The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed rule to limit surface-level ozone pollution might not have the health benefits the agency claims, according to nearly two-dozen doctors-turned-lawmakers.
In a letter to EPA administrator Gina McCarthy, the lawmakers, all Republicans, said there has been no correlation between falling ozone levels and the asthma rate in the United States. That “highlights important questions concerning the validity of EPA’s conclusions” about its ozone restrictions, they said.
{mosads}The letter also questioned the methodology behind ozone research the EPA used to justify the rule, saying it relies on test groups too small to get accurate results.
“These studies’ findings are again far too limited to be appropriately applied to the general U.S population, or, for that matter, to groups of sensitive individuals in the population,” the lawmakers, led by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), wrote.
The EPA intends to finalize more stringent standards for surface-level ozone concentration by this fall, reducing the allowable level from 75 parts per billion to 65 or 70 parts per billion.
“The science clearly tells us that exposure to sufficiently elevated ozone levels poses a real threat to our health, especially to growing children, older Americans, those of us with heart or lung conditions, and those who are active or work outside,” Janet McCabe, the acting assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, told a House subcommittee last week.
“The administrator’s proposal to strengthen the standards is designed to better protect children and families from the health effects of ozone pollution.”
Republicans say it will be very expensive for communities and the private sector to comply with the rule. Job losses associated with cutting ozone pollution, lawmakers said in the letter, will have their own impact on Americans’ health.
“If the true intent here is to improve public health, then the agency should factor how its ozone proposal affects every aspect of human health — including impacts from unemployment, poverty and reduced access to health insurance,” the lawmakers wrote.
“Public health should not be viewed in a vacuum, but rather considered holistically, mindful of the correlation between health and the economy.”
Read the GOP lawmakers’ letter:
06.17.15 Congressional Physician Ozone Letter FINAL