On the recordJune 8, 2016
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I strongly disagree with my friend from Texas. The proposed changes to the NAAQS review cycle would put lives at risk by permanently delaying updates to limits on not just ozone, but on every dangerous criteria air pollutant: carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen oxides, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. Mr. Chairman, the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to review the science every 5 years and to update the standards when necessary to protect the public health. It is important to note that the EPA isn't required to update the NAAQS every 5 years, but to just review the science. The 2015 ozone standard, Mr. Chairman, reflects strong scientific evidence regarding the harmful effects of ozone on human health and the environment; including more than 1,000 new studies. Scientists, Mr. Chairman, are constantly researching the impacts that air pollution have on human health, and have consistently discovered that ozone, particle pollutants, and other types of air pollution covered by the Clean Air Act are, indeed, harmful in more ways and at lower concentration than previously understood. Mr. Chairman, this bill would ignore all this scientific work and evidence by doubling the review period from 5 years to 10 years, delaying the review of science and potentially necessary updates to the standard. Mr.…





