Note: This release was issued by the Midwest Ozone Group, of which AEP is a member.

CHARLESTON, W.Va., Feb. 2, 1998 -- Air quality problems in Northeast states are caused by emissions from other Northeast states and their reluctance to adopt controls required by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, according to the Northeast states´ own letters, internal memorandums and other documents.

The documents contradict claims by the states that emissions from the Midwest prevent the Northeast from meeting federal air quality standards. The documents also indicate that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency informally encouraged the states in the effort to blame Midwest sources.

The documents were obtained by the Midwest Ozone Group through Freedom of Information Act requests made to Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. The Midwest Ozone Group is an organization of 30 utilities and businesses committed to seeking solutions to ozone nonattainment that are well founded in both science and law.

"These Northeast states loudly and repeatedly claim they have done everything they can to eliminate their smog, but can´t meet federal standards without massive emissions reductions from the Midwest," said David M. Flannery, legal counsel for Midwest Ozone Group. "These documents tell a different story.

"The Northeast states haven´t done everything they can; they´ve just done what they are willing to do. They have stopped short of taking the politically unpopular step of addressing automobile emissions. Instead they ´have been conspiring on a plan,´ as Maine´s environmental commissioner put it in a memo to his state´s governor, to find some way -- any way -- to shift responsibility and costs onto someone else."

The documents show Northeast environmental officials know the vast majority of out-of-state pollutants originate with their closest neighbors, not from sources in the Midwest. For instance:

In a letter dated April 14, 1997, from Maine Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Edward O. Sullivan to State Sen. Richard J. Carey, Sullivan said: "Massachusetts and New Hampshire are responsible for the majority of Maine´s transport problem, and must further reduce their emissions if Maine is to meet Federal ozone air quality standards. ... During some modeled episodes, contributions of NOx (nitrogen oxides) and VOCs (volatile organic compounds) from Massachusetts, leading to ozone both transported to and formed within Maine, may contribute as much as 110 ppb (parts per billion) to Maine´s ozone problem." The current federal limit on ozone is 120 parts per billion.

Minutes from a July 18, 1997, Maine regional ozone committee meeting said: "Long-range impacts are not necessarily as great as we thought, meaning closer range transport is more important. For example, the Ohio River Valley´s emissions may only increase ozone pollution in Maine by about 2-6 parts per billion." The statement is from a review of data developed by the Ozone Transport Assessment Group, a 37-state effort to study ozone transport and recommend control strategies. The review was provided by Jeff Crawford of the Maine Department of Environment Protection.

In a July 31, 1997, memo from Sullivan to Maine Gov. Angus King, Sullivan said: "The New England States and New York have been conspiring in a plan to issue 126 petitions at this time to ensure that EPA follows through on its pledge and imposes stringent enough requirements to achieve air quality goals in the region." Maine is contending that, under Section 126 of the Clean Air Act, states may petition EPA for a finding that a major source or group of stationary sources have emissions in violation of other Clean Air Act provisions that protect downwind states from air pollution generated beyond their borders. Later in the memo, Sullivan states: "USEPA has informally indicated it would welcome the 126 action at this time to give them political cover to resist the mid-western (sic) contingent which will want to minimize the additional controls they will face." The memo admits that "[a]uto and utility emissions from Massachusetts and New Hampshire have the greatest impact on Maine air quality."

Nevertheless, Section 126 petitions were filed two weeks later by eight Northeastern states. Maine´s petition listed emission sources in Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina; some petitions listed emission sources as far west as Missouri. Maine´s was signed by Gov. King.

In a Jan. 14, 1994, letter from Massachusetts Division of Air Quality Control Director Barbara A. Kwetz to U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Director John Sietz, Kwetz raised a number of concerns about the movement of ozone precursors from the dirtiest areas of the Northeast to less dirty areas: "This is the case for the marginal and moderate nonattainment areas of Maine and New Hampshire, which are downwind from Massachusetts, and for the serious nonattainment areas of Connecticut, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, all of which are downwind of the severe nonattainment area of the New York metropolitan region, New Jersey and the rest of the Ozone Transport Region (an area stretching from Washington, D.C. to Maine)."

In a February 1996 background document, Massachusetts concluded that: "... Massachusetts emissions significantly contribute to elevated ozone levels in the metropolitan Boston area and coastal areas in southern Maine and New Hampshire."

In an Aug. 25, 1997, memorandum from New Hampshire Air Resource Director Ken Colburn to New Hampshire House Speaker Donna Sytek, Colburn provided a discussion paper stating: "All of the state´s ozone violations over the last three years have occurred at the Rye Harbor monitoring station, which measures ozone produced by Boston´s emissions." The same document went on to discuss how New Hampshire´s refusal to have a vehicle inspection and maintenance program might adversely impact on EPA´s call for NOx state implementation plans, stating: "EPA´s position is greatly weakened, however, if upwind states can characterize downwind states as merely seeking to evade responsibility for their ozone problems by trying to shift the blame to upwind when they haven´t even implemented the actions required of them under the CAA-actions such as I/M (inspection and maintenance)." New Hampshire does not have an approved inspection and maintenance program.

A statement in the 1996 State of Connecticut Annual Air Quality Summary explained: "... the highest ozone levels occur on days with persistent winds out of the southwest. ... This is due to the special features of a southwest wind blowing over Connecticut. ... Another feature of a southwest wind is that it will transport precursor emissions from New York City and other urban areas to the southwest of Connecticut. It is the combination of these factors that often produces unhealthful ozone levels in Connecticut."

In a Dec. 12, 1996, letter from Rhode Island Office of Air Resources Director Stephen Majkut to EPA Regional Administrator John DeVillars, Majkut stated: "... Rhode Island emissions, even after the implementation of CAAA (Clean Air Act Amendments) controls, significantly impact the ozone levels in areas of eastern Massachusetts."

The 1994 New York State Implementation Plan for Ozone explains: "The New York City, northern New Jersey and Connecticut plots reflect the formation of ozone due primarily to the New York City CMSA (consolidated metropolitan statistical area) plume. ... [I]t is fairly evident that Connecticut often has the most exceedances ... as it is downwind from the line of urban area plumes which follow from Washington, D.C. to New York City."

Other documents detail efforts to delay implementation of vehicle inspection and maintenance programs. These programs have been required in non-attainment areas since 1993.

"Massachusetts, New York and Connecticut did not submit technically and administratively complete programs to EPA until late 1997," Flannery said. "These programs have not yet been approved by EPA.

"Pennsylvania is not scheduled to submit its program until late 1998. New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island and Vermont have indicated they will not submit programs at all. Even though the programs are required by law, they are so politically unpopular that the states would rather violate the Clean Air Act than implement these controls."

A similar vehicle inspection program was implemented in Cleveland to help that Midwest city comply with air quality regulations.

"Midwest states are taking necessary local steps to meet air quality standards," Flannery said. "It´s troubling that Northeast states complain about their residents being subjected to unhealthy air, but won´t implement all required local control measures to correct the problem.

"They keep pointing to the Midwest. If they insist on pointing our way, we would prefer they do it with clean hands."

Midwest Ozone Group is an ad hoc coalition of 30 electric utilities, coal and petroleum companies and affiliated organizations from 11 states formed to assist in the development of scientifically sound, accurate and effective ozone strategies.
--