SALT LAKE CITY — Nearly as large as New Jersey, San Juan County is home to less than 16,000 people and the yawning vistas of Canyonlands National Park.
Despite its remote and rural nature, the region often posts levels of ozone that are in violation of a new ozone standard set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last year.
Elsewhere in the state, Parley's Summit and the Park City area logged as many as 10 days in violation of the standard, posting levels at 75 parts per billion more often than did Salt Lake City in 2012.
Even Erda, in Tooele Valley, scored ozone concentrations well above the new standard of 70 parts per billion and is one of the worst places in Utah for the pollutant.
It is for these reasons that Alan Matheson, executive director of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, is urging a 10-year delay for the rule to take effect, testifying before a congressional subcommittee earlier this month on the potentially severe consequences the revised standard poses to Utah.
Matheson is not alone in his objections to the rule, which has elicited sharp condemnation from Republican politicians throughout the West who say the threshold is unattainable due to circumstances beyond their control, such as naturally occurring ozone, wildfires and "transport" of the pollutant from Asia.
But just as vehemently as states, industry and Republican politicians have been marshaling their opposition to the new ozone standard, environmental groups are lambasting the Obama administration for not going far enough with the rule and they, too, are seeking public and legal avenues for change.
The tug of war over the new ozone standard is just one more fight between the Obama administration and states — particularly those in the West — over a suite of rules and regulations that critics say either go too far or fail to instill adequate public health or environmental protections.
Battle lines
The rule had been out less than a month in October when five states announced a lawsuit. Utah joined Kentucky and Wisconsin as interveners in the petition, supporting the legal battle led by Arizona.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants the rule overturned, as do coal companies and manufacturing associations.
Matheson told members of the U.S. House Energy and Power Subcommittee April 14 the ozone standard of 70 parts per billion — it had been 75 parts per billion — will have severe economic repercussions for places like San Juan County.
Once an area is designated "nonattainment" for failing to reach the standard, any new source of pollution — which would be industry — must be accompanied by corresponding reductions in emissions that offset the contribution.
"These rules would effectively prevent development in rural areas that are designated nonattainment because there are no existing sources that could provide this offset," he said.
The standard is especially problematic for the Uinta Basin, Utah's prime oil and gas producing region that has a mosaic of land ownership that includes the federal government, the state of Utah and Native American tribes, he testified.
Matheson's agency has been leading a multiyear effort to understand the chemistry behind the unique wintertime formation of ozone that occurs in the basin when there are temperature inversions and snow cover on the ground.
Researchers know that precursor pollutants emitted in oil and gas production drive the high ozone readings and are working with companies to implement reductions. Matheson said the new rule — which fails to account for the complex chemistry at play — comes at a time when both state and federal resources are limited, setting up scenarios in which failure is guaranteed.
Critics like Matheson say implementing a new ozone standard — when the EPA has failed to fully institute the old threshold set in 2008 — creates a chaotic and futile situation for states and industry.
The EPA did not publish the regulations for the 2008 standard until early 2015, and by October had lowered the ozone limits even more.
Matheson testified in support of legislation sponsored by Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas, which increases the mandatory review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards from five years to 10 years.
"As we move forward with this more stringent ozone standard, EPA needs to have in place the necessary tools to allow states to succeed," Matheson said, pointing out that the science isn't yet clear on ozone levels in the West.
"Many areas in the West have little chance of identifying sufficient controls to achieve attainment, leading to severe consequences," he added. "Utah recommends that EPA work with states to determine what portion of ozone pollution and its chemical precursors is coming from background ozone and to clarify how exceptional events and international transport will affect attainment designations and compliance."
A question of health
Environmental groups are seeking a lower threshold of 65 parts per billion.
Earthjustice, representing the Sierra Club, Physicians for Social Responsibility and the National Parks Conservation Association, filed suit over the so-called "smog rule" and said it allows the pollutant's deleterious health effects to continue to cause "thousands of deaths and hospital and emergency room visits."
In a brief filed before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals this month, Earthjustice laid out its argument that the standard is too weak, accusing the EPA of bowing to political pressure and ignoring scientific evidence about the public health impacts of ozone.
"The EPA has a duty to set standards that assure our air is safe to breathe," said attorney David Baron, in a press release. "We say they violated that duty here."
The conflict between the states and the Obama administration leaves regulatory agencies like the EPA or the Bureau of Land Management occupying the landscape in the middle, pleasing practically no one.
In Utah, there is litigation over right-of-ways to roads and protections for sage grouse, as well as EPA's move to regulate certain waterways.
The state has stopped short of suing to gain control of certain public lands controlled by the BLM and Forest Service, but that lawsuit looms — with millions of dollars behind it — as Utah leaders continue to jockey for more access.
Email: amyjoi@deseretnews.com
Twitter: amyjoi16