Air Quality Monitoring Issues

1. Air Quality Monitoring Issues WESTAR Fall Business Meeting Millennium Harvest House Boulder, Colorado September 17-19, 2007 Bruce Louks Idaho Department of Environmental Quality

2. Ozone Monitoring Issues under Revised NAAQS • Ozone NAAQS NPRM…… • Ozone seasons will stay the same. Longer seasons will require rulemaking. • Does not affect existing QA/QC requirements • EPA may make specific proposals regarding monitoring requirements later • MSA’s with <350,000 will still not be required to monitor • Assuming NAAQS of 0.070 ppm, about 70 areas will be >85% which affects number of required monitors (actually 65 already have, 5 more will be added)

3. Secondary Ozone NAAQS • CASAC supported using a cumulative seasonal indicator called W126 • Aimed at reducing forest and crop damage • Highest 3 consecutive months of ozone season • 12 hours per day, weighted by concentration • CASAC recommended a range of 7 to 15 ppm-hours • EPA proposes W126 range of 7-21 ppm hrs, or alternately, the secondary standard should equal the primary standard • Rural SLAMS, NPS and possibly CASTNET ozone monitors could support designations in near term, but only in spots

4. What is W126?

7. Coming Next: Lead NAAQS • Final Rule due September 1, 2008 • NAAQS may be revised enough to make 10-30% existing monitors show violations • Monitoring issues with the rule: • Existing network is spotty. How many more monitors are needed? Where? • Monitoring method….hi-vol TSP or lo-vol TSP or PM10? How? • Sampling frequency • QA – collocation, flow checks, etc.

8. National Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy • EPA plans to update for consistency with PM NAAQS, final monitoring rule • EPA intends to finalize internal document by end of October • NACAA will have opportunity to comment • EPA will sign document at appropriate senior level • Hopefully in time to influence 2009 grant guidance

9. Steering Committee Comments on Monitoring Strategy Proposal • Original intent of strategy document that S/L/T NAAQS and Air Toxics networks leverage other networks (IMPROVE, Castnet), not the other way around • Make funding visible in document • Consider new approach for defining urban/rural • Broaden health component as data client

10. 2008 President’s Budget • Same as 2007 proposal • Cuts compared to FY2006 • ~ $15M cut from general 105 STAG • $17M cut from PM2.5 STAG, remaining $25.5M moved to 105 • About $10M for air toxics monitoring • ~ 50% of this will fund community-scale projects from the recent solicitation • Guidance says EPA will use 103 authority for all FY2008 air toxics monitoring STAG funds.

11. FY08 Monitoring Funds • Both House/Senate looking to fund $220M (2006 enacted) plus diesel retrofits • Rescission likely……..how much? • Retains 103…..not clear how much • EPA recommends we take a critical look at moving PM2.5 monitoring under Section 105 • States will have to match • Section 103 could then be for other programs, e.g. air toxics, mercury

12. FY 2008 Grant Guidance • Defines outcome for 2007 • Regional allocations • Common end date of March 31 for PM2.5 • Common end date of June 30, 2008 for NATTS • Explains President’s 2008 budget • Air toxics STAG will be spent as 103 • Announces plan to cut IMPROVE 15%, unless NACAA advises otherwise • Cites STAG reallocation process • Reaffirms priority for required monitoring.

13. Impacts of Level Funding • Rule changes impact monitoring resources • What is an adequate network? • Imbalance between minimum national network requirements and actual operating networks • Reductions in non-essential monitoring could free up substantial $$ and can be applied for new initiatives • Strategy Document needs to drive this realignment

14. 2008 Issues Still to Settle • Regional and State allocation framework • Assessment of current needs in light of PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS revision, etc. • Pro rata allocation based on 2007 pattern but adjusted to a common grant period. • IMPROVE • How much to cut IMPROVE vs. State/Local grants…..15%? NACAA is internalizing this discussion and will provide EPA with a recommendation. • Which sites to cut in Class I areas? • How much EPA versus grantee control?

15. Atmospheric Mercury Initiative • EPA is leading the planning effort with NADP to establish a new network for monitoring atmospheric mercury species • Scientific and policy communities have shown strong support for this network • Data needed for model evaluation and for assessment of Hg control programs • The goals of this atmospheric mercury initiative are to: • Build a data set for analyzing spatial and temporal trends • Provide data for evaluating models and assessing source- receptor relationships • Facilitate the calculation of wet, dry, and total deposition

16. Proposed Atmospheric Mercury Initiative Sites

17. Update on Technical Aspects • Emphasis on ensuring this is an inclusive, multi-stakeholder initiative through multiple meetings and collaboration • Developing standard operating procedures for atmospheric Hg species (initial SOPs Summer 2007) • NADP technical workshop – Chicago, IL – September 2007 • Experts operating Tekran systems • Consensus on the automated Hg monitoring SOP among Hg monitoring experts • NACAA will send 3 experts • Developing capacity to electronically collect and share atmospheric Hg data from 3 initial monitoring sites

18. Funding Opportunities • This is a voluntary effort looking for partners to collaborate • Limited EPA funding available this year to support existing speciated ambient mercury sites participating in the monitoring effort • Limited funding designated for site operations and/or to upgrade equipment (e.g., for how a site can interface with the network) • Near-term plan for a competitive acquisition process (i.e., contracts) • An efficient way to make a small amount of resources available for monitoring services and existing data collection efforts • Patchwork funding expected over the next couple of years

19. 25% Reduction in FY08 EPA CASTNET budget Translates to 8-10 sites shutting down Continuing reduction at NPS Anticipate shutting down 8 sites over 5 years Impact on Funding to NADP Reduce Site Audit Program Eliminate support for 10 sites For 2008, 86 → ~69 sites 45 EPA sites 24 NPS sites Facing 280K per yr Ozone QA cost Conversion may be delayed CASTNET Budget in the Near Future

20. Ozone Monitor Upgrades

21. Purpose: To determine actual costs of network, sampling variability and other considerations Bi-Weekly measurements Core network of 10 EPA-sponsored sites $7700 per site QAPP & SOPs to be prepared Total program cost $225K over two years Additional sites may be added at $5k/site Proposed NADP Passive Ammonia Network

22. Other Projects • $100K for PAMS review • Addition of PAH to NATTS • Addition of 3-5 sites to NATTS • Carbon channel changeout for PM2.5 speciation network nearly complete

23. Summary • There is not enough money to go around to support all monitoring initiatives • There are efforts underway to integrate monitoring networks to meet common objectives • There will be more competition for resources and there will be cuts and reductions in levels of effort, somewhere….. • Monitoring costs need to be updated for the next ICR