|
|
|
|
|
Government
& Public Affairs Update
|
|
|
Government &
Public Affairs Team
Reginald M. Turner
John
Van Fossen, Practice Group Leader
Lucius A. Vassar
Chris Wagner
|
|
|
|
|
EPA Will
Continue to Feel Political Pressure
Last Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) told a federal
court of appeals that finishing the new ground-level ozone
regulations is taking longer than anticipated, but that they could be
ready by late October.
In a draft rule from
earlier this year, EPA proposed lowering the ozone air quality
standard to between 60 and 70 parts per billion (ppb). The
current standard is 75 ppb -- set during the recent Bush
Administration. EPA estimates that lowering ppb to those levels
would offer health benefits ranging from $13 - $100 billion at a cost
of $19 - $90 billion.
Ozone (O3) is a
gas composed of three oxygen atoms. It is not usually emitted
directly into the air, but at ground-level is created by a chemical
reaction between oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic
compounds (VOC) in the presence of sunlight. Ozone has the same
chemical structure whether it occurs miles above the earth or at
ground-level and can be "good" or "bad,"
depending on its location in the atmosphere.
In the earth's lower atmosphere, ground-level ozone is considered
"bad." Motor vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions,
gasoline vapors, and chemical solvents as well as natural sources
emit NOx and VOC that help form ozone. Ground-level ozone is the
primary constituent of smog. Sunlight and hot weather cause
ground-level ozone to form in harmful concentrations in the air. As a
result, it is known as a summertime air pollutant. Many urban areas
tend to have high levels of "bad" ozone, but even rural
areas are also subject to increased ozone levels because wind carries
ozone and pollutants that form it hundreds of miles away from their
original sources (a.k.a. "transport" pollution).
As the EPA has continued to tighten ground-level ozone regulations,
Rep. Candice Miller (MI-10) has criticized EPA for placing an undue
hardship on the people and economy of Michigan that would not
necessarily result in cleaner air due to "transport"
pollution. Furthermore, a group of bipartisan Senators sent a letter to EPA
Administrator Lisa Jackson earlier this month expressing concern
about the negative economic impacts that could result from stricter
regulations.
Declaring that the Agency could move forward with the regulations
before November, the EPA has put itself in the peculiar position of
unveiling its regulations at the end of the campaign season, a time
when candidates' rhetoric usually reaches a fever pitch.
Republicans have the most to gain politically from an EPA release in
October given the poor economy, the strong anti-incumbent sentiment
shown in primary elections, and the fact that midterm elections
almost always favor the minority party. Pair that election
landscape with the fact that the ozone standards are likely to be
ambitious and expensive, and one can almost hear a collective grimace
from both environmentalists and Democrats.
|
|
If you have any questions concerning these issues,
please contact Chris Wagner at 202.772.0924 or cwagner@clarkhill.com.
|
|
|
|
|
To find out
more about Clark Hill and our Government & Public Affairs
Practice Group, visit clarkhill.com
or call 800.949.3124
|
|
|
