Witnesses from the US oil and gas industry and other businesses strongly spoke out on Jan. 29 against the US Environmental Protection Agency's proposal to reduce the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard from 75 ppb. Cutting the limits to a 65-70 ppb range is unnecessary, premature, and badly mistaken, they basically said in separate testimony at EPA's public hearing on the plan.
"If EPA chooses to unnecessarily lower the ozone standards, hundreds of billions of dollars in annual US economic output and millions of American jobs could be lost," warned Howard J. Feldman, the American Petroleum Institute's regulatory and scientific affairs director.
"The degree and range of potential impacts from any change in the standards highlight the need for a robust debate about the science EPA is using to justify these regulations," Feldman said.
The agency's determination of potential health benefits from a lower standard is flawed, Independent Petroleum Association of America Executive Vice-Pres. Lee O. Fuller said.
"In 2011, when EPA proposed a 70 ppb standard, its median 'net benefits' estimate for a 65 ppb standard was only $700 million, with a high possibility that the costs could outweigh any benefits," Fuller said. "But in 2014, EPA changed its mind, claiming net benefits of a lower ozone standard are now as high as $23 billion-a 3,100% increase in net benefits for the exact same standard."
In its support documents for the proposal, Fuller said EPA projections show the vast majority of US counties with monitors would meet the proposed standards by 2025 just with the rules and programs now in place or under way.
Air quality is improving
"The nation's air quality has significantly improved and continues to improve with new voluntary and regulatory programs already in place or being implemented," said Lorraine Gershman, the American Chemistry Council's senior director of environment and process safety. "According to EPA, total emissions of the six principal criteria air pollutants fell by 62% between 1980 and 2013."
The proposed lower allowed ozone range potentially could do more harm than good, Feldman said. "Depending on the level selected, decreasing the ozone standards could put almost the entire country out of compliance," he said. "Specifically, standards of 65 ppb could lead to nonattainment areas in 45 of the Lower 48 states. Furthermore, tighter standards could cause our economy to nosedive and people to lose their jobs."
Gershman said more than $137 billion in new chemical industry investment is planned or under way domestically, with 60% foreign direct outlays. EPA's proposal to lower the ozone NAAQS would impose significant burdens and hurdles on that new investment, she testified.