Tag: ground-level ozone

GOP Governors: EPA Agenda Harms Job Creation, Energy Security

Twenty Republican governors have signed a letter to President Obama detailing how the Environmental Protection Agency’s aggressive overrearch runs contrary to the President’s stated goals on common-sense regulation, energy and job creation. It’s a good, tough letter.

Excerpt:

The President’s Executive Order on January 18, 2011, emphasized the need for predictability and certainty when it comes to federal regulations. However, the EPA is simultaneously developing and implementing a number of regulatory and policy initiatives with extremely short and converging compliance deadlines within the next five years which will significantly impact the energy industry, increase burdensome costs to consumers, and hurt the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers. An abbreviated list of these new regulations and policy uncertainties includes:
1. Federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from industrial, manufacturing and electric generation facilities;
2. Promulgation of new Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards for industrial boilers.
3. Promulgation of stringent National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone, SO2, NO2, and particulates.
4. Proposed new MACT and cooling water intake structures requirements for power plants.
5. Multiple policy interpretations by the Agency related to American coal mining have resulted in the withdrawal of over 50% of pending applications, a 9% approval rate for those remaining, and an unprecedented revocation of an existing permit.
6. Continued uncertainty over whether Coal Combustion Residue will be regulated as a hazardous waste even though it does not meet any of the characteristics of a hazardous waste.
7. The impending EPA study which threatens to usurp state regulation of hydraulic fracturing.

The governors have identified issues that the National Association of Manufacturers also regard as priorities. Right now the EPA is working against common-sense rulemaking and the development of America’s abundant energy reserves.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


Circumnetting Energy, Drilling, the EPA, Administrator Jackson

Washington Post, “EPA chief Lisa Jackson perpetually on Capitol Hill hot seat“:

Republicans say that studies such as one by two manufacturers’ groups projected that 7 million jobs would be lost in the decade beginning in 2020 if their client organizations are forced to pay up to $1 trillion to meet the EPA’s ozone standards, said Alicia Meads, director of energy and resource policy for the National Association of Manufacturers. Meads also cited a study by the Council for Industrial Boiler Owners that said 16,000 jobs would be lost for every $1 billion spent to comply with EPA boiler regulations.

“We consider it an overreach,” Meads said. “This administration has been extremely aggressive in environmental regulations, and it’s very hard for our members to keep up with them.”

Wall Street Journal, “EPA Tangles with New Critic: Labor“:

WASHINGTON—The Obama administration’s environmental agenda, long a target of American business, is beginning to take fire from some of the Democratic Party’s most reliable supporters: Labor unions.

Several unions with strong influence in key states are demanding that the Environmental Protection Agency soften new regulations aimed at pollution associated with coal-fired power plants. Their contention: Roughly half a dozen rules expected to roll out within the next two years could put thousands of jobs in jeopardy and damage the party’s 2012 election prospects.

House Energy and Commerce news release, March 8, “Upton, Inhofe Question Process for Reconsidering EPA’s Ozone Standards“: (continue reading…)

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


Message to EPA: Jobs are at Stake

Just two years after the Environmental Protection Agency last imposed new, more costly regulations to limit economic activities that might contribute to ground-level ozone, the EPA is at it again. We can understand the political impetus: The Bush Administration was weak on the environment, and the Obama Administration is strong, so we’re going to double down.

But in the case of new ground-level ozone limits, the Bush Administration was neither weak nor strong, it was just wrong. The scientific basis for new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) was thin and the economic consequences serious.

So the current EPA is making doubly bad policy at a time when President Obama is elevating obs and reasonable regulation Administration priorities.

Unfortunately, the proposed NAAQS is slipping below the radar amid all the other regulating the agency is forcing onto the economy. Therefore, the National Association of Manufacturers has developed a website with the message, “Tell the EPA to Stop Putting Jobs at Stake.” It features an online petition and a sample letter to express one’s views to the agency. As the website explains:

The Agency has issued a proposal that would change the current ozone standard from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range from 70 ppb to 60 ppb. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), setting the standard at 60 ppb would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1 trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. Furthermore, the EPA is setting this new standard just two years after announcing the 75 ppb standard in 2008.

This is another example of the Agency’s overregulation and will put high-paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

The EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Panel will meet twice in the next few weeks to discuss its technical recommendations to the Agency on the new standard. This is a great opportunity for manufacturers to make their voices heard on another regulation that will cost jobs. Please sign your name to the petition below to tell the EPA not to adopt a new, more stringent ozone standard and to give the current standard time to work.

The deadline for the petition is NOON EST on Monday, February 7.

New jobs figures are due out this Friday, with the unemployment rate anticipated to be 9.5 or 9.6 percent. Are jobs really important? If so, the EPA can stand strong and abandon its plans to impose economy-harming ozone regs.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)


Manufacturers, Virginia’s Governor: EPA Rules Work Against Jobs

Roll Call has published an op-ed by Gov. Bob McDonnell (R-VA) and Jay Timmons, president of the National Association of Manufacturers, citing the EPA’s pending limits on ground-level ozone and industrial boiler emissions (the Boiler MACT rule) as an example of excessive regulation that slows economic growth and damages jobs creation.

From “Proposed EPA rules could hurt job growth“:

Manufacturers have also been alarmed by two proposals that have generated less public attention but could still wreak economic damage: lower limits on ground-level ozone and emissions controls on industrial boilers.

New rules for ozone would supersede lower emission limits adopted just two years ago, with compliance costs that EPA acknowledges could near $90 billion annually by 2020. Democratic and Republican senators and governors from industrial states have criticized this rulemaking as a “financial and regulatory burden” that would “create additional barriers to job creation and industry growth.”

Industrial boilers play a critical role in our economy, generating power for companies large and small, as well as municipalities and universities. The EPA has proposed dramatic new rules that skirt cost-benefit analysis and would be impossible for many existing facilities even to meet. The forest products industry, which makes extensive use of boiler-generated energy, would be hit especially hard, facing estimated costs of $7 billion.

None of our international competitors confronts standards such as these, which will only drive more jobs offshore. Industry studies demonstrate that hundreds of thousands of jobs may be at risk if this rule is adopted. The Administration’s own Commerce Department has produced a study that concludes the draft rule could cost the United States 40,000 to 60,000 jobs a year.

Since the column was written, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted the EPA a one-month extension to issue the final Boiler MACT rule (deadline is now February 21, 2011). The EPA had requested a 15-month extension to re-propose the rule to consider new information about the achievability of the regulations.

 The court order is available here, and the opinion is available here.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


On the Tax Bill, Regulations and the Like

NAM’s policy perspicatators are quoted in the news today about goings on at the White House and Congrss.

NPR, “Obama Seeks Common Ground With Business Leaders:

[Polls] show the overall tax-cut deal is popular. It extends Bush-era tax cuts for everyone, including the wealthy, and provides a one-year reduction in the payroll tax that workers contribute to Social Security. That payroll tax cut, along with an extension of unemployment benefits, will put an extra $160 billion into people’s pockets over the next year. Assuming that money doesn’t all stay in their pockets, more consumer spending could result.

That would be welcome news to Dorothy Coleman, vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

“Everyone would like demand to increase,” she said. “That would be a sign of economic growth. So some of the provisions in there, the lower tax rates, are going to help consumer demand.”

Portfolio.com, “Tax-Cut Deal Headed for a Vote

Changing the estate tax provision could jeopardize Republican support for the bill, however, since the lower estate tax rate was part of the deal they negotiated with Obama. Most business groups contend that high estate rates and low exemptions hurt family-owned businesses.

The estate tax is “a huge issue” for many manufacturers, said Dorothy Coleman, vice president of tax policy for the National Association of Manufacturers.

Bloomberg, ”Obama Meeting CEOs Today Shows Business President Who Delivers Their Gains“:

Within the past week, the administration announced delays in new rules to regulate industrial boilers and ozone. That showed a willingness to listen to business complaints that new regulations could impose unnecessary costs, according to the National Association of Manufacturers.

“We’re hopeful these are signs that there is going to be a newly invigorated growth agenda,” said Aric Newhouse, senior vice president for government relations at the Washington-based group.

Might the President reinforce that point about regulatory restraint today? Might he?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


Circumnetting the Pretty Good News, All Things Considered

The National Association of Manufacturers is mentioned in all these stories.

Bloomberg, “Mine-Safety Measure Giving US Regulator More Powers Fails to Pass House.” The vote on H.R. 6495 was 214-193, failing to get the two-thirds vote required under suspension.

Bloomberg, “EPA Delays US Clean-Air Regulation Until July to Seek Scientific Review” The story reports on the EPA’s decision to ask the court for a delay in the effective date for new rules governing ground-level ozone. See EPA information here.

The Hill  (blog),EPA delays tougher air pollution rules

Bloomberg,Obama Tax Deal Wins Praise From Business-Lobby Critics

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


A Political Delay Won’t Diminish Economic Damage of Ozone Rules

The Environmental Protection Agency in October postponed its announcement of new federal ozone limits, avoiding the politically damaging reports before Election Day. Yet another report about the EPA’s plans to crack down on economic activity would not have helped the Administration’s prospects.

The EPA’s proposed rule could drop the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone from the 75 parts per billion limit established by the Bush Administration in March 2008 to as low as 60 ppb.

The economic impact of the EPA’s proposal is one of the most under-reported stories in the United States today. Thankfully, at least one newspaper, The Sarasota Herald-Tribune, has taken advantage of the EPA’s delay to examine what the rules could mean to the local economy.

We could quibble with the article, but at least the paper is trying to explain the impact of the EPA’s threat. From “Air rules could force changes here“:

New federal air quality rules, expected in the coming weeks, will likely trigger a wave of emission controls on industries in Southwest Florida, and the possibility of motor vehicle inspections….[snip]

Southwest Florida’s air quality barely meets current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards, and with those thresholds set to rise, the region will be forced to put better curbs on air pollution.

Or businesses could relocate to a region that doesn’t face the additional limits. Or move to another country all together.

The Herald-Tribune cites the joint National Association of Manufacturers and American Petroleum Industry’s study conducted by the Manufacturers/Alliance MAPI, “Economic Implications of EPA’s Proposed Ozone Standard (ER-707).” The study reported that reducing the ozone standard to 60 parts-per-billion could destroy 7.3 million U.S. jobs and reduce the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by $687 billion in 2020. (More from API.)

And even more than the Bush Administration’s limits, the EPA’s latest proposal has thin scientific justification and could even be counterproductive when it comes improving the health of the U.S. populace.

The EPA’s jobs-killing plan is likely to be announced in January, perhaps during one of the slow news periods to avoid a sharp political backlash. In the meantime, other papers could follow the Herald-Tribune’s example and try to inform their readers about the impact of the ozone rules. The NAM stands ready to help with those explanations.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


EPA’s Ozone Regulations Would Choke the Economy

The Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy report we cited below , “The Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms,” did not take into account the Bush Administration’s 2008 ozone regulations (reducing the ambient air quality standard to 75 parts per billion), nor the Obama Administration’s proposed regulations, which could lower the standard to 60 ppb.

It’s safe to say those regulations will be expensive. Bet small business gets hit the hardest.

From The Oil and Gas Journal, “Proposed ozone standard would devastate US economy, API warns“:

WASHINGTON, DC, Sept. 21 — A US Environmental Protection Agency proposal to reduce the national primary ozone standard to 60 ppb from 75 ppb would devastate the US economy by forcing most of the country to meet stringent standards which now are imposed of its most heavily populated areas, the American Petroleum Institute warned.

“We all know that EPA cannot consider economics in considering standards,” Howard Feldman, API’s director of regulatory and scientific affairs, said in a Sept. 21 teleconference with reporters. “But it cannot ignore them. There’s a real cost and real significance to this.”

The story builds on the NAM-API co-sponsored report, “Economic Implications of EPA’s Proposed Ozone Standard (ER-707. The analysis by Donald A. Norman, Ph.D., Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI economist, concluded:

  • GDP would be reduced by $676.8 billion in 2020 (in 2010 dollars), an amount that represents 3.6 percent of projected 2020 GDP in the baseline case (2.5 percent annual GDP growth);
  • Total U.S. job losses attributable to a 60 ppb ozone standard are estimated to rise to 7.3 million by 2020, a figure equal to 4.3 percent of the projected 2020 labor force;
  • Together, annual attainment costs and reduced GDP in 2020 would total $1.7 trillion.

API’s Feldman raises another an angle we hadn’t considered: Unreasonably stringent ozone rules represent yet another move again U.S. energy security, including the tremendous promise shown by natural gas development of such areas as the Marcellus Shale: “Clearly, natural gas drilling is increasing across the country, and we expect that to continue…As more of it moves into areas such as Pennsylvania which would not meet these new standards, it would require extra costs and controls. The states also would have to offset these emissions.”

Earlier posts: (continue reading…)

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


Imperial EPA: Speeding Up Ozone Rules, Slowing Down Jobs

The EPA is so aggressive on so many regulatory fronts, otherwise major issues tend to get shortchanged in the media, so kudos to The Wall Street Journal for covering the agency’s proposed ozone regs, being pushed before the new 2008 regulations even had a chance to go into full effect.

Monday’s WSJ reported, “New Smog Proposals From EPA Draw Fire“:

A proposed crackdown on smog by the Environmental Protection Agency is fueling resistance from businesses groups concerned about costs, Republicans who say it’ll be a drag on the economy—and some heartland Democrats engaged in tough election battles this fall.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has dramatically stepped up the pace and scope of regulatory activity since 2009. She has pushed sweeping rules to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions linked to climate change, challenged coal companies over their mining practices, and questioned the methods energy companies are using to drill for natural gas.

Now Ms. Jackson is proposing to redefine what constitutes unsafe levels of ground-level ozone, a primary ingredient in smog.

The Journal cites two letters from elected officials alarmed by the EPA’s excesses. One comes from a bipartisan group of Senators led by Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH). The letter, available here, notes that the EPA normally revises the National Ambient Air Quality Standards on a five-year basis, if not longer. The Senators argue.

However, the Agency has proposed to significantly tighten the standards that were adopted less than two years ago, with no new data prompting EPA’s reconsideration. We believe that changing the rules at this time will have a significant negative impact on our states’ workers and families and will compound the hardship that many are now facing in these difficult economic times. (continue reading…)

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)


The EPA’s Ozone Rule, Regulating Against Seven Million Jobs

The Environmental Protection Agency’s drive to increase regulation of economy activity, starting with its proposed greenhouse gas regulations, is so expansive and so aggressive that much is what it’s doing is escaping real scrutiny. But the EPA’s agenda is a jobs-killer and the public needs to know about it.

Take the EPA’s latest move to lower ozone limits, regulations that a new economic analysis says could destroy more than seven million jobs.

Starting about four years ago, the EPA sought to reduce the national standards for ground-level ozone, a basic component of smog. In March 2008, the Bush Administration imposed a standard of 75 parts per billion, putting hundreds of counties out of compliance and adding billions of dollars of compliance costs to manufacturers, retailers, government and others.

Then, this January, even before those new, very strict and very expensive standards went into full effect, the EPA proposed even more stringent ozone regulations – with a huge impact on the economy and jobs.

The economists at the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI have just released a study that quantifies that impact, and the results are shocking.

The new report, “Economic Implications of EPA’s Proposed Ozone Standard,” concludes that reaching the proposed level of 60 parts per billion would:

  • Impose annual compliance costs of $1 trillion between 2020 and 2030. One trillion dollars!
  • And total U.S. job losses attributable to a 60 ppb would be 7.3 million by 2020. That’s more than 4 percent of the labor force projected for 2020.
  • Big states with large manufacturing sectors would be the hardest hit. The ozone regs would cost Texas 1.7 million jobs, Louisiana, 983,000 jobs, California, 846,000 jobs, etc.

Unemployment right now is 9.6 percent, and yet the EPA is moving forward with regulations that will crush economic growth and hiring. The environmental arguments for the regulations are debatable, at best, but the agency pushes on.

The Obama Administration has made job creation a priority, the centerpiece of its economic proposals. But at the same time, the Administration’s EPA is proposing regulations that would destroy seven million jobs!

You cannot credibly claim to be for new jobs and then lead a regulatory campaign that eliminates existing ones.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)


A Manufacturing Blog

  • Categories

  • Connect With Manufacturers

            
  • Blogroll