DHEC bucks pollution rules

South Carolina’s environmental agency is fighting federal rules to control greenhouse gas pollution that contributes to global warming.

The Department of Health and Environmental Control says the proposed rules will be expensive for South Carolina -- and, as written, could hurt the state’s struggling economy. DHEC has written the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency at least twice in the past two months to complain about the rules, records show.

"This proposal would have a detrimental effect on our state’s economy at a time when unemployment is currently 12.1 percent and is only expected to increase," according to a Nov. 24 letter from DHEC to the EPA. Many states worry about the cost and the time it will take to put the rules in place. But most generally support the EPA’s plan and a number of them have not raised as many economic questions. Critics said South Carolina regulators should worry more about public health and environmental concerns than how new greenhouse gas regulations would affect industries.

But South Carolina’s objections are substantial.

In an interview last week, DHEC’s Bob King said his agency is mostly concerned about the cost and the limited time states would have to get ready. The agency might have to regulate hundreds of new sources of greenhouse gas pollution from businesses, officials say.

The federal government has never required regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide, that trap the earth’s heat and cause surface temperatures to rise. Greenhouse gases released naturally help keep the earth warm. But greenhouse gas pollution from cars and industrial plants increases the amount of heat trapped.

The looming greenhouse gas rules impose tougher standards on new automobiles and light trucks beginning with the 2012 model year. But once the rules take effect this spring, they will for the first time trigger greenhouse pollution control requirements on new and expanding industries, including power plants, factories and other "stationary" sources.

The rules for automobiles and light trucks are supposed to be finalized by April, at which time the EPA would say when they become effective for industries. A Dec. 23 letter from DHEC to the EPA said South Carolina "will not be able to implement" the air pollution rules by this spring "or even several years thereafter." DHEC is concerned because the rules could cause a burden on South Carolina by slowing down the time it takes to process a range of pollution permits. The agency’s staff would be taxed at a time of shrinking state revenue and limited personnel, agency officials have told the EPA.

"We believe there is a lot more activity that would have to be permitted under the rules than (EPA officials) are perceiving -- and that burden comes back to the states," King said in an interview Thursday with The State newspaper.

How to combat global warming is a subject of intense debate worldwide. Many say tight controls are needed to limit carbon dioxide and other pollutants that are causing temperatures to go up. Increasing global temperatures have melted ice caps, caused sea levels to rise and threatened wildlife, many scientists agree. But some businesses and conservatives say tighter regulation could cost money and hurt the economy. The EPA effort to control carbon dioxide and other heattrapping gases results from a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said greenhouse gases are pollutants that can be regulated under the U.S. Clean Air Act. The question had been in dispute for years until the court’s ruling.

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has taken a lead role in Congress on the issue. He wants Congress, rather than the EPA, to be in control of limiting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. He’s pushing energy legislation to do that. Graham says having a law, rather than EPA regulations, would provide more flexibility in fighting global warming. A law, for example, could urge more development of nuclear power, which doesn’t produce greenhouse gases. A law also could offer federal incentives for the use of wind or solar power.

"I continue to believe regulation of carbon by unaccountable bureaucrats at EPA is the worst possible outcome," Graham said in a recent statement. "EPA regulators will not consider expanded nuclear energy or offshore drilling, the exact provisions that I am pushing to have included in Congressional legislation." Some business groups also would prefer Congress get involved, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Edison Electric Institute. The latter represents many of the country’s largest power companies. But bills in Congress have bogged down as the EPA moves forward with its own rules.

Environmentalists say the EPA rules are important to the fight against global warming. And DHEC’s mission is to protect the environment and public health -- but national air quality expert John Walke said the agency’s Nov. 24 letter to the EPA doesn’t reflect that.

"It’s very telling that the environmental agency for the state of South Carolina is strongly opposed to using environmental laws to protect public health and the environment," said Walke, a former South Carolina resident who is with the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington. "That is a paradox, to say the least."

Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch in Washington, said DHEC’s comments seem to reflect concerns by major business groups, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Those groups say the EPA’s plan is legally shaky and would be costly for business.

The rules "will impose massive economic burdens on American businesses and will provide an unparalleled set of tools to ... activists bent on stopping construction and development," a November letter to the EPA from the U.S. Chamber said.

The National Association of Clean Air Agencies says the new rules need revision. Otherwise, they could affect 1 million businesses nationally, association chief Bill Becker said Friday. States say the EPA rules won’t give them enough time to adopt changes in state rules that would be necessary, he said.

Becker said his association favors an EPA plan that would focus the rules on major industries that send large amounts of greenhouses gases into the skies. That would exempt small businesses, limiting the number of companies affected to about 13,000 nationwide. That also would lessen the amount of work states would have to do.

Becker said, however, that most states favor the EPA’s push to regulate greenhouse gases. "States are generally supportive of the actions the EPA has taken," Becker said.

In its Nov. 24 letter, DHEC asked for a delay in the rules. The letter said the rules contain "virtually no additional environmental benefits from greenhouse gas standards" on light trucks. It also said the new greenhouse gas rules would hurt states "like South Carolina who still employ many people in the manufacturing sector."

"The permitting process will become so backlogged as to create a permitting moratorium," the letter said. "New business and industry will not be built, existing businesses will not expand and existing business and industry will not repair equipment if such repairs would require a permit."

Reach Fretwell at (803) 771-8537.