文章基本信息

标题：The 1987 Revision of the NAAQS for Particulate Matter and the 1993 Decision Not to Revise the NAAQS for Ozone: Two Case Studies in EPA's Use of Science
本地全文：下载
作者：Powell, Mark R.
期刊名称：Journal of Food Distribution Research
印刷版ISSN：0047-245X
出版年度：1997
期号：SUPPL
出版社：Food Distribution Research Society
摘要：This paper discusses EPA's acquisition and use of science in two decisions regardingNational Ambient Air Quality Standards: the 1987 Revision of the NAAQS forParticulate Matter and the 1993 Decision Not to Revise the NAAQS for Ozone. In thefirst case, more than ten years before EPA proposed to revise the NAAQS forparticulates, narrowly-scoped results of academic experiments suggesting that the agencyshould focus its regulatory efforts on smaller diameter suspended particulates penetrateddeep into the agency, far removed from decisionmakers in Washington. The particulatesreview was elaborate and protracted and was promoted and inhibited by multiple factors.Due to the lengthy review period, however, researchers involved in complexepidemiological studies were able to produce information which bore directly onregulator's questions prior to the final decision. Such is a rarity given the normalmismatch between the pace of regulatory decisionmaking and the time required toproduce, analyze, and verify original scientific data. These studies observed an increase inrespiratory ailments in children at particulate concentrations experienced in U.S. urbanareas and suggested the lack of a discernible threshold in the relationship betweenparticulate levels and mortality. Furthermore, as the decision was being finalized, theagency leadership was warned that forthcoming studies would probably suggest healthconcerns at even lower levels than the lowest end of the proposed range. In the case ofozone, political factors and a divided Clean Air Science Advisory Committee (CASAC)led to a 1992 proposal by EPA Administrator Reilly not to revise the NAAQS for ozone.Administrator Browner essentially inherited this decision during the transition periodbetween the Bush and Clinton administrations, and although the role of science in the finaldecisionmaking was not substantive, the scientific review process was considered. Theozone case study illustrates that an elaborate and lengthy NAAQS review process isrequired to make science available for consideration by EPA decisionmakers and thatpolicy disagreements within CASAC provide the Administrator with a justification to notrevise the NAAQS on the basis of "scientific uncertainty." Both cases provide examplesof non-agency scientists operating in multiple, overlapping roles inside and outside theregulatory decisionmaking process. The NAAQS case studies also underscore that theClean Air Act is based on the false scientific premise that a threshold level exists belowwhich health effects from ubiquitous air pollutants will not be observed. As aconsequence of this mistaken legislative presumption, new scientific developmentsinevitably point toward ever more stringent ambient standards and preordain--in principle--the outcome of periodic reviews of the scientific basis of air quality regulation. Inpractice, EPA's response has been to delay the inevitable.