Document qznb6RXEJJROjQzqwEQVKwYE

Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Bennett, Tate [/0=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=1FA92542F7CA4D01973B18B2F11B9141-BENNETT, EL] 6/5/2018 7:30:02 PM Ryan Flickner [flicknerr@kfb.org] RE: E&E News on Flint Hills Please call me about this visit! From: Ryan Flickner [mailto:flicknerr@kfb.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 1:51 PM To: Bennett, Tate <Bennett.Tate@epa.gov> Cc: Gardner, Judd (Moran) (Judd_Gardner@moran.senate.gov) <Judd_Gardner@moran.senate.gov> Subject: E&E News on Flint Hills Tate and Judd, Wanted to make sure you saw the E&E story on Flint Hills burning. There is a backstory on a monitoring station near Manhattan (Konza Prairie). It was never intended to be regulatory in nature. If you ever have the good fortune to visit Manhattan, Kansas you'll see coming into town why an annual burn is absolutely critical in order to maintain the native, natural ecosystem. Without burning, the encroachment of Eastern Red Cedar trees (a major and severe allergen) is devastating to wildlife and a threat to uncontrolled fire and loss of life and property. https://www,epa.gov/sites/production/fiies/2016-12/documents/ks 2015 2016 network plan.pdf https://www.eenews.net/stories/1059980344/ http://cjoniine.com/news-state/2014-08-ll/sierra-ciub-chayenges-ioss-ozone-poliution-monitor http://kpbs.konza.k-state.edu/ http://themercurv.com/articies/officials-at-odds-about-air-quaiitv-monitor-shutoff/ Flere is a copy of a Google Map image. You'll see areas that have a 1, 3, 5 year burn cycle vs areas that haven't had fire for a generation or more. This is common, and readily viewed, all over the Flint Hills where fire is used to manage and maintain the ecosystem vs where landowners/tenants have prevented fire from occurring. Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 1 ED 002061 00078873-00001 Ryan Flickner Senior Director, Public Policy Kansas Farm Bureau 2627 KFB Plaza Manhattan, KS 66503-8154 Direct: i Ex. 6 i I________________________________________________: flicknerR@kfb.org m tm k w w \ i wiM Ki V im # ** Enviros urge more monitoring of Kan. grassland fires Sean Reilly, E&E News reporter Published: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 Grasslands burning in the Flint Hills area of eastern Kansas led to levels of fine particle pollution well above U.S. EPA's standard, environmentalists said in a report released yesterday that urged state regulators to increase monitoring. The report, which relied on data from portable monitors set up by the Kansas Sierra Club and members of the CleanAirNow Coalition, said fine particle levels were as high as 52.3 micrograms per cubic meter of air April 7 in the city of Manhattan, Kan., then hit 60.3 micrograms per cubic meter April 11. Manhattan, with a population of about 56,000, is the state's largest population center directly in the path of northward-moving smoke from the Flint Hills region. EPA's 24-hour standard for fine particles is 35 micrograms per cubic meter of air. Prescribed burning, engulfing some 2.4 million acres this year, is a rite of spring in the Flint Hills, both as a means of preserving tail-grass prairie from encroachment by trees and invasive species and to help generate richer grass that fattens cattle more quickly (Greenwire, May 16). But the practice generates enormous quantities of particulate-laden smoke, leading to complaints from downwind communities. Environmentalists say Kansas officials have been loath to gauge the extent of the problem. Around Manhattan, for example, there are no continuous monitors connected to EPA's warning system, according to the report. The Kansas Department of Health and Environment must "set up continuous monitors not only near Manhattan, but also elsewhere in the state threatened by heavy smoke from the burning," it said. A department spokeswoman did not reply to phone and email messages yesterday seeking comment. In response to complaints from the mayor of Lincoln, Neb., KDHE's environment director has previously said the agency would review its 2010 smoke management plan (Greenwire, May 1). Fine particles, technically known as PM2.5, are no more than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, or one-thirtieth the width of a human hair. They are linked to an array of heart and lung ailments. Twitter: @Ssanatreanwire Email: Si anaws.nat Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 1 ED 002061 00078873-00002