"Pollution Facts." By James D. Agresti. Just
Facts, May 17, 2012.
Revised 6/15/12.
http://www.justfacts.com/pollution.asp
* This research is based upon the most
recent available data in 2012. All graphs
show the full range of available data, and
all facts are cited based upon availability
and relevance, not to slant results by
singling out specific years that are
different from others.
* Pollution is defined by The American
Heritage Science Dictionary as the
| contamination of air, water, or soil by
substances that are harmful to living
organisms. Pollution can occur naturally,
for example through volcanic eruptions, or
as the result of human activities, such as
the spilling of oil or disposal of
industrial waste.[1] |
* A small amount of a given pollutant
confined to a small area may cause harm,
while a far larger amount of the same
pollutant dispersed over a large area can be
harmless.[2]
[3] A "fundamental principle" of
toxicology is "the dose makes the poison."[4]
* Per the textbook Understanding Environmental
Pollution:
| Anything is toxic at a high enough dose. …
Even water, drunk in very large quantities,
may kill people by disrupting the osmotic
balance in the body's cells. … Potatoes make
the insecticide, solanine. But to
ingest a lethal dose of solanine would
require eating 100 pounds (45.4 kg) of
potatoes at one sitting. However, certain
potato varieties – not on the market – make
enough solanine to be toxic to human beings.
Generally, potentially toxic substances are
found in anything that we eat or drink.[5] |
* With regard to respiration, even oxygen
can be toxic when breathed in high
concentrations.[6]
* In addition to a substance's chemical
structure and dosage, other factors that
affect its toxicity include (but are not
limited to) the duration of exposure, the
route of exposure (e.g., skin contact,
inhalation, ingestion), and the physiology
of the exposed organisms.[7]
[8]
[9]
* Per the book Molecular Biology and
Biotechnology: A Guide for Teachers:
| The factors driving your concept of
risk—emotion or fact—may or may not seem
particularly important to you, yet they are.
The risks you are willing to assume and the
experiences or products you avoid because of
faulty assumptions and misinformation affect
the quality of your life and the lives of
those around you. Thus, even though it may
be tempting to let misperceptions and
emotions shape your ideas about risky
products and activities, there are risks in
misperceiving risks.[10] |
* For facts about carbon dioxide (the
primary man-made greenhouse gas), visit Just
Facts' research on
global warming.
* The United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) monitors the outdoor (ambient)
concentrations of six major air pollutants
on a nationwide basis. These are called
"criteria pollutants."[11]
[12]
[13]
* Under federal law, criteria pollutants are
those that are deemed by the administrator
of the EPA to be widespread and to "cause or
contribute to air pollution which may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public
health or welfare…."[14]
[15]
[16]
* The six criteria pollutants are carbon
monoxide, ground-level ozone, lead, nitrogen
dioxide, particulate matter, and sulfur
dioxide.[17]
* The EPA administrator is required by law
to establish "primary" air quality standards
for criteria pollutants that are "requisite
to protect the public health" with "an
adequate margin of safety…."[18]
[19]
* The EPA administrator is also required to
establish "secondary" air quality standards
"requisite to protect the public welfare," a
term that includes "animals, crops,
vegetation, and buildings."[20]
[21]
* For some criteria pollutants, the EPA has
established a single criterion as the
primary and secondary air quality standard.
In other cases, the EPA has established up
to two different criteria as primary air
quality standards and up to two different
criteria as secondary air quality standards.[22]
* Per an EPA summary of laws and court
decisions relevant to the process of setting
air quality standards:
| The selection of any particular approach to
providing an adequate margin of safety is a
policy choice left specifically to the
Administrator's judgment. …
In setting primary and secondary standards
that are "requisite'' to protect public
health and welfare … EPA's task is to
establish standards that are neither more
nor less stringent than necessary for these
purposes. In so doing, EPA may not consider
the costs of implementing the standards.[23]
[24] |
* The administrator of the EPA is appointed
by the president, contingent upon the
approval of a majority vote in the Senate.[25]
[26]
* Per the American Heritage Dictionary of
Science, carbon monoxide (CO) is
| a colorless, odorless, very poisonous gas,
formed when carbon burns with an
insufficient supply of air. It is part of
the exhaust gases of automobile engines.
Carbon monoxide kills by depriving its
victim of oxygen. When inhaled it combines
with the hemoglobin … of the red blood cells
(Offner, Fundamentals of Chemistry).[27] |
* Gasoline-powered vehicles account for
roughly 86% of manmade CO emissions in the
U.S. Other major sources include stationary
items that burn fuel such as power plants
and home heaters (6%), industrial processes
(3%), and fires (2%).[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
* Ambient CO concentrations typically peak
near roadways and during the times of the
day when commuting is heaviest.[32]
* The population most susceptible to
elevated CO levels are those with coronary
artery disease.[33]
Coronary artery disease is typically caused
by the build-up of cholesterol-containing
deposits in major arteries.[34]
* The primary study used by the EPA to set
clean air standards for CO was conducted on
subjects with moderate to severe coronary
artery disease, more than half of whom
previously had heart attacks. To establish a
baseline, participants engaged in mild
exercise on a treadmill while measurements
were made of the time it took to develop
chest pain and a specific electrocardiogram
signal that indicates insufficient oxygen
supply to the heart. Subjects repeated this
test after resting for about an hour while
being exposed to elevated CO levels ranging
from 42 to 202 parts per million (mean of
117). After exposure, the amount of time
spent exercising before the onset of chest
pain decreased by 4.2%, and the amount of
time spent exercising before this specific
electrocardiogram signal emerged decreased
by 5.1%.[35]
[36]
* An EPA primary clean air standard for
carbon monoxide is an 8-hour average of 9
parts per million (ppm), not to be exceeded
more than once per year.[37]
[38] From 1980 through 2010, the average
U.S. ambient carbon monoxide level decreased
by 82% as measured by this standard:

[39]
[40]
* All of the U.S. population live in
counties that meet the EPA's clean air
standards for carbon monoxide.[41]
[42] Per the EPA, a "large proportion"
of monitoring sites have CO levels that are
below the limit that conventional
instruments can detect (1 ppm).[43]
* Per the EPA, ground-level ozone (O3):
• "is the primary constituent of smog."[44]
• "is not usually emitted directly into the
air" but is formed "by a chemical reaction
between oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and
volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the
presence of sunlight."[45]
• "can trigger a variety of health problems
including chest pain, coughing, throat
irritation, and congestion. It can worsen
bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma. Ground
level ozone also can reduce lung function
and inflame the linings of the lungs.
Repeated exposure may permanently scar lung
tissue."[46]
* Gasoline-powered vehicles account for
roughly 62% of manmade nitrogen oxides
emissions in the U.S. Other major sources
include stationary items that burn fuel
(30%) and industrial processes (7%).[47]
[48]
* Gasoline-powered vehicles account for
roughly 45% of manmade volatile organic
compound emissions in the U.S. Other major
sources include solvents (23%), industrial
processes (18%), stationary items that burn
fuel (4%).[49]
[50]
* The populations most susceptible to
elevated ozone levels are children, the
elderly, people with lung disease, and
people who are active outdoors.[51]
[52]
* Ambient ozone concentrations typically
peak on hot sunny days in urban areas.[53]
[54] Per the EPA:
• Ozone concentrations generally rise with
increasing elevation, and "since O3 monitors
are frequently located on rooftops in urban
settings, the concentrations measured there
may overestimate the exposure to individuals
outdoors in streets and parks, locations
where people exercise and their maximum O3
exposure is more likely to occur."
• A study performed in Boston found that
"ambient O3 levels overestimated personal
exposures 3- to 4-fold in the summer and
25-fold in the winter."
• "Using ambient concentrations to determine
exposure generally overestimates true
personal O3 exposures … by approximately 2-
to 4- fold…."
• "The use of central ambient monitors to
estimate personal exposure has a greater
potential to introduce bias since most
people spend the majority of their time
indoors, where O3 levels tend to be much
[about 10 times] lower than outdoor ambient
levels."[55]
* The EPA's primary and secondary clean air
standard for ozone is 0.075 parts per
million (ppm) as measured by a 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum
8-hour concentration per year.[56]
[57] From 1980 through 2010, the average
U.S. ambient ozone level decreased by 27% as
measured by this standard:

[58]
[59]
* As of 2010, about 35% of the U.S.
population live in counties that do not meet
the EPA's clean air standards for ozone.[60]
* Lead (Pb) is a metallic element that can
be released as particles into the air. These
airborne particles can be directly inhaled,
or they can settle out of the air into water
and food supplies, and thus be ingested
orally.[61]
Lead can accumulate in the human body over
extended periods, resulting in a condition
known as "cumulative poisoning." This can
impair cognitive ability and cause
conditions such as high blood pressure and
kidney dysfunction.[62]
[63]
* Gasoline-powered vehicles account for
roughly 58% of manmade lead emissions in the
U.S. Other major sources include industrial
processes (25%) and stationary items that
burn fuel (15%).[64]
[65]
[66]
[67]
* Ambient lead concentrations typically peak
near mines, busy roadways, and factories
that melt or fuse lead.[68]
* The population most susceptible to
elevated lead concentrations is children.
Effects can include behavioral disorders,
learning deficits, and lowered IQ.[69]
[70]
The EPA set the clean air standard for lead
with the goal of precluding a mean IQ loss
of more than one or two points among
children exposed to this threshold.[71]
* The EPA's primary and secondary clean air
standard for lead is a rolling 3-month
average of 0.15 micrograms per meter (μg/m3).[72]
From 1980 through 2010, the average U.S.
ambient lead level decreased by 89% as
measured by this standard:

[73]
[74]
* As of 2010, about 7% of the U.S.
population live in counties that do not meet
the EPA's clean air standards for lead.[75]
* Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is a highly
reactive gas that can cause respiration
problems.[76]
[77]
* Gasoline-powered vehicles account for
roughly 62% of manmade nitrogen oxides
emissions in the U.S. Other major sources
include stationary items that burn fuel
(30%) and industrial processes (7%).[78]
[79]
* Ambient NO2 concentrations typically peak
near roadways. Per the EPA, NO2 monitors are
"not sited to measure peak
roadway-associated NO2 concentrations," and
thus, "individuals who spend time on and/or
near major roadways could experience NO2
concentrations" that are 30% to 100% higher
than monitors in that general area indicate.[80]
* The populations most susceptible to
elevated NO2 levels are asthmatics and
children.[81]
* An EPA primary and secondary clean air
standard for nitrogen dioxide is an annual
average of 53 parts per billion (ppb).[82]
From 1980 through 2010, the average U.S.
ambient nitrogen dioxide decreased by 52% as
measured by this standard:

[83]
[84]
* All of the U.S. population live in
counties that meet this EPA clean air
standard for nitrogen dioxide.[85]
* In 2010, the EPA created a new primary NO2
standard that supplements the preexisting
standard. It is intended to provide
increased protection against health effects
associated with short-term exposures, as
opposed to the preexisting standard, which
is based on the average annual exposure.[86]
[87] It may be 2016 before the EPA is
able to determine which counties meet the
new standard.[88]
* Per the EPA, particulate matter (PM)
| is a complex mixture of extremely small
particles and liquid droplets … made up of a
number of components, including acids (such
as nitrates and sulfates), organic
chemicals, metals, and soil or dust
particles.
The size of particles is directly linked to
their potential for causing health problems.
EPA is concerned about particles that are 10
micrometers [μm] in diameter or smaller
because those are the particles that
generally pass through the throat and nose
and enter the lungs. Once inhaled, these
particles can affect the heart and lungs and
cause serious health effects.[89]
[90] |
* The EPA monitors the ambient
concentrations of two major categories of
particulate matter:
• PM2.5, which are 2.5 μm and smaller (no
larger than 1/28th the diameter of a human
hair). These are also called "fine
particles" and are mainly produced by
combustion and other chemical reactions.
• PM10, which are 10 μm and smaller (no
larger than 1/7th the diameter of a human
hair). These are also called "thoracic
coarse particles" and are mainly produced by
mechanical processes such as mining and road
work.[91]
[92]
* The EPA has itemized numerous methods to
control PM emissions including paving
unpaved roads, swapping out wood-burning
stoves for propane logs, and installing
particle filters/collection devices on
engines and factories.[93]
[94]
[95]
* The populations most susceptible to
elevated PM levels are individuals with
heart and lung diseases, the elderly, and
children.[96]
* Dust accounts for roughly 78% of manmade
PM10 emissions in the U.S. Other major
sources include stationary items that burn
fuel (6%), agriculture (5%), industrial
processes (4%), gasoline-powered vehicles
(3%), and fires (1%).[97]
[98]
* The EPA's primary and secondary clean air
standard for PM10 is a 24-hour mean of 150
micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3),
not to be exceeded more than once per year
on average over 3 years.[99]
From 1990 through 2010, the average U.S.
ambient PM10 level decreased by 38% as
measured by this standard:

[100]
[101]
* As of 2010, about 2% of the U.S.
population live in counties that do not meet
the EPA's clean air standards for PM10.[102]
* Dust accounts for roughly 34% of manmade
PM2.5 emissions in the U.S. Other major
sources include stationary items that burn
fuel (25%), gasoline-powered vehicles (12%),
industrial processes (9%), agriculture (4%),
and fires (4%).[103]
[104]
* An EPA primary and secondary clean air
standard for PM2.5 is an annual mean of 15
micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3),
averaged over 3 years.[105]
From 2000 through 2010, the average U.S.
ambient PM2.5 level decreased by 27% as
measured by this standard:

[106]
[107]
[108]
* As of 2010, about 6% of the U.S.
population live in counties that do not meet
the EPA's clean air standards for PM2.5.[109]
* Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a highly reactive
gas that can cause respiration problems.[110]
[111]
* Stationary items that burn fuel account
for roughly 85% of manmade sulfur dioxide
emissions in the U.S. Other major sources
include industrial processes (8%) and
gasoline-powered vehicles (7%).[112]
[113]
[114]
* The population most susceptible to
elevated SO2 levels is asthmatics. Among
healthy non-asthmatics, SO2 does not
typically affect lung function until
concentrations exceed 1,000 parts per
billion (ppb). Among asthmatics engaged in
exercise, exposure to SO2 concentrations
ranging from 200-300 ppb for 5-10 minutes
have been shown to decrease lung function in
5-30% of these individuals.[115]
* Until 2010, an EPA primary clean air
standard for sulfur dioxide was an annual
mean of 30 ppb.[116]
From 1980 through 2010, the average U.S.
ambient sulfur dioxide level decreased by
79% as measured by this standard:

[117]
[118]
* In 2010, about 5% of the U.S. population
lived in counties that did not meet the
EPA's clean air standards for sulfur
dioxide.[119]
* In 2010, the EPA created a new primary SO2
standard that is "substantially more
stringent than the previous standards." It
is intended to provide increased protection
against health effects associated with
short-term exposures. It may be 2016 before
the EPA is able to determine which counties
meet the new standard.[120]
[121]
* After tobacco smoke, the second leading
cause of lung cancer in the U.S. is radon, a
gas that arises from the decay of natural
uranium, which is common in rocks and soils.[122]
* The EPA estimates that 14.4 percent of
lung cancer deaths in the U.S. are related
to radon.[123]
* Radon typically seeps up from the ground
into houses via floors and walls. In houses
with radon levels at or above 4 picocuries
per liter of air (pCi/L), the EPA recommends
taking mitigation actions.[124]
* As of 2009, roughly 930,000 U.S. homes
have radon mitigation systems, and about
7,120,000 homes have radon levels that
reach or exceed 4 pCi/L and don't have
mitigation systems. This amounts to about
6.1% of all U.S. households.[125]
[126]
* Water has a pH of 7 (neutral on the pH
scale), but various natural and manmade
substances in the atmosphere can combine
with water to change its pH level. When
rainwater has a pH lower than 5.0-5.6, it is
considered acid rain.[127]
[128]
* Acid rain can harm lakes, streams, aquatic
life, buildings, crops, and forests.[129]
[130]
* The Encyclopædia Britannica states
that the
| formation of acid rain generally begins with
emissions into the atmosphere of sulfur
dioxide and nitrogen oxide. These gases are
released by automobiles, certain industrial
operations (e.g., smelting and refining),
and electric power plants that burn fossil
fuels such as coal and oil.[131] |
* Likewise, the EPA's "Plain English Guide
to the Clean Air Act" states that "sulfur
dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are
the principal pollutants that cause acid
precipitation" and attributes these
emissions strictly to manmade sources.[132]
* A study published in the journal Nature
in 2003 found that certain types of trees,
which were thought to absorb more NOx than
they emitted, actually emit more NOx than
they absorb. Previous studies had
underestimated these natural NOx emissions
because scientists had failed to replicate
natural conditions by exposing the trees to
ultraviolet light. Based upon the results of
a new study conducted under natural
conditions, the study's authors estimated
that coniferous trees (such as spruce, fir,
and pine) in the northern hemisphere may
emit "comparable" amounts of NOx to "those
produced by worldwide industrial and traffic
sources."[133]
[134]
[135]
* A 1989 paper in the journal
Hydrobiologia faults "human activities"
for the fact that "annual precipitation
averages less than pH 4.5 over large areas
of the Northern Temperate Zone, and not
infrequently, individual rainstorms and
cloud or fog-water events have pH values
less than 3."[136]
* Formic acid, an organic compound emitted
by natural processes and human activities,
can contribute to the acidity of rain, but
it is not associated with the harmful
effects of acid rain because it rapidly
decomposes.[137]
[138]
[139]
* An academic text published in 2002 asserts
that formic acid contributes "slightly" to
rainwater acidity.[140]
* A December 2011 paper published in
Nature Geoscience estimated based upon
satellite measurements and computer models
that:
• formic acid accounts for 30–50% of the
summertime rainwater acidity "over much of
the US."
• formic acid accounts for 60–80% of
rainwater acidity over the Amazon.
• 90% of atmospheric formic acid is emitted
by natural sources (primarily forests).[141]
[142]
* Nitrogen oxides are one of the two primary
ozone precursors.[143]
A study published in the journal Nature
in March 2003 estimated that coniferous
forests in the northern hemisphere may emit
"comparable" amounts of nitrogen oxides to
"those produced by worldwide industrial and
traffic sources."[144]
[145]
[146]
* The EPA's primary and secondary clean air
standard for ozone is 0.075 parts per
million (ppm) as measured by a 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum
8-hour concentration per year.[147]
[148]
* Ozone concentrations in relatively remote
U.S. wilderness areas often reach 0.050 ppm
to 0.060 ppm, particularly at high-altitude
locations. The EPA states that it is
"impossible to determine" the causes of
these elevated ozone levels using currently
available data, but based upon computer
models, the EPA attributes these high levels
to a combination of natural ozone
precursors, manmade ozone and precursors
being transported by winds, and natural
ozone in the upper atmosphere seeping down
to ground level.[149]
* The EPA estimates that natural
ground-level ozone concentrations in the
continental U.S. are roughly 0.015 ppm to
0.035 ppm and are typically less than 0.025
ppm "under conditions conducive to high O3
episodes." Five other studies have produced
results ranging from 0.020 ppm to 0.045 ppm.[150]
The range of results from these six studies
corresponds to natural ozone background
levels that vary from 20% to 60% of the
EPA's clean air standard.[151]
* For a study published in the journal
Nature in July 2003, scientists compared
the growth of trees in New York City to
genetically identical trees in surrounding
suburban and rural areas. Contrary to
expectations, the trees in the city grew
about twice as fast as those in the rural
areas. The study's lead author stated, "No
matter what soil I grew them in, they always
grew twice as large in New York City. … In
the country, the trees were about up to my
waist. In the city, they were almost over my
head—it's really dramatic."
Experiments performed for this study showed
that higher ozone levels in the rural areas
negatively impacted the trees' growth rates.
Although the city had higher peak ozone
levels than the rural areas, the rural areas
had higher long-term average levels than the
city. The study's authors attributed these
higher rural ozone levels to manmade ozone
precursors blowing in from the city and to a
"scavenging reaction" that limits ozone
levels in urban areas. The authors did not
address the prospect that higher ozone
levels in rural areas were related to
natural sources.[152]
[153]
[154]
* On average, Americans spend 87% of their
time indoors, 8% outdoors, and 6% in
vehicles.[155]
* Indoor levels of ozone are typically
one-tenth that of outdoor levels. This is
because ozone is removed from the air by
interactions with surfaces such as walls,
carpeting, and furnishings.[156]
* Lead exposure can often be higher in homes
than outdoors, and even greater lead
exposures can occur in office buildings,
older homes with lead paint, and homes of
smokers.[157]
* Carbon monoxide levels in vehicles are
typically 2-5 times higher in vehicles than
outdoors. These levels generally decline as
traffic volume declines and as speed
increases.[158]
* Carbon monoxide levels are generally
higher in homes than outdoors, and even
greater levels of CO have been measured in
rooms where people are smoking, indoor ice
rinks (from ice resurfacing machines), homes
with attached garages in which cars are
idled, and indoor arenas where motocross
races and tractor pulls are held.[159]
* In addition to criteria pollutants, the
EPA is required by law to regulate the
emissions of substances that
| present, or may present, through inhalation
or other routes of exposure, a threat of
adverse human health effects (including, but
not limited to, substances which are known
to be, or may reasonably be anticipated to
be, carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic,
neurotoxic, which cause reproductive
dysfunction, or which are acutely or
chronically toxic) or adverse environmental
effects…."[160]
[161] |
* These substances are called hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs) or toxic air pollutants.[162]
* Unlike criteria pollutants, the law
requires the EPA to consider the costs of
enacting regulations to control the
emissions of HAPs.[163]
[164]
* Unlike criteria pollutants, ambient HAP
levels are not monitored on a nationwide
basis.[165]
[166] Instead, the EPA estimates the
annual emissions of these pollutants.[167]
* The EPA currently regulates 188 HAPs and
has singled out five of them that are
"believed to account for the greatest health
risks…." These are acrolein, benzene,
1,3-butadiene, ethylene dibromide, and
hydrazine.[168]
[169]
* Between a baseline period of 1990-1993 and
2005,[170]
the combined annual emissions of all
hazardous air pollutants decreased by 42%.[171]
[172] During this same timeframe, the
annual emissions of the five HAPs believed
to account for the greatest health risks
fell by the following amounts:
[173]
* Major categories of water bodies in the
United States include:
• lakes and reservoirs;
• rivers and streams;
• wetlands, which are "areas that are
periodically saturated or covered by water"[174];
• coastal waters, which border the open
ocean and include areas such as estuaries,
coastal wetlands, seagrass meadows, coral
reefs, and kelp forests[175]
[176]; and
• aquifers, which are underground beds of
porous rock, sediment, or soil that store
water.[177]
* Some pollutants accumulate within living
organisms in greater concentrations than in
their surrounding environments. This is
called bioaccumulation, and it occurs
because certain pollutants are not easily
excreted or metabolized.[178]
* Bioaccumulative substances are often
passed upwards through aquatic food chains,
and thus, concentrations of such chemicals
tend to be higher in creatures near the top
of these food chains, such as salmon and
trout.[179]
[180]
* PCB's are a group of bioaccumulative
chemicals that were banned from production
in the U.S. in 1979. Due to bioaccumulation,
the concentrations of PCBs in fish can range
from 2,000 to more than 1,000,000 times
higher than the ambient concentrations in
waters that the fish inhabit.[181]
* Dioxins are a group of highly toxic
bioaccumulative chemicals that are sometimes
released through incineration, combustion,
and other processes. Due to bioaccumulation,
the concentrations of dioxins in fish can
range from hundreds to thousands of times
higher than the ambient concentrations in
waters that the fish inhabit.[182]
* During 2000 through 2003, the EPA
conducted a random survey of fish
contamination levels in 500 of the 147,000
lakes and reservoirs in the continental
United States. The EPA tested
bottom-dwelling and predator fish for 268
chemicals that bioaccumulate. The study
found that:
• mercury and PCBs were detected in all of
the fish.
• 43 of the 268 chemicals were not detected
in any of the fish.
• in the filets of predators, the EPA's
human health limits for the five chemicals
that account for 97% of fish consumption
advisories were exceeded as follows:
[183]
[184]
* During 2003 through 2006, the EPA
conducted a random survey of fish
contamination levels at 1,623 locations in
coastal waters throughout the continental
United States, Southeastern Alaska, American
Samoa, and Guam. The EPA tested
bottom-dwelling and slower-moving fish (such
as shrimp, lobsters, and finfish) for 16
chemical contaminants such as inorganic
arsenic, cadmium, and PCBs. The study found
that fish did not exceed the EPA's
four-meal-per-month contamination limits for
any of these chemicals:
• in 87% of all locations.[185]
• in 80% of locations in the Northeast.[186]
• in 91% of locations in the Southeast/Gulf
.[187]
• in 100% of locations on the West Coast.[188]
• in 100% of locations in Southeastern
Alaska.[189]
• in 96% of locations in American Samoa.[190]
• in 100% of locations in Guam.[191]
* Roughly 13% of U.S. surface waters do not
meet state fecal bacteria limits for various
uses such as recreation and public water
supplies. A technology called microbial
source tracking (MST) allows scientists to
trace the sources of fecal bacteria. A 2005
EPA report summarizes eight studies
conducted in various localities with
elevated levels of fecal bacteria.[192]
[193] The results were as follows:
• St. Andrews Park on Jekyll Island – The
dominant source was wild birds.[194]
• Tampa Bay (Florida) – The dominant source
was wild animals.[195]
• Vermillion River (Minnesota) – In
descending order, the dominant sources were
geese, pigs, cats, cows, humans, deer,
sheep, and turkeys.[196]
• Anacostia River (Maryland/District of
Columbia) – In descending order, the
dominant sources were birds (31%), wildlife
(25%), humans (24%), and pets (20%).[197]
• Accotink Creek, Blacks Run, and Christians
Creek (Virginia) – The dominant sources were
waterfowl, humans, pets, livestock, and
poultry.[198]
[199]
• Avalon Bay (California) – The dominant
sources were birds, "contaminated subsurface
water, leaking drains, and runoff from
street wash-down activities."[200]
• Holmans Creek (Virginia) – The dominant
sources were humans and cattle.[201]
• Homosassa Springs (Florida) – The dominant
source was wild animals.[202]
* The amount of fresh water that resides
under the surface of the earth is roughly 30
times greater than the world's fresh surface
waters. Such ground water feeds natural
springs and streams and is used by humans
for drinking, cleaning, agriculture, and
industry.[203]
* Federal law requires that public water
systems be tested for various contaminants
and treated (if needed) to meet these
standards. In 2007, 92% of public water
system customers were served by facilities
that had no reported violations of the EPA's
health-based drinking water standards.[204]
A caveat of this finding is that violations
are reported by states, and the EPA has
found cases in which violations were not
reported.[205]
* Per a 2006 EPA report, "very little" lead
in drinking water comes from water
utilities. Instead, it primarily comes from
indoor plumbing in public schools,
apartments, and houses.[206]
* Private wells are not regulated under
federal law and, in most cases, they are not
regulated under state law. During 1991-2004,
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) measured
contamination levels in 2,167 private wells
used for household drinking water. The wells
were tested for 214 manmade and natural
contaminants such as pesticides, radon,
fecal bacteria, and nitrate. The results
were as follows:
• About 23% of wells had at least one
contaminant with a concentration that
exceeded either an EPA or USGS health
benchmark.
• "No individual contaminant was present in
concentrations greater than available health
benchmarks in more than 8 percent of the
sampled wells."
• Other than nitrate and fecal bacteria, the
most frequent contaminants that exceeded
health benchmarks derive strictly from
natural sources.
• Manmade organic compounds (such as
pesticides) exceeded health benchmarks in
0.8 percent of wells.[207]
* In agricultural areas, about 1% of private
wells have pesticide levels that exceed
human health benchmarks.[208]
* Per the book Molecular Biology and
Biotechnology: A Guide for Teachers:
| Many people are frightened by the use of
synthetic chemicals on food crops because
they have heard that these chemicals are
"toxic" and "cancer causing," but are all
synthetic chemicals more harmful than
substances people readily ingest, like
coffee and soft drinks? No…. For example, in
a study to assess the toxicities of various
compounds, half of the rats died when given
233 mg of caffeine per kg of body weight,
but it took more than 10 times that amount
of glyphosate … which is the active
ingredient in the herbicide Roundup, to
cause the same percentage of deaths as 233
mg of caffeine.[209] |
* Municipal solid waste, also known as trash
or garbage, consists of nonhazardous items
that are thrown away, such as newspapers,
cans, bottles, packaging, clothes,
furniture, food scraps, and grass clippings.[210]
[211] Municipal solid waste does not
include industrial, hazardous, or
construction waste.[212]
* The most common types of municipal solid
waste (by weight) are paper (28.5%), food
scraps (13.9%), yard trimmings (13.4%),
plastics (12.4%), metals (9.0%), rubber,
leather and textiles (8.4%), wood (6.4%),
glass (4.6%), and other materials (3.4%).[213]
* In 2010, roughly 55% to 65% of municipal
solid waste was generated by residences,
while 35% to 45% was generated by businesses
and institutions (like hospitals and
schools).[214]
* In 2010, Americans generated about 250
million tons of trash or 4.43 pounds per
person per day.[215]
Of this, 54% was placed in landfills, 26%
was recycled, 12% was burned for energy, and
8% was composted.[216]
* Older landfills were often malodorous,
pest-ridden, and laden with noxious
pollutants. Modern landfills seldom have
such problems and operate under regulations
that require controls over the types of
refuse that can be buried, a daily covering
of dirt over the refuse, composite liners,
clay caps, and runoff collections systems.
Many modern landfills generate energy by
collecting and burning methane from
decomposing organic materials.[217]
[218]
[219]
[220]
* The average lifecycle of a landfill is
about 30-50 years.[221]
After this, landfills must be covered and
can be used for purposes such as parks,
commercial development, golf courses, nature
conservatories, ski slopes, and airfields.
Hazardous waste dumps can also be used for
such purposes.[222]
[223]
[224]
[225]
* The Fresh Kills landfill in Staten Island,
New York, serviced New York City from
1948-2001 and is now being converted into a
park. It contains five mounds of fill,
ranging from 90 to 225 feet.[226]
[227]
* At the current U.S. population growth rate
and the current per-person trash production
rate, the U.S. will use about 13.6 billion
cubic yards of municipal landfill volume
over the next 50 years. Given a landfill
height of 90 feet, this equates to a square
area that is 12.1 miles long on each side or
four one-thousandths of one percent
(0.0041%) of the country's land area:

[228]
* In 2010, Americans recycled about 26% of
solid municipal waste or 1.2 pounds per
person per day.[229]
* In 2010, the recycling rate for:
• all plastic containers and packaging was
13%.
• wood packaging (mostly pallets) was 23%.
• plastic natural polyethylene (HDPE)
bottles was 28%.
• plastic polyethylene (PET) bottles and
jars was 28%.
• glass containers was 33%.
• tires was 36%.
• office paper and magazines was 45%.
• aluminum beer and soda cans was 50%.
• steel cans was 67%.
• newspapers was 72%.[230]
[231]
* Factors that affect the environmental
impacts and financial costs associated with
recycling include (but are not limited to):
• the mining, harvesting, and manufacturing
of virgin materials that are recyclable,
• the process of washing out used
containers,
• the manufacturing of separate receptacles
for recycled products,
• the manufacturing and operation of
separate collection trucks for curbside
recycling programs,
• the post-collection sorting and
transportation of recyclables to
manufacturing facilities,
• the process of manufacturing recyclables
into new products, and
• the location of pollution emitted from the
above processes (for example, pollution from
curbside recycling trucks is mostly emitted
in populated areas where many people are
affected and where pollution levels are
already high).[232]
[233]
[234]
[235]
* Factors that determine the financial costs
and environmental impacts associated with
manufacturing from virgin materials and
disposal in landfills include (but are not
limited to):
• the mining and harvesting of virgin
materials,
• the transportation of raw materials to
manufacturing facilities,
• the process of manufacturing raw materials
into products,
• the transportation of discarded products
to landfills,
• the operations and post-closure
maintenance of landfills, and
• the location of pollution emitted from the
above processes.[236]
[237]
* In the mid-1970s, the EPA concluded that
recycling generally produces less pollution
than manufacturing from virgin materials.[238]
* In 1989, the U.S. Congress's Office of
Technology Assessment concluded that:
• the EPA's generalization about the
environmental benefits of recycling "does
not necessarily hold true in all cases."
• "it is usually not clear whether secondary
manufacturing [recycling] produces less
pollution per ton of material processed than
primary manufacturing."
• with paper recycling, "5 toxic substances
'of concern' were found only in virgin
processes and 8 were found only in recycling
processes; of 12 pollutants found in both
processes, 11 were present in higher levels
in the recycling processes."[239]
* Environmental impact assessments of
curbside recycling have produced conflicting
results, such as these:
• A study performed for a 1999 paper in the
Journal of Environmental Engineering
found that:
- "some recycling improves environmental
quality and sustainability, whereas other
recycling has the opposite effect."
- "for most communities, curbside recycling
is only justifiable for some postconsumer
waste, such as aluminum and other metals."
- "curbside recycling of postconsumer metals
can save money and improve environmental
quality if the collection, sorting, and
recovery processes are efficient. Curbside
collection of glass and paper is unlikely to
help the environment and sustainability save
in special circumstances."[240]
• A study performed for a 2005 paper in the
International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment found that:
- "recycling of newspaper, cardboard, mixed
paper, glass bottles and jars, aluminum
cans, tin-plated steel cans, plastic
bottles, and other conventionally
recoverable materials found in household and
business municipal solid wastes consumes
less energy and imposes lower environmental
burdens than disposal of solid waste
materials via landfilling or incineration,
even after accounting for energy that may be
recovered from waste materials at either
type disposal facility."
- "recycling is environmentally preferable
to disposal by a substantial margin."[241]
* Both of the studies cited above (and
others) conclude that without governmental
subsidies or mandates, curbside recycling is
generally more expensive than conventional
disposal and manufacturing. The recycling of
products made of aluminum is an exception to
this generality.[242]
[243]
[244]
[245]
* Various state and local governments have
enacted laws and quotas that require
mandatory recycling.[246]
Examples of such include the states of North
Carolina,[247]
New Jersey,[248]
and Connecticut,[249]
the cities of Seattle,[250]
San Francisco,[251]
and New York,[252]
168 municipalities in Massachusetts,[253]
and Monroe County, New York.[254]
* Various nations, localities, and
businesses have banned or imposed taxes and
surcharges on disposable plastic supermarket bags.
Example of such include China,[255]
Ireland,[256]
Seattle, San Francisco, Westport,
Connecticut,[257]
Washington, DC,[258]
and Whole Foods.[259]
* A 2011 study published by the United
Kingdom's Environment Agency evaluated nine
categories of environmental impacts caused
by different types of supermarket bags, such
as plastic, degradable plastic, paper, and
reusable cotton totes. The study quantified
"all significant life cycle stages from raw
material extraction, through manufacture,
distribution use and reuse to the final
management of the carrier bag as waste."[260]
The study found:
• "The environmental impact of carrier bags
is dominated by resource use and production.
Transport, secondary packaging and
end-of-life processing generally have a
minimal influence on their environmental
performance."
• "The manufacturing of the bags is normally
the most significant stage of the life
cycle, due to both the material and energy
requirements. The impact of the energy used
is often exacerbated by their manufacture in
countries where the electricity is produced
from coal-fired power stations."
• "Reusing lightweight [plastic] carrier
bags as bin liners [trash bags] produces
greater benefits than recycling bags due to
the benefits of avoiding the production of
the bin liners they replace."[261]
• The average supermarket shopper must use
the same reusable totes the following number
of times before they have less environmental
impact in each of the following categories
than the disposable plastic bags they
replace:
[263]
* The study also found that paper bags and
degradable plastic bags have a worse
environmental impact than standard
disposable plastic bags in all nine impact
categories.[264]
[1] Entry: "pollution."
The American Heritage Science Dictionary,
Houghton Mifflin, 2005. Page 495.
[2] Book: Chemical
Exposure and Toxic Responses. Edited by
Stephen K. Hall, Joana Chakraborty, and
Randall J. Ruch. CRC Press, 1997.
Pages 4-5: "The relationship between the
dose of a toxicant and the resulting effect
is the most fundamental aspect of
toxicology. Many believe, incorrectly, that
some agents are toxic and others are
harmless. In fact, determinations of safety
and hazard must always be related to dose.
This includes a consideration of the form of
the toxicant, the route of exposure, and the
chronicity [time] of exposure."
[3] Book: Biological
Risk Engineering Handbook: Infection Control
and Decontamination. By Edited by Martha
J. Boss and Dennis W. Day. CRC Press, 2003.
Chapter 4: "Toxicology." By Richard C. Pleus,
Harriet M. Ammann, R. Vincent Miller, and
Heriberto Robles. Page 98:
The maximum dose that results in no adverse
effects is called the threshold dose.
The concept of threshold implies that
concentrations of exposure present are so
low that adverse effect cannot be measured.
Some notable exceptions occur, such as when
a person develops an allergic reaction to
chemical (only specific chemicals are
capable of causing allergic reactions).
Another exception, although controversial,
is chemicals that cause cancer. Given our
current lack of understanding of the
mechanisms that lead to cancer initiation
and development, regulatory agencies have
adopted the position that any dose of a
carcinogen has an associated risk of
developing cancer. Scientifically, not all
carcinogens are in fact capable of causing
an effect at low doses; however, the problem
is that no one knows what the dose must be
in order to cause an effect, so to be safe
the dose is set as low as practicable
(usually at the limit of detection for
instrumentation).
[4] Book: Molecular
Biology and Biotechnology: A Guide for
Teachers, Third edition. By Helen
Kreuzer and Adrianne Massey. ASM [American
Society for Microbiology] Press, 2008.
Page 540: "Paracelsus, a Swiss physician who
reformed the practice of medicine in the
16th century, said it best: 'All substances
are poisons, there is none which is not a
poison. The dose differentiates a poison and
a remedy.' This is a fundamental principle
in modern toxicology: the dose makes the
poison."
[5] Book: Understanding
Environmental Pollution, Third edition.
By Marquita K. Hill. Cambridge University
Press, 2010. Pages 60, 62.
[6] Book: The Johns
Hopkins Manual of Gynecology and Obstetrics,
Third edition. Edited by Kimberly B.
Fortner. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins,
2007. Chapter 38: "Critical Care." By
Catherine D. Cansino and Pamela Lipsett.
Page 40: "The lungs are protected by a
concentrated supply of endogenous
antioxidants; however, when there is too
much oxygen or not enough of the
antioxidants, the lungs may be damaged, as
in acute repository distress syndrome (ARDS).
… Oxygen therapy with an F102 above 60% for
longer than 48 hours is considered toxic.
[7] Book: Clinical
Toxicology: Principles and Mechanisms.
By Frank A. Barile. CRC Press, 2004.
Page 3: "What transforms a chemical into a
toxin depends more on the length of time of
exposure, dose (or concentration) of the
chemical, or route of exposure, and less on
the chemical structure, product formulation,
or intended use of the material."
[8] Book: Biological
Risk Engineering Handbook: Infection Control
and Decontamination. By Edited by Martha
J. Boss and Dennis W. Day. CRC Press, 2003.
Chapter 4: "Toxicology." By Richard C. Pleus,
Harriet M. Ammann, R. Vincent Miller, and
Heriberto Robles. Page 98:
The degree of harm or the influencing
factors of toxicity are related to:
• Chemical and physical properties of the
chemical (or its metabolites)
• Amount of the chemical absorbed by the
organism
• Amount of chemical that reaches its target
organ of toxicity
• Environmental factors and activity of the
exposed subject (e.g., working habits,
personal hygiene)
• Duration, frequency, and route of exposure
• Ability of the organism to protect itself
from a chemical
[9] Book: 1999 Toxics
Release Inventory: Public Data Release.
United States Environmental Protection
Agency, April 2001.
Page 1-11:
Some high-volume releases of less toxic
chemicals may appear to be a more serious
problem than lower-volume releases of more
toxic chemicals, when just the opposite may
be true. For example, phosgene is toxic in
smaller quantities than methanol. A
comparison between these two chemicals for
setting hazard priorities or estimating
potential health concerns, solely on the
basis of volumes released, may be
misleading. …
The longer the chemical remains unchanged in
the environment, the greater the potential
for exposure. Sunlight, heat, or
microorganisms may or may not decompose the
chemical. … As a result, smaller releases of
a persistent, highly toxic chemical may
create a more serious problem than larger
releases of a chemical that is rapidly
converted to a less toxic form.
NOTE: Credit for bringing this source to
attention belongs to Steven F. Hayward of
the Pacific Research Institute ("2011
Almanac of Environmental Trends." April
2011.
http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20110419_almanac2011.pdf).
[10] Book: Molecular
Biology and Biotechnology: A Guide for
Teachers, Third edition. By Helen
Kreuzer and Adrianne Massey. ASM [American
Society for Microbiology] Press, 2008. Pages
540-541.
[11] "The Plain English
Guide to the Clean Air Act." EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, April
2007.
http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/pdfs/peg.pdf
Page 4:
Six common air pollutants (also known as
"criteria pollutants") are found all over
the United States. They are particle
pollution (often referred to as particulate
matter), ground-level ozone, carbon
monoxide, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides,
and lead. These pollutants can harm your
health and the environment, and cause
property damage. …
EPA calls these pollutants "criteria" air
pollutants because it regulates them by
developing human health-based and/or
environmentally-based criteria
(science-based guidelines) for setting
permissible levels. The set of limits based
on human health is called primary standards.
Another set of limits intended to prevent
environmental and property damage is called
secondary standards. A geographic area with
air quality that is cleaner than the primary
standard is called an "attainment" area;
areas that do not meet the primary standard
are called "nonattainment" areas.
[12] Web page: "What Are
the Six Common Air Pollutants?" EPA, July 1,
2010.
http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/
"For each of these [criteria] pollutants,
EPA tracks two kinds of air pollution
trends: air concentrations based on actual
measurements of pollutant concentrations in
the ambient (outside) air at selected
monitoring sites throughout the country, and
emissions based on engineering estimates of
the total tons of pollutants released into
the air each year."
[13] U.S. Code, Title 42,
Chapter 85, Subchapter I, Part A, Section
7403: "Research, investigation, training,
and other activities." Accessed March 21,
2012 at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7403
(a) Research and development program for
prevention and control of air pollution
The Administrator shall establish a national
research and development program for the
prevention and control of air pollution….
(c) Air pollutant monitoring, analysis,
modeling, and inventory research
In carrying out subsection (a) of this
section, the Administrator shall conduct a
program of research, testing, and
development of methods for sampling,
measurement, monitoring, analysis, and
modeling of air pollutants.
[14] U.S. Code, Title 42,
Chapter 85, Subchapter I, Part A, Section
7408: "Air quality criteria and control
techniques." Accessed March 20, 2012 at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7408
(a) Air pollutant list; publication and
revision by Administrator; issuance of air
quality criteria for air pollutants
(1) For the purpose of establishing national
primary and secondary ambient air quality
standards, the Administrator shall within 30
days after December 31, 1970, publish, and
shall from time to time thereafter revise, a
list which includes each air pollutant—
(A) emissions of which, in his judgment,
cause or contribute to air pollution which
may reasonably be anticipated to endanger
public health or welfare;
(B) the presence of which in the ambient air
results from numerous or diverse mobile or
stationary sources; and
(C) for which air quality criteria had not
been issued before December 31, 1970 but for
which he plans to issue air quality criteria
under this section.
[15] Report: "EPA's
Regulation of Coal-Fired Power: Is a 'Train
Wreck' Coming?" By James E. McCarthy and
Claudia Copeland. Congressional Research
Service, August 8, 2011.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41914.pdf
Pages 17-18:
In essence, NAAQS are standards that define
what EPA considers to be clean air. Their
importance stems from the long and
complicated implementation process that is
set in motion by their establishment. Once
NAAQS have been set, EPA, using monitoring
data and other information submitted by the
states to identify areas that exceed the
standards and must, therefore, reduce
pollutant concentrations to achieve them.
State and local governments then have three
years to produce State Implementation Plans
which outline the measures they will
implement to reduce the pollution levels in
these "nonattainment" areas. Nonattainment
areas are given anywhere from three to 20
years to attain the standards, depending on
the pollutant and the severity of the area's
pollution problem.
EPA also acts to control many of the NAAQS
pollutants wherever they are emitted through
national standards for certain products that
emit them (particularly mobile sources, such
as automobiles) and emission standards for
new stationary sources, such as power
plants.
In the 1970s, EPA identified six pollutants
or groups of pollutants for which it set
NAAQS.41 But that was not the end
of the process. When it gave EPA the
authority to establish NAAQS, Congress
anticipated that the understanding of air
pollution's effects on public health and
welfare would change with time, and it
required that EPA review the standards at
five-year intervals and revise them, as
appropriate.
[16] Report: "Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule (Part III)."
Federal Register (Vol. 75, No. 26), February
9, 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf
Page 6478: "NAAQS decisions can have
profound impacts on public health and
welfare, and NAAQS decisions should be based
on studies that have been rigorously
assessed in an integrative manner not only
by EPA but also by the statutorily mandated
independent advisory committee, as well as
the public review that accompanies this
process."
[17] Web page: "Air
trends." EPA, February 16, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/index.html
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA establishes air
quality standards to protect public health
and the environment. EPA has set national
air quality standards for six common air
pollutants. These include:
•carbon monoxide,
•ozone,
•lead,
•nitrogen dioxide,
•particulate matter (also known as particle
pollution), and
•sulfur dioxide.
Each year EPA tracks the levels of these
pollutants in the air and how much of each
pollutant (or the pollutants that form them)
is emitted from various pollution sources.
The Agency looks at these numbers year after
year to see how the pollutants have changed
over time. EPA posts the results of our
analyses to this web site.
[18] U.S. Code, Title 42,
Chapter 85, Subchapter I, Part A, Section
7409: "Air quality criteria and control
techniques." Accessed March 20, 2012 at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7409
(a) Promulgation
(1) The Administrator—
(A) within 30 days after December 31, 1970,
shall publish proposed regulations
prescribing a national primary ambient air
quality standard and a national secondary
ambient air quality standard for each air
pollutant for which air quality criteria
have been issued prior to such date; and
(B) after a reasonable time for interested
persons to submit written comments thereon
(but no later than 90 days after the initial
publication of such proposed standards)
shall by regulation promulgate such proposed
national primary and secondary ambient air
quality standards with such modifications as
he deems appropriate.
(2) With respect to any air pollutant for
which air quality criteria are issued after
December 31, 1970, the Administrator shall
publish, simultaneously with the issuance of
such criteria and information, proposed
national primary and secondary ambient air
quality standards for any such pollutant.
The procedure provided for in paragraph
(1)(B) of this subsection shall apply to the
promulgation of such standards.
(b) Protection of public health and
welfare
(1) National primary ambient air quality
standards, prescribed under subsection (a)
of this section shall be ambient air quality
standards the attainment and maintenance of
which in the judgment of the Administrator,
based on such criteria and allowing an
adequate margin of safety, are requisite to
protect the public health. Such primary
standards may be revised in the same manner
as promulgated.
[19] Report: "EPA's
Regulation of Coal-Fired Power: Is a 'Train
Wreck' Coming?" By James E. McCarthy and
Claudia Copeland. Congressional Research
Service, August 8, 2011.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41914.pdf
Page 17: "In essence, NAAQS are standards
that define what EPA considers to be clean
air."
[20] U.S. Code, Title 42,
Chapter 85, Subchapter I, Part A, Section
7409: "Air quality criteria and control
techniques." Accessed March 20, 2012 at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7409
(b) Protection of public health and
welfare
(1) National primary ambient air quality
standards, prescribed under subsection (a)
of this section shall be ambient air quality
standards the attainment and maintenance of
which in the judgment of the Administrator,
based on such criteria and allowing an
adequate margin of safety, are requisite to
protect the public health. Such primary
standards may be revised in the same manner
as promulgated.
(2) Any national secondary ambient air
quality standard prescribed under subsection
(a) of this section shall specify a level of
air quality the attainment and maintenance
of which in the judgment of the
Administrator, based on such criteria, is
requisite to protect the public welfare from
any known or anticipated adverse effects
associated with the presence of such air
pollutant in the ambient air. Such secondary
standards may be revised in the same manner
as promulgated.
[21] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Primary standards provide
public health protection, including
protecting the health of "sensitive"
populations such as asthmatics, children,
and the elderly. Secondary standards
provide public welfare protection, including
protection against decreased visibility and
damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and
buildings."
[22] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
[23] Report: "Review of
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Carbon Monoxide;
Final Rule." Federal Register (Vol. 76 , No.
169), EPA, August 31, 2011.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-08-31/html/2011-21359.htm
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). …
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION …
The following topics are discussed in this
preamble:
I. Background
A. Legislative Requirements …
The requirement that primary standards
provide an adequate margin of safety was
intended to address uncertainties associated
with inconclusive scientific and technical
information available at the time of
standard setting. It was also intended to
provide a reasonable degree of protection
against hazards that research has not yet
identified. See Lead Industries Association
v. EPA, 647 F.2d 1130, 1154 (DC Cir. 1980),
cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1042 (1980); American
Petroleum Institute v. Costle, 665 F.2d
1176, 1186 (DC Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455
U.S. 1034 (1982); American Farm Bureau
Federation v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512, 533 (DC
Cir. 2009); Association of Battery Recyclers
v. EPA, 604 F.3d 613, 617-18 (DC Cir. 2010).
Both kinds of uncertainties are components
of the risk associated with pollution at
levels below those at which human health
effects can be said to occur with reasonable
scientific certainty. Thus, in selecting
primary standards that provide an adequate
margin of safety, the Administrator is
seeking not only to prevent pollution levels
that have been demonstrated to be harmful
but also to prevent lower pollutant levels
that may pose an unacceptable risk of harm,
even if the risk is not precisely identified
as to nature or degree. The CAA [Clean Air
Act] does not require the Administrator to
establish a primary NAAQS [national ambient
air quality standards] at a zero-risk level
or at background concentration levels, see
Lead Industries v. EPA, 647 F.2d at 1156
n.51, but rather at a level that reduces
risk sufficiently so as to protect public
health with an adequate margin of safety.
In addressing the requirement for an
adequate margin of safety, the EPA considers
such factors as the nature and severity of
the health effects involved, the size of
sensitive population(s) at risk, and the
kind and degree of the uncertainties that
must be addressed. The selection of any
particular approach to providing an adequate
margin of safety is a policy choice left
specifically to the Administrator's
judgment. See Lead Industries Association v.
EPA, 647 F.2d at 1161-62; Whitman v.
American Trucking Associations, 531 U.S.
457, 495 (2001).
In setting primary and secondary standards
that are "requisite'' to protect public
health and welfare, respectively, as
provided in section 109(b), EPA's task is to
establish standards that are neither more
nor less stringent than necessary for these
purposes. In so doing, EPA may not consider
the costs of implementing the standards. See
generally, Whitman v. American Trucking
Associations, 531 U.S. 457, 465-472, 475-76
(2001). Likewise, "[a]ttainability and
technological feasibility are not relevant
considerations in the promulgation of
national ambient air quality standards.''
American Petroleum Institute v. Costle, 665
F. 2d at 1185.
[24] Web Page: "Area
Designations for 1997 Ground-level Ozone
Standards." EPA, March 27, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/glo/designations/1997standards/timeline.htm
"2001 The U.S. Supreme Court
unanimously upheld the constitutionality of
the Clean Air Act as EPA had interpreted it
in setting health-protective air quality
standards. The Supreme Court also reaffirmed
EPA's long-standing interpretation that it
must set these standards based solely on
public health considerations without
consideration of costs."
[25] Book: An
Introduction to the U.S. Congress. By
Charles B. Cushman Jr. M.E. Sharpe, 2006.
Page 89: "The framers gave the 'advice and
consent' powers to the Senate as a check on
the power of presidency in two key areas,
foreign policy and personnel decisions. … A
simple majority of votes cast is enough to
confirm a presidential appointment, while
treaties require a two-thirds majority for
ratification."
[26] Article: "The Obama
Cabinet: Confirmations & Nominations." NPR,
January 22, 2009.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99674016
Environmental Protection Agency — Lisa
Jackson
Date Nominated: Dec. 15, 2008
Hearing Date: Jan. 14, 2009 (Environment and
Public Works Committee)
Confirmed: (Vote: Unanimous Consent)
[27] Entry: "carbon
monoxide." American Heritage Dictionary
of Science. Edited by Robert K.
Barnhart. Houghton Mifflin, 1986. Page 89.
[28] Calculated with data
from: "National Carbon Monoxide Emissions by
Source Sector, 2008." EPA, March 18, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[29] Report:
"Quantitative Risk and Exposure Assessment
for Carbon Monoxide – Amended." EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division,
July 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 8-2: "Mobile sources (i.e., gasoline
powered vehicles) are the primary
contributor to CO emissions, particularly in
urban areas due to greater vehicle and
roadway densities."
[30] "National Emissions
Inventory Booklet." EPA, 2002.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2002neibooklet.pdf
Page 24: "Appendix A – Source Categorization
Detail for Figures 1, 2, and 3"
[31] "EPA's Report on the
Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[32] Report:
"Quantitative Risk and Exposure Assessment
for Carbon Monoxide – Amended." EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division,
July 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 3-20: "Ambient CO concentrations are
highest at monitors sited closest to
roadways (i.e., microscale and middle scale
monitors) and exhibit a diurnal variation
linked to the typical commute times of day,
with peak concentrations generally observed
during early morning and late afternoon
during weekdays."
[33] Report:
"Quantitative Risk and Exposure Assessment
for Carbon Monoxide – Amended." EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division,
July 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Pages 2-7/8:
AT-RISK POPULATIONS The term
'susceptibility' (and the term "at-risk")
has been used to recognize populations that
have a greater likelihood of experiencing
effects related to ambient CO exposure (ISA
[Integrated Science Assessment], section
5.7). This increased likelihood of response
to CO can potentially result from many
factors, including pre-existing medical
disorders or disease states, age, gender,
lifestyle or increased exposures (ISA,
section 5.7). For example, medical disorders
that limit the flow of oxygenated blood to
the tissues have the potential to make an
individual more susceptible to the potential
adverse effects of low levels of CO,
especially during exercise. Based on the
available evidence in the current review,
coronary artery disease (CAD), also known as
coronary heart disease (CHD) is the "most
important susceptibility characteristic for
increased risk due to CO exposure" (ISA, p.
2-11). While persons with a normal
cardiovascular system can tolerate
substantial concentrations of CO if they
vasodilate or increase cardiac output in
response to the hypoxia produced by CO,
those that are unable to vasodilate in
response to CO exposure may show evidence of
ischemia at low concentrations of COHb (ISA,
p. 2-10). There is strong evidence for this
in controlled human exposure studies of
exercising individuals with CAD, which is
supported by results from recent
epidemiologic studies reporting associations
between short-term CO exposure and increased
risk of emergency department visits and
hospital admissions for individuals affected
with ischemic heart disease (IHD)11 and
related outcomes (ISA, section 5.7). This
combined evidence, briefly summarized in
section 2.5.1 below and described in more
detail in the ISA, supports the conclusion
that individuals with CAD represent the
population most susceptible to increased
risk of CO-induced health effects (ISA,
sections 5.7.1.1 and 5.7.8).
[34] Web page: "Coronary
artery disease." Mayo Clinic, July 2, 2010.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/coronary-artery-disease/DS00064
Coronary artery disease develops when your
coronary arteries — the major blood vessels
that supply your heart with blood, oxygen
and nutrients — become damaged or diseased.
Cholesterol-containing deposits (plaques) on
your arteries are usually to blame for
coronary artery disease.
When plaques build up, they narrow your
coronary arteries, causing your heart to
receive less blood. Eventually, diminished
blood flow may cause chest pain (angina),
shortness of breath or other coronary artery
disease symptoms. A complete blockage can
cause a heart attack.
[35] Report:
"Quantitative Risk and Exposure Assessment
for Carbon Monoxide – Amended." EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division,
July 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Pages 2-12/13:
The controlled exposure study of principal
importance is a large multi-laboratory study
designed to evaluate myocardial ischemia, as
documented by reductions in time to change
in the ST-segment of an electrocardiogram17
and in time to onset of angina, during a
standard treadmill test, at CO exposures
targeted to result in mean subject COHb
levels of 2% and 4%, as measured by gas
chromatographic technique18 (ISA
[Integrated Science Assessment], section
5.2.4, from Allred et al., 1989a, 1989b,
1991). In this study, subjects on three
separate occasions underwent an initial
graded exercise treadmill test, followed by
50- to 70-minute exposures under resting
conditions to average CO concentrations of
0.7 ppm (room air concentration range 0-2
ppm), 117 ppm (range 42-202 ppm) and 253 ppm
(range 143-357 ppm). After the 50- to
70-minute exposures, subjects underwent a
second graded exercise treadmill test, and
the percent change in time to onset of
angina and time to ST endpoint between the
first and second exercise tests was
determined. Relative to clean-air exposure
that resulted in a mean COHb level of 0.6%
(post-exercise), exposures to CO resulting
in post-exercise mean COHb concentrations of
2.0% and 3.9%19 were shown to
decrease the time required to induce
ST-segment changes by 5.1% (p=0.01) and
12.1% (p<0.001), respectively. These changes
were well correlated with the onset of
exercise-induced angina the time to which
was shortened by 4.2% (p=0.027) and 7.1%
(p=0.002), respectively, for the two CO
exposures (ISA, section 5.2.4; Allred et
al., 1989a, 1989b, 1991).
17 The ST-segment is a portion of
the electrocardiogram, depression of which
is an indication of insufficient oxygen
supply to the heart muscle tissue.
Page 2-14: "Although the subjects evaluated
in the controlled human exposure studies
described above are not necessarily
representative of the most sensitive
population, the level of disease in these
individuals ranged from moderate to severe,
with the majority either having a history of
myocardial infarction or having ≥ 70%
occlusion of one or more of the coronary
arteries (ISA, p. 5-43)."
Page 2-16: "Among these studies, the
multilaboratory study of Allred et al.
(1989a, 1989b, 1991) continues to be the
principal study informing our understanding
of the effects of CO on individuals with
pre-existing CAD [coronary artery disease]
at the low end of the range of COHb levels
studied (US EPA, 1991, 2000, 2010a)."
Page 2-17:
Studies have not been designed to evaluate
similar effects of exposures to increased CO
concentrations eliciting average COHb levels
below the 2% target level of Allred et al.
(1989a, 1989b, 1991). In addition, these
studies do not address the fraction of the
population experiencing a specified health
effect at various dose levels. These aspects
of the evidence contributed to EPA's
conclusion that at this time there are
insufficient controlled human exposure data
to support the development of quantitative
dose-response relationships which would be
required in order to conduct a quantitative
risk assessment for this health endpoint,
rather than the benchmark level approach.
Page 2-19:
An individual's COHb levels reflect their
endogenous CO production, as well as CO
taken into the body during exposure to
ambient and nonambient CO sources. CO uptake
into the bloodstream during exposure is
influenced by a number of variables
including internal levels of CO and COHb,
such that net uptake may be lower or
negligible in instances where a preceding
exposure has been substantially higher than
the current one. Thus, the magnitude of the
change in COHb level in response to ambient
CO exposure may decrease with the presence
of concurrent or preceding nonambient CO
exposure.
Page 7-22:
The potential health effect benchmark levels
for considering the COHb estimates for the
simulated at-risk populations8 in
this REA [risk assessment analysis] were
identified (in section 2.6) based on data
from a well-conducted multi-center
controlled human exposure study demonstrate
cardiovascular effects in subjects with
moderate to severe coronary artery disease
at study mean COHb levels as low as 2.0-2.4%
of which were increased from a baseline mean
of 0.6-0.7% as a result of short (~1hour)
experimentally controlled increases in CO
exposures (study mean of 117 ppm CO). No
laboratory study has been specifically
designed to evaluate the effect of
experimentally increased exposure to CO
resulting in an increase in COHb levels to a
study mean below 2.0%. However, based on
analysis of individual study subject
responses at baseline and at the two
increased COHb levels, study authors
concluded that each increase in COHb
produced further changes in the study
response metric, without evidence of a
measurable threshold effect. There is no
established "no adverse effect level" and,
thus, there is greater uncertainty
concerning the lowest benchmark level
identified (i.e., 1.5%).
Page 8-2: "The specific cardiovascular
effects occurring at the lowest COHb levels
studied in CHD patients are reduced time to
exercise-induced angina and other markers of
myocardial ischemia, in particular, specific
changes to the ST-segment of an
electrocardiogram."
[36] Paper: "Short-Term
Effects of Carbon Monoxide Exposure on the
Exercise Performance of Subjects with
Coronary Artery Disease." By Elizabeth N.
Allred and others. New England Journal of
Medicine, November 23, 1989. Pages
1426-1432.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198911233212102
Page 1426: "[T]he differences when the
subjects had been exposed to ambient air
were then compared with the differences when
they were exposed to carbon monoxide levels
sufficient to produce 2 percent and 4
percent target carboxyhemoglobin levels."
Page 1428: "Carbon monoxide levels were
varied in response to individual rates of
uptake, determined during the qualifying
visit."
Page 1427: "Blood pressure and a complete
electrocardiogram were recorded during each
minute of exercise."
Page 1428: "The criteria for stopping the
exercise test were as follows: severe
fatigue or dyspnea, grade 3 angina, a
request by the subject, ST-segment
depression of 3 mm, systolic blood pressure
≥240 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥130
mm Hg, a drop of 20 mm in the systolic blood
pressure, or important arrhythmias."
Page 1430: "The results of this study
provide objective evidence that increasing
the mean carboxyhemoglobin level from 0.6
percent to 2.0 percent worsens the ischemic
response to mild graded exercise."
[37] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Carbon Monoxide … primary … 8-hour [=] 9
ppm … 1-hour [=] 35 ppm … Not to be exceeded
more than once per year"
[38] Report:
"Quantitative Risk and Exposure Assessment
for Carbon Monoxide – Amended." EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division,
July 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 1-1:
The current NAAQS [national ambient air
quality standards] for CO includes two
primary standards to provide protection for
exposures to carbon monoxide. In 1994, EPA
retained the primary standards at 9 parts
per million (ppm), 8-hour average and 35 ppm,
1-hour average, neither to be exceeded more
than once per year (59 FR 38906). These
standards were based primarily on the
clinical evidence relating carboxyhemoglobin
(COHb) levels to various adverse health
endpoints and exposure modeling relating CO
exposures to COHb levels.
[39] Calculated with the
dataset: "CO Air Quality, 1980-2010,
National Trend based on 104 Sites (Annual
2nd Maximum 8-hour Average)." EPA, March 26,
2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/carbon.html
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[40] Web page: "Carbon
Monoxide (CO) Standards - Table of
Historical CO NAAQS." EPA, November 08,
2011.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/co/s_co_history.html
[41] Web page: "Carbon
Monoxide." EPA, March 22, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airquality/carbonmonoxide/basic.html
"Everywhere in the country has air quality
that meets the current CO standards. Most
sites have measured concentrations below the
national standards since the early 1990s,
since which time, improvements in motor
vehicle emissions controls have contributed
to significant reductions in ambient
concentrations."
[42] Web page: "Air
Quality Trends." EPA, January 05, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrends.html
"Number of People Living in Counties with
Air Quality Concentrations Above the Level
of the NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standard] in 2010 … CO (8-hour) [=] 0.0"
[43] Report:
"Quantitative Risk and Exposure Assessment
for Carbon Monoxide – Amended." EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division,
July 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 8-2: "Recent (2005-2007) ambient CO
concentrations across the US are lower than
those reported in the previous CO NAAQS
review and are also well below the current
CO NAAQS levels. Further, a large proportion
of the reported concentrations are below the
conventional instrument lower detectable
limit of 1 ppm."
[44] Web page: "Ground
Level Ozone." EPA, February 29, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/
Ozone has the same chemical structure
whether it occurs miles above the earth or
at ground-level and can be "good" or "bad,"
depending on its location in the atmosphere.
In the earth's lower atmosphere,
ground-level ozone is considered "bad."
Motor vehicle exhaust and industrial
emissions, gasoline vapors, and chemical
solvents as well as natural sources emit NOx
and VOC that help form ozone. Ground-level
ozone is the primary constituent of smog. …
"Good" ozone occurs naturally in the
stratosphere approximately 10 to 30 miles
above the earth's surface and forms a layer
that protects life on earth from the sun's
harmful rays.
[45] Web page: "Ground
Level Ozone." EPA, February 29, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/
"Ozone (O3) is a gas composed of three
oxygen atoms. It is not usually emitted
directly into the air, but at ground-level
is created by a chemical reaction between
oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) in the presence of
sunlight."
[46] Web page: "Ozone
Health Effects." EPA, April 2, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/health.html
[47] Dataset: "National
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions by Source Sector,
2008." EPA, March 17, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
[48] "EPA's Report on the
Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[49] Dataset: "National
Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions by
Source Sector, 2008." EPA, March 17, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
[50] "EPA's Report on the
Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[51] Web page: "Ozone
Health Effects." EPA, April 2, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/health.html
Ozone in the air we breathe can harm our
health—typically on hot, sunny days when
ozone can reach unhealthy levels. Even
relatively low levels of ozone can cause
health effects. People with lung disease,
children, older adults, and people who are
active outdoors may be particularly
sensitive to ozone.
Children are at greatest risk from exposure
to ozone because their lungs are still
developing and they are more likely to be
active outdoors when ozone levels are high,
which increases their exposure. Children are
also more likely than adults to have asthma.
[52] Report: "Air Quality
Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical
Oxidants (Volume I of III)." EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Health
and Environmental Impacts Division, February
28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=456384
Page 6-23:
Children, adolescents, and young adults (<18
yrs of age) appear, on average, to have
nearly equivalent spirometric [vital lung
capacity] responses to O3, but have greater
responses than middle-aged and older adults
when exposed to comparable O3 doses….
Symptomatic responses to O3 exposure,
however, appear to increase with age until
early adulthood and then gradually decrease
with increasing age…. In contrast to young
adults, the diminished symptomatic responses
in children and the elderly may put the
latter groups at increased risk for
continued O3 exposure.
Page 6-45:
There is a tendency for slightly increased
spirometric responses in mild asthmatics and
allergic rhinitics relative to healthy young
adults. Spirometric responses in asthmatics
appear to be affected by baseline lung
function, i.e., responses increase with
disease severity. With repeated daily O3
exposures, spirometric responses of
asthmatics become attenuated; however,
airway responsiveness becomes increased in
subjects with preexisting allergic airway
disease (with or without asthma). Possibly
due to patient age, O3 exposure does not
appear to cause significant pulmonary
function impairment or evidence of
cardiovascular strain in patients with
cardiovascular disease or chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease relative to
healthy subjects.
[53] Web page: "Ozone
Health Effects." EPA, April 2, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/health.html
"Ozone is particularly likely to reach
unhealthy levels on hot sunny days in urban
environments."
[54] Web page: "Ground
Level Ozone." EPA, February 29, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/
Sunlight and hot weather cause ground-level
ozone to form in harmful concentrations in
the air. As a result, it is known as a
summertime air pollutant. Many urban areas
tend to have high levels of "bad" ozone, but
even rural areas are also subject to
increased ozone levels because wind carries
ozone and pollutants that form it hundreds
of miles away from their original sources.
[55] Report: "Air Quality
Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical
Oxidants (Volume I of III)." EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Health
and Environmental Impacts Division, February
28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=456384
Pages 3-70 to 73:
Studies on the effect of elevation on O3
concentrations found that concentrations
increased with increasing elevation…. Since
O3 monitors are frequently located on
rooftops in urban settings, the
concentrations measured there may
overestimate the exposure to individuals
outdoors in streets and parks, locations
where people exercise and their maximum O3
exposure is more likely to occur. …
There is no clear consensus among exposure
analysts as to how well stationary monitor
measurements of ambient O3 concentrations
represent a surrogate for personal O3
exposure. …
The use of central ambient monitors to
estimate personal exposure has a greater
potential to introduce bias since most
people spend the majority of their time
indoors, where O3 levels tend to be much
lower than outdoor ambient levels. …
Several studies have examined relationships
between measured ambient O3 concentrations
from fixed monitoring sites and personal O3
exposure…. Two studies by Sarnat et al.
(2001, 2005) examined relationships between
individual variations in personal exposure
and ambient O3 concentrations. … In the
Boston study, the regression coefficients
indicated that ambient O3 concentrations
were predictive of personal O3 exposures;
however, ambient O3 levels overestimated
personal exposures 3- to 4-fold in the
summer and 25-fold in the winter.
Page 7-6: "In several studies focused on
evaluating exposure to O3, measurements were
made in a variety of indoor environments,
including homes (Lee et al., 2004), schools
(Linn et al., 1996), and the workplace (Liu
et al., 1995). Indoor O3 concentrations
were, in general, approximately one-tenth of
the outdoor concentrations in these
studies."
Page 7-8:
Use of ambient monitors to determine
exposure will generally overestimate true
personal O3 exposure (because their use
implies that subjects are outdoors 100% of
their time and not in close proximity to
sources that reduce O3 levels such as NO
emissions from mobile sources); thus,
generally, their use can result in effect
estimates that are biased toward the null if
the error is not of a fixed amount.
Page 7-10:
Existing epidemiologic models may not fully
take into consideration all the biologically
relevant exposure history or reflect the
complexities of all the underlying
biological processes. Using ambient
concentrations to determine exposure
generally overestimates true personal O3
exposures (by approximately 2- to 4- fold in
the various studies described in Section
3.9), resulting in biased descriptions of
underlying concentration-response
relationships (i.e., in attenuated risk
estimates). The implication is that the
effects being estimated occur at fairly low
exposures and the potency of O3 is greater
than these effect estimates indicate. As
very few studies evaluating O3 health
effects with personal O3 exposure
measurements exist in the literature, effect
estimates determined from ambient O3
concentrations must be evaluated and used
with caution to assess the health risks of
O3.
The ultimate goal of the O3 NAAQS is to set
a standard for the ambient level, not
personal exposure level, of O3. Until more
data on personal O3 exposure become
available, the use of routinely monitored
ambient O3 concentrations as a surrogate for
personal exposures is not generally expected
to change the principal conclusions from O3
epidemiologic studies. Therefore, population
health risk estimates derived using ambient
O3 levels from currently available
observational studies (with appropriate
caveats taking into account personal
exposure considerations) remain useful.
[56] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Ozone … primary and secondary … 8-hour [=]
0.075 ppm … Annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hr concentration, averaged over 3
years"
[57] Code of Federal
Regulations, Title 40, Part 50, Appendix I:
"Interpretation of the 8-Hour Primary and
Secondary National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone." U.S. Government
Printing Office, July 1, 2011.
http://www.gpo.gov/...
Page 72:
2.1.2 Daily maximum 8-hour average
concentrations. (a) There are 24
possible running 8-hour average ozone
concentrations for each calendar day during
the ozone monitoring season. (Ozone
monitoring seasons vary by geographic
location as designated in part 58, appendix
D to this chapter.) The daily maximum 8-hour
concentration for a given calendar day is
the highest of the 24 possible 8-hour
average concentrations computed for that
day. This process is repeated, yielding a
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration for each calendar day with
ambient ozone monitoring data. Because the
8- hour averages are recorded in the start
hour, the daily maximum 8-hour
concentrations from two consecutive days may
have some hourly concentrations in common.
Generally, overlapping daily maximum 8-hour
averages are not likely, except in those
nonurban monitoring locations with less
pronounced diurnal variation in hourly
concentrations.
2.2 Primary and Secondary
Standard-related Summary Statistic. The
standard-related summary statistic is the
annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration, expressed in parts per
million, averaged over three years. The
3-year average shall be computed using the
three most recent, consecutive calendar
years of monitoring data meeting the data
completeness requirements described in this
appendix. The computed 3- year average of
the annual fourth-highest daily maximum
8-hour average ozone concentrations shall be
expressed to three decimal places (the
remaining digits to the right are
truncated.)
[58] Calculated with the
dataset: "Ozone Air Quality, 1980-2010,
National Trend based on 247 Sites (Annual
4th Maximum 8-Hour Average)." EPA, January
06, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/ozone.html
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[59] Web page: "Ozone
(O3) Standards - Table of Historical Ozone
NAAQS." EPA, November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_history.html
NOTE: The EPA's ozone standards for earlier
years are not shown in the graph because
they are based on parameters that are not
graphically comparable to the current
standard.
[60] Calculated with data
from:
a) Web page: "Air Quality Trends." EPA,
January 05, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrends.html
"Number of People Living in Counties with
Air Quality Concentrations Above the Level
of the NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standard] in 2010 … Ozone (8-hour) [=]
108.0"
b) Dataset: "Monthly Population Estimates
for the United States: April 1, 2010 to
December 1, 2011." U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, December 2011.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2011/index.html
"Resident Population … July 1, 2010 [=]
309,330,219"
CALCULATION: 108.0 million people living in
counties with air quality above NAAQS /
309.3 million population = 34.9%
[61] Report: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead;
Final Rule (Part II)." Federal Register
(Vol. 73, No. 219), EPA, November 12, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 66971:
(1) Lead is emitted into the air from many
sources encompassing a wide variety of
stationary and mobile source types. Lead
emitted to the air is predominantly in
particulate form, with the particles
occurring in various sizes. Once emitted,
the particles can be transported long or
short distances depending on their size,
which influences the amount of time spent in
aerosol phase. In general, larger particles
tend to deposit more quickly, within shorter
distances from emissions points, while
smaller particles will remain in aerosol
phase and travel longer distances before
depositing. …
(2) Once deposited out of the air, Pb can
subsequently be resuspended into the ambient
air and, because of the persistence of Pb,
Pb emissions contribute to media
concentrations for some years into the
future.
(3) Exposure to Pb emitted into the ambient
air (air-related Pb) can occur directly by
inhalation, or indirectly by ingestion of Pb-contaminated
food, water or other materials including
dust and soil.10 This occurs as
Pb emitted into the ambient air is
distributed to other environmental media and
can contribute to human exposures via indoor
and outdoor dusts, outdoor soil, food and
drinking water, as well as inhalation of
air.
[62] Article: "lead."
Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
"Lead and its compounds are toxic and are
retained by the body, accumulating over a
long period of time—a phenomenon known as
cumulative poisoning—until a lethal quantity
is reached. In children the accumulation of
lead may result in cognitive deficits; in
adults it may produce progressive renal
disease."
[63] Report: "Air Quality
Criteria for Lead," Volume I of II. EPA,
October 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=459555
Page E-9:
• Neurobehavioral effects of Pb-exposure
early in development (during fetal,
neonatal, and later postnatal periods) in
young infants and children (#7 years old)
have been observed with remarkable
consistency across numerous studies
involving varying study designs, different
developmental assessment protocols, and
diverse populations. Negative Pb impacts on
neurocognitive ability and other
neurobehavioral outcomes are robust in most
recent studies even after adjustment for
numerous potentially confounding factors
(including quality of care giving, parental
intelligence, and socioeconomic status).
These effects generally appear to persist
into adolescence and young adulthood. …
• In the limited literature examining the
effects of environmental Pb exposure on
adults, mixed evidence exists regarding
associations between Pb and neurocognitive
performance. No associations were observed
between cognitive performance and blood Pb
levels; however, significant associations
were observed in relation to bone Pb
concentrations, suggesting that long-term
cumulative Pb exposure may contribute to
neurocognitive deficits in adults.
Page E-10: "Epidemiologic studies have
consistently demonstrated associations
between Pb exposure and enhanced risk of
deleterious cardiovascular outcomes,
including increased blood pressure and
incidence of hypertension."
Page E-11: "In the general population, both
circulating and cumulative Pb was found to
be associated with longitudinal decline in
renal function. Effects on creatine
clearance have been reported in human adult
hypertensives to be associated with general
population mean blood-Pb levels of only 4.2
μg/dL. The public health significance of
such effects is not clear, however, in view
of more serious signs of kidney dysfunction
being seen in occupationally exposed workers
only at much higher blood-Pb levels (>30-40
μg/dL)."
[64] Dataset: "National
Lead Emissions by Source Sector, 2008." EPA,
March 18, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
[65] Report: "Air Quality
Criteria for Lead," Volume I of II. EPA,
October 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=459555
Historically, mobile sources were a major
source of Pb emissions, due to the use of
leaded gasoline. The United States initiated
the phasedown of gasoline Pb additives in
the late 1970s and intensified the phase-out
of Pb additives in 1990. Accordingly,
airborne Pb concentrations have fallen
dramatically nationwide, decreasing an
average of 94% between 1983 and 2002. This
is considered one of the great public and
environmental health successes. Remaining
mobile source-related emissions of Pb
include brake wear, resuspended road dust,
and emissions from vehicles that continue to
use leaded gasoline (e.g., some types of
aircraft and race cars).
[66] Report: "Air Quality
Criteria for Lead," Volume I of II. EPA,
October 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=459555
Page 2-82:
For most of the past 50 to 60 years, the
primary use of Pb was as additives for
gasoline. Leaded gasoline use peaked in the
1970s, and worldwide consumption has
declined since (Nriagu, 1990). The largest
source of air-Pb emissions was leaded
gasoline throughout the 1970s and 1980s. In
1980, on-road vehicles were responsible for
~80% of air-Pb emissions, whereas in 2002,
on-road vehicles contributed less than half
of a percent (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 2003). In every case where the U.S.
Pb NAAQS has been exceeded since 2002,
stationary point sources were responsible (www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/inte.html).
[67] "EPA's Report on the
Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[68] Report: "Air Quality
Criteria for Lead," Volume I of II. EPA,
October 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=459555
Page 3-14:
Measurements made in Riverside, CA show
diurnal trends (Singh et al., 2002). Lead
concentrations are high in the morning (6 to
10 a.m.) and the late afternoon (4 to 8
p.m.). This is most probably indicative of
heavy traffic, despite the use of unleaded
gasoline, a depressed atmospheric mixing
height in the morning, and advection from
Los Angeles traffic. Lead concentrations in
Riverside are significantly lower during
midday (10 a.m. to 4 p.m.) and night (8 p.m.
to 6 a.m.).
Pages 3-53 to 54:
The highest air, soil, and road dust
concentrations are found near major Pb
sources, such as smelters, mines, and
heavily trafficked roadways. While airborne
Pb concentrations have declined dramatically
with the phase out of leaded gasoline, soil
concentrations have remained relatively
constant, reflecting the generally long
retention time of Pb in soil. Soil-Pb
concentrations decrease both with depth and
distance from roadways and sources such as
smelters or mines. In another study of 831
homes in the United States, 7% of housing
units were found to have soil-Pb levels
exceeding 1200 ppm, the U.S.EPA/HUD standard
for soil-Pb concentration outside of play
areas (Jacobs et al., 2002).
[69] Report: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead;
Final Rule (Part II)." Federal Register
(Vol. 73, No. 219), EPA, November 12, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 66983: "With regard to the sensitive
population, while the sensitivity of the
elderly and other particular subgroups is
recognized, as at the time the current
standard was set, young children continue to
be recognized as a key sensitive population
for Pb exposures."
[70] Report: "Air Quality
Criteria for Lead," Volume I of II. EPA,
October 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=459555
Page 6-1: "Children are particularly at risk
due to sources of exposure, mode of entry,
rate of absorption and retention, and
partitioning of Pb in soft and hard tissues.
The greater sensitivity of children to Pb
toxicity, their inability to recognize
symptoms, and their dependence on parents
and healthcare professionals make them an
especially vulnerable population requiring
special consideration in developing criteria
and standards for Pb."
Page 6-269:
Lead effects on neurobehavior in children
have been observed with remarkable
consistency across numerous studies of
various designs, populations, and
developmental assessment protocols. The
negative impacts of Pb on neurocognitive
ability and other neurobehavioral outcomes
persist in most recent studies even after
adjustment for numerous confounding factors,
including social class, quality of
caregiving, and parental intelligence. These
effects appear to persist into adolescence
and young adulthood. Collectively, the
prospective cohort and cross-sectional
studies offer evidence that exposure to Pb
affects the intellectual attainment of
preschool and school age children at blood
Pb levels <10 μg/dL (most clearly in the 5
to 10 μg/dL range, but, less definitively,
possibly lower). Epidemiologic studies have
demonstrated that Pb may also be associated
with increased risk for antisocial and
delinquent behavior, which may be a
consequence of attention problems and
academic underachievement among children who
may have suffered higher exposures to Pb
during their formative years.
[71] Report: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead;
Final Rule (Part II)." Federal Register
(Vol. 73, No. 219), EPA, November 12, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 66998:
[T]he Administrator [of the EPA] proposed to
conclude that an air-related population mean
IQ loss within the range of 1 to 2 points
could be significant from a public health
perspective, and that a standard level
should be selected to provide protection
from air-related population mean IQ loss in
excess of this range. …
The proposal noted that there is no bright
line clearly directing the choice of level
within this reasonable range, and therefore
the choice of what is appropriate,
considering the strengths and limitations of
the evidence, and the appropriate inferences
to be drawn from the evidence and the
exposure and risk assessments, is a public
health policy judgment.
Page 66999:
In addition, the Administrator noted that
for standard levels below 0.10 μg/ m3, the
estimated degree of impact on population
mean IQ loss from air-related Pb would
generally be somewhat to well below the
proposed range of 1 to 2 points air-related
population mean IQ loss regardless of which
set of C–R [concentration-response]
functions or which air-to-blood ratio within
the range of ratios considered are used. The
Administrator proposed to conclude that the
degree of public health protection that
standards below 0.10 μg/m3 would
likely afford would be greater than what is
requisite to protect public health with an
adequate margin of safety.
Having reached these proposed decisions
based on the interpretation of the evidence,
the evidence-based frameworks, the
exposure/risk assessment, and the public
health policy judgments described above, the
Administrator recognized that other
interpretations, frameworks, assessments,
and judgments are possible.
Page 67000:
[I]t is important to recognize that the
air-related IQ loss framework provides
estimates for the mean of a subset of the
population. It is an estimate for a subset
of children that are assumed to be exposed
to the level of the standard. The framework
in effect focuses on the sensitive
subpopulation that is the group of children
living near sources and more likely to be
exposed at the level of the standard. The
evidence-based framework estimates a mean
air-related IQ loss for this subpopulation
of children; it does not estimate a mean for
all U.S. children.
EPA is unable to quantify the percentile of
the U.S. population of children that
corresponds to the mean of this sensitive
subpopulation. Nor is EPA confident in its
ability to develop quantified estimates of
air-related IQ loss for higher percentiles
than the mean of this subpopulation. EPA
expects that the mean of this subpopulation
represents a high, but not quantifiable,
percentile of the U.S. population of
children. As a result, EPA expects that a
standard based on consideration of this
framework would provide the same or greater
protection from estimated air-related IQ
loss for a high, albeit unquantifiable,
percentage of the entire population of U.S.
children.
[72] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Lead … primary and secondary … Rolling
3-month average [=] 0.15 μg/m3 …
Not to be exceeded"
[73] Calculated with the
dataset: "Lead Air Quality, 1980-2010,
National Trend based on 31 Sites (Annual
Maximum 3-Month Average)." EPA, January 06,
2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/carbon.html
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[74] Web page: "Lead (Pb)
Standards - Table of Historical Pb NAAQS."
EPA, November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pb/s_pb_history.html
NOTE: From 1978-2008, the averaging time was
over each calendar quarter. In 2008, the EPA
changed this to a rolling 3-month period.
[75] Calculated with data
from:
a) Web page: "Air Quality Trends." EPA,
January 05, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrends.html
"Number of People Living in Counties with
Air Quality Concentrations Above the Level
of the NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standard] in 2010 … Lead (3-month) [=] 20.2"
b) Dataset: "Monthly Population Estimates
for the United States: April 1, 2010 to
December 1, 2011." U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, December 2011.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2011/index.html
"Resident Population … July 1, 2010 [=]
309,330,219"
CALCULATION: 20.2 million people living in
counties with air quality above NAAQS /
309.3 million population = 6.5%
[76] Web page: "Nitrogen
Dioxide." EPA, March 22, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/nitrogenoxides/
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is one of a group of
highly reactive gasses known as "oxides of
nitrogen," or "nitrogen oxides (NOx)." Other
nitrogen oxides include nitrous acid and
nitric acid. While EPA's National Ambient
Air Quality Standard covers this entire
group of NOx, NO2 is the component of
greatest interest and the indicator for the
larger group of nitrogen oxides. NO2 forms
quickly from emissions from cars, trucks and
buses, power plants, and off-road equipment.
In addition to contributing to the formation
of ground-level ozone, and fine particle
pollution, NO2 is linked with a number of
adverse effects on the respiratory system.
[77] Report: "Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule (Part III)."
Federal Register (Vol. 75, No. 26), February
9, 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf
Page 6479:
In the last review of the NO2 NAAQS
[National Ambient Air Quality Standards],
the 1993 NOX Air Quality Criteria Document
(1993 AQCD) (EPA, 1993) concluded that there
were two key health effects of greatest
concern at ambient or near-ambient
concentrations of NO2 (ISA, section 5.3.1).
The first was increased airway
responsiveness in asthmatic individuals
after short-term exposures. The second was
increased respiratory illness among children
associated with longer-term exposures to
NO2. Evidence also was found for increased
risk of emphysema, but this appeared to be
of major concern only with exposures to NO2
at levels much higher than then current
ambient levels (ISA, section 5.3.1).
Page 6480:
As summarized below and discussed more fully
in section II.B of the proposal notice,
evidence published since the last review
generally has confirmed and extended the
conclusions articulated in the 1993 AQCD….
Overall, the epidemiologic evidence for
respiratory effects has been characterized
in the ISA [Integrated Science Assessment]
as consistent, in that associations are
reported in studies conducted in numerous
locations with a variety of methodological
approaches, and coherent, in that the
studies report associations with respiratory
health outcomes that are logically linked
together. In addition, a number of these
associations are statistically significant,
particularly the more precise effect
estimates (ISA, section 5.3.2.1). These
epidemiologic studies are supported by
evidence from toxicological and controlled
human exposure studies, particularly those
that evaluated airway hyperresponsiveness in
asthmatic individuals (ISA, section 5.4).
The ISA concluded that together, the
epidemiologic and experimental data sets
form a plausible, consistent, and coherent
description of a relationship between NO2
exposures and an array of adverse
respiratory health effects that range from
the onset of respiratory symptoms to
hospital admissions.
Page 6482: "As noted above in section II.A,
the only health effect category for which
the evidence was judged in the ISA
[Integrated Science Assessment] to be
sufficient to infer either a causal or a
likely causal relationship is respiratory
morbidity following short-term NO2
exposure."
[78] Dataset: "National
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions by Source Sector,
2008." EPA, March 18, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
[79] "EPA's Report on the
Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[80] Report: "Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule (Part III)."
Federal Register (Vol. 75, No. 26), February
9, 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf
Page 6479:
While driving, personal exposure [NO2]
concentrations in the cabin of a vehicle
could be substantially higher than ambient
concentrations measured nearby…. For
example, estimates presented in the REA
[Risk and Exposure Assessment] suggest that
on/near roadway NO2 concentrations could be
approximately 80% (REA, section 7.3.2)
higher on average across locations than
concentrations away from roadways and that
roadway-associated environments could be
responsible for the majority of 1-hour peak
NO2 exposures (REA, Figures 8–17 and 8–18).
Because monitors in the current network are
not sited to measure peak roadway-associated
NO2 concentrations, individuals who spend
time on and/or near major roadways could
experience NO2 concentrations that are
considerably higher than indicated by
monitors in the current area-wide NO2
monitoring network.
Research suggests that the concentrations of
on-road mobile source pollutants such as NOX,
carbon monoxide (CO), directly emitted air
toxics, and certain size distributions of
particulate matter (PM), such as ultrafine
PM, typically display peak concentrations on
or immediately adjacent to roads (ISA
[Integrated Science Assessment], section
2.5). This situation typically produces a
gradient in pollutant concentrations, with
concentrations decreasing with increasing
distance from the road, and concentrations
generally decreasing to near area-wide
ambient levels, or typical upwind urban
background levels, within a few hundred
meters downwind. While such a concentration
gradient is present on almost all roads, the
characteristics of the gradient, including
the distance from the road that a mobile
source pollutant signature can be
differentiated from background
concentrations, are heavily dependent on
factors such as traffic volumes, local
topography, roadside features, meteorology,
and photochemical reactivity conditions….
… As a result, we have identified a range of
concentration gradients in the technical
literature which indicate that, on average,
peak NO2 concentrations on or immediately
adjacent to roads may typically be between
30 and 100 percent greater than
concentrations monitored in the same area
but farther away from the road…. This range
of concentration gradients has implications
for revising the NO2 primary standard and
for the NO2 monitoring network (discussed in
sections II.F.4 and III).
Pages 6481-6482:
Based on data from the 2003 American Housing
Survey, approximately 36 million individuals
live within 300 feet (∼90 meters) of a
four-lane highway, railroad, or airport
(ISA, section 4.4).7 Furthermore, in
California, 2.3% of schools, with a total
enrollment of more than 150,000 students
were located within approximately 500 feet
of high-traffic roads, with a higher
proportion of non-white and economically
disadvantaged students attending those
schools (ISA, section 4.4).
[81] Report: "Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule (Part III)."
Federal Register (Vol. 75, No. 26), February
9, 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf
Page 6479:
In the last review of the NO2 NAAQS
[National Ambient Air Quality Standards],
the 1993 NOX Air Quality Criteria Document
(1993 AQCD) (EPA, 1993) concluded that there
were two key health effects of greatest
concern at ambient or near-ambient
concentrations of NO2 (ISA [Integrated
Science Assessment], section 5.3.1). The
first was increased airway responsiveness in
asthmatic individuals after short-term
exposures. The second was increased
respiratory illness among children
associated with longer-term exposures to
NO2. Evidence also was found for increased
risk of emphysema, but this appeared to be
of major concern only with exposures to NO2
at levels much higher than then current
ambient levels (ISA, section 5.3.1).
Page 6480:
As summarized below and discussed more fully
in section II.B of the proposal notice,
evidence published since the last review
generally has confirmed and extended the
conclusions articulated in the 1993 AQCD
(ISA, section 5.3.2). …
Overall, the epidemiologic evidence for
respiratory effects has been characterized
in the ISA as consistent, in that
associations are reported in studies
conducted in numerous locations with a
variety of methodological approaches, and
coherent, in that the studies report
associations with respiratory health
outcomes that are logically linked together.
In addition, a number of these associations
are statistically significant, particularly
the more precise effect estimates (ISA,
section 5.3.2.1). These epidemiologic
studies are supported by evidence from
toxicological and controlled human exposure
studies, particularly those that evaluated
airway hyperresponsiveness in asthmatic
individuals (ISA, section 5.4). The ISA
concluded that together, the epidemiologic
and experimental data sets form a plausible,
consistent, and coherent description of a
relationship between NO2 exposures and an
array of adverse respiratory health effects
that range from the onset of respiratory
symptoms to hospital admissions.
Page 6482:
In the United States, approximately 10% of
adults and 13% of children (approximately
22.2 million people in 2005) have been
diagnosed with asthma, and 6% of adults have
been diagnosed with COPD [chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease] (ISA, section
4.4). The prevalence and severity of asthma
is higher among certain ethnic or racial
groups such as Puerto Ricans, American
Indians, Alaskan Natives, and African
Americans (ISA, section 4.4). A higher
prevalence of asthma among persons of lower
SES [socioeconomic status] and an excess
burden of asthma hospitalizations and
mortality in minority and inner-city
communities have been observed (ISA, section
4.4). …
As noted above in section II.A, the only
health effect category for which the
evidence was judged in the ISA [Integrated
Science Assessment] to be sufficient to
infer either a causal or a likely causal
relationship is respiratory morbidity
following short-term NO2 exposure."
[82] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Nitrogen Dioxide … primary and secondary …
Annual [=] 53 ppb … Annual Mean"
[83] Calculated with the
dataset: "Nitrogen Dioxide Air Quality,
1980-2010, National Trend based on 81 Sites
(Annual Arithmetic Average)." EPA, January
06, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/carbon.html
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[84] Web page: "History
of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Oxides of Nitrogen
During the Period 1971-2010." EPA, February
14, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_history.html
[85] Web page: "Air
Quality Trends." EPA, January 05, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrends.html
"Number of People Living in Counties with
Air Quality Concentrations Above the Level
of the NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standard] in 2010 … NO2 (annual) [=] 0.0"
[86] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
Nitrogen Dioxide…
… primary … 1-hour [=] 100 ppb … 98th
percentile, averaged over 3 years
… primary and secondary … Annual [=] 53 ppb
… Annual Mean
[87] Report: "Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule (Part III)."
Federal Register (Vol. 75, No. 26), February
9, 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf
Page 6475:
Specifically, EPA is supplementing the
existing annual standard for NO2 of 53 parts
per billion (ppb) by establishing a new
short-term standard based on the 3- year
average of the 98th percentile of the yearly
distribution of 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations. EPA is setting the level of
this new standard at 100 ppb. EPA is making
changes in data handling conventions for NO2
by adding provisions for this new 1-hour
primary standard. EPA is also establishing
requirements for an NO2 monitoring network.
These new provisions require monitors at
locations where maximum NO2 concentrations
are expected to occur, including within 50
meters of major roadways, as well as
monitors sited to measure the area-wide NO2
concentrations that occur more broadly
across communities. EPA is making conforming
changes to the air quality index (AQI).
[88] NOTE: Although this
citation (below) refers to sulfur dioxide,
as shown in the footnote above, the
particulars regarding implementation time
are similar for nitrogen dioxide. New
monitors will need to be installed, and
three years of data must be collected to
determine which counties meet the new
standard.
Report: "EPA's Regulation of Coal-Fired
Power: Is a 'Train Wreck' Coming?" By James
E. McCarthy and Claudia Copeland.
Congressional Research Service, August 8,
2011.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41914.pdf
Page 18:
On June 22, 2010, EPA revised the NAAQS
[National Ambient Air Quality Standard] for
SO2, focusing on short-term (1-hour)
exposures. …
The timing and extent of any additional
controls is uncertain, however, for several
reasons. First, the monitoring network
needed to determine attainment status is
incomplete and is not primarily configured
to monitor locations of maximum short-term
SO2 concentrations. … Since three years of
data must be collected after a site's
startup to determine attainment status, it
may be as late as 2016 before some areas
will have sufficient data to be classified.
Even if the areas can be designated sooner
based on modeling data, it would be at least
2015 before State Implementation Plans with
specific control measures would be due, and
actual compliance with control requirements
would occur several years later.
[89] Web page:
"Particulate Matter (PM)." EPA, March 27,
2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/
"Particulate matter," also known as particle
pollution or PM, is a complex mixture of
extremely small particles and liquid
droplets. Particle pollution is made up of a
number of components, including acids (such
as nitrates and sulfates), organic
chemicals, metals, and soil or dust
particles.
The size of particles is directly linked to
their potential for causing health problems.
EPA is concerned about particles that are 10
micrometers in diameter or smaller because
those are the particles that generally pass
through the throat and nose and enter the
lungs. Once inhaled, these particles can
affect the heart and lungs and cause serious
health effects. EPA groups particle
pollution into two categories:
• "Inhalable coarse particles," such as
those found near roadways and dusty
industries, are larger than 2.5 micrometers
and smaller than 10 micrometers in diameter.
• "Fine particles," such as those found in
smoke and haze, are 2.5 micrometers in
diameter and smaller. These particles can be
directly emitted from sources such as forest
fires, or they can form when gases emitted
from power plants, industries and
automobiles react in the air.
[90] Report: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Particulate Matter; Final Rule (Part II)".
Federal Register (Vol. 71, No. 200), EPA,
October 17, 2006.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/data/fr20061017.pdf
Page 61146:
Particulate matter is the generic term for a
broad class of chemically and physically
diverse substances that exist as discrete
particles (liquid droplets or solids) over a
wide range of sizes. Particles originate
from a variety of anthropogenic stationary
and mobile sources as well as from natural
sources. Particles may be emitted directly
or formed in the atmosphere by
transformations of gaseous emissions such as
sulfur oxides (SOX), nitrogen oxides (NOX),
and volatile organic compounds (VOC). The
chemical and physical properties of PM vary
greatly with time, region, meteorology, and
source category, thus complicating the
assessment of health and welfare effects.
Page 61154:
For morbidity, the Criteria Document found
that new studies of a cohort of children in
Southern California have built upon earlier
limited evidence to provide fairly strong
evidence that long-term exposure to fine
particles is associated with development of
chronic respiratory disease and reduced lung
function growth (EPA, 2004a, pp. 9–33 to
9–34). In addition to strengthening the
evidence of association, the new extended
ACS mortality study (Pope et al., 2002)
observed statistically significant
associations with cardiorespiratory
mortality (including lung cancer mortality)
across a range of long-term mean PM2.5
concentrations that was lower than was
reported in the original ACS study available
in the last review. …
In reviewing this information, the Staff
Paper recognized that important limitations
and uncertainties associated with this
expanded body of evidence for PM2.5 and
other indicators or components of fine
particles need to be carefully considered in
determining the weight to be placed on the
body of studies available in this review.
For example, the Criteria Document noted
that although PM-effects associations
continue to be observed across most new
studies, the newer findings do not fully
resolve the extent to which the associations
are properly attributed to PM acting alone
or in combination with other gaseous
co-pollutants or to the gaseous
co-pollutants themselves. The Criteria
Document concluded, however, that overall
the newly available epidemiologic evidence,
especially for the more numerous short-term
exposure studies, substantiates that
associations for various PM indicators with
mortality and morbidity are robust to
confounding by co-pollutants (EPA, 2004a, p.
9–37).
[91] Web page:
"Particulate Matter (PM), Basic
Information." EPA, March 23, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/basic.html
"How Big is Particle Pollution? .. Human
Hair ~ 70 μm average diameter … PM2.5 = <2.5
μm in diameter … PM10 <10 μm in diameter"
[92] Report: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Particulate Matter; Final Rule (Part II)".
Federal Register (Vol. 71, No. 200), EPA,
October 17, 2006.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/data/fr20061017.pdf
Page 61146:
More specifically, the PM that is the
subject of the air quality criteria and
standards reviews includes both fine
particles and thoracic coarse particles,
which are considered as separate subclasses
of PM pollution based in part on
long-established information on differences
in sources, properties, and atmospheric
behavior between fine and coarse particles….
Fine particles are produced chiefly by
combustion processes and by atmospheric
reactions of various gaseous pollutants,
whereas thoracic coarse particles are
generally emitted directly as particles as a
result of mechanical processes that crush or
grind larger particles or the resuspension
of dusts. Sources of fine particles include,
for example, motor vehicles, power
generation, combustion sources at industrial
facilities, and residential fuel burning. …
The last review of PM air quality criteria
and standards was completed in July 1997
with notice of a final decision to revise
the existing standards…. In that decision,
EPA revised the PM NAAQS in several
respects. While EPA determined that the PM
NAAQS [National Ambient Air Quality
Standards] should continue to focus on
particles less than or equal to 10 μm in
diameter (PM10), EPA also determined that
the fine and coarse fractions of PM10 should
be considered separately. The EPA added new
standards, using PM2.5 as the indicator for
fine particles (with PM2.5 referring to
particles with a nominal aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to 2.5 μm), and
using PM10 as the indicator for purposes of
regulating the coarse fraction of PM10
(referred to as thoracic coarse particles or
coarse-fraction particles; generally
including particles with a nominal
aerodynamic diameter greater than 2.5 μm and
less than or equal to 10 μm, or PM10–2.5).
[93] Report: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Particulate Matter; Final Rule (Part II)".
Federal Register (Vol. 71, No. 200), EPA,
October 17, 2006.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/data/fr20061017.pdf
Page 61149: "Programs aimed at reducing
direct emissions of particles have played an
important role in reducing PM10
concentrations, particularly in western
areas. Some examples of PM10 controls
include paving unpaved roads and using best
management practices for agricultural
sources of resuspended soil."
[94] Webpage: "Agencies -
Changeout Guide." EPA, August 04, 2011.
http://epa.gov/burnwise/how-to-guide.html
During a changeout campaign, consumers
receive financial incentives (rebates) to
replace older appliances with either
non-wood-burning equipment (for example,
vented gas stoves), pellet stoves, or EPA
certified wood stoves. Approximately 10
million wood stoves are currently in use in
the United States, and 70 to 80 percent of
them are older, inefficient, conventional
stoves that pollute. Because EPA certified
wood stoves emit approximately 70 percent
less pollution than older, conventional wood
stoves, a successful changeout campaign will
reduce local particulate emissions.
[95] Draft Report: "Lists
of Potential Control Measures for PM2.5 and
Precursors." EPA, undated.
http://www.epa.gov/...
These informational documents are intended
to provide a broad, though not
comprehensive, listing of potential
emissions reduction measures for direct
PM2.5 and precursors. The purpose is
primarily to assist states in identifying
and evaluating potential measures as States
develop plans for attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS.
Before examining control measures, an
important step for States is to identify the
nature of the PM2.5 problem in their areas
and the sources contributing to that
problem. The severity, nature and sources of
the PM2.5 problem vary in each nonattainment
area, so the measures that are effective and
cost-effective will also vary by area.
Similarly, the geographic area in which
measures are effectively applied will vary
depending on the extent to which pollution
sources outside the nonattainment area
contribute to the area's PM2.5 problem. …
All industrial and commercial sources
currently controlling PM with cyclones or
multicylones … Upgrade to high-efficiency
collection device to collect fine fraction
of PM
Stationary diesel engines including
generators and other prime service engines …
Diesel particulate filter
[96] Report: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Particulate Matter; Final Rule (Part II)".
Federal Register (Vol. 71, No. 200), EPA,
October 17, 2006.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/data/fr20061017.pdf
Page 61152:
The nature of the effects that have been
reported to be associated with fine particle
exposures including premature mortality,
aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by
increased hospital admissions and emergency
department visits), changes in lung function
and increased respiratory symptoms, as well
as new evidence for more subtle indicators
of cardiovascular health. …
Sensitive or vulnerable subpopulations that
appear to be at greater risk to such
effects, including individuals with
pre-existing heart and lung diseases, older
adults, and children. …
The expanded and updated assessment
conducted in this review included estimates
of risks of mortality (total non-accidental,
cardiovascular, and respiratory), morbidity
(hospital admissions for cardiovascular and
respiratory causes), and respiratory
symptoms (not requiring hospitalization)
associated with recent short-term (daily)
ambient PM2.5 levels and risks of total,
cardiopulmonary, and lung cancer mortality
associated with long-term exposure to PM2.5
in a number of example urban areas. …
The EPA recognized that there were many
sources of uncertainty and variability
inherent in the inputs to this assessment
and that there was a high degree of
uncertainty in the resulting PM2.5 risk
estimates. Such uncertainties generally
relate to a lack of clear understanding of a
number of important factors, including, for
example, the shape of concentration-response
functions, particularly when, as here,
effect thresholds can neither be discerned
nor determined not to exist; issues related
to selection of appropriate statistical
models for the analysis of the epidemiologic
data; the role of potentially confounding
and modifying factors in the
concentration-response relationships; issues
related to simulating how PM2.5 air quality
distributions will likely change in any
given area upon attaining a particular
standard, since strategies to reduce
emissions are not yet defined; and whether
there would be differential reductions in
the many components within PM2.5 and, if so,
whether this would result in differential
reductions in risk. While some of these
uncertainties were addressed quantitatively
in the form of estimated confidence ranges
around central risk estimates, other
uncertainties and the variability in key
inputs were not reflected in these
confidence ranges, but rather were addressed
through separate sensitivity analyses or
characterized qualitatively.
[97] Dataset: "National
PM10 Emissions by Source Sector, 2008." EPA,
March 18, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
[98] "EPA's Report on the
Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[99] Web page: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Particle Pollution … PM10 primary and
secondary … 24-hour [=] 150 μg/m3
… Not to be exceeded more than once per year
on average over 3 years"
[100] Calculated with
the dataset: "PM10 Air Quality, 1990-2010,
National Trend based on 279 Sites (Annual
2nd Maximum 24-Hour Average)." EPA, January
06, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/pm.html
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[101] Web page:
"Particulate Matter (PM) - History of PM
Standards." EPA, July 06, 2011.
http://epa.gov/pm/history.html
[102] Calculated with
data from:
a) Web page: "Air Quality Trends." EPA,
January 05, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrends.html
"Number of People Living in Counties with
Air Quality Concentrations Above the Level
of the NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standard] in 2010 … PM10 (24-hour) [=] 6.0"
b) Dataset: "Monthly Population Estimates
for the United States: April 1, 2010 to
December 1, 2011." U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, December 2011.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2011/index.html
"Resident Population … July 1, 2010 [=]
309,330,219"
CALCULATION: 6 million people living in
counties with air quality above NAAQS /
309.3 million population = 1.9%
[103] Dataset: "National
PM2.5 Emissions by Source Sector, 2008."
EPA, March 18, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
[104] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[105] Web page:
"National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)."
EPA, November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Particle Pollution … PM2.5 primary and
secondary … Annual [=] 15 μg/m3 …
annual mean, averaged over 3 years"
[106] Dataset: "PM2.5
Air Quality, 2000-2010, National Trend based
on 646 Sites (Seasonally-Weighted Annual
Average)." EPA, January 06, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/pm.html
[107] Web page:
"Particulate Matter (PM) - History of PM
Standards." EPA, July 06, 2011.
http://epa.gov/pm/history.html
[108] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Volume I of III)."
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, February 28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=456384
Page 3-44: "Background O3 concentrations
used for purposes of informing decisions
about NAAQS [National Ambient Air Quality
Standards] are referred to as Policy
Relevant Background (PRB) O3 concentrations.
Policy Relevant Background concentrations
are those concentrations that would occur in
the United States in the absence of
anthropogenic emissions in continental North
America (defined here as the United States,
Canada, and Mexico)."
[109] Calculated with
data from:
a) Web page: "Air Quality Trends." EPA,
January 05, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrends.html
"Number of People Living in Counties with
Air Quality Concentrations Above the Level
of the NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standard] in 2010 … PM2.5 (annual and/or
24-hour) [=] 17.3"
b) Dataset: "Monthly Population Estimates
for the United States: April 1, 2010 to
December 1, 2011." U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, December 2011.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2011/index.html
"Resident Population … July 1, 2010 [=]
309,330,219"
CALCULATION: 17.3 million people living in
counties with air quality above NAAQS /
309.3 million population = 5.6%
[110] Web page: "Sulfur
Dioxide." EPA, March 23, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/sulfurdioxide/
"Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is one of a group of
highly reactive gasses known as 'oxides of
sulfur.' "
[111] Report: "Risk and
Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of
the SO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: Final Report." EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and
Environmental Impacts Division July 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 30: "[R]espiratory morbidity is the
only health effect category found by the ISA
[Integrated Science Assessment] to have
either a causal or likely causal association
with SO2."
[112] Dataset: "National
Sulfur Dioxide Emissions by Source Sector,
2008." EPA, March 18, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/...
[113] Report: "Risk and
Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of
the SO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: Final Report." EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and
Environmental Impacts Division July 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Pages 13-14:
Anthropogenic [manmade] SO2 emissions
originate chiefly from point sources, with
fossil fuel combustion at electric utilities
(~66%) and other industrial facilities
(~29%) accounting for the majority of total
emissions (ISA, section 2.1). Other
anthropogenic sources of SO2 include both
the extraction of metal from ore as well as
the burning of high sulfur containing fuels
by locomotives, large ships, and non-road
diesel equipment. Notably, almost the entire
sulfur content of fuel is released as SO2 or
SO3 during combustion. Thus, based on the
sulfur content in fuel stocks, oxides of
sulfur emissions can be calculated to a
higher degree of accuracy than can emissions
for other pollutants such as PM and NO2
(ISA, section 2.1).
[114] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
Consistent with the other emissions
indicators, the national data are organized
into the following source categories: (1)
"Stationary sources," which include fuel
combustion sources (coal-, gas-, and
oil-fired power plants; industrial,
commercial, and institutional sources; as
well as residential heaters and boilers) and
industrial processes (chemical production,
petroleum refining, and metals production)
categories; (2) "Fires: prescribed burns and
wildfires," for insights on contributions
from some natural sources; (3) "On-road
vehicles," which include cars, trucks,
buses, and motorcycles; and (4) "Nonroad
vehicles and engines," such as farm and
construction equipment, lawnmowers,
chainsaws, boats, ships, snowmobiles,
aircraft, and others.
[115] Report: "Risk and
Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of
the SO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: Final Report." EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and
Environmental Impacts Division July 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 24: "While SO2-attributable decrements
in lung function have generally not been
demonstrated at concentrations ≤ 1000 ppb in
non-asthmatics, statistically significant
increases in respiratory symptoms and
decreases in lung function have consistently
been observed in exercising asthmatics
following 5 to 10 minute SO2 exposures at
concentrations ranging from 400-600 ppb
(ISA, section 4.2.1.1)."
Page 31: "As previously mentioned, the ISA's
finding of a causal relationship between
respiratory morbidity and short-term SO2
exposure is based in large part on results
from controlled human exposure studies
involving exercising asthmatics."
Page 32:
In addition, the ISA [Integrated Science
Assessment] finds that among asthmatics,
both the percentage of individuals affected,
and the severity of the response increases
with increasing SO2 concentrations. That is,
at concentrations ranging from 200-300 ppb,
the lowest levels tested in free breathing
chamber studies3, 5-30% percent
of exercising asthmatics experience moderate
or greater decrements in lung function (ISA,
Table 3-1). At concentrations ≥ 400 ppb,
moderate or greater decrements in lung
function occur in 20-60% of exercising
asthmatics, and compared to exposures at
200-300 ppb, a larger percentage of
asthmatics experience severe decrements in
lung function (i.e., ≥ 200% increase in sRaw,
and/or a ≥ 20% decrease in FEV1) (ISA, Table
3-1). Moreover, at SO2 concentrations ≥ 400
ppb, moderate or greater decrements in lung
function are frequently accompanied by
respiratory symptoms (e.g., cough, wheeze,
chest tightness, shortness of breath) (Balmes
et al., 1987; Gong et al., 1995; Linn et
al., 1983; 1987; 1988; 1990; ISA, Table
3-1).
3 The ISA cites one chamber study
with intermittent exercise where healthy and
asthmatic children were exposed to 100 ppb
SO2 in a mixture with ozone and sulfuric
acid. The ISA notes that compared to
exposure to filtered air, exposure to the
pollutant mix did not result in
statistically significant changes in lung
function or respiratory symptoms (ISA
section 3.1.3.4).
Page 36: "Human exposure studies are
described in the ISA as being the
'definitive evidence' for a causal
association between short-term SO2 exposure
and respiratory morbidity (ISA, section
5.2). These studies have consistently
demonstrated that exposure to SO2
concentrations as low as 200-300 ppb for
5-10 minutes can result in moderate or
greater decrements in lung function,
evidenced by a ≥15% decline in FEV1 and/or ≥
100% increase in sRaw in a significant
percentage of exercising asthmatics (see
section 4.2.2)."
[116] Web page: "Sulfur
Dioxide (SO2) Primary Standards - Table of
Historical SO2 NAAQS." EPA, November 08,
2011.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/s_so2_history.html
1971 … Primary SO2 … Annual [=] 0.03 ppm …
Annual arithmetic average …
1996 … Existing primary SO2 standards
retained, without revision. …
2010 … Primary annual and 24-hour SO2
standards revoked.
[117] Calculated with
the dataset: "SO2 Air Quality, 1980-2010,
National Trend based on 121 Sites (Annual
Arithmetic Average)." EPA, January 06, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/sulfur.html
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[118] Web page: "Sulfur
Dioxide (SO2) Primary Standards - Table of
Historical SO2 NAAQS." EPA, November 08,
2011.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/s_so2_history.html
[119] Calculated with
data from:
a) Web page: "Air Quality Trends." EPA,
January 05, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/aqtrends.html
"Number of People Living in Counties with
Air Quality Concentrations Above the Level
of the NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standard] in 2010 … SO2 (annual and/or
24-hour) [=] 16.7"
b) Dataset: "Monthly Population Estimates
for the United States: April 1, 2010 to
December 1, 2011." U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, December 2011.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2011/index.html
"Resident Population … July 1, 2010 [=]
309,330,219"
CALCULATION: 16.7 million people living in
counties with air quality above NAAQS /
309.3 million population = 5.4%
[120] Report: "EPA's
Regulation of Coal-Fired Power: Is a 'Train
Wreck' Coming?" By James E. McCarthy and
Claudia Copeland. Congressional Research
Service, August 8, 2011.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41914.pdf
Pages 18-19:
On June 22, 2010, EPA revised the NAAQS
[National Ambient Air Quality Standard] for
SO2, focusing on short-term (1-hour)
exposures. The prior standards (for 24-hour
and annual concentrations), which were set
in 1971, were revoked as part of the
revision. Since 1971, EPA had conducted
three reviews of the SO2 standard without
changing it. However, following the last of
these reviews, in 1998, the D.C. Circuit
Court of Appeals remanded the SO2 standard
to EPA, finding that the agency had failed
adequately to explain its conclusion that no
public health threat existed from short-term
exposures to SO2.43 Twelve years
later, EPA revised the standard to respond
to the court's decision.
The new short-term standard is substantially
more stringent than the previous standards:
it replaces a 24-hour standard of 140 parts
per billion (ppb) with a 1-hour maximum of
75 ppb. This means that there could be an
increase in the number of SO2 nonattainment
areas (especially since there were no
nonattainment areas under the old
standards†), with additional controls
required on the sources of SO2 emissions in
any newly designated areas. Since electric
generating units [EGUs] accounted for 60% of
total U.S. emissions of SO2 in 2009,
additional controls on EGUs would be likely.
The timing and extent of any additional
controls is uncertain, however, for several
reasons. First, the monitoring network
needed to determine attainment status is
incomplete and is not primarily configured
to monitor locations of maximum short-term
SO2 concentrations.44 The agency
says it will need 41 new monitoring sites to
supplement the existing network in order to
have a more complete data base. Since three
years of data must be collected after a
site's startup to determine attainment
status, it may be as late as 2016 before
some areas will have sufficient data to be
classified. Even if the areas can be
designated sooner based on modeling data, it
would be at least 2015 before State
Implementation Plans with specific control
measures would be due, and actual compliance
with control requirements would occur
several years later.
Meanwhile, SO2 emissions will be
significantly reduced as a result of the
CAIR, Cross-State, and Utility MACT rules
described above. Thus, although EPA
identified 59 counties that would have
violated the new SO2 NAAQS based on
2007-2009 data, it is not clear whether any
of these counties will be in nonattainment
by the time EPA designates the nonattainment
areas.
† NOTE: The assertion that "there were no
nonattainment areas under the old standards"
is contradicted by the previous footnote,
which states that there were 16.7 million
people living in counties with air quality
concentrations above the annual and/or
24-hour standards for SO2 in 2010. Since the
newest standard (2010) is based on a 1-hour
time frame, this statement cannot refer to
the new standard.
[121] Web page:
"National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)."
EPA, November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Sulfur Dioxide … primary … 1-hour [=] 75
ppb … 99th percentile of 1-hour daily
maximum concentrations, averaged over 3
years"
[122] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_hd/ROE_HD_Final_2008.pdf
Page 2-73: "The link between some common
indoor air pollutants and health effects is
very well established. Radon is a known
human carcinogen and is the second leading
cause of lung cancer."
Page 2-74: "Radon is a radioactive gas. It
comes from the decay of uranium that is
naturally occurring and commonly present in
rock and soils. … [R]adon is the second
leading cause of lung cancer after
smoking…."
[123] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_hd/ROE_HD_Final_2008.pdf
Page 2-74: "Each year, radon is associated
with an estimated 21,100 lung cancer deaths
in the U.S., with smokers at an increased
risk; radon is the second leading cause of
lung cancer after smoking, and 14.4 percent
of lung cancer deaths in the U.S. are
believed to be radon-related (U.S. EPA,
2003)."
[124] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_hd/ROE_HD_Final_2008.pdf
Page 2-74:
It [radon] typically moves up through the
ground to the air above and into a home
through pathways in ground contact floors
and walls. Picocuries per liter of air (pCi/L)
is the unit of measure for radon in air (the
metric equivalent is becquerels per cubic
meter of air).
To reduce the risk of lung cancer, EPA has
set a recommended "action level" of 4 pCi/L
for homes. At that level, it is
cost-effective for occupants to reduce their
exposure by implementing preventive measures
in their homes.
[125] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_hd/ROE_HD_Final_2008.pdf
Page 274: "This indicator presents (1) the
number of U.S. homes estimated to be at or
above the EPA recommended radon action level
of 4 pCi/L and (2) the number of homes with
an operating radon mitigation system. The
gap between the homes in these two
categories is the number of homes that have
not yet been mitigated (generally, homes are
only mitigated if the EPA recommended radon
action level of 4 pCi/L or more is
measured)."
Page 2-75:
It has been reported anecdotally that radon
vent fans and mitigation systems are also
being used to control for soil gases and
vapor intrusion in homes in the vicinity of
Superfund sites, underground or aboveground
storage tank sites, and similar sites as an
element of corrective action plans. While
radon vent fans and mitigation systems used
in this way may provide a radon reduction
benefit, they could be considered a
subtraction from the number of homes with
operating mitigation systems, thus slightly
reducing the slope of the trend line.
Indicator Limitations
• The indicator presumes that radon vent
fans are used for their intended purpose;
the available information supports this
premise. Even if fans are used for managing
vapor intrusion, a radon risk reduction
benefit still occurs.
• A home with an operating mitigation system
is presumed to have a vent fan with an
average useful life of 10 years. Each year
the total number of homes with operating
mitigation systems is adjusted to reflect
new additions and subtractions (i.e., vent
fans installed 11 years earlier).
• The number of homes with radon levels at
or above 4 pCi/L is an estimate based on one
year of measurement data extrapolated for
subsequent years based on population data,
rather than on continuing measurements.
• This indicator does not track the number
of homes designed and built with
radon-resistant new construction features,
which can help diminish radon entry in
homes. Thus, more people are likely being
protected from elevated indoor air exposures
to radon than suggested by the trends in
operating radon mitigation systems alone.
[126] Calculated with
data from:
a) Dataset: "Homes at or above EPA's radon
action level and homes with operating
mitigation systems in the U.S., 1990-2009,
Report on the Environment." EPA, June 1,
2010.
http://cfpub.epa.gov/eroe/index.cfm?fuseaction=list.listByAlpha
b) Dataset: "Average Number of People per
Household, by Race and Hispanic Origin,
Marital Status, Age, and Education of
Householder: 2009." U.S. Census Bureau,
January 2010.
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[127] Book: Energy
and Society: An Introduction. By Harold
H. Schobert. Taylor and Francis, 2002. Page
443:
If we examined rain falling in some
pristine, unpolluted environment (assuming
such a place still exists somewhere), we
might expect it to have a pH of 7, since
pure water is chemically neutral. However,
carbon dioxide, a naturally occurring
constituent of the environment, is slightly
soluble in water. As rain falls through the
air, some carbon dioxide dissolves to form
the weakly acidic solution of carbonic acid
H2O + CO2 → H2CO3
This mildly acidic solution of carbon
dioxide in rainwater has a pH of 5.6. In
other words, even rain falling in a
completely nonpolluted environment will
still have a pH of 5.6 and be mildly acidic.
Therefore, only when the pH of rain is below
this value can we suspect the presence of
pollutants.
Small amount of other natural acids,
including formic acid and acetic acid, are
almost always present in rain and contribute
slightly to its acidity.
[128] Book: Aquatic
Pollution: An Introductory Text, Third
edition. By Edward A. Laws. John Wiley &
Sons, 2000. Page 540:
[A]cidic water has a pH less than 7, and
basic water has a pH greater than 7. …
While it therefore might seem logical to
define acid rain as any rainwater having a
pH below 7, acid rain is not defined in this
way. The reason stems from the fact that
natural waters invariably contain some
dissolved gases, including in particular
CO2. …
… The pH of such a water sample would be
about 5.6 to 5.7. Because of this fact, acid
rain is usually defined as rainwater having
a pH less than 5.6 (Colwing, 1982). In other
words, a pH of 5.6 is about what one would
expect if the rainwater contained no
dissolved substances other than atmospheric
gases. In fact, rainwater normally contains
a variety of dissolved substances in
addition to gases. The reason is that
raindrops form on tiny atmospheric aerosols,
which consist of particles of dust blown
from the surface of the Earth or even salt
crystals injected into the atmosphere at the
surface of the ocean. Because of the
presence of these other dissolved
substances, the pH of rainwater may vary
widely, in some cases being greater than 7
and in some cases substantially lower. …
However, the pH of natural precipitation
normally falls in the range of 5.0-5.6
(Wellford et al., 1982). For this reason,
acid rain can be defined as rainwater having
a pH less than this range rather than simply
as rainwater with a pH less than 5.6.
[129] Book: Green
Chemistry and Engineering: A Practical
Design Approach. By Concepción
Jiménez-González and David J.C. Constable.
John Wiley and Sons, 2011.
Page 49: "There are multiple effects from
acid deposition, including acidification of
lakes and rivers, rendering them unfit for
plant or animal life, accelerated decay and
corrosion of buildings and property (e.g.,
damage to automotive paint), and
indoor-quality issues. There is also damage
to agricultural crops and forests, as the
increased soil acidity can lead to the
displacement of calcium ions and inhibit
growth of plants, or plants can simply be
defoliated in extreme cases of acid
deposition."
[130] "The Plain English
Guide to the Clean Air Act." EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, April
2007.
http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/pdfs/peg.pdf
Page 14:
You have probably heard of "acid rain." But
you may not have heard of other forms of
acid precipitation such as acid snow, acid
fog or mist, or dry forms of acidic
pollution such as acid gas and acid dust.
All of these can be formed in the atmosphere
and fall to Earth causing human health
problems, hazy skies, environmental problems
and property damage. Acid precipitation is
produced when certain types of air
pollutants mix with the moisture in the air
to form an acid. These acids then fall to
Earth as rain, snow, or fog. Even when the
weather is dry, acid pollutants may fall to
Earth in gases or particles.
Heavy rainstorms and melting snow can cause
temporary increases in acidity in lakes and
streams, primarily in the eastern United
States. The temporary increases may last for
days or even weeks, causing harm to fish and
other aquatic life.
[131] Article: "acid
rain." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate
Reference Suite 2004.
"The process that results in the formation
of acid rain generally begins with emissions
into the atmosphere of sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen oxide. These gases are released by
automobiles, certain industrial operations
(e.g., smelting and refining), and electric
power plants that burn fossil fuels such as
coal and oil. The gases combine with water
vapour in clouds to form sulfuric and nitric
acids. When precipitation falls from the
clouds, it is highly acidic, having a pH
value of about 5.6 or lower."
[132] "The Plain English
Guide to the Clean Air Act." EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, April
2007.
http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/pdfs/peg.pdf
Page 14: "Sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen
oxides (NOx) are the principal pollutants
that cause acid precipitation. SO2 and NOx
emissions released to the air react with
water vapor and other chemicals to form
acids that fall back to Earth. Power plants
burning coal and heavy oil produce over
two-thirds of the annual SO2 emissions in
the United States. The majority of NOx
(about 50 percent) comes from cars, buses,
trucks, and other forms of transportation.
About 40 percent of NOx emissions are from
power plants. The rest is emitted from
various sources like industrial and
commercial boilers."
[133] Brief
communication: "Ultraviolet light and leaf
emission of NOx." By Pertti Hari and others.
Nature, March 13, 2003. Page 134.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v422/n6928/pubmed/422134a.html
Nitrogen oxides are trace gases that
critically affect atmospheric chemistry and
aerosol formation1. Vegetation is
usually regarded as a sink for these gases,
although nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide
have been detected as natural emissions from
plants2,3. Here we use in situ
measurements to show that solar ultraviolet
radiation induces the emission of nitrogen
oxide radicals (NOx) from Scots pine (Pinus
sylvestris) shoots when ambient
concentrations drop below one part per
billion. Although this contribution is
insignificant on a local scale, our findings
suggest that global NOx emissions from
boreal coniferous forests may be comparable
to those produced by worldwide industrial
and traffic sources. …
… The cover of each chamber was made of
ultraviolet-transparent quartz glass (which
has a transmittance of over 90% for
ultraviolet A and B light) so that the
plants were exposed to solar ultraviolet
radiation. …
… In previous NOx-exchange studies3,8,9,
ultraviolet radiation was excluded either by
the chamber material or from the light
source, causing the compensation-point
estimates to be too low.
[134] Entry: "boreal."
American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/boreal
"or relating to the forest areas of the
northern North Temperate Zone, dominated by
coniferous trees such as spruce, fir, and
pine."
[135] Entry: "conifer."
American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/conifer
"Any of various mostly needle-leaved or
scale-leaved, chiefly evergreen,
cone-bearing gymnospermous trees or shrubs
such as pines, spruces, and firs."
[136] Paper: "Acid rain
and its effects on sediments in lakes and
streams." By Gene E. Likens.
Hydrobiologia, July 1, 1989.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w2m8268021p73674/
Wet and dry deposition of acidic substances,
which are emitted to the atmosphere by human
activities, have been falling on
increasingly widespread areas throughout the
world in recent decades. As a result, annual
precipitation averages less than pH 4.5 over
large areas of the Northern Temperate Zone,
and not infrequently, individual rainstorms
and cloud or fog-water events have pH values
less than 3. Concurrently, thousands of
lakes and streams in North America and
Europe have become so acidified that they no
longer support viable populations of fish
and other organisms.
[137] Paper: "Satellite
evidence for a large source of formic acid
from boreal and tropical forests." By T.
Stavrakou. Nature Geoscience,
December 18, 2011. Pages 26-30.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n1/full/ngeo1354.html
Page 26: " Direct sources of formic acid
include human activities, biomass burning
and plant leaves. Aside from these direct
sources, sunlight-induced oxidation of
non-methane hydrocarbons (largely of
biogenic origin) is probably the largest
source3, 4."
[138] Article:
"Atmospheric chemistry: Natural atmospheric
acidity." By Dylan B. Millet. Nature
Geoscience, December 22, 2011.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n1/full/ngeo1361.html
Although it contributes to the acidity of
precipitation, formic acid is quickly
consumed by microbes, so does not lead to
the harmful effects of acid rain. However,
formic acid has a significant effect on
aqueous-phase chemistry in the atmosphere.
Aqueous reactions in cloud droplets and on
aerosols influence atmospheric composition,
for instance through the production and loss
of radicals that affect ozone, the
activation of halogens and the formation of
secondary organic aerosols3, 4, 5.
Many of these reactions are highly dependent
on pH and are thus sensitive to formic acid
levels.
[139] Book:
Acidification in Tropical Countries.
Edited by H. Rodhe and R. Herrera. John
Wiley & Sons, 1988. Chapter 4: "Potential
Effects of Acid Deposition on Tropical
Terrestrial Ecosystems." By William H.
McDowell.
http://globalecology.stanford.edu/...
Page 123: "Simple organic acids of low
molecular weight, especially formic and
acetic acids, are important components of
total acidic deposition, especially in the
tropics (Keene el at., 1983), but they are
not likely to be mobile within terrestrial
ecosystems due to rapid decomposition.
Organic acids found in wet deposition are
rapidly oxidized in samples of rainwater
alone (Keene et al., 1983; Keene and
Galloway, 1984), and would likely be rapidly
oxidized within a terrestrial ecosystem."
[140] Book: Energy
and Society: An Introduction. By Harold
H. Schobert. Taylor and Francis, 2002.
Page 443: "Small amount of other natural
acids, including formic acid and acetic
acid, are almost always present in rain and
contribute slightly to its acidity."
[141] Paper: "Satellite
evidence for a large source of formic acid
from boreal and tropical forests." By T.
Stavrakou. Nature Geoscience,
December 18, 2011. Pages 26-30.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n1/full/ngeo1354.html
Page 26: "Here, we use satellite
measurements of formic acid concentrations
to constrain model simulations of the global
formic acid budget. According to our
simulations, 100–120 Tg of formic acid is
produced annually, which is two to three
times more than that estimated from known
sources. We show that 90% of the formic acid
produced is biogenic in origin, and largely
sourced from tropical and boreal forests. We
suggest that terpenoids—volatile organic
compounds released by plants—are the
predominant precursors."
Page 29: "The inferred decrease in pH due to
the extra HCOOH [formic acid] source is
estimated at 0.25–0.5 over boreal forests in
summertime, and 0.15–0.4 above tropical
vegetated areas throughout the year
(Supplementary Fig. S9). Our model
simulations predict that formic acid alone
accounts for as much as 60–80% of the
rainwater acidity over Amazonia, in
accordance with in situ measurements29, but
also over boreal forests during summertime.
Its contribution is also substantial at
mid-latitudes, in particular over much of
the US, where it reaches 30–50% during the
summer (Supplementary Fig. S10)."
[142] Article:
"Atmospheric chemistry: Natural atmospheric
acidity." By Dylan B. Millet. Nature
Geoscience, December 22, 2011.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n1/full/ngeo1361.html
"Writing in Nature Geoscience, Stavrakou and
co-workers6 use satellite measurements to
investigate the global sources and sinks of
atmospheric formic acid, and suggest that
this acid can account for 50% or more of
rainwater acidity in many continental
regions of the world."
[143] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Volume I of III)."
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, February 28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/...
Page E-4: "Ozone (O3) is a secondary
pollutant formed by atmospheric reactions
involving two classes of precursor
compounds, volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Carbon monoxide
also contributes to O3 formation."
[144] Brief
communication: "Ultraviolet light and leaf
emission of NOx." By Pertti Hari and others.
Nature, March 13, 2003. Page 134.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v422/n6928/pubmed/422134a.html
Nitrogen oxides are trace gases that
critically affect atmospheric chemistry and
aerosol formation1. Vegetation is usually
regarded as a sink for these gases, although
nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide have been
detected as natural emissions from
plants2,3. Here we use in situ measurements
to show that solar ultraviolet radiation
induces the emission of nitrogen oxide
radicals (NOx) from Scots pine (Pinus
sylvestris) shoots when ambient
concentrations drop below one part per
billion. Although this contribution is
insignificant on a local scale, our findings
suggest that global NOx emissions from
boreal coniferous forests may be comparable
to those produced by worldwide industrial
and traffic sources.
[145] Entry: "boreal."
American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/boreal
"or relating to the forest areas of the
northern North Temperate Zone, dominated by
coniferous trees such as spruce, fir, and
pine."
[146] Entry: "conifer."
American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/conifer
"Any of various mostly needle-leaved or
scale-leaved, chiefly evergreen,
cone-bearing gymnospermous trees or shrubs
such as pines, spruces, and firs."
[147] Web page:
"National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)."
EPA, November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Ozone … primary and secondary … 8-hour [=]
0.075 ppm … Annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hr concentration, averaged over 3
years"
[148] Code of Federal
Regulations, Title 40, Part 50, Appendix I:
"Interpretation of the 8-Hour Primary and
Secondary National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone." U.S. Government
Printing Office, July 1, 2011.
http://www.gpo.gov/...
Page 72:
2.1.2 Daily maximum 8-hour average
concentrations. (a) There are 24
possible running 8-hour average ozone
concentrations for each calendar day during
the ozone monitoring season. (Ozone
monitoring seasons vary by geographic
location as designated in part 58, appendix
D to this chapter.) The daily maximum 8-hour
concentration for a given calendar day is
the highest of the 24 possible 8-hour
average concentrations computed for that
day. This process is repeated, yielding a
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration for each calendar day with
ambient ozone monitoring data. Because the
8- hour averages are recorded in the start
hour, the daily maximum 8-hour
concentrations from two consecutive days may
have some hourly concentrations in common.
Generally, overlapping daily maximum 8-hour
averages are not likely, except in those
nonurban monitoring locations with less
pronounced diurnal variation in hourly
concentrations.
2.2 Primary and Secondary
Standard-related Summary Statistic. The
standard-related summary statistic is the
annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration, expressed in parts per
million, averaged over three years. The
3-year average shall be computed using the
three most recent, consecutive calendar
years of monitoring data meeting the data
completeness requirements described in this
appendix. The computed 3- year average of
the annual fourth-highest daily maximum
8-hour average ozone concentrations shall be
expressed to three decimal places (the
remaining digits to the right are
truncated.)
[149] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Volume I of III)."
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, February 28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=456384
Page 2-24: "Ozone is ubiquitous throughout
the atmosphere; it is present even in remote
areas of the globe."
Page E-31: "Ozone is distributed very
unevenly within the atmosphere, with ~90% of
the total atmospheric burden present in the
stratosphere.† The remaining ~10% is
distributed within the troposphere,‡ with
higher relative concentrations near the
source of its precursors at the surface."
NOTES:
† The stratosphere is the "upper portion of
the atmosphere, a nearly isothermal layer
(layer of constant temperature) that is
located above the troposphere. The
stratosphere extends from its lower boundary
of about 6 to 17 km (4 to 11 miles) altitude
to its upper boundary (the stratopause) at
about 50 km (30 miles)." [Article:
"stratosphere." Encyclopædia Britannica
Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.]
‡ The troposphere "is the layer of the
atmosphere closest to Earth's surface.
People live in the troposphere, and nearly
all of Earth's weather-including most
clouds, rain, and snow-occurs there. The
troposphere contains about 80 percent of the
atmosphere's mass and about 99 percent of
its water." [Article: "troposphere."
Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.]
Page 3-44:
Background O3 concentrations used for
purposes of informing decisions about NAAQS
[National Ambient Air Quality Standards] are
referred to as Policy Relevant Background (PRB)
O3 concentrations. Policy Relevant
Background concentrations are those
concentrations that would occur in the
United States in the absence of
anthropogenic [manmade] emissions in
continental North America (defined here as
the United States, Canada, and Mexico).
Contributions to PRB O3 include
photochemical actions involving natural
emissions of VOCs, NOx, and CO as well as
the long-range transport of O3 and its
precursors from outside North America and
the stratospheric-tropospheric exchange
(STE) of O3. Processes involved in STE are
described in detail in Annex AX2.3. Natural
sources of O3 precursors include biogenic
emissions, wildfires, and lightning.
Biogenic emissions from agricultural
activities are not considered in the
formation of PRB O3.
Page 3-46:


Page 3-47:
Estimates of PRB concentrations cannot be
obtained solely by examining measurements of
O3 obtained at RRMS [relatively remote
monitoring sites] in the United States …
because of the long-range transport from
anthropogenic [manmade] source regions
within North America. It should also be
noted that it is impossible to determine
sources of O3 without ancillary data that
could be used as tracers of sources or to
calculate photochemical production and loss
rates.
Page 3-48: "Lefohn et al. (2001) have argued
that frequent occurrences of O3
concentrations above 50 to 60 ppbv at remote
northern U.S. sites in spring are mainly
stratospheric in origin."
Page 3-51:
PRB ozone is not a directly observable
quantity and must therefore be estimated
from models. Simple modeling approaches,
such as the use of back-trajectories at
remote U.S. sites to identify background
conditions, are subject to errors involving
the reliability of the trajectories,
chemical production along the trajectories,
and the hemispheric-scale contribution of
North American sources to ozone in air
masses originating outside the continent.
They also cannot describe the geographical
variability of the ozone background or the
depletion of this background during
pollution episodes. Global 3-D chemical
transport models such as GEOS-Chem can
provide physically-based estimates of the
PRB and its variability through sensitivity
simulations with North American
anthropogenic sources shut off. These models
are also subject to errors in the simulation
of transport and chemistry, but the wealth
of data that they provide on ozone and its
precursors for the present-day atmosphere
enables extensive testing with observations,
and thus objective estimate of the errors on
the PRB ozone values.
Page 4-54:
Figure 3-27. Time-series of hourly average
O3 concentrations observed at five national
parks: Denali (AK), Voyageur (MN), Olympic
(WA), Glacier (MT), and Yellowstone (WY).

[150] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Volume I of III)."
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, February 28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=456384
Pages 3-77 to 78:
Policy relevant background O3 concentrations
are used for assessing risks to human health
associated with O3 produced from
anthropogenic [manmade] sources in
continental North America. Because of the
nature of the definition of PRB
concentrations, they cannot be directly
derived from monitored concentrations,
instead they must be derived from modeled
estimates. Current model estimates indicate
that ambient air PRB concentrations in the
United States are generally 0.015 ppm to
0.035 ppm. They decline from spring to
summer and are generally <0.025 ppm under
conditions conducive to high O3 episodes.
However, PRB concentrations can be higher,
especially at elevated sites during spring,
due to enhanced contributions from
hemispheric pollution and stratospheric
exchange.
Page 3-48:
Previous estimates of background O3
concentrations, based on different concepts
of background, are given in Table 3-2.
Results from global three-dimensional CTMs
[chemistry transport models], where the
background is estimated by zeroing
anthropogenic [manmade] emissions in North
America (Table 3-8) are on the low end of
the 25 to 45 ppbv [parts per billion volume]
range.

Page 3-49:
Major conclusions from the Fiore et al.
(2003) study … are:
• PRB O3 concentrations in U.S. surface air
from 1300 to 1700 local time are generally
15 to 35 ppbv. They decline from spring to
summer and are generally <25 ppbv under the
conditions conducive to high-O3 episodes. …
• High PRB concentrations (40 to 50 ppbv)
occur occasionally at high-elevation sites
(>1.5 km) in spring due to the free-tropospheric
influence, including a 4- to 12-ppbv
contribution from hemispheric pollution (O3
produced from anthropogenic [manmade]
emissions outside North America). These
sites cannot be viewed as representative of
low-elevation surface sites … where the
background is lower when O3 >60 ppbv.
• The stratospheric contribution to surface
O3 is of minor importance, typically well
<20 ppbv. While stratospheric intrusions
might occasionally elevate surface O3 at
high-altitude sites, these events are rare.
[151] Calculated with
data from the footnote above and: "National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." EPA,
November 08, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
"Ozone … primary and secondary … 8-hour [=]
0.075 ppm … Annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hr concentration, averaged over 3
years"
CALCULATIONS:
0.015 / 0.075 = 20%
0.045 / 0.075 = 60%
[152] Article: "NYC
Trees Grow Larger Than Country Trees." By
Rick Callahan. Associated Press, July 9,
2003.
http://www.newsday.com
Scientists studying urban pollution have
discovered to their amazement that trees in
New York City's concrete jungle grow twice
as large as those in the countryside, far
from the billowing smokestacks and crowded
streets.
The findings illustrate what scientists have
only recently realized -- that pollution
from urban areas can have its biggest
effects far from cities. …
"In the country, the trees were about up to
my waist. In the city, they were almost over
my head -- it's really dramatic," said
Jillian W. Gregg, the study's lead author. …
"No matter what soil I grew them, in they
always grew twice as large in New York
City," said Gregg, who was initially
perplexed by the results.
[153] Paper:
"Urbanization effects on tree growth in the
vicinity of New York City." By Jillian W.
Gregg and others. Nature, July 10,
2003. Pages 183-187.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v424/n6945/abs/nature01728.html
Page 184: "Contrary to expectations,
cottonwoods grew twice as large amid the
high concentration of multiple pollutants in
New York City compared to rural sites (Fig.
1). Greater urban plant biomass was found
for all urban–rural site comparisons, two
separate planting dates in the first year
and two further consecutive growing
seasons."
Page 183: "[H]igher rural ozone (O3)
exposures reduced growth at rural sites.
Urban precursors fuel the reactions of O3
formation, but NOx scavenging reactions7
resulted in lower cumulative urban O3
exposures compared to agricultural and
forested sites throughout the northeastern
USA. Our study … shows a greater adverse
effect of urban pollutant emissions beyond
the urban core."
Page 185: "Primary O3 precursors are emitted
in cities, but must react in sunlight to
form O3 as air masses move to rural
environments20. Ozone exposures
were therefore consistently higher for rural
sites both to the north and the east of the
city in all consecutive growing seasons…."
Page 186: "Although individual 1- hour peak
concentrations are typically higher in urban
centres7, our data indicate that
the higher cumulative exposures at rural
sites had the greatest impact."
[154] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Volume I of III)."
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, February 28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=456384
Page 2-25:
The formation of O3 and associated compounds
is a complex, nonlinear function of many
factors, including the intensity and
spectral distribution of sunlight;
atmospheric mixing and other atmospheric
processes; and the concentrations of the
precursors in ambient air. At lower NOx
concentrations found in most environments,
ranging from remote continental areas to
rural and suburban areas downwind of urban
centers, the net production of O3 increases
with increasing NOx. At higher
concentrations found in downtown
metropolitan areas, especially near busy
streets and highways and in power plant
plumes, there is net destruction of O3 by
reaction with NO. In between these two
regimes, there is a transition stage in
which O3 production shows only a weak
dependence on NOx concentrations. The
efficiency of O3 production per NOx oxidized
is generally highest in areas where NOx
concentrations are lowest and decrease with
increasing NOx concentration.
[155] Report: "Risk and
Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of
the SO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: Final Report." EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and
Environmental Impacts Division July 2009.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 13: "There is a large amount of
variability in the time that individuals
spend in different microenvironments, but on
average people spend the majority of their
time (about 87%) indoors. Most of this time
is spent at home with less time spent in an
office/workplace or other indoor locations
(ISA, Figure 2-36). In addition, people
spend on average about 8% of their time
outdoors and 6% of their time in vehicles."
[156] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Volume I of III)."
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, February 28, 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=456384
Page E-9: "Humans are exposed to O3 either
outdoors or in various microenvironments.
Ozone in indoor environments results mainly
from infiltration from outdoors. Once
indoors, O3 is removed by deposition on and
reaction with surfaces and reactions with
other pollutants. Hence, O3 levels indoors
tend to be notably lower than outdoor O3
concentrations measured at nearby monitoring
sites, although the indoor and ambient O3
concentrations tend to vary together (i.e.,
the higher the ambient, the higher the
indoor O3 levels)."
Page 3-64: "To a lesser extent, O3
concentrations in microenvironments are
influenced by the ambient temperature, time
of day, indoor characteristics (e.g.,
presence of carpeting), and the presence of
other pollutants in the microenvironment.
Table 3-4 describes the findings of the
available studies."
Page 3-65: "Ozone enters the indoor
environment primarily through infiltration
from outdoors through building components,
such as windows, doors, and ventilation
systems. There are also a few indoor sources
of O3 (photocopiers, facsimile machines,
laser printers, and electrostatic air
cleaners and precipitators) (Weschler,
2000). Generally O3 emissions from office
equipment and air cleaners are low except
under improper maintenance conditions."
Page 3-68:
The most important removal process for O3 in
the indoor environment is deposition on, and
reaction with, indoor surfaces. The rate of
deposition is material-specific. The removal
rate will depend on the indoor dimensions,
surface coverings, and furnishings. Smaller
rooms generally have larger
surface-to-volume ratio (A/V) and remove O3
faster than larger rooms. Fleecy materials,
such as carpets, have larger
surface-to-volume ratios and remove O3
faster than smooth surfaces (Weschler,
2000). However, the rate of O3 reaction with
carpet diminishes with cumulative O3
exposure (Morrison and Nazaroff, 2000,
2002). Weschler (2000) compiled the O3
removal rates for a variety of
microenvironments.
Page 7-6: "In several studies focused on
evaluating exposure to O3, measurements were
made in a variety of indoor environments,
including homes (Lee et al., 2004), schools
(Linn et al., 1996), and the workplace (Liu
et al., 1995). Indoor O3 concentrations
were, in general, approximately one-tenth of
the outdoor concentrations in these
studies."
Page 7-7:
Other complications for O3 in the
relationship between personal exposures and
ambient concentrations include expected
strong seasonal variation of personal
behaviors and building ventilation practices
that can modify exposure. In addition, the
relationship may be affected by temperature
(e.g., high temperature may increase air
conditioning use, which may reduce O3
penetration indoors), further complicating
the role of temperature as a confounder of
O3 health effects. It should be noted that
the pattern of exposure misclassification
error and influence of confounders may
differ across the outcomes of interest as
well as in susceptible populations. For
example, those who may be suffering from
chronic cardiovascular or respiratory
conditions may be in a more protective
environment (i.e., with less exposure to
both O3 and its confounders, such as
temperature and PM) than those who are
healthy.
[157] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Lead," Volume I of II.
EPA, October 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=459555
Page E-6:
Given the large amount of time people spend
indoors, exposure to Pb in dusts and indoor
air can be significant. For children, dust
ingested via hand-to-mouth activity is often
a more important source of Pb exposure than
inhalation. Dust can be resuspended through
household activities, thereby posing an
inhalation risk as well. House dust Pb can
derive both from Pb-based paint and from
other sources outside the home. The latter
include Pb-contaminated airborne particles
from currently operating industrial
facilities or resuspended soil particles
contaminated by deposition of airborne Pb
from past emissions.
Pages 3-14 to 15:
3.1.2 Observed Concentrations – Indoor
Air
Concentrations of Pb can be elevated
indoors. Lead in indoor air is directly
related to Pb in housedust, which poses both
an inhalation and an ingestion risk and is
discussed in more detail in Section 3.2.
Strong correlations have been observed in a
Boston study between indoor air, floor dust,
and soil Pb concentrations (Rabinowitz et
al., 1985a). In the National Human Exposure
Assessment Survey (NHEXAS) study of six
Midwestern states, Pb concentrations in
personal air were significantly higher than
either indoor or outdoor concentrations of
air Pb (Clayton et al., 1999). The
predominant sources of indoor air Pb are
thought to be outdoor air and degraded Pb-based
paint.
Lead concentrations tend to be somewhat
elevated in houses of smokers. In a
nationwide U.S. study, blood-Pb levels were
38% higher in children who exhibited high
cotinine levels, which reflect high
secondhand smoke exposure (Mannino et al.,
2003). Lead is present both in tobacco and
in tobacco smoke, although Pb concentrations
in tobacco have fallen in parallel with
decreases in airborne Pb concentrations (Mannino
et al., 2003). …
Lead concentrations inside work places can
also be elevated. Thus, inhalation of Pb
during work hours is an additional route of
exposure for some subpopulations. Feng and
Barratt (1994) measured Pb concentrations in
two office buildings in the United Kingdom
(UK). In general, concentrations in the UK
office buildings were higher than those in
nearby houses.
Page 3-27: "Given the large amount of time
people spend indoors, exposure to Pb in
dusts and indoor air can be significant. For
children, dust ingested via hand-to-mouth
activity can be a more important source of
Pb exposure than inhalation (Adgate et al.,
1998; Oliver et al., 1999)."
Page 3-28:
Lead in housedust can derive from a number
of different sources. Lead appears both to
come from sources outside the home (Jones et
al., 2000; Adgate et al., 1998) and from Pb-based
paint (Hunt et al., 1993; Lanphear et al.,
1996). A chemical mass balance study in
Jersey City, NJ observed that crustal
sources contributed almost half of the Pb in
residences, Pb-based paint contributed about
a third, and deposition of airborne Pb
contributed the remainder (Adgate et al.,
1998). Residential concentrations measured
at the Bunker Hill Superfund Site in
northern Idaho indicate that the Pb
concentration in houses depends primarily on
the neighborhood soil-Pb concentration (Von
Lindern et al., 2003a, 2003b). However,
factors such as household hygiene, the
number of adults living in the house, and
the number of hours children spend playing
outside were also shown to affect Pb
concentrations.
Page 3-29: "Renovation, and especially old
paint removal, can greatly increase Pb
levels inside the home (Laxen et al., 1987;
Jacobs, 1998; Mielke et al., 2001). Removal
of exterior paint via power sanding released
an estimated 7.4 kg of Pb as dust, causing
Pb levels inside one house to be well above
safe levels (Mielke et al., 2001)."
[158] Paper: "Air
Quality Criteria for Carbon Monoxide." EPA,
Office of Research and Development, June
2000.
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/coaqcd.pdf
Page 153:
Regardless of the study, Table 4-2 shows
that the mean CO concentrations inside
vehicles always exceeded the mean ambient CO
concentrations measured at fixed-site
monitors. The ratio between a study's mean
in-vehicle CO concentration and its mean
ambient CO concentration fell between 2 and
5 for most studies, regardless of when the
study was done, but exceeded 5 for two
studies done during the early 1980s. Of the
more recent studies, Chan et al. (1991)
found that median CO concentrations were 11
ppm inside test vehicles driven on
hypothetical routes in Raleigh, NC, during
August and September 1988, but median
ambient concentrations were only 2.8 ppm at
fixed-site monitors. Fixed-site samples were
collected about 30 to 100 m from the
midpoint of each route. …
Like earlier studies, recent ones also have
looked at effects of different routes and
travel modes on CO exposure. Chan et al.
(1991) reported significantly different
in-vehicle exposures to CO for standardized
drives on three routes that varied in
traffic volume and speed. The median
in-vehicle CO concentration was 13 ppm for
30 samples in the downtown area of Raleigh,
which had heavy traffic volumes, slow
speeds, and frequent stops. The next highest
concentrations (median = 11 ppm, n = 34)
occurred on an interstate beltway that had
moderate traffic volumes and high speeds,
and the lowest concentrations (median = 4
ppm, n = 6) occurred on rural highways with
low traffic volumes and moderate speeds.
Page 156: "Studies have quantified the
effect of traffic volume and speed on
in-vehicle CO exposure. Flachsbart et al.
(1987) reported that in-vehicle CO exposures
fell by 35% when test vehicle speeds
increased from 10 to 60 mph on eight
commuter routes in Washington."
[159] Paper: "Air
Quality Criteria for Carbon Monoxide." EPA,
Office of Research and Development, June
2000.
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/coaqcd.pdf
Pages 159-160:
Ice skating, motocross, and tractor pulls
are sporting events in which significant
quantities of CO may be emitted in short
periods of time by machines in poorly
ventilated indoor arenas. The CO is emitted
by several sources, including ice
resurfacing machines and ice edgers during
skating events; gas-powered radiant heaters
used to heat viewing stands; and motor
vehicles at motocross, monster-truck, and
tractor-pull competitions. These
competitions usually involve many motor
vehicles with no emission controls. Several
studies of CO exposure in commercial
facilities were not cited in the previous CO
criteria document. First, Kwok (1981)
reported episodes of CO poisoning among
skaters inside four arenas in Ontario,
Canada. Mean CO levels ranged from 4 to 81
ppm for periods of about 80 min. The CO
levels in the spectator areas ranged from 90
to 100% of levels on the ice rinks. The ice
resurfacing machines lacked catalytic
emission controls. Second, both Sorensen
(1986) and Miller et al. (1989) reported CO
concentrations greater than 100 ppm in rinks
from the use of gasoline-powered resurfacing
machines. High concentrations were
attributed to poorly maintained machines and
insufficient ventilation in one rink. …
In the United States, surveys of CO exposure
were done at ice arenas in Vermont,
Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Washington.
For a rink in Massachusetts, Lee et al.
(1993) showed that excessive CO
concentrations can occur even with
well-maintained equipment and fewer
resurfacing operations if ventilation is
inadequate. Average CO levels were less than
20 ppm over 14 h, with no significant source
of outdoor CO. Ventilation systems could not
disperse pollutants emitted and trapped by
temperature inversions and low air
circulation at ice level. In another study,
Lee et al. (1994) reported that CO
concentrations measured inside six enclosed
rinks in the Boston area during a 2-h hockey
game ranged from 4 to 117 ppm, whereas
outdoor levels were about 2 to 3 ppm, and
the alveolar CO of hockey players increased
by an average of 0.53 ppm per 1 ppm CO
exposure over 2 h. Fifteen years earlier,
Spengler et al. (1978) found CO levels
ranging from 23 to 100 ppm in eight enclosed
rinks in the Boston area, which suggests
that CO exposure levels in ice arenas have
not improved. …
Studies also have been done in sports arenas
that allow motor vehicles. Boudreau et al.
(1994) reported CO levels for three indoor
sporting events (i.e., monster-truck
competitions, tractor pulls) in Cincinnati.
The CO measurements were taken before and
during each event at different elevations in
the public seating area of each arena with
most readings obtained at the midpoint
elevation where most people were seated.
Average CO concentrations over 1 to 2 h
ranged from 13 to 23 ppm before the event to
79 to 140 ppm during the event. Measured CO
levels were lower at higher seating levels.
The ventilation system was operated
maximally, and ground-level entrances were
completely open.
Page 164:
Given that the pNEM/CO exposure model
accounts for the passive exposure of
nonsmokers to CO concentrations from
smoking, this section briefly reviews two
studies of this type. In April 1992, Ott et
al. (1992b) took continuous readings of CO
concentrations inside a passenger car for an
hour-long trip through a residential
neighborhood of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Measurements were taken in both the front
and back seats of the vehicle as a passenger
smoked cigarettes. The neighborhood had low
ambient CO levels, because it had little
traffic and few stop signs. During the trip,
the air conditioning system was operated in
the recirculation mode. Concentrations in
the front and rear seats were similar
indicating that CO concentrations were well
mixed throughout the passenger compartment.
CO concentrations reached a peak of 20 ppm
after the third cigarette. Using the breath
measurement technique of Jones et al.
(1958), the breath CO level of the driver (a
nonsmoker) increased from 2 ppm before the
trip to 9.2 ppm at the end of the trip.
Pages 280-281:
Indoor and in-transit concentrations of CO
can be significantly different from the
typically low ambient CO concentrations. The
CO levels in homes without combustion
sources are usually lower than 5 ppm. The
highest residential concentrations of CO
that have been reported are associated with
vehicle startup and idling in attached
garages and the use of unvented gas or
kerosene space heaters where peak
concentrations of CO as high or higher than
50 ppm have been reported. Carbon monoxide
concentrations also have exceeded 9 ppm for
8 h in several homes with gas stoves and, in
one case, 35 ppm for 1 h; however, these
higher CO concentrations were in homes with
older gas ranges that had pilot lights that
burn continuously. Newer or remodeled homes
have gas ranges with electronic pilot
lights. Also, the availability of other
cooking appliances (e.g., microwaves,
heating plates) has decreased the use of gas
ranges in meal preparation.
Page 282: "Evaluation of human CO exposure
situations indicates that occupational
exposures in some workplaces, or exposures
in homes with faulty or unvented combustion
sources, can exceed 100 ppm CO, leading to
COHb levels of 4 to 5% with 1-h exposure and
10% or more with continued exposure for 8 h
or longer (see Table 7-1). Such high
exposure levels are encountered rarely by
the general public under ambient
conditions."
Page 283: "Putting the ambient CO levels
into perspective, exposures to cigarette
smoke or to combustion exhaust gases from
small engines and recreational vehicles
typically raise COHb to levels much higher
than levels resulting from mean ambient CO
exposures, and, for most people, exposures
to indoor sources of CO often exceed
controllable outdoor exposures."
[160] U.S. Code, Title
42, Chapter 85, Subchapter I, Part A,
Section 7412: " Hazardous air pollutants."
Accessed March 20, 2012 at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7412
(b) List of pollutants
(1) Initial list
The Congress establishes for purposes of
this section a list of hazardous air
pollutants as follows: …
(2) Revision of the list
The Administrator shall periodically review
the list established by this subsection and
publish the results thereof and, where
appropriate, revise such list by rule,
adding pollutants which present, or may
present, through inhalation or other routes
of exposure, a threat of adverse human
health effects (including, but not limited
to, substances which are known to be, or may
reasonably be anticipated to be,
carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic,
neurotoxic, which cause reproductive
dysfunction, or which are acutely or
chronically toxic) or adverse environmental
effects whether through ambient
concentrations, bioaccumulation, deposition,
or otherwise, but not including releases
subject to regulation under subsection (r)
of this section as a result of emissions to
the air.
(3) Petitions to modify the list
(A) Beginning at any time after 6 months
after November 15, 1990, any person may
petition the Administrator to modify the
list of hazardous air pollutants under this
subsection by adding or deleting a substance
or, in case of listed pollutants without CAS
numbers (other than coke oven emissions,
mineral fibers, or polycyclic organic
matter) removing certain unique substances.
Within 18 months after receipt of a
petition, the Administrator shall either
grant or deny the petition by publishing a
written explanation of the reasons for the
Administrator's decision. Any such petition
shall include a showing by the petitioner
that there is adequate data on the health or
environmental defects [2] of the pollutant
or other evidence adequate to support the
petition. The Administrator may not deny a
petition solely on the basis of inadequate
resources or time for review. …
(d) Emission standards
(1) In general
The Administrator shall promulgate
regulations establishing emission standards
for each category or subcategory of major
sources and area sources of hazardous air
pollutants listed for regulation pursuant to
subsection (c) of this section in accordance
with the schedules provided in subsections
(c) and (e) of this section.
[161] Website: "About
Air Toxics." EPA, August 11, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/toxicair/newtoxics.html
People exposed to toxic air pollutants at
sufficient concentrations and durations may
have an increased chance of getting cancer
or experiencing other serious health
effects. These health effects can include
damage to the immune system, as well as
neurological, reproductive (e.g., reduced
fertility), developmental, respiratory and
other health problems. In addition to
exposure from breathing air toxics, some
toxic air pollutants such as mercury can
deposit onto soils or surface waters, where
they are taken up by plants and ingested by
animals and are eventually magnified up
through the food chain. Like humans, animals
may experience health problems if exposed to
sufficient quantities of air toxics over
time.
[162] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48: "Toxic air pollutants, also known
as air toxics or hazardous air pollutants (HAPs),
are those pollutants that are known or
suspected to cause cancer or are associated
with other serious health (e.g.,
reproductive problems, birth defects) or
ecological effects."
[163] U.S. Code, Title
42, Chapter 85, Subchapter I, Part A,
Section 7412: " Hazardous air pollutants."
Accessed March 20, 2012 at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7412
(d) Emission standards …
(2) Standards and methods
Emissions standards promulgated under this
subsection and applicable to new or existing
sources of hazardous air pollutants shall
require the maximum degree of reduction in
emissions of the hazardous air pollutants
subject to this section (including a
prohibition on such emissions, where
achievable) that the Administrator, taking
into consideration the cost of achieving
such emission reduction, and any non-air
quality health and environmental impacts and
energy requirements, determines is
achievable for new or existing sources in
the category or subcategory to which such
emission standard applies, through
application of measures, processes, methods,
systems or techniques including, but not
limited to, measures which—
(A) reduce the volume of, or eliminate
emissions of, such pollutants through
process changes, substitution of materials
or other modifications,
(B) enclose systems or processes to
eliminate emissions,
(C) collect, capture or treat such
pollutants when released from a process,
stack, storage or fugitive emissions point,
(D) are design, equipment, work practice, or
operational standards (including
requirements for operator training or
certification) as provided in subsection (h)
of this section, or
(E) are a combination of the above.
[164] Report: "Air
Quality Trends – 1994." EPA, November 2,
1995.
http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/pdfs/aqtrnd94.pdf
Page 29: "For the six principal [criteria]
pollutants, a variety of control strategies
are used in geographic areas where the
national air quality standards have been
violated. In contrast, for toxic air
pollutants, EPA has focused on identifying
all major sources that emit these pollutants
and developing national technology-based
performance standards to significantly
reduce their emissions. The objective is to
ensure that major sources of toxic air
pollution are well controlled regardless of
geographic location."
[165] Report:
"Comparison of ASPEN [Assessment System for
Population Exposure Nationwide] Modeling
System Results to Monitored Concentrations."
EPA, April 15, 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata/draft6.html
Unlike for criteria air pollutants, there
currently is no formal national air toxics
monitoring network which follows
standardized EPA guidelines or established
national monitoring procedures. While
several States and local agencies have
collected some high quality HAP monitoring
data, some of the data have not undergone
any formal quality assurance tests, and the
data come from several different monitoring
networks which may vary in precision and
accuracy. In general, we would expect the
precision and accuracy of air toxics
monitoring data to be not nearly as good as
the SO2 and particulate matter monitoring
data used in the studies in the previous
section. We will discuss some of the other
monitoring uncertainties in more detail
below.
[166] Manual: Air
Toxics Risk Assessment Reference Library,
Volume 1. Prepared by ICF Consulting for the
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Emissions Standards Division,
April 2004. Chapter 2: "Clean Air Act
Requirements and Programs to Regulate Air
Toxics."
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/data/risk/vol_1/chapter_02.pdf
Page 2-1: "EPA has set National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for these
pollutants [criteria pollutants] based on
health and welfare-related criteria…. No
such national ambient air quality standards
currently exist for HAPs, although
regulatory programs are in place to address
emissions of HAPs."
[167] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48: "Air toxics emissions data are
tracked by the National Emissions Inventory
(NEI). The NEI is a composite of data from
many different sources, including industry
and numerous state, tribal, and local
agencies. Different data sources use
different data collection methods, and many
of the emissions data are based on estimates
rather than actual measurements."
Page 2-49: "The emissions data are largely
based on estimates. Although these estimates
are generated using well-established
approaches, the estimates have inherent
uncertainties. The methodology for
estimating emissions is continually reviewed
and is subject to revision. Trend data prior
to any revisions must be considered in the
context of those changes."
[168] Website: "About
Air Toxics." EPA, August 11, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/air/toxicair/newtoxics.html
"EPA is working with state, local, and
tribal governments to reduce air toxics
releases of 188 pollutants to the
environment. Examples of toxic air
pollutants include benzene, which is found
in gasoline; perchloroethylene, which is
emitted from some dry cleaning facilities;
and methylene chloride, which is used as a
solvent and paint stripper by a number of
industries. Examples of other listed air
toxics include dioxin, asbestos, toluene,
and metals such as cadmium, mercury,
chromium, and lead compounds."
[169] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
In addition to presenting emissions data
aggregated across all 188 air toxics, the
indicator presents emissions trends for five
individual air toxics: acrolein, benzene,
1,3-butadiene, ethylene dibromide, and
hydrazine. These compounds were selected for
display because EPA's 1999 National Air
Toxics Assessment estimates that they
present the greatest nationwide health risks
(whether for cancer or non-cancer endpoints)
among the subset of air toxics for which
available emissions and toxicity data
supported an evaluation (U.S. EPA, 2006).
Page 2-49:
Exhibit 2-42 shows emissions trends for five
compounds believed to account for the
greatest health risks that are attributed to
air toxics, according to a recent modeling
study (U.S. EPA, 2006). …
There is uncertainty associated with
identifying which air toxics account for the
greatest health risk nationwide. Toxicity
information is not available for every
compound, and emissions and exposure
estimates used to characterize risk have
inherent uncertainties. Additional
limitations associated with the National Air
Toxics Assessment are well documented (U.S.
EPA, 2006).
[170] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-48:
NEI [National Emissions Inventory] data have
been collected since 1990 and cover all 50
states and their counties, D.C., the U.S.
territories of Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands, and some of the territories of
federally recognized American Indian
nations. The NEI includes baseline air
toxics data for the 1990-1993 period and
since then has been updated every 3 years.
The baseline period represents a mix of
years depending on data availability for
various source types. While NEI data for air
toxics were also compiled for 1996 and 1999,
the methodology used in those years for air
toxics differed considerably from the
methodology that was used in 2002.
Therefore, the 1996 and 1999 data are not
presented because comparing the two
inventories might lead to invalid
conclusions.
[171] Calculated with
the dataset: "Air Toxics Emissions by
Source, Report on the Environment." EPA,
December 7, 2009.
http://cfpub.epa.gov/eroe/index.cfm?fuseaction=list.listByAlpha
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[172] "EPA's Report on
the Environment." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 2-49: "The indicator is an aggregate
number that represents contributions from
188 different chemicals with widely varying
toxicities and human exposures. Therefore,
the nationwide trend for total air toxics
and the resulting health effects likely
differs from emissions trends for specific
chemicals. Similarly, because the indicator
is a nationwide aggregate statistic, the
trend may not reflect emissions trends for
specific locations."
[173] Calculated with
the dataset: "Emissions of Selected Air
Toxics, Report on the Environment." EPA,
December 7, 2009.
http://cfpub.epa.gov/eroe/index.cfm?fuseaction=list.listByAlpha
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[174] "EPA's Report on
the Environment: Highlights of National
Trends." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 13: "Wetlands—areas that are
periodically saturated or covered by
water—are an important ecological resource.
Wetlands are like sponges, with a natural
ability to store water. They act as buffers
to flooding and erosion, and they improve
the quality of water by filtering out
contaminants. Wetlands also provide food and
habitat for many plants and animals,
including rare and endangered species. In
addition, they support activities such as
commercial fishing and recreation."
[175] "EPA's Report on
the Environment: Highlights of National
Trends." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 14: "Coastal waters—the interface
between terrestrial environments and the
open ocean—encompass many unique habitats
such as estuaries, coastal wetlands,
seagrass meadows, coral reefs, and mangrove
and kelp forests. These ecologically rich
areas support waterfowl, fish, marine
mammals, and many other organisms."
[176] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 1: "Estuaries are bodies of water that
receive freshwater and sediment influx from
rivers and tidal influx from the oceans,
thus providing transition zones between the
fresh water of a river and the saline
environment of the sea."
[177] Entry: "aquifer."
American Heritage Science Dictionary.
Houghton Mifflin, 2005.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/aquifer
"An underground layer of permeable rock,
sediment (usually sand or gravel), or soil
that yields water. The pore spaces in
aquifers are filled with water and are
interconnected, so that water flows through
them. Sandstones, unconsolidated gravels,
and porous limestones make the best
aquifers. They can range from a few square
kilometers to thousands of square kilometers
in size."
[178] Report: "The
Foundation for Global Action on Persistent
Organic Pollutants: A United States
Perspective." EPA, Office of Research and
Development, March 2002. Page 1-6:
Bioaccumulation is the phenomenon whereby a
chemical reaches a greater concentration in
the tissues of an organism than in the
surrounding environment (water, sediment,
soil, air), principally through respiratory
and dietary uptake routes. … The magnitude
of bioaccumulation is driven by the
hydrophobicity, or water insolubility, of
the chemical, principally operating through
the ability of a species to eliminate the
chemical from its body by excretion and/or
metabolism.
[179] Fact sheet:
"Mercury Update: Impact on Fish Advisories."
EPAS, Office of Water, June 2001.
http://infohouse.p2ric.org/ref/19/18358.pdf
Pages 1-2:
Mercury exists in a number of inorganic and
organic forms in water. Methylmercury, the
most common organic form of mercury, quickly
enters the aquatic food chain. In most adult
fish, 90% to 100% of the mercury is
methylmercury. Methylmercury is found
primarily in the fish muscle (fillets) bound
to proteins. Skinning and trimming the fish
does not significantly reduce the mercury
concentration in the fillet, nor is it
removed by cooking processes. Because
moisture is lost during cooking, the
concentration of mercury after cooking is
actually higher than it is in the fresh
uncooked fish.
Once released into the environment,
inorganic mercury is converted to organic
mercury (methylmercury) which is the primary
form that accumulates in fish and shellfish.
Methylmercury biomagnifies up the food chain
as it is passed from a lower food chain
level to a subsequently higher food chain
level through consumption of prey organisms
or predators. Fish at the top of the aquatic
food chain, such as pike, bass, shark and
swordfish, bioaccumulate methylmercury
approximately 1 to 10 million times greater
than dissolved methylmercury concentrations
found in surrounding waters.
[180] Web page: "The
Great Waters Program: The Great Lakes." EPA,
July 22, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/gr8water/xbrochure/lakes.html
The chemicals, however, biologically
accumulate (bioaccumulate) in the organism
and become concentrated at levels that are
much higher than in the surrounding water.
Small fish and zooplankton consume vast
quantities of phytoplankton. In doing so,
any toxic chemicals accumulated by the
phytoplankton are further concentrated in
their bodies. These concentrations are
increased at each level in the food chain.
This process of increasing pollutant
concentration through the food chain is
called biomagnification. The top predators
in a food chain, such as lake trout, coho
and chinook salmon, and fish-eating gulls,
herons, and bald eagles, may accumulate
concentrations of a toxic chemical high
enough to cause serious deformities or death
or to impair their ability to reproduce. The
concentration of some chemicals in the fatty
tissues of top predators can be millions of
times higher than the concentration in the
surrounding water.
[181] Fact Sheet:
"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Update:
Impact on Fish Advisories." EPA, Office of
Water, September 1999.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Pages 1-2:
PCBs are a group of synthetic organic
chemicals that contain 209 possible
individual chlorinated biphenyl compounds.
These chemically related compounds are
called congeners and vary in their physical
and chemical properties and toxicity. There
are no known natural sources of PCBs.
Although banned in the United States from
further production in 1979, PCBs are
distributed widely in the environment
because of their persistence and widespread
use. …
PCBs are highly lipophilic (fat soluble) and
are rapidly accumulated by aquatic organisms
and bioaccumulated through the aquatic food
chain. Concentrations of PCBs in aquatic
organisms may be 2,000 to more than a
million times higher than the concentrations
found in the surrounding waters, with
species at the top of the food chain having
the highest concentrations.
[182] Fact Sheet:
Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and
Related Compounds Update: Impact on Fish
Advisories." EPA, Office of Water, September
1999.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Pages 1-2:
Dioxins are a group of synthetic organic
chemicals that contain 210 structurally
related individual chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
(CDDs) and chlorinated dibenzofurans (CDFs).
For the purposes of this fact sheet, the
term "dioxins" will refer to the aggregate
of all CDDs and CDFs. These chemically
related compounds vary in their physical and
chemical properties and toxicity. Dioxins
have never been intentionally produced,
except in small quantities for research.
They are unintentionally produced as
byproducts of incineration and combustion
processes, chlorine bleaching in pulp and
paper mills, and as contaminants in certain
chlorinated organic chemicals. They are
distributed widely in the environment
because of their persistence. Dioxin
exposure is associated with a wide array of
adverse health effects in experimental
animals, including death. Experimental
animal studies have shown toxic effects to
the liver, gastrointestinal system, blood,
skin, endocrine system, immune system,
nervous system, and reproductive system. In
addition, developmental effects and liver
cancer have been reported. …
Dioxins in surface waters and sediments are
accumulated by aquatic organisms and
bioaccumulated through the aquatic food
chain. Concentrations of dioxins in aquatic
organisms may be hundreds to thousands of
times higher than the concentrations found
in the surrounding waters or sediments.
Bioaccumulation factors vary among the
congeners and generally increase with
chlorine content up through the tetra
congeners and then generally decrease with
higher chlorine content.
[183] Report: "National
Study of Chemical Residues in Lake Fish
Tissue." By Leanne Stahl and others. EPA,
Office of Water, Office of Science and
Technology, September 2009.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page xi:
This study is a national screening-level
survey of chemical residues in fish tissue
from lakes and reservoirs in the
conterminous United States (lower 48
states), excluding the Laurentian Great
Lakes and Great Salt Lake. It is unique
among earlier fish monitoring efforts in the
United States because the sampling sites
were selected according to a statistical
(random) design. Study results allow EPA to
estimate the percentage of lakes and
reservoirs in the United States with
chemical concentrations in fish tissue that
are above levels of potential concern for
humans or for wildlife that eat fish. This
survey also includes the largest set of
chemicals ever studied in fish. Whole fish
and fillets were analyzed for 268
persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT)
chemicals, including mercury, arsenic,
dioxins and furans, the full complement of
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners,
and a large number of pesticides and
semivolatile organic compounds.
Page xii:
The National Lake Fish Tissue Study focused
on lakes and reservoirs (hereafter referred
to collectively as lakes) for two reasons:
they occur in a variety of landscapes where
they can receive and accumulate contaminants
from several sources (including direct
discharges into water, air deposition, and
agricultural or urban runoff) and there is
usually limited dilution of contaminants
compared to flowing streams and rivers. …
This study applied a statistical or
probability-based sampling approach so that
results could be used to describe fish
tissue contaminant concentrations in lakes
on a national basis. The Nation's lakes were
divided into six size categories based on
surface area. Assigning different
probabilities to each category prevented
small lakes from dominating the group of
lakes selected for sampling. It also allowed
a similar number of lakes to be selected in
each size category.
For this study, a lake is defined as a
permanent body of water with a permanent
fish population that has a surface area of
at least one hectare (2.47 acres), a depth
of at least one meter (3.28 feet), and at
least 1,000 square meters of open,
unvegetated water. The lower 48 states
contain an estimated 147,000 lakes meeting
these criteria (i.e., the target
population). A list of candidate lakes was
randomly selected from the target population
for this study. From this list, EPA
identified 500 sites that were accessible
and appropriate for fish collection.
Page xiv:
After a brief pilot in the fall of 1999 to
test sampling logistics, EPA and its
partners began full-scale fish sampling in
2000 and continued sampling annually through
2003. Each year of the study, field sampling
teams collected fish from about 125
different lakes distributed across the lower
48 states. These teams applied consistent
methods nationwide to collect composite
samples of a predator fish species (e.g.,
bass or trout) and a bottom-dwelling species
(e.g., carp or catfish) from each lake or
reservoir. EPA identified twelve target
predator species and six target
bottom-dwelling species to limit the number
of species included in the study.
Page xiv: "EPA analyzed different tissue
fractions for predator composites (fillets)
and bottom-dweller composites (whole bodies)
to obtain chemical residue data for the 268
target chemicals. Analyzing fish fillets
provides information for human health, while
whole-body analysis produces information for
ecosystem health. … Resulting fish tissue
concentrations were reported on a wet weight
basis."
Page xvi:
Mercury and PCBs were detected in all the
fish samples collected from the 500 sampling
sites. … Forty-three of the 268 target
chemicals were not detected in any samples,
including all nine organophosphate
pesticides (e.g., chlorpyriphos and diazinon),
one PCB congener (PCB-161), and 16 of the 17
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
analyzed as semivolatile organic chemicals.
There were also seventeen other semivolatile
organic chemicals that were not detected.
In reporting the analytical results for this
study, it is important to distinguish
between detection and presence of a chemical
in a fish tissue sample. Estimates of fish
tissue concentrations ranging from the
method detection limit (MDL) to the minimum
level of quantitation (ML) are reported as
being present with a 99% level of
confidence. However, if a chemical is
reported as "not detected" at the MDL level,
there is a 50% possibility that the chemical
may be present. Therefore, results for
chemicals not detected in the fish tissue
samples are reported as less than the MDL
rather than zero.
Pages xvi-xvii:
According to EPA's 2008 Biennial National
Listing of Fish Advisories, mercury, PCBs,
dioxins and furans, DDT, and chlordane
accounted for 97% of the advisories in
effect at the end of 2008. These five
chemicals were also commonly detected in
fish samples collected for the National Lake
Fish Tissue Study. Since human health
screening values (SVs) were readily
available, they were applied to total
concentrations of mercury, PCBs, dioxins and
furans, DDT, and chlordane found in predator
fillets. The mercury SV is the tissue-based
water quality criterion published by EPA in
2001. All other SVs are risk-based
consumption limits published in 2000 in
EPA's Guidance for Assessing Chemical
Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Consumption
Limits, Third Edition. Specifically, the
applied SVs are the upper limit of the
four-meal-per-month concentration range for
the conservative consumption limit (where
tissue concentrations are available for both
cancer and noncancer health endpoints). If
available, wildlife criteria could be
applied in the same manner to interpret the
whole-body data from analysis of
bottom-dweller samples.
Predator results for the five
commonly-detected chemicals indicate that:
• 48.8% of the sampled population of lakes
had mercury tissue concentrations that
exceeded the 300 ppb (0.3 ppm) human health
SV for mercury, which represents a total of
36,422 lakes.
• 16.8% of the sampled population of lakes
had total PCB tissue concentrations that
exceeded the 12 ppb human health SV, which
represents a total of 12,886 lakes.
• 7.6% of the sampled population of lakes
had dioxin and furan tissue concentrations
that exceeded the 0.15 ppt [toxic
equivalency or TEQ] human health SV, which
represents a total of 5,856 lakes.
• 1.7% of the sampled population of lakes
had DDT tissue concentrations that exceeded
the 69 ppb human health SV, which represents
a total of 1,329 lakes.
• 0.3% of the sampled population of lakes
had fish tissue concentrations that exceeded
the 67 ppb human health SV for chlordane,
which represents a total of 235 lakes.
Page 12: "These field teams collected the
majority of the fish samples during the
summer and fall of each sampling year. This
schedule coincided with the peak period for
recreational fishing activity and allowed
sampling teams to avoid the spawning period
for most target species."
[184] Fact Sheet:
Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and
Related Compounds Update: Impact on Fish
Advisories." EPA, Office of Water, September
1999.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 1: "Dioxins are a group of synthetic
organic chemicals that contain 210
structurally related individual chlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxins (CDDs) and chlorinated
dibenzofurans (CDFs). For the purposes of
this fact sheet, the term "dioxins" will
refer to the aggregate of all CDDs and CDFs."
Page 28: "Specifically, the report screening
values are the upper limit of the
four-meal-per-month concentration range for
the more conservative consumption limit
where tissue concentrations are available
for both cancer and noncancer health
endpoints."
[185] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page ES-2: "This assessment is based
primarily on the EPA's NCA [National Coastal
Assessment] data collected between 2003 and
2006."
Page ES-15: "Because this assessment is a
'snapshot' of the environment at the time
the measurements were collected, some of the
uncertainly associated with the measurements
is difficult to quantify. Weather impacts
such as droughts, floods, and hurricanes can
affect results for weeks to months, in
addition to normal sampling variability."
Page ES-15: "Nearly 75% by area of all the
coastal waters, including the bays, sounds,
and estuaries in the United States, is
located in Alaska, and no national report on
coastal condition can be truly complete
without information on the condition of the
living resources and use attainment of these
waters. For this report, coastal monitoring
data were only available for the
southeastern region of Alaska…."
Page 1-9: "Southeastern Alaska's coastal
waters … represent 63% of Alaska's total
coastline…."
Page 1-22:
[F]ish sampling was conducted at all
monitoring stations where this activity was
feasible. At all sites where sufficient fish
tissue was obtained, contaminant burdens
were determined in fillet or whole-body
samples. The target species typically
included demersal (bottom-dwelling) and
slower-moving pelagic (water
column-dwelling) species (e.g., finfish,
shrimp, lobster, crab, sea cucumbers…) that
are representative of each of the geographic
regions (Northeast Coast, Southeast Coast,
Gulf Coast, West Coast, Southeastern Alaska,
American Samoa, and Guam). These
intermediate, trophic-level (position in the
food web) species are often prey for larger
predatory fish of commercial value (Harvey
et al., 2008). Where available, 4 to 10
individual fish from each target species at
each sampling site were analyzed by
compositing fish tissues from the same
species.
Although the EPA risk-based advisory
guidance values were developed to evaluate
the health risks of consuming market-sized
fish fillets, they also may be used to
assess the risk of contaminants in
whole-body fish samples as a basis for
estimating advisory determinations—an
approach currently used by many state fish
advisory programs (U.S. EPA, 2000c). Under
the NCA program, EPA is also using these
advisory guidance values as surrogate
benchmark values for fish health in the
absence of comprehensive ecological
thresholds for contaminant levels in
juvenile and adult fish. …
Page 1-23:

Page 123: "The rating for each site was
based on the measured concentrations of
these contaminants within the fish tissue
samples…. The fish tissue contaminants index
regional rating was based on percent of
sites rather than percent area because
target fish species were not caught at a
large proportion of sites in each region,
which invalidated the computation of percent
area and associated uncertainty."
Page 1-24: "Cutpoints for Determining the
Fish Tissue Contaminants Index by Station …
Rating … Poor: For at least one chemical
contaminant listed in Table 1-21, the
measured concentrations in fish tissue
exceeds the maximum value in the range of
the EPA Advisory Guidance values for
risk-based consumption associated with four
8-ounce meals per month."
Page 1-37:
The NCA [National Coastal Assessment]
analyzes both juvenile and adult fish, most
often as whole specimens, because this is
the way fish would typically be consumed by
predator species. This approach is
appropriate for an ecological assessment. In
contrast, most state programs assess the
risk of contaminant exposure to human
populations and, therefore, analyze
primarily the fillet tissue (portion most
commonly consumed by the general
population). … The use of whole-fish samples
can result in higher concentrations of those
contaminants (e.g., … (DDT), PCBs, dioxins
and other chlorinated pesticides) that are
stored in fatty tissues and lower
concentrations of contaminants (e.g.,
mercury) that accumulate primarily in the
muscle tissue.
Page 2-10:
Figure 2-10 shows that 13% of all stations
where fish were caught demonstrated
contaminant concentrations in fish tissues
above EPA Advisory Guidance values and were
rated poor. The NCA examined whole-body
composite samples, as well as fillets
(typically 4 to 10 fish of a target species
per station), for specific contaminants from
1,623 stations throughout the coastal waters
of the United States (excluding Hawaii,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands).
Stations in poor and fair condition were
dominated by samples with elevated
concentrations of total PCBs, total DDT,
total PAHs, and mercury.
[186] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 3-10:
The fish tissue contaminants index for the
Northeast Coast region is rated fair to poor
based on concentrations of chemical
contaminants found in composites of
whole-body fish, lobster, and fish fillet
samples. Twenty percent of the sites sampled
where fish were caught were rated poor, and
an additional 20% were rated fair based on
comparison to EPA advisory guidance values
(Figure 3-8). The poor sites were largely
congregated in Great Bay, NH; Narragansett
Bay, RI; Long Island Sound; NY/NJ Harbor;
and the upper Delaware Estuary. Elevated
concentrations of PCBs were responsible for
the impaired ratings for a large majority of
sites. Moderate to high levels of DDT were
detected in samples collected from sites
located in the Hudson, Passaic, and Delaware
rivers, and moderate mercury contamination
was evident in samples collected from sites
in Great Bay, NH; Narragansett Bay, RI; and
the Hudson River.
[187] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 5-11:
The fish tissue contaminants index for the
coastal waters of the Gulf Coast region is
rated good, with 9% of all sites where fish
were sampled rated poor for fish tissue
contaminant concentrations (Figure 5-10).
Contaminant concentrations exceeding EPA
advisory guidance values in Gulf Coast
samples were observed primarily in Atlantic
croaker and hardhead catfish. Commonly
observed contaminants included total PAHs,
PCBs, DDT, mercury, and arsenic. Although
many of the Gulf Coast estuarine and coastal
areas do have fish consumption advisories in
effect, that advice primarily concerns
recreational game fish such as king
mackerel, which are not sampled by the NCA
program.
[188] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 6-24:
Analysis of chemical contaminants in fish
tissues was performed on whole-fish
composites from 55 samples of four fish
species collected from 50 West Coast
coastal-ocean stations. Fish were collected
from 21 stations in Washington, 20 in
Oregon, and 9 in California. The fish
species selected for analysis were Pacific
sanddab (Citharichthys sordidus), speckled
sanddab (Citharichthys stigmaeus), butter
sole (Isopsetta isolepis), and Dover sole (Microstomus
pacificus). Concentrations of a suite of
metals, pesticides, and PCBs were compared
to risk-based EPA advisory guidelines for
recreational fishers (U.S. EPA, 2000c).
None of the 50 stations where fish were
caught would have been rated poor based on
NCA cutpoints. Nine stations had cadmium
concentrations between the corresponding
lower and upper endpoints, and one station
had total PCB concentrations between these
endpoints. Therefore, these10 stations would
be rated fair based on the NCA cutpoints
(see Table 1-21). The remaining 40 stations
had concentrations of contaminants below
corresponding lower endpoints and would be
rated good based on the NCA cutpoints. Based
on the NCA Fish Tissue Contaminants Index
(see Table 1-22) the overall offshore region
would receive the same rating, good, as the
West Coast coastal waters.
[189] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 8-8: "The fish tissue contaminants
index for the coastal waters of Southeastern
Alaska is rated good, with 6% of the
stations where fish were caught rated fair
and none of the stations rated poor (Figure
8-8)."
[190] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 9-5: "The fish tissue contaminants
index for American Samoa is rated good based
on fish tissue samples collected at 47
sites. The fish tissue contaminants index is
rated poor at 4% of the sites at which fish
were caught due to concentrations of PAHs
and mercury in fish tissue (Figure 9-7)."
[191] Report: "National
Coastal Condition Report IV." EPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Water,
April 2012.
http://water.epa.gov/...
Page 9-15: "The fish tissue contaminants
index for Guam is rated good, with 100% of
the stations where fish were caught rated
good (Figure 9-15). The fish tissue
contaminant index rating is considered
provisional because data are available for
only 28 stations. Additionally, it is worth
noting that only one sample was collected
from some of the areas where contaminants
have historically been present in Guam's
waters (e.g., Apra Harbor and Cocos
Lagoon)."
[192] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/...
Page 6: "While the majority of surface and
ground waters in the U.S. meet regulatory
standards, a significant portion of
monitored surface waters contains fecal
bacterial densities that exceed the levels
established by state surface water quality
standards."
Page 9:
Approximately 13% of surface waters in the
United States do not meet designated use
criteria as determined by high densities of
fecal indicator bacteria. Although some of
the contamination is attributed to point
sources such as confined animal feeding
operation (CAFO) and wastewater treatment
plant effluents, nonpoint sources are
believed to contribute substantially to
water pollution. Microbial source tracking
(MST) methods have recently been used to
help identify nonpoint sources responsible
for the fecal pollution of water systems.
Page 11:
The Clean Water Act establishes that the
states must adopt water quality standards
that are compatible with pollution control
programs to reduce pollutant discharges into
waterways. In many cases the standards have
been met by the significant reduction of
loads from point sources under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
Point sources are defined as "any
discernable, confined and discrete
conveyance, including but not limited to any
pipe, ditch or concentrated animal feeding
operation from which pollutants are or may
be discharged". However, more than 30 years
after the Clean Water Act was implemented, a
significant fraction of the U.S. rivers,
lakes, and estuaries continue to be
classified as failing to meet their
designated uses due to the high levels of
fecal bacteria (USEPA 2000b). As a
consequence, protection from fecal microbial
contamination is one of the most important
and difficult challenges facing
environmental scientists trying to safeguard
waters used for recreation (primary and
secondary contact), public water supplies,
and propagation of fish and shellfish. …
Microbiological impairment of water is
assessed by monitoring concentrations of
fecal-indicator bacteria such as fecal
coliforms and enterococci (USEPA 2000a).
These microorganisms are associated with
fecal material from humans and other
warm-blooded animals and their presence in
water is used to indicate potential presence
of enteric pathogens that could cause
illness in exposed persons (Dufour, 1984).
Fecally contaminated waters not only harbor
pathogens and pose potential high risks to
human health, but they also result in
significant economic loss due to closure of
shellfish harvesting areas and recreational
beaches (Rabinovici et al., 2004). For
effective management of fecal contamination
to water systems, the sources must be
identified prior to implementing remediation
practices.
[193] Article: "Wildlife
Waste Is Major Water Polluter, Studies Say."
By David A. Fahrenthold. Washington Post,
September 29, 2006.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
NOTE: Credit for bringing this article to
attention belongs to Stephen F. Hayward &
Amy Kaleita of the Pacific Research
Institute. (Report: "Index of Leading
Environmental Indicators." Twelfth edition,
2007.
http://liberty.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20070418_07EnvIndex.pdf)
[194] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 96-98:
Case 1. St. Andrews Park (Georgia) Source of
information: Hartel, P., K. Gates, and K.
Payne. 2004. Targeted sampling of St.
Andrews Park on Jekyll Island to determine
sources of fecal contamination …
Summary of results and conclusions. During
calm weather, highest concentrations of
enterococci were detected in the upper
reaches of Beach Creek, the sediments of the
creek, and the bathing area. Species
composition in creek sediments and bathing
area sediments were different, which was
taken to indicate effects by different
enterococci sources. The large proportion of
E. faecalis in the upper reaches of Beach
Creek was interpreted to implicate wild
birds or humans as a source. The conclusion
that wild birds, not humans, were a major
source in the upper reaches of Beach Creek
was supported by the marshy character of the
area, which makes a human source unlikely at
that location. Though there was no
statistical correlation between turbidity
and enterococci concentration, co-incidence
of high enterococci concentrations and high
turbidity in windy weather was taken as
evidence that sediments were a source of
elevated water-column numbers during windy
weather.
Human-specific adhesin factor was not
detected in any of 200 isolates tested. This
was interpreted as evidence that human
sources were not major contributors of
enterococci to the test area. However, the
incidence rate of the human-specific marker
in enterococci colonizing the human
population is unknown, and there was no
mention of a positive control in marker
detection by the research method used, which
might limit the interpretability of this
result. Human population size, local
approaches to control human waste, or
proximity of human residences to the
affected area, factors which were certainly
considered in the study, were not mentioned
in the report as further corroborating data.
[195] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 99-102:
Case 2. Tampa Bay (Florida) Source of
information: J.B. Rose, J.H. Paul, M.R.
McLaughlin, V. J. Harwood, S. Farrah, M.
Tamplin, J. Lukasik, M. Flanery, P. Stanek
and H. Greening. 2000. …
Summary of results and conclusions. Perhaps
one of the most striking findings of this
study is the extent to which wild animals
dominate as a source of fecal coliform and
E. coli isolates. Over the course of the
study, wild animal isolates dominated each
site according to ARA. Ribotyping results
were consistent; in 74% of all samples
(n=53) the majority of isolates were
identified as nonhuman. However, all sites
displayed some level of human fecal
pollution according to the three methods
used (ribotyping, ARA and enterovirus
counts). The three different methods did not
always coincide on their detection of the
presence or absence of human contamination,
however the data collected over the course
of the study unambiguously documents the
presence of human fecal sources.
[196] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 103-105:
Case 3. Vermillion River (Minnesota) Source
of information: Sadowsky, M. 2004. …
Summary of results and conclusions.
Identifications indicated that 14% of
unknowns matched with geese, 12% with pigs,
12% with cats, 10% with cows, 9% with human,
9% with deer, 9% with sheep, and 9% with
turkey. The remaining percentages (30%) then
fall off to match with the other groups or
remained unclassified. The conclusion was
that geese, pigs, cats, cows, humans, deer,
sheep, and turkeys were the dominant sources
of fecal pollution in the watershed.
[197] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 106-108:
Case 4. Anacostia River (Maryland/District
of Columbia) Source of information: Hagedorn,
C., K. Porter, and A. H. Chapman. 2003. …
Summary of results and conclusions. The
dominant sources over all 10 months of
sampling were (using ARA) birds (31%),
wildlife (25%), and humans (24%), followed
by pets (20%). Livestock detections were
essentially non-existent.
[198] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 109-112:
Case 5. Accotink Creek, Blacks Run, and
Christians Creek (Virginia) Source of
information: Hyer, K. E. and D. L. Moyer.
2003. …
Outcomes 1. Summary of results and
conclusions. Overall, about 65% of isolates
could be assigned to a source in this study.
Of the remaining 35%, some had no match in
the library (unknown) and others matched to
multiple sources (transient). Classification
was made to the species level with some
exceptions (for example, some bird-origin
feces could be classified to species, but
others could only be classified to "avian"
or "poultry"). The MST results were a
combination of the expected and the
unanticipated. Fecal-indicator sources in
Accotink Creek, the urban setting, were
affected by human and pet feces, as
expected, but were also strongly influenced
by waterfowl. Blacks Run fecal-indicator
bacteria were a mixture of human, pet, and
livestock sources, as expected.
Fecal-indicator concentrations in Christians
Creek had a larger human and pet component
than expected (about 25% of isolates),
compared with livestock and poultry (about
50%). A further unexpected finding in all
three watersheds was that relative
contributions from each major source were
about the same during both base-flow and
storm-flow periods, despite the expectation
that different transport pathways would
dramatically change relative contributions
from different sources.
[199] Article: "Wildlife
Waste Is Major Water Polluter, Studies Say."
By David A. Fahrenthold. Washington Post,
September 29, 2006.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
In the Potomac and the Anacostia, for
instance, more than half of the bacteria in
the streams came from wild creatures. EPA
documents show that similar problems were
found in Maryland, where wildlife were more
of a problem than humans and livestock
combined in the Magothy River, and in
Northern Virginia tributaries such as
Accotink Creek, where geese were responsible
for 24 percent of bacteria, as opposed to 20
percent attributable to people.
"Wildlife consistently came up as being . .
. a major player," said Peter Gold, an
environmental scientist for the EPA.
NOTE: Credit for bringing this article to
attention belongs to Stephen F. Hayward &
Amy Kaleita of the Pacific Research
Institute. (Report: "Index of Leading
Environmental Indicators." Twelfth edition,
2007.
http://liberty.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20070418_07EnvIndex.pdf)
[200] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 113-115:
Case 6. Avalon Bay (California) Source of
information: Boehm, A. B., Fuhrman, J. A.,
Mrše, R. D. and Grant, S. B. 2003. …
Summary of results and conclusions. FIB
[fecal indicator bacteria] in Avalon Bay
appear to be from multiple, primarily
land-based, sources including bird
droppings, contaminated subsurface water,
leaking drains, and runoff from street
wash-down activities. Multiple shoreline
samples and two subsurface water samples
tested positive for human-specific bacteria
and enterovirus, suggesting that at least a
portion of the FIB contamination is from
human sewage.
[201] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 116-117:
Case 7. Holmans Creek (Virginia) Source of
information: Noto, M., K. Hoover, E.
Johnson, J. McDonough, E. Stevens, and B. A.
Wiggins. 2000. …
Summary of results and conclusions. Human
sources were dominant in five of eight
sampling events, and at four of nine
locations. In 53 of the 64 samples, the
proportion of human was above the MDP, and
human was the dominant source in 29 of the
64 samples. Cattle was the dominant source
on three of eight sampling days, and at five
of nine locations. The proportion of cattle
was above the MDP Minimal Detectable
Percentage] in 52 of 64 samples, and cattle
was the dominant source in 26 of them.
Poultry and geese fecal contributions were
low throughout the sampling period. The
conclusions were that humans and cattle are
the dominant sources of fecal pollution in
the watershed.
[202] Report: "Microbial
Source Tracking Guide Document." EPA, Office
of Research and Development, June 2005.
http://www.extension.purdue.edu/waterquality/resources/MSTGuide.pdf
Pages 119-120:
Case 8. Homosassa Springs (Florida) Source
of information: Griffin, D. W., R. Stokes,
J. B. Rose, and J. H. Paul III. 2000. …
Summary of results and conclusions. F+
specific RNA coliphage analysis indicated
that fecal contamination at all sites that
had F+ RNA coliphage was from animal sources
(mammals and birds). These results suggest
that animal (either indigenous or residents
of HSSWP [Homosassa Springs State Wildlife
Park]) and not human sources influenced
microbial water quality in the area of
Homosassa River covered by this study.
[203] "EPA's Report on
the Environment: Highlights of National
Trends." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_hd/ROE_HD_Final_2008.pdf
Page 12:
More than 1 million cubic miles of fresh
water lies underground, stored in cracks and
pores below the Earth's surface. The vast
majority of the world's fresh water
available for human use is ground water,
which has 30 times the volume of the world's
fresh surface waters. Many parts of the
country rely heavily on ground water for
important needs such as drinking water,
irrigation, industry, and livestock.
Some ecological systems also depend on
ground water. For example, many fish species
depend on spring-fed waters for their
habitat or spawning grounds. Springs occur
when a body of ground water reaches the
Earth's surface. By some estimates, ground
water feeds about 40 percent of total
national stream flow, and the percentage
could be much higher in arid areas.
[204] "EPA's Report on
the Environment: Highlights of National
Trends." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_hd/ROE_HD_Final_2008.pdf
Page 15:
To protect public health, EPA sets federal
health-based standards for drinking water
for public water systems. Public water
systems include community water systems—
systems that supply drinking water to 25 or
more of the same people year-round in their
residences. Community water systems serve
more than 286 million people, or about 95
percent† of the U.S. population.
Public water systems must test for regulated
contaminants and treat the water, if needed,
to meet the federal standards. Disinfection
of drinking water effectively protects
against the risk of waterborne diseases such
as typhoid, cholera, and hepatitis.
Filtration, required for most public water
systems that use surface water, provides
additional protection against microbial
contaminants.
KEY POINTS
In 2007, 92 percent of community water
system customers (262 million people) were
served by facilities for which states
reported no violations of EPA's health-based
drinking water standards (see graphic).
Approximately 24 million people in 2007 were
served by systems for which states did
report violations of these standards. A
portion, but not all, of these people might
have been exposed to contaminants in
drinking water at levels above standards.
Most of these violations involved rules
addressing microbial contaminants or
disinfection byproducts (chemicals that can
form when disinfectants, such as chlorine,
react with naturally occurring materials in
water). The level of health risk associated
with violations varies, depending partly on
which contaminants were involved, the extent
to which a standard was exceeded, the extent
to which the distribution system was
affected, and how long the violation lasted.
Microbial violations, in particular, can be
short term.
These data address drinking water from
community water systems only. They do not
address the quality of drinking water that
people get from nonpublic supplies (such as
private wells and untreated surface water
sources), from public water systems serving
transient populations (such as roadside rest
stops and campgrounds), or from
nonresidential users (such as some
workplaces and schools).
† NOTE: This 95% figure for the portion of
Americans served by community water systems
appears to be in conflict with the 15%
figure (in the forthcoming footnote) for the
portion of Americans who "rely on privately
owned household wells for their drinking
water."
[205] Report: "FACTOIDS:
Drinking Water and Ground Water Statistics
for 2008." EPA, Office of Water, November
2008.
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/databases/pdfs/data_factoids_2008.pdf
Page 8: "These measures are based on
violations reported by states to the EPA
Safe Drinking Water Information System. EPA
is aware of inaccuracies and underreporting
of some data in this system. We are working
with the states to improve the quality of
the data."
[206] Report: "Air
Quality Criteria for Lead," Volume I of II.
EPA, October 2006.
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=459555
Page 3-33:
Lead in drinking water primarily results
from corrosion from Pb pipes, Pb-based
solder, or brass or bronze fixtures within a
residence (Lee et al., 1989; Singley, 1994;
Isaac et al., 1997). Very little Pb in
drinking water comes from utility supplies.
Experiments of Gulson et al. (1994) have
confirmed this by using isotopic Pb
analysis. Tap water analyses for a public
school, apartments, and free standing houses
also indicate that the indoor plumbing is a
greater source of Pb in drinking water than
the utility, even for residences and schools
serviced by Pb-pipe water mains (Moir et
al., 1996). Ratios of influent Pb
concentration to tap concentrations in homes
in four municipalities in Massachusetts
ranged between 0.17 to 0.69, providing
further confirmation that in-home Pb
corrosion dominates the trace quantities of
Pb in municipal water supplies (Isaac et
al., 1997). The information in this section
addresses Pb concentrations in water
intended for human consumption only.
However, such water comes from the natural
environment, and concentrations of Pb found
in natural systems are discussed in Chapter
7.
[207] Report: "Quality
of Water from Domestic Wells in Principal
Aquifers of the United States, 1991–2004."
By Leslie A. DeSimone. U.S. Department of
the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey,
National Water-Quality Assessment Program,
2009.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5227/includes/sir2008-5227.pdf
Pages 1-2:
As part of the National Water-Quality
Assessment Program of the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), water samples were collected
during 1991–2004 from domestic wells
(private wells used for household drinking
water) for analysis of drinking-water
contaminants, where contaminants are
considered, as defined by the Safe Drinking
Water Act, to be all substances in water.
Physical properties and the concentrations
of major ions, trace elements, nutrients,
radon, and organic compounds (pesticides and
volatile organic compounds) were measured in
as many as 2,167 wells; fecal indicator
bacteria and radionuclides also were
measured in some wells. The wells were
located within major hydrogeologic settings
of 30 regionally extensive aquifers used for
water supply in the United States. One
sample was collected from each well prior to
any in-home treatment. Concentrations were
compared to water-quality benchmarks for
human health, either U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) Maximum
Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for public water
supplies or USGS Health-Based Screening
Levels (HBSLs).
No individual contaminant was present in
concentrations greater than available health
benchmarks in more than 8 percent of the
sampled wells. Collectively, however, about
23 percent of wells had at least 1
contaminant present at concentrations
greater than an MCL [Maximum Contaminant
Level] or HBSL [Health-Based Screening
Level], based on analysis of samples from
1,389 wells in which most contaminants were
measured. Radon, nitrate, several trace
elements, fluoride, gross alpha- and
beta-particle radioactivity, and fecal
indicator bacteria were found most
frequently (in one or more percent of wells)
at concentrations greater than benchmarks
and, thus, are of potential concern for
human health. Radon concentrations were
greater than the lower of two proposed MCLs
(300 picocuries per liter or pCi/L) in about
65 percent of the wells and greater than the
higher proposed MCL (4,000 pCi/L) in about 4
percent of wells. Nitrate, arsenic,
manganese, strontium, and gross
alpha-particle radioactivity (uncorrected)
each were present at levels greater than
MCLs or HBSLs in samples from about 5 to 7
percent of the wells; boron, fluoride,
uranium, and gross beta-particle
radioactivity were present at levels greater
than MCLs or HBSLs in about 1 to 2 percent
of the wells. Total coliform and Escherichia
coli bacteria were detected in about 34 and
8 percent, respectively, of sampled wells.
Thus, with the exception of nitrate and
fecal indicator bacteria, the contaminants
that were present in the sampled wells most
frequently at concentrations greater than
human-health benchmarks were naturally
occurring.
Anthropogenic [manmade] organic compounds
were frequently detected at low
concentrations … but were seldom present at
concentrations greater than MCLs or HBSLs.
The most frequently detected compounds
included the pesticide atrazine, its
degradate deethylatrazine, and the volatile
organic compounds chloroform, methyl tert-butyl
ether, perchloroethene, and
dichlorofluoromethane. Only 7 of 168 organic
compounds were present in samples at
concentrations greater than MCLs or HBSLs,
each in less than 1 percent of wells. These
were diazinon, dibromochloroprane, dinoseb,
dieldrin, ethylene dibromide,
perchloroethene, and trichloroethene.
Overall, concentrations of any organic
compound greater than MCLs or HBSLs were
present in 0.8 percent of wells, and
concentrations of any organic compound
greater than one-tenth of MCLs or HBSLs were
present in about 3 percent of wells. …
Geographic patterns of occurrence among
principal aquifers showed that several
contaminants and properties may be of
greater potential concern in certain
locations or regions than nationally. For
example, radon concentrations were greater
than the proposed MCLs in 30 percent (higher
proposed MCL) and 90 percent (lower proposed
MCL) of wells in crystalline-rock aquifers
located in the Northeast, the central and
southern Appalachians, and Colorado. Nitrate
was present at concentrations greater than
the MCL more frequently in agricultural
areas than in other land-use settings.
Contaminant concentrations also were related
to geochemical conditions. For example,
uranium concentrations were correlated with
concentrations of dissolved oxygen in
addition to showing regional patterns of
occurrence; relatively high iron and
manganese concentrations occurred
everywhere, but were inversely correlated
with dissolved oxygen concentrations. …
More than 43 million people—about 15 percent
of the population of the United States—rely
on privately owned household wells for their
drinking water (Hutson and others, 2004).
The quality and safety of these water
supplies, known as private or domestic
wells, are not regulated under Federal or,
in most cases, state law. Rather, individual
homeowners are responsible for maintaining
their domestic well systems and for any
routine water-quality monitoring. The Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) governs the
Federal regulation and monitoring of public
water supplies. Although the SDWA does not
include regulation of domestic wells, its
approach to evaluating the suitability of
drinking water for public supplies provides
a useful approach for evaluating the quality
of drinking water obtained from domestic
wells. The SDWA defines terminology related
to water supply and the process by which
drinking-water standards, called Maximum
Contaminant Levels (MCLs), are established
to ensure safe levels of specific
contaminants in public water systems. The
SDWA defines a contaminant as "any physical,
chemical, biological, or radiological
substance or matter in water" (U.S. Senate,
2002), whether potentially harmful or not
(see sidebar on page 3).
When the SDWA was passed in 1974, it
mandated a national study of rural water
systems, including domestic wells. In that
study, which focused on indicator bacteria
and inorganic contaminants, contaminant
concentrations were found to be greater than
health benchmarks, which included available
MCLs, in more than 15 percent of the
domestic wells in the United States
(National Statistical Assessment of Rural
Water Conditions, or NSA; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1984). Studies of many
geographic areas and contaminants since then
have shown that a variety of contaminants
can be present in domestic wells, although
usually at concentrations that are unlikely
to have adverse human-health effects.
Page 3:
A contaminant is defined by the SDWA as "any
physical, chemical, biological, or
radiological substance or matter in water"
(U.S. Senate, 2002; 40 CFR 141.2). This
broad definition of contaminant includes
every substance that may be found dissolved
or suspended in water—everything but the
water molecule itself. Another term
sometimes used to describe a substance in
water is "water-quality constituent," which
has a meaning similar to the SDWA definition
of contaminant.
The presence of a contaminant in water does
not necessarily mean that there is a
human-health concern. Whether a particular
contaminant in water is potentially harmful
to human health depends on its toxicity and
concentration in drinking water. In fact,
many contaminants are beneficial at certain
concentrations. For example, many naturally
occurring inorganic contaminants, such as
selenium, are required in small amounts for
normal physiologic function, even though
higher amounts may cause adverse health
effects (Eaton and Klaassen, 2001). On the
other hand, anthropogenic organic
contaminants, such as pesticides, are not
required by humans, but may or may not have
adverse effects on humans, depending on
concentrations, exposure, and toxicity. As a
first step toward evaluating whether a
particular contaminant may adversely affect
human health, its concentration measured in
water can be compared to a U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) or a U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) Health-Based
Screening Level (HBSL). Concentrations
greater than these water-quality benchmarks
indicate the potential for health effects
(see discussion in the section,
"Water-Quality Benchmarks for Human
Health").
Page 9:
HBSLs [Health-Based Screening Levels], are
non-enforceable benchmark concentrations
that can be used in screening-level
assessments to evaluate water-quality data
within the context of human health…. … HBSLs
are equivalent to existing USEPA [U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency] Lifetime
Health Advisory and Cancer Risk
Concentration values (when they exist),
except for unregulated compounds for which
more recent toxicity information has become
available….
Water-quality benchmarks, including MCLs and
HBSLs, were available for 154 of the 214
contaminants measured in this study.
[208] "EPA's Report on
the Environment: Highlights of National
Trends." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 12:
About 60 percent of shallow wells tested in
agricultural areas contained pesticide
compounds. Approximately 1 percent of the
shallow wells tested had concentrations of
pesticides above levels considered safe for
human health. …
The data in this report do not provide
information about the condition of deeper
aquifers, which are more likely to be used
for public water supplies. These data only
characterize the uppermost layers of shallow
aquifers typically used by private wells.
[209] Book: Molecular
Biology and Biotechnology: A Guide for
Teachers, Third edition. By Helen
Kreuzer and Adrianne Massey. ASM [American
Society for Microbiology] Press, 2008. Page
540:
Many people are frightened by the use of
synthetic chemicals on food crops because
they have heard that these chemicals are
"toxic" and "cancer causing," but are all
synthetic chemicals more harmful than
substances people readily ingest, like
coffee and soft drinks? No (Table 37.2). For
example, in a study to assess the toxicities
of various compounds, half of the rats died
when given 233 mg of caffeine per kg of body
weight, but it took more than 10 times that
amount of glyphosate (4,500 mg glyphosate/kg
body weight), which is the active ingredient
in the herbicide Roundup, to cause the same
percentage of deaths as 233 mg of caffeine.
[210] Web page: "Wastes
» Non-Hazardous Waste » Municipal Solid
Waste." EPA, April 3, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/municipal/index.htm
"Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)—more commonly
known as trash or garbage—consists of
everyday items we use and then throw away,
such as product packaging, grass clippings,
furniture, clothing, bottles, food scraps,
newspapers, appliances, paint, and
batteries. This comes from our homes,
schools, hospitals, and businesses."
[211] Web page:
"Glossary of Recycling & Solid Waste Terms,
Abbreviations and Acronyms." Connecticut
Department of Energy and Environmental
Protection, November 18, 2009.
http://www.ct.gov/...
"Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) – Solid waste
from residential, commercial and industrial
sources, excluding solid waste consisting of
significant quantities of hazardous waste as
defined in section 22a-115, land-clearing
debris, demolition debris, biomedical waste,
sewage sludge and scrap metal."
[212] Report: "Municipal
Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and
Figures for 2010." EPA, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 2: "MSW [municipal solid waste] does
not include industrial, hazardous, or
construction waste."
[213] Report: "Municipal
Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and
Figures for 2010." EPA, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 4: "Figure 5. Total MSW Generation (by
material), 2010"
[214] Report: "Municipal
Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and
Figures for 2010." EPA, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 4: "We estimated residential waste
(including waste from apartment houses) to
be 55 to 65 percent of total MSW generation.
Waste from commercial and institutional
locations, such as businesses, schools, and
hospitals amounted to 35 to 45 percent."
[215] Report: "Municipal
Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and
Figures for 2010." EPA, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
"In 2010, Americans generated about 250
million tons of trash and recycled and
composted over 85 million tons of this
material, equivalent to a 34.1 percent
recycling rate (see Figure 1 and Figure 2).
On average, we recycled and composted 1.51
pounds out of our individual waste
generation of 4.43 pounds per person per
day."
[216] Calculated with
data from the report: "Municipal Solid Waste
Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the
United States: Tables and Figures for 2010."
EPA, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Table 29:
Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting,
Combustion, and Discards Of Municipal Solid
Waste, 1960 to 2010 (In thousands of tons
and percent of total generation) …
2010 …
Recovery for recycling [=] 64,970 …
Recovery for composting* [=] 20,170 …
Combustion with energy recovery** [=] 29,260
Discards to landfill, other disposal†
[=]135,460 …
* Composting of yard trimmings, food scraps
and other MSW [municipal solid waste]
organic material. Does not include backyard
composting.
** Includes combustion of MSW in mass burn
or refuse-derived fuel form, and combustion
with energy recovery of source separated
materials in MSW (e.g., wood pallets and
tire-derived fuel). 2010 includes 25,930 MSW,
520 wood, and 2,810 tires (1,000 tons)
† Discards after recovery minus combustion
with energy recovery. Discards include
combustion without energy recovery.
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[217] Paper: "Municipal
Solid Waste Recycling Issues." By Lester B.
Lave and others. Journal of Environmental
Engineering, October 1999. Pages
944-949.
http://msl1.mit.edu/...
Page 944: "The almost universal aversion to
landfills comes from the history of city
dumps that smelled, looked terrible, were
infested with rats and other pests, and
posed risks to health. Sanitary engineers
responded by designing modern landfills that
pose few of these problems. Modern landfills
have a minimum odor nuisance, do not have
pests, and pose few problems after they are
closed. With rules mandating daily cover,
clay and rubber liners, clay caps, and
leachate collection systems, modern
landfills are a tribute to sanitary
engineering."
[218] Paper:
"Comparative LCAs [Life Cycle Assessments]
for Curbside Recycling Versus Either
Landfilling or Incineration with Energy
Recovery." By Jeffrey Morris.
International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, 2005. Pages 273-284.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m423181w2hh036n4/
Page 276: "[R]efuse deposited in a landfill
with a LFG [landfill gas] collection system
will anaerobically decompose over time, and
… the LFG collection system captures methane
and other volatile gases released during
that decomposition process."
Page 277:
Estimated greenhouse gas offsets for energy
generated from landfill gases collected at
SLO's landfill in 2002 are shown as the
negative portion of the Garbage Impacts
stacked bar. These reductions in greenhouse
gases that would otherwise have been
generated at coal fired power plants to
produce the energy generated by SLO's [San
Luis Obispo County, Washington] collected
landfill gas were substantial enough, given
the greater than 75% capture efficiency
assumed for the landfill's gas collection
system, to more than offset the greenhouse
effect of methane emissions from gases that
escape the landfill's gas collection system
and carbon dioxide emissions from diesel
fuels consumed in collecting refuse, hauling
it to the landfill, and compacting it in
place at the landfill.
Page 282:
Fig. 10 shows the amount of greenhouse gas
emissions prevented each month by curbside
recycling in WA State's four regions. Here
even the waste management systems for three
of the regions show a reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions for recycling. This
is because, unlike SLO County, collected LFG
is not used to generate energy but is simply
flared. As a result the uncollected landfill
methane has more global warming impact than
the energy used to collect, process and
market materials collected in each region's
curbside recycling programs.
[219] Web page: "Wastes
» Non-Hazardous Waste » Municipal Solid
Waste » Landfills." EPA, April 9, 2012.
http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/municipal/landfill.htm
Modern landfills are well-engineered
facilities that are located, designed,
operated, and monitored to ensure compliance
with federal regulations. Solid waste
landfills must be designed to protect the
environment from contaminants which may be
present in the solid waste stream. The
landfill siting plan—which prevents the
siting of landfills in
environmentally-sensitive areas—as well as
on-site environmental monitoring
systems—which monitor for any sign of
groundwater contamination and for landfill
gas—provide additional safeguards. In
addition, many new landfills collect
potentially harmful landfill gas emissions
and convert the gas into energy. …
Municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs)
receive household waste. MSWLFs can also
receive non-hazardous sludge, industrial
solid waste, and construction and demolition
debris. All MSWLFs must comply with the
federal regulations in 40 CFR Part 258
(Subtitle D of RCRA), or equivalent state
regulations. Federal MSWLF standards
include:
• Location restrictions—ensure that
landfills are built in suitable geological
areas away from faults, wetlands, flood
plains, or other restricted areas.
• Composite liners requirements—include a
flexible membrane (geomembrane) overlaying
two feet of compacted clay soil lining the
bottom and sides of the landfill, protect
groundwater and the underlying soil from
leachate releases.
• Leachate collection and removal
systems—sit on top of the composite liner
and removes leachate from the landfill for
treatment and disposal.
• Operating practices—include compacting and
covering waste frequently with several
inches of soil help reduce odor; control
litter, insects, and rodents; and protect
public health.
• Groundwater monitoring
requirements—requires testing groundwater
wells to determine whether waste materials
have escaped from the landfill.
• Closure and postclosure care
requirements—include covering landfills and
providing long-term care of closed
landfills.
• Corrective action provisions—control and
clean up landfill releases and achieves
groundwater protection standards.
• Financial assurance—provides funding for
environmental protection during and after
landfill closure (i.e., closure and
postclosure care).
Some materials may be banned from disposal
in municipal solid waste landfills including
common household items such as paints,
cleaners/chemicals, motor oil, batteries,
and pesticides. Leftover portions of these
products are called household hazardous
waste. These products, if mishandled, can be
dangerous to your health and the
environment. Many municipal landfills have a
household hazardous waste drop-off station
for these materials.
[220] "EPA's Report on
the Environment: Highlights of National
Trends." EPA, 2008.
http://www.epa.gov/roe/docs/roe_final/EPAROE_FINAL_2008.PDF
Page 23: "Except for spills and natural
events, most land contamination is the
result of historical activities that are no
longer practiced."
[221] Report: "How
Landfills Work." South Carolina Department
of Health and Environmental Control, Office
of Solid Waste Reduction and Recycling,
April 5, 2012.
http://www.scdhec.gov/environment/lwm/recycle/pubs/landfill_102.pdf
A Class 3 landfill is a scientifically
engineered facility built into or on the
ground that is designed to hold and isolate
waste from the environment. Federal and
state regulations strictly govern the
location, design, operation and closure of
Class 3 landfills in order to protect human
health and the environment.
Class 3 landfills are the most common places
for waste disposal and are an important part
of an integrated waste management system. …
The life of a landfill depends on the size
of the facility, the disposal rate and the
compaction rate. All Class 3 landfills are
permitted by the S.C. Department of Health
and Environmental Control to accept a
specific amount (tons) of waste each year –
this amount cannot be exceeded. As mentioned
earlier, Class 3 landfill operators strive
for the maximum compaction rate possible in
order to save space. Given these
considerations, the average life expectancy
could be anywhere from 30 to 50 years. Class
3 landfills must be monitored for 30 years
after closure.
[222] "Fresh
Perspectives: Freshkills Park Newsletter."
New York City Department of Parks and
Recreation, Winter/Spring 2012.
http://www.nycgovparks.org/pagefiles/48/newsletter_winter12.pdf
Page 1:
"It is a common misperception that a
landfill is closed when it stops receiving
waste," said New York City Department of
Sanitation (DSNY) engineer, Richard
Napolitano, who managed the day-to-day
operations of the closure of East Mound.
Closing a landfill requires consideration of
its future uses, making engineering design
adjustments, and installing a multi-tiered
final cover system, or cap, that connects to
and safeguards the integrity of the other
environmental systems.
[223] Presentation:
"Post-Closure Use of Capped Landfills –
Opportunities and Limitations. By Bruce
Haskell. Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., October
26, 2006.
http://www.hartfordinfo.org/issues/wsd/landfill/Landfill_10_26_06.pdf
Page 5:
Reuse alternatives commonly evaluated
include
• Nature and habitat area
• Park and sports field
• Golf driving ranges
• Golf course
• Commercial Development
Page 6:
Nationwide reuse examples
also include
• Ski or sledding slopes
• Sculpture or botanical garden
• Public works or other municipal facilities
• Amphitheater
• Cemetery
NOTE: See pages 7-22 for examples of reused
landfills along with before-and-after
pictures.
[224] Article: "Once an
Urban Landfill, Now a Rowing Paradise." By
Juliet Macur. New York Times, May 7,
2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Near the junction of the New Jersey Turnpike
and Interstate 80, not far from the conga
line of traffic grinding toward New York
City, lies a body of water that was once a
garbage dump.
It was a murky soup of reeking refuse, home
to a flotilla of plastic bottles, tires and
even refrigerators. The land around it was
good for only two things, some longtime
residents say, and that was illegal dumping
and trapping muskrat.
But after a recent renaissance, that body of
water, Overpeck Creek, and the new park
abutting it have become a destination for a
much more refined hobby. The creek, nearly
all 134 acres of it in the upper region of
the Meadowlands, has become the newest hot
spot for rowing in the New York metropolitan
area.
[225] Report: "Returning
Some of the Nation's Worst Hazardous Waste
Sites to Safe and Productive Uses." EPA,
Office of Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation, 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/pdf/reusingsites.pdf
Page 2:
Superfund is the federal program to clean up
the nation's abandoned hazardous waste
sites. The program was created by law in
1980 in the wake of the discovery of toxic
waste dumps such as Love Canal and Times
Beach. It allows EPA to clean up sites and
to compel those responsible for
contamination to perform cleanups or
reimburse the government for cleanups. Since
Superfund's creation, remedies have been
completed at 1,060 sites, and work is
underway at an additional 423 sites. EPA has
also identified and assessed thousands of
sites. …
Reuse refers to the productive use of a site
after cleanup. Over the past ten years, EPA
has identified several types of reuse
options. Communities have reused sites for
industrial and commercial uses, such as
factories and shopping malls. Sites have
been used for housing and public works
facilities, such as transit stations. Many
communities have created new recreational
amenities, like ball fields, parks and golf
courses. Sites have also been reused to
support ecological resources, including
wildlife preserves and wetlands, as well as
agricultural land.
NOTE: See pages 4 and 6 for examples of
reused landfills along with before-and-after
pictures.
[226] Report: "Fresh
Kills: Landfill to Landscape." New York City
Department of City Planning, 2001.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/fkl/about_fkl.pdf
Page 1: "Fresh Kills Landfill is located on
the western shore of Staten Island.
Approximately half the 2,200-acre landfill
is composed of four mounds, or sections,
identified as 1/9, 2/8, 3/4 and 6/7 which
range in height from 90 feet to
approximately 225 feet. These mounds are the
result of more than 50 years of landfilling,
primarily household waste."
Page 2: "Fresh Kills Landfill received its
last barge of garbage on March 22, 2001,
marking the beginning of a new era for the
landfill."†
Page 3: "The city's five boroughs [are]
Staten Island, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens
and the Bronx…."
Page 6: "After the Second World War,
population began to grow slowly. However,
the central western shoreline of Staten
Island remained rural. This would become the
site for Fresh Kills Landfill, occupying
nearly 3,000 acres. It started receiving
waste in 1948 and this program was greatly
accelerated in 1951."
NOTE: † This was supposed to be the last
barge, but the remains of the World Trade
Center were later interred at this site.
[227] "Fresh
Perspectives: Freshkills Park Newsletter."
New York City Department of Parks and
Recreation, Winter/Spring 2012.
http://www.nycgovparks.org/pagefiles/48/newsletter_winter12.pdf
Page 1:
As development of Schmul Park and the Owl
Hollow Fields wraps up at the perimeter of
Freshkills Park, the largest
recently-completed construction project on
site might not be as noticeable. But that
massive, grassy hill along the site's
eastern border is no natural wonder; it is
the product of a five-year-long closure
process that concluded in November 2011. …
The 305-acre East Mound of Fresh Kills
Landfill, the second largest of the four
mounds with approximately 32 million tons of
waste enclosed within, will ultimately
become the East Park section of Freshkills
Park.
[228] Calculated with
data from:
a) Dataset: "Monthly Population Estimates
for the United States: April 1, 2010 to
March 1, 2012." U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, April 2012.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2011/index.html
Resident Population, July 1, 2010 =
309,330,219
Resident Population, July 1, 2011 =
311,591,917
b) Paper: "Estimating Method and Use of
Landfill Settlement." By Michael L. Leonard
and Kenneth J. Floom. American Society of
Civil Engineers, Proceedings of Sessions of
Geo‐Denver, 2000.
http://www.scs-secure.com/...
Pages 3-4: "Table 1 - Landfill Densities …
Long-Term Density [metric tons/m3 (lb/yd3)]
… Landfilling … Defined as weight of refuse
divided by total air space consumed by
refuse, cover soil and other operations
soil."
c) Report: "Municipal Solid Waste
Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the
United States: Facts and Figures for 2010."
EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 10: "The net per capita discard rate
(after recycling, composting, and combustion
for energy recovery) was 2.40 pounds per
person per day, lower than the 2.51 per
capita rate in 1960, when virtually no
recycling occurred in the United States (see
Table 4)."
d) Web page: "State & County QuickFacts:
USA." U.S. Census Bureau, January 17, 2012.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
"Land area in square miles, 2010 [=]
3,531,905.43"
NOTES:
- An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
- Credit for providing the idea and an
outline to perform these calculations
belongs to Bjørn Lomborg (Book: The
Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the
Real State of the World. Cambridge
University Press, 2001. Pages 206-208.)
[229] Calculated with
data from:
a) Report: "Municipal Solid Waste
Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the
United States: Tables and Figures for 2010."
EPA, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Table 29: "Generation, Materials Recovery,
Composting, Combustion, and Discards Of
Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 to 2010 (In
thousands of tons and percent of total
generation)"
b) Report: "Municipal Solid Waste
Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the
United States: Facts and Figures for 2010."
EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 1: "In 2010, Americans generated about
250 million tons of trash … [or] 4.43 pounds
per person per day."
c) Dataset: "Monthly Population Estimates
for the United States: April 1, 2010 to
March 1, 2012." U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division, April 2012.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2011/index.html
Resident Population, July 1, 2010 =
309,330,219
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[230] Report: "Municipal
Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and
Figures for 2010." EPA, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, December 2011.
http://www.epa.gov/...
Page 3: "Figure 3. Recycling Rates of
Selected Products, 2010"
Page 6: "We recycled more than 62 percent of
the paper and paperboard we generated. Over
19 million tons of yard trimmings were
composted, representing almost a five-fold
increase since 1990."
Page 8:
23 percent of wood packaging, mostly wood
pallets, was recovered. Over 13 percent of
plastic containers and packaging was
recycled, mostly from soft drink, milk, and
water bottles. Plastic bottles were the most
recycled plastic products. Polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) bottles and jars were
recovered at about 29 percent. Recovery of
high density polyethylene (HDPE) natural
(white translucent) bottles was estimated at
about 28 percent….
Overall recovery of nondurable goods was
just over 36 percent in 2010. Nondurable
goods generally last less than three years.
Newspapers/mechanical papers and other paper
products were the most recycled nondurable
goods. Newspapers/mechanical papers include
newspapers, directories, inserts, and some
advertisement and direct mail printing.
About 72 percent of newspapers/mechanical
papers were recovered. Collectively, the
recovery of other paper products such as
office paper and magazines was 45 percent in
2010.
[231] Web page:
"Education and Support: Glossary." Sappi
Fine Paper. Accessed May 10, 2012 at
http://www.na.sappi.com/education/glossary
Mechanical paper
Any paper containing 10% or more mechanical
wood pulp, such as newsprint.
Mechanical wood pulp
Produced by grinding wood mechanically; used
for example in newsprint, and combined with
larger proportions of chemical wood pulp for
other qualities.
[232] Paper: "Municipal
Solid Waste Recycling Issues." By Lester B.
Lave and others. Journal of Environmental
Engineering, October 1999. Pages
944-949.
http://msl1.mit.edu/...
Page 946: "Separate collection of
recyclables is particularly expensive,
because each residence is visited twice
(Lave et al. 1994). A collection truck that
can carry regular MSW [municipal solid
waste] and recyclables is preferable,
because each residence gets a single pickup.
… Because the truck will be collecting trash
and recyclables in different compartments,
one compartment will fill first requiring
the truck to go to the recycling site and
landfill even though the other compartment(s)
is partially empty."
Page 947: "A full analysis of the
environmental effects would also include the
environmental effects associated with
collection, sorting, and processing of
recycled materials. These processes require
capital equipment (particularly trucks) and
the use of energy (for truck operation and
sorting)."
[233] Paper:
"Comparative LCAs [Life Cycle Assessments]
for Curbside Recycling Versus Either
Landfilling or Incineration with Energy
Recovery." By Jeffrey Morris.
International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, 2005. Pages 273-284.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m423181w2hh036n4/
Page 273: "[A]dditional energy and
environmental burdens [are] imposed by
curbside collection trucks, recycled
material processing facilities, and
transportation of processed recyclables to
end-use markets."
Page 275: "Fig. 1 also shows estimated
energy used in 2002 for … manufacturing
processed recyclables into new products."
[234] Article: "In
Cheyenne, glass pile shows recycling
challenges." By Mead Gruver. Associated
Press, September 28, 2009.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/...
Used glass must be sorted by color and
cleaned before it can be crushed into cullet
that is suitable for recycling into new
containers. That contributes to much of the
cost of recycling glass, said Joe Cattaneo,
president of the Glass Packaging Institute
in Alexandria, Va.
"It's not just a glass company buying it
from your municipal waste company, or
recycling company," Cattaneo said. "Some
entity has to clean it so it meets the
specifications of mixing it with sand, soda
ash and limestone."
Another cost is transportation. The farther
away a community is from glass processors
and container manufacturers, he said, the
more expensive it is to recycle it.
[235] Article:
"Recycling Is Garbage." By John Tierney.
New York Times Magazine, June 30, 1996.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Collecting a ton of recyclable items is
three times more expensive than collecting a
ton of garbage because the crews pick up
less material at each stop. For every ton of
glass, plastic and metal that the truck
delivers to a private recycler, the city
currently spends $200 more than it would
spend to bury the material in a landfill. …
The recycling program has been costing $50
million to $100 million annually, and that's
just the money coming directly out of the
municipal budget. There's also the labor
involved: the garbage-sorting that millions
of New Yorkers do at home every week. How
much would the city have to spend if it
couldn't rely on forced labor? …
I tried to estimate the value of New
Yorkers' garbage-sorting by financing an
experiment by a neutral observer (a Columbia
University student with no strong feelings
about recycling). He kept a record of the
work he did during one week complying with
New York's recycling laws. It took him eight
minutes during the week to sort, rinse and
deliver four pounds of cans and bottles to
the basement of his building. If the city
paid for that work at a typical janitorial
wage ($12 per hour), it would pay $792 in
home labor costs for each ton of cans and
bottles collected. And what about the extra
space occupied by that recycling receptacle
in the kitchen? It must take up at least a
square foot, which in New York costs at
least $4 a week to rent. If the city had to
pay for this space, the cost per ton of
recyclables would be about $2,000.
… Less virgin pulp means less pollution at
paper mills in timber country, but recycling
operations create pollution in areas where
more people are affected: fumes and noise
from collection trucks, solid waste and
sludge from the mills that remove ink and
turn the paper into pulp.
[236] Paper: "Municipal
Solid Waste Recycling Issues." By Lester B.
Lave and others. Journal of Environmental
Engineering, October 1999. Pages
944-949.
http://msl1.mit.edu/...
Page 944: "In particular, recycling is a
good policy only if environmental impacts
and the resources used to collect, sort, and
recycle a material are less than the
environmental impacts and resources needed
to provide equivalent virgin material plus
the resources needed to dispose of the
postconsumer material safely."
[237] Paper:
"Comparative LCAs [Life Cycle Assessments]
for Curbside Recycling Versus Either
Landfilling or Incineration with Energy
Recovery." By Jeffrey Morris.
International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, 2005. Pages 273-284.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m423181w2hh036n4/
Page 275: "Fig. 1 also shows estimated
energy used in 2002 for operating the
landfill…."
Page 277: "[There are] emissions from diesel
fuels consumed in collecting refuse, hauling
it to the landfill, and compacting it in
place at the landfill."
[238] Report: "Facing
America's Trash: What Next for Municipal
Solid Waste?" U.S. Congress, Office of
Technology Assessment, October 1989.
http://www.fas.org/ota/reports/8915.pdf
Page 191: "In the mid-1970s, EPA concluded
that recycling of waste materials generally
resulted in less pollution than did
manufacturing from virgin materials (251).
[U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs,
First Report to Congress, Resource Recovery
and Source Reduction, Report SW-1 18, 3rd
ed. (Washington, DC: 1974).]"
NOTE: Credit for bringing this report to
attention belongs to Daniel K. Benjamin
(Report: "Recycling Myths Revisited."
Property and Environment Research Center,
2010.
http://www.perc.org/files/ps47.pdf)
[239] Report: "Facing
America's Trash: What Next for Municipal
Solid Waste?" U.S. Congress, Office of
Technology Assessment, October 1989.
http://www.fas.org/ota/reports/8915.pdf
Pages 190-194:
Proponents of recycling have made many
claims about the relative levels of
pollution generated by primary and secondary
manufacturing processes, often arguing that
recycling reduces pollution. In general,
recycling may result in fewer pollutants
when the entire MSW [municipal solid waste]
system is considered. In particular, if
recycled products replace products made from
virgin materials, potential pollution
savings may result from the dual avoidance
of pollution from manufacturing and from
subsequent disposal of replacement products
made from virgin materials.
However, it is usually not clear whether
secondary manufacturing produces less
pollution per ton of material processed than
primary manufacturing. Such an analysis,
which is beyond the scope of this report,
would have to examine all the pollutants
produced during each step in production, as
well as pollution generated while providing
energy to the process itself and for
transporting materials. It would also be
necessary to account for the effects of
water and raw materials use on ecological
systems. Definitive research has not been
conducted, however, on all the relevant
primary and secondary materials processes.
To provide a starting point, this section
reviews some comparisons of manufacturing
using recycled versus virgin materials. Box
5-G briefly illustrates some of the
pollutants generated in secondary
manufacturing processes.
Numerous publications have documented
pollutants emitted from manufacturing
processes that use virgin materials (e.g.,
131). In the mid-1970s, EPA concluded that
recycling of waste materials generally
resulted in less pollution than did
manufacturing from virgin materials (251).
[U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs,
First Report to Congress, Resource Recovery
and Source Reduction, Report SW-1 18, 3rd
ed. (Washington, DC: 1974).]
This generalization does not necessarily
hold true in all cases. Using EPA data on
paper production processes, for example, one
researcher found no clear difference in
measurements of chemical and biological
oxygen demand and of total suspended solids
in water effluents from recycling and virgin
materials processes (262). The EPA data also
indicated that 5 toxic substances "of
concern" were found only in virgin processes
and 8 were found only in recycling
processes; of 12 pollutants found in both
processes, 11 were present in higher levels
in the recycling processes.
This researcher also noted that EPA's
analyses of pollutants from virgin materials
processing did not account for pollution
from mining, timbering, and transportation
(262). He concluded that "there are clear
materials and energy conservation benefits
to recycling, [but] the picture regarding
environmental benefits and risks is complex,
especially when specific hazardous
pollutants are taken into account."
Paper
Virgin pulp processes generate various
liquid and gas residues, depending on the
type of paper, type of pulping process, and
extent of bleaching (131). In general, large
amounts of mill effluent are generated and
this contains suspended solids, dissolved
organic solids, various chemicals, and high
BOD. Wastewater generated in the bleaching
stage can contain dioxins, chlorine dioxide,
hypochlorite, and other bleaching chemicals
and byproducts. Spent liquor generated in
the pulping process can contain a wide
variety of chemicals; the liquors often are
burned in a recovery furnace or fluidized
bed. Other byproducts from the virgin paper
process also can be used to generate energy.
Gas emissions include chlorine, chlorine
dioxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate, and
hydrogen sulfide. Metals from de-inking are
present in sludge residues; the
concentration of lead in these sludges
appears to be in the same range as in
sludges from mills that use secondary fibers
(64).
Aluminum
At primary aluminum smelters, one major
concern is with the 'potliners'—pots lined
with carbon that serves as the cathode and
that contain compounds of aluminum,
fluorine, and sodium. The potliners are
replaced every 4 or 5 years, and
disagreement has arisen over whether used
potliners should be listed as a hazardous
waste under RCRA [Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act]. As of August 1988, EPA has
been required to list potliners as hazardous
waste. The aluminum industry claims,
however, that potliners can be used to fire
cement kilns, among other things, and
therefore should not be considered a "waste.
The designation of potliners as hazardous
waste discourages this recycling. Most
aluminum smelters in 1989 are disposing of
spent potliners in hazardous waste
landfills.
Steel
Various residues are generated during the
steps necessary to produce steel (e.g.,
coking, sintering, ironmaking, steelmaking,
rolling, and finishing steps) (131). Air
emissions from coke ovens, for example,
contain particulate and sulfur dioxide.
Wastewater from steelmaking contains
suspended and dissolved solids,
oxygen-demanding substances, oil, phenols,
and ammonia. Solid waste residues also are
common, particularly from open hearth and
oxygen furnaces. One study (131) modeled
production processes and estimated that
using less scrap and more ore would result
in increased generation of phenols, ammonia,
oxygen-demanding substances, sulfur dioxide,
and particulate, and decreased generation of
suspended solids.
Plastics
Once a resin is produced, the environmental
risks associated with fabricating products
from the resins are the same whether the
resin is produced from virgin or secondary
materials. However, primary production
processes generate air emissions,
wastewater, and solid waste. The types and
amounts of these wastes vary with different
processes and types of plastics, and some
are managed as hazardous waste. According to
one analysis, five of the six chemicals
whose production generates the most
hazardous waste in the United States are
chemicals commonly used by the plastics
industry (268).
In general, air emissions are highest during
the initial processing and recovery steps
for monomers, solvents, catalysts, and
additives. Wastewater associated with the
primary production process can contain
suspended monomers, co-monomers, polymers,
additives, filler particulate, soluble
constituents, and solvents that are washed
or leached from the plastic. Solid waste is
produced at various points, mostly from
spillage, routine cleaning, particulate
collection (from feeding, handling,
grinding, and trimming processes), but also
from production errors and a few production
process byproducts. It can contain mostly
polymers and small quantities of
plasticizers, fillers, and other additives.
Some emissions are associated with the
reprocessing of secondary plastic materials.
For example, volatile air emissions can be
generated during the heating of plastics,
and residues can be contained in the rinse
water used to cool the remelted resins.
Pages 192-193:
Box 5-G-Pollutants Generated in Secondary
Manufacturing Processes [Recycling]
Heavy Metals
Iron and Steel Recycling—Solid wastes
produced by iron and steel foundries that
primarily use ferrous scrap can contain
lead, cadmium, and chromium; these wastes
may be classified as hazardous (181).
Sludges from core-making processes and
baghouse dusts also are hazardous in some
cases, depending on emission controls and
the quality of incoming metal. Oman (181)
cited one study indicating that 9 out of 21
foundries generated emission control
residuals which would be considered as a
hazardous waste on the basis of EP toxicity
for lead. Air emissions also are common.
Electric arc furnaces, which normally
operate on 100 percent scrap, avoid some air
emission problems because they do not use
coke oven gases as a heat source; however,
they can emit high levels of particulate if
they use scrap with high concentrations of
dirt, organic matter, and alloys (131).
Aluminum Recycling—When aluminum
scrap is melted, associated substances
(e.g., painted labels, plastic, and oil and
grease) are burned off. The resulting air
emissions can contain particulate matter in
the form of metallic chlorides and oxides,
as well as acid gases and chlorine gas
(261). Similar types of emissions are likely
from plants that smelt other scrap metals.
Paper Recycling—Printing inks often
contain pigments that contain heavy metals
such as lead and cadmium (261 ). These and
other metals can be present in wastewater
and de-inking sludge from paper recycling;
for example, de-inking sludges have been
reported with lead concentrations ranging
from 3 to 294 ppm (dry weight) (64).
Materials Recycling Facilities (MRFs)—Very
little testing has been conducted at MRFs to
determine levels of pollutants. Even the
results of testing that has been done at one
facility that handles sorted paper, glass,
and metals are ambiguous. At that facility,
air withdrawn from within the building
(i.e., prior to emissions controls)
exhibited relatively low emission rates (in
terms of pounds per hour) for cadmium,
chromium, lead, mercury, and nickel (117,
262). However, actual concentrations of the
metals in the emissions were high. No data
were available about emissions after air
pollution controls or on heavy metal
concentrations in dust that settled in or
around the plant.
Comporting—Concentrations of heavy
metals tend to be higher in compost from
mixed MSW comporting facilities than from
compost made from separately collected
organic wastes, primarily because mechanical
separation cannot remove all metals. Compost
from MSW that is co-composted with sewage
sludge also tends to have high metal
concentrations. Sewage treatment processes
remove metals from effluent and concentrate
them in sludge, and this emphasizes the role
industrial pretreatment programs can play in
reducing the metals entering treatment
plants (240). The concentrations of metals
in mixed MSW compost and co-compost samples
vary from site to site (161). In some cases,
zinc and lead exceeded State limits (26),
while in other cases lead levels were lower
than the limits. Problems also have been
noted with heavy metals in mixed MSW compost
in Europe (23, 92, 101, 115, 132, 149, 156).
In one West German study, average
concentrations of seven heavy metals were
almost always lower in compost made from
source-separated organic waste; in some
cases they were essentially the same as soil
concentrations (77, 78). More research is
needed on the composition of leachate from
compost products under different conditions.
Dioxins—Dioxins can be produced at
paper mills, as a byproduct of pulp
bleaching, and can be present in the
effluent or sludge (241). Limited testing by
EPA has shown that concentrations of
2,3,7,8-TCDD in sludges from two mills that
use waste paper are relatively low, ranging
from 2 to 37 parts per trillion (17).
Dioxins also have been detected in
post-pollution control emissions from
certain secondary metals smelting
facilities. For example, dioxins have been
reported in post-control emissions from
(127):
• steel drum reclamation;
• scrap wire reclamation (combustion to
remove wire insulation, with afterburner);1
and
• metals recovery from electronic
Other Organic Chemicals
Paper—Inks that need to be removed
during recycling also contain acrylics,
plastics, resins, varnishes, defoamers, and
alcohols, some of which are discharged in
wastewater. Paper recycling processes,
particularly those with a bleaching step
involving chlorine, also are known to
discharge effluents that contain various
chlorine-based compounds, including carbon
tetrachloride, dichloroethane, methylene
chloride, and trichloroethylene (261). In
addition, the dispersing agents used in the
de-inking processes (e.g., detergents and
emulsifiers) end up in the sludge.
Plastics—Residues from the recycling
of plastics are difficult to assess without
knowing the specific details of proprietary
systems used to wash materials and remove
contaminants. Wash water and air emissions
may be contaminated by residues from other
products associated with recycled plastic,
such as food or pesticides. At least one PET
reclamation system planned to operate at a
scale of 25,000 tons per year by 1990 will
use 1,1,1-trichloroethane to remove
residues. This toxic solvent is a well-known
groundwater contaminant (239). However,
according to Dow, the developer of the
technology, the solvent is used in a closed
system that will not result in release to
the environment (165).
Compost—Few data are available on
organic chemicals in compost. Compost from
the Delaware facility has been found to
contain PCBs in concentrations up to 5 parts
per million (42), which is below the
allowable limit of 10 parts per million set
in Delaware's regulations. Questions have
been raised about chemicals in grass
clippings, particularly nitrogen from
fertilizers and organic chemicals from
pesticides (228). Many of these chemicals
are insoluble and may bind to particles
instead of being leached into groundwater,
but there is little data to evaluate this.
It also is unclear whether they could be
taken up in food crops grown on compost
containing the chemicals (228).
Chlorine and Sulfur
Chlorine and sulfur are common components in
many products and chlorine is used in some
recycling processes, so it is not surprising
that both elements are found in residues at
recycling facilities. For example, Visalli
(262) calculated that uncontrolled emissions
from one secondary aluminum smelter
contained 1.7 pounds of hydrogen chloride
and 1.8 pounds of S02 per hour.
1 It is likely that dioxins and
furans are produced from burning plastic
wire coating. Wire scrap makes up a small
percentage of total metal scrap processed.
NOTE: Credit for bringing this report to
attention belongs to Daniel K. Benjamin
(Report: "Recycling Myths Revisited."
Property and Environment Research Center,
2010.
http://www.perc.org/files/ps47.pdf)
[240] Paper: "Municipal
Solid Waste Recycling Issues." By Lester B.
Lave and others. Journal of Environmental
Engineering, October 1999. Pages
944-949.
http://msl1.mit.edu/...
Page 944:
From a review of the existing economic
experience with recycling and an analysis of
the environmental benefits (including
estimation of external social costs), we
find that, for most communities, curbside
recycling is only justifiable for some
postconsumer waste, such as aluminum and
other metals. …
Similar to Haith (1998), we emphasize that
some recycling improves environmental
quality and sustainability, whereas other
recycling has the opposite effect.
Pages 946-947:
Table 2 gives a direct indication of the
environmental benefits of avoided production
due to recycling of different commodities.
This table summarizes electricity use, fuel
use, energy (including electricity and
fuels), industrial water intake, some
conventional pollutant emissions, global
warming potential, toxic air releases, and
hazardous waste generation for 1,000 metric
tons of different commodity productions. …
These calculations show an upper bound on
savings from recycling by avoiding this
primary production; the figures are an upper
bound because the resource costs of
recycling are not included.
The final row in Table 2 represents a rough
estimate of the external environmental costs
of this production. … Included in these
costs are the estimated health effects
related to ozone, particulate, and other
conventional or "criteria pollutants." The
estimates are reported in thousands of
social cost dollars, and so a metric ton of
primary aluminum is estimated to have an
external environmental cost due to air
emissions of $220 (Table 2). Comparing this
number to the estimated cost of collection
($142/ton), aluminum appears to be a good
candidate for recycling, even without
counting the economic costs of producing a
ton of aluminum.
Page 948: "Curbside recycling of
postconsumer metals can save money and
improve environmental quality if the
collection, sorting, and recovery processes
are efficient. Curbside collection of glass
and paper is unlikely to help the
environment and sustainability save in
special circumstances."
[241] Paper:
"Comparative LCAs [Life Cycle Assessments]
for Curbside Recycling Versus Either
Landfilling or Incineration with Energy
Recovery." By Jeffrey Morris.
International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, 2005. Pages 273-284.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m423181w2hh036n4/
Page 273:
Recycling of newspaper, cardboard, mixed
paper, glass bottles and jars, aluminum
cans, tin-plated steel cans, plastic
bottles, and other conventionally
recoverable materials found in household and
business municipal solid wastes consumes
less energy and imposes lower environmental
burdens than disposal of solid waste
materials via landfilling or incineration,
even after accounting for energy that may be
recovered from waste materials at either
type disposal facility. This result holds
for a variety of environmental impacts,
including global warming, acidification,
eutrophication, disability adjusted life
year (DALY) losses from emission of criteria
air pollutants, human toxicity and
ecological toxicity. The basic reason for
this conclusion is that energy conservation
and pollution prevention engendered by using
recycled rather than virgin materials as
feedstocks for manufacturing new products
tends to be an order of magnitude greater
than the additional energy and environmental
burdens imposed by curbside collection
trucks, recycled material processing
facilities, and transportation of processed
recyclables to end-use markets.
Page 283:
Results from the two studies described in
this article show that recycling has
substantial benefits compared with disposal
in terms of reducing energy consumption and
environmental burdens imposed by methods
used for managing solid wastes.
Specifically, recycling compared with
disposal reduces potential impacts of solid
waste management activities on all public
health and environmental impact categories
examined – global warming, acidification,
eutrophication, human health effects from
criteria air pollutants, human toxicity, and
ecological toxicity. This conclusion holds
regardless of whether disposal is via
landfill without LFG [landfill gas]
collection, landfill with LFG collection and
flaring, landfill with LFG collection and
energy recovery, incineration without energy
recovery, or WTE incineration. For several
environmental impact categories the net
environmental benefits of recycling are
reduced by WTE incineration as compared with
landfilling, but the conclusion remains the
same – recycling is environmentally
preferable to disposal by a substantial
margin.
[242] Paper: "Municipal
Solid Waste Recycling Issues." By Lester B.
Lave and others. Journal of Environmental
Engineering, October 1999. Pages
944-949.
http://msl1.mit.edu/...
Page 944: "MSW [municipal solid waste]
recycling has been found to be costly for
most municipalities compared to landfill
disposal."
Page 946:
At one time, advocates claimed that
recycling of MSW would be profitable for
municipalities. Recycling programs were
expected to more than pay for themselves. A
few categories of postconsumer wastes can be
recycled or reused profitably; aluminum cans
and automobiles are common examples. …
However, at current price levels, curbside
collection programs for most recyclable
materials cost more than landfilling and
must be justified on environmental grounds.
…
TABLE 1. Average Annual Curbside Recycling
Costs in the United States … Net cost
[compared to disposal] after sale of
recyclables … Per household (dollars) [=] 21
… Per ton (dollars) [=] 97"
Page 947: "Recycling aluminum is generally
profitable because of the high price for
this scrap."
[243] Paper:
"Comparative LCAs [Life Cycle Assessments]
for Curbside Recycling Versus Either
Landfilling or Incineration with Energy
Recovery." By Jeffrey Morris.
International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, 2005. Pages 273-284.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m423181w2hh036n4/
Page 284:
Estimates of the economic value for
recycling's pollution prevention and
resource conservation benefits suggest that
the societal value of these benefits
outweighs the additional economic cost that
is often incurred for waste management when
systems for handling solid wastes add
recycling trucks and processing facilities
to their existing fleet of garbage
collection vehicles and existing transfer
and disposal facilities. This may be small
recompense for the local waste management
agency that is hard-pressed for cash to pay
its waste management costs, especially in
jurisdictions that have neither convenient
methods for imposing quantity-based fees on
waste generators – with those fees
structured to cover the costs of recycling
as well as garbage management programs – nor
political support for doing the right thing
environmentally.
However, ongoing developments in the trading
of credits for emissions reductions, such as
already exists for sulfur dioxide emissions
through EPA's emissions permits trading
program developed under the Clean Air Act
and is under consideration through various
experiments for greenhouse gases and other
pollutants, do offer hope for the future.
For example, a greenhouse gas credit of just
$9 a ton would by itself offset the net
costs of the average recycling program in
the Urban West region of Washington State.
[244] Article: "In
Cheyenne, glass pile shows recycling
challenges." By Mead Gruver. Associated
Press, September 28, 2009.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/...
Cheyenne hasn't recycled the glass it
collects—9 tons a week—for years. …
The economics of glass recycling have been
marginal for some time. …
In northern Idaho, Kootenai County gave up
collecting glass last year. In Oregon, which
was the first of 11 states to adopt a bottle
deposit law in 1971, Deschutes County
stockpiled 1,000 tons of glass at its
landfill before finally finding a use for it
a couple years ago—as fill beneath an area
for collecting compost.
Glass also has piled up at the landfill
serving Albuquerque, N.M., where officials
this year announced that a manufacturer of
water-absorbing horticultural stones would
eventually use up their stockpiles. New York
City gave up glass recycling from 2002 to
2004 because officials decided it was too
costly.
In a sense, glass ought to be the perfect
commodity to recycle. It can be recycled an
infinite number of times. Melting down one
glass bottle and making another isn't
particularly complicated or especially
costly.
The challenge is that the main ingredient in
glass, sand, is plentiful and cheap—often
cheaper than cullet, which is glass that has
been prepared for recycling.
[245] Article: "Report
Calls Recycling Costlier Than Dumping." By
Eric Lipton. New York Times, February
2, 2004.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Recycling metal, plastic, paper and glass in
New York is more expensive than simply
sending all the refuse to landfills and
incinerators, even if city residents resume
the habit of separating a sizable share of
those kinds of waste, according to an
analysis by the New York City Independent
Budget Office that is set to be released
today. …
Yet the Independent Budget Office's
conclusion--that recycling cost the city
about $35 million more in 2002 than
conventional disposal would have--is so
controversial that even before the new
report was set to be released today,
advocates of the recycling program condemned
the analysis.
[246] Article:
"Recycling Is Garbage." By John Tierney.
New York Times Magazine, June 30, 1996.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
"State and city officials enacted laws
mandating recycling and setting arbitrary
goals even higher than the E.P.A.'s. Most
states set rigid quotas, typically requiring
that at least 40 percent of trash be
recycled, often even more -- 50 percent in
New York and California, 60 percent in New
Jersey, 70 percent in Rhode Island."
[247] Article: "New
recycling law to promote better habits."
WRAL, June 2, 2009.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5265295/
"Starting in October, it will be against
state law to throw plastic bottles in your
trash."
[248] Policy Analysis:
"Wasting Resources to Reduce Waste:
Recycling in New Jersey." By Grant W.
Schaumburg Jr. and Katherine T. Doyle. Cato
Institute, January 26, 1994.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa202.pdf
The quantity of goods recycled as a result
of New Jersey's Mandatory Recycling Act
amounts to approximately 0.5million ton per
year. …
Each of New Jersey's 21 counties is given
some flexibility in its application of state
mandates. Nine counties require
municipalities to collect and market
recyclables independently, six offer to
market materials collected by the
municipalities, and six coordinate both the
collection and the marketing of recycled
materials. All counties require households
to recycle glass, aluminum, and newsprint.
Some have also mandated the recycling of
plastic beverage containers, all plastic
containers, tin food containers, corrugated
cardboard, grass clippings, junk mail, or
magazines.[2] The commercial sector is
required by all counties to recycle office
paper and corrugated cardboard as well as
the materials designated for household
recycling.
To help finance the massive recycling
effort, the Mandatory Recycling Act
increased the tax on landfilled solid waste
almost fourfold (from $0.12 per cubic yard
to $1.50 per ton, or approximately $0.45 per
cubic yard). The tax currently yields
approximately $15 million annually for the
State Recycling Fund, which is allocated as
follows: 40 percent to municipalities and
counties as tonnage grants; 35 percent for
low-interest loans and loan guarantees to
recycling businesses and industries and for
research on collection, market stimulation,
reuse techniques, and market studies; 10
percent for a public information and
education campaign; 8 percent for county
program grants; and 7 percent for state
administrative costs.
[249] Article: "Few
Towns Ready for Connecticut Recycling Law."
By Nick Ravo. New York Times, January
22, 1991.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Three weeks past Connecticut's self-imposed
deadline for its communities to begin
mandatory recycling, most are still
scrambling to start their programs. …
The law mandated that each of Connecticut's
169 towns and cities had until Jan. 1 to
appoint a recycling coordinator and adopt a
proper recycling ordinance.
[250] Article: "City's
recycling effort ratchets up." By Elizabeth
M. Gillespie. Associated Press, February 6,
2005.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/...
Seattle is trying to boost recycling,
already popular here, by making it
mandatory. …
Banned from trash: For houses, apartments
and condos, banned are cardboard, glass,
plastic bottles, jars, aluminum and tin
cans, all types of paper (unless soiled),
and yard debris, which has been banned from
residential garbage since 1989. For
businesses, it's just paper, cardboard and
yard debris.
The threshold: Trash cannot contain
"significant amounts" of recyclables, which
the city defines as more than 10 percent by
volume, as determined by a garbage
inspector.
[251] Article: "S.F. OKs
toughest recycling law in U.S." By John Coté.
San Francisco Chronicle, June 10, 2009.
http://www.sfgate.com/...
"Throwing orange peels, coffee grounds and
grease-stained pizza boxes in the trash will
be against the law in San Francisco, and
could even lead to a fine."
[252] Web page: "NYC
Recycling Law." New York City Department of
Sanitation. Accessed May 11, 2012 at
http://www.nyc.gov/...
"This Law mandates recycling in NYC by
residents, agencies, institutions, and
businesses, including the designation of
what materials are to be considered
recyclable, the recovery of those materials,
tonnages of recyclable materials that must
be recycled annually, and responsibilities
of each relevant party."
[253] Web page: "Is it
the law in Massachusetts to recycle?"
MassRecycle. Accessed May 11, 2012 at
http://www.massrecycle.org/faqs.html
"Although there is not a statewide recycling
law, many communities have passed their own
recycling laws. Of the 351 Massachusetts
communities, 168 of them have voluntarily
adopted mandatory recycling ordinances,
bylaws, or regulations. Most of these local
requirements regulate single-family
residences or those served by the municipal
collection programs. A growing number of
municipalities are also regulating
multi-family properties and businesses."
[254] Web page: "Reduce,
Reuse, Recycle: Recycling Laws and
Regulations." Monroe County Government
Accessed May 10, 2012.
http://www.monroecounty.gov/des-solidwaste.php
Recycling has been mandatory in Monroe
County for residents and
businesses/institutions since 1992. …
The law states, in general, that residents
must recycle the following food, drink and
household product containers: steel,
aluminum, glass bottles and jars (clear,
green, and brown only), plastics (#s 1 and
2). …
According to law, residents must also
recycle newspapers, magazines and corrugated
cardboard.
[255] Article: "China
bans free plastic shopping bags." New
York Times, January 9, 2008.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
China will ban shops from giving out free
plastic bags and has called on consumers to
use baskets and cloth sacks instead to
reduce environmental pollution. …
The production, sale and use of ultra-thin
plastic bags - those less than 0.025
millimeters, or 0.00098 inches, thick - were
also banned, according to the State Council
notice. Dated Dec. 31 and posted on a
government Web site Tuesday, it called for
"a return to cloth bags and shopping
baskets."
[256] Report: "Effect of
Plastic Bag Taxes and Bans On Garbage Bag
Sales." By Paul Frisman. Connecticut General
Assembly, December 17, 2008.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0685.htm
"Ireland imposed a 15 cent tax (the
equivalent of about 24 U. S. cents) on
plastic shopping bags on March 4, 2002.
Revenues from the tax are used for waste
management, recycling, and other
environmental initiatives."
[257] Report: "Effect of
Plastic Bag Taxes and Bans On Garbage Bag
Sales." By Paul Frisman. Connecticut General
Assembly, December 17, 2008.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0685.htm
San Francisco, California, and Westport,
Connecticut have banned the distribution of
plastic bags. Westport's ban will start in
March 2009. …
The Seattle city council voted July 28, 2008
to approve a 20-cent "green fee" on
disposable shopping bags that grocery, drug,
and convenience stores provide to customers
starting January 1, 2009. The proposal
exempts bags used for (1) bulk items, such
as fruit, vegetables, nuts, candy, or
hardware; (2) potentially wet items, such as
frozen foods, meat, flowers, and plants; (3)
prepared foods or bakery goods; (4)
prescription drugs; (5) laundry dry
cleaning; and (6) newspapers. It also
exempts bags sold in packages that are
intended for garbage, pet waste, or yard
waste disposal. Seattle estimates the fee
would cause disposable bag use to decrease
by 70% at stores required to impose the fee
(50% overall) and that it will generate
about $ 10 million annually.
[258] Article: "Nickel
bag tax dissuades D.C. shoppers: Revenue
shortfall $1.5 million." Associated Press,
January 5, 2011.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/...
District of Columbia shoppers have spent
approximately $2 million on paper and
plastic bags in the past year, one nickel at
a time.
The city's 5-cent tax on bags began in
January of last year, but consumers spent
much less pocket change than predicted to
pay for bags from grocery, liquor and
convenience stores.
City officials had guessed the fee would
raise $3.5 million to clean up the city's
Anacostia River before the end of 2010. The
tax brought in a total of $1.9 million in
the first ten months of 2010, according to
the city's latest data.
[259] Article: "Whole
Foods sacks plastic bags." By Bruce Horovitz.
USA Today, January 22, 2008
(updated).
http://www.usatoday.com/...
Tuesday, Whole Foods (WFMI) will announce
plans to stop offering disposable, plastic
grocery bags in all 270 stores in the USA,
Canada and United Kingdom by Earth Day —
April 22. That means roughly 100 million
plastic bags will be kept out of the
environment between that date and the end of
2008, the company says.
"This is something our customers want us to
do," says A.C. Gallo, Whole Foods
co-president. "It's central to our core
values of caring for communities and the
environment."
[260] Report: "Life
Cycle Assessment of Supermarket Carrier
Bags." U.K. Environment Agency, February
2011.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/...
Page 11: "Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a
standard method for comparing the
environmental impacts of providing, using
and disposing of a product or providing a
service throughout its life cycle (ISO
2006). In other words, LCA identifies the
material and energy usage, emissions and
waste flows of a product, process or service
over its entire life cycle to determine its
environmental performance."
Pages 12-13:
Conventional High-density polyethylene (HDPE)
bags
This is the lightweight, plastic, carrier
bag used in almost all UK supermarkets and
often provided free of charge. It is a
vest-shaped bag and has the advantage of
being thin-gauged and lightweight. It has
been termed "disposable" and "single use."
High-density polyethylene (HDPE) bags
with a prodegradant additive
This type of lightweight, plastic, carrier
bag is made from HDPE with a prodegradant
additive that accelerates the degradation
process. These polymers undergo accelerated
oxidative degradation initiated by natural
daylight, heat and/or mechanical stress, and
embrittle in the environment and erode under
the influence of weathering. The bag looks
like the conventional HDPE bag being
vest-shaped and thin-gauged.
Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) bags
These are thick-gauged or heavy duty plastic
bags, commonly known as 'bags-for-life', and
are available in most UK supermarkets. The
initial bag must be purchased from the
retailer but can be replaced free of charge
when returned. The old bags are recycled by
the retailer. {NOTE: LDPE bags are like the
plastic bags used in mall clothing stores.
The study (pages 80-81) found that LDPE bags
have an average weight capacity of 19
kilograms, and standard disposable plastic (HDPE)
bags have a capacity of 18.22 kilograms,
which amounts to a difference of less than
5%.}
Non-woven polypropylene (PP) bags
This type of bag is made from spunbonded
non-woven polypropylene. The non-woven PP
bag is stronger and more durable than a bag
for life and is intended to be reused many
times. To provide stability to the base of
the bag, the bag comes with a semi-rigid
insert.
Cotton bags
This type of bag is woven from cotton, often
calico, an unbleached cotton with less
processing, and is designed to be reused
many times.
Paper bags
These are generally no longer used in UK
supermarkets, although they are available
from other retail shops. The paper bag was
in effect the first "disposable" carrier
bag, but was superseded in the 1970s by
plastic carrier bags which were seen as the
perfect alternative, as they did not tear
when wet.
Biopolymer bags
Biopolymer carrier bags are a relatively
recent development. They are only available
in a few UK supermarkets. The biopolymers
are usually composed of either polylactic
acid (PLA), made from the polymerisation of
lactic acids derived from plant-based
starch, or starch polyester blends, which
combine starch made from renewable sources
such as corn, potato, tapioca or wheat with
polyesters manufactured from hydrocarbons
(Murphy et al 2008). These biodegradable
polymers decompose to carbon dioxide,
methane, water, inorganic compounds or
biomass (Nolan-ITU 2003).
Pages 18-19: "The study is a 'cradle to
grave' life cycle assessment. Therefore, the
carrier bag systems investigated include all
significant life cycle stages from raw
material extraction, through manufacture,
distribution use and reuse to the final
management of the carrier bag as waste. … [T]he
study quantifies all energy and materials
used, traced back to the extraction of
resources, and the emissions from each life
cycle stage, including waste management."
Page 55:
Each type of carrier bag is designed for a
different number of uses. Those intended to
last longer need more resources in their
production. To make the comparison fair, the
environmental impacts of the carriers bags
were considered in relation to carrying the
same amount of shopping over a period based
on studies of their volumes and the number
of items consumers put into them. Resource
use, primary and secondary reuse and
end-of-life recovery play a pivotal role in
the environmental performance of the carrier
bags studied. The analysis showed that the
environmental impacts of each type are
significantly affected by the number of
times a carrier is used.
Page 55: "All the reports agree that the
extraction and production of raw materials
has the greatest effect on the environmental
performance of the carrier bags studied."
Page 57: "The manufacturing of the bags is
normally the most significant stage of the
life cycle, due to both the material and
energy requirements. The impact of the
energy used is often exacerbated by their
manufacture in countries where the
electricity is produced from coal-fired
power stations."
[261] Report: "Life
Cycle Assessment of Supermarket Carrier
Bags." U.K. Environment Agency, February
2011.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/...
Page 60:
The environmental impact of carrier bags is
dominated by resource use and production.
Transport, secondary packaging and
end-of-life processing generally have a
minimal influence on their environmental
performance. …
Reusing lightweight [plastic] carrier bags
as bin liners [trash bags] produces greater
benefits than recycling bags due to the
benefits of avoiding the production of the
bin liners they replace.
[262] Report: "Life
Cycle Assessment of Supermarket Carrier
Bags." U.K. Environment Agency, February
2011.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/...
Page 103:
Abiotic depletion
What is it? This impact category refers to
the depletion of non-living (abiotic)
resources such as fossil fuels, minerals,
clay and peat.
How is it measured? Abiotic depletion is
measured in kilograms of Antimony (Sb)
equivalents.
Global warming potential
What is it? Global warming potential is a
measure of how much of a given mass of a
green house gas (for example, CO2, methane,
nitrous oxide) is estimated to contribute to
global warming. Global warming occurs due to
an increase in the atmospheric concentration
of greenhouse gases which changes the
absorption of infra red radiation in the
atmosphere, known as radiative forcing
leading to changes in climatic patterns and
higher global average temperatures.
How is it measured? Global warming potential
is measured in terms of CO2 equivalents.
Photochemical oxidation
What is it? The formation of photochemical
oxidant smog is the result of complex
reactions between NOx and VOCs under the
action of sunlight (UV radiation) which
leads to the formation of ozone in the
troposphere. The smog phenomenon is very
dependent on meteorological conditions and
the background concentrations of pollutants.
How is it measured? It is measured using
photo-oxidant creation potential (POCP)
which is normally expressed in ethylene
equivalents.
Eutrophication
What is it? This is caused by the addition
of nutrients to a soil or water system which
leads to an increase in biomass, damaging
other lifeforms. Nitrogen and phosphorus are
the two nutrients most implicated in
eutrophication.
How is it measured? Eutrophication is
measured in terms of phosphate (PO4 3-)
equivalents.
Acidification
What is it? This results from the deposition
of acids which leads to a decrease in the
pH, a decrease in the mineral content of
soil and increased concentrations of
potentially toxic elements in the soil
solution. The major acidifying pollutants
are SO2, NOx, HCL and NH3.
How is it measured? Acidification is
measured in terms of SO2 equivalents.
Toxicity
What is it? Toxicity is the degree to which
something is able to produce illness or
damage to an exposed organism. There are 4
different types of toxicity; human toxicity,
terrestrial ecotoxicity, marine aquatic
ecotoxicity and fresh water aquatic
ecotoxicity.
How is it measured? Toxicity is measured in
terms of dichlorobenzene equivalents.
[263] Calculated with
data from the report: "Life Cycle Assessment
of Supermarket Carrier Bags." U.K.
Environment Agency, February 2011.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/...
Page 17:
A comparison of life cycle environmental
impacts should be based on a comparable
function (or ‘functional unit’) to allow a
fair comparison of the results. The carrier
bags studied are of different volumes,
weights and qualities. The Environment
Agency commissioned a survey11
which found that, over a 4 weeks period,
supermarket shoppers purchased an average of
446 items. The functional unit has therefore
been defined as:
Carrying one month’s shopping (483 items)
from the supermarket to the home in the UK
in 2006/07.
Page 32: "All results and charts shown refer
to the functional unit, i.e. the carrier
bags required to carry one month's shopping
(483 items) from the supermarket to the home
in the UK in 2006/07."
Page 36: "Table 5.1 The environmental
impact of the HDPE [standard disposable
plastic] bag"
Page 43: "Table 5.6 The environmental impact
of the non-woven PP [polypropylene] bag"
Page 44: "Table 5.9 The environmental impact
of the cotton bag (used 173 times)"
Page 72: "Table A.4.1 The carrier bags
included in the study with specification and
major assumptions … Expected life … PP
(polypropylene) fibre = 104 uses … Calico
cotton = 52 uses"
NOTE: An Excel file containing the data and
calculations is available
upon request.
[264] Report: "Life
Cycle Assessment of Supermarket Carrier
Bags." U.K. Environment Agency, February
2011.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/...
Pages 12-13:
Conventional High-density polyethylene (HDPE)
bags
This is the lightweight, plastic, carrier
bag used in almost all UK supermarkets and
often provided free of charge. It is a
vest-shaped bag and has the advantage of
being thin-gauged and lightweight. It has
been termed "disposable" and "single use."
High-density polyethylene (HDPE) bags
with a prodegradant additive
This type of lightweight, plastic, carrier
bag is made from HDPE with a prodegradant
additive that accelerates the degradation
process. These polymers undergo accelerated
oxidative degradation initiated by natural
daylight, heat and/or mechanical stress, and
embrittle in the environment and erode under
the influence of weathering. The bag looks
like the conventional HDPE bag being
vest-shaped and thin-gauged. …
Paper bags
These are generally no longer used in UK
supermarkets, although they are available
from other retail shops. The paper bag was
in effect the first "disposable" carrier
bag, but was superseded in the 1970s by
plastic carrier bags which were seen as the
perfect alternative, as they did not tear
when wet.
Page 36: "Table 5.1 The environmental impact
of the HDPE [standard plastic] bag"
Page 40: "Table 5.4 The environmental impact
of the paper bag."
Page 59: "The HDPE prodegradant bag had a
larger impact than the HDPE bag in all
categories considered. Although the bags
were very similar, the prodegradant bag
weighed slightly more and therefore used
more energy during production and
distribution."
© 2012 Just Facts
Information provided by Just Facts is not
legal or investment advice.
|