New Hampshire environmentalists say proposed state regulations will allow an increase in mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants in the state. Weaker federal regulations that were proposed last December are responsible, they said.

The state Department of Environmental Services' proposal, released two weeks ago, recommends cutting emissions to 50 pounds per year for the two plants in New Hampshire. The change would take effect one year after federal Environmental Protection Agency regulations become final, or in about four years. In another four years, the state further recommended emissions be capped at 24 pounds per year for both plants.

Environmentalists and state officials say the proposal will be undercut if the EPA enacts the plan it outlined last December, which would allow more mercury pollution for a longer period of time.

Coal-burning power plants are the only major mercury polluters still unregulated by federal clean air standards.

"The assumption was we would have federal requirements . . . then (New Hampshire's) Clean Power Act would require further cuts," said Bob Scott, director of the state's air resources division at the Department of Environmental Services.

The issue is crucial in New Hampshire because emissions from the Midwest continually pass through New England.

The EPA proposed allowing power plants to trade credits toward reduction goals with other plants across the country. That means plants in New Hampshire could buy credits rather than clean up. And because the EPA proposed it, New Hampshire officials can also offer a credit system - instead of requiring power plants to cut the amount of mercury emitted directly from the smokestacks.

Public Service of New Hampshire's plant in Bow is the largest emitter of mercury in the state, at 125 pounds per year. Its smaller station in Portsmouth emits 10 pounds, according to PSNH officials.

State officials said they preferred emissions be reduced directly from the smokestacks, but the estimated cost for PSNH to comply would be between $72 million and $450 million. Instead, they suggested some lower-cost options:

Putting carbon into the flues would help filter out up to half the mercury and cost less than $1 million, according to state officials. PSNH said it was considering the solution.

Offering companies credits toward compliance goals if they help communities with mercury-removal, such as collecting thermometers and fluorescent light bulbs and paying for mercury cleanup in schools.

PSNH has also proposed burning lower-mercury coal.

The Department of Environmental Services handed the proposal over to the Legislature two weeks ago, hoping lawmakers will take it up next session. If not, New Hampshire will be left with whatever federal rules are adopted in December by the EPA, which will likely allow more pollution.

Mercury air pollution from coal-fired power plants contaminates water bodies and concentrates in fish. Mercury in some types of seafood damages children's brains, kidneys and nervous systems and can harm adult immune and cardiovascular systems.

When it passed the Clean Power Act in 2002, the Granite State became the first in the country to respond to global warming by requiring its three fossil-fuel-burning plants to cut emissions that cause acid rain and deplete the ozone layer. But the legislation also required utilities to measure mercury emissions, which would later be regulated by lawmakers.

Single page