In testimony delivered in Houston yesterday, API's Policy Advisor Ten Steichen told the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that its proposed new ozone pollution standard would exact significant costs on consumers, jobs and the economy without providing commensurate benefits.

Ted also said that there is no scientific justification for imposing the more stringent standards.

"There is actually far more debate on the science than EPA has represented," Ted said, noting that the studies EPA used for its proposal do not support lowering the ozone standard. "At the time of the 2008 rulemaking, it was clear that there were many issues with these studies, and those issues remain."

Dr. Robyn Prueitt, who reviewed the studies, agreed. Dr. Prueitt said the human-exposure tests conducted in 2002 and... more »

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today proposed to tighten U.S. ground-level ozone standards to protect people as well as plants. Under the new guidelines, the "primary" standard aimed at protecting public health would be reduced to 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million (ppm) measured over eight hours from the 0.075 ppm level set in March 2008.

API reacted swiftly in a statement:

"The action lacks scientific justification. EPA acknowledges the newer studies on ozone do not materially change any of the broad scientific conclusions regarding the health effects of exposure. Given that conclusion, there is absolutely no basis for EPA to propose changing the ozone standards promulgated by the EPA Administrator in 2008. To do so is an obvious politicization of the air quality standard setti... more »