MINUTES

Chairperson Bill Adams, PA Farm Bureau, called this special meeting of the Board to order at 10:00 a.m..

It was determined there was not a quorum of Board members since a majority of the Board’s voting members where not in attendance. Chairperson Adams decided that the Board would continue with the meeting but could take no official actions.

Proposed Air Monitoring Program Plan for the Installation and Location of Fine Particulate Monitors.

Wick Havens, DEP, Bureau of Air Quality, provided a presentation to the Board on the Department’s proposed plan for the installation and location of fine particulate monitors. This monitoring is being done to collect data in order to determine the PM 2.5 (particulate matter) concentrations in Pennsylvania. The monitoring is in response to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishing new standards for fine particulate matter (under 2.5 microns in size.) PM 2.5 is generated by combustion or chemical reactions in the atmosphere, and are smaller particles which can penetrate deeper into the lungs and cause more health effects. EPA grant money will be used to purchase and install the PM 2.5 monitoring network and operate it for the first two years. After that time the Department will assume full financial and operational responsibility. Havens noted that the proposed plan will be published in the PA Bulletin on May 30 for public comments which are due by June 29. The plan will also be reviewed by the Department’s Air Technical Advisory Committee at its May 29 meeting. The monitoring will be focused in areas of high population density, high levels of contaminants, or a combination of the two. The EPA requires that PM 2.5 sampler installations begin by September 16, 1998 with full operation by January 1, 1999. Pennsylvania is proposing that the new monitoring network be fully operational within two years. The Department proposes to install and operate 18 PM 2.5 sites in the first year starting January 1, 1999, and 16 PM 2.5 sites in year two which starts January 1, 2000. All year one monitors are proposed to be installed at existing total suspended particulate (TSP) and PM 10 sites in order to meet the EPA deadline since siting monitors is a very time consuming process. As data is analyzed the network will be reevaluated to ensure that it is properly located. Philadelphia and Allegheny County will operate their own monitoring networks. Board members were provided a map and list of proposed monitoring sites.

Bob Pardoe, Jr., Dairy Producer, questioned whether the PM 2.5 monitoring will have an effect on agriculture. Havens stated that we will need to look at the data we receive to determine the impact on agriculture but his best guess was that agricultural activities in Pennsylvania would not show up in the monitoring. He also stated that agricultural activities do not currently show up in the PM 10 monitoring in the state. He did feel that agricultural activities in the western United States would show up in the monitoring due to their use of dry land farming practices and slash and burn agriculture. Some Board members questioned the potential for confined animal operations or manure storage structures to show up in the monitoring. They also expressed concern that a monitor may be located in an area downwind of a large confined animal operation. Havens noted that large confined animal operations have not shown up in the PM 10 monitoring to date. Havens suggested that it would be interesting to conduct a study of the relationship between odor and PM 2.5, and encouraged the agricultural community to work with the Department on that issue.

Steve Crawford, House, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, questioned the relationship between odor and air quality. Havens stated that odor may indicate that a control device has broken down and a pollutant may be released which may cause health problems. An example would be a bakery whose emissions would form ozone, but rarely do people complain about the smell of bread. Odors can at times indicate that there is a problem. The public law behind odor problems is nuisance which is difficult to monitor. Havens noted that the standards allow for a 24 hour exceedance such as a structure fire being picked up by a monitor which would influence the data. Bob Junk, PA Farmers Union, expressed concern over the operation of diesel tractors and their effect on the monitors. Havens stated that diesel emissions will have an impact on the monitoring but a diesel tractor would probably not show up in the monitoring as opposed to a fleet of city buses which would. Curtis Kratz, Moyer Packing Company, noted that most agricultural products are moved by diesel motors and questioned what effect this standard will have on that. Havens noted that in the future there will be tighter restrictions on diesel fuel and motors and a reduction in diesel emissions.

Havens stated that no citizen groups will be enlisted by the Department to conduct monitoring for this program. Havens reminded the Board members that the monitoring program is not source specific but characterizes the air the public is breathing. The EPA has based the new standards on "spatial average" or so called community-oriented (core) approach. These core monitors will represent community wide average exposure. Havens stated that by 2003 we will have determined what areas have attainment of the standard and those areas of non-attainment for PM 2.5. A plan will be developed in 2004 for those areas of non-attainment, and the plan will be implemented between 2005-2007.

Chairperson Bill Adams noted that Carl Shaffer, Vegetable Producer, requested comments on the proposed mission statements for the Citizens’ Volunteer Monitoring Program (CVMP) and Panel. Steve Crawford, House, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, stated that agriculture’s concerns over the CVMP and the motives of the program goes far beyond the wording of the mission statements. Jay Howes, House, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, agreed by saying that reducing the debate to words on a mission statement loses the sight of the overall concept, that being agriculture’s concerns over the CVMP. Frank Long, PA Association of Conservation Districts, stated that he believes the program is acceptable but he does have concerns over what the data will be used for.

It was noted that the next meeting of the CVMP Environmental Monitoring Panel will be on May 21. Time will be set aside on the agenda to discuss agriculture’s concerns regarding the CVMP and to outline how these concerns will be addressed. Chad Weaver, Senate, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, stated that it is very critical that the three agricultural representatives to the Panel attend that meeting. Bill Adams noted that he will attend the meeting in place of Carl Shaffer who is unavailable that day. All Board members were encouraged to attend the CVMP Panel meeting if available that date. Chairperson Adams directed that the Board receive an update of what happens at the May 21 CVMP Panel meeting and further discuss this issue at the Board’s next regularly scheduled meeting on June 17, 1998.

Adjournment

There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 11:47 a.m..

           Respectfully Submitted,

           Dean M. Auchenbach
           DEP Liaison