[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 112 (Friday, August 1, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1590]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             CLEAN AIR STANDARDS WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT OHIO

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. RALPH REGULA

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 31, 1997

  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, Vice President Gore recently announced the 
final adoption of U.S. EPA's clean air standards for ozone and 
particulate matter. I, like many other members of the Ohio delegation, 
am particularly concerned with the more stringent regulations' 
implications on Ohio's economy. Eric Peters' recent editorial published 
by the Akron Beacon Journal, entitled ``Clean-Air Rules: Taking a Bite 
Out of All Paychecks?'' cuts to the heart of this issue.
  I encourage my colleagues to take time to read Mr. Peters' comments 
and to evaluate the impact of these regulations on their congressional 
districts. Because of the standard's effect on my district, I have 
cosponsored H.R. 1984, legislation introduced by Representative Ron 
Klink. The bill would enact a 4-year moratorium on the promulgation of 
the standards and require EPA to conduct a more complete scientific 
review of ozone and fine particles.
  I urge all my colleagues to consider supporting H.R. 1984. Let's give 
the current Clean Air Act regulations a chance to continue to clean our 
Nation's air without further expense and job dislocation to our 
precious economic base.

             [From the Akron Beacon Journal, June 23, 1997]

          Clean-Air Rules: Taking a Bite Out of All Paychecks?

                            (By Eric Peters)

       If you were disposed to being facetious, you could say the 
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's proposed new clean-air 
     standards for ozone and particulate matter--English 
     translation: smog and soot--contain both pluses and minuses.
       On the one hand, the standards require significantly higher 
     utility bills for American ratepayers and significantly 
     higher price tags on a wide range of manufactured goods for 
     American consumers.
       On the other hand, they almost certainly will result in 
     fewer jobs, lower wages and less economic growth.
       Don't take my word for it.
       Take the word of President Clinton's own Council of 
     Economic Advisers, which predicts the national costs of 
     reaching full attainment with the EPA standards will total 
     upwards of $60 billion--far exceeding the $1 billion value of 
     the benefits it projects. Even in Washington, D.C., a 60:1 
     ratio of cost to effectiveness is totally out-of-whack.
       Indeed, if science and sound economic policy served to 
     guide EPA policy recommendations, the agency's current clean 
     air agenda would never have seen the light of day.
       While virtually every state would lose under the Draconian 
     EPA proposals, some states would clearly lose more than 
     others.
       The economies of such disparate states as Ohio, Virginia, 
     Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, Indiana, West Virginia and 
     Missouri all would receive sledgehammer blows from tighter 
     standards that studies show would produce no overall 
     measurable improvement in the nation's air quality.
       Ohio is a particularly good case in point.
       Although the Federal EPA estimates that the national 
     compliance costs of its tougher ozone restrictions would be 
     only $600 million a year, Ohio's Environmental Protection 
     Agency projects that the annual capital expenditures for Ohio 
     utilities alone would exceed $730 million a year.
       The added expenditures would boost utility rates for Ohio 
     ratepayers and consumers by as much as 17 percent in some 
     areas, and would force an average increase of 7 percent 
     throughout the Buckeye State.
       Ohio manufacturers also are in a bind.
       G&S Titanium, a company in northeast Ohio, desperately 
     needs to expand to satisfy the demands of its current 
     customers. Right now, the company uses the most modern 
     technology available and complies with all Federal and local 
     environmental standards.
       It won't be able to comply with the new EPA rules for one 
     simple reason: The technology for complying with the 
     standards isn't available. As Ohio Gov. George V. Voinovich 
     pointed out to a House Commerce Committee hearing last month:
       These proposals are creating a catch-22.
       ``If they (businesses) do not expand,'' the Republican 
     governor said, ``They risk losing customers and market share. 
     If they expand and the new standards are implemented, they 
     risk being out of compliance.''
       Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who long has fretted about the 
     erosion of America's manufacturing base, has urged President 
     Clinton to recall the EPA's new clean-air standards and 
     correct their major defects.
       Failure to do so, Dingell observes, will permanently 
     alienate working men and women--and doom the Democratic 
     Party`s chances of retaking the U.S. House and Senate.
       Officials at the U.S. Departments of Commerce, 
     Transportation and Agriculture, as well as at the Small 
     Business Administration, have echoed Dingell''s warnings in 
     private meetings with White House officials.
       Nevertheless, EPA Administrator Carol Browner adamantly 
     defends the proposed new rules--particularly her agency's 
     attempt to regulate particulate matter (soot) as tiny as 2.5 
     microns (about one-fortieth the width of a human hair).
       This despite the fact that the Federal Government's own 
     figures show that some 83 percent of all such emission are 
     generated by ``fugitive dust,'' which comes from such benign 
     sources as farmers plowing fields, animals with dandruff and 
     pollen released from flowers, weeds and other fauna.
       Most of the remaining 17 percent of particulate matter 
     comes from burning wood, stoked-up barbeques and idling 
     internal-combustion engines that already have reduced 
     emissions by more than 98 percent.
       Since the Nation's ambient air quality has improved 
     exponentially over the past two decades, one can only wonder 
     about the EPA's motives in pursuing standards that are 
     virtually impossible to meet.
       Rather than voluntarily cut back its staff and budget and 
     earn grateful applause from American taxpayers, the agency 
     apparently has decided to try its hand at regulating areas 
     and items that literally defy regulation.

     

                          ____________________