U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

46–427 CC WASHINGTON : 1998

S. HRG. 105–355

OZONE AND PARTICULATE MATTER RESEARCH

ACT OF 1997

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON

CLEAN AIR, WETLANDS, PRIVATE PROPERTY AND

NUCLEAR SAFETY

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

S. 1084

A BILL TO ESTABLISH A RESEARCH AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR

THE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR OZONE AND

PARTICULATE MATTER AND TO REINSTATE THE ORIGINAL STANDARDS UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

OCTOBER 22, 1997

Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works

(

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington DC 20402
(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island, Chairman

JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia

ROBERT SMITH, New Hampshire

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri

TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas

WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama

MAX BAUCUS, Montana

DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, New York

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey

HARRY REID, Nevada

BOB GRAHAM, Florida

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut

BARBARA BOXER, California

RON WYDEN, Oregon

JIMMIE POWELL, Staff Director

J. THOMAS SLITER, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CLEAN AIR, WETLANDS, PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND

NUCLEAR SAFETY

JAMES M. INHOFE, North Carolina, Chairman

TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas

WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama

BOB GRAHAM, Florida

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut

BARBARA BOXER, California

(II)
(III)

CONTENTS

Page

OCTOBER 22, 1997

OPENING STATEMENTS

Baucus, Hon. Max, U.S. Senator from the State of Montana .............................. 6

Letter, Position on S. 1084, EPA Administrator Browner ............................ 29

Boxer, Hon. Barbara, U.S Senator from the State of California ......................... 3

Inhofe, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma .................... 1

Article, Smog Map Technology Is Launched .................................................. 34

List, supporters of S. 1084 ............................................................................... 50

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 49

Sessions, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama ............................. 5

Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming .......................... 13

WITNESSES

Abbott, Ande, assistant to the international president, International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers, & Helpers,

Fairfax, VA ........................................................................................................... 12

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 127

Grumet, Jason, executive director, Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use

Management (NESCAUM), Boston, MA ............................................................ 14

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 130

Martin, James A., vice president, Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., on

behalf of the American Bakers Association, Chambersburg, PA ..................... 8

Letter, supplementing testimony .................................................................... 122

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 121

Sharp, Adam, assistant director of governmental relations, American Farm

Bureau Federation ............................................................................................... 10

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 124

Smith, Thomas, president, National Coalition of Petroleum Retailers, Griffin,

GA .......................................................................................................................... 19

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 146

Thurston, George D., associate professor, Department of Environmental Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY ....................... 17

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 138

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

S. 1084, Ozone and Particulate Matter Research Act of 1997 ............................. 40

Articles:

Air Pollution’s Impact on the Weather ........................................................... 123

Smog Map Technology Is Launched ................................................................ 34

Letter, Position on S. 1084, EPA Administrator Browner ................................... 29

List, supporters of S. 1084 ...................................................................................... 50

Statement, Associated Builders and Contractors .................................................. 148
(1)

OZONE AND PARTICULATE MATTER

RESEARCH ACT OF 1997

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1997

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CLEAN AIR, WETLANDS, PRIVATE

PROPERTY, AND NUCLEAR SAFETY, Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:38 a.m. in room

406, Senate Dirksen Building, Hon. James M. Inhofe (chairman of

the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senators Inhofe, Sessions, Thomas, and Boxer.

Also present: Senator Baucus.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Senator INHOFE. The hearing will now come to order.

Today’s hearing will examine the Breaux-Inhofe bill, S. 1084,

which we call the Ozone and Particulate Matter Research Act of

1997. The legislation was introduced as a result of the new clean

air standards for ozone and particulate matter promulgated by the

EPA on July 17. And in the House we have a companion bill. It

is H.R. 1984. This bill is worded essentially the same, with some

modest changes in the $25 million that would be set aside for ozone

research.

Senator Breaux and I thought it was necessary to introduce this

legislation because the EPA ignored the tremendous opposition to

these new standards. Those who oppose the standards include everyone from the Governors, the U.S. Conference of Mayors—and I

used to be on the board of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and it’s

one certainly that cannot be accused of being a Republican organization—National League of Cities, National Association of County

Officials, National Conference of State Legislators, and local government officials.

The Farm Bureau, Farmers Union, Cattleman’s Association,

American Corn Growers, fertilizer and other groups, small business

community, including NFIB, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Black

Chamber of Commerce, Small Business Survival Committee, and a

number of State environmental directors too long to articulate

here.

In total, there have been over 3,200 letters, resolutions, and comments expressing concern with these standards. While I don’t want

to take time to read the names of all the organizations who have

sent these letters, I will distribute copies of an index. This is the
2

index of these letters, Senator Sessions. And we’re talking about

thousands and thousands. Of course, we have many of them up

here on the table. In addition, a number of organizations have written in support of this legislation being considered today.

I would also like to introduce these letters into the record, showing more than 30 organizations supporting it. These are the letters

that we have up here on the table.

[The index of letters is printed at the end of the hearing record:]

The House version currently has 191 co-sponsors, and the Senate

bill has a bipartisan list of nine co-sponsors. I’m pleased to say that

as of yesterday we added an additional 12 Senators, which means

we now have 21 co-sponsors for the Senate bill.

Before we get to the testimony today, I’d just like to briefly outline what the bill does. The bill establishes an independent panel

to be convened by the National Academy of Sciences to prioritize

the research needs on the health effects of particulate matter. This

step would help bring consensus to any new standards proposed by

the EPA in the future. So we’re dealing not just with what has

happened to us since the past—in the last 11 months, but also

what could happen in the future. So it would make the process a

little bit more professional and predictable.

With the recent standards, the EPA relied on epidemiological

studies and research performed by former EPA employees. The National Academy of Sciences would help restore credibility to this

process.

Next, in order to ensure that the Federal dollars are spent on the

research priorities of the independent panel, the legislation establishes a Particulate Matter Interagency Committee to coordinate

the activities of Federal agencies engaged in particulate matter research. This committee will be composed of eight different a agencies and departments. This is not a new committee, as such, but

a coordination of those efforts that are going on currently.

The EPA will use this research, in addition to private research,

to review the air quality criteria through the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee—CASAC—set up statutorily. This review must

be completed no earlier than 4 years after the enactment of this

Act.

In addition to this science research, the EPA is authorized to require State implementation plans in order to establish a particulate matter monitoring program. During this research, the monitoring period, the original standards for ozone and particulate matter

will be reinstated and shall not be revised until scientific review is

completed. The legislation also directs the National Institutes of

Health to begin a research program to study the health effects of

allergens in asthmatics, particularly in regard to urban inner

cities. One of the biggest holes in the EPA’s proposal was identifying the true causes of respiratory problems in inner-city children.

Finally, the legislation authorizes $100 million to carry out the

provisions, with 25 million of that set aside for ozone research. This

plan follows the advice of three of the four past CASAC chairs who

testified before this committee. It concentrates on understanding

the science.

For the farmers, the small businessman, the unions, the mayors,

and the Governors, it provides continuity. Today they are con-
3

cerned at the EPA’s implementation schedule. They realize it can

be challenged and thrown out by the courts, and they need stability

while they try to implement the 1990 standards. They say these

will not be implemented until 6 or 9 years, in accordance with what

came from the EPA, but the EPA knows well and everyone here

knows well that there are lawsuits that could come forward and

challenge the fact we have double standards.

I would like to remind everyone what Mary Nichols, the former

EPA Assistant Administrator for Air, said in our last hearing. This

is a quote. ‘‘Under the President’s implementation schedule, the

new standards will not save any lives over the next 5 years.’’

Therefore, the Breaux-Inhofe bill will provide the necessary research, monitoring, and stability for the American people without

endangering any lives.

Senator Baucus, do you have an opening statement.

Senator BAUCUS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Actually, I’ll defer to my colleague from California, Senator

Boxer.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much.

Mr. Chairman, I wanted to thank Senator Baucus for his understanding. I have to be introducing a nominee over at the Judiciary

Committee at 10:00 am.

Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to you and Senator Breaux,

I’m dismayed to see that the Subcommittee on Clean Air would

give serious consideration to a bill that, in my opinion, will jeopardize clean air and the public health.

S. 1084, the Ozone and Particulate Matter Research Act, would

block the EPA from protecting the public health by blocking the

new ozone and particulate clean air standards which have been in

effect since September of 1997. This bill turns the clock back and

reinstates the old, less-protective standards. S. 1084 would deny

the American public the health protections they deserve, violating

the most fundamental requirement of the Clean Air Act.

The EPA estimates that this bill will result in at least 60,000

premature deaths—this bill that we’re considering—300,000 additional cases of chronic bronchitis, 1.5 million asthma attacks, and

12.5 million work days lost.

It seems to me for the Committee on the Environment and Public

Works to be considering such a bill is a cruel irony.

EPA has a statutory mandate to protect the public health with

an adequate margin of safety. Those are the words in the law.

Mr. Chairman, the very same arguments that we’ve heard today

against new clean air standards we heard before the Clean Air Act

was approved in 1970, an Act that was signed into law by then

President Richard Nixon. And I have some of those quotes. I will

not go into them today, but you couldn’t tell the difference.

When EPA announced the new ozone and particulate matter

clean air standards in July of this year, it did so after an exhaustive scientific review, which indicated that current standards do

not adequately protect public health.
4

Under S. 1084, the EPA could not revise the ozone and particulate matter standards for at least 4 years, until further research

and review by a new National Academy of Sciences panel and a

new Inter-Agency Committee on Particulate Matter, a virtual duplication of the EPA effort, which resulted in the new standard.

Are we going to keep redoing studies that we’ve already done

until we find an answer every single person likes? I certainly hope

not. We need to deal with reality , Mr. Chairman.

When the EPA issued the new ozone and particulate matter

standards earlier this year, it did so after an exhaustive scientific

and public review process. The EPA analyzed thousands of peer-reviewed studies and presented its recommendations to an independent scientific advisory body, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.

This committee concluded that EPA’s standards for ozone and

particulate matter needed to be strengthened, and I think it is important to note that the committee came out with a range—a range

that it recommended—and the EPA took the middle of the road on

this. And the panel included scientists from General Motors. They

all agreed something had to be done, and they came out with a

range, and the EPA hit that right down the middle.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that, as Senators, we have no greater

duty and responsibility than to protect the health and safety of the

American people, and I look at that as an economic issue. I reject

the argument that there’s a conflict between clean air and the

economy. I believe, if you look around the world, what you’ll see in

countries where the air is filthy dirty and they don’t have any protective laws, economic growth grinds to a halt. It’s very simple: if

you can’t breathe, you can’t work.

So we need to move forward, it seems to me, with these standards, and I think blocking them will have significant adverse impacts on the health of Americans, especially our children and the

elderly. And we all know that when a society is judged, it’s judged

the way it treats the most vulnerable among us.

The current annual average concentration of fine particulate

matter in southeast Los Angeles County may be responsible for up

to 3,000 deaths annually and more than 52,000 incidents of respiratory symptoms, including 1,000 hospital admissions. Young

children constitute the largest group at high risk from exposure to

air pollutants. They breathe 50 percent more air by body weight

than the average adult. In California, alone, there are over six million children under the age of 14, and approximately 90 percent of

them live in areas that fail to meed State and Federal standards.

How are our children being affected? Studies show health effects

ranging from 20 to 60 percent loss of lung capacity. It isn’t fair, Mr.

Chairman, that a baby born in a certain part of the county has less

lung capacity than another. Despite this, representatives of industry claim that a 30 percent loss of lung capacity is not really a

health effect because it’s only a temporary, reversible loss in lung

function. Tell that to a mother whose asthmatic child has to stay

home or visit the emergency room a regular basis. Tell that to a

mother whose teenage son suffers from continuous coughing, throat

irritations, chest pain, and shortness of breath.
5

And what about the potential of causing permanent damage? We

have studies of lab animals which indicate long-term exposure to

ozone causes permanent damage to lungs.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to

have the floor to cast my strong disagreement with this bill. You’ve

been very generous in giving me this time. I think we must work

together to ensure that we don’t turn back the clock on the

progress we’ve already made, and I think we should move forward

with the EPA’s recommendation.

Thank you very much.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Senator Boxer. Senator Sessions.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really want to

express my appreciation to you for your intensive interest in this

important issue, and for coming forward with a positive solution to

a situation I’ve become very troubled with. For the past 9 months,

as a new member of this Senate and a new member of this committee, I have looked anxiously and waited anxiously to find a kind

of scientific basis for the kind of significant regulations that we

are—that EPA proposes to impose on America. I have not found

those.

Like you, I hear from the people in my State, from the business

community, from the mayors in the State, from the county commissioners in the State, and from our Department of Environmental

Management in our State. They have serious reservations and really objections to the proposals as they are.

Your idea of giving more intensive scientific study is the right

approach. There was not a witness that said we had the kind of

complete data that they would like to have to make these important decisions.

On February 5, for example, the Subcommittee on Clean Air held

a hearing, and I questioned Dr. Schwartz, a member of the EPA’s

own Scientific Advisory Committee, the CASAC committee, about

the Birmingham study—Birmingham, Alabama. Dr. Schwartz had

conducted that, showing increased mortality on high particulate

matter days.

A subsequent peer-reviewed study using the exact same data as

Dr. Schwartz’ study showed that when humidity was a factor in the

model, no statistically significant effect could be observed.

I don’t know the right scientific answer, but EPA admits relying

on Dr. Schwartz’ study as a basis for their new standards.

It was previously mentioned how many lives would be lost. I

have been very concerned, troubled, and really offended that use of

numbers in what I would consider a promotional tactic that would

create fear in America.

EPA announced these standards in late 1996. They stated 40,000

lives could be saved by implementation of the particulate matter

standards, 40,000. On February 12, the EPA Administrator appeared before the committee and testified that 20,000 deaths, 1⁄2 of

them, could be prevented by implementation of these standards. In

April of this year, after an outside analyst discovered an error in

the estimates, the agency again lowered its numbers to 15,000 pre-
6

mature deaths. Many of these are very elderly and in severe health

conditions. In May the same analyst who first discovered the error

in EPA’s estimates found additional errors, which brought the estimates of premature deaths to under 1,000.

These are not good numbers that we’re dealing with. This is

what you are looking forward to to answer, and I think we need

to do that.

The CASAC votes were split. If you add up the numbers—as I

recall their votes, those numbers really totaled in opposition to the

standards adopted by EPA if you added them up. Every vote was—

virtually every vote was severely split.

The cost of these standards will be extremely high. Our air is

getting better. Why asthma attacks are going up we don’t know,

but ozone is going down. At a time when ozone is going down, asthma attacks are going up. You are very wise, I think, to do some

research into why that health condition is occurring.

I support this approach. I think it is a reasoned, modest, and

moderate alternative to a proposal of the Environmental Protection

Agency that I think is not justified, and I support you and appreciate the leadership of you and Senator Breaux and others who put

this package together.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Senator Sessions. I appreciate your

attendance, too. This is the sixth hearing that we’ve had on this

particular subject, and you’ve been here for all six. I appreciate

that very much.

Senator BAUCUS.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MAX BAUCUS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA

Senator BAUCUS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I’d like to point out, first, it has been almost one year since the

EPA released its proposal to strengthen the national ambient air

quality standards for ozone and particulate matter, and since that

time we’ve heard from just about everyone interested in this issue.

You mentioned, Mr. Chairman, this subcommittee has had six

hearings. I might say that both the House and the Senate together

have held 24 hearings to examine the science, the economics, the

health aspects of the new standards, and we listened to scientists,

industry folks, farmers, ranchers, environmentalists, health professionals, State and local governments. And I might add, too, that in

the end the EPA also listened, because the final standards that

went into effect on September 18 were changed. They were changed

from what EPA initially proposed.

But, more importantly, EPA acknowledged the potential difficulties in implementing the new standards.

As a result of our hearings and other comments, it is clear that

the Agency is working hard to fashion a sensible approach to implementation. I don’t think anyone can dispute that.

Today we will hear about recently published research that supports EPA’s decision to set new standards. We will learn about new

technologies that will lower the cost of improving air quality. That’s

a familiar pattern.

Air quality standards have always been met with claims of economic demise. But then technology catches up, innovative pro-
7

grams are implemented, further research bolsters the initial decision—and I might add, in our economy, the drive to improve the

bottom line always results in ways to reduce costs. And in the end,

costs are a fraction of the initial claims and everyone breathes

cleaner air.

That is exactly the case with the emissions trading system set

up in the 1990 Clean Air Act. Compliance costs are now one-tenth

initial estimates. That is not to say we should be making decisions

without sufficient information. We need to continue the high-caliber research that has been a tradition of the United States.

In fact, EPA’s funding bill for fiscal year 1998 contains almost $50 million for particulate matter research, to the credit of Senators Bond and Mikulski, but I do not think we need this bill to

authorize more research. Existing Clean Air Act already provides

EPA with the authority it needs to conduct the necessary studies.

What is much more troubling to me, though, is that S. 1084

would revoke the ozone and particulate matter standards that just

became effective. Furthermore, it prohibits EPA from revising the

standards for at least 4 years, even if new research uncovers additional health problems resulting from ozone or particulate matter

air pollution.

With all due respect to you, Mr. Chairman, and the sponsors of

the bill, I think that’s the wrong approach. Instead, I believe that

we must continue to protect public health. Implementing the current standards is a fair and cost-effective manner, and a fair and

cost-effective manner is the best way to achieve the goal.

I hope we can work together in a bipartisan fashion to ensure

that it’s done right. And I want to underline that I think that all

of us here do want to improve our air quality standards. They are

good in this country.

Mr. Chairman, I don’t see very many Americans heading for the

door to go live in other countries because their costs are so high

in this country to comply or because of all the problems in this

country. It’s just the opposite. We need to learn about pollution of

other countries. It’s because those countries have not undertaken

the immense effort that is required to try to find air quality standards to assure that people in those countries breathe clean air.

They just don’t do it. They don’t because they just don’t make the

extra effort.

We, in our country, have made an extra effort, and I think it’s

incumbent upon us not to take the easy way—which is to criticize—but, rather the hard and right way—which is to work together to do this right. Thank you.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Senator Baucus.

I now ask our witnesses to take their places at the table.

And, while they’re coming forward, as the Chair I’ll give you an

overview of how we’ll proceed at this hearing.

We do have a time constraint. We have to be out of the room at

11:30. It should not take the 2 hours.

We have six witnesses who will be testifying today. I also mention that, while some of the members of the subcommittee are not

here, they will be coming in and out and the staffs are here at this

hearing, both majority and the monitory, who will be monitoring

and reporting back to the members.
8

The witnesses will be allocated 5 minutes to give an opening

statement. There will be lights in front of you—red, yellow, green.

I think we all know what that means. And we’d ask you to try to

comply with those time limitations.

Following the 5-minute comments by the witness, I will then ask

any member of the subcommittee if they would like to ask questions. They will have a round of questions and answers.

I think we’re ready to begin. Let me just introduce all six in the

order that they will be making presentations: Mr. James A. Martin

is the vice president of Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., on behalf of the American Bakers Associate in Chambersburg, PA. In

just a minute I will read a letter from Senator Santorum, who regretted he couldn’t be here today.

We’ll have Mr. Adam Sharp, assistant director of governmental

relations, regulatory affairs, American Farm Bureau Federation.

Mr. Andy Abbott, assistant to the international president, the

International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders,

Blacksmiths, forgers, and Helpers, in Fairfax, VA.

Mr. Jason Grumet, executive director, Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management in Boston, MA.

Dr. George Thurston—I welcome Dr. Thurston back. He has been

here with us before—associate professor, Department of Environmental Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New

York.

And Mr. Thomas Smith; president, National Coalition for Petroleum Retailers in Griffin, GA.

We that, please allow me to call on Mr. James Martin to present

his testimony. I will convey greetings from Senator Santorum. His

letter states every nice thing that he could say about you, Mr. Martin, and he’s very pleased that you are here today, and I’m sure

he’ll see you during your visit.

Mr. Martin.

STATEMENT OF JAMES A. MARTIN, VICE PRESIDENT, MARTIN’S FAMOUS PASTRY SHOPPE, INC., ON BEHALF OF THE

AMERICAN BAKERS ASSOCIATION, CHAMBERSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA

Mr. MARTIN. Good day, and thank you for the opportunity to be

here. I am Jim Martin, an owner of Martin’s Famous Pastry

Shoppe, Inc. We have bakeries in Chambersburg and

Shippensburg, Pennsylvania. Ours is a family business started in

1955 by my parents. Perhaps you’ve seen our Martin’s famous potato rolls in our grocery store bread aisles.

Today I’m speaking for myself and the members of the American

Bakers Association. The American Bakers Association represents

80 percent of the wholesale baking business, which includes small

businesses like ours and the companies with national brand names

that you may know. Bakeries were captured by the Clean Air Act

because the natural process of yeast fermentation used to make

bread and rolls produces ethanol, an alcohol, which is considered

volatile organic compound. Ethanol from bakeries is non-toxic, low

reactive, probably eaten by the bacteria in the atmosphere.

The American Bakers Association strongly supports Senate 1084.

This bill will ensure that sound science and good planning have the
9

time to develop before costly and potentially inappropriate controls

area required. The baking by has already spent $28 million to comply with existing requirements. We estimate that the banking industry will

spend $236 million to implement the new standard. The equipment

to control bread aroma from a bakery costs about $500,000 to install and costs between $35,000 a year and $100,000 a year to operate. That’s about $12,000 per ton of VOC controlled, not the $1,400

per ton estimated by the USEPA.

The American Bakers Association has worked with the bakers in

each State and with the State officials to develop reasonable rules

to bring States and industry into compliance. The States have

worked hard to implement the Clean Air Act under demanding and

often changing EPA policies. We offer our compliments to Pennsylvania and many of the other States where hard work has put

the most cost-effective control requirements in place. However,

State officials are struggling to further reduce emissions and are

being forced to look at smaller and smaller sources—that is, small

businesses.

Bakers are a low-volume, low-profit-margin business. Let me give

an example how a small baker might be affected by control requirements.

Imagine Joe’s Bakery in your State. Joe is operating a white

bread bakery he inherited from his father. The bakery has been in

business for 80 years, with a profit margin of 1.7 percent. His bakery, like others, is labor intensive, providing jobs at relatively high

pay rate and supporting many families in the neighborhood. No one

is getting rich, but everyone is being paid and the local area has

good, fresh-tasting bread.

His potential of emissions trigger the control requirements. Joe goes to his bank and asks for a loan for the $500,000 to install controls and cut his profit margin by 24 percent. The bank denies his

request, which is good business practice for the bank. If he can find

a buyer, he can sell his bakery, or Joe can close. Sadly, some bakeries have closed during the implementation of the current standard.

Now, let me share with you the situation at our bakeries. We

emit enough ethanol to trigger control requirements. Stack testing,

permitting, engineering reports, communications, and costs associated with investigating new technology have exceeded $250,000 to

date in our bakeries. Our engineers calculate that adding a control

device will increase our production energy consumption by 50 percent per package of rolls. However, rather than purchase the control equipment, we have chosen to limit our production and the

growth of our business. This means our ability to serve the region

with a maximum variety of product or to respond quickly to

changes in consumer taste and demand is limited. That’s not my

understanding of free enterprise, and I have wondered, ‘‘Is less

bread on the table a good trade for no measurable improvement in

air quality?’’

I and the bakers I represent urge you to pass Senate 1084 to

make clear legal statements about the funding of the research and

science and timing of the implementation of the air quality standard.
10

Please help us do the right thing to protect the air and the earth.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak, and I’ll answer any

questions.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. Martin.

Senator INHOFE. Mr. Sharp.

STATEMENT OF ADAM SHARP, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, REGULATORY AFFAIRS, AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION

Mr. SHARP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to

provide testimony for this important hearing on S. 1084.

I’m Adam Sharp, assistant director of governmental relations for

the American Farm Bureau Federation here in Washington, D.C.

I’m also a partner in my family’s farm in southeastern Ohio where,

along with my three brothers, my father, and my grandfather, I operate a dairy farm and diversified crop farm. Today I am representing the American Farm Bureau Federation, the Nation’s largest

general farm organization, with more than 4.7 million member

families.

The Farm Bureau supports Senate bill 1084 for many reasons,

but foremost because it will allow the necessary time for the agricultural community and EPA to gain a more accurate understanding of agricultural emissions, how much we emit, and to what extent the air quality standards will impact our industry.

My comments focus primarily on PM2.5 standard. There has been

and continues to be a tremendous amount of conservation activity

by farmers and ranchers across this country. These activities reduce wind erosion of the soil, which in turn provides cleaner air.

Farmers are cleaning the air and should get credit for those activities; however, agriculture is concerned because EPA lacks actual

measurements of what agriculture emits in the form of fine particulate. One estimate is that 34.3 percent of the primary fine particulate matter can be attributed to agriculture and forestry, and others suggest as low as 5 percent.

EPA is finally acknowledging what we have been telling it: that

agriculture is not a major emitter of this pollutant. However, nothing has been done to date to correct faulty documentation that

over-estimates agricultural sources or solidifies Administrator

Browner’s promises that agriculture will not be impacted. The Administrator’s promises have done little for our concerns because

States decide who will be regulated, not her.

I quote The Honorable Larry Combest, chairman of the House

Agriculture Subcommittee on Forestry, Natural resources, and conservation. He says—and we agree—that we don’t have the research

yet to know whether we can actually attain these standards, how

much it will cost the agricultural industry and the consuming public, and how much agriculture activity actually contributes to air

pollution problems.

Let me focus on an actual situation farmers in California already

face in regard to present PM10 serious nonattainment area for

central and southern California. Agriculture in other areas of the

country may face the same or similar situation when dealing with

the new particulate matter PM2.5 standard.
11

The emission inventory for agriculture used by EPA has proven

to have many flaws for PM10. Inaccurate estimates of the number

of times a farmer drives his tractor over a field is one major example—eight times for alfalfa, 13 times for rice, twice for rangeland.

But probably the most blatant example of an inaccurate inventory

was the initial emission inventory for combustion engines used to

drive irrigation pumps. The original inventory estimated nitrogen

oxide or NOX emissions, a precursor of PM, at 600 tons per day

for all the pumps in the San Joaquin Valley. This would have been

the highest emission category for NOX emissions in the valley, exceeding all the cars and trucks, which together only made about

300 tons per day.

Driven by agricultural inquiries, a new study based on interviews with farmers determined that the NOX emissions for these

pumps was only 32 tons per day—600 down to 32.

We have only begun to address agriculture’s concerns with PM10

measurements, many of which are still unaddressed and uncorrected. Considering these discrepancies, it is unimaginable that we

are now again faced with the same problems, only this time with

a smaller particulate matter.

In attempting to resolve some of these agriculture emission issues surrounding PM10 and PM2.5, it became necessary to conduct

a multi-year, multi-faceted air quality study, which is now underway in California. However, it will not be completed for roughly 5

years. S. 1084 would give agriculture the needed time to attain this

important agriculture PM2.5 emissions data.

I want to emphasize that this study is the first comprehensive

study that actually measures instead of estimating agriculture’s

PM2.5 emissions. In order to avoid the mistakes made with PM10, the new PM standard should be delayed until this study and others

like it are completed and before costly implementation activities

begin.

We fear that, despite guarantees, that implementation of this

new standard may come quicker than what has been spelled out.

In conclusion, I want to emphasize that the present approach of

placing a new PM standard before having good scientific data for

fine particulate sources may lead to false agriculture emission estimates again. Agriculture will also see a tremendous amount of indirect impacts from the new standards. Targeted industries such as

utilities, fuel, transportation, chemicals, equipment, and many

more will pass their costs on to their users. One of those is agriculture.

In a study by AUS consultants to be released soon, the net cash

income for all farmers is projected to fall by 10 percent, or $5 billion annually over the first 6 years of implementation of these new

standards. Those are simply indirect impacts. Those are not even

direct.

The agriculture community enjoys breathing clean air as much

as anybody. This committee must continue to demand that the concerns of America’s farmers and ranchers are addressed by the EPA

in order to ensure a continued safe, abundant, healthy, and affordable food supply.

Thank you.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. Sharp.
12

Senator INHOFE. Mr. Abbott.

STATEMENT OF ANDE ABBOTT, ASSISTANT TO THE INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT, THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS, IRON SHIP BUILDERS, BLACKSMITHS, FORGERS, & HELPERS, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA

Mr. ABBOTT. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I have to

apologize up front. I came down with a serious cold yesterday afternoon.

With your permission, sir, I’d like to just enter my statement into

the record and just make a very short verbal——

Senator INHOFE. Yes. All your statement will be entered into the

record in its entirety, and you can make any length of statement

you’d like, Mr. Abbott.

Mr. ABBOTT. Thank you very much, Senator.

The International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, along with all

the other building trades unions, as well as the Mine Workers

Union and many of the other unions, had been very supportive of

the Clean Air Act when it was up for consideration back years ago.

We understood that there was going to be an initial cost, we understood that there were going to be industries that were going to be

economically hurt, and we knew that there were going to be some

jobs at stake. But, overall, providing clean air to the United States

was very important to our agenda. We all felt that for our generation and all generations to come, that clean air was necessary.

Mr. Chairman, we met with EPA earlier this year to discuss

these new clean air standards, I guess I can tell you that the 21

or 22 people that were involved from the labor unions were really

quite stunned by what we discovered from EPA. Their inability to

answer questions and how easily some of their assumptions were

being successfully challenged—EPA initially used the 60,000 premature death figure, and I said, ‘‘Wait a minute. If you’re talking

about asthma’’—and, Mr. Chairman, I’m an asthmatic, myself— ‘‘I

know that you could shut down every combustible, every manufactured source of pollution in the United States, and you would still

have people with asthma and you would still have some people

dying of asthma.’’ Other people are even allergic to the sun, and

I don’t know what you can do about some of these.

When you have a background from nature, I just don’t know

what EPA is going to do about controlling that. But when I asked

EPA about, ‘‘When you made these studies for the PM standard

down to 2.5,’’ I said, ‘‘did you actually analyze the content of these

materials?’’ They said no, that they hadn’t really analyzed them,

they had no idea what it was. I said, ‘‘Well, would it be safe to say

that most of it was from nature?’’ and they said yes.

I become very concerned about that, especially when we start

looking at some of the coastal states, as an example, California, the

Gulf coast, Oregon, Washington, where you have salt that is just

naturally in the air, and all of this starts getting counted against

the PM standards, and all of that is going to be registering on monitors. I mean, 2.5 microns is very, very small, and I don’t know of

any pollen in nature that is smaller than that. Almost everything

is larger.
13

As a result of that, it has been projected that there will be over

800 additional counties that will be in noncompliance.

So we asked the question, ‘‘Well, what happens if you have an

area that is continually not in compliance?’’ EPA said, ‘‘Well, we’re

going to shut down heavy construction projects, we’re going to stop

mowing the gas, we’re going to end barbecues. We’re going to keep

people from burning stuff in their fireplaces.’’ And then they volunteered, well, in some areas—you’ve got the airline industry in Los

Angeles and San Francisco that’s putting hundreds of millions of

tons of pollution in the air every day on takeoff and landings of airplanes I said, ‘‘Well, what are you going to do about that?’’ They

just shook their head. They’ve got no answer for it at all.

Mr. Chairman, there were just so many things as we were going

through this that they could not answer even a little bit of it, and

I was, frankly, stunned. In dealing with EPA in the past, when we

were dealing with the Clean Air Act and the amendments to the

Clean Air Act in 1990, there was no hesitation. Things made sense.

You would go through. There seemed to be substance to what they

were saying, and when you began to challenge them with any

amount of logic in the past they were able to answer it. With these

standards, there is absolutely nothing that we found that we could

support in these standards.

We just feel that, with the effect that this is going to have on

employment, and especially since they’re talking about expanding

NAFTA and everything else, that, among other things, this is just

going to drive more businesses out of the United States.

It’s hard to estimate anything. I mean, you throw out the numbers of jobs lost. Some people have estimated it will be over 1.3

million jobs. Some have estimated higher. A few have estimated

lower. But, in any case, I just don’t think that we should be going

forward with any standards unless they can meet somewhat of a

logic test and meet somewhat of a scientific study, scientific scrutiny.

In dealing with the EPA and the issues that they brought up and

the answers that they gave, Senator, we were very, very disappointed.

I thank you very much, sir.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. Abbott.

Senator INHOFE. We’ve been joined by Senator Thomas from Wyoming. Senator Thomas, we’ve heard from Mr. Martin, who has a

small bakery and is in the bakery industry; and, of course, Mr.

Sharp with the Farm Bureau you’ve met before; and Mr. Abbott

with Boilermakers.

Do you have an opening statement you’d like to offer.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING

Senator THOMAS. I would like to submit it for the record, but

please proceed with this hearing.

Senator INHOFE. All right.

[The prepared statement of Senator Thomas follows:]
14

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF

WYOMING

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing today to discuss S. 1084, the

‘‘Ozone and Particulate Matter Research Act of 1997.’’ This is important legislation

and I want to compliment you, and Senator Breaux, for the leadership you have

taken in pursuing enactment of this initiative.

As most are aware, great uncertainty surrounds the Environmental Protection

Agency’s (EPA) rule to tighten National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

for particulate matter and ozone. Since the committee first held hearings on this

issue, scientists—including those on the EPA’s own Clean Air Scientific Advisory

Committee (CASAC)—have testified that the court-ordered deadline did not allow

enough time for them to adequately examine the rule. We also heard testimony that

more time was needed to conduct additional research.

However, these efforts were thwarted when President Clinton endorsed the standards on July 18, 1997. This was in spite of the fact that more than 250 members

of Congress, 27 Governors, labor groups, the agncultural community and the National Conference of Mayors expressed opposition to the new regulations. Even several of President Clinton’s agencies have expressed serious doubt.

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, the EPA’s regulation ‘‘is

certainly one of the most expensive regulations, if not the most expensive regulation

faced by small businesses in 10 or more years.’’ The Department of Agriculture stated that ‘‘farm groups have expressed concern that the proposed standards may impose significant costs on farmers and agribusiness.’’ The Department of Energy encouraged the EPA to ‘‘retain the current primary ozone standard,’’ and the Department of the Treasury believes ‘‘that many areas cannot achieve the new fine particle

standard.’’

It’s clear, Mr. Chairman, that the scientific evidence for these new standards is

not complete. Under your proposal, an independent panel would be organized by the

National Academy of Sciences to prioritize research needs on the health effects of

particulate matter. It’s my understanding that the EPA would be required to establish PM monitoring programs through state grants, and a Particulate Matter Interagency Committee would be established to coordinate the activities of federal agencies involved in fine particle research. With regard to ozone, S. 1084 takes the necessary steps to further research programs looking at the adverse health effects of

ground-level smog—especially in urban areas. I’m also encouraged that the bill authorizes adequate funding levels to carry out these research needs for the next 5

fiscal years.

This is good legislation; I am pleased to be a cosponsor, and willing to help Senator Inhofe and others pass S. 1084 this year. Let me say, however, that placing

a 4-year moratorium on the EPA’s regulations does not mean we are against a clean

environment. We need to continue to look for ways to improve and protect public

health, but this must be achieved in a balanced manner.

Many uncertainties remain, including the fact that a large number of areas are

having trouble meeting current Clean Air Act standards and may never reach attainment with the adoption of these new regulations. Furthermore, the costs will

be extreme and we need to make sure this initiative will be worth the enormous

price that businesses and individuals will have to bear. I do not believe we should

be heading down a regulatory road before additional research is conducted so we

truly know which pollutants are causing adverse health effects.

We have a diverse panel before us today, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to

their testimony. Thanks again for your leadership and willingness to make the EPA

come to the snubbing post and justify their actions.

Senator INHOFE. All right. Mr. Grumet, you’re recognized.

STATEMENT OF JASON GRUMET, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

NORTHEAST STATES FOR COORDINATED AIR USE MANAGEMENT (NESCAUM) BOSTON, MA

Mr. GRUMET. Thank you very much.

My name is Jason Grumet, and I’m the executive director of the

Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, or

NESCAUM, which for the last 30 years has been representing the

six New England States, New York, and New Jersey in their efforts

to achieve air pollution standards.
15

On behalf of my colleagues, who spend each and every day trying

to implement the Federal air quality standards, I appreciate the

opportunity to join you here today.

I’m going to try to continue Mr. Abbott’s thoughts about logic for

a moment. We reach a different conclusion. The northeast States

strongly support the new air quality standards because we believe

they represent a more rational, logical, and accurate physical reality of the problems that we are trying to address. We think,

moreover, these standards are long overdue, and therefore we are

opposed to S. 1084 and any other effort, for that matter, which

would shackle our programs to 20-year-old science.

What I’d like to do to help you understand this is really touch

on three issues: one, Government’s responsibility to provide the

public with accurate information; second, cost—something that

we’re all concerned about; and, third, equity, an issue of particular

concern to the northeast.

But, just to get started, I need to say a few things about the

standards. The standards do many things. One of the most important things, from our point of view, that the standards do is they

provide a blueprint, essentially a road map for how we can design

our air quality programs.

Anyone who has ever been on a country road on a dark night

with a 20-year-old road map will have some sense of what we think

these new standards do for us right now. They give us a general

direction, but they don’t get us from here to there in the quickest,

most rational way possible, and I’d like to try to explain why.

They’re 20 years old. They’re based on our scientific understanding of the ozone problem derived largely from the Los Angeles air

basin in the 1970’s. They tell us that air pollution is a local problem. Well, we now know it’s a regional problem, stretching hundreds of miles across many States. They tell us that our concern

should be for peak ozone levels and one-hour violations. We now

know that air pollution is a multi-day problem, and the health effects are chronic over several hours at a time.

The old standard also focuses towards VOC controls, the kind of

controls that Mr. Martin was complaining about being very expensive.

Well, we now know, since the National Academy study about 5

years ago, that the real problem is NOX pollution, which, fortunately, is much more cost-effective to control.

So we have a situation in which we are being given a road map

which does not, in fact, diagnose the problem.

In 1970, when these standards were adopted, they were fairly

called a ‘‘partial diagnosis.’’ Carrying the medical analogy forward,

since we think we do public health work, the 1970 standards right

now, frankly, represent air pollution malpractice, and the suggestion that we should go back to those standards deprives us of tools

that will help us achieve air quality in a cost-effective manner.

I’d like to now turn quickly to public information. And I’m going

to ask if you have it to take a peak at attachment A which I included in my testimony.

We believe government has a fundamental responsibility to provide people with accurate information, and one of the most important things the standards do is just that.
16

The map that I included is a map that shows the highest daily

ozone levels every single day for five summers—from 1991 to 1995.

It’s a depiction of chronic exposure to ozone.

Many critics of the standards have told us there’s no threshold

beneath which people are safe. Well, what this map shows you is

that there are dramatic health effects in States right now which

are deemed attainment. Massachusetts, where I’m proud to live, is

deemed a serious ozone non-attainment area, yet the chronic ozone

exposure in Massachusetts is far less than the ozone exposure in

Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Illinois—States that are now told

that they are in attainment.

I suggest to you that this is misleading tens of millions of Americans into believing that they, in fact, are not facing any risks from

air pollution. And to go back to that standard I think would be a

grave mistake.

I want to focus for a moment on cost, because this is something

that we all spend a great deal of time thinking about.

We have heard and Senator Baucus indicated that the worst case

dire projections, the fears of economic ruin that have accompanied

every air quality regulation to date have not been realized. We

posit the same will happen here. Simply put, the new standards

focus us on nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions. These are

emissions which come from two main sources—heavy-duty diesel

vehicles and utilities. These are some of the most cost-effective control options available today. We can achieve the utility controls we

want without adding more than 1 or 2 percent to the residential

electric bill, and, since heavy-duty vehicles have yet to be regulated, we also believe there are very cost-effective measures there,

as well.

The reason that costs are continuously overstated is really threefold: we have worst-case projections, understandably, by concerned

industries; we have a failure to take account for competition; and

a failure to account for innovation.

If you look at attachment C, which I won’t go into, you’ll see that

in each and every instance utilities—gasoline, automobiles—the

costs are dramatically overstated. There’s only one dynamic that

will stop this innovation from bringing these costs down in the future, and that dynamic is uncertainty and delay, and it’s our fear

that that would be the result if S. 1084 became law.

Let me just end by talking about equity for a moment.

Unsurprisingly, the areas with the highest chronic exposure to

ozone also have the highest utility NOX emissions.

If you look at attachment B, you will note that all the States listed have more NOX emissions from their utilities than all eight

northeast States combined. One of the reasons for this is that the

old standards have mislead these communities, these political leaders, and these residents to believe that they don’t have a problem.

They have had no self-interested incentive to reduce their pollution. And we have found that altruism, alone, has not gotten the

job done.

We believe that the new standards will provide people with good,

accurate information, and with that information the political leaders and the residents of the midwest and the southeast will take
17

the same self-interested rational actions we have to cost-effectively

reduce our emissions.

So, in conclusion, we think the new standards provide better information. We think they will provide more cost-effective approaches and more-equitable approaches to air pollution problems,

and for those reasons we support them.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. Grumet.

Dr. Thurston, welcome back.

STATEMENT OF GEORGE D. THURSTON, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE, NEW

YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, NEW YORK, NEW

YORK

Mr. THURSTON. Thank you. I am George Thurston, a tenured associate professor of environmental medicine at New York University School of Medicine. My scientific research involves investigations of the human health effects of air pollution.

I’m also the director of the National Institute of Environmental

Health Sciences’ Community Outreach and Education program at

NYU. A goal of this program is to provide an impartial scientific

resource on environmental healthy issues to decision-makers, and

that’s my purpose in testifying to you here today.

I must take issue with much of the intent of S. 1084 and with

the findings upon which it is based.

First, the new ozone standard will not disrupt or delay ozone reductions, as implied by finding four. Instead, it is S. 1084 that

would increase uncertainty in the marketplace and by regulators,

thereby slowing air quality progress.

Second, findings five and six fail to acknowledge that CASAC

reached a consensus that a PM2.5 standard is needed and that the

ozone standard should be changed to an eight-hour basis, both of

which the EPA promulgated on July 18, 1997.

I really would like to take issue with Senator Sessions’ statement

that there were lots of differences of opinion on the committee, on

all these issues, and that their CASAC vote was split.

I can show you the quote from the closure letter saying that

there was a consensus by CASAC on these two points—the need for

the PM2.5 and the need for an eight-hour ozone standard, as the

new standards reflect.

The revocation of these new standards called for in bill S. 1084

would be unwise and would be inconsistent with the intent of the

Clean Air Act.

Moreover, bill S. 1084 wrongly seeks to fundamentally rewrite

the Clean Air Act by restructuring who decides whether new standards are needed. The existing Clean Air Act requires that EPA review the standards every 5 years and then leaves that standardsetting decision to the Administrator with advice from CASAC.

Bill S. 1084, in contrast, seeks to shift that power to Congress

by imposing a change back to the old ozone and PM standards. To

my knowledge, this would be the first time that the Congress has

intervened to interfere with air quality standards set by the EPA.

The bill also says that the next science review of these standards

may not occur any earlier than 4 years from now, but sets no requirement for the latest that these reviews may occur, which could
18

possibly be interpreted as eliminating the Clean Air Act requirement for every-5-year reviews of these pollutants. These changes

would represent a dramatic and unacceptable change in the Clean

Air Act.

The newly promulgated EPA air quality standards for ozone and

particulate matter are based on sound science and need to be retained if the public’s health is to be adequately protected. The adverse health consequences of breathing ozone or PM are serious

and well-documented, even at levels below the US national ambient air quality standards that were in effect before July of 1997.

This documentation includes impacts demonstrated by controlled

chamber experiments and by observational epidemiology showing

consistent associations between each of these pollutants and adverse impacts across a wide range of human health outcomes.

These adverse impacts include: decreased lung function, a measure of our ability to breathe freely; more frequent respiratory

symptoms; increased numbers of asthma attacks; more frequent

emergency department visits; additional hospital admissions; and

increased numbers of daily deaths.

In previous Congressional hearings, much discussion has centered on New York City hospital admissions effects, but the adverse impacts on hospital admissions are only the tip of the iceberg

of adverse effects associated with PM and ozone pollution.

Indeed, in my testimony and in this table figure that’s included

in my testimony, I show that hospital admissions account for only

approximately .01 percent of all ozone-induced adverse health impacts in New York City. Also, while there are about seven million

persons in New York City, there are a total of some 122 million

persons throughout the U.S. who now live in areas exceeding the

ozone standard and will, therefore, also be benefitted by that new

standard.

Thus, the New York City hospital admissions effects are best

viewed as an indicator of a much broader spectrum of potentially

avoidable adverse health effects being experienced by the public

today as a result of air pollution exposures.

The scientific evidence that has been published since the PM and

ozone criteria documents were written is consistent with a need for

the immediate implementation of the more stringent standards

that the EPA promulgated. Indeed, while the exact causal mechanism—i.e., the smoking gun of the PM mortality association—is not

yet known, there are biologically plausible mechanisms that are

now known—and these weren’t available and weren’t included in

the criteria document—that could account for the associations. For

example, recent animal experiments by Godleski and coworkers at

Harvard University confirmed that exposures to elevated concentrations of ambient PM can result in cardiac-related deaths in

animals.

Epidemiological evidence has also accumulated over recent years,

indicating a role by ozone in daily human mortality, a fact not fully

considered by the EPA.

I’ve attached a list of over 20 studies showing associations between ozone and mortality which were not considered.
19

Thus, it is more clear than ever that important reductions in

public health risk can be achieved by rapidly implementing the

standards recently promulgated by the EPA.

They for this opportunity to testify.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Dr. Thurston.

Mr. Smith.

STATEMENT OF THOMAS SMITH, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL COALITION OF PETROLEUM RETAILERS, GRIFFIN, GEORGIA; ACCOMPANIED BY: JIM DASKEL, GENERAL COUNSEL, NATIONAL COALITION OF PETROLEUM RETAILERS

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I’m Tom Smith, president of NCPR, the chief advocate of the interests of America’s 45,000 mom and pop gasoline retailers across

America, and a Texaco dealer from Griffin, Georgia. And with me

is our counsel, Jim Daskel.

NCPR strongly supports Senate 1084, the Ozone and Particulate

Matter Research Act, and we want to make three major points in

our testimony today.

First, a claim that there is no need for the legislation because the

compliance deadlines are well off in the future is misleading. Without Senate 1084, compliance schedules would be dictated by citizen

suits and sanction threats, because the Clean Air Act mandates

that the states adopt a number of control technologies.

Second, EPA’s claims of a flexible implementation process are

undercut by the statutory mandates and, more importantly, by

EPA’s actions with respect to vehicle IM and SBREFA.

EPA hurts its credibility with statements such as telling the Agriculture Committee that the standards will lead to more ethanol

fuel sales. EPA tried to rewrite the Clean Air Act to mandate ethanol before and got shot down by the court of appeals.

Our third point is that we need Senate 1084 to ensure that we

do not rob Peter to pay Paul. If you do not pass Senate bill 1084,

our members’ limited resources would be diverted from compliance

with the 1998 underground tank regulatory deadline, where they

would most benefit human health and the environment, into ineffective redundancies like stage two vapor recovery.

Let me first talk about the idea that there is no need for the legislation because the compliance deadlines are well off into the future.

Once an area becomes a nonattainment area, the Clean Air Act

forces the States and our members to implement control strategies

such as stage two, enhanced IM, and the sale of reformulated gasolines. These mandatory control strategies can be enforced by citizen

suits and other threats which will inevitably occur well before the

date EPA is talking about.

States will be forced to act now if the legislation is not passed.

The threat is so severe that NCPR has had to file suit against

EPA, alleging that the provisions of the Clean Air Act that mandate certain control strategies are unconstitutional under the 10th

Amendment and a 1997 Supreme Court decision.

Though EPA has promised to be flexible, this statute ties their

hands. Based on our experience in the motor vehicle/IM debate, our

members have deep-seeded reservations over EPA’s flexibility
20

promise. To quote Georgia State Representative Mike Evans, testifying under oath before the House Commerce Committee in the

104th Congress, he stated, ‘‘EPA’s assertion that they have been

flexible is simply not so. We have not seen it in Georgia, nor do

we believe that other States have seen it, either. The only thing

that we have heard is sanctions, sanctions, and sanctions.

We also question the flexibility claim in light of EPA’s absurd position that changing the standard does not implicate SBREFA.

The EPA says we will not hurt small businesses and farmers,

such as those in my family. EPA has a funny definition of the word

‘‘hurt.’’ My family members and farm-based customers do not buy

the EPA line and are concerned that higher fuel prices and regulatory costs will squeeze already thin farm margins.

I also do not see how EPA can make the claim that the standards would mean more use of ethanol-blended gasolines with a

straight face. Ethanol cannot be used in many nonattainment areas

because it will hurt or worsen the ozone problems. Let me add that

the ethanol subsidy is destructive to competition in the gasoline industry, and any version of a highway bill that extends the ethanol

subsidy for another 7 years to us is just poisoned tea and would

force us to oppose the entire bill, though we support CMAQ funding.

As very small locally owned and operated businesses, gasoline

dealers’ limited resources must be used in a way so as to achieve

the maximum environmental bang for their buck. Our members

need to spend money on the underground tank upgrades required

by 1998 in order to protect groundwater. Due to the requirements

of the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act, many stations and their

tanks will be sold to small dealers and have to be replaced in the

next 15 months.

Gasoline dealers have long been involved in the debate over the

clean air, primarily because the dealer and his family, as well as

our employees and their families, breathe the same air and drink

the same water as our friends and neighbors do.

We support the 1990 Clean Air Act as amended, even though

they cost us at least 15 percent of the independent dealer stations.

We cannot support the new standards and urge the passage of

Senate 1084.

Thank you.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you very much, Mr. Smith.

We’ll have some 5-minute rounds up here, and we will adhere to

our time schedule so that we can have as many rounds as possible

within the time limit that we have, and we’ll have some other

Members that are coming here shortly.

Mr. Martin, I’ll start with you. In your testimony you offer two

very profound examples on impact of the air standards on small,

family-owned bakeries. First is the inability to secure loans to get

their equipment, the control equipment; and then your own example, where you’ve literally decreased production so that you don’t

trigger the control levels.

You know, neither example helps your businesses or the supply

of bread—to me, at least. It doesn’t seem efficient to force companies to cut production.
21

If the regulations were to continue in effect, as promulgated by

this association, what do you think would happen to your industry?

What is the—can you give us idea of what a profit margin is of a

small bakery.

Mr. MARTIN. I think, within our own experience, it would probably range from—just looking at a 10- to 15-year period—from

probably a small percentage loss to a high of maybe 3 to 4 percent.

Senator INHOFE. Yes. How do you think these regulations would

impact that.

Mr. MARTIN. I guess it would depend. If you want to put it on

a percentage, we know up front we’re going to spend the 500,000

at least to make building modifications and put the technology in

which we have gone and looked on site and have promised with the

way it would apply to our industry, and then for the extra cost of

operation it would be another 100,000 a year, probably.

Senator INHOFE. Mr. Grumet had said that the industry normally over-estimates the cost of compliance. In your testimony you

stated the cost to bakers is $12,000 per ton of DOCs controlled, not

the 1,400 per ton estimated by EPA. Who is right, you or the EPA.

Mr. MARTIN. Well, I can understand where they came up with

some of those numbers, although I was not particularly a part of

it. I asked some of those questions, myself, and, simply, the $1,400

would be taken from the handful of a certain type of baking operation, the 12,000 would be looking at the overview of all bakeries

of many different sizes and shapes and forms.

Senator INHOFE. You know, it is a difficult thing—and I think

that Senator Sessions touched on this—that the original estimate

of the cost of compliance by the EPA was—in fact, the one they’re

still using—is $8 billion. The President’s own Economic Council

used $60 billion per year. And the Reason Foundation out in California—I think came out with theirs right before our last hearing—

they estimated somewhere between $90 and $150 billion per year.

So it’s difficult to use these estimates in any logical sense.

Mr. Sharp, I was particularly impressed with your testimony because I spent quite a bit of time talking to farm bureau groups last

Monday night. I was their speaker at the banquet in Cherokee,

Oklahoma. That was a regional group. Not long before that I was

up in North Dakota at the North Dakota Farm Bureau.

A very consistent thing comes out of these guys. They say that

the biggest problem they have is over-regulation, and that they

don’t recall any time, including the BTU scare, that the over-regulation would be a greater problem to the small farmers. Do you

agree with that? Is this what you hear out there.

Mr. SHARP. Absolutely. Small- and average-sized farms obviously

are the ones that would suffer the most under regulation as is and

under new regulation. Even USDA came out in their comments

with concerns for small- and average-sized farms under this standard and, of course, under other regulation.

Senator INHOFE. I understand that there is a copy of the economic report on the impacts of these regulations on agriculture. I

think it is just coming out today. The results of these are pretty

dramatic. Have you had a chance to see that.

Mr. SHARP. I mentioned in my testimony the numbers that we’ve

seen. This is the first study that we have seen that has come out
22

with any numbers on agriculture impacts from the new standard,

and a 10 percent decrease or a $5 billion annual income loss to

farmers is something that is going to knock you way below any

small- or average-sized farm profitability margin. When you only

deal with a few percent anyway, a drop of 10 percent is quite dramatic for those folks in the average or small farm arena.

Senator INHOFE. Yes. Mr. Abbott, I was interested in some of

your comments as to the effect on jobs. I was one who was very

much concerned back when NAFTA was first imposed what would

happen. If you go industry-by-industry—I’m from Oklahoma. Of

course, it’s a big agriculture State. Also, we have a refinery industry. I was listening with some interest to Senator Dorgan, when he

was talking about the loss of jobs that has come, the fight from

across the border. And I’d kind of like to get your idea as to what

you think that job loss would be. You mention an estimated 35,000

jobs, but is that just within your union or your particular—how

would you broaden this to cover other jobs.

Mr. ABBOTT. Yes, sir. Just within our small union—and the number, I think, that the building trades department of the AFL–CIO

is using is 1.3 million amongst all the crafts and trades. That loss

comes because of a lot of different factors. We not only construct,

but we maintain a lot of the refineries, and the large power plants,

as well as cement kilns.

One of the things that happened with the Clean Air Act last

time, there was a lot of the refinery business that moved into the

Caribbean region, they actually moved off-shore. Very few refineries are actually left in the United States, which really is a problem.

But, of course, if you had maybe 8,000 or 10,000 people nationwide,

like the boilermakers did, that was maintaining those refineries,

those are just jobs lost. That’s just man-years of work lost.

Senator INHOFE. I’ll cover that in just a minute.

Senator BAUCUS. Senator BAUCUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Grumet, I’m very interested in this chart of yours in your

testimony that’s labeled ‘‘C.’’ It’s entitled, ‘‘Actual Costs are Less

than Original Estimates.’’

Mr. GRUMET. Yes. What I tried to do——

Senator BAUCUS. I can tell what you tried to do here, and I find

it very interesting that you’ve taken five different areas and you’ve

given the projected costs for each and the actual costs and you’ve

given a source, and the source is essentially industry sources. Now,

is that industry source the source for the projected cost? And does

that source actually agree with the actual costs in each of those

areas.

Let’s take number one, unleaded gasoline.

Mr. GRUMET. Unleaded gasoline, the suggestion at the time of

enactment by API and others was it would be eight to ten cents

per gallon. The actual cost, based on surveys by the Energy Information Association and others, has been one cent nationally and

two cents in California.

And I should just add that these aren’t the costs that people are

seeing. People are seeing no cost whatsoever. What we’ve tried to

do here is be absolutely accurate and indicate the costs that

the——
23

Senator BAUCUS. But the point is here that the actual cost of unleaded gasoline is about one-eight or one-seventh of the projected

cost.

Mr. GRUMET. That’s correct.

Senator BAUCUS. Let’s take VOC controls for marine vessel boating. Why don’t you explain that.

Mr. GRUMET. This was a nice example in that this was a very

particular issue in New Jersey. We had the industry testify at a

public hearing that the cost would be, at minimum, two cents per

gallon, based on the controls.

New Jersey’s penalty structure is based on the notion of disgorging any undue economic benefit a company gets from noncompliance. So it turns out that one of these Company’s failed to comply,

and in the penalty phase they demonstrated conclusively to the

State that the actual costs were, in fact, one-tenth of the costs they

suggested 2 years earlier.

Senator BAUCUS. One-tenth of the projected.

Mr. GRUMET. Yes.

Senator BAUCUS. All right. Let’s take power plant SO2 controls.

Mr. GRUMET. Well, this is an example that I think many people

refer to, the acid rain controls in the 1990 Clean Air Act. Again,

I think we were somewhat conservative. There were many industry

estimates that the cost for a tons of SO2 removed would be over

$1,500 a ton. But, looking at really just kind of the basic industry

projections—because what I think I want to stress here is that this

isn’t an effort, I think, on the part of industry to mislead anybody.

Senator BAUCUS. Right.

Mr. GRUMET. I just think there are some natural dynamics——

Senator BAUCUS. Right.

Mr. GRUMET. ——that inevitably inflate cost. The costs were projected to be $500 to $1,000, and recently the costs were $101.

They’re down actually to $75.

Senator BAUCUS. And the same general phenomenon occurred

with respect to power plant NOX controls.

Mr. GRUMET. Yes. Absolutely same with NOX controls.

Senator BAUCUS. And the California low emission vehicle program.

Mr. GRUMET. That’s correct.

Senator BAUCUS. I just saw something on the news last night. I

don’t know if you saw it. It’s a combination fuel cell gasoline, which

looked pretty promising. I don’t know if it’s going to turn out to be

as good as it sounds like it’s projected to be, but, as I recall, I think

it was on ABC news last night.

Mr. GRUMET. Daimler-Benz has committed to have 100,000 fuel

cell operated vehicles on the road in the next 10 years. The Ballard

Company in Canada is producing buses that run on fuel cells right

now.

What’s unfortunate is that there is no one in the U.S. doing it.

Senator BAUCUS. But I understand this car uses a combination

of regular gasoline and fuel cells.

Mr. GRUMET. Correct.

Senator BAUCUS. And it will be available in 5 or 6 years maybe,

or maybe sooner than that; that it will cost no more to operate
24

than current cars; it would have the same performance; and it will

have virtually none of certain emissions. I suppose it would be——

Mr. GRUMET. The only emissions would be some CO2 and some

water.

Senator BAUCUS. CO2 and water. But no other emissions.

Mr. GRUMET. Correct.

Senator BAUCUS. Now that would help with ozone, wouldn’t it.

Mr. GRUMET. That would be a dramatic advantage. Yes.

Senator BAUCUS. And so maybe these ozone standards might not

turn out to be quite so bad to the degree that those technologies

are developed, when there is no additional cost.

Mr. GRUMET. We have found time and time again that many of

the gentlemen to my left and right and their industries are incredibly capable of achieving cost-effective reductions when, in fact, we

set clear requirements and stick to those requirements.

Senator BAUCUS. Yes. Well, are there other technologies that

might develop.

Mr. GRUMET. There are a host of technologies. Just to touch on

a couple that are pertinent to these new standards, as I mentioned,

the main requirement would be to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions,

which would come as some comfort to Mr. Martin because bakers

really don’t emit much NOX emissions, if any. In order to get NOX

emissions down, there are two technologies that people are using.

One is selective catalytic reduction. It’s like taking the catalytic

converter you have in a car and putting it on a big smokestack. For

years we were told that it wasn’t possible, even though it was happening in Europe. Well, now it has happened in two of my States,

New Hampshire and New Jersey, and it has happened incredibly

cost-effectively. We are able to achieve up to 90 percent controls of

nitrogen oxide emissions for under $1,000 a ton, and that is, as Mr.

Martin indicated, far and away more cost effective than the control

strategies that the old standards were bringing forward.

I don’t know how many more you want me to touch on, but we

have—Honda just announced the ultra-low-emission vehicle for the

exact same cost as a regular vehicle. People said it couldn’t even

be done 4 years ago.

Senator BAUCUS. And one of the reasons this happens, as you

mentioned, is competition.

Mr. GRUMET. Absolutely.

Senator BAUCUS. Different companies want to develop a better

product—cheaper, more-efficient product. It’s just competition.

Mr. GRUMET. That’s the American way. And the ‘‘New York

Times’’ last Friday had an article showing that, in fact, pollution

control companies had stagnated their sales. Their sales have actually gone down since 1985, showing that, in fact, we’re really not

pushing our industrial base to improve our environmental quality.

Senator BAUCUS. Thank you. I see I’ve got a red light here, Mr.

Chairman.

Senator INHOFE. Well, we’ll have more rounds, Senator Baucus.

Senator THOMAS.

Senator THOMAS. Yes. As I listened to you, Mr. Grumet, if competition is driven by more efficiency, then why do we need regulation.
25

Mr. GRUMET. Well, pollution, in my micro-economics class—and

I wasn’t very good—was the example that was used to describe

market failure. When we have a situation——

Senator THOMAS. I don’t think that’s true. We’re talking about efficiency and cost is mostly why these new things come about,

not——

Mr. GRUMET. Well, Senator Thomas, I may not understand, but

I think it’s very possible for a company to have very low costs while

creating a tremendous amount of pollution, which inposes high

costs on other people, but——

Senator THOMAS. I won’t pursue it any farther, but if you’re talking about competition and efficiency driving these things, that’s

what drives it, and not the setting by EPA of standards.

Senator BAUCUS. If I might say, Mr. Chairman, the point is to

internalize the cost, and therefore the competition drives the technology. You have to have standards to internalize the cost.

Senator THOMAS. Senator Baucus, I was questioning them, but

thank you very much. I certainly appreciate it. I’m talking about

efficiency, and we get efficient——

Senator BAUCUS. If they internalize it, they get some efficiencies.

Senator THOMAS. Absolutely, and it doesn’t take regulation if you

believe in the marketplace. That’s an aside.

Doctor, you sort of indicated that there was great scientific consensus. You’re the first one I’ve heard say that.

Mr. THURSTON. Well, the points of consensus of CASAC have

been under-represented in hearings here, I think, and I think especially George Wolfe, when he talks about what happened at

CASAC, he tends to dwell on the points of lack of consensus. But

I feel that more emphasis should be put on where there was a consensus, and I think that’s where EPA acted.

There was a consensus, and I can read you right out of George

Wolfe’s closure letter where they said that there was a consensus—

let’s see. Here’s one. ‘‘There was also a consensus that a new PM2.5

NAAQS be established.’’ It’s right out of his closure letter. And,

similarly, for ozone.

Senator THOMAS. Well, wait a minute. You may have this group

consensus. I’m talking about science, in general.

You know, one of the real problems for us—and you can understand this—is on all these things, ‘‘Let’s have a scientific basis.’’

‘‘Let’s do it on good science.’’ We have ten scientists come, and all

of them have a different view.

Now, how many of this consensus group agreed on 15

micrograms daily.

Mr. THURSTON. There was a consensus to have a standard. They

didn’t attempt to set the actual standard. That was left to the Administrator. They——

Senator THOMAS. Only two out of twenty-one agreed with the initial proposition.

Mr. THURSTON. I think that what happened, if you read the transcript of the day that they talked about this, as I have, George

Wolff simply asked them where they would set it, and each person

gave a number, and I think that had they perhaps gone around the

table again you would have seen a little more consensus. But the

fact of the matter is there was a large agreement—there was a con-
26

sensus that they needed a PM2.5 standard, and the way it reads is

that EPA sets the standard. Their job wasn’t to come to a specific

number. As a matter of fact, I think George Wolff was the first

chairman who has done such a poll asking for a number, because

I don’t think it is the job of CASAC to set a number. That’s the

Administrator’s job, and that’s exactly what the Administrator did.

Senator THOMAS. Exactly, and not many scientists agree with

that. That’s the problem. And I understand science isn’t always

going to come the same, but to suggest that there is consensus

among science I think is a little misleading. That certainly hasn’t

been what we’ve heard from everyone who has come here.

Also, you’ve talked about the costs will not be substantial, and

I don’t know what ‘‘substantial’’ means. Small Business Administration says, ‘‘It is certainly one of the most expensive regulations,

if not the most expensive, faced by small business in 10 years or

more.’’

Mr. THURSTON. I don’t believe I said that——

Senator THOMAS. No, I’m talking to Mr. Grumet. I’m sorry.

Mr. GRUMET. Thanks.

Senator THOMAS. Small Business. This is the government agency.

Mr. GRUMET. Yes, I agree. Government is also not immune from

overstating costs—EPA does it all the time—because all Government can do is use the best information that they are given by the

same people who are providing you this information. I think,

though, that you also know that there are very often times tensions

in any large organization—the Administration being a very large

one—and EPA is going to great ends to try to diminish the impacts

on small businesses.

We care very deeply about small businesses in the northeast. We

are not apologists for EPA. We have many conflicts with them. We

are of the belief that these standards, because they reflect the true

science, will, in fact, bring forward—now, when I say ‘‘science’’ I’m

not talking health science, because——

Senator THOMAS. True science.

Mr. GRUMET. Well, Senator, let me back up for a second. These

standards are not perfect, but there’s a choice before us that is presented by S. 1084, and that choice is between the old standards or

the new standards. And if you ask yourself which standards better

reflect the health costs and the health impacts, which standards

better reflect the true reality of the problem, since that is the relative choice we have, I think there is little question that the new

standards are a better reflection of the health issues.

Senator THOMAS. That’s your view, and I understand that.

Mr. GRUMET. That’s why I’m here to offer it.

Senator THOMAS. But that’s not a consensus, obviously. Not everyone thinks that’s—it seems like the northeast seems to have

more problem with air quality. Is that valid.

Mr. GRUMET. It partially——

Senator THOMAS. I can almost tell where people came from as to

what they’re going to say.

Mr. GRUMET. I think the map I showed you—and I refer back to

attachment ‘‘A’’—demonstrates that if you care about chronic exposure to ozone, the midwest actually has a greater health risk than
27

the northeast. If you look at the highest one hour experienced each

year, the northeast has a worse problem than the midwest.

Senator THOMAS. Is the northeast generally in compliance.

Mr. GRUMET. By and large, no, for two reasons—our own pollution and the pollution that wafts into our region from other regions.

Senator THOMAS. Why would you then ask for more stringent

controls if you’re not in compliance with what’s in place.

Mr. GRUMET. That’s an excellent question, and the answer is because the existing standards call forth irrational and ineffective

controls, which is why implementing them doesn’t fix the problem.

Senator THOMAS. The EPA director said that they’re not putting

in the control; that they’re leaving that to somebody else. All

they’re doing is setting standards.

Mr. GRUMET. You have to apply standards in order to try to meet

a certain end point. If that end point is trying to reduce peak ozone

levels and your only opportunity is to try to place controls in the

urban area where you have that kind of violation, you are left with

doing things like regulating bakeries very stringently.

Senator THOMAS. But you haven’t met the controls now.

Mr. GRUMET. We have implemented far more controls than other

regions of the country, yet we still have——

Senator THOMAS. No. Let’s talk about results. Let’s talk about

goals. Your goal is compliance with current, isn’t it.

Mr. GRUMET. It is, absolutely. And if we are given an inappropriate set of tools which are ineffective in achieving those goals, it’s

hard for me to understand how we could be criticized for our failure.

Senator THOMAS. I don’t understand that, but my light is——

Mr. THURSTON. Maybe I could help if I responded to this point.

Senator THOMAS. My time is up.

Senator INHOFE. Well, I think it is kind of interesting. You talk

about where you are out of attainment, and out there you are. I’ve

often thought—I can remember when Secretary Browner talked

about when she goes around the country, so yes, you have an attainment problem. It’s not your fault. It’s the guys west of you.

This happened down in Louisiana when she was making a presentation down there. ‘‘You mean we’re going to have to actually implement all these changes?’’ No, your problem comes from Texas.

And I’m sure if she were in Texas she’d say it was from Arizona,

and eventually get maybe to Wyoming. I don’t know.

I was pleased yesterday to hear from Secretary Pena on this zero

emissions car, but I think we’re losing site of something here because I’d like to remind my colleagues that Carol Browner had previously stated that no new requirements would be placed on mobile

sources under these standards, anyway; that it would all be from

utilities.

And also I’d like to point out that I can remember some 20 years

ago when they said by the year 1998 we’d all be driving electric

cars. Well, that’s next year, and I don’t see that coming up either.

So I think in the best of circumstances the announcement yesterday—he said that this would be available in the show rooms in 10

years. Well, I wouldn’t want to predicate our decisions today on

what we think is going to happen in 10 years.
28

Back to you, Mr. Abbott. When you talked about the refineries,

and I don’t think you and I either one would blame the owner of

a refinery for going south of the border in that very competitive industry, because they could be down there where they do not have

the requirements—the EPA requirements and other requirements.

I can remember during the debate on NAFTA one of my concerns

was that in the transportation industry that we would allow—

NAFTA would allow a Mexican trucking line to pick up a load in

Brownsville, Texas, and take it to New York City and not comply

with all the requirements. And, of course, that gave them a competitive advantage. And so I don’t think either one of us would

blame them for doing that. I just want to correct an environment

that encourages that.

Mr. ABBOTT. Absolutely. Yes, sir. One of the things that’s important to point out, too, is that these cars that Senator Baucus talked

about, all of these things have been going for quite a while under

the old EPA Act. I mean, there has been a lot—there has been an

evolving technology that has been going on for some time. That certainly did not come about because EPA decided to change the

standards.

We are on the cutting edge. The building trades unions do install

a lot of the environmental controls, and therein is one of the problems, because a lot of these large utilities have gone to a tremendous expense, hundreds of millions of dollars, to install pollution

control equipment, and then all of the sudden the goal post is

moved and now some of the other businesses that were not in compliance perhaps under these standards have an additional 10 years

to comply.

It just seemed that the Clean Air Act was working, we were getting excellent results all the way through. The emissions were

being reduced, the pollution was being reduced, the ozone level was

going down, and the control equipment that was being put on or

had been ordered in the last few years, some of that equipment, because these standards were being proposed, the owners held off installing clean air equipment. So there were a lot of jobs that were

lost just from the fact that these standards were pending and not

knowing what was going to happen.

Senator INHOFE. Mr. Abbott, I think in all the seven hearings

we’ve had I don’t recall one person suggesting that the air isn’t getting cleaner every day. It is. However, that doesn’t seem to be

factored in to all these considerations, what we’re going to do from

this point forward.

I think the most—when you talk about moving the goal posts,

Government doesn’t understand what it costs to move goal posts.

When an industry—I don’t care if it’s a baking industry or the family farmer or the power industry—invests millions of dollars, and

then all the sudden finds, ‘‘Well, we now have implemented new

standards, so you have to do—’’ there just is not an appreciation

for the cost and who bears that ultimate cost, whether it’s the cost

of labor, the cost of manufacturing, the cost of production. It’s going

to be ultimately the consumer. That’s the thing that concerns me.

Mr. Grumet, I understand that the standards that are proposed

by the EPA are really not enough for you, are not set high enough
29

for you. I think you’ve been quoted many times saying you want

a more stringent standard.

Mr. GRUMET. Are you speaking of the recently-set standards or

the old standards.

Senator INHOFE. The recently-set standards.

Mr. GRUMET. I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but back, I

guess, 6 months ago we did comment that the particulate standard,

the daily particulate standard, should be set more strictly than the

65 micrograms per cubic meter, so we do think that standard is inadequately protective.

But, again, we’re not going to let the best become the enemy of

the good.

Senator INHOFE. I was really wondering whose side you’re on.

You’re against our bill, but you also are against the——

Mr. GRUMET. No. I’m strongly supportive, as are the Northeast

States, of the standards recently adopted by the Administrator.

Senator INHOFE. But you said those standards do not go far

enough.

Mr. GRUMET. I’m saying that I don’t think they’re perfect and I

don’t think any standards ever will be perfect. I think those standards are far better protective of public health and far better in

terms of inspiring cost-effective results.

Senator INHOFE. All right. I’m going to pursue this, and I don’t

have to leave but Senator Baucus does, so I’ll yield to him.

Senator BAUCUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I’d just like to—first of all, I have a letter I want to insert in the

record. This is from Administrator Browner. She has information

that bears on this hearing and the fact that she asked to testify

and she was refused the ability to come to testify at this hearing,

so I’ll put this letter in the record.

[The information to be supplied follows:]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR,

October 21, 1997.

The HONORABLE MAX BAUCUS,

Committee on Environment and Public Works,

United States Senate,

Washington, DC 20510.

Dear SENATOR BAUCUS: I am writing in response to your letter of October 15, 1997

requesting the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) views on S. 1084, a bill

that would repeal EPA’s recent update of the air quality standards for ozone and

particulate matter.

As you know, these new standards are a major step forward in public health protection. Each year, they will prevent approximately 15,000 premature deaths, as

well as hundreds of thousands of cases of significantly decreased lung function in

children and hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks in children and adults.

EPA strongly opposes S. 1084 because it would undermine these important public

health protections. The bill would revoke the stronger, updated standards, reinstate

the old standards, and prohibit EPA from revising or replacing these outdated

standards for at least 4 years. The decision to strengthen the air quality standards

was based on compelling science indicating that the old standards were not adequately protective. Repeal or delay would only result in needless suffering for millions of Americans. In addition, delay would have other adverse health consequences

and environmental effects such as reduced yields of agricultural crops, damage to

commercial and non-commercial forests, and continued visibility impairment.

Furthermore, the public has a right to know whether the air in their communities

is safe to breathe, as determined by the latest, best available science—and these

standards are the means by which government makes this information available.
30

As you know, the President has announced a flexible, common-sense implementation plan for the new standards. This implementation approach will continue current progress in achieving cleaner air. It will give states, local governments and

business the flexibility to meet the new standards in a cost-effective way. EPA’s

strategy for regional emissions reductions, as proposed by EPA last week, will allow

the vast majority of areas to meet the new ozone standard without additional local

pollution controls. The President’s implementation policy also ensures that at a new

round of review of particulate matter science will be completed within 5 years, and

that no areas will be designated as nonattainment for fine particles during this period.

The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is no objection to the

submission of this report from the standpoint of the President’s program.

I hope that these views are helpful. If I can provide any additional information,

please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

CAROL M. BROWNER.

Senator BAUCUS. Second, I’d just like to remind us all of the time

line—I’ll just take PM2.5—that something might happen.

This year EPA issues its final PM2.5 standard. This year EPA begins new scientific review of health effects of fine particulate matter. Next year, voluntary State discussions on regionally transported particle pollution. Between the year 1998 and the year 2000,

monitors are put in place nationwide. I might add that in Administrator Browner’s letter she states that, with respect to PM2.5, that

the President’s implementation policy also ensures that the new

round of review of particulate matter science will be completed

within 5 years, and that no areas will be designated as nonattainment for fine particles during this period, so there is a whole 5-

year study that will be in place before any decisions will be made

on particulate matter.

In the period 1998 to 2003, collect monitoring data; in the year

2002, EPA completes the 5-year scientific review of particulate

matter standards, which I just mentioned and she states in her letter. Between the years 2002 and 2005, EPA designates areas. Between the years 2005 and 2008, the States submit their plans,

their SIPs, outlining how they will meet the PM2.5 standard, and

the States needing reductions begin. That’s in the period between

2005 and 2008.

So, in summary, between the years 2012 and 2017, following designation, States may have up to—the point it, the States may have

up to 12 years under the Clean Air Act to meet PM2.5 standards.

We’re going to learn a lot in the next 12 years. We’re going to

learn the degree to which the standards selected by the Administrator make sense and the degree to which they don’t make sense,

reminding ourselves that the standards that she selected were for

range proposed by CASAC, the scientific review panel. She didn’t

just pick these out of thin air. This is a range of standards presented to her by CASAC, which is required under current law, a

5-year review of every 5 years.

So I understand some of the concerns that people have about

these standards. I have concerns, myself. I come from a farm State.

But I also think that this period of time gives us adequate time to

adjust it, to change the standards that they should be changed, depending upon data that we get and studies that are conducted.

All this makes much more sense to me to continue down this

time line rather than to pass this bill, which says stop. In fact, it

implies we don’t do anything. It just says do nothing for 4 years.
31

And, as has been pointed out, there’s nothing in this bill that says

we do anything after 4 years. It just says stop.

And we do know that there are a lot—that these standards will

avoid many premature deaths, certainly avoid a lot of unhealthy—

some people that have unhealthy conditions that have caused them

to be very unhealthy. And I trust, frankly, the American people. I

trust the process. It’s the only one we’ve got, folks. It’s us, our

country, our Government. We should work to make it work, not

just say stop, do nothing with respect to PM2.5 and ozone.

Another point I’d like to make is with respect to PM2.5. It’s my

understanding that virtually none of the PM2.5 would be directed

at agriculture. One could dispute whether it’s 1 percent or 2 percent or what not, but it’s a very small amount. In fact, we all know

the letter from Carol Browner to Secretary Glickman saying it’s not

targeted at agriculture, etc.

I have some sympathy to what you’re saying, Mr. Sharp. A lot

of farmers and ranchers, it’s a very small margin and they’re out

of business. There’s no doubt about that. I know that’s the case.

But I also strongly suspect that when States implement implementation plans for areas that are in nonattainment, they’re not going

to sell it to agriculture. They just won’t. At least they won’t in my

State. I can tell you that. I can’t speak to other States, but I think

that farmers should be slightly concerned about all of this, but I

don’t think they should be alarmed.

Mr. SHARP. Could I reply to that.

Senator BAUCUS. Sure.

Mr. SHARP. Our concern is that EPA has no idea how much we

emit of PM2.5. That’s the biggest concern for us. We want to avoid

regulation that California has already included for PM10. I’ll

read——

Senator BAUCUS. We don’t have time here. We don’t want to talk

about PM10, because we’re not talking about PM10. We’re talking

about PM2.5.

Mr. SHARP. Okay. PM2.5 for agriculture fugitive dust from crops,

three million tons is their estimate from agriculture; agricultural

livestock, 181,000 tons. Those figures are what has been given to

the States to use——

Senator BAUCUS. That’s 2.5.

Mr. SHARP. That’s 2.5

Senator BAUCUS. And whose studies are those.

Mr. SHARP. Those are all credited in STAPPA and ALAPCA, the

State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators, and

ALAPCA, the Association of Local Air Pollution Control——

Senator BAUCUS. I hear you and I understand that. But, again,

just to remind ourselves, we have a 5-year period here under the

law with which to study PM2.5. At the end of that 5-year period,

we’re going to know whether that study is valid or invalid or to

what degree it’s valid or invalid. We’re going to know a lot more

than we know now, and we can proceed from that point.

Mr. SHARP. We’re not sure if that time line is going to hold. As

was mentioned earlier, I do believe, at the end of the table down

here, civil suits have a big play in this, and this guarantees we

don’t——
32

Senator BAUCUS. I understand the argument, but I just, with the

deepest respect, think there’s not much validity in that argument.

That is, I don’t think that anyone who sues now, files a civil lawsuit saying EPA doesn’t have this authority, is going to get very

far. And most attorneys I’ve talked to on this issue have the same

conclusion.

The light has been red for a long time. I don’t want to take too

much of the chairman’s time.

Senator INHOFE. Well, let me go ahead and resume the questioning.

On my time, Mr. Sharp, why don’t you go back to your documentation on California and PM10. Mr. SHARP. You mentioned regulation to begin with, and this is

the exact type of regulation we want to not run into a problem with

on PM2.5. We need the data first.

This was included. This regulation or this control measure was

included in California’s State implementation plan that has now

gone to EPA for final approval, and they have a list of them here,

but my favorite one—and, being from a farm family, I didn’t even

know what tracking control was or what you would be doing by trying to gain or implement tracking control, so I had to look this one

up. But included for PM10—and this is the exact same thing we’re

trying to avoid here—tracking control, ‘‘Prevent tracking soil on unpaved public roads when turning at the end of runs during tillage

operations from August through October. Prevent tracking mud

and dirt on paved public roads from farm roads when water is used

to prevent dust during this period. The effectiveness of this measure would be dependent on the reduction of mud and dirts tracked

onto the paved public roads and the amount of traffic traversing

the affected paved public road.’’

They want us to control the dust that drops off the tractor tires

or between the treads onto dirt roads before you drive it out, before

you drive your tractor on the road or turn around on a road. Things

like that, we don’t know how you would implement.

Also regulation that’s impacting agriculture, the new regional

haze proposal and a non-road diesel proposal, both have come out

in the last couple months, both of which are under the guise of a

new PM2.5 plan. Both of those would control particulate matter,

PM2.5, from agriculture or have an impact, either directly or indirectly, to agriculture. The non-road diesel is an obvious one

through equipment, and the regional haze one has been spelled by

the Park Service and the Forest Service, and targets agriculture

PM2.5 controls for burning and for agriculture tillage.

Senator INHOFE. All right, sir. Thank you very much. I hope that

I have not been misrepresenting what would happen with implementation—not the setting, but the implementation of these standards, when I talk to farm groups.

A week ago Monday I was in western Oklahoma, seven different

communities, ending up talking to the Farm Bureau in Cherokee.

I commented to them that it would be more regulation by the Federal Government in terms of when you can plant a crop, when you

can harvest a crop, when you can burn a field, when you can burn

your diesel. And this is what really does concern. Am I misrepresenting this to these people.
33

Mr. SHARP. No. That’s accurate.

Senator INHOFE. You’re a family farm owner, as well as a professional.

Mr. SHARP. Based on what has happened in California under

PM10 for those controls, and then based on a document put together by the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee—they call it an

opportunity matrix. It’s a draft document. But in that document

they list a couple different pages of controls for agriculture for

PM2.5, including everything from banning burning, which is number one on the list to taking land out of agricultural production;

planting trees and permanent grasses; dietary changes for cattle,

for hogs, for poultry. The list goes on and on.

Senator INHOFE. Yes.

Mr. SHARP. So there are a number of these that have been

spelled out very clearly. Yes.

Senator INHOFE. I would say this: the family farmers that I

talked to, at least in the State of Oklahoma, are very sensitive to

this and are very well-informed on this, so someone has done a

good job. I would like to also mention that it’s not just the Farm

Bureau. The Farmers Union has been active in this, as well as the

Cattlemans Association and other groups, too.

Mr. SHARP. There are over 30 agricultural organizations.

Senator INHOFE. Mr. Grumet, going back to you, I was going to

read a quote and see if you still stand. You’re talking about such

steps that could be taken, and now we’re back referring to ozone.

Mr. GRUMET. Can you tell me where it’s from, also.

Senator INHOFE. Steps such as reducing car emissions, using

manual lawn mowers, and filling gas tanks during evening hours

will have a profound effect on reducing the levels of smog we all

breathe.

Mr. GRUMET. Can you remind me where that was from.

Senator INHOFE. Yes. Thursday, August 7, 1997, on ‘‘Business

Wire.’’ I have it right here.

Mr. GRUMET. Okay. I’m——

Senator INHOFE. And the reason I bring this is up is that if

there’s anything that has bothered me more than anything else in

the whole issue this last 11 months, it’s when Administrator

Browner, who is a very intelligent person, a very remarkable person, is always saying that nothing like this is going to have to happen. Nothing like this is going to have to happen and everything

is going to be fine. In fact, she goes so far as to say to the petroleum marketers, ‘‘Well, it’s not going to affect you. You guys aren’t

going to be affected. It’s going to be refineries.’’ To the bakers, ‘‘It’s

not going to affect you.’’ To the mayors of our cities, ‘‘It’s won’t affect you.’’ Everybody is outside. And even geographically, as I mentioned a minute ago, it’s always in some area other than where you

are.

Mr. GRUMET. Two comments. I’m pretty sure what you’re referring to was probably a quote from the ‘‘Good Morning America’’

show when the Northeast States were rolling out an ozone map

which tried to depict—and your staff is nodding—trying to depict

the daily ozone levels, and I was discussing the benefits of giving

people this information, because it would give them the ability to

take voluntary steps, ‘‘such as.’’
34

So, just to be absolutely clear, the suggestion that these new

standards or any standards in the northeast would stop people

from mowing lawns or restrict when you can fill up your gas tank

would be incorrect.

Senator INHOFE. Would be incorrect.

Mr. GRUMET. Yes.

Senator INHOFE. So you don’t agree with this statement.

Mr. GRUMET. I guess I didn’t speak clearly.

Senator INHOFE. I’m going to go ahead and put this document in

the record at this point, because I see what I consider to be a contradiction.

[The information to be supplied follows:]

(Business Wire, Thursday, August 7, 1997)

SMOG MAP TECHNOLOGY IS LAUNCHED; PUBLIC TO LEARN OF GROUND-LEVEL OZONE

DANGERS

BOSTON—Watching your television news broadcast can be good for your health.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in conjunction with the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC), the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management

(NESCAUM) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association

(MARAMA) today launched an animated smog map to broadcast during daily weather reports in many states that experience high levels of summertime ground-level

ozone, commonly known as smog.

Smog is a major air pollutant and respiratory irritant that can cause permanent

lung damage and sends thousands of people to hospitals each year with respiratory

ailments. As of June 1997, over 100 million people reside in areas of the country

that do not meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone.

‘‘The ozone map was developed to warn people about dangerous air quality,’’ said

Jason Grumet, executive director of NESCAUM. ‘‘Although we can’t see or smell

smog, individuals have the right to know what they are breathing and what is making them ill. Just as important, the map will also serve as a way to educate individuals so that they take actions every day to reduce their own contribution to groundlevel ozone. Steps such as reducing car emissions, using manual lawn mowers and

filling gas tanks during evening hours will have a profound effect on reducing the

levels of smog we all breathe.’’

The high-tech mapping system gathers air quality data from more than 200 state

and local air monitoring stations from North Carolina to Maine and provides colonized maps several times daily to show the concentration and location of smog. The

new smog map allows residents to reduce their exposure to unhealthful air and to

take proactive measures to reduce the amount of pollution they contribute.

‘‘Information is power. This information will give parents, athletes, seniors and

others the power to protect themselves,’’ said EPA’s New England Administrator

John P. DeVillars. ‘‘Last month President Clinton took a strong stand in favor of

better air quality by issuing a decision for stringent new standards for clean air.

The Ozone Map takes these efforts a step further by making Americans aware of

air quality in their own backyards.’’

Jeanne Fox, EPA Region-2 Administrator, said, ‘‘The 14-state Ozone Mapping

Project provides the public with critical data about a potential health hazard. We

all benefit from the investment in new technology that brings air monitoring data

to the TV screen in a way that is useful to the viewing public.’’

According to Dr. Alfred Munzer, past president of the American Lung Association,

‘‘Ozone air pollution is a health risk for the millions of Americans who live in affected areas, but especially for children, the elderly and people with respiratory disease. A recent Lung Association study of 13 cities found that hospitalization among

people with asthma and other lung disorders doubled during the summer ozone season. Providing air quality information directly to these vulnerable individuals gives

them a valuable tool to limit their exposure and protect their health.’’

Jane Nishida, secretary of the Maryland Department of the Environment, stated,

‘‘Maryland pioneered the ozone map technology 3 years ago with the American Lung

Association of Maryland. Maryland has aired the map locally for 3 years and is excited about the enhanced expansion of the ozone map throughout the Northeastern

and Mid-Atlantic states.’’
35

Susan Wierman, executive director of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management

Association, added, ‘‘In 1994, a group of key individuals believed that a map of

ground-level ozone was possible and pursued the concept tenaciously. Building on

their efforts, we can now offer this state-of-the- art technology to broadcasters, print,

radio and Internet providers throughout our 14-state region.’’

Ozone pollution is not just a danger to susceptible populations; healthy individuals who work, exercise or play outdoors for even an hour or two can suffer respiratory difficulty in the form of coughing, chest pains and throat irritation. Experts

estimate that between $50 and $100 billion per year is spent treating medical ailments caused by air pollution. Further, the consequences of ozone pollution go beyond health and safety concerns, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reports

that lowering ozone exposure will reduce the yield loss of major agricultural crops

by almost $500 billion.

Bruce Carhart, executive director of the Ozone Transport Commission, said, ‘‘Seeing the new ground-level ozone map on TV will bring to light the true extent of our

smog problem. The partnerships between states and media outlets to provide air

quality information will add to the public’s understanding of ground-level ozone’s

impact on their health.’’

Ground-level ozone is created through the interactions of man-made emissions of

volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides in the presence of heat and sunlight.

Cars and other gasoline-burning engines are large sources of volatile organic compounds. Other sources include oil-based paints, insecticides and cleaners. Nitrogen

oxides, the other chemical precursor of ground-level ozone, are produced whenever

fossil fuels are produced whenever fossil fuels are burned and are primarily produced by motor vehicles and power plants.

Ozone mapping data is available at no charge to broadcasters and the public on

the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/regionO1/eco/ozone/ The data will also be available at no charge to clients of Weather Service International, a leading weather

service provider, as ‘‘SMOGcast’’. Additional weather service providers will be

sought to distribute the map.

‘‘TV stations are very interested in using the map on their weather forecasts because demand by the public for health and safety information has never been greater,’’ said Maria Pirone of Weather Services International. ‘‘We are pleased to serve

the public by providing this free information through our partner television stations.’’

For those wishing to learn more about ground-level ozone call the U.S. EPA at

1–800–821–1237 to receive your free Air Quality guide and informational brochure.

Mr. GRUMET. Senator, please let me try again, because I don’t

think I was contradicting myself. I was indicating that those are

voluntary measures that people could choose to take if they were

given this kind of ozone smog map information on their nightly

news. I was not suggesting, nor am I, nor would I ever suggest

those were prescriptive measures that the Government would impose upon anybody. So I would welcome you putting it into the

record, as long as it is in the proper context.

Senator INHOFE. How many volunteers are you going to get out

there on using manual lawn mowers instead of automatic lawn

mowers.

Mr. GRUMET. Senator, I think——

Senator INHOFE. A groundswell of volunteers.

Mr. GRUMET. I guess, you know, it depends on what kind of yard

you have. Where I live in Boston, people have yards somewhat

smaller than the horseshoe right here.

Senator INHOFE. And instead of watching the World Series at

night, you think they want to go out and gas their cars.

Mr. GRUMET. I guess, Senator, the issue—and I think you’re talking it out of context, which I object to. The point is that we’re trying to give people information and we were trying to explain to the

TV audience what kinds of actions individuals could take of their

own volition if they, in fact, cared enough to try to reduce their pollution. And these proposed——
36

Senator INHOFE. That’s clear. I understand what you’re saying,

Mr. Grumet.

Mr. GRUMET. I have no idea how many people would choose to

take those options. Probably few.

Senator INHOFE. Yes. Dr. Thurston, you testified before—and I

really appreciate your coming back. One thing that has come from

your testimony is that not only do scientists disagree occasionally,

but so do doctors. And you might remember that—I think you were

here at our first scientific hearing, which was in February. Later

on in April, Dr. Christopher Grand, an emergency room doctor,

talked about how much more cost-effective in saving actual lives it

would be to invest a fraction of the ozone PM costs into trauma

care. Since then we have statistics—and he sent us these statistics—the flu vaccine for all citizens would be approximately $140

per life saved; a mammogram for women over 50, $810 per life

saved; pneumonia vaccine for elderly, $2,000 per life saved. And

then, compared to the PM ozone, based on EPA’s estimate, which

is dramatically different than some of the others we have, it would

be $533,000 per life saved. Based on the Reason Foundation out in

California that I referred to earlier, it would be $10 million per life

saved.

Do you think this is a good use of their funds.

Mr. THURSTON. I’m glad you bring this up, because I think that

that’s a specious argument that has been made quite a bit up here

in Washington.

The fact is that if we were to say we don’t want to clean up the

air, we won’t make utilities put scrubbers on, I don’t think they

would take that money and donate it to hospitals so they could set

up units like that.

The fact is that they’re a separate thing, and I think that’s a specious argument. In other words, it’s not a trade-off of one versus

the other at all; the question is whether to go forward and clean

up the air and get the benefits that those offer or not.

Senator INHOFE. What I’m trying to get to—and it seems as if it’s

not just when we’re talking about clean air, but the same is true

with endangered species, superfund, wetlands, kind of a cost/benefit analysis is something that I think should be somewhere induced

into this thing.

It may be true that that money wouldn’t be spent, but when Dr.

Grant was asked that same question he responded that, as an

emergency room doctor, he has a whole host of drugs that worked

that he needs more funds for trauma centers. And I think we’d

probably agree with that.

Mr. THURSTON. Well, there is a cost benefit. I mean, the RIA

looks at the cost and it looks at the benefits, and obviously there

are lots of benefits which are not monetized on that. EPA has had

cases where it has over-estimated the cost. I think the one that was

being mentioned before, the scrubbers, as I recall, EPA estimated

much higher cost for the acid rain cleanup than the less than $100

that a ton of SO2 is trading for today. So that’s a case where not

only industry but EPA also, as I recall, over-estimated the cost. So

there are these cost/benefit analyses that are done as part of the

regulatory process.

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Dr. Thurston.
37

Mr. Smith, you have your attorney with you. Mr. Daskel is it.

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Mr. DASKEL. Yes, sir.

Senator INHOFE. Mr. Daskel, you may want to answer this question. You’d probably be a little bit more familiar with it than Mr.

Smith would. I’m interested in your lawsuit under the 10th Amendment. Am I correct? And would you explain what that is.

Mr. DASKEL. Yes, sir. The 10th Amendment fundamentally guarantees State sovereignty, and under the Supreme Court’s decision

back in July striking down the pre-notice—the background check

provisions of the Brady bill, the Supreme Court found that the provisions were Constitutionally invalid because they effectively commandeered the regulatory apparatus of the States. States were

forced to pass legislation, implement regulations, and enforce them,

essentially dancing to the strings of a Federal puppeteer, as some

of the language of the opinion.

In the opinion they talked about Federal—the IM requirements,

which are one of the mandatory strategies under the Clean Air Act,

and the court noted that it was fortunate for EPA that the IM

cases of the late 1970’s did not reach the high court because they

would have invalidated those control measures, as well.

Now, it is our position that, because the Clean Air Act mandates

that once an area reaches a given area of nonattainment, certain

controls are triggered as a matter of law. There is no flexibility. For

example, in our industry we have to sell reformulated gasoline, we

have to install stage two vapor recovery, even though you’re controlling the same emissions now through on-board vehicle canisters. We have to do enhanced IM. And that forces the States to

do exactly the same thing. The States have no choice but to pass

legislation, adopt regulations, and implement and enforce those

regulations against noncomplying parties, all to the strings of EPA.

And I think what—my issue with Senator Baucus’ remarks was

that he was talking primarily in the context of PM2.5 versus ozone,

and legally they are two entirely different things, although I could

certainly conceive of a way down the road apiece where, if I see

that a control measure is going to—it’s reasonably foreseeable that

a given control measure is going to be needed to control PM2.5, that

I could bring a citizen suit and enforce it, and that’s one of our concerns.

We talked about the process. And, with ozone, in particular,

what really concerns us is that you’re talking about rewriting the

entire classification scheme of the Clean Air Act. I mean, EPA has

got to talk about areas of influence and areas of violation. And

while we were up here, I brought my Montana folks in to see Senator Baucus, himself, on occasions on this issue.

You had the bill out of this committee, S. 1630, that had a very

different classification scheme than the three House bills, and then

the House bill that was ultimately enacted.

What concerns us about the process is this grab that EPA can

rewrite a classification scheme that was bitterly fought over between the two houses of Congress. That’s one of the—I mean, as

my friend, Mr. Smith, wanted to say, we elected you folks to make

these decisions, not to hand them off to EPA.
38

Senator INHOFE. Since we’re speaking to an attorney here, let me

ask if you’ve given some thought to potential lawsuits that could

be brought by adopting a standard today that would not be implemented for 6 years in the case of ozone or 9 years in the case of

PM, that, in fact, it’s a double standard. What would be the legal

ramifications of that, or have you given any thought to that.

Mr. DASKEL. I really—in other words, that the agency has essentially violated a duty by adopting a standard but by putting the implementation off into the future.

Senator INHOFE. Yes. That has been the concern of a lot of people, the unpredictability. I think Mr. Sharp would agree that the

fact that you can’t predict into the future—and Mr. Abbott, also,

because this is something that you make preparations for, as you

pointed out. You spend a lot of money to do that, and then you find

that maybe a lawsuit could come along and say, ‘‘Wait a minute.

You say you’re not going to lower those standards, whether you’re

talking about ozone or PM, for a period of 6 years, and yet you’ve

already adopted the standards, therefore you don’t know when

these standards could come down on you and how to prepare for

them.’’ The same would go for you, Mr. Martin. That’s a concern

I have. Am I correct in the fact that it’s the nonpredictability that

is probably one of the greatest problems here.

Mr. GRUMET. Senator, could I comment for one moment.

Senator INHOFE. Yes. Of course.

Mr. GRUMET. Whatever the lawyers or judges decide, there are

just some absolute realities. You need time to set up the monitoring network. That’s going to take about 2 years. You need time to

monitor, since the Act requires 3 years of data. That’s 3 years. My

States have to develop the implementation plans. Those take public

hearings and State legislation. No matter what the courts say, lawyers can’t make us do the impossible.

Senator INHOFE. We’re almost out of time here. I just want to

cover a couple of things. One is that Senator Baucus made a comment that Administrator Browner was not a part of this panel. I

can assure you Administrator Browner has been in many, many

panels before my committee, as well as others. She said, when she

testified, she’s testified over 20 times on this issue. In our seven

hearings, one was devoted entirely to her, and the other devoted

entirely to her assistant, Mary Nickles. And earlier this month

Carol Browner testified in the House committee on the House companion bill, which is House bill 1984. So certainly it was not an effort to exclude her from testifying. She’s very gifted, and she also

has a talent of consuming time.

And I think that there is something that I would like to invite

all of you to read. It’s the current edition of ‘‘Forbes Magazine.’’ It’s

entitled, ‘‘Watch out for this Woman.’’ I won’t go into it, but if you’d

like to read that you might find it to be of some interest. And you

also might—it might be more revealing and maybe answer the

question that so many people have asked me, ‘‘Why is it, if there

is no scientific justification for imposing such hardships and overregulation on the American people, all the way from the farmer to

the union member to the entrepreneurs, why would she want to do

this?’’ I think that answers the question.
39

I would like to—I know we have to conclude this, because we

have to give up the room, but I hope that everyone who is—and

if there are any responses to this, I’d be glad to hear from any

member of the panel. But when we talk about the premature

deaths, that is really a great disservice to the American people, implying that people are going to die.

I remember when we had one of our hearings here, and I asked

the definition of what constitutes a premature death, and I don’t

remember if any of you—I don’t think any of you were on that particular panel. And when they described it, I told the story of my

very dear mother-in-law, who on New Year’s Day of this year died

at age 95, and it was really a blessing that it came at a time that

it was the appropriate time. However, she would have fit in the

category of premature deaths as defined before this panel.

And then, when you go from 60,000 premature deaths down to

20, down to 15, down to 5, down to 1,000, it’s a moving target. It’s

kind of like the amount of money. They said it’s only going to cost

$8 billion a year, and yet the President’s own Economic Advisory

Council said it’s going to be $60 billion a year. And, as we have

talked about, many of the foundations around say it is going to be

somewhere between $90 and $150 million a year. We’ve put that

to an average family of four, Mr. Abbott, to be around $1,700 a

family. I don’t know how many of your union members want to

incur that kind of a financial hardship.

So I do appreciate very much having this panel. We do feel very

enthusiastic about doing something with this bill. I disagree with

your comments about the bill. It’s not a matter of just doing nothing. As Senator Baucus said, we want to outline a system to put

something in place so that we would be able to predict that there

is going to be proper scientific input on not just this change that

is being advocated by the EPA and the Administration, but also

any future changes insofar as the clean air is concerned. And I

think that’s very reasonable.

It is my intention, I can announce to you, that even though I

don’t think we do have the votes to pass Senate bill 1084 and they

do have the votes to pass in the House the House bill 1984, I doubt

if we would have the votes to override a veto. It is my intention

to go ahead and try to put this on as an amendment, for example,

in the ISTEA bill that’s before us right now. I’m not sure we’re

going to get to it, but I have an amendment already drafted that

is this particular bill, because it is appropriate to be on the intermodal transportation reauthorization bill, as well as perhaps fast

track, if that should come along.

So I appreciate the input that we’ve received from all of you, and

I appreciate the time that you have devoted to this, and we are

now adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned, to

reconvene at the call of the Chair.]

[The introduced bill, S. 1084, and additional statements submitted for the record follow.]
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE

OF OKLAHOMA

Today’s hearing will examine the Breaux/Inhofe Bill, S. 1084 the ‘‘Ozone and Particulate Matter Research Act of 1997.’’ This legislation was introduced as a result

of the new clean air standards for ozone and particulate matter promulgated by the

EPA on July 17. This bill is a companion bill to H.R. 1984 introduced by Congressmen Klink and Upton and supported by Commerce Chairman Bliley and ranking

member John Dingell.

Senator Breaux and I felt it necessary to introduce this legislation because the

EPA ignored the tremendous opposition to these new standards. Those opposed to

the standards include everyone from:

Governors

U.S. Conference of Mayors

National League of Cities

National Association County Officials

National Conference of State Legislators

Local government officials

Agriculture Community (including:)

Farm Bureau

Farmers Union

Cattlemen

American Corn Growers

Small Business Community (including:)

NFIB

U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Black Chamber of Commerce

Small Business Survival Committee

A Number of State Environmental Directors (including):

Montana

Michigan

Louisiana

Alabama

Nebraska

Mississippi

Idaho

Ohio

Oklahoma

Kentucky

South Carolina

Tennessee

Virginia

In total, there have been over 3,200 letters resolutions and comments expressing

concern with these standards. While I don’t want to take the time to read the names

of all of the organizations who sent these letters, I will distribute copies of an index

to these letters to the members of the Committee and enter the index into the

record.

In addition, a number of organizations have written in support of the legislation

being considered today and they include:

U. S. Chamber of Commerce

Grocery Manufacturers Association

Steel Manufacturers Association

American Trucking Associations

National Federation of Independent Business

National Indian Business Association

National Food Processors Association

National Restaurant Association and the 1995 White House Conference on

Small Business Environmental Implementation Chairs

I would also like to introduce these letters into the record showing more than 30

organizations supporting the Breaux/Inhofe Bill.

The House version currently has 191 cosponsors and the Senate Bill has a bipartisan list of 9 cosponsors. The cosponsors are:

Kempthorne

Ford

Hagel

Byrd

Hutchison

Hollings
50

Phil Gramm

And I am pleased that yesterday we added an additional 12 cosponsors to the bill:

Landrieu

Cochran

Sessions

Tim Hutchinson

Murkowski

Ashcroft

DeWine

Hatch

Shelby

Enzi

Thomas

Roberts

Before we get to the testimony of today’s panel, I would like to briefly outline the

bill.

The bill establishes an independent panel to be convened by the National Academy of Sciences to prioritize the research needs on the health effects of particulate

matter. This step will help bring consensus to any new standards proposed by the

EPA in the future. In coming out with the recent standards the EPA relied on epidemiological studies and research performed by former EPA employees. The National

Academy of Sciences will help restore credibility to the process.

Next, in order to ensure that the Federal dollars are spent on the research priorities of the independent panel, the legislation establishes a Particulate Matter Interagency Committee to coordinate the activities of the Federal agencies engaged in

particulate matter research. This committee will be composed of 8 different Agencies

and Departments.

The EPA will use this research in addition to private research to review the air

quality criteria through the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee (CASAC). This

review must be completed no earlier than 4 years after the enactment of this Act.

In addition to the science research, the EPA is authorized to require State implementation plans in order to establish a particulate matter monitoring program.

During this research and monitoring period, the original standards for ozone and

particulate matter will be reinstated and shall not be revised until the scientific review is completed.

The legislation also directs the National Institute of Health to begin a research

program to study the health effects of allergens on asthmatics, particularly in regard to urban inner cities. One of the biggest holes in the EPA’s proposal was identifying the true causes of respiratory problems in inner city children.

Finally, the legislation authorizes $100,000,000 to carry out the provisions with

$25,000,000 of that sum set aside for the ozone research provision.

This plan follows the advice of three of the four past CASAC chairs, it concentrates on understanding the science. For the farmers, the small businessmen, the

unions, and the mayors and Governors; it provides continuity. Today they are concerned about the EPA’s implementation schedule. They realize it can be challenged

and thrown out by the courts and they need stability while they try to implement

the 1990 amendments.

I would like to remind everyone what Mary Nichols, the former EPA Assistant

Administrator for Air said at our last hearing. ‘‘Under the President’s implementation schedule, the new standards will not save any lives over the next 5 years.’’

Therefore, the Breaux/Inhofe bill will provide the necessary research, monitoring,

and stability for the American people without endangering any lives.

ATTACHMENT

LIST OF LETTERS, RESOLUTIONS, AND COMMENTS EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT

CHANGES TO THE NAAQS

State legislative resolutions

Alabama House Resolution (4/16/96)

• *Alabama Senate Joint Resolution (SJR 77) (3/13/97)

• *Arkansas House Resolution (HR 1011) (2/21/97)

• *Arkansas Senate Resolution (SR 7) (3/10/97)

• *Colorado Senate Joint Resolution (SJR 34) (no date)

• Delaware Senate Resolution—Delaware House concurs (5/9/96)

• *Delaware House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 5) (1/29/97)

• *Delaware House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 42) (1/30/97)
51

• Florida House Resolution (HB 1927) (no date)

• *Georgia House Resolution (HR 379) (3/13/97)

• *Georgia Senate Resolution (SR 278) (3/17/97)

• *Idaho House Joint Memorial (HJM 7) (3/18/97)

• Illinois House Resolution (5/2/96)

• Illinois Senate Resolution (5/2/96)

• *Indiana Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR 30) (1997)

• *Iowa Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR 12) (no date)

• *Iowa House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 8) (no date)

• *Kansas Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR 1608)

• *Interim Joint Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (no date)

• *Michigan House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 11) (3/12/97)

• *Michigan House Resolution (HR 13) (2/26/97)

• *Michigan Senate resolution (SR 22) (2/27/97)

• *Mississippi Senate resolution (SCR 577) (3/25/97) • *Missouri House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 23) (3/6/97)

• *Missouri Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR 12) (2/25/97)

• Ohio Resolution—passed both Houses of Legislature (11/14/96)

• *Ohio Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR 2)

• *Ohio House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 8)

• *Ohio House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 9)

• *Ohio House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 10)

• *Oklahoma House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 1007)

• Rhode Island Senate Resolution (4/11/96)

• *Rhode Island Senate resolution (3/4/97)

• South Carolina Resolution—passed both the House and Senate (4/18/96)

• *South Carolina Senate Resolution (SB 814) (4/22/97)

• *South Dakota Concurrent Resolution (SCR 4) (2/28/97)

• Tennessee House Resolution (4/3/96)

• *Utah Senate Joint Resolution (SJR 12)

• *West Virginia House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 7) (2/26/97)

Letters from Governors

• *Arizona Governor Fife Symington to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *Arizona Governor Fife Symington to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee to Carol Browner (3/3/97)

• *Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee to President Clinton (5/16/97)

• Arkansas Governor Jim Guy Tucker to Carol Browner and OMB (4/9/96)

• *Delaware Governor Thomas Carper to Mary Nichols (3/12/97)

• Florida Governor Lawton Chiles to Carol Browner (5/7/96)

• *Florida Governor Lawton Chiles to Carol Browner (1/8/97)

• Georgia Governor Zell Miller to President Clinton (9/19/96)

• Illinois Governor Jim Edgar to Carol Browner (5/2/96)

• Indiana Governor Evan Bayh to Carol Browner (7/16/96)

• *Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *Kansas Governor Bill Graves to Carol Browner (3/11/97)

• Kentucky Governor Paul Patton to Carol Browner (5/23/96)

• Kentucky Governor Paul Patton to President Clinton (6/12/96)

• Louisiana Governor Mike Foster to Carol Browner (5/23/96)

• *Louisiana Governor Mike Foster to Carol Browner (3/11/97)

• Michigan Governor John Engler to Carol Browner (6/12/96)

• *Michigan Governor Engler to his colleagues at the NGA meeting (2/2/97)

• Mississippi Governor Kirk Fordice to Carol Browner (7/2/96)

• Missouri Governor Mel Carnahan to Carol Browner (9/24/96)

• *Montana Governor Marc Racicot (3/11/97)

• *North Carolina Governor James Hunt to Carol Browner (3/11/97)

• *North Dakota Governor Ed Schafer to Carol Browner (3/10/97)

• *North Dakota Governor Ed Schafer to U.S. Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) (9/

12/97)

• *North Dakota Governor Ed Schafer to U.S. Representative Earl Pomeroy (DND) (6/10/97)

• Ohio Governor George Voinovich to Carol Browner (5/3/96)

• Ohio Governor George Voinovich to Carol Browner (11/25/96)

• Ohio Governor George Voinovich to Carol Browner (no date)

• *Ohio Governor Voinovich to Carol Browner (3/10/97)
52

• *Joint letter from Ohio Governor Voinovich, the Speaker of the Ohio House,

and the President of the Ohio Senate to Senator Chafee (1/7/97)

• *Ohio Governor Voinovich and Lieutenant Governor Hollister to all Ohio mayors and county commissioners impacted by the proposed NAAQS revisions (1/13/

97)

• *Ohio Governor Voinovich to U.S. Representative Sherrod Brown (D-OH) (7/23/

97)

• *Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• South Carolina Governor David Beasley to Carol Browner (5/7/96)

• *South Carolina Governor David Beasley to Carol Browner (3/7/97)

• *Tennessee Governor Don Sundquist to Carol Browner (1/13/97)

• *Texas Governor George W. Bush to Carol Browner (3/11/97)

• Utah Governor Michael Leavitt to Carol Browner (7/12/96)

• Virginia Governor George Allen to Carol Browner (9/13/96)

• Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson to Carol Browner (5/23/96)

• *Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *Wisconsin Governor Tommy G. Thompson to President Clinton (5/22/97)

• *Wyoming Governor Jim Geringer to North Dakota Governor Ed Schafer (12/

19/96)

• *Wyoming Governor Jim Geringer to Carol Browner (3/6/97)

• Letter signed by New Jersey Governor Christine Whitman and Nebraska Governor Benjamin Nelson (Chair and Vice Chair of the NGA Committee on Natural

Resources) to Carol Browner (8/27/96)

• *Western Governors’ Association letter signed by four Governors: Nelson (NE),

Schafer (ND), Leavitt (UT), and Miller (NV) (5/9/97)

Letters from members of the Clinton Administration

• Jere Glover (U.S. Small Business Administration) to Carol Browner (11/18/96)

• *White House Conference on Small Business to President Clinton (no date)

• *Department of the Air Force, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Ohio (2/11/97)

• *U.S. Department of Defense comments (3/12/97)

• *U.S. Department of Agriculture to EPA (3/31/97)

• *U.S. Department of Agriculture Air Quality Task Force to USDA Secretary

Dan Glickman (3/10/97)

• *U.S. Department of Energy (3/97)

• U.S. Department of Transportation to Sally Katzen, OMB (11/20/96)

• *Memo from Alicia H. Munnell, Executive Office of the President, Council of

Economic Advisors to Sally Katzen, OMB (12/10/96)

• *Memo from Alicia Munnell to Art Fraas, OMB (12/13/96)

Public policy group resolutions

• National Association of Counties (NACo) resolution (7/14/96) *National Association of Counties (NACo) resolution (3/2/97)

• Policy Statement (Resolution) adopted by the Energy Council (the Energy

Council is an organization of elected state legislators from ten energy producing

states and the province of Alberta. The member states are AK, WY, CO, NM, TX,

OK, AR, LA, MS, and AL.) (6/18/96)

• *Policy statement (resolution) adopted by the Energy Council (3/2/97)

• ALEC Resolution (11/19/96)

• Western States Coalition Resolution (11/17/96)

• *Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC) resolution (12/10/96)

• *Council of State Governments (CSG) resolution (12/96)

• *Midwestern Legislative Conference of the Council of State Governments (7/

13–16)

• *National League of Cities resolution (12/96)

• *National League of Cities resolution (7/11/97)

• *Western Governor’s Association resolution (1/22/97)

• *National Governors’ Association resolution (2/4/97)

• *National Conference of Black Mayors (NCBM) (4/25/97)

• *National Council of Elected County Executives (NCECE) (5/9/97)

• *Midwestern Governors’ Conference (6/9/97)

• *U.S. Conference of Mayors (6/24/97)

Letters from public policy groups
53

• *Representatives of several public policy groups (CSG, International City/

County Management Association, NACo, NCSL, NGA, National League of Cities,

United States Conference of Mayors) (12/19/96)

• Executive Director of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) (5/

17/96)

• *Western Governors’ Association to U.S. Senators Inhofe (R-OK) and Graham

(D-FL) (3/3/97)

• Energy Council (organization of legislators from ten energy-producing states

and a Canadian Province to U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK)

• Letter from the Republican Governors Association (went to Browner and Nichols) (11/26/97)

• *Joint letter from the National Association of Counties (NACo) and the National League of Cities (3/12/97)

• *Letter from the Executive Director of the National Council of Elected County

Executives to President Clinton (no date)

• *Letter and materials distributed by Paul Helmke, Mayor of Fort Wayne, Indiana and President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, to mayors nationwide (Aug.,

1997)

Letters from members of the U.S. Congress • *U.S. Representatives John Dingell (D-MI) and Ron Klink (D-PA) to Mayor

Daley (Chicago), President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors (6/20/97)

• *Joint letter from conservative Democrats (referred to as Blue Dog Democrats)

to President Clinton (4/30/97)

• *Joint letter from 42 House Democrats (previously referred to as the ‘‘Dingell

letter’’ to President Clinton (4/24/97)

• *Joint letter co-signed by 114 House members (the ‘‘Boucher letter’’) to President Clinton (4/22/97)

• *Letter from members of the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture to Carol

Browner (5/9/97)

• *Letter co-signed by 35 members of the U.S. Senate (the ‘‘Inhofe letter’’) to

President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Joint letter from 8 House members to Speaker Gingrich (R-GA) and Minority

Leader Richard Gephardt (D-MO) (4/23/97)

• Eight U.S. Senators (James Inhofe (R-OK), Don Nickles (R-OK), Dirk

Kempthorne (R-ID), John Warner (R-VA), Kit Bond (R-MO), Larry Craig (R-ID),

Robert Bennett (R-UT), Craig Thomas (R-WY)) to Carol Browner (10/9/96)

• *Letter from members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,

and Forestry to Carol Browner (6/9/97)

• *Five Democratic U.S. Senators (Robert Byrd (D-WV), John Glenn (D-OH), Jay

Rockefeller (D-WV), Wendell Ford (D-KY), Chuck Robb (D-VA)) to Carol Browner

(3/4/97)

• *U.S. Senator Kit Bond (R-MO) and Dale Bumpers (D-AR) to Carol Browner

(1/7/97)

• *U.S. Representatives John Dingell (D-MI) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) (2/25/

97)

• Alabama Congressional Delegation to President Clinton (8/23/96)

• *Alabama Congressional Delegation to President Clinton (4/18/97) • *Joint letter from U.S. Reps. Bud Cramer (D-AL), Spencer Bachus (R-AL), and

Sonny Callahan (R-AL) to Carol Browner and U.S. Secretary of Transportation

Rodney Slater (4/1/97)

• *Arkansas Congressional Delegation to President Clinton (5/13/97)

• *Opening statement of U.S. Senator Tim Hutchinson (R-AR) before the Senate

Env. and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property,

and Nuclear Safety (3/3/97)

• *U.S. Representative Gary Condit (D-CA) to Carol Browner (3/7/97)

• *U.S. Representative Jerry Lewis (R-CA) to Carol Browner (2/11/97)

• U.S. Representative Michael Castle (R-DE) to Carol Browner (6/20/96)

• *Florida Congressional Delegation to President Clinton (5/7/97)

• *U.S. Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) to Carol Browner (1/10/97)

• *U.S. Representative Robert Wexler (D-FL) to Carol Browner (5/2/97)

• *Georgia Congressional Delegation to Carol Browner (2/25/97)

• *Illinois Congressional Delegation to Carol Browner (4/11/97)

• U.S. Representative Lane Evans (D-IL) to Carol Browner (5/8/96)

• *Indiana Congressional Delegation to President Clinton (5/6/97)

• U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton (D-IN) to Carol Browner (10/29/96)

• U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton (D-IN) to President Clinton (11/18/96)
54

• U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton (D-IN) to Michael Kantor, Secretary, U.S.

Department of Commerce (11/26/96)

• U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton (D-IN) to Franklin Raines, OMB (11/26/96) • *U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton (D-IN) to Michael Kantor, Secretary, U.S.

Department of Commerce (1/8/97)

• *U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton (D-IN) William Daley, Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce (3/13/97)

• U.S. Representative John Hostettler (R-IN) to Carol Browner (2/25/97) • *U.S. Representative David McIntosh (R-IN) to Carol Browner (1/24/97) • *U.S. Representative Mark Souder (R-IN) to Carol Browner (2/14/97) • *Kentucky Congressional Delegation to Carol Browner (3/20/97) • *U.S. Representative Richard Hugh Baker (R-LA) to Carol Browner (2/13/97) • Five U.S. Representatives from (MI) to Bill Clinton (11/26/96) • *U.S. Representative John Dingell (D-MI) to Carol Browner (12/13/96) • *U.S. Representative John Dingell (D-MI) to his colleagues (7/15/97) • *U.S. Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) to Carol Browner (3/13/97) • *U. S. Representative Carolyn C. Kilpatrick (D-MI) to President Clinton (6/24/

97)

• U.S. Representative Pat Danner (D-MO) to President Clinton (10/23/96) • *U.S. Representative Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO) to Carol Browner (2/7/97) • *Joint letter from U.S. Representatives Karen McCarthy (D-MO), Ike Skelton

(D-MO), and U.S. Senator John Ashcroft (R-MO) to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *U.S. Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) to President Clinton (2/6/97) • *U.S. Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) to Carol Browner (2/6/97) • *U.S. Representative James Walsh (R-NY) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *North Carolina Congressional Delegation to Carol Browner (5/15/97) • *U.S. Representative Howard Coble (R-NC) to EPA (2/18/97) • *U.S. Representative Sue Myrick (R-NC) to Lyons Gray, NC Gen. Assembly (5/

27/97)

• *U.S. Representative Mike McIntyre (D-NC) to Lyons Gray, NC Gen. Assembly

(5/29/97)

• *U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) to NC state representative Timothy

Tallent (3/19/97)

• *U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) to NC state representative Frank Mitchell (3/19/97)

• *U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) to NC state senator R.L. Martin (3/13/

97)

• *U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) to NC state Representative Lyons Gray

(5/9/97)

• *U.S. Representative Bob Etheridge (D-NC) to NC state Representative Lyons

Gray (5/7/97)

• *U.S. Representative Bob Etheridge (D-NC) to NC Rep. Richard Conder (5/5/

97)

• *U.S. Representative Bob Etheridge (D-NC) to NC State Representative Lyons

Gray (6/12/97)

• *U.S. Representative Cass Ballenger (R-NC) to NC state representative Frank

Mitchell (3/20/97)

• *U.S. Representative Eva Clayton (D-NC) to NC state representative Richard

Conder (4/17/97)

• *U.S. Representative Eva Clayton (D-NC) to Carol Browner (6/17/97)

• *U.S. Representative Bill Hefner (D-NC) to NC state Senator Richard Condor,

Majority Leader (4/30/97)

• *U.S. Representative Bill Hefner (D-NC) to NC Rep. Mia Morris (5/14/97)

• *U.S. Representative Walter Jones (R-NC) to NC State Representative Lyons

Gray (6/6/97)

• *U.S. Representative David Price (D-NC) to NC state Senator Richard Condor,

Majority Leader (4/28/97)

• *U.S. Representative David Price (D-NC) to Lyons Gray, NC Gen. Assembly

(5/9/97)

• *Letter from 17 of 21 members of the OH Congressional Delegation (including

5 democrats) to Carol Browner (2/26/97)

• *U.S Representative Paul Gillmor (R-OH) to Carol Browner (1/16/97)

• *U.S. Representative Ted Strickland (D-OH) to Carol Browner (2/26/97)

• *U.S. Representative Robert Ney (R-OH) to Carol Browner (12/16/96)

• *U.S. Representative Bob Ney (R-OH) to Carol Browner (2/6/97)

• *U.S. Representative Bob Ney (R-OH) to Carol Browner (2/20/97)

• *U.S. Representative Bob Ney (R-OH) to Carol Browner (7/15/97)

• *U.S. Representative J.C. Watts, Jr. (R-OK) to Carol Browner (2/13/97)
55

• U.S. Representative Mike Doyle (D-PA) to Carol Browner (11/22/96)

• *U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *U.S. Representative Joseph Pitts (R-PA) (2/25/97)

• *U.S. Representative Joseph Pitts (R-PA) to U.S. Representative Thomas Bliley

(R-VA) (2/25/97)

• *U.S. Senator John Chafee (R-RI) to Carol Browner (4/16/97)

• *South Carolina Congressional Delegation to Carol Browner (6/6/97)

• U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC) to Robert Hickmott (EPA) (5/16/96)

• *U.S. Representative John Thune (R-SD) (3/11/97)

• *U.S. Representative John Thune (R-SD) to Sally Katzen, OMB (5/8/97)

• *U.S. Representative John Thune (R-SD) to Kathleen McGinty, Council on Environmental Quality (5/8/97)

• *U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (5/28/97)

• *U.S. Representative Ed Bryant (R-TN) to Carol Browner (2/25/97)

• *U.S. Representative John Duncan (R-TN) to Carol Browner (12/16/97)

• *U.S. Representative John Duncan (R-TN) to Carol Browner (1/24/97)

• *U.S. Representative John Duncan (R-TN) to Carol Browner (2/14/97)

• *U.S. Representative Van Hilleary (R-TN) to Carol Browner (1/20/97)

• *Texas Congressional Delegation to Carol Browner (4/17/97)

• *Joint letter from U.S. Representatives Kenneth Bentsen (D-TX) and Eddie

Bernice Johnson (D-TX) to Carol Browner (4/17/97)

• *U.S. Representative Martin Frost (D-TX) to Carol Browner (3/11/97)

• *U.S. Representative Kay Granger (R-TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) to Carol Browner (8/2/96)

• *U.S. Representative Max Sandlin (D-TX) to Carol Browner (3/4/97)

• U.S. Representative Frank Tejeda (D-TX) to Carol Browner (8/21/96)

• *U.S. Representative Tom Bliley (R-VA) to Carol Browner (2/26/97)

• *U.S. Representative Thomas Bliley (R-VA) to Carol Browner (6/17/97)

• *U.S. Representative Tom Bliley (R-VA) to Carol Browner (2/3/97)

• U.S. Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) to Lynne Ross (EPA) (6/14/96)

• U.S. Representative Alan Mollohan (D-WV) to Carol Browner (6/13/96)

• *U.S. Representative Bob Wise (D-WV) to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *U.S. Representative Mark Neumann (R-WI) to Carol Browner (6/20/97)

• Letters from state regulatory agencies

• *Letter from 13 environmental commissioners to U.S. Sens. Trent Lott (R-MS),

Tom Daschle (D-SD), and U.S. Reps. Newt Gingrich (R-GA) and Richard Gephardt

(D-MO) (7/21/97)

• *Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries (3/11/97)

• *Alabama Department of Environmental Management (3/12/97)

• *Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry to Carol

Browner (3/12/97)

• *Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (3/11/97)

• *Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology (4/15/97)

• *Arkansas State Highway Commission (2/11/97)

• *Florida Department of Transportation (3/4/97)

• *Georgia Department of Natural Resources (3/11/97)

• *Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality

(3/10/97)

• *Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (3/10/97)

• *Illinois Department of Transportation (2/11/97)

• *Illinois Department of Transportation to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Indiana Department of Environmental Management Commissioner Michael

O’Connor to Carol Browner (no date)

• *Indiana Department of Environmental Management to Carol Browner (7/8/97)

• *Iowa Department of Economic Development (3/10/97)

• *Kansas Department of Health and Environment (3/10/97)

• *Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet (3/12/97)

• *Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet Secretary

Bickford to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (5/30/97)

• *Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality to EPA (3/11/97)

• *Michigan Department of Agriculture to EPA (1/15/97)

• *Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (3/10/97)

• *Michigan Department of Transportation (3/10/97)

• *Minnesota Department of Transportation (2/12/97)

• *Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (3/7/97)

• *Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality to Patricia Koman and

David McKee, EPA (3/12/97)
56

• Letter from the Nevada Bureau of Air Quality Chief to the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Administrator (11/13/96)

• *New Mexico Environment Department to Carol Browner (3/10/97) • *Joint comments of the NC Secretary of Transportation, Secretary of Env.

Health and Nat. Resources and Secretary of the Dept. of Commerce (3/12/97)

• *North Dakota Department of Labor Commissioner Craig Hagen to President

Clinton (6/6/97)

• *North Carolina Commissioner of Agriculture James A. Graham to President

Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Ohio Department of Development to Carol Browner (2/25/97) • *Ohio Department of Health to Carol Browner (3/10/97) • *Ohio Environmental Protection Agency—Don Schregardus (3/10/97) • *Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (3/10/97) • *Oklahoma Department of Transportation (3/12/97) • *South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (3/10/97) • *South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control to U.S.

Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC) (7/31/97)

• *South Carolina Department of Transportation (2/19/97) • *South Carolina Department of Commerce to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (DSC) (6/17/97)

• *South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (3/11/97) • Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation

to Mary Nichols (5/16/96)

• Commissioner of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission to

Mary Nichols (7/19/96)

• *Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (3/10/97) • *Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (3/7/97) • *Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Transportation (2/6/97) • *West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highways (3/14/97) • *West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection (3/11/97)

Letters/comments from state senators and representatives • *Alabama Caucus of House Democrats Chair, Mike Box to President Clinton

(6/3/97)

• *Alabama State Senator Pat Lindsey to President. Clinton (6/13/97) • Alabama Speaker of the House James Clark (D-AL) (6/13/96) • *Alabama State Representative James Clark (D-AL) to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *Alabama State Representative Bill Fuller to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Alabama State Representative Blaine Galliher to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Alabama State Representative Seth Hammett to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Alabama State Representative Randy Hinshaw to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Alabama State Representative Ronald G. Johnson to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Alabama State Representative Neal Morrison to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Alabama State Representative Jack Page to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Arizona State Senator Scott Bundgaard to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Arizona State Senator Brenda Burns to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Arizona State Senator Edward Cirillo to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Arizona State Senator Randall Gnant to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Arizona State Senator Thomas Patterson to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Arizona State Senator Marc Spitzer to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Arizona State Senator Carol Springer to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Don Aldridge to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Carolyn Allen to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Mark Anderson to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Bob Burns to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Mike Gardner to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Jeff Groscost to President Clinton (6/3//97)

• *Arizona State Representative Marilyn Jarrett to President. Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Karen Johnson to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Laura Knaperek to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Wes Marsh to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Jean Hough McGrath to President Clinton (6/

4/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Robin Shaw to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Tom Smith to President Clinton (6/4/97)
57

• *Arizona State Representative Roberta Voss to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Arizona State Representative Barry Wong to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Arkansas State Senator Mike Bearden to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Arkansas State Senator Canada to President Clinton (no date)

• *Arkansas State Senator Cliff Hoofman to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Arkansas State Senator Roy Lewellen to President Clinton (no date)

• Arkansas State Senator William Walker (D-AR) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Arkansas State Representative M. Dee Bennett to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Pat Bond to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Michael Booker to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Irma Hunter Brown to President Clinton (6/

20/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Scott Ferguson (D-AR) (2/20/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Scott Ferguson (D-AR) to President Clinton (6/

3/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Joe Harris to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Myra Jones to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Ben McGee to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Jacqueline J. Roberts to President Clinton (6/

19/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Judy Smith to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Arkansas State Representative Wilma Walker to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *California State Assemblyman Steve Baldwin to U.S. Representative Brian

Bilbray (R-CA) (no date)

• *California State Assemblyman Howard Kaloogian to U.S. Representative

Brian Bilbray (R-CA) (no date)

• *California State Assemblyman Bernie Richter to U.S. Representative Vic

Fazio (D-CA) (8/27/97)

• *Colorado State Senator Jim Congrove to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Colorado State Representative Barry Arrington to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Colorado State Representative Chuck Berry (R-CO) to President Clinton (12/

9/96)

• *Colorado State Representative Doug Dean to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Colorado State Representative Carl Miller to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Colorado State Representative Mark Paschall to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Colorado (former) State Representative Eric Prionzler to President Clinton (6/

10/97)

• Colorado State Representative Paul Schauer (R-CO) to President Clinton (11/

26/96)

• *Delaware State Representative George Carey (R-DE) (1/30/97)

• *Joint letter from Delaware State Senator Harris McDowell (D-DE —Majority

Whip) and state Representative Joseph DiPinto (R-DE) (3/12/97)

• *Florida State Senator Charlie Bronson to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Florida State Senator Mario Diaz-Balart to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Florida State Senator John Grant to U.S. Representative Jim Davis (D-FL)

(9/23/97)

• *Florida State Senator John Grant to U.S. Representative Karen Thurman (DFL) (10/3/97)

• *Florida State Senator John Ostalkiewicz to President Clinton (no date)

• *Florida Senate and House agriculture committees to Carol Browner (3/11/97).

Letter signed by Sen. Charlie Bronson and Rep. ‘‘Irlo’’ Bud Bronson.

• *Florida State Representative George Albright to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Florida State Representative Joseph Arnall to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Florida State Representative Rudolph ‘‘Rudy’’ Bradley to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *Florida State Representative Bob Brooks to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Florida State Representative Jerrold Burroughs to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Florida State Representative James Bush III to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Florida State Representative D. Lee Constantine to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Florida State Representative George Crady to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Florida State Representative Faye B. Culp to U.S. Representative Jim Davis

(D-FL) (9/23/97)

• *Florida State Representative Willye F. Dennis to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Florida State Representative James Fuller to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Florida State Representative Howard Futch to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Florida State Representative Rodolfo ‘‘Rudy’’ Garcia to President Clinton (6/

4/97)
58

• *Florida State Representative Harry C. Goode, Jr. to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Florida State Representative John Morroni to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Florida State Representative Luis C. Morse to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Florida State Representative Bill Posey to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Florida State Representative Luis Rojas to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Florida State Representative R.Z. Sandy Safley to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Florida State Representative Jeff Stabins to U.S. Representative Cliff Stearns

(R-FL) (10/10/97)

• *Florida State Representative Jeff Stabins to U.S. Representative Karen

Thurman (D-FL) (10/10/97)

• *Florida State Representative Allen Trovillion to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Florida State Representative Earl Ziebarth to U.S. Representative Clifford

Stearns (R-FL) (9/27/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Robert Brown to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (D-GA) (9/

3/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Robert Brown to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Georgia State Senator Casey Cagle to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (D-GA) (8/

29/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Casey Cagle to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Georgia State Senator Hugh M. Gillis, Sr. to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/27/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Pam Glanton to U. S. Senator Max Cleland (D-GA) (8/

27/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Pam Glanton to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Georgia State Senator Floyd Griffin, Jr., to President. Clinton (6/17/97) • *Georgia State Senator Floyd L. Griffin, Jr. to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/27/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Steve Henson to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Georgia State Senator Donzella J. James to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Georgia State Senator Connie Stokes to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (D-GA) (8/

29/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Connie Stokes to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Georgia State Senator Nadine Thomas to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (D-GA)

(8/28/97)

• *Georgia State Senator Nadine Thomas to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Georgia State Senator Steve Thompson to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Georgia State Representative Alberta Anderson to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Georgia State Representative Terry Barnard to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/27/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Terry Barnard to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Sharon Beasley-Teague to U.S. Senator Max

Cleland (D-GA) (8/28/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Sharon Beasley-Teague to President Clinton (6/

9/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Jeffrey W. Brown to U. S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (8/29/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Jeffrey W. Brown to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Mark Burkhalter to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Mark Burkhalter to U. S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (8/29/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Tom Campbell to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Henrietta Canty to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Henrietta M. Canty to U.S. Senator Max

Cleland (D-GA) (8/29/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Grace W. Davis to U.S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (8/29/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Grace W. Davis to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Dorothy Felton to U. S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (8/29/97)

• *Georgia State Representative David Lucas, Sr. to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Georgia State Representative June Hegstrom to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Henry Howard to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/27/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Henry Howard to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Newt Hudson to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Robert A. Irvin to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/29/97)
59

• *Georgia State Representative Vermon Jones to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Vernon Jones to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/29/97)

• *Georgia State Representative George Maddox to U.S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (8/28/97)

• *Georgia State Representative George Maddox to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Billy McKinney to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Barbara J. Mobley to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Lawrence Roberts to U.S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (8/27/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Lawrence Roberts to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Calvin Smyre to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Georgia State Representative LaNett Stanley to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Pamela A. Stanley to U.S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (8/29/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Henrietta Turnquest to President Clinton (6/6/

97)

• *Georgia State Representative Henrietta E. Turnquest to U.S. Senator Max

Cleland (D-GA) (8/28/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Carl Von Epps to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/28/97)

• *Georgia State Representative Carl Von Epps to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Illinois State Senator J. Bradley Burzynski to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Earlean Collins to President Clinton (no date)

• *Illinois State Senator James DeLeo to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Illinois State Senator James DeLeo to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (DIL) (9/26/97)

• *Illinois State Senator James DeLeo to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) (9/

26/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Kirk W. Dillard to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Bruce Farley to President Clinton (5/30/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Beverly Fawell to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Jesus G. Garcia to President Clinton (5/31/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Denny Jacobs to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (DIL) (9/18/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Doris C. Karpiel to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Christopher Lauzen (R-IL) (1/13/97)

• *Illinois State Senator David Luechtefeld to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Illinois State Senator David Luechtefeld to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (DIL) (9/8/97). Letter also sent to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (D-IL).

• *Illinois State Senator Terry Link to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (D-IL)

(8/18/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Terry Link to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) (8/

18/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Terry Link to U.S. Representative John Edward Porter

(R-IL) (9/4/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Terry Link to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Illinois State Senator William F. Mahar to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Illinois State Senator John W. Maitland, Jr. to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Illinois State Senator John W. Maitland, Jr. to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Senator John W. Maitland to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun

(D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Robert Molaro to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Barack Obama to President Clinton (5/28/97)

• *Illinois State Senator William L. O’Daniel to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Illinois State Senator William L. O’Daniel to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin

(D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Kathleen K. Parker to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Kathleen Parker to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL)

(8/27/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Kathleen K. Parker to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (8/27/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Kathleen K. Parker to U.S. Representative John Edward Porter (R-IL) (8/19/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Steven Rauschenberger to President Clinton (6/18/97)
60

• *Illinois State Senator Steven Rauschenberger to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/12/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Steven Rauschenberger to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin

(D-IL) (9/12/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Jim Rea to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Illinois State Senator Penny Severns to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (DIL) (9/30/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Penny Severns to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin ( D-IL)

(9/30/97)

• *Illinois State Senator William Shaw to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Illinois State Senator Dave Syverson to President. Clinton (6/11/97) • *Illinois State Senator Louis S. Viverito to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (DIL) (8/22/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Louis S. Viverito to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun

(D-IL) (8/22/97)

• *Illinois State Senator Louis S. Viverito to President Clinton (6/15/97) • *Illinois State Senator Frank Watson (R-IL) to Carol Browner (1/28/97) • *Illinois State Representative Mike Boland to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Illinois State Representative Glenn E. Bradford to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Illinois State Representative Glenn E. Bradford to U.S. Senator Carol

Moseley-Braun (D-IL) (9/8/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Glenn E. Bradford to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (9/8/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Richard T. Bradley to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Illinois State Representative Richard T. Bradley to U.S. Senator Carol

Moseley-Braun (D-IL)

• *Illinois State Representative Richard T. Bradley to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (no date)

• *Illinois State Representative Richard T. Bradley to U.S. Representative Rod

Blagojevich (D-IL) (no date)

• *Illinois State Representative James D. Brosnahan to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Illinois State Representative Robert J. Bugielski to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Illinois State Representative Robert J. Bugielski to U.S. Representative Rod

Blagojevich (D-IL) (8/19/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Robert J. Bugielski to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) (8/19/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Robert J. Bugielski to U.S. Senator Carol

Moseley-Braun (D-IL) (8/19/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Daniel Burke to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Illinois State Representative Daniel J. Burke to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (9/5/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Daniel J. Burke to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin

(D-IL) (9/5/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Ralph Capparelli to President. Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Ralph C. Capparelli to U. S. Senator Carol

Moseley Braun (D-IL) (9/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Ralph C. Capparelli to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (9/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Ralph C. Capparelli to U.S. Representative Rod

R. Blagojevich (D-IL) (9/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Elizabeth Coulson to President Clinton (5/31/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Elizabeth Coulson to U. S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Elizabeth Coulson to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Elizabeth Coulson to U.S. Representative John

Edward Porter (R-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative M. Maggie Crotty to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Julie Curry to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Julie A. Curry to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (9/8/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Julie A. Curry to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin

(D-IL) (9/8/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Thomas Dart to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Illinois State Representative Steve Davis to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Steve Davis to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (8/20/97)
61

• *Illinois State Representative Steve Davis to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin

(D-IL) (8/20/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Terry Deering to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Illinois State Representative James B. Durkin to President Clinton (no date) • *Illinois State Representative Arline Fantin to President Clinton (5/31/97) • *Illinois State Representative Arline M. Fantin to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Arline M. Fantin to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Sara Feigenholtz to President Clinton (5/29/97) • *Illinois State Representative Mary Flowers to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Illinois State Representative John Fritchey to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Illinois State Representative Michael Giglio to President Clinton (5/30/97) • *Illinois State Representative Calvin L. Giles to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Illinois State Representative Calvin Giles to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/12/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Calvin Giles to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (DIL) (9/12/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Kurt Granberg to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Illinois State Representative Kurt Granberg to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Kurt Granberg to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Kurt Granberg to U.S. Representative Rod R.

Blagojevich (D-IL) (9/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Gary Hannig to President Clinton (no date) • Illinois State Representative Charles A. Hartke (D-IL) to Carol Browner (10/

23/96)

• *Illinois State Representative Charles A. Hartke to Lynn Cutler, Office of

Intergovernmental Affairs (5/30/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Charles A. Hartke to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Charles A. Hartke to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Brent Hassert to President Clinton (no date) • *Illinois State Representative Thomas Holbrook to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Illinois State Representative Tom Holbrook to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (8/20/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Tom Holbrook to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin

(D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Constance A. Howard to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Illinois State Representative Constance A. Howard to U.S. Carol Senator

Moseley Braun (D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Constance A. Howard to U.S. Senator Richard

J.Durbin (D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Lou Jones to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Shirley M. Jones to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Howard Kenner to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley

Braun (D-IL) (9/15/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Howard Kenner to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) (9/15/97)

• *Illinois State Representative I. Ronald Lawfer to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Joseph Lyons to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Joseph Lyons to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin

(D-IL) (9/18/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Frank J. Mautino to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Frank J. Mautino to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/8/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Frank J. Mautino to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (9/8/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Kevin McCarthy to President Clinton (5/31/97)

• *Illinois State Representative John C. McGuire to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative John C. McGuire to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative John C. McGuire to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Larry McKeon to President Clinton (6/9/97)
62

• *Illinois State Representative Larry McKeon to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (no date)

• *Illinois State Representative Larry McKeon to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin

(D-IL) (no date)

• *Illinois State Representative Jerry Mitchell to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Illinois State Representative Jerry Mitchell to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Jerry Mitchell to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin

(D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Jerry Mitchell to U.S. Representative Lane

Evans (D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Eugene Moore to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Illinois State Representative Charles G. Morrow III to President Clinton (6/

16/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Harold Murphy to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Illinois State Representative Richard P. Myers to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Illinois State Representative Richard Myers to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin

(D-IL) (9/15/97)

• *Illinois State Representative John Philip Novak to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Illinois State Representative John Phillip Novak to U.S. Senator Carol

Moseley-Braun (D-IL) (8/28/97)

• *Illinois State Representative John Phillip Novak to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (8/28/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Mary O’Brien to President Clinton (5/31/97) • *Illinois State Representative Mary O’Brien to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Mary O’Brien to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin

(D-IL) (9/2/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Carole Pankau to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Illinois State Representative David Phelps to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Illinois State Representative David Phelps to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (8/18/97)

• *Illinois State Representative David Phelps to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin

(D-IL) (8/19/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Coy Pugh to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Illinois State Representative Coy Pugh to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun

(D-IL) (9/30/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Coy Pugh to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL)

(9/30/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Dan Reitz to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun

(D-IL) (9/11/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Dan Reitz to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (DIL) (9/11/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Angelo Saviano to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) (9/4/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Angelo Saviano to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (9/4/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Angelo Saviano to U.S. Representative Rod R.

Blagojevich (D-IL) (9/4/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Jeffrey M. Schoenberg to President Clinton (6/

10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Jeffrey M. Schoenberg to U.S. Senator Carol

Moseley-Braun (D-IL) (9/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Jeffrey M. Schoenberg to U.S. Senator Richard

J. Durbin (D-IL) (9/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Jeffrey M. Schoenberg to U.S. Representative

John Edward Porter (R-IL) (9/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Doug Scott to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Doug Scott to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun

(D-IL) (8/12/97). This letter was also sent to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL).

• *Illinois State Representative Michael Smith to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Arthur L. Turner to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Arthur Turner to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (10/1/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Arthur Turner to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin

( D-IL) (10/1/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Ronald A. Wait to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Illinois State Representative David Winters to President Clinton (6/10/97)
63

• *Illinois State Representative Corrine Wood to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Larry D. Woolard to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Larry D. Woolard to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (8/29/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Larry D. Woolard to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (8/29/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Wyvetter H. Younge to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *Illinois State Representative Wyvetter H. Younge to U.S. Senator Richard J.

Durbin (D-IL) (9/11/97)

• *Illinois State Representative Wyvetter H. Younge to U.S. Senator Carol

Moseley-Braun (D-IL) (9/11/97)

• Indiana State Representative Ralph Foley (R-IN) (5/8/96)

• *Indiana State Representative Beverly J. Gard (IN) to Lynn Cutler, Office of

Intergovernmental Affairs (6/3/97)

• *Iowa State Senator Merlin Bartz to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Iowa State Senate Majority Leader Stewart Iverson, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Iowa State Representative Michael Cataldo to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Iowa State Representative Dennis May to President Clinton (no date)

• *Iowa State Representative Christopher Rants to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Kansas State Senator Dick Bond to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Kansas State Senator Chris Steineger to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Kansas State Representative David Adkins to President. Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Kansas State Representative Richard Alldrift to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Kansas State Representative Annie Kuether to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Kansas State Representative Bruce Larkin to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Kansas State Representative Laura McClure to President Clinton (6/14/97)

• *Kansas State Representative Tony Powell to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Kansas State Representative Doug Spangler to President Clinton (no date)

• *Kansas State Representative Galen Weiland to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Louisiana State Senator Paulette Riley Irons to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Louisiana State Senator Paulette Irons to U.S. Representative Bill Jefferson

(D-LA) (8/11/97)

• *Louisiana State Representative Arthur A. Morrell to President Clinton (6/4/

97)

• *Louisiana State Representative Arthur A. Morrell to U.S. Senator Breaux (DLA) (6/6/97)

• *Louisiana State Representative Arthur A. Morrell to U.S. Senator Landrieu

(D-LA) (6/6/97)

• *Maine State Senator Jane Amero to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Maine State Senator Richard A. Bennett to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Maine State Senator Jeffrey H. Butland to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Maine State Senator R. Leo Kleffer to President Clinton (6/7/97)

• *Maine State Senator Norman K. Ferguson, Jr. to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Maine State Senator Betty Lou Mitchell to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Maine State Representative Douglas Ahearne to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Maine State Representative Alvin Barth to President Clinton (6/7/97)

• *Maine State Representative Donald Berry, Sr., to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Maine State Representative Gerald N. Bouffard to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Maine State Representative Joseph Brooks to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Maine State Representative Randall L. Bumps to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Pat Gagliardi to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Maine State Representative Rosita Gagne to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Maine State Representative Gevorge Kerr to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Maine State Representative William Lemke to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Maine State Representative Thomas E. Poulin to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Maine State Representative Edward J. Povich to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Maine State Representative John H. Underwood to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Maine State Representative Lois A. Snowe-Mello to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Maine State Representative Marc. J. Vigue to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Maine State Representative G. Paul Waterhouse to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Maine State Representative Robert Winglass to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Maine State Representative Julie Winn to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Maine State Representative Tom Winsor to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Joint letter from MD Speaker of the House Casper Taylor (D) and Senate

President Mike Miller (D) (3/12/97)
64

• *Joint letter from 48 Maryland state legislators to Michael McCabe, U.S. EPA

Region III Administrator (2/18/97). The signatories are: Del. Martha Klima (R),

Sen. Norman Stone (D), Del. Donald Murphy (R), Sen. Philip Jimeno (D), Del.

James Malone (D), Sen. Edward Middlebrooks (R), Del. Wheeler Baker (D), Sen.

Thomas Bromwell (D), Del. Mary Roe Walkup (R), Sen. Timothy Ferguson (R),

Del. James Kelly (R), Sen. Larry Haines (R), Del. James Rzepkowski (R), Sen.

Lowell Stoltzfus (R), Del. John Leopold (R), Sen. Roy Dyson (D), Del. Nancy

Stocksdale (R), Sen. Richard Colburn (R), Del. John Arnick (D), Del. James Ports

(R), Del. Janet Greenup (R), Del. Diane DeCarlo (D), Del. Robert Baldwin (R), Del.

Kenneth Holt (R), Del. Raymond Beck (R), Del. Louise Snodgrass (R), Del. Michael Burns (R), Del. Anita Stup (R), Del. Victoria Schade (R), Del. Joan Cadden

(D), Del. Joseph Getty (R), Del. Thomas Dewberry (D), Del. Alfred Redmer (R),

Del. Kenneth Schisler (R), Del. Wade Kach (R), Del. Rose Bonsack (D), Del. Barrie

Ciliberti (R), Del. David Brinkley (R), Del. Donald Fry (D), Del. John Donoghue

(D), Del. Nancy Jacobs (R), Del. Robert McKee (R), Del. Donald Elliott (R), Del.

Joseph Minnick (D), Del. Jake Mohorovic (D), Del. Anthony O’Donnell (R), Del.

Robert Kittleman (R), Del. Robert Flanagan (R)

• *Maryland State Senator Walter Baker to Michael McCabe, EPA Region 3 Administrator (1/26/97)

• *Maryland State Senator Perry Sfikas to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Maryland State Senator Norman Stone (D-MD) (cover letter to 48 legislator

letter) (3/7/97)

• *Maryland Delegate Donald Murphy to Michael McCabe, EPA Region 3 Administrator (2/12/97)

• *Joint letter from Maryland Delegate D. Bruce Poole and Maryland State Senator Donald Munson to Michael McCabe, EPA Region 3 Administrator (1/30/97)

• *Letter from several MI state senators to Carol Browner (2/12/97). The signatories are: Sen. Loren Bennett (R), Sen. Dick Posthumus (R),Sen. Bill Bullard (R),

Sen.Doug Carl (R), Sen. Dan DeGrow (R), Sen. Chris Dingell (D), Sen. Mat

Dunaskiss (R), Sen. Joanne Emmons (R), Sen. Harry Gast (R), Sen. Robert Geake

(R), Sen. Joel Gougeon (R), Sen. Philip Hoffman (R), Sen. George McManus (R),

Sen. Walter North (R), Sen. Mike Rogers (R), Sen. Bill Schuette (R), Sen. John

Schwartz (R), Sen. Dale Shugars (R), Sen. Glenn Steil (R), Sen. Leon Stille (R),

Sen. Wm. Van Regenmorter (R).

• *Michigan State Representative Tom Alley to President Clinton (3/8/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Tom Alley to President Clinton (3/18/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Paul Baade to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Beverly A Bodem to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Beverly A. Bodem to U.S. Representative Bart

Stupak (D-MI) (8/21/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Beverly A. Bodem to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/21/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Rose Bogardus to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Robert Brackenridge to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Lingg Brewer to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Bob Brown to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Deborah Cherry to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Bob Emerson to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Bob Emerson to U.S. Representative Debbie

Stabenow (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Bob Emerson to U.S. Senator Carl Levin (DMI) (8/28/97)

• *Michigan State Representative A.T. Frank to President Clinton (5/30/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Pat Gagliardi to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Michael J. Goschka to President Clinton (6/11/

97)

• *Michigan State Representative David Gubow to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Michael J. Hanley to President Clinton (5/30/

97)

• *Michigan State Representative Clark Harder to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Clark Harder to U.S. Representative Debbie

Stabenow (D-MI) (8/27/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Clark Harder to U. S. Senator Carl Levin (DMI) (8/27/97)

• *Michigan State Speaker of the House Curtis Hertel to President. Clinton (6/

13/97)
65

• *Michigan State Representative Kwame M. Kilpatrick to President Clinton (5/

29/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Gerald H. Law to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Terry London to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Thomas Middleton to President Clinton (6/5/

97)

• *Michigan State Representative Raymond M. Murphy to President Clinton (5/

28/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Dennis Olshove to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Lynn Owen to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Glenn Oxender to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Michael Prusi to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Vera R. Rison to President Clinton (5/30/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Vera B. Rison to U.S. Representative Debbie

Stabenow (D-MI) (8/29/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Vera B. Rison to U.S. Senator Carl Levin (DMI) (8/29/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Mark H. Schauer to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Martha G. Scott to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Paul Tesanovich to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Paul Tesanovich to U.S. Representative Bart

Stupak (D-MI) (8/20/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Paul Tesanovich to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/20/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Ilona Varga to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Ted Wallace to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Michigan State Representative Howard Wetters to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Minnesota State Senator Steve Dille to U.S. Representative David Minge (DMN) (9/8/97)

• *Minnesota State Senator Bob Lessard to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Minnesota State Senator Jim Vickerman to U.S. Representative David Minge

(D-MN) (9/22/97)

• *Minnesota State Senator Deanna L. Wiener to U.S. Representative Bill Luther (D-MN) (9/11/97)

• *Minnesota State Representative Tim Commers to Representative Jim

Ramstad (R-MN) (9/4/97)

• *Minnesota State Representative Erik Paulsen to Representative Jim Ramstad

(R-NM) (9/6/97)

• *Minnesota State Representative Ken Wolf to U.S. Representative Jim

Ramstad (R-MN) (8/28/97)

• *Mississippi House of Representatives to Carol Browner (4/6/97) Legible signatures include: Tommy Woods (R), Herb Frierson (D), J. P. Compretta (D), Alvin

C. Endt (R), Mark Formby (R), Jim Ellington (R), Boby Shows (D), Carmel WellsSmith (R), Terry Brown (R), Tom Camerson (R), Thomas E. Johnson (R), Tom

King (R), Charlie Williams (R), Valeria Robertson (R), Bill Miles (D), John L.

Moore (R), James C. Simpson, Jr. (R), Frank Hamilton (D), Bobby Moody (D),

James D. Green (R), Clinton Rotenberry (R), Joe Elizey (D), Ted Foster (R), Tom

Weathersby (R), George Flagg (D), Keith Montgomery (R), Bobby Howell (D), Lee

J. Davis (R), Ken Stribling (R), John Read (D), Charles Smith (D), Earl Banks (D),

David L. Green (D), Mary H. Coleman (D), Gene Saucier (D), Eric Robinson

(R),Andrew Ketchings (R), Eloise H. Scott (R), Charles W. Capps, Jr. (D), Bill

Denny (R), Billy Bowles (D), David Gibbs (D), Leornard Morris (D), Omeria Scott

(D), Reta Holden (D), Joe Mitch McElwain (D), Rita Martinson (R), Robert Vince

(D), V.C. Manning (D), Percy Maples (R), Joe Warren (D), Joey Hudson (D), Mary

Anne Stevens (D), Ray Rogers (R), Harvey Moss (D), Johnny Stringer (D)

• *Missouri State Senator Steven Ehlmann (Minority Floor Leader) to President

Clinton (5/27/97)

• *Missouri State Senator Franc Flotron to President Clinton (5/15/97)

• *Missouri State Senator Sidney Johnson (Assistant Majority Floor Leader) to

President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Missouri State Senator Bill Kenney to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Missouri State Senator Peter Kinder to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Missouri State Senator William McKenna to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Missouri State Senator Edward Quick (Majority Floor Leader) to President

Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Missouri State Representative Connie J. Cierpiot to President Clinton (6/11/

97)
66

• *Missouri State Representative Bonnie Sue Cooper to President Clinton (6/6/

97)

• *Missouri State Representative Bonnie Sue Cooper to U.S. Representative

Karen McCarthy (D-MO) (8/25/97)

• *Missouri State Representative Rita Days (Majority Whip) to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Missouri State Representative Chuck Gross (R-MO) to Carol Browner (2/24/

97) *Missouri State Representative Jim Kreider (Speaker Pro Tem) to President

Clinton (5/9/97)

• *Missouri State Representative David Levin (R-MO) (2/19/97) • *Missouri State Representative Fred Pouche to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Missouri State Representative Carson Ross to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Missouri State Representative Delbert Scott (Minority Floor Leader) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Nevada State Senator Ernie Adler to President Clinton (5/30/97) • *Nevada State Senator Ernie Adler to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons (R-NV)

(8/21/97)

• *Nevada State Senator Bernice Matthews to President Clinton (no date) • *Nevada State Senator Bernice Matthews to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons

(R-NV) (no date)

• *Nevada State Senator Joe Neal to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Nevada State Senator Jack Regan to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Nevada State Senator Dean A. Rhoads to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons

(R-NV) (8/20/97)

• *Nevada State Senator Mike Schneider to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Nevada State Senator Ray Shaffer to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons (RNV) (8/18/97)

• *Nevada State Senator Ray Shaffer to President. Clinton (6/23/97) • *Nevada State Senator Valerie Wiener to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Nevada State Assemblyman Mark Amodei to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons (R-NV) (8/22/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Mark Amodei to President Clinton (6/26/97) • *Nevada State Assemblyman Bernie Anderson to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Nevada State Assemblywoman Bernie Anderson to U.S. Representative Jim

Gibbons (R-NV) (8/22/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Morse Arberry, Jr. to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Nevada State Assemblyman Doug Bache to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Nevada State Assemblywoman Barbara Buckley to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Nevada State Assemblyman Vonne Chowning to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Nevada State Assemblywoman Vonne Chowning to U.S. Representative Jim

Gibbons (R-NV) (8/19/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Tom Collins to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Tom Collins to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons

(R-NV) (8/21/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga to U.S. Representative Jim

Gibbons (R-NV) (8/19/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblywomen Marcia de Braga to President Clinton (6/22/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblywoman Vivian Freeman to U.S. Representative Jim

Gibbons (R-NV) (8/19/97)

• *Nevada State Representative Vivian Freeman to President Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman David Goldwater to President Clinton (no date)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Don Gustavson to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons (R-NV) (8/22/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Don Gustavson to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Dario Herrera to President Clinton (no date)

• *Nevada State Assemblywoman Lynn Hettrick to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons (R-NV) (8/20/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Lynn Hettrick to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblywoman Ellen Koivisto to President Clinton (no date)

• *Nevada State Assemblywoman Saundra Krenzer to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman John Lee to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman Mark Manendo to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman John Marvel to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons

(R-NV) (8/18/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblyman John Marvel to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Nevada State Assemblyman Harry Mortenson to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Nevada State Assemblywoman Genie Ohrenschall to President Clinton (no

date)
67

• *Nevada State Assemblyman David Parks to President Clinton (no date) • *Nevada State Assemblyman Wendell Williams to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *New Jersey Speaker Pro Tem. Nicholas Felice (R-NJ) to Mary Nichols (3/12/

97)

• *New Jersey Assemblyman Guy Gregg (R-NJ) to Mary Nichols (3/6/97) • *New Mexico State Representative Donald L. Whitaker to President Clinton (6/

11/97)

• *New York State Senator Joseph Bruno (R-NY) (2/7/97) • *New York State Senator Owen Johnson (R-NY) (2/11/97) • *New York State Senator Owen Johnson (R-NY) to Carol Browner (3/12/97) • New York State Senator George Maziarz (R-NY) (5/21/96) • *New York State Senator George Maziarz (R-NY) (2/4/97) • *New York State Assemblyman Thomas Reynolds (R-NY) (1/30/97) • *North Carolina State Senator Frank Ballance to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *North Carolina State Senator Patrick J. Ballantine to President Clinton (5/

29/97)

• *North Carolina Senate Maj. Leader Richard Conder (D-NC) to U.S. Rep. Eva

Clayton (D-NC) (4/17/97)

• *North Carolina Senate Maj. Leader Richard Conder (D-NC) to U.S. Rep. Melvin Watt (D-NC) (4/17/97)

• *North Carolina Senate Maj. Leader Richard Conder (D-NC) to U.S. Rep. Bill

Hefner (D-NC) (4/17/97)

• *North Carolina Senate Maj. Leader Richard Conder (D-NC) to U.S. Rep. Bob

Etheridge (D-NC) (4/17/97)

• *North Carolina Senate Maj. Leader Richard Conder (D-NC) to U.S. Rep. Mike

McIntyre (D-NC) (4/17/97)

• *North Carolina Senate Maj. Leader Richard Conder (D-NC) to U.S. Rep.

David Price (D-NC) (4/17/97)

• *North Carolina State Senator Charlie Dannelly to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *North Carolina State Senator Luther Jordan to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *North Carolina State Senator Howard Lee to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *North Carolina State Senator Bob Martin (D-NC) (2/25/97) • North Carolina State Senator Fountain Odom (D-NC) (5/10/96) • *North Carolina State Senator Eric Reeves to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *North Carolina State Senator Hugh Webster to President Clinton (5/28/97) • *North Carolina State Senator Allen H. Wellons to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *North Carolina State Representative Alma Adams (D-NC) to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Phil Baddour, Jr., to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Bobby H. Barbee, Sr. to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Daniel Blue to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Flossie Boyd-McIntyre to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Robert Brawley to President Clinton (5/

29/97)

• North Carolina Speaker of the House Harold Brubaker (R-NC) (5/13/96)

• *North Carolina Speaker of the House Harold Brubaker to President Clinton

(5/30/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Beverly Burke to President Clinton (6/

10/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative James Crawford to U.S. Representative

Eva Clayton (D-NC) (10/8/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Billy Creech (R-NC) (3/11/97)

• *North Carolina House Maj. Leader Leo Daughtry to President Clinton (5/28/

97)

• *North Carolina House Maj. Leader Leo Daughtry (R-NC) to U.S. Rep. Richard

Burr (R-NC) (5/1/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Rick Eddins to President Clinton (5/29/

97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Sam Ellis to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Milton Fitch to President Clinton (6/11/

97)

• *North Carolina House Finance Com. Chair Lyons Gray (R-NC) to U.S. Rep.

Richard Burr (R-NC) (4/30/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Thomas Hardaway to President Clinton

(6/10/97)
68

• *North Carolina State Representative Howard Hunter, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Larry Justus to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Theodore Kinney to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• North Carolina State Representative L.W. Locke (D-NC) (5/2/96) • *North Carolina State Representative Mary McAllister to President Clinton (6/

10/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative H. M. Michaels, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative H. M. Michaux to President Clinton (6/

10/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative George Miller (D-NC) (3/12/97) • *North Carolina State Representative Frank Mitchell (R-NC) (3/11/97) • *North Carolina State Representative Amelia Morris (R-NC) (3/12/97) • *North Carolina State Representative Charles Neely, Jr. (R-NC) (3/6/97) • *North Carolina State Representative John Nichols (R-NC) (2/6/97) • *North Carolina State Representative Warren Oldham to President Clinton (6/

10/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative David Redwine to President Clinton (/

27/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Timothy Tallent (R-NC) (3/12/97) • *North Carolina State Representative John Weatherly (R-NC) (3/12/97) • *North Carolina State Representative William Weinwright to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Larry Womble to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Stephen Wray Wood to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *North Carolina State Representative Thomas Wright to President Clinton (6/

11/97)

• *Joint letter from the members of the NC General Assembly who represent the

Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Gaston County and Lincoln County areas (Sen. Fountain

Odom (D), Sen. Robert Rucho (R), Sen. Charlie Dannelly (R), Rep. Martha Alexander (R), Rep. Jim Black (R), Rep. Pete Cunningham (R), Rep. W.W. Dickson (R),

Rep. Beverly Earle (R), Rep. Ruth Easterling (R), Rep. Jim Gulley (R), Rep. Ed

McMahan (R), Rep. John Rayfield (R), Rep. Drew Saunders (R), Rep. Connie Wilson (R)) (3/17/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator Randel Christmann to President Clinton (no

date)

• *North Dakota State Senator Randel Christmann to U.S. Representative Earl

Pomeroy (D-ND) (no date)

• *North Dakota State Senator Randel Christmann to U.S. Senator Kent Conrad

(D-ND) (no date)

• *North Dakota State Senator Marv Mutzenberger to U.S. Representative Earl

Pomeroy (D-ND) (9/10/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator Marv Mutzenberger to U.S. Senator Kent Conrad

(D-ND) (9/10/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator Pete Naadon to U.S. Representative Earl

Pomeroy (D-ND) (9/3/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator Pete Naadon to U.S. Senator Kent Conrad (DND) (9/3/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator Donna Nalewaja to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator Donna Nalewaja to U.S. Representative Earl

Pomeroy (D-ND) (8/19/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator Donna Nalewaja to U.S. Senator Kent Conrad

(D-ND) (8/19/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator David O’Connell to U.S. Senator Kent Conrad

(D-ND) (8/29/97)

• *North Dakota State Senator David O’Connell to U.S. Representative Earl

Pomeroy (D-ND) (8/29/97)

• *North Dakota State Representative Merle Boucher to U.S. Senator Kent

Conrad (D-ND) (8/28/97)

• *North Dakota State Representative Merle Boucher to U.S. Representative

Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) (8/28/97)

• *North Dakota State Representative Thomas T. Brusegaard to President Clinton (6/12/97)
69

• *North Dakota State Representative John Dorso to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *North Dakota State Representative Pete Nasden to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• Joint letter from Ohio Senate President (R-OH) and Speaker of the House (ROH) (7/23/96)

• *Ohio State Senator Robert Gardner (R-OH) (2/13/97)

• *Ohio State Senator Robert Gardner (R-OH) to U.S. Representative Steven

LaTourette (R-OH) (2/7/97)

• *Ohio State Senator Merle Grace Kearns (R-OH) and state Representative

Marilyn J. Reid (R-OH) to U.S. Representative Dave Hobson (R-OH) (1/7/97)

• *Ohio State Senator Scott Oelslager (R-OH) (12/2/96)

• *Ohio State Senator Scott Oelslager (R-OH) (no date)

• *Ohio State Senator Scott Oelslager (R-OH) to Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott

(12/12/96)

• *Ohio State Representative Randall Gardner, Majority Leader (R-OH) (2/3/97)

• *Ohio State Representative Joseph Sulzer (D-OH) to U.S. Senator John Glenn

(D-OH) (4/17/97)

• *Ohio State Representative Joe Sulzer to U.S. Representative Tony Hall (DOH) (8/8/97)

• *Ohio State Senator Gary Suhadolnik to President Clinton (2/28/97)

• *Ohio State Representative Lynn Watchmann to U.S. Senator Mike DeWine

(R-OH) (8/8/97)

• *Oregon State Senator Gary George (R-OR) (3/5/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Senator Roy Afflerbach to Carol Browner (3/10/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Senator Melissa Hart to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Senator Vincent Hughes to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Senator Allen Kukovich to U.S. Senator Rick Santorum

(R-PA) (6/26/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Senator Mary Jo White (R-PA) (1/23/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Senator Hardy Williams to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative Ellen Bard to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative Howard Fargo to Carol Browner (2/13/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative Robert Godshall to Michael McCabe, EPA

Region 3 Administrator (2/3/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative Michael Horsey to President Clinton (6/16/

97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative George T. Kenney, Jr. to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative John Myers President Clinton (6/15/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative John M. Perzel to President Clinton (6/19/

97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative W. Curtis Thomas to President Clinton (6/

17/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative Anthony H. Williams to President Clinton

(6/16/97)

• *Pennsylvania State Representative Rosita C. Youngblood to President Clinton

(6/19/97)

• *Rhode Island State Senator William Walaska (D-RI) (1/9/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Ralph Anderson to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Robert Ford (D-SC) to President Clinton (6/5/

97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Darrell Jackson to Vice President Gore (6/4/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Darrell Jackson to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Darrell Jackson to U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (9/2/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator John C. Land, III to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator James A. Lander to U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (8/29/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator James Lander to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Phil Leventis to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Phil Leventis to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings

(D-SC) (8/29/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Maggie Wallace Glover to Vice President Gore

(6/4/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Maggie Wallace Glover to President Clinton (6/

4/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Dewitt Williams to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Senator Dewitt Williams to Vice President Gore (6/4/97)
70

• *South Carolina State Representative John Graham Altman, III to U.S. Representative Mark Sanford (R-SC) (9/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative George H. Bailey to Vice President Al

Gore, Jr. (6/19/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative George H. Bailey to U.S. Senator Ernest

Hollings (D-SC) (9/29/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Liston D. Barfield to U.S. Representative Mark Sanford (R-SC) (8/21/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Floyd Breeland (D-SC) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Floyd Breeland (D-SC) to Vice President

Gore (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Theodore Brown to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Theodore Brown to Vice President Gore

(6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Alma Byrd to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Alma Byrd to Vice President Gore (6/4/

97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Marion Carnell to U.S. Senator Ernest

Hollings (D-SC) (9/29/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Wilbur Cave to President Clinton (6/5/

97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Wilbur Cave to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC) (10/2/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Amos L. Gourdine to President Clinton

(6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Amos L. Gourdine to Vice President

Gore (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Jerry Govan to President Clinton (6/5/

97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Jerry Govan to Vice President Gore (6/

5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Jesse Hines (D-SC) to President Clinton

(6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Mack Hines to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Shirley R. Hinson to U.S. Representative

Mark Sanford (R-SC) (9/10/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Leon Howard to President Clinton (6/5/

97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Leon Howard to U.S. Senator Ernest

Hollings (D-SC) (9/30/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Doug Jennings to President Bill Clinton

(6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Kenneth Kennedy to President Clinton

(6/4/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Kenneth Kennedy to Vice President

Gore (6/4/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Brenda Lee to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Brenda Lee to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC) (9/30/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Walter Lloyd (D-SC) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Walter Lloyd (D-SC) to Vice President

Gore (6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Walter Lloyd to U.S. Senator Ernest

Hollings (D-SC) (9/30/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative David Mack III to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Yancey McGill to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Willie McMahand to President Clinton

(6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Willie McMahand to Vice President Gore

(6/5/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Bessie Moody-Lawrence to President

Clinton (6/4/97)
71

• *South Carolina State Representative Bessie Moody-Lawrence to Vice President Gore (6/4/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Anne Parks to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *South Carolina State Representative Anne Parks to Vice President Gore (6/

4/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Elsie Rast Stuart to President Clinton

(1/21/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Thomas Rhoad to U.S. Senator Ernest

Hollings (D-SC) (9/29/97)

• *South Carolina State Representative Mickey Whatley to U.S. Representative

Mark Sanford (R-SC) (9/10/97)

• *South Dakota State Senator Kenneth Albers to President Clinton (no date) • *South Dakota State Senator Jim Dunn to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD)

(9/12/97)

• *South Dakota State Senator Jim Dunn to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD)

(9/12/97)

• *South Dakota State Senator Jerry Shoener to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *South Dakota State Senator Fred Whiting to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *South Dakota State Senator Fred Whiting to U. S. Senator Tom Daschle (DSD) (9/16/97)

• *South Dakota State Senator Fred Whiting to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (DSD) (9/16/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Michael Broderick, Jr. to U.S. Senator

Tim Johnson (D-SD) (8/26/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Michael Broderick, Jr. to U.S. Senator

Tom Daschle (D-SD) (8/26/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Mike Broderick, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/24/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Roger Brooks and State Senator Jim

Dunn to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Roger Brooks to President Clinton (no

date)

• *South Dakota State Representative Roger Brooks to U. S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (9/8/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Roger Brooks to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (9/18/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Roland Chicoine to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD)

• *South Dakota State Representative Roland Chicoine to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD)

• *South Dakota State Representative Roland Chicoine to President Clinton (6/

24/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Steve Cutler to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *South Dakota State Representative J.P. Duniphan to President Clinton (6/11/

97)

• *South Dakota State Representative J.P. Duniphan to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (9/15/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative J.P. Duniphan to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (9/15/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Deb Fischer-Clemens to President Clinton

(6/25/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Gil Koetzle to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson

(D-SD) (no date)

• *South Dakota State Representative Gil Koetzle to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle

(D-SD) (no date)

• *South Dakota State Representative Gil Koetzle to President Clinton (no date)

• *South Dakota State Representative Bill Napoli to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Bill Napoli to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle

(D-SD) (9/18/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Bill Napoli to U.S. Tim Johnson (D-SD)

(9/18/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Craig Schaunaman to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (8/28/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Craig Schaunaman to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD) (8/25/97)

• *South Dakota State Representative Craig Schaunaman to President Clinton

(6/24/97)
72

• *Tennessee Lt. Governor/Speaker of the Senate John Wilder (D-TN) (2/6/97) • *Tennessee State Senator Curtis Person to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Tennessee State Senator JoAnn Graves to President Clinton (5/26/97) • *Tennessee State Representative Steve Godsey to President Clinton (5/29/97) • *Tennessee State Representative Matthew Kisber to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Tennessee State Representative Mike Williams (D-TN) to Lynn Cutler, Office

of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/2/97)

• *Texas State Senator Royce West to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Texas State Representative Terri Hodge to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Virginia State Senator Joseph Benedetti to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Virginia State Senator L. Louise Lucas to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Virginia State Senator Kenneth Stolle to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Virginia State Senator Martin Williams to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Virginia Delegate Watkins M. Abbitt, Jr. to President Clinton (5/27/97) • *Virginia Delegate David Albo to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Virginia Delegate Eric Cantor to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Virginia Delegate Raymond Guest, Jr. to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Virginia Delegate Frank Hargrove, Sr. to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Virginia Delegate Robert McDonnell to President Clinton (6/7/97) • *Virginia Delegate Jay O’Brien to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Virginia Delegate John S. Reid to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Virginia Delegate Frank Ruff to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Virginia Delegate S. Vance Wilkins, Jr. to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Virginia Delegate John C. Watkins to President (6/10/97) • *Washington State Senator Bill Finkbeiner to U.S. Representative Rick White

(R-WA) (8/26/97)

• *Washington State Representative Bill Grant to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Washington State Representative Brian Hatfield to President Clinton (6/23/

97)

• *Washington State Senator Michael Heavey to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Washington State Representative Lynn Kessler to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Washington State Representative Erik Poulsen to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Washington State Representative Dave Quall to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *West Virginia State Senator Leonard W. Anderson to President Clinton (6/17/

97)

• *West Virginia State Senator Edwin J. Bowman to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *West Virginia State Senator Robert L. Dittmar to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *West Virginia State Senator Walter Helmick to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *West Virginia State Senator Sarah Minear to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *West Virginia State Senator Michael Oliverio, II to President Clinton (6/16/

97)

• *West Virginia State Senator Roman Prezioso, Jr. to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *West Virginia State Senator Mike Ross to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *West Virginia State Senator (President Pro Tem) William Sharpe, Jr. to

President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *West Virginia State Senator Vic Sprouse to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *West Virginia State Senator Martha Y. Walker to President Clinton (10/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Tom Azinger to President Clinton (no date)

• *West Virginia Delegate Robert C. Beach to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Michael Caputo to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate David Collins (D-WV) (2/3/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Jeff Davis to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Richard H. Everson to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Joe Farris to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Steve Harrison to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Larry Heck to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Dick Henderson to President Clinton (no date)

• *West Virginia Delegate Evan Jenkins to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Margaret Miller to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Jody G. Smirl to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Ron Thompson to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Scott G. Varner to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Barbara Warner to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *West Virginia Delegate Larry Williams to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Joint letter signed by 8 members of the West Virginia Legislature to Carol

Browner (3/11/97). Signatories are: Sen. Ed Bowman (D), Sen. Andrew McKenzie

(R), Del. Tamara Pettit (D), Del. Jeff Davis (D), Del. Tim Ennis (D), Del. Roy

Givens (D), Del. Tal Hutchins (D), Del. Gil White (R).
73

• *Wisconsin State Representative John Dobyns to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Stephen Freese to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative John Gard to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Mark Green to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Scott Gunderson to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Dave Hutchison (R-WI) to U.S. Senator Herb

Kohl (D-WI) (1/13/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Scott Jensen to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Neal J. Kedzie to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Alan Lasee (R-WI) (2/18/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Frank Lasee to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Terry Musser to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Stephen L. Nass to President Clinton (6/19/

97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Luther Olsen to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Wisconsin State Representative Al Ott (R-WI) (3/7/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Clifford Otte to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Chuck Schafer to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Daniel P. Vrakas to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Scott Walker to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wisconsin State Senator Robert Welch to U.S. Representative Mark Neumann

(R-WI) (8/21/97). Copy of this letter also went to all other members of the Wisconsin Congressional Delegation.

• *Wisconsin State Representative Robert Ziegelbauer to President Clinton (6/18/

97)

• *Wisconsin State Representative Robert K. Zukowski to President Clinton (6/

24/97)

• *Joint letter from 40 members of the Wisconsin State Assembly to Carol

Browner (3/12/97). Letter signed by: Rep. Frank Lasee (R), Speaker Ben Brancel

(R), Rep. Glenn Grothman (R), Rep. Frank Urban (R), Rep. Scott Jensen (R), Rep.

Gregg Underheim (R), Speaker Pro Tempore Steve Freese (R), Rep. Luther Olsen

(R), Rep. David Brandemuehl (R), Maj. Leader Steve Foti (R), Rep. Carol Kelso

(R), Rep. Robert Goetsch (R), Rep. Mark Green (R), Rep. Tim Hoven (R), Rep.

Scott Gunderson (R), Rep. John Dobyns (R), Rep. John Gard (R), Rep. Cloyd Porter (R), Asst. Maj. Leader Bonnie Ladwig (R), Rep. Mary Lazich (R), Rep. Robert

Zakowski (R), Rep. Dan Vrakas (R), Rep. Bill Lorge (R), Rep. Cliff Otte (R), Rep.

Neal Kedzie (R), Rep. Steve Nass (R), Rep. Michael Lehman (D), Rep. Terry

Musser (R), Rep. Chuck Schafer (R), Rep. Eugene Hahn (R), Rep. Lorraine Seratti

(R), Sen. Gary Dizewiecki (R), Rep. Scott Walker (R), Sen. Alan Lasee (R), Rep.

DuWayne Johnsrud (R), Sen. Margaret Farrow (R), Rep. Jim Kreuser (D), Sen.

Carol Buettner (R), Rep. Robert Ziegelbauer (D), Sen. Robert Welch (R)

• *Joint Letter from Wisconsin State Legislators to President Clinton (6/6/97).

The following people signed the letter: Senator Gwendelynne Moore, Senator Kim

Plache, Rep. James Kreuser, Senator Richard Grobschmidt, Senator Robert Wirch,

Senator Gary George, and Representative James Kreuser.

Letters/comments from mayors/county commissioners

• *Mayor Athens (AL) to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Mayor of Brent (no party-AL) to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Chickasaw (AL) to President Clinton (5/14/97)

• *Mayor of Clanton (AL) to President Clinton (4/22/97)

• *Mayor of Clanton (AL) to U.S. Representative Bud Cramer (D-AL) (4/22/97)

• *Mayor of Dothan (AL) to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Mayor of Florence (no party-AL) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Hanceville (AL) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs

(6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to Sally Katzen, OMB (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to Kathleen McGinty, Council on Environmental

Quality (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) (6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) (6/4/97)
74

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Representative Robert Aderholt (R-AL)

(6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Representative Robert Cramer (D-AL) (6/

4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Representative Spencer Bachus (R-AL)

(6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Representative Earl Hillard (D-AL) (6/

4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Representative Sonny Callahan (R-AL)

(6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Representative Terry Everett (R-AL) (6/

4/97)

• *Mayor of Rainbow City (AL) to U.S. Representative Bob Riley (R-AL) (6/4/97) • *Mayor of Stevenson (AL) to AL Governor Fob James (5/15/97) • *Jefferson County, AL Commissioner Chris McNair to President Clinton (5/97) • *Arkansas Commissioner of Roads and Transportation, Gary White to President Clinton (5/22/97)

• *President, Birmingham, Alabama City Council to President Clinton (4/21/97) • *President, Birmingham, Alabama City Council to U.S. Representative Bud

Cramer (D-AL) (4/21/97)

• *Mayor of Fredonia (AZ) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Mayor of Williams (AZ) to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Mayor of Winslow (AZ) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Vice Mayor of Phoenix to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Arizona Corporation Commission (AZ) Commissioner Jim Irvin to President

Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Navajo County Board of Supervisors (AZ) (2/10/97) • *Maricopa County (AZ) Board of Supervisors Vice Chair, Betsey Bayless to

President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Maricopa County (AZ) Supervisor Janice K. Brewer to President Clinton (6/

19/97)

• *Maricopa County (AZ) Supervisor Fulton Brock to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Maricopa County (AZ) Board of Supervisors Chairman, Don Stapley to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Mohave County (AZ) Supervisor Carol S. Anderson to President Clinton (6/

24/97)

• *Mohave County (AZ) Supervisor Jim Zatorsky to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of Alexander (AR) to U.S. Representative Vic Snyder (D-AR) (10/1/97) • *Mayor of Alexander (AR) to U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers (D-AR) (10/1/97) • *Mayor of Alexander (AR) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Mayor of Austin (AR) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Beebe (AR) to President Clinton (6/27/97)

• *Mayor of Benton (AR) to U.S. Representative Vic Snyder (D-AR) (8/26/97)

• *Mayor of Benton (AR) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Mayor of Bentonville (AR) to Presidents Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Mayor of Bradley (AR) to President Clinton (6/27/97)

• *Mayor of Bull Shoals (AR) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Mayor of Cabot (AR) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of Damascus (AR) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of Damascus (AR) to U.S. Representative Vic Snyder (D-AR) (9/23/97)

• *Mayor of Damascus (AR) to U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers (D-AR) (9/23/97)

• *Mayor of Des Arc (AR) to President Clinton (6/30/97)

• *Mayor of DeWitt (AR) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Mayor of Earle (AR) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Earle (AR) to U.S. Senator Bumpers (D-AR) (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Earle (AR) to U.S. Senator Hutchinson (R-AR) (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Earle (AR) to White House Personnel Director Bob Nash (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Evening Shade (AR) to President Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Mayor of Forrest City (AR) to President Clinton (6/30/97)

• *Mayor of Fouke (AR) to President Clinton (6/27/97)

• *Mayor of Gillett (AR) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Mayor of Gosnell (AR) to President Clinton (6/30/97)

• *Mayor Green Forest (AR) to President Clinton (6/30/97)

• *Mayor of Hamburg (AR) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Hope (AR) to U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers (D-AR) (10/9/97) • *Vice Mayor of Hope (AR) to U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers (D-AR) (10/9/97)

• *Mayor of Horseshoe Bend (AR) to President Clinton (6/30/97)

• *Mayor of Horseshoe Lake (AR) to President Clinton (6/18/97)
75

• *Mayor of Jacksonville (AR) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Mayor of Jericho (AR) to President Clinton (6/25/97) • *Mayor of Keo (AR) to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Mayor Little Rock (AR) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Mayor of Lonoke (AR) to President Clinton (6/25/97) • *Mayor of Portland (AR) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Mayor of Sherwood (AR) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Mayor of Stuttgart (AR) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Mayor of Turrel (AR) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Mayor of Ward (AR) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Mayor of the West Memphis (no party-AR) (2/20/97) • *Mayor of West Memphis (no party-AR) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Wrightsville (AR) to President Clinton (4/28/97) • *Mayor of Alhambra (CA) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Mayor of Anaheim (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of Apple Valley (CA) to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Mayor of Bakersfield (CA) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Mayor of Bell (CA) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Mayor of Cathedral City (CA) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Mayor of Ceres (CA) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Vice Mayor of Citrus Heights (CA) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Former Mayor of Costa Mesa (CA) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Vice Mayor of Desert Hot Springs (CA) to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Mayor of Desert Hot Springs (CA) to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Mayor of Dorris (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of El Monte (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of El Paso de Robles (CA) to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Mayor of Fortuna (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of Gardena (CA) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Mayor Pro Tem of Garden Grove (CA) to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Mayor of Glendale (CA) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Mayor of Grover Beach (CA) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Mayor of Highland (CA) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Mayor of Huntington Park (CA) to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Mayor of Huntington Park (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of Imperial Beach (CA) to Carol Browner (2/5/97) • *Mayor of Indian Wells (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of Irvine (CA) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Mayor of Irwindale (CA) to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Mayor of La Canada (CA) to U.S. Representative James Rogan (R-CA) (9/2/

97)

• *Mayor of Laguna Beach (CA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mayor of Lancaster (CA) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Mayor of Lancaster (CA) to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (6/9/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Loma Linda (CA) to President Clinton (6/14/97)

• *Mayor of Lomita (CA) to President Clinton (5/23/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Lompoc (CA) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Mayor of Lynwood (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Merced (CA) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Mission Viejo (CA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mayor of Mission Viejo (CA) to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Vice Mayor of Modesto City (CA) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Modesto (CA) to President Clinton (5/28/97)

• *Mayor of Monrovia (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Norwalk (CA) to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Mayor of Norwalk (CA) to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (6/24/97)

• *Mayor of Oceanside (CA) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Pasadena (CA) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Mayor of Pico Rivera (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Placentia (CA) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Mayor of Redondo Beach (CA) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Mayor of Rosemead (CA) to President Clinton (5/21/97)

• *Deputy Mayor of San Diego (CA) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of San Juan Capistrano (CA) to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Vice Mayor of Saratoga (CA) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Vice Mayor of Saratoga (CA) to U.S. Representative Tom Campbell (R-CA) (8/

26/97)
76

• *Mayor of South Gate (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Stanton (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Stanton (CA) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of Stockton (no party-CA) to the Region 9 EPA Administrator (2/12/97)

• *Mayor of Taft (CA) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Mayor of Vacaville (CA) to U.S. Representative Vic Fazio (D-CA) (8/27/97)

• *Mayor of Vacaville (CA) to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (6/23/97)

• *Mayor of Vacaville (CA) to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Mayor of Vernon (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Westminster (CA) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Mayor of Westminster (CA) to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (6/11/

97)

• *Mayor of West Sacramento (CA) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Mayor of Yuba City (CA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem Carolyn Ratto of (unidentified city) (CA) to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *Butte County (CA) Supervisor Curt Josiassen to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Butte County (CA) Supervisor Curt Josiassen to U.S. Representative Vic

Fazio (D-CA) (8/27/97)

• *El Dorado County (CA) Supervisor Ray Nutting to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Glenn County (CA) Supervisor Keith Hansen to President Clinton (5/22/97)

• *Glenn County (CA) Board of Supervisors to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Imperial County (CA) Board of Supervisors to EPA (2/11/97)

• *Imperial County (CA) Supervisor Bill Cole to U.S. EPA (2/11/97)

• *Imperial County (CA) Supervisor Dean Shores to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Imperial County (CA) Supervisor Dean Shores to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (6/24/97)

• *Imperial County (CA) Supervisor Dean Shores to U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer

(D-CA) (6/24/97)

• *Imperial County (CA) Supervisor Dean Shores to U.S. Representative Duncan

Hunter (R-CA) (6/24/97)

• *Irvine (CA) Transportation Commission Chair Alan Snodgrass to President

Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Los Angeles County (CA) Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich to U.S. Representative James Rogan (R-CA) (9/3/97)

• *Los Angeles (CA) Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich to President Clinton (6/

17/97)

• *Long Beach (CA) Commissioner Carmen Perez (Vice President) to President

Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mariposa County (CA) Supervisor Doug Balmain to President Clinton (5/28/

97)

• *Madoc County (CA) Supervisor Ben Zandstra to Carol Browner (2/18/97)

• *Madoc County (CA) Supervisor Ben Zandstra to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Merced County (CA) Supervisor, Gloria Cortez Keene to President Clinton (6/

10/97)

• *Mono County (CA) Supervisor Edward J. Inwood to President Clinton (6/24/

97)

• *Nevada County (CA) Board of Supervisors to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Nevada County (CA) Board of Supervisors to Felicia Marcus, U.S. EPA Region

9 Administrator (6/2/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Supervisor Charles Smith to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Supervisor Todd Spitzer to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Supervisor Thomas Wilson to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Placer County (CA) Supervisor Robert Weygandt to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Placer County (CA) Supervisor James T. Williams to President Clinton (6/16/

97)

• *Plumas County (CA) Board of Supervisors to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein

(D-CA) (6/16/97)

• *Plumas County (CA) Board of Supervisors to U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (DCA) (6/16/97)

• *Plumas County (CA) Supervisor William Coates to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Plumas County (CA) Supervisor William N. Dennison to President Clinton (6/

13/97)

• *Sacramento County (CA) Supervisor David Cox to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Sacramento County (CA) Supervisor Muriel P. Johnson to President Clinton

(6/19/97)
77

• *San Diego County (CA) Board of Supervisors to U.S. Representative Tom Bliley (R-VA) (4/15/97)

• *San Diego County (CA) Supervisor Greg Cox to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *San Diego County (CA) Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Horn to U.S. Representative Brian Bilbray (R-CA) (8/21/97)

• *San Diego (CA) County Supervisor Dianne Jacob to U.S. Representative Brian

Bilbray (R-CA) (8/26/97)

• *San Diego County (CA) Supervisor Ron Roberts to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *San Luis Obispo County (CA) Supervisor Harry L. Ovitt to President Clinton

(6/12/97)

• *San Luis Obispo (CA) County Supervisor Michael P. Mike Ryan President (6/

13/97)

• *Santa Clara (CA) Supervisor Pete Mchugh to U.S. Representative Tom Campbell (R-CA) (9/1/97)

• *Santa Cruz County (CA) Supervisor Ray Belgard to President Clinton (6/11/

97)

• *Shasta County (CA) Board of Supervisors to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Shasta County (CA) Supervisor Patricia A. Clarke to President Clinton (6/24/

97)

• *Sutter County (CA) Board of Supervisors (2/18/97) • *Sutter County (CA) Board of Supervisors to U.S. Representative Vic Fazio (DCA) (8/29/97)

• *Sutter County (CA) Supervisor Dick Akin to President Clinton (6/17/97) • Mayor of Denver (D-CO) (no date) • *Archuleta County (CO) Commissioners (1/22/97) • *Douglas County (CO) Commissioner Robert Christensen to Governor Roy

Romer (D) (6/16/97)

• *Mayor of New Haven (CT) to Carol Browner (3/12/97) • *Mayor of Dover (no party-DE) (3/11/97) • *Mayor of Boca Raton (no party-FL) to Carol Browner (1/23/97) • *Mayor of Flordia City (FL) to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Mayor of Opa-Locka (FL) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Vice Mayor Opa-Locka (FL) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Vice Mayor of Orange Park (FL) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Mayor of Orlando (no party-FL) to President Clinton/Lynn Cutler (6/10/97) • *Mayor of South Bay (D-FL) (second VP, National League of Cities) to Vice

President Gore (6/3/97)

• *Bradford County (FL) Commissioner Herman Johnson to President Clinton (6/

6/97)

• *Broward County (FL) Commissioner Sylvia Poitier to President Clinton (6/16/

97)

• *Dade County (FL) Commissioner James C. Burke to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Dade County (FL) Commissioner Barbara Carey to President Clinton (6/11/

97)

• *Dade County (FL) Commissioner Natacha Seijas Millan to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Dade County (FL) Commissioner Dennis C. Moss to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Jackson County (FL) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Opa-Locka County (FL) Commissioner Mary E. Allen to President Clinton (6/

13/97)

• *Opa-Locka (FL) Commissioner Timothy Holmes to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Opa-Locka County (FL) Commissioner Myra Taylor to President Clinton (6/

13/97)

• *Orange County (FL) Commissioner Mable Butler to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *Orange County (FL) Commissioner Bob Freeman to President Clinton (6/11/

97)

• *Orange County (FL) Commissioner Clarence M. Hoenstine to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Pinellas County (FL) Commissioner Calvin D. Harris to President Clinton (6/

16/97)

• *Santa Rosa County (FL) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (5/23/

97)

• *Mayor of Augusta (no party-GA) (3/11/97)

• *Mayor of Decatur (GA) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Mayor of Doerun (no party-GA) to President Clinton (6/3/97)
78

• *Mayor of Lafayette (R-GA) (3/10/97)

• *Albany (GA) Commissioner, Arthur Williams (3/10/97)

• *Albany (GA) Commissioner J.B. Howard to President Clinton (6/7/97)

• *Former Albany (GA) Commissioner Kenderson Hill to President Clinton (6/6/

97). Also owner of W.H. & Sons Cleaners.

• *Catoosa County (GA) Board of Commissioners to members of the Georgia

Congressional Delegation (5/15/97)

• *Cobb County (GA) Board of Commissioners (1/13/97)

• *Dekalb County (GA) Commissioner William Brown to President Clinton (6/9/

97)

• *DeKalb County (GA) Commissioner Porter Sanford III to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Dougherty County (GA) Commissioner George Brown to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Fulton County (GA) Board of Commissioners (2/12/97)

• *Fulton County (GA) former Commissioner Milton Farris to President Clinton

(6/4/97)

• *Fulton County (GA) Commissioner Bob Fulton to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Fulton County (GA) Commissioner Mitch Skandalakis to President Clinton (6/

5/97)

• *Fulton County (GA) Commissioner Michael Hightower to President Clinton (6/

6/97)

• *Fulton County (GA) Commissioner Michael Hightower to U.S. Senator Max

Cleland (D-GA) (8/28/97)

• *Fulton County (GA) Commissioner Tom Lowe to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Fulton County (GA) Commissioner Tom Lowe to U.S. Senator Max Cleland

(D-GA) (9/2/97)

• *Paulding County (GA) Board of Commissioners (3/7/97)

• *Mayor of Coeur D’Alene (no party-ID) to EPA (3/12/97)

• *Mayor of the City of Salmon (R-ID) to U.S. Senators Larry Craig (R-ID), Dirk

Kenpthorne (R-ID), and U.S. Representative Mike Crapo (R-ID) (1/17/97)

• *Mayor of Nampa (ID) and city civil engineer Case Houson to President Clinton (5/21/97)

• *Clark County Board of County Commissioners (ID) (1/13/97)

• *City of Chicago (IL) comments (no date)

• *Mayor of Belvidere (IL) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Mayor of Chicago (IL) to President Clinton (5/28/97)

• *Mayor of Dolton (IL) to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Mayor of Dolton (IL) to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (D-IL) (9/9/97)

• *Mayor of Granite City (D-IL) to Carol Browner (1/13/97)

• *Mayor of Peoria (IL) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Mayor of Taylorville (IL) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Belvidere Township (IL) Supervisor Robert L. Turner to President Clinton (6/

16/97)

• *Cook County (IL) Commissioner John Stroger, Jr. to President Clinton (6/6/

97)

• *Cook County (IL) Commissioner Roberto Maldonado to President Clinton (6/

18/97)

• *Cook County (IL) Commissioner Darlena Williams-Burnett to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Hidalgo County (IL) Commissioner Sylvia Handy to President Clinton (6/20/

97)

• *Peoria County (IL) Commissioner Gary Stella to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Peoria County (IL) Commissioner Gary Stella to Carol Browner (6/10/97)

• Mayor of Evansville (D-IN) to EPA (no date)

• *Mayor of Goshen (D-IN) to President Clinton (12/12/96)

• Mayor of Indianapolis (R-IN) to Carol Browner (5/14/96)

• Mayor of Indianapolis (R-IN) to Sally Katzen, OMB (5/14/96)

• Mayor of Indianapolis (R-IN) to Laura D’Andrea Tyson, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy (5/14/96)

• *Mayor of Indianapolis (R-IN) (3/11/97)

• *Mayor of Indianapolis (R-IN) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/2/97)

• Mayor of Mt. Vernon (D-IN) to Sally Katzen, OMB (4/19/96) • *Mayor of New Albany (IN) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• Mayor of South Bend (D-IN) to Carol Browner (4/22/96)

• Mayor of South Bend (D-IN) to Sally Katzen, OMB (4/22/96)
79

• Mayor of South Bend (D-IN) to Laura D’Andrea Tyson, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy (4/22/96)

• *Mayor of South Bend, (D-IN) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Fort Wayne (R-IN) (3/7/97) • *Mayor of Jeffersonville (D-IN) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/3/97)

• Mayor of Rensselaer (R-IN) to the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns (4/

18/96)

• *Mayor of Rensselaer (R-IN) (3/10/97) • *Mayor of Rensselaer (R-IN) to U.S. Representative Steve Buyer (R-IN) (3/10/

97)

• *Mayor of Terre Haute (D-IN) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/2/97)

• *Mayor of Hobart (IN) to U.S. Representative Peter Visclosky (D-IN) (8/25/97) • *Mayor of Charlestown (IN) to U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton (D-IN) (8/12/

97)

• *Mayor of Hammond (IN) to U.S. Representative Peter Visclosky (D-IN) (8/25/

97)

• *Mayor of Lake Station (IN) to U.S. Representative Peter Visclosky (D-IN) (8/

18/97)

• *Mayor of Valparaiso (IN) to U.S. Representative Peter Visclosky (D-IN) (8/20/

97)

• *Mayor of Whiting (IN) to U.S. Representative Peter Visclosky (D-IN) (9/2/97) • Indiana Association of Cities and Towns to the Mayor of Lebanon, Indiana (4/

15/96)

• *14 Indiana Mayors signed testimony of Indiana Association of Cities and

Towns for Chicago Jan. 15 NAAQS hearing—Mayors of Anderson (D), Auburn (R),

Bluffton (D), Elkhart (D), Evansville (D), Goshen (D), Greenfield (R), Greenwood

(R), Huntington (D), Martinsville (R), Mishawaka (R), Mt. Vernon (D), Noblesville

(R), Rensselaer (R)

• *Letter to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, signed by 14 Indiana mayors (5/29/97). Signatories are: Mayors of Anderson (D), Auburn (R),

Bluffton (D), Elkhart (D), Evansville (D), Goshen (D), Greenfield (R), Greenwood

(R), Huntington (D), Martinsville (R), Mishawaka (R), Mt. Vernon (D), Noblesville

(R), Rensselaer (R)

• *Letter to Sally Katzen, Office of Management and Budget, signed by 14 Indiana mayors (5/29/97). Signatories are: Mayors of Anderson (D), Auburn (R),

Bluffton (D), Elkhart (D), Evansville (D), Goshen (D), Greenfield (R), Greenwood

(R), Huntington (D), Martinsville (R), Mishawaka (R), Mt. Vernon (D), Noblesville

(R), Rensselaer (R) Martinsville (R), Mishawaka (R), Mt. Vernon (D), Noblesville

(R), Rensselaer (R).

• *Hendricks County (IN) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Boone County (IN) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *LaPorte County (IN) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Iowa Falls (IA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mayor of Dallas Center (IA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mayor of Manchester (IA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mayor of Mt. Pleasant (IA) to U.S. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) (8/26/97)

• *Mayor of Mt. Pleasant (IA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Waterloo (IA) John R. Rooff to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Cerro Gordo County (IA) Board of Supervisors to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Cerro Gordo County (IA) Board of Supervisors to President Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Hamilton County (IA) Board of Supervisors to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Sac County (IA) Supervisor Rebecca Hillmer to Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *Iowa League of Cities to Mayor of Muscatine, IA, Dick O’Brien. Same letter

went to 29 other Iowa mayors (8/12/97).

• *Mayor of Prairie Village (KS) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Wichita (R-KS) to EPA (3/4/97)

• *Mayor of Florence (D-KY) (1/13/97)

• Mayor of Louisa (R-KY) to Carol Browner (5/3/96)

• Mayor of Louisa (R-KY) to Sally Katzen, OMB (5/3/96)

• Mayor of Louisa (R-KY) to Laura D’Andrea Tyson, Assistant to the President

for Economic Policy (5/3/96)

• *Mayor of Russell (D-KY) to Carol Browner (3/10/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) President Tim Coulon to U.S. EPA (2/3/97)

• *Mayor of Lake Charles (D-LA) (2/18/97)

• *Mayor of New Orleans (LA) to President Clinton (6/25/97)
80

• *Mayor of New Orleans (LA) to U.S. Senator Breaux (D-LA) (6/25/96) • *Mayor of New Orleans (LA) to U.S. Senator Landrieu (D-LA) (6/25/96) • *Mayor of Portland (ME) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Oxford County (ME) Commissioner Steven Merrill to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *Cecil County (MD) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Mayor of Allen Park (MI) to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Mayor of Bay City (MI) to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Mayor of Burton (MI) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Mayor of Dearborn Heights, D-MI to Carol Browner (3/7/97) • Mayor of Detroit (D-MI) (11/7/96) • *Mayor of Detroit (D-MI) to U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) (5/2/97) • *Mayor of Detroit (D-MI) to U.S. Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA), Chair

of the Congressional Black Caucus (6/6/97)

• *Mayor of Detroit (D-MI) to Erskine Bowles, White House Chief of Staff (6/6/

97)

• *Mayor of Detroit (D-MI) to Gene Sperling, Assistant to the President and Director of the National Economic Council (6/6/97)

• *Mayor of Fenton (MI) to President Clinton (6/26/97) • *Mayor of Grand Rapids (MI) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Mayor of Linden (MI) to U.S. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) (9/4/97) • *Mayor of Rochester Hills (MI) to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Mayor of Rochester Hills (MI) to U.S. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) (6/4/97) • *Mayor of Rochester Hills (MI) to U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) (6/

4/97)

• *Mayor of Rochester Hills (MI) to U.S. Representative Dale Kildee (D-MI) • *Argentine Township (MI) Supervisor Robert W. Cole to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (8/22/97)

• *Argentine Township (MI) Supervisor Robert W. Cole to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/22/97)

• *Argentine Township (MI) Supervisor Robert W. Cole to President Clinton (6/

16/97)

• *Benzie County (MI) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Berrien County (MI) Commissioner R.J. Burkholz to President Clinton (6/25/

97)

• *Calumet Township (MI) Supervisor Paul A. Lehto to U. S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (9/5/97)

• *Calumet Township (MI) Supervisor Paul A. Lehto to U.S. Representative Bart

Stupak (D-MI) (9/5/97)

• *Clay Township (MI) Supervisor Jon E. Manos to EPA (3/4/97) • *Fenton Township (MI) Supervisor Carl Gabrielson to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Fenton Township (MI) Supervisor Carl Gabrielson to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Flint Township (MI) Supervisor Sally Shaheen Joseph, J.D. to U.S. Senator

Carl Levin (D-MI) (8/25/97)

• *Flint Township (MI) Supervisor Sally Shaheen Joseph, J.D. to U.S. Representative Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/25/97)

• *Flint Township (MI) Supervisor Sally Shaheen Joseph to President Clinton (6/

13/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Commissioner Floyd Clack to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Commissioner Raynetta Speed to President Clinton (6/

9/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Commissioner John J. Gleason to President Clinton (6/

6/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Commissioner John J. Gleason to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/22/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Commissioner John J. Gleason to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (8/22/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Commissioner Ken Hardin to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/25/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Commissioner Ken Hardin to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Drain Commissioner Anthony Ragnone to President

Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Kalamazoo County (MI) Commissioner Judy Todd Johnson to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Kalamazoo County (MI) Commissioner Charlotte Sumney to U.S. Representative Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) (7/3/97)
81

• *Kalamazoo County (MI) Commissioner Raymond Wilson to President Clinton

(6/2/97)

• *Macomb County (MI) Commissioner Diana Kolakowski to U.S. Representative

David Bonior (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Macomb County (MI) Commissioner Diana Kolakowski to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Macomb County (MI) Commissioner Michael Sessa to Carol Browner (1/27/97) • *Macomb Township (MI) Supervisor John D. Brennan to Representative David

Bonior (D-MI) (9/5/97)

• *Macomb Township (MI) Supervisor John D. Brennan to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (9/5/97)

• *Mundy Township (MI) Supervisor Donald G. Halka to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/27/97)

• *Mundy Township (MI) Supervisor Donald G. Halka to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (8/27/97)

• *Muskegon County (MI) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (3/7/97) • *Ottawa County (MI) Commissioner Robert J. Rinck to President Clinton (6/

6/97)

• *Ottawa County (MI) Commissioner Roger Rycenga to President Clinton (6/3/

97)

• *Wayne County (MI) Commissioner George Cushingberry to President Clinton

(6/5/97)

• *Wayne County (MI) Commissioner Ricardo A. Solomon to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Mayor of St. Paul (R-MN) to U.S. Representative David Minge (D-MN) (6/12/

97)

• *Hennepin County (MN) Commissioner Mark J. Stenglein to U.S. Representative Jim Ramstad (R-MN) (9/3/97)

• Mayor of Kansas City (D-MO) (9/18/96) • *Mayor of Kansas City (D-MO) to President Clinton (6/1/97) • *Mayor of Kansas City (D-MO) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Mayor of Saint Charles (no party-MO) to Carol Browner (2/11/97) • *Mayor of St. Joseph (D-MO) (2/4/97) • *Mayor of St. Joseph (MO) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs

(6/9/97)

• Mayor of St. Louis (D-MO) (10/16/96) • *Mayor of St. Louis (MO) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Clinton County (MO) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Lincoln County (MT) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (5/28/97) • *Lincoln County (MT) Board of Commissioners, Lincoln County Health Officer,

Lincoln County Environmental Health Department to Carol Browner (2/5/97)

• *Lincoln County (MT) Board of Commissioners to U.S. Senator Max Baucus

(D-MT) (6/18/97)

• *Fergus County Board of Commissioners (MT) (no date)

• *Mayor of Columbus (D-NE) (5/30/97)

• *Mayor of Gering (NE) to U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE) (9/8/97)

• *Mayor of Grand Island (D-NE) (5/30/97)

• *Mayor of Hastings (D-NE) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Imperial (NE) to U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE) (9/8/97)

• *Mayor of Kimball (NE) to U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE) (9/8/97)

• *Mayor of Lincoln (R-NE) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Mayor of Nebraska City (NE) to U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE) (9/3/97)

• *Mayor of Omaha (R-NE) to President Clinton (5/22/97)

• *Mayor of Ponca (NE) to U. S. Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE) (9/2/97)

• *Dawson County (NE) Board of Commissioners to Carol Browner (3/2/97)

• *Dawson County (NE) Commissioner Rodney Aden to President Clinton (6/16/

97)

• *Mayor of Boulder City (NV) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of Henderson (NV) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Mayor of North Las Vegas (NV) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Clark County (NV) Commissioner Erin Kenny to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of Holland (NJ) to President Clinton (5/27/97)

• *Clark County (NV) Commissioner Myrna Williams to President Clinton (6/25/

97)

• *Hobbs (NM) City Commissioner Joseph Calderon to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Hobbs (NM) County Commissioner Patricia Jones to President Clinton (6/17/

97)
82

• *Hobbs (NM) City Commissioner Jim Murphy to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Hobbs (NM) Commissioner Jimmy Woodfin to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Lea County (NM) Commissioner Zeak Williams, Jr. to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Santa Fe (NM) Commissioner Jerome D. Block to President Clinton (6/11/97)

*Socorro County (NM) Commissioner Benny Barreras to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Valencia County (NM) Commissioner Salomon Montano to President Clinton

(6/8/97)

• *New York State Conference of Mayors and Municipal Officials to New York

State mayors in projected nonattainment counties.

• *Mayor of Kaser (NY) to President Clinton (5/31/97) • *Mayor of Lake Grove (NY) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Haverstraw (NY) Supervisor Phillip Rotella to President Clinton (6/27/97) • *Joint letter from the mayors of the five largest cities in North Carolina to

U.S. Representative Richard Burr (R-NC) (North Carolina League of Municipalities’ letter). Letter signed by mayors of Charlotte (R), Durham (D), Greensboro

(D), Raleigh (R), and Winston-Salem (D) (4/30/97)

• *North Carolina League of Municipalities to NC state Representative Lyons

Gray (5/7/97)

• *Mayor of Alexander Hills (NC) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Mayor of Apex (R-NC) (3/10/97) • *Mayor of Bolton (D-NC) to EPA (3/10/97) • *Mayor of Cary (NC) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Mayor of Cary (NC) U.S. Representative David Price (D-NC) (9/4/97) • *Mayor Pro Tem of Clayton (NC) Jody McCleod to U.S. Representative Bob

Etheridge (D-NC) (no date)

• *Mayor of Clayton (NC) to U.S. Representative Bob Etheridge (D-NC) (8/2/97) • *Mayor of Garner (D-NC) to EPA (3/10/97) • *Mayor of Greensboro (D-NC) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Henderson (D-NC) (3/10/97) • *Mayor Pro Temp of Hickory (R-NC) (3/10/97) • *Mayor of Holly Springs (D-NC) (3/10/97) • *Mayor of Roxboro (D-NC) (3/10/97) • *Mayor of Smithfield (NC) to U.S. Representative Bobby Etheridge (D-NC) (9/

4/97)

• *Mayor of Wilmington (NC) to U.S. Representative Eva Clayton (D-NC) (8/26/

97)

• *North Carolina Association of County Commissioners to NC Governor Jim

Hunt (6/9/97)

• *Almance County (NC) Commissioner W. B. Teague, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/17/97)

• *Caldwell (NC) Board of Commissioners to U.S. Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC)

(6/16/97)

• *Caldwell (NC) Board of Commissioners to U.S. Representative T. Cass

Ballenger (R-NC) (6/16/97)

• *Caldwell (NC) County Commissioners to U.S. Representative Richard Burr

(R-NC) (6/16/97)

• *Caldwell (NC) County Commissioners to U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC)

(6/16/97)

• *Camden County (NC) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Chatham County (NC) Commissioner to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Guilford County (NC) Commissioner Warren Dorsell to President Clinton (5/

28/97)

• *Holly Springs (NC) Commissioner George Kimble (3/10/97)

• *Holly Springs (NC) Commissioner Kenneth Martin (3/10/97)

• *Holly Springs (NC) Commissioner Edison Perkins (3/10/97)

• *Holly Springs (NC) Commissioner Parrish Womble to EPA (3/10/97)

• *Martin County (NC) County Commissioner W. David Cannon to U.S. Representative Eva Clayton (D-NC) (9/16/97)

• *Mecklenburg County (NC) Board of Commissioners to Carol Browner (2/3/97)

• *Wake County (NC) Commissioner Leslie Merrit to U.S. Representative David

Price (D-NC) (9/29/97)

• *Wake County (NC) Commissioner Betty Lou Ward (also First Vice President

of the National Assoc. of County Officials) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *North Dakota Public Service Commissioner Bruce Hagen to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Mayor of Brook Park (D-OH) (6/2/97)
83

• *Mayor of Canton (R-OH) to President Clinton (5/26/97) • *Mayor of Fairview Park (OH) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Mayor of Chillicothe (OH) to U.S. Representative Tony Hall (D-OH) (8/11/97) • *Mayor of Fremont (OH) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Mayor of Gibsonburg (OH) to EPA (3/12/97) • *Mayor of Lima (D-OH) to President Clinton (6/7/97) • *Mayor of Lima (OH) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Mayor of Lorain (D-OH) to President Clinton (5/28/97) • *Mayor of Mansfield (D-OH) (5/29/97) • *Mayor of Maumee (D-OH) (1/2/97) • *Mayor of Northwood (no party-OH) (12/30/96) • *Mayor of the Village of Perry (no party-OH) (2/24/97) • *Mayor of Shelby (D-OH) (2/4/97) • *Mayor City of Solon (OH) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Mayor of Toledo (D-OH) (12/27/96) • *Mayor of Toledo (D-OH) to Vice President Gore (12/20/96) • *Mayor of Willowick (D-OH) (2/26/97) • *County Commissioners Association of Ohio to Carol Browner (3/10/97) • *Guernsey County Commissioners (OH) (2/3/97) • *Mahoning County, OH Commissioner David Engler to President Clinton (6/

17/97)

• *Office of Commissioners of Miami County (OH) to U.S. Senator Michael

DeWine (R-OH) (3/6/97). This letter went to other members of the Ohio Congressional Delegation as well.

• *Miami County (OH) Commissioners Richard Adams, Arthur Haddad, and Ann

Baird to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *Montgomery County (OH) Commissioner Don Lucas to Carol Browner (1/8/97) • *Montgomery County (OH) Commissioner Don Lucas to U.S. Representative

John Boehner (R-OH) (1/7/97)

• *Sandusky County Board of Commissioners (OH) (3/6/97) • *Sandusky County Board of Commissioners (OH) to Ohio State Senator Karen

Gillmor (3/6/97)

• *Sandusky County Board of Commissioners (OH) to Ohio State Representative

Rex Damschroder (3/6/97)

• *Sandusky County Board of Commissioners (OH) to U.S. Senator Michael

DeWine (R-OH) (3/6/97)

• *Sandusky County Board of Commissioners (OH) to U.S. Senator John Glenn

(D-OH) (3/6/97)

• *Stark County Commissioners, OH to Ohio EPA (1/7/97) • *Wood County (OH) Board of Commissioners to Carol Browner (12/31/96) • *Trumbull County (OH) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Mayor of Ada (OK) to EPA (3/10/97)

• *Mayor of Lawton (D-OK) to Carol Browner (2/17/97)

• *Mayor of Oklahoma City (R-OK) to Carol Browner (2/12/97)

• *Mayor of Tulsa (OK) to Carol Browner (1/6/97)

• *Curry County Board of Commissioners (OR) (1/21/97)

• *Deschutes County (OR) Board of Commissioners to Carol Browner (2/10/97)

• *Mayor of the Borough of Glassport (D-PA) to Carol Browner (1/29/97)

• *Mayor of Media (PA) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Murrysville (PA) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• Mayor of Philadelphia (D-PA) (10/16/96)

• *Allegheny County (PA) Commissioners Bob Cranmer, Larry Dunn, and Mike

Dawida to EPA (3/10/97)

• *Butler County (PA) Board of Commissioners Chari (1/13/97)

• *Butler County (PA) Board of Commissioners, James Kennedy, Chairman to

U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) (5/30/97)

• *Lawrence County (PA) Commissioner Thomas J. Fee to President Clinton (6/

16/97)

• *Westmoreland County (PA) Commissioner Tom Balya to President Clinton (6/

11/97)

• *Mayor of Cranston (RI) Michael A. Traficant to U.S. Senator John H. Chafee

(R-RI) (9/12/97)

• RI League of Cities and Towns (5/16/96)

• *Mayor of Bishopville (SC) to U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (no date)

• *Mayor of Bishopville (SC) to Vice President Gore (6/20/97) • *Mayor of Cayce (SC) to U. S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (8/27/97)

• *Mayor of Columbia (D-SC) (3/10/97)

• *Mayor of Columbia (D-SC) to President Clinton (6/18/97)
84

• *Mayor of Columbia (D-SC) to Kathleen McGinty, Council on Environmental

Quality (6/6/97)

• *Mayor of Columbia (D-SC) to U. S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (8/21/

97)

• *Mayor of Darlington (SC) to U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (8/20/97)

• *Mayor of Darlington (SC) to Kathleen McGinty (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Lancaster (SC) to Vice President Gore (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Marion (SC) to Vice President Gore (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Rock Hill (D-SC) (3/6/97)

• *Mayor of Spartanburg (no party-SC) (3/7/97)

• *Mayor of Spartanburg (SC) to Vice President Al Gore (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Winnsboro (SC) to U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (8/18/97)

• *Mayor of Winnsboro (SC) to Vice President Gore (6/12/97)

• *Joint letter from 5 South Carolina mayors (Municipal Association of South

Carolina) to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC). The mayors of Columbia (D),

Rock Hill (D), Florence (D) Spartanburg (No party), and Greenville (R) signed the

letter (5/15/97).

• *Mayor of Canton (SD) to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (8/26/97)

• *Mayor of Canton (SD) to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) (8/26/97)

• *Mayor of Canton (SD) to President Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Mayor of Fort Mill (SC) to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC) (10/3/97)

• *Mayor of Hartford (SD) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of Lennox (SD) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Mayor of Lennox (SD) to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (8/27/97)

• *Mayor of Lennox (SD) to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) (8/27/97)

• *Mayor’s Office City of Mitchell (SD) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of North Sioux City (SD) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of Rapid City (R-SD) (2/3/97)

• *South Dakota Association of Counties (3/11/97)

• *South Dakota Commissioner of School & Public Lands, Curt Johnson to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *South Dakota Association of County Commissioners to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (8/21/97)

• *South Dakota Association of County Commissioner to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (8/21/97)

• *Canton (SD) Commissioner Marie Beitzel to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD)

(8/26/97)

• *Canton (SD) Commissioner Marie Beitzel to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD)

(8/26/97)

• *Canton (SD) Commissioner Marie Beitzel to President Clinton (no date)

• *Canton (SD) Commissioner Robert Bogue to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD)

(8/26/97)

• *Canton (SD) Commissioner Robert Bogue to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD)

(8/26/97)

• *Canton (SD) City Commissioner Robert Bogue to President Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Clay County (SD) Commissioner to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (no

date)

• *Clay County (SD) Commissioner to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) (no

date)

• *Clay County (SD) Commissioner to President Clinton (no date)

• *Clay County (SD) Commissioner Todd Christensen to U.S. Representative

Tim Johnson (D-SD) (no date)

• *Clay County (SD) Commissioner Todd Christensen to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (no date)

• *Clay County (SD) Commissioner Todd Christensen to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Minnehaha County (SD) Commissioner to President Clinton (no date)

• *Pennington County (SD) Commissioner Delores Coffing to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD) (8/20/97)

• *Pennington County (SD) Commissioner Delores Coffing to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (8/20/97)

• *Pennington County (SD) Commissioner Delores Coffing to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Pennington County (SD) Commissioner Gale Holbrook to President Clinton (6/

19/97)

• *Pennington County (SD) Commissioner Mark Kirkeby to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD) (8/20/97)
85

• *Pennington County (SD) Commissioner Mark Kirkeby to U. S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (8/20/97)

• *Pennington County (SD) Commissioner Mark Kirkeby to President Clinton (6/

19/97)

• *Pierre (SD) Commissioner of School and Public Lands Curt Johnson to U.S.

Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) (6/25/97)

• *Pierre (SD) Commissioner of School and Public Lands Curt Johnson to U.S.

Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (6/25/97)

• *Tennessee Municipal League (signed by the President and Mayor of Knoxville

(R-TN)) to Carol Browner (2/17/97)

• *Mayor of Germantown (no party-TN) to Carol Browner (2/7/97)

• *Mayor of Germantown (TN) to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Mayor of Knoxville (R-TN) to Carol Browner (12/3/96)

• *Mayor of Memphis (TN) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Vice Mayor of Nashville (TN) to Carol Browner (2/4/97)

• *Shelby County, TN Commissioner Buckner Wellford (1/13/97)

• *Mayor of Alamo (TX) to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Alamo (TX) to U.S. Representative Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX) (8/25/97)

• *Mayor of Beaumont (TX) David W. Moore to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mayor of Carrizo Springs (TX) to U.S. Representative Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX)

(8/24/97)

• *Mayor of Carrizo Springs (TX) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of Copperas Cove (TX) to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Copperas Cove (TX) to Vice President Gore (6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Copperas Cove (TX) to U.S. Representative Chet Edwards (D-TX) (6/

4/97)

• *Mayor of Cotulla City (TX) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of Dallas (no party-TX) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Denton (TX) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Mayor of Denton (TX) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Mayor of Eagle Pass (TX) to U.S. Representative Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX) (8/

26/97)

• *Mayor of Eagle Pass (TX) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of Edinburg (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Floresville (TX) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Mayor of Fort Worth (TX) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mayor of Gainesville (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Gainesville (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of Groves (TX) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor of La Joya (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of La Villa (TX) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Mayor of Longview (no party-TX) to Sane Saginaw, EPA Region VI Administrator (1/30/97)

• *Mayor of Marshall (TX) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of McAllen (TX) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Mayor of McGregor (TX) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of McGregor (TX) to Vice President Gore (6/3/97)

• *Mayor of Mercedes (TX) to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Mayor of Missouri City (TX) to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Mayor of Mountain City (TX) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Mayor of Oglesby (TX) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Mayor of Oglesby (TX) to Vice President Gore (6/5/97)

• *Mayor of Oglesby (TX) to U.S. Representative Chet Edwards (D-TX) (no date)

• *Mayor of Pearsall (TX) to U.S. Representative Ciro Rodriguez (D-TX) (8/26/

97)

• *Mayor of Pearsall (TX) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Pearsall (TX) Rudy Rodriguez to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Mayor of Plano (R-TX) (3/3/97)

• *Mayor of Port Arthur (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of San Antonio (no party-TX) (3/10/97)

• *Mayor of Sanger (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor Pro Tem of Sanger (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Mayor of San Juan (TX) Roberto F. Loredo to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Mayor of Texas City (D-TX) (2/17/97) • *Mayor of Tyler (TX) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Bexar County Commissioners Court (TX) (2/6/97)

• *Comal County (TX) Commissioner Moe Schwab to President Clinton (5/27/97)
86

• *Comal County (TX) Commissioner Cristina Zamora to President Clinton (6/

20/97)

• *Cooke County (TX) Commissioner Virgil J. Hess to President Clinton (6/17/

97)

• *Dallas County (TX) Commissioner John Wiley Price to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Dimmit County (TX) Commissioner Oscar Alvardo to President Clinton (6/17/

97)

• *Gregg County (TX) Commissioner Charles Davis to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Harrison County (TX) Commissioner Charles. Bennett to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Jefferson County (TX) Commissioner Mark L. Domingue to President Clinton

(6/12/97)

• *Jefferson County (TX) Commissioner Waymon D. Hallmark to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Lampasas (TX) Commissioner Tommy Harkey to President Clinton (no date) • *La Salle County (TX) Commissioner Roberto Aldaco to President Clinton (6/

17/97)

• *Marshall (TX) Commissioner Martha Robb to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Marshall (TX) Commissioner A. Williams to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Nueces (TX) County Commissioner Oscar Ortiz to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Pecos County (TX) Commissioner to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Pharr (TX) Commissioner Lalo Arcaute to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Pleasure Island (TX) Commissioner Phil Hallmark to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Pleasure Island (TX) Commissioner Wade Walters to President Clinton (6/17/

97)

• *San Patricio (TX) County Commissioner Gordon Porter to President Clinton

(6/2/97)

• *Willacy County (TX) Commissioner Israel Tamez to U.S. Representative Solomon Ortiz (D-TX) (9/2/97)

• *Mayor of West Jordan (UT) to EPA (2/18/97) • *Vermont League of Cities and Towns to the EPA Region I Administrator (1/

20/97)

• *Virginia Association of Counties (3/6/97) • *Mayor of Appomattox (VA) to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Mayor of Fredericksburg (VA) to President Clinton (6/7/97) • *Mayor of Norfolk (no party-VA) (2/7/97) • *Mayor of Virginia Beach (VA) to President Clinton 6/5/97) • *Chesterfield County (VA) Midlothian District Supervisor Edward Barber to

President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Chesterfield County (VA) Supervisor Edward B. Barber to President Clinton

(6/4/97)

• *Mayor of Lacey (D-WA) (2/24/97)

• *Mayor of Snohomish (WA) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of Spokane (no party-WA) (2/12/97)

• *Mayor of Warden (WA) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Adams County (WA) Commissioner William ‘‘Bill’’ Schlagel to U.S. Representative Rick White (R-WA) (9/3/97)

• *Adams County (WA) Commissioner Bill Wills to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Franklin County (WA) Board of Commissioners to U.S. Representative Rick

White (R-WA) (8/27/97). (Copies also sent to U.S. Senator Slade Gorton (R-WA),

U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), U.S. Representative Doc Hastings (R-WA),

National Association of Counties (NACO) and Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA))

• *Franklin County (WA) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Grant County (WA) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Kittitas County (WA) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Skagit County Board of Commissioners (WA) (1/22/97)

• *Southwest Suburban Sewer District (WA) Commissioner John Jovanovich to

President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mayor of Bluefield (no party-WV) (3/6/97)

• *Mayor of Huntington (R-WV) (3/6/97)

• *Mayor of Welch (R-WV) to Carol Browner (3/6/97)

• *Mayor of DePere (no party-WI) to Carol Browner (1/21/97)

• *Mayor of New Berlin (WI) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Mayor of Racine (WI) to President Clinton (6/19/97)
87

• *Wisconsin Alliance of Cities (signed by the Mayor of Manitowoc (no party-WI))

to President Clinton (5/2/97)

• *Dane County (WI) Supervisor Andrew Janssen to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Oconto County Board of Supervisors, Legislative Committee (WI) (2/10/97) • *Racine County (WI) Supervisor Raymond DeHahn to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Walworth County (WI) Board of Supervisors Chairman Allen L. Morrison to

President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Waukesha County (WI) Supervisor Carolyn Evenson to President Clinton (5/

22/97)

• *Waukesha County (WI) Supervisor Jim Strand to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Campbell County Commissioners (WY) (3/6/97) • *Converse County, WY Board of Commissioners (3/6/97) • *Fremont County (WY) Commissioners Alma Nicol, Thomas Satterfield, Jane

Adamson, William Runner and T. Crosby Allen to President Clinton (6/3/97)

Letters/comments from other state and local officials • *National Association of Regional Councils (3/12/97) • *Alabama Democratic Party Vice Chair Amy Burks to President Clinton (6/4/

97)

• *Gadsden (AL) Judge of Probate Court Bobby Junkins to President Clinton (6/

9/97)

• *Anchorage (AK) Metropolitan Area Transportation Study, Municipality of Anchorage (2/13/97)

• *Arizona Secretary of State Jane Dee Hull to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Pima County (AZ) Department of Environmental Quality (3/12/97) • *Arizona State Mine Inspector Douglas K. Martin to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Flagstaff (AZ) City Councilman Rick Lopez to President Clinton (6/25/97) • *Arizona Corporation Commission Chairman Carl J. Kunasek to President

Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Phoenix (AZ) Councilman Sal DiCiccio to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Phoenix (AZ) Councilman Doug Lingner to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Alexander (AR) Councilmember Dorothy Smith to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Alexander (AR) Councilmember Doug Sullens to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Wrightsville (AR) Alderman Millie Brooks to President Clinton (no date) • *Wrightsville (AR) Alderman Gilbert Harris to President Clinton (no date) • *Wrightsville (AR) Alderwoman Dorothy Jackson to President Clinton (no date) • *Wrightsville (AR) Alderman Dameter Riley to President Clinton (no date)

• *Metroplan (AR—a council of local governments) (2/28/97)

• *Arkansas County (AR) Judge Glenn Cox to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Faulkner County (AR) Judge John Wayne Carter to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Hempstead County (AR) Judge Wallace Martin to U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers

(D-AR) (10/9/97)

• *Lake Village (AR) County Judge to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental

Affairs (6/12/97)

• *Pulaski County (AR) Judge/Chief Executive Officer to President Clinton (6/2/

97)

• *Saline County (AR) Judge Terry M. Parsons to President Clinton (6/97)

• *Pulaski County (AR) Justice of the Peace John Lewellen to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Pulaski County (AR) Justice of the Peace Mary Louise Williams to President

Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Hempstead County (AR) Treasurer Margie Vickers to U.S. Senator Dale

Bumpers (D-AR) (10/9/97)

• *Wrightsville (AR) Treasurer Carolyn King to President Clinton (no date)

• *Hempstead County (AR) Clerk Velora Haltom to U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers

(D-AR) (10/9/97)

• *Hempstead County (AR) Circuit Clerk Carolyn Neel to U.S. Senator Dale

Bumpers (D-AR) (10/9/97)

• *Hempstead County (AR) Tax Assessor Darlene Sinyard to U.S. Senator Dale

Bumpers (D-AR) (10/9/97)

• *Anaheim (CA) Councilman, Bob Zemel to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *Anderson (CA) City Councilmember Rodney Jones to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Campbell (CA) City Councilmember Robert Dougherty to U.S. Representative

Tom Campbell (R-CA) (9/29/7)
88

• *Cathedral City (CA) Councilmember Gary Amy to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Cathedral City (CA) Councilmember Sarah DiGrandi to President Clinton (6/

11/97)

• *Ceres (CA) City Councilmember Leo Havener, Jr. to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Ceres (CA) City Councilmember Stan Risen to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Commerce (CA) Councilmember Ray Cisneros to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Commerce (CA) Councilmember Rosalina Lopez to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Del Mar (CA) City Councilmember Andy Schooler to President Clinton (6/3/

97)

• *Desert Hot Springs (CA) Councilmember Gary Bosworth to President Clinton

(6/9/97)

• *Dixon (CA) Councilmember Chris Manson to U.S. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (6/

10/97)

• *El Cajon (CA) Councilman W.E. McClellan to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Fairfield (CA) Councilmember George E. Pettygrove to U.S. Representative

Vic Fazio (D-CA) (8/26/97)

• *Garden Grove (CA) Councilman Ken Maddox to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Garden Grove (CA) Councilman Mark Leyes to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Huntington Beach (CA) Councilmember David Garofalo to President Clinton

(no date)

• *City of Irvine (CA) Councilmember Barry Hammond to President Clinton (6/

18/97)

• *Laguna Niguel (CA) Councilmember to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Laguna Niguel (CA) Councilmember Mark Goodman to President Clinton (6/

18/97)

• *Lake Forest (CA) Councilmember to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *La Mesa (CA) Councilmember Barry Jantz to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Loma Linda (CA) City Councilmember Glenn Elssmann to President Clinton

(6/14/97)

• *Los Angeles (CA) City Councilman Rudy Svorinich to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *Los Gatos (CA) Councilmember Steven Blanton to U.S. Representative Tom

Campbell (R-CA) (8/28/97)

• *Los Gatos (CA) Councilmember Steven Blanton to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Mission Viejo (CA) Councilmember Sherri M. Butterfield to U.S. Senator

Feinstein (D-CA) (6/15/97)

• *Mission Viejo (CA) Councilmember Thomas Potocki to President Clinton (6/

6/97)

• *Modesto (CA) City Councilmember David Cogdill, Sr. to President Clinton (6/

16/97)

• *Modesto (CA) City Councilmember Stan Dobbs to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Modesto City (CA) Councilmember Mike Serpa to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Monterey Park (CA) Councilmember Rita Valenzuela to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Mountain View (CA) Councilmember Mario Ambra to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Orange (CA) Councilman Mark Murphy to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Pismo Beach (CA) Councilman Bill Rabenalde to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Powy (CA) City Councilmember Mickey Cafagna to President Clinton (6/23/

97)

• *Redwood City (CA) Councilman Matt Leipzig to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Rocklin (CA) Councilmember Peter Hill to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Sacramento (CA) Councilman Robert Kerth to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Sacramento (CA) Councilmember Robbie Waters to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *San Bernardino (CA) Councilmember Edward Negrete to President Clinton (6/

11/97)

• *San Diego (CA) City Councilmember Judy McCarty to President Clinton (6/

19/97)

• *San Diego (CA) City Councilmember Byron Wear to President Clinton (5/30/

97)

• *San Diego (CA) City Councilmember Byron Wear to U.S. Representative

Bilbray (R-CA) (8/25/97)

• *San Jose (CA) Councilmember David Pandori to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Santee (CA) Councilman Randy Voepel to President Clinton (no date)

• *Shasta County (CA) Supervisor Patricia Clarke to President Clinton (6/24/97)
89

• *South El Monte (CA) Councilman Arthur Olmos to President Clinton (6/17/

97)

• *Torrance (CA) Councilman Dan Walker to President Clinton (no date) • *Turlock (CA) City Councilmember John Lazar to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Monrovia (CA) City Manager Donald Hopper to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Spring Valley County (CA) official Susan Price to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Feather River Air Quality Management District (CA) to EPA (2/13/97) • *North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District (CA) (3/6/97) • *San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (CA) (1/13/97) • *San Diego County (CA) Chairman of the Air Pollution Control Board Bill

Horn to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (CA) (1/2/97) • *Santa Barbara County (CA) Air Pollution Control District to EPA (2/25/97) • *Santa Maria (CA) Public Airport District Director Muril Clift to President

Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Los Rios (CA) Community College Trustee Terry Cochran to President Clinton

(6/11/97)

• *Saddleback Community College District (CA) Board of Trustees Vice President John S. Williams to President Clinton (6/14/97)

• *San Diego (CA) Community College District Ken Moser to President Clinton

(no date)

• *West Valley-Mission Community College District Trusee Karin Dowdy to U.S.

Representative Tom Campbell (R-CA) (8/27/97)

• *West Valley-Mission Community College District (CA) Trustee Brian K. Sloan

to U.S. Representative Tom Campbell (R-CA) (no date)

• *Sacramento (CA) Municipal Utility District, member, Board of Directors, Anthony Pescetti to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Foothill Municipal Water District (CA) to U.S. Representative James Rogan

(R-CA) (9/11/97)

• *Helix Water District (CA) board member Barbara Barber to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Irvine Ranch (CA) Water District Board President Darryl Miller to President

Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Irvine Rancho Water District board member John Withers to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Los Alisos (CA) Water District Vice President James Reed to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Olivenhain (CA) Municipal Water District General Manager David McCollom

to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Olivehain (CA) Municipal Water District General Manager David C.

McCollom to U.S. Senator Feinstein (D-CA) (6/16/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Municipal Water District Director Phillip Anthony to

President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Municipal Water District official—also President of Bannister & Associates Insurance to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Municipal Water District official Wes Bannister to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Municipal Water District board member Wayne Clark to

President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Municipal Water District official Kenneth Witt to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Padre Dam (CA) Municipal Water Board member, Lex Boswell to President

Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Santa Clara Valley (CA) Water District, Robert W. Gross Ph.D to President

Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Santa Clara Valley (CA) Water District board member Gregory Zlotnick to

President Clinton (6/14/97)

• *Santa Margarita (CA) Water District Board member Roger Faubel to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *Santa Margarita (CA) Water District Board member Saundra Jacobs to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Yucaipa Valley (CA) Water District President Steve Copelan and Director

Conrad Nelson to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Bonita (CA) School Board member to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Bonsall (CA) Unified School District representative Arlene Ruiz to President

Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Elverta (CA) Joint Elementary School District Trustee Sandra Felley to President Clinton (6/19/97)
90

• *Fallbrook (CA) School Board Member Lynn Colburn to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Cajon Valley (CA) School Board Member Nancye M. Splintor to President

Clinton (no date)

• *Garden Grove (CA) Unified School District board member Terry Cantrell to

President Clinton (6/18/96)

• *Inglewood (CA) School Board Member Thomasina Reed to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Lynwood (CA) Vice President Board of Education Cynthia Green-Geter to

President Clinton (no date)

• *Marysville (CA) Joint United School District Trustee Sherrill Webb to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Montebello (CA) Unified School District President Thomas M. Caldron to

President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Newport-Mesa (CA) Unified School District Trustee Judy Franco to President

Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Newport-Mesa (CA) Unified School District Trustee Wendy Leece to President

Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Newport-Mesa (CA) Unified School District Trustee Serena R. Stokes to President Clinton (6/28/97)

• *Orange County (CA) School Board member Maureen Aschoff to President

Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Orange (CA) Unified School District Trustee Martin Jacobson to President

Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Orange County (CA) School Board Member Bill Lewis to President Clinton (6/

19/96)

• *Orange County (CA) Board of Education Trustee Dr. Ken Williams to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Orange County (CA) School Board Member Eric Woolery to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Saddleback Valley (CA) Unified School District Trustee Marcia Birch to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Saddleback Valley (CA) Unified School District Trustee Dore Gilbert to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *San Diego County (CA) Board of Education member Thomas P. Davies, Ph.D

to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *San Diego County (CA) School Board member John Witt to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Santa Ana (CA) School Board Member Rosie Avila to President Clinton (6/15/

97)

• *West Covina (CA) School Board President Mike Spence to President Clinton

(6/11/97)

• *Vallecitos (CA) School Board member Craig Olson to President Clinton (no

date)

• *School Board official (CA) Harald G. Martin to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Monterey Park (CA) Clerk David M. Barron to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *City of Del Mar (CA) Andy Schooler, to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Kern County, CA Planning Department, Resource Management Agency to

EPA (3/12/97)

• *Orange County, Transportation Corridor Agencies, William Woollett, Jr.,

Chief Executive Officer (CA) (3/10/97)

• *Orange County (CA) Council of Governments (2/3/97)

• *Calaveras County (CA) Agriculture and Environmental Management Agency,

Air Pollution Control District to Carol Browner (3/10/97)

• *San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, Regional Transportation Planning

Agency (3/12/97)

• *County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, CA (3/10/97)

• *Southern California Association of Governments (2/14/97)

• *Shasta County (CA) Department of Resource Management (3/3/97)

• *Palomar Pomerado (CA) Health System Trustee Karen Kirchoff to President

Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Palomar Pomerado Health System (CA) Trustee Nancy Scofield to President

Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Nipomo (CA) President, Board of Directors, Nipoma Community Services District Kathleen A. Fairbanks to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *East County (CA) Fire Chief Darrell Jobes to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *West Valley Mission (CA) Community College Trustee Brian K. Sloan to

President Clinton (6/13/97)
91

• *Lewes (DE) Board of Public Works to David McKee, U.S. EPA (3/7/97) • *Seaford (DE) City Manager to David McKee, U.S. EPA (3/7/97) • *Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (DC) (3/12/97) • *Hialeah (FL) Council President Herman Echevarria to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Hialeah (FL) City Councilman Guy Sanchez to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Hialeah (FL) Councilmember Jose Yedra to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Jacksonville Beach (FL) Councilman Mitch Kinsey to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Metro-Dade (FL) Community Councilmember Arnaldo ‘‘Arnie’’ Llerena to

President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Metro-Dade County (FL) Senator Gwen Margolis to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Metro-Dade County (FL) Councilwoman Jacqueline V. Pepper to President

Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Metro-Dade (FL) Community Councilman Melford Pinder to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *St. Petersburg (FL) City Council Chairman Ernest Fillyau, Sr. to President

Clinton (6/16/97)

• *St. Petersburg (FL) City Councilmember Frank Peterman, Jr. to President

Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Sweetwater (FL) City Council Vice President Prisca Barreto to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Sweetwater (FL) Council President Jose L. Diaz to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Sweetwater (FL) City Councilmember Manuel Duasso to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Sweetwater (FL) Councilmember Manolo Fernandez to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Sweetwater (FL) Councilmember Jesus Mesa to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Sweetwater (FL) City Councilmember Luis M. Rodriguez to President Clinton

(6/12/97)

• *Tampa (FL) City Councilmember to U.S. Representative Jim Davis (D-FL) (9/

23/97)

• *Volusia County (FL) Councilmember Freddye C. Moore to President Clinton

(6/27/97)

• *Pinellas County (FL) Department of Environmental Management (3/12/97) • *Supervisor of Elections (FL) Barbara Kirkman, to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Seminole County (FL) Tax Collector Ray Valdes to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Florida Association of Counties to U.S. Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) (5/7/97) • *Dade County (FL) School Board member Betsy Kaplan to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Dade County (FL) School Board Chair Solomon Stinson to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Dade County (FL) School Board member Frederick Wilson to President Clinton

• *Pinellas County (FL) Urban League President James O. Simmons to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Atlanta (GA) Councilmember Pamela Alexander President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Atlanta (GA) City Councilmember Michael Julian Bond to President Clinton

(6/6/97)

• *Atlanta (GA) City Councilmember Sheila Martin Brown to President Clinton

(6/18/97)

• *Eatonton (GA) City Councilman John Reid to U. S. Senator Max Cleland (DGA) (8/29/97)

• *Eatonton (GA) City Councilman John Reid to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *DeKalb County (GA) Chief Executive Officer, Liane Levetan to President

Clinton (2/10/97)

• *Illinois/Iowa Bi-State Regional Commission (2/12/97)

• *Caldwell (ID) City Engineer to Carol Browner (1/21/97)

• *Caldwell (ID) City Engineer to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Central Advisory Council (IL) Artensa Randolph, Chairman to Lynn Cutler,

Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/5/97)

• *IL State Central Committeeman Cora McGrudger to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Wheeling Township (IL) Committeeman Pat Botterman to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Thomas R. Allen to President Clinton (6/13/97)
92

• *Chicago (IL) Alderperson Carrie M. Austin to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman John Buchanan to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Walter Burnett to President Clinton (6/15/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Sam Burrell to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Vilma Colom to President Clinton (no date)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Percy Z. Giles to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Bernard Hansen to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Patrick M. Huels to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Virgil Jones to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Patrick Levar to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Patrick J. Levar to U.S. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun

(D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Patrick J. Levar to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (DIL) (9/10/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Patrick J. Levar to U.S. Representative Rod R.

Blagojevich (D-IL) (9/10/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Patrick O’Connor to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Gene Schulter to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Dan Sohns to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Michael A. Wojcik to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Michael R. Zalewski to President Clinton (no date)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Michael R. Zalewski to U.S. Senator Carol MoseleyBraun (D-IL) (no date)

• *Chicago (IL) Alderman Michael R. Zalewski to U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) (no date)

• *Chicago (IL) City Clerk James Laski to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Pekin City (IL) City Manager Dick Hierstein to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Hanover Township (IL) Trustee Brian McGuire to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) (9/12/97)

• *Hanover Township (IL) Trustee Brian McGuire to U.S. Senator Carol

Moseley-Braun (D-IL) (9/12/97)

• *Rock Island (IL) Sheriff Michael Grchan to U.S. Representative Lane Evans

(D-IL) (no date)

• *Pekin (IL) Director of Public Property Gregory J. Ranney to President Clinton

(6/3/97)

• *Indianapolis (IN) Councilmember Beulah Coughenour to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Indianapolis (IN) Councilman Jeffrey Golc to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Indianapolis (IN) Councilmember William G. Schneider to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Mt. Pleasant (IA) Councilmembers, Steve Brimhall, Beryl Shahan, Art

Hamm, Wally Ray, J. Beams and Stan Curtis to U.S. Senator Tom Harkin (DIA) (8/18/97)

• *Sellersburg (IN) Councilmembers, David Broady, Kenneth Alexander, William

Voylos, Gary Fenner, and Aulton Eddings to U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton

(D-IN) (8/19/97)

• *Marion County (IN) Assessor Bernard J. Gohmann, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *Davenport (IA) Aldermen Robert Lank, Joe Seng, Bob Tappendorf, George

Nickolas, Dan Vance, James Stolley, Jim Hayek, Tom Carroll, Barney Barnhill

and Ruth Reynolds to U.S. Representative Jim Leach (R-IA) (8/28/97). This letter

was also sent to U.S. Senator Harkin (D-IA).

• *De Soto (IA) Assistant City Manager Bill Lindley to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Marion (IA) Acting City Manager Riley F. Simpson to President Clinton (6/

13/97)

• *Davenport (IA) City Administrator James Pierce to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Mason City (IA) City Administrator Charles B. Hammen to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Muscatine (IA) City Administrator Kevin Whittaker to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Marion County (IN) Assessor Bernard J. Gohmann, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *Webster City (IA) Assistant City Manager Michael D. Quinn to President

Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Forest City (IA) City Clerk Paul Boock to President Clinton (6/12/97)
93

• *Fort Dodge (IA) City Clerk/Finance Director, Dennis Milefchik to President

Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wyandotte County (KS) Health Department, Department of Air Quality (3/11/

97)

• Bullitt County (KY) Judge (5/3/96) • Campbell County (KY) Judge (5/9/96) • Kenton County (KY) Judge (4/29/96) • *Clay County (KY) Judge Executive, James Garrison to Carol Browner (3/4/97) • *Lafayette Consolidated Government (LA) Parish President Walter Comeaux,

Jr. to Carol Browner (2/14/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Council Chairman Aaron Broussard to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Patricia A. Johnson to President Clinton (5/29/97) • *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Patricia A. Johnson to U.S. Representative Bill

Jefferson (D-LA) (8/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Patricia A. Johnson to U.S. Senator Breaux (DLA) (5/29/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Patricia A. Johnson to U.S. Senator Landrieu (DLA) (5/29/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Erroll G. Williams to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Erroll G. Williams to U.S. Representative Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Erroll G. Williams to U.S. Senator Breaux (D-LA)

(6/6/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) Assessor Erroll G. Williams to U.S. Senator Landrieu (DLA) (6/6/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Councilmember Aaron Broussard to Carol Browner (7/

16/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Councilmember Aaron Broussard to Vice President Gore

(7/16/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Troy A. Carter to President Clinton

(6/5/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Troy A. Carter to U.S. Representative

Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/21/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Troy A. Carter to U.S. Senator Breaux

(D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Troy A. Carter to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Roy E. Glapion, Jr. to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Roy E. Glapion, Jr. to U.S. Representative Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Roy E. Glapion to U.S. Senator Mary

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Roy E. Glapion to U.S. Senator John

Breaux (D-LA) (6/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Suzanne Haik Terrell to President

Clinton (6/9/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Suzanne Haik Terrell to U.S. Senator

Breaux (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Suzanne Haik Terrell to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Ellen Hazeur-Distance to President

Clinton (6/6/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Ellen Hazeur Distance to U.S. Representative Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Ellen Hazeur-Distance to U.S. Senator Breaux (D-LA) (6/6/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Ellen Hazeur-Distance to U.S. Senator Landrieu (D-LA) (6/6/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember R.E. ‘‘Gus’’ Payne to President Clinton

(6/2/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember R.E. ‘‘Gus’’ Payne to U.S. Senator

Breaux (D-LA) (6/2/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember R.E. ‘‘Gus’’ Payne to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/2/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Jim Singleton to President Clinton (6/

9/97)
94

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Jim Singleton to U.S. Representative

Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/12/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilman-at-Large Jim Singleton to U.S. Senator

Breaux (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilman-at-Large Jim Singleton to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Oliver Thomas to President Clinton

(6/5/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Peggy Wilson to President Clinton (no

date)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilmember Peggy Wilson to U.S. Representative

Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/20/97)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilwoman Peggy Wilson to U.S. Senator Breaux

(D-LA) (no date)

• *New Orleans (LA) City Councilwoman Peggy Wilson to U.S. Senator Landrieu

(D-LA) (no date)

• *Shreveport (LA) City Councilmember Keith Hightower to President Clinton

(6/11/97)

• *Shreveport (LA) City Councilmember Keith Hightower to U.S. Senator John

Breaux (D-LA) (6/11/97)

• *St. James Parish (LA) Councilmember Timothy Roussel to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *Abita Springs (LA) Justice of the Peace Mario Ventura to U.S. Senator John

Breaux (D-LA) (no date)

• *Abita Springs (LA) Justice of the Peace Mario Ventura to U.S. Senator Mary

Landrieu (D-LA) (no date)

• *Abita Springs (LA) Justice of the Peace Mario Ventura to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Justice of the Peace Steve J. Mortillaro to U.S. Senator

Mary Landrieu (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Justice of the Peace Steve Mortillaro to U.S. Senator

John Breaux (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Justice of the Peace Steve J. Mortillaro to President

Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board member Bill Bowers to President Clinton

(6/6/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Bill Bowers to U.S. Senator

Breaux (D-LA) (6/6/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Bill Bowers to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/6/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board President J. Berengher Brechtel to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board President J. Berengher Brechtel to U.S.

Representative Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/13/97)

• *Orleans (LA) Parish School Board President J. Berenger Brechtel to U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) (6/11/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board member Maudelle Cade to President Clinton (5/28/97). Also Executive Director of Covenant House New Orleans.

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Maudelle Cade to U.S. Senator

Breaux (D-LA) (5/28/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Maudelle Cade to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (5/28/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Cheryl Cramer to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Cheryl Q. Cramer to U.S. Senator

Breaux (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Cheryl Q. Cramer to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Carolyn Ford to U.S. Senator

Breaux (D-LA) (6/6/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Carolyn Ford to U.S. Senator

Landrieu (D-LA) (6/6/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Member Carolyn Ford to President Clinton

(6/6/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Vice President Gail M. Glapion to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Vice President Gail M. Glapion to U.S.

Representative Bill Jefferson (D-LA) (8/15/97)
95

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Vice President Gail M. Glapion to U.S. Senator Breaux (D-LA) (5/29/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) School Board Vice President Gail M. Glapion to U.S. Senator Landrieu (D-LA) (5/29/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Clerk Terrie Rodrigue to the Louisiana Department of

Environmental Quality (5/23/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Clerk Terrie Rodrigue to U.S. EPA (5/23/97) • *Jefferson Parish (LA) Constable Salvador Liberto to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Constable Salvador Liberto to U.S. Senator Breaux (DLA) (6/5/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Constable Salvador Liberto to U.S. Senator Landrieu

(D-LA) (6/5/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Constable Salvador Liberto to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Sheriff Harry Lee to President Clinton (6/25/97) • *Jefferson Parish (LA) Sheriff Harry Lee to U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu (DLA) (6/25/97)

• *Jefferson Parish (LA) Sheriff Harry Lee to U.S. Senator John Breaux (D-LA)

(6/25/97)

• *St. Tammany Parish (LA) Police Jury Floyd Glass to President Clinton (no

date)

• *St. Tammany Parish (LA) Police Jury Floyd Glass to U.S. Senator Breaux (DLA) (no date)

• *St. Tammany Parish (LA) Police Jury Floyd Glass to U.S. Senator Landrieu

(D-LA) (no date)

• *St. Tammany Parish (LA) District Attorney Walter P. Reed to President Clinton (no date)

• *St. Tammany Parish (LA) District Attorney Walter P. Reed to U.S. Senator

John Breaux (D-LA) (no date)

• *St. Tammany Parish (LA) District Attorney Walter P. Reed to U.S. Senator

Mary Landrieu (D-LA) (no date)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) Executive Committeeman Joseph Lama to U.S. Senator

Mary Landrieu (D-LA) (no date)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) Executive Committeemen Joseph Lama to U.S. Senator

John Breaux (D-LA) (no date)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) Executive Committeeman Jim Nugent to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) Executive Committeeman Jim Nugent to U.S. Senator

John Breaux (D-LA)(6/9/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) Executive Committeeman Jim Nugent to U.S. Senator

Mary Landrieu (D-LA) (6/9/97)

• *Orleans Parish (LA) Executive Committeeman John Treen to U.S. Senator

Mary Landrieu (D-LA) (6/11/97)

• *Louisiana State Executive Committee of the Republican Party member V.J.

Bruno to U.S. Senator Breaux (D-LA) (no date)

• *Louisiana State Executive Committee of the Republican Party member V.J.

Bruno to U.S. Senator Landrieu (D-LA) (no date)

• *Louisiana State Central Committee of the Republican Party official Francis

Berger to U.S. John Breaux (D-LA) (no date)

• *Louisiana State Central Committee of the Republican Party official Francis

Berger to U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) (no date)

• *Baltimore (MD) City Councilman Nicholas C. D’Adamo, Jr. to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *City of Detroit (MI) Department of Environmental Affairs (3/12/97)

• *Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) to EPA (2/28/97)

• *West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission to EPA, MI

DEQ, MI DOT, and Muskegon area local units of government (3/6/97)

• *Detroit (MI) City Councilmember Gil Hill to President Clinton (no date)

• *Detroit (MI) City Councilmember Alberta Tinsley-Williams to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Grand Blanc (MI) City Councilmember Jeffrey C. Pardee to U.S. Representative Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Grand Blanc (MI) City Councilmember Jeffrey C. Pardee to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Scottville (MI) City Manager (3/4/97)

• *Pere Marquette Charter Township Board (MI) (2/12/97)

• *Board of Trustees, Canton, Wayne County, Michigan to EPA (3/12/97)
96

• *Boston Township (MI) Clerk Carolyn K. Longwell to U.S. Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) (9/3/97)

• *Boston Township (MI) Clerk Carolyn K. Longwell to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (9/3/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Clerk Michael J. Carr to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Genesee County (MI) Clerk Michael J. Carr to U.S. Senator Carl Levin (DMI) (8/20/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Clerk Michael J. Carr to U.S. Representative Debbie

Stabenow (D-MI) (8/20/97)

• *Ionia County (MI) Clerk Barbara A. Trierweiler to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/25/97)

• *Ionia County (MI) Clerk Barbara A. Trierweiler to U.S. Representative Vernon J. Ehlers (R-MI) (8/25/97)

• *Macomb Township (MI) Clerk Norman J. Snay to U.S. Representative David

Bonior (D-MI) (9/5/97)

• *Macomb Township (MI) Clerk Norman J. Snay to U.S. Carl Levin (D-MI) (9/

5/97)

• *Oscoda County (MI) Clerk Patsy J. Peters to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Sebewa Township (MI) Clerk Grayden D. Slowins to U.S. Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) (9/3/97)

• *Sebewa Township (MI) Clerk Grayden D. Slowins to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (9/3/97)

• *Ada Township (MI) Treasurer Carolyn Soderberg to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/29/97)

• *Ada Township (MI) Treasurer Carolyn Soderberg to U.S. Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) (8/29/97)

• *Barry County (MI) Treasurer Susan VandeCar to U.S. Representative Vernon

Ehlers (R-MI) (9/22/97)

• *Berrien County (MI) Treasurer William A. Wolf to President Clinton (6/25/97) • *Crawford County (MI) Treasurer to U.S. Representative Bart Stupak (D-MI)

(9/11/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Treasurer Daniel T. Kildee to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Genesee County (MI) Treasurer Daniel T. Kildee to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/26/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Treasurer Daniel T. Kildee to U. S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/26/97)

• *Grand Blanc Township (MI) Treasurer Jeffrey Cyphert to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Fenton Township (MI) Trustee Denise Ketchmark to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/27/97)

• *Fenton Township (MI) Trustee Denise Ketchmark to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/27/97)

• *Flint Township (MI) Treasurer Sandra S. Wright to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Flint Township (MI) Treasurer Sandra S. Wright to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/28/97)

• *Macomb Township (MI) Treasurer Marie E. Malburg to U.S. Representative

David Bonior (D-MI) (9/5/97)

• *Macomb Township (MI) Treasurer Marie E. Malburg to U.S. Senator Carl

Levin (D-MI) (9/5/97)

• *Breitung Township (MI) Trustee Barbara J. Oliver to President Clinton (6/13/

97)

• *Flint Township (MI) Trustee George Menoutes to U.S. Representative Debbie

Stabenow (D-MI) (8/29/97)

• *Flint Township (MI) Trustee George Menoutes to U. S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/29/97)

• *Thetford Township (MI) Trustee E.H. Benning to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Thetford Township (MI) Trustee Edgar Benning to U.S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (4/24/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Prosecutor Arthur A. Busch to U.S. Representative

Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (8/27/97)

• *Genesee County (MI) Prosecutor Arthur A. Busch to U. S. Senator Carl Levin

(D-MI) (8/27/97)

• *Macomb County (MI) Prosecuting Attorney Carl Marlinga to U.S. Representative David Bonior (D-MI) (8/22/97)

• *Macomb County (MI) Prosecuting Attorney Carl Marlinga to U.S. Senator

Carl Levin (D-MI) (8/22/97)

• *Wayne County (MI) Executive Edward McNamara to President Clinton (6/97)
97

• *Bloomington (MN) City Councilmember Peggy Ramthun to U.S. Representative Jim Ramstad (R-MN) (no date)

• Office of the County Executive, St. Charles County, Missouri (8/19/96)

• *Office of the County Executive, St. Charles County, Missouri (1/13/97)

• *Office of the County Executive, St. Charles County, Missouri to President

Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Missouri Municipal League to Sally Katzen, OMB (5/27/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator (Chairman of Land Use Committee) Fred

Arbanas to U.S. Representative Karen McCarthy (D-MO) (8/25/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator John Burnett to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Carl Bussey to President Clinton (5/27/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Carl Bussey to President Clinton (5/27/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator (Chairman of the Legislature) Victor Callahan to U.S. Representative Karen McCarthy (D-MO) (8/25/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Dixie Flynn to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Victor Callahan to President Clinton (5/23/

97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Dan Tarwater to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Dan Tarwater to U.S. Representative Karen

McCarthy (D-MO) (8/19/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Fred Arbanas to President Clinton (5/23/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator John Graham to President Clinton (5/27/97)

• *Jackson County (MO) Legislator Dennis Waits to President Clinton (5/23/97)

• *Glendale (MO) Alderman Richard Magee to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Lincoln County, Department of Environmental Health (MT) (3/6/97)

• *Lincoln County (MT) Department of Environmental Health to Erskine

Bowles, White House Chief of Staff (6/19/97)

• *Omaha (NE) City Councilmember Lormong Lo to U.S. Senator Bob Kerry (DNE) (9/5/97)

• *Metropolitan Area Planning Agency (MAPA) (NE—a council of governments)

(3/11/97)

• *Joseph Salitros, City Administrator, Wayne, NE to EPA (2/28/97)

• *Auburn (NE) Board of Public Works to EPA (2/17/97)

• *Sidney (NE) official Marlan V. Ferguson to U.S. Senator Bob Kerry (D-NE)

(9/3/97)

• *Boulder City (NV) Councilwoman Iris Bletsch to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Las Vegas (NV) Councilman Matthew Callister to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Las Vegas (NV) Councilman Gary Reese to President Clinton (no date)

• *North Las Vegas (NV) Councilman Theron H. Goynes to President Clinton (6/

19/97)

• *North Las Vegas (NV) Councilman William Robinson to President Clinton (6/

4/97)

• *North Las Vegas (NV) Councilman John Rhodes to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Boulder City (NV) Councilman Byran Nix to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Bolder City (NV) Councilman Bryan Nix to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons

(R-NV) (8/15/97)

• *Henderson (NV) Councilman David Wood to U.S. Representative Jim Gibbons

(R-NV) (no date)

• *Santa Fe (NM) City Councilor Amy Manning to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Socorro (NM) Councilman Danny Armijo to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Espanola City (NM) Acting City Manager Alice D. Lucero to President Clinton

(6/25/97)

• *Socorro County (NM) Treasurer Isabel M. Montoya to President Clinton (6/

4/97)

• *Lea County (NM) Sheriff Bill Lane to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Santa Fe County (NM) Sheriff Benjamin Montano to President Clinton (6/25/

97)

• *Les County (NM) Presiding Magistrate Judge Jack D. Bailey to President

Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Socorro County (NM) Judge to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Lea County (NM) Assessor Melba Hamby to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Santa Fe County (NM) Assessor Benito J. Martinez, Jr. to President Clinton

(6/13/97)

• *Socorro (NM) state official Jean Fraissinet to President Clinton (no date) • *Espanola (NM) Chief Deputy Clerk Dorothy Borrego to President Clinton (6/

25/97)

• *Socorro County (NM) Clerk Carmen Gallegos to President Clinton (6/3/97)
98

• *Association of Towns of the State of New York to U.S. Representative Michael

McNulty (D-NY) (5/14/97) Same letter mailed to entire NY Congressional Delegation.

• *Orange County (NY) Legislator Rich Baum to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Orange County (NY) Legislators Richard L. Hansen, Sr. and Roberta K Murphy to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Orange County (NY) Legislators Roberta Murphy and Richard Hansen, Jr. to

President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Spring Valley (NY) Planning Board member Ryan Karben to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Suffolk County (NY) Legislator David Bishop to President Clinton (6/25/97) • *Haverstraw (NY) Village Trustee Ricky Sanchez to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Camden County (NC) Board of Commissioners to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Clayton (NC) Councilmember Roy Green to U.S. Representative Bobby

Etheridge (D-NC) (no date)

• *Clayton (NC) Councilmember Sue Johnson to U.S. Representative Bob

Etheridge (D-NC) (8/2/97)

• *Durham (NC) City Councilman Tyrone Cox to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Goldsboro (NC) Councilman Tim Bartlett to U.S. Representative Eva Clayton

(D-NC) (8/29/97)

• *Greensboro (NC) City Councilwoman Claudette Burroughs-White to President

Clinton (5/28/97)

• *Greensboro (NC) City Councilwoman Yvonne Johnson to President Clinton (6/

3/97)

• *Greensboro (NC) City Councilman Earl Jones to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Hickory (NC) City Councilman Robert Southerland to EPA (3/10/97) • *Wilmington (NC) City Councilman (3/10/97) • *Apex (NC) Assistant Town Manager J. Michael Wilson to EPA (3/10/97) • *Bessemer City (NC) City Manager Ralph Messera to EPA (3/10/97) • *Henderson (NC) City Manager Eric Williams to EPA (3/10/97) • *Hickory (NC) City Manager B. McGee to EPA (3/10/97) • *Hickory (NC) Assistant City Manager (3/10/97) • *Lexington (NC) City Manager R. Duke Whisenant to President Clinton (6/6/

97)

• *Wilmington (NC) City Manager (3/10/97) • *Hickory (NC) Alderman (3/10/97) • *Durham, Chapel Hill, Carrboro (NC) Metropolitan Planning Organization to

Carol Browner (3/12/97)

• *North Dakota Secretary of State to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *North Dakota State Labor Commissioner Craig Hagen to President Clinton

(6/6/97)

• *Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (3/10/97)

• *City of Ashtubula, Board of Health (OH) (1/29/97)

• *Ashtabula County (OH) Health Department (2/19/97)

• *Cuyahoga County (OH) Board of Health, Health Commissioner Timothy

Horgan to Donald Schregardus, Ohio EPA (1/30/97)

• *Monroe Township Board of Trustees, Ashtabula County, OH (2/28/97)

• *Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (OH) (2/27/97)

• *Brook Park City Council, Michael Gammella, Council President (OH) (3/5/97)

• *Lima, OH City Sanitary Engineer (3/12/97)

• *Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (OH) (1/22/97)

• *Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (OH) to selected Ohio state Senators and Representatives (1/22/97)

• *Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (OH) to selected Ohio state Senators and Representatives (different letter than above) (1/22/97)

• *Medina County Health Department (OH) (1/13/97)

• *Village of Ottawa Hills, OH Village Manager (2/12/97)

• *Summit County, OH County Engineer Gene Esser, P.E. (2/6/97)

• *Tim Davis, County Executive, Summit County (OH) to President Clinton (5/

15/97)

• *St. Marys (OH) Department of Public Works and Safety (3/11/97)

• *St. Mary’s (OH) Industrial/Community Development Department to Carol

Browner (2/10/97)

• *Ross County Sheriff (OH) to U.S. Senator John Glenn (D-OH) (4/19/97)

• *Ross County (OH) Sheriff Ronald L. Nichols to U.S. Representative Tony Hall

(D-OH) (8/7/97)

• *Ross County (OH) Auditor Stephen A. Neal to U.S. Representative Tony Hall

(D-OH) (8/5/97)
99

• *Ross County (OH) Treasurer to U.S. Representative Sherrod Brown (D-OH)

(4/19/97)

• *Ross County (OH) Treasurer Felix Melaragno to U.S. Representative Tony

Hall (D-OH) (8/11/97)

• *Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments, OH (TMACOG) (12/23/96) • Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments, OH (TMACOG) (11/25/96) • *Toledo (OH) Councilwoman, Edna Brown (3/5/97) • *Toledo-Lucas County (OH) Port Authority to Carol Browner (3/4/97) • *Toledo/Lucas County (OH) Convention & Visitors Bureau to Carol Browner (2/

25/97)

• *Caroll County (OH) Economic Development Council to Carol Browner (1/28/

97)

• *Allen County (OH) Department of Public Health, David Rosebrock, Health

Commissioner to EPA (3/7/97)

• *Saybrook Township Trustees to U.S. Representative Steven LaTourette (ROH) (3/5/97)

• *Williamsburg Township (OH) Board of Trustees to Hamilton County Environmental Services (1/13/97)

• *Barbara Young, Councilmember-At-Large, Ada, OK to EPA (3/10/97) • *Village of Whitehouse (OH) Administrator Randy Bukas to Carol Browner (2/

5/97)

• *Association of Central Oklahoma Governments to Carol Browner (3/3/97) • *Klamath County (OR) Department of Human Services, Public Health Division

(3/12/97)

• *Erie (PA) Councilman Robert L. Okicki to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Erie (PA) Councilwoman Joy Greco to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilman David Cohen to President Clinton (6/24/

97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilmember Happy Fernandez to President Clinton

(6/12/97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilmember James Kenney to President Clinton (6/

13/97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller to President Clinton

(6/17/97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilmember Michael A. Nutter to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilmember Michael A. Nutter to U.S. Representative Robert A. Borksi (D-PA) (9/9/97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilmember Michael A. Nutter to U.S. Representative Paul McHale (D-PA) (9/9/97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilmember Michael A. Nutter to U.S. Representative Chaka Fattah (D-PA) (9/9/97)

• *Philadelphia (PA) City Councilmember John F. Street to President Bill Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Borough of Chambersburg (PA) Electric Department Superintendent to David

McKee, U.S. EPA (3/6/97)

• *Lebanon County (PA) Conservation District to Michael McCabe, EPA Region

III Administrator (2/14/97)

• *Borough of Churchill (PA) Police Department to EPA (3/7/97)

• *Borough of West Chester (PA) Manager Ernie McNeely to President Clinton

(6/6/97)

• *Cranston (RI) Director of Administration to U.S. Senator John H. Chafee (RRI) (9/12/97)

• *Barnwell County (SC) Councilmember Harold Buckmon to U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (8/29/97)

• *Barnwell County (SC) Councilman Harold Buckmon to Vice President Gore

(no date)

• *Barnwell County (SC) Treasurer Pickens Williams, Jr. to Kathleen McGinty

(6/24/97)

• *Charleston (SC) City Councilmember Larry D. Shirley to U.S. Representative

Mark Sanford (R-SC) (8/25/97)

• *Columbia (SC) City Councilmember Jim Papadea to U.S. Senator Ernest F.

Hollings (D-SC) (9/2/97)

• *Columbia (SC) Councilman Jim Papadea to Kathleen McGinty (6/16/97)

• *Florence (SC) City Councilman Billy D. Williams to U.S. Senator Ernest F.

Hollings (D-SC) (8/20/97)

• *Florence City (SC) Councilman Billy D. Williams to Vice President Gore (6/

20/97)
100

• *Florence County (SC) Councilmember Joe W. King to U.S. Senator Ernest F.

Hollings (D-SC) (8/21/97)

• *Florence County (SC) Councilmember Joe King to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Richland County (SC) Councilmember Harriet Gardin Fields to U.S. Senator

Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) (8/18/97)

• *Richland County (SC) Councilmember Harriet Fields to Vice President Gore

(6/5/97)

• *Richland County (SC) Councilmember Paul Livingston to Vice President Al

Gore (6/20/97)

• *Ridgeville (SC) Councilmember R. Wesley Snipes to U.S. Senator Ernest F.

Hollings (D-SC) (9/2/97)

• *Ridgeville (SC) Councilmember R. Wesley Snipes to U.S. Representative Mark

Sanford (R-SC) (9/2/97)

• *Barnwell County (SC) Treasurer to U.S. Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC)

(8/28/97)

• *Newberry County (SC) Auditor Nancy Owen to Vice President Gore (6/20/97) • *South Carolina State Comptroller General Earle Morris, Jr. to Kathleen

McGinty(6/9/97)

• *Pennington County Air Quality Office, South Dakota (2/10/97) • *Custer City (SD) Councilmember Behlings to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Custer City (SD) Councilmember Ron Bradeen (6/11/97) • *Hartford (SD) Councilmember Barney Smith to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Hartford (SD) City Councilman Barney Smith to U.S. Senator Daschle (D-SD)

(8/28/97)

• *Hartford (SD) City Councilman Barney Smith to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson

(D-SD) (8/28/97)

• *Lennox (SD) Alderwoman Marlene Harms to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Lennox (SD) Alderwoman Marlene Harms to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (DSD) (8/27/97)

• *Lennox (SD) Alderwoman Marlene Harms to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (DSD) (8/27/97)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilman Edward Anderson to President Clinton (6/22/

97)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Pete Bruce to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson

(D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Pete Bruce to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle

(D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilman Peter Bruce to President Clinton (6/25/97) • *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Stephen Peschong to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Bill Rubendall to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Bill Rubendall to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Bill Rubendall to President Clinton (no

date) (6/13/97)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Don Verhey to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson

(D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Don Verhey to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle

(D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) City Councilmember Don Verhey to President Clinton (no date)

• *Rapid City (SD) Councilmember Karen Bulman to President Clinton (no date)

• *Rapid City (SD) Councilmember Karen Bulman to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson

(D-SD) (no date)

• *Rapid City (SD) Councilmember Karen Bulman to U.S Senator Tom Daschle

(D-SD) (no date)

• *Rapid City (SD) Alderman C.C. Knapp to President Clinton (no date)

• *Rapid City (SD) Alderman C.C. ‘‘Buzz’’ Knapp to U. S. Senator Tim Johnson

(D-SD) (9/16/97)

• *Rapid City (SD) Alderman C.C. ‘‘Buzz’’ Knapp to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle

(D-SD) (9/16/97)

• *Rapid City (SD) Council President Stan Petrik to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Rapid City (SD) Council President Stan Petrik to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson

(D-SD) (9/18/97)

• *Rapid City (SD) Council President Stan Petrik to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle

(D-SD) (9/18/97)

• *Vermillion City (SD) Councilman LeRoy Backhaus to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (no date)
101

• *Vermillion City (SD) Councilman LeRoy Backhaus to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (no date)

• *South Dakota School Board Member Vicki Clarke to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (no date)

• *South Dakota School Board Member Vicki Clarke to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) School Board Member Vicki Clarke to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Mitchell (SD) School Board Member Linda Margheim to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Mitchell (SD) School Board President Steven M. Rice to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Mitchell (SD) Board of Education President Steven Rice to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD) (no date)

• *Mitchell (SD) Board of Education President Steven Rice to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (no date)

• *Vermillion (SD) School Board Member Darrel Ludeman to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD) (no date)

• *Vermillion (SD) School Board Member Darrel Ludeman to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (no date)

• *Vermillion (SD) School Board Member Nick Merringer to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (no date)

• *Vermillion (SD) School Board Member Nick Merringer to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD) (no date)

• *Vermillion (SD) School Board Member to President Clinton (no date) • *Clay County (SD) Auditor Boneva R. Albers to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (DSD) (no date)

• *Clay County (SD) Auditor Boneva R. Albers to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (DSD) (no date)

• *Clay County (SD) Auditor Boneva R. Albers to President Clinton (no date) • *Clay County (SD) Sheriff Raymond Passick to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (DSD) (8/26/97)

• *Montgomery County (TN) Commissioner Norman Young to President Clinton

(6/17/97)

• *Justin Wilson, Deputy to Governor (TN) for Policy to EPA (3/10/97) • *Knoxville (TN) Urban Area Planning Organization (3/11/97) • *Hendersonville (TN) Executive Assistant Connie Billbrey to President Clinton

(7/1/97)

• *Montgomery County (TN) Executive Robert Thompson to President Clinton

(6/19/97)

• *Cook County (TX) official Jerry Lewis to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Abilene (TX) Councilwoman Carol Martinez to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Arlington (TX) City Councilmember Joe Ewen to U.S. Representative Martin

Frost (D-TX) (8/29/97)

• *Beaumont (TX) City Councilmember John Davis to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Beaumont (TX) City Councilmember Guy N. Goodson to President Clinton (6/

11/97)

• *Beaumont (TX) City Councilmember Bobbie Patterson to President Clinton (6/

12/97)

• *Dallas (TX) City Councilman Larry Duncan to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Dallas (TX) Councilmember Al Lipscomb to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Dallas (TX) Councilwoman Charlotte Maves to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Del Rio (TX) Councilman Roy Musquiz to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Denton (TX) City Councilmember Jerry Cott to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Denton City (TX) Councilman Carl Young to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Gainesville (TX) City Councilman L. Bishop to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Gainesville (TX) Councilmember Jim King to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Gainsville (TX) Councilman John Schmitz to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Gainesville (TX) City Councilman Rev. Clarence Tucker to President Clinton

(6/17/97)

• *Gatesville (TX) City Councilmember Robert Powell to U.S. Representative

Chet Edwards (D-TX) (no date)

• Gatesville (TX) City Councilmember Robert Powell to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Gatesville (TX) City Councilmember Robert Powell to Vice President Gore (no

date)

• *Mercedes (TX) City Councilmember Roy de Leon to President Clinton (6/6/97)
102

• *Pearsall (TX) City Councilmember Ramiro Verastique to U.S. Representative

Ciro D. Rodriguez (D-TX) (8/27/97)

• *Pearsall (TX) City Councilmember Ramiro Verastique to President Clinton

(no date)

• *Pleasanton (TX) City Councilman Abraham Saenz, Jr. to President Clinton (6/

18/97)

• *Sanger (TX) Alderperson Joe Bell to President Clinton (6/1/6/97) • *Sanger (TX) Alderman Glenn Erwin to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Sanger (TX) Alderperson Jerry Jenkins to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Sanger (TX) Alderman Jack Richardson to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Allen (TX) City Manager Jon McCarty to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Cedar Hill (TX) City Manager Greg Vick to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Corpus Christi (TX) City Manager Bill Hennings (2/10/97) • *Hereford (TX) City Manager Chester Nolen to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Hondo (TX) City Manager Scott Wall to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Jacksonville (TX) City Manager Jim Anderson to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Kilgore (TX) City Manager to David McKee, EPA (1/20/97) • *Kilgore (TX) City Manager Ronald Stephens to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Lampasas (TX) City Manager Michael Talbot to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Liberty (TX) City Manager Norman Dykes to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Longview (TX) City Manager Ted Willis to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Marshall (TX) City Manager Tony Williams to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *McGregor (TX) City Manager Bill Dake to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Nacogdoches (TX) City Manager Gordon Pierce to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *North Richland Hills (TX) Assistant City Manager Larry J. Cunningham to

President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Plainview (TX) City Manager Jim Jeffers to President Clinton (6/15/97) • *Schertz (TX) City Manager Kerry Sweatt to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Sperman (TX) City Manager Kelvin Knauf to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Tyler (TX) Assistant City Manager Paul Parker to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Weatherford (TX) City Manager to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Coryell County (TX) Judge John Hull to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Coryell County (TX) Judge John Hull to Vice President Gore (6/6/97) • *Dallas County (TX) Judge Thomas Jones to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Dallas County (TX) Judge Cleophas R. Steele Jr., to President Clinton (6/16/

97)

• *Dimmit County (TX) Judge Charles Johnson to U.S. Representative Ruben

Hinojosa (D-TX) (8/24/97)

• *Dimmit County (TX) Judge Charles Johnson to President Clinton (no date) • *Frio County (TX) Judge Carlos Garcia to U.S. Representative Ciro D.

Rodriguez (D-TX) (8/25/97)

• *Frio County (TX) Judge Carlos A. Garcia to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Fort Bend County (TX) Judge (2/4/97)

• *Harrison County (TX) Judge J. Rodney Gilstrap to President Clinton (no date)

• *Hidalgo County (TX) Judge Renato Cuellar to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Harris County, TX Judge Robert Eckels to President Clinton (5/29/97)

• *Jefferson County (TX) Judge Carl R. Griffith, Jr. to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Lampasas County (TX) Former County Judge Norris Monroe to U.S. Representative Chet Edwards (D-TX) (no date)

• *Lampasas County (TX) Judge Tom Honeycutt to Vice President Al Gore (6/

16/97)

• *LaSalle County (TX) Judge Jimmy P. Patterson to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Willacy County (TX) Judge Simon Salinas to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *Wood County (TX) Judge Lee Williams to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Zavala County (TX) Judge Pablo Avila to U.S. Representative Ruben Hinojosa

(D-TX) (8/26/97)

• *Zavala County (TX) Judge Pablo Avila to Vice President Al Gore (no date)

• *Cooke County (TX) Justice of the Peace Bill Freeman to President Clinton (6/

17/97)

• *Cooke County (TX) Justice of the Peace Royce Dale Martin to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Coryell County (TX) Justice of the Peace Larry McDonald to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Coryell County (TX) Justice of the Peace Larry McDonald to Vice President

Gore (6/6/97)

• *Coryell County (TX) Justice of the Peace Jimmy Wood to President Clinton

(no date)
103

• *Coryell County (TX) Justice of the Peace Jimmy Wood to U.S. Representative

Chet Edwards (D-TX) (no date)

• *Coryell County (TX) Justice of the Peace Jimmy Wood to Vice President Gore

( no date)

• *Dallas County (TX) Justice of the Peace Charles R. Rose to President Clinton

(6/16/97)

• *Hidalgo County (TX) Justice of the Peace Jesus E. Morales to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Jefferson County (TX) Justice of the Peace Thurman Bill Bartie to President

Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Jefferson County (TX) Justice of the Peace Ray S. Chesson to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Mercedes (TX) Justice of the Peace Gilberto Saenz to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *Zavala County (TX) Justice of the Peace Eddie Trevino to President Clinton

(6/10/97)

• *Zavala County (TX) Justice of the Peace Eddie Trevino to Vice President Gore

(6/12/97)

• *Cooke County (TX) Treasurer Janet Johnson to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Jefferson County (TX) Treasurer Linda Robinson to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *LaSalle County (TX) Treasurer Joel Rodriguez, Jr. to U.S. Representative

Ciro D. Rodriguez (D-TX) (8/28/97)

• *LaSalle County (TX) Treasurer Joel Rodriguez, Jr. to President Clinton (no

date)

• *Cooke County (TX) Clerk Evelyn Walterscheid to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Jefferson County (TX) Clerk Sandy Wilson to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Lampasas County (TX) Land Surveyor Jerry M. Goodson to U.S. Representative Chet Edwards (D-TX) (no date)

• *Dallas County (TX) Constable Joe Bagby to President Clinton (6/16//97) • *Dallas County (TX) Constable Burl Jerigan to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Jefferson County (TX) Constable Brandon Crowder to President Clinton (6/12/

97)

• *Jefferson County (TX) Constable Jeff Greenway to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Jefferson County (TX) Constable Joe Stevenson to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Jefferson County (TX) Sheriff G. Mitch Woods to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Cooke County (TX) Assessor-Collector Billie Knight to President Clinton (6/

17/97)

• *Jefferson County (TX) Tax Assessor-Collector Miriam Johnson to President

Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Cooke County (TX) Auditor Gloria Parrish to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *East Texas Council of Governments Executive Committee (3/6/97)

• *North Central Texas Council of Governments (1/29/97)

• *North East Texas Air Care (NETAC) Policy Committee comments (1/15/97)

• *South East Texas Regional Planning Commission (TX) to U.S. Senator Phil

Gramm (R-TX) (1/14/97)

• *South East Texas Regional Planning Commission to David McKee, EPA (3/

7/97)

• *Coryell County (TX) Attorney Edwin Powell Jr. to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Coryell County (TX) Attorney Edwin Powell to Vice President Gore (6/5/97)

• *Gainesville (TX) City Attorney Nancy Williams to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Lampasas County (TX) District Attorney Larry W. Allison to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Sanger (TX) Attorney Ron Neiman to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Harker Heights (TX) Operations Manager Jerry Atkinson to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Nederland (TX) City Secretary LaDonna Floyd to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *San Antonio/Alamo Area Air Quality Task Force (TX) (3/10/97)

• *City of Houston, Mary Ellen Whitworth, Director, Environmental Policy (2/18/

97)

• *Martinsville (VA) Councilmember Bruce Dallas to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Northumberland (VA) Commonwealth Attorney Michael McKenney to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Pearisburg (VA) Councilmember Barbara Stafford to President Clinton (6/10/

97)

• *Augusta County (VA) Clerk John B. Davis to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Richmond (VA) Clerk of Court Bevil Dean to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Staunton (VA) Court Clerk Thomas E. Roberts to President Clinton (6/13/97)
104

• *Crater Planning District Commission (VA) (2/26/97) • *Hampton Roads, VA Planning District Commission to EPA (1/14/97) • *Letter from the Richmond Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (VA) (2/

13/97)

• *County of Henrico, VA County Manager (3/6/97) • *Richmond, VA City Manager (3/11/97) • *York, VA County Administrator (2/13/97) • *Ed Maroney, City Manager, Newport News, VA to Carol Browner (2/5/97) • *Dinwiddie (VA) County Administrator Charles Burgess, Jr. to EPA (2/14/97) • *Clark County (WA) Auditor Elizabeth A. Luce to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (WA) (2/13/97) • *West Virginia Senate Clerk Darrell Holmes to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *West Virginia Municipal League to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Lincoln County, WI Administrative Coordinator (2/10/97) • *Janesville (WI) City Manager Steven E. Sheiffer to President Clinton (5/23/

97)

• *Oshkosh (WI) City Manager Richard Wollangk to President Clinton (6/2/97) • Local government resolutions • *American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

(AASHTO) (4/28/97)

• *Arkansas County Judges Association (6/13/97) • *City of North Little Rock, Arkansas resolution (2/24/97) • *City of West Memphis (AR) (3/6/97) • *San Diego (CA) County Board of Supervisors (2/11/97) • *Imperial County (CA) Air Pollution Control District Board of Directors (6/24/

97)

• *County of Peoria, IL (6/9/97) • *Tazwell County (IL) Board (6/25/97) • *Jefferson Parish (LA) Council (2/26/97) • *Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) (1/31/97) • *Southwestern Michigan Commission (1/28/97) • *Berrien County (MI) Personnel and Human Services Committee (1/23/97) • *Lincoln Charter Township, MI (2/11/97) • *Livingston County, MI Board of Commissioners (6/9/97) • *Port Huron, MI (3/10/97) • *Wayne County (MI) Commission (6/5/97) • *Twin Cities Area Transportation Study (MN) (1/27/97) • *Mayor and City Council of Holdrege, NE (9/4/97) • *Monclova Township (OH) (2/3/97) • *Willoughby, OH (6/11/97) • *City Council of Maumee, OH (2/3/97)

• Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments, OH (TMACOG) (11/20/96)

• *County of Ashtabula (OH) (2/25/97)

• *Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (no date)

• *Oregon, OH City Council (3/10/97)

• *Board of Commissioners of Miami County, OH (3/6/97)

• *Sylvania Township Trustees, OH (2/6/97)

• *Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (OH) (2/27/97)

• *Village of Holland Council, OH (2/4/97)

• *Board of Trustees of Jerusalem Township, Lucas County, OH (2/12/97)

• *Village of Luckey, OH (2/5/97)

• *Montgomery County Board of Commissioners (OH) (1/28/97)

• *Montgomery Township Trustees (OH) (2/3/97)

• *Stark County Regional Planning Commission, Stark County Area Transportation Study (OH) (1/27/97)

• *City Council of Toledo, OH (2/19/97)

• *Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments (TMACOG) (1/30/97)

• *City of Youngstown, OH (5/22/97)

• *City of Willowick, OH (3/4/97)

• *Clark County—Springfield, OH Transportation Coordinating Committee (2/14/

97)

• *Oklahoma County, OK Board of Commissioners (2/24/97)

• *City Council, Oklahoma City, OK (2/97)

• *Aiken County (SC) Council (1/17/97)

• *Cleveland, TN (3/10/97)

• *Milan, TN (4/8/97)

• *New Johnsonville, TN (3/3/97)

• *East Texas Council of Governments (3/6/97)
105

• *North East Texas Air Care (NETAC) (1/7/97) • *South East Texas Regional Planning Commission (5/21/97) • *Beaumont (TX) City Council (6/17/97) • *Bexar County Commissioners Court (TX) (2/4/97) • Gregg County (TX) Commissioners’ Court (8/29/96) • *Jefferson County (TX) Commissioners’ Court (5/5/97) • *City Council of Longview, TX (1/23/97) • Nederland (TX) (no date) • *Port Arthur (TX) City Council—97–119 (6/17/97) • *Port Arthur (TX) City Council—97–120 (6/17/97) • *Crater Planning District Commission (VA) (2/24/97) • *Danville (VA) Development Council (2/27/97) • *Board of Supervisors for Hanover County, Virginia (2/12/97) • *County of Henrico, VA Board of Supervisors (2/26/97) • *Richmond, VA (3/10/97) • *Stafford County, VA (3/4/97) • *Franklin County (WA) Board of Commissioners (5/7/97) • *Waukesha County Board of Supervisors (WI) (3/25/97) • Letters/comments from chambers of commerce • *United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce (1/8/97) • *Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce (DE) (1/13/97) • *New Castle County Chamber of Commerce (DE) (1/13/97) • *Greater Washington (DC) Board of Trade (DC metro area Chamber of Commerce) (1/7/97)

• FL Chamber of Commerce (11/7/96) • *Florida Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) (2/7/97) • Georgia Chamber of Commerce to Georgia Governor Zell Miller (5/1/96) • Georgia Chamber of Commerce 1997 legislative agenda recommendations regarding ozone and PM NAAQS (no date, but before rule proposal)

• *Georgia Chamber of Commerce (3/13/97) • South Georgia Chamber of Commerce (no date) • *Camilla (GA) Chamber of Commerce (3/10/97) • *Columbus (GA) Chamber of Commerce (1/24/97) • *Dalton Whitfield (GA) Chamber of Commerce (3/4/97) • *Douglas County (GA) Chamber of Commerce (2/27/97) • *Lee County (GA) Chamber of Commerce (2/27/97) • *Pierce County (GA) Chamber of Commerce & Industrial Development Authority (3/3/97)

• *Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce (IL) (12/23/96) • *Indiana Chamber of Commerce (3/5/97) • *Indiana Chamber of Commerce (3/10/97)

• *Indiana Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Representative Tim Roemer (D-IN)

• Berne Chamber of Commerce (IN) (5/15/96)

• Bluffton Chamber of Commerce (IN) (5/7/96)

• Boone County Chamber of Commerce (IN) (5/9/96)

• Carmel Clay Chamber of Commerce (IN) (5/15/96)

• Greater Fort Wayne Chamber of Commerce (IN) (5/10/96)

• Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce (KS) (10/96)

• *Paduca Area (KY) Chamber of Commerce (2/17/97)

• Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce (no date)

• *Greater Lexington (KY) Chamber of Commerce (3/17/97)

• *Greater Lexington (KY) Chamber of Commerce Policy Position (3/17/97)

• Maine Chamber and Business Alliance to Maine Governor Angus King (4/29/

96)

• *Maine Chamber and Business Alliance (2/13/97)

• *Maryland Chamber of Commerce (3/11/97)

• *Hagerstown-Washington County (MD) Chamber of Commerce (3/8/97)

• *Cecil County (MD) Chamber of Commerce (3/4/97)

• *Baltimore County (MD) Chamber of Commerce (3/6/97)

• *Southern Anne Arundel Chamber of Commerce (MD) (3/12/97)

• *Michigan Chamber of Commerce to the Michigan Congressional Delegation (1/

24/97)

• *Minnesota Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone (D-MN) (9/

2/97). This letter also went to Sen. Grams (R-MN) and all 8 MN House members.

• *Minnesota Chamber of Commerce (3/4/97)

• Missouri Chamber of Commerce to Missouri Governor Mel Carnahan (4/23/96)

• *St. Joseph Area Chamber of Commerce (MO) (2/5/97)

• *Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce (MO) (no date)
106

• *Greater Rochester Metro Chamber of Commerce (NY) to U.S. Senators Daniel

Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) and Alfonse D’Amato (R-NY)

• *North Carolina Citizens for Business and Industry to U.S Senator Jesse

Helms (R-NC) (2/10/97)

• *North Carolina Citizens for Business and Industry (3/6/97) • *North Carolina Citizens for Business and Industry (President and Chairman

of the Board) to Erskine Bowles, White House Chief of Staff (6/17/97)

• *Greater Durham (NC) Chamber of Commerce (3/12/97) • *Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Greensboro Area Chamber of Commerce (NC) (2/17/97) • *Winston-Salem (NC) Chamber of Commerce (2/13/97) • *Winston-Salem (NC) Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Representatives Melvin

Watt (D-NC), Cass Ballenger (R-NC), and Richard Burr (R-NC), and U.S. Senators Jesse Helms (R-NC) and Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) (2/13/97)

• *Winston-Salem Chamber of Commerce to NC Governor Jim Hunt (2/13/97) • *Eastern North Carolina Chamber of Commerce to the Eastern NC Congressional Delegation (resolution attached) (4/24/97)

• *High Point Chamber of Commerce (NC) to U.S. Representative Mike McIntyre

(D-NC) (resolution attached) (5/6/97)

• North Dakota Chamber of Commerce to North Dakota Governor Edward

Schafer and the ND Congressional Delegation (11/11/96)

• *Bismarck Chamber of Commerce to the North Dakota Congressional Delegation (12/18/96)

• *Greater Cincinnati (OH) Chamber of Commerce (1/31/97) • *Morgan County (OH) Chamber of Commerce (2/3/97) • *Morgan County (OH) Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Representatives John

Kasich (R-OH) and Robert Ney (R-OH), and U.S. Senators John Glenn (D-OH)

and Michael DeWine (R-OH) (2/3/97)

• *Greater Lawrence County Area (OH) Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Representative Sherrod Brown (D-OH). Also sent to U.S. Senators DeWine (R-OH)

and Glenn (D-OH), and U.S. Representatives Kasich (R-OH), Ney (R-OH), and

Strickland (2/3/97)

• Oklahoma State Chamber to Carol Browner (10/23/96) • *Oklahoma State Chamber to EPA (PM docket) (2/21/97) • *Oklahoma State Chamber to EPA (ozone docket) (2/21/97) • *Pennsylvania Chamber of Commerce (2/13/97) • Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (RPA) (10/21/96)

• Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce (RI) (5/21/96) • *Northern RI Chamber of Commerce (2/12/97) • *South Carolina Chamber of Commerce to U.S. Senators Strom Thurmond (RSC) and Ernest Hollings (D-SC) (2/4/97)

• *Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce (SC) (2/3/97)

• *Industry and Commerce Association of South Dakota to U.S. Senator Tom

Daschle (D-SD) (6/2/97)

• *Industry and Commerce Association of South Dakota to U.S. Senator Tim

Johnson (D-SD) (9/2/97)

• *Hopewell Area—Prince George (VA) Chamber of Commerce (2/4/97)

• *Roanoke (VA) Regional Chamber of Commerce (2/6/97)

• VA Chamber of Commerce (7/17/96)

• Virginia Chamber of Commerce to Governor George Allen (7/17/96)

• *Virginia Chamber of Commerce (1/16/97)

• West Virginia Chamber of Commerce to West Virginia Governor Gaston

Caperton (5/14/96)

• Letters/comments from economic development boards

• *Milledgeville-Baldwin County (GA) Development Authority (3/10/97)

• *Albany, Dougherty (GA) Economic Development Commission (3/11/97)

• *Commerce Legislative Alliance of St. Joseph County (IN—econ. dev.) (3/5/97)

• *Metropolitan Association of Greater Indianapolis Communities (IN—econ.

dev.) to Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon (3/4/97)

• *Mason County Economic Development Alliance (MI) (1/31/97)

• St. Louis (MO) Regional Commerce & Growth Association (RCGA) to Missouri

Governor Mel Carnahan (8/9/96)

• *Grandview Area Economic Development Council (MO) (2/12/97)

• *Akron (OH) Regional Development Board to the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (1//28/97)

• *Ohio Regional Office of Economic Development (Vandalia, OH) (2/27/97)

• *Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance (1/13/97)
107

• Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation to Rhode Island Governor

Lincoln Almond (5/9/96)

• *Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation to RI Governor Lincoln Almond (1/8/97)

• *Tri-County Alliance (SC-econ. dev. org.) to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (DSC) (8/20/97)

• *Copperas Cove (TX) Economic Development Corporation Chairman Russell

Love to Vice President Gore (6/5/97)

• *Copperas Cove (TX) Economic Development Corporation to U.S. Representative Chet Edwards (D-TX) (6/5/97)

• *Joint letter from the West Bend Economic Development Corporation and the

Washington County Board of Supervisors (WI) to EPA (3/7/97)

• Letters/comments from transportation interests

• *Letter to President Clinton signed by state transportation department officials from 21 states (6/25/97)

• *C.J. Bridges Railroad Contractor, Inc. (FL) (1/19/97)

• Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) (11/25/96)

• *Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) (3/11/97)

• *GTO Association of America (assoc. of auto enthusiasts) to Carol Browner (2/

5/97)

Letters/comments from truckers

• American Trucking Associations, Inc. (ATA) (10/15/96)

• *American Trucking Associations to U.S. Senator Christopher Bond (R-MO) (2/

21/97)

• *American Trucking Associations, Inc. (ATA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• Arizona Motor Transport Association to the Governor of Arizona (11/18/96)

• *Arkansas Motor Carriers Association to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• Colorado Motor Carriers Association to Colorado Governor Romer (11/18/96)

• *Motor Transport Association of Connecticut, Inc. to Connecticut Governor

Rowland (12/6/96)

• Hawaii Transportation Association to the Governor of Hawaii (11/18/96)

• *Indiana Motor Truck Association, Inc. (2/25/97)

• *Iowa Motor Truck Association to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Maine Motor Transport Association (2/7/97)

• *Maryland Motor Coach Association (3/12/97)

• *Frederick I-70 Truck City (MD) (3/12/97)

• *Independent Truckers & Drivers Association (MD) (3/11/97)

• *Maryland Motor Truck Association, Inc. (2/14/97)

• *Massachusetts Motor Transportation Association to Massachusetts Governor

Weld (12/6/96)

• *D & W Trucking, Inc., (MI) to President Clinton (no date)

• Montana Motor Carriers Association to Montana Governor Raciot (11/18/96)

• *New Jersey Motor Truck Association to new Jersey Governor Whitman (12/

6/96)

• New Mexico Motor Carriers’ Association to New Mexico Governor Johnson (11/

19/96)

• *New York State Motor Truck Association (2/12/97)

• *New York State Motor Truck Association, Inc. to New York Governor Pataki

(12/10/96)

• *North Carolina Trucking Association to Erskine Bowles, White House Chief

of Staff (6/4/97)

• *Fabrizi Trucking & Paving Co., Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Associated Motor Carriers of Oklahoma, Inc. to U.S. Senator Inhofe (12/23/96)

• *Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association (1/22/97)

• *Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association to Pennsylvania Governor Ridge (12/

6/96)

• *Rhode Island Trucking Association, Inc.(2/5/97)

• *Rhode Island Trucking Association to Rhode Island Governor Almond (12/6/

96)

• South Carolina Trucking Association (11/4/96)

• *South Carolina Trucking Association (2/6/97)

• South Carolina Trucking Association to the South Carolina Congressional Delegation (11/4/96)

• Texas Motor Transport Association to the Governor of Texas (11/18/96)

• Utah Motor Transport Association to the Governor of Utah (11/18/96)
108

• *Edward A. Miller, Jr. on behalf of the Vermont Truck and Bus Association

(1/13/97)

• *Vermont Truck and Bus Association (2/5/97) • *Virginia Trucking Association (3/4/97) • Wisconsin Motor Carriers Association (no date) • Letters/comments from the automakers • American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) (10/10/96) • American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) letters to Governors

of Missouri and Michigan (5/10/96)

• *Comments from AAMA on the proposed rule (12/20/96) • *General Motors Corporation to Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon (2/14/97) • *Chrysler Corporation to Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon (2/14/97) • Ford Motor Company to Indiana Governor Bayh (11/25/96) • *Ford Motor Company to Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon (2/13/97) • *Pundmann Ford (MO) (2/13/97) • *Reuther Ford, Mazda (MO) (2/19/97) • *Ford Motor Company, Gregory Moreland, Regional Manager (NY) to Mayor

of Buffalo, NY (6/10/97)

• *Ford Motor Company (TN) to U.S. Representative Bob Clement (D-TN) (8/11/

97)

• *Texas Automobile Dealers Association to U.S. Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX) (8/

15/97)

• *Texas Automobile Dealers Association to U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison

(R-TX) (8/15/97)

• *Texas Automobile Dealers Association to U.S. Representative Joe Barton (RTX) (8/14/97). Letter also went to the other Texas Delegation members who were

H.R. 1984 cosponsors at the time: Bonilla (R), Combest (R), Granger (R), Hall (D),

Ortiz (D), Sandlin (D), Sessions (R), Stenholm (D), Thornberry (R), Turner (D).

• *Texas Automobile Dealers Association to U.S. Representative Bill Archer (RTX) (8/14/97). Letter also went to the other Texas Delegation members who were

not H.R. 1984 cosponsors at the time: Johnson (R), Brady (R), Lampson (D),

Doggett (D), Edwards (D), Paul (R), Hinojosa (D), Reyes (D), Lee (D), Gonzalez

(D), Smith (R), DeLay (R), Frost (D), Bentsen (D), Armey (R), Green (D), Johnson

(D).

• *Wyatt Buick Sales Co. (VA) (3/5/97) • Letters from highway user groups and AAA affiliates • *Mid-Continent Highway Users Conference resolution (9/3—9/5/97)

• *AAA Northern New England (1/13/97)

• *AAA Mid-Atlantic (3/12/97)

• *AAA Club South

• *Highway Users Federation of Delaware (1/13/97)

• *Georgia Highway Users Conference (3/12/97)

• *Indiana Highway Users Conference (3/11/97)

• *Indiana AAA to Carol Browner (11/18/96)

• *Indiana AAA to OMB (11/18/96)

• *Indiana AAA to the White House (11/18/96)

• *Maine Better Transportation Association to U.S. Representative John

Baldacci (D-ME) (2/12/97)

• *Maryland Highway Users Federation (3/3/97)

• *Highway Users Federation of Michigan to members of the Michigan House

and Senate (2/27/97)

• *Pennsylvania AAA Federation (1/13/97)

• *Virginia Hospitality & Travel Association (VHTA) (2/6/97)

• *Wisconsin Highway Users Conference (3/10/97)

• *Wisconsin Highways Users Conference to U.S. Representative Jay Johnson

(D-WI) (8/14/97). Same letter went to Reps. Kind, Petri, Kleczka, Klug, Sensenbrenner, Obey, Barrett, and Neumann.

Letters/comments from the petroleum industry

• *American Petroleum Institute (3/4/97)

• *American Petroleum Institute (3/12/97)

• Petroleum Transportation and Storage Association (11/7/96)

• Comments from NPRA on the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (8/20/

96)

• *National Petroleum Refiners Association (NPRA) (1/24/97)

• *National Petroleum Refiners’ Association (3/12/97)

• *National Association of Texaco Wholesalers, Inc. (1/28/97)
109

• Alabama Oilmen’s Association/Association of Convenience Stores to Alabama

Governor Fob James (5/2/96)

• *Diesel Equipment Co. (CA) (3/9/97) • *Buccaneer Marine, Ltd. (CA-petroleum) (3/10/97) • *Steven Evans Kirby (CA-petroleum) (3/11/97) • *Delaware Petroleum Council (1/13/97) • Florida Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association (10/31/96) • Florida Equipment Sales (industrial and petroleum) (11/6/96) • McKenzie Petroleum (FL) (11/5/96) • Mid-State Energy, Inc. (petroleum) (FL) (11/6/96) • Thomas Oil Company (FL) (11/7/96) • Pioneer Oil Company (FL) (11/12/96) • Lake Oil Company (FL) (11/12/96) • Smith Oil Company (FL) (no date, but before rule proposal) • *Quality Petroleum Corporation (FL) (1/8/97) • *Georgia Petroleum Council (3/12/97) • *Georgia Association of Petroleum Retailers, Inc. (3/17/97) • *Amoco Corporation (Atlanta, GA office) (3/14/97) • *Young Refining Corporation (GA) (2/27/97) • *Lynch Oil, Inc. (ID) to U.S. Senator Dirk Kempthorne (R-ID) (3/17/97) • Indiana Oil Marketers’ Association, Inc. to Carol Browner (11/19/96) • Indiana Oil Marketers’ Association, Inc. to OMB (11/19/96) • Indiana Oil Marketers’ Association, Inc. to the White House (11/19/96) • Indiana Oil Marketers’ Association, Inc. to U.S. Senator Dan Coats (R-IN) (11/

19/96)

• Indiana Oil Marketers’ Association, Inc. to U.S. Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

(11/19/96)

• *Amoco—Whiting refinery to U.S. Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) (2/20/97) • *Marathon Oil (OH) (2/19/97) • *Indiana Petroleum Council to Governor Frank O’Bannon (1/29/97) • *Iowa Petroleum Council (3/7/97) • *Kansas Oil Marketers Association to Kansas Governor Bill Graves (2/7/97) • *Kansas Oil Marketers Association to all members of the Kansas Congressional Delegation (2/7/97)

• *Kansas Oil Marketers Association comments (2/10/97) • *Kansas Petroleum Council (2/11/97) • *National Cooperative Refinery Association (KS—petroleum) (3/5/97) • Kentucky Petroleum Marketers Association (5/6/96) • Kentucky Petroleum Marketers Association to Kentucky Governor Paul Patton

(5/7/96)

• *Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association to U.S. Senators Mary

Landrieu (D-LA) and John Breaux (D-LA) (2/18/97)

• *Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association (3/10/97)

• *Maine Petroleum Association (3/7/97)

• *Maryland Petroleum Council (3/11/97)

• *Southern Maryland Oil to U.S. Representative Steny Hoyer (D-MD) (2/4/97)

• *WMDA (Washington/MD/Delaware Service Station and Automotive Repair

Association) (3/11/97)

• *Mid-Atlantic Petroleum Distributors’ Association (MD) (1/28/97)

• *Ewing Oil (MD) (2/12/97)

• *Ewing Oil (MD) to Maryland Governor Parris Glendening (2/12/97)

• *Ewing Oil (MD) to U.S Representative Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), and U.S. Senators Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) (2/12/97)

• *Service Station Dealers of America and Allied Trades (MD) (2/7/97)

• *Minnesota Petroleum Council (3/10/97)

• *Minnesota Petroleum Council to U.S. Rep. Jim Ramstad (R-MN) (7/31/97).

Similar letters also went to U.S. Reps. Oberstar (D-MN), Minge (D-MN), Luther

(D-MN), and Gutknecht (R-MN)

• *Minnesota Petroleum Council to U.S. Sen. Rod Grams (R-MN) (8/4/97)

• *Nebraska Petroleum Council (3/6/97)

• *Nebraska Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association (2/3/97)

• *Johnson & Dix Petroleum Marketers (NH) to NH Senators Judd Gregg and

Bob Smith, and others (1/24/97)

• *New Hampshire Petroleum Council (3/7/97)

• *Reid Petroleum Corporation (NY) (2/5/97)

• North Carolina Petroleum Marketers Association (5/13/96)

• *Newsom Oil Company, Inc. (NC) to U.S. Representative Eva Clayton (D-NC)

(5/6/97)
110

• *Newsom Oil Company, Inc. (NC) to U.S. Representative Bob Etheridge (DNC) (5/6/97)

• *Associated Petroleum Industries of Pennsylvania (1/14/97) • *Associated Petroleum Industries of Pennsylvania to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) (9/5/97)

• Liberty Oil Company, Inc. (PA) to U.S. Representatives Timothy Holden (DPA) and Paul Kanjorski (D-PA) (no date)

• *DB Companies (RI) (2/20/97) • *South Carolina Petroleum Marketers Association (2/14/97) • South Carolina Petroleum Council to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC) (5/

9/96)

• *South Carolina Petroleum Council to members of the SC Congressional Delegation (3/26/97)

• *Infinger Transportation Company, Inc. (SC-petroleum) too U.S. Senator Hollings (D-SC) (3/20/97)

• *Stern Oil Co. Inc. (SD) to Lynn Cutler, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs (6/

3/97)

• *South Dakota Petroleum Council to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D) (8/20/97) • *South Dakota Petroleum Council to U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D) (8/20/97) • *Tennessee Petroleum Council to Lt. Governor/Speaker of the Tennessee Senate John Wilder (1/22/97)

• *Tennessee Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Ed Bryant (R-TN) (8/20/

97)

• *Tennessee Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Bob Clement (D-TN) (8/

20/97)

• *Tennessee Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Bart Gordon (D-TN) (8/

20/97)

• *Tennessee Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Van Hilleary (R-TN) (8/

20/97)

• *Tennessee Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Zach Wamp (R-TN) (8/

20/97)

• *Virginia Gasoline Marketers Council (2/21/97) • *Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Association, Inc. (1/9/97) • *Virginia Petroleum Council (3/7/97) • *Virginia Petroleum Council to selected local officials (5/20/97) • *Virginia Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA) (8/14/

97)

• *Virginia Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Thomas Davis (R-VA) (8/

14/97)

• *Virginia Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Robert Scott (D-VA) (8/14/

97)

• *Virginia Petroleum Council to U.S. Representative Herbert Bateman (R-VA)

(8/14/97)

• *Wisconsin Petroleum Council (3/11/97)

Letters/comments from the mining and minerals processing industry

• *China Clay Producers Association, Inc. (GA—mining) (1/31/97)

• *Mine & Mill Supply Company (FL) (1/9/97)

• *JuNo Industries (FL—does business with the phosphate industry) (1/23/97)

• *Anderson Mining Corporation (FL) (1/10/97)

• *Florida Rock Industries, Inc. (1/13/97)

• *Indiana Coal Council email (3/12/97)

• *Maryland Coal Association (3/11/97)

• *Anthracite Industries, Inc. (PA), to Pennsylvania Congressmen/Senators (2/6/

97)

• *Bradford Coal Co., Inc.(PA) to U.S. Representative Bud Shuster (R-PA) (1/21/

97)

• *Mine Safety Appliances Company (PA) to U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

(2/4/97)

• *Virginia Coal Association (3/7/97)

• Letters/comments from the cast metals industry

• *Nichols Wire Inc. (AL) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Brown Tank & Steel (AZ) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Steiner Fabrication, Inc. (AZ—cast metals) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Valley Metal Treating Inc. (CA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Artsons Manufacturing Inc. (CA—cast metals) to President Clinton (6/27/97)

• *Pressure Cast Products Corp. (CA) to President Clinton (6/20/97)
111

• *California Cast Metals Assoc. (CA—cast metals) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *ASC Tubing, Inc. (CA-metals casting) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Atlantic Steel Industries, Inc. (GA) (2/28/97) • *Macon Iron (GA) (2/28/97) • *Metallurgical Processing, Inc. to U.S. Representative Mark Souder (R-IN) (3/

25/97)

• *Indiana Steel Environmental Group to Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon (1/

27/97)

• *Inland Steel Flat Products (IN) to Indiana Department of Env. Management

Commissioner (1/31/97)

• *I/N Tek and I/N Kote (IN—steel) (3/11/97) • *Indiana Metal Treating (IN) to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Merchants Metals (IN) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Truecast Precision Castings LLC (KY) to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Dailey Ironworks Inc. (LA) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Metalloy Manufacturing Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (6/26/97) • *Western Foundry Co., (MI) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Non-Ferrous Cast Alloys, Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (7/1/97) • *Modern Metal Processing, Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *GST Steel Company (MO) (1/22/97) • *GST Steel Company (MO) (2/6/97) • *Shamrad Metal Fabricators (MO) (2/28/97) • *Shamrad Metal Fabricators (MO) (3/4/97) • *Atlas Casting Co., Inc. (MO) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Engelhard-Clal (NJ—metals casting) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *F. W. Winter Inc. & Co. (NJ—metals casting) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Aluminum Shapes (NJ—metals casting) to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Century Tube Corp. (NJ—cast metals) to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Wormuth Brothers Foundry (NY—cast metals) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Lamothermic Corp. (NY—cast metals) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Funk FineCast, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *American Wire and Cable Co. (OH) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *T & B Foundry Co. (OH) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Blanchester Foundry Co. (OH) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Lincoln Foundry (PA) to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Gupta Permold, Corp. (PA-cast metals) to President Clinton (6/8/97) • *United Foundry Co. Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *All-Lite Metal Co. (PA) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Weatherly Casting & Machine Co. (PA) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Pennsylvania Precision Cast Parts, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Arcos Alloys (PA) to U.S. Representative Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), and Senators

Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Rick Santorum (R-PA) (2/4/97)

• *Benton Foundry, Inc. (PA) to U.S. Representatives Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), Peterson, and Joseph McDade (R-PA) (2/3/97)

• *Bucks Fabricating (PA) to U.S. Rep. English (R-PA), U.S. Sen. Santorum (RPA), and U.S. Sen. Specter (R-PA) (1/20/97)

• *Caparo Steel (PA) to U.S. Representative Phil English (R-PA) (2/11/97)

• *FLO BIN Fabricated Metals, Inc. (PA) to U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

(1/21/97)

• *National Torch Tip Co. (PA—manufactures welding and cutting devices), to

U.S. Representative Mike Doyle (D-PA) (2/11/97)

• *Symphony P/M Inc. (RI-metalworking) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Metallurgical Solutions, Inc. President John O’Meara (RI) to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Metallurgical Solutions, Inc. VP, Metallurgist Gregory W. Dexter (RI) to

President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Castex Industries (RI) (and member of the White House Conference on Small

Business) to Clinton, Sen. Bumpers (AR), Sen. Bond (MO) and the U.S. Small

Business Administration (1/20/97)

• *Kingsport Foundry & Manufacturing Corp. (TN) to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *General Smelting & Refining, Inc. (TN) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Assured Castings Corp. (TN) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *TexCast, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Alloy Casting (TX) to President Clinton (6/27/97)

• *Intermountain Precision Casting (UT) to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *KBAlloys, Inc. (WA) to President Clinton (5/30/97)

• *Pentz Design, Inc. (WA-foundry) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Wisconsin Cast Metals Association (1/13/97)
112

• *Wisconsin Cast Metals Association (WI) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Crown Metal Company Inc. (WI) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Westwood Aluminum Castings, Inc. (WI) President to President Clinton (6/19/

97)

• *Westwood Aluminum Castings, Inc. (WI) Vice President to President Clinton

(6/19/97)

• *Westwood Aluminum Castings, Inc. (WI) Admin. Manager to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Westwood Aluminum Castings, Inc. (WI) Sales Manager to President Clinton

(6/19/97)

• Letters/comments from labor groups • *Building and Construction Trades Department Emergency Action letter (DC)

(6/6/97)

• *International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (DC) to President Clinton (5/

15/97)

• United Mine Workers of America Resolution (no date) • *Eugene Trisko for the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) to U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) (2/28/97)

• *Laborers’ International Union of North America, Midwest Regional Office (IL)

to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Illinois Brotherhood of Teamsters Joint Council No. 25 to President Clinton

(5/30/97)

• Illinois Brotherhood of Teamsters Joint Council No. 25 resolution (no date) • *United Mine Workers of America (Indiana COMPAC) to Indiana Governor

Frank O’Bannon (2/18/97)

• *United Mine Workers of America (Indiana COMPAC) (3/8/97) • *Comments of the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) (3/11/97) • *International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Central Region (Missouri and Kansas) Vice President Phil Young to President Clinton (5/28/97)

• *Laborers-Employers Cooperation and Education Trust (Western Missouri and

Kansas district to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Greater Kansas City Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO to

Ron Klain (6/26/97)

• *Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers International Union (MD) to

President Clinton (5/23/97)

• *Baltimore, MD International Union of Operating Engineers to President Clinton (5/30/97)

• Baltimore, MD International Union of Operating Engineers resolution (no

date)

• *Resolution passed by the Michigan State AFL-CIO (5/2/97) • *Michigan Teamsters Joint Council No. 43 to President Clinton (5/7/97)

• Michigan Teamsters Joint Council No. 43 resolution (no date)

• *Dearborn, MI Utility Workers Union of America, AFL-CIO to President Clinton (5/12/97)

• *Detroit, MI Service Employees International Union to President Clinton (5/

13/97)

• *Southfield, MI Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union to President Clinton (5/9/97)

• *Wayne County, MI Sheriff/Airport Police, Local 502 to President Clinton (5/

9/97)

• *Montana Pulp and Paperworkers to U.S. Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) (6/5/

97)

• *General Drivers & Helpers, Local Union No. 554 (NE) to President Clinton

(5/21/97)

• *Columbiana Mahoning & Trumbull, Ohio UAW to Carol Browner (6/9/97)

• *Ohio AFL-CIO to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Toledo Area AFL-CIO Council (OH) (5/19/97)

• *Toledo, OH Port Council to President Clinton (5/28/97)

• *International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers—Local Union No. 8 (OH) (2/

24/97)

• *Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, AFL-CIO (OH) (resolution-no date)

• *Washington State Building Construction Trades Council to President Clinton

(5/9/97)

• *Washington State Building Construction Trades Council to Alexis Herman,

Secretary, U.S. Department of Labor (5/12/97)

• *Washington State Building Construction Trades Council resolution (5/29/97)

• Letters/comments from agricultural interests
113

• *20 groups representing agricultural interests to the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry Committee, the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee,

the House Agriculture Committee, and the House CommerceCommittee (2/24/97)

• *National Farmer’s Union to EPA (3/12/97) • Florida Nurserymen and Growers Association (11/4/96) • *Gold Kist Inc. (GA—farm cooperative) (3/3/97) • *Illinois Agriculture Roundtable to the members of the Illinois Congressional

Delegation (7/28/97)

• Growmark, Inc. (IL—a regional agricultural supply and grain marketing cooperative) (no date)

• *CENEX, Inc. (regional agricultural supply cooperative) (2/27/97) • *Countrymark Cooperative, Inc. (IN—farm cooperative) (3/10/97) • *Grain Processing Corporation (IA) to U.S. Representative Jim Leach (R-IA) (2/

13/97)

• *Maryland Farm Bureau, Inc. (3/10/97) • *Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company (MO) (2/6/97) • *Syntex Agribusiness, Inc. (MO) (1/24/97) • *Bayer Agriculture Division (MO) (2/11/97) • *Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation (3/12/97) • *Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation (5/30/97) • *New Hampshire Farm Bureau Federation (3/11/97) • *New York Farm Bureau (2/7/96) • *North Carolina Farm Bureau Federation email to Carol Browner (no date) • *Pennsylvania State Grange (1/8/97) • *South Carolina Farm Bureau Federation (3/10/97) • *Tennessee Forage and Grassland Council (1/29/97) • *Virginia Agribusiness Council (2/17/97) • Virginia Farm Bureau Federation (11/21/96) • Letters/comments from bakers • *Smith’s Bakeries (CA) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Henri’s Bakery (GA) to President Clinton (6/14/97) • *Lovin Oven Cakery (IL) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Donut Express (MA) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *The Bread Basket (MI) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Freedman’s Bakery Inc. (NJ) to President Clinton (no date) • *Century Bakery (NJ) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Britts Donut Shop (NC) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Brown’s Bakery, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (5/30/97) • *Link’s Bakery (OH) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *New Horizons Baking Company (OH) to U.S. Representative Steven

LaTourette (R-OH) (2/17/97)

• *New Bakery Co. of Ohio to U.S. Representative Robert Ney (R-OH) (2/12/97)

• *Sno-White Donut Company (OH) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Mt. Washington Bakery (OH) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Maiers Inc. (PA-bakery) to President Clinton (6/4/97)

• *DeRosa Bakery, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Moio’s Italian Pastry Shop (PA) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Donut Den (TN-bakery) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Great American Cookie, Co. (TN) to ‘‘Whom It May Concern’’ (no date)

• *Erika M. Pepas’ bakery (TX) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Poffenbarger’s Bakery (VA) to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• Letters/comments from the food industry

• Florida Gift Fruit Shippers Association (11/1/96)

• *Jackson Beverages (GA) (2/28/97)

• *Universal Foods Corporation (MD) (3/11/97)

• *Seagram Americas (MD) (3/10/97)

• *Hercules Food & Functional Products (MO) (1/21/97)

• *American Dehydrated Foods, Inc. (MO) (2/6/97)

• *Curry Flour Mills, Inc. (PA) to U.S. Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Rick

Santorum (R-PA), and U.S. Representative George Gekas (R-PA) (2/6/97)

• *Moyer Packing Company (PA—beef packers) to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter

(R-PA) (2/3/97)

• *Pennsylvania Food Processors Association (3/3/97)

• *R&H Maxxon, Inc. (SC—Depot Food Stores) (2/5/97)

• *R&H Maxxon, Inc. (SC-food) to U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings (D-SC) (3/20/97) • Letters/comments from state manufacturing associations

• *Associated Industries of Kentucky (1/30/97)

• Associated Industries of Massachusetts (6/3/96)
114

• Associated Industries of Massachusetts to Massachusetts’ DEP Commissioner

David Struhs (no date, but before rule proposal)

• *Associated Industries of Massachusetts sent to the Massachusetts’ Congressional Delegation (2/10/97)

• *Associated Industries of Massachusetts to U.S. Representative John Joseph

Moakley (D-MA) (2/10/97)

• *Mississippi Manufacturers Association (3/6/97) • Associated Industries of Missouri to Missouri Governor Mel Carnahan (4/12/96) • Associated Industries of Vermont to Governor Dean (11/26/96) • Virginia Manufacturers Association to Virginia Secretary of Natural Resources,

Becky Norton Dunlop (7/2/96)

• Letters/comments from utility interests • *American Public Power Association (DC) to John Haines, EPA (3/24/97) • *Flint Electric Membership Corporation (GA) to U.S. Sens. Max Cleland (DGA) and Paul Coverdell (R-GA), and U.S. Reps. Jack Kingston (R-GA), Mac Collins (R-GA), John Lewis (D-GA), and Bob Barr (R-GA) (3/18/97)

• *Southern Indiana Gas And Electric Company (SIGECO) to the Indiana Congressional Delegation (12/3/96)

• *Southern Indiana Gas And Electric Company (SIGECO) to the Indiana Congressional Delegation (4/16/97)

• *Southern Indiana Gas And Electric Company (SIGECO) to Governor

O’Bannon (2/21/97)

• *Southern Indiana Gas And Electric Company (SIGECO) to President Clinton

(1/29/97)

• *Muscatine Power and Water (IA) (2/21/97) • *Western Resources (KS—utility) (1/16/97) • *Hopkinsville Electric System (KY) to U.S. Senator Wendell Ford (D-KY) (2/

6/97)

• *Hopkinsville Electric System (KY) (2/6/97) • *St. Joseph Light & Power Company (MO) (1/20/97) • *The Empire District Electric Company (MO) (2/11/97) • *Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. (MO) (3/6/97) • *Auburn (NE) Board of Public Works (Utility) General Manager James P.

Dietz to U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE) (9/10/97)

• *Duke Power (NC) to U.S. Representative Richard Burr (R-NC) (1/28/97) • *North Carolina Association of Electric Cooperatives, Inc. to North Carolina

Gov. Hunt (6/4/97)

• *Ohio Electric Utility Institute (2/3/97) • *Ohio Municipal Electric Association to the Ohio Congressional Delegation (1/

29/97)

• *Michigan Electric and Gas Association to U.S. Representative James Barcia

(D-MI) (2/28/97)

• *Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency (TX) (3/11/97)

• *Menasha Utilities (WI) (3/5/97)

• Letters/comments from chemicals interests

• *Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association (3/10/97)

• *Chemical Industry Council of Delaware (1/13/97)

• Florida Manufacturing and Chemical Council, Inc. (11/12/96)

• *Melamine Chemicals Inc. (LA) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Manufacturers and Chemical Industry Council of North Carolina (3/10/97)

• *Occidental Chemical Corporation (NC) to U.S. Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) (4/

28/97). Same letter also went to U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) and U.S.

Representative Mike McIntyre (D-NC).

• Sterling Chemicals to U.S. Sens. Phil Gramm (R-TX), Kay Bailey Hutchison

(R-TX), Governor George W. Bush (R-TX), U.S. Reps. Joe Barton (R-TX), Bill Archer (R-TX), Nick Lampson (D-TX), Ron Paul (R-TX), Tom DeLay (R-TX), Dick

Army (R-TX), and Gene Green (D-TX)

• *Virginia Chemical Manufacturers’ Association prepared by W. Thomas Hudson & Associates, Inc. (3/7/97)

• Letters/comments from natural resources interests

• Florida Forestry Association (11/15/96)

• *Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (FL) (12/5/96)

• Letters/comments from other businesses/industry groups

• Ray Distributing Company (FL) (11/5/96)

• Greater Houston Partnership (10/8/96)

• Illinois Retail Merchants Association (10/25/96)

• Tenneco Packaging (GA) (11/15/96)

• South Dakota Retailers Association (11/21/96)
115

• *South Dakota Retailers Association to U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) (8/

26/97)

• Indiana Manufactured Housing Association—Recreation Vehicle Indiana Council (11/11/96)

• *Indiana Manufactured Housing Association Recreation Vehicle Indiana Council, Inc. to Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon (2/28/97)

• *Fridrich & Clark Realty (TN) (1/27/97) • *Vermont Ski Areas Association (1/13/97) • *Whirlpool Corporation (MI) (2/3/97) • *National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) New York (2/10/97) • *Hasbro (RI) (3/6/97) • Associated Petroleum Industries of Michigan, Michigan Manufacturers Assn.,

Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Michigan Oil and Gas Assn., Michigan Chemical

Council, and the National Federation of Independent Business to Michigan Governor John Engler (4/15/96)

• *Several Texas business and industry groups to the Texas Natural Resource

Conservation Commission (TNRCC) (1/10/97)

• *Texas division of Citizens for a Sound Economy to the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) (1/10/97)

• *Robertshaw Controls Company (PA) to U.S. Representative Frank Mascara

(D-PA) (1/25/97)

• *Red Hill Grinding Wheel Corporation (PA) to U.S Representative Paul

McHale (D-PA) (1/20/97)

• *Surco Products, Inc. (PA—odor control) to Pennsylvania state Senators

Bodack, Habay, and Ridge (1/23/97)

• *Ohio Air Quality Standards Coalition to Governor Voinovich (2/7/97) • *Gow-Mac Instrument Co. (PA) to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) and U.S.

Representative Paul McHale (D-PA) (2/10/97)

• *Acme Wire Products Inc. (PA) to U.S. Representative Jon Fox (R-PA) (2/10/

97)

• *Weave Corporation (PA) to U.S. Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Rick

Santorum (R-PA), and U.S. Representatives Tim Holden (D-PA) and Joseph Pitts

(R-PA) (2/3/97)

• *R.E. Uptegraff Manufacturing Co. (PA) to U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

(2/4/97)

• *Grinnell (PA) to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) (1/20/97) • *Cyklop (PA) to U.S. Representatives Joseph Pitts (R-PA) and Curt Weldon (RPA) (2/3/97)

• *Rigidply Rafters, Inc. (PA) to U.S. Representative George Gekas (R-PA) (2/4/

97)

• *C-B Tool Co. (PA) to U.S. Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Rick Santorum

(R-PA), and U.S. Representative Joseph Pitts (2/5/97)

• *Air-Scent International (PA—env. air fresheners) to Pennsylvania state Representative Jeffrey Habay (1/23/97)

• *SMC Business Councils (PA—small business) to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter

(R-PA) (2/14/97)

• *Legislative Clean Air Policy Committee (3/12/97)

• *Georgia Clean Air Group (3/11/97)

• *Georgia Clean Air Group to U.S. Senator Max Cleland (D-GA) (3/20/97)

• *Minnesota Environmental Coalition of Labor and Industry (3/3/97)

• *NC Association of Financial Institutions (3/12/97)

• *Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) (3/11/97)

• *Connecticut Business & Industry Association (3/11/97)

• *Connecticut Business & Industry Association to U.S. Senator Chris Dodd (DCT) (6/2/97) Same letter sent to all members of the CT Congressional Delegation.

• *American Council on Science and Health (3/7/97)

• *New Jersey Air Quality Standards Coalition (3/11/97)

• *Associated General Contractors of America (New York State Chapter) (2/5/97)

• *Associated General Contractors of America, New York State Chapter, Inc. to

U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) (5/30/97)

• *Associated General Contractors of America, New York State Chapter, Inc. to

U.S. Senator Alfonse D’Amato (R-NY) (5/30/97)

• *Associated Constructors of Maine, Inc. (2/18/97)

• *Construction Industries of Rhode Island (3/10/97)

• *National Federation of Independent Business—Virginia Chapter (3/24/97) • *Georgia Economic Developers Association, Inc. (2/28/97)

• *Georgia Industry Association (3/11/97)

• *Georgia Textile Manufacturers Association, Inc.
116

• *ASR Manufacturing Company (GA) (3/3/97) • *Carr & Associates (GA) (3/6/97) • *Cushman & Wakefield (GA) (3/10/97) • *Dublin Construction Co., Inc. (GA) (3/3/97) • *Engelhard Corporation (GA) (3/10/97) • *Fabritex, Inc. (GA) (3/3/97) • *Futren Corporation (GA) (3/3/97) • *Horton Homes, Inc. (GA) (2/27/97) • *Huron Tech Corp (GA) (2/27/97) • *J.L. Todd Auction Company (GA) (2/27/97) • *Macgregor Associates Architects (GA) (3/13/97) • *Law firm representing the City of Toccoa, GA and a number of businesses in

Stephens County (2/27/97)

• *Reddick Construction Company (GA) (2/27/97) • *Richport Properties (GA) (3/12/97) • *Sandersville Railroad ? (GA) (2/7/97) • *Sanford Rose Associates—Atlanta North (GA) (2/28/97) • *Synovus Financial Corp. (2/27/97) • *T. Eleanor Davis, Inc. (GA) (no date) • *Wilheit Packaging Materials Company (GA) (2/26/97) • *Yancy Bros. Co. (GA) (3/12/97) • *Competitive Enterprise Institute (Washington, DC) (3/12/97) • *Ernst & Young (MO) (3/10/97) • *Leak-Goforth Company (NC—econ. development consultants) to U.S. Representative Howard Coble (R-NC) (4/4/97)

• *Leak-Goforth Company LLC to U.S. Representative Cass Ballenger (R-NC) (4/

4/97)

• *Center Management Corporation (IN) to U.S. Representative Tim Roemer (DIN) (2/27/97)

• *Missouri NAAQS Coalition to U.S. Senator Ashcroft (R-MO) (4/10/97) • *Missouri NAAQS Coalition to U.S. Senator Kit Bond (R-MO) (4/10/97) • *Bill Pfeiffer (concerned citizen—MO) (2/3/97) • *Commercial Lithographing Co. (MO) (2/3/97) • *Wabash Fibre Box Company (MO) (1/23/97) • *Peterson Manufacturing Company (MO) (1/21/97) • *Prime Tanning Corporation (MO) (1/17/97) • *Chester P. Gunn (MO) (1/24/97) • *Bary Marquardt (KS) (2/5/97) • *Neff Printing, Inc. (KS) (2/6/97) • *Stouse Sign & Decal, Inc. (KS) (2/5/97) • *Spangler Printers (KS) (1/22/97)

• *Burd Fletcher (MO) (2/5/97)

• *Sweetheart Cup Company, Inc. (MO) (2/11/97)

• *Crest Mobil Home Court (MO) (2/14/97)

• *Pundmann Family Real Estate Company (MO) (2/17/97)

• *Larkin Associates, Consulting Engineers, Inc. (MO) (1/24/97)

• *Lyle Van Vleet (KS) (1/24/97)

• *James L. Fletcher, Jr., M.D. (MO) (2/13/97)

• *Jesco Resources, Inc. (MO) (3/10/97)

• *Mid America Dental, Hearing & Vision Center of Mt. Vernon, MO (1/29/97)

• *Joseph Crenshaw (MO) (2/12/97)

• *Jim Seamon (MO—concerned citizen) (2/8/97)

• *American Society of Civil Engineers (MD) (3/11/97)

• *Printing Industries of Maryland (3/12/97)

• *Greater Baltimore Committee (MD) (3/11/97)

• *Maryland Highway Contractors Association (3/12/97)

• *National Federation of Independent Business—Maryland (no date)

• *Maryland Aggregates Association, Inc. (MD) (3/10/97)

• *Edward Looker, Concerned Citizen (MD) (3/10/97)

• *Marine Trades Association of Maryland, Inc. (2/17/97)

• *Campbell House Inn, Suites, and Golf Club (KY) (2/5/97)

• *Campbell House Inn, Suites, and Golf Club (KY) to U.S. Senator Wendell

Ford (D-KY) (2/5/97)

• *Partnership for Environmental Progress (IL) to Sally Katzen, OMB (4/17/97)

• *Partnership for Environmental Progress (IL) to Dr. Laura D’Andrea Tyson,

the White House (4/17/97)

• *John Maxwell (NJ—concerned citizen) to Mary Nichols (3/12/97)

• *Vincent D. Brown (NE-concerned citizen) (3/7/97)
117

• *Vincent D. Brown (NE-attorney) (3/6/97)

• *Barbara Lampe (NE-concerned citizen) (3/5/97)

• *Carol Nash-Drain (NE-concerned citizen) (3/6/97)

• *David Klas, Tenneco Packaging (NY) to U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) (3/25/97)

• *David Klas, Tenneco Packaging (NY) to U.S. Senator Alfonse D’Amato (R-NY)

(3/25/97)

• *David Klas, Tenneco Packaging (NY) to U.S. Representative Bill Paxon (RNY) (3/25/97)

• *Anthony Searing, Tenneco Packaging (NY) to U.S. Representative John

McHugh (R-NY) (3/27/97). Same letter went to U.S. Sens. Alfonse D’Amato and

Daniel Patrick Moynihan

• *New York Coalition for Clean Air Standards to U.S. Representative James

Walsh (R-NY) (4/4/97)

• *Empire State Marine Trades Association (NY) (2/7/97)

• *Bryce Harthoorn, Deere & Company (IA) (3/10/97)

• *Ralph Grotelueschen, Deere & Company (IA) (3/12/97)

• *South Carolina Textile Manufacturers’ Association (3/6/97)

• *South Carolina Asphalt Pavement Association (3/10/97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to Governor Bill Graves (2/13/97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to Kansas legislators on NCSL Environment

Committee (2/13/97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to U.S. Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) (2/13/97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) (2/13/

97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to U.S. Representative Jerry Moran (R-KS) (2/

13/97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to U.S. Representative Jim Ryun (R-KS) (2/13/

97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to U.S. Representative Vince Snowbarger (R-KS)

(2/13/97)

• *Kansas Air Quality Coalition to U.S. Representative Todd Tiahrt (R-KS) (2/

13/97)

• *Joan Gilbert (ME-concerned citizen) (3/6/97)

• *Asphalt Paving Association of Iowa (3/12/97)

• *Iowa Association of Business and Industry (2/14/97)

• *The Fulton Group (TN—former mayor of Nashville) (no date)

• *Joint letter from 29 associations representing small businesses to President

Clinton (6/18/97)

• *R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to EPA (2/14/97)

• *R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to U.S. Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) (3/17/

97)

• *R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) (3/

17/97)

• *R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to U.S. Representative Richard Burr (R-NC)

(3/17/97)

• *R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to NC Governor Jim Hunt (D) (3/17/97)

• *Rohm and Haas Company (NC) to U.S. Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) (4/

29/97). Same letter also went to U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC) and U.S. Rep. Sue

Myrick (R-NC).

• *Allied Signal Fibers (NC) to U.S. Representative David Price (D-NC) (5/9/97)

• *Richard Sweetman to Kathleen McGinty, Council on Environmental Quality

(6/10/97)

• *Richard Sweetman to Sally Katzen, OMB (6/10/97)

• *Joe Turnham, Chairman Alabama Democratic Party to President Clinton (6/

4/97)

• *Arizona Corporation Commission Chair, Carl Kunasek to President Clinton

(6/4/97)

• *Martin Luther King, III (GA) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Parkway Corporation (PA) to Edward Rendell, Mayor of Philadelphia (6/11/

97)

• *Hooker Furniture Corporation (VA) to U.S. Representative Virgil Goode (DVA) (2/19/97)

• *Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group to EPA (3/11/97)

• *Industrial Development Authority of Kansas City (MO) President Jane Kieffer

to U.S. Representative Karen McCarthy (D-MO) (8/25/97)

• *President, National Baptist Convention (FL) to President Clinton (6/4/97)
118

• *Republic Container Company (WV) President/CEO Jon Amores to President

Clinton (6/10/97)

• *The Biscuit and Cracker Manufacturers’ Association to all House Agriculture

Committee members, all House Commerce Committee members, all Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee members, and all Senate Environment

and Public Works Committee members (9/4/97)

• *Letter signed by 11 business and industry trade associations to U.S. Senator

Tom Harkin (D-IA) (9/9/97). Signatories include: Iowa Farm Bureau Federation,

Iowa Petroleum Council, Iowa Bankers Association, Iowa Retail Federation, Iowa

Utility Association, Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities, Iowa Good Roads Association, Inc., Iowa Association of Business Industry, Iowa Limestone Producers

Association, Inc., Iowa Association of Electric Cooperatives, and Asphalt Paving

Association of Iowa.

• *Illinois Municipal League resolution (9/11—9/14/97) • *McGregor (TX) citizen Bob Melton to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *McGregor (TX) citizen Bob Melton to Vice President Gore (6/5/97) • *McGregor (TX) citizen Bob Melton to U.S. Representative Chet Edwards (DTX) (5/30/97)

• *McGregor (TX) citizen Bob Melton to U.S. Representative Lloyd Doggett (DTX) (5/30/97)

• *President Elect, NABCO (DC) to President Clinton (no date) • *Texas State Democratic Committee member Ruth L. Wyrick to President

Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Pharr (TX) Chairman of the Southwest Voter Registration and Education

Project Juan J. Maldondo to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *McGinley Mills Inc. (NJ) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Oxford Instruments Inc. (NJ) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Valley Brook Machine Tool Co. Inc. (NJ) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Lisa Industries, Inc. (NJ) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Double O Mfg., Inc. (NJ) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Somerset Wood Products Co.(NJ) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Krisanna Construction, Inc. ( NJ) to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Smith and Aquirre Construction Co, Inc. (NM) to President Clinton • *HSFS Industries (NY) Inc. to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Ben Mer Manufacturing Inc. (NY) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Precision Molding & Millwork (NY) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Rainbow Ribbons and Fabrics Inc. (NY) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *IMC (Industrial Management Council) Services (NY) to State Representative

Erskine Bowles (6/25/97). Similar letter went to Clinton, appropriate staff and

cabinet officials.

• *U. C. Millwork (NY) to President Clinton (5/30/97)

• *GRC (NY) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Intercontinental Polymers, Inc. (NC) to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Charles D. Roberts Company (NC) to President Clinton (6/15/97)

• *Perry’s Frame Shop, Inc. (NC) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Tim Smith (NC) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Myers Carving & Sanding Co., Inc. (NC) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *McDonald Grading Company, Inc. (NC) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Cecil—Johnson MFG. (NC) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Edward B. Seguin, Jr. (citizen—OH) to President Clinton (6/30/97)

• *Cincinnati Woodworks, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Architectural Wood Products (OH) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Abbott Assembly, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (no date)

• *The Velotta Company (OH—highway construction) to President Clinton (6/19/

97)

• *Smith-Wheeler Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Tru-Line Manufacturing (AL) Quality Manager R.B. Fiske to President Clinton (7/10/97)

• *Tru-Line Manufacturing (AL) Quality Spec. Geoff Haney to President Clinton

(7/9/97)

• *White Fab Inc. (AL) President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Arizona Custom Millwork & Contracting (AZ) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Arizona Chapter Associated General Contractors (AZ) to President Clinton (6/

24/97)

• *Marchand Co. of Arizona (AZ) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Construction 70 Inc. (AZ) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Pima Paving Inc. (AZ) to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Hunter Contracting (AZ) to President Clinton (6/20/97)
119

• *Garner Heat Treat (CA) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *C. Beecham Co. (CA) to President Clinton (no date) • *FCI Constructors, LLP (CA) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Eezer Products (CA—plastics) to President Clinton (no date) • *C & S Door and Trim, Inc. (CA) to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Homefix Inc. (CA) to President Clinton (6/16/97) • *Banks Construction Company, Inc. (CA) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Industrial Weed Control (CA) to President Clinton (6/1/97) • *Eagle Claw Quality Fishing Tackle (CO) to Lynn Cutler (6/11/97) • *Kendo, Inc. to President Clinton (7/2/97) • *De Sio Inc. (CT) to President Clinton (7/6/97) • *Conway Hardwood Products (CT) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *HMT Hooven Metal Treating, Inc. (CT) to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Blakeslee Arpaia Chapman Inc. (CT) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Nelson Heat Treating Co., Inc. (CT) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *PTFE Compounds, Inc. (DE—plastics) to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Industrial Metal Treating Corp. (DE) to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Culpepper Lumber Co., Inc. (GA) to President Clinton (no date) • *Walker & Walker Co. (GA) to President Clinton (6/5/97) • *Southern Asphalt (GA) to President Clinton (no date) • *Cherry Lists (GA) to President Clinton (no date) • *Montgomery Contracting Co. (GA) to President Clinton (5/30/97) • *Futura Co. (GA) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Gossen Corp. (GA) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Yuenger Wood Moulding, Inc. to President Clinton (6/17/97) • *Reese Construction Co. (IL) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *John Sterling Corp. (IL) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *W. H. Maze Nails Inc. (IL) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Station Eight, Inc. (IL) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Applied Thermal Technologies (IN) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Nampa Paving & Asphalt Co., (ID) to President Clinton (no date) • *Sheilen Industries, Inc. (IN) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *J.H Rudolph & Co. (IN) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *E.E. & E Industries Inc. (IA) to President Clinton (6/24/97) • *Andrews Asphalt & Construction, Inc. (KS) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Heartstone, Inc. (KS) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Judy Co., Engineers & Contractors (KS) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *TA Millwork (KS) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *WSI Wood Specialties Inc. (KS) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Shelby Industries (KY) to Lynn Cutler (6/11/97) • *Shelby Industries to Sally Katzen (6/11/97)

• *Alvey Co., (KY) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Diefenthal Investments LLC (LA) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Western Stress (LA) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Richard Price Contracting Co. Inc. (LA) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Marine Industrial Contractors Inc. (LA) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Highland Cabinets & Millworks, Inc. (LA) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Leo Lebourgeois (LA) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *General Marine Construction Corp. (ME) to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Russell Paving Co., (MD) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Precision Form (MD) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Vintage Lumber (MD) to President Clinton (6/8/97)

• *Clendenin Brothers Inc. (MD) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Advanced Tool & Mfg., Co.(MD) to President Clinton (no date)

• *AmTote International Inc. (MD) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Metals Service, Inc. (MD) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Cosmec XL (MA) to President Clinton (6/13/97)

• *Henry Perkins Co., (MA) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Palmer Paving Corp. (MA) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Dyecraftsmen, Inc., (MA) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *National Cord & Braid Corp. (MA) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Daiek Woodworks (MI) to President Clinton (6/14/97)

• *Ad-Tech Plastic Systems Corp. (MI) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Atmosphere Annealing, Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Milbocker & Sons, Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Ajax Paving Industries Inc., (MI) Chairman. to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Ajax Paving Industries Inc. (MI) President to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Harbor Black Oxide, Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (6/25/97)
120

• *Applied Process, Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (5/30/97) • *Great Lake Woods, Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (6/12/97) • *Henry H. Smith & Co. (MI) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Process Prototype Inc. (MI) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Automated Building Components, Inc. (MN) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Building Material Wholesalers, Inc. (MN) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *CMIC Construction Mortgage Investors Co. (MN) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Lyman Development Co. (MN) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Mid-America Cedar (MN) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Keystone Report (MN) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Hitchiner Manufacturing Co. Inc.(MO) to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Earthmovers, Inc. (MS) to President Clinton ( no date) • *Regal Plastic Supply Co. (NE) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Flinn Paving Co., Inc. (NE) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Integrity Hardwoods Inc.(NE) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *Peavine Construction, Inc. (NV) to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Nevada Hydrocarbon, Inc. to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *Anthony Galluzzo Corp. (NH) to President Clinton (6/3/97) • *Chamberlain Companies, Inc. (NH) to President Clinton (6/13/97) • *G.A. Avril Co. (OH) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Northwestern Ohio Building & Construction Trades (OH) to President Clinton

(6/17/97)

• *Pemjay, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *Landscaping & Reclamation Specialists, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (6/6/

97)

• *Morris Bean & Co. (OH) to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Zircoa Co. (OH) to President Clinton (6/6/97) • *Delta Railroad Construction, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (7/7/97) • *Kool Seal, Inc. (OH) to President Clinton (6/19/97) • *Gemini Coatings, Inc.(OK) to President Clinton (6/20/97) • *Gemini Coatings, Inc. (OK) to Lynn Cutler (6/19/97) • *Toth Lane Clearing (PA) to President Clinton (6/9/97) • *MP of Easton (PA) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *CMI Tech Cast, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (no date) • *JMG Excavating Co. Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/23/97) • *Milestone Materials, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/11/97) • *E.J. Breneman, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/4/97) • *Center Manufacturing, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/18/97) • *Bird-in-Hand Woodworks, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/2/97) • *Latrobe Construction Co. (PA) to President Clinton (6/10/97) • *Stanwood Mills, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *PRL, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Portec (PA) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *Ranbar Technology, Inc. (PA) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *King Asphalt, Inc. (SC) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Pickens Construction, Inc. (SC) to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Superior Bands, Inc. (SC) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Sloan Construction (SC) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Steve Ward & Associates, Inc. (TN) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Loudon Hickory Products, Inc. (TN) to President Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Carolina Commercial Heat Treating (TN) to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Plant Maintenance Service Corp. (TN) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Sudberry Millwork, Inc. (TN) to President Clinton (6/23/97)

• *Ford Construction Co. (TN) to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Keay Construction, LLC (TN) to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *LaMontagne Wood Furnishings (TN) to President Clinton (no date)

• *Memphis Stone and Gravel Co. (TN) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Lehman-Roberts Co. (TN) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Cox Fence Fittings, Co. (TX) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Quality Heat Treat, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Lowman Land Clearing, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *J-N Construction Co., (TX) to President Clinton (6/3/97)

• *Wm. B. Schieffer Studio (TX—wood carving) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *ABC (TX) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Paramount Liquid Seal (TX) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Russell & Sons Construction Co. (TX) to President Clinton (6/6/97)

• *Houston Flame Hardening Co. (TX) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *O’Hair Shutters, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton (6/13/97)
121

• *DMV Stainless USA, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Techemet, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton ( no date )

• *Roadway Construction, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Megatrend Designs, Inc. (TX) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Western Quality Concrete, Inc. (UT) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Triplett Lumber Co., Inc. (VA) to President Clinton (6/16/97)

• *Interior Building Systems Corp. (VA) to President Clinton (6/17/97)

• *Dan River, Inc. (VA) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Salem Frame Co. (VA—wood) to President Clinton ( no date)

• *Phil R. Hobbs & Son, Inc. (VA) to President Clinton (6/24/97)

• *Wintech, Inc. (WA) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Air-Tite Mfg. Inc. (WA) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Kimberly Industries (WV) to President Clinton (6/12/97)

• *Wilson Construction Co.(WV) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Plastomeric Inc. (WI) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *Lyman Lumber Co. (WI) to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Rice Enterprises (WY) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Precious Metals Plus (NY) to President Clinton (6/18/97)

• *Protectnical Manufacturers (AL) to President Clinton (6/26/97)

• *Lampros, Inc. (CA) to President Clinton (6/11/97)

• *C.C. Johnson Co. (VA) to President Clinton (6/10/97)

• *Jack Webb (CA—citizen) to President Clinton (6/9/97)

• *Theodore J. Rapallo (GA—citizen) to President Clinton (6/25/97)

• *Fred Evens (IL—citizen) to President Clinton (6/2/97)

• *Victor M. Perez (TX—citizen) to President Clinton (6/19/97)

• *Virginia Smith (state unknown—citizen) to President Clinton (6/5/97)

• *John J. Surinak (WI—citizen) to President Clinton (6/20/97)

• *Mead Publishing Paper Division to U.S. Representative Bart Stupak (D-MI)

(9/25/97)

• *Lignite Energy Council President to U.S. Representative Earl Pomeroy (DND) (9/26/97)

• *Lignite Energy Council President to U.S. Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) (9/26/

97)

• Other

• Article in FYI, ALEC’s newsletter (5/8/96)

• *ALEC ‘‘Action Alert’’ (solicits comments from members) (3/10/97)

• Conference report from the VA-HUD appropriations bill (9/23/96)

• AAA press release (3/31/97)

• Updated October 17, 1997

* An asterisk indicates letters sent or resolutions passed after EPA proposed the

NAAQS rules.

STATEMENT OF JIM MARTIN, VICE PRESIDENT, MARTIN’S FAMOUS PASTRY SHOPPE,

INC.

Good day and thank you for the opportunity to be here. I am Jim Martin, an

owner of Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc. We have bakeries in Chambersburg

and Shippensburg, Pennsylvania. Ours is a family business started in 1955 by my

parents—perhaps you have seen our ‘‘Martin’s Famous Potato Rolls’’ in the grocery

store bread aisle.

Today I am speaking for myself and for the members of the American Bakers Association. The American Bakers Association represents 80 percent of the wholesale

baking business which includes small businesses like ours and the companies with

national brand names that you may know. Bakeries are captured by the Clean Air

Act because the natural process of yeast fermentation used to make bread and rolls

produces ethanol, an alcohol, which is considered a volatile organic compound

(VOC). Ethanol from bakeries is nontoxic and low reactive, probably eaten by bacteria in the atmosphere.

The American Bakers Association strongly supports S.1084. This bill will ensure

that sound science and good planning have the time to develop before costly and

potentially inappropriate controls are required. The baking industry has already

spent $28 million to comply with existing requirements. We estimate that the baking industry will spend $236 million to implement the new standard. The equipment

to control bread aroma from a bakery costs about $500,000 to install and costs between $35,000 and $100,000 each year to operate. That is about $12,000 per ton of

VOC controlled, not the $1400 per ton estimated by the US EPA.
122

The American Bakers Association has worked with the bakers in each state and

with the state officials to develop reasonable rules to bring the states and industry

into compliance. The states have worked hard to implement the Clean Air Act under

demanding and often changing EPA policies. We offer our compliments to Pennsylvania and many of the other states where hard work has put the most cost-effective control requirements in place. However, state officials are struggling to further

reduce emissions and are being forced to look at smaller and smaller sources, that

is, small businesses.

Bakeries are low volume, low profit margin businesses. Let me give you an example of how a small baker might be affected by control requirements. Imagine Joe’s

Bakery in your state. Joe is operating the white bread bakery he inherited from his

father. The bakery has been in business for 80 years with a profit margin of 1.7

percent. His bakery, like others, is labor intensive, providing jobs at a relatively

high pay rate and supporting many families in the neighborhood. No one is getting

rich but everyone is being paid and the local area has good tasting fresh bread. His

potential emissions of ethanol trigger control requirements. Joe goes to his bank and

asks for a loan for the $500,000 to install controls and cut his profit margin by 24

percent. The bank denies his request, which is good business practice for the bank.

If he can find a buyer, he can sell his bakery or Joe can close. Sadly, some bakeries

have closed during the implementation of the current standard.

Now let me share with you the situation at our bakeries. We emit enough ethanol

to trigger control requirements. Stack testing, permitting, engineering reports, communication, and costs associated with investigating new technology have exceeded

$250,000 to date at our bakeries. Our engineers calculate that adding a control device will increase our production energy consumption by 50 percent per package of

rolls. However, rather than purchase the control equipment we have chosen to limit

our production and the growth of our business. This means our ability to serve the

region with the maximum variety of product or to respond quickly to changes in

consumer taste and demand is limited. This is not my understanding of free enterprise. And I’ve wondered, is less bread on the table a good trade for no measurable

improvement in air quality?

I and the bakers I represent urge you to pass S. 1084 to make clear legal statements about the funding of the research and science and the timing of the implementation of the air quality standard. Please help us do the right thing to protect

our air quality and the earth!

Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I will be glad to answer any questions.

The HONORABLE JAMES M. INHOFE, Chairman,

Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property Nuclear Safety,

Committee on Environment Public Works,

United States Senate,

Washington, DC 20510–6175.

Submitted for the Subcommittee Hearing Record on S. 1084, October 22, 1997

Dear MR. CHAIR: I am Jim Martin, an owner of Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe,

Inc. We have bakeries in Chambersburg and Shippensburg, Pennsylvania. I am

writing in support of S. 1084, the Ozone and Particulate Matter Research Act of

1997.

Our bakeries release ethanol from the yeast fermentation of rolls. To put the

amount of ethanol we release into perspective, I learned, through discussion with

Pennsylvania based medical professionals, that if less than one percent of our customers drink to the legal limit, they emit from their breath more alcohol than our

bakery.

Clearly more study is needed before costly control requirements are put in place.

I believe that we first need to define ‘‘Clean Air.’’ Is it the naturally occurring ozone

from the very productive environment of the Smokey Mountains National Park; or

is it the semi-arid east side of the Rocky Mountains with its very limited natural

production potential? Scientists are only beginning to understand atmospheric

science and the relationship between the natural and human-made processes on the

air quality.

To illustrate the potentially interrelated processes, I note that rain forms on airborne particulate, falls to the ground; and dissolves excess carbon dioxide and other

naturally occurring contaminates from the atmosphere to nourish the earth! I have

attached pages 453 to 456 from Meteorology. The Atmosphere and The Science of
123

1Taken from: Meteorology: The Atmosphere and the Science of Weather, by Joseph M. Morgan,

Michael D. Morgan, and Patricial M. Pauley, New York: Macmillian Publishing Company, 1991.

Weather by Joseph M. Morgan, Michael D. Morgan, and Patricia M. Pauley, New

York; Macmillan Publishing Company, 1991.

Sincerely,

JAMES A. MARTIN,

Executive Vice President

AIR POLLUTION’S IMPACT ON WEATHER1

We have seen how weather conditions influence air pollution potential. Air pollution also impacts weather. Air pollution affects the amount of cloudiness, and the

quantity and quality of precipitation, especially downwind from large urban-industrial areas. In Chapter 18, we discuss how air pollution may be affecting global climate.

Urban Weather

Certain air pollutants usually found in urban air, including a variety of dust particles and acid droplets, can influence the development of clouds and precipitation

within and downwind from a city. These pollutants, many of which are hydroscopic

serve as nuclei for cloud droplets and thus accelerate condensation. In addition, the

heat island effect of large urban areas (Chapter 19) spurs uplift of air and consequent cloud formation.

The influence of urban air pollution on condensation and precipitation is illustrated by the typical climatic contrasts between urban and rural areas. Winter fogs

occur about twice as frequently in cities as in the surrounding countryside. Downwind from cities, rainfall may be enhanced by 5 to 10 percent. The greater contrasts

tend to occur on weekdays, when urban/industrial activity is at its peak, suggesting

that increased precipitation is at least partially due to urban-industrial air pollution. Data from the Metropolitan Meteorological Experiment (METROMEX) indicate

significantly greater precipitation enhancement downwind of St. Louis.

METROMEX scientists analyzed weather observations during an intensive field

study over 5 years (1971–1975) and concluded that summer rainfall was up to 30

percent greater downwind of St. Louis than upwind of the city. This rainfall anomaly was attributed to the combined effect of urban contributions of heat and ‘‘giant’’

cloud condensation nuclei.

Because precipitation, fog, and cloudiness in urban areas of en have adverse effects on both surface and air transportation, any artificial increase in these conditions is potentially troublesome. Reduced visibility, for example, slows surface traffic, contributes to auto accidents, and curtails air travel. In the last decade, significant improvement in local urban visibilities has been reported and is apparently the

consequence of enforcement of stricter air quality standards.

Jet aircraft traffic is modifying the cloud cover, especially along the heavily traveled air corridors between major cities. The visible jet contrails etching the sky are

composed of ice crystals that are traceable to the water vapor and condensation

nuclei produced by jet engines as combustion products (refer back to the Special

Topic, ‘‘Clouds by Mixing: in Chapter 6). Contrails sometimes dissipate rapidly; and

sometimes spread laterally as a thin cirrus overcast Increased cloudiness, in turn,

reduces sunshine penetration and may enhance local precipitation by serving as a

source of ice-crystal nuclei for lower clouds.

Acid Deposition

As we saw in Chapter 6, the atmospheric subcycle of the hydrologic cycle purifies

water. That is, through evaporation or sublimation and subsequentcondensation or

deposition, dissolved and suspended substances are removed from water. As raindrops and snowflakes fall from clouds to the ground, however, they wash pollutants

from the air, thereby altering the chemistry of the precipitation.

Rain is normally acidic because it dissolves some atmospheric carbon dioxide, providing a weak acid solution. Where the air is polluted with oxides of sulfur and oxides of nitrogen, these gases interact with moisture in the atmosphere to produce

tiny droplets of sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HNO3). These substances dissolve in precipitation and thereby increase its acidity: Precipitation that falls

through such contaminated air may become 200 times more acidic than normal.

Furthermore, in the absence of precipitation. sulfuric acid droplets convert to acidic

particles that settle to the ground as dry deposition (See Figure 16.11).The combination of acidic precipitation with dry deposition is often referred to as acid deposition.
124

2Distilled seater that is saturated with carbon dioxide has a pH of 5.6. This is why a pH of

5.6 is taken as the threshold for acid precipitation; that is. rain or snow having a pH under

5.6 is described as acidic. However, recent studies demonstrates that small amounts of naturally

occurring acids (other than carbonic acid) lower the normal pH of precipitation closer to 5.0.

This argues for a revision of the current pH criterion for acid precipitation.

The rank of acidity and alkalinity, called the pH scale, is shown in Figure 16.12.

which compares the normal acidity of rainwater with the pH values of some other

familiar substances. The normal pH of rainwater: is 5.6; rain that is more acidic

than normal is called acid rain. 2 Note that the pH scale is logarithmic; that is. each

unit increment corresponds to a tenfold change in acidity. Hence, a drop in pH from

5.6 down to a value of 3.6 represents a hundredfold (10 x 10) increase in acidity.

Gene E. Likens (now of the New York Botanical Garden) and his associates reported an increase in the acidity of rainfall over the eastern United States during

the 1955 to 1973 period. Their findings were later confirmed and updated by measurements made by the National Atmospheric Deposition Program in the United

States and by the Canadian Networks for Sampling Precipitation (Figure 16.13).

Much of this upswing in precipitation acid. can be attributed to acid rain precursors

emitted during fuel combustion for power.

STATEMENT OF ADAM SHARP, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS,

AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to provide testimony for this important hearing on air quality. I am Adam Sharp, Assistant Director of Governmental Relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, here in Washington,

DC. I also am a partner in my family’s farm in southeastern Ohio. Along with my

three brothers, father and grandfather, we operate a dairy farm and a diversified

crop farm. I am a member of the Virginia Farm Bureau Federation and today I am

representing the American Farm Bureau Federation, the nation’s largest general

farm organization with more than 4.7 million member families. I am pleased to have

the opportunity to discuss with you today the impacts of new air standard on the

agricultural community. My comments focus primarily on the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS) for particulate matter. Farm Bureau supports Senate Bill 1084 for many

reasons. but foremost because it would allow the necessary time for the agriculture

community and EPA to gain a mote accurate understanding of agriculture emissions, how much we emit, and to what extent the air quality standards will impact

our industry My comments focus primarily on the new PM2.5 standard.

As a preface to my comments, I think that it would be appropriate to share with

you a portion of Farm Bureau’s policy on air quality chat was adopted by delegates

to our annual meeting. It clearly outlines the position of America’s farmers and

rancher.

Regarding the Importance of Clean Air

It reads in part:

‘‘We support a healthy environment.’’

‘‘We support government policies that: Are based on sound scientific evidence;

provide incentives to industries seeking to become more energy efficient or to reduce emissions of identifiable atmospheric pollutants; sect cooperation of organizations and governments, foreign and domestic, to develop better understanding and

research on the implications of atmospheric pollution and the means of preventing

it.’’

The evidence is quite strong that conservation has been a priority for farmers and

ranchers for many years. There has been and continues to be a tremendous amount

of conservation activity on farms and ranches across the country. These activities

include such things as protecting wildlife habitat, creating wetlands, grassed waterways and field buffer strips. We also use conservation tillage techniques, cover crops

and planting trees and vegetation for wind breaks. All these activities reduce wind

erosion of the soil. which in turn, provides cleaner air. The Conservation Reserve

Program alone will idle up to 36.4 million acres across the country that provides

vegetation that stabilizes soil and prevents wind blown dust. Wind erosion on 84

percent of the nation’s rangeland, 86 percent of the cropland, and virtually all of

the pasture land is now less than the tolerable soil loss rate—meaning, the rate at

which soil erosion can occur without surpassing the natural rate of soil regeneration

(which is 2–12 tones per acre per year). And soil lost to wind erosion continues to
125

decrease as farmers expand these extremely environmentally beneficial practices.

Farmers are cleaning the air and should get credit for those activities.

However, agriculture is concerned because EPA lacks actual measurements of

what agriculture emits in the form of fine particulate. One estimate is that 34.3 percent of primary fine particulate matter can be attributed to agriculture and forestry.

Another suggests as low as 5 percent of primary fine particulate. However, that figure does not take into account diesel emissions. fertilizer and chemical sources, unpaved roads, organic and ammonia sources and many others.

EPA is finally acknowledging what we have been telling them: Agriculture is not

a major emitter of this pollutant However, nothing has been done to date to correct

faulty documentation that overestimates agricultural sources, or solidify Administrator Browners’ promise that agriculture will not be impacted. The Administrator’s

promises have done little for our concerns because State decide who will be regulated, not her.

Regarding these questionable estimates, I quote Dr. Calvin Parnell, a professor

of Agricultural Engineering at Texas A&M University and a member of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Task Force on Air Quality. He says, and we agree that:

‘‘The data used to develop this inventory was based on erroneous emission factors published by CPA for cattle feed yards, feed mills, grain elevators and dust

from farmers’ field operations.’’

Those comments were made last spring in a hearing held by a subcommittee of

the House Agriculture Committee, Furthermore, I quote the Honorable Larry Combest, Chairman of the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Forestry Resource Conservation, and Research, from that same hearing. He says, and we agree, that:

The science employed in developing this rule is not up to par, and I’m concerned

that farmers could bear the brunt of a bad policy based on equally bad science,

We don’t have the research yet to know whether we can actually attain theme

standards, how much it will cost the agriculture industry and the consuming public, and bow much agriculture activity actually contribute to air pollution problems.’’

We share these same concerns. We also commend and extend the comments

raised by the USDA, the USDA Task Force on Air Quality and the Small Business

Administration in regards to economic impacts of this standard on farms and

ranches.

California Situation

Today, however, I want to focus on the actual present situation California agriculture is dealing with in regards to the present PM10 Non-Attainment Area for

central and southern California. as determined by the 1990 Amendments to the

Clean Air Act. Under this status, a major potion of California’s agriculture has been

faced with a number of challenges which, in many cases, are yet to be resolved. Agriculture in others areas of the country may face the same situations if a new PM

standard is imposed.

The money, time and resources California agriculture has spent attempting to

meet the PM10 ambient air quality standard has given Farm Bureau plenty of reasons to believe that we cannot jump immediately into a new air quality standard

of which we know so little about. It is an absolute necessity to allow science surrounding PM2.5 to develop so that intelligent, reasonable and justifiable decisions

can be made.

Let me expand on one air district’s experiences in dealing with the present PM10

standard. These are examples of situations agriculture has faced in the San Joaquin

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.

Example 1: The emission inventory for agricultural tillage operations was the

focus of the initial discussions with the air district. There are two major problems

identified in this inventory. First, the actual number of passes the equipment makes

per acre, and second, the PM10 emission produced from each type of operation such

as discing, ripping or furrowing. This problem was due to the fact that information,

published by the EPA, indicated that alfalfa was disced 8 times per year, rice 13

times per year and rangeland twice per year. This greatly overestimated the emissions and made agriculture the prime target. First, farmers disc and seed alfalfa

maybe only once every 3 or more years, not 8 per year, and farmers don’t even disc

rice or rangeland at all, especially 13 times and twice per year respectively.

Some of the control measures suggested for agriculture operations included: sprinkler irrigation on fields prior to planting; water tanks mounted on tractors and

water sprays on the back of discing equipment (without thing into account that

water is at a premium in California), and the use of shaking equipment to shake

trucks and farm implements prior to exiting a field or unpaved road onto a paved

road (this would supposedly eliminate the carry-out of mud or dirt, which would
126

later be entrained into the atmosphere by cars or trucks on paved roads). These irrational and impractical controls would have done little if nothing to clean the air

and would have been extremely costly for California agriculture, had they not been

corrected.

Just by updating the inventory with current acreage information for each crop

and correcting the number of passes per acre for tillage equipment, the agricultural

PM10 emission inventory for tillage operations was reduced 30 percent.

Example 2: At one point it was discussed that farms should be permitted by their

local air districts. In the San Joaquin Valley alone, it was speculated that there

would be over 31,000 permits for farms written. Each silage pile, unpaved road and

equipment storage yard, to name a few, would have been permitted. The District

estimated that they would need 70 additional permitting engineers to process air

quality permits just for farms (local stationary source permit, and also a Federal

Operating permit).

Example 3: As, I indicated, there has been information used by the air districts

that identifies agriculture as a primary source of PM10 emissions. For the past 5

years, California’s agriculture community has fought to address the deficiencies in

those inventories. One example is windblown dust emissions from agricultural

lands. In the original inventory, it was assumed that all farming in California was

‘‘dryland’’ farmed. It assumed that the land was not irrigated, and that there was

no vegetation cover, or cover canopy, from the crops. Once irrigation and vegetation

cover was put into the wind erosion equations, the wind erosion PM10 emission inventory was reduced an incredible 80 percent from 410 tons per day of PM10, to 58

tons per day of PM10.

Example 4: Probably the most blatant example of an inaccurate inventory, which

would have cost the agricultural industry thousands of dollars, was the initial emission inventory for combustion engines used to drive irrigation pumps. The original

inventory estimated nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions (a precursor of PM) at 626 tons

per day from all of the diesel engine pumps in the San Joaquin Valley. This would

be the highest emissions category for NOX emissions in the San Joaquin Valley, exceeding all the mobile sources including all cars and trucks, which together only

emit 353 tons per day. Driven by agricultural inquiries a new study was commissioned that was based on actual interviews with 360 farmers. The new study determined that the NOX emission for these pumps is only 32 tons per day.

We have only begun to address agriculture’s problems with PM10 measurements.

Many of which are still unaddressed and uncorrected. And, other PM10 issues are

still arising. For example, EPA is also looking at oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and ammonia (NH3) from soils as contributors to ambient levels of PM10. This could mean

farmers will also have to address the application of fertilizers and pesticides as an

air quality concern, not to mention livestock. Yet, recent studies performed in the

Valley indicate that there is very little NOX or NH3 emissions from the soil. Questions about how much particulate matter is released into the air through natural

occurrences, such as high wind or volcanoes also remain to be addressed.

Considering all these discrepancies, it is unbelievable the we are now again faced

with the same problems, only this time with smaller particulate matter. Based on

the 1994 Emissions Inventory for the National Particulate Matter Study, fugitive

dust emissions from agriculture have been listed as the third largest source of PM2.5

nationwide, falling behind paved and unpaved roads. This is hard to believe, since

there has never been any actual PM2.5 emission data taken on agricultural tillage

equipment using EPA approved PM2.5 samplers. All of these examples only emphasizes the necessity to fully study PM2.5 before deadlines are set and rules are developed.

California Study

In attempting to resolve some of the previously mentioned issues, it became necessary to conduct a multi-year, multi-faceted air quality study. Such a study was

developed and is now underway in California. This study, known as the California

Regional Particulate Matter Air Quality Study (CRPMAQS), will address all areas

of PM10 and PM2.5 issues. This includes emissions determinations and quantifications, data analyses, demonstration studies, ambient air quality measurements and

model development. USDA is playing a major role in this study by helping to fund

emissions studies for agricultural activities and operations. Once completed, it will

be the source by which decisions in regards to particulate matter will be made in

California, and will serve to aid other areas in the nation and the world in their

particulate matter decisionmaking process.

This comprehensive study, however, will not be completed for roughly 5 years and

is not all inclusive for agricultural sources. S. 1084 would give agriculture the needed time to attain this important agriculture PM2.5 emissions data I want to empha-
127

size that this study is the first comprehensive study that actually measures, instead

of estimating, agriculture’s PM2.5 emissions. In order to avoid the mistakes made

for PM10, this study and others like it must be completed before implementation activities, attainment deadlines and regulations begin for yet a new PM standard.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I want to reiterate that much work is yet to even begin in regards

to agriculture industry emissions which should be finished before setting a new

standard for particulate matter. We must develop an accurate measurement method

for PM2.5 in order to determine and quantify the significant sources of PM2.5 and

we must complete the necessary research to understand the true nature of PM2.5

and what contributes to its formation so as not to make the same mistakes that we

are making with agricultural PM10 emissions.

The present approach will only serve to put American agriculture at a competitive

disadvantage with other countries and put agricultural producers out of work. Because U.S. agricultural commodity prices are tied to world prices, a farmer cannot

simply ‘‘pass on’’ the cost of doing business to the consumer. In other words, we are

‘‘price takers and not a price makers.’’ Therefore, any increase in operational costs

of farming is significant and must be based on accurate information that justifies

the expenditures.

Agriculture will also see a tremendous amount of indirect impact from the new

standards. Targeted industries such as the utilities, fuel, transportation, chemical,

equipment and many more will pass costs on to their users. One of which is agriculture. In a study by AUS Consultants to be released soon, net cash income for

all farmers is projected to fall by 10 percent or $5 billion annually over the first

6 years of implementation of these standards.

We also want to be careful in not tipping the balance of regulation in this country

too far, and force our grocers to fill market orders with food purchased from other

countries that do not always meet the same safeguards and health standards as

U.S. produced commodities.

The agriculture community enjoys breathing clean air as much as anybody, yet

doesn’t want to waste money on control measures that have little or no effect on

cleaning up the air of this nation.

Finally, the USDA must maintain a strong presence as discussions continue on

these new standards. The USDA, the Small Business Administration and the USDA

Agricultural Air Quality Task Force and this committee must continue to raise and

demand that the concerns of America’s farmers and ranchers are addressed by the

EFA in order to ensure a continued safe, abundant, healthy and affordable U.S. food

supply.

I end on a note of caution as expressed by Paul Johnson, Chief of the Natural

Resources Conservation Service of the USDA, who remarked at last spring’s hearing

that:

‘‘When local air quality administrators make decisions about which pollution

control programs to implement they will consider factors such as the percentage

of total pollution in the airshed that is caused by a specific activity or source, and

costs and benefits of implementing a set of controls on these activities. Agriculture

is practiced throughout the country using many different technologies on a variety

of soils and in a variety of climates. Conditions, technology and practices, along

with a number of other factors determine emissions. Agricultural emissions are

highly variable within and across airsheds and must be evaluated carefully.’’

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF ANDE ABBOTT, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS,

IRON SHIP BUILDERS, BLACKSMITHS, FORGERS & HELPERS

The ‘‘Boilermakers’’ union represents approximately 90,000 workers who are employed in cement production, foundry and forging industry, shipyards, and in the

construction and maintenance of coal and fossil fuel power plants and their emission

equipment. In addition, Boilermaker members fabricate, install, and maintain cement kilns and their emissions equipment.

Our members strongly support the Clean Air Act. We also worked hard to pass

the amendments strengthening the Clean Air Act in 1990. We are proud that the

Clean Air Act has been an effective tool in reducing air pollution through out the

United States. In the refined amendments to the Clean Air Act in 1990, Congress

carefully crafted methods to clean the air and preserve jobs at the same time. However, in regards to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Particulate and
128

Ozone Standards which has gone into effect, EPA was, even reckless, in promulgating their proposal.

We support S. 1084 which would mandate a moratorium on implementation of the

regulations until reasonable research can be conducted. Congress has the right to

say ‘‘no’’ to the immediate implementation of these regulations, and we are encouraging members of Congress to stop the process of implementing such radical air

quality changes.

The Clean Air Act has a provision that requires the EPA to review the law after

5 years to see if modifications need to be made. EPA has used that 5-year review

provision to propose new air quality standards to the law. These Standards are referred to as the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

On November 27, 1996, U.S. EPA proposed a substitution to the existing ozone

standard and a new air quality standard for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Under

the new rules the regulated particulate matter would be reduced from 10 microns

to 2.5 microns. Additionally, they are counting particulate matter from ALL

sources—including nature. These levels were proposed despite the fact that serious

scientific uncertainties exist about the health benefits associated with them. Even

EPA’s own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) has raised several

questions about the technical basis and scientific justifications for these proposals.

CASAC could not reach a consensus that the specific controls would result in improved health. Moreover, at this time, we do not even have an air monitoring system with the ability to track the levels of PM that have been proposed.

Based on EPA’s own information, including its 1996 Air Quality and Emissions

Trend Report, air quality nationwide is improving and the emissions of particulate

and ozone are decreasing. All air pollutant levels have declined significantly over

the past several years, primarily as a result of implementation of the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990. (The 1990 Amendments of the Clean Air Act are only 40%

enacted). As subsequent controls mandated by this Act are put in place, air quality

will be further improved and additional particulate and ozone emission reductions

will be realized.

These emission reductions have come at a considerable cost to the U.S. economy.

Many plants have added clean air equipment to meet existing standards. Other

companies have escaped meeting the standards by using various legal schemes and

are currently directed by EPA to comply with the clean air standards and comply

with the law over the next few years Other companies have packed up and left the

United States, opting to move to Mexico or Asia.

The added expense associated with the new EPA particulate and ozone rules, estimated in the tens of billions of dollars a year, should not be imposed without a clear

demonstration that the public health and environmental benefits are commensurate

with the costs. Those companies that have made the investment to comply with the

current standards may have to lay out additional money to comply with the new

standards, while providing no real improvement in clean air quality.

Because of the significant uncertainty surrounding the costs, benefits, and impacts of EPA’s proposed ozone and particulate matter rules, the Boilermakers’ International President, Mr. Charles W. Jones has urged the EPA to reaffirm the current

standards, conduct additional monitoring of particulate matter and related air quality issues, and allow the states to complete action on the ambitious clean air standards that are already in place, including existing standards on ozone, before embarking on entirely new and costly undertakings. On June 25, 1997, President Clinton sided with EPA and ordered the new regulations to be put in effect. The President did modify the implementation schedule of the new standards, but the effect

on U.S. workers and industry will be the same in 5 years; disastrous. It is the millions of average Americans—not companies or their stockholders—who will ultimately pay most of the bill as the costs of implementing the standards are passed

along throughout the economy in the form of higher prices and lower wages. Industry analysts estimate 1.3 million American jobs will be lost as a result of the implementation of the new particulate matter and ozone rules.

By including particulate matter from natural sources in the air quality counts,

many more areas of the country will be in noncompliance with the Air Quality

Standards. This will force many more companies to move out of the U.S. and into

other countries such as Mexico, South America or Asia where there is no enforcement of clean air standards.

Nearly half of the country and virtually every economic sector will be threatened,

the new rules amount to the most aggressive EPA regulation ever. The proposed

changes would immediately place 800 counties—five times the current number—into

nonattainment. Some parts of the country could remain in a perpetual state of nonattainment because the proposed ozone standard is so tough.
129

Areas that fail to comply with the standard could have severe controls and sanctions imposed upon them. These include: limitations on the construction of and the

expansion of manufacturing facilities; a delay of highway projects and a loss of federal highway funds; a complex and lengthy permitting process; a need for high emissions offsets; residential growth limits; and other restrictions on construction.

A nonattainment designation for any area is not an insignificant action. It translates into slower economic growth and fewer new businesses and expansions. Offset

requirements and other new source review and licensing provisions increase the difficulty of luring new companies into nonattainment areas.

Additionally, because of the EPA implemented standards, those areas of the country that are not currently in compliance will have an additional 10 years to comply

with the Clean Air Act. Under the current clean air standards, Washington, D.C.,

as an example, must be in compliance in 1998, since these new regulations have

been implemented, the Washington D.C. area will have until 2008 to comply with

the Clean Air Act. Therefore, air quality will actually be worse in that area.

Other onerous restrictions and sanctions also impact plants in nonattainment

areas. The Clean Air Act requires a complex and time-consuming permitting requirement on all new construction in nonattainment areas. All transportation

projects must be found to be in ‘‘conformity’’ with the State’s clean air plan before

they can go forward. And if a State misses any of the myriad of Clean Air requirements, the Act mandates EPA to withhold all federal highway funds as an automatic sanction. The result: industrial and infrastructure projects can be delayed

years—even decades—by Clean Air Act requirements in nonattainment areas.

The primary way EPA intends to reduce ozone emissions is to target large power

plants, ‘‘37 states have worked over the last 2 years to address the long distance

transport of ozone. This plan focuses on major power plants (which offer the most

cost-effective opportunities for reducing pollution) to reduce nitrogen oxide, a key ingredient of smog.’’

EPA cannot reduce or eliminate natural airborne particulates. EPA’s standards,

according to their own press releases, are intended to reduce or eliminate the effects

that air pollutants have on people with lung ailments such as asthma. Asthma is

an allergic reaction to various substances. Many people are allergic to grass, dust

mites, dogs, cats, birds, weeds, trees, flowers, carpet, perfume, etc. and, unfortunately, some people die of exposure to those substances. Some studies show that the

incidence of asthma actually increases as the air gets cleaner. However, there are

no scientific studies that indicate that the incidence of asthma related deaths would

be reduced by the new air quality standards. In addition, EPA is forced to control

only man made sources of emissions.

There are periods of times when the pollen count from grass and trees are high

enough to trigger an EPA action day. As a result, EPA has said they would be

forced to shut down construction sites, ban lawn mowing, shut down power plants

and force car pooling.

In the long range, coal and fossil fuel fired plants would not be permitted to exist.

Cement plants would not be permitted to be built in most areas of the United States

and turbine powered electrical power generators would be the EPA preferred plant

type. Utilities would cost more and the jobs of most workers who build and maintain

the coal and fossil fuel boiler plants would be eliminated.

Considering the effect on our foundry and forging industry, cement plants, shipyards and shops, Boilermakers are likely to lose 35,000 jobs over the next seven to

10 years because of the new standards. And, the United States would not have air

quality any cleaner than it would have been under the current standards.

Conclusion

There are also serious questions regarding the need to change these air quality

standards at this time. EPA must under the Clean Air Act review these air quality

standards every 5 years. There are ample reasons why waiting until the next review

to change the standards would make more sense.

First and foremost, EPA is trying to fix something that isn’t broken. EPA has

publicly and repeatedly stated that the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 are

working to reduce air pollution. For instance, EPA’s recent air pollution ‘‘trends’’

analysis found 204 metropolitan areas with downward trends in pollution levels and

only 16 showing an upward increase; 15 of these 16 are in no danger of violating

any EPA air quality standard.

This progress will continue. The Clean Air Amendments of 1990 created a blueprint for state and federal action on ozone that will deliver continuing improvements

in air quality well into the next century. A myriad of other Clean Air Act programs,

such as the acid rain, clean cars, and air toxin programs, have yet to be fully imple-
130

mented and will also insure that continued progress is made on ozone, particulates,

and other pollutants for the foreseeable future.

For particulate matter, EPA acknowledges that additional monitoring of the air

should be done to determine the extent of the fine particle problem. Moreover, because of the lack of monitoring data, EPA and states cannot start designating areas

and ordering emissions reductions for approximately 5 to 8 years. This delay gives

ample time for EPA to reconsider the science and build consensus before implementing a new standard.

In conclusion, due to the significant uncertainty surrounding the costs, benefits,

and impacts of EPA’s implemented ozone and PM rules, we urge Congress to support S. 1084 which would mandate a moratorium on implementation of the regulations until reasonable research can be conducted. This is an issue of considerable

importance to the Boilermakers, the nation and to all of America’s working families—especially to those American workers whose lives would be enormously disrupted due to the twin requirements that would keep new jobs away and drive existing jobs out of the urban areas and into rural areas—and potentially out of the

U.S. We believe we can continue to enjoy air quality improvements without imposing additional costly and potentially unnecessary rules, like those implemented by

the EPA for particulate matter and ozone.

STATEMENT OF JASON GRUMET, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST STATES FOR

COORDINATED AIR USE MANAGEMENT (NESCAUM)

Good morning. My name is Jason Grumet. I am Executive Director of the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management or NESCAUM, a regional association of state air pollution control agencies representing the six New England states,

New York and New Jersey. Since 1967, NESCAUM has provided technical assistance and policy guidance to its member states on regional air pollution issues of

concern in the Northeast. On behalf of my colleagues who work every day to achieve

compliance with the national air quality standards, I appreciate the opportunity to

present our views regarding S. 1084 and the revised National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and particulate matter.

As most of you are undoubtedly aware, the Northeast states support the revised

ozone and PM standards. We support them because they make more sense, because

they will do a better job of protecting and informing the public, and because they

will drive more rational air quality management decisions. For the same reasons,

we oppose S. 1084 which would effectively rescind the new standards and lead to

another 5 years of unnecessary delay when we could be moving in the right direction.

I would like to try and provide some insight into the thinking that has led us to

this position. It begins with a fundamental premise: that certainty and perfection

are always goals, but never options. Over the last 30 years we have made incredible

progress reducing the public health threat from polluted air while the economy has

prospered and grown. Still, in the field of air pollution control I am not aware of

a single instance when we were able to make a decision with the benefit of scientific

consensus. Rather, our decisions have been relative choices between imperfect options. Examined in this context, sound decisions have been made which have substantially improved our quality of life. The new standards represent another such

decision. When facing the question of supporting or opposing the new NAAQS, we

asked ourselves two basic questions:

1. Will the new standards provide the public with better information about the

risks associated with air pollution than the old standards?

2. Will the new standards result in more rational, cost-effective, and equitable pollution control strategies than the old standards?

To both these questions, the answer is yes. I submit to the Subcommittee that

we do know enough right now to be certain that the new standards based on 1990’s

science do a better job in both these respects than the old standards that were based

on 1970’s science. Because the new standards better reflect the physical reality of

the pollution problems they address, they will more accurately inform the public,

thereby empowering people to better protect their health, and they will inspire more

effective and less costly pollution control efforts.

Overview of Old & New Ozone Standards

The old standards are based on 20-year-old science. Much of it conducted in the

geological and meteorological oddity we refer to as the Los Angeles Air Basin. These

standards, that S. 1084 would perpetuate, provide at best a partial diagnosis of our

air quality problems. As such, they inspire a regulatory framework that at times
131

drives inefficient and inequitable results. Our physical understanding of ozone in

the 1970’s was that it was primarily an urban problem driven by volatile organic

compounds (VOCs). Believing that ozone was formed locally each day and destroyed

each night, we designed a standard to protect against one hour spikes in peak ozone

levels.

We now know that ozone pollution is a regional problem which adversely effects

large areas for several days at a time. In the last 20 years, we also have learned

that regionwide controls on nitrogen oxides (NOx) are by far the most effective approach to bringing down these chronically high ozone levels in both urban and rural

areas. While VOC controls have reduced peak ozone levels in our heavily urbanized

areas, a continued effort to address a regional environmental problem primarily

through urban control efforts will ultimately fail. The mismatch between the old

standard and the true science is demonstrated by the fact that many areas ‘‘bounce’’

in and out of attainment every few years. This inefficient and confusing situation

results from the old standard’s extreme sensitivity to a single high ozone episode

and from the old standard’s incorrect assumption that local air quality is determined solely by local actions.

The new eight-hour ozone standard—because it aims at bringing down the underlying average ozone values over a several year period—is less susceptible to meteorological variability. Removing the threat that one hot summer will bring an area

into nonattainment will allow states to focus their regulatory efforts on long term

strategies that will provide government and business with the certainty necessary

to plan for the future.

The New Ozone Standard Provides the Public with Accurate Information

One of government’s fundamental obligations is to provide the public with accurate information about the risks we face. This obligation is particularly strong in

the case of ozone pollution since daily levels vary greatly and people with proper

information can take steps to diminish their exposure. The present ozone standard

fails to accurately inform tens of millions of people that the air in their communities

presents a health risk. The old standard’s focus on ozone peaks leads one to conclude that residents of the Northeast bear substantial risk from ozone pollution

whereas residents throughout most of the Southeast and Midwest live in places that

are ozone free.

An examination of the chronic ozone levels monitored over a 5-year period tells

a very different story. Attachment A depicts the highest ozone level recorded each

and every day during the summer months from 1991 through 1995. Under the old

standard which determines an areas’ status based on the fourth highest hour long

ozone level in a 3-year period, the entire state of Massachusetts is designated as

a ‘‘serious’’ ozone nonattainment area. Yet when measuring the ozone levels experienced every day, Massachusetts residents experience considerably less exposure to

ozone smog than residents in a host of states that are entirely or largely in attainment of the old standard. Most troubling from a public health standpoint is that

millions of people are being misled by the old standards regime to believe that they

are not being exposed to unhealthy levels of ozone smog. The new ozone standard

will go a long way toward aligning chronic exposure levels with an area’s attainment status. Vacating this new standard, as S. 1084 proposes to do, will knowingly

perpetuate misinformation.

Such an action would also mean missing a critical opportunity to build, over the

next several years, the public support needed to implement future pollution control

measures. Unsurprisingly, many of the areas with the highest chronic ozone exposures happen to be the areas with the highest NOx emissions. See Attachment B.

Under the old standard, political leaders and citizens from many of these areas had

little motivation to reduce their emissions because they believed, incorrectly, that

their air was clean. We have found that the altruistic desire to reduce the pollution

transported into other states has failed to motivate upwind states to impose even

the most cost effective pollution controls. Given accurate information, millions of

midwesterners will quickly learn that there is a compelling new reason to support

clean air efforts—protection of their health and their children’s health. In the Northeast, rational self-interest has motivated substantial reductions in utility NOx emissions. We anticipate similar behavior by our upwind neighbors once they are given

accurate information by the EPA. The fact that controlling pollution from midwest

power plants will also improve air quality and public health in the Northeast is simply an added benefit.

Overview of Old and New Particulate Standards

While the Northeast states have far less experience dealing with fine particle pollution, our support for the new fine particle standards reflects many of the same
132

themes outlined in the previous discussion about ozone smog. We believe that the

health science strongly supports a focus on small particles. The new standard recognizes the regional nature of the fine PM problem. And, the new standard appears

relatively robust and not contingent upon sporadic meteorological events.

Under the old standard, which targeted larger particles of ten microns or less,

control efforts focused on highly localized problems of windblown dust often associated with construction sites in the East and agricultural practices in the West.

Under the new standards, our attention will turn to the small combustion related

particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter. Far from a localized problem, elevated

levels of PM2.5 persist across most of the Eastern United States. These tiny particles

are emitted directly from sources like heavy-duty diesel trucks and are formed from

the gaseous emissions of sulfates, nitrates, and organic aerosols. Undoubtedly debate will persist for years over particle size, the stringency of the standards and the

exact biological mechanisms that cause more people to die and get sick when fine

particle levels are elevated. However, the existence of debate and disagreement does

not justify interrupting progress toward implementation of the new PM standards.

EPA has created ample time for additional scientific review and extensive state

based monitoring prior to the designation of PM2.5 nonattainment areas and prior

to the imposition of controls. The presence of the new PM2.5 standard provides the

certainty necessary for states and industry to begin to plan effectively. The Northeast States are moving quickly to design monitoring networks and to build a better

understanding of the sources and science behind small particle pollution. If S. 1084

becomes law, these efforts will be slowed considerably and possibly stopped altogether. The fact that no one state can solve this problem independently creates an

impediment to continued action without the knowledge that all states are working

to achieve a federal health standard.

The New Standards are More Cost Effective than the Old Standards

I’ve indicated previously that the new standards will focus our control efforts

where they will have the greatest environmental benefit. The new standards will

also assist states in focusing controls where they’re most cost-effective. While Congress was correct in instructing EPA to disregard economic considerations when setting health based air quality standards, cost has everything to do with how we go

about implementing these standards. Compliance costs are a matter of great concern to our states, to those impacted by our regulatory decisions, and I’m sure, to

the members of this Subcommittee.

We believe the new standards are more cost-effective than the standards they will

replace. For ozone, the focus will shift to NOx controls on utilities. The good news

is that very significant NOx reductions are available from utilities and heavy duty

diesel engines (the largest sources of regional NOx emissions) for less than $1,000

per ton. By comparison, we have spent up to $10,000 ton for VOC controls in attempts to meet the old ozone standard. Since highly cost-effective emissions controls

are available in these sectors, the costs that will be passed through to manufacturers in the form of electricity or transportation costs will be quite low. For example,

a study we performed in 1995 and many similar studies indicate that utility NOx

reductions on the order of 85 percent can be achieved for one to two tenths of a cent

per kilowatt hour—a small fraction of the savings that will be achieved through utility restructuring. For fine particles, the focus of our control efforts will shift to emissions from heavy duty diesel engines and to sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from

utilities. Because we haven’t done as much to regulate heavy duty engines in the

past, further, cost-effective emissions reductions are still available from this sector.

And SO2 is, as you know, a pollutant we already regulate very cost-effectively under

the acid rain program.

Much attention has been devoted to attempts to identify the costs and benefits

of complying with the new air pollution standards. Some of these studies provide

useful insights and can improve the quality and thoughtfulness of regulatory proposals. However, I would caution anyone relying solely on cost-benefit analysis to

reach a decision on the efficacy of the new standards. The sum of uncertainties contained in any effort to project costs and benefits over a 20-year period is often greater than the insight provided. For one thing, it is very difficult to fairly express clean

air benefits in monetary terms. At the same time, the costs of complying with new

environmental standards tend to be are consistently overstated, thus skewing the

cost-benefit analysis.

First, industry estimates are almost always overly conservative since they are

based on worst-case scenarios and contain a host of negative contingencies which

are often never realized. Second, once environmental requirements are clearly set,

competition among bidders and vendors invariably lower compliance costs. Third, innovation in methods, processes and technologies often substantially lowers the costs
133

of compliance. Finally, the recent regulatory trend toward market-based control

strategies has succeeded in allowing companies with higher than average marginal

control costs to procure credits from companies with lower than average costs.

These factors have consistently produced actual control costs far below industry

predictions. Looking across a wide range of industries, predicted costs seem to be

overstated by a factor of five to ten. Attachment C provides some examples to illustrate this point. In New Jersey, when opposing regulations to control the pollution

emitted when marine vessels off-load gasoline, the industry estimated an increased

cost of 2 cents per gallon. Actual costs were later reported by the industry to be

1/5 of a cent per gallon. Similarly, the American Petroleum Institute argued that

removing lead from gasoline would add 8–10 cents to a gallon of gasoline when the

actual cost turned out to be less than 2 cents per gallon. The American Automobile

Manufacturers Association and its member companies testified on numerous occasions that it would cost over $1000 per car to meet the Low Emission Vehicle Tailpipe standards if it was technologically possible at all. The actual cost has been

found by California to be roughly $100 per vehicle. Moreover, the automobile manufacturers are promoting a voluntary program to sell vehicles meeting these standards nationwide. When the acid rain program was under consideration in 1990, we

were told by utility representatives to expect costs up to $1,000 per ton of SO2 removed. Today you can buy a one-ton SO2 allowance for about $100 under the kind

of flexible, market based emissions trading approach we’re bound to see more of as

we implement the new standards. It seems no one is immune from overstating predicted costs, even the EPA. In its March 1994 guidance on NOx reductions from

utilities, the Agency predicted that sources should be able to achieve a 30 percent

to 50 percent NOx reduction for under $1,300 per ton. A mere 3 years later, present

technology can achieve a 90 percent NOx reduction for under $1,000 per ton.

In short, we have every reason to expect that these new standards, like all the

ones that came before, will turn out to be cheaper to implement that their critics

now estimate. There is only one dynamic that can interrupt the technological innovation and competition necessary to drive down the cost of additional pollution control. That dynamic is uncertainty and delay. If the standards are repealed under

S. 1084 while more studies are conducted, industry will not commit the investment

necessary to innovate. The result will be higher than necessary compliance costs.

My third and final point relates to regional equity. One of the reasons we in the

Northeast support the new ozone and fine particle standards is because we are

deeply concerned by the inequity that exists between upwind and downwind regions

under the present ozone standard and EPA’s traditional implementation regime. I

mentioned earlier that many of the ‘‘chronic exposure attainment areas’’ in the industrial Midwest also happen to be the states with the highest utility NOx emissions. A comparison of Attachments A and Bdemonstrates this fact. As you will

note, each of the seven states identified in Attachment B produce more utility NOx

emissions than the eight northeast states combined.

We commend EPA for recognizing that the long-range windborne transport of pollutants—especially in the case of ozone and fine particulates—requires regional solutions and for incorporating this understanding in its plans for the implementation

of the new standards. Attachment D illustrates the importance of long-range transport with respect to ozone. Analysis of 5 years of ozone and wind data shows that

on good air quality days in the Northeast, the wind is coming from Canada and is

stagnant over the Midwest. But on the highest ozone days in the Northeast, winds

are blowing strongly over the Ohio River Valley which is home to many of the largest NOx sources in the nation. The new standards should at long last require these

upwind areas to join the Northeast in emissions reduction strategies. By doing so,

those areas won’t just be doing the Northeast a favor, they’ll be creating immediate

public health and environmental benefits for their own citizens. When you consider

that the states with the highest chronic ozone exposure and highest utility emissions are largely in compliance with the old standard, while states with lower chronic ozone exposures and lower utility emissions are largely out of compliance with

the old standard, I hope you will understand why the Northeast states are opposed

to S. 1084 and any other efforts to slow the transition to a new ozone standard.

In short, we believe that implementation of the revised standards can result in

more rational, equitable, and cost-effective emissions reduction strategies. That

doesn’t mean it will be easy or that there will be no regulatory impacts. It will be

a challenge. But it is one that we in the Northeast are prepared to take on because

we know that regional levels of both ozone and fine particulate matter must be lowered to protect the public health. We also know that we need the new standards,

now, to empower us to begin to do just that. Thank you again for this opportunity

to present testimony.
134
135
136
137
138

STATEMENT OF GEORGE D. THURSTON, SC.D., ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE AT THE NEW YORK UNIVERSITY (NYU) SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

I am George D. Thurston, a tenured Associate Professor of Environmental Medicine at the New York University (NYU) School of Medicine. My scientific research

involves investigations of the human health effects of air pollution.

I am also the Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’

(NIEHS) Community Outreach and Education Program at NYU. A goal of this program is to provide an impartial scientific resource on environmental health issues

to decision-makers, and that is my purpose in testifying to you here today.

I must take issue with much of the intent of Bill S. 1084 and with the findings

upon which it is based. First, the new ozone standard will not disrupt or delay ozone

reductions, as implied by Finding 4: instead, it is S. 1084 that would increase uncertainty in the marketplace and by regulators, thereby slowing air quality progress.

Second, Findings 5 and 6 fail to acknowledge that, as stated in George Wolff’s letters of closure to the Administrator, CASAC reached a consensus that a fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standard is needed, and that the ozone standard should be

changed to an 8-hr basis, both of which the EPA promulgated on July 18, 1997. The

revocation of these new ozone and PM2.5 standards that is called for in Bill S. 1084

would be unwise, and would be inconsistent with the intent of the Clean Air Act.

It is argued in the findings of Bill S. 1084 that significant progress has already

been made, but this is not really the case for ozone over the last decade. As shown

in the figure below, progress regarding ambient ozone levels in the U.S. had slowed

in recent years under the old standards. In contrast, the new standards will engender a cleaning up of the air on a broader geographical basis than under the old

standard. Thus, implementing the standards recently set by the EPA is the best

way to ensure continued and even more rapid U.S. air quality improvements.

Moreover, Bill S. 1084 wrongly seeks to fundamentally rewrite the Clean Air Act

by restructuring who decides whether new standards are needed. The existing Clean

Air Act requires that the EPA review the standards every 5 years, and then leaves

that standard setting decision to the Administrator, with advice from CASAC. Bill

S. 1084, in contrast, seeks to shift that power to the Congress, by imposing a change

back to the old O3 and PM standards. In addition, this bill says that the next

science review of these standards may not occur any earlier than 4 years from now,

but sets no requirement for the latest that this review may occur, which could possibly be interpreted as eliminating the Clean Air Act requirement for every 5-year

reviews of these pollutants. These changes would represent a dramatic and unacceptable change in the Clean Air Act.
139

The CAA has worked well for the last quarter of a century, right up to today. During the most recent O3 and PM standard reviews, CASAC reached consensus that

the PM standard needed to be revised to directly control fine particles (PM2.5), and

that the ozone standard needed to be changed to an eight hour average basis. The

EPA followed that advice, and set standards that are in the best interest of the

American public. The Congress should not try to ‘‘fix’’ something that isn’t broken:

the Clean Air Act is working just fine, and there is no need for the fundamental

change in the Clean Air Act that is being proposed by S. 1084.

The adverse health consequences of breathing ozone or particulate matter are serious and well documented, even at levels below the U.S. National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS) that were in effect before July 18, 1997. This documentation includes impacts demonstrated by controlled chamber exposures and by

observational epidemiology showing consistent associations between each of these

pollutants and adverse impacts across a wide range of human health outcomes. The

implementation of the NAAQS promulgated by the U.S. EPA on July 18 will provide

a substantial improvement in the public health protection provided to the American

people by the Clean Air Act, but the passage of Bill S. 1084 would block that much

needed improvement in public health protection.

Ozone (O3) is a highly irritating gas that is formed in our atmosphere in the presence of sunlight from other ‘‘precursor’’ air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides and

hydrocarbons. These precursor pollutants, which cause the formation of ozone, are

emitted by pollution sources including automobiles, electric power plants, and industry.

Particulate Matter (PM) air pollution is composed of two major components: primary particles, or ‘‘soot,’’ emitted directly into the atmosphere by pollution sources

such as industry, electric power plants, diesel buses, and automobiles, and; ‘‘secondary particles’’ formed in the atmosphere from sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide

gases, emitted by many combustion sources, including coal-burning electric power

plants.
140

Observational epidemiology studies have shown compelling and consistent evidence of adverse effects by ozone and PM below the old U.S. standards that Senate

Bill 1084 seeks to regress back to, if passed. These scientific studies statistically

evaluate changes in the incidence of adverse health effects in a single population

as it undergoes varying real-life exposures to pollution over time, or across multiple

populations experiencing different exposures from one place to another. They are of

two types: 1) population-based studies, in which aggregated counts of effects (e.g.,

hospital admissions counts) from an entire city might be considered in the analysis;

and, 2) cohort studies, in which selected individuals, such as a group of asthmatics,

are considered. Both of these types of epidemiologic studies have shown confirmatory associations between ozone and PM air pollution exposures and increased adverse health impacts, including:

• decreased lung function (a measure of our ability to breathe freely);

• more frequent respiratory symptoms;

• increased numbers of asthma attacks;

• more frequent emergency department visits;

• additional hospital admissions, and;

• increased numbers of daily deaths.

The newly promulgated EPA air quality standards are appropriate, and are based

on sound science.

In my own research, I have found that both ozone and particulate matter air pollution are associated with increased numbers of respiratory hospital admissions in

New York City, Buffalo, NY, and Toronto, Ontario, even at levels below the current

standards. My results have been confirmed by other researchers considering locales

elsewhere in the world. The U.S. EPA used my New York City asthma results in

their ‘‘Staff Paper’’ when estimating the health benefits of tightening the ozone

standard.

In previous Congressional hearings, much discussion centered on the hospital admissions effects of ozone, but ozone’s other impacts have been largely ignored. Indeed, hospital admissions in New York City are only a small fraction of the benefits

to be accrued by lowering pollution levels. The effects of ozone on hospital admissions represent only the ‘‘tip of the iceberg’’ of all of the many adverse effects associated with this pollutant, and they are therefore best viewed as indicators of the

much broader spectrum of adverse health effects being experienced unnecessarily by

the public today as a result of air pollution exposures. Most of these adverse effects

are not directly recorded, however, as no central records are kept of these related,

but more numerous, adverse pollutant impacts, such as increased restricted activity

days and doctors visits.

In order to give some insight into the much larger numbers of other effects lurking beneath the surface of the ozone hospital admissions effects noted by George

Wolff in Table VI-2 (revised) of the Ozone OAQPS Staff Paper (June, 1996) and during previous testimony to this Subcommittee, I have made working estimates of the

other documented adverse impacts of ozone exposure that will also be reduced in

New York City, if the EPA’s new ozone standard were to be implemented as originally proposed.

The results of my analysis are presented in the figure below, entitled the ‘‘Pyramid of Annual New York City Adverse Impacts of Ozone Avoided by the Implementation of the Proposed New Standard (vs. ‘‘As Is’’). This pyramid is intended to be

illustrative of the enormous gaps in the table presented by Dr. Wolff, and is not presented as a peer-reviewed comprehensive documentation of all the benefits which

would be accrued by achieving the EPA’s proposed new standard. Please note that

the figure could not be drawn ‘‘to scale.’’ If it were drawn ‘‘to scale’’, the New York

City (NYC) asthma admissions triangle would not even be visible, since it accounts

for only approximately 0.01% of the total number of ozone related impacts noted for

NYC. However, despite the fact that it visually overstates the relative size of the

NYC hospital asthma admissions, and the fact that still other ozone effects cannot

be considered in these calculations due to a lack of data, this figure still makes very

clear that the New York City asthma admissions counts considered in the Wolff

table represent only a small fraction (far less than 1 percent) of the adverse effects

of air pollution which will be avoided through the implementation of the new standard being proposed by the EPA.
141

The starting point of the analysis I used to estimate the ‘‘pyramid’’ of effects noted

in the attached figure is the 265 New York City asthma admissions estimated to

be avoided as a result of the implementation of the new standard, as per the top

line of the Wolff chart (i.e., 385–120 = 265 admissions). First, as I noted above, there

are also non-asthma respiratory admissions effects. Based upon the average ozone

impacts derived from my ozone-admissions regression results for New York City and

Buffalo, this indicates that the non-asthma respiratory admissions avoided (for

causes such as pneumonia and bronchitis) are about 90 percent of the size of the

asthma admissions, or 240/yr. Now, based on the fact that New York City hospital

records indicate that 12.6% of pediatric asthma emergency department (ED) visits

result in an asthma hospital admission (Barton et al, 1993), it is estimated that the

ED visits associated with the 505 ozone-related respiratory admissions would

amount to approximately 3,500 ozone-induced ED visits (i.e., 505 x 1.126). Furthermore, using the ozone adverse health effect coefficients derived from the published

literature by the Empire State Electric Energy Research Corporation (ESEERCO)

in the New York State Environmental Externalities Cost Study (Oceana Publications, Inc., December, 1995), and ratioing the ozone effect coefficients provided in

that report with that for asthma hospital admissions in New York City (used to get

the 265 admissions), effects for other outcomes were derived, based on the original

265 NYC hospital admissions/day estimate. In this way, estimated annual effects to

be avoided in New York City each year were also derived for:

• acute (i.e., daily) mortality,

• asthma attacks,

• restricted activity days (i.e., the total number of person-days during which some normal activities were curtailed), and

• acute respiratory symptom days (i.e., the total number of persondays during which additional respiratory symptoms would be experienced).

Some may quarrel with the specific coefficients chosen here to model the other

effects, but the overall point remains that these other effects collectively represent

large multiples of the hospital admissions benefits noted for New York City in the

chart presented at the hearing. Moreover, the categories of effects considered in the

attached figure are not exhaustive by any means, but they still serve to show that

the table presented by Dr. Wolff greatly underestimates the number of adverse

health events that can be avoided by the meeting the standard.
142

Note that the numbers in this figure have been corrected to avoid double counting

of adverse health ‘‘events.’’ For example, the number of hospital admissions has

been subtracted from the total number emergency department visits, assuming that

the patients would have first passed through the ED before being admitted.

Note also that this figure can be used to consider other cases in Dr. Wolff’s chart

as well, since all estimates have been scaled to the asthma admissions number. For

example, for the difference between the existing and the proposed new standard

cases, the numbers in this figure would all be divided by three (= (210–120)/(385–

120) = 90/265). However, this calculation underestimates the benefits of the new

standard, since it fails to account for the more rapid progress which will no doubt

be able to be achieved in New York City under the new standard, when upwind

counties clean up. The comparison to the ‘‘as is’’ case contained in the above figure

is the more apt comparison.

Finally, while there are about 7 million persons in New York City, there are a

total of some 122 million persons throughout the U.S. who now live in areas exceeding the proposed O3 standard, and will therefore also be benefited by that new

standard. Thus, the New York City hospital admissions effects are best viewed as

an indicator of a much broader spectrum of potentially avoidable adverse health effects being experienced by the public today as a result of air pollution exposures.

Mr. Wolff’s table also ignores the point that these pollution-related hospital admissions differ from other admissions, in that they are a violation of the law in the

U.S., as embodied in the Clean Air Act. It is important to remember that these admissions are unlike most other admissions in this important way, and, thus, warrant the regulation and societal expense needed to eliminate them.

It is not illegal to be admitted to the hospital, but it is illegal for pollution to

cause people to go to the hospital. In other words, it is right to go to the hospital

if you are sick, but it is wrong to cause someone else to have to go. This is how

air pollution induced hospital admissions differ from most others, and why it is inappropriate to treat them as equivalent to, or as a percentage of, other admissions

in legislative deliberations and policy making decisions.

Thus, since polluters are today causing many people to get sick enough to go to

the hospital, and even to die prematurely, who would otherwise not have this happen, and since the Clean Air Act has appropriately declared this to be unacceptable

and illegal, then we must act as a society to stop it, even if it is only a small percentage of all admissions or deaths.

A relevant analogy is to homicides in the U.S.: approximately 2 million persons

die in the U.S. each year, but only about 1 percent of these deaths are due to homicides. We as a society do not ignore these homicides because they are expensive to

prevent and represent only a small fraction of all deaths. Homicide is wrong and

illegal, so we as a society expend a great deal of money and effort trying to prevent

homicides, and in bringing violators to justice, even though homicides represent only

a small fraction of all deaths. If one were to apply the logic that we should do nothing about air pollution because it represents only one of many causes of hospital

admissions to this case, we would therefore not try to prevent or prosecute killers

because it is too expensive, relative to the small percentage of deaths that homicides

represent. No one would make this argument for homicides, and neither should we

make it for hospital admissions and deaths caused by pollution. The hospital admissions and deaths induced by polluters must also be stopped, even if it is expensive,

as the Clean Air Act has declared them to be illegal.

I believe that this rationale is one reason why the legislative history of the Clean

Air Act, as affirmed by the Courts, indicates that these NAAQS must be set without

consideration of attainment costs.

Returning to the subject of air pollution health effects, among the important adverse effects noted above as also occurring in the New York region as a result of

air pollution exposure are asthma attacks. The airway inflammation induced by

present day ozone and PM is especially a problem for children and adults with asthma, as it makes them more susceptible to having asthma attacks. For example, recent controlled human studies (e.g., Molfino et al., 1991) have indicated that prior

exposure to ozone enhances the reactivity of asthmatics to aeroallergens, such as

pollens, which can trigger asthma attacks. In addition, the increased inflammation

and diminished immune system ozone effects in the lung can make the elderly more

susceptible to pneumonia, a major cause of illness and death in this age group.

In February, the results of a study I conducted on the effects of air pollution on

children at a summer ‘‘asthma’’ camp in Connecticut were published. This study of

a group of about 55 moderate to severely asthmatic children shows that these children experience diminished lung function, increased asthma symptoms, and increased use of unscheduled asthma medications as ozone pollution levels rise. As

shown in the figure below, the risk of a child having an asthma attack was found
143

to be approximately 40 percent higher on the highest ozone days than on an average

study day, with these adverse effects extending to below the old 120 ppb O3 air

quality standard.

The O3 morbidity associations indicated by epidemiologic studies are supported by

a large body of data from controlled exposure studies that give consistent and/or

supportive results, and that have demonstrated pathways by which ozone can damage the human body when it is breathed. Clinical studies have demonstrated decreases in lung function, increased frequencies of respiratory symptoms, heightened

airway hyper-responsiveness, and cellular and biochemical evidence of lung inflammation in healthy exercising adults exposed to ozone concentrations at the present

standard, and at exposures as low as 80 parts per billion for 6.6 hours (e.g.,

Follinsbee et al., 1988, and Devlin et al, 1991).

Similarly, animal exposures to combustion-related fine particles (PM2.5) have also

been shown by recent controlled exposure studies to have significant adverse effects

on the lung, including diminished respiratory defense mechanisms, opening the lung

to illness from other causes. In addition, repeated exposures to acidic fine particulate matter, a portion of the fine PM2.5 which the EPA now aims to focus on in the

newly proposed reductions in the PM standard, has been shown to affect clearance

in the lung in a manner similar to that of tobacco smoking, suggesting that these

fine particles may have analogous long-term exposure effects on the development of

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

The epidemiologic evidence indicating an association between PM and increased

mortality and morbidity has been well documented by numerous investigators in the

published literature (e.g., see Schwartz, 1997). The fact that these effects have both

been shown so consistently across outcomes and from place to place is supportive

of the interpretation of these associations as causal, and not due to some unknown

confounder. Furthermore, controlled human and animal exposures of combustion

aerosols have shown significant adverse effects by these fine particles, which are the

class of particles which EPA now appropriately aims to regulate.
144

While the exact causal mechanism (i.e., the ‘‘smoking gun’’) of the PM-mortality

association is not yet known at this time, there are biologically plausible mechanisms that are now known which could account for the associations. For example,

PM stresses on the lung (e.g., by inducing edema), places extra burden on the heart,

which could induce fatal complications for persons with cardiac problems. Recent

animal experiments by Godleski and coworkers (1996, 1997) at Harvard University

confirm that exposures to elevated concentrations of ambient PM can result in cardiac related death in animals. Thus, the situation with PM and mortality is similar

to many public health risks in the past, such as cholera in London 100 years ago,

or smoking over the past few decades: the epidemiology shows biologically plausible

effects, but the exact mechanism by which the documented adverse impacts are effected is not yet known. This uncertainty about the exact mechanism of effect did

not stop us from taking societal action against epidemiologically documented health

threats, such as smoking, in the past, and should not be a deterrent to controlling

the adverse consequences of particulate matter air pollution now.

Epidemiological evidence has also accumulated over recent years indicating a role

by O3 in daily human mortality, a factor not fully considered by the U.S. EPA in

the latest O3 Staff Paper or in the EPA’s recent Regulatory Impact Assessment

(RIA) for ozone. For example, Verhoeff, et al. (1996) used Poisson regression analysis to analyze associations between daily mortality and air pollution concentrations

in Amsterdam, The Netherlands during 1986–1992, finding a daily mortality

RR=1.10 per 100 ppb 1-hr daily maximum O3, even after controlling for weather and

co-pollutants. Anderson et al. (1996) investigated whether outdoor air pollution levels in London, England influenced daily mortality during 1987–1992, finding a daily

mortality RR=1.10 per 100 ppb 8-hr O3 (RR=1.08 per 100 ppb 1-hr O3), even after

controlling for weather and co-pollutants. Samet et al. (1997) considered total daily

mortality and environmental data for Philadelphia during 1973–1980, finding that,

when pairs of pollutants were considered simultaneously, only the ozone coefficient

consistently remained unchanged and statistically significant, with a total mortality

RR of 1.02 for a 20 ppb increase in 24-hr daily average ozone. Cause of death-specific regressions indicated the largest ozone RR for respiratory deaths, consistent

with biological plausibility. More recently, I have found that daily mortality also

rises after high ozone days in the U.S. cities of New York City, Atlanta, Detroit,

Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Houston, even

after accounting for other factors such as season and weather, and at ozone levels

below the current NAAQS standard (Thurston, 1997). I find that the overall population’s risk of death rises by about 6 percent on ozone days having a 1-hour maximum of ozone that is 100 ppb above the average. The many new studies released

since the EPA Criteria Document was prepared that document associations between

ozone air pollution and human mortality are listed in the attached Table 1.

Once the weight of this new evidence of biologically plausible associations between

acute ozone exposures and increased daily human mortality is considered, it is clearer than ever that important reductions in public health risks can be achieved by

going from the old standard (equivalent to about a 90 ppb 8-hour standard) down

to an 80 ppb 8-hour O3 standard, as was promulgated by the EPA.

In conclusion, I would like to restate the key messages contained in the letter that

I and 26 other air pollution researchers and physicians sent to President Clinton

earlier this year:

• Please listen to the medical and scientific community on this issue. • Exposures to O3 and PM air pollution have been linked to medically significant

adverse health effects. • The pre-July 18, 1997 NAAQS for these pollutants were not sufficiently protective of public health.

Thus, the recently promulgated air quality standards for both ozone and particulate matter should be retained.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important issue.

References

Anderson, H. R., Ponce de Leon, A, Bland, J.M., Bower, J.S., and Strachen, D.P.

(1996) Air pollution and daily mortality in London: 1987–92. British Medical Journal, 312:665–669.

Barton, D.J.; Teets-Grimm, K.; and Kattan, M. (1993) Emergency room visit patterns of inner city children for asthma. Am. Rev. of Resp. Dis. 147: A577.

Devlin, R.B.; McDonnell, W.F.; Mann, R.; Becker, S.; House, D.E.;

Schreinemachers, D., and; Koren, H.S.. (1991) Exposure of humans to ambient levels of ozone for 6.6 hours causes cellular and biochemical changes in the lung. Am.

J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol. 4: 72–81.
145

Follinsbee, L.J.; McDonnell, W.F., and; Horstman, D.H. (1988) Pulmonary function and symptom responses after 6.6 hour exposure to 0.12 ppm ozone with moderate exercise. JAPCA 38:28–35.

Godleski, J.J.; Sioutas, C.; Katler, M.; Catalano, P.; and Koutrakis, P. (1996)

Death from inhalation of concentrated ambient air particles in animal models of pulmonary disease. Proceedings of the Second Colloquium on Particulate Air Pollution

and Human Health, May 1–3, 1996, Park City, Utah.

Godleski, J.J., Sioutas, C., Verrier, R.L.; Killingsworth, C.R.; Lovett, E.; Murthy,

G.G.; Hatch, V.; Wolfson, J.M.; Ferguson, T., and Koutrakis, P. (1997) Inhalation exposure of canines to concentrated ambient air particles. Am. J. Resp. and Crit. Care

Med., 155:(4) A246.

Molfino, N.A.; Wright, S.C.; Katz, I.; Tarlo, S.; Silverman, F.; McClean, P.A.;

Szalai, J.P.; Raizenne, M.; Slutsky, A.S., and; Zamel, N. (1991) Effect of low concentrations of ozone on inhaled allergen responses in asthmatic subjects. Lancet.

338(8761): 199–203.

Samet, J.M.; Zeger, S.L.; Kelsall, J.E., Xu, J.; and Kalkstein, L.S. (1997) Air pollution, weather, and mortality in Philadelphia 1973–1988. Analyses of the Effects of

Weather and Multiple Air Pollutants. The Phase I.B Report of the Particle Epidemiology Evaluation Project. Health Effects Institute, Cambridge, MA, March, 1997.

Schwartz, J. (1997) Health effects of air pollution from traffic: ozone and particulate matter. Health at the Crossroads: Transport Policy and Urban Health, T.

Fletcher and A.J. McMichael Eds., John Wiley and Sons Ltd., New York, NY.

Thurston, G.D. (1997) Ozone Air Pollution and Human Mortality. Paper 97-

MP9.04. For presentation at the Air & Waste Management Association’s 90th Annual Meeting & Exhibition, June 8–13, 1997, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Verhoeff, A.P., Hoek, G.; Schwartz, J.; and Wijnen, J.H. (1996) Air pollution and

daily mortality in Amsterdam. Epidemiology. 7:225–230.

Table 1. Recent Studies Linking Ozone With Daily Mortality

Not Considered by the U.S. EPA O3 Criteria Document or Staff Paper

Anderson et al. 1996. Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in London: 1987–1992.

BMJ 312:665–669.

Bates, D. 1995. Ozone: A Review of Recent Experimental, Clinical and Epidemiological Evidence, with Notes on Causation, Part 2. Can. Respir. J. 2(3): 161–171.

Cifuentes, L.A. and L. Lave. 1997. Association of Daily Mortality and Air Pollution in Philadelphia, 1983–1988. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. (In press).

Hoek et al. 1997. Effects of Ambient Particulate Matter and Ozone on Daily Mortality in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Accepted to: Arch. Environ. Health.

Ito, K. and Thurston, G.D. 1996. Daily PM10/Mortality Associations: An Investigation of At–Risk Subpopulations. J. Expo. Analysis Environ. Epidemiol. 6(1): 79–225.

Kinney et al. 1995. A Sensitivity Analysis of Mortality/PM10 Associations in Los

Angeles. Inhal. Toxicol. 7:59–69.

Loomis et al. 1996. Ozone Exposure and Daily Mortality in Mexico City: A Time–

Series Analysis. Health Effects Institute Research Report Number 75, October 1996.

Moolgavkar et al. 1995. Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in Philadelphia. Epidemiology 6(5): 476–484.

Ostro. 1995. Fine Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality in Two Southern California Counties. Environ. Res. 70: 98–104.

Ostro et al. 1996. Air Pollution and Mortality: Results from a Study of Santiago,

Chile. J. Expo. Analysis Environ. Epidemiol. 6: 97–114.

Ozkaynak et al. 1995. Associations Between Daily Mortality, Ozone and Particulate Air Pollution in Toronto, Canada. Paper Presented at the Colloquium on Particulate Air Pollution, Irvine, CA, January 24–25.

Saldiva et al. 1994. Association Between Air Pollution and Mortality Due to Respiratory Diseases in Children in Sao Paulo, Brazil: A Preliminary Report. Environ.

Res. 65: 218–225.

Saldiva et al. 1995. Air Pollution and Mortality in Elderly People: A Time–Series

Study in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Arch. Environ. Health 50(2): 159–163.

Samet et al. 1996. Air Pollution and Mortality in Philadelphia, 1974–1988. Report

to the Health Effects Institute on Phase IB: Particle Epidemiology Evaluation

Project, March 25, 1996 (Accepted for publication).

Samet et al. 1997. Particulate Air Pollution and Daily Mortality: Analysis of the

Effects of Weather and Multiple Air Pollutants. The Phase I.B Report of the Particle

Epidemiology Evaluation Project. Health Effects Institute, March 1997.

Sartor, F. et al. 1995. Temperature, Ambient Ozone Levels, and Mortality during

Summer 1994, in Belgium. Environ. Res. 70: 105–113.

Sunyer et al. 1996. Air Pollution and Mortality in Barcelona. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 50 (Suppl. 1): S76–S80.
146

Thurston, G.D. 1997. Ozone Air Pollution and Human Mortality. Paper 97–

MP9.04. Presented at the Air and Waste Management Association’s 90th Annual

Meeting and Exhibition, June 8–13, 1997, Toronto, Canada.

Touloumi et al. 1997. Short Term Effects of Ambient Oxidants Exposure on Mortality: A Combined Analysis Within the APHEA Project. Am. J. Epidemiol. (In

press).

Verhoeff, A.P. et al. 1996. Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in Amsterdam. Epidemiology 7(3): 225–230.

Wyzga, R.E. and F.W. Lipfert. 1995. Temperature–Pollution Interactions with

Daily Mortality in Philadelphia. In: Particulate Matter: Health and Regulatory Issues: Proceedings of an International Specialty Conference Sponsored by the Air and

Waste Management Association, April, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 3–42.

Wyzga, R.E. and F.W. Lipfert 1996. Ozone and Daily Mortality: The Ramifications

of Uncertainties and Interactions and Some Initial Regression Results. In: Vostal,

J.J., Ed., Tropospheric Ozone: Critical Issues in the Regulatory Process: Proceedings

of a Specialty Conference Sponsored by the Air and Waste Management Association,

May, 1994, Orlando, FL, pp. 453–487.

Zmirou et al. 1996. Short Term Effects of Air Pollution on Mortality in the City

of Lyon, France, 1985–1990. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 50(Suppl. 1):S30–S35.

STATEMENT OF TOM SMITH, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL COALITION OF PETROLEUM

RETAILERS

I am Tom Smith, President of NCPR, the chief advocate of the interests of America’s 45,000 mom and pop gasoline retailers, and a Texaco dealer in Griffin, GA, located just outside the metro Atlanta non-attainment area, but inside what EPA

would call an ‘‘area of influence’’.

NCPR strongly supports S. 1084, the Ozone and Particulate Matter Research Act.

We have always supported environmental regulation that has a basis in common

sense, and that we can explain to our members in a simple and straightforward

manner. While NCPR supported the change to an 8 hour ozone standard, EPA’s proposals fail this test.

S. 1084 is necessary legislation, because the evidence shows few if any increased

health benefits, while the costs of compliance are enormous. A greater return of

health benefits will occur if our limited resources are spent elsewhere.

The argument that there is no need for the legislation because the compliance

deadlines are well off in the future is misleading. Without the legislation, compliance schedules will be dictated by citizens’ suits and sanctions threats, well in advance of the deadlines EPA speaks of.

Under the Clean Air Act, once an area reaches a certain level of non-attainment,

gasoline retailers are required to implement control strategies such as Stage 2 vapor

recovery, enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance, and sale of reformulation gasolines, by reason of the plain language of the statute.

Because the Act mandates control strategies. That can be enforced by citizen suits

and other threats, which will inevitably occur well before the dates EPA is talking

about—States will be forced to act now if the legislation is not passed.

The threat is so severe that NCPR has had to file suit against EPA alleging that

the provisions of the Clean Air Act that mandate certain control strategies are unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment, and a 1997 Supreme Court decision.

While we believe that the Act’s provisions are unconstitutional because the legislative and regulatory apparatus of the state is commandeered by EPA, as States

must pass authorizing legislation, propose and enact implementing regulations, and

then enforce those enactments against the private sector, including the mom and

pop retailers we represent; passage of S. 1084 would alleviate the immediate problem, because it allows us time to be sure of what we are doing before we turn the

States into puppets whose strings can be pulled by lawsuits and other threats.

Thus, even though EPA has promised to be flexible, the statute, to the extent it

is constitutional, ties their hands.

Based on our experience with the motor vehicle I/M debate, our members have

deep seated reservations over EPA’s ‘‘flexibility’’ promise. To quote Georgia State

Representative Mike Evans testifying under oath before the House Commerce Committee in the 104th Congress:

EPA’s assertion that they have been flexible is simply not so.

We have not seen it in Georgia, nor do I believe that the other

States have seen it either. The only thing we have heard is sanctions, sanctions, sanctions....
147

1 House Hearing No. 104–12 at 307.

It is abundantly clear, in closing, that people across this country do not want and will not accept this consumer unfriendly

plan. It is also just as clear that without public support, any plan

is bound to fail. Please help us by allowing Georgia to tailor a

plan that specifically meets the needs of Georgia.1

We also question the flexibility claims in light of EPA’s position that changing the

standard does not implicate SBREFA or ‘‘Reg Flex’’—the change of the standard

automatically worsens the non-attainment level of many areas, and forces these

areas to adopt control; measures that inflict substantial costs on a significant number of small businesses as a matter of law. EPA has already started playing games

with the ‘‘Implementation Process,’’ forcing small business to have to threaten to

walk out of a March 18 meeting

We are also disturbed by what appears to be pandering to a given audience, as

shown by EPA’s claims before the Agriculture Committee to the effect that farmers

would be minimally impacted by the new standards. As one with family in farming,

and a number of farm based customers’, I can tell you they do not share EPA’s

sunny outlook, rather they correctly fear that higher fuel prices will squeeze already

thin farm margins.

As a gasoline retailer, I was deeply disturbed by her remarks that the standards

would mean more use of ethanol; blended gasoline, and ‘‘good news for farmers.’’

Ethanol blends raise the Reid Vapor Pressure of gasoline, and cannot be used in

many non-attainment areas because they will worsen the ozone problem, and EPA’s

efforts to rewrite the 1990 Amendments by mandating ethanol fuel were struck

down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Therefore, we do not understand what the basis is for this claim, other than political posturing.

The ethanol subsidy itself distorts, and is destructive to competition in the gasoline industry. All it does is allow large chain marketers a government mandated

competitive advantage over small ‘‘mom and pop’’ dealers such as myself, while

draining the treasury, and providing little real relief for farmers. We would be better off taking the money and block granting it to the states, or finding a way to

ensure that the benefits went to real farmers, not ethanol producers. NCPR would

add that any extension of the highway bill that extends the ethanol subsidy for another 7 years is to us ‘‘Poison-Tea’’ and would force us to oppose the entire bill,

though we support CMAQ funding.

As very small locally owned and operated businesses’ gasoline dealers limited

funds limited resources must be used in a way so as to achieve the maximum environmental bang for the buck.

If EPA moves forward with these regulation, our limited resources will be forced

into spending money on technology such as Stage 2 Vapor Recovery, something EPA

Administrator Lee Thomas called ‘‘a costly technological redundancy that will do little to solve the ozone problem’’—instead of spending the money on underground

tank upgrades required by 1998 in order to protect groundwater. It does not appear

that the left hand of EPA knows what the right hand is doing, and that they are

willing to ‘‘rob Peter to pay Paul’’; and that the net result will be an environmental

detriment, as our members limited resources would be diverted from compliance

with the 1998 underground tank regulatory deadline, where they would most benefit

human health and the environment.

It is very important that policy makers at all levels of government be aware of

the fact that thousands of gasoline station franchise agreements will be coming up

for renewal; and franchisers will be required to decide whether or not to make the

investment in upgrading the facility. In the event the franchiser decides that it does

not wish to make the investment; the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.

2801, 2802(b)(3)(D), requires that an offer to sell the leased marketing premises be

made to the franchisee. As a result, many stations and their tanks will be sold and

replaced in the remaining 21 months.

NCPR expects a significant ‘‘1998 Bubble’’ to occur, that will stress the resources

of states and their existing underground tank trust funds. and those of our members. who need to be focused on addressing this problem. including moving Sen.

Allard’s legislation. as opposed to preparing to implement new air standards, whose

benefits are questionable at best.

Gasoline dealers have long been involved in the debate over clean air, primarily

because the dealer and his family, as well as our employees and their families

breath the same air and drink the same water as our friends and neighbors do. We

sponsor the Little League teams, Boy and Girl Scout troops and other children’s ac-
148

tivities, and our children and grandchildren take part in these activities as well. We

take exception to those who would use our children as pawns, or try to paint those

of us who wish to regulate sensibly as ‘‘anti-child’’ in order to advance their political

agendas and ambitions.

S. 1084 passes the common sense test; EPA’s new standards do not.

STATEMENT OF ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS

Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) thanks the Senate Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee of the Environment and

Public Works Committee for the opportunity to submit a statement on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulations on ozone and particulate matter in

the atmosphere. ABC believes the EPA’s new federal air quality regulations for

ozone smog and fine particles could have crippling effects on hundreds of thousands

of American construction workers and cost consumers and businesses billions of dollars, with little or no health benefit.

ABC is a national trade association representing over 19,000 contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers, and related firms from across the country and from

all specialties in the construction industry. ABC’s diverse membership is bound by

a shared commitment to the merit shop philosophy of awarding construction contracts to the lowest responsible bidder through open and competitive bidding. This

practice assures taxpayers and consumers the most value for their construction dollar. With 80 percent of the construction performed today by open shop contractors,

ABC is proud to be their voice.

ABC strongly supports S. 1084, which would retain EPA’s existing air quality regulations for ozone and small particles until research can be conducted to determine

if the agency’s more stringent new rules would benefit public health. EPA could reissue the new standards if the research showed they were necessary. The legislation

would ensure that the scientific facts are well established before the nation makes

a huge investment in new emission control programs that could, according to the

Reason Public Policy Institute, cost as much as $150 billion annually. The nation

would pay this bill in higher business and consumer costs, lost jobs, less economic

development, and inconvenient lifestyle changes.

After careful review of the technical and health information and analyses in the

Criteria Document and the Staff Paper prepared by EPA for this rulemaking, the

Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), the agency’s expert review panel

established by the Clean Air Act and appointed by the Administrator, concluded

there were significant uncertainties and unanswered questions that had to be addressed before EPA proceeds with the Particulate Matter (PM) rulemaking. Additionally, the same panel concluded there was no health basis to establish new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone. ABC concurs with

CASAC’s opinion and strongly advises EPA to reaffirm the current standards for

PM and ozone while initiating a targeted research program to resolve the questions

and uncertainties identified during the just-completed review process.

The proposed tightening of the ozone and PM NAAQS, in conjunction with the

highway funding sanction authorities and Metropolitan Planning Organizations

(MPOs) approval requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) and 1991

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), pose enormous restrictions to the transportation construction industry throughout the United States. The

combination of these new regulatory requirements endangers tens of thousands of

jobs and creates major new constraints to mobility.

Additionally, ABC is concerned that the EPA has not adequately taken into account the affect these costly new requirements will undoubtedly have on the American worker and average motorists. If the EPA succeeds in changing the standard

such limitations as mandatory employee carpooling, centralized state-run emissions

inspections, and the use of more expensive reformulated gasoline are only a few of

the policies that will adversely affect small business. Other transit initiatives could

be higher vehicle taxes and higher tolls in peak driving times.

Non-vehicle remedies could place restrictions on the use of power tools, lawn mowers, and snow blowers as well as other equipment. ABC shares with all Americans

an interest in efforts to preserve, protect and enhance the natural environment. Pollution prevention is in our nation’s interest; however, efforts to reduce emissions

must be balanced with considerations for the safety of those operating the equipment, as well as the cost and technological feasibility of achieving any prescribed

reductions. Many construction industry workers rely upon non-road engines in their

daily efforts to safely build construction projects on time and on budget. The per-
149

formance and reliability of these engines directly impact a contractor’s ability to successfully execute their contracted responsibilities on the construction job site.

The EPA initially claimed the new PM/ozone standard would extend the lives of

as many as 20,000 people a year (recently revised down to 15,000 people). Clearly,

the extent of this health risk is of concern. However, exactly which components in

urban air are causing the health problems is not yet well understood. The EPA’s

preference for regulating every fine particle in the air before understanding the real

causes and quantifiable health benefits is not a prudent strategy. ABC is concerned

that:

1) The EPA has failed to properly characterize PM concentrations across the

United States. Key technical analyses have not been completed. For example, the

EPA has not determined the chemical composition or size of the particulate matter that is linked to the supposed increases in mortality and morbidity. The EPA

has also failed to identify the biological mechanism that would explain the link

between PM2.5 and increases in mortality. The use of a nationwide PM2.5/PM10

ratio to estimate PM2.5 concentrations is insupportable from the limited PM2.5

data available.

2) The EPA has failed to accurately analyze the impact of the new standard.

The EPA has stated its refusal to conduct a small business analysis for these

rules. The Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs) are incomplete; no analysis was

conducted on the proposed secondary ozone standard, no analysis was conducted

on impacts to small businesses, the Unfunded Mandates Act was not addressed,

and the analyses do not estimate the full cost of attaining the proposed standards

throughout the country (there are ‘‘residual nonattainment areas’’). The RIA for

ozone rulemaking does not use the proposed standards in the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking as the basis for its costs and benefits projections.

3) The EPA has used questionable health impact studies to justify their actions.

There is virtually no PM2.5 exposure data on either the general population or on

susceptible populations. The use of community-based epidemiological studies is

not appropriate because individual personal exposures do not correspond to these

community-based studies.

Due to the predominance of small businesses within the construction industry,

ABC remains concerned that compliance with the Clean Air Act Amendments could

have significant adverse affect. We continue to encourage the Congress to give serious consideration to the impact these new requirements would have on small businesses.

Associated Builders and Contractors strongly urges that there be no change in the

ozone or particulate matter standards at this time until more comprehensive scientific studies can be performed. Again, ABC appreciates the opportunity to submit

this statement for the record.

Æ