In one of the most aggressive environmental enforcement actionsever, the federal government yesterday filed a series of lawsuitsagainst 32 coal-fired electric utility plants in the South andMidwest alleging that they made illegal modifications to theirfacilities, which resulted in increased nitrogen oxide (NOx) andsulfur dioxide (SOx) emissions over the years.

The lawsuits, which were filed by the Department of Justice onbehalf of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), asked thefederal courts to force the power plants to install thepollution-control technology to curb emissions. They were filed inU.S. District Courts in five cities – Atlanta, GA; Indianapolis,IN; Tampa, FL; East St. Louis, IL, and Columbus, OH.

The suits were brought against 17 power plants owned by sevenmajor utilities – American Electric Power, Cinergy, FirstEnergy,Illinois Power, Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Co., SouthernCo. and Tampa Electric Co. In addition, the EPA brought anadministrative complaint against the Tennessee Valley Authority(TVA) for similar violations at seven of its power plants. Theagency also issued notices of violations to eight other facilitiesoperated by Cinergy, American Electric and Southern.

All told, 32 utility plants in Alabama, Florida, Georgia,Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee and WestVirginia were targeted by yesterday’s action. The lawsuits were theproduct of a two-year investigation by the EPA, which it says isstill ongoing. The agency intends to investigate a number of otherelectric utilities to determine whether they, too, are violatingemission standards.

Specifically, the coal-fired plants, which were grandfatheredunder the Clean Air Act (CAA), were cited for the violations afterthey made major modifications to extend the lives of their plantoperations.

“The companies were allowed to perform routine maintenance[under the CAA], but they were not allowed to make significantchanges to the plant – such as increased generating capacity,increased burning of coal, or modifications that prolonged the lifeof the plant,” said EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner yesterdayduring a press conference held at the Justice Department Wednesday.

“We charge that the companies named in these actions spenthundreds of millions of dollars modifying these plants – increasingtheir life and increasing their pollution. And they did thiswithout applying for permits, without public notice and withoutinstalling pollution-control technology,” she told reporters. Forexample, she noted, one plant spent $60 million on five newfurnaces, while another spent $10 million on ten new burners.

The cited plants “collectively emit millions [of] tons of sulfurdioxide every year,” which contribute to acid rain, and millions oftons of nitrogen oxide, which cause “the smog that stings our eyesand lungs every summer,” said Attorney General Janet Reno.

Under the CAA, the utility violators face civil penalties of upto $25,000 for each day of violations at each plant prior to Jan.30, 1997, and $27,500 for each day thereafter.

The natural gas industry wasn’t ready to declare thegovernment’s action against the coal-fueled plants to be good newsfor gas. “I hate to say any litigation is good for gas. I thinkit’s unfortunate that it’s gotten to this point where they’re incourt, and they haven’t been able to work out these issues throughprivate settlements,” said John Sharp, vice president ofgovernmental affairs for the Natural Gas Supply Association.

“Is it good for gas? I suppose some people might say it is. Butlitigation like this usually takes a long period of time, and it’snot clear that the EPA or Justice will prevail in the end. I thinkit’s premature to say whether it will be good for gas,” he toldNGI.

©Copyright 1999 Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. Thepreceding news report may not be republished or redistributed, inwhole or in part, in any form, without prior written consent ofIntelligence Press, Inc.