Katherine T. Egland 

Gulfport, MS 

ktegland@aol.com 

First let me preface my remarks by commending this Administration for 

proposing this much needed New Source Performance Standard 

regulation. This is a tremendous leap towards providing safeguards to 

assure cleaner air while promoting a more robust and responsible 

economy. 

One of the most perplexing concerns that I have heard from those who 

object to the regulation is that it is a "job killer". Let me be clear, you 

simply cannot justify killing people to create jobs. We cannot 

compromise the health of a nation for the wealth of the privileged. 

Making a living wage is of no consequence to an unhealthy or dying 

worker. The end does not justify the means. 

Former President Bill Clinton once said: 

"I have never believed we had to choose between either a clean 

and safe environment or a growing economy. Protecting the 

health and safety of all Americans doesn't have to come at the 

expense of our economy's bottom line. And creating thriving 

companies and new jobs doesn't have to come at the expense of 

the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, or the 

natural landscape in which we live. We can, and indeed must, 

have both." 

We should never tum a blind eye or a deaf ear to those who have a deep 

and abiding commitment to protecting our environment and dismiss 

them as opponents of progress or even worse- hired assassins to kill the 

job market. 

I am certainly grateful for this administration and all those who work so 

diligently to protect my right to breathe clean air. I am here today in a 

volunteer capacity, as the grandmother of a child who requires periodic 

breathing treatments and as a Gulfport, Mississippi homeowner, who for 

the past 33 years has resided within f1ve miles of a failing coal plant, 
Jack Watson. Three of my grandchildren live only two blocks from me 

which places them within that same five mile radius. 

It isn't enough that Plant Watson's owner, Mississippi Power Company, 

has this one failing plant, they are pending final approval by the Public 

Service Commission to develop yet another coal plant in the state. This new 

Kemper County site will utilize lignite and eliminate 20,000 acres of prime forest 

land and small farms. Any run off from the project will impact the Pascagoula 

River. And tc add insult to injury, it app.::a;s that we, the rate-payers, will finance 

the b~:lding of this plant with a 30% rate hike. But the company claims it is doing 

us a favor as the increased power rates will take effect gradually over a ten year 

period. Apparently they have no appreciation for the fact that social security, 

retirement and most other incomes will not increase at a rate of 3 0% over a 1 0 year 

period and that this increase will impose a considerable hardship on many of its 

consumers. This is really an absolute travesty that the construction of the new coal 

plant will be financed on the backs of struggling customers with absolutely no risk 

to the shareholders of this publicly traded company. 

The company's spokeswoman claims that l.Juilding the plant will secure a better 

energy future for customers. Well, the greatest beneficiary is the power company 

which will boost their bottom line, at our expense. This kind of blatant disregard is 

why we need federal government intervention. 

Also located within five miles of Plant Watson is the Gulf of Mexico. Gulf 

residents have had to contend not only w'th the results of extreme climate changes 

which spawn the unprecedented devastation of Hurricane Katrina, but we have also 

had to cope with the horrendous BP oil drilling disaster. And we also have 

continued concerns regarding the environmental impact of all the pollutants of the 

Mississippi River, which flows through ten states, before dumping into the Gulf of 

Mexico. 

We need federal government regulation to protect us, notjust for futun:: coal plants, 

but for all the existing pitfalls which have 'ed us down this unyielding path of 

destruction. 

I encourage cons:deration ofNSPS as well as protective guidelines for existing 

coal plants. Thank you.