Air Management Services, Philadelphia Dept. of Public Health By Dennis Sosna, 5/28-29/2014

1. Experience with a Community-Scale Continuous Air Toxics Monitoring Project In South Philadelphia. A Progress Report Air Management Services, Philadelphia Dept. of Public Health By Dennis Sosna, 5/28-29/2014 Air Directors’ Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA

2. New technologies (Open Path) will provide real-time measurements to assist Air Management Services (AMS) in assessing the degree to which air toxics from a refinery impacts the immediate community. The refineryuses hydrofluoric acid (HF) as a catalyst in making gasoline. AMS will continuously monitor HF and be in a position to quickly take appropriate action to protect the community. The community will be kept informed and involved on air toxics issues and measurements from the site through the use of: Web-based real-time data Community outreach through Academic partners Summary

3. Why a Community Scale Grant? • The EPA Grant provides the funding for projects designed to assist state, local and tribal communities in: • identifying and profiling air toxics sources, • assessing emerging measurement methods, • characterizing the degree and extent of local air toxics problems, and • tracking progress of air toxics reduction activities. • AMS currently measures toxic pollutants on a one-in-six day basis at 5 sites.

4. South Philadelphia Concerns • The Community has long been concerned about the health impacts of exposure to air toxics due to a refinery. • This neighborhood has high poverty rates, lower-than-average education levels, and a large at-risk population. • The 2005 National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) indicated high health risks in the City: http://www.epa.gov/nata/. Philadelphia is ranked 87th out of 3222 counties in the nation for total cancer risk.

5. Philadelphia’s Plan • Use Open Path Monitors for the measurement of Air Toxic Compounds • UV-DOAS • Infrared Laser • Involve the Community • Provide real-time air toxics measurements to the community through web-based technology. • Partner with the Philadelphia academic community to assist in outreach for the community to aid understanding of air quality issues affecting health and create measurement/IT tools to enable delivery of information to the community.

6. Open Path Technology provides the following: • Monitor as many of the air toxic compounds indicated in the 2005 NATA study as possible. • Provide continuous monitoring. • Provide sufficient levels of detection for monitor distances ranging up to a mile or two from the source. • Provide analysis of HF. • Operate with minimal power requirements and operating costs. • Send data via wireless technology to a central station. • Provide alarms for various warning and action levels of compounds.

7. Open Path Technology - Operating Principles All open path methods operate on the well established principles of light absorption – i.e. the Lambert-Beer Law: A=ebc Where: • A is absorbance (no units). • eis the molar absorptivity. This quantity is characteristic of each compound to be measured. • b is the path length of the sample. • c is the concentration of the compound.

8. Open Path Monitoring – two basic types • Infrared • Advantages: • Most versatile - large library of functional group data for various organic compounds. • Most suitable for monitoring inside the fenceline. • With the use of a Laser can monitor compounds like HF. • Disadvantages: • Limits of detection are higher than UV the greater the distance from the source. • Can have interference from certain climatic conditions – i.e. heavy rain, fog, etc.

9. Open Path Monitoring – two basic types • UV-DOAS - UV Differential Optical Absorption Spectrometry • Advantages: • Higher sensitivity than IR. Able to provide useful detection at greater distances from the source. • Able to operate using greater path lengths than IR equipment. • Depending on the UV Lamp, can have path lengths on the order of 1000 meters such as with the Xenon lamp. • Disadvantages: • Compounds of interest must absorb in the UV. This may lead to difficulty in monitoring certain compounds such as straight chain hydrocarbons. • Fewer compounds are suitable to monitoring by this method. For example, Xenon lamp is unsuitable for the monitoring of 1,3-butadiene due to the UV cut-off of this source. • Long distances from the source to the retro-reflector give higher sensitivities. However, long distances may lead to alignment problems under certain weather conditions – eg. high winds.

10. Spectra-1 Laser and UV-DOAS • UV-DOAS • Spectra-1 laser

11. Costs Costs for acquiring the equipment, training, sampling platform, installation, and extended warrantiesas of May, 2014. • Total: $127,994.00

12. Compound List • The following compounds can be analyzed using the selected open path equipment: • Acetaldehyde • BTX (5 compounds) • Benzene, toluene, and o, m, and p-xylene • Butadiene • Ethyl benzene • Formaldehyde • Styrene • Trimethylbenzene • Hydrogen Fluoride (via Spectra-1 laser) • Additional Compounds – added by the manufacturer • Nitrogen oxide • Sulfur dioxide • More Compounds • The software permits the user to add additional compounds of interest by allowing the user to generate reference spectra of other compounds using published literature absorbance spectra.

13. Site Selection Criteria • Find a site in S. Philadelphia in a reasonable proximity to the refinery at a distance within ~2 miles from the source. • Site must downwind of the refinery given the prevailing winds. • The siting of the monitors and retro-reflectors must have a clear unobstructed open path of (at least 125 meters) to support sufficient detection limits in the PPB range, yet not so far as to cause alignment difficulties. • The site should be relatively free from other emission sources (background).

14. 2010 Wind Rose Data From Phila Intl Airport

15. Overview of South Philadelphia and the Refinery Area

16. Community Toxics Project - Alternative SitesProspective Locations in South Philadelphia

17. Final Site Selection – PHA, 3100 Penrose Ferry Road, 19145 • Site is located at a reasonable distance from the refinery to allow adequate mixing of the air sample yet not so far as to prohibit adequate detection. • Sample path is raised sufficiently above the ground to minimize interference and obstruction of the beam path from pedestrians and vehicles. This also minimizes any safety concerns to pedestrians with the laser. • The site – though well used and busy – provides reasonable security to minimize the threat of theft of vandalism. • The use of storage containers as a sample platform provides a cheap easy solution for a stable monitor platform with storage capability. • The site is located within visible proximity to several refinery emission points.

18. PHA - 3100 Penrose Ferry Rd

19. Refinery Emission Points – visible from PHA parking lot

20. Site Installation • Container with retro-reflectors • Container with monitors and roof

21. Open Path – UV Screen

22. Open Path – Laser Monitor Screen

23. Open Path – Data Screen

24. SO2 Comparison – 5/17/14 (RIT and PHA sites)

25. Next Steps • Data Collection began 2/10/2014 • The following activities are planned: • Optimize data capture, generate/choose an appropriate background. • Challenge the instrumentation with neat compounds to verify detection and check for false positives. • Develop a calibration check routine. • Complete comparison with TO-15 Canisters. • Compare data with Ritner TO-15 data and passive sampling monitors. • Develop data on the web access for community outreach.