Proposed air quality standards under fire on Hill

Issues in Science and Technology, Summer 1997

With the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) facing a July 19 deadline to make final its proposed tougher air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter, the standards are under increasing attack in Congress.

Congressional interest in the subject has been intense, with more than 15 hearings held. Typifying the tenor of the debate, Rep. David McIntosh (R-Ind.), chairman of the House Government Reform Committee's Regulatory Affairs Subcommittee, has accused EPA of concealing information on the new standards from Congress.

The focus of the debate has been on EPA's finding that very fine particles in the air-those smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter-can make people ill. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to set ambient air quality standards solely on the basis of public health considerations.

But members of Congress and others, in addition to criticizing the cost of the new regulation, have argued that EPA's scientific evidence is insufficient. Short-term research on the health effects of particulate matter has been relatively extensive, showing a "reasonable" correlation between the fine pollutants and human illnesses. But only two long-term studies have been conducted. Although both have shown a more significant correlation than have the short-term studies, members of Congress argue that two studies are not enough.

In late May, the White House, in response to criticism from Democrats on the Hill, asked the National Economic Council, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Office of Management and Budget to coordinate an internal review of the proposed standards, prompting speculation that the standards might be softened.