The Houston Chronicle
www.chron.com

Clean air plan's future clouded with uncertainty

By BILL DAWSON
December 8, 2000

It took a long time -- and a lot of work and debate -- to produce the new plan to solve Houston's ozone problem.

But the state smog plan's approval this week is hardly the end of the road to cleaner air. Just ahead lie various uncertainties and perils for the cleanup effort, as well as opportunities to advance it. They include:

· The crucial question of whether the plan adopted by the state's environmental commissioners will receive needed federal approval next year. Rejection could bring economic sanctions and a federally drafted plan.

· Possible lawsuits -- both from business groups, arguing that the plan goes too far, and environmentalists, contending it isn't tough enough.

· Actions by state lawmakers when they reconvene in January, which could both strengthen the plan and erode it.

· Pending scientific studies, which could show that the plan needs more, or fewer, pollution cuts -- or that they should happen differently.

As it now stands, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission's plan falls short of the total pollution reduction that TNRCC officials say is needed to comply with the national health standard for ozone by 2007, as federal law requires.

To gain approval for the plan from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, TNRCC officials included a legally binding promise to adopt still more pollution-cutting rules by 2004.

By that time, officials hope the state's new scientific research will help them make those choices -- or render them unnecessary, if the studies show a smaller emission reduction will achieve the ozone standard.

The EPA approved a compliance plan for Los Angeles with a binding pledge for future pollution cuts, and TNRCC Chairman Robert Huston said he thinks it will accept that approach in Houston, too.

All issues have not been resolved yet, but "it's reasonable to expect approval from the EPA," Huston said.

Under the terms of a national lawsuit settlement with environmental groups, the EPA must approve the Houston plan by October, or propose its stricter smog plan for the metropolitan area.

Meanwhile, state lawmakers could chip away parts of the plan, leaving it even further away from its goal -- elimination of about 70 percent of the region's nitrogen oxide, a byproduct of combustion.

One such legislative challenge could come from the area's outlying counties, where some local officials say they will fight their inclusion in the smog plan.

They are hearing a cautionary message from Republican state Sen. J.E. "Buster" Brown of Lake Jackson, a Brazoria County city where residents are vocal in criticizing the plan.

Brown, chairman of the Senate Natural Resources Committee, said lawmakers should substitute equivalent pollution cuts for any they remove from the smog plan.

Huston said he is not concerned that lawmakers will weaken the plan so much that federal officials reject it.

Huston said TNRCC officials expect lawsuits to be filed against parts of the Houston plan by some affected business interests, just as there were against a Dallas plan earlier this year.

A construction industry coalition has already said it may sue to block the Houston plan's morning ban on the use of diesel-powered construction equipment.

But Kelly Frels, a Houston attorney who chairs the Greater Houston Partnership's environmental advisory committee, said many such legal challenges may simply be "place-holder suits" initially, of which ultimate effects "depend on how hard people push it and how fast the courts go."

Meanwhile, Jim Marston, Texas director of Environmental Defense, said it may file a lawsuit to strengthen the smog plan if the EPA approves it without firmer commitments for extra measures by the TNRCC and without legislative action adding still more pollution cuts.