17
Working together for clean air Approved Regional Method (ARM) Demonstration Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Mike Gilroy, Erik Saganic

Working together for clean air Approved Regional Method (ARM) Demonstration Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Mike Gilroy, Erik Saganic Puget Sound Clean Air

  • View
    223

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Working together for clean airWorking together for clean air

Approved Regional Method (ARM) Demonstration

Approved Regional Method (ARM) Demonstration

Puget Sound Clean Air Agency

Mike Gilroy, Erik Saganic

Puget Sound Clean Air Agency

Mike Gilroy, Erik Saganic

OverviewOverview

Definition of the ARM

Sites and Instruments that may apply

ARM Tools

Preliminary Results

Definition of the ARM

Sites and Instruments that may apply

ARM Tools

Preliminary Results

What is the “ARM”?What is the “ARM”?

The Approved Regional Method

EPA established in 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4

Defined in CFR as “Approved regional method (ARM) means a continuous PM2.5 method that has been approved specifically within a State or local air monitoring network for purposes of comparison to the NAAQS and to meet other monitoring objectives. ”

The Approved Regional Method

EPA established in 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4

Defined in CFR as “Approved regional method (ARM) means a continuous PM2.5 method that has been approved specifically within a State or local air monitoring network for purposes of comparison to the NAAQS and to meet other monitoring objectives. ”

Pertinent Information (Source: 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4)Pertinent Information (Source: 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4)

Applications can be accepted as of 09/28/06 to EPA-ORD.

Must meet Class III FEM guidelines. However, if low levels are typical, may approve large bias.

30% collocation of “required FRM/FEM/ARM sites” rounded up with 1 in 6 collocated frequency

≥ 7.5% of sites for the comparison requires a collocated candidate ARM for Coefficient of Variation (CV) calculations.

Applications can be accepted as of 09/28/06 to EPA-ORD.

Must meet Class III FEM guidelines. However, if low levels are typical, may approve large bias.

30% collocation of “required FRM/FEM/ARM sites” rounded up with 1 in 6 collocated frequency

≥ 7.5% of sites for the comparison requires a collocated candidate ARM for Coefficient of Variation (CV) calculations.

Pertinent Information (Source: 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4)Pertinent Information (Source: 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4)

Data can be recalculated in non-linear fashion Details must be included in Agency QAPP and ARM

application to ORD.

Section “2.4.2.4 The ARM must be capable of providing for flow audits, unless by its inherent measurement principle, measured flow is not required.”

Need: 1-2 FRMs and 1-2 candidate monitors for each ARM. Validate periodically with changing aerosols and instrument performance.

Data can be recalculated in non-linear fashion Details must be included in Agency QAPP and ARM

application to ORD.

Section “2.4.2.4 The ARM must be capable of providing for flow audits, unless by its inherent measurement principle, measured flow is not required.”

Need: 1-2 FRMs and 1-2 candidate monitors for each ARM. Validate periodically with changing aerosols and instrument performance.

Pertinent Information (Source: 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4)Pertinent Information (Source: 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section 2.4)

Yearly assessments

Network assessments every 5 years

Data Duration: 1 year (seasons) ≥ 90 sample sets required ≥ 20 per season required

Up to 2 CBSA/CSA & 1 Rural or MSA, 1 of each in areas already approved

If WA DoE already accepted, than can go straight to Region X office for approval

External audits are required as an FEM.

Yearly assessments

Network assessments every 5 years

Data Duration: 1 year (seasons) ≥ 90 sample sets required ≥ 20 per season required

Up to 2 CBSA/CSA & 1 Rural or MSA, 1 of each in areas already approved

If WA DoE already accepted, than can go straight to Region X office for approval

External audits are required as an FEM.

Our ObjectivesOur Objectives

Collect 1-year of precision collocated data for all perspective ARM samplers

To package all our applicable data for analysis

Determine if the data meets regulations

To compile all the necessary QAPP’s

Submit the data package for approval if all the data meets regulations

Collect 1-year of precision collocated data for all perspective ARM samplers

To package all our applicable data for analysis

Determine if the data meets regulations

To compile all the necessary QAPP’s

Submit the data package for approval if all the data meets regulations

PSCAA Sites with Recent FRM DataPSCAA Sites with Recent FRM Data

Snohomish County (Possibly non-attainment): Marysville (Wood Smoke Aerosol) Darrington (Wood Smoke Aerosol) Lynnwood (Wood Smoke Aerosol) – Analysis no longer on-going

Pierce County (Will be non-attainment): South Tacoma (Wood Smoke Aerosol)

King County (Attainment): Lake Forest Park (Wood Smoke Aerosol) Seattle – Duwamish (Industrial Aerosol)

Snohomish County (Possibly non-attainment): Marysville (Wood Smoke Aerosol) Darrington (Wood Smoke Aerosol) Lynnwood (Wood Smoke Aerosol) – Analysis no longer on-going

Pierce County (Will be non-attainment): South Tacoma (Wood Smoke Aerosol)

King County (Attainment): Lake Forest Park (Wood Smoke Aerosol) Seattle – Duwamish (Industrial Aerosol)

Other Recent FRM Data Available in WashingtonOther Recent FRM Data Available in Washington

Clark County Vancouver – (Urban Residential Aerosol – Wood smoke)

Data good only through 2004

King County Seattle – Beacon Hill (Urban Residential Aerosol)

Okanogan Twisp – Rural site (Wood smoke/Forest fire Aerosol?)

Data good only through 2004

Spokane County Spokane – Ferry Street (Aerosol type - Industrial?)

Yakima County Yakima (Aerosol type – Industrial/Agricultural?)

Data good only through 2004

Clark County Vancouver – (Urban Residential Aerosol – Wood smoke)

Data good only through 2004

King County Seattle – Beacon Hill (Urban Residential Aerosol)

Okanogan Twisp – Rural site (Wood smoke/Forest fire Aerosol?)

Data good only through 2004

Spokane County Spokane – Ferry Street (Aerosol type - Industrial?)

Yakima County Yakima (Aerosol type – Industrial/Agricultural?)

Data good only through 2004

Sites in WA since 2004 with FRM data that does not meet ARM requirementsSites in WA since 2004 with FRM data that does not meet ARM requirements

Benton County Kennewick (Discontinued after 2005, ran only 1/6 sampling)

Spokane County Spokane – Monroe Street (Discontinued after 2005, ran only 1/6

sampling)

Benton County Kennewick (Discontinued after 2005, ran only 1/6 sampling)

Spokane County Spokane – Monroe Street (Discontinued after 2005, ran only 1/6

sampling)

PSCAA Potential Candidate ARMs by SitePSCAA Potential Candidate ARMs by Site

Darrington Nephelometer (ongoing)

Lake Forest Park Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Lynnwood Nephelometer (Old Data) FDMS-TEOM (Old Data) TEOM (Old Data)

Marysville Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Seattle – Duwamish Nephelometer (ongoing) FDMS-TEOM (after a year of data completion) TEOM (older data)

South Tacoma Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Darrington Nephelometer (ongoing)

Lake Forest Park Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Lynnwood Nephelometer (Old Data) FDMS-TEOM (Old Data) TEOM (Old Data)

Marysville Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Seattle – Duwamish Nephelometer (ongoing) FDMS-TEOM (after a year of data completion) TEOM (older data)

South Tacoma Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Other WA Potential Candidate ARMs by SiteOther WA Potential Candidate ARMs by Site

Beacon Hill Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Spokane – Ferry Street Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Vancouver TEOM (2004 only)

Yakima Nephelometer (2004 only)

Twisp Nephelometer (2004 only)

Beacon Hill Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Spokane – Ferry Street Nephelometer (ongoing) TEOM (ongoing)

Vancouver TEOM (2004 only)

Yakima Nephelometer (2004 only)

Twisp Nephelometer (2004 only)

Tools for the ARMTools for the ARM

Templates are available that contain all the details necessary to apply for the application

Excel file with calculations built in

Word Document to describe the sites, methods, descriptions, QA procedures, etc.

Templates are available that contain all the details necessary to apply for the application

Excel file with calculations built in

Word Document to describe the sites, methods, descriptions, QA procedures, etc.

Example of Excel Summary Tab – Marysville NephelometerExample of Excel Summary Tab – Marysville Nephelometer

Will any instruments be approved? Will any instruments be approved?

Preliminary correlations indicate yes.

However, as aerosols change overtime, there may be difficulty for surrogate analyzers (like the nephelometer).

There is a 30% collocated FRM requirement in the network that would monitor this issue.

Preliminary correlations indicate yes.

However, as aerosols change overtime, there may be difficulty for surrogate analyzers (like the nephelometer).

There is a 30% collocated FRM requirement in the network that would monitor this issue.

Word Document ExampleWord Document Example

SummarySummary

In Washington state, we have a few analyzers that we will aim to achieve ARM status: Nephelometer TEOM TEOM-FDMS

Preliminary analysis indicates the data fits the criteria, but we are at the mercy of EPA-ORD

Evolving aerosols are still of some concern and sites may loose ARM status

In Washington state, we have a few analyzers that we will aim to achieve ARM status: Nephelometer TEOM TEOM-FDMS

Preliminary analysis indicates the data fits the criteria, but we are at the mercy of EPA-ORD

Evolving aerosols are still of some concern and sites may loose ARM status