Review of the Air Quality Criteria Document for Particulate Matter

More documents

Recommendations

Info

P. 5.43, Lines 21-29 Please eliminate, the section does not add anything to discussion.P. 5.45 There is an assumption that there is no cross linkage betweenaccumulation due to chemistry outdoors, and chemistry indoors. Ozone ispresent indoors and outdoors. Thus part of the PM assumed to penetrateindoor could be a mischaracterization of new particle accumulationindoors, due to reactions between ozone and VOC. The reason: ozoneusually varies with PM 2.5 , in the summertime.P. 5.45, Lines 21-30 Agree with statement.P. 5-47, Lines 1-10 However, the baseline PM from primary indoor PM sources may stillaccount for the mass burden to the lung that is built upon by the variableportion caused by the outdoor concentration and exposure.P. 5-48 These analyses are consistent with other previous studies. Need areference to previous document, AQCD (1996).P. 5-49, Line 10 Need to add the BaP data in THEES. Outdoor BaP was the same at alloutdoor sites across 3 sampling periods. (See attached article byWaldman et al.). Is a good study of BaP indoor/outdoor/personalexposure. It indicates seasonal differences due to sources and activities.P. 5-51 to 5-56 These are very good sections. However, the results are discounted orignored when the authors try to construct mean linear relationshipsbetween E og , and E ig , etc.P. 5-59 Indoor air chemistry is discounted and/or ignored. If we were to put itinto an appropriate context for exposure there would be an E ov-rxn-iv orE (ioRn) exposure variable for particles generated by gases outdoors, reactingwith gases indoors to produce fresh particles.P. 5-61 Good section.P. 5-61 to 5-63 Ignored in mass balance representations. The chapter authors lean towardaveraging everything to point estimates. I would recommend sensitivityanalyses to begin understanding and presenting a distribution of exposure.P. 5-67 Lines 18-19 need to be at beginning of the paragraph.P. 5-73 Need to add the BaP exposure results from THEES (see attached article,pg. 211-215). A very comprehensive analysis, which shows a lot aboutseasonal variability of indoor/outdoor sources and resultant changes inpersonal exposure to BaP.P. 5-78 Oglesby et al 2000, lines 11-14 is a very good analysis, and is an honest“qualitative” discussion about the uncertainties. But still ignores the factthat “association does not make the poison.”P. 5-79 (5.5.4) Ignores freshly generated aerosol indoors.P. 5-80 (5.5.5) Good except for the lack of E ov-rxn-iv or E(ioRn) .P. 5-81 (5.6.1), Lines 8-15 Should bring to beginning of the chapter. All of page 81 isexcellent, and should be moved closer to the front of theA - 39
document.P. 5-82, Lines 15-30 Need more research and not just hypotheses to explain “paradox”. In theend, there may be complex synergisms, which preclude simple decouplingof indoor and outdoor particles. Again, this does not discount the strongepidemiological “association” established and summarized in volume 2.The comment tries to direct attention to the ultimate goal of the dose tothe lung and other systems.P. 5-82, Line 28 Add – Co-generation of fresh fine and ultra fine PM from outdoor air andindoor gaseous air pollutants.P. 5-84, Lines 6-19 The E nonag may not provide the variability, but will add to the dailybaseline dose received by the lung.P. 5-84, Lines 20-27 Good point, needs to be highlighted in conclusions.P. 5-85 Need to include E ov-rxn-iv .P. 5-89 to 5-92 Good analysis of the problem. The uncertainties around the various meanvalues or at least the variability of each variable must be part of anypresentation in the staff paper.P. 5-90, Line 30, to 5-91, Line 1-3 Still does not discount the need to consider the presenceand addition of the quasi-constant non-ambient mass.Exposures will yield a dose from indoor, outdoor, andpersonal PM.P. 5-91, Lines 11-14 Good point, but lines 15-19 are just as important.P. 5-93, Lines 21-25 Very important. Should be part of conclusions.P. 5-95, Lines 5-7 It is a working hypothesis. Needs to be stated as such here and on page101.P. 5-95, Lines 29-31 Point about describing a single individual needs to be made earlier. Theassumption in the text is that it represents the mean, and this has to becouched by a statement on distribution functions for all variables and theneed to establish a probabilistic distribution of exposure, including95%tile.Missing – How will exposure data be used to address causality issues. A dose fromindoor/outdoor/personal exposures to fine and coarse particles will be delivered to the lung. Dowe need research that looks at the incremental toxicity of each for specific endpoints, or thesynergisms that can occur among various toxic compounds of each fraction?CHAPTER 7Page Line(s) CommentsMort Lippmann, PhD7-1 12 after "aerodynamic" replace "a" with a "comma", and after"thermodynamic", insert ", and/or electrostatic".A - 40
Page 5: known, the potential causes deserve
Page 10: SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STAFFMr. A.
Page 13 and 14: Page 2-77, line 19-22: Should menti
Page 15 and 16: Page 8-1, lines 26-28: Combustion a
Page 17 and 18: mode vs. the other. In fact, such k
Page 19 and 20: p. 7-49, l. 20 In an effort to make
Page 21 and 22: ambient PM effects. The paragraph d
Page 23 and 24: dominant, one criticism is that “
Page 25 and 26: 6. Susceptible sub-populationsIt is
Page 27 and 28: is OK. But in most settings it stil
Page 29 and 30: 2. There are repetitions of the sam
Page 31 and 32: 15. Page 3-57 and 3-58, line 29-31
Page 33 and 34: P 7- 27, L 15: What does “compara
Page 35 and 36: there is pertains almost solely to
Page 37 and 38: studies, and is presented as observ
Page 39 and 40: P 8-47, L 23-27: These two sentence
Page 41 and 42: also be summarized. Second, the cha
Page 43 and 44: P 9-76, L 30: It should be “these
Page 45 and 46: 4. Page 4-7,lines 14-18. Similar th
Page 47 and 48: control when it may be possible to
Page 49: 1990. Reference Lioy, P.J. “The A
Page 53 and 54: 7-12 8 insert "that are either very
Page 55 and 56: 8-62 10,11 The preceding discussion
Page 57 and 58: 9-27 17 insert "source and/or" afte
Page 59 and 60: 2. The paper by Künzli et al. on t
Page 61 and 62: 6-243 12 This section (6.4.4.) shou
Page 63 and 64: Chapter 5. Human Exposure to PM and
Page 65 and 66: the chapter. Many of the poor quali
Page 67 and 68: Page 5-17, equation 5-10; the coeff
Page 69 and 70: illustrated using a figure from Kel
Page 71 and 72: tied back to the base-line health s
Page 73 and 74: Page 7-4, Structure of the Respirat
Page 75 and 76: Günter Oberdörster, PhDChapter 7
Page 77 and 78: efficiencies as well as the ratio o
Page 79 and 80: The title of this section is also s
Page 81 and 82: old and young rats and mice used on
Page 83 and 84: passive use values as opposed to us
Page 85 and 86: Specific Comments:Page 5-19, lines
Page 87 and 88: Chapter 9 - General CommentsThis ch
Page 89 and 90: George Taylor, PhDAir Quality Crite
Page 91 and 92: atmospheric stressors associated wi
Page 93 and 94: “At the surface, a variable fract
Page 95 and 96: that point from this review! “Vis
Page 97 and 98: 6. P 2-86, section 2.2.5.1 - A shor

Review of the Air Quality Criteria Document for Particulate Matter

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?