FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 31, 2004
 Contact: Josh Freed
(202) 225-4431

DENVER, CO – U.S. Representative Diana DeGette (D-CO) released the following statement for the Environmental Protection Agency public hearing in Denver on proposed changes to the Utility Mercury Reductions Rule:

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed Utility Mercury Reductions Rule to regulate mercury emissions from oil and coal-fired power plants.

I would like to welcome you to Denver, the heart of my Congressional District. Denver is a beautiful city with a vibrant downtown, diverse neighborhoods, and stunning mountain views. Not long ago, Denver was most known for the brown cloud of noxious air pollution that loomed over downtown – obscuring Denver's skyline and blocking the tremendous Rocky Mountain vistas. After several years of clean air, the brown cloud is back and the once-visible peaks of the Front Range are again disappearing behind the haze. The new mercury rule would make the air quality problem even worse.

The key to Denver's temporary air quality success is no secret: the city worked with the state and federal governments as well as industry to utilize innovative and collaborative methods to tackle its air quality problem. But the city always had the backstop of the Clean Air Act, which set time tables that had to be met, put the health of citizens and the environment first, and it mandated that Denver's air must get progressively cleaner using the best available technology.

The proposed mercury rule before us today runs counter to what has led to so much success in Denver. It signals a complete reversal of the Clinton Administration’s decision to make industry reduce its mercury emissions by 90 percent by 2007.

Instead, the proposed rule contemplates only a 70 percent reduction in emissions and would regulate power plant mercury emissions as a run-of-the-mill pollutant requiring less stringent controls, rather than as a hazardous air pollutant. The result would be a rule that does not protect public health and the environment and instead allows emission standards that are six to seven times higher than emission rates already achieved by existing power plants.

The rule also proposes an emissions trading program which would allow "hot spots" of mercury contamination in areas near plants that buy pollution credits instead of reducing their mercury emissions.
This policy fails to use existing mercury emission control technologies, would allow additional mercury emissions in the short-term, reduces the potential for significant emission reductions in the long-term, and allows greater localized mercury emissions. This is a complete abrogation of our responsibility to protect those most susceptible to mercury emissions: pregnant mothers, infants, small children and aquatic species in our lakes and rivers.

Moreover, this rule is counter to the intent of our Clean Air laws. This landmark legislation seeks the greatest improvement in air quality and works towards the total elimination of hazardous air pollutants from the air using the best and most innovative technology available.
For these reasons, I urge the EPA to go back to the drawing board. I urge you to review the findings of your own scientists and listen to the communities affected by this rule. It is of the utmost importance that the EPA creates a mercury emission rule that works toward permanently eliminating this dangerous pollutant from our air and waterways. Anything less fails to protect our most vulnerable citizens from the threat of mercury contamination." 

###