Roseville Rail Yard Air Monitoring Project (RRAMP)

1. Roseville Rail YardAir Monitoring Project (RRAMP) Yushuo Chang Placer County Air Pollution Control District EPA National Air Quality Conference April 8, 2008 Portland, Oregon

2. To Sacramento westbound trains Sac-Placer County Line Main Departure Yard Rock pile Yard North side Tracks (through trains) Hump-Trim Main Receiving Yard Service Area: Staging Tracks Wash Racks Service Tracks Mod/Search Bldg. Maintenance. Shop Ready Tracks Subway City Yard Downtown Roseville Northbound Tracks Eastbound Tracks

3. Overview • Background • Project Design • Data Analysis • Next Step

4. Background

5. Facts about theRoseville Rail Yard • Located near City of Roseville • occupies about 950 acres, 2/3 in Placer County and 1/3 in Sacramento County • Maintenance, service and classification yard (24/7 operation) • the largest rail facility on the West Coast • About 31,000 locomotives stopped at the Yard in 2000 • Plus additional 15,000 non-stop locos through the yard • 2,350,000 gallons of fuel dispensed monthly

6. ARB Rail Yard Study • In 2000, Placer County APCD (PCAPCD) asked California Air Resources Board (CARB) to conduct a risk assessment of Rail Yard in response to community concerns. • ARB agreed, conducted the study, and released results in October 2004.

7. Key Findings in ARB Study • Diesel PM emissions estimated to be about 25 tons in 2000 • Large region impacted by the diesel PM emissions from the Yard • excess cancer risk of 100-500/million affect an area in which 14,000-26,000 people live • excess cancer risk of 10-100/million affect an area in which 140,000-155,000 people live

9. Agreement Between UP and PCAPCD • Mitigation Plan • UP committed to reduce diesel PM emissions from 2000 baseline level by 25% by the end of 2007 • Monitoring Project (RRAMP) • UP to provide at least $100,000 to monitor diesel PM emissions from the rail yard • Grant Program • UP committed to provide at least $150,000 to reduce one ton of diesel PM from other sources in Roseville area

10. Project Design

11. RRAMP Objectives • Determine, through monitoring, localized air pollutant concentrations from the UPRR facility • Verify if possible effectiveness of mitigation measures over time • Provide feedback to the community • Provide information for further modeling analysis

12. Project Participants • Placer County APCD (project coordinator) • UPRR (funding, logistics) • Sacramento AQMD (funding, resources) • South Coast AQMD (laboratory analysis) • USEPA Region 9 (funding, resources) • CARB (audits, resources) • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)

13. Monitoring Strategy • Utilize two pairs of upwind/downwind site locations • Minimize non-UPRR emissions sources between each pair • Optimize pair orientation to the prevailing wind direction • Optimize time of year with predominance of prevailing wind: summer months

14. Monitoring Strategy (cont’d) • One pair located to cover area with model-predicted maximum impact • Second pair located where logistics can find optimum directional (prevailing wind) alignment

15. Diurnal Considerations • Time of day of most persistent winds • night time • Emissions from Rail Yard during time of most persistent winds • Constant emissions from yard activities

16. Roseville plot showing the persistent wind direction in summer

17. Diagnostic variance in hourly DPM emissions very constant

18. Instrumentation Approach • Utilize continuous monitors to capture short-term details: • Aethalometers (for black carbon) • BAMs (for PM2.5) • NO/NOx Analyzers • Wind

19. Instrumentation Approach (cont’d) • Use filter based FRMs to compare continuous measurements to reference methods for PM • Teflon filter for PM2.5 mass • Quartz filter for EC/TC • Establish model grade met tower on UPRR facilities • Erect on-site wind data

20. Aerial View of Sites Prevailing wind direction

21. Denio/Pool Sites

22. Church/Vernon Sites & Met Tower

23. Data Analysis

24. Project Duration • 3 Years (2005-2007) • Denio / Pool sites: • 2005: 7/15~10/15 • 2006 & 2007: 6/15~10/15 • Church St. / Vernon St. sites: • 2005: 9/7~10/15 • 2006 & 2007: 6/15~10/15

25. On-site Met Tower in consistent with Roseville in CARB Study June ~ September 2200 ~ 0500

26. Screening Criteria • Wind Direction • Between 45o and 225o to capture max impacts from emissions • Wind Speed • Between 1 and 4 m/s to avoid calm or windy conditions • Time Frame • Overnight hours from 10PM to 5AM during period of steady winds and emissions

27. Average 7 hours nighttime BC

28. Average 7 hours nighttime PM2.5

29. Average 7 hours nighttime NO

30. Average 7 hours nighttime NOx

31. Average nighttime FRM results for 2006

32. Average nighttime BC/PM2.5from continuous monitors in 2006

33. Average nighttime NO/NOxfrom continuous monitors in 2006

34. Summary • Higher average concentrations at downwind sites relative to upwind site is highly significant. • Little or no significant difference in concentrations between upwind sites • Ratios of NO/NOx and BC/PM2.5 are indicative of fresh emissions at downwind sites only

35. Next Step

36. 2007 Report • Analysis is in progress • Draft report will be submitted to PCAPCD governing Board in June, 2008 • 3-year trend analysis • Re-analyzing 2005 data to reconcile with 2006 & 2007 data analysis procedures • 2005 ~ 2007

37. Additional Monitoring • Rationales: potential emission reduction • Low sulfur diesel usage • Idling management practice • Switcher replacement/upgrades • Monitoring period • Same as 2006 & 2007 • 2008 data report • Including 4 year (2005 ~ 2008) trend analysis

38. Contact Information Yushuo Chang Planning & Monitoring Supervisor ychang@placer.ca.gov (530)745-2325 Placer County APCD website http://www.placer.ca.gov/Departments/Air/railroad.aspx

39. Questions?