Pollutant Limits for Children

Re “Are Children Well-Protected From Toxins?” Aug. 9:

Gov. Pete Wilson’s administration does not oppose the intent of Assemblywoman Martha Escutia’s (D-Bell) proposed legislation. However, it is unnecessary and is based on a misunderstanding of current law. State law already requires environmental agencies to set standards to protect sensitive populations. The reason state law focuses on sensitive populations is that other groups--such as the elderly and those with preexisting health conditions--can be even more susceptible than children to certain pollutants.

California continues to have the most health-protective environmental standards in the world. Supporters of the proposed legislation have not provided any evidence indicating those standards are failing to protect the health of all Californians.

In the first years of this administration, the California Air Resources Board began a 10-year study of the chronic effects of ambient air pollution, conducted under the auspices of the USC School of Medicine, tracking 5,000 children in a dozen Southern California communities. The state is also synthesizing data from original research on toxic air contaminants, conducted by the ARB and others, that provides specific information on the respiration, food intake, water consumption and soil ingestion rates of children--the very things that make children “unique” when compared to adults.

For all its good intentions and for all the empathy we feel about protecting children, this legislation is not the answer. Escutia is too late. Thankfully, it has already been done.

JOHN D. DUNLAP III

Chairman, Air Resources Board

Sacramento