Northwest Airquest Annual MeetingNorthwest Airquest Annual MeetingNAAQS UpdateNAAQS UpdateDecember, 2006December, 2006

Bruce Louks, Idaho Dept. of Environmental Bruce Louks, Idaho Dept. of Environmental QualityQuality

All slides in this presentation are taken from EPA OAQPS and EPA R10 presentations.

How do the PM NAAQS and Ambient Air Monitoring Packages fit together?How do the PM NAAQS and Ambient Air Monitoring Packages fit together?

Part 50 – National Primary and Secondary

Ambient Air Quality Standards

Includes:PM NAAQS

PM2.5 Primary and SecondaryPM10 (daily) Primary and SecondaryRevocation of PM10 annual NAAQS

PM2.5 FRMPM10-2.5 FRM

Interpretation of NAAQS for PM2.5

Interpretation of NAAQS for PM10

Removing proposed Interpretation of NAAQS for PM10-2.5

Part 53 – Ambient Air Monitoring

Reference and EquivalentMethods

Includes:Approval of FRMs and FEMs

PM2.5

PM10-2.5

Part 58 – Ambient Air Quality Surveillance

Includes:Network Description

Periodic AssessmentsOperating Schedule

Data CertificationSpecial Purpose Monitoring

Quality AssuranceMethodology

Network DesignProbe and Siting Criteria

PM NAAQS Final Rule

Monitoring Final Rule

PM NAAQS and Ambient Air Monitoring Final Rules

Coarse Particle Protection through Coarse Particle Protection through PMPM1010, not PM, not PM10-2.510-2.5

• Finalized only some of the PMFinalized only some of the PM10-2.510-2.5 proposals proposals PMPM10-2.510-2.5 Federal Reference Method. Federal Reference Method. Procedures for designating PMProcedures for designating PM10-2.510-2.5 Federal Equivalent Federal Equivalent

Methods (e.g., continuous samplers).Methods (e.g., continuous samplers). PMPM10-2.510-2.5 monitoring monitoring onlyonly at about 75 NCore sites, at about 75 NCore sites,

including PM10-2.5 speciation including PM10-2.5 speciation (more sites than (more sites than proposed).proposed).

Quality assurance procedures.Quality assurance procedures.

• Retained existing PMRetained existing PM1010 network requirements. network requirements.• Finalized monitor discontinuation criteria for Finalized monitor discontinuation criteria for

criteria pollutants, including PMcriteria pollutants, including PM1010..• Deleted 5-part suitability test and minimum Deleted 5-part suitability test and minimum

network requirements beyond NCorenetwork requirements beyond NCore

July 1, 2009July 1, 2009

Plan for required NCore stationsPlan for required NCore stations• PM10-2.5: 1:3 mass and 1:3 speciationPM10-2.5: 1:3 mass and 1:3 speciation• PM2.5: 1:3 filter mass, continuous mass, and PM2.5: 1:3 filter mass, continuous mass, and

1:3 speciation1:3 speciation• Trace-level SO2, NO, NO2, NOy, COTrace-level SO2, NO, NO2, NOy, CO• Meteorology: WS, WD, RH, TMeteorology: WS, WD, RH, T• One in 41 states, DC, VI, and PROne in 41 states, DC, VI, and PR• Two or three in 9 states: CA, FL, Il, MI, NY, NC, Two or three in 9 states: CA, FL, Il, MI, NY, NC,

OH, PA, TX.OH, PA, TX.• Mostly urbanMostly urban• ““Alternatives” can be approved.Alternatives” can be approved.

PM2.5 FRM/FEM Monitoring PM2.5 FRM/FEM Monitoring SitesSites

982 982

749 749

290 319

11 130

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

CSA MSA

Operating

Required - OldRule

Required -New Rule

New sitesneeded

Areas where using MSA instead of CSA results in a change in the required number of new sites – (based on utilizing remaining two columns in proposal)

AreaArea Difference in number of required sitesDifference in number of required sites

Albany, NYAlbany, NY -1 (csa would require 2 new sites; msa 1)-1 (csa would require 2 new sites; msa 1)

Greensboro, NCGreensboro, NC 11

Raleigh, NCRaleigh, NC 11

San Jose, CASan Jose, CA 11

(342 of 749 req. in areas < 200K)

National Core (NCore) Multi-National Core (NCore) Multi-pollutant Sitespollutant Sites

NCore Multi-Pollutant NetworkNCore Multi-Pollutant Network• Network plans due July 1, 2009Network plans due July 1, 2009• Full network operational by January 1, 2011Full network operational by January 1, 2011

~75 Sites Nationally~75 Sites Nationally ~55 Urban Sites at Neighborhood to Urban Scale~55 Urban Sites at Neighborhood to Urban Scale ~20 Rural Sites at Regional Scale~20 Rural Sites at Regional Scale 1-3 sites per State1-3 sites per State 50 States, plus, DC, VI, and PR50 States, plus, DC, VI, and PR States with 2-3 sites – CA, FL, IL, MI, NY, NC, OH, PA, States with 2-3 sites – CA, FL, IL, MI, NY, NC, OH, PA,

TX.TX. Additional rural sites negotiated with States, NPS, Additional rural sites negotiated with States, NPS,

Tribes, CASTNETTribes, CASTNET PollutantsPollutants

• ParticlesParticles PMPM2.52.5 filter-based and continuous, speciated PM filter-based and continuous, speciated PM2.52.5, ,

PM10-2.5 FRM/FEM PM10-2.5 FRM/FEM at 1:3at 1:3 or continuous PM or continuous PM10-2.5 10-2.5 FEMFEM PM10-2.5 speciationPM10-2.5 speciation

• GasesGases OO33; high-sensitivity - CO, SO; high-sensitivity - CO, SO22, NO/NO, NO/NOyy

• Waivers for NOy in urban areas until NO2 method Waivers for NOy in urban areas until NO2 method improves so that NOy and NOy differences are improves so that NOy and NOy differences are meaningfulmeaningful

• MeteorologyMeteorology Amb. Temp, WS, WD, RHAmb. Temp, WS, WD, RH

Working Draft of NCore Multi-pollutant Sites

PM2.5 Daily StandardPM2.5 Daily Standard

§ 50.13(c)§ 50.13(c)• ‘‘The 24-hour primary and secondary The 24-hour primary and secondary

PM2.5 standards are met when the 98PM2.5 standards are met when the 98thth percentile 24-hour concentration,…, is percentile 24-hour concentration,…, is less than or equal to 35 less than or equal to 35 μμg/m3g/m3.’.’

• Effective standard = 35.5Effective standard = 35.5μμg/m3g/m3• Average over 3 yearsAverage over 3 years

Key Part 58 DatesKey Part 58 Dates

By Dec 31, 2006 – redesignate SLAMS to SPMs w/o By Dec 31, 2006 – redesignate SLAMS to SPMs w/o public comment requirement (public comment requirement (§§58.10 and 58.20)58.10 and 58.20)

July 1, 2007 – first annual network plans due July 1, 2007 – first annual network plans due ((§58.10)§58.10)

Jan 1, 2008 – start operation of newly required Jan 1, 2008 – start operation of newly required monitorsmonitors

Jan 1, 2009 – App. A QA required for FRM/FEM/ARM Jan 1, 2009 – App. A QA required for FRM/FEM/ARM at SPM sites at SPM sites ((§58.11)§58.11)

July 1, 2009 – NCore plans due July 1, 2009 – NCore plans due ((§58.10)§58.10) May 1, 2010 – New date for data certification letter May 1, 2010 – New date for data certification letter

((§58.15)§58.15) July 1, 2010 – first 5-yr AQSS assessment due July 1, 2010 – first 5-yr AQSS assessment due

((§58.10)§58.10) Jan 1, 2011 – NCore sites operational Jan 1, 2011 – NCore sites operational ((§58.10)§58.10)

What do the new siting What do the new siting requirements tell us?requirements tell us?

Gaseous pollutants (SOGaseous pollutants (SO22,NO,NO22, & CO) no , & CO) no longer considered a NAAQS problemlonger considered a NAAQS problem• Focus shifted to trace level PMFocus shifted to trace level PM2.52.5 research research

PMPM1010 and Pb still a concern, to a lesser and Pb still a concern, to a lesser extentextent

More detailed OMore detailed O33 network siting criteria network siting criteria establishedestablished• likely based on projected changes to the NAAQS.likely based on projected changes to the NAAQS.

PMPM2.52.5 sites reduced due to shrinking funds. sites reduced due to shrinking funds.• Focus now on metropolitan areas (NCore) at the Focus now on metropolitan areas (NCore) at the

expense of rural areas expense of rural areas

PM10 areas of concernPM10 areas of concern

Expected No. of ExceedencesExpected No. of Exceedences• Quarterly calculation for each yearQuarterly calculation for each year• 3 year average3 year average• If EE above 1, then site exceeds standardIf EE above 1, then site exceeds standard

Fort Hall and Mat-Su valley above 1Fort Hall and Mat-Su valley above 1• Mat-Su flagged as Natural Event by ADECMat-Su flagged as Natural Event by ADEC

Colville and Kennewick at or below 1Colville and Kennewick at or below 1 Road dust issues in AK NVsRoad dust issues in AK NVs

• Exceedences have been recordedExceedences have been recorded

Puget Sound O3 DVs

0.0710.072

0.068

0.074

0.063

0.0690.067

0.0600.058

0.063

0.074

0.065

0.0720.0730.071

0.0680.069

0.072 0.070

0.069

0.072

0.067

0.0650.0660.064

0.055

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

0.080

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

North Bend Mud Mtn Pack Forest Mt Rainier Yelm

0.068

Oregon O3 DVs

0.066

0.073

0.0710.073

0.0690.066

0.069 0.0680.066

0.0710.0700.070

0.067

0.065

0.070

0.0640.0660.066

0.064

0.060

0.055

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Canby Talent Saginaw Turner

0.068

Treasure Valley O3 DVs - 4th high

0.077

0.067

0.077 0.076 0.074

0.0710.068

0.066

0.0640.066

0.068

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

0.080

0.085

2003 2004 2005 2006

Boise Middleton SIMCO

0.068

DV % of 35DV % of 35(in reg)(in reg)

DV Conc DV Conc (μg/m3)(μg/m3)

(not in reg)(not in reg)SLAMS RequirementSLAMS Requirement(Pt 58, App. D, (Pt 58, App. D, §4.7)§4.7)

<85%<85%<30<30

(29.75)(29.75)2* FRM/FEM in MSA if pop 2* FRM/FEM in MSA if pop ≥≥ 1 mil 1 mil1 FRM/FEM in MSA if pop ≥ 500K1 FRM/FEM in MSA if pop ≥ 500K

≥≥85% 85% ≥≥3030

3* 3* FRM/FEMFRM/FEM if pop ≥ 1 million if pop ≥ 1 million2* 2* FRM/FEMFRM/FEM if pop ≥ 500K if pop ≥ 500K

1 FRM/FEM if pop ≥ 50 K and MSA1 FRM/FEM if pop ≥ 50 K and MSA

90% to <95%90% to <95%32 to 3332 to 33

(31.5 to < 33.25)(31.5 to < 33.25)1 in 3 sampling required1 in 3 sampling required

(FRM/FEM)(FRM/FEM)

95%-105%95%-105%34 to 3634 to 36

(33.25 to 36.75)(33.25 to 36.75)1 in 1 sampling required1 in 1 sampling required

(FRM/FEM)(FRM/FEM)

>105% to >105% to 110%110%

37 to 3837 to 38( >36.75 to 38.5)( >36.75 to 38.5)

1 in 3 sampling required1 in 3 sampling required(FRM/FEM)(FRM/FEM)

< 90% and < 90% and >110%>110%

<33 and >39<33 and >39

Manual sampler may be on 1 in 6 Manual sampler may be on 1 in 6 schedule if site has a continuous schedule if site has a continuous

sampler and DV is outside sampler and DV is outside 10% of std or has not exceeded 10% of std or has not exceeded

daily standard for 3 years.daily standard for 3 years.

*1 site must be pop-oriented/max concentration and 1 site in area of poor air quality

PM2.5 CriteriaPM2.5 Criteria

Daily PMDaily PM2.52.5

Idaho data – 2003 to 2005Idaho data – 2003 to 2005• 2 sites 2 sites ≥ 85% of standard ≥ 85% of standard

Nampa (μg/m3)Nampa (μg/m3) Fort Hall (μg/m3)Fort Hall (μg/m3) Salmon & Franklin Co. ≥ 85% but < 3 years of data.Salmon & Franklin Co. ≥ 85% but < 3 years of data.

• 2 sites > 100% of standard2 sites > 100% of standard Pinehurst (μg/m3)Pinehurst (μg/m3) St. Maries (μg/m3)St. Maries (μg/m3) These sites are not in an MSAThese sites are not in an MSA

Pinehurst, St. Maries and Pinehurst, St. Maries and Salmon are not in MSAs, Salmon are not in MSAs,

thus sampling not required thus sampling not required by new regulationby new regulation

IDEQ and EPA can agree to IDEQ and EPA can agree to designate these sites as designate these sites as

SPM or SLAMS sites and SPM or SLAMS sites and add to Network Plan (may be add to Network Plan (may be

done already).done already).

Will EPA fund sites outside MSAs Will EPA fund sites outside MSAs but included in the Network Plan?but included in the Network Plan?

Daily PMDaily PM2.52.5

Washington – 2003 to 2005Washington – 2003 to 2005• 1 site 1 site ≥ 85% of standard≥ 85% of standard

Spokane (29.87 μg/m3)Spokane (29.87 μg/m3)

• 3 sites 3 sites ≥ 100% of standard≥ 100% of standard Marysville (35 μg/m3)Marysville (35 μg/m3) Tacoma (40 μg/m3)Tacoma (40 μg/m3) Vancouver (35 μg/m3)Vancouver (35 μg/m3) Yakima for 2002 to 2004 (38.3 μg/m3)Yakima for 2002 to 2004 (38.3 μg/m3) Darrington is a sight of concern based on Darrington is a sight of concern based on

continuous data. FRM monitoring has just continuous data. FRM monitoring has just begun.begun.

WA PM2.5 DVs

3735

2931

40

35 35

41

2930 29

32

40 4139

3836

18

35

53

2003 2004 2005

Marysville Seattle Spokane Tacoma Vancouver Yakima

Daily PMDaily PM2.52.5

Oregon – 2003 to 2005Oregon – 2003 to 2005• 2 sites 2 sites ≥ 85% of standard≥ 85% of standard

Eugene (31.4 μg/m3)Eugene (31.4 μg/m3) Medford (34.3 μg/m3)Medford (34.3 μg/m3) Both in MSAsBoth in MSAs

• 2 sites 2 sites > 100% of standard> 100% of standard Klamath Falls (41 μg/m3)Klamath Falls (41 μg/m3) Oakridge (53 μg/m3)Oakridge (53 μg/m3) Both in MSAsBoth in MSAs

Oregon PM2.5 DVs

29 30 29

3735

31

3941 41

35 3634

56

52 53

2528 27

17.5

35.0

52.5

2003 2004 2005

Albany Eugene K Falls Medford Oakridge Portland

Daily PM2.5Daily PM2.5

Alaska – 2003 to 2005Alaska – 2003 to 2005• 1 site 1 site ≥ 85% of standard≥ 85% of standard

Juneau (30.07 μg/m3)Juneau (30.07 μg/m3) Wasilla site is close (29.53 μg/m3)Wasilla site is close (29.53 μg/m3)

• 1 site 1 site ≥ 100% of standard≥ 100% of standard Fairbanks (43 μg/m3)Fairbanks (43 μg/m3)

Approved Regional MethodsApproved Regional Methods

Allows Regions to approve and Allows Regions to approve and designate PMdesignate PM2.52.5 monitors as Class III monitors as Class III FEMs.FEMs.

Continuous monitors such as the TEOM Continuous monitors such as the TEOM nephelometer, and the BAM.nephelometer, and the BAM.

1 year minimum1 year minimum May provide needed assistance to May provide needed assistance to

S/L/TsS/L/Ts• e.g., prescribed burnse.g., prescribed burns

NCore NetworkNCore Network

Approximately 75 sites nationwideApproximately 75 sites nationwide• Primarily urbanPrimarily urban• Hopefully Cheeka PeakHopefully Cheeka Peak

PM, SOPM, SO22, NO/NO, NO/NO22/NOx/NOy, CO, O/NOx/NOy, CO, O33, , MetMet• Includes PMIncludes PM10-2.510-2.5 monitors monitors

• Pb monitoring at 1 site per regionPb monitoring at 1 site per region

Ozone updateOzone update

CASAC sent letter to Administrator on CASAC sent letter to Administrator on Oct 24, 2006, recommending 8 hour Oct 24, 2006, recommending 8 hour primary standard be lowered to primary standard be lowered to 0.060 – 0.070 ppm range.0.060 – 0.070 ppm range.

Review of EPA 2Review of EPA 2ndnd draft Ozone Staff draft Ozone Staff Paper. Paper.

Requirement to review NAAQS Requirement to review NAAQS standards every 5 years.standards every 5 years.

Treasure Valley O3 DVs - 4th high

0.077

0.067

0.077 0.076 0.074

0.0710.068

0.066

0.0640.066

0.068

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

0.080

0.085

2003 2004 2005 2006

Boise Middleton SIMCO

4th high

Treasure Valley O3 DVs - 3rd high

0.078

0.069 0.068

0.0780.079 0.077

0.067

0.072

0.0700.067

0.065

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

0.080

0.085

2003 2004 2005 2006

Boise Middleton SIMCO

3rd high

Puget Sound O3 DVs

0.0710.072

0.068

0.074

0.063

0.0690.067

0.0600.058

0.063

0.074

0.065

0.0720.0730.071

0.0680.069

0.072 0.070

0.069

0.072

0.067

0.0650.0660.064

0.055

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

0.080

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

North Bend Mud Mtn Pack Forest Mt Rainier Yelm

Non-PS O3 DVs - 4th high

0.068

0.062

0.0650.063

0.064

0.061 0.061

0.074 0.0730.072

0.070

0.060

0.0630.065

0.067 0.066 0.066

0.060

0.063

0.060

0.055

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

0.080

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Spokane Cheney Wishram Vancouver

Oregon O3 DVs

0.066

0.073

0.0710.073

0.0690.066

0.069 0.0680.066

0.0710.0700.070

0.067

0.065

0.070

0.0640.0660.066

0.064

0.060

0.055

0.060

0.065

0.070

0.075

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Canby Talent Saginaw Turner