Pollution Cannot Move

In addition to dealing with auto emissions, the clean air legislation of 1970 specified that each state devise its own scheme for controlling stationary pollution sources. By last spring, however, environmentalists had spotted a gaping loophole. Polluters could simply move their plants to states with cleaner air--provided their emissions stayed under federal limits for air pollutants.

But last week the Supreme Court closed the loophole. The Justices held that no "significant deterioration" of air quality will be allowed in any part of any state.

Although the interpretation of "significant" remains to be thrashed out, the decision was a far-reaching achievement for the Sierra Club and three other groups, which brought the suit against the Environmental Protection Agency.

The court essentially commanded that the nation's air--from Maine to the wide open West--be kept as clean as it is now. One particular target on the Sierra Club's list: an enormous complex of coal-burning power plants suggested for Wyoming and Montana. Any such development will now have to maintain the quality of the big sky country's air, already threatened by mining and other industries.

The suit grew out of EPA's contention last year that the law permitted states to let air quality slip in some areas as industries relocate from the polluted cities. Environmentalists countered that the law was not written to spread pollution around, but to clean it up. EPA then argued that the rule constitutes a de facto no-growth policy. Attorney Bruce Terris, who presented the case for the clean-air side, replies that the law still allows industrial growth--but not much air pollution. Thus, before moving their plants, managers will have to figure in the costs of effective antipollution controls--costs that will raise expenses for producer and consumer alike.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.