ITEM 5 DRAFT LETTER TO CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION FROM CAC JURISDICTIONS. Intended audience:

Transcription

1 Intended audience: Senator John Cornyn (Texas, R) Senator Ted Cruz (Texas, R) Representative Michael McCaul (District 10, R) Representative Bill Flores (District 17, R) Representative Lamar Smith (District 21, R) Representative Roger Williams (District 25, R) Representative Blake Farenthold (District 27, R) Representative John Carter (District 31, R) Representative Lloyd Doggett (District 35, D) Dear [Senator or Representative]: [Jurisdiction name] is asking you to consider introducing some targeted updates to the Clean Air Act (CAA) in response to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA s) proposal to lower the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. The provisions of the CAA related to the NAAQS have not been updated in 25 years, and some limited changes in the statute could provide significant regulatory and economic relief for Central Texas without sacrificing environmental protections. On November 25, 2014, the EPA proposed lowering the ozone NAAQS from parts per billion (ppb) to a range of ppb. EPA is under a court order to finalize its proposal no later than October 1, Central Texas has already reached ozone levels that would be in compliance with a 70 ppb standard and is likely to be in attainment of a NAAQS set as low as 65 ppb within the next five years. However, the region s ozone levels may not reach 65 ppb soon enough to avoid EPA designating Central Texas nonattainment if it sets the standard that low. Being designated nonattainment would mean decades of new regulations for Central Texas, but would not speed up attainment of the new NAAQS. The Clean Air Act also requires EPA to complete its next ozone NAAQS review no later than five years after it finalizes its current review. A nonattainment designation in 2017, followed by a new ozone standard in 2020, would make it difficult to determine which combination of short-term and long-term ozone reduction strategies would be most beneficial. While [jurisdiction name] is not taking a position on the appropriate level of the ozone standard and is not seeking a delay in EPA finalizing its proposal, there are some things that Congress could do to help reduce some of the burdens that implementing this standard could cause for Central Texas. Page 1 of 5

2 1. Allow for extra time between when EPA finalizes the new ozone standard and when areas are designated as nonattainment. Under the CAA, EPA is required to issue designations within two years after finalizing a standard. Allowing for a few more years between these two milestones would likely enable Central Texas and many other parts of the country to avoid a nonattainment designation for the new ozone standard, even if EPA sets it at the lowest end of the proposed range of ppb. 2. Reduce the decades-long burdens of transportation conformity requirements for newly designated ozone nonattainment areas. This would solve one of the biggest problems associated with a nonattainment designation without postponing actual attainment of the standards. 3. Allow EPA a longer period of time to complete its next ozone NAAQS review. This would enable EPA to perform a more thorough review than what can be achieved in five years, as statute currently requires, and would significantly reduce the regulatory uncertainty for areas like Central Texas. Since Congress enacted the CAA in 1970, the NAAQS review process and the processes for implementing these standards have become more complex and timeconsuming. Local and state efforts to ensure transparency and due consideration of various pollution control strategies can be a time-consuming process, and the full effects of implementing a NAAQS are not realized for at least five years after a new standard is set. By requiring EPA to complete reviews of the NAAQS once every five years, EPA is prevented from accounting for the air quality benefits from the previous review in determining whether and how to further revise the NAAQS. Furthermore, developing and considering quality-assured, peer-reviewed, and valid health and public welfare effects research takes significant amounts of time. Therefore, a longer period time between NAAQS reviews would enable EPA to perform a more thorough review than what can be achieved in only five years. It would be premature for EPA to complete another ozone NAAQS review in The following chart shows the improvements in ozone levels in Central Texas over the past 15 years and the projection for where ozone levels are expected to be in 2017, when EPA is expected to make its nonattainment designations. These trends, combined with voluntary efforts undertaken by the region, have been enough to keep ozone levels just below what would have triggered nonattainment designations for the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards. Based on the requirement in the CAA that EPA must designate nonattainment areas no later than two years after it finalizes a new standard, it likely will designate areas for the new standard in 2017 based on ozone levels. Page 2 of 5

3 8-Hour Ozone Averages (parts per billion) ITEM 5 DRAFT LETTER TO CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION FROM CAC JURISDICTIONS Central Texas Compliance with Ozone Standards Monitored, and Projected Under the Clean Air Act, EPA would likely use data to designate areas as nonattainment Standard 2008 Standard Proposed 2015 Standard Design Value The Central Texas Clean Air Coalition (CAC) submitted a comment letter to the EPA on the proposed ozone NAAQS that included ideas on how the agency might be able to address the region s concerns within the current statutory language. These ideas included: 1. Changing the way compliance is calculated for the proposed standard; 2. Designating areas as unclassifiable or deferring designations by a year if ozone levels are close to the proposed NAAQS; 3. Fully addressing ozone pollution transported across regional and state boundaries; and 4. Adjusting the requirements for nonattainment areas to better account for voluntary emission reduction efforts like those in Central Texas. We are hopeful that the CAC s comment letter might help persuade EPA to find ways to implement its proposed ozone standards without causing undue burdens for areas like Central Texas. However, the EPA Administrator may feel constrained by prior court cases limiting the EPA s discretion. Congressional action may be the only way that Central Texas can avoid the decades of problems that a nonattainment designation could create for the region. Central Texas is doing its part to stay in attainment of federal ozone standards, regardless of where EPA sets them. As a member of the CAC, [jurisdiction name] has been part of a long-standing, and awardwinning voluntary effort to stay in attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The CAC is an air quality committee of elected officials from both parties, representing local governments from the five counties that make up the Austin-Round Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Page 3 of 5

4 Williamson Counties. The CAC s primary goal is to keep Central Texas in attainment of federal ozone standards. In support of this goal, the CAC develops, adopts, and implements regional air quality plans. In 2014, the EPA awarded the CAC a Clean Air Excellence Award for Community Engagement in recognition of these efforts. The CAC and the EPA have a good relationship and EPA has offered significant support to the region for our efforts. As a member of the CAC, [jurisdiction name] believes that our region s experience with voluntary air quality planning provides us with a unique perspective and puts us in a situation that the CAA as written 25 years ago was not designed to address. Like any piece of legislation that arises out of a particular set of historical circumstances, adjustments to the CAA might be warranted now in order to better account for the significant progress the 1990 CAA Amendments have achieved in reducing ozone levels. We believe that the legislative solutions identified in this letter could provide significant relief for Central Texas and many other regions around the country without sacrificing cleaner air, and could achieve bipartisan support. We also believe that bipartisan, narrowly tailored legislation could stand a chance of passing Congress and being signed by the President. We believe that the most likely window of opportunity for action along these lines would be prior to EPA s court-ordered October 1, 2015, deadline for finalizing the proposed ozone NAAQS. Waiting until after EPA sets the NAAQS could eliminate some of the incentives for compromise that currently exist, prior to EPA finalizing the standard. As representatives of our community, we understand the need to protect public health. We think the points made above show a path to providing areas like Central Texas significant relief from the more problematic aspects of implementing the proposed NAAQS without changing the underlying structure of the CAA and without sacrificing cleaner air. We welcome any questions or discussions you or your staff may wish to have on this topic and stand ready to provide you with any information you may require in order to pursue such legislation. If you do have questions or wish to discuss these issues with us, please contact Andrew Hoekzema, Air Quality Program Manager for the Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) in Austin, Texas, at (512) , or at ahoekzema@capcog.org. Signed: Page 4 of 5

5 CC: Administrator Gina McCarthy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chairman Bryan Shaw, Ph.D., P.E., Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Executive Director Betty Voights, Capital Area Council of Governments Commissioner William Piña, Commissioner, Bastrop County Judge Ken Schawe, Caldwell County Commissioner Ray Whisenant, Hays County Judge Sarah Eckhardt, Travis County Commissioner Ron Morrison, Williamson County Council Member Don Zimmerman, City of Austin Mayor Ken Kesselus, City of Bastrop Council Member Stephen Thomas, City of Cedar Park Council Member Chris Cannon, City of Elgin Mayor Debbie Holland, City of Hutto Mayor Lew White, City of Lockhart Mayor Mike Hendricks, City of Luling Mayor Jeff Coleman, City of Pflugerville Mayor Alan McGraw, City of Round Rock Mayor Daniel Guerrero, City of San Marcos Page 5 of 5