Lee Terry: “I am amused, humored by the opposition, all hailing from our greatest cities in the United States, urban areas. I would…”

“I am amused, humored by the opposition, all hailing from our greatest cities in the United States, urban areas. I would like to read a note that I received from a rancher in Nebraska and our Nebraska cattlemen representing those who are affected: The bill is needed to provide regulatory certainty to rural areas. We applaud the recent statement from Administrator Jackson that EPA does not intend to propose revisions to the current dust standard. The reality is, however, that regulations often change from the proposal stage of a rulemaking to the final. For example, in 1996, EPA proposed to remove the PM10 24-hour standard altogether, only to bring it back in the final rule. And in 2006, EPA proposed to exempt agriculture dust, but that exemption also disappeared in the final rule. Second, under the Clean Air Act, EPA must review this standard every 5 years. That means we could face the same challenges again in just 5 short years. Also, citizen lawsuits could be brought that could result in a court deciding farm dust should be regulated. H.R. 1633 is the only way to provide regulatory certainty to farmers, ranchers, and rural residents. Nuisance dust occurs naturally in rural areas. The type of ``nuisance dust'' that this bill would exempt from Federal regulation occurs naturally in rural areas, especially in arid and windy areas of the Plains and western States. This dust does not stay in the air but falls out quickly.…”