EPA has recognized that certain deadlines are difficult to meet because of transported air pollution. On two occasions, Congress has extended the time frame for compliance. Currently, EPA is working with an advisory committee of industry, environmental groups and other interested parties to develop cost- effective strategies for implementing the proposed standards. Questions are now being raised about whether or not air quality standards should be based solely on health concerns. In one sense, the answer is simple.
People have the right to know whether they are breathing clean air.
Today, in areas that don't meet the standards for ozone or particulate matter or carbon monoxide, people know they are breathing air that presents a risk for public health. I don't want to change that paradigm. If the standards are not based solely on public health, some places in our country could be meeting the standards and still have unhealthy air. Not very much. In other words, Mr. Chairman, it's one thing to tell the public that you won't have clean air for 10, IS or even 17 years because that time frame will allow for implementation of more cost effective solutions.