The White House's move to pull back on national standards for ground-level ozone pollution -- smog -- represents a clear victory for business groups and Republicans, who had been lobbying to postpone the regulations until a new scheduled review in 2013. Here are six things to know about the debate over the standards:
1 What are the standards? Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required to conduct a review of standards on industrial smog every five years. But the last time new ozone standards were set was back in 1997 -- at 84 parts per billion.
2 Why are the 1997 standards still being used? In 2006, the EPA reviewed the science on ozone and health, which had advanced considerably. It wasn't until the 2000s, for instance, that researchers realized ground-level ozone might actually be killing people, not just causing respiratory problems. Realizing that the standards were out of date, EPA scientists recommended a new level of 60 to 70 parts per billion. The Bush administration decided to go with a less-stringent level of 75 parts per billion in its 2008 rules. But groups such as the American Lung Association quickly sued to stop the rules, which they claimed were too weak.
3 Why weren't the rules updated under Obama? After President Obama got elected, the new EPA said it would issue stronger rules by August 2010. But that deadline came and went. Then EPA asked for an extension. Then the EPA said it wanted to look at the science again. After a review, its scientific board agreed that a standard of 60 to 70 parts per billion was the most cost-effective way to protect public health. Now White House officials argued that it doesn't make sense to put out new rules in 2011 when another review is due in 2013.
4 Why did industry groups objected to stricter standards? They said that complying with a stricter standard could cost them $19 billion to $90 billion per year by 2020. (The EPA did note that a tougher standard would yield benefits of $13 billion to $100 billion.) Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor dubbed the proposal "possibly the most harmful of all the currently anticipated Obama administration regulations."
5 Why do critics object to the postponement? Frank O'Donnell of Clean Air Watch said there's no reason to think that a new ozone standard will be issued by 2013. That's just when the scientific review is due. Crafting new rules will take longer than that, given the inevitable delays and lawsuits. And if a new president hostile to environmental regulation comes into office, the EPA may never get around to issuing new ozone rules.
6 What happens now? Right now, most states are still operating under the 1997 standards. Bill Becker of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies said the EPA now has the option of directing states to follow the Bush-era rules, but that seems unlikely, given the White House's preference to wait until the 2013 review. That means states would keep operating under the 1997 standards, which are more lax than even what the Bush administration had proposed.
WASHINGTON POST
