~. f, 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION2 

Robert K. W arland, Director 

Division of Air Resources 

New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation 

625 Broadway 

Albany, NY 12233-3250 

Dear Mr. Warland: 

290 BROADWAY 

NEW YORK, NY 10<.<07-1866 

This letter is to review the current status of the particulate matter situation in Manhattan and to 

establish a basis for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 

and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to proceed concerning a variety of particulate 

matter issues. 

The l'a ~. ~ and EPA, 's PM-10 Attainment Determination Obligation 

On January 20, 1994, New York County was redesignated a PM-I 0 moderate nonattainment 

area. This designation was based on monitor readings recorded at the Manhattan microscale 

street canyon site at Madison Avenue between 47th and 48th Streets. · Nonattainment areas 

designated m 1994 were required to come into attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) by December 31 , 2000. Further, by July 1, 2001 the Clean Air Act requires 

EPA to make a determination as to whether or not the State attained the NAAQS. EPA's criteria 

for determining whether an area has attained the NAAQS is three consecutive years of valid data 

showing that the 24-hour and annual arithmetic mean concentrations did not exceed 150 g/m3 

snd 50 glm3

, respectively. If EPA made a finding that the area did not attain the NAAQS, we 

would be required to publish a Federal Register reclassifying the area as being in serious 

nonattaimnent. 

Evaluation o(New York's PM-10 Air Quality Data and Attainment Status 

Since the PM-10 air quality data collected throughout the rest ofNew York City, and the entire 

State ior that matter, meets the NAAQS by a wide margin, the attainment status issue becomes 

solely a discussion about levels at the Madison A venue monitor. The State first wrote to us on 

April 27, 2000 regarding the reclassification of the Madison A venue mopjtor as a special fmrpose 

monitor. More recently, in a letter dated July 26, 2001, you state that because of instrument and 

location changes made at the site in response to vandalism, L'le monitor doe§ not meet State and 

Local Ajr Monitoring Station (SLAMS) siting criteria outlined in appendix E of 40 CFR 58. 

This office has investigated the matter further and we agree with your assessment that the 

monitor does not meet siting criteria and thus, the recent data recorded at this site cannot be used 

to support NAAQS detenninations. Moreover, because of a variety of constraints, the monitor 

cannot practicably be brought into compliance with the siting criteria. We therefor'! agre~ with 

your staff that the monitor is most appropriately considered a "special purpose 1 'lonitor" (SPM) 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

~a.d/R~ • Pr1m.d with V~etable 011 a...d lnQ on Recyded Paper (Minlmu.n 50% Poa~. wu~nsr cont~t) 
pursuant to the criteria in EPA Part 58 monitoring regulations. 

You and your staffhave also presented information suggesting that the Madison Avenue monitor 

has not produced consistent quality data since late 1998 resulting from a variety of causes 

including dust and particles from construction/demolition at nearby buildings, scaffolding which 

obstructed the air flow in close proximity to the monitor, and monitoring equipment shut-downs. 

We have reviewed this information and concur that in addition to the siting problems noted 

previously, the most recent years' data [1999, 2000, and 2001] are rot reliable for these other 

reasons and should not be considered in the attainment determination. 

Based on the factor£ discussed above, we have concluded that the three most recent years of valid 

data for PM-10 at the Madison Avenue monitor are 1996, 1997, and 1998 which recorded an 

annual arithmetic mean of 49.7 glm3

• Since this attains the NAAQS of 50 glm3 and since no 

other PM-10 monitor in New York County has recorded a violation of the NAAQS from 1994 to 

the present, we concur with New York that Manhattan is attaining the PM-1 0 NAAQS. 

Notwithstanding our concurrence with the attainment determination, since the Madison Avenue 

monitor measured P:tvi-1 0 levels very close to the NAAQS, continued monitoring of the situation 

is needed. In this regard, we have been working closely with your staff to find a replacement 

monitor for the Madison A venue monitor and have several alternative locations near that site we 

may be able to use. On February 20, 2002 NYSDEC and EPA staffs conducted a joint field 

survey of the midtown area. At that time, our staffs agreed to consider an alternative monitoring 

location (at the 47th Street entrance to Grand Central Terminal). We understand that NYSDEC 

Region 2 staff is now negotiating for use ofthe site and we ask that you keep us informed on its 

progress. I need your commitment to establish a replacement diesel traffic monitoring site that 

meets all siting criteria as s.:>on as practical. IfNYSDEC carmot use the Grand Central Terminal 

site, then it is essential that our staffs select a mutually satisfactory site as soon as practical. 

Redesi~ation for Manhattan 

It is important to note, however, that this clean data determination does not constitute a 

redesignation to attainment. In order to redesignate the area to attainment, NYSDEC must 

officially request a redesignation as was recently done for carbon monoxide. This request needs 

to contain a fully approvable PM-10 SIP and a maintenance plan- see Section 107(d)(3)(E) of 

the Clean Air Act for the five specific requirements an area must meet in order to be redesignated 

from nonattainment to attainment). Although the State submitted a PM-10 SIP several years ago, 

questions concerning off-road emission inventories and contingency measures still need to be 

resolved, and a copy of the public hearing record must be submitted prior to final EPA action on 

the SIP. Furthermore, as part of the maintenance plan, we believe a critical component is a 

SLAMS traffic-oriented (up to seven meters above ground level) monitoring site which would 

substitute for the one S:PM site currently operating at Madison A venue. 

PM2.5 Desi~rrations 

As you know, the District ofColumbia Circuit Court has acted favorably on EPA's promulgation 

of the PM2.5 standard. With this in mind, EPA is likely to request the states' recommendations 

for PM2.5 designations in the July 2003 time frame. EPA would then take rulemaking action on 

the designations during 2004 and 2005. 
· Considering the importance of early planning to address the particulate matter issues before us, I 

recommend that we meet within the next few weeks to plan our actions and to share information. 

Should you have any questions or if you would like to discuss this further, please contact 

Raymond Werner, Chief of the Air Programs Branch at (212) 637-4249. 

Walter Mugdan, Director 

Division of Environmental Planning and Protection 

cc: R. Werner, APB 

D. Shaw, NYSDEC 

N. Isabel, NYSDEC