Bethlehem Steel Plant Fire
Air Monitoring Results
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016, a fire broke out at the site of the former coal mill of the Bethlehem Steel plant, located on NYS Route 5 near Lincoln Avenue, Lackawanna, New York. Heavy smoke from the industrial site caused concern for area residents. Staff from multiple state and local agencies assisted at the site and Former Governor Cuomo directed DEC to do additional air monitoring in the area.
On November 14, 2016, DEC released the latest data available on particulate matter (PM) from the fire. DEC set up two air monitors on November 9 to assess air quality in the area of the fire. The sampling sites to the east and east northeast of the fire, were selected based on forecasted wind direction. The monitors were located within the residential neighborhoods on Electric Avenue and on Madison Avenue in Lackawanna. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provided additional air quality monitoring in other areas of the community.
The plume from the fire passed over the monitor on Madison Avenue in the afternoon and evening of November 10. The plume moved easterly and impacted the monitor on Electric Avenue early on November 11. The PM concentrations at times during these periods were in the hazardous Air Quality Index category. These levels were expected and were consistent with instructions issued by local first responders to shelter in place, and later to evacuate, and limit exposure to the smoke. PM concentrations decreased to baseline levels and were consistent with expected levels for the time of year in the Buffalo area. The State worked with the Lackawanna Mayor to lift the evacuation order and allow residents to return to their homes on November 11. DEC continued to monitor the air quality as fire response and investigations continued.
This figure is data collected on the evening of November 9 and the morning of November 10 using portable non-Reference Method instruments. The sites were on Electric Avenue.
This figure is for the monitor located at the end of Madison Avenue.
This figure is for the monitor located on Electric Avenue.
VOC Canister Sampling
Three canister samples for volatile organic compounds (VOC) were collected on November 10 and one on November 11 in the vicinity of the fire site. Details of the sample collection are provided in Table 1.
| Sample # | Date | Time | Location | Lat. | Long. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11/10/16 | 11:08 - 12:02 | Spruce St. Tennis Court | 42.81097739 | -78.842227 |
| 2 | 11/10/16 | 11:13 - 12:10 | Madison Ave Bocce Field | 42.81103847 | -78.83925812 |
| 3 | 11/10/16 | 17:30 grab | Seal Place | 42.81379096 | -78.83224023 |
| 4 | 11/11/16 | 11:07 grab | 3711 Lake Ave | 42.79781415 | -78.84230393 |
Note that samples 1 and 2 were composite 1-hour samples while samples 3 and 4 were grab samples. Grab samples reflect an instantaneous reading whereas composite samples represent time-averaged concentrations. Location maps are shown in Figures 1 and 2.
The canister samples arrived at the DEC toxics laboratory in Rensselaer, New York in the evening of November 11 for VOC analysis. Forty-five hazardous air pollutants are routinely analyzed in the statewide toxics network using EPA Method TO-15. The analysis was performed expeditiously and the results are listed in Table 2. The concentrations are in parts per billion by volume (ppbv). Also listed are the method detection limit (MDL) for each compound, as well as the most current sampling results (11/2) for the Buffalo monitoring station at Dingens Street. The MDL is the minimum level of analyte present in the ambient air before it can be quantified.
| Compound Name | #1 | #2 | #3 | #4 | Buffalo 11/2 | MDL, ppbv |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dichlorodifluoromethane | 0.483 | 0.472 | 0.473 | 0.504 | 0.519 | 0.008 |
| Chloromethane | 0.556 | 1.301 | 1.014 | 0.458 | 0.465 | 0.007 |
| Dichlorotetrafluoroethane | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.02 | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Vinyl Chloride | 0.133 | 0.062 | 0.075 | 0.004 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| 1,3Butadiene | 1.576 | 4.628 | 2.587 | 0.081 | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Bromomethane | 0.298 | 0.565 | 0.349 | 0.009 | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Chloroethane | 0 | 0.068 | 0.04 | 0 | 0 | 0.005 |
| Trichlorofluoromethane | 0.227 | 0.261 | 0.226 | 0.308 | 0.235 | 0.008 |
| 1,1Dichloroethylene | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.010 |
| Dichloromethane | 0.033 | 0.046 | 0.038 | 0.041 | 0.046 | 0.010 |
| Trichlorotrifluoroethane | 0.063 | 0.061 | 0.061 | 0.068 | 0.076 | 0.006 |
| 1,1Dichloroethane | 0.003 | 0 | 0 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Methyl Tert Butyl Ether | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| trans 1,2Dichloroethylene | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.004 |
| Chloroform | 0.026 | 0.029 | 0.025 | 0.02 | 0.025 | 0.005 |
| 1,2Dichloroethane | 0.016 | 0.017 | 0.018 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| 1,1,1Trichloroethane | 0.005 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Benzene | 10.811 | 36.545 | 15.938 | 0.839 | 0.203 | 0.018 |
| Carbon Tetrachloride | 0.072 | 0.072 | 0.075 | 0.077 | 0.08 | 0.006 |
| 1,2Dichloropropane | 0.007 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Bromodichloromethane | 0.004 | 0 | 0 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Trichloroethylene | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.005 | 0.053 | 0.023 | 0.008 |
| cis1,3Dichloropropylene | 0.004 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| trans1,3Dichloropropylene | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0 | 0.009 |
| 1,1,2Trichloroethane | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.010 |
| Toluene | 2.388 | 5.443 | 3.326 | 0.272 | 0.429 | 0.013 |
| 1,2Dibromoethane | 0.003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Tetrachloroethylene | 0.01 | 0.016 | 0.011 | 0.012 | 0.022 | 0.008 |
| Chlorobenzene | 0.04 | 0.184 | 0.099 | 0.006 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Ethylbenzene | 0.826 | 1.699 | 1.543 | 0.089 | 0.06 | 0.009 |
| m,pXylene | 0.338 | 0.729 | 0.364 | 0.152 | 0.202 | 0.025 |
| Styrene | 2.335 | 4.709 | 3.209 | 0.105 | 0.3 | 0.015 |
| 1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane | 0.012 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| oXylene | 0.103 | 0.23 | 0.143 | 0.058 | 0.083 | 0.013 |
| 1,3,5Trimethylbenzene | 0.042 | 0.084 | 0.074 | 0.013 | 0.017 | 0.011 |
| 1,2,4Trimethylbenzene | 0.046 | 0.062 | 0.043 | 0.044 | 0.06 | 0.013 |
| aChlorotoluene | 0.029 | 0.03 | 0.027 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| 1,3Dichlorobenzene | 0.012 | 0.011 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| 1,4Dichlorobenzene | 0.019 | 0.012 | 0.006 | 0.002 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| 1,2Dichlorobenzene | 0.024 | 0.066 | 0.034 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| 1,2,4Trichlorobenzene | 0.069 | 0.03 | 0.013 | 0.003 | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Hexachloro1,3Butadiene | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.012 |
| Acrolein | 0.65 | 1.568 | 0.852 | 0.063 | 0.144 | 0.028 |
| Carbon disulfide | 0.027 | 0.041 | 0.018 | 0.004 | 0.018 | 0.007 |
| Naphthalene | 1.43 | 3.312 | 1.468 | 0.056 | 0.045 | 0.839 |
Findings
Elevated levels of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, styrene, naphthalene, and 1,3-butadiene were observed during the first sampling day when the fire was intense and smoke was billowing. These are expected combustion products from fires. The highest benzene concentration was observed at the Madison Avenue Bocci Field (Sample #2). By Friday, after the fire was out, the sample collected at Lake Ave (Sample #4) showed much reduced concentrations, and was similar to the sample collected on November 2 at the Dingens Street, Buffalo monitor.
A presentation about the monitoring results (PDF) was given on November 16, 2016. On November 30, 2016, DEC and the New York State Department of Health issued a press release announcing additional air sampling and procedures for the company to address smoke damage clean up.
Additional information from DOH is available below:
Summary of Microscopy Analysis
The microscopy analysis study (PDF) is available for download.
DEC's initial response included staff from the Spills Response Program who were able to assist in the evaluation of the impacts on water and air quality in the immediate vicinity of the structure. Additional staff from the Division of Air Resources were called to help assess the impacts of the plume on neighborhoods downwind of the fire.
DEC assisted the on-scene EPA emergency response staff by placing two aerosol monitors in areas where the plume from the fire was expected to impact residences. The monitors were able to provide hourly data and also could collect samples of the filtered air stream for subsequent analysis. Eight samples were collected over approximately two weeks. The sampled filters were submitted to the DEC Particle Identification Laboratory for analysis. The laboratory's objective was to determine if any hazardous PM was present in the samples.
An image of one of the sample filters is included below. All of the samples showed evidence of combustion-related PM. The samples from the fire have similar characteristics to simulated combustion-related petroleum materials. The image below on the left shows what petroleum products look like after combustion.
Laboratory simulated combusted petroleum sample
Cleveland Ave. and Electric Ave.
The sample filters showed that the majority of the PM collected on the filters was consistent with combusted petroleum products. Petroleum-based products that produce this type of PM can include plastic and other synthetic materials. Elemental analysis was performed on the sample filters as well as on a piece of material that floated from the fire onto a nearby property. The analysis found carbon, calcium, silicon, salts, and other commonly occurring metals found in the earth's crust.
The microscopic and elemental analysis found that the samples represented combusted petroleum-based materials. The results are consistent with samples impacted by a structure fire.
EPA Findings
EPA's Environmental Response Team (leaves DEC website) conducted sampling. Their data are available (leaves DEC website) for the Steelworks Industrial Park Fire. More information on AQI categories (leaves DEC website) can be found on EPA's website.