Calissa Matthews

12345 Sandia Ln SW
Albuquerque, NM 87212

May 11th, 2018

James Donovan
5432 Blackberry Ave
Albuquerque, NM 87216
Dear Mr. Donovan,
With this letter I have enclosed my report reviewing the current status of air pollution in
Albuquerque.
Air pollution is detrimental to the health of our community and low income areas with fewer
means to protect themselves face the brunt of this issue. The members of these communities have
aired their conerns time and time again yet still remain feeling unheard. To resolve this, I suggest
that the Air Quality Board work with community members to understand their needs and better
help them. In addition, I am recommending that the board take a new approach to how it
monitors air pollution in a given area to account for a cumulation of air pollution from
surrounding businesses. I suggest that this monitoring is taken into account when issuing permits
to new companies so as not to permit on a case-by-case basis. These changes will benefit the
community in more ways than one. Air pollution will decrease, overall community health will
improve, and community members will feel heard and not forgotten.
Please look over this report as soon as possible. Please schedule a conference with our company
within the next few weeks to discuss the report.
Thank you taking the time to review this report and giving us the opportunity to work with you.
If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at (505) 555-6675 or email me at
cmatthews99@unm.edu.
Best regards,

Calissa Matthews
Calissa Matthews
Head Researcher
Air Justice for New Mexico
Clean Air for Our
Community
Prepared for the air quality board of
Albuquerque by the San Juan and
Mountain View communities

Calissa Lynn Matthews

UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO
Introduction
Albuquerque has a bad habit of handing out permits to business after business setting up shop
within the same neighborhood without taking into consideration that these polluting facilities
start to add up. Clean air isn’t simply an environmental health issue but a human health issue.
Cardiovascular health effects can be linked to exposure to chronic as well as acute particle
pollution. This includes but is not limited to heart attacks, heart failure, and strokes. Particle
pollution exposure is also a like cause of respiratory problems including asthma attacks,
wheezing, shortness of breath, and reduced lung development in children (Particle Pollution
Exposure, 2017).
While it is no secret that New Mexico has made many successful strides towards improving the
community’s environmental health, the fight for clean air isn’t over for many Albuquerque
neighborhoods. Air pollution seems to be at its highest in low-income communities whose
inhabitants are predominantly people of color. The claims of environmental discrimination come
from community leaders and members of the San Juan and Mountain View neighborhoods. Their
stance on the subject is that the city of Albuquerque needs to reform their air permitting process.
After being denied a hearing by the board, the community filed a formal complaint that led to an
investigation by the EPA (Williams, 2016). The members of these communities are also claiming
that the air pollution in the area has led to health problems. Many members of the community
have lived there for years and can feel a difference (Williams, 2016). The board refused to hear
the community's proposal on the basis that air reform is too costly and too much of a hassle for
companies that it would drive business away.

Methodology
These claims may sound severe but that is exactly why I was asked by community leaders within
the San Jose and Mountain View neighborhoods to find evidence to back these allegations.
Fortunately, the city of Albuquerque along with prominent community groups have dutifully
collected data over the years. My objective is to look deeper into the data collected and identify
the problem. Beyond that my research will include testimony from members of the affected
communities because facts and figures aren’t everything. I’m going to explore the data starting at
the bigger picture and working my way down. I’ll begin by looking at air quality in Albuquerque
as well as the rest of New Mexico to see how our city compares. Then I’ll take it one step further
and examine the air quality within low income neighborhoods that have so piqued the interest of
the United States Environmental Protection Agency that it launched an investigation of
Albuquerque’s air policies. Finally, I’ll look into the policies themselves to identify where our
city has failed the people of Albuquerque.

Air Quality Level

In 2015, a report by the American Lung Association ranked the Albuquerque, Santa Fe, and Las
Vegas area as 16th cleanest among 220 other metropolitan areas within the United States. This
places Bernalillo County at about half the national average levels (Uyttebrouck, 2015). If you
compare this with the Las Cruces, El Paso area that was ranked 23rd most polluted area then it
looks like Albuquerque is doing really well. However, a few hours east, Farmington was ranked
2nd for cleanest air in a metropolitan area (Uyttebrouck, 2015). This shows very clearly that
Albuquerque could be doing better. Albuquerque's policies appear to be doing the work but the
policies fail to consider the cumulative emissions from all the existing businesses before
accepting another one (Williams, 2016).

Air Quality Discrimination

The Mountain View and San Juan communities have been proactive in insisting for
improvements of Albuquerque’s air quality board’s monitoring of air quality and permit granting
process. There appears to be a higher concentration of polluting facilities within these
neighborhoods as compared to other parts of Albuquerque.
Figure of polluting facilities around the San Juan area.
Over the years, the members of these communities have been desperately trying to be heard only
to be silenced time and time again by the air quality board. These are our neighbors and if there’s
one thing Albuquerque is good at, it’s coming together as a community to make change.
It's not hard to determine that the neighborhoods with lower income have a large amount of
polluting facilities in their area. Members of these communities have been reaching out to the air
quality board, but they haven't been heard. Board members demanded more evidence but refused
to accept the results (Lyman, 2016).

Effectiveness of Monitoring

Air quality is determined by measuring the number of high ozone days and particle pollutants. A
high ozone day occurs when the weather combines with pollutants to promote unhealthy levels
of ozone typically on hot, sunny days in a urban area. Particle pollutant is the blanket term for
solid and liquid particles suspended in the air. These particles can include acids, metals, soot, and
smoke. Fine and coarse particles are considered more dangerous as they can easily pass through
the nose and throat into the lungs. Groups that are most likely to suffer the negative health effects
of these pollutant levels are called sensitive groups and consist of individuals under the age of 18
and over the age of 65.
Albuquerque received a C grade for high ozone days with 4 days reaching a level of 71 to 85
parts per billion. These levels are considered dangerous for sensitive groups.
The city of Albuquerque distributes permits on a case by case basis without considering the fact
that pollution can add up. By neglecting to consider the sum total of the number of particulates in
the air, the air quality board is not able to accurately support the claim that their monitoring and
permitting process is effective (Lyman, 2016). This system is not effectively protecting the
citizens of Albuquerque.

Results
The air quality board of the city of Albuquerque appears to hand out permits to business after
business and doesn't look at the bigger picture. The city of Albuquerque has denied requests by
the community to reform their permitting process to include a total emissions test of all the
polluting facilities within the area before admitting an additional business. Handing out these
permits on an individual level with complete disregard for how the overall air pollution
particulates are being affected within the area.
It is clear that there is a larger than normal amount of polluting facilities within the San Juan and
Mountain View neighborhoods and without gathering data on the cumulative, overall, effect of
the facilities working together the city of Albuquerque is failing its residents. Regardless, by
denying the community members a hearing, the air quality board acted in such a way that caught
the attention of the federal government on that basis of racial discrimination by the permitting
process itself according to the EPA’s notice of acceptance.

Discussion of the Results

The residents of the San Juan and Mountain View neighborhoods need to feel heard. By denying
the community a voice in this matter the city is effectively creating more tension and upset in
areas that already need support. It is unclear whether the common health problems within
these low income areas can be explicitly blamed on air pollution which is why the air quality
board needs to do the work and collect data without any bias. Regardless of a health concern,
these communities are being affected by these companies and that is something that needs to be
recognized.
The very fact that the San Juan neighborhood is home to so many polluting facilities should be
enough to make board members consider the overall impact it is having on the community.
Looking for pollution particulates on an individual case by case basis is not enough.

Conclusion with recommendations

My first recommendation is that the community continues to stay involved. The air quality
board should hear from the residents of these communities to be able to understand the extent of
what is going on in their neighborhoods. It's hard for an outside force like the committee to be
able to fully recognize the consequences of their actions. I suggest that the board no longer
denies the community's requests for hearings to prevent tension between
the community members and the board.
In addition, the city of Albuquerque needs to consider reforming their permitting policies to
consider and measure the overall status of polluted air particulates within an area. It does not
seem effective to measure particulates on a case by case basis and the overall picture should be
looked at as well.
 Works Cited

Uyttebrouck, O. (2015, April 30). Albuquerque area 16th-Cleanest in air report. Retrieved
from https://www.abqjournal.com/577239/albuquerque-area-16thcleanest-in-air-
report.html

Williams, E. (2016, August 5). Do Albuquerque's Air Pollution Policies Violate Civil Rights?
Retrieved from http://kunm.org/post/do-albuquerques-air-pollution-policies-violate-civil-
rights

Lyman. A. (2016, August 9). EPA investigating alleged discrimination by air quality board.
Retrieved from http://nmpoliticalreport.com/87719/epa-investigating-alleged-
discrimination-by-air-quality-board/

“Particle Pollution Exposure.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 15 Aug. 2017,

www.epa.gov/pmcourse/particle-pollution-exposure

http://nmenvirolaw.org/images/pdf/160719_EPA_notice_of_acceptance_Title_VI_Complaint.pd
f

http://www.lung.org/our-initiatives/healthy-air/sota/city-rankings/states/new-mexico/