Laserfiche WebLink
Unlike the other TACs,no ambient monitoring data are available for diesel PM because no routine measurement <br /> method currently exists. However,ARB has made preliminary concentration estimates based on a PM exposure <br /> method. This method uses the ARB emissions inventory's PMIo database, ambient PMIo monitoring data, and the <br /> results from several studies to estimate concentrations of diesel PM. In addition to diesel PM,the TACs for which <br /> data are available that pose the greatest existing ambient risk in California are benzene, 1,3-butadiene, <br /> acetaldehyde, carbon tetrachloride,hexavalent chromium,para-dichlorobenzene, formaldehyde,methylene <br /> chloride, and perchloroethylene. <br /> Diesel PM poses the greatest health risk among these 10 TACs. Based on receptor modeling techniques,ARB <br /> estimated the diesel PM health risk in the SJVAB in 2000 to be 390 excess cancer cases per million people. Since <br /> 1990,the health risk of diesel PM in the SJVAB has been reduced by 50%. Overall, levels of most TACs, except <br /> for para-dichlorobenzene and formaldehyde,have gone down since 1990(ARB 2006a). <br /> EXISTING AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS—ODORS <br /> Odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazed. However,manifestations of a person's <br /> reaction to foul odors can range from psychological(e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety)to physiological(e.g., <br /> circulatory and respiratory effects,nausea,vomiting,and headache). <br /> The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some <br /> individuals have the ability to smell very minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same <br /> sensitivity but may have sensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition,people may have different <br /> reactions to the same odor; an odor that is offensive to one person may be perfectly acceptable to another(e.g., <br /> fast food restaurant). It is important to also note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely <br /> to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which a <br /> person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the intensity. <br /> Quality and intensity are two properties present in any odor. The quality of an odor indicates the nature of the <br /> smell experience. For instance, if a person describes an odor as flowery or sweet,then the person is describing the <br /> quality of the odor. Intensity refers to the strength of the odor. For example, a person may use the word strong to <br /> describe the intensity of an odor. Odor intensity depends on the odorant concentration in the air. When an odorous <br /> sample is progressively diluted,the odorant concentration decreases.As this occurs,the odor intensity weakens <br /> and eventually becomes so low that the detection or recognition of the odor is quite difficult. At some point <br /> during dilution,the concentration of the odorant reaches a detection threshold.An odorant concentration below <br /> the detection threshold means that the concentration in the air is not detectable by the average human. <br /> The existing WQCF is a source of odors as a result of the biological processes that occur within the treatment <br /> process. Persons who have been bothered by the odors from the WQCF, as well as from many other sources in the <br /> wastewater collection(sewer) system,have telephoned complaints to the WQCF staff.A history of complaints <br /> from the WQCF logs from May 04,2001 through July 08,2005 shows a total of 44 calls. The years and nature of <br /> these calls are summarized in Table 4.3-4. Of the three calls in 2005, one was related to composting in a park not <br /> near the WQCF, one was related to the sludge drying beds, and one to the equalization ponds. <br /> Persons with odor complaints may also contact the SJVAPCD. The SJVAPCD reported one call received in <br /> recent years. The call was in June 2003, during same the period of 8 complaints received at the WQCF <br /> (SJVAPCD 2006c). <br /> EDAW Manteca WQCF and Collection System Master Plans EIR <br /> Air Quality 4.3-10 City of Manteca <br />