There is no threshold level of fine particle pollution below which health risk reductions are not achieved by reduced exposure.

Proponents of efficiency standards argue that they save consumers and businesses money, reduce energy use, and reduce emissions. But families and businesses already understand how energy costs impact their lives and make decisions accordingly.

When discussing overall impacts on employment, it is important not to overlook the new technologies and industries that can be driven by pollution control standards.

But just [proposing the standard] puts companies on notice that if you're looking to construct a new natural-gas or coal facility, you really need to pay attention to these. This is what they should be designing new facilities toward as soon as this proposal hits the streets.

I don't think any administration, when they come in, thinks that their job is to tell the scientists what the science looks like or to be quiet about the science. Scientists need to remain true and not allow science to be politicized. Scientists are not politicians, and no politician should consider themselves to be a scientist.

Critics play a dangerous game when they denounce the science and law EPA has used to defend clean air for more than 40 years. The American people know better.

States with tremendous oil and natural gas reserves have the most to gain economically from proper regulation.