OFFICIALS LEGISLATION INTEREST GROUPS PUBLIC STATEMENTS COMMITTEES VETOES

Ozone Standards Implementation Act of 2016

Floor Speech

By: Bob Latta
By: Bob Latta
Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Washington, DC
Issues: Environment

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LATTA. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4775, the Ozone Standards Implementation Act, of which I am a proud sponsor.

I would like to focus, in particular, on what this bill really does for the timeline of implementing ozone standards. H.R. 4775 focuses on efficient implementation of ozone and other air quality requirements by making commonsense adjustments to facilitate how air quality standards are implemented, based on practical experience.

Our legislation provides States with additional time to implement the 2015 standards which is needed to fully implement the 2008 ozone standards, since EPA only issued the implementing regulations in 2015.

Further, H.R. 4775 allows EPA time to develop the new implementing regulations and guidance needed for the 2015 standards, and also allows EPA to clear its existing backlog of hundreds of implementation plans relating to other existing standards.

Clean air remains our priority, and this legislation does not change the recent new ozone standard of 70 parts per billion. It does not change of the standards set by the agency for any other criteria pollutants.

Instead, it ensures that hundreds of counties are not unnecessarily subjected to additional regulatory burdens, paperwork requirements, and restrictions.

EPA projects that, based on 2012-2014 data, over 240 counties with ozone monitors would violate the 2015 standards, but they are already on track to meet those standards by 2025. It makes no sense to sweep these counties into unnecessarily burdensome ``nonattainment'' regulatory regimes.

EPA has estimated compliance costs for 2008 beginning in 2020 of $7.6 billion to $8.8 billion annually. On top of these costs, EPA estimates compliance costs for the 2015 standards beginning in 2025, of $2 billion annually, including $1.4 billion outside California, and $800 million in California.

However, EPA's own estimate may be too low, since they have admitted that in some places, most of or even all of the technology that will be needed to meet this rule has yet to be invented.

What this legislation postpones is the diversion of State resources from the most pressing challenges to meet a standard that EPA projects will be met anyway through measures already on the books.

Mr. Chairman, I urge support of H.R. 4775.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward