EPA sets tighter standards for soot pollution

MATTHEW DALY

Asso­ci­ated Press

WASHINGTON — Respond­ing to a law­suit from 11 states, the Envi­ron­men­tal Pro­tec­tion Agency is propos­ing new air qual­ity stan­dards to lower the amount of soot that can be released into the air.

The Obama admin­is­tra­tion, fac­ing strong resis­tance from con­gres­sional Repub­li­cans and indus­try offi­cials, had sought to delay the polit­i­cally fraught rule until after the elec­tion, but was forced to act by a court order. Crit­ics, includ­ing offi­cials rep­re­sent­ing the oil and gas indus­try, refiner­ies and man­u­fac­tur­ers, com­plained that overly strict rules could hurt eco­nomic growth and lead to job losses.

Soot, made up of micro­scopic par­ti­cles released from smoke­stacks, diesel trucks, wood-burning stoves and other sources, con­tributes to haze and can bur­row into lungs. Breath­ing in soot can cause lung and heart problems.

Dr. Albert Rizzo, chair­man of the board of the Amer­i­can Lung Asso­ci­a­tion, said soot, also known as fine par­ti­cle pol­lu­tion, is a known killer. “The sci­ence is clear, and over­whelm­ing evi­dence shows that par­ti­cle pol­lu­tion at lev­els cur­rently labeled as offi­cially ‘safe’ causes heart attacks, strokes and asthma attacks,” he said.

The long-delayed rule, to be made pub­lic on Fri­day, responds to a fed­eral court order requir­ing the Obama admin­is­tra­tion to update air qual­ity stan­dards under the Clean Air Act. Admin­is­tra­tion offi­cials described the rule to The Asso­ci­ated Press on con­di­tion of anonymity because it has yet to be announced.

Eleven states, includ­ing New York and Cal­i­for­nia, filed suit ear­lier this year to force a deci­sion. The states and the Amer­i­can Lung Asso­ci­a­tion say cur­rent stan­dards jeop­ar­dize pub­lic health. Soot has been linked to thou­sands of pre­ma­ture deaths each year, as well as aggra­va­tion of res­pi­ra­tory ill­nesses, heart attacks and strokes.

An Obama admin­is­tra­tion offi­cial said the new rule was based on a rig­or­ous sci­en­tific review. Vir­tu­ally all coun­ties in the United States would meet the pro­posed stan­dard with no addi­tional actions needed beyond com­pli­ance with cur­rent and pro­posed rules set by the EPA, the offi­cial said.

More than a dozen states, along with envi­ron­men­tal groups, sued the EPA sev­eral years ago, con­tend­ing that the Bush admin­is­tra­tion had ignored sci­ence and its own experts when it decided in 2006 not to lower the nearly decade-old annual stan­dard for soot. The agency’s own analy­sis found a lower stan­dard rec­om­mended by sci­en­tific advis­ers would have pre­vented almost 2,000 pre­ma­ture deaths each year.

The EPA ini­tially promised it would review recent sci­ence and issue a deci­sion in 2011. After months of inac­tion, states led by New York filed suit to force a deci­sion. The lung asso­ci­a­tion and the National Parks Con­ser­va­tion Asso­ci­a­tion filed a sim­i­lar suit. A fed­eral court even­tu­ally ordered the EPA to pro­pose a new rule by Thurs­day. A final rule is due in Decem­ber after a pub­lic com­ment period.

The new rule would set the max­i­mum allow­able stan­dard for soot at range of 12 to 13 micro­grams per cubic meter of air. The cur­rent annual stan­dard is 15 micro­grams per cubic meter.

Admin­is­tra­tion offi­cials said the pro­posed changes are con­sis­tent with advice from inde­pen­dent sci­en­tists and are based on exten­sive research show­ing neg­a­tive health impacts from soot at lower lev­els than pre­vi­ously under­stood. The agency will solicit com­ments from the pub­lic, as well as indus­try, pub­lic health groups and other inter­ested groups to help deter­mine the final standard.

Besides Cal­i­for­nia and New York, states join­ing in the law­suit forc­ing an EPA deci­sion were Con­necti­cut, Delaware, Mary­land, Mass­a­chu­setts, New Mex­ico, Ore­gon, Rhode Island, Ver­mont and Washington.

Posted by AP News on Jun 14 2012. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS Feed. Comments can be made below.