Status of Garfield County’s Air Quality Monitoring Program

April 6, 2006

Energy Advisory Board Meeting

Today’s Presentation

•Air Monitoring Study Overview

•PM10, what is it and what have we found?

•VOC, what is it and what have we found?

•How does our air compare so far?

•What do we know?

•Where do we go from here?

Basis of theAir Quality Monitoring Study

• Evaluate air quality characteristics within a portion Garfield County

• Address public concern regarding potentially degraded air quality from industrial activity

• Characterize air quality concerns of all types throughout central portion of Garfield County

Sampling Locations

• PM10 at 7 sites (every 3rd day)

• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) monitoring at 17 locations– Fixed monitoring sites monthly or quarterly– Six additional locations are also being

sampled monthly for VOC only – Grab samples

• Garfield County staff in response to complaints• Local residents during strong odor events

• Meteorological equipment has been installed at 6 of the fixed monitoring stations– Stations will continuously record

• Windspeed & direction• Temperature• Relative humidity• Barometric pressure• Precipitation (Summer)

• Passive ozone monitoring planned during the 2006 ozone season (June thru September)

Additional Monitoring

Current Air Monitoring

What is PM10? • Particles less than or equal to 10 μm in diameter.• Mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets

• many sizes and shapes • can be made up of hundreds of different chemicals

• Health effects (particularly in sensitive populations)

• pulmonary disease• cardiac disease

• Environmental effects • physical damage to buildings and vegetation• soil and water chemistry effects• haze and smog

• EPA current PM10 standards• 50 µg/m3 (monthlyannual average) • 150 µg/m3 (24 hour maximum)

Source: http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/pmreport03/pmunderstand_2405.pdf#page=1

How Small?

Particulate Sampling Unit

Intake/impact areaMotor

Flow Controller

Barometer

Elapsed Time Meter

PM10 Monitoring Results, 5/2005 – 2/2006readings in micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3)

Month Average Maximum Average Maximum Average Maximum Average Maximum

5/2005 14.1 26 18.6 29 10.1 13 8.8 166/2005 15.4 24 19.7 39 11.8 26 9.8 227/2005 19.0 25 25.0 34 17.3 20 16.9 268/2005 13.2 18 18.6 29 12.2 16 10.1 139/2005 13.9 23 25.9 92 9.9 15 9.0 16

10/2005 12.2 19 25.6 38 7.1 10 6.8 1211/2005 13.3 23 22.7 39 7.1 14 6.3 1312/2005 12.3 19 16.3 33 7.5 12 5.3 9

1/2006 14.9 27 27.8 50 8.6 13 6.3 102/2006 14.1 23 25.6 38 9.1 17 6.6 9

Overall: 14.2 27 22.7 92 9.9 26 8.6 26

Month Average Maximum Average Maximum Average Maximum

5/2005 23.1 33 17.9 336/2005 17.7 33 23.4 34 18.9 337/2005 26.3 62 29.3 39 29.0 408/2005 16.4 23 19.8 32 20.9 329/2005 12.3 20 23.4 44 22.5 39

10/2005 8.9 13 23.4 36 22.7 3511/2005 8.0 11 26.8 52 26.0 5712/2005 10.8 15 26.8 52 23.4 34

1/2006 10.1 15 31.8 52 33.4 612/2006 11.0 17 31.9 48 31.9 55

Overall: 13.1 62 25.9 52 24.7 61

Parachute102 E. 2nd St.

Silt-Cox5933 CR 233

Rifle-Henry144 E. 3rd Ave.

512 Owens Dr. 884 CR 327Glenwood-Courthouse New Castle Silt-Bell Silt-Daley

109 8th St. 402 W. Main St.

Silt-Cox high value in 7/2005 due to dirt moving activity nearby.

New Castle high value in 9/2005 due to railroad re-bedding across street from site.

Garfield County PM10 --- Monthly Averages

0

10

20

30

40

50

5/20

05

6/20

05

7/20

05

8/20

05

9/20

05

10/2

005

11/2

005

12/2

005

1/20

06

2/20

06

Ove

rall:

Mic

rogr

ams

per

cubi

c m

eter

Glenwood New Castle Silt-Bell Silt-DaleySilt-Cox Rifle Parachute

PM10 --- Federal Annual Average Standard = 50 ug/m3

Garfield County PM10 --- Monthly 24-Hr. Maximums

0

20

40

60

80

100

5/20

05

6/20

05

7/20

05

8/20

05

9/20

05

10/2

005

11/2

005

12/2

005

1/20

06

2/20

06

Ove

rall:

Mic

rogr

ams

per

cubi

c m

eter

Glenwood New Castle Silt-Bell Silt-DaleySilt-Cox Rifle Parachute

PM10 --- Federal 24-Hour Standard = 150 ug/m3

VOC Collection

West Landfill

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions

Can react with nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight to form ozone and photochemical smog

Some can be toxic to humans, animals or vegetation.

There are currently no National Ambient Air Quality Standards for VOC

Source: Federal Code of Regulations

VOC --- June 2005 - February 2006

Detected compounds 89 samples (81 = 24-hour samples and 8 = grab samples)

CAS # Compound Min Max Avg Min Max Avg # %

  µg/m³ ppb detected detected

74-87-3 Chloromethane 2.2 2.2 0.02 1.10 1.10 0.01 1 1.1%

67-64-1 Acetone 8.6 81.0 14.8 3.60 34.00 6.22 61 68.5%

75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.5 26.0 0.3 0.27 4.70 0.06 2 2.2%

75-09-2 Methylene chloride 1.8 3.5 0.1 0.53 1.00 0.02 3 3.4%

108-05-4 Vinyl Acetate 5.9 7.9 0.2 1.70 2.30 0.07 3 3.4%

78-93-3 2-Butanone (MEK) 1.5 12.0 1.8 0.52 4.20 0.60 48 53.9%

67-66-3 Chloroform 1.6 1.6 0.02 0.32 0.32 0.004 1 1.1%

71-43-2 Benzene 1.6 180.0 5.7 0.49 57.00 1.80 46 51.7%

108-88-3 Toluene 1.6 540.0 16.7 0.43 140.0 4.38 82 92.1%

591-78-6 2-Hexanone 2.1 4.4 0.1 0.51 1.10 0.03 3 3.4%

127-18-4 Tetrachloroethene 2.3 2.3 0.03 0.34 0.34 0.004 1 1.1%

100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 2.0 28.0 0.7 0.46 6.40 0.15 8 9.0%

136777-61-2 m,p-Xylenes 1.8 290.0 9.7 0.40 67.00 2.24 65 73.0%

95-47-6 o-Xylene 1.8 46.0 1.2 0.42 10.00 0.27 13 14.6%

106-46-7 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 4.6 4.6 0.05 0.76 0.76 0.008 1 1.1%

VOC Monitoring Results6/2005 – 2/2006

Garfield County --- Volatile Organic Compounds (ug/m3)

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

ug

/m3

Maximum 24-Hr

Average 24-Hr

Maximum Grab

Average Grab

Adjusted for non-detects using 1/2 of MRL.

15 of 43 compounds detected.

VOC Monitoring Results 6/2005 – 2/2006

Garfield County --- 24-Hr. samples --- Volatile Organic Compounds

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

ug

/m3

Maximum 24-Hr

Average 24-Hr

Adjusted for non-detects using 1/2 of MRL.

15 of 43 compounds detected.

November only,10 samples, 8-24 hour, 2 Grab

Additional 29 organic compounds identified

Widely varying concentrations Additional sample analysis likely needed Significant review/analysis needed to

determine relevant information of source, exposure, health risk, etc.

Tentatively Identified Compounds (TIC)

VOC Comparisons(Denver and Grand Junction)

•Difficult to Draw Strong Conclusions at this time

Differences in the amount of data

All compounds are detected in relatively small concentrations

Of the 15 compounds detected, several appear to be higher than Denver

or Grand Junction

So, What Do We Know?• PM10 levels are generally low in Garfield

County.• Highest average PM10 levels are in the

urbanized areas.• Ambient VOC levels, when detected, are very

low.• Grab samples in odor plumes show much

higher concentrations of VOC than ambient air.• Tentatively identified compounds need deeper

investigation.• More data, exposure information and source

information is needed to determine health risks.

What else are we doing now?What else are we doing now?•Air Quality Technical Work Group

Ongoing data analysis, monitoring analysis, emissions inventory, research, information and

data gathering, professional and community networking

•Ozone monitoring plan

Collaboration with the White River National Forest ozone monitoring program

•Open Burning Permit/Education Work

Collaboration with Local Fire Chiefs and Sheriff’s Department

•Complaint Response

What Does the Future Hold?• Regular update meetings • Presentation series on more specific subjects• Publish the monitoring results• Refine monitoring/analysis needs• Secure funding for ongoing monitoring and

other air quality efforts• Continue to gather public input• Develop and implement a community-based

air quality management program

Challenges to the EAB

• Work to establish perpetual funding base for ongoing air quality monitoring

• Spearhead efforts to raise the standards for Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) in Garfield County

• Establish a leadership role in attacking air quality issues countywide

Questions???