Copyright 2000 Federal News Service, Inc.
Federal News Service
March 28, 2000, Tuesday
SECTION: PREPARED TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 2508 words
HEADLINE:
PREPARED TESTIMONY OF ROBERT PERCIASEPE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR OFFICE OF AIR
AND RADIATION U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
BEFORE THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS SUBCOMMITTEE
ON CLEAN AIR, WETLANDS, PRIVATE PROPERTY AND NUCLEAR SAFETY
BODY:
Senator Inhofe and Members of the
Subcommittee, I am pleased to be here today to present the accomplishments of
our air and radiation programs, describe the future outlook for those programs,
and discuss the Clinton-Gore Administration's FY 2001 budget request for these
programs. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank you and the
Committee for working with us toward our collective goal of protecting public
health and the environment.
First, I will highlight the impressive
health and environmental results that the Clean Air Act is achieving as well as
discuss the solid progress we are making through our voluntary climate change
and indoor air programs.
In 1990, Congress passed the Clean Air Act
Amendments with overwhelming support, setting ambitious air pollution reduction
goals.
Since then, we have achieved unprecedented success in cleaning
our nation's air and protecting public health. We have achieved these successes
through rulemakings, voluntary measures, market mechanisms, State partnerships,
and stakeholder negotiations. In November 1999, EPA submitted a new Report to
Congress which estimates the benefits and costs of the 1990 Amendments. There
are significant uncertainties associated with any benefit-cost analysis of clean
air programs, requiring scores of methodological decisions and assumptions. Many
of the uncertainties involved in this study are the subject of continuing
discussion within the economic and policy analysis communities and within the
Administration. Reflecting many key uncertainties, the new study estimates that
the year 2010 Title I through V benefits which can be expressed in dollar terms
may range from 240 billion dollars more than costs to 1 billion dollars less
than costs. However, the Primary Central estimate in the study shows net
benefits of 83 billion dollars, indicating that the benefits of the 1990
Amendments exceed the costs by 4 to 1. As President Clinton himself stated when
it was released: "This report further demonstrates that public health and
environmental benefits can be achieved along with economic benefits and this
Administration will continue to work aggressively to protect the air we breathe,
the water we drink, and the land on which we live."
From 1970 to 1997,
U.S. Gross Domestic Product has grown by 114 percent, the U.S. population by 31
percent, and the number of miles traveled by on-road vehicles (VMT) by 127
percent. Yet, the aggregate emissions of criteria pollutants -- ozone
precursors, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and lead -- are
down 31 percent. Emissions are down significantly for each of these pollutants
except for nitrogen oxides (NOx), which are up somewhat. Lead emissions have
been cut 98 percent. Most of these declines in emissions can be attributed to
implementation of the Clean Air Act.A few prominent examples of Clean Air Act
successes since 1990 include the following: In the Acid Rain Program, electric
utilities have cut sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions by 22% or 3.5 million tons and
have cut rainfall acidity in the East by up to 25%. When Title IV is fully
implemented in 2010, EPA's study projects that SO2 and NOx reductions will
provide substantial health benefits (mostly from a reduction in annual cases of
premature mortality). Acid Rain control will also produce significant benefits
in terms of improved visibility, lowered surface water acidity, and less damage
to high elevation forests and materials. The U.S. and other developed countries
have phased out production of many of the chemicals most harmful to the
stratospheric ozone layer, including CFCs. We have estimated that once
completed, the worldwide phaseout will prevent approximately 295 million skin
cancers in the U.S. through 2075.
- We have issued air toxics rules, or
MACT Standards, that we believe will cut industrial air toxics by 1.5 million
tons a year, 8 times the amount achieved in the previous 20 years. The air in
our cities is cleaner than it has been in a long time. Nationally, average air
quality levels have improved for all five of six common pollutants subject to
air quality standards. There have been dramatic cuts in the number of areas
violating these standards. Our cars and fuels are cleaner. The average new car
is 40 percent cleaner (in terms of emissions) than in 1990; over 30 percent of
the nation's gasoline is now reformulated gasoline. In December 1999, we set the
tightest emissions standards ever for cars, gasoline and the first standards
that apply equally to sport utility vehicles (SUVs) and minivans. The projected
costs to meet these standards, about $100 for cars,
$200 for light-duty tracks, and two cents per gallon of gas,
are far outweighed by the projected public health benefits. Estimated benefits
include the long term yearly avoidance of premature deaths, cases of bronchitis,
and significant numbers of hospital visits, lost work days, and multiple
respiratory ailments (especially affecting children). Through EPA's voluntary
climate change programs, the American people have enjoyed a significant return
on their investment. For every dollar spent by EPA on its voluntary energy
efficiency programs, the private sector and consumers have invested more than
$15 in new more efficient technologies; businesses and
consumers have saved over $70; and greenhouse gases have been
reduced by more than half a ton of carbon equivalent. As you can see, we have
made impressive progress. Based on EPA's findings in the November study, we
believe that the health benefits from reductions in ground-level ozone,
particulate matter, and associated pollutants (especially from reductions in SO2
emissions) achieved under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments will continue to
grow. For example, the study's Primary Central Estimate of benefits for the year
2010 is: 23,000 fewer incidences of premature mortality, 20,000 fewer cases of
chronic bronchitis and 47,000 cases of acute bronchitis, 22,000 fewer
respiratory related hospital admissions, 42,000 fewer cardiovascular hospital
admissions, and 4,800 fewer emergency room visits for asthma, 91,000 fewer
incidence-days of shortness of breath and 1,700,000 fewer asthma attacks, and
4,100,000 fewer lost work days and 31,000,000 fewer days with restricted
activity due to air pollution-related illness.
With respect to climate
change, if the EPA programs were funded at the President's request, we can
deliver sizeable additional benefits across the U.S. By 2010, we estimate that
we can realize: an additional 335 million metric tons of carbon equivalent of
cumulative
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions; an additional
$35 billion in energy savings to families and businesses, and
an additional 850,000 tons of NOx emissions reductions.
To achieve these
benefits, we must aggressively pursue our programs. Will Rogers once said, "Even
if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there." To
keep pace with increasing VMTs, economic growth, etc., there's still more work
that needs to be done.
But before I move on to the discussion of the FY
2001 Budget Request, I'd like to give you a few highlights of our agenda for FY
2000 which is already well under way.
We continue to work on attaining
the existing air quality standards, especially the 1-hour ozone standard. We are
also laying the groundwork for our new standards - the 8-hour ozone standard,
the PM2.5 standard, and our regional haze program. We work with the Office of
Research and Development and others to reduce the uncertainties associated with
air pollution science.
We also intend to propose more stringent
standards for large trucks and buses. As we did with the recent rule for cars,
SUVs, and minivans, we will consider these vehicles in conjunction with their
fuels as a system. These standards could become effective in 2007.
While
the Acid Rain Program has gotten off to a great start in reducing SO2 and NOx
emissions, Phase II of the Program only began this year. It is essential that we
maintain sufficient funding if we are to realize the full emission reductions of
10 million tons in SO2 and 2 million tons in NOx by 2010.
While
industries have made great strides in reducing the large quantities of toxic air
pollutants, we still need to keep moving forward with issuing MACT standards for
the additional major sources. We also are beginning the early stages of
implementing the second phase of the air toxics program, targeting specific
problems for evaluation such as elevated risks in urban areas, deposition of air
toxics into the Great Lakes, mercury emissions, and residual risks from already
controlled sources. We are also moving beyond stationary sources to focus on
potential increased controls for air toxics from mobile sources. We expect to
finalize a rule on mobile air toxics in December 2000.
In our radiation
programs, we are finalizing environmental radiation protection standards for the
Yucca Mountain radioactive waste disposal site in Nevada. In
1998, we certified that the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico complies
with EPA's safety standards for radioactive waste. Radioactive waste is now
being shipped to the WIPP.In our indoor air programs, much of our effort is
focused on the government-wide asthma initiative to better educate and inform
parents and children about asthma. We specifically focus on indoor triggers of
asthma like environmental tobacco smoke.
We are actively carrying out
the voluntary programs that are part of the President's Climate Change
Technology Initiative (CCTI). Along with the CCTI programs which include EPA's
contribution in the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (a multi-agency
research effort to produce highly fuel-efficient vehicles), we continue to
explore strategies that lead to both criteria pollutant reductions and
greenhouse gas reductions. We have learned that our voluntary programs like
Energy Star are successful in helping reduce both greenhouse gases and
conventional pollutants. And this can often work both ways smart measures to
reduce SO2 or NOx can often reduce greenhouse gases as a by-product.
All
this leads me into describing our request for FY 2001. The Office of Air and
Radiation is requesting a total of $831 million. Of that total,
$308 million is for grants to states, tribes and localities.
$523 million is for the operating programs.
A highlight
of our request is the Clean Air Partnership Fund. We proposed the Fund for the
first time last year and we still believe it provides an innovative, yet common
sense, approach for speeding reductions in pollution. The President's Budget
requests $85 million for the Partnership Fund. The Fund will
support demonstration projects by cities, states and tribes that (1) control
multiple air pollution problems simultaneously; (2) leverage the original
federal funds; (3) facilitate meaningful public involvement, and (4) provide
examples that can be replicated across the country. By stimulating innovative
technology and policies, the Clean Air Partnership Fund will help communities
provide clean, healthful air to local citizens.To address global warming we are
requesting $227 million. We are proposing an increase of
$124 million over the FY 2000 enacted budget for the third year
of the Climate Change Technology Initiative. Under this budget, EPA will expand
its partnership efforts with businesses, organizations, and consumers to achieve
greenhouse gas reductions by taking advantage of the many opportunities to
reduce pollution and energy bills by fostering energy efficient programs,
products, technologies, and cost-effective renewable energy. As a result of work
already under way, EPA efforts with FY 2001 funding are projected to: reduce
greenhouse gas emissions annually by over 66 million metric tons of carbon
equivalent, offsetting about 20% of the growth in greenhouse gas emissions above
1990 levels; reduce other forms of pollution, including reducing NOx emissions
by about 170,000 tons; reduce U.S. energy consumption from projected levels by
more than 70 billion kilowatt hours, providing $9 billion in
energy bill savings to consumers and businesses that use energy-efficient
products; and contribute to developing a new generation of efficient and low-
polluting cars and trucks.
The opportunity to save on our nation's
$500 billion annual energy bill over the next decade while
reducing air pollution is tremendous. The opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions is also large. We currently expect that more than half of the nation's
greenhouse gas emissions in 2010 will come from equipment that will be purchased
over the next ten years. We shouldn't forego this opportunity by not funding
expanded energy efficiency programs.
For air toxics, we are requesting
$23 million, an increase of $6.6 million over
FY 2000 operating plan levels, to address the final round of MACT standards by
the May 2002 "hammer date"-- the date by which states must determine controls
for such sources if EPA has not acted.
The request for the Montreal
Protocol Fund totals $21 million, an increase of
$9 million over the FY 2000 enacted level. The funding to the
Protocol is dedicated to paying our dues to the fund and to reduce accumulated
arrearage.
To strengthen our relationships with our state and tribal
partners, this budget provides $215 million in state and tribal
grants to help implement solutions to air pollution problems locally. Of these
resources, a $5 million increase will be targeted to regional
planning bodies to combat the problem of regional haze - one of the most obvious
effects of air pollution. Additionally, $8 million is provided
to our state and tribal partners to design, implement, and maintain radon
programs.
In late February, Administrator Browner went before the
Committee on Environment and Public Works and talked about the Agency's budget
as a whole. One of the things she talked about was the magnitude of special
projects that Congress "earmarked" in EPA's budget. For our office that amount
totaled over $17 million. Without going into the validity of
each individual project, I believe that the earmarks do direct money away from
the Agency's core programs.
These are the highlights of our Fiscal Year
2001 request and of our accomplishments since the passage of the Clean Air Act
Amendments. By providing our children, our sensitive populations, our native
populations and our community as a whole with cleaner air, both indoors and
outdoors and improved quality of life, this budget maintains the
Administration's dedication to the protection of public health and the
environment. It ensures that the Environmental Protection Agency will continue
the impressive progress of the past decade in cleaning our nation's air.
I look forward to discussing with you now, or as the year progresses,
our budget request specifically or any of our policy positions. Thank you.
END
LOAD-DATE: March 29, 2000