1. A Tale of South Philadelphia COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS

2. Background  South Philadelphia  Focus on the Philadelphia Energy Solutions (PES) facility, formerly Sunoco refinery and the surrounding Communities  Largest source of air pollution in the greater Philadelphia area  Communities directly next to the facility (Point Breeze, Greys Ferry)  High health risks from NATA  Lower income and education  Emissions expected to increase

3. Background  Over the last 2 years, Region 3 has collaborated with  EPA/Office of Research and Development (ORD)  EPA/Office of Environmental Information (OEI)  toxics Release Inventory (TRI)  City of Philadelphia  Department of Health, Air Management Services (AMS)  Parks and recreation Services  Philadelphia housing Authority  University of Pennsylvania and Drexel University

4. Background  R3 Partnering Projects  ORD Regional applied research effort (RARE) and Regional Methods—Passive sampling  OEI—TRI community engagement pilot project: R3 mapping project  R3/UPenn/Drexel—community focus group meetings  Philadelphia AMS—community air toxics monitoring grant—open path monitoring  R3 Office of Air Monitoring and Analysis Staff  Carol Ann Gross-Davis  Howard Schmidt

5. ORD RARE Project

6. RARE—VOC Passive Sampling  ORD research to gather field measurements using low-cost, passive VOC samplers  Intent is to replace method TO-15 with methods 325 A and B in certain circumstances (long term monitoring)  Opportunity to field test air sensors  Project: Summer 2013, continue to sept. 2014 (may be extended)

7. RARE—Passive Sampler, Air Sensor

10. One EPA prototype sensor just deployed (SPOD). AMS’ open path monitor is in operation.

11. Preliminary data  Sorry, the preliminary data have been removed. ORD is still in the QA/QC process and therefore, we had to remove this from public distribution.

12. OEI/R3 Mapping Project

13. R3 Mapping Project in Collaboration with OEI, TRI  EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) community Engagement Pilot projects Initiative  Raise awareness of tri data  Increase accessibility and usefulness to communities  Demonstrates how communities can use publically available environmental data  South Philadelphia was selected in order to build upon an ongoing air monitoring effort (AMS, EPA/ORD)  Project: 2012-2014

14. R3 Mapping Project  OEI’s special pilot projects demonstrate innovative ways that TRI data can be used to help communities address local environmental challenges  Project produced a web-accessible map  displays all TRI and other federally regulated facilities  location of other sites that youth and senior citizens frequent  NO information pertaining to emissions, exposure, risk, or health is included within the map.. However, a link to Envirofacts will be available

16. R3 Mapping project  Project is currently in product review and OEI estimates a public release on the TRI Communities Webpage by the end of June 2014  This project motivated questions on how to engage the local communities on air toxics issues…which led to…

17. R3 Community Outreach

18. R3/UPenn/Drexel  Growing movement of communities in Point Breeze and Grays Ferry wanting to address environmental (air, water, soil) pollution concerns near PES  In 2011, Philadelphia AMS received a 2-yr Community Air Toxics monitoring grant for a multi- gas open-path air monitoring system  Target compounds: Benzene, mercury, napthalene, ethyl benzene and styrene  AMS also interested in formulating a communication strategy that could be used

19. R3/UPenn/Drexel  Paired with EPA’s interest on raising environmental awareness, this outreach effort is a collaboration between EPA, AMS, UPENN, DREXEL and the following organizations  The Right to Know Committee in South Philadelphia  South Philadelphia H.O.M.E.S.  Diversified Community Services  Neighbors in Action  Neighborhood Network Plus

20. R3/UPenn/Drexel  Purpose  Qualitatively explore the thoughts, beliefs and perceptions of the environment  Recruited adults over 18 yrs  Conducted focus group discussions

21. R3/UPenn/Drexel  Results  Participants did not voluntarily mention air pollution as a problem, other stresses where more overwhelming—trash, violence  Participants were aware of air pollution problems but have lived nearby the refinery for a very long time…got used to it  Source of stigma, but don’t believe they have control…nothing you can do  Suspicion, feelings of discrimination, displacement, lack of security in ownership and belonging to their place of residence

22. R3/upenn/drexel  Discussion  Exposure and risk assessments typically neglect to role of Psychosocial stressors and in the formulation of possibilities for scientific, programmatic or regulatory response  This project provided a framework in which place influences air pollution-related stress and risk perception  Participants are aware of air problems but they protect themselves from fear of disease and displacement, stigma and discrimination  Participants feel powerless to change, but are suspicious that any effort to reduce impact would not be in their best interest

23. R3/UPenn/Drexel  Findings  Community-related projects which seek to change behaviors or disseminate information will be challenged  Must address public’s identification with a place or industry  Must address other stressors, abandonment, waste, odors  Must address public perception of lack of social controls, fear of displacement

24. R3/UPenn/Drexel  May be possible to reduce impacts of pollution through mitigation of other related social and physical stressors  cleaning and greening of vacant lots  improved housing  better solid waste management  Programs must be sensitive to power dynamics  “Place-based stressors associated with industry and air pollution,” Kondo, et al, health & place 28(2014) 31-37 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.03.004 )http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.03.004

25. Philadelphia AMS Open Path Monitoring DENNIS SOSNA WILL PRESENT AMS’ EXPERIENCE IN BREAKOUT SESSION

26. In summary  Over the last 2 years, projects are coming together to not only establish new monitoring methods, but also understand community needs  A new tool has been developed for residents to keep them better informed  A new study suggests consideration of residents’ views as an essential element for community- related projects—as opposed to a one-way information dissemination