Sample Letter to EPA on Air Quality at Mono Lake

Sample Letter to EPA

The Honorable Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Mailcode: 6102T
Washington, DC 20460

Re: Air Quality Standards –– Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2001-0017

Dear Administrator Johnson,

I am writing to urge the EPA to continue regulation of air quality in rural areas for PM10-2.5 particulate matter resulting from windblown dust. To do any less will cause economic damage and jeopardize the health of California’s Mono Lake, local Mono Basin residents, and more than 300,000 annual visitors.

Mono Lake is one of the largest single sources of particulate matter air pollution in the country. Dust storms with PM10 concentrations of up to 10,500 µg/m3 are the major concern. This pollution is “anthropogenic,” or human caused, but it is also being human solved.

The problem started in the 1940s when Los Angeles began excessive water diversions from Mono Lake’s tributary streams, causing the lake level to decline and exposing alkali-encrusted dry lakebed that contains high levels of toxic materials like arsenic and sulfate salts.

But the EPA has been part of the solution by requiring compliance with air quality standards. Win-win solutions have been found and in 1994 the California Water Resources Control Board established a lake management level to solve the dust pollution problem as well as other issues. In the 12 years since that decision, Mono Lake has risen 8 feet and is on its way to a manageable, healthy level.

However, Mono Lake is in a rural area, and your recent proposal calls for rural areas to be exempt from PM10-2.5 air quality standards. Not only that, your proposal goes on to exempt windblown dust from regulation as well, even when human activity is the cause.

I don’t think that reopening a solved problem by eliminating the standards makes any sense. I believe that children, residents, and visitors to these rural areas deserve the same protection they would have in urban areas. And I am worried that EPA’s proposal undermines the tourism-dependent economy of the region.

I urge you to change the proposed rule as follows:

1. Apply the PM10-2.5 standard to the Mono Lake area, the Owens Valley, and the entire country, not just urban areas.

2. Use the PM10-2.5 standard to regulate windblown dust, in particular dust originating from the exposed bed of Mono Lake; creating a loophole is not appropriate for pollution of this magnitude.

Thank you for your action on this matter,

____________________________________________________

[Name Line 1] Signature

[City], [ST]

--END SAMPLE LETTER--

Where you sent your letter

The comment period is over. Comments were accepted for 90 days beginning when this proposal was published in the Federal Register. If you commented on the proposed EPA rule change for National Ambient Air Quality Standard Particulate Matter you had until April 17, 2006. All comments should have been identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2001-0017 and submitted by one of the following methods:

Federal e-rulemaking portal;
www.regulations.gov ;
E-mail (a-and-r-docket@epa.gov );
Facsimile (202) 566-1741;
Mail (Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460); or
Hand delivery (Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC).

Back to Air Quality Page

Last Updated February 22, 2006