CLEAN-AIR GOAL VISIBLE IN HAZE : VIGOROUS PUBLIC SUPPORT IS A BRIGHT SPOT IN CONTINUED BATTLE AGAINST POLLUTION.

Byline: Robert O. Vos

THE debate over how clean air must be to be healthy and how much we might have to pay for it is approaching a stalemate.

With the July 19 deadline to accept or reject the EPA's proposed standards, a different perspective is worth considering. The Clean Air Act properly guides the debate's emphasis on public health.

However, it is also important to understand the debate in terms of the implementation of the current standards. Substantial political challenges have confronted advocates of clean air in the nearly 30 years since the passage of the original act. After all, hundreds of American communities, many right here in Southern California, continue to breathe air which contains more pollutants than current standards allow.

Advocates for industry claim credit for improvements achieved in the years following the initial law. No need for new standards, they argue, air quality is already improving. However, with the exception of cleaner-running automobiles, industry has made little progress in cleaning up its act.

After years of litigation and delay, as state implementation plans were at long last being finalized, the enforcement capacities of the EPA were decimated by the Reagan administration. A 12 percent reduction in the EPA's 1982 budget weakened an already chronically underfunded agency. Its technical and legal capacities have never fully recovered. When it comes time for enforcement, EPA's first Administrator William Ruckleshaus had promised to be a ``gorilla in the states' closet.'' But too often the EPA's gorilla turns out to be a puppy dog.

Further, many polluters have successfully challenged state and national standards in enforcement proceedings by once again raising the issue of cost to operations and seeking ``equitable relief'' from enforcement decrees.

Industry leaders loudly support public health as the relevant basis for standards, while their lawyers are busy fighting enforcement. Indeed, while air quality has improved modestly following the initial Clean Air Act, we should look elsewhere for the reasons why.

Less polluting automobiles and economic changes that have moved large polluting industries offshore, must take the lion's share of the credit.

One bright spot in an otherwise dismal picture is continued public support for clean air.

In the face of industry's reluctance to meet the current standards, strong public support and a vigorous environmental movement are necessary. A recent study by the Foundation for Clean Air Progress notes that the public believes air quality has declined in spite of measurable improvements. Perhaps the public is reacting to widespread reports of noncompliance and missed deadlines. By bringing more regions into compliance, raising standards will reinforce public support for clean air, not diminish it as leaders in Congress have claimed.

Raising air quality standards also will stimulate research and development of pollution control technologies. Thus, costs for each increment of cleanup achieved may actually be lower under new standards. The capacity of the free market to create inexpensive control technology consistently surprises analysts.

Costs to clean up sulfur compounds that led to acid rain, for example, turned out to be a fraction of even the lowest estimates. A more stringent law was the driving force.

It created new markets for pollution control systems, resulting in greater economies of scale and incentives for new technologies.

If more regions are out of compliance under cleaner standards, similar effects might be expected. More incentive would exist to develop cost-effective technologies for cleaning up currently unregulated diesel exhaust and other pollutants.

While medical science offers a solid reason for raising clean-air standards, political science is equally persuasive. In political terms, cleaner ambient air standards are particularly important to regions like Southern California.

Without stricter standards, Angelenos will have to wage the fight for clean air alone. But with stricter standards, the national economy and corporate ingenuity will be called into action. With new standards, Los Angeles may look forward to achieving the existing standards in the foreseeable future. Without them, we are unlikely to achieve either.