POLISCOPE
Back to feed
Part ofEPA
FEDERALhearing transcript

Congressional Hearing on 2015 EPA Ozone Standards

Original title: EPA'S 2015 OZONE STANDARD:. CONCERNS OVER SCIENCE AND IMPLEMENTATION

January 1, 2017

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The hearing examines the scientific and economic implications of the EPA's 2015 decision to lower s, which dictates air quality compliance requirements for states and industries nationwide.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

State and Local Air Pollution Control Districts

These agencies are responsible for implementing and enforcing air quality standards set by the EPA.

Environmental Defense Fund

The organization provides scientific input on the health impacts of ozone standards.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

The agency manages air quality compliance for the state of Texas under federal guidelines.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2017.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

This document is a transcript of a 2015 House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology hearing regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) updated ozone air quality standards. The hearing focused on the scientific basis for the new regulations and the practical challenges of implementing them at the state and local levels.

Key Facts

  • The hearing took place on October 22, 2015, to review the EPA's 2015 ozone standard.
  • The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held the hearing to evaluate the scientific evidence and implementation feasibility of the new ozone rules.
  • Witnesses included representatives from legal, environmental, and state regulatory backgrounds.
  • The record includes extensive post-hearing questions and additional materials submitted by committee members.
  • The hearing addressed concerns regarding the stringency of the ozone standard and its impact on regional air quality management.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of this hearing?
The hearing was held to examine the scientific basis and the implementation challenges associated with the EPA's 2015 ozone air quality standards.
Who testified at the hearing?
Witnesses included Jeffrey Holmstead (Bracewell & Giuliani LLP), Seyed Sadredin (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District), Dr. Elena Craft (Environmental Defense Fund), and Dr. Michael Honeycutt (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality).

Why It Matters

The hearing examines the scientific and economic implications of the EPA's 2015 decision to lower s, which dictates air quality compliance requirements for states and industries nationwide.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Show 1 more sponsor

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

Regulatory Tension

The hearing highlights the ongoing tension between federal environmental standard-setting and the operational capacity of state-level regulatory bodies.

Connected Entities

personJeffrey HolmsteadWitness, Partner at Bracewell & Giuliani LLPMap →
personLamar S. SmithChairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and TechnologyMap →
personMichael HoneycuttWitness, Director of Texas Commission on Environmental QualityMap →
personEddie Bernice JohnsonRanking Member of the CommitteeMap →
organizationEnvironmental Protection AgencyThe federal agency responsible for setting the ozone standards under discussionMap →
personSeyed SadredinWitness, Executive Director of San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control DistrictMap →
personElena CraftWitness, Senior Health Scientist at Environmental Defense FundMap →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance65
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy60
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz15
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record