"[P]eople acting in a group can accomplish things which no individual acting alone could even hope to bring about." - FDR

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

Friday, August 31, 2007

Public Supports Tighter Standard for Ozone

Yesterday, EPA held two public hearings on the agency's proposed revision to the national standard for ozone (a.k.a. smog) exposure. In June, EPA proposed tightening the standard within a range of 0.070 to 0.075 parts per million. The current standard is 0.084 ppm.

The Philadelphia Enquirer and The Los Angeles Times report on the hearings in their respective cities. In both hearings, speakers expressed displeasure with the proposal. Public health advocates and local citizens demand an even stricter standard, while industry representatives want to maintain the status quo.

Both articles offer compelling tales of speakers afflicted with asthma who feel as though the government has a responsibility to step in and ensure the safety of the human environment. Both articles also point out supporters of tighter standards outnumbered industry reps during the hearings.

Industry representatives likely know EPA is under a legal and moral obligation to tighten the standard. But the manufacturing industry is concerned the proposal may hurt their bottom line. They resort to two arguments in attempts to defeat EPA's efforts.

First, they call into question the science behind EPA's proposal. This argument is ridiculous. If anything, science supports an even stricter standard than the agency is proposing. EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee — a premiere body of scientists — recommends a standard between 0.060 ppm and 0.070 ppm.

Second, they claim the rule would levy billions in compliance costs. Ignoring for a moment industry's penchant for overstating costs, this argument is still meaningless. Federal law states, and the Supreme Court has upheld, that EPA may not consider economic costs in setting the ozone standard. In fact, Reg•Watch thinks EPA officials should turn up the volume on their iPods when industry starts talking about compliance costs.

Reg•Watch hopes EPA respects the will of the people, the spirit of public health, and the law. Unfortunately, industry reps are more closely allied with senior officials within EPA and the White House.

Reg•Watch will continue to follow this story. In the meantime, the public comment period for the rule is still open. To submit comments, go to the federal government's regulatory portal (Regulations.gov) and, under Step 4, search for this Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172-0231.