David M. Bearden
Specialist in Environmental Policy
Testimony
of David M. Bearden Specialist in Environmental Policy for the Congressional
Research Service Before the House of
Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Environment
and Economy
Date of Report: May 22, 2013
Number of Pages: 6
Order Number: T-052213
Price: $19.95
To Order:
T-052213.pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing
James E. McCarthy
Specialist in Environmental Policy
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is nearing the end of a
statutorily required review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for ozone. EPA is likely to propose a revised standard in 2014,
with promulgation perhaps a year later.
NAAQS are standards for outdoor (ambient) air that are intended to protect
public health and welfare from harmful concentrations of pollution. If the
EPA Administrator changes the standard to a lower level, she would be
concluding that protecting public health and welfare requires lower concentrations
of ozone pollution than were previously judged to be safe. In high enough concentrations,
ozone has been found to aggravate heart and lung diseases and may contribute to premature
death. It also can have negative effects on forests and crop yields, which the
secondary NAAQS are intended to protect.
As of July 2013, 123 million people (40% of the U.S. population) lived in areas
classified nonattainment for the primary (health-based) ozone NAAQS. If
the standards are further strengthened, more areas might be affected, and
sources that contribute to that nonattainment might have to impose more
stringent emission controls. This could be costly: in 2011, EPA concluded
that strengthening the primary NAAQS from 75 parts per billion to 70 ppb would
cost at least $19 billion annually by 2020.
EPA last revised the ozone standard in March 2008, but the standards chosen at
that time remain subject to controversy. A 23-member panel of EPA science
advisers, chosen from outside the agency, unanimously recommended a more
stringent range of standards than the Administrator chose. In 2009, the
agency agreed to reconsider the 2008 standard, but the process was
shortcircuited by a presidential decision to await conclusion of the next
regular review—the review now nearing completion.
The agency begins a NAAQS review by compiling an Integrated Science Assessment,
which summarizes the science surrounding the standards. The current assessment,
released in February 2013, finds that the evidence associating ozone
exposure with morbidity and mortality has strengthened since the 2008
review was completed. This would appear to support more stringent standards.
Proposed standards might raise a number of issues, including whether their
expected benefits justify their costs. This is a perennial issue raised by
stakeholders when EPA considers revising the NAAQS. As the Clean Air Act
is currently written, however, the agency is prohibited from weighing
costs against benefits in setting these standards. The statute simply states
that the Administrator is to set the primary standard at a level requisite
to protect the public health, allowing an adequate margin of safety. A
unanimous Supreme Court has found that the absence of language mentioning
cost means that costs are not to be considered in setting these standards. Many
in Congress would like to change this to require a cost or cost-benefit
consideration: in the 112th Congress, House-passed legislation would have done so.
A related question is how nonattainment areas would lower emissions
sufficiently to comply with a more stringent standard. Current federal
standards for cars, trucks, nonroad vehicles and engines, power plants,
and other stationary pollution sources are not strong enough to bring many areas
into attainment, thus requiring local pollution control measures in those
cases. To attain more stringent standards, there might be increased
pressure to strengthen federal controls on the sources that contribute to
ozone pollution; Congress might also revisit the perennial issue of how to
control sources that contribute to pollution downwind, in other states.
There are also monitoring issues: at present, only 675 of the nation’s 3,000
counties have ozone monitors in place.
This report discusses the standard-setting process, the specifics of the
current and most recent reviews, and issues that may be raised as EPA
brings the current review to completion.
Date of Report: November 7, 2013
Number of Pages: 20
Order Number: R43092
Price: $29.95
To Order:
R43092 .pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing
James E. McCarthy
Specialist in Environmental Policy
As the 113th Congress continues consideration of air quality issues, oversight of
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory actions is expected to
remain the main focus. Of particular interest are EPA’s Clean Air Act
regulations on emissions of greenhouse gases. President Obama’s June 25
announcement of initiatives to address climate change and EPA’s subsequent
(September 20) proposal of GHG emission standards for new fossil-fueled
power plants sparked renewed interest in the issue.
Air quality has improved substantially in the United States in the 40 years of
EPA’s Clean Air Act (CAA) regulation. According to the agency’s science
advisers and others, however, more needs to be done to protect public
health and the environment from the effects of air pollution. Thus, the agency
continues to promulgate regulations using authority given it by Congress in CAA amendments
more than 20 years ago. Members of Congress from both parties have raised questions
about the cost-effectiveness of some of these regulations and/or whether the
agency has exceeded statutory authority in promulgating them. Others in
Congress have supported EPA, noting that the Clean Air Act, often affirmed
in court decisions, has authorized or required the agency’s actions.
EPA’s regulatory actions on GHG emissions have been the main focus of
congressional interest in 2013. Although the Obama Administration has
consistently said it would prefer that Congress pass new legislation to
address climate change, such legislation now appears unlikely. Instead, over
the last four years, EPA has developed GHG emission standards using its
existing CAA authority. Relying on a finding that GHGs endanger public
health and welfare, the agency promulgated GHG emission standards for cars
and light trucks on May 7, 2010, and again on October 15, 2012, and for
larger trucks on September 15, 2011. The implementation of these standards,
in turn, triggered permitting and Best Available Control Technology
requirements for new major stationary sources of GHGs (power plants,
manufacturing facilities, etc.).
It is the triggering of standards and permit requirements for stationary
sources that has raised the most concern in Congress. A proposal to limit
carbon dioxide emissions from new power plants is the focus of attention
currently, but other sources (refineries, cement plants, etc.) could be subject to
GHG emission controls under the same statutory authority. In addition to the
proposed standards for new power plants, the President has directed EPA to
develop standards for existing power plants by June 2015.
Legislation has been introduced in both the House and Senate aimed at
preventing EPA from implementing such requirements. The House passed several of
these bills in the 112th Congress, but none passed the Senate. Meanwhile, EPA has implemented
permit and Best Available Control Technology requirements for new stationary
sources of GHGs. A challenge to these requirements will be heard by the
Supreme Court in early 2014.
Besides addressing climate change, EPA has taken action on a number of other
air pollution regulations, generally in response to court actions
remanding previous rules. Remanded rules included the Clean Air Interstate
Rule (CAIR) and Clean Air Mercury Rule—rules designed to control the
long-range transport of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury from power plants
through cap-and-trade programs. Other remanded rules included hazardous air
pollutant standards for boilers and cement kilns. EPA also recently
proposed a controversial rule to lower the sulfur content of gasoline, in
conjunction with tighter (“Tier3”) standards for motor vehicle emissions.
Date of Report: November 4, 2013
Number of Pages: 26
Order Number: R42895
Price: $29.95
To Order:
R42895 .pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing
Posts
