near-roadway health effectspubs.awma.org/gsearch/em/2009/8/em august-full.pdfnear-roadway health...

AUGUST 2009

Near-RoadwayHealth EffectsUnderstanding and Minimizing the Impact of Emissions

Also in this issue:

Mitigating Air Quality Impacts from Traffic p. 6

The Latest EPA Near-Roadway Research p. 18, 34

The Air & Waste Management AssociationListed members joined A&WMA between January 1 and June 20th, 2009.

Heather AbramsChristian AcunaPaul AdamsGlenn AdamusAromake AfiegbeRoyden AgostiniJennifer AhluwaliaNing AiHuzefa AkbarallyArjun AkkalaOmar AlaghaSevda AlanyaMarilyn AlbertBrad AlbrinckMartin Alcala JrRicardo AlcantaraPaul AlguMichel AllaireRandi AllanRyan AllenJames AllenBrent AllredJumaan Al-QahtaniAri AltmanYamini AminTheresa AmorosoZhisheng AnWoojin AnPatrick AndersenJean AndinoJustin AndrewsGreg AndrusMichael AntonettiNicole ArleneauxDavid ArmstrongSonia ArriagaAkua Asa-AwukuFernando Astorga-BustillosYvonne AustinTroy AustrinsJohn AveggioMaryam AzadDarren AzarianJesse BabuZhipeng BaiQaiser BaigStuart BaileyGary BakerDaryl BaldersonMarcel BallingerSara BalsJohn BaltrusJenny BardMorton BarlazRamiro Barrios-CastrejonNoor BarshaLinda BartlettErica BartlettLee BauerleGuenter BaumbachSam BaushkeKyle BeallRobert BeckGary BeckmanDavid BeecherChristine BenderMelissa BenhamRob BennettJames BensonMark BerardChristopher BerottiSarah BertrandDavid BesnerBrian BeuginFred BeyerAmit BhargavaAbhishek BhatAniruddha BhattacharyyaPanduranga BichalGladys BienosehJaswinder Binpal

Karen BlakemoreAndrew BlicharzSamuel BoadiDavid BockFrank BodamiNicholas BoekeAlain BolducKlym BolechowskyWade BontempoYvette BonvalotAmy BoshartPierre BouchardMarc BouchardKylie BoydDonald BradleyTom BradleyKenneth BradleyHarold BrazilAlexander BreidoPaulette BremerDavid BrennerLynn BrickettCharles BridgesEdward BristowCatherine BrownWalter BrownMaria BrownElizabeth BrownRobert BruhnsenCharles BrumfieldMilla BudiartoCecile BuncioChad BurdenChuck BurgessTimothy BurkeLeAnne BurnettChristopher BurnsJames BurrisThomas BykowHaynes CampbellLee CanelDavid CanningFred CannonSibyl CannonShannon CappsMa. Carmela CapuleErman CarDaniel CarneyMarc Carreras-SospedraPatrick CarrickGary CarterJames CarverJarrod CaseRandy CavadiniJulie ChadburnKai ChakRifat ChalabiKevin ChalkBrett ChambersNathan ChampagneArthur ChanVictor ChangBiao ChangWen-Shing ChangChih ChaoJames ChapmanLuther ChaversAmy CheathamTerry CheekChiu Hsin ChenJack ChenNaveen ChennubhotlaRobert CheungDanielle ChikarJo-Yu ChinYvonne ChiuSunhee ChoHyung-Wook ChoiIndranil ChowdhuryPatrick ClarkDonald ClarkEric Clark

Melissa ClementMichele ClementJack ColbournMamie ColburnJohn ColebrookBarbara ColerTokesha CollinsTodd ColonLarry ConradCarolyn CopperIrra CoreAndrew CornelBiljana CosicCaitlin CostelloRobin CrabbeJulie CraigRobert CraigKimberly CramePhilippe CreteRobert CromwellKevin CrosbyRobert CummingRoylene CunninghamMartha CurranMary Grace CurtisRyan DaileyRobert DallapiazzaJason DalpiasMohit DalviJeff DambrunRichard DAmicoBrenda DanielElizabeth DarceJulia DarlingSarit DasJacob DavisThomas DavisEdmilson de SouzaLeslie DeckardIrene DeGraffFarida DehghanArt DeickeGordon DenkerJared DesrochersGeorge DevaullJason DeWeesAbhishek DhobleWade DiehlBrad DixonVan DobbsJoshua DodsonAnita DoepkeEdlira DokoGregory DongDarletha DorseyLisa DouglasKevin DouglassYvonne DownsRobert DoyleStuart DrakeDeanna DrakoHeather DraytonBonnie DrozdowskiKarl DuckworthAmelie DugasDale DuhonDavid DunbarCharles DuncanPeter DunfordJennifer DunnThomas DuPlessisAl DurandKimberly EarlJennifer EbertSandy EdmundsAlice EdwardsDaniel EdwardsMark EhrnschwenderSamir El-daraziHeather EliffKatrin EllefsonAnthony Elliott

Philip ElliottChristopher EllsburySarah EmmionAnthony EndresStacie EnochAnn ErhardtChelsea EricksonAlison ErlenbachSofia EscajedaRichard EsserAllan EustisStephanie EwingBryan EyaAlex EzerskyJoe FalkoYan FangElaine FarrowOuattara FatogomaGeorge FedericoChen FengMichelle FergusonMegan FerreiraMichael FesslerJohn FilipkowskiKrag FiliusJames FindleyStephen FishmanDaniel FlynnCraig FooCarol FortneyShirrell FosterMichael FoxSylvie FradetteKimerly FrazierAlicia FrazierBill FrederickJudy FreemanMark FreyTrisha FroemmingSusan FrundStacey FrutigerFengfu FuFrederic Gagnon-LebrunNick GalaudetMarcio Morato GalvãoNicholas GalvinTingting GaoYang GaoMartha GarciaJennifer GarofaloRoberto GaspariniAndreanne GaudetM. Martin GauthierApril GaydoshPhilip GeddisGuy GenestTom GibbonsNagiabi GicuhiJohn GillPablo GinezKevin GivensJeffrey GleesonStacey GlenewinkelSantiago GómezLili GoncalvesNatalia GonzalezLee GoodrichJohn GoodsonFred GordonCharles GouletRakesh GovindMary GrahamDavid GraiverCathy GrantKen GreavesDavid GreeneJon GreenePeter GreggGlen GregoryMarvin GregoryThomas GroschKevin Gross

Michael GruberMichelle GrzybowskiOlga Irene GuevaraMontemayorKen GuilbeaultJia GuoGail GuzmanKatherine HadleyBrant HaflichScott HaggertyRachel HahsYaghoub HajizadehMark HallGail HallCharles HallFrederik HamelNatalie HamiltonAngela HammJinglei HanThomas HaneyCarol HansonTodd HarbourJ. Alan HarrellAnthony HarringtonAndrea HarrisBob HarrisonCamron HarryLinda HarveyGary HaterThomas HattonStephen HaughtonQing HeTammy HeadrickReba HeathBernard HeilweckBryan HeimDaniel HeimelDaniel HeiserScott HekmanG. Vinson HellwigTammy HelminskiNeena HemmadySarah HendersonRobert HenschelKylie HensleySteve HernandezMatthew HeskinDavid HessVijayamala HettiarachchiCynthia HibbardWilliam HildesonBruce HillGerald HilsherTanya HintzErika HintzDaniel HlaingEric HobanS. Kent HoekmanGarrett HoeksemaMichele HoffmannJohn HolleranChris HomerShengmao HongShintaro HonjoSuzanne HotsonJeffrey HoukChristopher HouseJim HoustonNicholas HoutchensOksana HowardDesiree HowellHung-Te HsuAutumn HuWei-Hsing HuInh HuaHong HuangJoyce HuangTara HubnerWilliam HuebnerSarah HuffmeyerAndrea HugginsLaura Hughes

Yves HugronKraig HumeChinte HungJeffrey HunterJay HurstYoichi IchikawaKeith IdingJames IdzorekIvory IheanachoMark InkroteRobert IresonCelia JacksonDebra JacobsonDavid JacobsonLeslie JamesBill JamiesonThomas JaniszewskiAlbert JaroszewskiStephanie JarrettJaiwant JayakaranIndumathy JayamaniCecilia JejeMelanie JenningsHerb JerniganChunrong JiaLi JiaoHideto JinnoKaren JohnsRebecca JohnsonMichael JohnsonBecky JohnsonAnn Marie JohnsonCorey JohnsonPaula JohnsonPaul JonesDennis JonesWilliam JonesDaniel JordanMichael JovanovicJaegun JungAnita JunkerJulie KabelMark KalivodaRobert KaltenbacherJennifer KaminskyAllen KaneIn-Suk KangSy-Yuan KangAnand KarreAron KatzBobby KaushikMichael KavanaughDan KearnsSteven KeeslingJustin KelleyJane KelleyJack KellyMargaret KellyMatthew KerwinJanet KesterImad KhalekNasrin KhaliliShaista KhanRania KheirDonna Jean KilpatrickJacob KimJo Chun KimJeong-Hun-KimWong Kin ChungStanley KingKurt KisslingJill KjellssonLaura KleinMarti KleinRyan KlussMelissa KnappLuke KnibbsPaul KnollColin KnueHyung Hwan KoDevin KoeleWade Koglin

Mark KompGerrit KorneliusKetwalee KositkanawuthBrian KowalskyMatthew KrausJason KrawczykDanny KringelTimothy KroekerLina KruthKim KuberaTim KuikenDavid KumarMahesh KunapuliAmy KurtzMartina KusniadiJaymin KwonKevin Kyrias-GannDouglas LaBarRobbie LabordeMarie-Helene LabrieCarl LairdMichel LajoieAleksandr LakhtychkinJacques LaliberteDenis LalondeYun-Fat LamMaryann LamberMary Claire LambertErkki LamminenBeth LandaleKimberly LandickAnthony LandlerIsabelle LandryMarla LaneTobias LangAustin LangleyLuc LangloisMichael LargeMartin LarocheTheresa LarsenMelanie LarsenRebecca LarsonBarbara LaskarzerskaEric LauerKen LaurinFrank LauroChristopher LawlessBarrie LawrenceThomas LawrenceJule LazonDeborah LazowskiTrung LeNancy LeaseBruno LeblancGenevieve LeBlancRobert LeeKeum Bong LeeJoo-Youp LeeJared LeeCharles LeeNorman LeeEric LeeSang-Hun LeeKyoung Bin LeeMichael LegerCatherine LeightonKyle LeJeuneDaniel LeMaistreGavin LeungStephane LevesqueWinston LewXinghua LiShuang LiangKit LiangJonathan LibbySarah LiddellHanlie Liebenberg-EnslinRowena LimberJim LinXing Jun LinDerrick LinCharles Lippert

Would Like To Welcome Our New Members!

Wei LiuJinting LiuLauren LiuzzaDianne LiwanagFname LnameBrian LofferMatthew LomeliMichael LoolaraTeri Lopeman-CorteseMario LopezShannon LordSusan LorenzJie-Chung LouChungsying LuJohn LudwickSteve LuzkowGeorgeanna LynchAlan LynchLan MaScott MacLeanThomas MaddoxCathy MadoreJesse MadsenGibert MagpantayDeepika MahendranIdrees MahmudPhuong MaiSteve MaltbyKate ManahanMark ManninenShannon ManoulianJosemaria ManriqueJimmy MansurKathleen MarBruno MarinoRobert MarstonPhil MartienJeremiah MartinLouise MartineauAndres MartinezKelly MartoranoSashikala Maruthai PillaiMegan MassaTamara MatthewsCarlyn MatzDavid MazyckLara McAlister-WagnerMichael McAloonJerrold McAlpineAustin McBradyChris McBrideJessica McCartyAndrew McClellandShannon McClendonKevin McClintockRichard McCollumJonna McConaughyBritney McCoyKeith McCullockArthur McDanielWes McDonaldMichael McFarlandRebecca McGeeKen McGregorLynn McGuireNicole McGuireGlenn McLellanFrancea McNairDennis McNallyLaura McNinchKerry McPhedranCarrie MeagherAshley MefferdShari MeghreblianWilliam MendenhallJose Carlos MendesDarryl MendivilAdarsh MenonLince MerinEugenia MerkoulovJonathon MerrickRaymond Merrill

Natasha MeskalChris MeyersJudith MiddlebrooksJason MidgettPeter MierasJessica MierzejewskiDennis MikelMichael MileyThomas MillerLindsay MillerWilliam MillsKen MiloStephen MitchellNafissa Mizin-YawaMichael MoesClifford MohsHassan Mohseni NameghiJean-Philippe MonfetRobin MongeonDeborah MooreSteve MooreMeagan MooreAaron MooreMark MooreMichelle Mora-GonzalesMichael MoranMathew MorosettiKathleen MorroneColby MorrowMd Golam MorshedDevin MountsCornelia MuellerVioleta MugicaGreg MuldrewStacy MulrooneyTimothy MurphyAislin MutoGreg MyersOdette NadonDouglas NaftzRekha NambiarMonica NeedobaAntonio Carlos NeivaAlana NelsonDavid NeuschulerChristopher NewcombThomas NgJean-Yves NgabonzizaPhuong NguyenPrachi NimseAmanda NobleBlair NorrisPatrick NortzJason NovakMohammad NozariMorgan O`HareStephen O`KaneGavin O`NeillHarry O`NeillJoseph OdencrantzEduardo OlaguerMichael OlesRobert OlsonLeah Olson-PerryHector OlveraRiza OraltayCarlos OrtizDiana Ortiz-MontalvoNeal OsborneMauricio OssesSun OungLisa OverlyEstela PachecoPriyanka PainulyMichael PalazzoloM PamperlRichard PandulloPantelis PanteliHai Woong ParkAmy ParkerDave ParseAmy Peccia

Russ PellegrinoLin PengKelly PennellPavan Kumar PenumallaVenkataPearl PereiraDaniel PerezLuigi PerraBethany PerryOphneil PerryMelissa PetersBill PetruzziLarry PettersonDiane PhillipsMario PieriesShobha PillaiMark PishinskyLori PittmanDavid PlusquellicKevin PochePauline PoonRaymond PorterCharles PorterGenevieve PotvinJessica PouporeRichard PowalsBill PowersLewis PozzebonGyanendra PrasaiDaniel PringDavid PuiShannon PutmanGuangxia QiMichael QuinnRussell RabagoPaul RachiellesErin RafuseImran RahmanJohn RailtonRathamanoharan RajaratnamSiddharth RajmohanRandolph RakoczynskiAdam RanalloAlison RayMeghan ReedDustin ReidPeter ReidJames RennerThom RennieAndrew RezendesJ. Frederick RialAlisa RichLance RichardsPaul RichardsonGreg RideoutJames RidgelyStephen RieckDale RobertsonMitchell RobinsonKathryn RobinsonJessica RobinsonScott RodrigueJoe RogersDavid RomanSheri RomickLi RongBrian RosentreterSteve RossingWilliam RoszelMichael RothDavid RothbartChristopher RowlandChristian RoyJean-Pierre RoyPrabal RoyCraig RubertiTim RussellRon RyanRyan RybchukRebecca SaariMenchie SabaterJennifer Sabol

Seth SadofskyJessica SagonaRobert SaikalySteve SakiyamaIbrahim SalauGurdas SandhuReginald SanfordAdison SasivongpakdiZiv SassonKayla SaxonJulie SaxtonMichael ScanlonDavid ScarsellaJason SchaeferBrian SchimmollerPeter SchmidtTodd SchmidtMatthew SchmidtDeborah SchoenChristopher SchollTerry SchomerWilliam SchrandJohn SchroederDerek SchruhlJeff SchruppBrian SchumacherGershon SchwartzDave SchwassVincent ScolaBetty SetoArchana ShahJohn ShamburgerMatt ShanahanJessica SharrowKevin SheaSharene ShealeyMark ShepherdJianhua ShiJingmiao ShiRahul ShrivastavaShi (Segovia) ShuWilliam ShuffJane SiegelRobert SimmonsDustin SimpsonRakesh SinghKaramjit SinghAlan SingletonMorten SissenerPrasanna SivapiragasamNisha SizemoreSarah SizemoreMonica SkeldonAndrew SkoglundErica SkokoKelly SmithBenjamin SmithDave SmithClara SmithDavid SmithWilliam SnyderDerrick SnyderStanislav SokolenkoLisa SolomchukBesrat SolomonMarsha SonderfanDonald SpaederKatie SpahrScott SpakMichael SparksJennifer SpencerSharon SpezialeSylvie SpraakmanSuzanne StanekTamara SteeleJuliana SteffensChristy SteffkeStan SteinbachChady StephanN. Tucker StevensGregory StineBrian Storey

Steven StrausbauchDavid StrayerSteve StretchberryZhaoji SuRoger SuidMark SujataQinyue SunMichael SwansonKim SwartzGreg SweelDavid SwisherJoshua TappCraig TapscottDavid TarnocaiDavid TarnowArundhati TejJenna TemplerCarmen TengChristopher TennantCristiane TheDanielle TheTim TheeuwesNushat ThomasKevin ThompsonSean ThomsonMeghan ThomsonJonathan ThornburgMichael ThorntonNicole ThorpLinwei TianRichard TibbittsMaggie TisdaleDevon TodaAleksandar TodoroskiDuygu TokatTyson ToloczkoEric TomasiStephen TonerChristian ToranAlfred TownsendKristen TranKim TranVatsi TrivediDonald TruebloodJason TucheltCharlene TuckAmanda TuckerMichael TudayParyse TurgeonBryan TylerNobuyuki UkaiJoseph UnjakotiJyoti UpadhyayaAmbarish VaidyanathanEdwin ValisPhil VallanceMichael Van CleaveSarah van de MerweSusan van de MerweDean Van OrdenMarcelle van ReenenAlec Van RyanDonald Van SchaackChristine VanamanTimothy VargaTravis VaughnEmmalee VecereMatthew VeltriTimothy VenverlohGerald VetterPierre VezinaFabiola VillaIgnacio VillanuevaAndres VillavicencioBrian VossMichael VossJanelle WadasVictoria WagnerMichael WaguespackAbdul WahabJohn WainwrightBarbara Walden

Joshua WaldmeierThomas WalkerLance WallaceRobert WallaceKeith WalshSteven WalshXinming WangXinhong WangFang WangYi WangXiaoliang WangRick WardripKenneth WarnGlenn WatsonKeith WatsonKristin WattSteve WeaverMatthew WebbDavid WeberAmanda WebsterHenry WedaaJeffrey WeeberJoan WeidnerJacob WeinrichRoger WellEric WellingBrooke WellsShane WellsAaron WendzelMartha WestHannah WestMarla WesterholdJames WhetstoneGary WhitakerJohn WhiteJohn WilcoxBrad WilkinsCecile WillertSebastien WillervalMargaret WilliamsBrad WilliardSantamaria WilsonChristi WilsonAaron WimberlyWilliam WinberryBrittany WinsteadVeryl WittigMichael WittmanMark WolfEric WolffDouglas WongMyung Heui WooPatrick WoodPhyllis WoodsonJennifer WrightYu Syuan WuGuangli XiuQingshan XuAmir Mohammad YadgharEverest YanGoSu YangTzu-Hui YangLiu YangMeng YaoFelix YeboahZiqiang YinCody YoushockMin-Hao YuanAngela ZahniserJohn ZamecnikMark ZekoMeigen ZhangLianzhong ZhangKai ZhangChunsheng ZhaoXiangdong ZhengLiming ZhouChongshu ZhuLihua ZhuJohn ZimmermanEva ZlotnickaShichun Zou

2 em august 2009 awma.orgCopyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association

FEATURESCOLUMNSInside the IndustryLEEDing by Example . . . 30by Anthony Buonicore and Dianne Crocker

IT InsightGood Requirements Leadto Better Software . . . . . 32by Jill Barson Gilbert

ASSOCIATIONNEWSMessage from the President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4What’s in Your Transformation?

Members in the News . . 29Joseph A. Martone and David W. Mills

The Member Minute . . . 44Jim Donnelly

DEPARTMENTSIPEP Quarterly . . . . . . . . . . 29EPA Research Highlights . . 34Washington Report. . . . . . . 36Canadian Report. . . . . . . . . 37News Focus. . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Advertisers’ Index . . . . . . . . 40Professional Development Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42JA&WMA Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Calendar of Events . . . . . . . 43

Printed on Recycled Paper

Near-Roadway Health EffectsThis month, EM presents research on near-roadway effects to explain how new emissions control systems andfuels potentially affect human health, including studies that look at roadway design, diesel exhaust, and otherroadway pollution health effects.

NEXT MONTH:

Maximum Achievable Control Technology(MACT) Standard

Can Roadway Design Be Used to Mitigate Air Quality Impacts from Traffic?Richard Baldauf, Chad Bailey, Richard Cook, and George Bowker, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;Thomas Cahill, University of California, Davis; Andrey Khlystov, Duke University; K. Max Zhang, Cornell University; and Chatten Cowherd, Midwest Research InstitutePage 6

Laboratory Studies of Diesel Exhaust Health Effects: Implications for Near-Roadway ExposuresThomas Hesterberg and William Bunn, Navistar Inc.; Peter Valberg andChristopher Long, Gradient Corp.; and Charles Lapin, Lapin and AssociatesPage 12

EPA Research Focus: Health Effects of Near-Roadway Air PollutionNalini Padmanabhan and Barbara Glenn, U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyPage 18

Simulating Carbonaceous Pollutant Nanoparticles—An Aid to DiscoverySteven Fiedler and Angela Violi, University of Michigan, Ann ArborPage 24

EM, a publication of the Air & Waste Management Association (ISSN 1088-9981), is published monthly with editorial and executive offices at One Gateway Center, 3rd Floor, 420 Fort Duquesne Blvd., Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1435. ©2009 Air & Waste Management Association. All rights reserved. Materials may not be reproduced, redistributed, or translated in any form without prior written permission of the Editor. Periodicals postage paid at Pittsburgh and at an additional mailing office. Postmaster: Send address changes to EM, Air & Waste Management Association, OneGateway Center, 3rd Floor, 420 Fort Duquesne Blvd., Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1435. GST registration number: 135238921. Subscription rates are $265/year for nonprofit libraries and nonprofit institutions and $405/year for all other institutions. Additional postage charges may apply. Pleasecontact A&WMA Member Services for current rates (1-800-270-3444). Send change of address with recent address label (6 weeks advance notice) and claims for missing issues to the Membership Department. Claims for missing issues can be honored only up to three months for domes-tic addresses, six months for foreign addresses. Duplicate copies will not be sent to replace ones undelivered through failure of the member/subscriber to notify A&WMA of change of address. A&WMA assumes no responsibility for statements and opinions advanced by contributors to thispublication. Views expressed in editorials are those of the author and do not necessarily represent an official position of the Association.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

Life Cycle Assessment as an Environmental Management ToolListed by Time Magazine as the method behind calculating “Ecological Intelligence,” one of “10 IdeasChanging the World Right Now” (March 23, 2009), life cycle assessment (LCA) is an objective processused to evaluate the environmental burdens (or impacts) associated with a product, process, or activity.Join Mary Ann Curran, PhD, and the Air & Waste Management Association, for “Life Cycle Assessment asan Environmental Management Tool” to discuss:• The development of LCA methodology and the basic components of conducting a LCA• Key issues associated with data collection, impact assessment modeling, and interpretation of the results• Real world applications of LCA such as biobased products• The application of information generated by a LCA in a life cycle management framework to lead tobetter-informed choices

Harmonizing Greenhouse Gas Assessment and Reporting ProcessesThe reporting of accurate and consistent data is key to determining the success of climate action plans andmitigation measures. Harmonizing Greenhouse Gas Assessment and Reporting Processes will provide aforum to discuss advances in greenhouse gas emission estimation methods, emission inventories, andreporting. Industry experts will examine the convergence of mandatory and voluntary reporting initiatives,and emerging technical and policy issues.

Professional Development Courses:August 31 - AIR-129: Your GHG Program: Practical Considerations for Managing Greenhouse

Gas Emissions in an Evolving LandscapeAugust 31 - AIR-128: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Management

Air Quality Impacts of Oil and Gas Production in the Rocky MountainsAir Quality Impacts of Oil and Gas Production in the Rocky Mountains will explore the potential impacts of oiland gas exploration and production activities on air quality in the Rocky Mountain region. Environmentalprofessionals working in the oil and gas industries, government, consulting, and academia will not want to missthis opportunity to join industry experts to discuss observations on air quality changes and air monitoring studiesin the Front Range region; positions and concerns about oil and gas; state regulatory programs and plans;industry concerns and actions to address air quality issues; and pollutant specific air quality issues.

Guideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of ModelsGuideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of Models will provide a technical forum for environmentalprofessionals to discuss proposed revisions to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Guideline on AirQuality Models, the guideline that is required for use in the preparation of state implementation plans, federalconstruction permits, and state permits. Source owners, regulatory agencies, and consultants won’t want tomiss this international symposium to discuss the technical and regulatory issues associated with theseproposed changes.

Professional Development Courses:October 26 - AIR-298: Introduction to the CALPUFF Modeling SystemOctober 27 - AIR-297: Introduction to AERMOD

VISITWWW.AWMA.ORG/EVENTS FOR MORE INFORMATION

September 1-2, 2009Baltimore, MD

WebinarAugust 20, 20092-4 p.m. Eastern

September 15-17, 2009Centennial, CO

October 28-30, 2009Raleigh, NC

awma.org

Many of you are probably familiar with the phrase“What’s in your wallet?” used in a recent U.S. television advertising campaign by a certain creditcard company. Well, A&WMA wants to know what you want…if not in your wallet, then for our Association?

Times have been challenging in recent years formany professional associations, including ours, butwe have managed to weather the storm and holdour own. Then the global recession hit at the endof 2008, and A&WMA, as well as just about everyenterprise around the planet, has been forced tomake drastic adjustments…many quite unpleasant.

In previous messages, I have talked about the needto address not only the immediate challenges, butalso maintain a vision for the future. Where do wereally want to be in three years? Recovered towhere we started? I think not. We need to do betterwhen times are good. This is not just a question offinances; it is a question of vitality and increasingvalue. But what does that actually mean? And whatneeds to be done?

World-class athletes visualize an exceptional performance beforehand to enable them to hittheir peak. We are doing the same.

In May, A&WMA’s Board of Directors asked Executive Director, Adrianne Carolla, to draft anoperational “Transformation Plan” to articulate a vision for the future, including improved products,better customer focus and service, measurable performance metrics and integrated financial management, and state-of-the-art technology, thatwill provide us with new inspiration and ideas totake A&WMA to the next level and provide a

ADVERTISINGMalissa [email protected]

EDITORIAL Lisa BucherManaging [email protected]

EDITORIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEEAnn McIver, QEP, ChairCitizens Energy GroupDan L. Mueller, P.E., Vice ChairCDM Inc.Ferdinand B. AlidoNavistar Inc.John D. BachmannVision Air ConsultingJane C. BartonPatterson ConsultantsPrakash Doraiswamy, Ph.D.State University of New York at AlbanyJennifer B. Dunn, Ph.D.URS Corp.Steven P. Frysinger, Ph.D.James Madison UniversityJohn D. KinsmanEdison Electric InstituteAshok KumarUniversity of ToledoMiriam Lev-On, Ph.D.The LEVON GroupJulian A Levy, Jr.Exponent Inc.Mingming LuUniversity of CincinnatiCharles E. McDadeUniversity of California at DavisPaul J. MillerNortheast States for Coordinated Air

Use ManagementChris Pepper Jackson WalkerS.T. RaoU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyDaniel R. WeissDuke Energy IndianaSusan S.G. WiermanMid-Atlantic Regional Air

Management AssociationJames J. Winebrake, Ph.D.Rochester Institute of Technology

PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEEJudith C. Chow, ChairDesert Research Institute

A&WMA HEADQUARTERSAdrianne Carolla, CAEExecutive Director

Air & Waste Management AssociationOne Gateway Center, 3rd Floor420 Fort Duquesne Blvd.Pittsburgh, PA 15222-14351-412-232-3444; 412-232-3450 (fax)[email protected]

What’s in YourTransformation?by Rick [email protected]

more current context to the Association’s overallStrategic Plan.

The Transformation Plan was presented to theBoard, Councils, and Committees at this year’s An-nual Conference in Detroit, and we are now in theprocess of incorporating comments and sugges-tions from the Association’s leadership into a re-vised plan. However, the Transformation Plan mustbe a broadly vetted product and we need bold,creative, yet pragmatic and affordable, ideas fromacross the Association membership. So this iswhere you, the members, come in.

What do you want in your Transformation Plan? Inthe near future, A&WMA’s Transformation Plan willbe made available online to all members, and we’dlike you to weigh in with your comments and sug-gestions. Look for additional information via e-mailand on A&WMA’s Web site over the comingweeks.

Obviously, not every idea can be included andthere are likely things in the present version thatwon’t enthrall all of you. Still, this exercise shouldgenerate plenty of new and interesting ideas. Butwe also need to be realistic in our expectations. Wehave limited resources, staff, and volunteer avail-ability. This is just a plan, but an important first stepto a new place.

I’m betting that this Association will emerge betterthan before.

emawma.org

4 em august 2009 Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association

em • message from the president


em • feature

by Richard Baldauf, Thomas Cahill, Chad Bailey,Andrey Khlystov, K. MaxZhang, Richard Cook, Chatten Cowherd, andGeorge Bowker

Richard W. Baldauf, Ph.D.,Chad R. Bailey, and RichardCook are with the U.S. Envi-ronmental Protection Agency’s(EPA) Office of Transportationand Air Quality in Ann Arbor,MI. Dr. Baldauf also has a jointappointment with EPA’s Officeof Research and Development,National Risk Management Re-search Laboratory in ResearchTriangle Park, NC. Thomas A.Cahill, Ph.D., is a professor inthe Department of Physics andAtmospheric Sciences at theUniversity of California, Davis.Andrey Khlystov, Ph.D., is aprofessor in the Department ofCivil and Environmental Engi-neering at Duke University inDurham, NC. K. Max Zhang,Ph.D., is a professor at the Sib-ley School of Mechanical andAerospace Engineering at Cor-nell University in Ithaca, NY.Chatten Cowherd, Ph.D., is asenior research engineer at the Midwest Research Institute inKansas City, MO. George E.Bowker, Ph.D., works forEPA’s Office of AtmosphericPrograms in Washington, DC.E-mail: [email protected].

In recent years, a consensus has emerged that exposure to traffic emissions increases risksof adverse health effects for populations living, working, or going to school near largeroadways.1-4 Near-roadway air pollution is characterized by elevated levels of traffic-generated compounds compared to overall urban background levels with the gradual decrease in concentrations within several hundred meters of the road.5-8

Traffic-generated compounds impact air qualitythrough three major pathways: vehicle runningemissions of gaseous and particulate compounds,secondary formation during plume transport ofgases and particles, and mechanical processes thatabrade particles from brakes, tires, and the roadsurface. Carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides(NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), aswell as particulate matter (PM) constituents such aspolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and black carbon,are among the numerous compounds that havebeen identified at elevated concentrations nearlarge roads.

Emission reduction programs implemented bygovernment agencies throughout the world havesignificantly reduced emission rates of air pollutantsfrom motor vehicles. Since 1970, average per vehicle

emissions in the United States have been reducedby more than 90% for VOCs and 80% for PM10

and NOx.9,10 In spite of these reductions, motor vehicles still significantly contribute to pollution inurban areas, often due to large increases in vehicleuse offsetting per vehicle emission reductions. Furthermore, emissions from some vehicle associatedsources (e.g., brake and tire wear) are not regulated,and pollutants generated from these sources mayalso increase in the future with increased vehicle use.

Populations near roads are exposed to this mixtureof primary emissions and secondarily formed pollutants. Approximately 30–45% of urban pop-ulations in the United States are likely exposed toelevated pollution levels near roads.4 In manycountries with densely populated urban areas, thisfigure is likely higher.

awma.org

Can Roadway DesignAir Quality Impacts

awma.org august 2009 em 7Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Associationawma.org

Roadway Design Influences onNear-Road Air QualityIn addition to U.S. emission standards, recent researchhas shown that transportation agencies may haveopportunities for reductions in air pollutant expo-sures experienced by near-road populations. Theseopportunities include roadway design options thataffect pollutant transport and dispersion, such asthe roadway configuration and the presence ofroadside structures.

Roadway ConfigurationWind tunnel assessments have been reported thatcompared a number of roadway configuration scenarios.11 These studies indicate that at-graderoadways (i.e., sections of road where the road surface is at the same elevation as the surroundingterrain) experience the least amount of pollutantmixing if no other structures exist near the road.However, cut section roads, whether vertical orsloped walls, will increase the turbulence in air flowresulting from winds into and along the cut section, increasing pollutant mixing and dispersion,and resulting in lower near-road concentrations. Inaddition, as winds flow up and out of a cut section,the plume will be elevated compared with at-graderoad conditions.

Field measurements have also shown the potentialimpacts of roadway design on near-road air quality.Size-resolved PM lead samples collected upwindand downwind of five urban freeways in Los Angeles with differing road configurations (i.e., at-grade, sloped cut section, and elevated fill section)also indicated that cut sections resulted in lowernear-road concentrations than the other scenar-ios.12,13 This study also suggested that elevated, fill-section roadways could result in higher downwindpollutant concentrations than at-grade sectionswhen the plume reaches ground level. In additionto affecting wind flow, this study suggested thatchanging roadway configurations may also affectthe momentum and buoyancy of the traffic emissions due to vehicle-induced turbulence andvehicular exhaust heat, parameters that could notbe assessed in the wind tunnel study.

Roadside FeaturesStructures that impact pollutant transport and dis-persion may also be present near the road, suchas noise barriers, vegetation, and buildings. Thesefeatures also affect pollutant concentrations aroundthe structure by blocking initial dispersion and increasing turbulence and mixing of the emittedpollutants downwind of the road.

Be Used to Mitigatefrom Traffic?


Noise barriers reduce noise levels from traffic byblocking and deflecting sound waves. These barriersalso affect air pollutant dispersion, leading to increased vertical mixing due to the upward deflection of air flow caused by the structure. Mod-eling, wind tunnel, and field measurement studiessuggest that this upward deflection of air can createa recirculation cavity downwind of the barrier con-taining a well-mixed, and potentially lower, zoneof pollution concentrations.7,11,14 However, somestudies suggest that noise barriers adjacent to aroad may also inhibit air movement off the road,leading to elevated on-road pollutant concentra-tions. Buildings and other roadside solid structuresmay have similar effects as noise barriers.

Vegetation stands also affect near-road pollutantconcentrations similarly to noise barriers. The com-plex and porous structure of trees and bushes canincrease air turbulence and promote mixing anddispersion as air flows through and around thevegetation. Vegetation may also reduce pollutantconcentrations by enhancing deposition of certainpollutants on leaves and branches. Modeling, windtunnel, and field measurements have evaluated therole of vegetation on pollutant concentrations.11,14-16

Variables such as the vegetation type, height, andthickness will influence the extent of mixing anddeposition experienced at the site, although specific interrelationships of these factors have notbeen identified. In addition, the porosity of vege-tation may promote wind flow off the road and,thus, not lead to elevated on-road pollutant concentrations that may occur with noise barriers.

Policy Implications of Roadway Design OptionsThe influence of natural and man-made structureson the dispersion of traffic-emitted pollutants enables transportation planners and engineers todesign roadways that reduce air pollutant expo-sures for nearby populations. Government entitiesinvolved in regulating the development of landalong highways may also consider the impact ofroadway design in decisions on building and access permits. The following discussion presentspolicy implications and applications of roadway

design options using U.S. examples, althoughthese options can be applicable to many parts ofthe world.

The consideration of roadway design in determiningthe air quality impacts of existing roads, or newroad projects, can allow future planners to estimatethe benefits of roadway design decisions. Construct-ing a fill or at-grade section roadway in populatedareas could result in greater downwind impactsthan cut sections. In addition, a transportation projectengineer may consider preserving mature vegeta-tion as a means of mitigating adverse air qualityimpacts. Alternatively, planners may add vegeta-tive and concrete barriers to existing roadways tomitigate the current impact of traffic emissions.

Air quality impacts of project design could also allow consideration of vegetative plantingsthroughout urban areas as a means of reducingpopulation exposures to existing and plannedemissions from motor vehicles. These considera-tions at a broader urban scale allow project designelements to be integrated into urban air qualityplanning. For example, the U.S. Forest Service developed online tools allowing urban areas to survey and assess tree populations and estimatethe uptake of air and water pollutants from trees.17

Surface characteristics, such as tree canopy area,also influence the magnitude and extent of urbanheat island effects.18 Changes in surface roughnessfor a single project will also affect local meteorology,influencing dispersion from all nearby air pollutantsources.19 Together, coordination of planning onroadway design options among projects and jurisdictions could be useful in improving urban air quality.

The National Environmental Policy Act and Transportation ConformityAir quality policy analysis of the effects of trafficemissions on nearby populations relies heavily onavailable air quality models and guidelines. In theUnited States, the National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA) requires government agencies to consider the environmental impacts of major projects. The U.S. transportation conformity program

Coordination of planning onroadway designoptions amongprojects and jurisdictionscould be usefulin improvingurban air quality.

awma.org august 2009 em 9Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association

requires transportation plans, programs, and projectsto “conform to” the goals established in State Implementation Plans for areas designated as either in nonattainment or maintenance for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)for CO, PM2.5, PM10, ozone, and nitrogen dioxide.Thus, conformity ensures that transportation activitieswill not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of theNAAQS. Project-level analyses, known as “hot spotanalyses,” are required for projects that are eitherfunded or approved by the U.S. Federal HighwayAdministration or Federal Transit Administration inCO, PM2.5, and PM10 nonattainment and mainte-nance areas.

Under both NEPA and project-level conformityanalyses, the primary air quality analysis method isthe use of dispersion models. At present, the modelsrecommended by the U.S. Environmental Protec-tion Agency contain simple algorithms for assessingthe impacts of cut and fill roadway segments and

none for roadside features. Qualitatively, discus-sions of the effects of roadway design on dispersionand downwind pollutant concentrations may beuseful for consideration in project planning and design. The future development of validated techniques for modeling the influence of roadwaydesign will enable consideration of design decisionsto be employed quantitatively in analyses con-ducted under NEPA and transportation conformity.

State and Local JurisdictionIn most areas of the United States, the state department of transportation (DOT) and municipalgovernment have overlapping responsibilities and authorities over land use development along roads.While city governments typically regulate the development of land through zoning, building codes,and permitting, the state DOT often has authorityover land immediately adjacent to highways. The twolevels of jurisdiction tend to focus on different aims,with municipal governments often promoting economic development and the state DOT seeking


to preserve highway right-of-way for safety or futurehighway expansion. Coordination between local gov-ernments and DOTs can be a successful means ofimplementing approaches that allow development toproceed while minimizing impacts on congestion.20

The consideration of air quality benefits of roadwaydesign options may also present opportunities inthese situations. Transportation project sponsorsmay be able to use sections of right-of-way to improve nearby air quality and noise levels, subjectto government standards.

One additional set of policies may be informed by the implications of the studies discussed above.In the state of California, proposed new school construction near major roadways must demon-strate that “neither short-term nor long-term expo-sure poses significant health risks to pupils.”21 Insome California jurisdictions, land developers mustdemonstrate that ambient concentrations of air toxics from proposed development will not result in increased cancer risks.22 Consideration and

quantification of roadway design may offer devel-opers new tools. In the absence of such mitigation techniques, development incentives may be relocated to “greenfield” sites with lower traffic volumes, but greater travel distances for users ofthe development.

Voluntary Programs and PartnershipsRoadway design options may also be a componentof voluntary programs designed to lower environmental impacts from transportation. For example, the Green Highways Partnership(www.greenhighways.org) integrates public andprivate interests and employs sustainable planning,design, construction, maintenance, and materialsrecycling to build highways. Many land developersare implementing low-impact development (LID)practices and technologies to simultaneously conserve and protect natural resource systems andreduce infrastructure costs. LID practices includepreserving existing vegetation on developmentsites, avoiding construction in environmentally sen-sitive areas, and using more compact street layouts.

A&WMABuyers GuideTap into the incredible network of the Air & Waste Management Association with the A&WMA Buyers Guide. Powered by MultiView, the Guide is the premier search tool for environmental professionals. Find the suppliers you need, within the network of the association you trust.

Start your search today at awma.org.


Roadway design considerations to reduce elevatedpollutant concentrations near roads can also be included with other LID practices.

Recent studies suggest lower regional emissionsare associated with “compact growth” land use.23-25

However, compact growth often brings people intogreater proximity to emission sources, leading to thepossibility of greater exposures to traffic-generatedpollutants despite lower overall emissions from thetransportation system. The mitigation optionspresented above may allow compact growth andhigher population density urban designs withoutincreased pollutant exposures.

ConclusionRecent studies have confirmed the risk to humanhealth for populations spending significant amounts

of time near large roadways. Research studies alsoshow elevated air pollutant concentrations ofgaseous and particulate compounds near roads.While motor vehicle exhaust standards have reducedair pollutant emission levels on a per-vehicle basis,elevated pollutant concentrations can still persistnear the road. This article summarizes research indicating that air pollutant impacts near roads maybe mitigated by infrastructure design options suchas the roadway configuration and the presence ofroadside structures (including vegetation), offeringadditional air quality benefits. These roadway design options also provide opportunities to implement urban land use planning programs thatpromote higher population density and smartgrowth practices without increasing the population’sexposure to air pollution. em

References1. Adar, S.D.; Kaufman, J.D. Cardiovascular Disease and Air Pollutants: Evaluating and Improving Epidemiological Data Implicating Traffic Exposure;

Inhal. Toxicol. 2007, 19 (1), 135-149.2. Salam, M.T.; Islam, T.; Gilliland, F.D. Recent Evidence for Adverse Effects of Residential Proximity to Traffic Sources on Asthma; Current Opinion

in Pulmonary Medicine 2008, 14 (1), 3-8.3. Samet, J.M. Traffic, Air Pollution, and Health; Inhal. Toxicol. 2007, 19 (12), 1021-1027.4. Special Report 17: Traffic-Related Air Pollution: A Critical Review of the Literature on Emissions, Exposure, and Health Effects; Health Effects Institute:

Boston, MA, 2009; http://pubs.healtheffects.org/getfile.php?u=453 (accessed May 2009).5. Zhang, K.M.; Wexler, A.S.; Zhu, Y.F.; Hinds, W.C.; Sioutas, C. Evolution of Particle Number Distribution Near Roadways. Part II: The ‘Road-to-

Ambient’ Process; Atmos. Environ. 2004, 38, 6655-6665.6. Zhu, Y.; Kuhn, T.; Mayo, P.; Hinds, W.C. Comparison of Daytime and Nighttime Concentration Profiles and Size Distributions of Ultrafine Particles

near a Major Highway; Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40 (8), 2531-2536.7. Baldauf, R.W.; Thoma, E.; Isakov, V.; Long, T.; Weinstein, J.; Gilmour, I.; Cho, S.; Khlystov, A.; Chen, F.; Kinsey, J.; Hays, M.; Seila, R.; Snow, R.;

Shores, R.; Olson, D.; Gullett, B.; Kimbrough, S.; Watkins, N.; Rowley, P.; Bang, J. Traffic and Meteorological Impacts on Near Road Air Quality:Summary of Methods and Trends from the Raleigh Near Road Study; J. Air & Waste Manage Assoc. 2008, 58, 865-878.

8. Hagler, G.S.W.; Baldauf, R.W.; Thoma, E.D.; Long, T.R.; Snow, R.F.; Kinsey, J.S.; Oudejans, L.; Gullett, B.K. Ultrafine Particles Near a Major Roadwayin Raleigh, North Carolina: Downwind Attenuation and Correlation with Traffic-Related Pollutants; Atmos. Environ. 2009, 43, 1229–1234.

9. National Emission Inventory Air Pollutant Emission Trends Data; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2009;www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/index.html (accessed may 2009).

10. Highway Statistics; U.S. Federal Highway Administration: Washington, DC, 2007; www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2007 (accessed may 2009).

11. Baldauf, R.W.; Thoma, E.; Khlystov, A.; Isakov, V.; Bowker, G.E.; Long, T.; Snow, R. Impacts of Noise Barriers on Near-Road Air Quality; Atmos.Environ. 2008, 42, 7502–7507.

12. Cahill, T.A.; Feeney, P. J.; Flocchini, R.J.; Dunn, T. Contribution of Freeway Traffic to Airborne Particulate Matter; Final Report to the California AirResources Board; Contract ARB – 502; 1973.

13. Feeney, P.J.; Cahill, T.A.; Flocchini, R.G.; Eldred, R.A.; Shadoan, D.J.; Dunn, T. Effect of Roadbed Configuration on Traffic-Derived Aerosols; J. AirPoll. Control Assoc. 1975, 25, 1145-1147.

14. Bowker, G.E.; Baldauf, R.W.; Isakov, V.; Khlystov, A.; Petersen, W. Modeling the Effects of Sound Barriers and Vegetation on the Transport andDispersion of Air Pollutants from Roadways; Atmos. Environ. 2007, 41, 8128-8139.

15. Cowherd, C. Transportability of Haul Road Dust Emissions in Open Pit Mines. Presented at the 101st Annual Conference & Exhibition of the Air& Waste Management Association, Portland, OR, June 2008; paper # 573.

16. Fujii, E.; Lawton, J.; Cahill, T.A.; Barnes, D.E.; Hayes, C.; Spada, N.; McPherson, G. Removal Rates of Particulate Matter onto Vegetation as a Functionof Particle Size; Final Report to the Breathe California of Sacramento Emigrant Trails Health Effects Task Force (HETF) and Sacramento MetropolitanAQMD, 2008.

17. See iTreeTools.org. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2008.18. Stone, B.; Norman, J.M. Land Use Planning and Surface Heat Island Formation: A Parcel-Based Radiation Flux Approach; Atmos. Environ. 2006,

40, 3561–3573.19. Brode, R.; Wesson, K.; Thurmann, J. AERMOD Sensitivity to the Choice of Surface Characteristics. Presented at the 101st Annual Conference &

Exhibition of the Air & Waste Management Association, Portland, OR, June 2008.20. Vanka. S.; Handy, J.; Kockelman, K.M. State–Local Coordination in Managing Land Use and Transportation Along State Highways; J. Urban Plan.

Develop. 2005, 131, 10-18.21. State of California Senate Bill 352, Chapter 668 Legislative Council’s Digest, 2003; http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/sen/sb_0351-0400/

sb_352_bill_20031003_chaptered.html (accessed May 2009).22. Sacramento Air Quality Management District, 2008.23. Frank, L.D.; Stone, B.; Bachman, W. Linking Land Use with Household Vehicle Emissions in the Central Puget Sound: Methodological Framework

and Findings; Trans. Res. Part D 2000, 5, 173-196.24. Johnston, R.A.; Rodier, C.J.; Abraham, J.E.; Hunt, J.D.; Tonkin, G.J. Applying an Integrated Model to the Evaluation of Travel Demand Management

Policies in the Sacramento Region: Year Two; FHWA/CA/OR-2001-28, Library of Congress #2001096066; 2001.25. Stone, B.; Mednick, A.C.; Holloway, T.; Spak, S.N. Is Compact Growth Good for Air Quality?; J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2007, 73 (4), 404-418.

em • feature

by Thomas Hesterberg,Peter Valberg, ChristopherLong, William Bunn, andCharles Lapin

Thomas W. Hesterberg,Ph.D., is director of productstewardship and environmentalhealth, and William B. Bunn,III, MD, JD, MPH, is vicepresident of health, safety, security, and productivity, bothwith Navistar Inc., Warrenville,IL. Peter A. Valberg, Ph.D.,and Christopher M. Long,Sc.D., are principals with Gradient Corp., Cambridge,MA. Charles Lapin, Ph.D.,DABT, is a toxicology consultantwith Lapin and Associates,Glendale, CA. E-mail: [email protected].

There is a growing interest in understanding the potential health impacts of near-roadwayexposures to vehicle emissions. Epidemiologic studies have reported statistical associationsbetween vehicle traffic intensity and increased respiratory symptoms1 and decreased pulmonary function.2-4 These effects cannot be directly linked to diesel exhaust (DE), whichencompasses both particulates and gases, because there are other contributing sourcesto near-roadway exposures, such as road dust, brake wear, tire wear, and gasoline engineexhaust. However, there is a large and expanding database of health studies involvingcontrolled exposures of volunteers to diesel emissions.5-8 This database can help provideinsight into the potential role of DE in contributing to near-roadway related health effects.

LaboratoryDiesel Exhaust

12 em august 2009 awma.org

Implications for Near-

Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association


Before proceeding, it is important to realize that mostof the data were collected on exposures to exhaustfrom older diesel engines, manufactured beforeemission regulations were mandated. With increas-ingly stringent emission standards, new technologydiesel engines have been developed that providedramatic emission reductions9-11 (see Figure 1).

With new technology diesel engines, emissions ofdiesel particulate matter (DPM; i.e., the particlephase of DE) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) are morethan 99% lower than emissions from engines priorto regulations. In addition, emissions are substan-tially lower for other regulated and nonregulated compounds, including carbon monoxide, total hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds (e.g.,benzene), aldehydes (e.g., formaldehyde), polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons, and ultrafine particles. Togain further insight into the potential health effectsof new technology diesel emissions, new toxicologystudies are underway and more are planned.12

Roadside Levels of DEDE is a complex mixture that has similar componentsto gasoline engine exhaust, thus a unique markerto measure near-roadway DE has not been estab-lished.13 Elemental carbon (EC) is frequently usedas a measurement surrogate because DE is themain source of EC along roadways. EC, however,is an imprecise measure of DE as there are othersources that contribute to roadside EC (e.g., fossilfuel combustion, meat-cooking, biomass burning).On-road measurements of DE or DPM can

provide an upper bound for near-roadway DE levels, as DPM concentrations decline rapidly asone moves downwind from the roadway.14

In-vehicle exposure levels to DPM ranging from6–33 µg/m3 have been measured in California15

(see Figure 2), and EC exposures along a Londonstreet restricted to diesel trucks ranged from 4–16µg/m3.3 As new technology diesels replace agingdiesels, and as diesels are retrofitted with the newemission control technology, these exposure levelscan be expected to decline.

Health Effects StudiesControlled DE Exposure StudiesControlled DE exposure studies with human volunteers have been conducted at inhaled DPMconcentrations ranging from 100 to 300 µg/m3,which are 5–10 times higher than levels foundnear roadways (see Figure 2).

Lung Inflammation and Immune System Changes.The results of controlled DE exposure studies suggest that DPM concentrations on the order of100 µg/m3 are well-tolerated by the human lungdue to its protective antioxidant capacity, whichprevents the occurrence of lung injury and inflam-mation.16,17 Results of elevated DE inhalation levelsby asthmatic volunteers were variable, but with little evidence for greater adverse respiratory effects, compared to normal volunteers. Althoughhuman studies exhibit considerable heterogeneity,perhaps attributable to the source of DPM, theconclusions of the human studies suggest that the

Studies ofHealth Effects Roadway Exposures


tested levels of DPM can elicit a mild, transient inflammatory response that is not highly adversefor either healthy individuals or asthmatics.8

Laboratory animal studies of controlled exposuresto elevated DE concentrations have reportedchanges in inflammatory markers such as im-munoglobulin levels, cell infiltration into the lungs,cytokine concentrations, reactive oxygen species,and susceptibility to infection.8 However, the resultsshow considerable variability and inconsistency inallergic responses to DPM across animal species,disease model, study protocol, and particularly,

among different sources of DPM. For example,studies have concentrated on observed immunesystem stimulation effects of nasally-instilled orlung-administered DPM,18,19 with results dependingcritically on the source of the DPM. Also, DPMdoses were generally 50 times or more higher than would be achievable for typical, near-roadwaylevels.

Several large-scale animal experiments of multiplespecies have investigated chronic effects of DE inhalation on the respiratory system.8 The data indicate that highly elevated DPM doses (concentration × duration) can lead to chronic lung inflammation; however, at lower doses that are stillmuch higher than typical levels of DPM, little hasbeen found in the way of adverse or irreversibleeffects.20

Cardiovascular Health Effects. Findings fromhuman-exposure studies suggest increased bloodclotting and decreased blood flow effects of inhaledDE,21 albeit at exposure levels 10–15 times higherthan typical roadside levels. Studies in laboratoryanimals provide some insights on the potentialmechanisms underlying observed cardiovascularhealth responses (e.g., abnormal electrical activity,increase in vascular inflammatory factors,22 plateletactivation), but given the use of unrealistically highexposure levels, the mechanisms identified bythese studies may not be relevant at lower near-roadway DE exposure levels.8

Other Health Endpoints. Some findings in animalsare suggestive of potential reproductive responses,such as increased testosterone levels and decreasedspermatogenesis for very high DE exposures dur-ing gestation (i.e., fetal development).23 However,there is no evidence of reproductive responses atDE levels near the ranges typical of either occupa-tional or ambient environments.8

Occupational StudiesStudies of occupationally exposed workers in thetransportation industry (e.g., trucking, busing, andrailroad), where DE exposures would be higherthan near-roadway exposures, show small associa-tions with lung cancer risk (i.e., risk ratios generallybelow 1.5).24-26 However, in most cases, lung cancerrates did not increase with increasing duration of

Figure 1. Percentage reductions in new diesel technology engine emissions compared to pre-2007model-year engines. Figure developed from data presented in Hesterberg et al. 2008.9

Figure 2. DPM concentrations in laboratory and clinical experiments vs. real-world situations. Figuredeveloped from Hesterberg et al. 2009, Figure 6.8


employment or exposure. Thus, a dose responsefor DE is lacking, and no causal relationship betweenDE and lung cancer risk in humans has beenclearly demonstrated.6 The studies are also limitedby a lack of quantitative concurrent exposure dataand inadequate or lack of controls for potentialconfounders, particularly tobacco smoking. Fur-thermore, prior to dieselization, similar elevationsin lung cancer incidence have been reported fortruck drivers. These findings suggest that uniden-tified occupational agent(s) or lifestyle factor(s)might be responsible for the small elevations inlung cancer reported in the transportation studies.6

In contrast, underground miners experience thehighest occupational exposures to DPM (see Table1), but do not show elevations in cancer.

Laboratory Studies and CancerLaboratory studies must be interpreted with caution with respect to predicting the carcinogenicpotential of DE in humans.5-7 Life-span bioassaysin rats, mice, and hamsters have demonstrated thatchronic inhalation of high concentrations of DE (>1,000 µg/m3) can cause lung tumors in rats, butnot in mice or hamsters. Moreover, even in rats, athreshold level may have been identified belowwhich no elevations in excess lung tumors wereobserved.7 Subsequent research has shown that,in rats, similarly high chronic exposures to particulatematter (PM) generally considered innocuous (e.g.,carbon black and titanium dioxide) also can cause increased lung tumors. This appears to be the result of an overwhelming of the lungs’ ability toclear particles, which leads to a build up of particlesin the lung, sustained inflammation and cell prolif-eration, and eventually lung fibrosis and tumors.This mechanism of action would not be expectedto occur in humans exposed under occupationalor ambient conditions. For example, the occupationwith historically the greatest lifetime lung burdens

of inhaled particulate is coal mining. Althoughthese heavy particle retentions have been shownto produce lung diseases in coal miners, lung canceris not, however, increased.

ConclusionsNear-roadway levels of DE are much lower thanthose used in controlled DE exposure studies withhumans and laboratory animals. These data suggestthat, while high levels of DE may cause lung

Table 1. Approximate DPM concentrations in the ambient and occupational environments.

Exposure Group DPM (µg/m3)

Ambient < 4

Truckers 10

Railroad workers 70

U.S. surface miners 88

U.S. underground coal miners 640

U.S. underground metal/mineral miners 830

New!Journal Table of Contents Alert

Be the first to know what cutting-edge research is in the Journal! Sign up for the

new Journal Table of Contents Alert atwww.awma.org/go/JournalTOC to

have this monthly alert delivereddirectly to your inbox.

346Inorganic and Carbonaceous Components in Indoor/Outdoor Partic

Oslo, NorwayMihalis Lazaridis, Victoria Aleksandropoulou, Jan Erik Hanssen, Christi

Eleftheria Katsivela357Apportionment of Ambient Primary and Secondary Fine Particulate M

Laboratory Particulate Matter Characterization Site Using Positive Ma

Source Contributions Function Analysis

Donald V. Martello, Natalie J. Pekney, Richard R. Anderson, Cliff I. Davidson

William F. Christensen, Nolan F. Mangelson, and Delbert J. Eatough

369Seasonal and Spatial Variations of Ammonia Emissions from an Open-Lot D

Saqib Mukhtar, Atilla Mutlu, Sergio C. Capareda, and Calvin B. Parnell

377Evaluation of an Offline Method for the Analysis of Atmospheric Reactive Ga

MercuryAndrew P. Rutter, Katy L. Hanford, Jaime T. Zwers, Anthony L. Perillo-Nicholas, Ja

Mark L. Olson384

Soil Suspension/Dispersion Modeling Methods for Estimating Health-Based Soil C

Hexavalent Chromium at Chromite Ore Processing Residue Sites

Paul K. Scott and Deborah Proctor

404An Assessment of Air Emissions from Liquefied Natural Gas Ships Using Different Po

Different FuelsYinka Afon and David Ervin412

Biofiltration Kinetics of a Gaseous Aldehyde Mixture Using a Synthetic Matrix

Li Wang, Praveen Kolar, James R. Kastner, and Brian Herner

424Measurements of Ultrafine Particles and Other Vehicul

Los Angeles FreewaysYifang Zhu, David C. Fung, Nola K

435A New M

Available online at www.aw

JOURNAO F T H E A I R & WASTE MAN A G E M

2008 Critical Review:

spects for Future Climate Change

nd the Reasons for Early Action

p 735

Probing Emissions of Military Cargo Aircraft: Description of a Joint Field Measurement Strategic

Environmental Research and Development Program

Meng-Dawn Cheng, Edwin Corporan, Matthew J. DeWitt, Chester W. Spicer, Michael W. Holdren, Kenneth A.

Cowen, Alex Laskin, David B. Harris, Richard C. Shores, Robert Kagann, and Ram Hashmonay

Particle Size Distributions and Elemental Composition of Atmospheric Particulate Matter in Southern Italy

Francesca Sprovieri and Nicola Pirrone

6Quality Assured Measurements of Animal Building Emissions: Odor Concentrations

Larry D. Jacobson, Brian P. Hetchler, David R. Schmidt, Richard E. Nicolai, Albert J. Heber, Ji-Qin Ni,

Steven J. Hoff, Jacek A. Koziel, Yuanhui Zhang, David B. Beasley, and David B. Parker

812Nonlinear Regression Adjustments of Multiple Continuous Monitoring Methods Produce Effective

Characterization of Short-Term Fine Particulate Matter

Roxolana Kashuba and Peter A. Scheff

821Applications of Open-Path Fourier Transform Infrared for Identification of Volatile Organic Compound

Pollution Sources and Characterization of Source Emission Behaviors

Naiwei Liou, and Endy Sun

ation of Diesel Exhaust in a Facility for Controlled Human Exposures

J Wayne Miller, Tony Taliaferro, David Diaz-Sanchez, William S. Linn,

sion Factors from Residential Wood

Available online at www.awma.orgURNAL& WASTE MAN A G E MENT AS SOCIAT ION

6JUNE 2008

VOLUME 58

474 Characterization of Particulate Matter and Gaseous Emissions of a C-130H AircraftEdwin Corporan, Adam Quick, and Matthew J. DeWitt

484 Mercury Oxidation Promoted by a Selective Catalytic Reduction Catalyst under Simulated PowderRiver Basin Coal Combustion ConditionsChun W. Lee, Shannon D. Serre, Yongxin Zhao, Sung Jun Lee, and Thomas W. Hastings

494 Design Approaches for a Cycling Adsorbent/Photocatalyst System for Indoor Air Purification: FormaldehydeExamplePaul Chin and David F. Ollis

502 Estimating the Resuspension Rate and Residence Time of Indoor ParticlesJing Qian, Andrea R. Ferro, and Kathleen R. Fowler

517 Investigations of Ash Fouling with Cattle Wastes as Reburn Fuel in a Small-Scale Boiler Burner underTransient ConditionsHyukjin Oh, Kalyan Annamalai, and John M. Sweeten

530 Development of a Regenerable System Employing Silica-Titania Composites for the Recovery of Mercuryfrom End-Box Exhaust at a Chlor-Alkali FacilityJennifer M. Stokke and David W. Mazyck

538 Emissions Tradeoffs among Alternative Marine Fuels: Total Fuel Cycle Analysis of Residual Oil, Marine GasOil, and Marine Diesel OilJames J. Corbett and James J. Winebrake

543 Effect of Meteorological Parameters on Fine and Coarse Particulate Matter Mass Concentration in aCoal-Mining Area in Zonguldak, TurkeyLokman Hakan Tecer, Pinar Suren, Omar Alagha, Ferhat Karaca, and Gurdal Tuncel

553 Hot Filter/Impinger and Dilution Sampling for Fine Particulate Matter Characterization from Ferrous MetalCasting ProcessesSue Anne N. Sheya, Clifford Glowacki, Ming-Chih Oliver Chang, Judith C. Chow, and John G. Watson

562 Impact of Downward-Mixing Ozone on Surface Ozone Accumulation in Southern TaiwanChing-Ho Lin

580 Modeling Analyses of the Effects of Changes in Nitrogen Oxides Emissions from the Electric Power Sectoron Ozone Levels in the Eastern United StatesEdith Gego, Alice Gilliland, James Godowitch, S. Trivikrama Rao, P. Steven Porter, and Christian Hogrefe

Available online at www.awma.org

JOURNALO F T H E A I R & WASTE MAN A G E MENT AS SOCIAT ION

4APRIL 2008VOLUME 58


inflammation, cardiovascular, and immunologicaleffects, the lower DE levels characteristic of currentnear-roadway exposure would not be expected topose a significant health concern. Such a conclu-sion goes counter to health effects predictionsbased on a causal interpretation of statistical correlations between surrogates of DE exposure(e.g., roadway proximity, traffic intensity, black car-bon) and health outcomes of nearby populationsreported by recent epidemiological studies.27,28 The

reasons for the discrepancy are not understood,but similar discrepancies have been observed between ambient PM health-effect predictions asprojected by observational epidemiology versusexperimental data on PM- exposure effects in humans and animals.29 Emissions from new tech-nology diesel engines, which are much lower thanolder diesel engines, are expected to result in near-roadway levels of DE that will be even less likely tobe a cause of concern. em

References1. Garshick, E.; Laden, F.; Hart, J.E., Caron, A. Residence Near a Major Road and Respiratory Symptoms in U.S. Veterans; Epidemiol. 2003, 14, 728-736.2. Brunekreef, B.; Janssen, N.A.; de Hartog, J.; Harssema, H.; Knape, M.; van Vliet, P. Air Pollution from Truck Traffic and Lung Function in Children

Living Near Motorways; Epidemiol. 1997, 8, 298-303.3. McCreanor, J.; Cullinan, P.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J.; Stewart-Evans, J.; Mailliarou, E.; Jarup, L.; Harrington, R.; Svartengren, M.; Han, I.-K.; Ohman-Strick-

land, P.; Chung, K.F.; Zhang, J. Respiratory Effects of Exposure to Diesel Traffic in Persons with Asthma; N. Engl. J. Med. 2007, 357, 2348-2358.4. Zhang, J.; McCreanor, J.E.; Cullinan, P.; Chun, K.F.; Ohman-Strickland, P.; Han, I.; Järup, L.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. Health Effects of Real-World

Exposure to Diesel Exhaust in Persons with Asthma; Report Number 138; Health Effects Institute: Boston, MA, February 27, 2009.5. Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust; EPA/600/8-90/057F; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 2002.6. Hesterberg, T.W.; Bunn, W.B.; Chase, G.R.; Valberg, P. A.; Slavin, T. J.; Lapin, C. A.; Hart, G. A. A Critical Assessment of Studies on the Carcino-

genic Potential of Diesel Exhaust; Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2006, 36, 727-776.7. Hesterberg, T.W.; Bunn, W.B.; McClellan, R.O.; Hart, G.A.; Lapin, C.A. Carcinogenicity Studies of Diesel Engine Exhausts in Laboratory Animals:

A Review of Past Studies and a Discussion of Future Research Needs; Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2005, 35, 379-411.8. Hesterberg, T.W.; Long, C.M.; Bunn, W.B.; Sax, S.; Lapin, C.; Valberg, P. Non-Cancer Health Effects of Diesel Exhaust (DE): A Critical Assessment

of Recent Human and Animal Toxicological Literature; Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2009, 39, 195-227.9. Hesterberg, T.W.; Lapin, C.A.; Bunn, W.B. A Comparison of Emissions from Vehicles Fueled with Diesel or Compressed Natural Gas; Environ.

Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 6437-6445.10. Kado, N.Y.; Okamoto, R.A.; Kuzmicky, P. A.; Kobayashi, R.; Ayala, A.; Gebel, M.E.; Rieger, P.L.; Maddox, C.; Zafonte, L. Emissions of Toxic Pollutants

from Compressed Natural Gas and Low Sulfur Diesel-Fueled Heavy-Duty Transit Buses Tested Over Multiple Driving Cycles; Environ. Sci. Technol.2005, 39, 7638-7649.

11. Holmen, B.A.; Ayala, A. Ultrafine PM Emissions from Natural Gas, Oxidation-Catalyst Diesel, and Particle-Trap Diesel Heavy-Duty Transit Buses;Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36, 5041-5050.

12. Mauderly, J. ACES Phase 3. Chronic Inhalation Bioassay. Presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Health Effects Institute, April 2007. Seewww.healtheffects.org/Slides/AnnConf2007/Mauderly.pdf.

13. Schauer, J.J. Evaluation of Elemental Carbon as a Marker for Diesel Particulate Matter; J. Expo. Anal. Environ. Epidemiol. 2003, 13, 443-453. 14. Zhu, Y., Hinds, W.C., Kim, S., Shen. S., Sioutas, C. Study of Ultrafine Particles Near a Major Highway with Heavy-Duty Diesel Traffic; Atmos. Environ.

2002, 36, 4323-4335.15. Fruin, S.A.; Winer, A.M.; Rodes, C.E. Black Carbon Concentrations in California Vehicles and Estimation of In-Vehicle Diesel Exhaust Particulate

Matter Exposures; Atmos. Environ. 2004, 38, 4123-4133.16. Carlsten, C.; Kaufman, J.D.; Peretz, A.; Trenga, C.A.; Sheppard, L.; Sullivan, J.H. Coagulation Markers in Healthy Human Subjects Exposed to Diesel

Exhaust; Thromb. Res. 2007, 120, 849-855.17. Behndig, A.F.; Mudway, I.S.; Brown, J.L.; Stenfors, N.; Helleday, R.; Duggan, S.T.; Wilson, S.J.; Boman, C.; Cassee, F.R.; Frew, A.J.; Kelly, F.J.; Sandström,

T.; Blomberg, A. Airway Antioxidant and Inflammatory Responses to Diesel Exhaust Exposure in Healthy Humans; Eur. Respir. J. 2006, 27, 359-365.18. Diaz-Sanchez, D.; Garcia, M.P.; Wang, M.; Jyrala, M.; Saxon, A. Nasal Challenge with Diesel Exhaust Particles Can Induce Sensitization to a

Neoallergen in the Human Mucosa; J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 1999, 104, 1183-1188.19. Diaz-Sanchez, D.; Penichet-Garcia, M.; Saxon, A. Diesel Exhaust Particles Directly Induce Activated Mast Cells to Degranulate and Increase Histamine

Levels and Symptom Severity. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2000, 106, 1140-6.20. Seagrave, J.; McDonald, J.D.; Reed, M.D.; Seilkop, S.K.; Mauderly, J.L. Responses to Subchronic Inhalation of Low Concentrations of Diesel Exhaust

and Hardwood Smoke Measured in Rat Bronchioalveolar Lavage Fluid; Inhal. Toxicol. 2005, 17, 657-670.21. Mills, N.L.; Tornqvist, H.; Gonzalez, M.C.; Vink, E.; Robinson, S.D.; Söderberg, S.; Boon, N.A.; Donaldson, K.; Sandström, T.; Blomberg, A.;

Newby, D.E. Ischemic and Thrombotic Effects of Dilute Diesel-Exhaust Inhalation in Men with Coronary Heart Disease; New Engl. J. Med. 2007,357, 1075-1082.

22. Nemmar, A.; Al-Maskari, S.; Ali, B.H.;Al-Amri, I.S. Cardiovascular and Lung Inflammatory Effects Induced by Systemically Administered DieselExhaust Particles in Rats; Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell Mol. Physiol. 2007, 292, L664-L670.

23. Watanabe, N. Decreased Number of Sperms and Sertoli Cells in Mature Rats Exposed to Diesel Exhaust as Fetuses; Toxicol. Lett. 2005, 155, 51-58.24. Garshick, E.; Schenker, M.B.; Munoz, A.; Segal, M.; Smith, T.J.; Woskie, S.R.; Hammond, S.K.; Speizer, F.E. A Case-Control Study of Lung Cancer

and Diesel Exhaust Exposure in Railroad Workers; Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1987, 135, 1242-8.25. Garshick, E.; Laden, F., Hart, J.E.; Rosner, B.; Davis, M.E.; Eisen, E.A.; Smith, T.J. Lung Cancer and Vehicle Exhaust in Trucking Industry Workers;

Environ. Health Perspect. 2008, 116, 1327-1332.26. Steenland, N.K.; Silverman, D.T.; Hornung, R.W. Case-Control Study of Lung Cancer and Truck Driving in the Teamsters Union; Am. J. Public

Health 1990, 80, 670-674.27. Beelen, R.; Hoek, G.; van den Brandt, P.A.; Goldbohm, R.A.; Fischer, P.; Schouten, L.J.; Jerrett, M.; Hughes, E.; Armstrong, B.; Brunekreef, B. Long-Term

Effects of Traffic-Related Air Pollution on Mortality in a Dutch Cohort (NLCS-AIR Study); Environ. Health Perspect. 2008, 116, 196-202.28. Franco Suglia, S.; Gryparis, A.; Schwartz, J.; Wright, R.J. Association between Traffic-Related Black Carbon Exposure and Lung Function Among

Urban Women; Environ. Health Perspect. 2008, 116, 1333-1337.29. Valberg, P.A. Is PM More Toxic Than the Sum of Its Parts? Risk-Assessment Toxicity Factors vs. PM-Mortality “Effect Functions”; Inhal. Toxicol.

2004, 16 (Suppl. 1), 19-29.

Findings fromhuman-exposurestudies suggestincreased bloodclotting and decreased bloodflow effects of inhaled DE.


em • feature

by Nalini Padmanabhan and Barbara Glenn

Nalini Padmanabhan, MPH,recently completed a one-yearinternship with the U.S. Envi-ronmental Protection Agency’s(EPA) Office of Research andDevelopment, National Centerfor Environmental Research inWashington, DC. Barbara S.Glenn, Ph.D., MPH, is an environmental epidemiologistwith EPA’s National Center forEnvironmental Research. E-mail:[email protected].

In recent years, near-road exposure to air pollution has emerged as an issue in environ-mental health. People live, work, commute, and go to school in these environments—anestimated 45 million Americans live within 300 feet of a highway.1 Policy-makers have attempted to reduce exposure levels; for example, California passed a law in 2004 prohibiting the construction of new schools within 500 feet of a major highway.2 Researchconducted and supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has improved understanding of the pathway from traffic sources to health outcomes. In turn,these findings will help policy-makers understand when and where interventions areneeded to reduce emissions and exposure and minimize health effects.

EPA Research FocusHealth Effects of Near-Roadway Air Pollution

Near-Road Air Pollution and HealthNear-road air pollution involves a complex mix ofgases, vapors, and particulates that differs fromother air pollution in many ways, including com-position and particle size. The composition of this mixis affected by factors such as the temporal variationof traffic and sunlight patterns, and the vehicle mixof cars, light-duty trucks, and heavy-duty trucks. Influential, but often overlooked, are other productsof vehicle travel, resulting from wear and tear ofthe road, tires, engines, and brakes.

Research has linked near-road air pollution exposureto a variety of adverse health outcomes affectingboth children and adults. Most strongly establishedare the ties to asthma exacerbation, but recent re-search suggests that near-road exposure may eveninitiate asthma. Studies in the past few years havedetected additional birth and childhood outcomes,such as retardation in lung development, cognitiveeffects, and increased risk of childhood leukemia.Both short-term and long-term traffic exposuremay increase the risk of myocardial infarction, andreduce the rate of survival after heart failure.

Many of these outcomes are similar to those resulting from exposure to particulate matter (PM)in general, but there are important differences

between the particles themselves. Near-road airhas higher concentrations of ultrafine particles, resulting from fresh combustion emissions, andcoarse particles, resulting from tire/brake wear andresuspended road dust. There are also significantdifferences in particle composition; for example,concentrations of organic compounds and metalssuch as aluminum, iron, manganese, lead, and zincare significantly higher in certain size fractions ofnear-road particles than in other particles.

How these differences affect exposure levels andhealth effects is still uncertain. Research studieshave used various methods to estimate people’s exposure to near-road emissions, such as distancefrom roadway, vehicles per unit time, activity diaries, and emission data, but there has been littleevaluation of these tools and consensus on theiruse. Several potential health effects have been proposed and substantiated to various degrees, butquestions remain on the medical and social characteristics that increase susceptibility and why,how the effects take place, how they can be pre-vented, and the role of other influencing factors.

In 2006, EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation respondedto these observed effects and new science ques-tions by identifying near-roadway research as one


‘Something was going on close to thefreeway. There was more allergenicity

in the particles at 50 m.’>>Dr. Michael Kleinman,

Southern California Particle Center


of its highest priority needs. The resulting Near-Roadway Action Plan integrated the many inde-pendent efforts that were being planned or alreadytaking place.3,4 With the goal of improving programs and activities at the federal, state, andlocal levels, the plan addresses several points alongthe pathway from source to health outcome: characterization and apportionment of sources and emissions, air quality, exposure assessmentsand modeling in a variety of micro-environments,and health effects.

Increasing knowledge of these health effects willprove valuable as well; according to a recent reportfrom the Health Effects Institute on traffic-relatedair pollution, there is sufficient evidence to find acausal relationship between PM exposure andasthma exacerbation, but more work is still requiredto characterize its other health effects.5 Researchon these topics is proceeding, and the followingpages highlight two ongoing studies and their results. These studies focus on the latter half of thepathway from source to health outcome, addressingthe variety of health effects resulting from expo-sure to near-road air pollution.

Immune Responses to Near-RoadPollutant ExposureDr. Michael Kleinman and colleagues at the EPA-funded Southern California Particle Center studiedthe potential of roadway particles to aggravate allergic and immune responses in mice.6 Usingmice that were not inherently susceptible, but hadbeen pre-sensitized by exposure to ovalbumin(egg whites), followed shortly by exposure to con-centrated ambient particles, the research grouptested the effect of particles at different distancesfrom the roadway.

They found that within 50 m of the roadway, therewas a significant allergic response and elevatedproduction of specific antibodies. At 150 m and500 m downwind of the roadway, these effectswere not statistically significant. According to Kleinman, “Something was going on close to thefreeway. There was more allergenicity in the particles at 50 m.”

To try to explain these differences, the research groupcompared the composition of near-road particles

to that of other ambient particles. They found thatnear-road particles had significantly higher massconcentrations of elemental carbon (EC) and organic carbon (OC) than other particles, but theseconcentrations did not differ between particles at50 m from the roadway and those at 150 m.

However, searching the literature revealed otherwork showing a possible shift in the size distributionof particles during the few seconds it takes forthem to travel that distance. Although the massconcentrations of EC and OC remained the same,the compounds shifted from smaller to larger particles as they reached 150 m, which deposit lessefficiently in the lower respiratory tract. As a result,the effect on health is reduced.

What’s Next?Future studies will examine the ultrafine fraction ofnear-road particles, which with its high depositionefficiency and air toxics concentrations has thegreatest capacity to generate reactive oxygenspecies and cause oxidative stress. Factors affectingambient particle concentrations, such as roadwayconfiguration and wind direction, should also beaddressed. According to Kleinman, “[Future research]has to take into account meteorology…and workon mitigation in areas of maximum exposure.”

“There’s certainly an environmental justice issuehere,” he adds. “When I look around and see usbuilding more schools near freeways, I just thinkwe have to do better as a society.”

The MESA Air StudyIn 2004, EPA awarded a US$30 million grant tothe University of Washington to conduct a 10-yearprospective air pollution study built on the frame-work of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis(MESA), a 10-year epidemiological study initiatedin 1999 by the National Heart, Lung, and BloodInstitute.

The MESA Air Pollution Study fills a gap identifiedin a 2001 National Research Council report by examining the impact of long-term air pollution exposure on the onset and progression of heartdisease, differences in susceptibility, and the roles ofPM and gaseous pollutants, including near-roadpollutants. The MESA study involves more than

There is sufficient evidence to find a causal relationship between PM exposure and asthma exacerbation.


7000 participants aged 45–84, living in nine loca-tions in six states.

The study’s central hypothesis is that long-term fineparticulate (PM2.5) exposure is associated with afaster progression of coronary atherosclerosis andan increased risk of coronary events, such as heartattack and heart failure. Researchers are developinga state-of-the-art exposure model to examine PMvariability between and within study sites using national PM monitoring system data; measurements,and variability estimates at the neighborhood,home, and individual levels; meteorological data;neighborhood and housing characteristics; individualtime-activity data; and traffic data. Health effects areassessed by tracking individual clinical cardiovas-cular outcomes in the entire cohort and conductingpre-symptomatic atherosclerosis examinations fora subgroup of 3600 participants.

Although work on the detailed exposure modelcontinues, researchers are beginning to publishearly analyses based on MESA clinical examina-tions already conducted and less sophisticatedmeasures of PM and traffic exposure.7 According toprincipal investigator Joel Kaufman, “These earlystudies use novel health outcomes compared toprevious air pollution studies, and are a step on theway to what will be a more sophisticated approach.”

Traffic Exposure and Indicators of Heart FailurePrevious research has suggested a relationship between air pollution and health outcomes in indi-viduals with heart failure disease—hospitalization,heart attack, and mortality, for example—but little isknown about the impact of pollution on heart failuredisease itself. A study by University of Washingtonresearcher Victor Van Hee and colleagues, pub-lished in May’s issue of The American Journal ofRespiratory and Critical Care Medicine, aimed tofill this gap. It examined the effect of residential traffic exposure on two preclinical indicators ofheart failure: left ventricular mass index (LVMI),measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging(MRI), and ejection fraction.8

The study involved 3827 participants, classified bythe distance between their residence and the nearestinterstate highway, state or local highway, or major

arterial road. Four distance groups were defined:less than 50 m, 50–100 m, 101–150 m, and greater than 150 m. Overall, most participantslived within 150 m of a major roadway, but thisproportion varied by location.

After adjusting for demographic, behavioral, andclinical covariates, the group found that livingwithin 50 m of a major roadway was associatedwith a 1.4 g/m2 higher LVMI than living more than150 m from one, equivalent to the response associated with a 6-mmHg rise in systolic bloodpressure. No relationship was found for ejectionfraction. The association between traffic exposureand LVMI was stronger for men than for women,and in New York City, St. Paul, and Baltimore com-pared to Chicago, Winston-Salem, and Los Angeles.No interactions were detected for hypertension status or use of blood pressure medication.

This suggests an association between traffic-relatedair pollution and increased prevalence of a preclinical

The International Society ofExposure Science (ISES) 2009Annual Conference will gatherscientists from a wide rangeof disciplines to share currentresearch activities and to identifycritical needs for exposurescience in the 21st century.Participants will explore currentand emerging issues in globalenvironmental and humanhealth.

V is i t the conference Web s i teat www. i ses09 .org

for more informat ion .Quest ions?

E -ma il i ses09@gma il . com

Transforming Exposure Science in the 21st Century

2009ISESMinneapolis

TransformingExposure Science

in the 21st Century19th Annual Conference of the

International Society of Exposure ScienceNovember 1-5, 2009 • Minneapolis, MN


predictor of heart failure among people living nearbusy roads. According to the authors, “given that arelatively large number of individuals in this cohortlive near major roadways, the public health impli-cations of an association of this magnitude may besubstantial.” MESA investigators will be able toevaluate traffic-related impacts of PM on LVMIchanges and ejection fraction among a subset ofparticipants after its final examination in 2010–2012 using more precise exposure assignmentsaccounting for within- and between-city variability.

PM Exposure, Traffic, and Systemic AtherosclerosisToxicology research has linked PM exposure to incidence of atherosclerosis, but epidemiological research on this link in humans is limited. To addressthis question, Ryan Allen and colleagues at the University of Washington studied associations between traffic proximity, background PM2.5 levels,and abdominal aortic calcification, an indicator ofsystemic atherosclerosis. Their findings were published in March in Epidemiology.9

Allen’s study involved 1147 participants split into twoexposure groups by geocoded residence. Participantswere considered highly exposed to traffic if theylived within 100 m of a highway or 50 m of a majorarterial road. Again, the average residential distancefrom a roadway varied by city. Background concentrations were based on two-year averagesbetween 2000 and 2002 using national PM2.5

monitoring data interpolated to residence.

After adjusting for covariates, no overall associationswere found between abdominal aortic calcificationand background PM2.5 levels or traffic proximity.However, sensitivity analyses using those partici-pants hypothesized to have more accurate expo-sure estimates because of residential stability andcloseness to PM monitors, found that PM2.5

concentration was associated with an elevated riskof detectable aortic calcification and an increase in calcium score. Interpretation of results was complicated by the use of different computerizedtomography (CT) scanner technologies at each location, but analyses controlled for this.

Future reports will describe results of the MESA Airstudy’s primary focus using more direct measuresof subclinical atherosclerosis in the heart, physio-logic changes over time, and the impact of between- and within-city variation in PM. Developingmore precise exposure estimates will help explainthe effect of exposure misclassification on the abilityto assess the cardiovascular risk posed by trafficpollution.

ConclusionThese examples show just two of the many ways inwhich near-road air pollution is emerging as an important health issue, one with outcomes as variedas allergy exacerbation, immune responses, andcardiovascular effects. Given the centrality of trans-portation in people’s lives and the growing numberof people living near roadways, it is a problem witha large potential impact on public health. em

References1. American Housing Survey for the United States, 2007; U.S. Census Bureau: Washington, DC, 2008; available online at www.census.gov/

prod/2008pubs/h150-07.pdf. 2. Senate Bill No. 352, Chapter 668; Official California Legislative Information, 2003-2004 Session; available online at www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/

bill/sen/sb_0351-0400/sb_352_bill_20031003_chaptered.pdf. 3. Baldauf, R.; Vette, A.; Neas, L.; Costa, D. ORD Near-Road Research Program: Draft; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research

and Development: Washington, DC, 2008.4. Costa, D. EPA’s Near Road Research Program. Presented to Air Quality Research Subcommittee, February 19, 2009. See www.epa.gov/

osp/bosc/pdf/airoverview.pdf.5. Traffic-Related Air Pollution: A Critical Review of the Literature on Emissions, Exposure, and Health Effects; HEI Special Report 17; HEI Panel on the

Health Effects of Traffic-Related Air Pollution; Health Effects Institute: Boston, MA, 2009. In press.6. Kleinman, M.T.; Sioutas, C.; Froines, J.R.; Fanning, E.; Hamade, A.; Mendez, L.; Meacher, D.; Oldham, M. Inhalation of Concentrated Ambient

Particulate Matter Near a Heavily Trafficked Road Stimulates Antigen-Induced Airway Responses in Mice; Inhal. Toxicol. 2007, 19 (Supp. 1),117-126; available online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08958370701495345.

7. Gilmour, M.I. Assessment of Cardiopulmonary Toxicity in Size-Fractionated Ambient Air Samples. Presented to EPA PM Center Call-In Seminar,November 7, 2007.

8. Van Hee, V.C.; Adar, S.D.; Szpiro, A.A.; Barr, R.G.; Bluemke, D.A.; Diez Roux, A.V.; Gill, E.A.; Sheppard, L.; Kaufman, J.D. Exposure to Traffic andLeft Ventricular Mass and Function; Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2009, 179 (9), 827-834.

9. Allen, R.W.; Criqui, M.H.; Diez Roux, A.V.; Allison, M.; Shea, S.; Detrano, R.; Sheppard, L.; Wong, N.D.; Stukovsky, K.H.; Kaufman, J.D. Fine ParticulateMatter Air Pollution, Proximity to Traffic, and Aortic Atherosclerosis; Epidemiol. 2009, 20 (2), 254-264.

AcknowledgmentsThe authors thankMichael Kleinman, JoelKaufman, and DanCosta for their editorialcomments.

Disclaimer: Although this article has been reviewed by EPA andapproved for publication,it does not necessarilyreflect the agency’s policies or views.

NTH Consultants, Ltd.Infrastructure Engineeringand Environmental Services

West Michigan Chapter /Lake Michigan Section of A&WMA

A&WMA GRATEFULLY ACKNOWLEDGES OUR SPONSORS FORTHEIR GENEROUS SUPPORT OF THE

102ND ANNUAL CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION

C O N F E R E N C E S P O N S O R :

S I L V E R S P O N S O R S :

S U P P O R T I N G S P O N S O R S :

G O L D S P O N S O R S :

P L A T I N U M S P O N S O R S :

BT Environmental Consulting, Inc.Dickinson Wright PLLC

East Central Section of A&WMAEast Michigan Chapter of A&WMA

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP

Indiana Chapter of A&WMAKentucky Chapter of A&WMA

Miller CanfieldPepper Hamilton LLP

AECOM EnvironmentalBuckner Law Group

Combustion Controls Solutions & Environmental Services, Inc.Dickinson Wright PLLCEndlish Environmental

EQ – The Environmental Quality CompanyHB Engineering, Inc.

Northern Ohio Chapter of A&WMARoss Environmental Services, Inc.

Southwest Ohio Chapter of A&WMAState Bar Environmental Law Section

University of Michigan DearbornURS Corporation

Warner, Norcross & Judd

B R O N Z E S P O N S O R S :

24 em august 2009 awma.org

em • feature

by Steven Fiedler and Angela Violi

Steven L. Fiedler and Angela Violi are both with the Department of MechanicalEngineering at The Universityof Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. E-mail: [email protected].

Particulate matter (PM) ranks as one of the principal air pollutants linked to acute andchronic physiological ailments. Sized 200 times smaller than a grain of sand, PM is generated by both natural and anthropogenic sources with the latter primarily consisting offuel combustion processes from utilities, vehicles, and industrial emitters.1 Since 1987,the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set an air quality standard for inhalable“coarse” PM sized less than 10 µm (PM10) and in 1997, the agency set stricter standardsfor “fine” PM, defined to be sized less than 2.5 µm (PM2.5).2 This action was taken to address determinations of greater health risks associated with PM in this category. A subsequent revision in 2006 further highlighted the recognized size-based health risk distinctions by respectively tightening and eliminating the 24-hour PM2.5 and annualPM10 standards.3

Simulating CarbonaceousPollutant NanoparticlesAn Aid to Discovery



With an understanding of the toxicity of micrometer-sized pollutant particles becoming clearer, a newfrontier in epidemiology is emerging with attentiondirected toward smaller, combustion-generatednanoparticles. Recent studies have indicated a pos-sibility that “ultrafine” particles of less than 0.1 µm(PM0.1) may pose an even greater risk than PM2.5.Additionally, the aforementioned ambient air qual-ity standards that regulate PM by mass have alsobeen questioned, since in this regard, nanoparticlesare not proportionally represented.4 In fact, it hasbeen estimated that PM0.1 account for 80% of theparticle number concentration in urban environ-ments.5 To begin tackling open toxicological questions, this article considers the health effects of combustion-generated nanoparticles, and the contribution of our molecular level insights gainedfrom computational simulations.

Particle ToxicityParticle toxicity can scale inversely with size. A common example of this phenomenon is carbonblack, which is inert in the bulk, but can inducelung injury when reduced to nanoparticle dimen-sions. Three explanations have been advanced:the net exposed surface area of the material is inversely proportional to particle size (i.e., feweratoms in the particle interior, which increases thenumber of reactive sites); smaller sizes could enhance a particle’s ability to act as a reducingagent and generate the superoxide radical (O2-), areactive toxic species; and material (chemical) prop-erties and the electronic structure of the particlecan change at such small dimensions, which couldcreate reactive sites on the particle.6 Experimentally,demonstrations of the destructive and perturbativecapabilities of certain nanoparticle species havebeen observed in in vitro cytotoxicity studies,7 andneutron, X-ray scattering, and spectroscopic meas-urements;8 however, conclusive determination of thetoxicity of even prototypical “simple” nanoparticlespecies has proven difficult, with buckyball molecules, C60, a case in point.7

To address concerns regarding public reaction to(im)proper environmental risk assessments, a callfor standardization of nanoparticle toxicity meas-urement techniques has been issued.9 To this end,an international regulatory consortium, includingEPA, specified a set of prototypical nanomaterialsfor toxicological testing, of which, carboneous molecules are represented by C60 and nanotubemolecules (see Figure 1b).10 There is an obviousconfluence of concerns of ultrafine pollutant particlesand the risk of manufactured nanomaterials. In fact,combustion is the dominant pathway by which anthropogenic particles are emitted into the envi-ronment. With this in mind, we have developed aset of approaches to specifically study biochemicalinteractions of combustion-generated nanoparti-cles, which differ from these prototypical particlescurrently under review.

Importance of ModelingComputer simulation is a standard research anddevelopement tool used to gain a fundamental understanding of macroscopic phenomena andoptimize design. Once established, models andsimulations can minimize development cost ortime and elucidate mechanisms in a manner some-times unobtainable by experiments (e.g., the correlation between contaminant particle size andtoxicity). Systems on the continuum scale are particularly amenable to simulation due in part tothe maturity of the methods such as computationalfluid dynamics and finite element analysis. Relativelysmall molecular systems comprised of less than10–100 atoms can also be simulated with a degree of confidence using quantum mechanical(ab initio)-based approaches.

Due to computational cost and the length of timerequired to run the simulations, larger molecularsystems (103–105 atoms) require more efficient approaches. Often efficiency necessitates a degreeof empiricism that tends to scale proportionally withsize of the system (number of atoms) or timescaleof the behavior simulated. Molecular modeling is acommon approach that falls in this category, whereintra- and inter-molecular interaction parameters arederived from experiment or ab initio calculations.

Many biological, chemical, and material processes,however, are too large to be efficiently simulated

Figure 1. (a) Representative combustion-generated nanoparticlescalculated with the AMPI code suite; (b) Prototypical nano-sizedcarboneous particles: fullerene (C60), and single- and multi-wallednanotubes currently under EPA review;10 (c) Coarse graining of combustion-generated nanoparticles into one (left) and threesites (right).

Recent studieshave indicateda possibility that ‘ultrafine’particles maypose an evengreater riskthan PM2.5.


by conventional molecular modeling approaches,but require molecular-level insight that cannot beprovided by the continuum-based methods. Themultiscale approach developed in the Violi groupis designed to fill that void and provide the neces-sary computational tools to tackle simulation ofthese mesoscopic-sized systems. Using a hierarchi-cal sequence of methods, a subset of atoms/mole-cules simulated at high levels of accuracy is used togenerate input for the next tier of simulations thatincorporate more atoms/molecules or cover longertimescales.

Combustion-Generated ParticlesDetermining the structures of combustion particlesis not a trivial task. Experimental limitations includethe fact that removing a particle from an ambientenvironment for measurement causes deforma-tions. Since the formation of nanoparticle soot precursors spans large time (ps to ms) and length(100–103 nm) scales and involve large numbers ofatoms and molecules, conventional computationalapproaches are rendered to be too slow to simulatethis massive process. A recent computational modeldeveloped in the Violi group, termed AtomisticModel Particle Inception (AMPI), combines twostandard computational techniques, kinetic MonteCarlo and Molecular Dynamics (MD), to become a tractable alternative.11-14 The input for the FORTRAN-based AMPI code, include number andconcentration profiles of the gas species that contribute to PM growth, reaction rates that governgrowth rates, and the temperature profile. Thebasic premise of the approach is to simulate thegrowth of a nanoparticle structure in a combustionenvironment by collisions with polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons (PAH) and clusters.

Resultant calculated nanoparticle structures, suchas those shown in Figure 1a, were found to comparewell with known experimental properties.11,12 Thereare no inherent size limitations of the nanoparticle“grown” with AMPI; however, computational timesvary proportionally to particle size. A calculation fora structure consisting of hundreds of atoms typicallyrequires a couple weeks on modern computationalarchitectures. Presently the AMPI code is proprietary.

We can now also begin to ask questions about thestructure and growth mechanisms of larger PMspecies. It has been hypothesized that an aggre-gation process occurs for nanoparticles that exceeda minimum size threshold. To consider this process,we employed a multiscalar approach, culminatingwith the application of a coarse graining procedure,where the interactions of groups of atoms werecondensed and represented by larger sites.15 Forcomputational efficiency, each nanoparticle was rep-resented by a limited number of sites (see Figure 1c),where site–site interaction parameters were obtained from atomic simulations.

Clear demonstrations of the aggregation behavior

Figure 2. Aggregation of soot precursor nanoparticles at different temperatures. Each orange pointrepresents a nanoparticle of ~400 atoms. As opposed to the disperse distribution of nanoparticles at1800 K, significant clustering was observed at lower temperatures.

Figure 3. A representative cell membrane in (a) the presence of a carboneous nanoparticle (denoted as “excluded” in Table 1) and (b) and an embedded particle in the bilayer center.


were observed (see Figure 2) that could aid experimental structural characterization. Goodagreement of the Hamaker constant and the stick-ing probability of the nanoparticles, was obtainedbetween calculated and spectroscopic values.15

Using a similar set of computational tools, onecould conceivably create designer fuel additivesthat could shift the PM size distribution outside therange found to be most toxic.

Mechanism of Ultrafine PM Cell PermeationIn a related series of studies we explored the permeation of combustion-generated particlesthrough cell membranes.16-18 Nanoparticles canenter our system by respiration, ingestion, andthrough the skin. Since inhalation is presently a primary concern, we considered permeation mechanisms across lung surfactant17 and epithelialcells lining the respiratory track.16,18 Immediateclues to permeation mechanisms were apparent inthe surfactant study, as surfactant molecules (lipids)were found to wrap around the nanoparticle.Furthermore, the nanoparticle and a representativelung surfactant protein were observed to repeleach other.

Interesting insights were also obtained by observation of nanoparticles permeating cell membranes (lipid bilayers). Previous computationalstudies considered the permeation of small mole-cules,19-21 C60,22,23 and nanotubes.24 Combustion-generated particles though, differ from these andthe prototypical, synthetic, nanoparticles currentlyunder toxicological evaluation (see Figures 1a and1b). To determine the influence of nanoparticlemorphology and chemical composition on the diffusion process through the cell, we used a molecular modeling-based approach in conjunc-tion with AMPI.

From the simulations (see Figure 3), the presenceof a permeated nanoparticle was found to hinderthe motion of the surrounding lipid and cholesterolmolecules, effectively acting as an anti-plasticizer inthe membrane (see Table 1).16,18 This instigatedhardening has toxicological implications, sincesome membrane processes such as cell signaling,regulate or depend on membrane fluidity. We canalso obtain a microscopic view of mechanisms

associated with the permeation process. As depicted in Figure 4, molecules sized from ben-zene to the combustion-generated nanoparticle(C68H29) were found to orient to minimize theirfootprint and pass through the membrane with aprofile parallel to the bilayer norm. Similar behav-ior was also previously observed for hexane.21

Particle sphericity was shown to be an influentialfactor for the preferential location that nanoparti-cles would settle as they passed through the mem-brane.16 The particles were not found to be locallytrapped however, but could travel at rates in accordance with their molecular masses. Thepropensity of PAH and nanoparticles to enter andcontinue to pass though the cell membrane, wasalso demonstrated from calculated thermodynamicfree energy profiles18 to be highly correlated to theparticle surface area.18 This correlation was not surprising, since as stated above, toxicity has beenattributed to a high particle surface area to massratio that can enhance chemical reactivity and facilitate its role as oxidant. Quantitative agreementwas obtained by comparison of the above free energy profiles to available literature values forbenzene20 and C60.22

Figure 4. Profile orientation of a corannulene (C20H10,250 amu, 6Å diameter) permeant (red) highlightedby a perpendicular axis (yellow).


References1. EPA: National Air Quality Status and Trends Through 2007; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC; available at www.epa.gov/

airtrends/reports.html.2. Pope, C.A. III; Dockery, D.W. Health Effects of Fine Particulate Air Pollution: Lines that Connect; J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2006, 56, 709-742.3. PM Standards Revision–2006; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC; available at www.epa.gov/particles/naaqsrev2006.html.4. Kittelson, D.B. Engines and Nanoparticles: A Review; J. Aerosol Sci. 1998, 5/6, 575-588.5. Zhu, Y.; Hinds, W.C.; Kim, S.; Sioutas, C. Concentration and Size Distribution of Ultrafine Particles Near a Major Highway; J. Air & Waste Manage.

Assoc. 2002, 52, 1032-1042.6. Nel, A.; Xia, T.; Madler, L.; Li, N. Toxic Potential of Materials at the Nanolevel; Science 2006, 311, 622-627.7. Lewinski, N.; Colvin, V.; Drezek, R. Cytotoxicity of Nanoparticles; Small 2008, 4, 26-49.8. Jeng, U.-S.; Hsu, C.-H.; Lin, T.-L.; et al. Dispersion of Fullerenes in Phospholipid Bilayers and the Subsequent Phase Change in the Host Bilayers;

Physica. B 2005, 357, 193-198.9. Erickson, B.E. Nanomaterial Characterization: Grassroots Effort Aims to Improve Quality of Nanotoxicology Studies; Chem. Eng. News 2008, 86,

25-26.10. Nanotechnology under the Toxic Substances Control Act; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC; available at www.epa.gov/oppt/nano.11. Violi, A.; Sarofim, A.F.; Voth, G.A. Kinetic Monte Carlo-Molecular Dynamics Approach to Model Soot Inception; Combust. Sci. and Tech. 2004,

176, 991-1005.12. Violi, A.; Venkatnathan, A. Combustion-Generated Nanoparticles Produced in a Benzene Flame: A Multiscale Approach; J. Chem. Phys. 2006,

125, 054302.13. Violi, A. Modeling of Soot Particle Inception in Aromatic and Aliphatic Premixed Flames; Combust. Flame 2004, 139, 279-287.14. Chung, S.H.; Violi, A. Insights on the Nanoparticle Formation Process in Counterflow Diffusion Flames; Carbon 2007, 45, 2400-2410.15. Fiedler, S.L.; Izvekov, I; Violi, A. The Effect of Temperature on Nanoparticle Clustering; Carbon 2007, 45, 1786-1794.16. Chang R.; Violi, A. Insights into the Effect of Combustion-Generated Carbon Nanoparticles on Biological Membranes: A Computer Simulation

Study; J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 5073-5083.17. Choe, C.; Chang, R.; Jeon, J.; Violi, A. Molecular Dynamics Simulation Study of a Pulmonary Surfactant Film Interacting with a Carboneous

Nanoparticle; Biophys. J. 2008, 95, 4102-4114.18. Fiedler, S.L.; Violi, A. Interactions of Carbonaceous Nanoparticles with a Lipid Bilayer Membrane: A Molecular Study; Proc. 6th U.S. Nat. Comb.

Meeting 2009.19. Marrink, S.; Berendsen, H.J.C. Simulation of Water Transport through a Lipid Membrane; J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 98, 4155-4168.20. Bemporad, D.; Essex, J.W.; Luttmann C. Permeation of Small Molecules through a Lipid Bilayer: A Computer Simulation Study; J. Phys. Chem.

B, 2004, 108, 4875-4884. 21. MacCallum, J.L., Tieleman, D.P. Computer Simulation of the Distribution of Hexane in a Lipid Bilayer: Spatially Resolved Free Energy, Entropy,

and Enthalpy Profiles; J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 125-130.22. Bedrov, D.; Smith, G.D; Davande, H.; Li, L. Passive Transport of C60 Fullerenes through a Lipid Membrane: A Molecular Dynamics Simulation

Study; J. Phys. Chem. B, 2008, 112, 2078-2084.23. Qiao, R.; Roberts, A.P.; Mount, A.S.; Klaine, S.J.; Ke, P.C.; Translocation of C60 and Its Derivatives across a Lipid Bilayer; Nano Lett. 2007, 7, 614-619.24. Lopez, C.F.; Nielsen, S.O.; Moore, P.B.; Klein, M.L. Understanding Nature’s Design for a Nanosyringe. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 4431-4434.

ConclusionBy continuing to improve our understanding of biologically active nanoparticles, computationalsimulations can lend a valuable hand for establish-ing accurate toxicological assessments. The alteredproperties possessed by nanoparticles from that oftheir bulk values complicates the evaluationprocess. These and other experimental hurdles8

necessitate a careful, methodical approach to in

vivo and in vitro studies, which can attenuate theconvergence of toxicity determinations. Modelingand simulation can provide an economical approachto view toxic mechanisms at the molecular level.Once a base understanding of open questions related to ultrafine particles is achieved, the toxicityof particles in this class can be assigned with ahigher degree of confidence. em

Table 1. Diffusion constants (10-5 nm2/ps) of constituent molecules in a representative lipid bilayer, dimyris-toylphosphatidylcholine (DMPC)/cholesterol (Chol) in the absence and presence of a combustion-generatednanoparticle (C68H29; see Figure 3). Embedded and excluded systems are defined as simulations with particles located in the bilayer center and outside the membrane in the water layer, respectively.

System DMPC Cholesterol Nanoparticle

Neat DMPC/Chol 14.4 10.9 N/A

Embedded Nanoparticle 5.2 7.8 6.6

Excluded Nanoparticle 8.8 9.4 19.4

Using computa-tional tools, onecould create designer fueladditives thatcould shift thePM size distri-bution outsidethe rangefound to bemost toxic.


Since its inception in 1993, the Institute of Profes-sional Environmental Practice (IPEP) has certifiedmore than 1500 environmental professionals.

IPEP’s main certification is the Qualified Environ-mental Professional (QEP) credential. Candidatesfor the QEP certification must have a minimum offive years of relevant professional experience, andmust pass a two-part written examination. Part I addresses general environmental science. Part II istaken in one of four practice areas: air quality; water quality; waste management; or environmentalscience, management, and policy. Senior environ-mental professionals with more than 15 years ofrelevant experience may qualify for the QEP cre-dential by oral examination.

In addition, IPEP offers the Environmental Profes-sional Intern (EPI) credential for young and aspiringenvironmental professionals, particularly collegeseniors and recent graduates. EPI candidates arerequired to take only Part I of the QEP examinationin general environmental science. EPIs then haveup to seven years in which to take Part II andachieve full QEP certification.

The QEP and EPI certification confirms that the recipient has demonstrated, through a rigorous application and examination process, a broad understanding of the environment and environ-mental issues.

As a proud supporter of IPEP and the QEP and EPI certification, A&WMA congratulates thenewest* QEPs and EPIs on their outstandingachievement. em

QEPsElizabeth Bartleson, Albany, ORRonda Hooper, Newburgh, INDavid McKenzie, Kingston, JamaicaGhada Morsy, Abu Dhabi, United Arab EmiratesRobert O’Day, Kalamazoo, MIThessa Smith, Kingston, JamaicaJames Tyndall, Geismar, LA

EPIsSteven B. Bredesen, Seguin, TX

*QEPs and EPIs certified after May 31, 2009, will be acknowl-

edged in the November 2009 edition of IPEP Quarterly.

The Institute of ProfessionalEnvironmental Practice(IPEP) is a member of theCouncil of Engineering and Scientific Specialty Boards(CESB), an independant organization that accreditsengineering, scientific, andtechnology programs. Formore information about IPEPand the QEP and EPI certifi-cation, contact CertificationServices Coordinator, IPEP,600 Forbes Ave., 339 FisherHall, Pittsburgh, PA 15282;phone 1-412-396-1703;fax: 1-412-396-1704; e-mail: [email protected];web: www.ipep.org.

em • ipep quarterly

Members in the NewsHill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah has been awardedthe 2009 U.S. Department of Defense’s Environ-mental Quality Award for Industrial Installations.U.S. Vice President Joe Biden presented theaward at a ceremony at the Pentagon on June 3.The award recognizes Hill AFB’s environmentalexcellence in managing nearly 1 million acres ofthe Utah Test and Training Range. Among HillAFB representatives receiving the award wereA&WMA Past-President, Joseph A. Martone,Ph.D., CIH, QEP, and Past Chair of the A&WMAGreat Basin Chapter, David W. Mills.

Photo: Members of the 75th Civil Engineering Group at Hill AFB hold the Secretary of Defense Environmental Award Trophywhile standing with the vice president and military leaders. Left to right: Gen. William M. Fraser III, Vice Chief of Staff, U.S. AirForce; Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.; Timothy K. Bridges, Director of Communications, Installations and Mission Support,Air Force Materiel Command Headquarters; Glenn Palmer, Chief, Compliance Section, Environmental Management Division,Hill AFB (holding the flag); Dr. Joseph Martone, Chief, Operations Branch, Environmental Management Division, Hill AFB (holdingthe trophy); David Mills, Chief, Compliance Branch, EnvironmentalManagement Division, Hill AFB; and Deputy Secretary ofDefense, William J. Lynn III.

em • association news


em • inside the industry

LEEDingby ExampleAttention on energy efficiency and green buildings is at an all-time high. The recession and rising energy costs have helped green buildings shed their pricey, boutique image and win theattention of commercial real estate investors. A growing number of studies have shown thatgreen buildings have benefits for owners in the form of lower energy costs, higher leasing rates,more appeal for prospective tenants, and greater marketability. In just a few short years, a building’senergy consumption is playing an increasingly important role in how commercial real estate ismanaged, purchased, and sold.

During a May 2009 webinar sponsored by RTM Communications Inc., entitled “Green Building Under-writing: Increasing Cash Flow and Reducing Expenses”(www.rtmcomm.com), Lewis Jones, managing director atJPMorgan Chase Asset Management, predicted that, “Inthe very near future, the capital markets will reward sustainably-built, energy-efficient buildings with highervaluations, and penalize ‘non-green’ ones. What thismeans is that if you’re not green, you’ll be in the red.”

Building Energy Use RequirementsOnly very recently did the green building sector legit-imize itself in commercial real estate. This is a significantchange from the not-so-distant past, when a building’sgreen rating was not even on mainstream investors’radar screens. The Empire State Building and SearsTower are now undergoing multimillion-dollar upgradeswith a focus on green building retrofits, and more high-profile office buildings are expected to follow suit.

Recent legislative efforts at the federal, state, and locallevels are establishing building energy use disclosure requirements across the country, and a growing numberof cities and municipalities are adopting energy efficiencyrequirements in their building codes. These types of regulations can impact the capital needs of any buildinginvolved in a real estate transaction in these locations,and therefore, its valuation. In part due to the fact that

improving the energy efficiency of the nation’s real estateis a focus of the federal stimulus package, retrofittingcommercial and government buildings recently madeMSNBC’s list of “10 Hot Green Jobs to Watch in 2009.”

Energy use assessments may soon be a standard part ofenvironmental due diligence based on the latest devel-opment on the green building front: a newly-formedASTM Task Group that’s writing the first standard on “Energy Performance Disclosure for Buildings Involved inReal Estate Transactions.” This effort aims to standardizethe way building energy use numbers are determinedand reported in commercial real estate transactions.

New Opportunities for Environmental ConsultantsThe collective attention that’s being paid to green buildingsand energy use is already creating new opportunities forenvironmental consultants, and cutting-edge firms havejumped on the bandwagon by launching energy, greenbuilding, and sustainability divisions. The number of proj-ects seeking certification under the Leadership in Energyand Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building RatingSystem, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council,doubled last year. To take advantage of the opportunity toassist property owners in seeking LEED certification, agrowing number of environmental professionals are becoming LEED Accredited Professionals.

by Anthony Buonicoreand Dianne Crocker

Anthony J. Buonicore,P.E., DEE, QEP, is chairman and CEO of the Buonicore Group, areal estate and environ-mental risk managementconsulting company. E-mail: [email protected] P. Crocker ismanaging director of theMarket Research Group at Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) inMilford, CT. E-mail:[email protected].


After giving a client workshop in Bloomfield Hills, MI, inearly June, we had the good fortune of witnessing first-hand another manifestation of the green building trend:an environmental consulting firm that is pursuing LEEDcertification on an office building—not for a client, but forits own workspace. Berkley, MI, houses the metro Detroitregional office of PM Environmental, a full-service envi-ronmental consulting firm with several offices throughoutthe eastern United States. Typical services include envi-ronmental due diligence (Phase I and II environmentalsite assessments), property condition assessments, andtax incentive services related to the redevelopment ofcontaminated properties.

From Brown to GreenIn February 2008, PM Environmental was shoppingaround for a new location. The company found its“dream space” in the form of a hollowed-out industrialbuilding sitting on a brownfield site that once housed atool and die shop dating back to the late 1940s. Residualsoil contamination consisted of arsenic and polynucleararomatics. In redeveloping the site and converting it intooffice space, no active remediation was required; PM Environmental simply had to implement engineeringcontrols to eliminate direct contact exposure to elevatedmetals. This facilitated eligible, reimbursable expensesutilizing tax increment financing for maintaining pavementand adding topsoil, sod, and landscape to areas aroundthe perimeter of the building.

Now completely renovated, the only evidence of the site’spast life is some exposed beams. PM Environmental’sowners, Mike Kulka and his partner Pete Bosanic, decided to add silver LEED certification to their brownfieldredevelopment efforts as a strategy for promoting thefirm’s energy auditing and LEED certification service line.In fact, the site’s designation as a brownfield awarded onepoint toward its LEED certification.

Additionally, the business was able to take advantage ofbrownfield tax credits offered by the state of Michigan.This encouraged the firm to upgrade IT and environ-mental sampling equipment, including a new state-of-the-art ground penetrating radar system with GISmapping and software functionality. The cost of using anexisting building in distress and renovating it was far lessthan new construction. The tax incentives alone added a21% return on investment.

During a tour of the renovated site, Kulka detailed thetypes of steps the LEED certification process entails, including installing a shower to encourage employees to

bike to work, making use of natural light to reduce energyuse, and designating preferential parking for carpoolers.With early planning, most of the design modificationsdid not result in significant cost increases. For example,tool and die buildings were typically designed with largeexpansive windows around the perimeter walls. As a result, virtually all of the existing windows were simply replaced with more energy-efficient models, allowing PMEnvironmental to meet LEED requirements for naturallight without paying for new window design. Interior officeswere designed to incorporate “windows” that allow thepath of light from the perimeter to interior work spaces.By providing a means for natural daylight to reach all ofthe interior spaces, PM qualified for two more LEEDpoints. That wasn’t the only benefit. “Our employees lovethe natural light throughout. They’re noticeably happier,and more productive,” Kulka says. Even the former highbay area, with a remnant 30-ton crane rail, that nowhouses a workout area enjoys natural light.

Setting a Positive ExampleSo, while the country is in the midst of its worst economicdownturn in decades, PM Environmental bought abrownfield site, created a beautiful workspace for its employees, and did it in such a way that daily operationsare energy-efficient and the property will be more mar-ketable at point of sale. And, while many firms are down-sizing in a tough economy, PM’s layout allows for spaceto house future employees in keeping with the company’splans to expand over time. This is particularly significantgiven that PM Environmental is located in the Detroitmetro area, where the contraction of employment base hasbeen the worst of any metro area in the United States andunemployment has doubled in the past 18 months alone.

By Kulka’s account, the strategy of buying a brownfieldand redeveloping it into a LEED-certified workspace isalready paying off. “I routinely visit with new clients andgive them a real-world tour of our office and a first-handnarration on the process we used. It often results inclients requesting information or proposals for a numberof services from brownfield incentive information to pre-LEED checklist services,” Kulka added.

It is an impressive effort to build a new office on a con-taminated site literally from the ground up. Doing so ina way that embraces the green building trend and theneed to be as energy efficient as possible, as well as creating a positive image for the company in the localcommunity and a healthier work environment for its employees, is even better. These are impressive stridesby a firm that is striving to LEED by example! em

‘If you’re notgreen, you’ll be in the red.’

>>Lewis Jones, JPMorgan Chase

Asset Management


em • it insight

If you have ever been involved in a software implementation—particularly, an environment,health, and safety (EH&S) or enterprise resource planning (ERP) system—you know thatthe process is complex, involves many stakeholders, and can take months or even yearsto see results. According to information technology (IT) research group InfoTech Advisor(www.infotech.com), 70% of information systems projects fail because of flawed requirements, and up to 50% of project rework is due to problems with requirements.

creep. They also reflect an organization’s needs, areclear, accurate, prioritized, and represent the consensus of key stakeholders.

Requirements that align with an organization’sbusiness and EH&S strategy and separate the“needs” from the “wants” lead to good systemspecifications, which, in turn, lead to better software.

Requirements ManagementSoftware requirements are difficult to define.More often than not there is a difference betweenbusiness requirements and the implemented system. For example,

• end users may have only a vague idea of whatthe system should look like;

• IT staff often lack knowledge of the businessfunctions the system must support;

• requirements come from all directions, andmanaging them is complex; and

• many organizations use tools that are not wellsuited to managing requirements.

Requirements must be managed to be of value toan organization. Requirements management is theprocess of determining, capturing, and trackingchanges to software requirements (see Figure 1).The purpose of requirements management is tomaximize the likelihood that an application devel-opment or maintenance initiative will deliver applications that function as desired. Requirementsmanagement helps accomplish this by storing requirements in a secure and central location, track-ing relationships among requirements artifacts, andcontrolling changes to requirements. More often

Good Requirements Lead toBetter Software

Figure 1. The requirements management process.

by Jill Gilbert

Jill Barson Gilbert, QEP,is president of Lexicon Systems, LLC. E-mail:[email protected].

Doing requirements well is difficult. An effective requirements management process can help youto identify and mitigate risk factors and ensure yoursystems initiative becomes a success, instead of another statistic.

Characteristics of RequirementsBusiness requirements, or needs, establish an understanding of user needs, establish the ground-work for software selection (or a development planfor in-house projects), and provide the basis formeasuring the success of a software effort. Requirements state what the system will or won’tdo, and who will use the system.

Business requirements come from many sources,in many forms, and at varying levels of detail. Requirements can relate to business process, design,training, documentation, and users. Requirementscan have interrelationships; they can be geograph-ically sensitive (e.g., languages, local regulations),time sensitive, and organizationally sensitive.

Good requirements set software project scopeboundaries and minimize unbudgeted scope


than not, business analysts and project managersaccomplish these three objectives without any specialized tool support, relying instead on manualeffort or combinations of office software and net-work drives.1 MKS, HP, IBM, Borland, Telelogic,and Compuware offer requirements managementsoftware either within their Life Cycle Managementsolutions, or as stand-alone solutions. These tools canhelp organizations to create, test, and track require-ments that meet business goals and objectives.

Requirements CaptureRequirements capture is the means to arrive at aconsensus set of prioritized software needs and capabilities. It includes the first four process stepsshown in Figure 1 and involves more than askingpeople to describe their needs and then selectingor developing software. It calls for experienced an-alysts who speak the languages of business and IT.

Systems analysts knowledgeable in the subjectmatter (e.g., EH&S) work with software end usersto capture requirements. Seasoned analysts pro-vide a buffer between IT and the ultimate softwareusers. They understand what requirements are,and are not (see Figure 2), and keep requirementscapture on track.

The analyst records the requirements in a businessrequirements document, which typically contains anoverview of the proposed system, a list of prioritizedrequirements organized by business process (e.g.,EH&S incident management, compliance task man-agement, air emissions management), a descriptionof software users and job roles, business processflow diagrams, and data flow maps.

Requirements TraceabilityCollecting a set of negotiated, prioritized businessrequirements, analyzing them, and documentingthem is only the beginning. Tracing these require-ments throughout the system’s life cycle is critical toensure that the resulting software truly meets theneeds of end users (see Figure 3).

After using the business requirements documentto evaluate and select software, an organizationthen develops software use cases—that is, realisticscenarios of how a user interacts with the softwareto perform EH&S tasks—to test the software andverify that the requirements are met. Once the

software is deployed throughout an organization,the requirements should be stored in a secure location for future reference.

Change HappensRequirements often change as an implementationproject progresses and business needs evolve.Change is inevitable, so anticipate and managechange. Implement a change control process to ensure that potential changes are reviewed andoccur for the right reasons. Changes that occurearly in the life cycle are much easier to managethan those that occur later.

Project teams often think they lack the time to effectively elicit and capture requirements, butsomehow find the time and money to fix problemsthat result from poor requirements. There is nosuch thing as a perfect set of requirements. Goodapproaches and managed processes can producehigher quality software systems that better meetbusiness objectives and result in better user adoption. em

Figure 2. What requirements are/are not.

Figure 3. Systems Life Cycle.

Reference1. Schwaber, C.; Gerush, M. The

Forrester Wave: RequirementsManagement, Q2 2008; HPand IBM Lead, with MKS, Telel-ogic, Compuware, and BorlandClose Behind; Forrester Re-search, Inc., May 30, 2008;www.forrester.com.


Kerouac’s scroll provides an icon suggesting freedom, open spaces, and new adventures. Butfor some 45 million people who live or work within300 m of a highway, what is on the road—morespecifically in the air near and along the road—raises concern about exposures to near-road pollution and the potential health impacts.

The Clean Air Research program of the U.S. Envi-ronmental Protection Agency’s Office of Researchand Development (ORD) is conducting research tobetter understand how emissions from vehicles affect air pollution around major roadways. The research is examining tailpipe emissions, as well asthose from road wear, such as tire latex, and dust,which often has vehicle-related contaminants likecopper from brake linings.

In 2006, with growing concern over the adverseeffects of air pollution from traffic, EPA’s Office ofAir and Radiation identified near-roadway researchas one of its highest priority science needs. To meetthat need, ORD initiated a multidisciplinary Near-Roadway Action Plan that identified and coordi-nated many ongoing, independent efforts, andformulated a plan for future research. The plan addresses several points along the pathway fromsource to health outcomes associated with near-road-way vehicle emissions, including the composition andproportions of emissions, air quality, exposure assessments and modeling in a variety of micro-environments, and health effects.

Under ORD’s Clean Air Research Program (formore information, see www.epa.gov/airscience/),scientists and engineers with expertise in a diversityof disciplines, including vehicle emissions, measuring

and modeling emissions, risk management, andhealth effects, joined forces to significantly advancethe scientific understanding of near roadway emis-sions. The team surveyed and evaluated existingsampling and monitoring methods, and crafted aresearch strategy for conducting in situ, real-time,near-roadway research.

Pilot StudiesThe groundwork for EPA near-roadway researchbegan in Brooklyn, NY, with the Traffic-Related Exposure (T-REX) study, which assessed the impactsof traffic emissions on the complex mixture of airpollutants present near highways and other largethoroughfares. It focused on short-term measure-ments of select pollutants and the infiltration ofthese pollutants into a nearby row house.

Results from T-REX led to the development of a2006 EPA study conducted along Interstate 440 inRaleigh, NC, to assess the relationship betweentraffic activity, meteorology, and air pollutant concentrations for a diverse variety of traffic-emitted pollutants.

The Raleigh pilot study resulted in a number of scientific findings highlighting the presence of elevated concentrations of a number of pollutantsnear the road, the development of new models to evaluate near-road air quality, and the identifi-cation of natural and man-made features with thepotential to mitigate air pollutant levels if placedalong roadways.

Ongoing Research: Las VegasThe success of the pilot research in Brooklyn andRaleigh provided the foundation for the development

em • epa research highlights

The goal of EPA’s near-road research programis to better understand thepathway betweentraffic emissionsand risks tohuman health.

On the RoadEPA Near-Roadway Research2009 marks the 50th anniversary since the publication of Jack Kerouac’s autobiographical novel On the Road. He famously crafted the novel on longsheets of tracing paper taped end to end; the final draft was 120 feet long.


of a collaborative study with the Federal HighwayAdministration to conduct more extensive research.

The year-long National Near-Roadway MobileSource Air Toxics (MSAT) Study, begun in December2008 along Interstate 15 in Las Vegas, is the firstfull-scale effort to measure, define, and profile road-way air pollutants. During the field season, EPA scientists are collecting real-time information onroadway characteristics, such as traffic counts andvehicle types, as well as gathering emission datafrom instruments placed at various distances (e.g., 10, 100, and 350 m) from the roadway. In addition, they are measuring weather conditions,including temperature, wind speed and direction,and humidity.

The Road AheadThe Las Vegas study runs through December2009. After its completion, EPA will move the research project to a stretch of highway in Detroit,MI. EPA researchers from Research Triangle Park,NC, will collaborate with scientists at the Universityof Michigan to study the health effects of roadwayexposure to children, aged 6–14, with persistent

asthma who live in Detroit. The researchers willmeasure levels of traffic-related air pollution nearmajor roadways and in the nearby neighborhoodsto improve computer models. University of Michiganresearchers will study the types of traffic-associatedpollution and the biological mechanisms by whichexposure to traffic may induce more severe asthmaattacks in children. That effort is scheduled to beginin 2010.

The goal of EPA’s near-roadway research program isto generate the science and engineering needed tobetter understand the pathway between traffic emis-sions and risks to human health. That science willsupport federal, state, and local governments taskedwith making sound decisions in areas where near-roadway emissions could have an impact, such ascommunity development and school construction.Such science-based decisions will help protect notjust those on the road, but the 45 million people liv-ing and working along the way. em

This month's column was written by Aaron Ferster,lead science writer-editor in EPA's Office of Researchand Development.

For more information on the research discussed in this column, contact DeborahJanes, Public Information Officer, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (B205-01),Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;phone: 1-919-541-4577; e-mail: [email protected]. Disclaimer: Although this textwas reviewed by EPA staff andapproved for publication, itdoes not necessarily reflect official EPA policy.

awma.org

Report Finds Climate Impacts EvidentIn what is being called a “game changing” report,the U.S. Climate Change Science Program con-cluded that the nation is already experiencing theeffects of climate change and must act quickly toreduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The re-port, Global Climate Change Impacts in the UnitedStates, was overseen by the White House Office ofScience and Technology Policy and the NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Without efforts to reduce GHG emissions, the reportsays global average temperatures will rise by 2 to11 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100. The range wasderived from a series of models that take variouseconomic development scenarios into account—the same three scenarios considered in a 2007 International Panel on Climate Change report.

The U.S. report focuses on 10 key findings: threefindings that establish that climate change is a realhuman-induced problem that is already present,six that specify areas of concern, and one thaturges action. The authors stress that the report isnonpartisan and does not promote any specific solution to GHG emissions.

Emission Allowances Could be TaxedWitnesses at a Senate Finance Committee hearingraised the possibility that carbon emissions

allowances distributed for free could be taxed. Thehearing followed the release of a detailed JointCommittee on Taxation report giving law-makersan overview of cap-and-trade issues and providingthem with tax principles.

Gary Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute for Interna-tional Economics told the Finance Committee thatfree allowances should be subject to income tax onthe date of issuance. “When the U.S. governmentissues free permits, it is already conferring a big favoron recipient firms,” Hufbauer said. “It would be atravesty to double up the favor by exempting thesepermits from the definition of income for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code.”

Hufbauer recommended that all trading incomeshould be treated as ordinary income rather thancapital gains, and should be subject to the first-in, first-out accounting method rather than last-in, first-out.

KPMG LLP’s Mark Price, a principal in the Wash-ington National Tax Office, identified a number ofissues the Senate should consider when cap-and-trade legislation comes to the chamber, includingborrowing emissions allowances, treatment of allowances as commodities, treatment of carbonderivatives, treatment of tax-exempt entities anddonations, and interaction with federal renewableenergy certificates. em

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared a public health emergency at a Superfund site in Libby, MT,committing the federal government to provide medical care for asbestos-related disease and to “move more aggressively”to complete cleanup of tremolite asbestos contamination that permeates the area.

“This is the first time EPA has made a determination under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, andLiability Act (CERCLA) that conditions at a site constitute a public health emergency,” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson saidat a news conference in Washington, DC. Jackson said conditions at the site constitute “a unique public health tragedy”where investigators have found rates of asbestos-related illness and mortality “staggeringly higher than the national average.”

The Libby site was added in 2002 to EPA’s National Priorities List—a list of most seriously contaminated Superfund sites—and includes the towns of Libby and Troy and an inactive vermiculite mine seven miles northeast of Libby. Tremolite asbestosfound throughout the community results from the W.R. Grace & Co.’s mining of vermiculite, which contains asbestos, andits manufacture of Zonolite insulation. The company operated in Lincoln County, MT, from 1963 to 1990.

Jackson said declaring a public health emergency under CERCLA “assures the financial resources needed for the cleanup”as well as “a comprehensive risk assessment and research program … that will assure that the cleanup is fully protective.”

em • washington report

First-Ever Health Emergency Declared by EPA at Superfund Site

Compiled by Mark WilliamsThe Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.www.bna.com

36 em august 2009 Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association

awma.org august 2009 em 37

Sydney Tar Ponds Remediation Contract UnderwayA company based in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia has won a $52-million contract to clean up theprovince’s Sydney Tar Ponds.

Nordly’s Environmental started solidifying and stabilizing the tar ponds sediment on June 26,2009. The Sydney Tar Ponds and Coke Ovens, located in Cape Breton, are contaminated by a

em • canadian report

PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) has compiled a list of credits and incentives that can help Canadian businesses go green—and make some, too. PwC identified some of the most notable incentives available in Canada, such as the ecoENERGY for Renewable Heat incentives, with a corporate maximum of $2 million (all amounts in Canadian dollars), which include$80,000 for installing solar air projects and $400,000 for solar hot water projects; the Industrial Research Assistance Program, which offers up to 50% of eligible project costs for Canadian companies to pursue innovative products, processes,and technology (the program has a maximum of $175,000); and the SD Tech Fund, which offers two rounds of fundingeach year for late-stage development and pre-commercial demonstration of new, clean technology solutions (the fund canprovide up to 50% of eligible costs per project). More information is available online at www.pwc.com.

New List of Sustainable Incentives for Canadian Companies

Canadian Report is compiledwith excerpts from EcoLogNews and the EcoCompli-ance.ca newsletter, both pub-lished by EcoLog InformationResources Group, a division ofBIG Information Product LP.For more Canadian environ-mental information, visitwww.ecolog.com or phone +1-888-702-1111, ext. 8.

century of steel-making. Many companies havebeen contracted for the huge remediation.

Nordly’s will mix cement into contaminated materialto immobilize hazardous substances such as poly-chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Cement reacts withwater in the material to change the physical andchemical properties, preventing contaminants fromentering the environment. The contract is expectedto create 40 construction jobs and provide reme-diation skills to local laborers.

Eventually, the site will be capped with a clean layerof soil for future development. The entire cleanupis due to be completed in 2014.

British Columbia Offers CompaniesAid for GHG-Reduction TrainingThe British Columbia (B.C.) government will supportscholarships for firms looking to reduce green-house gas (GHG) emissions.

Through LiveSmart B.C., a total of 20 $1500 schol-arships are being offered for Climate Smart work-shops. Small and medium-size companies will learnhow to create an emissions inventory and reductionstrategy, with a focus on cost-savings as well asbuilding brand awareness. The first workshops,which run for three half-days, will be held in Kamloops and Kelowna in summer 2009, thenelsewhere across the province in fall 2009.

The workshops are collaborations between the B.C. government and various nonprofit and profit organizations. More information is available onlineat www.livesmartbc.ca.

In Next Month’s Issue…

Maximum Achievable ControlTechnology (MACT) StandardEM takes a look at the challenges faced bystates in enforcing the new MACT standard,also known as “Boiler MACT”.

Also look for…

• PM File

• Competitive Strategy

• EPA Research Highlights

• ICAC Update

…And a Call for Abstracts for the 2010 Annual

Conference & Exhibition in Calgary



em • news focus

and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Wax-man (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.), wereable to pick up the support of electric utilities, otherindustries, and a few labor unions by setting asidefree emissions allowances to help cushion the impact without losing significant support from environmental groups.

In the days leading up to the June 26 vote, Wax-man agreed to other changes that were reflected ina 309-page manager’s amendment to the under-lying bill. The amendment would make changes tothe bill’s renewable electricity standard; provide theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission authorityover the siting of high-priority transmission lines inthe West; direct the secretary of agriculture to establish an emissions offset program for agricultureand forests; and specifically exempt the agricultureand forestry sector from the bill’s emissions caps. Italso would establish a renewable electricity stan-dard for federal agencies.

Obama Lobbies MembersIn talks with undecided House members, HouseDemocratic leaders, President Obama, and key figures in his administration also appealed to loftierthemes in trying to pick up support from some Democrats, such as Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas).

Obama has vowed to take a lead role when nego-tiators from more than 190 countries gather inCopenhagen in December to conclude talks on anew international climate deal, but told some undecided members in recent days that he needsa House-passed bill as a show of resolve in thosetalks. That approach paid dividends later in the daywhen Doggett, one of 30 Democrats who hoursearlier voted against his party on the proceduralrule to bring the bill to the floor, told House colleagues he would vote for the bill.

The rule (H. Res. 587), which incorporated themanager’s amendment offered by Waxman and allowed a vote on the Republican alternative, wasapproved 217–205. No Republicans voted for theprocedural rule. That vote was close enough tospur speculation throughout the afternoon that Democrats were in danger of losing a final vote topass the bill later in the day.

Doggett Votes for BillDoggett, who in the morning said he could notsupport the bill, told colleagues on the House floor

News Focus is compiledfrom the current editionof Environment Reporter,published by the Bureauof National Affairs Inc.(BNA). For more informa-tion, visit www.bna.com.

House Approves Bill to Cap GHGsThe House approved legislation June 26 thatwould place mandatory caps on U.S. greenhousegas (GHG) emissions, with Democrats saying thevote will end years of inaction on global warmingand create millions of new clean-energy jobs.

Passage of the American Clean Energy and SecurityAct (H.R. 2454), approved by a vote of 219–212,represents the first time that the House has approvedlegislation to limit growth of the nation’s GHG emis-sions. Democratic leaders lost 44 Democrats in thevote on the climate change and energy bill, but offset some of those defections with eight “yes” votesfrom Republicans, a number that in the end provedcrucial to passage. The bill would cut U.S. emissions17% by 2020 from 2005 levels and 83% by 2050by establishing a cap-and-trade system, and it wouldimpose a renewable electricity standard on states.

In the Senate, Democrats are expected to drafttheir own climate change bill, although prospectsfor passage of that bill this year are uncertain.

Prior to the vote, Republicans repeatedly said thelegislation will send U.S. jobs overseas to countriesthat do not impose mandatory emissions caps andraise the cost of electricity, home heating fuel, andgasoline. Democrats allowed debate on one amend-ment to the bill—a Republican alternative that largelywould have scuttled the bill in favor of further clean-energy research—but it was defeated, 172–256.

“We know that this national energy tax will cost theAmerican people [trillions of dollars],” Rep. MicheleBachmann (R-Minn.) said on the House floor priorto the vote, and “result in a loss of 2.5 million jobsevery year for the American people.”

But Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.)framed the debate over the bill in historic terms, arguing that “this is one of the historic actions we willtake, not just in this Congress [but for years to come].”

Democrats Round Up SupportHoyer and other Democratic leaders pressed reluc-tant Democrats and a few Republicans to ensurethe bill’s passage by arguing that they had ensuredthat the bill would benefit, not harm, the agriculturesector and shield electric utilities, natural gasproviders, and consumers from and other energyproviders from large compliance costs.

Supporters of the bill, introduced by House Energy


in the afternoon he would vote yes. He said he wasnow convinced that absent House passage, theSenate “will not act” on climate change legislation“and we will not get the international agreementswe need to address this serious challenge” of globalwarming. “I’m voting yes in the hopes that we willhave a better deal” negotiated in the Senate beforethe bill is signed into law, Doggett said. “I believethere is still some hope to improve this bill once itleaves the House, [but it is] better to have a seat atthe table to influence” those changes, he said.

The eight Republicans voting for the bill were Reps.John McHugh (N.Y.), Dave Reichert (Wash.),Christopher Smith (N.J.), Mary Bono Mack (Calif.),Michael Castle (Del.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), LeonardLance (N.J.), and Frank LoBiondo (N.J.).

Republicans Warn of CostsRepublicans focused much of their debate on thepotential costs of the bill. House Minority Whip EricCantor (R-Va.) asked why the House “would evencontemplate a plan that amounts to a growth-killing millstone around the necks of small businessand all consumers” in the midst of a recession.

“It’s a national energy tax, let’s make that clear,” saidRep. Geoff Davis (R-Ky.). “America needs a federalenergy plan, not a tax.”

Republicans also warned that the bill would only forcecompanies to relocate to India and China, which arenot considering mandatory emissions reductions.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), speak-ing at the end of hours of debate on the bill, said“Just remember these four words for what this leg-islations means: Jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs,” as Democratsjoined in chorus. “We passed transformational legislation that will take us into the future,” Pelosisaid, noting that she had received congratulatorycalls from Obama, Senate Majority Leader HarryReid (D-Nev.), and former Vice President Al Gore.

Following the vote, Hoyer said, “I urge the senateto pass it—perhaps amend it—so we can get it toconference” and have Obama sign it.

Updated Cost Estimate ReleasedAs the House prepared to take up the bill early inthe day, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)and the Joint Committee on Taxation released newestimates on the cost of the legislation, concluding

that the most recent version of the bill would netUS$9 billion a year, which could be used to eitherreduce future budget deficits or offset new spending.

As approved by the House Rules Committee in theearly hours of June 26, the bill would generate atotal of US$873 billion from 2010 to 2019 andwould spend approximately US$864 billion of thatnew revenue on programs in the bill. That analysissuggests the latest bill would increase revenues, aswell as spending compared to previous versions.An earlier CBO analysis said the bill would raiseUS$845.6 billion between 2010 and 2019 andlead to a total of US$821.2 billion in new spendingover that period. CBO and the Joint Committeecautioned in their June 26 analysis that the analysisdid not include projections on how the bill wouldimpact future discretionary spending by Congress.Text of H.R. 2454, as it was filed to the HouseRules Committee June 22, is available online atwww.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hr2454_sub.pdf.—by Dean Scott and Leora Falk, BNA

EPA Proposes Hourly Standard forNO2, Retains Annual LimitThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)proposed on June 29 the first ever one-hour airquality standard for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), whileretaining the existing annual standard for the pollutant and expanding its monitoring network.

EPA’s proposed rule, which will be published in theFederal Register, would amend 40 C.F.R. Parts 50,53, and 58 to create the first ever primary one-hourNational Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)for NO2 at a level between 0.080 and 0.10 partsper million (ppm). The agency proposed retainingthe current annual primary standard of 0.053 ppm,which is an annual average. The secondary annualstandard currently also is set at 0.053 ppm. Theprimary air quality standard is set to protect publichealth; the secondary standard protects public welfare and the environment.

“We’re updating these standards to build on thelatest scientific data and meet changing health protection needs,” EPA Administrator Lisa Jacksonsaid in a statement. “In addition to limiting annualaverage concentrations, we’re preventing highNO2 levels for shorter periods of time and addingstronger monitoring in areas near roadways, wherethe highest levels of NO2 are often found. This will

NO2 emissionsstandards areexpected to‘decrease substantially’over the next20 years.


fill gaps in the current standard and provide important additional protections where they areneeded most.”

The existing air standards require air quality mon-itoring in cities with more than 1 million people,and the new proposal would add a requirement tomonitor for NO2 along major roads in cities with atleast 350,000 residents. NO2 forms from vehicleemissions, and exposure has been linked to airwayinflammation, increased response to allergens, and other impairments to respiratory functions. According to EPA, ambient concentrations of NO2dropped 41% between 1980 and 2006.

All areas of the country currently meet the existingprimary annual air quality standard, according toEPA. Areas in states that fail to meet the new hourlystandard would be required to take steps to reduceNO2 emissions. The largest sources of nitrogendioxide emissions are vehicle engines and powerplants, according to EPA.

According to the agency, NO2 emissions standardsare expected to “decrease substantially” over thenext 20 years as the agency implements regulationscurbing vehicle emissions. The Tier 2 nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions standards for light-duty vehicles, which were phased in with the 2004model year, will contribute to further NO2 emis-sions reductions, according to the agency. NewNOx emissions standards for heavy-duty vehiclesare also phasing in between the 2007 and 2010model years, according to EPA, and that will alsohelp reduce NO2 formation.

EPA has until Jan. 22, 2010, to issue the final primarystandard for NO2 as part of a consent decree(Center for Biological Diversity vs. Johnson, D. D.C.,No. 05-1814, consent decree 11/19/07). The Center for Biological Diversity filed its lawsuit inU.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in

2006, alleging EPA had failed to perform its non-discretionary duty to review the primary and sec-ondary air quality standards for NO2 as requiredby the U.S. Clean Air Act. The lawsuit also allegedEPA had missed its statutory deadline to perform arequired review of sulfur oxides (SOx) as well. EPAand the Center for Biological Diversity agreed tothe consent decree requiring the agency to beginits reviews of the NO2 standards as well as its review of SOx in 2007.

Stronger Annual Standard UrgedThe American Lung Association favors tighteningthe annual air quality standard for NO2 to 0.050ppm. “We have strong scientific research that tellsus that the current NO2 standard fails to protectpublic health,” Janice Nolen, the American LungAssociation’s assistant vice president for policy andadvocacy, said in a statement. “Some of the peoplemost exposed to this pollutant live or go to schoolnear major highways where NO2 levels seem tobe the highest. It is time for EPA to follow the science and adopt tighter standards to protect thehealth of all of our communities.”

A July 2008 integrated science assessment forNO2 compiled by EPA found exposure to ambientNO2, even at levels below current standards, increased the risk of hospital visits for respiratorysymptoms by between 2% and 20%.

Clean Air Watch President Frank O’Donnell toldBNA June 29 that proposing an hourly standard forNO2 is a “critical” step, but said he favors loweringboth the annual and hourly standard to 0.050 ppm.

EPA will accept public comment on the proposalfor 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. Comments can be made online at www.regulations.gov and should reference docket No.EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0922.

The agency also will hold public hearings in LosAngeles and Washington, D.C., in August.

More information about the NO2 NAAQS is avail-able online at www.epa.gov/air/nitrogenoxides.—by Andrew Childers, BNA

EPA Considers Emissions Standards,Trading to Replace Interstate RuleEPA will consider a hybrid system combining regional emissions trading with targeted emissions

Advertisers’ IndexEM Advertiser (www) Go to page

Lakes Environmental Software Inc.(weblakes.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Back Cover

Trinity Consultants Inc.(trinityconsultants.com). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

To advertise in EM, call Malissa Goodman at 1-412-904-6012.


standards for power plants in response to federalcourt decisions striking down two earlier air pollution rules, an agency official told a Senate subcommittee July 9.

Gina McCarthy, EPA’s assistant administrator for airand radiation, told the Senate Environment andPublic Works Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety that she did not think a federal courtdecision striking down the U.S. Clean Air InterstateRule (CAIR) means the agency is prohibited fromestablishing regional emissions trading programsfor sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. “We don’tbelieve trading is off the table by any means,” she said.

The July 9 hearing focused on the future of boththe interstate rule and EPA’s Clean Air MercuryRule (CAMR), also vacated by judges.

The interstate rule, issued in 2005 at 40 CFR Parts51-52, was intended to reduce ozone and fine par-ticle pollution from power plants that is transportedacross state boundaries and to help downwindstates attain EPA air quality standards by establishingan interstate emissions trading scheme for nitro-gen oxides and sulfur dioxide. Sulfur dioxide andnitrogen oxides are precursors to particulate matterand ozone, respectively.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the interstate rule July11, 2008. That decision was reversed in December,and the rule was remanded to EPA for correction(North Carolina vs. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, 67 ERC1151 (D.C. Cir. 2008)).

Though emissions trading may still be viable, McCarthy told the senators, EPA believes emissionsstandards for power plants may also be necessary tofurther reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide, as well as address the vacated CAMR.The mercury rule, also issued in 2005 at 40 CFRPart 60, would have established an interstate mercuryemissions trading program rather than requiring individual power plants to install updated pollutioncontrols. The rule also was vacated by the D.C. Circuit in 2008, which found that EPA had ignoredthe “plain text” of the U.S. Clean Air Act when itchose to establish an emissions trading programrather than following the hazardous air pollutant requirements under Section 112 (New Jersey vs.EPA, 517 F.3d 574, 65 ERC 1993 (D.C. Cir. 2008)).

The U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition fromthe Utility Air Regulatory Group, a power industrytrade group, to consider the CAMR case in February.

Mercury Controls Effective, AffordableJohn Stephenson, director of natural resources andenvironment at the Government Accountability Office (GAO), told the subcommittee a preliminaryanalysis of mercury emissions controls found a90% reduction “appears achievable and affordableat power plants.”

Power plants using sorbent injection systems tocontrol mercury emissions routinely saw emissionsreductions of between 80% and 90%, he said.EPA’s mercury rule was designed to achieve a 70%reduction of mercury emissions by 2018, thoughactual emissions reductions were only estimated tobe 50% of 1999 levels because utilities were allowed to bank emissions credits.

The GAO study found that sorbent injection mercury controls have been installed on 25 boilersat 14 coal-fired power plants in four states that limitmercury emissions, Stephenson said. The controlscost an average of US$3.6 million per boiler, hesaid. As a comparison, wet scrubbers commonlyused to control sulfur dioxide emissions from powerplants average US$86.4 million per boiler, accordingto GAO’s findings. Installing the mercury controlswould likely only increase electricity customers’ billsby 10 cents per month, Stephenson said.

EPA is working toward establishing hazardous pollutant emissions limits for power plants thatwould require them to curb mercury emissions byas much as 90%.

The agency intends to issue a Maximum AvailableControl Technology (MACT) standard for powerplants as required of new major sources of hazardous air pollutants under Section 112 of theU.S. Clean Air Act. MACT is defined as the tech-nology used in the best-performing 12% ofsources in a source category. McCarthy said EPA isanalyzing power plant emissions data and discussinga timeline for issuing those hazardous pollutantstandards with litigants after 12 health and envi-ronmental groups filed a lawsuit in December toforce the agency to make a MACT determinationfor power plants (American Nurses Ass’n vs. John-son, D. D.C., No. 08-02198, 12/18/08). —by Andrew Childers, BNA em


The following two courses are being held in conjunctionwith the specialty conference, Harmonizing Greenhouse GasAssessment and Reporting Processes, September 1–2, 2009,Baltimore, MD.

AUGUST 31 (8:00 A.M.–12:00 P.M.)AIR-128: GHG Emissions ManagementInstructors: Katherine N. Blue, Managing Consultant, andRam Ramanan, Ph.D., P.E., Principal Consultant, Trinity Consultants Inc.Learn the latest on this timely topic, including significant regional, U.S., and international policy developments related to climate change and methods of effective GHGemissions management. Real-world case studies and exercises demonstrate how to prepare effective GHG inventories according to World Resources Institute/World Business Council for Sustainable Development(WRI/WBCSD) Greenhouse Gas Protocols and other frequently used protocols. Participants will also learn aboutvoluntary program options, carbon risk management andstrategy development, carbon offsets and emissions trading,emissions reduction opportunities, and benchmarking bestpractice companies.

AUGUST 31 (1:00 P.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-129: Getting Started with Your Greenhouse Gas(GHG) Program: Practical Considerations for ManagingGHG Emissions in an Evolving ClimateInstructor: Terri Shires, URS Corp.

Climate change is receiving significant attention in theUnited States. States and regional organizations are takingaction now through voluntary and mandatory programs,while a myriad of federal activities are being explored. Thefinancial community and shareholders are questioning companies about potential exposures, their impact on sharevalue, and what specific actions are being taken to mitigatethese risks. Companies recognize that they will be affected,but are looking for guidance and direction in this uncertainand rapidly evolving GHG landscape.

The following two courses are being held in conjunctionwith the specialty conference, Guideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of Models, October 26–30, 2009,Raleigh, NC.

OCTOBER 26 (8:00 A.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-298: Introduction to the CALPUFF Modeling SystemInstructors: Joseph S. Scire, CCM, Vice President, Earth Tech Inc.CALPUFF has been designed by the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) as a guideline model for long-range transport applications and for use on a case-by-casebasis for both near- and far-field applications in complexflow situations where steady-state conditions do not apply.This course will provide an overview of the modeling systemand its capabilities, including recent developments.

OCTOBER 27 (8:00 A.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-297: Introduction to AERMODInstructors: Robert Paine, CCM, QEP, and Jeff Connors,both with AECOM Inc.AERMOD was adopted on December 9, 2005, by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a replacementfor the ISCST3 model, which has been in use in variousforms for 25 years. The advanced model will require theuser community to become acquainted with new conceptsin air quality modeling. This course provides an overviewof AERMOD’s features and performance. It discusses implementation issues regarding this new model. Severalcomputer exercises and debugging sessions are providedon CD as part of the course. Attendees should plan to bringa laptop with a CD drive to the session. em

For more infor-mation about the courses andconferences onthis page, go towww.awma.org/events.

em • professional development programs

Listed below are the articles appearing in theAugust 2009 issue of the Journal. For ordering information, go to www.awma.org/journal or call1-412-232-3444.

In This Month’s Issue...Methods to Assess Carbonaceous Aerosol Sampling Artifacts for IMPROVE and Other Long-Term Networks

Comparison of Flexible Fuel Vehicle and Life-Cycle FuelConsumption and Emissions of Selected Pollutants andGreenhouse Gases for Ethanol 85 versus Gasoline

A Robust Method for Estimating Landfill Methane Emissions

Portable Emission Measurements of Yellowstone ParkSnowcoaches and Snowmobiles

Particulate Matter Emission Factors for Almond Harvest as a Function of Harvester Speed

Development of a Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Schedulefor Representative Measurement of Emissions

Testing of a Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Schedule for Representative Measurement of Emissions

Investigation of a Mercury Speciation Technique for FlueGas Desulfurization Materials

Applications of the Three-Dimensional Air Quality System toWestern U.S. Air Quality: IDEA, Smog Blog, Smog Stories,AirQuest, and the Remote Sensing Information Gateway

Adsorption Kinetic, Thermodynamic, and Desorption Studiesof Isopropyl Alcohol Vapor by Oxidized Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes

Performance of a Pilot-Scale Biotrickling Filter in Controllingthe Volatile Organic Compound Emissions in a FurnitureManufacturing Facility

Modifications to the Sunset Laboratory Carbon AerosolMonitor for the Simultaneous Measurement of PM2.5 Nonvolatile and Semi-Volatile Carbonaceous Material

AUGUST 2009 • VOLUME 59

JOURNAL

awma.org august 2009 em 43Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association august 2009 em 43

2010MARCH7–10 GEO 2010: 9th Middle East Geosciences

Conference & Exhibition, Manama, Bahrain;www.geobahrain.org

21–24 WEF/A&WMA Odors & Air Pollutants 2010,Charlotte, NC

22–26 Air Pollution and Health: Bridging the Gapfrom Sources to Health Outcomes, An International Specialty Conference by theAmerican Association for Aerosol Research,San Diego, CA; www.aaar.org/index2.cfm?section=Meetings_and_Events

MAY17–20 Joint Conference: International Thermal

Treatment Technologies and HazardousWaste Combustors, San Francisco, CA

JUNE22–25 A&WMA’s 103rd

Annual Conference & Exhibition, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

AUGUSTAug 30 Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Mega –Sept 2 Symposium, Baltimore, MD

SEPTEMBER11–16 15th World Congress of the International

Union of Air Pollution Prevention Associations (IUAPPA): Achieving Environmental Sustainability in a Resource Hungry World, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

29–30 2010 Vapor Intrusion, Chicago, IL

NOVEMBER2–4 Symposium on Air Quality Measurement

Methods and Technology, Los Angeles, CA

2009SEPTEMBER1–2 Harmonizing Greenhouse Gas Assessment

and Reporting Processes, Baltimore, MD

15–17 Air Quality Impacts of Oil and Gas Production in the Rocky Mountains, Centennial, CO

21–25 Energy Efficiency and Air Pollutant Control, Wroclaw, Poland; www.energy-air-wroclaw.pwr.wroc.pl

OCTOBER4–6 A&WMA Florida Section’s Annual

Conference, Captiva Island, FL; [email protected]

20–22 ASTM International Committee E50 on Envi-ronmental Assessment, Risk Management,and Corrective Action, Atlanta, GA;www.astm.org/COMMIT/E50.htm

25–29 International Air Quality VII Conference, Arlington, VA; www.undeerc.org

28–30 Guideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of Models, Raleigh, NC

NOVEMBER1–5 International Society for Exposure Science

(ISES) 2009 Annual Conference: Transforming Exposure Science in the 21st Century, Minneapolis, MN

4-6 1st International Conference on Solid WasteManagement (IconSWM) and Exhibition ofMunicipal Services, Waste Management,Urban Development, and Public Works,Kolkata, India; www.iconswm.com

17 A&WMA Rocky Mountain States Section’sConference on Air Quality Issues in theRocky Mountain Region, Golden, CO;[email protected]

em • calendar of events

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

CALGARY 2010

Events sponsored and cosponsored by the Air &Waste Management Association (A&WMA) arehighlighted in bold. For moreinformation, call A&WMAMember Services at 1-800-270-3444 or visit theA&WMA Events Web site:www.awma.org/events.

To add your events to this calendar, send to: Calendar Listings, Air & Waste Manage-ment Association, One GatewayCenter, 3rd Floor, 420 FortDuquesne Blvd., Pittsburgh, PA15222-1435. Calendar listingsare published on a space-available basis and should be received by A&WMA’s editorialoffices at least three months inadvance of publication.

Go online for the most up-to-date events informationwww.awma.org/events


em: What inspired you to become an environmentalprofessional?Donnelly: Two things come to mind. First, growing up, myfamily often vacationed in the mountains of California, thewestern states, and Canada. We loved fishing in the mountainstreams and lakes. This experience gave me a love of natureand the great outdoors. Second, reading Rachel Carson’sSilent Spring during my college days gave me a new perspective and understanding about the human potentialfor negative impacts on the environment. This led to mygetting involved with environmental activities at CaliforniaState University and ultimately to my participation in organizing the first Earth Day celebration at California StateUniversity, Long Beach in 1970. I knew then that I wantedto make working to protect our environment part of my life.

What environmental leader do you admire most and why?The two leaders I admire most are Rachel Carson (SilentSpring) and Garrett Hardin (The Tragedy of the Commons),as their writings have deeply influenced the way I view theenvironment and man’s stewardship toward it.

What advice would you give to students and/oryoung professionals just starting out in the field?Look at everything you do in your professional career as anopportunity and be willing to grab for the brass ring. Following that advice has led me on a wonderful careerworking and achieving success in a number of differentfields while fulfilling my desire to live, work, and experiencemany different countries and cultures.

What does A&WMA membership mean to you?My membership in A&WMA has allowed me to connectwith many people that have become valued colleagues andfriends. It has provided me a great forum to learn aboutand have in depth discussions about the many environ-mental issues facing our nation and the world.

What was the best A&WMA Annual Conferenceyou’ve attended (and why)?The 100th Annual Conference & Exhibition in Pittsburgh in2007. I got to share in a once-in-a-life-time experience,learn about the past history of the Association, and spendtime with old friends.

Are you currently working on any interesting projects?I’m currently working as a consultant for a major site remediation project at an active copper smelter in Arizona.A smelter has operated on this site for more than 100 yearsand presents many unique environmental challenges.

What are your proudest accomplishments as an environmental professional?This is a challenging question to answer, as I have had manywonderful experiences throughout my career. Working atone of the first low-sulfur flue gas desulfurization (FGD)pilot plants in the early 1970s is one, as it advanced theknowledge base and led to one of the first full-size demon-stration plants in the United States. Working for Niro Atomizer in Demark in the early 1980s developing majoradvances in dry FGD technology is another. Being selectedas a peer reviewer for the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency’s (EPA) Municipal Waste Combustion research anddevelopment program also stands out, as well as being selected as lead author for an EPA Innovative TechnologyMonograph on Chemical/Solvent Extraction Technologiesfor site remediation. And being awarded fellow member-ship in A&WMA.

How do you like to let off steam?I take my three dogs for a walk to a nearby park everydayI’m home and enjoy the roses, the birds, and the view ofMount Diablo. I also love to fish and spend time in theSierra Nevada Mountains (Jim is pictured above on a recent fishing trip).

MinuteJames R. Donnelly, QEPConsultantJ.R. Donnelly ConsultingDanville, CA

A&WMA Member Since 1975

Golden West Section

Association leadership roles held: Technical Council Liaison to the Sections & ChaptersCouncil; Chair, Training Division of Education Council(present); Member, Sensenbaugh Committee (present);Board Liaison to the Institute of Professional EnvironmentalPractice (IPEP); Vice Chair, Metal Industries TechnicalCommittee; Vice Chair, Golden West Section (present)

em • association news

The Member

‘A&WMA has provided me a greatforum to learn aboutand have in depthdiscussions about themany environmentalissues facing our nation and the world.’

Each month, this page profiles a different A&WMA member to find out what makes them tick at work and at home.

Tell Us What Makes You Tick!The Member Minute is a greatway to share your experiences,work, and accomplishementswith A&WMA’s membershipand EM readers. Want to seeyour photo and story high-lighted in EM, or do you wantto recommend someone to be featured? Just e-mail yourcontact information to EMManaging Editor Lisa Bucher [email protected] for consideration.

near-roadway health effectspubs.awma.org/gsearch/em/2009/8/em august-full.pdfnear-roadway health...

Documents