P.1 

OAR Box 1802 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

29) IV-E-24 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 11/4/200811:57:59 AM Sheet 29 of 117 
P.2 

DOCKETING FORM TO BE FILED IN THE FOLLOWING RULEMAKINGS: 

New Source Review Reform Rulemaking- Docket No. A-90-37 

Regional Haze rulemaking-Docket No. A-95-38 

NAME OF EXTERNAL GROUP Department of Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

MEETING X SPEECH . PHONE CALL (check one) 

DATE: September 30,1998 

TIME: 4:30 pm 

~li^ 

LOCATION OF MEETING/SPEECH/PHONE CALL: 

US EPA, 401M Street, SW [MC6103J 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

PURPOSE OF MEETING/SPEECH/PHONE CALL: 

To discuss concerns associated with Regional Haze and New Source Review Reform 

rulemakings 

ATTENDEES: See attached list 

COMMENTS: 

An agenda setting forth the information discussed and handouts provided during the 

meeting are attached. No new substantive information was provided. 
P.3 

> . 

Date: September 30,1998 

Meeting: EPA Meeting u> .Bi Dor/ PT~(JO S on Rfyon«& tkjt, //VS/Z ityw 

Name Organization Phone # 

SwbT&rTiceSftpg/ £PAJ<?A£ toi)2to-lWX) 

Frlli** feH-W (JSFLJ S 3 0 3 %^^6>(7 

<DOf^ iAULTA/lAN} us'Ros "70S *><£S(7*H 

/?//^ tt&tJe-TT €MlOAf<L &9rt«&//-</?94 

Of r<>j& \~<DtT(<L tPA/09c lo* MO 76If 

Anna Man* uW t EPA/A?AIL ZdTyTJoQ 8"7 T J^ 

/)» ^ \*Si(.fr- EfA fo/r1 ld-\60-74ov 

AVS MsM^h 

Ste TLa'IOg'WIb 

Q/O ^ sS^L^Ls. £ ^ r^z-aba-sv^"" 

f%4w.9u^& 

Uj<dW WflQ IMflArt gPA/aAflPS B

£

0m\J^Dlr 

ly-
P.4 

£PA-M 

TENTATIVE AGENDA . ~ 

SEPTEMBER 30,1998 DCQT ~cW o WMZwe^ 

EPA/DOI MEETING ON AIR QUALITY ISSUES 

IN NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDERNESS AREAS 

4:30-5:30 pm 

EPA-HQ 

Room 937 

40lMSt,SW 

Washington, DC 

PURPOSE: 

• To discuss air quality-related issues affecting resources in national parks and wilderness areas 

managed by the Department ofthe Interior (NPS and FWS). 

• To suggest actions EPA can take to assist DOI in carrying out resource protection 

responsibility 

AGENDA 

Introductions And Overview of NPS/FWS Air Quality Issues 

• FLM roles and responsibility 

• Overview of NPS/FWS air programs 

• Summary of AQ/AQRV conditions/trends 

Discussion Of EPA Regulatory FrameworkFor Class I Areas 

• Regional haze regulation 

• New source review regulation and policy guidance 

/ 

i 

• Use of SIP authority/process to address AQRV issues 

• She-specific troubleshooting: BRAVO and MOHAVE 

Next Steps 

3 
- * 

Air Quality Monitoring in National Parks, bv Type 

Parks in red indicates funding provided by other agency 

Olympi^o. Cascades 

Rcdwoc 

Pt.R( 

Pinnai 

Voyageurs 

j \ m Isle Royale 

Cam/onlanarpB-'Ro<^ Mt 

Yoscmite Grefit Basin 

u ML

 Br>cc

 c$fi 

JosfiUaTrqen > nff ' " * 

Uj<>r n LUSat>tu/ro Gila CHIT 

Organ PtB£ua<|uQ 

IChirieatmamciiadalupc Mis. 

HaTeoW 

Hawaii MolBioes 

•n. _ 

NPS Air Resourcei Division: 9/98 

ied-Ferya^—| (Sipiilin Volcano 

18

 \! ^^"Type offlffinitoring 

i H —-, Visibility-Optical (18) 

^ - ^ £ 0 Visibility-Fine Particle (37) 

Efl Ozone (31) 

nm Wet Deposition (Acid Rain) (29) 

lo. in parenthesis • number of parks monitored) 

Everglades 

m in Islands 
DRAFT 

o\ 

Olympic 

Air Quality Trends in National Parks 

Ci. 

Haleakala i 

\n ^n j Everglades 

NPS Air Rttonut DKUloo: 9i9%- <jb 

Legend 

Increase Same Decrea^ No Report 

• D • • 

ffH Visibility-Average Duy [-Hp| Visibility-Bad Day 

|-| ^ Visibility-Cood Day 2 ^ Ozone 

P ^ j Sulfate Ion j-frj Nitrate Ion 

V 
P.7 

* . 

»»«S. ** 

E3 SULFATE 

11 NITRATE D SOIL 

S i ORGANICS m ELEMENTAL CARBON 

4 jug/ms OF FINE MASS 

E3 SULFATE 

DD NITRATE ___ ABSORPTION 

( S ORGANICS M COARSE -I- FINE SOIL 

EXTNCTON EQUAL TO SO 

MVERSE MEGAMETERS 

h 
P.8 

-<. 

Summer 1998 High Ozone Hit List 

The summer of 1998 is shaping up to have the highest ozone concentrations since 1988. Seven paries have 

already have the 4* highest 8-hour average concentrations of greater than 85 ppb. Great Smoky 

Mountains, Sequoia, Shenandoah, and Joshua Tree National Parks are having exceptionally bad years from 

a pollution standpoint Several paries that had not previously been exceeding the 1-hour National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) are not exceeding the 8-hour averages of 85 ppb. (John Ray.303-969-2820) 

NPS monitoring stations exceei 

National Park 

Great Smoky Mts 

Cades Cove 

Clingmans Dome 

Cove Mountain 

Look Rock 

Mammoth Cave 

Shenandoah 

Joshua Tree 

Rocky Mountain 

Sequoia-Kings Canyon 

Lower Keweah 

Lookout Point 

Big Bend 

Death Valley 

Pennacles 

Grand Canyon 

Craters of the Moon 

Yosemite 

IMPORTANT NOTE: These table: 

ling the NAAQS of 85 ppb 0 3 over 8-hours in 1998 

May June 

Number Number 

2 

6 

9 

7 

3 

2 

i an based ot 

1 

2 

1 

4 

1 

- 1 

1 

2 

i screened, rav 

July August Season Max 8-hr 4th 

03 max 

Number Number Total 8-hr (ppb) 8-hr 

exceedances 03 

(PPb) 

1 

2 

8 

1 

17 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

* data and are 

1 

15 

13 

14 

4 

7 

5 

1 

7 

19 

3 

1 

4 

not final. Tlx 

3 

22 

24 

23 

7 

15 

14 

3 

25 

27 

1 

1 

4 

1 

1 

7 

tie were no exceedan 

86 

100 

99 

98 

92 

118 

85 

87 

85 

87 

97 

117 

100 

ces of either tl 

91 

98 

94 

88 

103 

110 

94 

. 99 

85 

90 

lie 1-hr 

or 8-hr standards prior to May in 1998. 

The National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone is 0.8 ppm (>- 85 ppb) over any 8-hr period in a day, using the 4* 

highest annual values averaged over 3 years. The tables above count the number of times that the max. daily 8-hr averages exceeded 

85 ppb. 

MI*M03.doe 8*86 JDR 

1 
P.9 

Title: Ecological Effects of Air Pollution on National Part Service Resources 

Issue: The National Park Service (NPS) Organic Act and the 1977 Clean Air Act 

Amendments require the NPS to protect the natural resources of the lands it 

manages from the adverse effects of air pollution. NPS researchers catalog 

sensitive resources, known as air quality related values, on Department of 

Interior lands, and establish dose-response relationships between levels of air 

pollutants and effects on ecosystems and populations. Deleterious effects have 

been documented for tropospheric ozone on native vegetation and for acid 

precipitation on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. 

Background and Status: 

o Ozone is generally acknowledged as the air pollutant causing the greatest 

amount of injury to native vegetation. Ozone enters plants through leaf stomata 

(holes) and may cause direct physiological injury to plants. Ozone may also 

weaken sensitive plants, permitting significant injury by secondary stressors. 

o Sensitivity to ozone varies by plant species; environmental conditions; 

total amount of ozone entering a plant; and the timing and peak characteristics 

of the total ozone dose. 

o Researchers have documented ozone injury to native hardwood and 

coniferous trees and herbaceous plants in NPS units across the United States. 

o Plants in the Sierra Nevada are exposed to chronic high ozone levels. 

Both growth and foliar effects have been documented on ponderosa and Jeffrey 

pines since the early 1960's, including plots within Sierran national parks. 

Changes in plant community structure due to ozone have been documented in 

southern California. 

o Researchers fumigated 46 plant species at the Great Smoky Mountains 

National Park Fumigation Facility (1987-1992). TWenty-two of these species 

displayed foliar injury at treatment levels equal to local ambient ozone. 

o With the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and the phased 

reductions in sulfur dioxide from power plants and industry, attention is now 

focused on issues related to nitrogen deposition, resulting from power plant, 

industry, and automobile emissions. 

o On NPS-protected lands, we are concerned with the long distance transport 

and transformation of nitrogen and sulfur oxides and the deposition of nitrogen 

and sulfur compounds that can affect freshwater lakes, streams, ponds, the 

watersheds surrounding these water bodies, and estuarine ecosystems. 

o The regions of concern regarding acid deposition include the upland areas 

of the eastern U.S., the mountainous preserves of the Rockies, Cascades and 

Sierra Nevada, and the shallow bays and estuaries along the Atlantic and Gulf 

Coasts. We have observed acidification of streams in both Shenandoah and Great 

Smoky Mountains NPs. 

o Effects of concern include changes in water chemistry that affect algae, 

submerged vegetation, fish, amphibian, and aquatic invertebrate communities. 

These changes can result in higher food web impacts. 

o There is some evidence that atmospheric deposition is leading to soil 

acidification, aluminum mobilization, and loss of base cations (essential 

nutrients) in forests; however, because of compounding factors it has been much 

more difficult to establish dose/response relationships for these ecosystems. 

<\ 
National Atmospheric Deposition Program / National Trends Network 

1985-1993 Trends in Nitrate Ion Concentration at NPS Sites 

\ 

»? 

r: 

O 

c 

01 

- f. 

\f Negative slope estimate, p>0.05 

V Negatiyeislope estimate, p<0.05 

A Positive slope estimate, p>0.05 

A Positive slope estimate, p<0.05 

Precipitation Chemistry Trends In the United States: 1980-1993. Summary Report. 

J. A. Lynch, V. C. Bowereox, C. Simmons. 1995. National Atmospheric Depostion Program, 

TJ 

o 
fyZJlllAJy PdrloCA 

FISH AND WILDUFE SERVICE CLASS I AREAS 

>\ % 

r r—^__ 

/ l Medicine Lake^T •rostwocfa—r-

« \ ULBend« ' \ 

> l ' I 

S ^Red-K_ockLal^es 

My±^_ 

/ \ 

M^-""'Vk^ 

Moos^horn* 

wanquarter 

^ «_Cape Romain 

Wolf Island 

*§t. M^*ks 

ahowitzka 

Map produced by the Hah and Wildlife Service Air Quality Branch 2/27/199 8 
P.12 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

I FWS manages 93 M acres of land and 

water in >500 national wildlife refuges 

I 20.6 M acres in 75 wilderness areas 

I 21 of the 75 wilderness areas are 

Class I air quality areas 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act, 1997 

..^isis&ssii^^^misims^si^ 

Clearly establishes wildlife conservation as 

the mission of the Refuge System: 

"ensure that the biological integrity, 

diversity, and environmental health of the 

system are maintained for the benefit of 

present and future generations of 

Americans." 

FWS Air Quality Branch 

I Part of the FWS Division of Refuges 

I Co-Located in Denver with the NPS Air 

Resources Division 

I FWS and NPS have IAG to cooperate on 

air quality issues affecting FWS and NPS 

lands and resources 

FWS Class I Areas 

I Include a variety of habitats - wetlands 

and floodplains, islands, prairies, forests 

I Provide important habitat for waterfowl 

and other birds, mammals, reptiles, 

amphibians, and fish 

I Provide habitat for threatened and 

endangered species 

I Many are located near urban areas with 

high rates of development 

ACAO 

BRET 

BRIG 

CHAS 

CMO 

EVER 

ORSH 

HALE 

•ACA 

MORA 

SKEN 

1 

} 

1 1 1 1 —I 1 

10 20 30 40 SO 60 

NSR PERMIT APPLICATIONS, 1987-1997 

70 80 

Resources at Risk From Air 

Pollution include: 

I Vegetation 

I Water Quality 

I Wildlife 

I Visibility 

AO 
P.13 

Air Quality Effects on Vegetation 

Ozone injury documented at: 

I Brigantine (NJ) 

I Cape Romain (SC) 

I Mingo (MO) 

I Moosehorn (ME) 

Other areas have not been examined. 

Air Quality Effects on Water 

Quality 

I Many FWS Class I areas contain 

significant estuarine and coastal waters 

sensitive to nitrogen deposition 

(eutrophication) 

I Toxics, e.g., Hg, deposited into aquatic 

ecosystems are bioaccumulated 

I Certain freshwaters are tow in ANC 

Air Quality Effects on Wildlife 

I Habitat alteration (e.g., eutrophication, 

acidification) 

I Toxicity (e.g., mercury) 

Air Quality Effects on Visibility 

I Visible plumes (e.g., Moosehorn) 

I Regional haze (all areas) 

New Source Review Issues of 

Concern 

I Class IS02 increment exceeded or nearly 

exceeded at Breton, Chassahowitzka, and 

Cape Romain 

I State emissions inventories are not 

adequately maintained 

l BACT analyses are inconsistent; NSPS not 

in keeping with new technology 

Case Study: 

Breton Air Quality Study 

I Purpose: to evaluate status of S02 

increment at Breton 

I Cooperative effort of FWS, MMS, EPA, 

States of LA, MS, and AL, and onshore 

and offshore industry 

I Need guidance from EPA on baseline, 

inventories, and modeling 

|3 
. _ &Br%y ;EPA AIR D0CKE17 

United Spates 

Environmental Protection 

Agenw 

WasWngton. DC 20460 

penalty for Private U M 

$300 

* » • ^ 

/** -u. — . *. 

Dennis Crumpler f A-90-37] 

US EPA, Q^QPS 

Research Triangl e Park, NC 27711 

Tl 
P.15 

A-90-37 

DOCKETING FORM TO BE FILED IN THE FOLLOWING RULEMAKINGS: 

New Source Review Reform Rulemaking-Docket No. A-90-37 

Regional Haze rulemaking-Docket No. A-95-38 

NAME OF EXTERNAL GROUP Department of Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

MEETING X SPEECH PHONE CALL (check one) 

DATE: September 30,1998 

-2 

TIME: 4:30 pm ! U 

I 

LOCATION OF MEETING/SPEECH/PHONE CALL: 

US EPA, 401 M Street, SW [MC6103] 

Washington, D.C. 2Q460 

PURPOSE OF MEETING/SPEECH/PHONE CALL: 

To discuss concerns associated with Regional Haze and New Source Review Reform 

rulemakings 

ATTENDEES: See attached list 

COMMENTS: 

- • • - • "> . 

An agenda setting forth the information discussed and handouts provided during the 

meeting are attached. No new substantive information was provided. 
P.16 

OCT-30-1998 17:38 EPfl-OflR/OfiP 202 565 2147 P.22/23 

WaenEnww Corporation ,.„ W'ZzS*] 

0r*W0T4H«ftflt!.V^«Ptaini.NewVb* 10601 .{M«M*4600- ta(ei4)94WlS?jei00 

1GIN 

Peat-if Fax Nets 7871 

*SJtuuUcZ C*6w? 

7 

F B ¥ f&-£J?74to-> 

H M I . ^ • ft M m rr\lhll 

rzr, 

October 23,1998 

Mr. Robert Pereiasepe 

Assistant Adrnmisttator 

AirandRadktion . — 

Environmental fftteetion Agency 

401MSISW 

Washington. DC 50460 

Dear Assistant AdmmistxatoT Pereiasepe: 

Thank you fcragamspene^tro^ yesterday with to power generation eonsultation group. I 

think it was another very useful discussion. Ai you know, Trlgen's approach to (he energy 

business is to be competitive by being more efficient than our competition, no matter what fuel 

we use in a particular location, that practice combined with the use of clean technologies makes 

our projects among the lowest emitting fossil fuel burning facilities in operation. 

We have been participating in this consultation group as we are concemed about situations where 

environmental regulations actually create barriers to pursuing projects which accomplish our 

' nations environmental goals. I think you and the group have identified some of these barriers 

and suggested some userWappxoaehes lo addressing them. The purpose of tiiis letter is to simply 

list the hems that ware brought up that I think aigmry some p'rogreu and that would wsrrant 

further attention. 

• Erie Sveuson mentioned the importance of output-based regulation. We agree that this ls 

a critical tool to internalizing efficiency in EPA's mission. When regulation is based en 

. output, many ofthe problems we currently race of encouraging and recognizing 

efficiency and pollution prevention simply disappear. We endorse the broadest 

application of output-based environmental regulation at the earliest possible pace and wo 

think that pace ean be much faster than is currently envisioned. We understand that there 

are perceived barriers to implementing these approaches but we believe that tare are 

simple, near-term solutions to most or all of them. 

• In the discussion of new source review, you mentioned the simplification made possible 

by emission cap programs. We also believe that integration of NSR with emission caps is 

a great opportunity to simplify many regulatory programs without risk to the 

environment. When aU affected sources are under a robust cap, netting, offsets, 

fluctuations and growth in emissions and even new technology requirements ean be 

largely or entirely taken care of by tha eap. This reduces the burden en regulate** and the 
^ i 

ys. 

OCT-30-1998 17:38 EPfi-OflR/QPIP 202 565 2147 P. 03/03 

letter to: Robert Pereiasepe 

September 10,1998 

Page 2 

• • regulated community alike. A^pmpedy designed eap is also oumut-based and thus 

ericouragejei&iency and pollution prevention Among other venues, the development 

ofthe ozone/PM standards may be an excellent opportunity to pursue the integration of 

these types of programs and there are other nesrer term opportunities that we could work 

on. . 

• We appreciated your discussion ofthe local netting is ^ related to cistict energy and 

other CftP projects. We know that there is a real, measurable environmental benefit 

associated with these projects and we'd tike to work with you to find a way ibr EPA to 

recognize mat under either existing or new regulations. 

• We did not have time to discuss die Title V ownership separation issue but we believe 

tiiat is another topic that ean be solved to provide enviroxunenral benefits ifwe devote a 

little time to it 

We are committed to working further on these issues and sharing our thoughts and suggestions 

with you and others at the EPA, Thank you again for taking time to work on this with us and we 

loejc forward to future discussions. 

Sincerely, 

Mark C Hall 

Director of Government Afters 

^ 
P.18 

A-90-37 

IV-g-^ f 

DOCKETING FORM TO BE FILED IN THE FOLLOWING RULEMAKINGS: 

New Source Review Reform Rulemaking- Docket No. A-90-37 

Regional Haze rulemaking-Docket No. A-95-38 

NAME OF EXTERNAL GROUP Department of Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

MEETING ^ X SPEECH PHONE CALL (check one) 

DATE: September 30,1998 

TIME: 4:30 pm 

-2i-:. 

F c / -• 

1 

LOCATION OF MEETING/SPEECH/PHONE CALL: 

US EPA, 401 M Street, SW [MC6103] 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

PURPOSE OF MEETING/SPEECH/PHONE CALL: 

To discuss concerns associated with Regional Haze and New Source Review Reform 

rulemakings 

ATTENDEES: See attached list 

COMMENTS: 

.• • - o . 

An agenda setting forth the information discussed and handouts provided during the 

meeting are attached. No new substantive information was provided. 
P.19 

Date: September 30,1998 

Meeting: EPA Meeting uo i 

Name Organization Phone # 

'trio V>yc\cj&q&> £PA^A£ . to&zbo-WHtt 

Pll^Vl Por+^s OSFuJS 333 WZQf? 

"Do ^ t\ULTA/lAN) US^LG S las *><£af74i 

Of r<L,& \^a>of<L 

GfrMGAK. 9/9-St//-*/??* 

ZPA/O9C lo* MO 76If 

Anna Un„o uWt EPA//\fxiL ZcisZOoQ S-7T 3~ 

EfA fo/rf? ZO1-\C0-74OD 

Clrte M/JJMT m 3&-%? 'Jrti 

Shfhoyn ^kuLndny? £%p 'tfl'206'Wlb 

^Jc> h"d §^u^ dZj^ >Q>Z-2b$-S^'7 

(%-tiA,.V\M>ne. 

Ujd\t\y\C*yy Wfj WfjOlMdAr Q t ePAl£A&PS flKDWI-gflty 

ly 
P.20 

£PA-M 

TENTATIVE AGENDA . ~ 

SEPTEMBER30,1998 DOT -cWo &i^^7\ 

EPA/DOI MEETING ON AIR QUALITY ISSUES 

IN NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDERNESS AREAS 

4:30-5:30 pm 

EPA-HQ 

Room 937 

401MSL.SW 

Washington, DC 

PURPOSE: 

• To discuss air quality-related issues affecting resources in national parks and wildemess areas 

managed by the Department ofthe Interior (NPS and FWS). 

• To suggest actions EPA can take to assist DOI in carrying out resource protection 

responsibility 

AGENDA 

Introductions And Overview of NPS/FWS Air Quality Issues 

• FLM roles and responsibility 

• Overview of NPS/FWS air programs 

• Summary of AQ/AQRV conditions/trends 

Discussion Of EPA Regulatory Framework For Class I Areas 

• Regional haze regulation 

• New source review regulation and policy guidance 

• Use of SIP authority/process to address AQRV issues 

• She-specific troubleshooting: BRAVO and MOHAVE 

Next Steps 

3 
-s 

Air Quality Monitoring in National Parks, bv Type 

OlympioNo. Cascades 

L •• • Mount Rainier 

,<o 

Redwoijd_ffl 

pt RoLta Yosemite Great Basin i-

-• ^3 TM MS m Bryce C^ 0" ' ^ 

Pinnatjc«| WM, DeathFTM- ' ' 

Klfifis^j^fH 

Hawaii MQ&I I toes 

f

ongarec Swamp 

\ , 

.^^y Type oflVfonitonng 

-__. Visibility-Optical (18) 

TM Visibility-Fine Particle (37) 

EH Ozone (31) 

[

-

M

 Wet Deposition (Acid Rain) (29) 

NPS Air Resources Division: 9/98 

IVJ. 

o. in parenthesis = number of parks monitored)' 

71 Everglades 

in Islands 
DRAFT 

^A 
P.23 

»*^. +» 

VZ SULFATE 

• NITRATE • SOIL 

SORGANICS ^ELEMENTAL CARBON 

4 >jg/ms OF FINE MASS 

22 SULFATE ^ 

NITRATE • ABSORPTION 

H ORGANICS W COARSE + FINE SOIL 

EXTNCTION EQUAL TO 30 

NVERSE MEGAMETERS 

b 
Summer 1998 High Ozone Hit List 

The summer of 1998 is shaping up to have the highest ozone concentrations since 1988. Seven parks have 

already have the 4* highest 8-hour average concentrations of greater than 85 ppb. Great Smoky 

Mountains, Sequoia, Shenandoah, and Joshua Tree National Parks are having exceptionally bad years from 

a poUution standpoint Several parks that had not previously been exceeding the 1-hour National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) are not exceeding the 8-hour averages of 85 ppb. (John Ray,303-969-2820) 

NPS monitoring stations exceec 

National Park 

Great Smoky Mts 

Cades Cove 

Clingmans Dome 

Cove Mountain 

Look Rock 

jMammoth Cave 

[Shenandoah 

Jjoshua Tree 

Rocky Mountain 

Sequoia-Kings Canyon 

Lower Keweah 

Lookout Point 

pig Bend 

[Death Valley 

IPennacles 

[Grand Canyon 

[Craters ofthe Moon 

|Yosemite 

IMPORTANT NOTE: These table 

ling the I 

May June 

Number Number 

2 

6 

9 

7 

3 

2 

s are based oi 

1 

2 

1 

4 

1 

• 1 

1 

2 

i screened, ra\ 

"IAAQS of 85 ppb 0 3 over 8-hours in IS 

July August Season Max 8-hr 

03 

Number Number Total 8-hr (ppb) 

exceedances 

1 

2 

8 

1 

17 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

M data and are 

1 

15 

13 

14 

4 

7 

5 

1 

7 

19 

3 

1 

4 

not final. Th 

3 

22 

24 

23 

7 

15 

14 

3 

25 

27 

1 

1 

4 

1 

1 

• 7 

:re were no exceedan 

86 

100 

99 

98 

92 

118 

85 

87 

85 

87 

97 

117 

100 

ces of either t 

•98 

4th 

max 

8-hr 

03 

(PPb) 

91 

98 

94 

88 

103 

110 

94 

99 

85 

90 

he 1-hr 

or 8-hr standards prior to May in 1998. 

The National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone is 0.8 ppm ( » 85 ppb) over any 8-hr period in a day, using the 4* 

highest annual values averaged over 3 years. The tables above count the number of times that the max. daily 8-hr averages exceeded 

85 ppb. 

96 Ntfat03.doc 9-9-98 JOR 

1 
Title: Ecological Effects of Air Pollution on National Park Service Resources 

Issue: The National Park Service (NPS) Organic Act and the 1977 Clean Air Act 

Amendments require the NPS to protect the natural resources of the lands it 

manages from the adverse effects of air pollution. NPS researchers catalog 

sensitive resources, known as air quality related values, on Department of 

Interior lands, and establish dose-response relationships between levels of air 

pollutants and effects on ecosystems and populations. Deleterious effects have 

been documented for tropospheric ozone on native vegetation and for acid 

precipitation on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. 

Background and Status: 

o Ozone is generally acknowledged as the air pollutant causing the greatest 

amount of injury to native vegetation. Ozone enters plants through leaf stomata 

(holes) and may cause direct physiological injury to plants. Ozone may also 

weaken sensitive plants, permitting significant injury by secondary stressors. 

o Sensitivity to ozone varies by plant species; environmental conditions; 

total amount of ozone entering a plant; and the timing and peak characteristics 

of the total ozone dose. 

o Researchers have documented ozone injury to native hardwood and 

coniferous trees and herbaceous plants in NPS units across the United States. 

o Plants in the Sierra Nevada are exposed to chronic high ozone levels. 

Both growth and foliar effects have been documented on ponderosa and Jeffrey 

pines since the early 1960's, including plots within Sierran national parks. 

Changes in plant community structure due to ozone have been documented in 

southern California. 

o Researchers fumigated 46 plant species at the Great Smoky Mountains 

National Park Fumigation Facility (1987-1992). Twenty-two of these species 

displayed foliar injury at treatment levels equal to local ambient ozone. 

o With the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and the phased 

reductions in sulfur dioxide from power plants and industry, attention is now 

focused on issues related to nitrogen deposition, resulting from power plant, 

industry, and automobile emissions. 

o On NPS-protected lands, we are concerned with the long distance transport 

and transformation of nitrogen and sulfur oxides and the deposition of nitrogen 

and sulfur compounds that can affect freshwater lakes, streams, ponds, the 

watersheds surrounding these water bodies, and estuarine ecosystems. 

o The regions of concern regarding acid deposition include the upland areas 

of the eastern U.S., the mountainous preserves of the Rockies, Cascades and 

Sierra Nevada, and the shallow bays and estuaries along the Atlantic and Oulf 

Coasts. We have observed acidification of streams in both Shenandoah and Great 

Smoky Mountains NPs. 

o Effects of concern include changes in water chemistry that affect algae, 

submerged vegetation, fish, amphibian, and aquatic invertebrate communities. 

These changes can result in higher food web impacts. 

o There is some evidence that atmospheric deposition is leading to soil 

acidification, aluminum mobilization, and loss of base cations (essential 

nutrients) in forests; however, because of compounding factors it has been much 

more difficult to establish dose/response relationships for these ecosystems. 

°l 
National Atmospheric Deposition Program / National Trends Network 

1985-1993 Trends in Nitrate Ion Concentration at NPS Sites 

rl 

CD 

n 

iav 

6 

P1 

»' 

I ?(. 

*-^ww > • ' f 

^T Negative slope estimate, p>0.05 

^ Negative slope estimate, p<0.05 

A Positive slope estimate, p>0.05 

A Positive slope estimate, p<0.05 Precipitation Chemistry Trends in the United States: 1980-1993. Summary Report. 

J. A. Lynch, V. C. Bowersox, C. Simmons. 1995. National Atmospheric Depostion Program. 

TJ 
£01JOU P(fA-<7\ 

S % v~--

FISH AND WILDUFE SERVICE CLASS I AREAS 

/ 7-—— . 

/ < 

/ 

7 

< 

y^ 

Medicine Lake^T •Lostvvodd

 r

-

\ ULBend* 

^ I — 

S^^JItedJRojck Lakes 

/ \ 

\7 

Moosehorn •> A x 

w v 

577-- o^y 

/ 0 ^ 

wanquarter 

^ ^Cape Romain 

'wolf Island 

f Chassahowitzka 

Map produced by the Hsh anl WildUfe Service Air Quality Branch 2/27/1998 
P.28 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

i FWS manages 93 M acres of land and 

water in >500 national wildlife refuges 

1 20.6 M acres in 75 wilderness areas 

I 21 of the 75 wilderness areas are 

Class I air quality areas 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act, 1997 

Clearly establishes wildlife conservation as 

the mission of the Refuge System: 

"ensure that the biological integrity, 

diversity, and environmental health of the 

system are maintained for the benefit of 

present and future generations of 

Americans." 

FWS Air Quality Branch 

i Part of the FWS Division of Refuges 

I Co-Located in Denver with the NPS Air 

Resources Division 

I FWS and NPS have IAG to cooperate on 

air quality issues affecting FWS and NPS 

lands and resources 

FWS Class I Areas 

i Include a variety of habitats - wetlands 

and floodplains, islands, prairies, forests 

I Provide important habitat for waterfowl 

and other birds, mammals, reptiles, 

amphibians, and fish 

I Provide habitat for threatened and 

endangered species 

I Many are located near urban areas with 

high rates of development 

Resources at Risk From Air 

Pollution include: 

I Vegetation 

i Water Quality 

I Wildlife 

• Visibility 

s 
P.29 

Air Quality Effects on Vegetation 

Ozone injury documented at: 

1 Brigantine (NJ) 

B Cape Romain (SC) 

f Mingo (MO) 

I Moosehorn (ME) 

Other areas have not been examined. 

Air Quality Effects on Water 

Quality 

I Many FWS Class I areas contain 

significant estuarine and coastal waters 

sensitive to nitrogen deposition 

(eutrophication) 

i Toxics, e.g., Hg, deposited into aquatic 

ecosystems are bioaccumulated 

1 Certain freshwaters are low in ANC 

Air Quality Effects on Wildlife 

§ Habitat alteration (e.g., eutrophication, 

acidification) 

i Toxicity (e.g., mercury) 

Air Quality Effects on Visibility 

i Visible plumes (e.g., Moosehorn) 

§ Regional haze (all areas) 

New Source Review Issues of 

Concern 

§ Class IS02 increment exceeded or nearly 

exceeded at Breton, Chassahowitzka, and 

Cape Romain 

S State emissions inventories are not 

adequately maintained 

i BACT analyses are inconsistent; NSPS not 

in keeping with new technology 

Case Study: 

Breton Air Quality Study 

••,1wm&emm®mm$s^8RBB0aB8ii 

i Purpose: to evaluate status of S02 

increment at Breton 

1 Cooperative effort of FWS, MMS, EPA, 

States of LA, MS, and AL, and onshore 

and offshore industry 

l Need guidance from EPA on baseline, 

inventories, and modeling 

I *