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

2. Overview 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

3. 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 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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. ”

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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. Our 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

8. PSCAA 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)

9. Other 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

10. Sites 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)

11. PSCAA 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)

12. Other 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)

13. Tools 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.

14. Example of Excel Summary Tab – Marysville Nephelometer

15. 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.

16. Word Document Example

17. Summary 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