Report on Merger Plan Stirs Concern in San Diego : Smog: The joining of Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric could increase pollution in L.A. and have an immediate effect on its southern neighbor’s skies, the study concludes.

City administrators and air quality officials here expressed concern Tuesday about a state report saying that if San Diego Gas & Electric Co. merges with Southern California Edison Corp., Los Angeles’ pollution could have an immediate effect on San Diego’s skies.

The draft environmental impact report, released by the state Public Utilities Commission on Monday, found that the merger would significantly increase Los Angeles’ smog. The increase in pollution, however, could be offset in part by using San Diego-area power plants when smog alerts forced a slowdown at plants in Los Angeles.

Paul Downey, spokesman for San Diego Mayor Maureen O’Connor, bridled at the implied linking of San Diego’s and Los Angeles’ fate. The use of San Diego as a backstop, he said, would place the city where it doesn’t want to be--squarely in the shadow of its larger and more polluted northern neighbor.

“This has long been a fight for local control over our utility’s future. But this takes it a step further and links us environmentally to what’s happening in L.A.,” Downey said. “Basically, San Diego would become a suburb of Los Angeles and would be subjected to the whims of (Edison’s) bureaucrats sitting up in Rosemead. It’s saying, ‘If L.A. has a smoggy day, so will San Diego.’ ”

Downey was among several politicians and air quality advocates in San Diego and Los Angeles who expressed renewed opposition Tuesday to the proposed $2.5-billion merger, which would create the nation’s largest utility company with 4.8 million customers.

Some agencies, including the South Coast Air Quality Management District, reserved comment until they could fully examine the 900-page report. But others said the report’s highlights alone supported their worst fears.

Bob Goggin, a spokesman for the San Diego County air pollution control district, agreed with Downey. He said that permits issued to San Diego plants in the 1970s would allow them to burn dirtier fuels--oil instead of natural gas. In addition, Goggin said, San Diego plants operate at only 38% of the capacity they are allowed. If a merger took place, Goggin said, Edison could legally stoke up San Diego’s plants to full capacity on smoggy Los Angeles days.

“If that were to take place,” Goggin said, “it would require tighter restriction on other industry. It lays it on everybody else.”

Edison officials deny that this could happen, arguing that it is in their own economic interest to boost operations at Los Angeles plants, not at the older, less efficient San Diego plants.

“Oil is more costly than gas, so we wouldn’t use oil instead of gas if gas were available,” said Lewis M. Phelps, a vice president at Edison, who said San Diego plants “would never have to run more than they do now.” He repeated his claim that the merger would be “environmentally positive.”

Tom Soto, a spokesman for the Los Angeles-based Coalition for Clean Air, disagreed. He said a merger would be “a disaster” for Los Angeles.

“It’s very inconsistent with local policy and it’s certainly inconsistent with the goals of the 20-year plan,” Soto said, referring to the far-reaching clean air plan that aims to bring the four-county Los Angeles Basin into compliance with federal standards by 2007.