During a Feb. 2 public hearing in Houston, Texas, the American Petroleum Institute urged the Environmental Protection Agency to drop its proposed rule that would strengthen the national ambient air quality standards for ground-level ozone, a primary component of smog, beyond those set in 2008.
Ted Steichen, a policy advisor at API, said that scientific studies do not support the EPAs proposal.
“This reconsideration is obviously a political, not a scientific act,” said Steichen. “If there is no demonstrable benefit from this proposal, then moving forward could mean unnecessary energy cost increases, job losses and less domestic oil and natural gas development and energy security.”
On Jan. 19, the EPA submitted its proposed ozone standard to the Federal Register, which allows for 60 days of public comment. Should the proposal become the new standard, it would push numerous communities in the United States into a nonattainment status with the Clean Air Act. Communities that fail in achieving attainment with the standard are required to work on a State Implementation Plan that would engineer a change in those communities to attainment. Communities not in attainment with the Clean Air Act would be required to only sell a reformulated gasoline.
Steichen said EPA’s trends data indicate emissions from six criteria air pollutants dropped by 60 percent between 1970 and 2008, while vehicle miles traveled went up 163 percent.
“This is an impressive accomplishment matched by progress in other areas,” he said. “Equally important, regulations and standards already in place will assure further progress.”
He noted that U.S. refineries implemented new processes designed to dramatically reduce the presence of sulfur in gasoline and diesel, and that cleaner fuels, along with cleaner cars, buses, trucks, and non-road equipment “will produce significant continuing air quality improvements.”
“Amplifying this progress, cars and trucks will be 77-95% cleaner than those produced before 2004,” said Steichen. “The annual emission reductions from the use of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel with cleaner technology engines will be equivalent to removing the pollution from more than 90% of today’s trucks and buses by 2030.”
Robyn Prueitt, PhD, with Gradient in Seattle, Wash., conducted a study on behalf of the API that determined that the scientific studies used by the EPA to justify the proposed rule are flawed.
“At the time of the 2008 rulemaking, it was clear that there were many issues with these studies, and those issues still remain,” said Prueitt in prepared testimony, referring to the tougher standards imposed by EPA under the Bush administration that year.
Prueitt said the EPA “ignored certain negative studies in favor of those with positive results,” including using a small decrement found in one study as evidence to support the stiffer standard.
“EPA reported that this decrement was statistically significantly different based on a t-test EPA used to re-analyze the data at the final time point only. This re-analysis was not then published or peer-reviewed, and the use of a t-test to compare the final measurements,” charged Prueitt.
Steichen said too, that “a more stringent ozone standard will burden the States with a new and more difficult target before they complete work and implement attainment plans for the current standard. To cite a football analogy, EPA is effectively proposing to move the goalposts in the middle of the game.”
He said many communities will be saddled with new costs that will hurt both large and small businesses, and cause job losses.
Steichen said, “Without a clear certain scientific basis for selecting a different numeric standard, the ozone standard need not be changed now. We urge the Administrator not to pursue this proposal.”
