March 8, 2006: Public Hearings in Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco
EPA will hold three public hearings on its proposal to revise air quality standards for fine and coarse particles in Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco. The hearings will all take place on March 8, 2006 from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.
Register to Speak
To pre-register to speak, please contact Tricia Crabtree with EPA crabtree.tricia@epa.gov. Her phone number is: 919-541-5688.
Please indicate the city of the hearing, your affiliation, any audio-visual requirements, and your time preference.
The locations of the hearings are as follows:
Chicago: Hyatt Regency 151 E. Wacker Dr. 312-565-1234
Philadelphia: Holiday Inn Historic District, 400 Arch St. 215-923-8660
San Francisco: Courtyard Marriott, 299 Second St. 415-947-0700
Regional Contacts
Contacts for the regional hearings are as follows:
Chicago:
Becky Stanfield
State Director
Illinois PIRG
rstanfield@illinoispirg.org
312-364-0096
Philadelphia:
Nathan Willcox
Clean Energy & Air Advocate
PennEnvironment
nwillcox@pennenvironment.org
215-732-5897
San Francisco:
Moira Chapin
California Field Organizer
Environment California
mchapin@environmentcalifornia.org
213-251-3680 x305
Please let the regional contacts know that you have requested a speaking opportunity.
Talking Points
• Fine particle pollution is the nation’s deadliest air pollutant. Particles can lodge deep within the lungs and even enter the bloodstream, causing serious respiratory and cardiovascular problems, such as asthma attacks, heart attacks, lung cancer, and strokes. Fine particle pollution is so dangerous that it contributes to tens of thousands of premature deaths every year.
• The more we learn about particle pollution, the more we understand how dangerous it is. A major study published just last November in the journal Epidemiology found that the chronic effects of fine particles are 2-3 times greater than previously believed.
• We have overwhelming evidence of the devastating effects of fine particles, even at levels below the current standards. More than 2,000 peer-reviewed studies have been published since 1996 confirming the relationship between particles and illness, hospitalization, and premature death. Studies also show that these effects occur at levels well below the current standards, indicating that the standards are too weak to protect public health.
• The Bush administration’s proposal, which largely maintains the status quo for fine particles, is inadequate to protect public health. EPA’s own analysis shows that the proposed fine particle standards will leave millions of Americans unprotected.
• The Bush administration’s decision to reject the recommendations of its own independent science advisors to strengthen both the annual and daily standards is very troubling. It is unprecedented for an administration to disregard the recommendations of the independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. As the committee concluded, both the annual and daily standards need to be substantially strengthened to protect public health.
• The consensus in the medical and scientific community is that the standards should be set at the most protective levels within EPA’s recommended ranges. Specifically, the Bush administration should adopt an annual standard no higher than 12 micrograms per cubic meter and a daily standard no higher than 25 micrograms per cubic meter when it finalizes the standards in September.
• EPA should adopt the most protective form of the standards. The proposal will allow unlimited levels of elevated pollution on far too many days each year. The daily standard should be set at the 99th percentile, meaning no more than four days in any year should be above the standard. Monitors that record high annual exposures should not be allowed to average their readings with monitors at cleaner sites.
• In addition, the Bush administration should issue standards and monitoring requirements for coarse particles that protect all Americans. The science shows that coarse particles, like fine particles, penetrate deep into the lung and pose serious health risks. The administration’s proposal to eliminate pollution monitoring in small and mid-sized communities and to categorically exempt agriculture and mining from control requirements is unprecedented and unjustified.
Written Comments
For a copy of the Federal Register proposal and other information from EPA [www.epa.gov/air/particles/actions.html]click here.
Written comments are due April 17, 2006.
You can submit your comments by email to EPA. All comments should be identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2001-0017. a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
The mailing address is:
Air and Radiation Docket
Environmental Protection Agency
Mailcode: 6102T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
To submit comments online [www.regulations.gov] click here.
To take action immediately [www.lungaction.org] click here.
Background Information
Particle pollution is made up of tiny particles, called “fine” particles, and slightly larger ones, called “coarse” particles, that are both dangerous and pervasive. Because of their size, these particles can bypass the body’s natural defenses, such as coughing and sneezing, and lodge deep within the lungs or even pass into the bloodstream, causing serious respiratory and cardiovascular problems, such as asthma attacks, heart attacks, and lung cancer. In fact, particle pollution is so dangerous that it cuts short the lives of tens of thousands of Americans each year. Power plants and diesel engines are the largest source of particle pollution. In some parts of the country, agriculture and mining contribute to serious local coarse particle problems.
Under the Clean Air Act, the administration must set air quality standards at levels that protect public health, review these standards every five years, and update them as needed. For fine particle pollution, there are two standards: an “annual” standard based on how much fine particle pollution is safe to breathe on a regular, everyday basis and a “24-hour” standard based on how much fine particle pollution is safe to breathe on any one day. The current annual standard for fine particles is 15 micrograms per cubic meter; the daily standard is 65 micrograms per cubic meter.
In the last several years, study after study has confirmed the damaging health effects of particles, even at levels well below the current annual and 24-hour standards. In 2005, both the administration’s independent science advisors on clean air issues and the EPA’s staff scientists concluded that adverse health effects occur at levels well below the current fine particle standards. As a result, they recommended that the administration strengthen the standards to protect public health.
In December, however, the Bush administration rejected these recommendations and proposed fine particle standards that would largely maintain the status quo, as requested by electric utility lobbyists and other special interests. Specifically, the administration rejected lowering the annual standard and proposed only a token reduction in the daily standard—from 65 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter—that will have little impact on public health. It is unprecedented for an administration to disregard the recommendations of its independent clean air science advisors.
Air quality standards are the foundation for reducing air pollution nationwide, so the decision on the fine particle standards is one of the most important decisions this administration will make on air pollution. We are urging the administration to heed the scientific research on the dangers of particle pollution and to adopt an annual standard no higher than 12 micrograms per cubic meter and a daily standard no higher than 25 micrograms per cubic meter.
In addition to the revisions to the fine particle standards, EPA is proposing to replace the existing standard for coarse particles, which had been defined as particles less than 10 microns in size, with a standard for a new size range, from 2.5 to 10 microns. This new standard would be limited to urban areas and would exempt agriculture and mining from controls aimed at meeting the standard. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to issue uniform air quality standards that protect all Americans with an adequate margin of safety. There is no precedent for EPA’s proposal to limit standards to urban areas and issue blanket exemptions for major industrial sectors.
The coarse particle standards are important because breathing coarse particles is associated with serious illness, hospital admissions, and premature death. EPA’s proposal to limit the coarse standards to urban areas will have the most serious consequences in the western United States, where many small and mid-size communities already face high levels of coarse particles due to industrial activities including mining, oil and gas.
