March 3, 2011 

Dr. Holly Stallworth 

Designated Federal Office 

Science Advisory Board 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

RE: RECONSIDERATION OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR 

OZONE

Dear Dr. Stallworth: 

On behalf of Manufac ture Alabam a, we are wr iting to you to reiterate our concerns regarding 

Environmental P rotection Agency’s (EPA) R econsideration of the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. 

Manufacture Alabam a is Alabam a’s only trade association represen ting exclusive ly the com petitive, 

legislative and related interest s of m anufacturers. Manufacture Alabama represents hundreds of 

companies in a wide range of indu stries including chem ical, pulp and paper, shipbuilding, and steel. 

Our m embers shar e co mmon interests and go als and f ace common com petitive c hallenges in today’s 

tough global m arketplace. Som e of our m embers are among the nation’s larg est, m ost recognized 

corporations. Many are mid-sized or small family-owned manufacturers or manufacturing suppliers and 

vendors. All of them are vital pa rts of a m anufacturing base crucia l to Alabam a’s and the nation’s 

economy and job base. 

Changes to the NAAQS for ozone under the Clean Air Ac t (CAA) will directly im pact the operation of 

manufacturers, power plants and othe r sources of energy. Of particular concern, is the lowering of the 

current 8-hour NAAQS for ozone from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to the proposed 60 to 70 ppb. A recent 

study conducted by the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI concluded that EPA’s proposed ozone standards 

will result in 7.3 million job losses by 2020 if the EPA moves forward with a 60 parts per b illion (ppb) 

primary standard. Economic Implications of EPA’s Proposed Ozone Standard (ER-707), Donald A. 

Norman, Ph.D., (Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI econom ist). In addition, the study concluded that 

lowering the standard would result in the annual attainm ent cost to be $ 1.013 trillion between 2020 and 

2030 (in 2010 dollars). This is equi valent to 5.4 percent of projecte d constant dollar gross dom estic 

product (GDP) in 2020. 

Given the heavy job loss potential this policy could result in and the ab sence of any new scientific data, 

we strongly believe changing the current NAAQS standard outside of the ongoing five year review 
The Honorable Holly Stallworth 

March 3, 2011 

Page 2 

process is u nnecessary and will ex acerbate efforts to m ove our country’s econo my out of t he Great 

Recession. For the reasons stated below, we urge the E PA to preserve the cu rrent 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

EPA has br oad policy discretion to establish air quality standards, but the CAA de fines the required 

legal framework through which it m ay set these standard s. After developm ent of “air quality criteria” 

documents and review by the Clean Air Act Science Advisory Committee (CASAC) - the CAA requires 

the Adm inistrator to ex ercise her p olicy judgm ent to estab lish national prim ary air quality standards 

requisite to protec t th e public he alth w ith an adequate margin o f safe ty. See 42 U.S.C. Secs. 

7408(a)(2) (requiring developm ent of criteria docum ents), 7409(b)(1) (defini ng level of protection 

required by standards), and 7409(d)(2) (requiring review by CASAC(). This means that EPA must set 

the NAAQS at the level that is “sufficient but not more than necessary’ to protect public health. ” 

Whitman v. American Trucking Ass’n, 531 U.S. 457, 473 (2001). 

Manufacture Alabama opposes any em issions regulations that would impose m ore compliance costs on 

manufacturers, especially when those regulation s do not demonstrate tangible environm ental or healt h 

benefits through thorough scientific study. The current 8-hour ozone standard is fulfilling EPA’s duty to 

protect the environm ent a nd public health. EP A’s own data dem onstrates tha t am bient air qu ality is 

improving significantly even when our economy grows. Between 1980 and 2008, total emissions of the 

six pr incipal air po llutants dropped by 54 pe rcent. (See http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/aqtrends.html) 

Measured am bient concentrations of ozone have dropped 25% since 1980. (See 

http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/aqtrends.html). During this same time period, our nation’s gross domestic 

product increased 126 percent, vehicle m iles trav eled increased 91 percent, energy consum ption 

increased 29 percent, and the U.S. population grew by 34 percent. 

EPA’s action to tighten the current ozone standard would unnecessarily result in many areas of Alabama 

and across the nation being designated as non-attainm ent areas. If the cu rrent ozone standard of 75 ppb 

is revised to 60 ppb, the num ber of counties designated as non-attain ment areas would increase from 75 

monitored counties to 650 m onitored counties, out of a total of 675 m onitored counties. Being 

designated as a non -attainment area adversely impacts communities, making it m ore difficult to attract 

and retain industry and sustain economic growth and vitality. For manufacturers, being located in a nonattainment area r esults in incre ased operating co sts, permitting delays, a nd restrictions on expan sions, 

which increases tim e needed to bring i mproved products to markets. Furthermore, facilities located in 

counties designated as in “severe” or “extreme” non-attainment will face significant Section 185 fees for 

circumstances beyond their control, even though m any of these fac ilities have already spent m any 

millions of dollars to reduce emissions and be in compliance with the current NAAQS. 

Manufacture Alabama believes that new non-attainment area designations will hurt both large and small 

manufacturers and prevent expansion and growth in many urban, suburban, and rural counties, hindering 

their ability to create jobs. Our nation is sufferi ng through the m ost severe recession since the 1930s. 

Manufacturers have los t more than 2.1 m illion high-wage jobs acro ss the nation. Econom ic recovery 

will not be swift and individual States will not recover from the economic downturn at the same pace. It 

is unfairly burdensom e to im pose a new ozone sta ndard when states are facing serious budgetary and 

financial issues and businesses and industries are laboring to rem ain open. A tighter and m ore costly 

ozone standard would result in incr eased state and local tax es, higher consumer prices and a significant 

increase in the cost of doing bus iness at a tim e when th e American economy is struggling to recove r 

from this significant recession. Manufacturers may be forced to relocat e out of non-attainment areas, or 
The Honorable Holly Stallworth 

March 3, 2011 

Page 3 

relocate overseas to countries with less strict e nvironmental regulations sim ply be cause they cannot 

afford to operate under extrem e financial conditions in the United States. W idespread leakage would 

competitively disadvantage America and significantly impede economic recovery. 

New standards will also operate as an energy tax. The manufacturing sector uses about one-third of the 

nation’s energy, including one-third of its natural gas and alm ost 30 percent of its electricity. 

Compliance with regulations promulgated pursuant to the CAA such as the ozone NAAQS, am ong 

others, com prise a larg e percen tage of energy a nd electricity cos ts for Am erican m anufacturers and 

consumers. The EPA e stimates that the cost of a new ozone standard could reach $90 billion. As of 

2007 - prior to the onset of the gr eat recession - the U.S. spent more than $180 billion on all CAA 

programs. A m ore stringent ozone standard could cost industry approximately $22 billion in ad ditional 

annual compliance costs, further undermining competitiveness and diverting resources from investments 

in technological innovation. 

For the above stated reasons and in the interest of improving the environment and the economy, we urge 

you to maintain the current 8-hour oz one standard and allow businesses to continue their current efforts 

to protect the environment. 

Sincerely, 

 Blake Hale Hardwich 

Director of Public Relations & 

External Affairs 

Manufacture Alabama