On November 25, 2014, EPA proposed to strengthen the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. The rule is available online and should be published soon in the Federal Register.
“Based on extensive recent scientific evidence about the harmful effects of ground-level ozone, or smog,” EPA is proposing to lower the ozone NAAQS to within a range of 65 to 70 parts per billion (ppb), while taking comment on a level as low as 60 ppb. The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that EPA review the standards every five years; EPA last updated these standards in 2008, setting them at 75 ppb. The law also requires EPA to set two types of NAAQS for ozone: a primary standard to protect public health with an “adequate margin of safety,” and a secondary standard to protect the public welfare. EPA is proposing to update both the primary ozone standard, to protect public health, and the secondary standard, to protect the public welfare. Both standards would be 8-hour standards set within a range of 65 to 70 ppb. In addition to lowering the NAAQS, EPA seeks to expand the ozone monitoring season for many states and update the Air Quality Index to ensure people are notified when air quality is unhealthy.
According to EPA’s analysis, lowering the NAAQS for ozone will improve significantly protection for children, preventing from 320,000 to 960,000 asthma attacks and from 330,000 to 1 million missed school days. EPA claims that a stronger ozone NAAQS will also better protect both children and adults by preventing more than 750 to 4,300 premature deaths, 1,400 to 4,300 asthma-related emergency room visits, and 65,000 to 180,000 missed workdays. EPA estimates that the benefits of meeting the proposed standards will significantly outweigh the costs. If the standards are promulgated in final, EPA claims that “every dollar we invest to meet them will return up to three dollars in health benefits.” EPA values these health benefits at $6.4 to $13 billion annually in 2025 for a standard of 70 ppb, and $19 to $38 billion annually in 2025 for a standard of 65 ppb. Annual costs are estimated at $3.9 billion in 2025 for a standard of 70 ppb, and $15 billion for a standard at 65 ppb. EPA will seek public comment on the proposal for 90 days following its publication in the Federal Register, and it plans to hold three public hearings. EPA stated that it will issue final ozone standards by October 1, 2015.
The proposal is certain to face fierce opposition from Republican lawmakers and many industry sectors. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) ranking member David Vitter (R-LA) and fellow EPW member James Inhofe (R-OK) in a November 20, 2014, letter to the White House urged the administration to halt the rule and pursue a comprehensive review of the potential adverse economic and other impacts of a stricter limit before it issued a proposal. In a statement on EPA’s proposal, Inhofe claimed that the proposed rule could impose massive economic harm and noted that many states have not fully implemented the current ozone NAAQS. “As Senate committees return to regular order in the new Congress, this rule will face rigorous oversight so we can gain a better understanding of the health and economic impacts of the proposed standard, and we will solicit the thoughtful input of state and local leaders across the country,” Inhofe said. Several major trade associations also came out in opposition to the rule after it was released, predicting that the lowered NAAQS standard will result in manufacturers canceling or delaying projects and jobs. Jack Gerard, President of the American Petroleum Institute, in a written statement cautioned that “Tightening these standards could be the most expensive regulation ever imposed on the American public, with potentially enormous costs to the economy, jobs, and consumers.”
