Skip to Navigation
Skip to Content

Support PSR!

Make a difference in the challenge to confront global warming and prevent nuclear war and the development and use of nuclear weapons.

Donate Now »

Take Action

Please voice your support for a strong, health-protective rule by submitting your comment to the EPA today.

New EPA Ozone Standard Falls Short, Fails to Adequately Protect Public Health

March 18, 2008

(Washington, DC) In a final rule announced yesterday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tightened the national air quality standard for ozone, but not to the level recommended by the Agency’s independent science advisors and a host of health and environmental organizations. Ground-level ozone, commonly known as smog, is the nation’s most pervasive air pollutant.

“Once again, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson has shown that he is willing to put politics before protecting the health of the American public,” said Dr. Michael McCally, Executive Director of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR). Exposure to ozone has been linked to a range of health effects, including wheezing, coughing, reduced lung function, asthma attacks, heart attacks, stroke and premature death. Children, the elderly and individuals suffering from respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema and chronic bronchitis are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of ozone. “While the revised standard is a slight improvement, millions of Americans will continue to breathe dangerous levels of ozone,” Dr. McCally added.

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is obligated to establish national air quality standards at levels that protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations, with an adequate margin of safety. The current ozone standard, effectively set at 0.084 parts per million (ppm), will be lowered to 0.075 ppm under the new rule announced by Johnson yesterday. Last spring, however, EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) unanimously recommended that the standard be set at a level between 0.060 and 0.070 ppm, while the Agency’s Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee urged EPA to set the standard at the low end of this range (0.060 ppm) in order to protect the health of sensitive children. PSR joined 15 major medical societies and public health organizations in supporting an ozone standard of 0.060 ppm.

In recent weeks, EPA received tremendous pressure from both the White House and industry lobbyists to scale back the new ozone standard because of concerns about implementation costs. When he announced his final decision on the level of the new standard, Administrator Johnson also declared his intention to seek changes to the Clean Air Act that would allow for the consideration of economic costs when setting air quality standards. “The Clean Air Act makes very clear that science, and only science, should dictate our nation’s air quality standards. Unfortunately, EPA decided to ignore both the law and the science in setting a new ozone standard that fails to adequately protect public health,” Dr. McCally said. “That Administrator Johnson is now attempting to undermine the Clean Air Act itself in order to conform to the wishes of industry and the White House is absolutely reprehensible,” he added.

Share

EmailFacebookTwitter
Share on Facebook
Cancel
Share on MySpace
Cancel
Share on Twitter
A short URL will be added to the end of your Tweet.

Cancel
Share on LinkedIn
Cancel

Action Alerts

More action alerts»

Resources

  • Annual Report 2012

    PSR is pleased to present its 2012 Annual Report to our members and other stakeholders. Read more »

  • Toxic Chemicals in Our Food System

    What chemicals are in the food we eat? Chemicals are used in every step of the process that puts food on our table: production, harvesting, processing, packing, transport, marketing and consumption and can be dangerous to our health. Read more »

  • Fracking: Harm on the Farm

    Chemical exposures that harm farm animals and wild animals raise concern about health risks for people living near fracking sites, as the animals use the same water and breathe the same air as humans. Another, indirect concern for human health also exists: in multiple known cases of chemical exposure, cows continued to produce dairy and meat for human consumption, although it remained untested for chemical contaminants. Read more »

In the Spotlight

  • July 17, 2014
    Our Best Opportunity to Cut Climate Change
    We need you to take action now! Tell the EPA that its proposed rule to cut carbon pollution from power plants Is vitally important and on the right track – but can be strengthened.