EPA-600/1-77-014
                               February 1977
THE PITTSBURGH AIR POLLUTION EPISODE OF
  NOVEMBER 17-21, 1975; AIR QUALITY
            Douglas W.  Baty
             Jose M. Sune
            David 0. Hinton
      Exposure Assessment Branch
      Population Studies Division
  Health Effects Research Laboratory
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 Research Triangle Park, N.C.   27711
 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
  OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
  HEALTH EFFECTS RESEARCH LABORATORY
  RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C. 27711

-------
                             DISCLAIMER

     This report has  been reviewed by the Health Effects  Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, and approved for
publication.   Mention of trade  names or commercial  products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

-------
                              FOREWORD
     The many benefits of our modern,  developing,  industrial  society  are
accompanied by certain hazards.   Careful  assessment of the  relative risk
of existing and new man-made environmental  hazards is necessary  for the
establishment of sound regulatory policy.   These regulations  serve  to
enhance the quality of our environment in  order to promote  the public
health and welfare and the productive  capacity of  our Nation's population.

     The Health Effects Research Laboratory,  Research Triangle Park,
conducts a coordinated environmental  health research program  in  toxicology,
epidemiology, and clinical studies using  human volunteer subjects.  These
studies address problems in air pollution,  non-ionizing radiation,
environmental carcinogensis and the toxicology of  pesticides  as  well  as
other chemical pollutants.  The Laboratory  develops and revises  air quality
criteria documents on pollutants for which  national ambient air  quality
standards exist or are proposed, provides  the data for registration of new
pesticides or proposed suspension of  those  already in use,  conducts research
on hazardous and toxic materials, and  is  preparing ^he health basis for
non-ionizing radiation standards.  Direct  support  to the regulatory function
of the Agency is provided in the form  of  expert testimony and preparation of
affidavits as well as expert advice to the  Administrator to assure  the
adequacy of health care and surveillance  of persons having  suffered imminent
and substantial endangerment of their  health.

     The recent air pollution episode  of  November  1975, in  which a  cloud
of pollution literally descended on the valleys around Pittsburgh,  Penn-
sylvania, presented the Health Effects Research Laboratory  with  a real-life
situation in which our various technologies could  be applied.  Our  recently
developed computerized air monitoring  system,  The  Community Health  Air
Monitoring Program (CHAMP), was able  to be  utilized during  the Pittsburgh
episode.  This was done by using one of the mobile laboratory vans  sent
from HERL in Research Triangle Park, North  Carolina, to the scene to
characterize and study the pollution  levels.   Such study is essential  to
epidemiologists and other health scientists in determining  the health
effects in populations from pollutants.  This Report describes and  dis-
cusses HERL's monitoring efforts during and after  the pollution  alert.
Much valuable information and experience was  gained by our  staff which
will be used in future situations requiring such technical  expertise.
                                                   H.  Knelson, M.D.
                                                  iP'roct or,
                                        iieaUh  tJ I •,•(..ts  Research Laboratory
                                 in

-------
                                  ABSTRACT
     In November 1975 a serious air stagnation problem developed over
Western Pennsylvania, with extremely heavy air pollution  in  the Pittsburgh
area.  The United States Environmental  Protection Agency's Health Effects
Research Laboratory (HERL) immediately  mobilized a team of air monitoring
and epidemiological personnel  to verify the nature of pollutants and to
determine the possible health  effects from this pollution.   By Wednesday,
November 19, pollution levels  reached emergency stage, as determined by the
standards of the Allegheny County Health Department,  with particulate con-
centrations measuring 7.0 COH/1000 feet for a  24-hour average.   HERL sent
an EPA Community Health Air Monitoring  Program (CHAMP) mobile  monitoring
laboratory van from Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,  to provide in-
dependent verification of the  Allegheny County monitoring data.   School
children were tested for pulmonary function near the  site of monitoring
facilities.

     This Report describes and discusses EPA's monitoring effort during
and after the pollution alert.  It concludes that HERL's  monitoring con-
firmed data collected by the local health department, that air stagnations
such as this one are likely to recur, that different  pollutants do not
increase uniformly during an air inversion, and the Benzo-Alpha-Pyrene
and suspended sulfates significantly contributed to the pollution problem.
The Report includes tables and figures  on relevant data gathered regarding
the episode, illustrations, and a map showing  monitoring  sites.
                                     TV

-------
                         ACKNOWLEDGMENTS





        We gratefully acknowledge the many contributions and



cooperation received in gathering data for this report.  The use



of data furnished by personnel  of the Bureau of Air Pollution



Control,  Allegheny County Health Department was especially help-



ful.   We  would particularly thank Dr. Arvid Ek, Administrator of



Technical  Services of the Bureau, for his assistance and patience

-------
                     THE PITTSBURGH EPISODE





In trod uc t i o n



        On  Monday, November 17, 1975, an air stagnation advisory



was issued  for western Pennsylvania.  It was later extended to



Friday, November 21.  By Uednesday, pollution levels reached



emergency stage  with particulate concentrations measured 7.0



COH/1000 feet (24-hour average) at the Allegheny County Liberty



Borough site outside Pittsburgh.   The Environmental  Protection



Agency's Health Effects Research  Laboratory (HERL) in Research



Triangle Park, North Carolina, then mobilized a team of air



monitoring  and epidemiological personnel  to verify the nature of



pollutants  and determine the possible health effects from these



high pollution levels.  HERL was  also needed by EPA's legal staff



for possible medical testimony to curtail  major industrial



operations.



        An  EPA Community Health Air Monitoring Program (CHAMP)



mobile monitoring laboratory was  sent from North Carolina and



arrived Thursday.   However, the mobile lab was not yet fully



operating when a cold front dispelled the  inversion  layer early



Friday morning, November 21.   But pollution levels during the



episode were measured in detail by Allegheny County's eight auto-



mated stations.   Later data gathered by the mobile van did  provide



independent verification of the Allegheny  County data.

-------
        Schoolchi1dren's pulmonary function was  tested in the


parochial  school  nearest the site of the mobile  monitoring labora-


tory and in five  other area schools.   South Allegheny County High


School, the location of the Liberty Borough monitoring site, was


not used because  of inability to get necessary pulmonary testing


authorization.   The tests continued for one week to determine how


quickly lungs recover from high air pollution.  A separate report

                               2
details results of  these tests.



Background


        Pittsburgh  produces one-fifth of the entire nation's


steel  and  is also  the country's largest aluminum production cen-


ter.  Because of  the heavy concomitant production and use of coke


in Pittsburgh's leviathan steel industry,  Pittsburgh historically


has had an air  pollution problem.  The city of Pittsburgh, real-


izing  the  serious  gravity of this problem,  has,  since 1946,


attempted  to improve the ambient air with  a number of programs.


One such program  was to establish an extensive air monitoring


network with a  staff delegated emergency powers  to protect public


health.



Geography


        Pittsburgh, situated in the valleys formed by the junc-


ture of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers,  has a topography


especially susceptible to air pollution episodes.  The city is in


sort of a  "trough-box," with the banks of  the  rivers rising to


150 meters (approximately 500 feet) on two  sides, which are fur-


ther bordered by  the 2000-feet-high Allegheny  Mountains.


                               2

-------
Meteorology



        Stagnant air is a common phenomenon in river valleys,



particularly during the colder seasons when there is not enough



sunshine for vertical  mixing.   Air inversions such as those in



Pittsburgh and Allegheny County during November 1975 keep air



within these river valleys, which sets the stage for very high



accumulation of pollutants.



        At 12 noon on  Monday,  November 17, 1975, the National



Weather Service Forecast Office at Pittsburgh Airport issued an



Air Stagnation Advisory for western Pennsylvania, the adjoining



eastern Ohio counties  of Columbiana, Jefferson, Belmont and Mon-



roe, and for the adjacent West Virginia Northern Panhandle



counties of Brooke, Ohio, Hancock and Marshall.



        During the severe episode  recorded in Allegheny County



(November 16-20, 1975), winds  were limited to 10 m/s.  Wind



speeds averaged 1.1 m/s (2.5 mph) the morning of the 19th, the



day air pollution concentrations reached emergency levels (Table 1)



Vertical mixing heights reached 1455 meters above ground surface on



November 16, but then  failed to rise above 310 meters for the  next



four days, creating an  inversion.  (Throughout the episode,  verti-



cal mixing heights stayed below 500 meters while wind speeds held



5 m/s for 3 days.)  High winds, precipitation, and a passing cold



front dispelled the air inversion on the 21st.  These meteorologi-



cal conditions closely  match those Holzworth found to occur once



previously at Pittsburgh during the five years, 1960-64.

-------
Site Selection
     Because of existing high pollution levels,  the Liberty
Borough, 18 kilometers (km)  southeast of downtown  Pittsburgh,
was chosen for air sampling  by EPA's mobile monitoring  laboratory.
Figure 1 shows the location  of the monitoring site.  The mobile
laboratory was less than 100 meters from the Allegheny  County
monitoring site at Liberty Borough so EPA and Allegheny data  could
be compared for accuracy.   This site consistently  records one  of
the highest pollution index  levels of all Allegheny County locations
monitored.  Holy Cross and St. Joseph's Schools,  2 of the 6 schools
used in the epidemic logical  study, were within one kilometer  of the
Liberty Borough site.  In  addition, U.S. Steel's  Clairton Coke Works,
3 kilometers southwest of  the site, was one of the most serious
pollution emission sources.
     Figure 2 is a photograph of the mobile laboratory  at the
Liberty Borough site, showing South Allegheny High School, the
monitoring site.  The RSP  sampler inlet, gaseous  sample inlet,
and hi-vol shelter are mounted from left to right  on top of the
van.  Monitoring instruments and computer are housed inside the
van .

Synopsis of Pollution Levels in Pittsburgh during  1966  and 1967
     The National Air Sampling Network (NASN) collected air
pollution data in the Pittsburgh area before the  November episode.
NASN's sampling site is located in a commercial  section of down-
town Pittsburgh (see Figure  1).  Data from this  site indicates
that Pittsburgh has long had a problem with high  participate
concentrations.
                             4

-------
        Figure 3 is a graph showing Total Suspended Particulates


(TSP) for  the years 1966 and 1967.  The dashed lines across the


graph at 140 and 134 micrograms per cubic meter (yg/m )  are the


geometric means for the samples taken in 1966 and 1967.   This


exceeds the present National Primary Air Quality Standard of


75 yg/m , indicated by the dotted line.


        The frequency distribution graph of Suspended Sulfates


(SS) for the years 1966-67 is given in Figure 4.  The arithmetic

                                 3
mean for this period is 13.1 yg/m .  While there are no  standards


pertaining to SS,  the concentrations can be compared to  total TSP


for reference.  For the years shown, arithmetic mean SS  levels


were 9.6 percent of geometric mean TSP concentrations.   The


arithmetic mean for SS during this time  period and the  ratio of


SS to TSP will be  compared to data taken during the episode.


        Suspended  Nitrates (SN) for the  1966-67 period  are shown


in Figure 5,  The  arithmetic mean is 2.1 yg/m .   This mean level


will be used to compare with episode levels.


        Benzo-a-pyrene (BaP) concentrations for the years 1966-67,


the first years of detailed BaP records  in Pittsburgh,  are graphed


by quarters in Figure 6.   The national average in the 1966-67


period of all urban areas tested is 2.7  nanograms per cubic meter


(ng/m3), as indicated by  the dotted line.  As this graph demon-


strates, downtown  Pittsburgh has had a history of higher-than-


average BaP concentrations.   However, none of the quarters in


this period had BaP concentrations.   However, none of the quarters


in this period had BaP levels as high as the  concentrations


recorded during the episode.


                                5

-------
        A frequency distribution  plot  of  Sulfur  Dioxide  (S0?),
Figure 7, was made from 1967  data  from the  NASN  downtown  site.
The data arithmetic mean,  66  yg/m  ,  is lower than  the  present
                                          3
National Primary Standard  for S0? ,  80  yg/m  .   The  maximum recorded
24-hour concentration,  164 yg/m ,  is  much less  than  the  24-hour
National Primary Standard  of  365  yg/m  .
        Nitrogen Dioxide (N0?)  concentrations  in  downtown Pitts-
burgh in 1967 averaged  well  above  the  National  Primary Standard
of 100 yg/m , as seen in Figure 8.   The  data arithmetic  mean,
        3
141 yg/m ,  represented  by  the dashed  line,  is  40  percent  more  than
        3
100 yg/m ,  the dotted line.   Maximum  daily  concentration  standards
have not been established.

Analysis of Recent 1974 Data  at Liberty  Borough  Site
        The three graphs (Figures  9-11)  present  the  TSP  and S0?
data for the 1974 calendar year.   The  TSP graph  (Figure  9)  has
both the National Primary  Annual  Standard and  the  corresponding
observed mean indicated on the  plot.   The observed geometric mean,
115 micrograms per cubic meter, is  well  above  the  standard  of
       3                                       3
75 yg/m .  The maximum  observed value, 473  yg/m  , greatly  exceeds
                                                3
the maximum primary 24-hour  standard  of  260 yg/m  .
        From the daily  TSP plot in  the months  of  November 1973,
1974 and 1975 (Figure 10), the  past three years  can  be easily
compared.  Although the 1975  data  (squares) obviously  exceeds  the
other two years, in both November  1973 and  November  1974, the
maximum national 24-hour standard  was  exceeded.   If  TSP  had been
sampled daily instead of every  2-4  days,  more  data points both
above and below the standards would appear  on  the  graphs.
                               6

-------
        The SOr, concentrations in 1974 were also high.   As indi-


cated by the graph (Figure 11), 50 percent of the values exceeded


the National Primary Standard of 80 yg/mJ, with a resultant

                   3
average of  142 yg/m .   This high average concentration  approaches


twice the standard.


        Neither SN, N0?, nor carbon monoxide are routinely sam-


pled at the Liberty Borough site.  Data pertaining to these


pollutants were obtained during the episode and are presented in


the next section.



Analysis of TSP/COH, SS, SN Data during Episode


        EPA's mobile van did not become fully operational  until


shortly after the weather frontal passage caused wind and precipi-


tation to cleanse the  air over Pittsburgh.  EPA data, therefore,


are available only for the week following the episode.   These


data do provide independent verification of Allegheny County


data although EPA data are limited to the lower concentrations


present after the  episode.  An EPA National Air Surveillance Net-


work (NASN) station located within Pittsburgh samples every


twelfth day.  Unfortunately the sampling period bracketed the


episode.


        Allegheny County Health Department maintains  seven con-


tinuous telemetering stations in and around Pittsburgh.   Data from


one of these sites, the Liberty Borough site, is graphically


represented by Figures 12-15 and 17-19.


        TSP concentrations at the Liberty Borough site  from


November 10-November 29 are shown in Figure 12.  The  highest con-

                                                3
centration recorded during the episode, 921 vg/m , represents a

-------
15-hour average during Wednesday,  November 19, 1975.   This peak
value, 921 yg/m ,  does not show in Figure 12 because  concentra-
tions are graphed  as 24-hour values.   Sampling time was reduced
from the usual 24-hour collection  period because air  flow through
the high volume sampling instrument was being significantly
reduced by the build-up of particles  on the filter.  Thus, the
770 yg/m  value shown on the graph is a time-weighted average of
the two samples taken November 19, 1975.  This value  greatly
                                                               3
exceeds the maximum national primary  daily standard of 260 yg/m ,
as shown by the dotted line on the graph.  Graphed TSP concentra-
tions after November 20 from both  EPA and Allegheny County indi-
cate more modest pollution levels.  Correspondence between the
two data sets may  have been improved  if sampling frequency could
have been the same:   EPA's daily sampling indicated slightly
lower concentrations.
        Coefficient of Haze (COH), for which there is no national
standard, was used as an indicator to declare an emergency epi-
sode.  COH is compared with total  suspended particulates through
the formula:   1 COH -100 (TSP) yg/m3, at the Liberty  Borough site
     2
only.   Because of the ratio of fine  to coarse suspended particu-
lates and participate composition  vary geographically, the above
ratio will not necessarily apply outside the Liberty  Borough
area.  A graph of  the COH values at Liberty Borough (Figure 13)
may be compared to that of TSP (Figure 12) for the episode period.
The extreme peak on the TSP graph  appears as a more gradual rise
with COH.  Using the above conversion formula, an expected TSP
value for Wednesday, November 19,  would be average daily COH (7.37)

-------
times 10°CQH/rT1   equals 737 yg/m3 TSP.   The measured value of 921

    3
yg/m  is within the 30 percent accuracy attributed to this con-


version by Allegheny County.


         Very high suspended  sulfate (SS)  concentrations were


present in the hi-vol  samples collected at the Liberty Borough


site as shown in Figure 14.  The dotted line at the very bottom


of the graph is the mean sulfate concentration for the 1966-67


period as seen in Figure 4.  The uncommonly high concentration of

        3
191  yg/m  recorded on  November 19 is the time-weighted average


from two hi-vol samples taken that day.  SS averaged 10 percent


of TSP values during 1966-67, 19 percent during the week of the


episode, and 25 percent of TSP values on November 19, 1975, the


day  SS and TSP values  peaked.  Unfortunately,  comparison between


SS determinations on EPA and  Allegheny  collected TSP samples is


only possible on November 21.  As the graph shows, the two hi-vol


sample values nearly coincide.  The same laboratory conducted


both sample analyses.


         Suspended Nitrate (SN)  concentrations at Liberty, depicted


in Figure 15, did not  appear  to  be unusually affected by the

                                                    3
inversion.  The peak concentration recorded, 10 yg/m , occurred


on November 18, a day  before  concentrations peaked for SS and TSP.


Six  days later, November 24,  another peak  was  recorded, this one

                 3
reaching 7.6 yg/m .   The SN levels during  the  episode are little


higher than SN levels  after the  episode.  Most of the data shewn


in Figure 15 is far above the mean 1966-67 concentration of 2.1


yg/m -  This may be due to the differences in  the pollution levels

-------
between the commercial  downtown site in  1966-67  and the industrial



Liberty Borough site with which it is  being compared in the graph.



As in SS, comparisons between Allegheny  County and EPA SN data is



limited to one day, with that day coinciding on  the graph.   One



laboratory also analyzed both samples.





Analysis of Benzp-a-Pyrene (BaP)  Data  during j^pi sode



        Hi-vol samples  collected  by Allegheny County were sent to



EPA to analyze SS, SN and BaP.   Figure  16 presents the BaP  results.



A number of samples are usually composited to increase chemical



analysis accuracy due to the small quantity of BaP in hi-vol  sam-



ples.   Batch #1 is a combination  of 20  hi-vol samples taken from



several  different sites in the  Pittsburgh area during the week



before the episode.  Batch #2 is  of 25  samples taken during the



episode week.   Batch #3 is composed of  11 samples  taken the week



after the episode.  The national  average computed  for urban areas



is the dotted  line at the bottom  of the  graph at  2 nanograms/cubic



meter.  An exceptionally high value of  184 nanograms per cubic



meter was recorded for  Batch #2.   This  high value  is flanked  by


             3                                              3
18 nanogram/m  from Batch #1 taken before and 21  nanograms/m



from Batch #3  taken after the episode.   While there is no national



standard established concerning BaP concentrations in ambient air,



BaP is a suspected carcinogen.   More samples need  to be collected



to substantiate these very high recorded concentrations,.



        Comparing the 1975 BaP  concentrations (Figure 16) with



those of earlier years  (Figure  6) shows  little correlation  between



past and present pollution levels.  Some discrepancies would  be



expected because of site differences since the 1966-67 years' data




                              10

-------
were taken from one downtown site, while the 1975 data is a con-


glomerate of 12 sites in the Pittsburgh area.   The industrial


sites,  such as Liberty Borough, would be expected to yield higher


BaP concentrations than the more commercial  downtown sites.  As


BaP emissions are strongly associated with coking operations,


high concentrations during an air inversion  would be expected  in


Pittsburgh.  However, since "emergency" episodes are a rare occur-


rence,  duplication of the high BaP results would be difficult.   A


previous EPA publication reported annual average BaP concentra-

                                              3
tions in Pittsburgh of 6, 14 and 6 nonograms/m  for the years

        5
1968-70.   A hi-vol sample collected at Liberty Borough on July 11,


1976 gave the following results:  TSP, 113.7 ug/m3; BaP,  98.66

   , 3 2
ng/m .



Analysis of SQp-N00-CO Data during Episode


        For S02»  high readings are apparent  at the Liberty Borough


site two days before the air stagnation advisory was issued on


Monday, November  17, 1975, as seen in Figure 17.  The maximum

                                        3
24-hour average concentrations, 325 yg/m  occurred on November  16,


but this value does not exceed the National  Primary Daily Standard

                 2
for S0?, 365 yg/m  (dotted line on graph).  Highest one-hour aver-


age (for which there is no standard) was recorded two days later

           3
as 812  ug/m .


        Unexpectedly high S0? hourly averages  were recorded by


EPA on  the weekend following the episode as  presented in  Figure 18.


Concentrations briefly exceeded the range setting of the  instru-


ment, 524 ng/m  (0.2 ppm) in two separate hours on the morning  of


the 23rd.  Allegheny County data do not show these peaks, but

                              11

-------
otherwise the data follow the same curve  pattern  as  EPA data.   A


consistent bias between the two data sets can  be  seen on the graph


(Figure 18).   This is probably attributed to the  difference


between the sampling sites or the instruments  themselves.


Allegheny's sampling intake was two stories above ground level,


while EPA's was one story.  Inlet sampling lengths were different


for the two sites.  Separation between  the sites  was approximately


100 meters, with South Allegheny County High School  in between.


Because sudden rises and falls of S0? concentrations are charac-


teristic of this geographical area, the separation is significant..


EPA used a flame photometric S0? monitor, while Allegheny  County


used a coulometric monitor for S0? sampling.  No  differences


between the two instruments were found  when a  quick  calibration


check was conducted.   However, the calibration check did not


include response time or sampling inlet differences.

                                           3
        N 0 2 hourly levels exceeded 100  yg/m ,  the national  stan-


dard arithmetic mean, on Sunday, November 23,  1975,  for about 10

                                                             4
hours (Figure 19).  The daily average did not  exceed 100 yg/m ,


indicating that annual averages would probably fall  below  national


standards.  This differs from the results in 1967 (Figure  8) when


the average exceeded 100 yg/m .  This difference  may be caused by


the different N0? pollutant levels present in  the downtown  site


(1967  data)  versus the industrial Liberty site (1975 data).  The


limited quantity of data available for  NO,, at  the Liberty  Borough


site limits the data comparisons.  The  only N0? monitor in  Pitts--


burgh during the episode was a bubbler  operated under NASN.
                              12

-------
Sampling is on a regular schedule which,  unfortunately,  missed the


epi sode .


        Figure 20 is a plot of the CO concentration during the


episode month at a downtown site within the city limits.   The line


of arrows across the top of the graph is  the National  Standard for

                                                    3
maximum one-hour average concentrations,  40,000 yg/m .   At no time


did  the highest hourly concentrations exceed this  value.   However,

                                                 3
the  daily 24-hour averages did exceed 10,000 yg/m   (the  National


Primary Standard for maximum 8-hour concentrations) for  a three-


day  period during the episode.  This can  be seen by comparing the


solid line, representing average daily concentrations,  with the


dotted line near the bottom of the graph.   A standard  for CO 24-


hour averages or 8-hour data averages, if  available, should show


more striking differences.



Conclus ions


1.  HERL's monitoring program in Pittsburgh confirmed  data col-


    lected by Allegheny County, permitting greater confidence in


    local data used to determine health effects.


2.  Air pollution concentrations in the Pittsburgh area  exceeded


    National  Primary annual Standards for  both S0? and  TSP at the


    Liberty Borough site before the November episode.


3.  Air pollution concentrations showed marked increases  before


    and during the stagnation advisory.


4.  Air stagnations of similar magnitude  to November 1975 are


    likely to reoccur in the future.


5.  Different pollutants do not increase  uniformly during an air


    inversion.


                               13

-------
6.   Benzo-Alpha-Pyrene and suspended sulfates significantly con-

    tributed  to the Pittsburgh pollution  problem.


Recommendations

    Benzo-Alpha-Pyrene should be routinely analyzed from hi-vol

filters in the  Pittsburgh area to verify  and help  control  their

contribution  to local  air pollution.


References

1.   Allegheny County Health Department,  "Rules and Regulations,
    Article XVII,  Air  Pollution Control,"  June 15, 1972.

2.   Stebbings,  James,  Diane G. Fogleman,  K.  E. McClain and T.  C.
    Towrisend, "Effect  of the Pittsburgh  Air  Pollution Episode
    Upon Pulmonary Function in Schoolchildren."   APCA Journal
    Vol. 26,  No.  6 (June 1976), pp.  547-553.

3.   Holzworth,  G,  C.,  "Mixing Heights,  Wind  Speeds and Potential
    for Urban Air  Pollution Throughout  the Contiguous United
    States,"  Preliminary Document,  May  10, 1971,  Environmental
    Protection  Agency.

4.   "Air Quality  Data  for 1967 from the  National  Air Surveillance
    Networks  and  Contributing State and  Local Networks," revised
    1971,  Environmental  Protection  Agency  Publication No.  APTD/
    0741 .

5.   "Preferred  Standards Path Report for  Polycyclic Organic Mat-
    ter,"  Strategies and Air Standards  Division,  Office of Air
    Quality Planning and Standards,  Environmental  Protection
    Agency, October 1974.
                                14

-------
                                  PITTSBURGH WEATHER INFORMATION
tn
Date
1975
11/15
11/16
11/17
11/18
11/19
11/20
11/21
11/22
0700
Mixing Height*
(meters)

670
130
186
115
144
no inversion
0.14" precipitation
0.01" precipitation
0700 EST
Wind**
(dir/kts/m/s)

270-
300-
310-
190-
210-
250-
270-

10-
13-
10-
5-2
10-
20-
20-

5
7
5
.
5
1
1

m/s
m/s
m/s
6 m/s
m/s
0 m/s
0 m/s
1900 EST
Mixing Depth
( me te rs )

1455
874
125
122
236
no inversion
no inversion
1900 EST
Wind
(dir/kts/m/s)

290-
250-
251-
250-
170-
250-

10-
15-
10-
10-
20-
30-
30-10-

5
8
5
5
10
15
-5

m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
Temperatur1
Hi gh/Low
44/25
55/34
62/35
63/36
63/35
63/35
56/35
37/27
        *Height above ground level at airport.  Airport is 360 meters above sea level.
       **Wind speed measured at height of 10 meters above ground level.
                                              Table 1

-------
16

-------
EPA mobile monitoring  laboratory  at  Liberty, Pennsylvania; November 22, 1975
                                       17

-------
oo
      o:
      LJ
      h-
      u
      m
      X.
      in
      2:
      [E
      u:
      La
      a
      •z.
      a
      i-
      a;
      iz
      i-
      •z.
      u
      u
      z
      n
          t SE1.
         SIZJ.
HI —VDI_     TSP     I  SBB — G~7


CDNC.   vs  rREiaueNCY  nr  DCCURRETNCE:


ODWNTDWN  PITT5BURC5H —  COUNTY  DmCE  BL_O B.


NR5N  t>RTR


7	7  =   I SET   T5P
      -B  =
3BB  TSP
                  GEOMETRIC  MEFIN  I SBV
                            H
           N
           n
    ts
N
W
                                                          LD
N
                                                                           m
                                            PERCETNTILE:

                                               Figure 3

-------
                                                                          •06
                                                                          '0B
                                                                          •0Z.
                                                                               J

                                                                               h

                                                                          '05  y t

                                                                               V  I
                                                                               H s:
                                                                               U
                                                                          •0h  Q.
                                                                          •0E
                                                                          •0z
                                                                          •01
El
bl
B
J
PI
            El
El
                                                   NI

-------
                                                                     *0B
                                                                     •0B
                                                                         j
                                                                         F
                                                                         u
                                                                         D.
                                                                     'BE
                                                                     "0!
3

M
2

J

El
w
w
                                               NI
u
a
                                  20

-------

o:
h
0

Ul
>
[ i
V
Z
D
V



in
Z m y
U _ h

K i in

\_
n ID I
1 in ID
c m D
I ^
OL f!
J h
I E
In"
-r F
D |jj|
N D 6
Z J-
M Z Z
1 ll f- «—
ffl D E
6 Z


M
(i ni
- —
y^









D:

h u
in
Ul

^_
ffl ^
E V
-, \
m
Ul
I ^
J n-
k z
Q *•
IT
U.
> h
01 ni
!D „
u u
z z
J J
^ ^
u u
h 1-
1 1
1- J-
D n
£1 ^



H 1/|
h
U3W ^ian> y3d sw







































y







































aai






































L/l
3NyN Nl





































Id
ni
•-NK






































H
D3>


h/h



h/E ^
ID

in
"> y
h/E ID

rv
LL


h/1 I

^>



y
h/h h
tr
i
B
h/E tn
ID
in
LU
h/E 01

—


h/l



•

21

-------
r BEJ.
I 20.
20.
        5ULF"UR   [>[DX![>E:      I 3E7
RTR  RRITHMETIC  MERN  =  BE3  UC3/M
                         NRTinNRL.  STRNOHRC*  MRX  2M HR  = 3BS LJG/M"
                         MRX. RE<:DRI>E:[>  CPNC.  =  i BM
                         NUMBER DP"  5RMFL.E5  r 23
                            S*
                            n
  H      S
  X      W
PERCENTIUE
     Figure 7
                                  E3
                                  in
si
r«
d*
a
ta-
rn

-------
oo
        LJ
        I-
        LJ
        z:
        m
in
2;
o:
tr
in
a
a:
        a
           H00.
           3013.
           200.
            I £0.
           50.
                            NIT ROE BIN   OIDXIOE:     ISBV


                    CDNC",  vs  F~RE:EIUE:N<:Y  DR  nRTR
                      DHTR BRrTHMETTIC METRN  s  I H t
                                                NRTIDNRL STRNC>RRD  MRX. RNNURL  METRN
                                        MRX. RETCDROETD  CONC.



                                        NUMBETR  PF" 5PMRL.E5
                                                             23V



                                                            2H
                                        i	h
                               H
                                        H
                                        rn
 B      13      S
 T      w      in

PEZRCETNTfLE:

   Figure 8
                                                                      s
                                                                        tn
s
m

-------
z
a
       I 000..



      B00.  .




      B00.  .







      H00.  .




      300.  .







      200.  .
      t 00.
^   B0.




 LD   B0.
      H0.




      30.






      20.
                          HI-VDL      T5P



                     CDNCEZNTRRTiDN  V5   FREIQUErNCY   DF   DCCURRETNCE:



                     NRDB   DRTR



                     LIBEIRTY  BDRDUBH



                               I 3VH
                  LIBERTY  EETPMETTRIC
                                                      ->   IIS  UE/M3
                                          NHTIPNHU  5TRNORRI>  •>  7S  UC3/M3
MHX  DBBeRVETO  VRLUET  =  H73  LJGXM3




MHX  NRTIDNPL.  PRIMRRY  5TRNt>RRD>  =  2B0  UI5/M3
                                 i	1	1	h
                         tsi
                                                                    H
                                                                    m
                                                                              m
                                                             w
                                                             m
m
m
m
m
                                            PETRCETNTfLE:


                                                  Figure 9

-------
ro
ui
                 I 000.   „.
                 300.
            o:
            u
            S   700.
|jj   G00.
z:
EC
iz
[£]   SEJ0.
n
o:

?=   H00.
            p
0.
in
                 200.
                 100.
 [>RTR  rRDM  NRt>B  RND>

 rROM  RL.UEEHENY  CO.


LIBERTY  BDRP


AA  =  NOVEMBER   1373

XX  =  NOVEMBER   t 37H


DO  =  NOVEMBER   I37S
                              NBTIDNRU  5T[>.
                             MRX  2H  HR       A
                •     A
                                      A
                                       X
                                            A
                                          H	1	h
                        X

                        A
                                                            Q
                                                                                   Q
                                                                                Q
                                                     m
                                                                                       D
                                                   X
                                                                                A
                                                                          A

                                                                          —i—
                                                               m
                                                     _i—|—|—|—|—f_







                                               ORYS  DP   NDVETMBEIR

                                                                  Figure 10
                                                                                             A

                                                                                             El
                                                         ^ B       X       ^

                                                   H	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
                                                            M     N     M     PJ     PI  PI

-------
                                                                           "SB



                                                                           •BS





                                                                           '5S
                                                                           •09
                                                                                 y
                                                                           •03   y  %
                                                                                 v  §.
                                                                                 o: -
                                                                           •0s   y
                                                                                 Q.
                                                                           •0h
                                                                           '0E
                                                                           •01
H  H   Q     El   El
B  H   El     EJ   El     El
-  tD   ID     T   PI     PJ
El   .
El  El    El
-  ffl    IB
El
T
El
Fl
E)
N
El
                           -W/EDH  Ni
                                       26

-------
1000.  _
T5P   CHI-VDLD   CDNC.

LIBERTY  BOROUGH

-El ->  RLLETBHEINY  CO. ORTR
      E!PR
                                                V5   DRY
       MHX. 2H HR  NHTIDNRL
       PRIMBR'Y 'STHN'I>RRI>
                    ORY5  PR NDVEIMBEIR   I SVS
                               Figure 12

-------



Lij
h
Ul
D
01
n
Kl
UJ

y~
j_
rr
t.i

ir
h
it
6
D
^
>*
Z
y
i
a
y
j
j
E
I E
D £

T Ul
U
x z
EC Q
&••
t
X



X




>-
J
I
e> .
V
yz
>o
EEV
t
a



i




m^    x--

>J  x

0 '   •  "x

Si      x-.
                      X
                      •x
                       .X
"BE




'BE




"BZ




"hZ




•zz  W


    01





    U



'H1  I


-si  n
                                                    'hi
    n

    ui
    >-
    cc
                                                    'Hi
                    3ZUH JD  1N3DUJ3D^
                          28

-------
s
w
N
H
Q
N
W
El
S
                                                                             •3Z
                                                                             •sz
                                                                             •HE
                                                                                   bl
                                                                                   h
                                                                                   01
                                                                                   E
                                                                                   y
                                                                             •zz   ffl
                                                                                   I  *
                                                                                   U  0.
                                                                             •iz   7.

                                                                                   L
                                                                                   D

                                                                             •HZ   in

                                                                                   IE
                                                                             •51
    H


Nl  '
                                       29

-------
                                    •3S1
                                    •52:
                                    "HE
                                    'Eel
                                    •is
                                        I/I
                                        h
                                        m
                                                  to
                                                  Z  £
                                                  111  
-------
o:
u
j-
u
Ul

tE

in
n
z
a:
z
z
a
       I 7S.
       I SEJ.
ffi     I2S'    4
Zl
       I HH.
      7S.
£:    SET.
      Z5T.
      El.
BENZD-RLPHR-PYREINE: CDNC. V5 BRTCH

UJ
d
R
E
Ul

Ul
E
LJ

2
V
n;
H
E
E
in
a
N
h
_i
D
1-






Ul

P
10
0.
uj
u.
a
Ul
Z
in
d
z

in
a.
in
t/1
PJ
U.
a

en
i 	
a
J>0TTED LINE

REPRESENTS

NPTIDNRL HVERREE


URBRN RRER5







E B
E iQ
tn u
n 5
o E
5: u
L_ V
a tt
i- »-

                     BRTCH   NO  I         BRTCH   2                BRTCH  3


                  Samples were  taken from 12 sites located in and around  the city of Pittsburgh


                                                 Figure 16

-------
CO
          m
                 I 000.  -T.
     300.
                B00.
                700.
                B00.
     500.

g
H
n:   H0a.
a
H-
z
           Z
           a
           a
           1/1
                 300.
                200.
                                    SULFUR    OIDXIt>E:   CDNC.   V


                                    LIBERTY  BOROUGH

                                    NDVETMBEIR   1 3VS:
                                                                                       ORY
                                                                RLLETEHETN Y   CC3.  [>RTR
                                                                               X	X  •*  MRX  HDURL.Y  CDNC


                                                                               AT	A  ->  RVE  ORIUY  CDNC.
                                                      X
                                              x
                                                  \

                                                                   . _ L- _I^X'Bf^J=^-STJRNt>RJRI>	„ _ _ L.


                                                                          MRX  2H  HOUR RVET  CPNC.
                                                                                              •-.    .X
                                       —       —       —       r\i       r-i


                                    DRY5   DF  NnVEIMBER    I

                                                     Figure 17
                                                                                                           PJ       PI

-------
GO
to
              I H0EJ.  T-
             see.
         a:



         Ld   BEIia.
         (JJ  700.



         M


         Ul  saa.
          a:
          o:
          m
          a
21  M00.



-7     3SS-*
          Z
          a
          M


          FM
         a
         in
              300.
    200.
                      SULFUR   DIOXIDE   CDNC.   V5   TIME!


                      LIBERTY   BDRDUEH


                      HUNGRY   NDVEMBETR   23   I 3"7S


                     B	B   ->  ETFH   ORTR


                     .A-	A   -»  RLLETEHEZNY   CD.   ORTR
                 EPA data:  5 minute values exceeded 52k ug/m  (off scale) during hours 0 and 7.
                                                     NRT1DNRL.  5TRNt>RR[>  MRX  2H  HR  RVE
                         H	1-
                             pi      x      to      tri



                                HOURS  DF  DRY
x      id      m      E!




 NOV.  23   f SVS
                                                                                            ni  ri
                                                                                            w  N
                                                          Figure  18

-------
              I S0.
CO
-p.
           Ct
           U
           H
           LJ
           m
in

o:
on

a
a:

S

z
a
I—
en
a
i-
-z.
LJ
               i as.
              set.
    tZJt	H.
                    NITRDEEIN  DIDXIDE   CDN  EPH  [>FTF


                    NOVEMBEIR  23   I 3VS
                       NHTIdNRL PRIMRRY  RNNURL.  STRNOPRD-
                       ORIUY  I>RTR RVERRCHE:  =  va
                            1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - »
                                                   1 - 1 - 1-
                                                     tS3
                                                                        \a

                               HDUR5  DF*  DRY  VS32V    SUND-RY  NDV.  23  I 375


                                                     Figure 19

-------
to
tn
     Fl
       X
       \
       m
       zi
      v
      z
      p
      V

      o
      M
         3S00EI. . .
         2S00I3. ..
200130. . .
          I KEI00. . .
t 0000. . .
         SEJ0EJ. . .
                      CHRBDN  MONOXIDE:  CONC.   vs  DRY

                      COUNTY  CDURT HOUSE — HL-LEBHEINY  CO,  DRTR
                       B
                       •> MRX. I  HOUR CPNC./ORY

                       •> RVCRREE  DRILY CDNC,
                  NRT1ONRL PRIMRRY STBNC»RRE> — MRXIMUM  I HOUR  CDNC.
                         t
                                                    DOTTED- LINE: =  NBTIONBL.

                                                    FRtMBRY STRNDBRD	HBX.

                                                    H HOUR RVE. CONC.
                                          A
  T     in    m     s



DRY5  OF" NOVEMBER

          Figure 20
                                                          s

                                                       I 3TS
                                                               ta
                                                                     oi
                                                                 n

-------
                                        ;A_ REi'ORT DATA
  R E D O R T \'">
  EPA-600/1-77-014
                                                         |3 RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOf*NO
  THE  PITTSBURGH  AIR  POLLUTION EPISODE OF NOVEMBER 17-21
  1975: AIR  QUALITY
                                                         5 REPORT DATE
                                                           February 1977
                o PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
  A U T H O P v 5 '

  Douglas  W.  Baty,  Jose  M.  Sune and David 0.  Hinton
                                                         8 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
£  PERFORMING OH -A NATION N.-'I-'  AMD ADDRESS
   Population Studies  Division
   Health  Effects  Research Laboratory
   U.S.  Environmental  Protect'on Agency
   Research  Triangle Park, N.C.  27711
HERL,RTP,NC
12 SPONSOR' \G AGENCY !MAPv':L AIVC1 "-\DDREbS
  Health  Effects  Research Laboratory
  Office  of Research and Development
  U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
  Research  Triangle Park, N.C.  27711
                10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                   1AA601
                11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO


                   IN-HOUSE
                                                          13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                14 SPONSORING AGENCr CODE
15 SUPPLEMFNTAR' NOTES
16 ABSTRACT
           In  November 1975 a serious air stagnation problem developed  over  Western
  Pennsylvania,  with  extremely heavy air pollution in the Pittsburgh area.   The  U.S.
Environmental  Protection  Agency's Health Effects Research Laboratory (HERL)  immediate-
ly  mobilized  a  team of air nonitoring and epidemiological personnel to verify the
nature  of  pollutants  and  to determine the possible health effects  from this  pollution.
 By  Wednesday,  November 19,  pollution levels reached emergency stage,  as  determined by
 the  standarub  of the  Allegheny County Health Department,with participate concentration
 measuring  7.0  COH/1000 ft.  for a 24-hr,  average.  HERL  sent an EPA  Community Health Air
 Monitoring  Program (CHAMP)  mobile monitoring laboratory van from Research Triangle Darl<
 North  Carolina to provide independent verification of the Allegheny County monitoring
 data.  School children were  tested for pulmonary function near the site of monitoring
 facilities.    This report describes and  discusses EPA's monitoring  effortduring and
 after  the  pollution alert.   It concludes that HERL's monitoring confirmed data collec-
 ted  by the  locan  health department, that air stagnations such as this one are likely
 to  recur,  that different, pollutants do not increase uniformly during  an  air inversion,
 and  that Benzo-Alpha-Pyrene and suspended sulfates significantly contributed to the
 pollution  problem.  This  report includes tables and figures on relevant  data gathered
 regarding  the  episode, illustrations, and a map showing monitoring  sites.
                               -;E ' WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
Air Pollution
Monitors
Smog
Sulfates
Lung
                                             h IDtNTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
    Pittsburgh
    air  inversion
    Benzo-Alpha-Pyerene
    Lung  function
13 DiSFRIBUT, j!J C1, ATEMt N1

RELEASE TO  PUBLIC
   19 SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
   L  UKCLASSIFIErj	
   j 20 SECURITY C'.ASS { :/us page I
                                COS AT I Liold/Group
13 B
06 F, A
                                                                       21  NO. OF PAGES
 41
                                                                       122 PP'CE
EPA Fern ?220-1 (9-73)
                                           36

-------