Denka Performance Elastomer, a synthetic rubber manufacturer in Louisiana, has warned that it may have to shut down its operations permanently if it is forced to comply with the Biden administration’s stringent new emissions deadline. The company made this argument in a recent filing with a federal appeals court in Washington, DC.
Denka blames a new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that imposes strict emissions limits on over 200 industrial plants. While other facilities have been given a two-year timeframe to meet the new standards, Denka has been assigned a 90-day deadline, which the company argues is “illegal and politically motivated.”
Located in Reserve, Louisiana, the Denka plant produces neoprene for wetsuits and automotive belts. The facility employs around 250 people and is just half a mile from an elementary school. Due to its high cancer rates, this area falls within the Mississippi River Chemical Corridor, often called Cancer Alley.
The plant has become a focal point in a larger debate about environmental justice and the Biden administration’s efforts to protect vulnerable communities from pollution. These communities, often poor and predominantly minority, are disproportionately affected by industrial emissions.
Initially, the EPA proposed more time for Denka to meet the new emission standards. However, after suing the company last year, the EPA determined that Denka’s facility posed an “imminent and substantial endangerment” to the surrounding community, justifying the shortened 90-day compliance period.
Denka contends that it cannot meet this accelerated deadline and will be forced to close the plant if the rule is not adjusted. “Absent relief from the 90-day implementation period, (Denka) will have no ability to comply with the rule and will be forced to shut the facility, likely permanently,” the company stated in its court filing.
Environmental activists, such as Sharon Lavigne of Rise St. James, have been vocal opponents of the Denka plant, citing its harmful impact on local residents. Lavigne supports the EPA’s tough stance, stating, “They poisoned the people in Reserve.”
The EPA’s new regulations target chloroprene emissions and other toxic substances, aiming to reduce cancer risks in affected communities significantly. While the EPA declined to comment on the ongoing litigation, it maintains that the health benefits of the new rules are substantial.
Denka is seeking a delay in the EPA’s 90-day deadline and claims it has already made significant strides in reducing emissions. The company argues that the EPA has exaggerated the risks of chloroprene and insists that more time is needed to comply with the new standards.
In 2022, environmental activists filed civil rights complaints with the EPA, accusing Louisiana air regulators of permitting new facilities in already overburdened Black communities without adequate pollution controls. Although the EPA initially found evidence supporting these claims, it later dropped the investigation, citing difficulties securing commitments from state regulators by the deadline.
Despite the setback, the EPA pursued legal action against Denka, asserting that the plant’s emissions presented an unacceptable cancer risk. The agency requested to pause this lawsuit while it finalized new emission rules for industrial plants.
Denka maintains that it requires at least two years to implement the necessary controls to comply with the new EPA rule. The company is pressing the court to intervene, arguing that the strict deadline will cause “irreparable harm” by potentially forcing a shutdown.
The company has attempted to negotiate an extension with the EPA, but these discussions stalled when the agency demanded specific emissions reduction commitments that Denka was unwilling to make.
In its statement, Denka thanked Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry and other state officials for their support. Previously, as attorney general, Landry’s office sued the EPA over its civil rights investigation, claiming that the agency overstepped its authority by focusing on the impacts of discrimination on Black residents rather than intentional discrimination. Earlier this year, a federal judge ruled in favor of the state in this matter.