Suit alleges W.Pa. university a polluter |

Suit alleges W.Pa. university a polluter

The federal government sued Pennsylvania and Slippery Rock University on Wednesday over allegations the school’s coal-fired boilers violate pollution laws.

The federal government filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency and is seeking fines of $32,500 per day for each alleged violation that occurred after March 15, 2004, and $37,500 per day for each alleged violation after Jan. 12, 2009.

The lawsuit asks a judge to order that Slippery Rock be prohibited from operating the boilers unless they are in compliance with the Clean Air Act and to install emissions control technology on the boilers.

Slippery Rock spokesman Karl Schwab said he had not seen the lawsuit and that it will be referred to a state lawyer.

“The heating plants have been under review and upgraded for a number of years,” Schwab said. “We are a green university. We’re building a green student center that has a green roof with plants to help improve the environment. We were one of the first universities in the country to offer a master’s degree in sustainable systems.”

Schwab said the boilers, which use a combination of coal and natural gas, provide heat and hot water for residence halls and campus buildings.

The lawsuit states that the EPA notified the state and Slippery Rock on Jan. 22, 2009, of possible violations. The EPA contends the boilers have been violating pollution laws since at least Feb. 6, 2003.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.