The chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee responded with suspicion to new clean air standards proposed by the EPA, saying they appear to be based on “secret data.”
On Friday, the EPA announced that, in response to a court order, it would recommend that the annual health standard for harmful fine particle pollution be within a range of 13 micrograms per cubic meter to 12 micrograms per cubic meter, instead of the 15 micrograms per cubic meter allowed now. The agency said that 99 percent of U.S. counties are projected to meet the proposed standards without undertaking any further actions to reduce emissions because of recent Clean Air Act rules.
“The proposed changes, which are consistent with the advice from the agency’s independent science advisors, are based on an extensive body of scientific evidence that includes thousands of studies – including many large studies which show negative health impacts at lower levels than previously understood,” the EPA said in a press release. “By proposing a range, the agency will collect input from the public as well as a number of stakeholders, including industry and public health groups, to help determine the most appropriate final standard to protect public health. It is important to note that the proposal has zero effect on the existing daily standard for fine particles or the existing daily standard for coarse particles (PM10), both of which would remain unchanged.”
“While I look forward to reviewing this proposal in more detail, I am concerned that EPA is pursuing yet another costly, job-killing regulation at a time when the American economy can least afford it,” said committee Chairman Ralph C. Hall (R-Texas). “I am also troubled that this rule appears to be based on secret data that EPA has refused to make public despite repeated requests from scientific experts and Members of Congress.”
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson will testify before Hall’s committee on June 28.
“We are all for clean air, and according to EPA’s own data, particulate matter emissions have plummeted 55 percent in the last decade,” the congressman added. “However, in advancing this regulation, I fear the Obama Administration has failed to make the case that the existing standard is not sufficient or that the underlying science has changed. Rather, the decision appears to further demonstrate EPA’s regulate-at-all-costs mentality.”
The EPA will accept public comment for 63 days after the proposed standards are published in the Federal Register. The agency will also hold public hearings in Sacramento and Philadelphia, and will issue the final standards by December 14.
When they notch a standard down from 15 to 12, it’s bot because there’s a measurable health effect. It’s because there’s a particular city that they want to punish. I’m going to guess Houston.
Snork,
My guess would be Phoenix. They already have a *lot* of trouble meeting the existing standard as the place is full of dry clay soils that kick up lots of fine particulates when disturbed or when the wind picks up. The Arizona governor who resides there is infamous for a finger-in-the-face tongue lashing of Mr. Obama during a recent trip. He is now setting up his retaliation.
Evidently, the only way to meet the EPA particulate standards would be to pave the planet.
Works for me!
And how were all these studies funded?
I suspect they were government funded, or taxpayer subsidized (by tax exempt “charitable” organizations). Hey, if industry funded studies are suspect when they shore up a particular industry, they government funded studies that point out a “need” for more government should be equally suspect.
Another Opposite Day in ObamaWorld:
Pollution studies are now confidential. National secrets, not so much.
I call for a United States population that is less than one part per billion EPA bureauthug.
LOL!
Do they even factor in pollen?
Fine particulate matter is composed of particles 2.5 microns or less. Individual pollen grains are much larger than this. Some are small enough to qualify as coarse particulate matter, defined as 10 microns or less (but most appear to be too big even for this classification).
Cut the entire federal government 50% across the board, then figure out how. Cut agencies all together and give power all back to congress as defined. PROSECUTE any/all who break ANY law, or do not uphold oath. NOTHING to be written and considered until having gone over EVERYTHING PASSED, since (constitution written?), keep only if passes strict guidelines, constitutional, and does NO HARM, with changes by amendment(s) when/where they were supposed to. etc. etc.
We need bold!