2009 ambient air surveillance report [Nov. 1, 2010]

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION
Air Protection Branch Ambient Monitoring Program
2009 Ambient Air Surveillance Report

This document is published annually by the Ambient Monitoring Program, in the Air Protection Branch of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division.
Date of Initial Publication November 1, 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................... v LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................... v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................... vi GLOSSARY..........................................................................................................................................viii INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 1 CHEMICAL MONITORING ACTIVITIES................................................................................................2
CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) ...........................................................................................7 OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NO, NO2, NOx and NOy)......................................................11 SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)..............................................................................................16 OZONE (O3)..................................................................................................................19 LEAD (Pb).....................................................................................................................29 PARTICULATE MATTER .............................................................................................32 PM10 ..............................................................................................................................33 PM2.5 .............................................................................................................................38 PM2.5 SPECIATION ......................................................................................................50 ACID PRECIPITATION.................................................................................................56 PHOTOCHEMICAL ASSESSMENT MONITORING STATIONS (PAMS)............................................58 CARBONYL COMPOUNDS .........................................................................................63 AIR TOXICS MONITORING................................................................................................................. 70 METALS .......................................................................................................................72 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM (Cr6) ................................................................................78 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (TO-14/15)........................................................79 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ................................................................84 METEOROLOGICAL REPORT............................................................................................................ 91 STATE CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY OF 2009.................. 91 SUMMARY OF METEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS FOR 2009.......................... 97 OZONE AND PM2.5 FORECASTING AND DATA ANALYSIS .................................... 100 SELECT METEOROLOGICAL AND AIR QUALITY STUDIES FOR 2009 .................104 QUALITY ASSURANCE..................................................................................................................... 107 QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT ............................................... 108 GASEOUS POLLUTANTS .........................................................................................109 PARTICULATE MATTER ...........................................................................................112 AIR TOXICS ...............................................................................................................117 NATTS ........................................................................................................................118 PHOTOCHEMICAL ASSESSMENT MONITORING................................................... 121 METEOROLOGY ........................................................................................................ 125 QUALITY CONTROL REPORTS ...............................................................................126 STANDARDS LABORATORY ....................................................................................126 LABORATORY AND FIELD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE..................... 126 SITING EVALUATIONS..............................................................................................126 RISK ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................................... 128 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................128 RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION ..........................................................................128 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................137 OUTREACH AND EDUCATION ........................................................................................................143 MEDIA OUTREACH ...................................................................................................146 OTHER OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES....................................................................147 Appendix A: Additional Criteria Pollutant Data ................................................................................... 150 Carbon Monoxide (CO)...............................................................................................150 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) ...............................................................................................150 Nitric Oxide (NO) ........................................................................................................150 Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) ...........................................................................................151
i

Reactive Oxides of Nitrogen (NOy) ............................................................................151 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)....................................................................................................152 Ozone (O3)..................................................................................................................153 Lead (Pb) ....................................................................................................................155 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)....................................................................................156 Appendix B: Additional PM2.5 Particle Speciation Data ......................................................................161 Appendix C: Additional PAMS Data ................................................................................................... 166 PAMS Continuous Hydrocarbon Data (June-August 2009)........................................ 166 PAMS 2009 24-hour Canister Hydrocarbons .............................................................170 Appendix D: Additional Toxics Data ................................................................................................... 174 2009 Metals ................................................................................................................174 2009 Semi-Volatile Compounds .................................................................................176 2009 Volatile Organic Compounds .............................................................................179 2009 Carbonyl Compounds, 24-hour..........................................................................186 2009 Carbonyl Compounds, 3-hour (June-August) ....................................................187 Appendix E: Monitoring Network Survey............................................................................................ 188 Appendix F: Siting Criteria.................................................................................................................. 193 Appendix G: Instrument and Sensor Control Limits ...........................................................................195 References ......................................................................................................................................... 196
ii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Georgia Air Monitoring Site Map ............................................................................................. 6 Figure 2: Common Sources of Carbon Monoxide (CO) in Georgia in 2005...........................................7 Figure 3: Carbon Monoxide (CO) Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View .....................................7 Figure 4: Carbon Monoxide Site Monitoring Map.................................................................................10 Figure 5: Typical Diurnal Pattern of Nitrogen Dioxide ..........................................................................11 Figure 6: Common Sources of Nitrogen Oxides in Georgia in 2005 ....................................................12 Figure 7: Nitrogen Oxides Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View...............................................13 Figure 8: Oxides of Nitrogen Monitoring Site Map ...............................................................................15 Figure 9: Common Sources of Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) in Georgia in 2005..............................................17 Figure 10: Sulfur Dioxide Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View ................................................17 Figure 11: Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Site Map..................................................................................... 18 Figure 12: Typical Urban 1-Hour Ozone Diurnal Pattern .....................................................................19 Figure 13: Common Sources of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Georgia in 2005 ................. 20 Figure 14: Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View............ 20 Figure 15: Demonstration of Ozone Formation ....................................................................................21 Figure 16: Ozone Formation Process .................................................................................................. 21 Figure 17: Ozone Monitoring Site Map................................................................................................. 23 Figure 18: Georgia's 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Map ............................................................25 Figure 19: Metro Atlanta Ozone- Number of Violation Days per Year .................................................26 Figure 20: Metro Atlanta Ozone Exceedance Map ..............................................................................27 Figure 21: Ozone Concentrations in ppm, 2008 (Fourth Highest Daily Maximum 8-Hour
Concentrations) ............................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 22: Common Sources of Lead in Georgia in 2005 ....................................................................29 Figure 23: Lead Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View ..............................................................30 Figure 24: Lead Monitoring Site Map ................................................................................................... 31 Figure 26: PM10 Monitoring Site Map ...................................................................................................34 Figure 27: PM10 Annual Arithmetic Mean Chart ...................................................................................36 Figure 28: PM10 24-Hour Design Values ..............................................................................................37 Figure 29: Common Sources of Particulate Matter 2.5 in 2005 ...........................................................38 Figure 30: Particulate Matter 2.5 Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View ....................................39 Figure 31: PM2.5 Federal Reference Method Monitoring Site Map .......................................................41 Figure 32: PM2.5 Continuous and Speciation Monitoring Site Map....................................................... 42 Figure 33: PM2.5 Three-Year 24-Hour Averages, By Site .....................................................................44 Figure 34: PM2.5 Three-Year Annual Averages, By Site.......................................................................46 Figure 35: Georgia's PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Map ..........................................................................48 Figure 36: PM2.5 Annual and 24-Hour Concentrations across the United States, 2008 ....................... 49 Figure 37: Speciation, by Species, 2003-2009..................................................................................... 51 Figure 38: PM2.5 Speciation, by Site, 2003-2009..................................................................................53 Figure 39: Four-Season Average of PM2.5 Composition Data for 15 U.S. Cities.................................. 55 Figure 40: Process of Acid Rain Deposition......................................................................................... 56 Figure 41: Acid Rain Monitors .............................................................................................................. 56 Figure 42: Acid Rain Monitoring Site Map............................................................................................ 57 Figure 43: PAMS Monitoring Site Map ................................................................................................. 59 Figure 44: Isoprene Yearly Profile, 2003-2009..................................................................................... 60 Figure 45: Toluene Yearly Profile, 2003-2009...................................................................................... 61 Figure 46: Toluene & Isoprene, Typical Urban Daily Profile ................................................................62 Figure 47: Carbonyls Monitoring Site Map ........................................................................................... 64 Figure 48: Average South DeKalb 3-Hour Carbonyls, June-August, 2005-2009 ................................. 65 Figure 49: Average 24-Hour Carbonyls Concentration and Number of Detects, by Site, 2005-2009 .. 66 Figure 50: Average 24-Hour Carbonyls Concentration vs. Number of Detects, by Species, 2005-2009
....................................................................................................................................................... 67 Figure 51: Acrolein Concentrations and Percent Detections, 2007- 2009 ...........................................68 Figure 52: Metals Monitoring Site Map................................................................................................. 74 Figure 53: Percentage of Metals Detections by Site, 2005-2009 .........................................................75
iii

Figure 54: Average Concentration and Percentage Detections of Metals, by Species, 2005-2009..... 76 Figure 55: Average Concentration Comparison of Zinc, by Site, 2005-2009 .......................................77 Figure 56: Comparison of Metals Collected at the Macon Site ............................................................78 Figure 57: Hexavalent Chromium at South DeKalb .............................................................................79 Figure 58: Total Volatile Organic Compounds Percent Detected per Site, 2005-2009 ........................ 80 Figure 59: Average Concentration and Percent Detection of Volatile Organic Compounds (TO-15),
Common Compounds, 20052009................................................................................................80 Figure 60: Total Volatile Organic Compound Loading all Species, by Site, 2005-2009 ....................... 81 Figure 61: VOC and SVOC Monitoring Site Map .................................................................................83 Figure 62: Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds Percentage of Detections Per Site, 2005-2009........... 84 Figure 63: Comparison of Fourth Quarter 2009 Semi-VOCs Detects ..................................................85 Figure 64: Total Average Concentration and Percentage Detections of Semi-Volatile Organic
Compounds by Compound, 2005-2009.........................................................................................86 Figure 65: Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds at South DeKalb, 2007-2009.......................................87 Figure 66: Correlation Matrix of Common Compounds Found at South DeKalb, 2009 ....................... 88 Figure 67: NCEP/NCAR/GPCC Composite Mean Accumulated Precipitation for September 2009 .... 93 Figure 68: Southeast River Forecast Center 24 hour Multisensor Rainfall Estimates for 8AM
September 20 to 8AM September 21, 2009 ..................................................................................94 Figure 69: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c)
Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for December 2008- February 2009 ....................................................................................................................................................... 95 Figure 70: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c) Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for March-May 2009 ..................... 95 Figure 71: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c) Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for June-August 2009 ................... 96 Figure 72: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c) Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for September-November 2009.... 96 Figure 73: Meteorological Site Map...................................................................................................... 99 Figure 74: Monthly Time Series of Ozone Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 Ozone Season (May-July) ........................................................................................................... 101 Figure 75: Monthly Time Series of Ozone Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 Ozone Season (August-September)............................................................................................101 Figure 76: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 (January-March) ................................................................................................................. 102 Figure 77: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 (April-June) ......................................................................................................................... 102 Figure 78: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2009 (July-September) ................................................................................................................ 103 Figure 79: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2009 (October-December)........................................................................................................... 103 Figure 80: Visible Satellite Imagery of the Southeast U.S. on June 10, 2000.................................... 105 Figure 81: NASA Satellite Imagery Overlaid on Google Application for June 10, 2009 ..................... 105 Figure 82: Hazard Mapping System Fire and Smoke Product for April 24, 2009...............................106 Figure 83: Smartfire Smoke Upper Level Trajectory and Fire Information for April 24, 2009 ............ 106 Figure 84: Formulas For Calculating Risk and Hazard Quotient........................................................133 Figure 85: Aggregate Cancer Risk and Hazard Index by Site for 2005-2006 .................................... 135 Figure 86: Aggregate Cancer Risk and Hazard Index by Site for 2007-2009 .................................... 136 Figure 87: Estimated County-Level Cancer Risk From the 2002 National Air Toxics Assessment.... 141 Figure 88: The AQI............................................................................................................................. 144 Figure 89: Number of Days with an AQI Value Above 100 ................................................................146 Figure 90: Sample AIRNOW Ozone Concentration Map ...................................................................148
iv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards Summary...................................................................3 Table 2: 2009 Georgia Air Monitoring Network ...................................................................................... 5 Table 3: Common Oxides of Nitrogen Species and Terms ..................................................................12 Table 4: Temperature and Rainfall Statistics for Select Georgia Cities in 2009................................... 92 Table 5: Comparison of Monthly Rainfall Amounts for 2009 and the 30 Year Average for Select Cities
in Georgia ...................................................................................................................................... 92 Table 6: Rainfall Accumulations from the EPD Meteorological Network for 14-22 September 2009 ... 93 Table 7: Meteorological Parameters Measured, 2009 .........................................................................98 Table 8: Audits Performed for Each Air Monitoring Program in 2009 ................................................108 Table 9: NO Data Quality Assessment............................................................................................... 110 Table 10: NO2 Data Quality Assessment............................................................................................110 Table 11: NOX Data Quality Assessment ...........................................................................................110 Table 12: CO Data Quality Assessment............................................................................................. 111 Table 13: SO2 Data Quality Assessment............................................................................................111 Table 14: O3 Data Quality Assessment ..............................................................................................112 Table 15: PM2.5 Data Quality Assessment for FRM Samplers............................................................ 114 Table 16: PM2.5 Data Quality Assessment for Semi-Continuous Samplers........................................ 115 Table 17: PM10 Data Quality Assessment of 24-Hour Integrated Samplers....................................... 115 Table 18: Summary of Unexposed Filter Mass Replicates ................................................................116 Table 19: Summary of Exposed Filter Mass Replicates.....................................................................116 Table 20: NATTS Sites with EPA Region Numbers and AQS Site Codes.........................................119 Table 21: Measurement Quality Objectives for the NATTS Program................................................. 119 Table 22: MQO Data Sources for the Georgia NAATS Program .......................................................120 Table 23: 23 Selected HAPs and Their AQS Parameter Codes ........................................................121 Table 24: Percent Completeness of Georgia's 2009 AQS Data, Selected Compounds .................... 121 Table 25: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for South DeKalb..................... 122 Table 26: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for Conyers ............................. 123 Table 27: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for Yorkville ............................. 124 Table 28: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for Ambient Monitoring Program
..................................................................................................................................................... 125 Table 29: Meteorological Measurements Accuracy Results ..............................................................126 Table 30: Compounds Monitored and Screening Values Used in Initial Assessment........................ 130 Table 31: Summary of Chemicals Analyzed in 2009..........................................................................131 Table 32: Site-Specific Detection Frequency and Mean Chemical Concentration, 2009 ................... 132 Table 33: Cancer Risk and Hazard Quotient by Location and Chemical, 2009 ................................. 134 Table 34: Aggregate Cancer Risk and Hazard Indices for Each Site, Excluding Carbonyls, 2009.... 135 Table 35: Summary Data for Select VOCs at PAMS Sites, 2009 ......................................................137 Table 36: Summary Observations, Cancer Risk, and Hazard Quotient for Carbonyls, 2009............. 137 Table 37: AQI Summary Data, 2009 .................................................................................................. 145 Table 38: AIRNOW Participation Evaluation Results .........................................................................148
v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Ambient Monitoring Program of the Air Protection Branch of the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) has monitored air quality in the State of Georgia for more than thirty years. The list of compounds monitored has grown over the thirty years to more than 200 pollutants using several types of samplers at sites statewide. This monitoring is performed to protect public health and environmental quality. The resulting data is used for a broad range of regulatory and research purposes, as well as to inform the public. This report is the summary of the monitoring data from 2009, and is an assessment of the data in conjunction with previous years' findings.
The Chemical Monitoring Activities, Photochemical Assessment Monitoring (PAMS), and Air Toxics Monitoring sections provide an in-depth discussion of the chemicals that are monitored and maps identify individual monitoring sites. These sections also contain discussions on health effects, measurement techniques, and attainment designations for the chemicals that are monitored. Additionally, these sections discuss trends and common sources for the monitored pollutants.
Six pollutants fall within the criteria pollutant list. These pollutants are carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter (now regulated in two size categories). The ambient concentrations of these pollutants must meet a regulatory standard. The regulatory standard is health-based. Concentrations above the standard are considered unhealthy for sensitive groups.
Another set of compounds called air toxics are monitored throughout the state in the Air Toxics Network. The sources of these emitted compounds include vehicle emissions, stationary source emissions, and natural sources. These air toxic compounds do not have ambient air regulatory standards. However, the compounds monitored in the Air Toxics Network are analyzed annually for theoretical lifetime cancer risk and potential non-cancer health effects. This analysis is presented in the Risk Assessment section of this report. Estimates of theoretical cancer risk posed by these compounds are primarily driven by a small number of chemicals in the metals, volatile organic compounds, and carbonyls groups of the air toxics. The estimates of theoretical lifetime cancer risk related to air toxic pollutants in the areas monitored across the state ranged from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 1,000,000. The potential risk of non-cancer health effects from air toxic pollutants is estimated differently, and most chemicals were well below the `acceptable' hazard quotient of 1.
The Ambient Monitoring Program also operates an extensive network of meteorological stations. The Meteorological Report section discusses Georgia's climatology based on the meteorological data captured at the PAMS sites and the sites located statewide. The meteorological sites provide, at a minimum, wind speed and wind direction data. Some stations are very sophisticated and provide information on barometric pressure, relative humidity, solar radiation, temperature, and precipitation. A discussion of the Georgia ozone and PM2.5 forecasting effort is also included in this section.
The Quality Assurance section shows the Ambient Monitoring Program's undertaking to produce quality data. The data has to be collected and measured in a certain manner to meet requirements that are set forth by the EPA. The requirements for each monitored pollutant is provided, including field and laboratory techniques, as well as results of the quality assurance audits.
The Outreach and Education section provides information concerning the efforts of the Clean Air Campaign to change the commuting habits of residents of Atlanta. The voluntary program partners with the public and private sector to reduce vehicle congestion and aid in reducing vehicle emissions. This section includes a description of educational and news media outreach activities, and explains how the Air Quality Index (AQI) is used to offer the public an easy to use indicator of air quality.
The appendices of this document contain summary tables for the pollutants measured during 2009. Included in the summary tables is information on where air toxic compounds were detected, the number of samples collected, and average and maximum concentrations.
Copies of this and previous annual reports are available in Adobe Acrobat format via the Ambient
vi

Monitoring Internet website at http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp/. A limited number of print copies are available and may be requested at 404-363-7006. Real time air monitoring information for the criteria pollutants may be found at the above website by selecting the pollutant of concern. In addition, the website also provides links to the Clean Air Campaign and the smog forecast.
vii

Aerosols AM APB AQCR Anthropogenic ARITH MEAN AQS By-product BAM CAA CFR CO CV DNR EPA EPD FRM
GEO MEAN HAP HI HQ IUR LOD g/m3 m/s MDL Mean MSA NAAQS NAMS NATTS NMHC NO2 NOx NOy NUM OBS NWS ODC O3 PAH PAMS Pb PM2.5 PM10 ppbC ppm Precursor PUF QTR Rawinsonde RfC Screening Value SLAMS

GLOSSARY
A gaseous suspension of fine solid or liquid particles Annual Mean Air Protection Branch Air Quality Control Region Resulting from human activity Arithmetic Mean Air Quality System Something produced in making something else; secondary result Beta Attenuation Monitor Clean Air Act Code of Federal Regulations Carbon Monoxide Coefficient of Variation Department of Natural Resources (state agency) Environmental Protection Agency (federal agency) Environmental Protection Division (state agency) Federal Reference Method- the official measurement technique for a given pollutant Geometric Mean Hazardous Air Pollutant Hazard Index Hazard Quotient Inhalation Unit Risk Limit of Detection Micrograms per cubic meter Meters per second Method Detection Limit Average Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau National Ambient Air Quality Standard National Ambient Monitoring Site National Air Toxics Trends Station Non-Methane Hydrocarbons Nitrogen Dioxide Oxides of Nitrogen Reactive oxides of Nitrogen Number of Observations National Weather Service Ozone depleting Chemicals Ozone Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station Lead Particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less Particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less Parts per billion Carbon Parts per million A substance from which another substance is formed Polyurethane Foam Calendar Quarter A source of meteorological data for the upper atmosphere Reference Concentration Initial level of air toxic compounds used in risk assessment State and Local Air Monitoring Site
viii

SO2 SPMS TEOM TNMOC TRS TSP UV VOC w/m2

Sulfur Dioxide Special Purpose Monitoring Site Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance Total Non-Methane Organic Compounds Total Reduced Sulfur Total Suspended Particulates Ultraviolet Volatile Organic Compound Watts per square meter

ix

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Introduction

INTRODUCTION

This report summarizes the air quality data collected by the State of Georgia during calendar year 2009. The Air Protection Branch is a subdivision of the state's Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Environmental Protection Division (EPD).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates air quality standards nationwide through authority granted by Congress in the Clean Air Act. Few people realize, though, that the air quality monitoring that is required by the Act is performed almost entirely by state and local governments. The Ambient Monitoring Program conducts monitoring in Georgia, both to satisfy Clean Air Act monitoring requirements and to exceed them in cases where additional monitoring proves beneficial to the citizens and industries of the State. Monitoring is performed to facilitate the protection of public health, as well as to protect our natural environment. The data is collected and quality assured using equipment and techniques specified by EPA. Once the data is ready, it is submitted to EPA's national air quality database (AQS), where it is available to a broad community of data users.

Despite the technical nature of the information collected, every effort has been made to make the data relevant and useful to those who do not routinely study air quality data. To provide additional information for those who have interest in more detailed technical information, extensive Appendices are included. Further information about air quality in Georgia and nationwide is available from EPA.

Due to budget constraints and lack of available personnel, the Ambient Air Monitoring Program temporarily discontinued certain samplers in 2009. Much consideration went in to deciding which samplers would be temporarily discontinued. Which pollutants are examined for attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, which pollutants are federally mandated, and the number of pollutants measured at each site are some of the factors that were considered in the decision making process. The samplers that are temporarily discontinued are shown in red in Table 2, on pages 4 and 5.

1 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

CHEMICAL MONITORING ACTIVITIES

This section contains a summary of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and the monitoring techniques used to measure ambient air quality for comparison with these standards.

The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the EPA Administrator to identify pollutants that may endanger public health or welfare. The Administrator is required to issue air quality criteria that reflect current scientific knowledge useful in indicating the type and extent of all identifiable effects on public health or welfare that may be expected from the presence of such pollutant in ambient air. Under the CAA, the EPA Administrator establishes NAAQS for each pollutant for which air quality criteria have been issued. The EPA is to set standards where "the attainment and maintenance are requisite to protect public health" with "an adequate margin of safety." In 1971, the EPA established standards for five "criteria" pollutants as required by the Clean Air Act. The standards and pollutants have changed over time to keep up with improvements in scientific knowledge and now consist of seven pollutants. For the most current list of standards, EPA's website (http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html) should be referred. To summarize the list as of 2009, Table 1 below is included here.

As shown in Table 1, there are two categories for ambient air quality standards, primary and secondary. Primary standards are intended to protect the most sensitive individuals in a population. These "sensitive" individuals include children, the elderly, and people with chronic illnesses. The secondary standards are designed to protect public welfare or the quality of life. This includes visibility protection, limiting economic damage, damage to wildlife, the climate, or man-made material. The varied averaging times are to address the health impacts of each pollutant. Short-term averages are to protect against acute effects. Long-term averages are to protect against chronic effects.

The Georgia ambient air monitoring network provides information on the measured concentrations of criteria and non-criteria pollutants at pre-selected locations. The 2009 Georgia Air Sampling Network collected data at 61 locations in 36 counties, including all sites monitored during segmented sections of the year. Monitoring occurs year-round, with the exception of ozone, which is sampled from March through October, and the continuous (hourly) Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) volatile organic compounds that sample from June through August. Table 2 is a list of sites in the monitoring network along with details of pollutants monitored and their locations. Figure 1, is a spatial display of the air monitoring locations in the state. Please note that not all pollutants are monitored at all sites. Maps of the monitoring locations for individual pollutants are provided in each pollutant's respective section.

The number of monitoring sites and their respective locations can vary from year to year. This variation depends on the availability of long-term space allocation, regulatory needs, and other factors such the sufficiency of resources. Once a site is established, the most common goal for its use is to monitor for long-term trends. All official monitoring performed in support of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) must use U.S. EPA-defined reference methods described in 40 CFR Part 53, Appendix A, or equivalent methods designated in accordance with Part 53 of that chapter. All data collected in the networks undergoes an extensive quality assurance review and is then submitted to the Air Quality System (AQS) database that is maintained by the EPA.

In general, the basic monitoring objectives that govern the selection of sites are: 1) to measure the highest observable concentration; 2) to determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density; 3) to determine the impact of significant sources or source categories on ambient pollution levels; 4) to determine the general background concentration levels; and 5) to determine the concentration of a number of compounds which contribute to the formation of ground level ozone. Data collected from continuous monitors in Georgia's monitoring network are published on EPD's website at http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp/. The data is updated hourly. Specific annual summary data for 2009 are available in Appendix A.

2 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

COMPOUND

PRIMARY STANDARD SECONDARY STANDARD UNITS

TIME INTERVAL



Sulfur Dioxide

0.14

0.5



ppm

3 Hour 24 Hour

0.03



Annual Mean

Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

15.0
98th percentile: 35.0

Same as Primary Same as Primary

g/m3

Annual Arithmetic Mean (3 years)
24 Hour

Particulate Matter (PM10)
Carbon Monoxide

2nd Maximum: 150
2nd Maximum: 35.0 2nd Maximum: 9.0

Same as Primary


g/m3 ppm

24 Hour
1 Hour 8 Hour Average

Ozone

4th Maximum: 0.075

Same as Primary ppm

8 Hour Average

Nitrogen Dioxide

0.053

Same as Primary ppm

Annual Mean

Lead

0.15*

Same as Primary g/m3 Rolling 3-Month Average

*The lead standard changed from 1.5g/m3, averaged per calendar quarter. This standard was signed October 15, 2008, became effective January 12, 2009, and is to be implemented by January 1, 2010.

Table 1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards Summary

3 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

SITE ID

COMMON NAME

COUNTY

Rome MSA

131150003 *Coosa Elementary

Floyd

131150004

Co. Health Dept.

Floyd

131150005

*Coosa High

Floyd

Brunswick MSA

131270004 Arco Pump Station

Glynn

131270006

Risley Middle

Glynn

131273001 Brunswick College

Glynn

Valdosta MSA

131850003

Mason Elem.

Lowndes

Warner Robins MSA

131530001

Robins Air Base

Houston

Dalton MSA

132130003

Fort Mountain

Murray

Albany MSA

130950007

Turner Elem.

Dougherty

Gainesville MSA

131390003 Fair St. Elementary

Hall

Athens-Clark County MSA

130590002 College Station Rd.

Clarke

Macon MSA

130210007

Allied Chemical

Bibb

130210012

Forestry

Bibb

130210013

Lake Tobesofkee

Bibb

Columbus Georgia- Alabama MSA

132150001

Health Dept.

Muscogee

132150008

Airport

Muscogee

132150011 Cusseta Elementary

Muscogee

132151003

Crime Lab

Muscogee

132155000

Columbus State

Muscogee

Savannah MSA

130510014 Shuman Middle School Chatham

130510017

Market St.

Chatham

130510021

E. President St.

Chatham

130510091

Mercer Middle

Chatham

130511002 W. Lathrop & Augusta Ave. Chatham

Augusta Georgia-South Carolina MSA

130730001

Riverside Park

Columbia

131890001

Fish Hatchery

McDuffie

132450005

Med. College GA

Richmond

132450091

Bungalow Rd.

Richmond

132450092 Clara Jenkins School

Richmond

PM2.5 PM2.5 PM2.5

PM10 Acid PAMS

Carb- Meteoro- Aethal-

O3 CO FRM Cont. Spec. NO NOx NO2 NOy SO2 TRS Pb PM10 Cont. Rain VOC VOC SVOC onyls logy ometer

S

X

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S
S
S S M

NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
NR

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

X

S

X

S

S

S

S

S
S S S

NR NR

NR NR

NR

NR

S

S

S

S

S

X

S S
S S

S

S

S

S

S

X

S S S
S S S S
S

NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR NR
G NR
NR NR

Cr6 Metals NR NR NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
NR

4 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

SITE ID

COMMON NAME

PM2.5 PM2.5 PM2.5

PM10 Acid PAMS

Carb- Meteoro- Aethal-

COUNTY O3 CO FRM Cont. Spec. NO NOx NO2 NOy SO2 TRS Pb PM10 Cont. Rain VOC VOC SVOC onyls logy ometer Cr6 Metals

Atlanta MSA

130150003

Cartersville

Bartow

S

NR

130630091

Georgia DOT

Clayton

S

130670003

National Guard

Cobb S

S

130670004 Macland Aquatic Center

Cobb

S

130770002

Univ. of West GA

Coweta S

S

NR

130850001

GA Forestry

Dawson S

G

NR NR NR NR

NR

130890002

South DeKalb

DeKalb S/P S/P S

S

T S/P S/P S/P S/P

P N N P/N

P

N

N

N

130890003

DMRC

DeKalb

S

130892001

Police Dept.

DeKalb

S

130893001

Tucker

DeKalb

S NR

130970004

W. Strickland St.

Douglas S

NR

131130001

Georgia DOT

Fayette S

NR

131210020

Utoy Creek

Fulton

NR NR

NR

131210032

E. Rivers School

Fulton

S

S

131210039

Fire Station#8

Fulton

S

131210048

Georgia Tech

Fulton

S

SS S

S

S

NR

131210055

Confederate Ave.

Fulton S

S

S

NR

131210099

Roswell Road

Fulton

S

131350002

Gwinnett Tech

Gwinnett S

S

S

131510002 132230003

County Extension Yorkville

Henry S

S

Paulding S/P S/P S

S

S/P S/P S/P

P NR NR

P

NR

132470001

Monastery

Rockdale S/P

S/P S/P S/P

P

P

132970001

Fish Hatchery

Walton

S

Chattanooga Tennessee-Georgia MSA

132950002

Co. Health Dept.

Walker

S

S

X

Not In An MSA

130090001 Baldwin Co. Airport

Baldwin

NR NR

NR

130550001

Fish Hatchery

Chattooga S

S

G

130690002 General Coffee State Park Coffee

X

NR NR

NR

132410002

Lake Burton

Rabun

G

132611001

Union High

Sumter S

133030001

Co. Health Dept.

Washington

S

S

133190001

Police Dept.

Wilkinson

S

Monitoring Types: S=SLAMS; P=PAMS; M=SPM; X=Supplemental Speciation; T=STN; N=NATTS; NR=Non-Regulatory; G=General Information

Samplers in red are temporarily not operational *Indicates sites consolidated in 2009, with all samplers at site 131150003.

Table 2: 2009 Georgia Air Monitoring Network

5 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
All Georgia Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 1: Georgia Air Monitoring Site Map
6 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
CARBON MONOXIDE (CO)

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

GENERAL INFORMATION Carbon Monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless, and poisonous gas that is a by-product of the incomplete burning of fossil fuels. In most large metropolitan areas the primary source of CO pollution is engendered from automobile exhaust. The CO emissions from automobiles are responsible for approximately 60% of CO emissions nationwide. Other contributors of CO are fires, industrial processes, cigarettes, and other sources of incomplete burning in the indoor environment. Figure 2 and Figure 3 give a visual representation of the CO emissions in Georgia. These figures are taken from EPA's latest available data on air emission sources, based on 2005 data.

On Road Vehicles

Non Road Equipment

Waste Disposal

136,996

Fossil Fuel Combustion 52,341

Fires 2,345

Industrial Processes 54,432

Residential Wood Combustion 47,456

Electricity Generation 12,903

Miscellaneous 531

Solvent Use 22

684,109

0

1000000

Tons

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)

1,734,540 2000000

Figure 2: Common Sources of Carbon Monoxide (CO) in Georgia in 2005

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)
Figure 3: Carbon Monoxide (CO) Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View
7 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Higher concentrations of ambient CO may be present during the colder months of the year. During the winter months, cooler temperatures prevent complete combustion of fuels, causing an increase in CO emission. Fuel combustion in gas-powered automobiles is especially affected as friction is increased during cold engine operation. At the same time, winter is subjected to more frequent inversion layers. In standard conditions, the troposphere contains temperatures that increase with increasing altitude. An inversion layer can occur when a layer of warmer air traps cooler air near the surface, disrupting the descending temperature gradient of the troposphere and preventing the usual mixing that would occur in normal conditions. These increased emissions are therefore trapped by the cap that is formed by the inversion layer, locking in CO emissions near the earth's surface.

The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) with a population greater than 500,000, as determined by the last census (2000), to have at least two CO State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS). In Georgia, only the Atlanta MSA meets the population requirement. Currently, the SLAMS site is located at Roswell Road (Figure 4). The Roswell Road site was established to monitor for CO at a microscale level. The purpose of microscale measurements is to measure peak concentrations in major urban traffic areas. A microscale site monitors an air mass that covers a distance of several meters to about 100 meters.

In substitution for a second SLAMS monitor, high sensitivity CO monitors have been installed at the Yorkville and South DeKalb sites. The purpose of these CO monitors is to aid in the detection of combustion and smoke plumes from power plants.

HEALTH IMPACTS Once CO is inhaled, it enters the blood stream, where it binds chemically to hemoglobin. Hemoglobin is the component of blood that is responsible for carrying oxygen to the cells. When CO binds to hemoglobin, it reduces the ability of hemoglobin to do its job, and in turn reduces the amount of oxygen delivered throughout the body. The percentage of hemoglobin affected by CO depends on the amount of air inhaled, the concentration of CO in air, and the length of exposure. At the levels usually found in ambient air, CO primarily affects people with cardiovascular disease.

Negative health effects of CO include weakening the contractions of the heart that reduces blood flow to various parts of the body. In a healthy person, this effect significantly reduces the ability to perform physical activities. In persons with chronic heart disease, this effect can threaten the overall quality of life, because their systems may be unable to compensate for the decrease in oxygen. CO pollution is also likely to cause such individuals to experience chest pain during activity. Adverse effects have also been observed in individuals with heart conditions who are exposed to CO pollution in heavy freeway traffic for one or more hours.

In addition, fetuses, young infants, pregnant women, elderly people, and individuals with anemia or emphysema are likely to be more susceptible to the effects of CO. For these individuals, the effects are more pronounced when exposure takes place at high altitude locations, where oxygen concentration is lower. CO can also affect mental functions, visual acuity, and the alertness of healthy individuals, even at relatively low concentrations.

MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES CO is monitored using specialized analyzers made for that specific purpose. The analyzers continuously measure the concentration of CO in ambient air using the non-dispersive infrared analysis and gas filter correlation methods.

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION Data collected from the continuous monitors is used to determine compliance with the Clean Air Act (CAA) 8-hour and 1-hour standard for CO. This standard requires that, for 8-hour averages, no concentration greater than 9 ppm may be observed more than once per year. For 1-hour averages, no

8 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

concentration greater than 35 ppm may be observed more than once a year. If the data shows that these criteria are met, then the area is considered to be in attainment of the standard.

All of Georgia is in attainment of both the 8-hour and 1-hour standards for carbon monoxide.

For additional summary data on carbon monoxide, see Appendix A.

9 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
CO Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 4: Carbon Monoxide Site Monitoring Map
10 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NO, NO2, NOx and NOy)

GENERAL INFORMATION
Oxides of nitrogen (see Table 3 on the following page) exist in various forms in the atmosphere. The most common is nitric oxide (NO), but other forms such as nitrogen dioxide (NO2), nitric acid (HNO3) and dinitrogen pentoxide (N2O5) are also present. The bulk of these compounds in the atmosphere are produced from high temperature combustion and lightning. Nitrogen is a very stable molecule and is essentially inert unless subjected to extreme conditions. The oxides of nitrogen are less stable, however, and are key participants in atmospheric chemistry, converting back and forth between numerous states under different conditions. Many of these reactions involve the conversion of oxygen atoms between their atomic (O2) and ozone (O3) forms. As such, oxides of nitrogen are studied more intensely than their direct health impacts would imply; they are precursors of (and alternately byproducts of) ozone formation. The many forms of oxides of nitrogen in the atmosphere are the reason that they are sometimes referred to using the generic terms NOx or NOy.
NO is changed to NO2 in very rapid atmospheric reactions. During daylight hours, ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun breaks apart NO2 into NO and free oxygen (O). The free oxygen atom will attach itself to molecular oxygen (O2) creating an ozone (O3) molecule. This is the origin of all ground level ozone. Daytime levels of NO2 and N2O5 are low but their concentration rises rapidly overnight. When the sun rises again in the morning, they are converted back to NO and ozone. Nitric acid (HNO3) is the most oxidized form of nitrogen in the atmosphere. This species is water-soluble and is removed from the atmosphere in the form of acidic raindrops. The following graph, Figure 5, is a representation of this typical diurnal pattern of NO2. Refer to the ozone section and Figure 12 for a comparison of each diurnal pattern.

Concentration (ppm)

0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0 0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00
Hour

Figure 5: Typical Diurnal Pattern of Nitrogen Dioxide

11 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

ABBREVIATION NO
NO2
HNO3 PAN NOx NOy

FULL NAME

CREATION PROCESSES

ELIMINATION PROCESSES

Nitrous Oxide
Nitrogen Dioxide

Result of ozone photochemistry High-temperature
combustion High-temperature
combustion Reaction of NO and ozone

Reacts with ozone to form NO2 and oxygen
Reacts with oxygen in strong sun to form ozone plus NO "Washes out" in rain

Nitric Acid

NO2 + H2O

"Washes out" in rain

Peroxyacetyl Oxidation of hydrocarbons

Nitrate

in sunlight

Slow devolution to NO2

Name for NO + NO2

Name for all atmospheric oxides of nitrogen- mostly NO, NO2, HNO3, N2O5, and PAN

Table 3: Common Oxides of Nitrogen Species and Terms

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is one of the important oxides of nitrogen. It is a light brown gas, and can be an important component of urban haze, depending upon local sources. Nitrogen oxides usually enter the air as the result of high-temperature combustion processes, such as those occurring in automobiles and power plants (Figure 6). Home heaters and gas stoves also produce substantial amounts of NO2. NO2 is formed from the oxidation of nitric oxide (NO), which has a pungent odor at high concentrations and a bleach smell at lower concentrations. NO2 is a precursor to ozone formation and can be oxidized to form nitric acid (HNO3), one of the compounds that contribute to acid rain. NO2 and sulfur dioxide (SO2) can react with other substances in the atmosphere to form acidic products that can be deposited in rain, fog, snow, or as particle pollution. Nitrate particles and NO2 can block the transmission of light, reducing visibility. Figure 7 shows a spatial view of the varying concentrations of nitrogen oxides by county in Georgia during 2005. The following figures are taken from the latest emissions report from EPA, based on 2005 data.

On Road Vehicles

Electricity Generation

112,805

Non Road Equipment

92,086

Fossil Fuel Combustion

59,613

Industrial Processes

21,805

Waste Disposal 5,148

Residential Wood Combustion 583

Fires 6

Solvent Use 43

Miscellaneous 40

0

100000

200000

Tons

(From EPA`s Air Emissions Sources)

251,331
300000


Figure 6: Common Sources of Nitrogen Oxides in Georgia in 2005

12 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

(From EPA`s Air Emissions Sources)
Figure 7: Nitrogen Oxides Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View
Efforts are being taken to reduce the emissions of harmful nitrogen oxides. School bus retrofitting, truck stop electrification, and locomotive conversions are three methods that are being introduced as alternatives to previously unregulated combustion sources. School Bus retrofitting focuses on older school buses that are being fitted with an emission control device to reduce emitted NOx. A specific type of retrofit known as selective catalytic reduction (SCR) reduces output by converting nitrogen oxides to molecular nitrogen and oxygen-rich exhaust streams. SCR systems are enhanced by using a low sulfur fuel. The amount of sulfur in diesel was recently reduced by 97 percent, creating low sulfur fuel. As sulfur tends to hamper exhaust-control devices, the introduction of low sulfur fuel has allowed retrofitting to be an effective means of reducing emissions. Truck stop electrification (TRE) reduces idling by diesel powered commercial trucks. Truck drivers are typically required to rest every 8 hours for every 10 hours of travel time. During this resting period, trucks idle their diesel engines as a means to power their air conditioning and heating systems. TRE eliminates this diesel dependence by providing an electrical system that charges battery-powered appliances including air conditioning, heating, and other electronic devices, thus reducing oxides of nitrogen that would be produced by unnecessary idling. In addition, cool or warm air is pumped into the trucks via a hose hookup at the stops as another method of cutting down on idling and emissions. Locomotive conversions reduce emissions by replacing old single diesel engines used by switch locomotives with smaller, more efficient modular diesel engines. Switch locomotives, or switchers, assemble and disassemble trains at rail yards. When they are not in action, they idle on the rails until another train comes along. The new engines, known as "genset" and eventually Tier 4 engines, utilize two or more smaller engines that can combine to equal the strength of the older engines to pull the maximum load. They can function individually or with less horsepower to handle less demanding loads while cutting down on the fuel needed to perform the task. These lower-emitting off-road diesel engines also feature an automatic engine start/stop technology to reduce idling when not in use.
HEALTH IMPACTS Exposure to high levels of NO2 for short durations (less than three hours) can lead to respiratory problems. Asthma sufferers, in particular, are sensitive to NO2. This sensitivity was expressed in a study that examined changes in airway responsiveness of exercising asthmatics during exposure to relatively low levels of NO2. Other studies also indicate a relationship between indoor NO2 exposures
13 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

and increased respiratory illness rates in young children, but definitive results are still lacking. In addition, many animal analyses suggest that NO2 impairs respiratory defense mechanisms and increases susceptibility to infection. Several other observations also show that chronic exposure to relatively low NO2 pollution levels may cause structural changes in the lungs of animals. These studies suggest that chronic exposure to NO2 could lead to adverse health effects in humans, but specific levels and durations likely to cause such effects have not yet been determined.

MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES Oxides of nitrogen, particularly NO2, are monitored using specialized analyzers that are developed specifically for measuring oxides of nitrogen in ambient air. The analyzers continuously measure the concentration of oxides of nitrogen in ambient air using the ozone-phase chemiluminescent method. There are two major instrument designs. While they are closely related, they do not monitor the same species. NOx analyzers measure NO, NO2, and NOx. NOy analyzers measure NO and NOy, but cannot measure NO2. The NOy analyzers are also specialized for measuring trace-level concentrations; as such, they cannot measure higher concentrations. Because of these tradeoffs, it is necessary to operate a network of both instrument types to get a complete picture of local conditions.

Of the oxides of nitrogen, only NO2 is regulated under the NAAQS. Therefore, only the NOx type analyzers produce data directly relevant to the standard. NO2 monitoring is required in urban areas with populations greater than 1,000,000. Atlanta is the only urban area in Georgia that meets that population requirement. Atlanta metro area has four NO2 sites. They are located at the South DeKalb, Georgia Tech, Conyers, and Yorkville sites. The complete oxides of nitrogen monitoring network, including NOx and NOy monitor locations, can be found in Figure 8.

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION Data collected from the continuous monitors is used to determine compliance with the NAAQS primary and secondary annual standards for NO2. This standard requires that a site's annual average concentration exceed 0.053 ppm no more than an average of once a year over a three-year period. The Atlanta MSA is in attainment of the NO2 standard. For additional summary data on this topic, see Appendix A.

14 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
NOx / NOy Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 8: Oxides of Nitrogen Monitoring Site Map
15 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)
GENERAL INFORMATION Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a colorless reactive gas that is formed by burning sulfur-containing material, such as coal, or by processing sulfur-containing ores. Most SO2 emission in Georgia comes from electric generation (Figure 9). SO2 is odorless at low concentrations, but pungent at very high concentrations. It can be oxidized in the atmosphere into sulfuric acid. When sulfur-bearing fuel is burned or ores that contain sulfur are processed, the sulfur is oxidized to form SO2. SO2 then can react with other pollutants to form aerosols. In liquid form, SO2 may be found in clouds, fog, rain, aerosol particles, and in surface liquid films on these particles. Both SO2 and NO2 are precursors to the formation of acid rain that leads to acidic deposition. SO2 is also a precursor for sulfate particles. Major sources of SO2 are fossil fuel-burning power plants and industrial boilers. Figure 9, below, shows common SO2 sources and Figure 10, below, shows SO2 emissions in Georgia. These figures are based on 2005 data and are taken from the latest emissions report from EPA.

HEALTH IMPACTS Exposure to SO2 can cause impairment of respiratory function, aggravation of existing respiratory disease (especially bronchitis), and a decrease in the ability of the lungs to clear foreign particles. It can also increase mortality, especially if elevated levels of particulate matter (PM) are present. Individuals with hyperactive airways, cardiovascular disease, and asthma are most sensitive to the effects of SO2. In addition, elderly people and children are also likely to be sensitive to SO2.

The effects of short-term peak exposures to SO2 have been evaluated in controlled human exposure studies. These studies show that SO2 generally increases airway resistance in the lungs, and can cause significant constriction of air passages in sensitive asthmatics. These impacts have been observed in subjects engaged in moderate to heavy exercise while exposed to relatively high peak concentrations. These changes in lung function are accompanied by perceptible symptoms such as wheezing, shortness of breath, and coughing in these sensitive groups.

The presence of particle pollution appears to aggravate the impact of SO2 pollution. Several studies of chronic effects have found that people living in areas with high particulate matter and SO2 levels have a higher incidence of respiratory illnesses and symptoms than people living in areas without such a combination of pollutants.

MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES Sulfur dioxide is measured in the ambient air using EPA-approved "equivalent method" instruments as defined in 40 CFR Part 53, Appendix A. Georgia's network consists of instruments using a pulsed UV fluorescence technique. In Brunswick, a variation of this instrument is configured to monitor for total reduced sulfur (TRS), which monitors for other sulfur-bearing compounds such as hydrogen sulfide. Figure 11 shows the locations of the Georgia SO2 monitoring stations for 2009.

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION To determine if an SO2 monitor is in attainment, the annual, 24-hour average, and 3-hour averages are evaluated. The data collected has to be at least 75 percent complete in each calendar quarter. A 24-hour block average is considered valid if at least 75 percent of the hourly averages for that 24-hour period are available [61 FR 25579, May 22, 1996]. To be considered in attainment, an SO2 site must have an annual mean less than 0.03 parts per million (ppm), no more than one 24-hour average exceeding 0.14 ppm, and no more than one 3-hour average exceeding 0.50 ppm. For 2009, all of Georgia is in attainment of the sulfur dioxide standard. For additional summary data on this topic, see Appendix A.

16 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Electricity Generation

Fossil Fuel Combustion

98,537

Industrial Processes 13,105

On Road Vehicles 8,213

Non Road Equipment 8,755

Waste Disposal 639

Residential Wood Combustion 87

Solvent Use 0

618,178

0

200000 400000

Tons

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)

600000

800000

Figure 9: Common Sources of Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) in Georgia in 2005

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)
Figure 10: Sulfur Dioxide Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View
17 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
SO2 Sites
Total Reduced Sulfur MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 11: Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Site Map
18 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

OZONE (O3)

GENERAL INFORMATION Ground level ozone is not a primary pollutant. Ozone is not directly emitted by any sources such as a mobile or stationary. Ozone formation occurs though a complex series of chemical reactions that take place in the presence of strong sunlight (photochemical reactions). For these reactions to take place, certain ingredients (precursors) must be available. Since the reactions must take place in the presence of strong sunlight, ozone concentrations have a strong diurnal pattern (Figure 12).

Concentration (ppm)

0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0 0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00
Hour
Figure 12: Typical Urban 1-Hour Ozone Diurnal Pattern
The precursors1 to ozone, are oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and reactive organic substances (also known as VOCs or hydrocarbons). Examples of the reactive organic substances that contribute to ozone formation are: hydrocarbons found in automobile exhaust (benzene, propane, toluene); vapors from cleaning solvents (toluene); and biogenic emissions (isoprene). Sources of VOCs in Georgia are shown in Figure 13, on the following page, and it is followed by a spatial view of VOC emissions across the state in Figure 14. These figures are taken from the latest emissions report from EPA, based on 2005 data. Ozone is a colorless gas, however, when mixed with particles and other pollutants, such as NO2, the atmospheric reaction forms smog, a brownish, pungent mixture (see Figure 15 and Figure 16). This type of pollution first gained attention in the 1940's as Los Angeles photochemical "smog". Since then, photochemical smog has been observed frequently in many other cities.

1 For a more complete discussion on ozone precursors, please see the NO2 section and the PAMS section of this report.
19 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

On Road Vehicles

Solvent Use

Non Road Equipment

77,604

Miscellaneous

48,413

Industrial Processes

36,287

Waste Disposal

20,080

Residential Wood Combustion 10,363

Fires 361

Fossil Fuel Combustion 3,984

Electricity Generation 1,432

0

100,000

Tons

151,925 162,555
200,000

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)

Figure 13: Common Sources of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Georgia in 2005

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)
Figure 14: Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View
20 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Figure 15: Demonstration of Ozone Formation
As indicated above, ozone is formed when its precursors come together in the presence of strong sunlight. The reaction only occurs when both precursors are present, and the reaction itself consumes the precursors as it produces ozone. The amount of ozone produced, assuming sufficient sunlight, is controlled by what is known as the "limiting reactant." This limiting reactant can be thought of in terms of household baking. You can only bake cookies until you run out of any one of the ingredients you need. If you run out of flour, it doesn't matter how much milk and sugar you have on hand; you can't make any more cookies without more flour. In the same way, ozone production can only occur until the process has consumed all of any one of the required ingredients. As it turns out, natural background hydrocarbon levels are quite low in Los Angeles, so in that area hydrocarbons are typically the reactant that limits how much ozone can be produced. The control measures that proved effective in reducing smog there involved reducing hydrocarbon emissions. These control measures and the science behind them have become relatively advanced because the Los Angeles ozone problem was so severe and developed so long ago. But many of the fundamental lessons learned about smog formation in Los Angeles over many years of research have proven to not apply in the same way in Georgia.

Figure 16: Ozone Formation Process
At the start of air quality control implementation in Georgia, the then-standard assumption was that Georgia was also hydrocarbon limited. However, the initial control measures seemed ineffective in actually reducing ozone levels. In time, researchers discovered that vegetation naturally emits large
21 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

quantities of hydrocarbons. The solution to ozone control in Georgia, then, would have to focus on a different limiting reactant. Since there will always be strong sunshine in the summer, and there will always be oxygen, the only effective way left to control ozone production is to reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen.

The control technologies that reduce hydrocarbon emissions are generally not effective on oxides of nitrogen, so a whole new set of control technologies had to be developed. This area has been in some ways unable to take full advantage of the technologies developed for Los Angeles, then, because those technologies were not suited to local conditions. With respect to reducing emissions from automobile engines, for example, the addition of relatively simple and inexpensive catalytic converters to existing engine designs was a great leap forward in reducing hydrocarbon emissions. Catalytic converters have been used with great success since the early 1970s. Thus far, emissions of oxides of nitrogen have proven more difficult to control than hydrocarbon emissions, especially given that the control measures have not had forty years to mature. Research on the topic continues, and new emissions control equipment is always under development. For example, where catalytic converters could be added to existing engine designs to greatly reduce hydrocarbon emissions, solutions for reducing emissions of oxides of nitrogen have generally required far more reengineering of the engines themselves. There is no easy "bolt on" solution.

With the exception of the South DeKalb site, ozone in Georgia, unlike other pollutants previously discussed, is only monitored during the "summer" months (March through October), according to EPA's 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 58 monitoring requirements. The South DeKalb site began year-round monitoring as of November 2009. Many urban areas experience high levels of ground level ozone during the summer months. We also see high ozone levels in rural and mountainous areas. This is often caused by ozone and/or its precursors being transported by wind for many hundreds of miles.

A final difference between ozone and the other pollutants is that ozone is sometimes good. While ground level ozone is considered a hazardous pollutant, the ozone in the upper atmosphere, approximately 10-22 miles above the earth's surface, protects life on earth from the sun's harmful ultraviolet (UV) rays. This ozone is gradually being depleted due to man-made products called ozone depleting chemicals, including chloroflourocarbons (CFC), which when released naturally migrate to the upper atmosphere. Once in the upper atmosphere, the CFCs break down due to the intensity of the sun's UV rays, releasing chlorine and bromine atoms. These atoms react with the ozone and destroy it. Scientists say that one chlorine atom can destroy as many as 100,000 "good" ozone molecules. The destruction of this ozone may lead to more harmful ultraviolet rays reaching the earth's surface, causing increased skin cancer rates. This reduction in the protection provided by ozone in the upper atmosphere is usually referred to as the "ozone hole" and is most pronounced in polar regions.

The Georgia Environmental Protection Division monitors ground level ozone at 22 sites throughout the state (Figure 17).

22 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
O3 Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 17: Ozone Monitoring Site Map
23 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

HEALTH IMPACTS Ozone and other photochemical oxidants such as peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN) and aldehydes are associated with adverse health effects in humans. Peroxyacetyl nitrate and aldehydes cause irritation that is characteristic of photochemical pollution. Ozone has a greater impact on the respiratory system, where it irritates the mucous membranes of the nose, throat, and airways. Ninety percent of the ozone inhaled into the lungs is never exhaled. Symptoms associated with exposure include cough, chest pain, and throat irritation. Ozone can also increase susceptibility to respiratory infections. In addition, ozone impairs normal functioning of the lungs and reduces the ability to perform physical exercise. Recent studies also suggest that even at lower ozone concentrations some healthy individuals engaged in moderate exercise for six to eight hours may experience symptoms. All of these effects are more severe in individuals with sensitive respiratory systems, and studies show that moderate levels may impair the ability of individuals with asthma or respiratory disease to engage in normal daily activities.

The potential chronic effects of repeated exposure to ozone are of even greater concern. Laboratory studies show that people exposed over a six to eight hour period to relatively low ozone levels develop lung inflammation. Animal studies suggest that if exposures are repeated over a long period (e.g. months, years, lifetime), inflammation of this type may lead to permanent scarring of lung tissue, loss of lung function, and reduced lung elasticity.

MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES Ozone is monitored using specialized commercial instruments made for that specific purpose. The analyzers continuously measure the concentration of ozone in ambient air using the U.V. photometric method and are EPA-approved for regulatory air monitoring programs. Data gained from the continuous monitors is used to determine compliance with the NAAQS for ozone.

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION Ozone monitoring has been in place in the Atlanta area since 1980. The 1980 network consisted of two monitors located in DeKalb and Rockdale Counties. Currently the metro Atlanta ozone network includes eleven monitors located in ten counties.

In July 1997 the US EPA issued an 8-hour ozone standard intended to eventually replace the older 1hour standard. This 8-hour standard is attained when the average of the fourth highest concentration measured is equal to or below 0.08 ppm (0.085 ppm with the EPA rounding convention) averaged over three years (see Table 1; 62 FR 38894, July 18, 1997). Areas EPA has declared in attainment of 1-hour standard are immediately exempt from that standard, but thereafter are subject to the 8-hour standard. In the summer of 2005, metro Atlanta was declared in attainment of the 1-hour standard. As of the printing of this report, then, only the 8-hour ozone standard is applicable in Georgia. On March 27, 2008 the ozone primary standard level was lowered to 0.075 ppm for the 8-hour averaging time, fourth maximum value, averaged over three years (Federal Register, Vol. 63, No.60).

The Atlanta ozone nonattainment area currently consists of Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, Rockdale, Barrow, Carroll, Hall, Newton, Spalding, and Walton Counties. All other metropolitan statistical areas in Georgia are currently in attainment. Catoosa County is party of the Chattanooga Early Action Compact area. Figure 18, on the next page, shows the boundaries of these nonattainment areas. The designations process for the 2008 ground-level ozone standards is ongoing and final designations are scheduled to be determined in the spring of 2009.

A number of activities to aid in controlling the precursors to ozone formation have been implemented. A new State Implementation Plans (SIP) will be developed to assist in ozone reduction. As new areas are declared in nonattainment, these control measures may be expanded to include them. One activity could include a vehicle inspection program. However, as the vehicle fleet gets younger, this is not as beneficial. Other activities include installing controls on stationary emission sources, and the

24 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

establishment of a voluntary mobile emissions reduction program. An example of such a program in metro Atlanta is called The Clean Air Campaign (CAC). Activities of The Clean Air Campaign include distributing daily ozone forecasts (as well as PM2.5 forecasts produced by EPD) during the ozone season to enable citizens in the sensitive group category as well as industries to alter activities on days that are forecasted to be conducive to ozone formation. This is also done for the Macon and Columbus areas. In addition to the daily forecasts, citizens have access to forecast and monitoring data on an as needed basis by either calling 1-800-427-9605 or by accessing the Georgia DNR/EPD Ambient Air Monitoring website at http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp/index.php. For a more detailed discussion concerning the CAC, see the section titled "Outreach and Education".

Figure 18: Georgia's 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Map
25 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Figure 19 shows how past air quality would relate to the new 0.075 ppm 8-hour standard (green line), and how current air quality relates to the old 0.080 ppm 8-hour standard (blue line). This chart was produced by comparing measurement data against both ambient standards. This demonstrates the relative strictness of each standard and shows how metro Atlanta's air quality has changed over time. Despite a great deal of fluctuation, over the course of the past twenty-five years, there has been a gradual reduction in the number of days exceeding either ozone standard. A trendline, produced by regression analysis, was created for both the 8-hour standards. The trendlines for both 8-hour ozone standards show that the number of days that exceed the ozone standard has fallen by about a day each year over this time period. Even with the new, lower 8-hour ozone standard, the data shows a decrease in the number of days with ozone exceedances for the metro Atlanta area. In 2009, the metro Atlanta area had a total of 14 days that violated the current (0.075 ppm) 8-hour standard.

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Exceedance Days
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

0.085 ppm

0.075 ppm

Year Linear (0.085 ppm)

Linear (0.075 ppm)

Figure 19: Metro Atlanta Ozone- Number of Violation Days per Year
Figure 20, on the following page, maps each metro Atlanta ozone monitor that exceeded the 8-hour ozone standard in 2009, and also indicates the monthly breakdown of the exceedances. Since the 8hour increment is calculated as a running 8-hour timeframe, there are a number of averages each day. Figure 20 shows the number of times that each monitor had 8-hour averages above the 0.075 ppm standard. The Confederate Avenue site shows the highest number of 8-hour ozone averages above 0.075 ppm, with 23 total for the 2009 ozone season. Seven of the total ten ozone sites collecting data in 2009 in the metro Atlanta area had exceedances in 2009.
For additional ozone summary data, see Appendix A.

26 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Figure 20: Metro Atlanta Ozone Exceedance Map
27 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

The following map was taken from the EPA document "Our Nation's Air- Status and Trends through 2008". It shows the fourth maximum reading for the 8-hour ozone readings across the United States. It is interesting to see the correlation of higher readings with the more populated areas across the United States. One can also see how Georgia's ozone readings compare with other states across the country. Georgia's fourth maximum ozone readings in 2008 were in the 0.060-0.075 ppm (light blue) and 0.076-0.095 ppm (yellow) ranges.

(From EPA's "Our Nation's Air Quality-Status and Trends through 2008") Figure 21: Ozone Concentrations in ppm, 2008 (Fourth Highest Daily Maximum 8-Hour Concentrations)
28 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

LEAD (Pb)

GENERAL INFORMATION In the past, the Clean Air Act required extensive lead monitoring in order to detect the high levels of airborne lead that resulted from the use of leaded gasoline. With the phase-out of leaded gasoline, lead concentrations have decreased to nearly zero by the late 1980s. Since then, the concentrations have hovered just above zero. Based on data from EPA's Air Emission Sources for 2005, Georgia's primary source of lead emissions is fossil fuel combustion (Figure 22). Other sources of lead emissions include industrial processes (metals processing, iron and steel production), combustion of solid waste, and lead-acid battery manufacturing. Figure 23, on the following page, shows a spatial view of Georgia's lead emissions, also from EPA's Air Emission Sources, based on 2005 data.

At the beginning of 2009, there were two dedicated lead monitors remaining in Georgia for comparison to the NAAQS lead standard. One was in the Atlanta area for monitoring long-term trends in ambient lead levels. The other was in Columbus for industrial source monitoring, given the historical issues with lead pollution in the area. At the end of 2008, EPA strengthened the standard and monitoring requirements. As well as lowering the standard, additional monitors were to be placed in areas with demonstrated lead emissions of 1.0 or more tons per year and urban areas of more than 500,000 (Federal Register, Vol. 73, No. 219, dated November 12, 2008). In response to this rule change, in December of 2009, GA EPD added a site to monitor another lead source in the Cartersville area. Since this time, EPA has proposed to lower the source-oriented monitors for lead emission level to 0.50 tons per year, change the population based requirement to include the `NCore network', and treat airports with aircraft using leaded fuel as sources of lead when determining source-oriented monitoring requirements (Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 249, dated December 30, 2009). If these changes are made in the rule, GA EPD will re-evaluate the need for additional lead monitors in Georgia.

The current criteria lead monitoring network is as indicated in Figure 24. For summary data on criteria lead monitoring, see Appendix A. In addition to the criteria network sites, lead is also being monitored at sites throughout Georgia as a trace metal in the Georgia Air Toxics Monitoring Network and with the PM2.5 speciation samplers. The equipment used at those sites can detect far smaller concentrations. For additional summary data on lead as collected as an Air Toxics trace metal, see Appendix D.

Fossil Fuel Combustion

Non Road Equipment

Industrial Processes

Electricity Generation

2

26 23 22

Waste Disposal 0 Solvent Use 0
Miscellaneous 0

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

28

Tons

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)

Figure 22: Common Sources of Lead in Georgia in 2005

29 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)
Figure 23: Lead Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View
HEALTH IMPACTS Exposure to lead occurs mainly through inhalation and ingestion of lead in food, water, soil, or dust. Lead particles can re-enter the environment through re-entrainment of dust from vehicle traffic, construction activities, and agricultural activities. It accumulates in the blood, bones, and soft tissues. Lead can adversely affect the kidneys, liver, nervous system, and other organs. Excessive exposure to lead may cause neurological impairments, such as seizures, mental retardation, and behavioral disorders. Even at low doses, lead exposure is associated with damage to the nervous systems of fetuses and young children, resulting in learning deficits and lowered IQ. Recent studies also show that lead may be a factor in high blood pressure and subsequent heart disease. Lead can also be deposited on the leaves of plants, presenting a hazard to grazing animals. Lead deposition in soil puts children at particular risk exposure since they commonly put hands, toys, and other items in their mouths, which may come in contact with the lead-containing dust and dirt.
MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES Since lead is a particulate, the measurement for ambient air lead concentrations is performed using a manual method, unlike measurements for the gaseous pollutants discussed earlier (ozone, SO2, NO2 and CO). Samples are collected on 8" x 10" pre-weighed fiberglass filters with a high-volume sampler for 24 hours, collecting all particulate sizes. The filter sample is shipped to a laboratory for analysis using inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy (commonly known as ICP-MS). Data gained from the lead sampler is used to determine compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for lead.
ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION The compliance with the national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards for lead and its compounds is determined based on the assumption that all lead is elemental lead. In order to comply with both the primary and secondary standard, the concentration of lead in the air must have an arithmetic mean no higher than 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter averaged on a rolling 3-month basis (Federal Register, Vol. 73, No. 219, dated November 12, 2008). On October 15, 2008 this standard was changed from the original standard of 1.5 g/m3 averaged per calendar quarter that has been in place since October 5, 1978 (43 FR 46258). This new lead standard became effective on January 12,
30 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

2009 and is to be implemented by January 1, 2010. All of Georgia is currently in attainment of the lead standard. For additional summary data on this topic, see Appendix A.

Lead Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 24: Lead Monitoring Site Map
31 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

PARTICULATE MATTER

GENERAL INFORMATION Particulate matter is a broad range of material that consists of solid particles, fine liquid droplets, or condensed liquids absorbed onto solid particles. Airborne particulates are not a single pollutant as discussed for the other criteria pollutants, but rather a mixture of many different air pollutants. Primary sources that emit particles include combustion, incineration, construction, mining, metals smelting, metal processing, and grinding. Other sources include motor vehicle exhaust, road dust, wind blown soil, forest fires, open burning of vegetation for land clearing or waste removal, ocean spray, and volcanic activity.

There are two ways that particulate matter is formed. Primary particulate is emitted directly from a source, like a vehicle's tailpipe or a factory's smokestack. However, a great deal of particulate matter is not directly emitted from such sources. In fact, the vast majority of primary air pollution is in the form of gases. Those gaseous air pollutants readily react in the atmosphere with oxygen and with each other. While many of those reactions produce other gases, they frequently produce particles. Particles formed through this process are known as secondary particulate matter. Examples of secondary particulates include:
Atmospheric sulfate particles, formed from the oxidation of gaseous SO2. Atmospheric nitrate particles, such as ammonium nitrate, formed from a complex series of
reactions that transform gaseous NOx. Atmospheric calcium nitrate or sodium nitrate particulates formed from a series of atmospheric
reactions involving gaseous nitric acid (HNO3) reacting with sodium chloride/calcium carbonate.

As diesel combustion and vehicle exhaust are sources of particulate matter, efforts are being made to reduce these emissions by retrofitting diesel engines and making alternative diesel fuels available.
Retrofitting is defined as the addition of an emission control device designed to remove emissions from an exhaust engine. Currently, school buses and diesel powered commercial trucks are being retrofitted for emission reduction. One method promoted by GA EPD is a particulate trap, which essentially filters exhaust from the engine. In some cases, as the particulate accumulates in the filter, the particulate is oxidized or burned off in order to regenerate the filter and reuse it. Regeneration is achieved by various techniques that reduce the temperature necessary to oxidize accumulated particulate matter. Disposable filters are also used when the particulate matter cannot be cleaned by oxidation. For more information about Georgia EPD's program, go to http://www.georgiaair.org/retrofit/index.htm. In addition, cleaner diesel fuels are available that reduce PM emissions, as well as other pollutant emissions, depending on the fuel. Ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel reduces sulfur and PM emissions. The use of biodiesel reduces PM, CO, hydrocarbons, and air toxics. Using emulsified diesel reduces both NOx and PM emissions.

Particulate pollution may be categorized by size since there are different health impacts associated with the different sizes. The Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program currently monitors for two sizes of particles: PM10 (up to 10 microns in diameter) and PM2.5 (up to 2.5 microns in diameter). Both of these particles are very small in size. For example, Figure 25 shows how approximately ten PM10 particles can fit on a cross section of a human hair, and approximately thirty PM2.5 particles would fit on a cross section of a hair.
Figure 25: Analogy of Particulate Matter Size to Human Hair
32 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Maps of each of the particulate matter networks (PM10, PM2.5 federal reference method, PM2.5 continuous, and PM2.5 speciation) are included in the following subsections that discuss particulate matter.

PM10

Particulate matter (PM) less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter is defined as PM10. These particles can be solid matter or liquid droplets from smoke, dust, fly ash, or condensing vapors that can be suspended in the air for long periods of time. PM10 represents part of a broad class of chemically diverse particles that range in size from molecular clusters of 0.005 microns in diameter to coarse particles of 10 microns in diameter (for comparison, an average human hair is 70-100 microns in diameter, as shown in the previous figure). PM results from all types of combustion. The carbonbased particles that result from incomplete burning of diesel fuel in buses, trucks, and cars are of particular concern. Another important combustion source is the burning of wood in stoves and fireplaces in residential settings. Also of concern are the sulfate and nitrate particles that are formed as a by-product of SO2 and NO2 emissions, primarily from fossil fuel-burning power plants and vehicular exhausts.

The U.S. national ambient air quality standard was originally based on particles up to 25-45 microns in size, termed "total suspended particles" (TSP). In 1987, EPA replaced TSP with an indicator that includes only those particles smaller than 10 microns, termed PM10. These smaller particles cause adverse health effects because of their ability to penetrate deeply into the lungs. The observed human health effects of PM include breathing and respiratory problems, aggravation of existing respiratory and cardiovascular disease, alterations in the body's defense system against inhaled materials and organisms, and damage to lung tissue. Groups that appear to be most sensitive to the effects of PM include individuals with chronic lung or cardiovascular disease, individuals with influenza, asthmatics, elderly people, and children.

For a map of the PM10 network, refer to Figure 26 on the next page.
HEALTH IMPACTS Marked increases in daily mortality have been statistically associated with very high 24-hour concentrations of PM10, with some increased risk of mortality at lower concentrations. Small increases in mortality appear to exist at even lower levels. Risks to sensitive individuals increase with consecutive, multi-day exposures to elevated PM10 concentrations. The research also indicates that aggravation of bronchitis occurs with elevated 24-hour PM10 levels, and small decreases in lung function take place when children are exposed to lower 24-hour peak PM10 levels. Lung function impairment lasts for 2-3 weeks following exposure to PM10.

33 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
PM10 Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 26: PM10 Monitoring Site Map
34 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES The Georgia PM10 monitoring network consists of two types of monitors. The first is an event monitor in which samples are collected for 24 hours on a quartz microfiber filter. A specialized sample-sorting device is used so that the filter collects only particles 10 microns in size and smaller. The filters are weighed in a laboratory before and after the sampling period. The change in the filter weight corresponds to the mass of PM10 particles collected. That mass, divided by the total volume of air sampled, corresponds to the mass concentration of the particles in the air. Because of the need for manual filter loading and unloading, and shipping back to the laboratory, there is significant time lag between taking the measurement and obtaining data. The other type of monitor is fundamentally similar, but has been greatly modernized. It draws particle-laden air through a filter and analyzes how the mass of the filter changes on an hourly or nearly continuous basis. This monitor gives much more information about how PM10 concentrations vary over time, is less labor-intensive, and produces results almost instantly.

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION The primary and secondary standards for PM10 are the same. In order for an area to be considered in compliance with the PM10 standard, the 24-hour concentration of 150 micrograms per cubic meter should not be exceeded more than once per year on average over three years [52 FR 24663, July 1, 1987, as amended at 62 FR 38711, July 18, 1997; 65 FR 80779, Dec. 22, 2000]. There was also an annual average standard for PM10 until December 17, 2006. EPA revoked the standard because of a lack of evidence of chronic health effects resulting from long-term exposure to moderate levels of PM10.

35 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
40.0

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

35.0

30.0

Average Concentration (g/m3)+

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Year

2007

2008

2009

Albany Metro Atlanta

Augusta

Brunswick

Metro Savannah* Rome**

Columbus Sandersville

Macon Summerville

+ Includes exceptional event data for 2007 * Average includes one site for 2007,2008, and 2009 **Rome data consolidated for 131150003 and 131150005
Figure 27: PM10 Annual Arithmetic Mean Chart
Figure 27 shows the annual PM10 averages for metro areas in Georgia. On an annual basis, PM10 levels in Georgia are relatively low. However, there was an increase in the annual averages of PM10 for 2007 that is presumed to be a product of the Okefenokee Swamp wildfire. Due to this wildfire, Georgia EPD requested from the U.S. EPA that two PM10 data points from the Albany site be taken out of the dataset for regulatory purposes. The U.S. EPA has approved this request. However, since the public was exposed to these levels of PM10 concentrations, they are included in Figure 27 and Figure 28, on the following page. In 2008, with the exception of the Brunswick site, there was a noticeable reduction in annual average concentrations of PM10 across the state. In 2009, concentrations remained relatively consistent with the 2008 concentrations, with annual averages ranging from 18-27 g/m3.
Figure 28, below, shows how the same areas compare to the 24-hour standard for PM10, which remains set at 150 g/m3. The standard allows one exceedance per year averaged over a 3-year period, therefore this chart shows the 2nd highest 24-hour average for each site or metro area. Although there is a great deal of variation from year to year at any given site, the statewide 24-hour average is relatively stable. It is believed that concentrations of PM10 in 2007 were above normal due
36 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

to excessive smoke from the Okefenokee Swamp wildfire. For the 2007 data (shown in teal), the second highest value of 187 g/m3 for the Albany site is one of the two exceptional event datapoints
that were taken out of the dataset for attainment purposes. The other datapoint was Albany's highest value of 189 g/m3. In 2008 (shown in dark blue), almost all the sites show a marked decline in the 2nd
highest concentration of PM10, with many sites' concentrations below the level of the 2006
concentrations (shown in green). The majority of the sites continued to show a decrease in PM10
concentration for 2009 (shown in lighter blue), as well. A few sites showed an increase in concentrations, but all sites' second highest PM10 concentrations remained below 60 g/m3.

For additional PM10 summary data, see Appendix A.

Statew ide

Sandersville

Augusta

Columbus Brunsw ick

150 g/m3 limit

Site

Rome***

Albany

Metro Atlanta** Summerville

Savannah

Macon

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

Second Highest 24-Hour PM10 Concentration (g/m 3)+

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

+ Includes all data for 2007 that was excluded for exceptional events * 2007 and 2008 no data available ** 2007 and 2008 no data available from FS#8 *** Sites consolidated, data combined for Rome-Coosa Elem and Coosa High

Figure 28: PM10 24-Hour Design Values

37 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

PM2.5

The U.S. EPA defines 2.5 particulate matter as solid particles and liquid droplets present in the air that are less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter. These particles and droplets are invisible to the naked eye. However, collectively, they may appear as a fog-like haze or clouds and are often referred to as "fine" particles.

Fine particles are produced by various sources, including industrial combustion, residential combustion, and vehicle exhaust (Figure 29 and Figure 30). However, fine particles are also formed when combustion gases are chemically transformed. Fine particles can soil and accelerate the deterioration of man-made materials. In addition, fine particles impair visibility and are an important contributor to haze, particularly in humid conditions. The visibility effect is roughly doubled at 85% relative humidity as compared to humidity under 60% (U.S. EPA, 2004a). Based on data from EPA's Air Emission Sources for 2005, Georgia's primary source of PM2.5 emissions is electricity generation, with over 28,000 tons attributed to this emission source. This information is displayed in Figure 29. Figure 30 shows a spatial view of Georgia's PM2.5 emissions, also from EPA's Air Emission Sources, based on 2005 data.

Considerable effort is being undertaken to analyze the chemical composition of fine particles (PM2.5), so pollution control efforts can be focused in areas that create the greatest hazard reductions. Therefore, Georgia currently monitors fifty-three (53) particle species, which include gold, sulfate, lead, arsenic, and silicon. This speciation data is discussed further in the PM2.5 Speciation section.

On Road Vehicles Non Road Equipment
Waste Disposal Fossil Fuel Combustion
Fires Industrial Processes Residential Wood Combustion Electricity Generation
Miscellaneous Solvent Use 9

5,258 6,728
8,603 9,488
6,493

18,726 17,920

15,615

28,412

0 Tons
(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)

50000

Figure 29: Common Sources of Particulate Matter 2.5 in 2005

38 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

(From EPA's Air Emissions Sources)
Figure 30: Particulate Matter 2.5 Emission in Georgia in 2005 Spatial View
HEALTH IMPACTS Fine particles can penetrate into the sensitive regions of the respiratory tract, which make them a health concern. Recently published community health studies indicate that significant respiratory and cardiovascular-related problems are associated with exposure to fine particle levels below the existing particulate matter standards. In addition, fine particles are likely to cause the most serious health effects, which include premature death, hospital admissions from respiratory causes, and increased respiratory problems. Long-term exposure to particulate matter may increase the rate of respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses and reduce the life span of an individual. Some data also suggests that fine particles can pass through lung tissues and enter the bloodstream. Therefore, children, the elderly, and individuals with cardiovascular disease or lung diseases such as emphysema and asthma are especially vulnerable.
MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES PM2.5 mass concentrations are measured with two types of methods. These two techniques consist of an integrated method and a continuous method. At sites where mass PM2.5 samples are taken on an integrated basis, the samples are measured using very similar techniques utilized for measuring PM10. The official reference method requires that samples are collected on Teflon filters with a PM2.5 sampler for 24 hours. A specialized particle size sorting device is used to filter the air, collecting only particles 2.5 microns in size and smaller. The filters are weighed in a laboratory before and after the sampling period. The change in the filter weight corresponds to the mass weight of PM2.5 particles collected. That mass weight, divided by the total volume of air sampled, corresponds to the mass concentration of the particles in the air for that 24-hour period. The reference method filters are used for attainment determinations. However, due to the delay in collecting each filter, shipping it to the laboratory, and weighing, weeks may pass before the results are known. Although this method is very accurate, it is not useful for real-time determinations of PM2.5 concentrations in ambient air.
At sites where the continuous method is utilized, Georgia EPD uses two types of instruments. One type is the MetOne BAM-1020, adapted from PM10 service by use of an inline BGI `Sharp Cut Cyclone'. The sampling method for the BAM type of continuous PM2.5 monitor was approved as Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) in Notices of the Federal Register/Vol.73, No.49 dated March 12,
39 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

2008 when used with a "Very Sharp Cut Cyclone". When GA EPD begins operating the continuous BAM as an FEM with a "Very Sharp Cut Cyclone", these samplers will be used for making attainment decisions relative to the NAAQS. At the other locations where Georgia EPD samples PM2.5 on a continuous basis, GA EPD uses the Rupprecht & Patashnick TEOM Series 1400/1400a monitors, using an inline PM2.5 cyclone for particle size selection and an inline Sample Equilibration System (SES), which uses a diffusion drying technique to minimize water vapor interference with the particle mass measurement. The instrument oscillates the sample filter on a microbalance continuously while particles are collected from ambient air. By measuring the change in the oscillation frequency, the change in filter mass can be determined. Because these analyzers (TEOM) are not approved as reference or equivalent method, the data collected from these samplers cannot be used for making attainment decisions relative to the NAAQS. Both types of samplers are used to support development of air quality models and forecasts, including the Air Quality Index (AQI), and to provide the public with information about pollutant concentrations in real time. Continuous samplers produce hourly averaged data that is available fifteen minutes after the end of each hour. The immediate availability of this data allows the public to make informed decisions regarding their outdoor physical activities. Continuous PM2.5 data is reported every hour on Georgia's Ambient Air Monitoring web page located at http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp/index.php. Figure 31 shows the location of Georgia's PM2.5 FRM monitors and Figure 32, on the following page, shows the location of PM2.5 continuous and speciation monitors.

40 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
PM2.5 FRM Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 31: PM2.5 Federal Reference Method Monitoring Site Map
41 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
PM2.5 Continuous Sites
PM2.5 Speciation Sites MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 32: PM2.5 Continuous and Speciation Monitoring Site Map
42 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

As can be seen in Figure 33 on the following page, the three-year averages of 98th percentile of PM2.5 24-hour data are compared to the 24-hour standard of 35 g/m3. For the 2003-2006 data, there were
no exceptional events to consider. The 2007 data was affected by the Okefenokee Swamp wildfire. To
show the complete data set that was collected, the 2007 data includes the exceptional event data that
was taken out for regulatory purposes. Therefore, in Figure 33 the three-year average calculations including the 2007 data (2005-2007, 2006-2008, and 2007-2009) are not a regulatory comparison to the 24-hour standard. The 98th percentile of 24-hour average concentrations have consistently shown
decreased averages from the 2004-2006 to the 2007-2009 averages. With the exception of the
Albany site, all of the 2007-2009 24-hour averages (shown in light blue) are below the standard of 35 g/m3.

43 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Site

Gordon Sandersville
Rossville Augusta Bungalow Rd.
Augusta Med. Col. Yorkville
Columbus Cussetta Rd. Columbus Airport** Columbus H.D. Valdosta Warner Robins Gainesville Gw innett Brunsw ick Atl. F.S. # 8* Atl. E. Rivers Sch. Rome*** Albany Doraville South DeKalb Pow der Springs Kennesaw Forest Park
Athens College Station Rd.** Sav. Mercer
Sav. Market St. Macon Forestry Macon Allied Chem.
0.00

35 g/m3 limit

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

98th Percentile Concentration (g/m 3)+

07-09 06-08 05-07 04-06

+ Includes all data from 2007 that was excluded for exceptional events * Site was shut down from 9/06 to 12/08; 2004-2006 and 2005-2007 average not complete 3 years ** Sites established in 2005 *** Sites consolidated in 2009, data combined for Rome-Coosa Elem and Rome-Coosa High
Figure 33: PM2.5 Three-Year 24-Hour Averages, By Site

44 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

On the next page, Figure 34 also shows a non-regulatory comparison of three-year averages of annual PM2.5 data to the annual standard of 15.0 g/m3. This graph includes the PM2.5 exceptional event data for 2007 to show the complete data set that was collected, as well. Therefore, in Figure 34
the 2005-2007, 2006-2008 and 2007-2009 annual averages are not a regulatory comparison to the
standard. A few monitoring sites across Georgia have 2006-2008 averages (shown in dark blue)
above the PM2.5 annual standard, but the majority of sites are below the annual standard for the 20062008 average. Almost all of the three-year averages are lower for the 2006-2008 timeframe,
compared to previous averages. The 2007-2009 averages (shown in light blue) continue to show a
decrease in concentration. All of the 2007-2009 annual averages are below the annual standard of 15.0 g/m3. The sites with the higher averages are generally in north and central Georgia, and the
sites with lower averages are generally in the south and coastal areas.

For additional PM2.5 summary data, see Appendix A.

45 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Site

Gordon Sandersville
Rossville Augusta Bungalow Rd.
Augusta Medical Col. Yorkville
Columbus Cusseta Rd. Columbus Airport
Columbus Health Dept. Valdosta
Warner Robins Gainesville Gwinnett Brunswick
Atlanta Fire Station # 8** Atlanta E. Rivers School
Rome*** Albany
Doraville South DeKalb Powder Springs
Kennesaw Forest Park Athens College Station Rd.* Savannah Mercer Savannah Market St. Macon Forestry Macon Allied Chem.

15.0 g/m3 limit

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

15.0

17.5

Concentration (g/m3)+

07-09

06-08

05-07

04-06

+ Includes all data for 2007 that was excluded for exceptional events * Site established 2005; only 2005-2009 data used for graph ** Site was shut down 9/06 to 12/08; averages do not include three full years *** Sites consolidated in 2009, data combined for Rome-Coosa Elem and Rome-Coosa High

Figure 34: PM2.5 Three-Year Annual Averages, By Site

46 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION In order for an area to be in attainment of the national primary and secondary annual ambient air PM2.5 standard, the area must have an annual arithmetic mean concentration less than or equal to 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter [62 FR 38711, July 18, 1997]. In addition, there is a 24-hour primary and secondary standard that requires that the three year average of the 98th percentile of the 24-hour concentration be less than or equal to 35 micrograms per cubic meter [71 FR 61144, October 17, 2006]. All sample analyses used for determining compliance with the standards must use a reference method based on information present in 40 CFR Appendix L or an equivalent method as designated in accordance with Part 53.

The PM2.5 annual standard attainment and nonattainment designations require three years of monitoring data. Therefore, Georgia's initial attainment status was not determined until late 2004. Based on the three years of data (2001-2003), EPA officially declared several areas of Georgia in nonattainment of the annual standard. Nonattainment areas included Walker and Catoosa Counties, which are a part of the metro Chattanooga nonattainment area. All of Bibb County and portions of Monroe County have been included in the Macon nonattainment area. Floyd County itself has been declared a nonattainment area. Finally, the metro Atlanta nonattainment area has been also declared. This includes Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, and Walton Counties, along with portions of Heard and Putnam Counties. Figure 35, on the next page, illustrates the boundaries of Georgia's PM2.5 annual standard nonattainment areas.

For the PM2.5 24-hour standard, the entire state of Georgia is classified as in attainment. The 24-hour standard is also based on three years of monitoring data, and this attainment status is based on the 2005-2007 data.

47 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Figure 35: Georgia's PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Map Figure 36, on the next page, shows maps that were taken from the EPA document "Our Nation's Air Status and Trends through 2008". The first map shows PM2.5 annual average concentrations across the United States for 2008, and the second map shows the 24-hour average concentrations. This gives a comparison of Georgia's PM2.5 data, compared to the rest of the country. It appears that for Georgia, the annual average concentrations were in the 4.3-12.0 g/m3 (light blue) and 12.1-15.0 g/m3 (dark blue) ranges. The 24-hour average concentrations were in the 16-35 g/m3 (light blue) range across Georgia.
48 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report Annual Concentrations

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Daily Concentrations
(From EPA's "Our Nations Air- Status and Trends through 2008") Figure 36: PM2.5 Annual and 24-Hour Concentrations across the United States, 2008
49 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

PM2.5 SPECIATION

As required by the National PM2.5 Speciation program (40 CFR 58), EPD monitors the mass concentration of fine particulate matter (in micrograms per cubic meter of air) along with the chemical composition of those particles. Attempts to control the concentration of fine particulate matter are a national priority through listings in the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Therefore, regulations intended to reduce levels of fine particulate matter are now being implemented on a widespread basis. The desired reduction of fine particulate matter concentrations is expected to produce benefits in human health and assist in the improvement of visibility by reducing the presence of haze.

It is known that particulate matter has varying health effects depending of their size and chemical composition. The particles that compose fine particulate matter are not uniform. While they are all smaller than 2.5 microns in diameter, their size varies. Some fine particles are emitted into the air directly from engine exhaust, fossil fuel combustion, unpaved roads, and the tilling of fields; others are formed in the atmosphere through reactions between gaseous pollutants. Each individual particle, regardless of its source, has a distinct chemical composition. The overall composition of all particles that make up the fine particulate matter in a given volume of air may also vary, depending on local sources and a variety of other factors. Within the make up of the particulate matter, some chemicals are more toxic than others. There has been some disagreement on whether the quantity or toxicity of fine particulate matter is the main culprit. This reinforces the need to monitor and analyze both the species of particulate matter and weight of the species.

Georgia currently monitors fifty-three species, which include gold, sulfate, lead, arsenic, and silicon. However, there are only approximately six chemicals that are detected frequently. Of these, sulfate and organic carbon are detected in the highest concentrations, with magnitudes of up to five to nine times greater than the other major species. Figure 37 illustrates the average concentrations of these six chemicals from 2003 to 2009. The chemical elements typical of the Earth's crust are grouped together as "crustal". All of the sites are shown for one bar, showing how each site makes up the total of each of the major constituents of the speciation data. Below the figures is a listing of the most significant chemical constituents of fine particulate matter.

Refer to Figure 32 for a map of Georgia's PM2.5 Speciation monitors.

50 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Other

Crustal

Nitrate

Species Sulfate

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003
0

5

10

Macon Athens

15 Douglas

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

Concentration (ug/m 3)

South DeKalb Rome* Columbus Augusta Rossville**

* Rome consolidated 2009 **Rossvile started 2005

Ammonium Ion Elemental Carbon Organic Carbon

Figure 37: Speciation, by Species, 2003-2009

51 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

PREDOMINANT SPECIES FOUND IN PM2.5

Ammonium Ion: commonly released by fertilizer production, livestock production, coke production, and some large refrigeration systems. Ironically, it can be emitted by NOx control systems installed on large fossil fuel combustion systems, which use ammonia or urea as a reactant.
Sulfate products: formed during the oxidation of SO2 in the atmosphere. SO2 is primarily produced by coal burning boilers.
Nitrate products: formed through a complex series of reactions that convert NOx to nitrates. Vehicle emissions and fossil fuel burning produce NOx.
Crustal products: are components that are the result from the weathering of Earth's crust. They may include ocean salt and volcanic discharges. Crustal products include aluminum, calcium, iron, titanium, and silicon. These components are released by metals production, and can be resuspended in the atmosphere by mechanisms that stir up fine dust, such as mining, agricultural processes, and vehicle traffic.
Elemental carbon: carbon in the form of soot. Sources of elemental carbon include diesel engine emissions, wood-burning fireplaces, and forest fires.
Organic carbon: consist of hundreds of organic compounds that contain more than 20 carbon atoms. These particles may be released directly, but are also formed through a series of chemical reactions in the air, mostly as a result of the burning of fossil fuels and wood.

Data on the composition of fine particulate matter is a useful input to scientific models of air quality. Ultimately, it will help scientists and regulators track the progress and effectiveness of newly implemented pollution controls. The data will also improve scientific understanding of the relationship between particle composition, visibility impairment, and adverse human health effects.

Monitoring for the chemical speciation of fine particulate matter began late in 2001, therefore, limited data is available. As the data set becomes more robust, other conclusions may be drawn. However, some general observations can already be made. The concentrations of sulfate and organic carbon are generally less at the Douglas-General Coffee site than at the remaining seven sites. This is expected since the sulfate and organic carbon fractions are mainly caused by human activities. The Douglas-General Coffee site is considered a rural background site and will be used in future comparisons between rural and urban areas.

Figure 38 presents a different view of the same data to facilitate visualization of trends. Each site is shown with all species making up the composition of each bar. Each year is shown separately.

52 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

Rossville**

Augusta

Columbus

Rome*

Species

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

South DeKalb

Douglas

Athens

Macon

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Concentration (ug/m3)

Ammonium Ion Elemental Carbon Organic Carbon Sulfate Nitrate Crustal Other

*Rome consolidated 2009 **Rossville started 2005

Figure 38: PM2.5 Speciation, by Site, 2003-2009

Compared to the 2007 data, the total make up of the speciation parameters showed lower average
concentrations for all the sites in 2008. The Columbus and Macon sites seem to show the biggest drop in total average concentration, with almost 6 g/m3 less than 2007 concentrations. In 2009, this
overall decrease in average concentrations continued. The Columbus site continued to have the lowest overall average concentration (close to 8 g/m3), with the Macon site's average concentration

53 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

as the second lowest (close to 9 g/m3). The South DeKalb site showed the highest total average concentration, with close to 11 g/m3. In comparison, the total PM2.5 mass average concentrations
sampled with the speciation monitor, the continuous PM2.5 monitor, and the integrated PM2.5 monitor at these sites range from around 10 to 12 g/m3.

Ammonium ion concentrations (shown in pink) are relatively even statewide, with concentrations lowest at the Douglas site. The concentrations ranged from 0.54-0.89 g/m3 in 2009. Ammonium ion is the third largest single contributor to the total speciation make up.
The South DeKalb area has the highest elemental carbon concentration, 0.85 g/m3 shown in burgundy, which is no surprise given the site location on major interstate trucking corridors. Cities with less heavy vehicle traffic generally have lower concentrations. The Columbus site has the least elemental carbon concentration, with 0.28 g/m3 in 2009.

Organic carbon concentrations (shown in green) are also relatively consistent throughout the state, usually consisting of about 4-5 g/m3 of the total speciation concentration. Organic carbon concentrations are much higher than typical ammonium ion or elemental carbon concentrations, having one of the largest contributions to the total PM2.5 mass concentrations.
Sulfate (shown in dark blue) is also found in higher concentrations, with concentrations around 2-2.5 g/m3 in 2009. Concentrations are relatively consistent statewide, though somewhat lower in rural areas, and their relatively large observed mass means that they are also a major contributor to overall PM2.5 mass concentrations.
Nitrate concentrations (shown in purple) are relatively small (0.31-0.72 g/m3 in 2009), usually contributing the fourth or fifth largest single component of the total five major constituents. Atmospheric forms of nitrate can be formed from the conversion of NOx. Other forms of nitrate can be found in fertilizers, animal and human organic waste, medications, and used in welding.

Crustal matter concentrations (shown in gray) are generally one of the lowest speciation concentrations (0.18-0.45 g/m3 in 2009) and consistent in most areas. Rome and Macon have in
some years recorded unexpectedly high crustal matter concentrations. This may be a sign of poor
dust control at agricultural, construction, or mining operations in those areas.

The section labeled `Other' (shown in orange) is a make up of all the rest of the compounds not
included in the five major contributors or crustal make up. This is a total of the remaining 43 compounds in the speciation sample. Concentrations range from 1.18 to 1.35 g/m3 in 2009.

For PM2.5 speciation summary data, see Appendix B.

To show a comparison of Georgia's PM2.5 speciation data to the rest of the United States, the following map was taken from the EPA's "Our Nation's Air- Status and Trends through 2008." In Georgia, as well as the other states in the Southeast, sulfate and organic carbon are the main contributors of PM2.5 data, while nitrate is barely a contributor. In the North and the West, sulfate and organic carbon are still major contributors, however nitrate (shown in red) also shows considerable contribution. Nitrate's predominant sources originate from highway vehicles, non-road mobile, electric utilities, and industrial boilers. In the East, the main sources of sulfate are electric utilities and industrial boilers. The major sources of organic carbon are highway vehicles, non-road mobile, waste burning, wildfires, and vegetation. In addition, woodstoves and fireplaces are principal contributors to organic carbon in the West. The composition of PM2.5 seems to vary across the country depending on predominant sources.

54 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

(From EPA's "Our Nations Air- Status and Trends through 2008") Figure 39: Four-Season Average of PM2.5 Composition Data for 15 U.S. Cities
MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES Particle speciation measurements require the use of a wide variety of sampling and analytical techniques, but all generally use filter media to collect the particles to be analyzed. Laboratory techniques currently in use are gravimetric (microweighing); X-ray fluorescence and particle-induced X-ray emission for trace elements; ion chromatography for anions and selected cations; controlled combustion for carbon; and gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy (GC/MS) for semi-volatile organic particles.
ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION Particle speciation measurements are performed to support the regulatory, analytical, and public health purposes of the program. There are no ambient air quality standards regarding the speciation of particles.
55 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
ACID PRECIPITATION

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities

In 2009, acid precipitation was not monitored at GA EPD's sites due to budget constraints. As the state budget allows, acid precipitation data will be collected at a future time. When collecting data, the samples were collected weekly and were weighed and analyzed for acidity, conductivity, and selected compounds. There are no national or state standards for acid precipitation, but it is generally desirable for rain to have a relatively neutral pH. However, in many regions of industrialized nations, rainfall absorbs air emissions that make it acidic, with lower pH numbers. Most of the culprits of this acidification are sulfur and nitrogen compounds, and the result is rain that contains excess acidity from sulfuric acid and nitric acid. The excess acidity in the rain causes damage to buildings and vehicles, and can acidify ponds and small lakes to the point of killing off all life in them. Figure 40 shows a diagram of the acid rain deposition process.

Figure 40: Process of Acid Rain Deposition
Figure 41: Acid Rain Monitors Georgia's Acid Rain monitoring network is shown in Figure 42, on the following page.
56 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Chemical Monitoring Activities
Acid Rain Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 42: Acid Rain Monitoring Site Map
57 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

PHOTOCHEMICAL ASSESSMENT MONITORING STATIONS (PAMS)

GENERAL INFORMATION Ozone is the most prevalent photochemical oxidant and an important contributor to smog. The understanding of the chemical processes in ozone formation and the specific understanding of the atmospheric mixture in nonattainment areas nationwide are essential. To better understand the chemical processes and develop a strategy for solving those problems, EPA revised the ambient air quality surveillance regulations. In February 1993, Title 40, Part 58 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR Part 58) was developed to include provisions for enhanced monitoring of ozone, oxides of nitrogen, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), selected carbonyl compounds, and monitoring of meteorological parameters. These chemicals would be monitored at Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS). Stated in Title 40, Part 58 of the Code of Federal Regulation (40 CFR Part 58), the increased monitoring of ozone and its precursors concentrations allows for the characterization of precursor emissions within the area, transport of ozone and its precursors, and the photochemical processes leading to nonattainment. By expanding on the study of ozone formation, PAMS monitoring sites better serve as a means to study trends and spatial and diurnal variability.

According to EPA, PAMS monitoring was to be implemented in cities that were classified as serious, severe, or extreme for ozone nonattainment. The classifications were based on the number of exceedances of the ozone standard, and the severity of those exceedances. Nineteen areas nationwide were required to implement a PAMS network. In the Atlanta metropolitan area, a network of four sites was established beginning in 1993. The monitoring sites were selected depending on the pollutants monitored in relation to the prevailing winds in the area. The Yorkville site serves as a Type 1 site. It is a rural background site, upwind of the city, which aids in determining the role of transport of pollutants into the Atlanta area. The South DeKalb and Tucker sites were the primary and secondary wind directions for an urban core-type site, serving as Type 2 sites. These sites are expected to measure the highest precursor concentrations of NOx and VOCs in the Atlanta area. The Conyers site is the downwind site where titration of the precursors has occurred and the ozone concentrations should be at their highest. The Conyers site serves as a Type 3 site. Until the end of 2006, this was the set up of the PAMS network. At the end of 2006, the Tucker site was shut down. From that point, South DeKalb has served as the urban core-type site. When the PAMS network was originally designed, there was a plan for a Type 4 site, which samples the air once it has returned to background levels far downwind from the metropolitan area. However, when the network was instituted, this type of site was not used. The PAMS network as it was set up for the 2009 monitoring year can be seen in Figure 43.

58 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

PAMS Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 43: PAMS Monitoring Site Map
59 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

Of the fifty-six PAMS compounds monitored, the data consistently shows the same top ten volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for all three sites. These compounds are isoprene, m/p xylene, toluene, propane, ethane, isopentane or isopentane/cyclopentane, n-butane and n-pentane. Propane, ethane, isopentane, n-butane, and n-pentane have a limited reactivity for ozone formation and therefore were the most prevalent of the volatile organic compounds measured. However, when the characterization of the top ten species is based upon contributions to ozone formation potential, the list is slightly different. Isoprene, the tracer for VOC emissions from vegetation, is by far the largest contributor to ozone formation at every site.

Isoprene is a 5 carbon organic compound naturally released in large quantities by conifer trees. These trees are very abundant in the Southeastern United States contributing a significant portion to the overall carbon loading of the atmosphere in this region. Isoprene's chemical structure makes it a highly reactive substance with a short atmospheric lifetime and large ozone forming potential.

Figure 44 compares the seasonal occurrence of isoprene from 2003 to 2009. The figure represents a combination of the 6-day, 24-hour data from the three PAMS sites, and concentrations are given in parts per billion Carbon (ppbC). Evidence of isoprene's natural origin is shown in Figure 44, where the ambient concentration is essentially non-existent from November to May. During 2009, the laboratory facility moved its location, and during this time the PAMS canister data was not processed. Therefore, there is a break in the data from March until June of 2009 in the following two figures.
35

30

25

Concentration (ppbC)

20

15

10

5

0 JanuaMrya-0rc3h-M0Sa3ey-pJ0ute3Nlymo-0bv3eemr-J0ba3enru-0a3Mrya-0rc4h-M0Sa4ey-pJ0ute4Nlymo-0bv4eemr-J0ba4enru-0a4Mrya-0rc5h-M0Sa5ey-pJ0ute5Nlymo-0vb5eemr-J0ba5enru-0a5Mrya-0rc6h-M0Sa6ey-pJ0ute6Nlymo-0vb6eemr-J0ba6enru-0a6Mrya-0rc7h-M0Sa7ey-pJ0ute7Nlymo-0vb7eemr-J0ba7enru-0a7Mrya-0rc8h-M0Sa8ey-pJ0ute8Nlymo-0vb8eemr-J0ba8enru-0a8Mrya-0rc9h-M0Sa9ey-pJ0ute9Nlymo-0vb9eemr-0b9er-09
Date

South DeKalb

Yorkville

Conyers

Figure 44: Isoprene Yearly Profile, 2003-2009
In Figure 44, all three sites exhibit the seasonal cycle of isoprene, with an occasional spike outside the consistent cycle. The site with the highest concentration of isoprene appears to vary year to year. With the Yorkville and Conyers sites being in a rural area, or semi-rural area, one would expect to see higher levels of isoprene. This has been true for most years. As part of the seasonal cycle, in 2003, Conyers had the highest concentration with 16 ppbC, in 2004 Yorkville had the highest with 17 ppbC,
60 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

in 2005, South DeKalb had the highest with 18 ppbC, in 2006, Conyers had the highest concentration with 22 ppbC, and in 2007 Yorkville had the highest concentration with 35 ppbC. With the 2008 data added, Yorkville had the highest concentration again, with a spike outside of the normal season, with a reading of 44 ppbC. In 2009, the South DeKalb site had the highest concentration, with 17 ppbC. The levels of isoprene concentration appear to remain relatively constant over the past seven years, with the exceptional spike.

The anthropogenic compounds detected at all sites with the highest ozone formation potential were toluene, m/p xylene, propylene, ethylene, and isopentane. The sources for these five compounds are varied. All five compounds are emitted by mobile sources, with ethylene being an important tracer for vehicle emissions. Toluene, the most abundant species in urban air, m/p xylene, and isopentane also are emitted by solvent use and refinery activities. Toluene reaches the air from a variety of sources such as combustion of fossil fuels and evaporative emissions. It has a substituted benzene ring possessing modest atmospheric reactivity. This hydrocarbon is in motor vehicle fuel and is also used as a common solvent in many products such as paint. Figure 45 compares the seasonal occurrence of toluene from 2003 to 2009. Again, this figure is a combination of the 6-day, 24-hour data from the three PAMS sites, and concentrations are given in parts per billion Carbon (ppbC).

50

45

40

35

Concentration (ppbC)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0
JanuaMrya-0rc3hM-0Sa3eyp-J0uteN3lymo-0vbe3emr-J0ba3enru-0aM3rya-0rc4hM-0Sa4eyp-J0uteN4lymo-0vbe4emr-J0ba4enru-0aM4rya-0rc5hM-0Sa5eyp-J0uteN5lymo-0vbe5emr-J0ba5enru-0aM5rya-0rc6hM-0Sa6eyp-J0uteN6lymo-0vbe6emr-J0ba6enru-0aM6rya-0rc7hM-0Sa7eyp-J0ute7Nlymo-0vbe7emr-J0ba7enru-0aM7rya-0rc8hM-0Sa8eyp-J0uteN8lymo-0vbe8emr-J0ba8enru-0aM8rya-0rc9hM-0Sa9eyp-J0ute9Nlymo-0vbe9emr-0b9er-09 Date

South DeKalb

Yorkville

Conyers

Figure 45: Toluene Yearly Profile, 2003-2009

As shown in Figure 45, the atmospheric levels of toluene are relatively constant throughout the year, suggesting a steady level of emissions year-round. There is an occasional spike in concentration, but no evident high or low pattern for the past seven years. Overall, the PAMS site that is situated in the urban area (South DeKalb) has slightly higher levels of toluene, while the sites located on the outskirts of the Atlanta metropolitan area (Yorkville and Conyers) show lower levels of toluene. Yorkville appears to have an upward swing throughout 2006, but the levels decline through 2009 for all three sites. As the 2009 data is added, the lower levels of toluene data appear to continue. The highest concentration was found at the South DeKalb site, with 10 ppbC. As data is collected in the future, this

61 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

site can be examined for a possible trend. The jaggedness of these graphs is an artifact of the sampling frequency.

In the following graph, Figure 46, the daily profiles of toluene and isoprene are plotted. This graph uses data gathered in the summer, and shows a constant background of toluene emissions with higher levels resulting from morning and evening rush hour traffic. The graph shows the typical diurnal, or daily, profile for a typical urban area. During morning hours, when the nocturnal inversion has not yet broken, emissions become trapped within the boundary layer, resulting in a temporary increase in atmospheric concentration. Nighttime toluene levels are constant from midnight to 5:00 am. From 6:00 am to 7:00 am, increased vehicular activity releasing emissions into an atmosphere with limited dispersing ability produces an increase in the ambient concentration. This behavior is typical of area source anthropogenic emissions with modest to long atmospheric lifetimes. Isoprene, on the other hand, exhibits very different behavior. At night, emission levels are at zero as photosynthesis ceases. At sunrise (about 6:00 am) concentrations begin to rise and continue to do so throughout the daylight hours. The vertical flux, or mass input per unit area, in the atmosphere of this substance is massive, being only slightly influenced by the enhanced mid-morning mixing. This effect can be seen at 9:00 am when a slight drop in concentration occurs followed by a quick resumption in rise.

Concentration (ppbC)

12.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Time of Day

Toluene

Isoprene

Figure 46: Toluene & Isoprene, Typical Urban Daily Profile

62 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
CARBONYL COMPOUNDS

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

Carbonyl compounds define a large group of substances, which include acetaldehyde, acrolein, and formaldehyde. These compounds can act as precursors to ozone formation. The majority of carbonyl compounds come from vehicle exhaust or the combustion of wood. Depending on the amount inhaled, exposure to these compounds can cause irritation to the eyes, ears, nose, and throat, dizziness, and damage to the lungs. Each of the seven carbonyls compounds that Georgia EPD monitors is discussed further in the following paragraphs. The South DeKalb site is part of both the PAMS network and the National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) network, and samples every six days throughout the year, and every three hours throughout the summer. Savannah, Dawsonville, and Brunswick are part of the Air Toxics Network and sample every twelve days. For a map of monitoring locations, see Figure 47.

Acrolein is primarily used as an intermediate in the manufacture of acrylic acid. It can be formed from the breakdown of certain organic pollutants in outdoor air, from forest fires and wildfires, as well as from vehicle exhaust. It is also found in cigarette smoke.

Acetaldehyde is mainly used as an intermediate in the production of other chemicals. Acetaldehyde is formed as a product of incomplete wood combustion (in fireplaces and woodstoves, forest fires, and wildfires), pulp and paper production, stationary internal combustion engines and turbines, vehicle exhaust, and wastewater processing.

Formaldehyde is used mainly to produce resins used in particleboard products and as an intermediate in the production of other chemicals. The major sources of emissions to the air are forest fires and wildfires, marshes, stationary internal combustion engines and turbines, pulp and paper plants, petroleum refineries, power plants, manufacturing facilities, incinerators, cigarette smoke, and vehicle exhaust.

Acetone is used industrially as a reactant with phenol to produce bisphenol A, which is an important component of polymers. It is used in nail polish removers, superglue removers, and as a drying agent. It is also used to dissolve plastic. Acetone is highly volatile and evaporates quickly. Inhalation of acetone can lead to liver damage.

Benzaldehyde is the simplest form of the aromatic aldehydes. It has an almond scent and is used in the food industry. It is also used as an industrial solvent, and is used in making pharmaceuticals, plastic additives, and aniline dyes. Liquid phase oxidation or chlorination of toluene can form benzaldehyde. In addition, benzaldehyde can be formed from a reaction between benzene and carbon monoxide. The combustion of gasoline, diesel fuel, wood burning, and incinerators emit benzaldehyde into the atmosphere.

Butyraldehyde is used in the manufacture of synthetic resins, solvents, and plasticizers. It is emitted into the air by combustion of gasoline, diesel fuel, and wood.

Propionaldehyde is a highly volatile compound that is produced or used in the making of propionic acid, plastics, rubber chemicals, alkyd resins, and is also used as a disinfectant and preservative. It is released into the atmosphere by combustion of gasoline, diesel fuel, wood, and polyethylene.

63 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

Carbonyls Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 47: Carbonyls Monitoring Site Map
As part of the PAMS network, the South DeKalb site collects 3-hour samples of carbonyls during the summer months (June, July, and August). Samples are collected at hours 6:00, 9:00, 12:00, and 15:00, every three days. The average concentrations (shown in micrograms per cubic meter) of all the 3-hour samples of carbonyls collected during those months for 2005 through 2009 have been
64 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

combined for a given hour and are shown in Figure 48. The early morning ambient concentrations are generally lower for all constituents. Almost all of the concentrations appear to peak at the 12:00 hour for all the carbonyls components except benzaldehyde, which tends to peak at the 15:00 hour. There are a few visible changes when comparing the 2005 data through 2009. All of the concentrations seem to gradually increase year to year from 2005 to 2007, and then decrease with the 2008 concentrations. With the 2009 carbonyl data, the average concentrations have increased. The largest increases are the formaldehyde concentrations, which have more than doubled from the 2008 concentrations. Acetaldehyde, acetone, and formaldehyde continue to be the biggest contributors, and generally follow the same pattern with the averages increasing from the 6:00 to 9:00, and again from the 9:00 to 12:00 hours, then decreasing at the 15:00 hour.

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

6:00 9:0012:0015:00 6:00 9:00 12:00 15:00 6:00 9:00 12:00 15:00 6:00 2005

2006

2007

9:00 12:00 15:00

6:00

9:00 12:00 15:00

2008

2009

ButyrPalrdoephiBoyendnaezldAaecldheeytahdAlyedcdeeethoFynoderemaldehyde

Figure 48: Average South DeKalb 3-Hour Carbonyls, June-August, 2005-2009

65 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

The next two graphs address the carbonyls data without the acrolein compound. Due to the differences in collection and analysis method and the sites included in sampling acrolein, it is discussed separately in later paragraphs. As can be seen in Figure 49, when the average concentration of the remaining carbonyls is compared with the total number of detections at each of the sampling sites, the carbonyl detections and concentrations tend to track each other directly. Because the South DeKalb site collects data every six days with the PAMS network, while Savannah, Dawsonville, and Brunswick collect data every twelve days with the Air Toxics Network (discussed in next section), the detections are shown as a percentage of the overall samples taken. A detection of any given pollutant is counted as any number that is above half the limit of detection. To compare the data collected from 2005 to 2009, there are some noticeable changes. The Dawsonville site had a visible increase in concentration from 2006 to 2007, almost tripling from 7.7 g/m3 to 21.3 g/m3. Then in 2008, the Dawsonville concentration dropped back down to 6.3 g/m3. The Brunswick site showed a lower average concentration from 2005 to 2006 (18.4 g/m3 to 10.5 g/m3), remained the same from 2006 to 2007, and then dropped again from 2007 to 2008 (10.6 g/m3 to 6.6 g/m3). In 2009, the Brunswick site did not collect carbonyl data; therefore the following graphs will not have data for Brunswick. The South DeKalb site has consistently had the highest concentrations of all four sites. Overall, the number of detections above detection limit, and average concentrations were lower in 2008. With the 2009 data, all of the sites showed a slight increase in total average concentrations. The percent detections remained relatively the same from 2008 to 2009 (around 40-50%).

25.0

100.0

Total Average Concentration (ug/m3) Percent Detections

20.0 75.0
15.0 50.0
10.0
25.0 5.0

0.0

0.0

Savannah

Dawsonville

S. DeKalb Name of Site

Brunswick

Concentration

Detects

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 49: Average 24-Hour Carbonyls Concentration and Number of Detects, by Site, 20052009

Figure 50, below shows the six of the seven species in the analyte group according to their statewide annual abundance, based on number of detections and average concentration. A graph of the seventh carbonyl, acrolein, is shown separately, as it is collected with the canister method and involves all the Air Toxics sites (discussed below). A gradient is evident from this graph below, with formaldehyde as the most abundant carbonyl. For the most part, it appears that the number of detections track the average concentration. With the higher average concentration, there are higher percent detections. Acetaldehyde does not follow this pattern, however, having more detections compared to the concentration. For all the compounds, there appears to be a slight decrease from the

66 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

2005 to 2006 data, and then an increase from the 2006 to 2007 data. In 2008, there is a decrease in both concentrations and detections (shown in light green). With the 2009 data (shown in tan), the average concentrations and percent detections maintained about the same levels as the 2008 data. However, as stated earlier, the Brunswick site was not included in these calculations, as data was not collected at this site in 2009. This could be affecting the 2009 values. The proportion of each compound remained the same throughout all five years of data, with the biggest contributors (formaldehyde, acetone, and acetaldehyde) continuing through the years.

25.0

100.0

Total Average Concentration (g/m3) Percentage of Detections

20.0 15.0 10.0
5.0

75.0 50.0 25.0

0.0

0.0

Formaldehyde

Acetaldehyde

Propionaldehyde

Butyraldehyde

Name of Carbonyl Species

Acetone

Benzaldehyde

Concentration

Detects

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 50: Average 24-Hour Carbonyls Concentration vs. Number of Detects, by Species, 20052009
Due to EPA research to improve acrolein sampling and analysis, a new method was developed by EPA and implemented in Georgia in July of 2007. The sampling method uses the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) canister collection method, and the analysis method uses gas chromatograph and mass spectroscopy (GC/MS). This change occurred due to EPA's findings during the new School Air Toxics Monitoring Initiative. For more information on this study, please see EPA's website, http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/airtoxschool.html. Georgia EPD began using the new method for the National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) at the South DeKalb site and at the other 14 Air Toxics sites (discussed in the next section). In previous years, acrolein was sampled, along with the six other carbonyls, with the method of a dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) cartridge and analyzed with high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) at select sites across the state. The DNPH sampling and HPLC analysis method was used on the data that is displayed in the three previous carbonyls graphs. Since acrolein is no longer collected with DNPH and analyzed with HPLC, it is not shown in the previous carbonyls graphs. Before the new methods were used, in 2005, there were a total of 4 detections above detection limit, in 2006 there was zero, and in 2007 there was one detection above the detection limit.
With the canister collection and GC/MS analysis method and additional sampling locations, the number of acrolein detections above detection limit drastically increased in 2007. Several sites had 100% detection, and all sites were above 80% (Figure 51, on the next page) in 2007. There appears to be variation in concentrations across the state. The average concentrations for the six month period

67 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

from July through December in 2007 ranged from 0.399 g/m3 at the Savannah site to 1.04 g/m3 at the Brunswick site (using half the detection limit for non-detected samples). This is over two times the difference between the lowest concentration to the highest. In 2008, there is also a large difference between the lowest and highest concentrations. The Macon site had a concentration of 0.25 g/m3 and the Milledgeville site had 1.46 g/m3, which is almost six times the difference between the two sites. It appears that most sites had a decrease in concentration from 2007, except the Milledgeville site, which had double the concentration in 2008. The percent detections above detection limit decreased from around 80%-100% in 2007 to 52%-100% in 2008. In 2009, there were fewer sites collecting acrolein data. Six sites (shown in yellow in the graph below) collected acrolein data in 2009. There was a slight increase in average concentrations in 2009, but overall levels remained around the 2008 concentrations. The most noticeable increase for the 2009 data was at the South DeKalb site, with a 0.2 g/m3 increase from 2008. This average concentration slightly surpasses the 2007 average level. Acrolein may enter the environment as a result of combustion of trees and other plants, tobacco, gasoline, and oil. Additionally, it has a number of industrial uses as a chemical intermediate (ATSDR, 2005c). The potential for acrolein to cause health effects is not well understood. At very low concentrations, it is an upper respiratory irritant. At very high concentrations it may produce more serious damage to the lining of the upper respiratory tract and lungs (ATSDR, 2005c; U.S. EPA, 2003).

Average Concentration (g/m3) Percent Detections

1.6

1.4

1.2

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 AugustaBrunsGweicnkeral CoffeeColumbuDsawsonvilleGainesville

MacoMnilledgeville

RomeSavannSaohuth DeKalbUtoy Creek ValdWosatraner Robins Yorkville

Site

Concentration

2007

2008

2009

Detects

2007

2008

2009

100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00%

Figure 51: Acrolein Concentrations and Percent Detections, 2007- 2009
MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES A number of methods are used to conduct the PAMS hydrocarbon portion of the analyses. Throughout the year, 24-hour integrated hydrocarbon samples are taken and analyzed in the EPD laboratory for 56 hydrocarbon compounds. A 24-hour integrated carbonyl sample is taken once every sixth day throughout the year and analyzed. During June, July, and August, four integrated three-hour carbonyl samples are taken every third day. All analyses are conducted at the EPD Laboratory.
During June, July, and August, hydrocarbon samples are analyzed hourly on-site using a gas chromatography unit with a Flame Ionization Detector (FID). The gas chromatograph produces analyses of the ambient air for the same 56 hydrocarbons.
The carbonyls are sampled with two types of methods. One type is an absorbent cartridge filled with dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) coated silica that is attached to a pump to allow approximately 180 L

68 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

of air to be sampled. The cartridge is analyzed using High Performance Liquid Chromatography. The other method is the canister sampler that is used for sampling volatile organic compounds. Acrolein is analyzed using this method. A SUMMA polished canister is evacuated to a near-perfect vacuum and attached to a sampler with a pump controlled by a timer. The canister is filled to greater than 10 psig. The canister is analyzed using a gas chromatograph with mass spectroscopy detection (GC/MS). Specific annual summaries for the 2009 PAMS data may be found in Appendix C.

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION There are no specific ambient air standards for the hydrocarbon and aldehyde species measured. PAMS measurements are performed to support the regulatory, analytical, and public health purposes of the ambient air monitoring program. By performing these measurements, GA EPD can better understand the characterization of precursor emissions within the area, transport of ozone and its precursors, and the photochemical processes leading to nonattainment. In addition, by studying local atmospheric chemistry, it improves the ability to control the formation of secondary pollutants like ozone and particulate matter. By making such data available, scientists can study air quality and how it relates to human health. This data can serve to guide policymakers toward making decisions that protect public health.

69 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
AIR TOXICS MONITORING

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

GENERAL INFORMATION The citizens of Georgia have demonstrated a long-term interest in the quality of Georgia's air. Since the 1970's, ambient ozone concentrations have been monitored in several communities throughout the state. As the state's population grew, more compounds have been monitored in ambient air as required by the Federal Clean Air Act. In 1993, the EPD began to monitor a number of compounds that have no established ambient air standard. The monitoring has been conducted under two efforts, the first being the previously discussed Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station (PAMS) project, a federally mandated program for areas in serious, severe, or extreme non-attainment of the ozone standard. The second effort is the EPD-sponsored monitoring activities for ambient concentration of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). That effort was undertaken since monitoring only criteria pollutants would not provide an adequate understanding of the quality of Georgia's air.
In 1994, the EPD conducted an intensive air quality study in Savannah (GADNR, 1996a). Then in 1996, the EPD conducted an intensive study in Glynn County as part of a multimedia event with EPA (GADNR, 1996b). These studies provided detailed pictures of the air quality in the communities, but the studies were not long-term studies and could not provide information on seasonal variation or trends. A reassessment of the air toxic monitoring program occurred, and in 1996 the EPD embarked on establishing a statewide hazardous air pollutant-monitoring network. The network was not designed to monitor any one particular industry, but to provide information concerning trends, seasonal variations, and rural versus urban ambient concentrations of air toxics. In order to evaluate the rural air quality, two background sites were proposed: one in North Georgia and one in South Georgia. The majority of the other sites were located in areas with documented emissions to the atmosphere of HAPs exceeding one million (1,000,000) pounds per year as indicated by the 1991 Toxic Release Inventory (GADNR, 1993).

After six years, by 2002, the Air Toxics Network (ATN) consisted of fourteen sites statewide, including a collocated (where two sets of monitors sample side by side) site at Utoy Creek, monitoring for a common set of toxic compounds. From the list of 188 compounds identified by EPA as being HAPs, the toxic compounds include metals, volatile organic compounds, and semi-volatile organic compounds. In addition, three of the ATN sites (Brunswick, Dawsonville, and Savannah) monitor carbonyl compounds (as seen in the previous section).
In 2003, a National Air Toxics Trends site was added to the network at the South DeKalb site, bringing the total to fifteen air toxics sites. The National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) network was established in 2003 and is intended for long-term operation for the purpose of discerning national trends. The National NATTS Network consists of 23 sites, 18 urban and 7 rural, with two of the urban sites added in 2007. At the South DeKalb site, the same compounds are monitored as at the other air toxics sites, as well as hexavalent chromium, black carbon, and carbonyls.
All of these air toxic pollutants can have negative effects on human health, ranging from causing headaches, nausea, dizziness, cancer, birth defects, problems breathing, and other serious illnesses. These effects can vary depending on frequency, length of time, health of the person that is exposed, along with the toxicity of the compound. These air pollutants also affect the environment. Wildlife experiences symptoms similar to those in humans. Pollutants accumulate in the food chain. Many air pollutants can also be absorbed into waterways and have toxic effects on aquatic wildlife. Some of the substances tend to have only one critical effect, while others may have several. Some of the effects may occur after a short exposure and others appear after long-term exposure or many years after being exposed. Exposure is not only through direct inhalation of the pollutant, but also through the consumption of organisms such as fish that have absorbed the pollutant.

Air toxic compounds are released from many different sources, including mobile sources (such as vehicles), stationary industrial sources, small area sources, indoor sources (such as cleaning

70 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

materials), and other environmental sources (such as wildfires). The lifetime, transportation, and make-up of these pollutants are affected by both weather (rain and wind) and landscape (mountains and valleys). They can be transported far away from the original source, or be caught in rain and brought down to waterways or land. The following section discusses air toxic compounds, possible sources, monitoring techniques, findings for 2009 and a comparison of 2009 data to previous years.

In 2004, the Air Toxics Network underwent changes to the detection limits and reporting limits of the chemicals in this network. Lowering the limit of detection helps the data better represent reality. Instead of only seeing the higher numbers that were detected and using those numbers for average concentrations, one is able to see both sides of the spectrum and have a truer average for each chemical. Also, including the lower concentrations for each chemical allows for a better understanding of what levels can cause chronic health problems. Seeing only the higher levels of concentration, or possibly spikes, only yields data useful for identifying acute health effects. However, with the lower concentration levels included in the data, there can be further assessment of potential chronic health effects. With the lower limits included in the data, one is able to see all possible effects of the chemicals analyzed.

As stated earlier, in 2008, certain samplers within Georgia's ambient air monitoring network were temporarily discontinued. More than half of the Air Toxics Network was included in this process. Six out of the 15 total Air Toxics sites (including one NATTS site) collected data in 2009. The following section will reflect the data collected in 2009, and the other sites are shown for comparison to past data. Refer to Table 2 for complete list of temporarily discontinued samplers.

71 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
METALS

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

The metals subcategory includes antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, and zinc.

Antimony is used as a hardener in lead for storage batteries, in matches, as an alloy in internal combustion engines, and in linotype printing machines. Antimony compounds are used in making materials flame-retardant, and in making glass, ceramic enamels, and paints. Forms of the antimony metal are also used in medicines, and can be found in gasoline and diesel exhaust.

Arsenic occurs naturally at trace levels in soil and water. Most people are not exposed to arsenic through air pollution, but it can be found in food. The arsenic found in air comes mainly from the burning of coal or fuel oil, from metal smelters or iron foundries, and from the burning of waste.

Beryllium is a lightweight and rigid metal and used in watch springs, computer equipment, and used in the production of beryllium-copper as an alloying agent. This strong alloy is used to conduct heat and electricity, in spot welding, electrical contacts, and high-speed aircraft. Until 1949, beryllium was used in fluorescent lighting, until it was determined to have caused berylliosis, a disease that primarily affects the respiratory system and skin. Beryllium in ambient air is mainly a result of the burning of coal or fuel oil.

Cadmium emissions, like beryllium and arsenic, are mainly from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal or oil. The incineration of municipal waste and the operation of zinc, lead, or copper smelters also release cadmium to the air. For nonsmokers, food is generally the largest source of cadmium exposure.

Chromium sources include the combustion of coal and oil, electroplating, vehicle exhaust, iron and steel plants, and metal smelters. The emissions from these sources are a combination of elemental chromium and compounds including chromium ions. The most toxic form is hexavalent chromium.

Cobalt is used as a pigment (blue and green coloring agent), as a drying agent for paints, inks and varnishes, and as a catalyst for the petroleum and chemical industries. It is used as an alloy for parts in turbine aircraft engines, corrosion-resistant alloys, magnets, battery electrodes, and steel-belted tires. Cobalt also has a medicinal use as a radioactive metal in radiotherapy. It is also found in gasoline and diesel exhaust. Cobalt is actually necessary to many forms of life, when ingested through the digestive tract, in small amounts, as a micronutrient. It is a central component of vitamin B-12. As with most micronutrients, however, human activity can cause it to accumulate in unnatural locations or in unnatural concentrations. In those cases, it may be harmful and is considered a pollutant.

Lead is used in the manufacturing of batteries. The largest source of lead in the atmosphere used to be from the combustion of leaded gasoline. With the elimination of lead from gasoline, lead levels in the air have decreased considerably. Other sources of lead emissions include combustion of solid waste, coal, oils, emissions from iron and steel production, and lead smelters. Exposure to lead can also occur from food and soil. Children are at particular risk to lead exposure, because they commonly put hands, toys, and other items in their mouths that may come in contact with lead-containing dust and dirt. Lead-based paints were commonly used for many years. Flaking paint, paint chips, and weathered paint powder may be a major source of lead exposure, particularly for children.

Manganese is a naturally occurring substance found in many types of rock and soil; it is ubiquitous in the environment and found in low levels in water, air, soil, and food. Manganese can also be released into the air by combustion of coal, oil, wood, the operation of iron and steel production plants.

72 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

Nickel is found in the air as a result of oil and coal combustion, residential heating, nickel metal refining, lead smelting, sewage sludge incineration, manufacturing facilities, mobile sources, and other sources.

Selenium is a by-product of mining and smelting sulfide ores, such as silver, copper, and pyrite. It is found in soils, and can also be released by burning coal. Selenium has photovoltaic and photoconductive properties and is therefore used in photocells and solar panels. It is used as a pigment (red coloring agent) in enamels and glass. It is also used as a toner in photographs and in photocopying. Selenium is also found in gasoline and diesel exhaust. Selenium is a micronutrient, needed at very low levels for the health of all living creatures. It is normally absorbed through the digestive tract, though, and is not desirable in the air.

Zinc is found in gasoline and diesel exhaust. It is used to prevent corrosion of galvanized steel. It is also used in diecasting, and as part of battery containers. Zinc has been used as the primary metal in making the U.S. penny since 1982. Zinc compounds are used in making white pigment, sunscreen, deodorant, calamine lotions, and pigments for glow in the dark items. It is also used in the rubber industry. Like selenium, zinc is also a micronutrient needed for the health of living beings when consumed through the digestive system. When found in the air, though, it may be considered a pollutant.

See Figure 52 for a map of monitoring locations for metals.

73 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring
Metals Sites
out of TSP out of PM10
Cr6+ MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 52: Metals Monitoring Site Map
74 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

Percentage Detections

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Augusta BrunswGicekneral Coffee ColumbuDs awsonville Gainesville

MaconMilledgeville

Rome SavannSaohuth DeKalb*Utoy Creek

Valdostaarner Robins W

Yorkville

Site

*From PM10 Fraction

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 53: Percentage of Metals Detections by Site, 2005-2009
Figure 53 shows the percentage of metal species detected above the detection limit at each site for the years 2005 to 2009. Following EPA's guidance, a detection of any given pollutant is counted as any number that is above half the limit of detection. It is important to note that the South DeKalb metals sampler is designed to take the sample from the smaller PM10 fraction of the air, while the other samplers in the network collect samples from all the total suspended particles. Lower limits of detection (LOD) were introduced in September of 2004, therefore to be consistent, the data represented in these figures starts with the 2005 data. There have been only five full years of data collected at the lower limits, therefore true trends may not be discernible at this time. In 2009, six of the fifteen Air Toxics sites collected metals data, shown in red. With Figure 53, the distribution of metals at the various locations across the state can be examined as well as any changes in the past five years. The General Coffee, Dawsonville and Yorkville sites showed a decrease from the 2008 detections. The Macon, Savannah, and South DeKalb sites showed an increase from the 2008 detections. The distribution across the sites is relatively similar. For all the sites, the percent detections remain around 80% of the total samples collected. The variability across the various sampling locations is modest, considering the vast geographic distribution of the sites, and climatological and anthropogenic influences from nearby urban development.

75 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

Figure 54 shows the network's percentage of detections above detection limit and total average concentrations by metallic species at all Air Toxics sites during 2005 through 2009. The detection of any given pollutant is counted as any number that is above half the limit of detection. One point of interest when looking at data is to track the percentage of detections along with the concentration. When examining this aspect, it appears that most metals had several detections, almost consistently up to 100%. Therefore, each metal detection contributes little concentration to the overall total concentration. This does not seem to be the case for zinc. While its detection frequency was almost the same as the other metals, zinc had the highest average concentration for all five years. This would indicate that for each zinc detection, there was a higher concentration of that metal. With the 2009 data, there is a decrease in zinc concentrations, however, there were fewer sites collecting data across the state. Some metals including zinc, nickel, antimony, lead, chromium, and cadmium have been associated with emissions from tires and brake linings. The use of vehicles on Georgia's roads could be a reason for higher levels associated with some of these metals. With the concentrations of zinc being much higher than the other metals, zinc is explored further in Figure 55 (on the following page), which examines the concentrations of zinc by site.

0.45

100.0

Average Concentration (g/m3) Percent Detections

0.4

90.0

0.35

80.0

70.0 0.3
60.0 0.25
50.0 0.2
40.0
0.15 30.0

0.1

20.0

0.05

10.0

0

0.0

Antimony

Arsenic

Berrylium

Cadmium

Chromium

Cobalt

Lead Manganese

Nickel

Selenium

Zinc

Name of Metal

Concentration

Detects

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 54: Average Concentration and Percentage Detections of Metals, by Species, 2005-2009

76 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

With Figure 55, the total average concentrations of zinc are investigated more closely, divided by site, for 2005 through 2009. Zinc can be released into the environment from mining, metal processing, steel production, burning coal, and burning certain wastes. Several sites had a consistent level of zinc through the five years of data, and a few sites even had a decrease in zinc levels. The General Coffee, Columbus, Gainesville, and Valdosta sites, however, had a noticeable increase in zinc levels from 2005 to 2006. With the 2007 and 2008 data, all four of these sites except the Valdosta site showed a slight decrease in concentration from the 2006 zinc levels. Another change to take note of is the increase of zinc at the Brunswick site from 2006 to 2007. In 2007, there was an increase of over two times the 2006 level of zinc at the Brunswick site. In 2008, the zinc levels at the Brunswick site are lower than the 2007 level, but remain higher than the 2006 level. In 2009, the Brunswick site did not collect Air Toxics data.

To look at the overall levels of zinc, the Utoy Creek site has consistently had the highest average concentration from 2005 to 2008, with levels almost nine times as high as the lowest concentrations, which were at the South DeKalb site. As noted earlier, the South DeKalb metals sampler is designed to take the sample from the smaller PM10 fraction of the air, while the other samplers collect samples from all the total suspended particles. This could be a reason for the lower levels at the South DeKalb site compared to the other sites around the state. With the zinc samples taken at the Utoy Creek site, several samples were at least a magnitude higher than most other zinc samples collected at the other sites. The Utoy Creek site is situated at the Utoy Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility. Zinc can be used to help keep galvanized steel from corroding, and is possibly used for this reason on the pipes at the wastewater treatment facility. In addition, there are industries in the area that discharge their wastewater into the Utoy Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility. Also, the sludge that is produced at the wastewater treatment facility is incinerated. These circumstances provide more possibilities for seeing higher levels of zinc at the Utoy Creek site. In 2009, however, the Utoy Creek site did not collect Air Toxics data. To look at the data collected at the other six sites (shown in purple), the Macon site's 2009 average concentration (0.05427 g/m3) more than doubled from the 2008 average concentration (0.02029 g/m3). The five other sites that collected data in 2009 collected concentrations at relatively the same levels as in 2008.
0.100

0.090

Average Concentration (g/m 3)

0.080

0.070

0.060

0.050

0.040

0.030

0.020

0.010

0.000

Augusta BrunswGicekneral Coffee ColumbuDsawsonvilleGainesville

MaconMilledgeville

Rome South

DeKalb*SavannahUtoy

Creek

Valdostaarner Robins W

Yorkville

Site

*From PM10 Fraction

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 55: Average Concentration Comparison of Zinc, by Site, 2005-2009

77 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

With the Macon site's zinc levels more than doubling from 2008 to 2009, the Macon metals data was examined further. The following graph compares the concentrations of all eleven metals collected at the site every twelve days from 2005 through 2009. Obviously, the zinc levels are much higher than the other metals collected, and the 2009 zinc levels show a significant increase. Further investigation is being undertaken to help determine the cause of the increase in zinc concentrations.
0.35

0.30

Concentration (ug/m3)

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

0.00
1/10/230/1005/250/1005/270/1005/290/10051/210/1005/210/1005/230/1006/250/1006/270/1006/290/10061/210/1006/210/1006/230/1007/250/1007/270/1007/290/10071/210/1007/210/1007/230/1008/250/1008/270/1008/290/10081/210/1008/210/1008/230/1009/250/1009/270/1009/290/10091/210/1009/2009 Date

Zinc Cadmium Manganese

Antimony Chromium Nickel

Arsenic Cobalt Selenium

Berrylium Lead

Figure 56: Comparison of Metals Collected at the Macon Site
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM (Cr6)
Hexavalent chromium (chromium in its +6 oxidation state) in the environment is almost always related to human activity. Hexavalent chromium can be released into the atmosphere through the production of stainless steel, chrome plating, coating processes, and painting. It is also found in vehicle engines. The presence of chromium compounds is common at hazardous waste sites. From locations such as these, exposure of populations residing or working nearby can occur through exposure to air containing particulates or mists of chromium compounds. These particles can also find their way into drinking water if soluble forms of chromium leach into groundwater. Human exposure can also occur through skin contact with soil at hazardous waste sites. Hexavalent chromium is absorbed most readily through the lungs or digestive tract. Other forms of the metal, such as chromium in the +3 oxidation state, occur naturally in the environment and are not as efficient at entering the body. In general, hexavalent chromium compounds are more toxic than other chromium compounds. The toxicity of hexavalent chromium is in part due to the generation of free radicals formed when biological systems reduce hexavalent chromium to the +3 oxidation state. Effects in humans exposed occupationally to high levels of chromium or its compounds, primarily hexavalent chromium, by inhalation may include nasal septum ulceration and perforation, and other irritating respiratory effects. Cardiovascular effects, gastrointestinal and hematological effects, liver and kidney effects, and increased risks of death from lung cancer may also result from such exposure. In addition to the respiratory effects, exposure to chromium compounds can be associated with allergic responses (e.g., asthma and dermatitis) in sensitized individuals. Hexavalent chromium dioxide is a tetravalent chromium compound with limited industrial application. It is used to make magnetic tape, as a catalyst in chemical reactions, and in ceramics. Because of its limited industrial uses, the potential for human

78 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

exposure is less for chromium dioxide than for the more industrially important hexavalent chromium and chromium +3 compounds.

This is the fifth year hexavalent chromium has been monitored at the South DeKalb site. The data for 2005 through 2009 is presented in Figure 57. The sampler did not operate the last quarter of 2007 through part of May 2008. Observed concentrations range over an order of magnitude, from 0.01 to 0.3 ng/m3 (nanograms per cubic meter). The graph is shown up to 0.12 ng/m3 in order to observe the lower data points. The observed concentrations are represented with the points, while the black line represents a moving average across the data set. At this point, true trends are hard to define, but the 2009 data shows much lower concentrations than the previous year's concentrations. The highest data point of 0.3 ng/m3 was observed in 2006, while the highest 2009 value was 0.09 ng/m3. As the data set grows, possible seasonal variation in its concentration, the magnitude of its health risk, and which wind directions are most associated with elevated concentrations will be investigated.
0.12

0.10

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0.00
Jan-05Mar-05Jun-05Aug-05Oct-05Dec-05Feb-06Apr-06Jun-06Aug-06Oct-06Dec-06Feb-07Apr-07Jun-07Aug-07Oct-07Dec-07Feb-08Apr-08Jun-08Aug-08Oct-08Dec-08Feb-09Apr-09Jun-09Aug-09Oct-09Dec-09 Date

Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure 57: Hexavalent Chromium at South DeKalb
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (TO-14/15)
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) make up a group of chemicals from various industrial, stationary, and mobile sources. Chlorinated compounds are very stable in the atmosphere, with lifetimes of several years. Dichlorodifluoromethane, a chlorinated compound, was the refrigerant of choice for automotive cooling. This material has not been manufactured since the mid-1990s (cars now use R134a), yet it remains prevalent in the environment. Chloromethane is a volatile industrial solvent. Toluene is a major component of paints, solvents and is also present in gasoline. It reaches the atmosphere by way of evaporative emissions as well as incomplete combustion processes. Benzene is found with burning coal and oil, gasoline service stations, and vehicle emissions. Carbon tetrachloride and the Freons are generally used as refrigerants, industrial solvents, and as fire suppressants (though generally known as Halon in that application). The atmospheric reactivity of aromatic compounds is relatively high, with lifetimes in the weeks to months range.
Figure 58 shows the statewide detection distribution of air toxic (TO-15) type volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from 2005 to 2009 across the state's Air Toxics Network. The detection of any given pollutant is counted as any number that is above half the limit of detection. Again, the South DeKalb site has samples collected every six days, and Gainesville has an extra monthly sampling, compared to the other sites which have samples collected every twelve days. Therefore, the detections are shown in percentage of number of samples taken. The distribution is relatively even across the state, with the more urban or industrial sites near the upper extreme and the more rural

79 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

sites near the lower extreme. In 2008, most sites showed a drop in the percentage of detections above the detection limit. The exceptions to this drop in detections were the Brunswick and Milledgeville sites. When each of these two site's data was examined more closely, the Brunswick site had higher percentages of chlorobenzene, styrene, and toluene detections in 2008. The Milledgeville site had higher percentage detections of cyclohexane and methyl chloroform in 2008. To note, the Augusta site had higher percentages of detections in 2006, which were attributed to methyl chloroform. The predominant volatile organic compounds that are detected above the detection limit are explored further in the following graph, Figure 59.

18.0

16.0

14.0

Precent Detections

12.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0 Augusta BrunswGicekneral Coffee ColumbuDsawsonville Gainesville

MaconMilledgeville Site

Rome SavannSahouth DeKalbUtoy Creek ValdoWstaarner Robins Yorkville

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 58: Total Volatile Organic Compounds Percent Detected per Site, 2005-2009

Percent Detections

40

Total Average Concentration (g/m 3)

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

TrDiciChclhhollrooorrfooludmoiferluothomareontmeheanthemaM(n/FpeerteXhoyynllec1nh1eloT)(mrool/ufpoe-rnDmBei(me1ne,1zteh,1ny-leTbreicnhzleonroe1oe),2-tCh,X4ayy-ncTleelroNni)mheae(emoxtah-DenyliebmoeefntCzheyonlbmeenEpzTtoehenyutrleban)ecdnhzloernoeethyCleanrbeoSntytreetnraechlorCidhelCorholoforormbenzene

Concentration

Detects

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0

Figure 59: Average Concentration and Percent Detection of Volatile Organic Compounds (TO15), Common Compounds, 20052009

80 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

Figure 59 compares the relationship between the concentrations observed and percent detections above detection limit, showing the top sixteen compounds of the VOCs group that were detected for 2005-2009. Although there are 42 species in this analyte group, only a relatively smaller subset is typically detected with any regularity. The percentage of detections was derived using any detection that was above half of the method detection limit. To obtain the average concentration for compounds with at least one detection, the half method detection limit for that compound was substituted for any number lower than that compound's half method detection limit. It should be noted that six of the fifteen ATN sites collected data in 2009, causing the total averages to appear smaller. Chloromethane and trichlorofluoromethane consistently had the same pattern of the highest detection rates, but the total average concentrations were consistently the second and third highest over the five years. This would indicate that the concentrations of chloromethane and trichlorofluoromethane are relatively low per detection. Conversely, toluene had the fourth or fifth highest detection rate, but one of the top average concentrations for 2005 through 2007. This would indicate that each detection of toluene has a relatively high concentration compared to the other VOCs. However, there was an obvious decrease in the overall toluene levels from 2007 to 2008 (33.6 g/m3 to 12.7 g/m3) and again in 2009 (to 3.6 g/m3. Dichlorodifluoromethane had one of the highest levels of concentration and one of the highest detection rates consistently for the five years of data. This would indicate that for each detection the concentration had a consistent, average weight.

180

160

140

Concentration (ppb)

120

100

80

60

40

20

0 Augusta BrunswGicekneral Coffee ColumbusDawsonville Gainesville

MaconMilledgeville

Rome SavannaShouth DeKalbUtoy Creek

Valdostaarner Robins W

Yorkville

Site

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Figure 60: Total Volatile Organic Compound Loading all Species, by Site, 2005-2009

Figure 60 shows the total volatile organic compound concentration, or loading, at each site for 2005 through 2009. This "total loading" measurement is produced by adding all the detected concentrations of all VOCs, even those below half of the detection limit as discussed earlier. It is intended as a surrogate measure showing general trends in overall VOC concentrations. When considering Figure 60, it is important to note that the South DeKalb and Gainesville sites would appear elevated since these two sites have a larger number of scheduled samplings than the rest of the sites in the network. South DeKalb samples on a 6-day schedule, and Gainesville has an additional sample collected per month over the network's regular sample days. VOC levels at sites located close to or within urban centers (South DeKalb, Utoy Creek, and Augusta) generally show higher levels of these pollutants, while sites in smaller communities or rural areas (General Coffee, Dawsonville, and Yorkville) generally show lower levels. It is important to note that the Macon site was shut down for most of

81 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

2008 due to damage to the site, causing that value to appear much lower than the other Air Toxics sites. In looking at trends in the data, there seems to be some fluctuation of VOCs concentrations at most sites, and a slight decrease in 2008. Then, at most sites that collected samples in 2009, there was a slight increase in total VOC concentrations. As more data is collected, possible VOCs trends will be examined.

For a map of VOC and SVOC monitoring locations, see Figure 61 on the next page.

82 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring
VOC/SVOC Site
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 61: VOC and SVOC Monitoring Site Map
83 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), also called semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOC) are chemical compounds that consist of fused, six-carbon aromatic rings. They are formed by incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as wood, coal, diesel fuel, fat or tobacco. Over 100 different chemicals are comprised within this designation. Many of them are known or suspected carcinogens. Some environmental facts about this class of compounds are listed below.

PAHs enter the air mostly as releases from volcanoes, forest fires, burning coal, and automobile exhaust.
PAHs can occur in air attached to dust particles. Some PAH particles can readily evaporate into the air from soil or surface waters. PAHs can break down by reacting with sunlight and other chemicals in the air over a period of
days to weeks. PAHs can enter water through discharges from industrial and wastewater treatment plants. Most PAHs do not dissolve easily in water. They stick to solid particles and settle to the
bottoms of lakes or rivers. Microorganisms can break down PAHs in the soil or water after a period of weeks to months. In soils, PAHs are most likely to stick tightly to particles. Certain PAHs move through soil to
contaminate groundwater. PAH content of plants and animals may be much higher than the PAH content of the soil or
water in which they live.

For a map of SVOC monitoring locations, see Figure 61.

Percentage Detections

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Augusta BrunswiGckeneral Coffee Columbus Dawsonville Gainesville
2005

MaconMilledgeville Site
2006 2007

Rome Savannah Utoy Creek 2008 2009

ValdosWtaarner Robins

Yorkville

Figure 62: Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds Percentage of Detections Per Site, 2005-2009
Figure 62 displays the percentage of detections according to site for 2005 through 2009 for all semivolatile organic compounds combined in the Air Toxics Network, except the South DeKalb site (discussed below). Detections were counted as any number that was above half of the method detection limit. As can be seen from this graph, the semi-volatile organic compounds are detected much less frequently than the other groups of compounds in the Air Toxics Network. Historically, the highest number of detects occurred in 2005, with 36 detects over the 14 sites (shown in green). That changed in 2009 when the five sites that collected semi-VOC samples had a total of 102 detections (shown in purple). This is still a relatively low number of detections, though a noteworthy increase. In

84 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

the fourth quarter of 2009, the semi-VOCs laboratory analysis method changed from a gas chromatograph with Electron Capture Detector to a gas chromatograph. The gas chromatograph method is used by the EPA contractor to analyze samples from the South DeKalb site. The following graph was produced with this fourth quarter data and includes the South DeKalb site for comparison. The seventeen semi-VOCs that were collected at all sites were compared in this graph. Even though the same laboratory analysis method was used for this analysis, the South DeKalb data shows a significantly higher percentage of detections. As data is collected in the future, the relationship between these sites will continue to be tracked. In addition, the data will be observed for possible continuing increase in detections with the gas chromatograph laboratory analysis method.

100

Percentage Detections

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
0 General Coffee

Daw sonville

Macon

Savannah

South DeKalb

Yorkville

Site

Figure 63: Comparison of Fourth Quarter 2009 Semi-VOCs Detects
Figure 64, on the following page, shows the percentage of detections for each semi-volatile organic compound compared to the total average concentration of those compounds across the statewide network of sites from 2005 through 2009. The y-axis is formatted in order to show the smaller concentrations and detections in more detail. The percentage detections were derived using any detection that was above half of the method detection limit. To obtain the average concentration for compounds with at least one detection, the half method detection limit for that compound was substituted for any number lower than that compound's half method detection limit. Even with the few detections and low concentrations, the relationship between these two measures can still be examined. With the 2005 data (shown in green), the compound with the highest number of detections was benzo(g,h,i)perylene, but this compound had one of the lowest detectable concentrations of the group. This would show that each detection of benzo(g,h,i)perylene had a low concentration. The compound with the highest average concentration was phenanthrene, but this compound had one of the lowest detection rates. In 2006 (shown in dark blue), phenanthrene again had the highest average concentration, though at about half the 2005 concentration level, and had the fewest number of detections of the compounds detected. This would mean that for each detection of phenanthrene, there was a higher concentration. In 2007, no detections occurred for phenanthrene above the detection limit for these sites. Overall, detections ceased for all but one of the semi-volatile compounds, leaving fluoranthene (shown in yellow) as the only compound that was found to be present above the detection limit at these sites in 2007. In 2008 (shown in light blue), the only compound detected above the detection limit was indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, with an average concentration of 0.0008 g/m3. As discussed above, the 2009 data (shown in purple) had the highest number of detections since the 2005 data. There were detections of approximately half of the compounds in 2009. The naphthalene compound had the highest total average concentration with 0.17571 g/m3.

85 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

Total Average Concentration (g/m3) Percentage Detections

0.1

25.0

0.09

0.08

20.0

0.07

0.06

15.0

0.05

0.04

10.0

0.03

0.02

5.0

0.01

0

0.0

Pyrene FluoPrehneenanthrFelnueorantheNnaephthalenAenthraAcceenBneeanpzhoth(aeB)naeenntzhora(bc)efBlnueeonrzaon(tkh)eflnueoranBtehneznBoee(en)zpoy(rge,hn,ei)peBryeInlnedzneoen(ao)(p1y,2re,3n-ecd)pyrene

Name of Compound

Concentration

Detects

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 64: Total Average Concentration and Percentage Detections of Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds by Compound, 2005-2009
In April of 2007, the South DeKalb site had semi-volatile organic compounds added to its list of compounds to sample. Instead of the EPD laboratory analyzing this data as it does with the other Air Toxics sites, the South DeKalb site is part of the National Air Toxics Trends Sites (NATTS) Network, which uses the Eastern Research Group (ERG) to analyze this data. ERG is a multidisciplinary consulting firm, and in the laboratory at ERG, gas chromatography is used to separate and measure a number of pollutants detected in the troposphere. Until the fourth quarter of 2009, this differed drastically from the EPD's laboratory methods, in which liquid chromatography was instead used to sort out the compounds of interest. As a result of the dilution of pollutants necessary for liquid chromatography, several of the compounds analyzed by the ERG laboratory were not detected by the EPD laboratory. Furthermore, the detection limits used varied quite a bit from one laboratory medium to the other. Since the data was analyzed differently until the end of 2009, the South DeKalb data is shown separately.
Figure 65, below, is produced from the results of semi-volatile organic compounds at the South DeKalb monitor that were analyzed at ERG. The average concentrations and number of detections are shown. The detections were derived using any detection that was above half of the method detection limit. The concentrations of naphthalene in 2007, 2008, and 2009 were 0.083 g/m3, 0.085 g/m3, and 0.097 g/m3, respectively. These concentrations are an order of magnitude higher than the next highest concentrations of around 0.004 g/m3 for phenanthrene. Therefore, the y-axis is formatted in order to show the other concentrations and detections in more detail. In general, there has not been much change in the data over the last three years. A few of the compounds with lower average concentrations show a slight increase in the number of detections (mainly on the right half of the graph, shown with teal dashes). Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons such as these are found in the air from the burning of coal, oil, gas, and garbage, and are found in dyes, cigarette smoke, coal tar, plastics, and pesticides. They have been found to bother the skin and mucous membranes and have even been linked to cancer. According to ERG's results, naphthalene appears to be the largest threat of the semi-volatile organic compounds, and more than half the compounds have averages less than 0.0005 g/m3.

86 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

Average Concentration (g/m 3) Detections

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

0.005

70

0.0045 60
0.004

0.0035

50

0.003

40

0.0025

0.002

30

0.0015

20

0.001 10
0.0005

0

0

NaphAthcaelneanApechethneanpehthylenFeluPohreennaentFhrlueonreanthAenntheracenCBehernyszeon(ae)pyrenePyreneCRye9ct-elfolnupeoernetnao(cnde)pyreCneoroBneennzPeoBe(arey)naleznnoteh(bBra)efclnuezonorea(kn)tfhlueonDBreaiebnnethznoez(one(e)apB,hyer)eannnzIeotnh(drgea,nhceo,i)n(p1ee,2r,y3le-cnde)pyrene

Compound

Concentration

Detects

2007 2008 2009 2007 2008

2009

Figure 65: Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds at South DeKalb, 2007-2009
As part of the NATTS program, the South DeKalb site collects black carbon data. One source of black carbon is diesel exhaust. To give a comparison of a few other compounds that are also commonly seen at the South DeKalb site, correlations were performed and a correlation matrix was produced with the 2009 data. With this, an attempt was made to see what other compounds are found along with black carbon. The resulting data can be seen in Figure 66, below. The correlation values are given, as well as colors to show how well the compounds correlated. The red shows a perfect positive correlation of 1.0, while dark blue shows a perfect negative correlation of 1.0. The color scale is shown to the right of the correlation matrix. Data was compared when a sample day had a pair of data for both compounds. As can be seen in the correlation matrix, the toluene and m/p-xylene data have the strongest relationship, with 0.978. In 2008, the highest correlation was also between m/p-xylene and toluene, with 0.903, suggesting that the two compounds are consistently connected, and this relationship continues to strengthen in its common source. The black carbon data correlated well with the toluene and m/p-xylene data, with a value of 0.861 for each pairing. This could indicate that these compounds could be found in diesel exhaust, or they could be found in conjunction with diesel exhaust or other vehicle exhaust. The benzene data correlated well with toluene and m/p xylene with 0.883 and 0.870, respectively. Benzene's correlation with the black carbon data is a relatively strong relationship at 0.778, yet it is slightly weaker than black carbon's relationship with toluene and m/p xylene. This may suggest that while black carbon shares sources with benzene, these sources are less common and widespread as the sources shared by black carbon, toluene, and m/p xylene. Two other noteworthy correlations are black carbon with naphthalene and PM2.5 data, which were 0.758 and 0.602, respectively. The black carbon data had the highest negative relationship to the formaldehyde data, with a correlation of 0.034. Chromium +6 and zinc have the overall highest negative relationship, with a correlation of 0.230. The majority of correlations fall within the range of 0.200 and 0.599.

87 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

Black Form- NaphCarbon aldehyde thalene

Acrolein

Zinc

Benzene

Toluene

Trichlorofluoro-
methane

DichloroDifluoromethane

Chloromethane

M/P Xylene

Chrome +6

Lead

PM 2.5

Black Carbon

1.000

-0.034

0.758

0.432

0.442

0.778

0.861

0.280

0.156

0.039

0.861

0.048

0.453

0.602

Formaldehyde

-0.034

1.000

-0.010

0.186

-0.070 -0.152 -0.015

0.209

0.024

-0.047

0.000

-0.067 -0.136 -0.012

Naphthalene

0.758

-0.010

1.000

0.458

0.441

0.670

0.738

0.344

0.051 -0.144 0.758

0.037

0.401

0.434

Acrolein 0.432 0.186 0.458 1.000 0.223 0.333 0.445 0.806 0.564 0.526 0.488 -0.003 0.093 0.058

Zinc 0.442 -0.070 0.441 0.223 1.000 0.445 0.443 0.207 0.072 -0.027 0.452 -0.230 0.460 0.204

Benzene 0.778 -0.152 0.670 0.333 0.445 1.000 0.883 0.213 0.303 -0.107 0.870 -0.006 0.537 0.437

Toluene 0.861 -0.015 0.738 0.445 0.443 0.883 1.000 0.323 0.222 -0.059 0.978 -0.076 0.375 0.482

TrichloroFluoro- 0.280 methane
DichloroDifluoro- 0.156 methane

Chloromethane

0.039

0.209 0.344 0.024 0.051 -0.047 -0.144

0.806 0.564 0.526

0.207 0.213 0.323 0.072 0.303 0.222 -0.027 -0.107 -0.059

1.000 0.724 0.500

0.724 1.000 0.389

0.500 0.389 1.000

0.350 0.239 -0.032

0.003 0.191 0.076

-0.026 -0.056 -0.006 -0.045 -0.215 0.002

M/P Xylene

0.861

0.000

0.758

0.488

0.452

0.870

0.978

0.350

0.239 -0.032 1.000 -0.099 0.368

0.461

Chrome +6

0.048

-0.067

0.037

-0.003 -0.230 -0.006 -0.076

0.003

0.191

0.076

-0.099

1.000

0.126

0.186

1.000 0.800 0.600 0.400 0.200 0.000 -0.200 0.400 -0.600 -0.800 -1.000

Lead 0.453 -0.136 0.401 0.093 0.460 0.537 0.375 -0.026 -0.006 -0.215 0.368 0.126 1.000 0.395

PM 2.5 0.602 -0.012 0.434 0.058 0.204 0.437 0.482 -0.056 -0.045 0.002 0.461 0.186 0.395 1.000

Figure 66: Correlation Matrix of Common Compounds Found at South DeKalb, 2009
MONITORING TECHNIQUES In 2009 air toxics samples were collected from a total of six sites, including a NATTS site, and two background (rural) sites.
The compounds sampled at the ATN sites are shown in Appendix D. The list was derived from the 188 compounds EPA has designated as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS). Many of the HAPS do not have standardized ambient air sampling and analytical methods. In order to collect the compounds of interest for the Georgia network, three types of samplers are used at all locations: the HIVOL, PUF, and canister. Also, carbonyls are monitored at three of the air toxics sites (as well as one PAMS site).
This equipment samples for metals, semi-volatile organic compounds, and volatile organic compounds once every twelve days following a pre-established schedule that corresponds to a nationwide sampling schedule. The South DeKalb site collects samples every six days, as part of the National Air Toxics Trends (NATTS) network. On the run day, the sampler runs midnight to midnight and takes a 24-hour integrated sample.
88 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

The HIVOL sampler used for sampling metals is a timed sampler. The sampler is calibrated to collect 1300 to 2000 liters of air per minute. Particulate material is trapped on an 8.5" x 11" quartz fiber filter. The particulates include dust, pollen, diesel fuel by-products, particulate metal, etc. The filters are preweighed at a remote laboratory prior to use and weighed again after sampling. The filters are subjected to a chemical digestion process and are analyzed on an inductively coupled plasma spectrometer.

The PUF (polyurethane foam) sampler used for sampling semi-volatile organic compounds is a timed sampler. The sampler is calibrated to collect 198 to 242 liters (L) of air per minute. A multi-layer cartridge is prepared which collects both the particulate fraction and the volatile fraction of this group of compounds. The plug, filter and absorbent are extracted at a remote laboratory and until the fourth quarter were analyzed using a gas chromatograph with Electron Capture Detector. As of the fourth quarter of 2009, the labortory analysis method changed to gas chromatography.
The canister sampler used for sampling volatile organic compounds is a timed sampler. A SUMMA polished canister is evacuated to a near-perfect vacuum and attached to a sampler with a pump controlled by a timer. The canister is filled to greater than 10 psig. The canister is analyzed using a gas chromatograph with mass spectroscopy detection (GC/MS).

The carbonyls are sampled with two types of methods. One type is an absorbent cartridge filled with dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) coated silica that is attached to a pump to allow approximately 180 L of air to be sampled. The cartridge is analyzed using High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). A 24-hour integrated carbonyl sample is taken every 6 days throughout the year. The other method used for collecting carbonyls is the cansiter sampler that is used for sampling volatile organic compounds. Acrolein is a carbonyl compound that is collected using the canister method, described above, and analyzed with the GC/MS method.

As part of the National Air Toxics Trends network, South DeKalb monitors the above listed compounds, as well as hexavalent chromium and black carbon. In addition, the South DeKalb metals are sampled on a PM10 sampler.

The hexavalent chromium sampler used for sampling Cr+6 is a timed sampler. Samples are collected at a flow rate of 15 liters of air per minute using a 37 mm diameter substrate of bicarbonate impregnated cellulose. The filter is controlled by an auto cover which remains closed until sampling, and fully exposes the filter when the sampler is running. The sample is analyzed using the modified California Air Resources Board (CARB) SOP 039. The filters are extracted in deionized water via sonication, which is analzyed by ion chromatography. Cr+6 is separated through a column, forming a complex with diphenylcarbohydrazide. Dianex Peaknet chromatography software is used to determine the peak analysis.

The aethalometer is a continuous sampler used for sampling black and organic carbon. Operating at 60 watts / 110V AC, the aethalometer uses quartz tape to perform an optical analysis to determine the concentration of carbon particles passing through an air stream. The analysis is conducted using spectrophotometry, measuring the wavelength of the light energy absorbed and plotting the results on the site computer.

The PM10 sampler used for sampling toxic metal particles less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter is a timed sampler. Collecting 1020 to 1240 liters of air per minute, the sampler uses a 8.5" x 11" quartz glass fiber filter to trap particulate matter. The sample is analyzed using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). In ICP-MS, an argon gas is used to atomize and ionize the elements in a sample. The resulting ions are used to identify the isotopes of the elements and a mass spectrum is used to identify the element proportional to a specific peak formed from an isotope.

89 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Air Toxics Monitoring

ATTAINMENT DESIGNATION Currently, there are no attainment standards for the air toxics compounds, with the exception of lead, which has its designation as a criteria pollutant. Air toxics measurements are performed to support the regulatory, analytical, and public health purposes of the program. While it is understood that these compounds are toxic, it is not well understood what airborne concentrations of each compound may be harmful. By collecting data about their current concentrations, researchers can later compare GA EPD's data with health data to determine what levels of each compound may be safe.

90 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

METEOROLOGICAL REPORT

STATE CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY OF 2009

According to the National Weather Service office in Peachtree City, Georgia, 2009 was a year of weather anomalies for North and Central Georgia. Meteorological extremes ranged from large hail produced in super cells during a severe weather outbreak in mid-February to a record 100-year flood event on the Chattahoochee River in mid-late September.

After three consecutive years of drought, conditions in January hinted that more of the same was in store for the dry region (Table 4 and Table 5). Rainfall deficits ranged from -1.99 inches in Athens to 3.66 inches in Macon. In February, the severe weather season began early, with two severe thunderstorm events occurring on the 18th and 27-28th. However, precipitation totals were again below average in Athens (-0.72"), Atlanta (-0.98"), and Macon (-2.23"). Nevertheless, record rainfall in Columbus on the last day of the month, along with the fifth wettest February 28th in Atlanta, established a drought-reversing trend for the next several months. The first heavy snowfall in seven years occurred in March, with a daily and monthly record set in Columbus of 6.5". Surprisingly, this heavy snow event stretched from Columbus to Athens and was accompanied by thunderstorms through its duration. Two more heavy precipitation events during mid and late March contributed to monthly surpluses in all four cities. With all the cloud cover and precipitation, temperatures averaged near or within a degree above normal for all four locations. Plentiful rainfall continued over the next two months, as April totals exceeded the average in all four cities. Ample precipitation continued in May, as Atlanta, Columbus, and Macon all posted wetter than average totals.

Hot summertime conditions occurred in June, as all four cities recorded average monthly temperatures of more than two degrees above normal. High temperatures reached 90 degrees (F) or above on 17 to 23 days among the four locations. Uncharacteristically, this hot weather led to June being the warmest summer month in all four locations. During this heat wave, precipitation became quite scarce. Atlanta recorded only 0.02 inches of rainfall during the final eighteen days of the month. The drier than normal conditions continued through July as all four locations posted rainfall deficits. An excess of rainfall returned to parts of north and central Georgia in August, due in part to the remnants of Tropical Storm Claudette on the 16-17th.

91 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Atlanta 1971-2000

J

F

M

A

M

J

J

A

S

O

N

D

Yearly

+/-

2009 2.88 3.70 7.13

5.18

4.54

2.34

5.02

6.14

8.94

8.71

5.75

9.10

+19.23

30 yr avg

5.0 4.68 5.38

3.62

3.95

3.63

5.12

3.67

4.09

3.11

4.10

3.82

Athens 1971-2000

2009 2.70 3.67 7.05

4.47

3.58

1.66

1.33

2.70

9.86

9.14

5.17

8.87 +12.37

30 yr avg

4.6 4.39 4.99

3.35

3.86

3.94

4.41

3.78

3.53

3.47

3.71

3.71

Macon 1971-2000

2009 1.34 2.32 7.78

5.66

5.73

2.82

2.19

3.83 10.68 6.37

3.89

8.98 +16.54

30 yr avg

5.0 4.55 4.90

3.14

2.98

3.54

4.32

3.79

3.26

2.37

3.22

3.93

Columbus
1971-2000

2009
30 yr avg

2.49 5.44 12.70 6.53

5.10

3.79

3.83

8.26

5.30

6.39

4.7

4.48 5.75

3.84

3.62

3.51

5.04

3.78

3.07

2.33

(Data compiled by National Weather Service Office in Peachtree City)

6.75 3.97

13.62 4.40

+31.63

Table 4: Temperature and Rainfall Statistics for Select Georgia Cities in 2009

City
Atlanta Athens Macon Columbus

Mean Temperature
for 2009

Normal Mean Temperature

Mean Temperature
Departure from Normal

Total Normal Rainfall Total for 2009 Rainfall

62.1

62.1

0.0

69.43" 50.20"

62.3

61.5

+0.8

60.20" 47.83"

65.3

63.7

+1.6

61.54" 45.00"

64.8

65.1

-0.3

80.20" 48.57"

(Data compiled by National Weather Service Office in Peachtree City)

Total Rainfall Departure
from Normal
+19.23"
+12.37"
+16.54"
+31.63"

Table 5: Comparison of Monthly Rainfall Amounts for 2009 and the 30 Year Average for Select Cities in Georgia

Extreme weather occurrences for 2009 continued during September. A persistent low-pressure system located over the lower Mississippi Valley brought a week with prolonged periods of heavy rain (Figure 67). This resulted in an 8-day period from the 14th through the 22nd, which produced many rainfall totals in excess of ten inches across north and central GA, including 18.62 inches in Tucker (Table 6, Figure 68). The epic flood which resulted, set or broke several high water marks in the local watersheds that dated back to 1919. This historic event saw the Sweetwater Creek Basin rise to the 500-year flood level.

92 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Figure 67: NCEP/NCAR/GPCC Composite Mean Accumulated Precipitation for September 2009

Monitoring Site
Augusta Columbus Conyers South DeKalb
Tucker Yorkville

Maximum Daily
Total [In]
1.10 (18th) 0.86 (19th) 2.77 (21st) 2.13 (21st) 7.55 (21st) 1.24 (20th)

Three Day Total September 19-21
[In] 0.41 0.96 5.16 4.98 10.99 3.58

Storm Total September 14-22
[In] 1.77 1.87 7.34 8.21 18.62 4.09

Table 6: Rainfall Accumulations from the EPD Meteorological Network for 14-22 September 2009

93 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Figure 68: Southeast River Forecast Center 24 hour Multisensor Rainfall Estimates for 8AM September 20 to 8AM September 21, 2009
A strengthening El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) warm episode in the tropical Pacific shifted storm track position, which continued the very wet pattern across the southeastern U.S. in October. A series of four potent storm systems brought record rainfall again to north and central Georgia. A midOctober polar outbreak contributed to cooler than normal temperatures.
Although not as wet as the previous two months, November also received well above average rainfall. One storm in particular resulting from the remnants of Tropical Storm Ida on the 9th-11th produced most of the monthly precipitation. As the El Nino continued to strengthen, a persistent cycle of low pressure systems once again became established in December. Four of these systems originating along the Texas Gulf coast, then tracking east-northeastward produced significant precipitation across northern and central Georgia in the range of 1 to 4 inches. All four cities had above normal rainfall for the year, with Columbus setting a record with 80.20". Atlanta had its second wettest year on record and Macon came in third wettest since records were kept.
Seasonal composite means across the southeast for 2009 are seen in Figure 69 through Figure 72. The images depict NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data for the following surface meteorological parameters: air temperature, relative humidity, accumulated precipitation, wind speed and wind direction. The averages are in agreement with the climatological assessment for 2009 from the National Weather Service at Peachtree City.
94 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Figure 69: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c) Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for December 2008- February 2009

Figure 70: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c) Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for March-May 2009
95 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Figure 71: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c) Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for June-August 2009

Figure 72: NCEP/NCAR Composite Means for Surface a) Air Temperature, b) Relative Humidity, c) Accumulated Precipitation, and d) Wind Speed and Direction for SeptemberNovember 2009
96 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

SUMMARY OF METEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS FOR 2009

A complete suite of meteorological instrumentation is used to characterize meteorological conditions around metropolitan Atlanta. The basic surface meteorological parameters measured at the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Sites (PAMS) are shown in Table 7. The PAMS sites are Conyers, South DeKalb, Tucker, and Yorkville. South DeKalb is considered an NCORE and a NATTS site as well. The Tucker site primarily records meteorological data for possible future modeling or comparative purposes. All PAMS sensors measure hourly-averaged scalar wind speed and vectoraveraged wind direction at the 10-meter level, and hourly-averaged surface temperature, relative humidity and barometric pressure at the 2-meter level. Several sites include instruments to record hourly-averaged precipitation, global solar radiation and total ultraviolet radiation. The standard deviation of the wind direction is also computed at the NCORE site (South DeKalb). Other surface meteorological measurements were made across the state in 2009 and are also shown in Table 7. All the meteorological sites are mapped in Figure 73. Upper air meteorological observations (primarily wind speed and direction) are made at Peachtree City using a PA5-LR SODAR system.

97 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Statewide Monitoring
Sites

Wind Speed (m/s)

Wind Direction
(deg)

Sigth (deg)

Relative Humidity
(%)

Solar Radiation
(W/m2)

Total Ultraviolet Radiation
(W/m2)

Barometric Pressure
(mb)

Precip. (in)

Temp. (C)

Conyers

a

a

a

a

a

South Dekalb a

a

a

a

Tucker

a

a

a

a

a

Yorkville

a

a

a

a

a

Fort

a

a

a

Mountain

Brunswick

a

a

Confederate

a

a

Avenue

Dawsonville

a

a

Savannah

a

a

E. President

Macon SE

a

a

Douglasville

a

a

Fayetteville*

a

a

Newnan

a

a

Savannah

a

a

L&A

Augusta

a

a

a

Macon West* a

a

a

Columbus

a

a

a

Evans

a

a

a

Cartersville

a

a

*Temporarily discontinued

Table 7: Meteorological Parameters Measured, 2009

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

98 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report
Meteorological Sites
MSAs Shown as Solid Colors

Figure 73: Meteorological Site Map
99 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

OZONE AND PM2.5 FORECASTING AND DATA ANALYSIS

Each day a team of meteorologists from Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division (EPD) and Georgia Tech scientists meet at 1:30 EST to issue an air quality forecast for the Atlanta, Macon, Columbus, and Augusta metropolitan areas. The air quality forecast is then relayed to the Clean Air Campaign and EPA, which disseminate the forecast to important national outlets, such as NWS, USA Today, and The Weather Channel. The forecasts are determined based upon several meteorological factors, such as the synoptic regime, surface and upper air meteorology, satellite imagery, as well as the ambient concentration of pollutant. Multiple 2D and 3D forecasting models generated by Georgia Tech are utilized in addition to National Weather Service (NWS) synoptic forecasting models. These synoptic models consist of the North American Model (NAM/WRF), the Global Forecasting System (GFS), the European, and the Canadian models to name a few.

Metropolitan Atlanta had 14 ozone violations during ozone season (May through September) in 2009, while Macon had 2 ozone violations, and Augusta did not exceed the ozone standard at all. This was considered to be a below average ozone season for Metro Atlanta. Monthly time series plots of ozone predictions and observations for Metro Atlanta during the 2009 ozone season are shown in Figure 74 and Figure 75. The dark squares shown in the figure indicate days where an ozone violation occurred, but was not forecasted, or did not occur and was forecasted. Overall forecasting performance for the team for the 2009 ozone season was 91.5% on an event to a non-event basis (binary error) and 73.9% on an AQI basis (color category). Most violations (8 out of the 14) occurred during June, with the highest concentration days occurring during a heat wave in late June. During this period, the Eastern-central part of the United States was dominated by high pressure, which provided a stable air mass with clear skies and low moisture, leading to the breakout of ozone violations. As shown in the figure, there were no major ozone episodes during May, August, or September for Metropolitan Atlanta. This could partly be attributed to the fact that return flow from the Gulf of Mexico allowed for moist, unstable conditions for much of the summer season. The synoptic regime for summer 2009 was somewhat abnormal. The Atlantic basin had only 11 named tropical systems, so tropical activity influencing the SE U.S. was not a major factor in keeping ozone levels from being elevated for extended periods. Parts of Metropolitan Atlanta did experience major flash flooding during the month of September, as reflected in the figure by the extended period of low ozone during the middle of the month, due to training of convective cells and high Gulf moisture fetch across the area.

100 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Maximun O concentrations (ppbv) 3

O 3 observed O 3 p re d icte d

2009

80

70

60

50

40

30

MAY

20

100

90

JUN

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

100

90

JUL

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

1

3

5

7

9

11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31

D ay of th e m on th

(Data compiled by Dr. Carlos Cardelino of Georgia Tech)

Figure 74: Monthly Time Series of Ozone Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 Ozone Season (May-July)
O3 observed O3 predicted

2009
100

80

60

40

AUG

20

Maximun 8-hrs O3 concentrations (ppbv)

80
60
40
SEP
20
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 Day of the month
(Data compiled by Dr. Carlos Cardelino of Georgia Tech)
Figure 75: Monthly Time Series of Ozone Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 Ozone Season (August-September)
Overall performance for PM2.5 forecasting in 2009 for Metro Atlanta was 79.2% on an AQI basis. A total of four PM2.5 violations were observed in Metropolitan Atlanta in 2009. Athens recorded one PM2.5 violation, Macon had two violations, north Georgia mountains had one violation, while south central Georgia had five PM2.5 violations in 2009. Monthly time series plots of PM2.5 predictions and observations for Metropolitan Atlanta during 2009 (24-hour averages) are shown below in Figure 76

101 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

through Figure 79. Some seasonal variability in PM2.5 does exist, as shown in the figure; however, June, July and September show periods of elevated PM2.5, relative to other seasons. This enhancement can most likely be attributed to limited early morning mixing depth, and to the moist and unstable conditions (along with isolated convection) in the tropical air mass residing over the southeast. The elevated readings shown in the winter month of February can partly be attributed to local and regional fire activity.

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

JANUARY 2009 25

20

15

10

5

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

FEBRUARY 2009 40

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

30

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

MARCH 2009

30

Observed

Predicted

20

PM 2.5 (ug/m3)

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

(Data compiled by Dr. Carlos Cardelino of Georgia Tech)

Figure 76: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 (January-March)
APRIL 2009 30

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

MAY 2009 30

Observed

20

Predicted

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

10

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

JUNE 2009 50

40

30

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

(Data compiled by Dr. Carlos Cardelino of Georgia Tech)

Figure 77: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2008 (April-June)

102 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

PM 2.5 (ug/m 3)

PM 2.5 (ug/m 3)

JULY 2009 40

30

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

AUGUST 2009 40

30

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

SEPTEMBER 2009 50
Observed 40
Predicted
30

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

(Data compiled by Dr. Carlos Cardelino of Georgia Tech)

PM 2.5 (ug/m 3)

Figure 78: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2009 (July-September)

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

OCTOBER 2009 30

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

NOVEMBER 2009 30

20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

DECEMBER 2009 30
Observed
Predicted 20

10

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

(Data compiled by Dr. Carlos Cardelino of Georgia Tech)

PM2.5 (ug/m3)

Figure 79: Monthly Times Series Plots of PM2.5 Predictions and Observations for Metro Atlanta During 2009 (October-December)

103 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

SELECT METEOROLOGICAL AND AIR QUALITY STUDIES FOR 2009

Several smoke/fire events affected the southeast in 2009, elevating the PM2.5 around the Atlanta area. One such event took place on June 10th with visible satellite imagery (Figure 80) showing an area of
haze over the southeast, also highlighted by a Google satellite overlay image (Figure 81). Elevated
PM2.5 readings were recorded around the metro area, with hourly values at the Confederate Avenue site reaching as high as 41.1 g/m3. Widespread fire activity was also observed across the Midwest (Figure 82) on April 24th, 2009, with trajectories showing upper level transport of smoke into the
southeast (Figure 83).

There were other parameters that were also in place to cause elevated ozone values across the region. On July 21st, 2009 Atlanta experienced a Code Orange day for ozone, with the South DeKalb
air monitoring station reading a maximum 8-hour average concentration of 84 ppb at 7:00 pm that day. On both July 20th and July 22nd maximum 8-hour average concentrations were only in the green category, with South DeKalb reading 51 ppb on July 20th and 53 ppb on July 22nd. The July 21st event
was dependent on two specific contributing factors: relative humidity and recirculation.

Humidity levels have a large effect on ozone concentrations, and how much moisture is in the air can
sometimes be the difference between a good air quality day and a Code Orange ozone event. On July 20th, a stationary front was strung across southern Georgia, even as a dry pocket of air began to
move in from the northwest. However, due to the sea breeze circulation along the coast, the
stationary front pushed back into central Georgia in the afternoon, and the humidity rose for the latter
half of the day. The temperature reached 81 degrees F, and the dewpoint reached 51 degrees, giving a relative humidity of 35%. The winds for the 20th were steady from the north, at between 5 and 10 knots. On the 21st, the stationary front had broken down and the dry pocket of air had moved overtop
of north and central Georgia. The temperature that day went up to 85 degrees F, while the dewpoint
again reached 51 degrees, giving a relative humidity of 31%. In addition, by mid-morning the winds
had shifted, swinging around to blow from the east and southeast, then around from the west a few hours later, before going stagnant for the rest of the day. This caused a recirculation of pollution and
ozone precursors back onto Atlanta, which coupled with the lower humidity, caused ozone levels to
climb very quickly into the orange category. Values maxed out at the 8-hour average of 84 ppb. The next day, on the 22nd, the dry pocket of air had been pushed off to the southeast by an approaching
cold front. The maximum temperature reached 83 degrees F, with a dewpoint of 53 degrees, bringing
the relative humidity back up to 35%, and the winds had become fairly steady from the south and southwest, between 5 and 10 knots.

104 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Figure 80: Visible Satellite Imagery of the Southeast U.S. on June 10, 2000
Figure 81: NASA Satellite Imagery Overlaid on Google Application for June 10, 2009 105
Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Meteorological Report

Figure 82: Hazard Mapping System Fire and Smoke Product for April 24, 2009
Figure 83: Smartfire Smoke Upper Level Trajectory and Fire Information for April 24, 2009 106
Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

QUALITY ASSURANCE

The purpose of this report is to provide ambient air quality users and the general public, with a summary of the quality of the 2009 ambient air monitoring data in quantifiable terms. It presents an overview of various quality assurance and quality control activities. The tables included in this report provide summary data for ambient air monitoring stations in the statewide network.
The Georgia Air Protection Branch mission is to promote and protect public health, welfare, and ecological resources through effective and efficient reduction of air pollutants while recognizing and considering the effects on the economy of the state. The Ambient Air Monitoring Program provides a key element of that mission through collecting and reporting on quality information on a large number of pollutants and for a vast air monitoring network. The Ambient Air Monitoring Program, directed by federal law, conducts various monitoring projects in support of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GA DNR), Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). The monitoring projects include gaseous criteria and non-criteria pollutants, particulate matter, air toxics, non-methane hydrocarbons, and meteorological parameters. Data from these monitoring sources provide the means to determine the nature of the pollution problem and assess the effectiveness of the control measures and programs.
It is the goal of the Ambient Monitoring Program to provide accurate, relevant, and timely measurements of air pollutants and their precursors associated with the corresponding meteorological data to support Georgia's Air Protection Branch for the protection of environment and public health. The Quality Assurance Unit conducts various quality assurance activities to ensure that data collected comply with procedures and regulations set forth by the U.S. EPA and can be considered good quality data and data for record.
What is quality assurance? Quality assurance is an integrated system of management activities that involves planning, implementing, assessing, and assuring data quality through a process, item, or service that meets users needs for quality, completeness, representativeness and usefulness. Known data quality enables users to make judgment about compliance with quality standards, air quality trends and health effects based on sound data with a known level of confidence. The objective of quality assurance is to provide accurate and precise data, minimize data loss due to malfunctions, and to assess the validity of the air monitoring data to provide representative and comparable data of known precision and accuracy.
Quality assurance (QA) is composed of two activities: quality control and quality assessment. Quality control (QC) is composed of a set of internal tasks performed routinely at the instrument level that ensures accurate and precise measured ambient air quality data. Quality control tasks address sample collection, handling, analysis, and reporting. Examples include calibrations, routine service checks, chain-of-custody documentation, duplicate analysis, development and maintenance of standard operating procedures, and routine preparation of quality control reports.
Quality assessment is a set of external, quantitative tasks that provide certainty that the quality control system is satisfactory and that the stated quantitative programmatic objectives for air quality data are indeed met. Staff independent of those generating data perform these external tasks. Tasks include conducting regular performance audits, on-site system audits, inter-laboratory comparisons, and periodic evaluations of internal quality control data. Performance audits ascertain whether the samplers are operating within the specified limits as stated in the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Table 8 illustrates the types of performance audits currently performed by the QA program in 2009. Field and laboratory performance audits are the most common. System audits are performed on an as needed basis or by request. Whole air sample comparisons are conducted for the toxic air contaminants and non-methane hydrocarbons.

107 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

Air Monitoring Program
Gaseous Pollutants Particulate Matter Air Toxic Contaminants Non-Methane Hydrocarbons
Meteorology

Field Performance
Audit X X X X X

Laboratory Performance
Audit
X X X

System Audit
X X
X X

Whole Air Audit
X X

Table 8: Audits Performed for Each Air Monitoring Program in 2009

QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT

The Quality Assurance Program supports all ambient monitoring programs undertaken by Georgia EPD, which in 2009 includes gaseous pollutants, particulate pollutants, air toxics contaminants, nonmethane hydrocarbons and meteorological sensors run by the Ambient Monitoring Program. In 2009, 61 air monitoring sites operated in Georgia. Appendix E provides information about the air-monitoring network (i.e., sampling schedules, number of instruments, collection/analysis method, etc.). The air quality monitors collect data in both real-time and on a time integrated basis. The data is used to define the nature, extent, and trends of air quality in the state; to support programs required by state and federal laws; and to track progress in attaining air quality standards. The precision and accuracy necessary depends on how the data will be used. Data that must meet specific requirements (i.e., criteria pollutants) are referred to as controlled data sets. Criteria for the accuracy, precision, completeness, and sensitivity of the measurement in controlled data sets must be met and documented.
The process by which one determines the quality of data needed to meet the monitoring objective is sometimes referred to as the Data Quality Objectives Process. Data quality indicators associated with measurement uncertainty include:
Precision. A measurement of mutual agreement among individual measurements of the same property usually under prescribed similar conditions, expressed generally in terms of the standard deviation.

Bias. The systematic or persistent distortion of a measurement process, which causes errors in one direction.
Accuracy. The degree of agreement between an observed value and an accepted reference value. Accuracy includes a combination of random error (imprecision) and systematic error (bias) components that are due to sampling and analytical operations.
Completeness. A measure of the amount of valid data obtained from a measurement system compared to the amount that is expected to be obtained under correct, normal conditions.
Detectability. The low critical range value of a characteristic that a method specific procedure can reliably discern.
Data without formal data quality objectives (i.e., toxics) are called descriptive data sets. The data quality measurements are made as accurately as possible in consideration of how the data are being used. Quantified quality assessment results describe the measurement variability in standard terminology, but no effort is made to confine the data set to values within a predetermined quality limit.

108 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

The Georgia Air Sampling Network's (GASN) Quality Assurance Program is outlined in a five-volume Quality Assurance Manual. The volumes, listed below, guide the operation of the quality assurance programs used by the GASN.

Volume I: Quality Assurance Plan Volume II: Standard Operating Procedures for Air Quality Monitoring Volume III: Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures Volume IV: Monitoring Methods for the State Ambient Air Quality standards Volume V: Audit Procedures for Air Quality Monitoring

Volume I lists the data quality objectives and describes quality control and quality assessment activities used to ensure that the data quality objectives are met.
GASEOUS POLLUTANTS

Sampling Cone

Ambient concentrations of Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), Ozone (O3), and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) are continuously monitored by an automated network of stations run by the Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program. Exposure to these pollutants may cause adverse health effects such as: respiratory impairment, fatigue, permanent lung damage, and increased susceptibility to infection in the general population. Gaseous criteria and non-criteria pollutant data are a controlled data set and are subject to meeting mandatory regulations.

Accuracy: Annually, EPA conducts field through-the probe (TTP) performance audits for gaseous pollutants to verify the system accuracy of the automated methods and to ensure the integrity of the sampling system. Accuracy is represented as an average percent difference. The average percent difference is the combined differences from the certified value of all the individual audit points. The upper and lower probability limits represent the expected accuracy of 95 percent of all the single analyzer's individual percent differences for all audit test levels at a single site. Bias is the systematic or persistent distortion of a measurement process, which causes errors in one direction. Overall, the responses of the individual analyzers indicate that as a whole, the network is providing accurate data. Ninety-five percent of the gaseous pollutant instruments audited in 2009 were found to be operating within the Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring control limits (15%). The tables below summarize the 2009 performance audit results for each gaseous pollutant.

Precision: On a weekly basis, site operators confirm the linear response of the instrument by performing zero, precision and span checks. The zero precision check confirms the instrument's ability to maintain a stable reading. The span precision check confirms the instrument's ability to respond to a known concentration of gas. The degree of variability in each of these weekly measurements is computed as the precision of that instrument's measurements.

Annually, the Quality Assurance Unit conducts a precision data analysis as an overall indicator of data quality. The analysis addresses three parameters: precision data submission, precision data validity, and a combination of the two referred to as data usability rates. The precision performance goal for all three parameters is 85%. The submission rate is the number of precision points submitted for a pollutant divided by the expected number of bi-weekly submissions. Data validity is the percent difference of the actual and indicated values of each precision check. These differences should not exceed 15% for gaseous analyzers. Usable data rates are determined by multiplying the data submission and data validity rates that indicate the completeness of verifiable air quality data on the Official database. The tables below show the Georgia annual Data Quality Assessment summary for the gaseous pollutants (NO, NO2, NOX, CO, SO2, O3).

109 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

NO Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary

Site Code

Site Name

Validation of Bias Annual Performance Evaluation Bias

No. of Precision Absolute Bias

Obs. CV (%) Estimate (%) Avg 95% LPL 95% UPL No. of Avg

(%) (%)

(%) Obs. (%)

Completeness

95% LPL 95% UPL

(%)

(%)

(%)

13-089-0002 Decatur - S. DeKalb

49 2.88

6.28 -5.68 -10.56

13-121-0048 Atlanta - Georgia Tech 6 3.31

2.28 -0.19 -3.87

13-223-0003 Yorkville - King's Farm 50 1.78

6.92 -6.56 -9.57

13-247-0001 Conyers - Monastery 49 4.85

5.82 -4.67 -12.90

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program 154 3.17

6.19 -5.43 -11.15

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

-0.80 3.50 -3.54 3.56 0.29

4 0.12 -7.08 4 2.83 -5.19 4 -0.68 -12.09 4 -4.86 -13.45 16 -0.65 -9.60

7.32 10.85 10.74 3.72 8.30

Table 9: NO Data Quality Assessment

93 96 97 95 95.3

NO2 Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary

Site Code

Site Name

Validation of Bias Annual Performance Evaluation Bias

No. of Precision Absolute Bias

Obs. CV (%) Estimate (%) Avg 95% LPL 95% UPL No. of Avg

(%) (%)

(%) Obs. (%)

Completeness

95% LPL 95% UPL

(%)

(%)

(%)

13-089-0002 Decatur - S. DeKalb

49 2.86

2.82 1.62 -3.23

13-121-0048 Atlanta - Georgia Tech 6 5.53

1.98 0.96 -5.19

13-223-0003 Yorkville - King's Farm 50 2.32

1.98 1.24 -2.71

13-247-0001 Conyers - Monastery 48 6.95

5.92 1.29 -10.48

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program 153 4.07

3.49 1.36 -6.23

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

6.47 7.11 5.18 13.06 8.96

4 -2.61 -6.34 4 1.18 -4.49 4 -8.08 -17.93 4 7.38 -1.53 16 -0.53 -7.99

1.11 6.86 1.76 16.30 6.92

Table 10: NO2 Data Quality Assessment

90 96 94 95 93.8

NOx Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary

Site Code

Site Name

Validation of Bias Annual Performance Evaluation Bias

No. of Precision Absolute Bias

Obs. CV (%) Estimate (%) Avg 95% LPL 95% UPL No. of Avg

(%) (%)

(%) Obs. (%)

Completeness

95% LPL 95% UPL

(%)

(%)

(%)

13-089-0002 Decatur - S. DeKalb

49 3.10

4.82 -4.10 -9.36

13-121-0048 Atlanta - Georgia Tech 6 5.06

3.56 0.37 -5.27

13-223-0003 Yorkville - King's Farm 50 1.86

5.79 -5.40 -8.57

13-247-0001 Conyers - Monastery 49 4.28

3.56 -1.99 -9.25

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program 154 3.15

4.68 -3.68 -9.16

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Table 11: NOX Data Quality Assessment

1.15 6.00 -2.24 5.26 1.80

4 -0.27 -6.73 4 -1.29 -13.81 4 -0.72 -12.00 4 -5.19 -13.06 16 -1.87 -11.71

6.19 11.23 10.56 2.68 7.98

93 96 97 92 94.5

110 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

CO Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary

Site Code

Site Name

Validation of Bias Annual Performance Evaluation Bias

No. of Precision Absolute Bias

Obs. CV (%) Estimate (%) Avg 95% LPL 95% UPL No. of Avg

(%) (%)

(%) Obs. (%)

Completeness

95% LPL 95% UPL

(%)

(%)

(%)

13-121-0048 Atlanta - Georgia Tech 52 5.12

4.01 -0.05 0.00 8.67 9 -4.23 -9.31 0.85

97

13-223-0003 Yorkville - King's Farm 54 4.89

4.89 2.81 -5.35 11.37 6 0.00 -2.83 2.83

90

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program 106 5.00

4.46 1.40 -7.14 9.94 15 -2.54 -6.89 1.81

94

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Table 12: CO Data Quality Assessment

SO2 Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary

Site Code

Site Name

Validation of Bias Annual Performance Evaluation Bias

No. of Precision Absolute Bias

Obs. CV (%) Estimate (%) Avg 95% LPL 95% UPL No. of Avg

(%) (%)

(%) Obs. (%)

Completeness

95% LPL 95% UPL

(%)

(%)

(%)

13-021-0012 Macon - Forestry

43 3.46

3.19 2.07 -3.73

13-051-0021 Savannah - E President St. 51 5.55

7.41 5.82 -3.62

13-051-1002 Savannah - L & A

50 2.35

7.38 6.90 2.90

13-215-0008 Columbus Airport

47 3.52

7.70 6.96 1.01

13-115-0003 Rome - Coosa Elementary 39 1.79

3.39 2.95 -0.03

13-121-0048 Atlanta - Georgia Tech

15 2.37

3.81 3.00 -0.46

13-121-0055 Atlanta - Confederate Ave. 51 1.85

3.66 3.26 0.12

13-127-0006 Brunswick - Risley School 51 3.46

4.99 3.97 -1.92

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program 347 3.14

5.41 4.57 -1.37

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

7.87 15.26 10.89 12.91 5.93 6.46 6.41 9.85 10.51

6 -5.99 -10.61 3 3.14 1.97 3 -3.30 -4.08 3 -6.78 -7.41 6 0.77 -0.55 3 -2.11 -6.31 3 -6.63 -10.88 3 -6.42 -11.69 30 -3.25 -6.61

-1.37 4.32 -2.53 -6.14 2.08 2.09 -2.37 -1.15 0.10

91 98 95 92 98 96 95 96 96.3

Table 13: SO2 Data Quality Assessment

111 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

O3 Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary

Site Code

Site Name

No. of Obs.

Precision Estimate CV (%)

Absolute Bias
Estimate (%)

Validation of Bias

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

Annual Performance Evaluation Bias

No. of Avg Obs. (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

Completeness (%)

13-021-0012

Macon - Forestry

21

13-051-0021

Savannah - East President St.

32

13-055-0001 Summerville - DNR Fish Hatchery

35

13-059-0002

Athens - Fire Station 7

38

13-067-0003 Kennesaw - Georgia National Guard 36

13-073-0001

Evans - Riverside Park

36

13-077-0002 Newnan - University of West Georgia 34

13-085-0001

Dawsonville - Georgia Forestry

37

13-089-0002

Decatur - South DeKalb

49

13-097-0004 Douglasville - West Strickland Street 37

13-121-0055

Atlanta - Confederate Ave.

35

13-127-0006

Brunswick - Risley School

30

13-135-0002

Lawrenceville - Gwinnett Tech

37

13-151-0002 McDonough - County Extension Office 34

13-213-0003

Chatsworth - Fort Mountain

36

13-215-0008

Columbus - Airport

38

13-223-0003

Yorkville - King's Farm

37

13-245-0091

Augusta - Bungalow Rd.

39

13-247-0001

Conyers - Monastery

36

13-261-1001

Leslie - Union High School

34

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program

711

2.09 1.85 1.36 1.06 0.77 2.50 1.56 1.47 2.08 0.38 1.34 3.76 0.96 1.18 0.59 2.61 1.11 2.04 1.23 1.71 1.56

1.45 0.66 -2.57 3.89 3 -2.19 -3.24 -1.15 1.94 -1.24 -4.25 1.78 3 -1.89 -4.20 0.42 0.94 0.39 -1.84 2.63 3 1.43 -0.53 3.38 1.07 0.82 -0.93 2.58 3 0.77 -2.94 4.47 0.58 0.24 -1.03 1.52 3 2.19 1.14 3.24 2.25 -0.76 -4.90 3.35 3 0.83 -2.00 3.66 1.72 1.13 -1.44 3.69 3 3.79 1.47 6.12 2.03 1.63 -0.79 4.09 3 1.12 -0.96 3.19 1.94 0.67 -2.51 4.55 3 -0.24 -2.03 1.55 2.28 2.19 1.57 2.82 3 2.37 1.92 2.82 1.08 0.45 -1.75 5.53 3 4.32 3.08 5.56 2.97 -0.56 -6.65 2.30 3 3.38 0.62 6.13 0.97 0.70 -0.89 1.84 3 4.14 2.69 5.60 0.51 -0.10 -2.04 1.27 3 1.05 -2.52 4.63 0.44 0.31 -0.67 5.79 3 1.43 -0.53 3.38 2.46 1.46 -2.86 1.01 3 14.32 13.08 15.56 1.20 -0.82 -2.65 2.70 3 2.54 2.39 2.69 1.95 0.77 -2.50 3.89 3 -2.02 -3.66 -0.38 1.19 0.77 -1.35 3.89 3 3.55 1.01 6.09 1.80 1.08 -1.73 1.78 3 -1.55 -4.64 1.53 1.54 0.52 -2.33 3.37 60 1.97 -0.20 4.14

98 98 99 99 98 95 94 93 95 94 95 96 97 96 97 96 97 93 98 97 97.9

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Table 14: O3 Data Quality Assessment

PARTICULATE MATTER

Particulate matter is a mixture of substances that include elements such as carbon, metals, nitrates, organic compounds and sulfates; complex mixtures such as diesel exhaust and soil. Particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or smaller pose an increased health risk because they can deposit deep in the lung and contain substances that are particularly harmful to human health. Respirable particulate matter (PM10) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) increase the chance of respiratory disease, lung damage, cancer, and premature death.

Particulate matter monitoring is conducted using both manual and continuous type samplers. Manual samplers are operated on a six-day sampling schedule for PM10, and a similar, or more frequent schedule, for PM2.5. The Georgia Ambient Monitoring particulate program also includes total suspended particulates (TSP) sulfate, mass and lead monitoring.

Particulate matter is a controlled data set, and as such is subject to formal data quality objectives and federal and state regulations.

112 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

Accuracy (field): The accuracy of particulate samplers is determined by comparing the instrument's flow rate to a certified variable orifice (PM10 and TSP), or a calibrated mass flow meter (TEOM, BAM, and PM2.5 samplers) that is certified against a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable flow device or calibrator. Since an accurate measurement of particulate matter is dependent upon flow rate, the Ambient Monitoring Program conducts annual flow rate audits at each site. The average percent difference between the sampler flow rates and the audit flow rates represents the combined differences from the certified value of all the individual audit points for each sampler. The upper and lower probability limits represent the expected flow rate accuracy for 95 percent of all the single analyzer's individual percent differences for all audit test levels at a single site.

Overall, the 2009 flow audit results indicate that the flow rates of samplers in the network are almost all within bounds. Approximately ninety-eight percent of the instruments audited in 2009 operated within the Georgia Ambient Monitoring Program's control limits. The 2009 PM2.5 yearly data quality assessment summary of integrated and analyzation using federal reference method, the PM2.5 yearly data quality assessment summary semi-continuous measurements, and the PM10 yearly data quality assessment summary of 24-hour integrated measurements are shown in the tables below.

113 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

PM2.5 Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary of Integrated Sampling and Analyzation Using Federal Reference Method

Site Code

Site Name

Collocated (g/m3)

One-Point Flow Rate Check (L/min)

No. of Obs.

Precision Estimate CV (%)

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

Absolute Bias (%)

Signed Bias (%)

Semi-Annual Flow Check (L/min) (Bias %)

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

95% 95% LPL UPL (%) (%)

Completeness (%)

13-021-0007

Macon - Allied Chemical

29 4.97 12 0.01 0.72 +/-0.72 4 -0.16 -1.81 1.49

95

13-021-0012

Macon - Macon SE

NA NA 13 -0.48 0.69 -0.69

3 -1.66 -4.18 0.85

90

13-051-0017 Savannah - Market Street (Scott) 33 10.27 34 -3.58 8.31 -8.31

4 -0.51 -3.26 2.25

97

13-051-0091 Savannah - Mercer Jr. High School NA NA 12 0.17 0.91 +/-0.91 2 -0.88 -6.19 4.43

89

13-059-0001

Athens - Fire Station 7

NA NA 11 -0.18 0.49 +/-0.49 4 0.77 -5.63 7.18

80

13-063-0091

Forest Park - D.O.T.

NA NA 14 0.78 1.21 0.00

2 1.00 -0.61 2.61

94

13-067-0003

Kennesaw - National Guard

NA NA 12 -0.93 1.21 0.00

2 1.37 1.11 1.62

98

Powder Springs - Macland Aquatic

13-067-0004

Center

NA NA 15 0.47 1.07 0.00

2 0.51 -0.07 1.10

95

13-089-0002

Decatur - South DeKalb

43 20.49 14 -0.75 0.90 0.00

5 0.82 -0.17 1.82

90

13-089-2001 Doraville - Health Department NA NA 13 -0.17 0.42 0.00

3 -0.34 -1.11 0.44

85

13-095-0007 Albany - Turner Elem. School

NA NA

5 -6.80 18.36 +/-18.36 3 0.15 -2.02 2.31

87

13-115-0005

Rome - Coosa High School

NA NA 12 -0.18 0.94 0.00

2 0.97 -0.55 2.50

83

13-121-0032

Atlanta - E. Rivers School

28 6.00 12 0.64 1.01 0.00

4 -0.49 -1.81 0.83

98

13-121-0048

Atlanta - Georgia Tech

NA NA 12 -0.45 0.74 0.00

2 -1.04 -1.28 -0.80

98

13-127-0006 Brunswick - Risley Middle Sch. NA NA 14 1.02 1.20 +1.2

2 -1.01 -1.66 -0.36

80

13-135-0002 Lawrenceville - Gwinnett Tech NA NA

13 0.46 0.59 +0.59

3 -0.46 -1.21 0.30

88

13-139-0003 Gainesville - Fair St. Elem. Sch. NA NA 12 0.17 0.56 +/-0.56 3 -1.18 -7.96 5.60

85

13-153-0001 Warner Robins - Warner Robins NA NA 14 -0.51 0.81 -0.81

2 -0.68 -3.22 1.87

93

13-185-0003 Valdosta - S. L. Mason School NA NA 12 -0.29 1.14 +/-1.14 2 0.69 -1.89 3.27

75

13-215-0001 Columbus - Health Department NA NA 18 1.79 2.91 +/-2.91 2 -0.24 -1.40 0.92

89

13-215-0008

Columbus - Airport

NA NA 12 0.04 0.65 +/-0.65 4 2.11 1.41 2.82

92

13-215-0011 Columbus - Cussetta Rd. Sch. NA NA

13 2.35 3.70 +/-3.7

2 0.79 -0.06 1.63

95

13-223-0003

Yorkville - King's Farm

NA NA 13 0.42 0.80 +0.8

2 0.70 -1.57 2.97

95

13-245-0005

Augusta - Med. Col. of GA

29 7.42 12 1.28 2.58 +/-2.58 4 -1.28 -4.62 2.06

95

13-245-0091 Augusta - Bungalow Rd. Sch.

NA NA

12 2.45 3.04 +3.04

4 -0.53 -5.68 4.62

83

13-295-0002 Rossville - Health Department NA NA 12 -1.36 1.84 -1.84

1 -0.60 NA NA

89

13-303-0001 Sandersville - Health Department NA NA

13 2.20 2.73 +2.73

3 -2.14 -4.33 0.04

87

13-319-0001

Gordon - Police Dept

NA NA 11 0.72 0.90 +0.9

2 -0.71 -1.53 0.10

88

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program

162 10.79 372 -0.06 2.19

78 -0.14 -2.76 1.88

90

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Table 15: PM2.5 Data Quality Assessment for FRM Samplers

114 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

PM2.5 Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary of Semi-Continuous Measurements

Site Code

Site Name

One-Point Flow Rate Check Semi-Annual Flow Check (L/min) (Bias

(L/min)

%)

Completeness

No. of Avg Absolute Signed No. of Avg 95% LPL 95% UPL

(%)

Obs. (%) Bias (%) Bias (%) Obs. (%)

(%)

(%)

13-021-0012

Macon - Macon SE

13 -0.50 0.69 -0.69 3 -1.24 -3.14 0.66

85

13-051-1002 Savannah - W. Lathrop & Augusta Ave. 12 0.17 0.91 +/-0.91 3 2.09 -5.86 10.03

82

13-059-0002

Athens - Fire Station 7

11 -0.18 0.49 +/-0.49 2 3.97 -3.67 11.61

82

13-077-0002 Newnan - University of West Georgia 11 1.23 1.96 +1.96 4 0.62 0.17

1.07

85

13-089-0002

Decatur - South DeKalb

14 0.63 1.04 +/-1.04 3 -0.15 -2.99 2.70

86

13-121-0055

Atlanta - Confederate Ave.

12 0.24 0.50 +0.5 2 -1.45 -1.85 -1.04

80

13-135-0002

Lawrenceville - Gwinnett Tech

12 -0.50 0.61 -0.61 3 -0.46 -1.21 0.30

85

13-151-0002 McDonough - County Extension Office 12 -0.58 1.24 +/-1.24 2 0.24 -0.26

0.74

83

13-215-0008

Columbus - Airport

12 4.52 5.64 +5.64 4 0.27 -1.15 1.70

82

13-223-0003

Yorkville - King's Farm

12 0.42 0.80 +0.8 2 0.70 -1.57 2.97

83

13-245-0091

Augusta - Bungalow Rd. Sch.

9 0.04 0.76 +/-0.76 4 -0.53 -5.68 4.62

83

13-297-0001 Social Circle - DNR Fish Hatchery

10 0.61 1.20 +/-1.2

2 0.76 -2.02

3.55

80

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program

140 0.51 1.33

34 0.31 -3.59 4.50

84

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Table 16: PM2.5 Data Quality Assessment for Semi-Continuous Samplers

PM10 Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary of 24-Hour Integrated Measurements

Site Code

Site Name

Collocated (g/m3)

One-Point Flow Rate Check Semi-Annual Flow Check

(L/min)

(L/min)

Completeness

No. of Obs.

Precision Estimate CV (%)

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

Absolute Bias (%)

Signed Bias (%)

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

(%)

13-021-0007

Macon - Allied Chemical

57 17.08 12 0.23 0.86 +/-0.86 2 -0.66 -1.48 0.17 97

13-051-0014

Savannah - Shuman School

NA NA 12 -0.64 1.30 -1.3 2 -0.51 NA NA 92

13-055-0001 Summerville - DNR Fish Hatchery NA NA 13 0.31 2.23 +/-2.23 3 -8.02 -32.00 15.96 92

13-089-2001

Doraville - Police Department NA NA 13 0.30 0.68 +0.68 1 -1.45 NA NA 88

13-095-0007

Albany - Turner Elem. School NA NA 12 0.20 2.80 +/-2.8 3 -0.43 NA NA 89

13-115-0005

Rome - Coosa High School

NA NA 12 -0.26 0.93 +/-0.93 3 -0.35 NA NA 90

13-121-0032

Atlanta - E. Rivers School

41 14.82 10 0.22 0.63 +0.63 3 -0.50 -3.43 2.43 92

13-115-0005 Brunswick - Arco Pump Station NA NA 12 -0.86 2.24 -2.24 2 -0.47 NA NA 89

Columbus - Cussetta Rd. Elem.

13-121-0039

School

NA NA 13 0.32 1.18 +/-1.18 2 -0.79 -6.50 4.93 91

Augusta - Bungalow Rd. Elem.

13-245-0091

School

NA NA 9 0.17 1.03 +/-1.03 2 1.69 NA NA 89

13-303-0001 Sandersville - Health Department NA NA 12 -0.66 1.35 +/-1.35 3 0.15 NA NA 90

Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Program:

98 31.90 130 -0.06 1.40

26 -1.17 -3.40 2.18 93

NA: Not Applicable

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Table 17: PM10 Data Quality Assessment of 24-Hour Integrated Samplers

Precision (field): Precision data for non-continuous particulate samplers is obtained through collocated sampling whereby two identical samplers are operated side-by-side and the same laboratory conducts filter analyses. Collocated samplers are located at selected sites and are intended to represent overall network precision. Validity of the data is based on the percent difference of the mass concentrations of the two samplers. In 2009 collocated PM2.5 samplers were operated at Augusta Medical College,

115 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

Atlanta E. Rivers, Decatur-South DeKalb, Savannah Scott School and Macon Allied. Collocated PM10 samplers were operated at Atlanta E. Rivers and Macon Allied. Collocated TSP-Lead samplers were operated at Atlanta DMRC.

Particulate samplers (collocated PM10 and TSP) must have mass concentrations greater than or equal to 20 g/m3 to be used in data validity calculations. The difference between the mass concentrations must be no greater than 5 g/m3. If the mass concentrations are greater than 80 g/m3, the difference
must be within 7% of each other. TSP (lead) samplers must have both mass concentrations greater than or equal to 0.15 g/m3 to be used in data validity calculations. For collocated PM2.5 samplers,
data probability limits validity is based on the sampler's coefficient of variation, which cannot exceed 10%. Both sample masses must also be greater than 6 g/m3.

Precision for continuous PM2.5 monitors is based on the comparison of the sampler's/analyzer's indicated and actual flow rates. The differences between the flow rates must be within 15.

Accuracy (lab): Annual performance audits for PM10 and PM2.5 mass analysis programs include an onsite check and assessment of the filter weighing balance, relative humidity and temperature sensors, and their documentation. The performance audits conducted in 2008 found that the Ambient Monitoring Program was operating in accordance with U.S. EPA guidelines and that the data were of good quality and should be considered data-for-record.

Precision (lab): Laboratories perform various quality control tasks to ensure that quality data are produced. Tasks include duplicate weighing on exposed and unexposed filters, replicate analysis on every tenth filter, and a calibration of the balance before each weighing session. After samples are collected in the field, laboratory staff has up to 30 days to analyze the PM2.5 samples. Filters are visually inspected for pinholes, loose material, poor workmanship, discoloration, non-uniformity, and irregularities, and are equilibrated in a controlled environment for a minimum of 24 hours prior to the filters being weighed. If room conditions are not within the established U.S. EPA control limits, weighing is done only after the proper environment is re-established and maintained for 24 hours.

In 2009, when samples were analyzed, there were no occurrences in which the Georgia's Ambient Monitoring laboratory balance room was outside of control limits. The analytical precision results indicate that the Ambient Monitoring Program is providing precise particulate matter data. The tables below show the unexposed and exposed filter replicate results for the Air Protection Branch's (APB) laboratory in 2009.

QC Checks for Pre-weighed Filters

PM10

Total # of sample analyzed

707

Total # of replicates

43

Total % replicated

6.1%

Total # out-of-range

0

Source: Laboratory Section, Quality Control Report

PM2.5
5,643 382 6.4%
0

Table 18: Summary of Unexposed Filter Mass Replicates

QC Checks for Post-weighed Filters

PM10

Total # of samples analyzed

679

Total # of replicates

70

Total % replicated

10.3%

Total # out-of-range

0

Source: Laboratory Section, Quality Control Report

Table 19: Summary of Exposed Filter Mass Replicates

PM2.5
4,582 690 15.1%
0

116 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

AIR TOXICS

In 1996, the Air Protection Branch established an Air Toxics Network in major urban areas of the state to determine the average annual concentrations of air toxics. The program was established to assess the effectiveness of control measures in reducing air toxics exposures. Compounds identified as air toxics vaporize at ambient temperatures, play a critical role in the formation of ozone, and have adverse chronic and acute health effects. Sources of air toxics include motor vehicle exhaust, waste burning, gasoline marketing, industrial and consumer products, pesticides, industrial processes, degreasing operations, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and dry cleaning operations. Under the current air toxic sampling schedule, ambient air is collected in a stainless steel canister (or cartridge) every 12 days over a 24-hour sampling period at each of the network stations. Toxic particulate samples are also collected and analyzed for air toxic contaminants to support the Georgia Air Toxic Network. By using a low-flow multi-channel sampler capable of sampling onto filters or cartridges, ambient air is collected and analyzed for carbonyl and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) compounds (also called semi-volatile organic compounds) and toxic metals. The quality of the air toxic data set is governed by a series of quality assurance activities, including audits. The laboratory and monitoring staff are made aware of any exceedance found during an audit, and every effort is made to ensure that the data collected is as accurate as possible.

Flow audits of the toxic metal, VOCs, semi-VOCs and carbonyl samplers are typically conducted annually at each site to ensure the accuracy of measuring toxic metals and carbonyl compounds. Flow rates are a determining factor in calculating concentration and are included as part of the Quality Assurance Program. Although toxics data are a descriptive data set, completeness is issued based on the operating parameters of the sampler. Corrections are made to the data if an audit is found to be outside the Air Toxic Program control limits.

Precision (field and lab): As part of the Air Toxic Program laboratory analyses, internal QC techniques such as blanks, control samples, and duplicate samples are applied to ensure the precision of the analytical methods and that the toxics data are within statistical control. Precision data for noncontinuous toxics particulate samplers are obtained through collocated sampling whereby two identical samplers operate side-by side simultaneously and the same laboratory conducts filter analyses. The collocated toxic sampler located at the Utoy Creek site is intended to represent overall network precision. However, in 2009, the Utoy Creek site did not collect samples. This was one of the sites that was temporarily discontinued as explained earlier, due to funding.

Stainless steel canisters used to collect ambient air samples are also checked for contamination. Canisters are analyzed for aromatic and halogenated hydrocarbons. One canister per batch of eight is assayed to ensure individual compound measurements fall below the limit of detection. In the event a compound exceeds canister cleanliness criteria, the canister and all other canisters represented in the batch are re-cleaned until compounds meet the cleanliness criteria. In addition, Xontech 910A air samplers are checked for cleanliness. Failed air collection media are re-cleaned and re-tested until they pass Xontech 910A cleanliness criteria. Overall, the network is providing precise air toxic contaminants data.

Accuracy (field): The accuracy of air toxic samples is determined by comparing the instrument's flow rate to a certified variable orifice (PM10 and TSP), or a calibrated mass flow meter (PM2.5 samplers) that is certified against a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable flow device or calibrator. Since an accurate measurement of particulate matter is dependent upon flow rate, the Ambient Monitoring Program conducts annual flow rate audits at each site. The average percent difference between the sampler flow rates and the audit flow rates represents the combined differences from the certified value of all the individual audit points for each sampler. The upper and lower probability limits represent the expected flow rate accuracy for 95 percent of all the single analyzer's individual percent differences for all audit test levels at a single site.

117 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

NATTS

There are currently 188 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), or air toxics, regulated under the Clean Air Act (CAA). These compounds have been associated with a wide variety of adverse human health and ecological effects, including cancer, neurological effects, reproductive effects, and developmental effects. According to the Government Performance Results Act (GPRA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is committed to reducing air toxics emissions by 75 percent from 1993 levels in order to significantly reduce Americans' risk of cancer and of other serious health effects caused by airborne toxic chemicals. Early efforts toward this end have focused on emissions reductions through the assessment of technical feasibility. However, as new assessment tools are developed, more attention is being placed on the goal of risk reduction associated with exposure to air toxics.

To meet the GPRA goals, the National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) network has been established, consisting of 23 stations in the contiguous 48 states, with one in Georgia. Having data of sufficient quality is paramount for a network such as the NATTS. As such, Georgia has closely followed the Quality System (QS) for the NATTS, established by U.S. EPA, two aspects of which are Technical Systems Audits (TSAs) and Instrument Performance Audits (IPAs) of each network station and its affiliated sample analysis laboratory. Another integral part of the QS is the quarterly analysis of performance evaluation (PE) samples. Furthermore, the sampling and analytical techniques selected to collect and quantify the air toxics of concern must demonstrate acceptable analytical and overall sampling precision as well as suitable overall method detection limits that are compatible with expected ambient air toxics concentrations.

There are 23 sites in the NATTS network. Georgia joined the network with one site established in Decatur at the South DeKalb Monitoring Station. The EPA Region in which the sites are located, the location of the sites (site identifier), whether the site is located in an urban or rural area, and the unique AQS identification code (site code) for all the sites are given in Table 20.

118 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

Region I I I II II III IV IV IV IV IV V V V VI VI VII
VIII
VIII
IX IX X X

Site Identifier Boston-Roxbury, MA Chittenden City, VT
Providence, RI Bronx, NY
Rochester, NY Washington, DC Chesterfield, SC
Decatur, GA Hazard, KY Hillsborough City, Tampa, FL Pinellas City, Tampa, FL Dearborn, MI Mayville, WI Northbrook, IL Deer Park, TX Harrison County, TX St. Louis, MO Bountiful, UT
Grand Junction, CO
Phoenix, AZ San Jose, CA La Grande, OR Seattle, WA

Type Urban Rural Urban Urban Urban Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Urban Urban Rural Urban Urban Rural Urban Urban
Rural
Urban Urban Rural Urban

AQS Site Code 25-025-0042 50-007-0007 44-007-0022 36-005-0110 36-055-1001 11-001-0043 45-025-0001 13-089-0002 21-193-0003 12-057-3002 12-103-0026 26-163-0033 55-027-0007 17-031-4201 48-201-1039 48-203-0002 29-510-0085 49-011-0004 08-077-0017, -0018 04-013-9997 06-085-0005 41-061-0119 53-033-0080

Table 20: NATTS Sites with EPA Region Numbers and AQS Site Codes
Several Measurement Quality Objectives (MQOs) have been established for the NATTS network in order to ensure that only data of the highest quality are collected by the NATTS network, and to meet the NATTS Data Quality Objective (DQO): "to be able to detect a 15 percent difference (trend) between two consecutive 3-year annual mean concentrations within acceptable levels of decision error"2. Initially, the four compounds of primary importance to the NATTS program were benzene, 1,3butadiene, formaldehyde, and PM10 arsenic. The Data Quality Objective MQOs for these four compounds are summarized in Table 21 below.

Compound Completeness Precision (Coefficient of Variation) Laboratory Bias Method Detection Limit (MDL)

Benzene 1,3-Butadiene Formaldehyde
Arsenic

> 85 % > 85 % > 85 % > 85 %

< 15 % < 15 % < 15 % < 15 %

< 25 % < 25 % < 25 % < 25 %

0.044 g/m3 0.020 g/m3 0.014 g/m3 0.046 ng/m3

Table 21: Measurement Quality Objectives for the NATTS Program

Other compounds have been added to the list of compounds, including hexavalent chromium, acrolein, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). GA EPD collects data to monitor for these compounds as part of the NATTS program, as well as organic carbon, additional carbonyls, and additional volatile organic compounds.

2 Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement System. Volume 1. Principles. EPA-600/R94/038A, January 1994.
119 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

The MQOs require that (1) sampling occurs every sixth day and is successful 85 percent of the time; (2) precision as measured by the coefficient of variation (CV) be controlled to less than 15 percent; and (3) that laboratory (measurement) bias be less than 25 percent. Data acquired to assess compliance with the above stated MQOs are derived from a variety of sources. These sources are given in Table 22.

Criteria Completeness Precision Bias - Laboratory Bias - Field
MDL

Data Source Air Quality System (AQS) AQS and Proficiency Testing
Proficiency Testing Audits of Sampler Flowrates
Laboratories

MQO Limit < 15 % < 15 % < 25 % < 10 %
0.046 ng/m3 to 0.044 g/m3

Table 22: MQO Data Sources for the Georgia NAATS Program

The Air Quality System (AQS) database contains raw data that is used to assess data completeness, and to estimate precision from results of replicate analyses and collocated sampling. In addition, results from the analysis of proficiency testing samples allow one to calculate laboratory precision and bias.

Completeness (of NATTS Data): The AQS database was accessed and the raw data records analyzed 23 compounds having the AQS codes given in Table 23. The completeness of the 2009 AQS dataset was assessed for four compounds: benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, and arsenic. The results are shown in Table 24. The presence of 61 concentration values in the database indicates 100 percent completeness, since sampling is to occur every sixth day. Furthermore, the completeness data presented here are composite values for both the primary and collocated sampler at the South DeKalb site. Primary and collocated data are differentiated in AQS by use of parameter occurrence codes (POCs).

120 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

Compound Name Benzene
1,3-Butadiene Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform 1,2-Dibromoethane 1,2-Dichloropropane 1,2-Dichloroethane Dichloromethane 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Tetrachloroethylene Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride Cis-1,3-Dichloropropene Trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde
Arsenic Beryllium Cadmium
Lead Manganese
Mercury Nickel

AQS Code 45201 43218 43804 43803 43843 43829 43815 43802 43818 43817 43824 43860 43831 43830 43502 43503 82103 82105 82110 82128 82132 82142 82136

Table 23: 23 Selected HAPs and Their AQS Parameter Codes

Site Decatur, GA

Completeness of Compound by AQS Number and by Name

45201

43218

43502

benzene

1,3-butadiene

formaldehyde

96%

90%

90%

82103 arsenic
93%

Table 24: Percent Completeness of Georgia's 2009 AQS Data, Selected Compounds

PHOTOCHEMICAL ASSESSMENT MONITORING

In 1996, the Air Protection Branch began a routine seasonal sampling program to gather information about non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC) species that were precursors to ozone formation in high ozone areas. In 1994, Federal regulations required states to establish photochemical assessment monitoring stations (PAMS) as part of their State Implementation Plan monitoring networks in areas designated as serious or higher for ozone. Monitoring is to continue until the ozone standard is reached. The PAMS program is intended to supplement ozone monitoring and add detailed sampling for its precursors. PAMS sites collect data on real-time total NMHC, PAMS speciated VOCs, carbonyls, and various meteorological parameters at ground level and aloft. As this is a descriptive data set, there are currently no mandatory data quality objectives or regulations for the data. However, efforts are made to ensure that accurate data are collected and that the analyzers are operating within PAMS audit standards.
Accuracy (field and lab): Laboratory performance audits are conducted annually to assess the laboratory's ability to measure ambient levels of hydrocarbons. Through the probe sampler

121 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

performance audits are typically conducted annually at each monitoring site to assess the integrity of the sampling, analysis, and transport system. The 2009 PAMS speciated VOCs yearly data quality assessment summary for the three PAMS sites on the tables below show that the results were within the PAM's control limits of 20%.

PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary for Decatur - South DeKalb Site

Parameter Code

Parameter Name

2-Comp. Std. Weekly Check

No. of Obs.

Precision Estimate CV
(%)

Absolute Bias
Estimate (%)

Validation of Bias

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

Annual Perform, Evaluation Bias

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

43202 43204

Ethane+ Propane*

NA

NA

12

15.24

NA

NA NA NA

6

12.35 3.22 -18.05 24.49 6

11.23 7.36

-2.83 -5.89

25.29 20.60

43214

Isobutane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

12.32 -6.78 31.43

43216

Trans-2-Butene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

8.88 -10.75 28.52

43220

N-Pentane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

9.58 -8.95 28.11

43285

2-Methylpentane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

10.58 -5.45 26.62

43243

Isoprene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

-16.70 -35.06 1.66

43231 45201

N-Hexane+ Benzene*

NA

NA

12

19.12

NA

NA NA NA

6

19.23 10.82 -15.87 37.5

6

18.26 5.85

10.30 -6.61

26.22 18.31

43232

N-Heptane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

9.60

-3.9

23.11

45202

Toluene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

2.91 -6.97 12.79

45203

Ethylbenzene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

-5.51 -16.38 5.37

43238

N-Decane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

-29.21 -32.59 -25.84

45225

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene+ NA

NA

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

PQAO: Primary Quality Assurance Organization

* NIST traceable

+ Only NIST traceable by weight

NA

NA NA NA

6

-32.45 -41.2 -23.70

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Completeness (%)
64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64

Table 25: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for South DeKalb

122 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary for Conyers - Monastery Site

Parameter Code

Parameter Name

2-Comp. Std. Weekly Check

No. of Obs.

Precision Estimate CV
(%)

Absolute Bias
Estimate (%)

Validation of Bias

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

Annual Perform, Evaluation Bias

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

43202 43204

Ethane+ Propane*

NA

NA

11

8.28

NA

NA NA NA

6

11.46 8.18 -3.38 19.74 6

18.46 14.99

-0.76 1.27

37.68 28.70

43214

Isobutane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

14.06 9.17

18.95

43216

Trans-2-Butene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

8.41

1.97

14.84

43220

N-Pentane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

-5.28 -28.51 17.95

43285

2-Methylpentane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

-35.26 -45.27 -25.25

43243

Isoprene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

-40.68 -54.99 -26.36

43231 45201

N-Hexane+ Benzene*

NA

NA

12

19.26

NA

NA NA NA

6

13.4 -0.89 -27.77 25.99 6

17.53 5.84

10.11 -1.36

24.96 13.05

43232

N-Heptane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

15.10 6.95

23.25

45202

Toluene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

8.73

0.53

16.92

45203

Ethylbenzene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

6.36 -1.74 14.45

43238

N-Decane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

6

-6.54 -15.74 2.66

45225

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene+ NA

NA

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

PQAO: Primary Quality Assurance Organization

* NIST traceable

+ Only NIST traceable by weight

NA

NA NA NA

6

5.08 -31.92 42.08

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Completeness (%)
66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66

Table 26: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for Conyers

123 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary for Yorkville King's Farm Site

Parameter Code

Parameter Name

2-Comp. Std. Weekly Check

No. of Obs.

Precision Estimate CV
(%)

Absolute Bias
Estimate (%)

Validation of Bias

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

Annual Perform, Evaluation Bias

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

43202 43204

Ethane+ Propane*

NA

NA

12

2.60

NA NA NA NA

6

5.61 4.65 1.02 8.29

6

9.75 -0.33 19.84 5.84 -7.88 19.55

43214

Isobutane+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

6.09

3.23

8.94

43216

Trans-2-Butene+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

7.91

6.04

9.78

43220

N-Pentane+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

6.25

4.25

8.25

43285

2-Methylpentane+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

6.82

2.96

10.69

43243

Isoprene+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

-14.83 -27.22 -2.43

43231 45201

N-Hexane+ Benzene*

NA

NA

13

10.38

NA NA NA NA

6

17.24 -13.58 -28.32 1.17

6

15.23 3.02

3.10

-5.7

27.43 11.89

43232

N-Heptane+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

14.54 5.48

23.59

45202

Toluene+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

10.08 1.82

18.35

45203

Ethylbenzene+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

12.24 1.16

23.33

43238

N-Decane+

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA

6

4.84

-3.1

12.78

45225

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene+ NA

NA

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

PQAO: Primary Quality Assurance Organization

* NIST traceable

+ Only NIST traceable by weight

NA NA NA NA

6

11.95 -16.32 40.21

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Completeness (%)
64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64

Table 27: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for Yorkville

124 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for GA EPD Ambient Air Monitoring Program (as a PQAO)

Parameter Code

Parameter Name

2-Comp. Std. Weekly Check

No. of Obs.

Precision Estimate CV
(%)

Absolute Bias
Estimate (%)

Validation of Bias

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

Annual Perform, Evaluation Bias

No. of Obs.

Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

43202 43204

Ethane+ Propane*

NA

NA

35

8.72

NA

NA NA NA

18

9.76 5.27 -9.08 19.62 18

13.15 9.39

-1.78 -4.17

28.08 22.95

43214

Isobutane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18

10.82 -0.68 22.33

43216

Trans-2-Butene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18

8.40 -3.58 20.38

43220

N-Pentane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18

3.52 -13.68 20.71

43285

2-Methylpentane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18

-5.95 -17.09 5.19

43243

Isoprene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18 -24.07 -39.29 -8.84

43231 45201

N-Hexane+ Benzene*

NA

NA

37

16.09

NA

NA NA NA

18

16.64 -1.55 -24.81 21.706 18

17.01 4.93

7.56 -4.81

26.45 14.67

43232

N-Heptane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18

13.08 2.58

23.58

45202

Toluene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18

7.24 -1.57 16.05

45203

Ethylbenzene+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18

4.37 -5.75 14.48

43238

N-Decane+

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA

18 -10.30 -17.59 -3.02

45225

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene+ NA

NA

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

PQAO: Primary Quality Assurance Organization

* NIST traceable

+ Only NIST traceable by weight

NA

NA NA NA

18

-5.14 -32.49 22.21

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Completeness (%)
64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64

Table 28: PAMS Speciated VOCs Yearly Data Quality Assessment for Ambient Monitoring Program

METEOROLOGY

The Ambient Monitoring Program monitors meteorological parameters such as wind speed, wind direction, ambient temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, total ultra violet radiation, precipitation and total solar radiation. Real-time meteorological data are generated to characterize meteorological processes such as transport and diffusion, and to make air quality forecasts and burn day decisions. The data are also used for control strategy modeling, case study analysis, and urban airshed modeling. A state/local meteorology subcommittee of the Air Monitoring Technical Advisory Commission (AMTAC) agreed to define the level of acceptability for meteorological data as those used by the U.S. EPA for both the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) programs. The Quality Assurance Unit audits to those levels.

The data variability collected by this element of the monitoring program is generally described as meeting or not meeting the PSD requirements. Station operators are notified if an exceedance is found during an audit, and every effort is made to enusre that the data meets the audit standards. The wind speed, wind direction, ambient temperature and relative humidity data sets are controlled data sets, and subject to meeting PAMS objectives. Since the inception of the meteorological audit program, the data quality has improved significantly.

125 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

Accuracy (field): The accuracy of meteorological sensors is checked by annual performance audits. Table 29 summarizes the 2009 data quality assessment results. The average difference (average degree difference with respect to ambient temperature) represents the combined differences from the certified value of all the individual audit points for each sensor. The upper and lower probability limits represent the expected accuracy of 95 percent of all the single sensor's individual percent differences for all audit test levels at a single site.

Meteorological Measurements Yearly Data Quality Assessment Summary for GA EPD Ambient Air Monitoring Program (as a PQAO)

Parameter Code

Parameter Name

Annual Audit (Bias %)

No. of Obs. No. of Site Avg (%)

95% LPL (%)

95% UPL (%)

61101

Wind Speed

52

61102

Wind Direction

52

62101 Ambient Temperature

9

64101 Baromatric Pressure

6

62201

Relative Humidity

9

95% LPL: 95% Lower Probability Limit

PQAO: Primary Quality Assurance Organization

13

0.58

-1.18

2.35

13

0.13

-0.46

0.71

9

-1.48

-6.58

3.62

6

0.16

-0.20

0.53

9

3.55

-12.48

19.57

95% UPL: 95% Upper Probability Limit

Completeness (%)
98.5 98.4 94.8 100.0 94.8

Table 29: Meteorological Measurements Accuracy Results

QUALITY CONTROL REPORTS

Quality Control (QC) reports are summaries of the quality control activities conducted by the laboratory to support accurate and precise measurements. These activities include: blanks, duplicates, controls, spiked samples, limits of detection, calibrations, and audit results.
STANDARDS LABORATORY

The U.S. EPA Region IV Standards Laboratory yearly performs technical support and certification services for Georgia's ozone primary standard. Flow rate transfer standards and certification of compressed gas cylinders are sent to the manufactures for re-certification to ensure that all are traceable to standards of the NIST. A calibration establishes a correction factor to adjust or correct the output of an instrument; a certification establishes traceability of a transfer standard to a NISTtraceable standard; and verification establishes comparability of a standard to a NIST-traceable standard of equal rank.
LABORATORY AND FIELD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are guidance documents for the operation of quality assurance programs used by the Georgia Ambient Monitoring Program. The SOPs are intended for field operators and supervisors; laboratory, data processing and engineering personnel; and program managers responsible for implementing, designing, and coordinating air quality monitoring projects. Each SOP has a specific method that must be followed to produce data-for-record. The SOPs are developed and published to ensure that, regardless of the person performing the operation, the results will be consistent.
SITING EVALUATIONS

To generate accurate and representative data, ambient monitoring stations should meet specific siting requirements and conditions. It is assumed that the stations meet the siting criteria in place at the time

126 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Quality Assurance

initial operation began. The siting requirements of the AMP Quality Assurance Manual Volume II; 40 CFR 58, Appendix E; U.S. EPA's Quality Assurance Handbook Volume IV: U.S. EPA's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD); and U.S. EPA's PAMS guidelines, present siting criteria to ensure the collection of accurate and representative data. The siting criterion for each pollutant varies depending on the pollutant's properties, monitoring objective and intended spatial scale. The U.S. EPA's siting criteria are stated as either "must meet" or "should meet". According to 40 CFR 58, Appendix E, the "must meet" requirements are necessary for high quality data. Any exception from the "must meet" requirements must be formally approved through the Appendix E waiver provision. The "should meet" criteria establish a goal for data consistency. Siting criteria are requirements for locating and establishing stations and samplers to meet selected monitoring objectives, and to help ensure that the data from each site are collected uniformly. There are four main monitoring objectives: to determine highest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the network; to determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density; to determine the impact on ambient pollution levels of significant sources or source categories; and to determine general background concentration levels. Typical siting designations are: micro, middle, neighborhood, and regional. These designations represent the size of the area surrounding the monitoring site which experiences relatively uniform pollutant concentrations. Typical considerations for each of these site designations are, for example, the terrain, climate, population, existing emission sources, and distances from trees and roadways. The Quality Assurance Unit conducts siting evaluations annually. Physical measurements and observations include probe/sensor height above ground level, distance from trees, type of ground cover, residence time, obstructions to air flow, and distance to local sources. These measurements and observations are taken to determine compliance with 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E requirements.

127 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

RISK ASSESSMENT

INTRODUCTION

In 2009, Air Toxic Network (ATN) samples were collected from a total of six of the previously established 15 ATN sites, including two background (rural) sites. As a result of severe decreases in resources, nine of the 15 ATN sites did not collect data in 2009. Therefore, the following risk assessment reflects data collected at only six ATN sites. The compounds sampled at the ATN sites are shown in Table 30. The list was derived from the 188 compounds EPA has designated as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS). Many of the HAPS do not have standardized ambient air sampling and analytical methods. In order to collect the compounds of interest for the Georgia network, at least three types of samplers are used at all locations: HIVOL, PUF, and canister. A carbonyls sampler is located at the Brunswick, Dawsonville, Savannah, South DeKalb (NATTS and PAMS) sites. This equipment samples for metals, semi-volatile organic compounds, volatile organic compounds, and carbonyls once every twelve days following a pre-established schedule that corresponds to a nationwide sampling schedule. On the twelfth day the sampler runs midnight to midnight and takes a 24-hour composite sample. Exceptions to this sampling schedule are the South DeKalb and Gainesville sites. The South DeKalb site samples every 6 days as part of the National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) and PAMS network. The Gainesville site has an extra sample once a month.

Some of the chemicals monitored in the Air Toxics Network (ATN) are also monitored at sites in the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) network. While the monitoring schedule and some analysis methods are different at the PAMS sites and ATN sites, several of the compounds from the PAMS sites were also evaluated and compared to concentrations measured at nearby ATN sites for this report.

To provide an idea of the size of risks from environmental hazards as risk analysts will describe them, the continuum below presents risk statistics for some familiar events. Risk analysts describe cancer risks numerically in scientific notation, for example 1 x 10[-5] or 1 x 10-5 or 1.00E-05, which means that there is one chance in 100,000 of an event occurring. It is important to note that these risk statistics are population averages, while risk analysts usually estimate risk to the maximum exposed individual. Additionally, it should be noted that these risk values are considered additional risk. That is, risk above and beyond the normal background risk from exposure in everyday life.

Putting Risks in Perspective

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION
The air toxic data [(volatile organic compounds (VOC), semi-volatile organic compounds, and metals)] collected during 2009 from the Air Toxics Network was evaluated to assess the potential for health concerns. The data collected for the group of chemicals known as carbonyls were assessed separately from the other air toxics, with the exception of acrolein, because those chemicals were only monitored at three of the ATN sites and one of the PAMS locations.
128 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

The initial evaluation consisted of a comparison of the monitored results to "health based" screening values. These values were calculated using procedures recommended in EPA's latest guidance on risk assessment for air toxics, `A Preliminary Risk-Based Screening Approach for Air Toxics Monitoring Data Sets' (U.S. EPA, 2006). Briefly, EPA's prioritized chronic dose-response values for both noncancer (reference concentrations, RfC) and cancer (inhalation unit risks, IUR) were used to generate screening air concentrations. To screen for noncancer effects, the reference concentration was used as a starting point. However, to account for possible exposure to multiple contaminants, the screening air concentration was obtained by dividing the RfC by 10. Screening values for the cancer endpoint were determined by calculating air concentrations equivalent to a risk level of one in one million. Most screening values utilized in this assessment are listed in Appendix A of the previously mentioned guidance document (U.S. EPA, 2006) and updated "Table 1. Prioritized Chronic DoseResponse Values for Screening Risk Assessments (4/27/2010)" (U.S. EPA, 2010). These screening values and the chemicals monitored are displayed in Table 30. For a limited number of chemicals, other resources such as toxicity values from the Regional Screening Table (http://www.epa.gov/region4/waste/ots/) were used to calculate conservative screening values. These compounds are indicated with an asterisk. When available, both the names derived from the International Union of Chemistry (IUC) and the common names are given. It is important to emphasize that the screening values were calculated in a very conservative manner. Assumptions were made that accounted for the potential for continuous exposure to air toxics for 24 hours per day for 70 years. The conservative screening process was utilized so that the chance of underestimating the potential for health impacts would be minimized, as chemicals were excluded from further quantitative analysis.

Because results for many of the chemicals assessed were routinely below detection limits of the analytical methods available, the initial review of the data was based on an assessment of the number of chemicals detected and the frequency with which they were detected. The process included determining how often (if at all) a chemical was detected (present), if it was present above detection limits, and if those concentrations were above screening values of concern.

129 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

Chemical

Screen Value Chemical (g/m3)

Screen Value (g/m3)

Metals

Antimony

0.02 Cobalt

0.01

Arsenic

0.00023 Lead

0.15

Beryllium

0.00042 Manganese

0.005

Cadmium

0.00056 Nickel

0.0021

Chromium

0.000083 Selenium

2

Chromium VI

0.000083 Zinc

N/A

Semi-Volatiles

Acenaphthene

0.3 Cyclopenta(cd)pyrene

N/A

Acenaphthylene

0.3 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene

0.00083

Anthracene

0.3 Fluoranthene

0.3

Benzo(a)anthracene

0.0091 Fluorene

0.3

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

0.0091 9-Fluorenone

N/A

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

0.0091 Ideno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene

0.0091

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

0.3 Naphthalene

0.029

Benzo(a)pyrene

0.00091 Phenanthrene

0.3

Benzo(e)pyrene

0.3 Perylene

N/A

Chrysene

0.091 Pyrene

0.3

Coronene

N/A Retene

N/A

Volatile Organic Compounds

Benzene

0.13 1,3 and 1,4-Dimethylbenzene (m/p-Xylene)

10

Benzenecarbonal (Benzaldehyde) Benzyl chloride Bromomethane (Methyl bromide) 1,3-Butadiene
Butanal (Butyraldehyde) Chlorobenzene (Phenyl chloride) Chloroethane (Ethyl chloride) Chloroethene (Vinyl chloride) Chloromethane (Methyl chloride) Cyclohexane 1,2-Dibromoethane (Ethylene bromide) 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 1,1-Dichloroethane (Ethylidene chloride) cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1-Dichloroethylene) Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride) 1,2-Dichloropropane (Propylene chloride) cis-1,3-Dichloropropene trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
1,1-Dichloro-1,2,2,2-tetrafluoroethane(Freon114) 1,2-Dimethylbenzene (o-Xylene)

N/A 0.02 0.5 0.03 N/A 100 1000 0.11 9.0 6300* 0.002 0.091 N/A 0.091 210* 0.63 370 210* 2.10 0.3 N/A N/A N/A 10

Ethanal (Acetaldehyde) Ethylbenzene Ethenylbenzene (Styrene) 1-Ethyl,4-methyl benzene (4-Ethyltoluene) Freon 113 Hexachloro-1,3-Butadiene(Hexachlorobutadiene)
n-Hexane Methanal (Formaldehyde) Methylbenzene/Phenylmethane (Toluene)
Propanal (Propionaldehyde) 2-Propanone (Acetone) Propenal (Acrolein) 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Tetrachloroethene (Perchloroethylene) Tetrachlormethane (Carbon tetrachloride) 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (Methylchloroform) 1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene (Trichloroethylene) Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) Trichloromethane (Chloroform)

0.45 100 100 N/A N/A 0.045 20 0.0769 5000 0.8 32000* 0.002 0.017 0.17 0.067 20 7.3* N/A 100 0.063 0.5 730* 9.8

*From Regional Screening Table (http://www.epa.gov/region4/waste/ots/)

Table 30: Compounds Monitored and Screening Values Used in Initial Assessment

130 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

Table 31 summarizes the total number of chemicals monitored at each site (excluding all carbonyls except acrolein), the number of chemicals detected, and the number of chemicals detected above the health based screening values for 2009. Seventy-one chemicals were monitored at all the ATN sites, except the South DeKalb site, where 76 air toxic chemicals were monitored. In 2009, twenty-nine of the 71 sampled compounds were not detected at the sites, and an additional 20 compounds had 2 or fewer sites with detections. The number of chemicals that were detected at concentrations above the screening levels was even less, with a mean value of 6. Of the three categories of chemicals measured at all sites (VOC, semi-VOC, metals), most of the chemicals that were detected above screening values belonged to both the metals and VOCs group.

Location

County

Number of Compounds
Monitored

Number of Compounds
Detected

Number Greater than Screening
Value

Dawsonville

Dawson

71*

22

6

Douglas

Coffee

71

17

6

Macon

Bibb

71

23

6

Savannah

Chatham

71*

25

7

South DeKalb

DeKalb

76*

41

6

Yorkville

Paulding

71

20

5

* 6 additional chemicals were monitored at these locations, but that information is summarized in Table 36.

Table 31: Summary of Chemicals Analyzed in 2009

Table 32, on the following page, shows only the chemicals that were detected above screening values at each ATN site in 2009. They also provide detailed information on how often they were detected (frequency), and the overall average (mean) in micrograms per cubic meter. The number of detects were counted as any number that was above half the method detection limit. The average was computed using the sample concentration when it was above half the method detection limit and substituting half the method detection limit if the sample concentration was below this limit.

131 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

Location Dawsonville Douglas Macon Savannah
South DeKalb Yorkville

Chemical Arsenic Chromium Naphthalene 1,3-Butadiene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Nickel Naphthalene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Manganese Naphthalene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Nickel Naphthalene Trichloroethylene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Naphthalene Dichloromethane Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Naphthalene Benzene Acrolein

Mean (g/m3) 5.5 x 10-4 2.29 x 10-3 3.65 x 10-2 2.77 x 10-1 5.15 x 10-1 4.29 x 10-1 9.6 x 10-4 2.85 x 10-3 2.46 x 10-3 3.23 x 10-2 4.4 x 10-1 4.75 x 10-1 5.6 x 10-4 2.08 x 10-3 6.19 x 10-3 3.62 x 10-2
2.05 4.04 x 10-1 6.3 x 10-4 2.18 x 10-3 2.23 x 10-3 3.54 x 10-2 6.78 x 10-1 4.36 x 10-1 3.42 x 10-1 5.1 x 10-4 1.69 x 10-3 1.05 x 10-1
5.43 8.21 x 10-1 6.85 x 10-1 6.2 x 10-4 1.92 x 10-3 3.53 x 10-2 4.13 x 10-1 3.79 x 10-1

Detection Frequency 15/24 24/24 4/26 1/30 12/30 23/30 23/29 29/29 29/29 2/26 3/31 22/31 20/29 29/29 29/29 4/26 16/27 18/37 24/31 30/31 31/31 4/23 1/31 5/31 20/31 36/57 56/57 59/59 15/53 41/53 46/53 19/26 25/26 4/25 4/26 14/26

Table 32: Site-Specific Detection Frequency and Mean Chemical Concentration, 2009

132 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

Formula For Calculating Risk Using IUR For Carcinogens
Risk = IUR*Conc
Formula For Calculating Hazard Quotient Using RfC For Noncarcinogens
HQ = Conc RfC
Equation Parameters Risk Theoretical lifetime cancer risk (unitless probability) HQ Hazard quotient (unitless ratio) Conc Measured ambient air concentration in g/m3 IUR Inhalation unit risk (1/(g/m3)) RfC Reference concentration (g/m3)
Figure 84: Formulas For Calculating Risk and Hazard Quotient
Figure 84 shows the formulas used to calculate cancer risk and non-cancer hazard for chemicals that were carried beyond the screening process into the quantitative assessment.
On the following page, Table 33 shows the theoretical cancer risk and non-cancer hazard that would result from an individual breathing air containing the detected chemicals at the estimated concentrations daily for seventy years, or a full lifetime. These cancer risk and hazard quotient estimates are likely conservative because they were calculated assuming continuous exposure to outdoor air at breathing rates typical of moderate exertion. Real risk cannot be calculated, but may be substantially lower. Lifetime cancer risks for the limited number of chemicals exceeding screening values (and excluding that from carbonyls) exceeded 1 x 10-6 or one in one million, a value generally deemed as insignificant. However, lifetime cancer risks for these chemicals did not exceed 1 x 10-4 or one in ten thousand. This value is generally taken as a crude upper limit for "allowable" risk in many regulatory contexts.
Individual hazard quotients (HQs) are ratios that relate daily exposure concentrations, or dose, to a concentration or an amount thought to be without appreciable risks of causing deleterious non-cancer effects in sensitive individuals as well as the general population. HQ values less than 1.0 indicate the air "dose" is less than the amount required to cause toxic effects other than cancer. In July of 2007, Georgia EPD changed the analysis method for acrolein. The sampling method changed from a dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) cartridge with high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis to the VOCs canister collection with gas chromatograph with mass spectroscopy (GC/MS) analysis. This change occurred due to EPA's findings during the new School Air Toxics Monitoring Initiative. For more information on this study, please see EPA's website, http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/airtoxschool.html. With this GC/MS analysis method, there were several more detections of acrolein than have been seen in previous years, with the HPLC cartridge method. These results are shown along with the other hazard quotients for the ATN sites. The HQ numbers for acrolein are much higher than for the other air toxic compounds. This may be due to methodological changes. Potential reasons for differences are still being investigated.
133 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

Location Dawsonville Douglas Macon Savannah
South DeKalb Yorkville

Chemical Arsenic Chromium Naphthalene 1,3-Butadiene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Nickel Naphthalene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Manganese Naphthalene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Nickel Naphthalene Trichloroethylene Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Naphthalene Dichloromethane Benzene Acrolein Arsenic Chromium Naphthalene Benzene Acrolein

Cancer Risk
2 x 10-6 3 x 10-5 1 x 10-6 8 x 10-6 4 x 10-6
4 x 10-6 3 x 10-5 1 x 10-6 1 x 10-6 3 x 10-6
2 x 10-6 2 x 10-5
1 x 10-6 2 x 10-5
3 x 10-6 3 x 10-5 1 x 10-6 1 x 10-6 1 x 10-6 3 x 10-6
2 x 10-6 2 x 10-5 4 x 10-6 3 x 10-6 6 x 10-6
3 x 10-6 2 x 10-5 1 x 10-6 3 x 10-6

Hazard Quotient
0.04 0.02 0.01 0.1 0.02 21 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01 24 0.04 0.02 0.1 0.01 0.07 20 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.001 0.01 17 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.005 0.03 34 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.01 19

Table 33: Cancer Risk and Hazard Quotient by Location and Chemical, 2009

Table 34 shows total or aggregate theoretical cancer risk and hazard indices (added hazard
quotients) for the chemicals (VOCs, semi-VOCS, and metals) carried through the quantitative
assessment. It is considered appropriate to treat the potential for effects in an additive manner and to
sum cancer risk and hazard quotients. For example, if cancer risk for two separate chemicals were 1 x 10-4 and 2 x 10-4, then the sum or aggregate cancer risk would equal 3 x 10-4. Likewise, if cancer risk for two separate chemicals were 1 x 10-4 and 1 x 10-5, then total cancer risk for the two would equal 1.1 x 10-4, or rounded to 1 x 10-4. Similarly, if hazard quotients were 0.6 and 0.5 for two different
chemicals it would indicate that each chemical alone is not likely to result in detrimental effects.
However, summing the two would yield a Hazard Index (HI) of 1.1 or rounded to 1. Comparing this
value to the threshold value of 1.0, this HI suggests at least the potential for detrimental effects from
the combination of the two chemicals.

134 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

In 2009, the aggregate theoretical cancer risk (excluding carbonyls) for all ATN sites exceeded 1 x 106, with risks ranging from 3 x 10-5 to 5 x 10-5. Both the Hazard Indices (HIs) calculated without the
acrolein data and calculated with the acrolein data are shown. The HIs ranged from 0.08 to 0.2
without the acrolein data, and the HIs ranged from 17 to 34 with the acrolein data.

Location Dawsonville Douglas Macon Savannah South DeKalb Yorkville

Cancer Risk
5 x 10-5 4 x 10-5 4 x 10-5 4 x 10-5 4 x 10-5 3 x 10-5

Hazard Index without Acrolein 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.08

Hazard Index with Acrolein 21 24 20 17 34 19

Table 34: Aggregate Cancer Risk and Hazard Indices for Each Site, Excluding Carbonyls, 2009

The information from Table 34 is summarized in Figure 86. Figure 85 is shown as a comparison, with the different methods of collection and analysis for acrolein. It shows the combined or aggregate hazard index and theoretical cancer risk for each site from 2005 to 2006, and Figure 86 shows the data from 2007 to 2009. Note the hazard index in Figure 85 shows values up to 0.5 and in Figure 86, the values are up to 74. With the GC/MS analysis used for the acrolein compound, the hazard indices significantly increased starting with the 2007 data. The lowest hazard index was 20, at the Savannah site, and the highest was 52, at the Brunswick site in 2007. In 2008, the lowest hazard index was 13 at the Macon site, and the highest was at the Milledgeville site with 74. Then in 2009, the lowest hazard index was again at the Savannah site, with a HI of 17. The highest hazard index was at the South DeKalb site, with a HI of 34. These numbers increased from a range of 0.08 to 0.2 before the acrolein data was added to the hazard index. There seems to be more variation for cancer risk from site to site for 2005 and 2006, but for 2007 the cancer risk numbers appear to be almost identical from site to site across the state. In 2008 and 2009, the theoretical cancer risk seems to vary across the state a bit more than in 2007. Overall, the theoretical cancer risk seems consistently lower in the second graph showing 2007 through 2009 data, compared to the 2005 and 2006 data.

0.6

9.00E-05

8.00E-05 0.5
7.00E-05

Hazard Index Cancer Risk

0.4

6.00E-05

5.00E-05 0.3
4.00E-05

0.2

3.00E-05

2.00E-05 0.1
1.00E-05

0

AugustaBrunswickColumbDusawsonville DouglaGs ainesville

MacMonilledgevilSleiteRomeSavanSnoauhth DeKalUbtoy Creek ValdWoasrtaner Robins Yorkville

Hazard Index Cancer Risk

2005 2006 2005 2006

0.00E+00

Figure 85: Aggregate Cancer Risk and Hazard Index by Site for 2005-2006
135 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

80

6.00E-05

70 5.00E-05
60
4.00E-05 50

Hazard Index Cancer Risk

40

3.00E-05

30 2.00E-05
20
1.00E-05 10

0

AugustaBrunswick ColumbDusawsonville DouglasGainesville

MacoMnilledgeviSlleiteRomeSavanSnaohuth DeKalUbtoy Creek ValdWosatraner Robins Yorkville

Hazard Index Cancer Risk

2007 2008 2009 2007 2008 2009

Figure 86: Aggregate Cancer Risk and Hazard Index by Site for 2007-2009

0.00E+00

A few of the compounds collected from the PAMS network were evaluated in conjunction with the ATN data. The PAMS network is a federally mandated network required to monitor for ozone precursors in those areas classified as serious, severe, or extreme for ozone non-attainment. Fiftyfour (54) chemicals are monitored on six-day intervals at these sites. In Georgia, as of 2007, PAMS sites are located in Conyers, South DeKalb, and Yorkville. Of the 54 chemicals monitored at these sites, many are ozone precursors, and are not truly comparable to the chemicals monitored at the ATN sites, or appropriate to evaluate as air toxics. Therefore, for this study, only twelve chemicals were assessed for their potential to have detrimental effects on human health if present in ambient air. Those twelve chemicals were benzene, cyclohexane, ethyl benzene, p-ethyltoluene, n-hexane, 1,2,3trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, styrene, toluene, m,p-xylene, and o-xylene.

Of those twelve chemicals evaluated from the PAMS network, only benzene and 1,2,4-
trimethylbenzene were found in concentrations above the screening values in 2009. Table 35, on the
next page, shows the number of samples collected, first and second highest sample concentrations (1st and 2nd Max), averages (means) in micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3), hazard quotients (HQ)
and cancer risk (CR) for chemicals evaluated in the quantitative assessment at each of the three
PAMS sites for 2009. Benzene was detected consistently and when evaluated as a potential carcinogen, produced theoretical cancer risks as great as 4 x 10-5 and hazard quotient of 0.2 at the South DeKalb site. The lowest theoretical cancer risk was at the Yorkville site with 1 x 10-5 and hazard
quotient of 0.05. 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene was detected above the screening value at the South DeKalb
and Yorkville sites, and when evaluated as a non-cancer hazard, produced a HQ of 2 at the South
DeKalb site and HQ of 7 at the Yorkville site.

136 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

Location Conyers South DeKalb
Yorkville

Chemical
Benzene Benzene 1,2,4-Trimethybenzene Benzene 1,2,4-Trimethybenzene

Detection Frequency
26/40 39/39 26/39 15/39 9/32

1st Max (g/m3)
6.07 15.65 73.74 4.79 93.40

2nd Max (g/m3)
5.75 15.33 68.83 4.79 58.99

Mean (g/m3)
2.08 5.62 12.78 1.37 11.70

HQ
0.07 0.2 2 0.05 2

CR 2 x 10-5 4 x 10-5
1 x 10-5

Table 35: Summary Data for Select VOCs at PAMS Sites, 2009

With the exclusion of acrolein, the carbonyls (acetaldehyde, acetone, benzaldehyde, butyraldehyde, formaldehyde, and propionaldehyde) were measured at only two of the ATN sites (Savannah and Dawsonville) and one PAMS/NATTS site (South DeKalb) in 2009. For that reason, their results are displayed separately from the rest of the data. Detection frequency, average (mean) concentration in micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3), cancer risk, and non-cancer HQs for the carbonyls are shown in Table 36. This table also shows the sum of the cancer risk and hazard quotients, which are the aggregate cancer risk and hazard index (HI), per site. Of the six carbonyls sampled, acetaldehyde and formaldehyde were detected above the screening value for 2009. All the sites monitoring for acetaldehyde and formaldehyde detected these compounds with a relatively high detection frequency. Acetaldehyde was detected 50% to 89% of the time, with Savannah having the lowest detection frequency and South DeKalb having the highest detection frequency. Formaldehyde was detected 77% to 100% of the time, with the Dawsonville site having the lowest detection rate and the South DeKalb site having the highest. Acetaldehyde had relatively low theoretical cancer risks, ranging from 2 x 10-6 to 5 x 10-6, and relatively low hazard quotients, ranging from 0.1 to 0.2. Formaldehyde had theoretical cancer risks, ranging from 1 x 10-4 to 3 x 10-5, and hazard quotients, ranging from 0.3 to 0.8.

Location Dawsonville
Savannah
South DeKalb

Chemical
Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde SUM Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde SUM Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde SUM

Detection Frequency
16/31 24/31
15/30 28/30
48/54 54/54

Mean (g/m3) 9.29 x 10-1
2.08
8.96 x 10-1 2.32
2.16 8.92

Cancer Risk
2 x 10-6 3 x 10-5 3 x 10-5 2 x 10-6 3 x 10-5 3 x 10-5 5 x 10-6 1 x 10-4 1 x 10-4

Hazard Quotient
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.8 1

Table 36: Summary Observations, Cancer Risk, and Hazard Quotient for Carbonyls, 2009

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

In 2009, there were 71 air toxics compounds monitored at the 6 sites across the state, with the exception of the South DeKalb site that monitored 76 air toxic compounds. Of these compounds monitored, 29 were not detected and 20 compounds were detected at two sites or less. 44.4% of the compounds detected above the screening value were in the metals category, 44.4% were in the volatile organic compounds category, and 11.1% were in the semi-volatile organic compounds category. For the 2009 data, there was an average of 6 compounds per site that were above the screening value.

137 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

In 2009, five volatile organic compounds, 1,3-butadiene, dichloromethane, benzene, trichloroethylene,
and acrolein, were evaluated in the quantitative assessment. (Acrolein is discussed along with the
carbonyls, as it was previously detected with the carbonyls). Benzene was found above the screening
value at all six ATN sites. Average benzene concentrations at the ATN sites ranged from 0.41 to 2.05 g/m3. These concentrations correspond to the predicted theoretical lifetime cancer risk in the range of 3 x 10-6 to 2 x 10-5. All three PAMS sites detected benzene above the screening value. Average concentrations of benzene measured in the PAMS network ranged from 1.37 to 5.62 g/m3. These concentrations correspond to predicted theoretical lifetime cancer risks in the range of 1 x 10-5 to 4 x 10-5 for the PAMS sites. Major sources of benzene to the environment include automobile service
stations, exhaust from motor vehicles, and industrial emissions (ATSDR, 1997). Most data relating
effects of long-term exposure to benzene are from studies of workers employed in industries that
make or use benzene, where people were exposed to amounts hundreds or thousands of times
greater than those reported herein. Under these circumstances of high exposure, benzene can cause
problems in the blood, including anemia, excessive bleeding, and harm to the immune system.
Exposure to large amounts of benzene for long periods of time may also cause cancer of the blood-
forming organs, or leukemia (ATSDR, 1997). The potential for these types of health effects from
exposure to low levels of benzene, as reported in this study, are not well understood. Benzene has
been determined to be a known carcinogen (U.S. EPA, 2000) and was evaluated as such in this
study.

Another volatile organic compound found above the screening value was 1,3-butadiene. It was detected above the screening value at only one site (Dawsonville) and with a low detection frequency, approximately to 3%. Lifetime theoretical cancer risk calculated from the mean concentration of 1,3butadiene was 9 x 10-6, with a non-cancer hazard quotient of 0.1. 1,3-Butadiene is used to process petroleum, make synthetic rubber, make plastics, and small amounts are in gasoline (ATSDR, 2009). With exposure to high levels of 1,3-butadiene for a short time, it can cause dry mouth and nose, nausea, headache, and decreased pulse rate and blood pressure. U.S. EPA and Department of Health and Human Services has classified 1,3-butadiene as a human carcinogen (ATSDR, 2009). Studies have shown that workers exposed to 1,3-butadiene may have an increased risk of cancers of the stomach, blood, and lymphatic system (ATSDR, 2009).

Dichloromethene, the third volatile organic compound found above screening values, was detected at one of the six sites, with a 28% detection rate. It was found at the South DeKalb site. Dichloromethene, also called methylene chloride, is used as an industrial solvent, paint stripper, can be found in aerosol and pesticides, and is used in making photographic film (ATSDR, 2001b). Breathing large amounts of dichloromethane can damage the central nervous system, causing unsteadiness, dizziness, nausea, and tingling or numbness in fingers and toes (ATSDR, 2001b). For this study, the chemical was evaluated as a carcinogen and a non-carcinogen. Theoretical cancer risk calculated from the mean ambient air concentrations (accounting for non-detected samples) was 3 x 10-6 for 2009. The non-cancer hazard quotient was 0.005 for 2009.

The fourth volatile organic compound detected above screening value was trichloroethylene. This compound was found at the Savannah site with a 3% detection frequency. Trichloroethylene is used as a solvent for cleaning metal parts, and is used as an ingredient in adhesives, paint removers, typewriter correction fluid and spot cleaner. Breathing large amounts can cause nervous system effects, abnormal heartbeat, coma, and possibly death (ATSDR, 2003). The theoretical lifetime cancer risk was 1 x 10-6, and the hazard quotient was 0.001 for the Savannah site for 2009.

In 2009, one compound in the semi-volatile organic compound group was found above the screening
value. Naphthalene was the only semi-volatile organic compound found above the screening value. It
was detected at all six sites. The South DeKalb site had detections with every sample taken, or 100% detection frequency. The theoretical lifetime cancer risks ranged from approximately 1 x 10-6 to 4 x 106, which includes adding the half detection limit for the non-detected samples. The non-cancer hazard
quotient ranged from 0.01 to 0.03. Naphthalene is found in moth repellents, petroleum, coal, and is

138 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

used in making polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastics. Exposure to large amounts can cause hemolytic anemia (ATSDR, 2005e).

Four metals, manganese, arsenic, chromium, and nickel, were evaluated in the quantitative assessment. Manganese was detected above the screening value for one of the six ATN sites. Manganese is a trace element, and small amounts are needed to support good health. However, exposure to very large amounts through inhalation can result in neurological effects (ATSDR, 2000a). Manganese was evaluated as a neurotoxin, but did not contribute significantly in the quantitative assessment with a HQ of 0.1. These HQs suggest that there is little potential for neurological effects from ambient air concentrations of manganese.

Arsenic was found at all six ATN sites. Arsenic occurs naturally in soil and rocks, and was used extensively in the past as a pesticide on cotton fields and in orchards (ATSDR, 2005b). However, the majority of arsenic found in the atmosphere comes from the burning of coal and oil, incineration, and smelting operations. Arsenic has been recognized as a human poison since ancient times. Inhalation of large quantities of some forms of arsenic may cause irritation of the throat and upper respiratory tract. Long-term exposure either by inhalation or ingestion may result in a unique pattern of skin changes, and circulatory and peripheral nervous disorders (ATSDR, 2005b). Inhalation of some forms of arsenic may also cause cancer, so arsenic was evaluated as a carcinogen in this assessment. The detection frequency was high, with the lowest (88%) at the Dawsonville site, up to 100% at the Macon and Savannah sites. Theoretical lifetime cancer risks estimated from the data collected in 2009 ranged from 2 x 10-6 to 4 x 10-6.

In 2009, total chromium was detected at all six ATN sites. Total chromium also had a high detection frequency, with 95% to 100% detections. The theoretical cancer risk ranged from 2 x 10-5 to 3 x 10-5.
The sites with the highest theoretical cancer risk were the Dawsonville, Douglas, and Savannah sites, with 3 x 10-5. Chromium is a naturally occurring element and is common in low amounts in foodstuffs
(ATSDR, 2000b). Natural processes such as wind generating dust and even volcanoes may release
chromium into the atmosphere. However, many human activities such as coal and oil combustion,
electroplating, smelting, and iron and steel production also release it into the atmosphere.

The chemistry of chromium is complex. It may occur in different forms or oxidation states in the environment, having very different degrees of toxicity. Chromium+3 is the form that often predominates in the natural environment, and is also an essential element required for good nutrition. Hexavalent chromium (chromium+6) is the most toxic form of chromium and is often related to releases from industrial activities (ATSDR, 2000b). Inhaling large amounts of chromium+6 may cause upper respiratory track irritation, and chromium+6 has also been shown to be a carcinogen, causing increases in the risk of lung cancer (ATSDR, 2000b).

Studies have shown that in ambient air, even near industrial sites, chromium+6 is usually only a small portion of total chromium, with measured concentrations for chromium+6 accounting for a range of values from 1 to 25% of total chromium (ATSDR, 2000b). As part of the NATTS network, sampling for chromium+6 takes place at the South DeKalb site. When the 2009 concentration of chromium+6 is compared to the total chromium concentration, it shows that the chromium+6 is 0.6% of the total chromium accounted for at the South DeKalb site. However the concentrations of chromium+6 detected were below the screening value and were not evaluated further as a potential cancer risk. The South DeKalb site is located within and representative of an urban area. Since the chromium+6 concentrations were below the screening value for the South DeKalb site, this could indicate that chromium+6 levels are low throughout the network. The other sites that measure for chromium, measure for the total form. Therefore, the measurements used in this study were for the total form, and distinctions cannot be made as to how much of the different states of chromium are present at the other ATN sites. In the interest of conservativeness, chromium was evaluated with the most stringent toxicity index as chromium+6, even though the chromium metal measured was not in this most toxic form. Data collected on the ratio of chromium+6 to total chromium (ATSDR, 2000b) indicates that this

139 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

process may appreciably overestimate risk. Further work is needed to better understand chemical forms of chromium in Georgia's air, and determine if chromium is an important contributor to risk.

In 2009, nickel was detected above the screening value at two of the six ATN sites, with a theoretical lifetime cancer risk of 1 x 10-6 at both sites (Douglas and Savannah). When detected, nickel had a high detection frequency, occurring in 100% of the collected samples. Nickel is a naturally occurring element used in many consumer and industrial products such as stainless steel, alloys, and coins, and is also released in the burning of oil and coal. If large amounts are breathed, nickel can cause damage to the lungs and nasal cavities, and can be carcinogenic (ATSDR, 2005d).

Carbonyls were monitored at three sites in Georgia in 2009. Two sites, Dawsonville and Savannah are ATN sites, while the other site, South DeKalb, is in the PAMS network. Three carbonylsformaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein- were detected with sufficient frequency, and have sufficient potential for toxicity to be included in the quantitative assessment.

Formaldehyde, the simplest of the aldehydes, is produced by natural processes, and from the fertilizer, paper, and manufactured wood products industries (ATSDR, 1999). It is also found in vehicle emissions. Formaldehyde is a health concern because of its respiratory irritancy and potential as a carcinogen. It may cause irritation of the eye, nose, throat, and skin, and has the potential under certain exposure scenarios to cause cancers of the nose and throat (ATSDR, 1999). Acetaldehyde, as an intermediate product of plant respiration and a product of incomplete combustion, is ubiquitous in the environment. Acetaldehyde, like formaldehyde, is also a concern as an upper respiratory irritant, and because of its potential to cause nasal tumors in animal studies. However, research has shown it to be significantly less potent than formaldehyde (U.S. EPA, 1987; U.S. EPA 1991b).

In 2009, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde were detected at all three locations where carbonyls were
assessed. As noted in past studies, concentrations of these aldehydes were higher at the PAMS site
(South DeKalb) compared to the ATN sites. The South DeKalb site had an average concentration of 8.92 g/m3 for formaldehyde and 2.16 g/m3 for acetaldehyde. The major sources of formaldehyde are
forest fires, marshes, stationary internal combustion engines and turbines, pulp and paper plants,
petroleum refineries, power plants, manufacturing facilities, incinerators, cigarette smoke, and vehicle
exhaust. Historically, the PAMS site has had higher levels of concentration possibly related to
differences in siting criteria between the two networks. Type II PAMS sites are intentionally located in
"urban core" locations to monitor precursors of ozone, but ATN sites are not. Historically, the difference could be that vehicle emissions play a greater role in measurements made at PAMS sites
compared to ATN sites. When the theoretical cancer risk for formaldehyde was evaluated, the risk ranged from 1 x 10-4 to 3 x 10-5 for 2009. When acetaldehyde was evaluated for theoretical cancer risk, the risk ranged from 2 x 10-6 to 5 x 10-6.

In 2007, acrolein began to be collected with the other VOCs in a canister and analyzed using a GC/MS method. This method was started in July of 2007, drastically changing the number of detections that were found across the state. In previous years, acrolein was analyzed along with the carbonyls, at select sites. With the GC/MS and canister method, this allowed acrolein to be sampled at all of the air toxics sites. In 2009, it was detected at all the sites, with the detection frequency ranging from 49% to 87% of samples. Acrolein was evaluated as a non-carcinogen, and the hazard quotients ranged from 17 to 34, accounting for the change in the data from Figure 85 to Figure 86, above. The average concentrations ranged from 0.342 g/m3 to 0.685 g/m3 (using half the detection limit for non-detected samples). Acrolein may enter the environment as a result of combustion of trees and other plants, tobacco, gasoline, and oil. Additionally, it has a number of industrial uses as a chemical intermediate (ATSDR, 2005c). The potential for acrolein to cause health effects is not well understood. At very low concentrations, it is an upper respiratory irritant. At very high concentrations it may produce more serious damage to the lining of the upper respiratory tract and lungs (ATSDR, 2005c; U.S. EPA, 2003).

140 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

At the PAMS sites, benzene was detected above the screening value at all three sites, and 1,2,4trimethylbenzene was detected above the screening value at the South DeKalb and Yorkville sites. When evaluated as a theoretical cancer risk, benzene's levels ranged from 1 x 10-5 at Yorkville to 4 x 10-5 at South DeKalb. As stated earlier, major sources of benzene to the environment include automobile service stations, exhaust from motor vehicles, and industrial emissions (ATSDR, 1997). 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene occurs naturally in coal tar and petroleum crude oil. It is a component of gasoline, and has other uses in industry as an intermediate in the production of dyes, drugs, and coatings. Exposure to very large amounts of 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene may cause skin and respiratory irritancy and nervous system depression, fatigue, headache, and drowsiness. However, risks resulting from exposure to low ambient concentrations of 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene have not been studied extensively (U.S. EPA, 1994a). For this study, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene was evaluated as a noncarcinogen with potential to cause central nervous system and irritant effects (U.S. EPA, 2004b). The 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene HQ was approximately 2 at both the South DeKalb and Yorkville sites.

In Figure 87 below, a map is shown of the most recent official National Air Toxics Assessment that was done with 2002 data. The estimated risk levels are given per county across the United States. The map indicates that in more populated areas and transportation corridors, the estimated cancer risk levels are higher than the national average.

(From EPA's "Our Nation's Air- Status and Trends through 2008")
Figure 87: Estimated County-Level Cancer Risk From the 2002 National Air Toxics Assessment
As stated previously, the estimates of risk presented herein are likely overestimates due to conservative assumptions used in this exercise. Conservative assumptions were used to estimate the potential for possible exposures (high inhalation rates and long term exposure) and toxicity values. In
141 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Risk Assessment

the absence of good exposure information, this practice is warranted to decrease the potential for underestimating risk.

The results presented herein suggest that the majority of calculated risk is due to a small number of chemicals. The risk values presented in this report should not be interpreted as indicators of true or "real" risk, but for relative comparisons of a chemical's contribution to aggregate risk, or for comparisons of risk between locations within the monitoring network or in other areas of the country.

142 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Outreach and Education

OUTREACH AND EDUCATION

One of the most important tasks of the Ambient Monitoring Program is maintaining effective public outreach and education. The program seeks to address the air quality issues that are most vital to the citizens of Georgia by identifying the pollutants that represent the greatest risks, continually monitoring them, and communicating the monitoring results directly with the public. The goal is to provide an understanding of the presence of air pollution throughout the state and to educate the public on the steps they can take to improve air quality. This is done by issuing smog alerts and information provided in the Air Quality Index (AQI), maintaining a partnership with the Clean Air Campaign in the metro Atlanta nonattainment area, and other outreach strategies aimed at keeping the public up to date on air quality issues.

What is the Clean Air Campaign? The Clean Air Campaign (CAC) is a not-for-profit organization that works to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality in the metro Atlanta nonattainment area through a variety of voluntary programs and services, including free employer assistance, incentive programs, public information and children's education. EPD is a proud funding sponsor of the CAC.

The CAC works with more than 300 public and private sector employers, representing several hundred thousand employees, to reduce the number of single-occupancy vehicle commuters in metro Atlanta year-round. The program has helped reduce emissions and vehicle miles traveled by encouraging people to alter their commuting habits and to reconsider behaviors-driving in particular.

In addition to addressing commuters' driving habits, CAC utilizes the Air Quality Index (AQI) to relay air quality information to metro Atlanta residents.

The Air Quality Index The Air Quality Index (AQI) is a national air standard rating system developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The AQI is used state wide to provide the public, on a daily basis, with an analysis of air pollution levels and possible related health risks. Generally, an index scale of 0 to 500 is used to assess the quality of air, and these numbers are synchronized with a corresponding descriptor word such as: Good, Moderate, Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups, Unhealthy and
Very Unhealthy. To protect public health the EPA has set an AQI value of 100 to correspond to the NAAQS for the following pollutants: Ozone (O3), Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Particulate Matter 10 (PM10), and Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). For Particulate Matter 2.5 (PM2.5), the AQI is set up for the range of 15.5 to 40.4 g/m3 to be equivalent to the 51 to 100 AQI value. The AQI for a reporting region equates to the highest rating recoded for any pollutant within that region. Therefore, the larger the AQI value, the greater level of air pollution present, and the greater expectation of potential health concerns. However, this system only addresses air pollution in terms of acute health effects over time periods of 24 hours or less and does not provide an indication of chronic pollution exposure over months or years. Figure 88 shows how the recorded concentrations correspond to the AQI index values, descriptors and health advisories.

143 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Outreach and Education

Maximum Pollutant Concentration

PM2.5 PM10 SO2
(24hr) (24hr) (24hr) g/m3 g/m3 ppm

O3
(8hr) ppm

O3
(1hr) ppm

CO
(8hr) ppm

NO2
(1hr) ppm AQI
Value

Descriptor EPA Health Advisory

0 15.4 0 54

0 0.034

0 0.059

None

0 4.4

None 0 to 50

Good (green)

Air quality is considered satisfactory, and air pollution poses little or no risk.

15.5 40.4

55 154

0.035 0.060 0.144 0.075

None

4.5 9.4

None

51 to 100

Moderate (yellow)

Air quality is acceptable; however, for some pollutants there may be a moderate health concern for a very small number of people. For example, people who are unusually sensitive to the condition of the air may experience respiratory symptoms.

40.5 65.4

155 254

0.145 0.076 0.125 9.5 0.224 0.095 0.164 12.4

None

Unhealthy Members of sensitive groups

for Sensitive (people with lung or heart

Groups disease) are at greater risk from

101 to

exposure to particle pollution.

150

Those with lung disease are at

(orange) risk from exposure to ozone. The general public is not likely

to be affected in this range.

65.5 150.4

255 354

0.225 0.096 0.165 12.5 0.304 0.115 0.204 15.4

None

151 to 200

Unhealthy (red)

Everyone may begin to experience health effects in this range. Members of sensitive groups may experience more serious health effects.

150.5 355 0.305 0.116 0.205 15.5 0.65 201 to 250.4 424 0.604 0.374 0.404 30.4 1.24 300

Very Unhealthy
(purple)

AQI values in this range trigger a health alert. Everyone may experience more serious health effects. When the AQI is in this range because of ozone, most people should restrict their outdoor exertion to morning or late evening hours to avoid high ozone exposures.

250.5 500.4

425 604

0.605 1.004

None

0.405 30.5 1.25 301 to 0.604 50.4 2.04 500

AQI values over 300 trigger Hazardous health warnings of emergency
conditions. The entire (maroon) population is more likely to be
affected.

Figure 88: The AQI

Each day the AQI value for metropolitan areas in Georgia are available to the public through the Environmental Protection Division's website http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp/. An analysis of AQI values for the 2009 monitoring year is listed in Table 37.

144 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Outreach and Education

Air Quality Index Summary by Region

AQI Category

Good Moderate

Number of Days

Unhealthy

for

Sensitive

Very

Groups Unhealthy Unhealthy Hazardous

(0-50) (51-100) (101-150)** (151-200)** (201-300)** (>300)**

Athens

Pollutants Monitored
in 2009

2009 301

64

0

0

0

0

O3, PM2.5

Atlanta

O3, SO2, CO,

2009 195 155

15

0

0

0

NO2, PM10, PM2.5

Augusta

2009 285

77

1

0

0

0

Chattanooga, TN-GA

2009 255

72

1

0

0

0

Columbus

2009 297

68

0

0

0

0

Macon

2009 250 112

2

1

0

0

Savannah

2009 323

41

0

0

1

0

**AQI numbers above 100 may not be equivalent to a violation of the standard.

O3, PM10, PM2.5
O3, PM2.5
O3, SO2, PM10, PM2.5
O3, SO2, PM10, PM2.5
O3, SO2, PM10, PM2.5

Table 37: AQI Summary Data, 2009

In the following graph on the next page, the number of days that the AQI value was above 100 is plotted for each metropolitan statistical area (MSA) in Georgia where an AQI value is produced. The data was produced starting in 1972 and is shown through 2009. To be consistent, the most current standards were applied throughout the historical dataset. As one would expect, the Atlanta MSA (shown in yellow) has historically had the highest number of days above 100. The pattern across the timeframe seems to be cyclic over the past thirty-eight years. However, the number of days above 100 for the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta MSA has decreased dramatically over the past four years. The number dropped from 63 days in 2006 to 15 days in 2009. The remaining sites had three or fewer days above 100 in 2009. The Athens-Clarke County, Columbus GA-AL, and Savannah MSAs did not have any days above 100. The Augusta-Richmond County GA-SC MSA had one day above 100, and the Albany, Chattanooga TN-GA, and Macon MSAs had three days above 100 in 2009.

145 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Outreach and Education

Days Above an AQI Value of 100

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Year

Albany Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta Chattanooga TN-GA Macon

Athens-Clarke County Augusta-Richmond County GA-SC Columbus GA-AL Savannah

Figure 89: Number of Days with an AQI Value Above 100
How does Georgia's Ambient Monitoring Program (AMP) Cooperate with The Clean Air Campaign (CAC)? The Ambient Monitoring Program is responsible for measuring air pollutant levels in metro Atlanta and throughout the state. Equipment at fourteen continuous monitoring stations across metro Atlanta is used for these measurements of particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and ozone (O3). This data is reported hourly on a website which is maintained and updated by the Ambient Monitoring Program. Based on these levels, AMP calculates the Air Quality Index (AQI), which represents overall air quality in a way that is quick and easy for the general public to understand. The Ambient Monitoring Program's website is linked to a website
maintained by CAC. The AQI is then displayed on The Clean Air Campaign's website. The CAC also distributes AQI information to people who have signed up to receive daily air quality forecasts via e-mail. When a smog alert is forecasted, an automated fax blast informs all local media as well. Through these connections, thousands of metro Atlanta citizens and businesses keep abreast of current air quality conditions. The Ambient Monitoring Program also encourages the public to access the CAC's website and become aware of what voluntary measures they can take to improve local air quality.
MEDIA OUTREACH
The Ambient Monitoring Program is in constant touch with citizens as well as the news media through phone calls, the AMP web site and

146 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Outreach and Education

media interviews. At many times throughout the year, the demand for a story puts AMP in the limelight. The program manager and staff of the Ambient Monitoring Program make themselves available to television and newspaper reporters, thus educating the public about the AQI, the statewide air monitors, and the Clean Air Campaign.

OTHER OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES

Meteorologists
In cooperation with The Clean Air Campaign, forecasters from the ambient monitoring program visit the weather centers of Atlanta's top four commercial television stations. During these visits, the group is briefed on how each station's weather team receives and uses ambient monitoring information in their daily smog forecasts. The EPD/Clean Air Campaign team provides input and direction to the weathercasters as to how they can best use the data to maximize the usefulness of this information for their viewers.

Elementary and Middle Schools Educating school children and incorporating air quality information into the classroom-learning environment is also an outreach strategy for the Ambient Monitoring Program. AMP staff visits Georgia classrooms to discuss air quality, forecasting, and monitoring. Each program presented by the AMP is designed to supplement grade-specific curricula. Learning opportunities include meteorological lessons, such as weather patterns and conditions, as well as forecasting techniques.

In many situations, these lessons involve hands-on activities and mini-field trips to the monitoring sites. High School students simulate forecasting conditions and use scientific methods to create their own forecasts. AMP Staff also participate in Career Days at both elementary and high schools to draw excitement into environmental and meteorological careers.

Colleges and Universities The Ambient Monitoring Program works with colleges and universities in several capacities. Utilizing a more technical, advanced approach, AMP has participated in several college-level seminars, providing scientific expertise on the subject of meteorology and forecasting. Through this close contact with university staff, AMP staff have co-authored scientific papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals. AMP Staff provide technical data to professors as well as students, thus incorporating realtime data into college courses and projects. Additionally, AMP contracts with Georgia Institute of Technology in a joint forecasting effort.

Monitoring Data Requests AMP also regularly receives requests for specific, detailed monitoring data from members of the research community and the broader public. Completely fulfilling the needs of these data users often also requires not just providing such data, but also providing guidance on how the data can be interpreted and what the limitations of the data set may be. We welcome these opportunities to serve the public and the research community and to ensure that the data we collect is put to its fullest and most advantageous use is protecting the health and welfare of Georgia's citizens and the state's natural environment.

EPA AIRNOW Website Georgia supplies ozone and particulate matter data to the US EPA every hour for pollution mapping activities. AIRNOW is a cooperative effort between EPA, states, and local air pollution control agencies to provide near real-time information on ground level ozone and PM2.5 concentrations. EPA uses the data to produce maps that display ozone and PM2.5 contours covering the Midwest, New England, Mid-Atlantic, Southeastern, South central and Pacific coastal regions of the country. Colorcoded, animated concentration gradient ozone maps are created that show daily ozone formation and

147 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Outreach and Education

transport at various spatial scales. The information is available on the EPA's AIRNOW website at: http://www.airnow.gov/. See Figure 90 for a sample map.

Figure 90: Sample AIRNOW Ozone Concentration Map

The AIRNOW Data Management Center (DMC) regularly evaluates the performance of monitoring agencies that participate in the AIRNOW project based on three criteria:
1. Percent of hourly data files received 2. Average arrival time (earlier in the hour is better) 3. Percent completeness of the data within the submission files There is a three-tier system set up to evaluate each agency based on these performance criteria. An agency is placed in a tier based on how it performs these three criteria, with respect to all participating agencies. The three tiers are top, middle, and lower. Georgia's evaluation results are shown in Table 38.

Evaluation Criteria
Percent of Data Files Received Average Data Arrival Time (minutes)
Percent Completeness of Files

Ozone Season (May 1-Septemeber 30, 2009)
Middle Tier (97%) Top Tier (7 minutes)
Lower Tier (93%)

PM2.5 Season (whole year)
Middle Tier (96%) Top Tier (15 minutes)
Lower Tier (93%)

Table 38: AIRNOW Participation Evaluation Results

148 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Outreach and Education

GA EPD Website and Call-In System The Ambient Monitoring Program also provides a public-access website with Georgia-specific current and historical air quality data more promptly and with more detail than what is available at the AIRNOW website. AMP's website provides hourly information about current pollutant concentrations from Georgia's continuous and semi-continuous monitoring equipment, and is updated with each hour's data only 15 minutes after the hour ends. The site also offers downloads of bulk data, and electronic copies of archived Annual Reports such as this one, on a self-serve basis to facilitate research projects and satisfy public interest on these topics. Finally, the Ambient Monitoring Program also maintains an automated dial-in system that provides current air quality information for those who may not have ready access to the internet. These resources are listed below.

Ambient Monitoring Program Website: http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp

Call-In System: (800) 427-9605 (statewide) (404) 362-4909 (metro Atlanta free calling zone)

149 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Appendix A: Additional Criteria Pollutant Data

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Units: parts per million

Site ID

City

County

Site Name

Hours Measured

131210099 Atlanta Fulton 132230003 Yorkville Paulding

Roswell Road
Yorkville

8524 7897

Max

1 - Hour

1st

2nd

3.3

2.7

Obs. > 35
0

0.512 0.502 0

Max 8 -

Hour

1st

2nd

2.0 1.5

Obs. > 9
0

0.5 0.5 0

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Units: parts per million

Site ID

City

County

Site Name

Hours Measured

130890002 Decatur 131210048 Atlanta 132230003 Yorkville 132470001 Conyers *Monitor ran partial year.

DeKalb Fulton Paulding Rockdale

South DeKalb Georgia Tech
Yorkville Monastery

8110 2771* 8259 8051

Nitric Oxide (NO)

Units: parts per million

Site ID

City

130890002

Decatur

131210048

Atlanta

132230003

Yorkville

132470001

Conyers

*Monitor ran partial year.

County Site Name
DeKalb South DeKalb Fulton Georgia Tech Paulding Yorkville Rockdale Monastery

Hours Measured
8111 2771* 8522 8319

Max 1-Hour

1st

2nd

0.067 0.065 0.033 0.021

0.061 0.058 0.025 0.021

Annual Arithmetic
Mean
0.0107 0.0156
0.0025
0.0035

1st Max
0.394 0.321 0.013 0.058

Annual Arithmetic Mean
0.0209 0.0091 0.0050 0.0052

150 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)

Units: parts per million

Site ID

City

County

130890002 131210048

Decatur Atlanta

132230003 Yorkville

132470001 Conyers *Monitor ran partial year.

DeKalb Fulton Paulding Rockdale

Site Name
South DeKalb Georgia Tech
Yorkville Monastery

Hours Measured
8111 2771* 8522 8051

1st Max
0.462 0.376 0.033 0.067

Annual Arithmetic Mean
0.0283 0.0208
0.0053
0.0060

Reactive Oxides of Nitrogen (NOy)

Units: parts per million

Site ID

City

County

130890002 Decatur DeKalb

Site Name South DeKalb

Hours Measured 6036

1st Max**
0.2010

Annual Arithmetic Mean
0.02547

** The NOy instrument is specialized for measurement of trace concentrations, so its range is only 0-0.200 ppm. Actual 1st Max appears to have exceeded the instrument's measurement range. Since all ambient concentrations exceeding the instrument's range are recorded as 0.200 instead of the actual (higher) value, the reported annual arithmetic mean may be biased slightly downward from the true concentration.

151 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

24-Hour, 3-Hour, and 1-Hour Maximum Observations

Units: parts per million

Site ID

Hours

City

County Site Name Measur

-ed

130210012 Macon 130510021 Savannah 130511002 Savannah 131150003 Rome 131210048 Atlanta 131210055 Atlanta 131270006 Brunswick 132150008 Columbus *Monitor ran partial year.

Bibb Chatham Chatham
Floyd Fulton Fulton Glynn Muscogee

Georgia Forestry Comm.
East President St.
W. Lathrop & Augusta
Ave.
Coosa Elem. School
Georgia Tech
Confederate Ave. Risley Middle
School Columbus
Airport

8540 8592 8611 6178* 2728* 8590 8571 8250

Max 24 - Hour

1st

2nd

0.011 0.006

0.022 0.021

0.024 0.022

0.008 0.007 0.010 0.008 0.015 0.010

0.015 0.004

0.007 0.007

Obs. >
0.14
0
0
0
0 0 0
0
0

Max 3 - Hour

1st

2nd

0.034 0.018

0.056 0.046

0.079 0.065

0.044 0.024 0.053 0.023 0.084 0.022

0.115 0.010

0.019 0.019

Obs. > 0.5
0
0
0
0 0 0
0
0

Max 1-Hour

1st

2nd

0.039 0.037

0.066 0.065

0.157 0.100

0.064 0.054 0.124 0.039 0.116 0.079

0.210 0.134

0.026 0.023

Annual Arithme
-tic Mean 0.0014
0.0026
0.0026
0.0014 0.0021 0.0017
0.0011
0.0013

152 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Ozone (O3)

1-Hour Averages

Units: parts per million

Site ID

City

130210012 130510021 130550001 130590002 130670003 130730001 130770002 130850001 130890002 130970004 131210055 131270006 131350002 131510002 132130003 132150008 132230003 132450091 132470001 132611001

Macon Savannah Summerville
Athens Kennesaw
Evans Newnan Dawsonville Decatur Douglasville Atlanta Brunswick Lawrenceville McDonough Chatsworth Columbus Yorkville Augusta Conyers
Leslie

County
Bibb Chatham Chattooga
Clarke Cobb Columbia Coweta Dawson DeKalb Douglas Fulton Glynn Gwinnett Henry Murray Muscogee Paulding Richmond Rockdale Sumter

Site Name
GA Forestry Comm. E. President Street DNR Fish Hatchery College Station Rd. Georgia National Guard
Riverside Park Univ. of West Georgia GA Forestry Comm.
South DeKalb W. Strickland St. Confederate Ave. Risley Middle School Gwinnett Tech. County Extension Office
Fort Mountain Columbus Airport
Yorkville Bungalow Road Elementary School
Conyers Monastery Leslie Community Center

Days Measured
241 244 243 243 245 239 238 235 242 245 244 238 245 245 241 238 245 227 243 233

Section: Appendix A

1st Max
0.089 0.082 0.096 0.081 0.109 0.071 0.080 0.080 0.099 0.100 0.107 0.078 0.099 0.104 0.102 0.083 0.078 0.081 0.097 0.070

2nd Max
0.088 0.079 0.076 0.078 0.102 0.071 0.080 0.079 0.096 0.081 0.103 0.078 0.094 0.088 0.085 0.081 0.077 0.080 0.093 0.065

153 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Ozone (O3)

8-Hour Averages

Units: parts per million

Site ID

City

County

130210012 130510021 130550001 130590002 130670003 130730001 130770002 130850001 130890002 130970004 131210055 131270006 131350002 131510002 132130003 132150008 132230003 132450091 132470001 132611001

Macon Savannah Summerville
Athens Kennesaw
Evans Newnan Dawsonville Decatur Douglasville Atlanta Brunswick Lawrenceville McDonough Chatsworth Columbus Yorkville Augusta Conyers
Leslie

Bibb Chatham Chattooga
Clarke Cobb Columbia Coweta Dawson DeKalb Douglas Fulton Glynn Gwinnett Henry Murray Muscogee Paulding Richmond Rockdale Sumter

Site Name

Days Measured

GA Forestry Comm.

241

E. President Street

244

DNR Fish Hatchery

243

College Station Road

243

Georgia National Guard

245

Riverside Park

238

Univ. of West Georgia

237

GA Forestry Comm.

233

South DeKalb

240

W. Strickland St.

245

Confederate Ave.

241

Risley Middle School

238

Gwinnett Tech.

244

County Extension Office

244

Fort Mountain

240

Columbus Airport

237

Yorkville

245

Bungalow Road Elementary School

224

Conyers Monastery

242

Community Center

229

1st Max
0.077 0.075 0.070 0.074 0.091 0.067 0.071 0.071 0.083 0.084 0.094 0.066 0.084 0.081 0.080 0.068 0.073 0.070 0.087 0.062

2nd Max

3rd Max

0.076 0.066 0.068 0.072 0.088 0.066 0.071 0.069 0.083 0.078 0.091 0.064 0.081 0.077 0.077 0.067 0.070 0.068 0.081 0.060

0.074 0.063 0.066 0.067 0.079 0.065 0.066 0.068 0.082 0.072 0.086 0.059 0.076 0.075 0.070 0.066 0.068 0.066 0.076 0.060

4th Max
0.070 0.062 0.065 0.067 0.076 0.064 0.065 0.067 0.077 0.072 0.077 0.057 0.073 0.074 0.069 0.065 0.067 0.065 0.070 0.060

Number of Days > 0.075 2 0 0 0 4 0 0
0 5 2 5 0 3 2 2 0 0 0 3 0

4th max used in 3-year average, therefore if number above 0.075 is more than 4 per site, it is shown in bold.

154 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Lead (Pb)

Quarterly Composite Averages

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City

County

130890003

Atlanta

DeKalb

132150011 Columbus Muscogee

*Changed to 24-hour data as of August 2009.

Site Name
DMRC Cusseta School

Number of Observations
7* 7*

1st Quarter Composite
Avg.
0.0034 0.0163

2nd Quarter Composite
Avg.
0.0026 0.0103

3rd Quarter Composite
Avg.
0.0029 0.0045

4th Quarter Composite
Avg.

Number of
Values > 1.5
0 0

Note: The analysis method used for lead cannot reliably distinguish concentrations smaller than 0.20. This is known as the Method Detection Limit (MDL). In cases where the analysis results in a raw data concentration less than the MDL for that method, EPA requires us to report a concentration of one half the MDL. For many purposes, however, these values could alternatively be interpreted as "Not Detected". As of October 15, 2008, the NAAQS for lead was changed to 0.15 g/m3 on a rolling 3-month average. This new lead standard will be effective January 12, 2009 and implemented by January 1, 2010.

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City

County

130150003 Cartersville

Bartow

130890003

Atlanta

DeKalb

132150011 Columbus Muscogee

*Monitor started sampling December 2009.

24-Hour Averages

Site Name
Cartersville DMRC
Cusseta School

Number of Observations
4* 25 25

1st Quarter Avg.

2nd Quarter Avg.

3rd Quarter Avg.
0.0028 0.0092

4th Quarter Avg.
0.0049 0.0034 0.0280

Number of
Values > 1.5
0 0 0

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City

County

130150003 Cartersville

Bartow

130890003

Atlanta

DeKalb

132150011 Columbus Muscogee

*Monitor started sampling December 2009.

24-Hour Averages Using Federal Equivalent Method

Site Name
Cartersville DMRC
Cusseta School

Number of Observations
4* 15 15

1st Quarter Avg.

2nd Quarter Avg.

3rd Quarter Avg.

4th Quarter Avg.
0.0053 0.0035 0.0286

Number of
Values > 1.5
0 0 0

155 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

Annual Arithmetic Mean Integrated Sampling (midnight to midnight) Using Federal Reference Method

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City

County

130210007 Macon

Bibb

130210012 Macon

Bibb

130510017 Savannah Chatham

Site Name
Allied Chemical GA Forestry Comm. Market St.

Days Measured
310

98th Percen-
tile
25.2

Values Exceeding Applicable
Daily Standard
1

108

24.6

1

113

21.3

0

Annual Arithmetic Mean
12.31
10.64
9.93

130510091 Savannah Chatham Mercer School 107

24.5

130590002 Athens

Clarke

College Station Rd.

111

19.5

130630091

Forest Park

Clayton

Georgia DOT

116

23.3

130670003 Kennesaw Cobb

GA National Guard

341

24.1

130670004

Powder Springs

Cobb

Macland Aquatic Center

102

19.7

130890002 Decatur DeKalb

South DeKalb

326

25.8

0

10.23

0

10.32

0

11.54

0

11.22

0

10.31

1

11.41

130892001 Doraville DeKalb

Police Dept.

333

24.6

130950007

Albany Dougherty

Turner Elem. School

178

31.6

131150003* Rome

Floyd

Coosa Elementary*

335

24.5

131210032 Atlanta

Fulton E. Rivers School 261

24.8

1

11.72

1

11.80

2

11.35

0

11.55

131210039 Atlanta

Fulton

Fire Station #8 113

24.7

131270006 Brunswick Glynn

Risley Middle School

105

26.4

*Sites consolidated; data combined for Rome-Coosa Elem and Rome-Coosa High.

0

12.07

2

9.71

156 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) (continued)

Annual Arithmetic Mean Integrated Sampling (midnight to midnight) Using Federal Reference Method

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City

County

131350002 131390003 131530001 131850003 132150001 132150008 132150011 132230003

Lawrenceville
Gainesville Warner Robins Valdosta
Columbus
Columbus
Columbus
Yorkville

Gwinnett Hall
Houston Lowndes Muscogee Muscogee Muscogee Paulding

Site Name
Gwinnett Tech
Fair St. Elem.
Robins AFB S.L. Mason
Elem. Health Dept.
Columbus Airport
Cusseta Rd. School Yorkville

Days Measured
102

98th Percen-
tile
22.1

Values Exceeding Applicable
Daily Standard
0

Annual Arithmetic Mean
11.55

109

20.0

0

10.22

107

23.5

0

10.39

107

24.7

0

9.76

114

22.8

0

11.22

60

25.0

0

11.79

113

23.8

1

11.01

103

22.4

0

9.91

132450005 Augusta Richmond Medical College 95

23.7

132450091 Augusta

Richmond

Bungalow Rd. School

110

24.2

132950002 Rossville

Walker

Health Dept. 117

23.6

133030001 Sandersville

Washington

Health Dept.

109

30.9

133190001 Gordon

Wilkinson Police Dept.

119

27.4

0

10.92

1

12.03

0

10.70

1

11.27

1

12.51

157 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Annual Arithmetic Mean Semi-Continuous Measurements

Section: Appendix A

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City

County

Site Name

Hours Measured

1st Max

2nd Max

Annual Arithmetic Mean

130210012

Macon

Bibb

GA Forestry Comm.

8537 80.0 76.6 10.06

130511002

Savannah

Chatham

Lathrop & Augusta Avenues

8648

70.2 66.3

9.95

130590002

Athens

Clarke College Station Rd. 8663 153.8 64.5 9.50

130770002

Newnan

Coweta

Univ. of West Georgia

8385 86.4 73.1 9.89

130890002

Decatur

DeKalb

South DeKalb

8556 90.4 65.4 11.20

130950007

Albany

Dougherty

Turner Elem

7402 125.4 99.1 13.97

131150003*

Rome

Floyd

131210055

Atlanta

Fulton

131350002 Lawrenceville Gwinnett

Coosa Elem*
Confederate Avenue
Gwinnett Tech

7747 8624 8662

82.4 75.5 87.5 86.7 67.5 57.6

11.81 13.77 10.07

131390003 131510002 131530001 131850003

Gainesville
McDonough Warner Robins Valdosta

Hall Henry Houston Lowndes

Gainesville County Extension
Office Warner Robins
Valdosta

7587 260.0 108.1 11.99

8661 85.3 79.9 9.98

6936 7759

73.9 68.1 62.7 58.2

13.46 13.22

132150008 Columbus Muscogee Columbus Airport 8602 85.3 80.3 9.89

132230003

Yorkville

Paulding

Yorkville

8615 55.4 49.6 8.95

132450091

Augusta

Richmond

Bungalow Rd. School

8272 69.1 68.7 10.27

132950002 Rossville

Walker Health Department 7469 57.6 47.6 12.05

*Sites consolidated; data combined for Rome-Coosa Elem and Rome-Coosa High These semi-continuous methods for measuring PM2.5 are not approved for use in making attainment determinations.

158 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Particulate Matter (PM10)

24-Hour Integrated Measurements

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City

County

130210007 Macon

Bibb

130510014 Savannah Chatham

130550001 Summerville Chattooga

130892001 Doraville

DeKalb

Site Name
Allied Chemical Shuman
School DNR Fish Hatchery
Police Dept.

Days Measured

1st Max

Number Values >150

Annual Arithmetic Mean

59

53

0

22.9

56

34

0

18.1

60

37

0

19.6

56

35

0

20.6

130950007

Albany

Dougherty

Turner Elementary

55

71

0

26.6

131150003* Rome

Floyd

Coosa Elem School*

60

45

0

24.9

131210032 Atlanta

Fulton

E. Rivers School

45

40

0

21.5

131270004 Brunswick

Glynn

Arco Pump Station

47

85

0

23.5

132150011

Columbus

Muscogee

Cusseta Rd. Elem. School

59

94

0

22.6

132450091 Augusta

Richmond

Bungalow Rd. Elem. School

58

46

0

23.6

133030001 Sandersville Washington Health Dept.

53

55

0

*Sites consolidated; data combined for Rome-Coosa Elem and Rome-Coosa High

24.6

159 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix A

Particulate Matter (PM10)

Hourly Averages of Semi-Continuous Measurements

Units: micrograms per cubic meter

Site ID

City County Site Name

131210048 Atlanta *Monitor ran partial year.

Fulton

Georgia Tech

Hours Measured
5483*

1st Max 42

Annual Arithmetic
Mean
18.2

160 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix B

Appendix B: Additional PM2.5 Particle Speciation Data

Particle Speciation- 2009 Statewide Average

Organic Carbon 41%

Sulfate 24%

Elemental Carbon 5%
Ammonium Ion 8%

Other 13%

Nitrate 6%
Crustal 3%

161 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix B

Particle Speciation - Macon 2009

Organic Carbon 38%

Sulfate 25%

Othe r 14%
Elem ental Carbon 4% Am m onium Ion 8%

Nitrate 6%
Cr us tal 5%

Particle Speciation - Athens 2009

Organic Carbon 44%

Sulfate 22%

Other 12%

Nitrate 7%

Elemental Carbon Ammonium Ion

4%

9%

Crustal 2%

162 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
Particle Speciation - Douglas 2009

Section: Appendix B

Organic Carbon 51%

Sulfate 21%

Othe r 12%

Elem ental Carbon

6%

Am m onium Ion

5%

Nitrate 3%
Cr us tal 2%

Particle Speciation- Atlanta 2009

Organic Carbon 44%

Sulfate 21%

Elemental Carbon 8%
Ammonium Ion 8%

Other 12%

Nitrate 5%
Crustal 2%

163 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix B

Particle Speciation - Rome 2009

Organic Carbon 36%

Sulfate 26%

Othe r 13%

Elem ental Carbon 6%

Am m onium Ion 9%

Nitrate 7%
Cr us tal 3%

Particle Speciation - Columbus 2009

Organic Carbon 36%

Sulfate 28%

Elem ental Carbon 3%
Am m onium Ion 8%

Othe r 16%

Nitrate 6%
Cr us tal 3%

164 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
Particle Speciation - Augusta 2009

Section: Appendix B

Organic Carbon 41%

Sulfate 24%

Othe r 14%

Elem ental Carbon

5%

Am m onium Ion

8%

Nitrate 5%
Cr us tal 3%

Particle Speciation - Rossville 2009

Organic Carbon 40%

Sulfate 24%

Other 13%

Elemental Carbon 4%

Ammonium Ion 9%

Nitrate 7%
Crustal 3%

165 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

Appendix C: Additional PAMS Data

PAMS Continuous Hydrocarbon Data (June-August 2009)

(concentrations in parts per billion Carbon (ppbC))

Name

Site #Samples

Avg.

1st Max

2nd Max

PAMSHC

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1290 1962 1379

60.15 33.37 21.54

291.6 116.5 86.1

246.2 110.3 83.8

TNMOC

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1290 1962 1379

74.37 37.65 28.38

355.0 129.7 93.9

287.8 123.9 91.5

Ethane

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1425 1959 1854

3.606 2.718 2.343

15.00 11.50 9.72

14.90 11.00 9.22

Ethylene

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1425 1959 1839

2.251 0.373 0.369

29.68 4.70 2.34

18.02 3.40 2.14

Propane

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1425 1959 1845

4.554 3.154 2.698

39.69 14.80 50.62

37.14 13.90 16.04

Propylene

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1425 1959 1843

1.358 0.563 0.375

12.49

8.09

2.90

2.00

2.05

1.58

Acetylene

S. DeKalb

1425

0.89

19.1

11.5

Conyers

1959

0.19

4.2

2.7

Yorkville

1870

0.16

3.8

1.9

n-Butane

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1425 1959 1867

2.315 1.091 0.751

13.69 4.80 19.21

12.29 4.20 2.78

Isobutane

S. DeKalb

1425

1.310

7.86

7.46

Conyers

1959

0.538

2.60

2.50

Yorkville

1864

0.321

2.67

1.45

trans-2-Butene

S. DeKalb

1425

0.181

1.31

1.23

Conyers

1959

0.007

0.30

0.30

Yorkville

1870

0.005

0.26

0.24

cis-2-Butene

S. DeKalb

1425

0.091

1.48

1.44

Conyers

1959

0.007

0.60

0.30

Yorkville

1871

0.005

0.01

0.01

n-Pentane

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1425 1959 1871

5.685 0.938 0.554

38.12 11.30 3.98

34.66 10.40 3.62

Isopentane

S. DeKalb Conyers Yorkville

1425 1959 1871

4.415 1.820 0.972

28.20 13.90 5.95

25.17 13.10 5.86

1-Pentene

S. DeKalb

1425

0.100

1.02

0.90

Conyers

1959

0.005

0.20

0.01

Yorkville

1867

0.005

0.49

0.22

166 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

PAMS Continuous Hydrocarbon Data (June-August 2009)(continued)

Name

(concentrations in ppbC)

Site #Samples

Avg.

1st Max

2nd Max

trans-2-Pentene

S. DeKalb

1425

0.168

6.65

1.99

Conyers

1959

0.007

0.60

0.20

Yorkville

1869

0.007

0.52

0.43

cis-2-Pentene

S. DeKalb

1425

0.072

0.99

0.79

Conyers

1959

0.005

0.20

0.20

Yorkville

1866

0.005

0.24

0.01

3-Methylpentane

S. DeKalb

1425

0.867

5.27

5.02

Conyers

1956

0.160

2.50

1.90

Yorkville

1867

0.074

1.59

0.97

n-Hexane

S. DeKalb

1282

1.189

6.94

6.91

Conyers

1749

0.478

3.70

2.30

Yorkville

2065

0.073

3.31

2.81

n-Heptane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.532

5.25

3.95

Conyers

1954

0.162

1.70

1.10

Yorkville

2065

0.020

1.44

0.94

n-Octane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.172

1.54

1.50

Conyers

1954

0.029

1.20

0.60

Yorkville

2065

0.013

0.68

0.49

n-Nonane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.147

1.23

1.20

Conyers

1954

0.062

0.50

0.50

Yorkville

2065

0.018

3.63

0.44

n-Decane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.140

2.53

2.17

Conyers

1954

0.034

1.60

0.70

Yorkville

2065

0.019

1.22

1.06

Cyclopentane

S. DeKalb

1425

0.542

40.99

20.94

Conyers

1959

0.030

0.60

0.50

Yorkville

1871

0.010

0.34

0.28

Isoprene

S. DeKalb

1425

7.478

31.49

28.57

Conyers

1958

6.642

60.20

59.00

Yorkville

1872

7.415

67.66

65.18

2,2-Dimethylbutane

S. DeKalb

1425

0.114

1.12

0.94

Conyers

1958

0.043

1.50

1.00

Yorkville

1868

0.005

0.27

0.22

2,4-Dimethylpentane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.203

1.72

1.62

Conyers

1954

0.051

0.70

0.60

Yorkville

2065

0.008

0.72

0.68

Cyclohexane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.182

1.50

1.31

Conyers

1954

0.036

0.60

0.40

Yorkville

2065

0.006

0.31

0.24

3-Methylhexane

S. DeKalb

1282

1.009

4.98

4.05

Conyers

1954

0.201

2.60

1.90

Yorkville

2065

0.033

1.65

1.01

2,2,4-Trimethylpentane S. DeKalb

1282

1.159

7.76

7.52

Conyers

1954

0.437

3.40

2.40

Yorkville

2065

0.077

2.09

1.76

167 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

PAMS Continuous Hydrocarbon Data (June-August 2009)(continued)

Name

(concentrations in ppbC)

Site #Samples

Avg.

1st Max

2nd Max

2,3,4-Trimethylpentane S. DeKalb

1282

0.303

2.25

2.25

Conyers

1954

0.089

0.70

0.70

Yorkville

2065

0.010

0.83

0.82

3-Methylheptane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.159

1.76

1.36

Conyers

1954

0.035

0.70

0.50

Yorkville

2065

0.010

1.27

1.15

Methylcyclohexane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.524

3.15

2.36

Conyers

1954

0.056

0.90

0.60

Yorkville

2065

0.011

1.40

1.36

Methylcyclopentane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.518

3.78

3.60

Conyers

1954

0.212

2.00

1.20

Yorkville

2065

0.028

2.89

2.70

2-Methylhexane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.487

3.43

2.84

Conyers

1954

0.161

1.90

1.60

Yorkville

2065

0.012

1.66

1.17

1-Butene

S. DeKalb

1425

0.348

2.29

1.18

Conyers

1959

0.125

0.60

0.50

Yorkville

1872

0.007

0.32

0.32

2,3-Dimethylbutane

S. DeKalb

1425

0.321

6.96

2.26

Conyers

1956

0.038

1.50

1.30

Yorkville

1867

0.012

0.43

0.42

2-Methylpentane

S. DeKalb

1425

1.215

7.70

7.06

Conyers

1956

0.158

1.90

1.00

Yorkville

1867

0.204

2.33

1.45

2,3-Dimethylpentane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.340

2.44

2.10

Conyers

1954

0.072

0.80

0.70

Yorkville

2065

0.010

0.74

0.68

n-Undecane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.424

4.25

4.05

Conyers

1954

0.065

14.80

1.60

Yorkville

2065

0.067

2.77

1.78

2-Methylheptane

S. DeKalb

1282

0.129

2.88

1.80

Conyers

1954

0.028

0.40

0.30

Yorkville

2065

0.008

1.16

0.79

m & p Xylenes

S. DeKalb

1282

1.472

17.93

10.23

Conyers

1954

0.532

6.00

5.60

Yorkville

2065

0.147

2.67

1.92

Benzene

S. DeKalb

1282

1.305

15.03

8.62

Conyers

1954

0.551

5.00

2.40

Yorkville

2065

0.107

1.63

1.10

Toluene

S. DeKalb

1282

3.752

26.83

20.77

Conyers

1954

1.455

37.40

9.50

Yorkville

2065

0.578

5.35

4.10

Ethylbenzene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.486

4.91

2.66

Conyers

1954

0.171

2.10

1.70

Yorkville

2065

0.020

0.82

0.68

168 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

PAMS Continuous Hydrocarbon Data (June-August 2009)(continued)

Name

(concentrations in ppbC)

Site #Samples

Avg.

1st Max

2nd Max

o-Xylene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.565

5.47

4.11

Conyers

1954

0.223

1.90

1.40

Yorkville

2065

0.029

1.06

0.77

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene S. DeKalb

1282

0.192

2.83

1.79

Conyers

1954

0.125

1.10

0.90

Yorkville

2065

0.014

0.87

0.79

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene S. DeKalb

1282

0.835

9.68

4.60

Conyers

1954

0.314

2.80

1.70

Yorkville

2063

0.053

1.85

1.45

n-Propylbenzene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.098

1.49

1.18

Conyers

1954

0.094

0.60

0.60

Yorkville

2065

0.011

0.66

0.65

Isopropylbenzene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.207

2.52

2.39

Conyers

1954

0.053

0.60

0.60

Yorkville

2065

0.012

2.98

1.40

o-Ethyltoluene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.161

2.17

1.51

Conyers

1954

0.056

0.90

0.70

Yorkville

2065

0.010

0.60

0.58

m-Ethyltoluene

S. DeKalb

N/A

Conyers

N/A

Yorkville

875

0.568

5.04

3.61

m-Diethylbenzene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.044

2.11

2.00

Conyers

1954

0.011

0.40

0.40

Yorkville

1996

0.006

0.38

0.24

p-Diethylbenzene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.124

2.25

1.43

Conyers

1954

0.048

0.70

0.60

Yorkville

2065

0.011

0.84

0.82

Styrene

S. DeKalb

1282

0.614

2.93

2.67

Conyers

1954

0.176

1.50

1.50

Yorkville

2064

0.145

0.94

0.92

Beta Pinene and 1,2,3- S. DeKalb

1283

2.554

14.16

13.05

Trimethylbenzene

Conyers

1954

5.491

30.20

29.90

Yorkville

2065

1.933

16.93

12.94

Pinene and p-Ethyltoluene S. DeKalb

N/A

Conyers

N/A

Yorkville

875

0.006

0.45

0.33

m and p-Ethyltoluene

S. DeKalb

1283

2.096

13.98

11.10

Conyers

1954

3.545

19.90

19.50

Yorkville

1190

1.075

5.44

5.11

N/A indicates not applicable

169 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

PAMS 2009 24-hour Canister Hydrocarbons

(concentrations in parts per billion Carbon (ppbC))

Name

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.* 1st Max 2nd Max

PAMSHC

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

11

Yorkville

39

39

61.21 160.0 160.0

11

39.91 100.0 80.0

39

23.19 54.0 46.0

TNMOC

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

11

Yorkville

39

39 234.54 430.0 410.0

11 153.55 350.0 230.0

39

97.03 215.0 150.0

Ethane

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

32

4.62 14.0 13.0

40

4.72 9.6 9.2

39

4.38 10.0 7.7

Ethylene

S. DeKalb

39

ND

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

Propane

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

54Yorkville

39

37

6.35 19.0 17.0

38

4.56 11.0 10.0

37

4.36 12.0 8.3

Propylene

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

27

0.99 4.2 3.8

16

0.27 1.2 0.9

3

0.12 0.4 0.3

Acetylene

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

30

1.36 5.4 5.1

26

0.82 2.5 2.4

24

0.52 1.8 1.5

n-Butane

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

37

5.10 18.0 18.0

33

2.18 6.8 6.5

31

1.54 4.4 4.1

Isobutane

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

30

1.61 6.0 5.7

24

0.57 1.9 1.6

15

0.37 1.4 1.3

trans-2-Butene

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

4

0.13 0.5 0.4

5

5.96 100.0 71.0

ND

cis-2-Butene

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

3

0.12 0.6 0.3

1

0.11 0.6

ND

n-Pentane

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

38

3.24 8.6 8.3

34

1.05 3.4 3.2

32

0.59 1.6 1.5

Isopentane

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

38

6.00 27.0 15.0

38

1.92 5.8 5.0

33

1.24 5.2 3.9

1-Pentene

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

6

0.15 1.0 0.5

4

0.16 1.4 0.5

1

0.11 0.3

trans-2-Pentene

S. DeKalb

39

Conyers

40

Yorkville

39

11

0.71 6.2 5.9

13

1.71 7.8 7.3

9

0.90 10.0 7.1

170 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

PAMS 2009 24-hour Canister Hydrocarbons (continued)

(concentrations in ppbC)

Name

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.* 1st Max 2nd Max

cis-2-Pentene

S. DeKalb

39

3

0.20 3.7

0.3

Conyers

40

2

0.25 3.1

3.0

Yorkville

39

2

0.44 10.0 3.4

3-Methylpentane

S. DeKalb

39

29

1.43 4.1

3.9

Conyers

40

19

0.38 2.9

1.0

Yorkville

39

13

0.28 1.2

1.0

n-Hexane

S. DeKalb

39

32

1.08 3.2

3.0

Conyers

40

9

0.17 0.8

0.5

Yorkville

39

10

0.19 0.6

0.6

n-Heptane

S. DeKalb

39

14

0.28 1.2

1.1

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

n-Octane

S. DeKalb

39

2

0.11 0.4

0.3

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

n-Nonane

S. DeKalb

39

1

0.10 0.3

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

n-Decane

S. DeKalb

39

3

0.11 0.4

0.3

Conyers

40

2

0.14 1.6

0.3

Yorkville

39

ND

Cyclopentane

S. DeKalb

39

1

0.1

0.2

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

Isoprene

S. DeKalb

39

19

2.70 17.0 12.0

Conyers

40

15

2.23 12.0 12.0

Yorkville

39

15

1.81 13.0 12.0

2,2-Dimethylbutane

S. DeKalb

39

31

1.04 3.5

2.9

Conyers

40

11

0.52 4.3

2.7

Yorkville

39

1

0.11 0.6

2,4-Dimethylpentane

S. DeKalb

39

5

0.12 0.4

0.3

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

Cyclohexane

S. DeKalb

39

6

0.14 0.5

0.4

Conyers

40

2

0.11 0.2

0.2

Yorkville

39

4

0.18 2.4

0.7

3-Methylhexane

S. DeKalb

39

16

0.39 1.5

1.4

Conyers

40

2

0.11 0.3

0.3

Yorkville

39

ND

2,2,4-Trimethylpentane S. DeKalb

39

24

1.04 4.4

4.4

Conyers

40

8

0.18 0.9

0.7

Yorkville

39

2

0.11 0.4

0.2

2,3,4-Trimethylpentane S. DeKalb

39

8

0.20 1.0

0.9

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

171 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

PAMS 2009 24-hour Canister Hydrocarbons (continued)

Name

(concentrations in ppbC)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.* 1st Max 2ndMax

3-Methylheptane

S. DeKalb

39

1

0.11 0.4

0.1

Conyers

40

1

0.10 0.2

Yorkville

39

ND

Methylcyclohexane

S. DeKalb

39

5

0.14 0.5

0.5

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

Methylcyclopentane

S. DeKalb

39

16

0.37 1.5

1.4

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

2-Methylhexane

S. DeKalb

39

17

0.97 8.3

4.6

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

1-Butene

S. DeKalb

39

15

0.35 4.0

1.0

Conyers

40

1

0.11 0.4

Yorkville

39

1

0.11 0.3

2,3-Dimenthylbutane

S. DeKalb

39

13

0.25 0.9

0.9

Conyers

40

6

0.19 0.9

0.9

Yorkville

39

6

0.18 1.1

1.0

2-Methylpentane

S. DeKalb

39

28

1.14 3.7

3.7

Conyers

40

17

0.25 0.9

0.9

Yorkville

39

8

0.29 3.6

1.3

2,3-Dimethylpentane

S. DeKalb

39

22

1.07 4.1

3.7

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

n-Undecane

S. DeKalb

39

17

0.29 0.9

0.9

Conyers

40

1

0.14 1.5

Yorkville

39

2

0.13 1.1

0.3

2-Methylheptane

S. DeKalb

39

1

0.11 0.4

0.1

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

m & p Xylenes

S. DeKalb

39

37

1.61 4.7

4.6

Conyers

40

23

0.33 0.9

0.9

Yorkville

39

9

0.28 1.9

1.2

Benzene

S. DeKalb

39

39

1.76 4.9

4.8

Conyers

40

26

0.65 1.9

1.8

Yorkville

39

15

0.43 1.5

1.5

Toluene

S. DeKalb

39

39

3.98 10.0 9.9

Conyers

40

39

1.40 3.4

3.3

Yorkville

39

35

1.17 5.6

4.1

Ethylbenzene

S. DeKalb

39

16

0.30 1.2

1.1

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

3

0.12 0.5

0.3

o-Xylene

S. DeKalb

39

17

0.38 1.5

1.5

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

5

0.16 0.8

0.5

172 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix C

PAMS 2009 24-hour Canister Hydrocarbons (continued)

Name

(concentrations in ppbC)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.* 1st Max 2ndMax

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene S. DeKalb

39

2

0.11 0.4

0.3

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

3

0.13 0.7

0.3

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene S. DeKalb

39

26

2.60 15.0 14.0

Conyers

3

ND

Yorkville

32

9

2.38 19.0 12.0

n-Propylbenzene

S. DeKalb

39

ND

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

1

0.11 0.3

Isopropylbenzene

S. DeKalb

39

ND

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

o-Ethyltoluene

S. DeKalb

39

4

0.14 0.9

0.5

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

2

0.11 0.3

0.2

m-Ethyltoluene

S. DeKalb

39

15

0.30 1.2

1.0

Conyers

40

1

0.11 0.3

Yorkville

39

5

0.20 1.6

0.9

p-Ethyltoluene

S. DeKalb

39

9

0.19 0.8

0.7

Conyers

40

7

0.20 1.0

0.9

Yorkville

39

5

0.16 1.1

0.6

m-Diethylbenzene

S. DeKalb

39

ND

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

ND

p-Diethylbenzene

S. DeKalb

39

ND

Conyers

40

ND

Yorkville

39

2

0.11 0.4 0.3

Styrene

S. DeKalb

39

31

0.48 1.4 1.1

Conyers

40

12

0.22 1.7 0.6

Yorkville

39

30

1.86 17.0 9.9

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene S. DeKalb

39

6

0.15 0.6 0.6

Conyers

40

4

0.14 1.1 0.3

Yorkville

39

5

0.17 1.0 0.9

ND indicates no detection *When a detected concentration is below one half of the method detection limit, then one half of the method detection level is used to calculate the average.

173 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Name Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Chromium+6*** Cobalt

Appendix D: Additional Toxics Data

2009 Metals
(concentrations in micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3))

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.*

Macon

29

29

0.00056

Savannah

31

31

0.00056

General Coffee

29

26

0.00031

Dawsonville

24

21

0.00045

South DeKalb**

57

56

0.00077

Yorkville

26

24

0.00045

Macon

29

20

0.00056

Savannah

31

24

0.00063

General Coffee

29

23

0.00096

Dawsonville

24

15

0.00055

South DeKalb**

57

36

0.00051

Yorkville

26

19

0.00062

Macon

29

2

0.00003

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

24

ND

South DeKalb**

57

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Macon

29

29

0.00015

Savannah

31

31

0.00026

General Coffee

29

29

0.00019

Dawsonville

24

23

0.00015

South DeKalb**

57

54

0.00006

Yorkville

26

25

0.00014

Macon

29

29

0.00208

Savannah

31

30

0.00218

General Coffee

29

29

0.00285

Dawsonville

24

24

0.00229

South DeKalb**

57

56

0.00169

Yorkville

26

25

0.00192

South DeKalb

58

21

0.00001

Macon

29

20

0.00021

Savannah

31

18

0.00009

General Coffee

29

20

0.00011

Dawsonville

24

12

0.00007

South DeKalb**

57

16

0.00006

Yorkville

26

10

0.00007

1st Max 0.00234 0.00159 0.00142 0.00132 0.00278 0.00121 0.00114 0.00148 0.00220 0.00161 0.00177 0.00161 0.00022

2nd Max 0.00143 0.00108 0.00066 0.00109 0.00211 0.00094 0.00097 0.00147 0.00219 0.00129 0.00133 0.00106 0.00009

0.00050 0.00068 0.00176 0.00057 0.00023 0.00075 0.00354 0.00409 0.03048 0.00683 0.01056 0.00307 0.00009 0.00192 0.00023 0.00055 0.00021 0.00021 0.00014

0.00031 0.00054 0.00080 0.00021 0.00015 0.00041 0.00347 0.00389 0.00349 0.00392 0.00350 0.00305 0.00007 0.00106 0.00021 0.00035 0.00012 0.00011 0.00012

174 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Name

2009 Metals (continued)

(concentrations in g/m3)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.*

1st Max 2nd Max

Lead

Macon

29

29

0.00492 0.03437 0.01056

Savannah

31

31

0.00248 0.00536 0.00505

General Coffee

29

29

0.00180 0.00503 0.00378

Dawsonville

24

24

0.00153 0.00395 0.00328

South DeKalb**

57

57

0.00136 0.00456 0.00336

Yorkville

26

26

0.00163 0.00369 0.00312

Manganese

Macon

29

29

0.00619 0.02916 0.01152

Savannah

31

31

0.00439 0.01536 0.01312

General Coffee

29

29

0.00355 0.00852 0.00749

Dawsonville

24

24

0.00339 0.01105 0.00916

South DeKalb**

57

57

0.00211 0.00509 0.00498

Yorkville

26

26

0.00309 0.00688 0.00594

Nickel

Macon

29

29

0.00166 0.00548 0.00232

Savannah

31

31

0.00223 0.00436 0.00428

General Coffee

29

29

0.00246 0.01949 0.00292

Dawsonville

24

24

0.00178 0.01562 0.00194

South DeKalb**

57

57

0.00134 0.02308 0.00169

Yorkville

26

25

0.00153 0.00357 0.00276

Selenium

Macon

29

28

0.00051 0.00130 0.00095

Savannah

31

30

0.00045 0.00114 0.00097

General Coffee

29

28

0.00046 0.00109 0.00105

Dawsonville

24

21

0.00058 0.00138 0.00137

South DeKalb**

57

49

0.00043 0.00241 0.00142

Yorkville

26

25

0.00054 0.00094 0.00092

Zinc

Macon

29

29

0.05427 0.31489 0.17563

Savannah

31

31

0.01518 0.03623 0.03482

General Coffee

29

29

0.02480 0.05947 0.05777

Dawsonville

24

24

0.01790 0.09780 0.02805

South DeKalb**

57

57

0.01090 0.02285 0.02122

Yorkville

25

25

0.01791 0.06704 0.04174

*When a detected concentration is below one half of the method detection limit, then one half of the method detection level is used to calculate the average, ** Selected PM10 Hi-Vol, sample collected every 6 days, *** Hexavalent Chromium, sample collected every 6 days, ND indicates no detection

175 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Name Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Benzo(a)pyrene

2009 Semi-Volatile Compounds
(concentrations in g/m3)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.**

Macon

30

1

0.02908

Savannah

27

2

0.02954

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

1

0.03003

South DeKalb*

59

58

0.00209

Yorkville

29

ND

Macon

26

ND

Savannah

23

ND

General Coffee

25

ND

Dawsonville

25

ND

South DeKalb*

59

43

0.00066

Yorkville

25

ND

Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

6

0.00596

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

27

0.00035

Yorkville

29

ND

Macon

28

ND

Savannah

25

ND

General Coffee

27

ND

Dawsonville

27

ND

South DeKalb*

59

30

0.00007

Yorkville

27

ND

Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

44

0.00017

Yorkville

29

ND

Macon

29

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

29

0.00006

Yorkville

29

ND

Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

26

0.00008

Yorkville

29

ND

1st Max 0.00247 0.00430 0.00093 0.01740
0.00597 0.00359 0.00492
0.00048
0.00102
0.00028
0.00060

2nd Max 0.00205 0.00592
0.00349 0.00208 0.00455
0.00025
0.00069
0.00026
0.00027

176 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Name

2009 Semi-Volatile Compounds (continued)

(concentrations in g/m3)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.** 1st Max

Benzo(e)pyrene

Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

37

0.00010 0.00048

Yorkville

29

ND

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

34

0.00011 0.00053

Yorkville

29

ND

Chrysene

Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

51

0.00014 0.00072

Yorkville

29

ND

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

28

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

1

0.00005 0.00006

Yorkville

29

ND

Fluoranthene

Macon

30

4

0.00033 0.00086

Savannah

27

8

0.00081 0.00422

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

3

0.00031 0.00053

South DeKalb*

59

59

0.00099 0.01130

Yorkville

29

2

0.00043 0.00453

Fluorene

Macon

30

3

0.00596 0.00201

Savannah

27

8

0.00702 0.01007

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

1

0.00606 0.00107

South DeKalb*

59

59

0.00275 0.01840

Yorkville

29

1

0.00578 0.00061

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Macon

30

ND

Savannah

27

ND

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

ND

South DeKalb*

59

30

0.00010 0.00052

Yorkville

29

ND

Naphthalene

Macon

26

4

0.03621 0.02727

Savannah

23

4

0.03541 0.02151

General Coffee

26

2

0.03225 0.00596

Dawsonville

26

4

0.03654 0.03569

2nd Max
0.00031
0.00034
0.00064
0.00085 0.00265 0.00047 0.00212 0.00043 0.00125 0.00926 0.00637
0.00035 0.01862 0.01590 0.00417 0.01898

177 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Name

2009 Semi-Volatile Compounds (continued)

(concentrations in g/m3)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.** 1st Max

Naphthalene (continued) South DeKalb*

59

59

0.10486 0.2960

Yorkville

25

4

0.03530 0.01836

Phenanthrene

Macon

30

8

0.00312 0.00475

Savannah

27

8

0.00466 0.01389

General Coffee

29

6

0.00245 0.00105

Dawsonville

29

6

0.00278 0.00284

South DeKalb*

59

59

0.00464 0.05290

Yorkville

29

6

0.00257 0.00183

Pyrene

Macon

30

1

0.00028 0.00042

Savannah

27

8

0.00050 0.00221

General Coffee

29

ND

Dawsonville

29

1

0.00029 0.00046

South DeKalb*

59

59

0.00062 0.00618

Yorkville

29

ND

Retene

South DeKalb*

59

55

0.00030 0.00149

9-fluorenone

South DeKalb*

59

58

0.00085 0.00806

Cyclopenta(cd)pyrene South DeKalb*

59

7

0.00007 0.00022

Coronene

South DeKalb*

59

16

0.00008 0.00025

Perylene

South DeKalb*

59

9

0.00005 0.00021

2nd Max 0.2920 0.01268 0.00433 0.01299 0.00085 0.00251 0.01090 0.00153
0.00145
0.00127
0.00142 0.00245 0.00011 0.00017 0.00017

ND indicates no detection *Sample collected every 6 days and analyzed at ERG laboratory with gas chromatography. **When a detected concentration is below one half of the method detection limit, then one half of the method detection level is used to calculate the average.

178 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Name Freon 113 Freon 114 1,3-Butadiene Cyclohexane Chloromethane Dichloromethane Chloroform Carbon tetrachloride

2009 Volatile Organic Compounds
(concentrations in g/m3)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.**

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

1

0.2770

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

30

4

0.5016

General Coffee 30

4

1.1077

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Macon

27

27

1.1781

Savannah

31

31

1.2746

General Coffee 31

31

1.3512

Dawsonville

30

30

1.0513

South DeKalb*

53

53

1.1360

Yorkville

26

26

1.0446

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

15

5.4362

Yorkville

26

ND

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

1st Max
0.2876 1.3086 9.6425 1.5284 1.5491 2.4785 1.2599 1.6317 1.3219
33.3350

2nd Max
1.0331 5.8544 1.4252 1.4665 1.8382 1.2186 1.4252 1.2806
31.5988

179 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

2009 Volatile Organic Compounds (continued)

(concentrations in g/m3)

Name

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.** 1st Max

Carbon tetrachloride

South DeKalb*

53

ND

(continued)

Yorkville

26

ND

Trichlorofluoromethane Macon

27

27

1.2467 1.5173

Savannah

31

31

1.2762 1.5735

General Coffee 31

31

1.2399 1.5173

Dawsonville

30

30

1.2120 1.5173

South DeKalb*

53

53

1.5499 2.0793

Yorkville

26

26

1.2666 1.6297

Chloroethane

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

1

0.3198 0.3323

Yorkville

26

ND

1,1-Dichloroethane

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Methyl chloroform

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Ethylene dichloride

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Tetrachloroethylene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

2nd Max
1.4611 1.5735 1.4611 1.4611 2.0231 1.5173

180 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

2009 Volatile Organic Compounds (continued)

(concentrations in g/m3)

Name

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.** 1st Max

Bromomethane

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Dichlorodifluoromethane Macon

27

27

2.3662 2.9174

Savannah

31

31

2.3767 3.0163

General Coffee 31

31

2.3161 2.7691

Dawsonville

30

30

2.3125 3.0163

South DeKalb*

53

53

2.4444 3.3625

Yorkville

26

26

2.3716 3.1063

Trichloroethylene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

1

0.6778 0.8599

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,1-Dichloroethylene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,2-Dichloropropane

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

trans-1,3Dichloropropylene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

cis-1,3-Dichloropropylene Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

2nd Max
2.8680 2.8680 2.7691 2.7691 3.1647 2.9174

181 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

2009 Volatile Organic Compounds (continued)

(concentrations in g/m3)

Name

Site

Samples Detects Avg.** 1st Max

cis-1,3-Dichloropropylene Dawsonville

30

ND

(continued)

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Ethylene dibromide

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Hexachlorobutadiene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Vinyl chloride

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

m/p Xylene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

1

0.5478 0.6950

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

11

0.5917 1.0425

Yorkville

26

ND

Benzene

Macon

27

16

2.0466 12.4577

Savannah

31

5

0.4359 1.3097

General Coffee 31

3

0.4400 1.1499

Dawsonville

30

12

0.5153 1.0222

South DeKalb*

53

41

0.8209 3.5137

Yorkville

26

4

0.4128 0.6069

Toluene

Macon

27

15

0.6208 1.1677

Savannah

31

14

0.7516 3.0135

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

5

0.5079 0.7534

South DeKalb*

53

39

1.2274 3.6539

Yorkville

26

7

0.5107 0.9417

Ethylbenzene

Macon

27

ND

2nd Max
0.9990 5.4303 0.5111 0.7347 0.8944 2.0443 0.5111 1.0547 1.6574 0.7534 3.5785 0.6780

182 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

2009 Volatile Organic Compounds (continued)

(concentrations in g/m3)

Name

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.** 1st Max

Ethylbenzene

Savannah

31

ND

(continuted)

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

o- Xylene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Styrene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

3

0.6171 2.4718

Benzene,1-ethenyl-4-

methyl

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Chlorobenzene

Macon

27

4

0.6166 1.0592

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

2nd Max
0.7245 0.8290

183 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

2009 Volatile Organic Compounds (continued)
(concentrations in g/m3)

Name

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.** 1st Max

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

(continued)

Yorkville

26

ND

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

Benzyl chloride

Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Macon

27

ND

Savannah

31

ND

General Coffee 31

ND

Dawsonville

30

ND

South DeKalb*

53

ND

Yorkville

26

ND

2nd Max

ND indicates no detection *sample collected every 6 days **When a detected concentration is below one half of the method detection limit, then one half of the method detection level is used to calculate the average.

184 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Site ID 130890002

2009 Black Carbon (NATTS)
(concentration in micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3)

City

County

Site Name

Hours Measured

1st Max

2nd Max

Decatur DeKalb

South DeKalb

8419

9.48

9.32

Annual Arithmetic
Mean
1.197

185 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

Name Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Propionaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Acetone
Benzaldehyde
Acrolein (with canister method)

2009 Carbonyl Compounds, 24-hour

(concentrations in micrograms per cubic meter)

Site

#Samples #Detects Avg.**

Savannah

30

28

2.3206

Dawsonville

31

24

2.0761

S. DeKalb*

54

54

8.9159

Savannah

30

15

0.8964

Dawsonville

31

16

0.9293

S. DeKalb*

54

48

2.1640

Savannah Dawsonville S. DeKalb*

30

ND

31

1

0.5997

54

ND

Savannah

30

1

0.5962

Dawsonville

31

3

0.6486

S. DeKalb*

54

3

0.6026

Savannah

30

28

2.5990

Dawsonville

31

30

3.2756

S. DeKalb*

54

51

5.6168

Savannah

30

1

0.6562

Dawsonville

31

5

0.9228

S. DeKalb*

54

5

0.6627

Macon

37

Savannah

31

General Coffee 31

Dawsonville

30

South DeKalb*

53

Yorkville

26

18

0.4041

20

0.3416

22

0.4748

23

0.4287

46

0.6847

14

0.3786

1st Max
7.0588 5.0158 36.3529 1.7824 1.6000 5.1177

2nd Max
4.5167 4.5421 30.000 1.6941 1.5579 5.0588

1.7316

1.5882 1.8737 1.5529 6.5882 6.1667 10.2941 3.3882 4.2222 3.0941 0.6883 0.6425 1.1013 0.7801 1.2390 1.0325

1.3222 1.2353 4.8278 5.8333 9.7059
3.7368 1.5000 0.6425 0.4589 0.9866 0.6883 1.2390 0.7801

ND indicates no detection,*sample collected every 6 days,** When a detected concentration is below one half of the method detection limit, then one half of the method detection level is used to calculate the average.

186 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix D

2009 Carbonyl Compounds, 3-hour (June-August)

Name

(concentrations in micrograms per cubic meter)

Site

Time #Samples #Detects Avg.*

1st Max

Formaldehyde

S. DeKalb 0600

28

28

14.9627 37.5000

0900

25

25

13.5462 21.0556

1200

26

26

14.8308 22.7222

1500

26

26

13.9060 22.7222

Acetaldehyde

S. DeKalb 0600

28

25

2.5203 5.3778

0900

25

25

3.7807 6.8333

1200

26

26

4.3421 7.3889

1500

26

26

3.8861 7.1667

Propionaldehyde

S. DeKalb 0600

28

ND

0900

25

ND

1200

26

ND

1500

26

ND

Butyraldehyde

S. DeKalb 0600

28

5

0.7422 2.0833

0900

25

4

0.7741 2.4833

1200

26

6

0.8590 3.1833

1500

26

8

0.9369 3.1889

Acetone

S. DeKalb 0600

28

28

6.8407 12.3889

0900

25

25

7.6691 13.0556

1200

26

26

8.6784 14.0556

1500

26

26

8.3788 16.3889

Benzaldehyde

S. DeKalb 0600

28

13

1.1751 3.6667

0900

25

18

2.3507 7.6667

1200

26

23

2.6007 9.1111

1500

26

23

3.0418 10.2778

2nd Max 29.2222 20.5000 22.3889 21.3333 4.9111 6.4444 7.1111 5.7778
1.8611 2.0667 2.3167 2.4389 11.9444 11.6111 13.2222 12.8889 3.0056 6.5000 8.6667 5.2389

ND indicates no detection, * When a detected concentration is below one half of the method detection limit, then one half of the method detection level is used to calculate the average.

187 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix E

Appendix E: Monitoring Network Survey

Georgia Gaseous Criteria Pollutant Monitoring as of January 2009

Parameter Measured
Sampling Schedule
Number of GASN Sites
Method Used
EPA Reference
Method Data
Availability

Ozone

Nitrogen Dioxide

Carbon Monoxide

Continuous hourly average

Sulfur Dioxide

20

4

3

8

Ultraviolet photometry
Ultraviolet photometry

Ultraviolet photometry
Ultraviolet photometry

Non-dispersive Infrared
photometry
Non-dispersive Infrared
photometry

Ultraviolet fluorescence detector
Spectrophotometry (pararosaniline method)

U.S. EPA Air Quality System (AQS) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/) and GA DNR/EPD Ambient Air Monitoring Program (http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp)

188 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix E

Georgia Ambient Air Particulate Matter Monitoring as of January 2009

Parameter Measured

PM10

Mass (integrated)

Mass (semicontinuous)

PM2.5

Mass (integrated)

Mass (semicontinuous)

Speciated

Sampling Schedule
Collection Method
Sampling Media

Every 6 days
Mass sequential, single channel
Teflon filter 46.2mm,

Continuous hourly averages
TEOM; BAM
Proprietary filter; filter tape

Varies; daily, every day,
every third day, or every sixth
day
FRM sampler
Teflon filter 46.2mm

Continuous hourly
averages
TEOM; BAM
Proprietary filter; filter
tape

1 in 6 days; 1 in 3 days for South DeKalb
Speciation air sampling system
(SASS)
Teflon, nylon & quartz filter
46.2mm

Number of

Sites

14

Analyzed

1

28

17

8

Number of

Collocated

3

0

Sites

Analysis Method

Method 016 Electronic analytical balance

Method 079; TEOM
gravimetric at 50 degrees C;
Method 122 Beta
Attenuation Monitor

5

0

0

Method 055 Electronic analytical balance

Method 703 R&P TEOM with SCC at 30 degrees
C; Beta Attenuation
Monitor

Method 055 Electronic analytical balance Method 014
x-ray fluorescence Method 062 filter preparation Method 064 Ion chromatography Method 065 Thermal/optical
carbon

Data Availability

U.S. EPA Air Quality System (AQS) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/) and GA DNR/EPD Ambient Air Monitoring Program (http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp)

189 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix E

Georgia Organic Air Toxic Contaminant Monitoring as of January 2009

Parameter Volatile Organic Measured Compounds (VOCs)

Carbonyls

Semi - VOCs

Metals

Method

TO-14A/15

TO-11A

TO 13A

10-2.I

Sampling Schedule

Every 12 days, 24-hour;
1 in 6 day schedule for South DeKalb

Collection Equipment

AVOCS or ATEC2200

Sampling Media

Polished stainless steel canister

Number of

Sites

6**

Analyzed

Number of

Collocated

1

Sites

Every 12 days, 24-hour; 1 in 6 day schedule for South DeKalb
ATEC100 and AVOCS or ATEC2200
DNPH-coated silica cartridges
and Polished stainless steel
canister
3
1

Every 12 days, 24hour; 1 in 6 day
schedule for South DeKalb

Every 12 days, 24hour;
1 in 6 day schedule for South
DeKalb*

PUF sampler

High volume TSP

Polyurethane Foam filter

Quartz micro-fiber filter 8 x 10 inch

6**

6**

1

1

Data Availability

U.S. EPA Air Quality System (AQS) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/) and GA DNR/EPD Ambient Air Monitoring Program (http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp)

* Sampler at this site is a PM10 Hi-Vol ** 5 GA ATN sites, 1 NATTS (South DeKalb)

190 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report PAMS Monitoring as of January 2009

Section: Appendix E

Parameter
Sampling Schedule
Collection Equipment Sampling
Media Number of
Sites
Analysis Method
Data Availability

54 PAMS-Speciated VOCs & Total NMHC

Continuous 54PAMS
Speciated VOCs & Total
NMHC

24-hour 1 in 6 day schedule (all year)
ATEC 2200

Continuous hourly average
(June-August)
Perkin-Elmer HC GC

Polished stainless steel canister

Direct injection

3

3

Carbonyl Compounds
3-hour sample (June-August); 24-hour, 1 in 6 day
(all year) ATEC 8000; PUF Sampler DNPH coated silica gel
Cartridge; Polyurethane Foam
1

PAMS GC/FID

GC/FID

High performance liquid chromatograph/ultraviolet
detector

U.S. EPA Air Quality System (AQS) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/) and GA DNR/EPD Ambient Air Monitoring Program (http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp)

191 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report Georgia Meteorological Monitoring as of January 2009

Section: Appendix E

Parameter Measured
Sampling Schedule

Wind Speed (m/s)

Wind Direction (degrees)

Ambient Temperature
(C)

Relative Humidity
(%)

Atmosphere Pressure (mb)

Continuous hourly average

Solar Radiation
(w/m2)

Precip (in)

Sig. Theta (deg)

Total Ultraviolet Radiation

Number of Sites

17

17

8

8

6

3

6

1

3

Method Used Data Availability

Propeller or cup
anemometer

Wind vane potentiometer

Aspirated Thermocouple or thermistor

Thin film capacitor

Pressure transducer

Thermopile or Tipping Wind

UV

pyranometer bucket direction radiometer

U.S. EPA Air Quality System (AQS) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/) and GA DNR/EPD Ambient Air Monitoring Program (http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/amp)

192 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
Appendix F: Siting Criteria

Section: Appendix F

Instrument PM10, AISI Nephelo-
meter Dichot, TEOM, PM2.5
Lead, TSP
O3
CO
NO2

Height Above Ground
Micro Other
2-7m 2-15m
2-7m 2-15m

207m 2-15m

3-15m 3-15m

2.5 3.5m

3-5m

3-15m 3-15m

Space Between Samplers
2m 1m
2m
1m

Height Above Obstructions
1m
2 times height of obstacle
above inlet
1m

Distance From
Obstacles

Distance From Tree
Dripline

2 times height or obstacle above inlet
2 times height or obstacles above inlet
2 times height of obstacles above inlet
2 times height of obstacles above inlet
Micro: must be no trees
between sampler and
road Others: must be 10m if trees, 5m above sampler
2 times height of obstacle above inlet

Should be 20m, must be 10m if considered
an obstruction Should be 20m, must be 10m if considered
an obstruction Micro and middle: no
trees between sampler and source Neighborho od: should be 20m, must be
10m if considered
an obstruction Should be 20m, must be 10m if considered
an obstruction Micro: must be no trees
between sampler and road Others: must be 10m if trees, 5m above sampler Should be 20m, if individual tree 5m above probe, must be 10m
from dripline

Distance from Walls,
Parapets, etc. 2m 2m
2m
1m
1m
1m

Airflow Arc
270
270
270
270, or on side
of buildin g 180
270, or on side
of buildin g 180
270, or on side
of buildin g 180

193 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Instrument

Height Above Ground
Micro Other

Space Between Samplers

SO2

3-15m 3-15m

H2S

3-15m 3-15m

CH4, THC, NMHC, PAMS

3-15m 3-15m

Toxics: Gaseous 910, 910A, 929, 920

3-15m 3-15m

Temperature and Relative
Humidity

1.252m

2.252m

Wind Speed

and

10m 10m

Direction

Solar Radiation

1.5m 1.5m

Height Above Obstructions
1m
1m
1m
2m

Section: Appendix F

Distance From
Obstacles
2 times height of obstacle above inlet
2 times height of obstacle above inlet
2 times height of obstacle above inlet
2 times height of obstacle above inlet 4 times height of obstacle
above sensor
1.5 times height of obstacle
above sensor

Distance From Tree
Dripline
Should be 20m, must be 10m if considered
an obstruction Should be 20m, must be 10m if considered
an obstruction Should be 20m, must be 10m in direction of urban core
1 tower width from tower side
2 tower widths from tower side,
1 tower width from tower top

Distance from Walls,
Parapets, etc. 1m
1m
1m
4.5m

Airflow Arc
270, or on side
of buildin g 180
270, or on side
of buildin g 180
270, or on side
of buildin g 180

194 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: Appendix G

Appendix G: Instrument and Sensor Control Limits

ARB'S CONTROL AND WARNING LIMITS

LIMITS

Control 15% 15% 10%

Warning 10% 10% 7%

4% (Flow)

None

5% (Design) None

20%

None

INSTRUMENT
All gaseous criteria and non-criteria analyzers Total suspended particulate (TSP) samplers
PM10 Dichotomous (Dichot), Lead (Pb), Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalalance (TEOM), Toxic Air Contaminant (XonTech920) Samplers, Beta Attenuation Monitors (BAM),
and Carbonyl (XonTech9250) Samplers
PM2.5
Laboratory audits (Toxics, PAMS, Motor Vehicle Exhaust and Total Metals)

ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR METEOROLOGICAL (MET) SENSORS

LIMITS

SENSOR

1.0 Celsius (0.5C PAMS only) 2.25 mm of Mercury (Hg) 3% RH for 10-90% RH
5% RH for <10% or >90% RH 5% Watts/m2
Less than or equal to 5 combined accuracy and orientation error
0.25 m/s between 0.5 and 5m/s and less that 5% difference above 5 m/s Less than or equal to 0.5m/s
0.25 m/s between 0.5 and 5 m/s and less than 5% difference above 5 m/s Less than or equal to 0.5 m/s

Ambient Temperature Barometric Pressure
Relative Humidity Solar Radiation Wind Direction
Horizontal Wind Speed Horizontal Wind Speed Starting Threshold
Vertical Wind Speed Vertical wind Speed Starting Threshold

195 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report
References

Section: References

http://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=static.aqi. "Air Quality Index (AQI) - A Guide to Air Quality and Your Health."
http://www.epa.gov/region4/waste/ots/ U.S. EPA Region 4: Superfund. Technical Services-Risk Assessment and Hydrology.
http://www.epa.gov/air/emissions/ U.S. EPA. Air Emission Sources.
http://www.epa.gov/cleanschoolbus/retrofit.htm U.S. EPA. Clean School Bus U.S.A.
http://www.georgiaair.org/retrofit/index.htm Georgia Retrofit Program. Georgia Environmental Protection Division.
http://www.gfc.state.ga.us/GFCNews/CFI.cfm Georgia Forestry Commission.
AIRNOW DMC. 2009 Data Polling Summary. Poster presented at the National Air Quality Conference. Sonoma Technology, Petaluma, California.
ATSDR, 1992. Toxicological Profile for 1,3-Butadiene. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.
ATSDR, 1996. ToxFAQS for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 1997. Toxicological Profile for Benzene. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.
ATSDR, 1999. Toxicological Profile for Formaldehyde. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.
ATSDR, 2000a. Toxicological Profile for Manganese. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.
ATSDR, 2000b. Toxicological Profile for Chromium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2001a. Toxicological Profile for 1,2-Dichloroethane. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.
ATSDR, 2001b. ToxFAQS for Methylene Chloride. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.
ATSDR, 2003. ToxFAQS for Trichloroetheylene (TCE). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.
ATSDR, 2005a. Toxicological Profile for Carbon Tetrachloride. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2005b. Toxicological Profile for Acrolein, Draft for Public Comment. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

196 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: References

ATSDR, 2005c. Toxicological Profile for Arsenic, Draft For Public Comment. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2005d. ToxFAQS for Nickel. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2005e. Toxicological Profile for Naphthalene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, and 2-Methylnaphthalne. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2006a. ToxFAQS for 1,1,1-Trichloroethane. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2006b. Toxicological Profile for Dichlorobenzenes. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2006c. Medical Mangement Guidelines for Xylenes. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2007. Case Studies in Environmental Medicine (CSEM) Nitrite/Nitrate Toxicity. What Are Nitrate and Nitrite? U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

ATSDR, 2009. ToxFAQS for 1,3-Butadiene. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Registry, Atlanta, Georgia.

Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Parts 50, 51, 53, and 58.

Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Georgia Ambient Monitoring Network Plan.

Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Georgia Ambient Air Monitoring Quality Assurance Manual, Quality Assurance Plan.

GADNR, 1993. Toxic Release Inventory Report, 1991. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. Atlanta, Georgia.

GADNR, 1996a. The 1994 Chatham County Air Toxics Study, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. Atlanta, Georgia.

GADNR, 1996b. 1996 Glynn county Initiative: Air Toxics Dataset Ground Level Measurements, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. Atlanta, Georgia.

GADNR, 2006. 2005 Ambient Air Surveillance Report. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. Atlanta, Georgia.

U.S. EPA, 1987. Health Assessment Document for Acetaldehyde. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 1991a. Integrated Risk Information System, Carbon Tetrachloride. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 1991b. Integrated Risk Information System, Acetaldehyde. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

197 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division

2009 Georgia Ambient Air Surveillance Report

Section: References

U.S. EPA, 1994a. OPPT Chemical Fact Sheet, Chemicals in the environment: 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (CAS No. 95-63-6). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 1994b. Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement System. Volume 1: Principles. EPA-600/R-94/038A, January 1994.

U.S. EPA, 1998. Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement System. Volume 1: Principles. EPA-600/R-94/038B, April 1998.

U.S. EPA, 2000. Integrated Risk Information System, Benzene. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 2002. Integrated Risk Information System, 1,3-Butadiene. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 2003. Integrated Risk Information System, Acrolein. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 2004a. Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 2004b. Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value Database. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia.

U.S. EPA, 2006. A Preliminary Risk-Based Screening Approach for Air Toxics Monitoring Data Sets. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA, 2007. Latest Findings on National Air Quality: Status and Trends through 2006, No. EPA454/R-07-007. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards EPA Publication Air Quality Assessment Division Research Triangle Park, NC.

U.S. EPA, 2008. National Air Quality-Status and Trends through 2007, No. EPA-454/R-08-006. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards EPA Publication Air Quality Assessment Division Research Triangle Park, NC.

U.S. EPA, 2009. Air Toxics Data Analysis Workbook, STI:908304.03-3224. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Research Triangle Park, NC.

U.S. EPA, 2010. Our Nation's Air Quality-Status and Trends through 2008, No. EPA-454/R-09-002. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards EPA Publication Air Quality Assessment Division Research Triangle Park, NC.

U.S. EPA, 2010. "Table 1. Prioritized Chronic Dose-Response Values for Screening Risk Assessments (4/27/2010)". http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/toxsource/summary.html Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards EPA Publication Air Quality Assessment Division Research Triangle Park, NC.

198 Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division