To:

Cc:

Bcc:

Subject: Re: Data from Francine Laden

From: Francine Laden <nhfrl@channing.harvard.edu>

To: Beth Hassett-Sipple/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 05/21/2009 10:00 PM

Subject: Re:

Beth,

Here is a table of the annual PM2.5 levels used in the update of the Harvard Six Cities Study. 

The on-line supplement describes in detail what monitors were used where. For the years when 

we are using actual measurements there is only one monitor per city...in the latter years, when 

EPA AQS monitors are used, we are actually using estimated PM2.5 concentrations as opposed 

to actual measured PM2.5. Please let me know if you need a copy of the online supplement, or 

any further information.

Francine

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:45 PM, <Hassett-Sipple.Beth@epamail.epa.gov> wrote:

Francine, thank you for your quick response to our request. Since you will be out of the country during 

the middle part of May, please let us know when it would be reasonable for you to provide the requested 

information.

Regarding the Puett et al 2008 study, this study focussed on effects associated with exposures to 

PM10. While it is certainly a study that is being evaluated in the broader review of the scientific 

evidence, the current request for more specific air quality data is focussed on important studies that 

evaluated health effects associated with exposures to PM2.5 and/or PM10-2.5.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

We sincerely appreciate your help!

Regards,

 Beth

Beth M. Hassett-Sipple 

Environmental Health Scientist

Ambient Standards Group (C504-06)

Health and Environmental Impacts Division

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

109 TW Alexander Drive

RTP, NC 27711

(919) 541-4605

Hassett-Sipple.Beth@epa.gov

(919) 541-0237 (FAX)
Francine Laden Francine Laden<nhfrl@channing.harvard.edu>

05/04/2009 10:33 AM

To Beth Hassett-Sipple/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject Re:

I am happy to try to answer these questions. However, I am going to an international 

conference on May 15-May 25, and I may not be able to get you all the answers before I depart.

I have noticed that the following article is not on your list 

Puett RC, Schwartz J, Hart JE, Yanosky J, Speizer FE, Suh H, Paciorek C, Neas L, Laden F. 

Chronic particulate exposure, mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in the Nurses Health 

Study. Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Nov 15;168(10): 1161-1168. 

Francine

Francine Laden, ScD

Mark and Catherine Winkler Assistant Professor of Environmental Epidemiology

Harvard School of Public Health

Assistant Professor of Medicine

Channing Laboratory, Brigham & Women's Hospital

Phone: 617-525-2711

Mailing Address: Channing Laboratory, 181 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115

Office Location: 3rd Floor West, Landmark Center 
.................

On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 5:36 PM, <Hassett-Sipple.Beth@epamail.epa.gov> wrote: 

To: Authors of recent U.S. and Canadian epidemiological studies

evaluating health effects associated with exposure to fine and thoracic

coarse particles

 EPA is in the process of reviewing the national ambient air

quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM). Important

components of this review include the preparation of an Integrated

Science Assessment (ISA) and a Risk and Exposure Assessment (REA). In

evaluating the epidemiological evidence in the ISA and in using this

information in the quantitative risk assessment presented in the REA, it

is crucial to consider the air quality distributions from areas where

these studies were conducted to investigate associations between PM and

health effects. Most epidemiological studies provide some information

on the distribution of ambient measurement data for PM, however,
published information is often generally limited in scope and the

descriptive statistics reported vary from one study to another.

 In order to effectively place key epidemiological studies in a

policy-relevant context, EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards (OAQPS) and National Center for Environmental Assessment

(NCEA) are jointly contacting you to request specific information on the

distribution of the air quality data for PM2.5 and/or PM10-2.5 used in

your studies. These data will provide important information as NCEA

develops the second draft ISA and OAQPS develops the first draft REA.

The final ISA and REA together with a policy assessment will inform

EPA’s decision making process and the basis for recommendations that the

Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) will make to the EPA

Administrator regarding whether to retain or modify the PM NAAQS.

 Specifically, we are interested in receiving the following

descriptive statistics on the air quality data used in your study (see

reference list below):

A. For studies evaluating mortality and morbidity effects associated

 with long-term PM2.5 ambient concentrations, please provide the

 following:

 o mean of the ambient PM2.5 mean concentrations across cities

 reported in the study for the time period evaluated in the

 study

 o range (high-to-low) of the city-specific means across all

 cities or locations

 o in addition, include where applicable, the above air quality

 information differentiated by:

 specific individual years, if multiple years were

 evaluated

 season, as defined in the study

 region, as defined in the study (e.g., east-west)

 o if your study considered air quality data from multiple

 monitors in a city, please also include the above information

 for the HIGHEST reporting monitor within each city; this will

 facilitate our assessment of the current annual PM2.5 NAAQS and

 any alternative standards that may be considered

B. For multi-city studies evaluating mortality and/or morbidity effects

 associated with short-term PM2.5 and/or PM10-2.5 concentrations,

 please provide the following:

 o mean; 95th, 96th, 97th, 98th, and 99th percentile values; and

 minimum and maximum values (each as the average across modeled

 cities - e.g., average of the 98th percentile values across the

 cities evaluated)
 o range (high to low) of city-specific 98th percentile values

 across all cities

 o in addition, include where applicable, the above air quality

 information differentiated by:

 specific individual years, if multiple years were

 evaluated

 region, as defined in the study (e.g., east-west)

 o please also include the following information for the HIGHEST

 reporting monitor within each city; this will facilitate our

 assessment of the current 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and any

 alternative standards that may be considered

 98th and 99th percentile of the 24-hour concentrations

 for each city

 annual mean concentration for each city

 average 98th and 99th percentile of 24-hour

 concentrations across cities

 range (high to low) of 98th and 99th percentile

 concentrations across cities

 in addition, include where applicable, the above air

 quality information differentiated by:

 specific individual years, if multiple years were

 evaluated

 region, as defined in the study (e.g., east-west)

 o in addition, we would ask that you identify the air quality

 monitors used, unless these monitors are identified already in

 the study publication

C. For single-city studies evaluating mortality and morbidity effects

 associated with short-term PM2.5 ambient concentrations, please

 provide the following information:

 o information requested in B above for the one city evaluated

 Please note, this request is for information on the distribution

of air quality data for PM2.5 used in your studies. It is important to

emphasize that we are not requesting health data. In addition, we are

not requesting raw air quality data, but rather information on the

distribution of the data. However, if you would prefer to send the

entire air quality data set for us to compute the descriptive statistics

that would also be acceptable. Please be aware that your responses,

together with whatever data you provide, will be placed in our public

docket.

 We recognize that you are all very busy. We know that it may take

some time to respond to our request, but we would be extremely grateful

if you could provide us with these additional data. The information you

provide is likely to play an important role in the current review of the

PM NAAQS. Our current schedule includes NCEA preparing a second draft
ISA for CASAC and public review by the end of July and OAQPS preparing a

first draft REA for CASAC and public review by early September. In

order to use the requested information in preparing these documents, we

ask that you provide them to us by May 22, 2009. If you are not able to

meet this date, we ask that you provide, if possible, an alternate date

by which you could prepare the requested information.

 References for U.S. and Canadian studies for which we are

requesting air quality data for fine and coarse fraction PM are listed

below. In most cases, the first author is also listed as the contact

for correspondence; however, where another author is indicated as the

corresponding author, we have listed that name at the end of the

reference and will follow up with that author. We will follow this

email message with a telephone call in the next few days to address any

questions you might have regarding this request. If you have already

provided NCEA and/or OAQPS with additional air quality data in response

to earlier requests, we thank you, and we will verify that we have

received the requested data when we call. Please contact us at any time

if you have any questions. You may reach Dr. Lindsay Stanek, NCEA, at

919 541-7792, stanek.lindsay@epa.gov or Beth Hassett-Sipple, OAQPS, at

919 541-4605, hassett-sipple.beth@epa.gov.

 Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Beth M. Hassett-Sipple Lindsay Wichers Stanek, PhD

Environmental Health Scientist Physical Scientist

OAQPS NCEA-RTP