Request a Demo
Request A Demo
+1.216.765.7100
close

EHSvoice

Dakota Software's Blog for EHS and Sustainability Professionals

EPA sets new ground-level ozone limits

October 5th, 2015 by Dakota Software Staff Industry News

EPA sets new ground-level ozone limits

On Oct. 1, the Environmental Protection Agency reduced the amount of allowable ground-level ozone from 75 parts per billion to 70 ppb, stating the lower levels of allowable ozone will improve public health. Ground-level ozone results from a reaction of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in the air.  It is linked to a number of health issues, including asthma, heart and lung disease and premature death, according to The New York Times. The EPA reported the new limits come after extensive scientific evidence of the effects of ozone pollution showed the environmental regulations set out by the National Ambient Air Quality Standards were not enough.

"Put simply - ozone pollution means it hurts to breathe for those most vulnerable: our kids, our elderly and those suffering from heart and lung ailments," said Gina McCarthy, the EPA administrator, in a press release. "Our job is to set science-backed standards that protect the health of the American people. Today's action is one of the most important measures we can take for improving public health, reducing the costs of illness and protecting our children's health."

The press release reported the EPA reviewed almost 2,300 different studies, 1,000 of which were published after the EPA last adjusted emissions in 2008. The EPA estimated the new standards will create health benefits savings between $2.9 and $5.9 billion annually.

The EPA estimated the costs of the new environmental regulations to the economy at approximately $1.4 billion. According to The New York Times, the EPA's estimate makes these new standards some of the most expensive regulations in the country's history.

According to Politico, Jay Timmons, president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, stated the new regulations would hurt American companies and destroy job opportunities. However, Timmons also said the new standards could be worse for emissions-producing companies because environmentalists wanted the limit set at 60 ppb.

The EPA angers many, pleases few
The new standards angered people on both sides of the issue. Industry leaders said the laws are too stringent while environmentalists feel they are not enough.

Jack Gerard, president and CEO of the American Petroleum institute, implored Congress to stop the EPA's new standards, according to Politico. He said the agency "ignored science by changing the standards before allowing current standards to work," according to Politico.

Joe Manchin, a Democratic senator from West Virginia, also voiced is unhappiness with the new laws. 

"This doesn't make any sense at all when you have so many states that haven't met the threshold they already have," Manchin said to Politico. "But it's nothing new, this is the way EPA has been operating from day one."

Frank O'Donnel, president of environmental advocacy group Clean Air Watch, also wasn't happy with the new standards - but for different reasons.

"Disappointing is too mild a term," Frank O'Donnell, told The New York Times. "The big polluters won this time, for the most part. This decision will tarnish the president's environmental legacy. The national clean air standards are the heart of the Clean Air Act. This decision is heart failure."

The Obama administration's record on emissions contributing to smog is a sore spot for environmentalists because of the delay in revising the rules not long before the 2012 presidential election, The New York Times reported. Although the standards passed, many environmentalists still feel slighted. However, some do understand the difficultly of making both environmentalist and industry leaders happy. 

"EPA has threaded the needle in strengthening the ozone standard," S. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, which represents state and local air regulators, told The Washington Post. "The agency has appropriately balanced the views of divergent stakeholders with the public's right to breathe clean air."

Be Part of the Solution

Sign up for the Dakota EHS e-Newsletter for monthly updates from our regulatory and industry experts.

subscribe