ILNews

Indiana seeks to overturn EPA decision on air quality in Lake, Porter counties

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Gov. Mitch Daniels and Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller said Wednesday they will appeal the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to designate Lake and Porter counties as nonattainment regarding ozone.

The EPA includes Lake and Porter counties in the Chicago metropolitan statistical area, and Illinois air quality exceeded the ozone standard by less than 1 percent.

Daniels said for the first time in the history of the Clean Air Act, all of Indiana’s counties meet air quality limits, yet the state is “about to be punished by the EPA because Illinois’ air doesn’t.”

“EPA restrictions make it harder to hire people, and we don’t want to lose jobs in Indiana, where the air is clean, just because the air isn’t clean enough in Illinois,” he said.

The state was notified by the EPA earlier this year about the decision to designate the two Indiana counties as nonattainment. A release from the governor’s office says that the air in the counties has met the ozone standard and all other air quality standards since the end of the 2007-2009 measurement period.

The Illinois air monitor in question has been impacted by that state’s exemption of all vehicles produced before 1996 from its vehicle admissions testing program, according to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management. IDEM claims that had those older vehicles been tested, the air monitor would have met the federal standard.

The petition for judicial review is in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

“By arbitrarily lumping us in with Chicago’s dirty air, EPA has wrongly penalized northwest Indiana even though Lake and Porter counties are within the proper ozone levels and the federal nonattainment designation would do nothing to improve air quality in the two counties. The state will ask the federal appeals court to stay this EPA action before the burdensome new nonattainment permit requirements force local companies to move their expansion projects elsewhere due to cost,” Zoeller said.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A sad end to a prolific gadfly. Indiana has suffered a great loss in the journalistic realm.

  2. Good riddance to this dangerous activist judge

  3. What is the one thing the Hoosier legal status quo hates more than a whistleblower? A lawyer whistleblower taking on the system man to man. That must never be rewarded, must always, always, always be punished, lest the whole rotten tree be felled.

  4. I want to post this to keep this tread alive and hope more of David's former clients might come forward. In my case, this coward of a man represented me from June 2014 for a couple of months before I fired him. I knew something was wrong when he blatantly lied about what he had advised me in my contentious and unfortunate divorce trial. His impact on the proceedings cast a very long shadow and continues to impact me after a lengthy 19 month divorce. I would join a class action suit.

  5. The dispute in LB Indiana regarding lake front property rights is typical of most beach communities along our Great Lakes. Simply put, communication to non owners when visiting the lakefront would be beneficial. The Great Lakes are designated navigational waters (including shorelines). The high-water mark signifies the area one is able to navigate. This means you can walk, run, skip, etc. along the shores. You can't however loiter, camp, sunbath in front of someones property. Informational signs may be helpful to owners and visitors. Our Great Lakes are a treasure that should be enjoyed by all. PS We should all be concerned that the Long Beach, Indiana community is on septic systems.

ADVERTISEMENT