Statement of Angel O. Torres on EPA Ozone Standards

September 5, 2007 -- I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to be here today. My name is Angel Torres and I have worked for the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University for more than 11 years. Because of my work there, as a GIS Specialist, often I get to see first hand the effects that different air pollutants have on the general public. Early on I realized that Asthma was a major persistent issue among the communities that I visited, especially childhood asthma. Never did I think that I would be faced with similar issues.

Today, I am the proud father of a typical four years old child with asthma and allergies. Because of the asthma, he is a little different than your average four year old child. One of the main differences is that during the summer months, he must stay indoors most of the time. It is very difficult for an otherwise healthy four year old boy to understand this. Like many of his friends and classmates he is currently trying to enjoy the end of the summer by participating on the different available sports leagues (soccer, baseball, etc.). And like with many kids in his situation, my son has a very hard time participating in such events. Asthma restricts the activities that he enjoys.

For the last couple of weeks, we have had record setting temperatures in the city of Atlanta. I addition to the extremely high temperatures, we have also register some of the unhealthiest days of the year. As clearly documented by many health studies, this combination exacerbates his asthma.

I was in the process of preparing speech with some nice facts like more than 17.3 million Americans have asthma. Including more than 4 million children under the age of 18 that have had an asthma attack in the past 12 months, or that asthma is the most common cause of school absence. And that an estimated 50,000 to 120,000 premature deaths are associated with exposure to air pollutants. Or that people with asthma experience more than 100 million days of restrictive activity annually, costing $4 billion a year.

I could also point out that the impact of asthma in children is clearly illustrated by the fact that asthma accounts for more hospitalizations in children than any other chronic illness. Or maybe that ozone exposure during childhood can lead to permanent lung damage. But I am pretty sure that by the end of that day you would probably heard these facts many times.

With all that said, I like to ask you today to consider lowering the ozone standard not to the proposed 0.07 ppm but to the more rational 0.06 ppm threshold. Everybody, even healthy people, will benefit from a 0.07 ppm standard, but the lower 0.06 ppm would allow people suffering from chronic respiratory diseases, including my son, to have a real reprieve from their “prisons.”

We all know that there will be a great deal of resistance to a lower, more stringent standard from entities and corporations that are benefiting from the current standard. Those that oppose the lower standards should be informed that according to your own website’s Myths & Facts about Nonattainment, specifically, Myth # 1.

Myth:
A designation of nonattainment (unhealthy air) will significantly limit economic growth.

Fact:
History shows this is not true. Nonattainment emissions controls are designed to help areas improve air quality even as they grow. Counties surrounding Atlanta, for example, have grown as much as 123 percent over the past decade while, the number of exceedances (of the existing 1-hour standard) have dropped more than 85 percent. Areas are able to improve their air quality without inhibiting economic growth.

Ultimately this is not about how much it would cost business if a lower standard is set, after all according to the Supreme Court, EPA must set these standards based solely on public health considerations without consideration of costs. Thank you for your time.