Air Monitoring
Update
Southeast Air Directors’ Meeting
Montgomery, Alabama
Overview
• Draft Regional Guidance on Monitoring Site
Establishment and Relocation
• Ozone NAAQS – Air Monitoring Aspects
• Near Road Monitoring – Update and Data Review
• SO2 Monitoring Update
• Next Generation Air Monitoring
• PM2.5 FRM Particle Separator Replacement
Program
Draft Region 4 Guidance on Monitor
Establishment & Relocation
•
Currently in Draft
•
•
Requesting feedback by the end of October.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Shared with state/local/tribal agencies monitoring staff in July 2015.
We have already received feedback from several agencies
Plan on drafting another section regarding shutdowns as requested by
some agencies
Not meant to create extra burden, only clarifies existing requirements
Outlines CFR requirements to serve as a checklist for preparing
documentation to submit to EPA.
Intended to help foster consistency in documentation submitted across
the region
Following this guidance will be important in establishing new SO2 sites on
time to meet the data requirements rule
Ozone NAAQS: Monitoring Requirements
• Updates to the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS)
network to reduce redundancy, improve geographic distribution, and add
flexibility
• Extension of the ozone monitoring season in 32 states and D.C. (NC,
SC and FL affected in Region 4)
• New Federal Reference Method (FRM) for ambient measurements of
ozone while retaining existing FRM and Federal Equivalent Methods
(FEMS)
• Revisions to the Part 53 FEM performance testing requirements
• New Appendix U to Part 50 data handling provisions for determining
compliance with the revised NAAQS
PAMS Network Design
•
We are replacing the existing 20 year-old multi-site, enhanced ozone network design with an
updated 2-part network design
– Simplify existing network design by requiring PAMS measurements to be collocated with
existing NCore sites in areas with population of 1 million or more irrespective of Ozone
NAAQS attainment status
• Simplifies implementation and provides improved network stability by delinking from
designations process and relying on population to limit size (42 sites)
• Include a waiver for historically low ozone areas
• Includes an option to make PAMS measurements at an alternative location (e.g., an
existing PAMS site) which may cross CBSA or even state boundaries
•
•
•
Require states with moderate or above ozone non-attainment areas to develop and implement
an Enhanced Monitoring Plan (EMP) to support flexible approaches for collecting data to
understand ozone issues in new and existing high ozone areas
– Only require EMPs in moderate or above ozone non-attainment areas (focus resources on
areas with highest ozone)
– Require all states in Ozone Transport Region to develop an EMP
– EMPs should reflect “regional” ozone data needs and could/should include states that do
not have formal requirements
PAMS monitoring at NCore sites will become effective by June 1, 2019
EMPs submitted within two years of designations or by October 1, 2019, whichever is later
Locations of Required PAMS Sites
Changes to Required PAMS Measurements
• Requires hourly VOC measurements
– Included a waiver to allow 3 8-hr canister samples in locations with low VOC
concentrations and for “logistical and programmatic constraints”
• Requires 3 8-hr carbonyls samples on a 1 in 3 day schedule
– Included an alternative to allow for continuous formaldehyde measurements
• Required “true NO2” in addition to existing NOy
• Required hourly mixing height measurement (replaces “upper air
measurements”)
– Added a waiver option to allow measurements to be made at an alternative
location (e.g., NOAA ASOS sites)
• Additional PAMS measurements that are not part of the NCore
requirements include atmospheric pressure, precipitation, solar
radiation, and UV radiation
Implementation Challenges
• Funding strategy being developed
– Existing national PAMS funding is adequate, however, a regional reallocation of
PAMS funds will be needed to cover new states who will start making PAMS
measurements and those states who will have reduced PAMS requirements
– States will need to make significant capital purchases (mainly for autoGCs, true
NO2, and ceilometers). Per grant guidance, EPA plans to hold back a portion of
PAMS funds in FY 2016-2018 to provide targeted funds for equipment
• A number of guidance documents need to be developed or
revised
– TAD, EMP guidance, QA
• Training on autoGCs, ceilometers, data validation/reporting
Ozone Monitoring Seasons
• EPA requires ozone monitoring only during the “ozone season” – the time
of year when weather conditions are most favorable for ozone formation.
– This season varies by state
– Last revisions were made in 1997 in response to the 0.08 ppm 8-hour NAAQS
• Final rule extends the ozone monitoring season for NC and SC by one
month, FL extended to year-round.
– Year-round seasons for all NCore multi-pollutant sites
• All waivers are revoked when the rule becomes effective
– Regions and states with existing waivers should pursue new waivers as appropriate
– Regional Administrators will still be allowed to approve changes to states’ ozone
monitoring seasons without rulemaking
• Expanded monitoring season requirements and year-round monitoring at
NCore will become effective January 1, 2017
Ozone Seasons: Current Requirements
4-9
5-9
6-9
4-9
5-9
5-9
4-10
5-9
4/1510/15
6-9
4-10
4-10
4-10
5-9
4-10
4-10
3-10 4-10
3-9
4-10
1-12
4-10
4-10 4-9
1-12
410
4-9
4-10
3-10
3-11
1-12
1-12
3-10
4-10
4-10
1-12
4-10
NJ
DE
MD
DC
4-10
3-11
3-10
4-9
NH
RI
MA
CT
3-10 3-10
3-10
3-10
1-12
1-12
1-12
Ozone Seasons: Finalized
Requirements
4-9
5-9
4-9
3-9
4-9
3-10
5-9
4-9
310/15
3-10
3-10
3-10
1-9
3-10
3-10
1-12
3-9
NH
RI
MA
CT
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
1-12
3-10
3-10
1-12
1-12
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-10
3-11
1-12
3-10
3-11
1-12
3-11
4-10
3-10
1-12
3-10
NJ
DE
MD
DC
3-10
3-10
3-10
Season Change
No Change
1-12
1-12
1-12
1-12
New Data Handling Rules for the 2015
Ozone NAAQS
• EPA is finalizing as proposed Appendix U to Part 50, which deals
with data handling provisions for determining compliance with the
revised O3 NAAQS
• Appendix U is similar to Appendix P for the 2008 O3 NAAQS, except
for the following elements:
– Revisions to the procedures in Appendix P for determining daily maximum 8hour average concentrations
– Addition of a new procedure for combining data when two or more monitoring
instruments are operating at the same monitoring site
– Addition of a new procedure allowing the Regional Administrator to approve
“site combinations” when monitoring sites are replaced or relocated
– Minor change to the data substitution test in Appendix P (used to determine a
clear exceedance of the NAAQS in the presence of missing data)
Near-Road Monitoring Update
Near-Road Monitoring Update
Implementation CBSA
Phase
Population
Phase 1
52 Sites
[funded]
> 1 Million
Phase 2
23 Sites
(second sites)
[funded]
>2.5 Million
OR road
segment
>250,000
AADT
(NO2 only)
Phase 3
51 Sites
[unfunded]
Between
500K and
1 Million
NO2
CO*
PM2.5 *
Jan 1, 2015 for
CBSAs > 2.5M
Jan 1, 2015 for
CBSAs > 2.5M
Jan. 1, 2017 for
CBSAs > 1M
and < 2.5M
Jan. 1, 2017 for
CBSAs > 1M
and < 2.5M
Jan 1, 2014
Jan 1, 2015
(second site)
Jan 1, 2017
*Near-road CO and PM2.5 monitors are required to be co-located with an NO2 monitor.
Near-Road Monitoring Network
Status
•
•
As of July 2015, the EPA estimates that there are 56 operational
near-road monitoring sites
Phase 1 sites: 45 of 52 sites operational
– Missing CBSAs: Chicago, Las Vegas, Orlando, Sacramento, Salt Lake
City, Virginia Beach, Washington, D.C. {2nd D.C. site is operational}
•
Phase 2 sites: 9 of 23 sites operational
– Atlanta, Ft. Worth, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Minneapolis,
Riverside, St. Louis, Washington, D.C.
•
Phase 3 sites: Boise and Des Moines are operational
– Fresno and Bakersfield scheduled to come on-line early
Near-road NO2 Summary of
Preliminary Data
•
During 2014, no near-road site had an estimated annual
average for NO2 (of available data) above 27 ppb (annual
standard is 53 ppb)
– The 27 ppb value at the LA Near-road site in Anaheim, CA is
the highest nationwide
•
During 2014, no near-road site had an estimated daily max 1hour 98th percentile value for NO2 (of available data) above
90 ppb (daily 1-hr standard is 100 ppb)
– The 90 ppb value at NYC Near-road Site in Fort Lee, NJ is the
highest nationwide
– Second highest value is 88 ppb value at a site in Vernal, Utah
Near-road NO2 Summary of
Preliminary Data
•
Based off available 2014 data from 40 near-road NO2 monitors that
have one or more non-near-road NO2 monitor counterparts:
– 17 CBSAs where the near-road site has BOTH the highest annual
average and the highest 98th percentile 1-hr daily max value
– 18 CBSAs where the near-road site has the highest annual average
but NOT the highest 98th percentile 1-hr daily max value
– 1 CBSAs where the near-road site has the highest 98th percentile 1-hr
daily max value but NOT the highest annual average
– 4 CBSAs where the near-road site is NOT the highest for BOTH the
annual average and the highest 98th percentile 1-hr daily max value
Region 4 Preliminary NO2 Data
Atlanta
Charlotte
Raleigh
Tampa
Memphis
PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS - DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Example Region 4 NO2 Data:
Atlanta Area Average Hourly NO2
NO2 (ppb)
Atlanta near-road NO2 compared with other near-by NO2 monitors
Atlanta Near-road
Monastery
PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS - DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
South Dekalb
Yorkville
Other Parameters Measured at
Near-road Sites
•
Near-road sites have always been envisioned to be multipollutant
•
In addition to NO2 at all Near-road sites, we currently have:
– 31 sites with PM2.5 instrumentation
• 21 with continuous methods
• 14 with filter-based FRMs
• 4 of the 31 sites have collocated continuous & FRMs
– 40 sites with CO instrumentation
– 17 sites with black carbon instruments
•
For a complete listing of current near-road site metadata, visit
http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/nearroad.html
Near-road Next Steps
•
Continue installation of Phases 1 & 2 Near-road sites
– EPA Region 4 and HQ are tracking installations & are available to
assist
•
Continue updating near-road site metadata
– Characterizing the sites is critical to data analyses
•
Continue analyzing data as it is reported
– NO2 NAAQS Review is utilizing the new NO2 data
– Planning more in-depth looks and analyses of CO, PM2.5, Black
Carbon, and other data
– EPA plans to continue providing periodic updates to stakeholders
SO2 Monitoring Update
SO2 Monitoring
•
•
•
•
Reminder on upcoming SO2 Data Requirements Deadlines:
– 1/15/2016 – Final list of SO2 sources to be characterized due to EPA
– 7/1/2016 – Identify the how each source will be characterized (monitoring or modeling),
and submit monitoring site proposals and modeling protocols to EPA for approval
– 1/1/2017 – SO2 monitors used for Data Requirements Rule must begin operation
EPA monitoring and modeling staff will be scheduling a call
with each state to discuss your plans for source
characterization in detail
Good communication on these issues will be important to
ensure that the above timeline can be met
Monitoring Site Proposals and Modeling Protocols should be
developed in consultation with the SO2 Technical Assistance
Documents, and the R4 monitoring site proposal policy.
Next Generation Air Monitoring
Update
EPA Community Air Monitoring Training
•
•
•
Hosted in RTP and via
webinar on July 9, 2015.
More than thirty citizen
scientists selected by EPA
Regions participated in
person, others participated
online.
Video of training, as well as
presentation slides are
available:
epa.gov/airresearch/community-airmonitoring-training
Overview: Common Types of Sensors
Metal Oxide Sensors
•
•
•
•
•
•
The most widely available of all
sensor types
Inexpensive ($15-$300)
Available in a wide array of
pollutants
Light Scattering Sensors
•
•
Often not specific to any one
pollutant
•
•
Co-factors often influence their
output
•
Response relational to some
given parameter
•
Light scattering sensors
dominate market
Cost varies ($50-6000)
•Sensitive to RH and stray light
Size definition varies widely
Unit output definition varies
widely
Aerosol composition influences
response
Not true mass measurement
PM Sensor Examples
Dylos
Speck
Shinyei
AirBeam
Met One
TZOA
Gas Sensor Examples
Sensaris
Aeroqual
Air Casting
Air Quality Egg
CairClip
NODE
Multipollutant Station Examples
ELM
HAZ-Scanner
AQ Mesh
Ongoing EPA Citizen Science Projects
•
•
•
•
•
•
Region 2: Citizen Science Air Monitor (CSAM) development and
completion of pilot study in Newark
Region 5: Air Mapper development and educational awareness
Region 10: Air Mapper use being planned
Region 2-Puerto Rico: EJ area and sensor development /
community training
Regions 4, 6, and 7: CitySpace Project in Memphis. Community
involvement and use of mapping tools to design PM sensor
network.
Regions 4 and 8: CAIRSENSE Project – Field evaluation of
sensor technologies in Atlanta and Denver
Air Sensor Citizen Science Toolbox
epa.gov/air-research/air-sensor-toolbox-citizen-scientists-resources
•
•
Designed for citizens, also
useful to air agencies
Available resources
include:
– EPA Air Sensor Guidebook
– Sensor Standard Operating
Procedures
– Technical Findings and
Reports from Sensor Lab and
Field Evaluations
– Training Resources
PM2.5 Very Sharp Cut Cyclone
(VSCC) Particle Separator Purchase
• EPA is working on a national purchase of VSCC particle
separators for PM2.5 samplers.
• Our plan is to make these available to State, local, and
Tribal monitoring programs that still use the WINS in
their PM2.5 FRMs at no cost to the monitoring agency.
• While we are not requiring agencies to make this switch,
replacing the WINS with a VSCC is advantageous:
• Less maintenance with the VSCC
• VSCC generates better comparability than the WINS in the
performance evaluation program (PEP) audits and with
PM2.5 continuous monitors (see assessment from national
monitoring conference in Atlanta)
• We will provide more updates on the timing and availability
of the VSCC’s as that information becomes available.
Questions?