|
Abstract: This Article critiques the EPA’s refusal to consider economic impacts and health disbenefits in revising the ozone standard on both policy and legal grounds. For each of these two factors, it is first argued that consideration of the factor is necessary for rational decision-making. Second, the EPA’s argument that the Clean Air Act precludes the Agency from considering each factor is shown to be untrue, and indeed is inconsistent with the statutory languages and objectives. Part I briefly summarizes the EPA’s decision to revise the ozone standard. Part II examines the policy and legal flaws in the EPA’s decision not to consider costs, while Part III addresses parallel flaws in the EPA’s refusal to consider the health disbenefits of the revised ozone standard.
|