State Attorney General William Tong released a statement condemning today’s Supreme Court decision on Ohio v. EPA, which decided to temporarily stay an EPA rule that would limit cross-state ozone pollution.
“This disappointing decision is a serious setback for Connecticut’s air quality and public health,” said Tong. “Without strong federal regulations and responsible actions by our upwind neighbors, we will continue to inhale smog from our country’s heaviest cross-state polluters.”
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of temporarily staying the “Good Neighbor Provision” of the Clean Air Act, which required states to submit to the EPA plans for reducing ozone smog emissions that cross state lines.
In 2019, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Delaware, Massachusetts and New York City sued the EPA, demanding stricter enforcement of the rule. The multi-state coalition came to an agreement with the Biden Administration in 2021, requiring the EPA to finalize Good Neighbor plans. In February 2023, the EPA denied the proposed plans of 23 states and announced its own plan a month later, leading the states of Ohio, Indiana and West Virginia, with the support of numerous energy and industrial companies, to challenge the ruling via the Ohio v. EPA suit. The EPA ruling is also currently being challenged by twelve other states in separate suits.
Connecticut legislators have been aggressive in their pursuit of emissions reductions. In 2022 alone legislators passed the Connecticut Clean Air Act, a sweeping bill that aimed to reduce vehicle emissions, and codified its commitment to reaching zero emissions electric power by 2040. According to 2023 data released by the US Energy Information Administration, Connecticut is the state with the 11th lowest CO2 emissions per capita.
In spite of this commitment, Connecticut still struggles with ozone pollution, mostly as a result of smog carried by wind from out-of-state. The American Lung Association issues air quality grades for counties in all 50 states based on different pollutant factors, including the number of high ozone days. Currently, four of Connecticut’s eight counties that collect ozone data have received F-grades, with three of the others receiving C’s. According to Tong’s statement, more than 90 percent of ozone levels in southwest Connecticut and more than 80 percent of ozone in other parts of the state originate from other states.
Ozone is a gas produced both naturally and by human activities. While ozone located high in the Earth’s atmosphere is beneficial, reducing Earth’s exposure to harmful ultraviolet rays, lower-hanging ozone is detrimental to human health when inhaled.
Roger Reynolds, senior legal director at Save the Sound, a New Haven-based environmental advocacy group, also spoke out in opposition to the Court’s ruling.
“This case will have a direct impact on air quality in the Long Island Sound region,” said Reynolds. “Currently, a significant percentage of our ozone pollution problem—pollution linked to asthma, cancer, cardiovascular disease, neurological issues, and low birth weight—originates from out-of-state sources that would be governed by the Good Neighbor provision. With this decision, the ongoing efforts by New York and Connecticut to improve air quality, decrease adverse health outcomes and hospitalizations, and reduce medical costs will be made much more difficult.”
Reynolds went on to pan the current Supreme Court’s recent environmental rulings, calling it “the worst three years for the environment at the Supreme Court since the start of the modern environmental era.”
Tong vowed to remain persistent in pursuing stronger EPA regulation of ozone producing states.
“Our fight is not over,” said Tong. “While the Supreme Court has temporarily paused enforcement of the Good Neighbor Provision, we will continue to aggressively pursue our ongoing litigation.”
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
