Skip to main content

Proposed particulate matter standard

Hydrocarbon Engineering,

API Director of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs, Howard Feldman, has said that the EPA’s proposed new particulate matter (PM) standards could not be justified on the basis of health benefits. He said it made no sense to impose added costs on the nation by implementing more stringent standards, when the existing standards would continue to improve air quality.


‘We support keeping the standards where they are, not only because there is no compelling evidence for changing them, but because our current emission control programs implementing the existing standards are working and continue to reduce pollution levels…With the control measures already proposed or being implemented under the current regulations, we could expect to reduce particulate pollution by more than 1 million tpy (about 20%) in the next couple of years, and make steady progress further reducing the number of Americans living in areas exceeding the current standards.

‘Another important point needs to be kept in mind when it comes to costs. The new rule would not be happening in a vacuum. Other regulations, including the forthcoming ozone rules, the refinery sector rules and pending greenhouse gas regulations for refineries, and the delayed boiler MACT rules, may be finalised and imposed in the very near future. The collective impacts of all of these and other potential new regulations at a time when 12 million Americans are still unemployed would be a blow to our economy as it struggles to recover and put Americans back to work. These rules could significantly slow business development and job creation. It makes no sense to risk this when the necessity of many of these regulations is ambiguous at best.’

Adapted from press release by Claira Lloyd

Read the article online at:


Embed article link: (copy the HTML code below):