1. Missouri Air Quality Issues Stephen Hall Air Quality Analysis Section Air Pollution Control Program Air Quality Applied Sciences Team (AQAST) 9 th Semi-Annual Meeting June 2, 2015 St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO 1

2. Outline  Current and Emerging Air Quality Issues  Examples by Pollutant (SO 2, PM 2.5 )  Value in AQAST Projects 2

3. Current and Emerging Air Quality Issues Current Issues: Due to Revised NAAQS for Lead, SO 2, NO 2, PM 2.5 : Ambient Monitoring- Network Revisions- Remove sites to add new monitoring sites. Lower ambient concentrations need better/newer methods & monitors. Permitting- Difficult to permit new sources in some areas- No margin for historically ‘conservative’ dispersion modeling. Need it done yesterday! Emission Inventory- How well do we know the source parameters? Where to focus quality assurance efforts and over which source categories. Enforcement- Keeping up with current compliance and new compliance plans. Planning- New Rules, new emissions limit agreements with facilities, modeling demonstrations, what sources contribute to violation?, etc… Fiscal & Budget- How are we going to pay for all this?!? 3

4. Current and Emerging Air Quality Issues Emerging Issues: 2015 Ozone NAAQS, Carbon Pollution : 2015 Ozone NAAQS Proposal- No new Ozone sites but many rural sites near 65-70 ppm range. New PAMS requirement for NCore sites in nonattainment areas. Potential for increase in # of nonattainment areas depending on final standard and 2015 Ozone season. Carbon Pollution- “Clean Power Plan” Significant ‘interest’. New stakeholder interaction. Non-traditional implementation approach. What’s next...? 4

5. Industry Monitoring-SO 2, Lead Two new industry SO 2 monitoring areas for 2015. Six facilities monitoring: 3 SO 2 & Meteorology 3 Lead & Meteorology More expected pending final SO 2 DRR. How many??? Modeling/monitoring involves coordination with neighboring states. Missouri borders 8 states. 5

6. 2012 PM 2.5 NAAQS:  Missouri currently meets the NAAQS, but…  St. Louis MO area monitors ‘close’ to the annual NAAQS. (Annual Design Value about: 11 µ g/m 3 )  If the St. Louis area were to be designated nonattainment complex technical analysis will be needed to determine contributing sources and develop control strategies.  New continuous (hourly) monitoring for PM: Black Carbon, Organic Carbon, Elemental Carbon, Total Carbon, PM 10-2.5, PM 10, ‘PM 2.5 Volatiles’, Metals. 6

7. PM 2.5 Episodes- A combination of local emissions & ‘transport’: The Challenge: It’s not always the ‘same PM’ for every episode. 24-hour PM 2.5 Speciation only 1-in-3 or 1-in-6 days. 7

8. March 3, 2014, 24-hour PM 2.5 9.3 µg/m 3 (Forest Park site) 8

9. March 6, 2014, 24-hour PM 2.5 36.5 µg/m 3 (Forest Park site) High PM has both health and welfare effects Poor Urban Visibility 9

10. March 8, 2014, 24-hour PM 2.5 54.6 µg/m 3 (Forest Park site) 1-hour PM 2.5 Concentration at Noon CST: 70.8 µg/m 3 10

11. Historical PM 2.5 Speciation Data for Similar Episodes (March 2014) indicate Ammonium Nitrate is a dominant PM Species during these winter/spring episodes. TEOM-1405-DF In absence of speciation data- PM 2.5 reference (Volatile) channel good indicator of secondary PM formation 11

12. 12 Sunset OC/EC Semi-continuous carbon monitor. Organic & Elemental Carbon, 1-hour averages. TEOM-1405-DF PM 2.5, PM 10, PM 10-2.5, PM 2.5 semi-volatile 1-hour averages Blair St. Site, St. Louis MO AQS # 29-510-0085

13. 13

14. 14

15. 15

16. 48 hour episode March 11 th and 12 th 2015 March 11 th - Smoke transport likely from prescribed burns in neighboring states. (No 24-hour PM 2.5 Exceedance) Source: http://www.airnowtech. org/navigator 16

17. March 12 th 2015- No pronounced ‘smoke plume’ but monitored a 24-hour PM 2.5 Exceedance. Source: http://www.airnowtech. org/navigator 17

18. Blair St. St. Louis Ncore Site Data. (Unfortunately March 11 th & 12 th were not PM 2.5 speciation sampling days.) However- We have continuous PM monitoring data “24-7”. High PM 2.5 semi- volatile channel concentrations. Indicator of secondary semi- volatile aerosol formation. 18

19. NO Y How much is local vs. transport? Wed. Thursday. Local mobile NOx emissions are not trivial. Exceedance ‘but for the event’?!?. 19

20. 20 Rural ‘background’ NOx Conc. was low over the period 3/10 through 3/12 2015

21. Source: http://www.epa.gov/air/emissions/ 21

22. Value of AQAST Tiger Team Projects  Provide example analysis projects for states to consider for air quality planning.  Evaluate pollutant contributions to air pollution episodes.  Leverage technical resources for episode analysis. (Some states do not have resources for significant research projects.)  Provide interpretation and application of remote sensing data.  Provide analysis which helps states inform future monitoring network design considerations and monitoring methodology. 22

23. Sources for More Information:  St. Louis Sunset organic & elemental carbon semi-continuous monitoring project: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/2014conference/wedcsnwetherell.pdf http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/2014conference/wedcsnwetherell.pdf  MDNR/APCP resources: http://dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/airpollutants.htmhttp://dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/airpollutants.htm  MO visibility cameras: http://dnr.mo.gov/env/esp/aqm/archcam-1.htmhttp://dnr.mo.gov/env/esp/aqm/archcam-1.htm  National Air Monitoring Resources: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/ 23

24. Division of Environmental Quality Director: Leanne Tippett Mosby June 2, 2015 Nothing in this document may be used to implement any enforcement action or levy any penalty unless promulgated by rule under chapter 536 or authorized by statute. 24