Environmentalists
want Owens Corning to pay daily penalties for building without a pollution
permit
CATHERINE
TREVISON
Those daily penalties were
triggered about five months ago, when Owens Corning started building its plant
at 18456 N.E. Wilkes Road, the groups said in a legal notice they sent to the
company Wednesday. The penalties should continue for each day that the company
allows the building to remain in place without appropriate permits, they said.
The notice is a critical new
maneuver in the federal lawsuit that the Northwest Environmental Defense
Center, the
The groups first sued to
stop construction of the plant when Owens Corning said it would emit more than
250 tons of HCFC 142-b, a greenhouse gas that also depletes the Earth's ozone
layer. Under the federal Clean Air Act, such a plant would be a new major
source of pollution and would have to prove that it was using the best
pollution control available in order to get a permit, the lawsuit in U.S.
District Court said.
Two weeks ago, Owens Corning
agreed to suspend construction until it received a pollution permit. A few days
later, the company told the state Department of Environmental Quality that new
calculations showed it would emit less than 250 tons of the chemical.
Therefore, it would not have to undergo the "best available control"
analysis, the DEQ said.
But the notice sent by the
environmental groups Wednesday said Owens Corning was violating a separate
state rule that requires pre-construction permits for plants that emit more
than 100 tons of pollution.
"It's a chess
game," said David Paul, board president of the
An Owens Corning spokesman
could not be reached for comment late Wednesday.
HCFC 142-b is a potent
greenhouse gas associated with global warming. Owens Corning now says the new
plant would emit about 245 tons a year; that would have the same effect as
82,000 cars driving 12,000 miles a year, according to the DEQ.
HCFC 142-b also thins the
stratospheric ozone layer. Scientists say a depleted ozone layer allows more
ultraviolet radiation to reach the Earth, causing health problems such as
cataracts and skin cancer. Under the federal Clean Air Act, manufacturers such
as Owens Corning are supposed to find a substitute for HCFC 142-b before 2010.
The plant would use HCFC
142-b to blow bubbles in the foam it uses to make insulation. Owens Corning
contends that insulation ultimately benefits the environment by preventing
additional fossil fuels from being burned at power plants.
The environmental groups say
that other companies are already making rigid foam insulation using technology
that is less harmful to the environment.
The DEQ said this week that
it would hold two more meetings on the pollution permit that Owens Corning has
applied for.
An information meeting is
set for
Catherine Trevison: 503-294-5971; ctrevison@news.oregonian.com