|NEW JERSEY CLEAN AIR COUNCIL
C.S.R. LICENSE NO. XIO1634
|SCHULMAN, CICCARELLI & WIEGMANN
CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS
2 LINCOLN HIGHWAY, SUITE 405
EDISON, NEW JERSEY 08820
(908) - 494 - 9100
NEW JERSEY CLEAN AIR COUNCIL
|JOSEPH A. SPATOLA, Ph.D., Chairman
JOHN A. MAXWELL, Public
RAYMOND MANGANELLI, Public
MICHAEL BERRY, New Jersey Department of Health and Senior
LINDA STANSFIELD, Public
STEPHEN J. PAPENBERG, New Jersey Health Officers' Association
FARID AHMAD, Department of Community Affairs
JORGE BERKOWITZ, New Jersey Business and Industry Association
JOHN SERKIES, New Jersey Department of Commerce
MARIA LANIA-HOWARTH, M.D.
Click on the speaker's name below to go to their
| RAYMOND WERNER, EPA
| GEORGE WOLFF,
General Motors Corp.
| PAUL LIOY, EOSHI
| JOHN ELSTON,
| CHARLES PIETARINEN, DEP
| AL MANNATO,
American Petroleum Institute
| BARBARA TURPIN, Rutgers
| BERNARD GOLDSTEIN,
Environmental and 201 Health Sciences Institute
| TIM DILLINGHAM, Sierra
| MARIE A. CURTIS,
N.J. Environmental Lobby
| BETTY WOLFE, Princeton Environmental
| REBECCA STANSFIELD,
| JIM SINCLAIR, N.J. Business
& Industry Association
| REVEREND JOSEPH
R. PARRISH, St. John's Episcopal Church
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like
to get started this morning.
I want to welcome all of you here to the Clean Air Council
public hearing. Today we're going to be talking about the proposed
standard and how it may affect New Jersey for the new particulate
My name is Joseph Spatola, and I'm in charge of this year's
Clean Air Council's public hearing. My co-chair is John Maxwell,
to my left.
I just have a few introductory statements to make.
This year's public hearing will focus on a proposed federal
fine particulate matter standard PM2.5. Today we'll be seeking
more information on the basis of the proposed standards and
the implications of the new standard for New Jersey.
Before we start this morning's hearing I would like to speak
to you very briefly about the Clean Air Council.
The Clean Air Council was created in 1954 through New Jersey
statute N.J.S.A. 26:2C3.2. The Council makes recommendations
to the Commission of the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection on matters and programs pertaining to air pollution
The Council consists of seventeen members, three of whom represent
the Department of Commerce and Economic Development, the Department
of Community Affairs and the Department of Agriculture. Six
members represent the general public, including one medical
doctor licensed in New Jersey. And eight members are from organizations
enumerated by the Governor. These include the New Jersey Health
Officers' Association, the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce, the
New Jersey Society of Professional Engineers, the New Jersey
Manufacturers Association, the New Jersey section of the American
Industrial Hygiene Association, the New Jersey League of Municipalities,
the New Jersey Freeholder Association, and lastly, the New Jersey
So, you can see that we have a good cross-section of the various
interested parties in the State.
The Clean Air Council meets monthly and is required to hold
an annual public hearing on existing air pollution strategies,
codes, rules and regulations, the state-of-the-art and technical
capabilities and limitations in air pollution control, and then
to report its recommendations to the Commissioner of the DEP.
Before we begin this public hearing today I would like each
council member to introduce himself or herself and indicate
whom they represent.
I would like to start from the left-hand side.
DR. MANGANELLI: Ray Manganelli, public.
MR. BERRY: Michael Berry, New Jersey Department of Health
and Senior Services, which you need to update your list as one
of the departments.
MS. STANSFIELD: Linda Stansfield, public.
MR. MAXWELL: John Maxwell, public.
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: I'm Joseph Spatola, representing the public.
MR. PAPENBERG: Steve Papenberg, representing New Jersey Health
Officers' Association and its present chair.
MR. AHMAD: Farid Ahmad from the Department of Community Affairs.
MR. BERKOWITZ: George Berkowitz. I represent New Jersey Business
and Industry Association.
MR. SERKIES: John Serkies. I represent the New Jersey Department
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: I also at this time would wish to acknowledge
Ms. Erin Indelicato, the N.J. DEP, --
A VOICE: She just left the room.
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: -- who is our liaison with the Department
who was instrumental in coordinating all those activities that
were necessary to enable us to have this public hearing today.
Sorry she missed that.
It's on the record.
We will be hearing some background statements this morning
from the Department. I'd like to adjust a few little background
statements myself regarding this issue of the new PM2.5 standard.
Just in the way of background, the Federal Clean Air Act directs
the Environmental Protection Agency to identify and set national
standards for pollutants which cause adverse impacts to public
health and the environment.
EPA is required to review the health and welfare-based standards
at least once every five years. Standards are included in each
State's Implementation Plan, which is called a SIP, and which
is ultimately approved by the EPA. This plan outlines how a
state such as New Jersey will attain the standards.
Concerning the proposed PM2.5 standard, EPA has concluded
that the particulate matter PM10 standards are not fully protective
of public health. They have cited increased premature deaths,
aggravation of respiration and cardiovascular illness, lung
function effects, changes to lung structure and defense mechanisms,
and that smallest particles at 2.5 microns and smaller are of
significant concerns for effects. In addition, other effects,
EPA has included are visibility effects, soiling and material
The current and proposed particulate matter standards are
as follows: Currently the PM10 standard has been set at fifty
micrograms per cubic meter annual average arithmetic mean, with
a second standard of a hundred and fifty micrograms per cubic
meter per twenty-four hour standard with one exceedence allowed.
The proposed PM10 standards would be the same for the annual
one and the twenty-four hour one will remain the same but at
the ninety-eight percentile concentration.
The proposed 2.5 standards are two: One is a fifteen microgram
per cubic meter annual average arithmetic mean, it being, however,
a spatial average. And there is also proposed a fifty microgram
per cubic meter twenty-four hour ninety-eight percentile concentration.
In terms of projected impacts to proposed PM standards, EPA
estimates the PM standards to result in costs of approximately
In contrast, EPA estimates that the benefits would be in the
range of seventy to a hundred and forty-three billion dollars.
The Air and Waste Management's Association magazine for environmental
managers suggests that large urbanized areas in New Jersey may
likely be out of attainment with the new PM2.5 standards. In
its January 1997 edition the following ten New Jersey counties
were named as examples: Atlantic, Bergen, Camden, Essex, Gloucester,
Hudson, Mercer, Passaic, Union and Warren.
In short, many questions have been raised regarding the standards.
There are strong proponents and those who believe strongly that
the standard is not needed.
This morning we'll have an opportunity to hear both sides
of this issue and begin flushing out all of the concerns that
we need to be aware of.
On that note, before we begin anything further, I would like
at least to ask any of my fellow council people here if they
would like to add any statements of their own at this time?
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: John, did you have something you wanted
MR. MAXWELL: Joe, I think you said it all. You've done a great
job as chair, and I'll pass it on.
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: Thank you very much.
On that note, then I would like to introduce Assistant Commissioner
Lewis Nagy to make some introductory comments on behalf of the
MR. NAGY: Thank you, and good morning. I'm Lew Nagy, Assistant
Commissioner for Policy and Planning here at DEP, and on behalf
of Commissioner Shinn and the management team, I'd like to welcome
the Clean Air Council to the Department of Environmental Protection
today. We would like to express our appreciation to all of you,
not only for hosting today's public hearing, but for your continuing
efforts toward ensuring the public's awareness of New Jersey's
air quality. Through your efforts the public plays a continuing
role in improving and preserving the air quality of New Jersey.
I'd also like to specifically thank Steve Papenberg, chairman
of the Council, today's hearing chairman, Joe Spatola, and vice-chairman
We're fortunate to have the opportunity to hear testimony
from your list of distinguished speakers.
On behalf of the Department, I'd like to personally thank
each of today's speakers with participating in and contributing
to today's topic. That's a thank you in advance.
Everyone is entitled to their position on the issues, but
the dialogue needs to take place, and thank you for participating
in these proceedings.
Later this morning John Elston and Charlie Pietarinen of my
staff will address specific New Jersey considerations in their
presentations. I would, however, like to help set the stage
for today's hearing.
The standard that EPA is proposing for fine particulates is
based on health studies which link an increased incidence of
both respiratory problems and mortality rates to elevated levels
of fine particulates in the air. Proponents of the new standards
believe that because of the severity of the health effects and
the weight of the evidence tying them to particulates it is
imperative that we act now to control the problem.
Opponents of the new standard find the evidence insufficient
and inconclusive. They believe that adoption of a standard now
is too costly, given the current data available.
I'm sure you're going to hear both sides of the argument here
The implication for New Jersey are, indeed, significant. The
health studies are accurate, attaining the standard could not
only improve the quality of life for citizens of the State,
but also extend it.
On the other hand, if significant additional controls are
required to meet the standard, it could put some industries
at an economic disadvantage.
Thus, today's hearing is especially appropriate and timely.
New Jersey meets the current air quality standards for particulates,
but, as you will see later this morning, it is likely that some
or all of the State will not be able to meet the new standards
If this proves to be true, the State will have to develop
a plan to meet these new standards.
Although our knowledge of the makeup of fine particulates
in New Jersey is incomplete, we do know that a significant part
of the total amount comes from secondary aerosols, particulates
that are not directly emitted to the air but form from emissions
of gaseous pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.
These types of particulates take time to form and can be transported
long distances, hundreds of miles or more. Thus, just as with
our ground level ozone problem, we will be looking to work with
neighboring states to help address the transport problem.
Controls of some of the gases that eventually form secondary
aerosols are also being implemented as part of our other efforts
to improve air and water quality. Sulfur dioxide emissions will
be cut significantly as part of the national effort to control
acid rain. This will have the added benefit of cutting levels
of sulfate particles in the air. Similarly, reducing emissions
of nitrogen oxides in an effort to reduce ground level ozone
will also cut levels of nitrate particles.
These efforts shall go a long way to assuring that New Jersey
can attain the new standard if and when they are adopted.
Depending on the severity of the problem, however, additional
controls specific to New Jersey may be necessary.
We also know that diesel emissions contribute to fine particle
concentrations, and this mobile source is another area to look
for for reduction.
Indeed, we have recently adopted new laws requiring the inspection
and maintenance of heavy-duty diesel powered vehicles, which
will begin full implementation next year. Thus, it is possible
that continuing programs will be sufficient to attain the standard
without the need for significant additional controls in industries
in the State.
The proposed standards for particulates will pose many challenges
for New Jersey, all of which will be made easier by an open
and full dialogue on the issues. Today is a way of fostering
that open and full dialogue. So, I want to thank the Council
for this hearing and on behalf of the Department say that we
really await your finding.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: Thank you, Commissioner.
MR. MAXWELL: Commissioner, thank you very much.
Just a procedural note in addition to welcoming you all here,
which Joe had done, if there are questions that you have for
individuals who are testifying, if you could kindly give them
to either Erin or Lori, they would be happy to bring them up
to us. That way we may be able to get into more depth in terms
of our dialogue.
I just say that as an opening here.
Do we have the cards?
MS. INDELICATO: We also left some out on the table out front.
MR. MAXWELL: There are cards out front.
CHAIRMAN SPATOLA: At this time I'd like to ask the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2, to begin their presentation.