criticized by environmentalists. They say the changes will actually make it easier for industrial plants to increase their dirty emissions.
Administration officials strenuously disputed criticism that their decision would roll back the Clean Air Act rules that require industries to modernize their pollution controls when their plants undergo major expansions or upgrades.
They also rejected the notion that their decision would lead to more pollution, especially in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast.
On the contrary, officials said, the changes are likely to aid the environment by correcting flaws in the 30-year-old Clean Air Act.
Under the law, they argued, power plants, chemical plants and oil refineries are discouraged from making renovations that would reduce dirty emissions. Every time these industries try to renovate, officials say, they trigger costly and unwarranted legal scrutiny.
"These reforms are about making the Clean Air Act work effectively," said Christine Todd Whitman, administrator the Environmental Protection Agency.
Specifically, Whitman announced changes in how a provision of the Clean Air Act called "new-source review" would be enforced.
Some of the changes could take effect within weeks and require no congressional review or public comment, officials said. Others will require lengthy periods of public comment and might not take effect for a few years.
In general, the changes would make it easier for industrial facilities to sidestep new-source review. That provision requires older facilities, such as coal-fired plants, to upgrade their pollution controls whenever they undergo significant renovations.
Under the Clinton administration, the EPA brought dozens of lawsuits against aging coal plants, mostly in the Midwest, arguing that those plants had undergone renovations without modernizing pollution controls.
Yesterday, President Bush's EPA proposed ways for facilities to avoid the requirements of new-source review, in some cases for up to 10 years.
The announcement reflected Bush's broader thinking on the environment. He has often argued that once their legal burdens are eased, private companies could find on their own the cheapest and most efficient ways to cut pollution.
He has long expressed concern that too much regulation in the energy industry discourages the investments in technology that would maximize production of electricity for Americans.
Yesterday, he said his administration "is committed to clean air, and we're going to work vigorously to achieve clean air."
But the reaction from some influential members of Congress, as well as environmental groups, was fierce.
These critics said they were concerned that Bush's changes would allow power plants to pollute more. They also asserted that the EPA's action would make it harder for government regulators to do their jobs - specifically, forcing power plants to install modern anti-pollution technology through the threat of fines or lawsuits.
Bush's critics have long accused the White House of carrying out an environmental policy that reflects the interests of its allies in the energy industry, which heavily supported Bush's campaign for president.
Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat, said, "Once again, clean air takes a back seat to the polluters and the special interests that seem to have such power in this administration."
Sen. James M. Jeffords, the Vermont independent who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, called for a hearing to "examine the administration's decision-making process" that led to yesterday's announcement.
"This administration is intent on undoing more than 25 years of progress on clean air - the question is why?" Jeffords said. "This decision is a victory for outdated polluting power plants and a devastating defeat for public health and our environment. Why anyone would pick smog and soot over clean air is beyond comprehension."
Environmental groups said they would likely challenge the changes in court. In particular, they argued that the administration did not invite enough public comment before announcing the decision and that the action is inconsistent with how the Clean Air Act was written three decades ago.
"It is difficult to imagine a more aggressive assault on our clean air protections," said Rebecca Stanfield of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
"We hope and expect that many of these changes will be ruled illegal. But in the meantime, a lot of people will suffer unnecessarily from heart and lung disease, and a lot of environmental damage will be done."
