Air Monitoring Outlook

1. Air Monitoring Outlook Gregg Worley, US EPA Region 4 Spring Grants/Planning Meeting May 22, 2013

2. Overview • Current NAAQS Review Schedule • Near-road Monitoring • PM2.5 Continuous FEM Data Handling • Data Certification • Monitoring Network Plans • Region 4 PM2.5 Monitor Analysis

3. Current Schedule for Ongoing NAAQS Reviews NOTES: Underlined dates indicate court-ordered or settlement agreement deadlines Blue: finalized rules, Green: upcoming rules For more information see: http://epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/

4. Region 4 Near-Road Monitoring

5. Region 4 Near-road Monitoring Regulatory Deadlines for Near-road Monitoring • NO2: 1st Monitor Jan 2014; 2nd Monitor Jan 2015 • PM2.5: January 1, 2015 • CO: January 1, 2015 • NO2: January 1, 2014 • PM2.5: January 1, 2017 • CO: January 1, 2017 • NO2: January 1, 2017 • PM2.5: not required • CO: not required

6. Near-road Site Information in 2013 Network Plans • Agencies with current funding for a near-road site (CBSA population> one million) must submit information for approval of the near-road site in the upcoming monitoring plan. • Agencies may also submit an addendum to the 2012 monitoring plan for quicker approval of the near-road site. • A list of minimum information for near-road site approval was included in EPA’s 2012 Network Plan response to applicable agencies

7. PM2.5 Continuous Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) Data Handling

8. PM2.5 Continuous FEM Data Handling • PM NAAQS final rule [§58.11(e)] allows certain PM2.5 continuous FEM data to be excluded from the NAAQS if: • Performance criteria are not met when assessed with collocated FRM(s); (See §58.11(e) and Table C-4 to Part 53) • Monitoring agency requests exclusion of data; • EPA Regional Office approves exclusion of data.

9. PM2.5 Continuous FEM Data Handling • Recommend monitoring agencies do the following: • If your agency is planning to request exclusion of data: • Report data to AQS parameter code 88101 • Use Special Purpose and Non-Regulatory monitor types • Apply for exclusion of data already collected as soon as possible. • So that design value calculations are produced with the right data • Ensure your Annual Monitoring Network Plan and AQS are aligned with the metadata information cited in §58.10(b). • EPA is has developed a template and guidance document to assist monitoring agencies in this effort. • Emailed to monitoring contacts on 4/22/13

10. Data Certification New Process in 2013

11. Data Certification – The Basics • Process required by 40 CFR §58.15 • Formal statement attesting to ambient data completeness and accuracy • Submitted by states to EPA on annual basis: Due May 1 for previous calendar year’s data • Process that combines a required action followed by a discretionary EPA review

12. Why Change the Process? • Data reviews are manually intensive, often involving hundreds of individual monitors per state • AQS flag setting decision(s) have lacked explicit criteria for a “Y” or “N” • Process is overwhelmed by early and regular certification submittals, therefore AQS flag setting has been haphazard at best for current and historical data

13. What Has Been Done? • Reporting tool developed in AQS that summarizes key information needed to support timely and consistent reviews (AMP600) • AQS flagging process partially automated to reduce manual workload • Workload redistributed to make task more manageable • Longer term – consider CFR changes to focus on criteria pollutants only (e.g., drop PAMS, CSN)

14. Old vs. New OLD PROCESS • Certifying Agency (CA) submits certification letter, AMP450, AMP450NC (if applicable), AMP255 reports to EPA Region Administrator. • EPA Region Office staff makes sure the submitted documentation is complete and forwards it to OAQPS. • OAQPS staff reviews, notifies RO staff of problems. • RO staff communicates with affected agency to resolve problem. • When problem is resolved or irresolvable, OAQPS is notified. • Certification flags (“Y” or “N”) are manually added at some point after that. NEW PROCESS • Certifying Agency (CA) adds certification flags to AMP600 Report, noting any differences with the AQS recommendation • The CA prints and signs the AMP600. • The CA submits their signed certification letter, signed AMP600, and AMP450NC (if applicable) to Region 4 APTMD • APTMD staff reviews the documentation and adds EPA determination flags (in many cases within a day or two).

15. 2012 Data Certification Status • This year agencies had the option of using either the old or new processes • Almost ALL Region 4 agencies opted for the new process • To date, nearly all certifications have been reviewed and completed by EPA Region 4.

16. 2013 Network Plans • For the 2013 plans, due July 1st, please make sure to include: • The NO2 related information that was requested in EPA’s 2012 approval letters • Exclusion requests for any PM2.5 FEMs that you think should not be comparable to the NAAQS

17. Region 4 PM2.5Monitor Analysis

18. PM2.5 Monitor Analysis: Background • The last comprehensive analysis of the Region 4 PM2.5monitoring grant allocation was conducted 15 years ago when the network was established. • Many changes (monitor additions and shutdowns) have occurred to the network over those years.

19. PM2.5 Monitor Analysis: Objective and Approach • Objective: Conduct an analysis of monitoring work to determine if CAA section 103 grant funding is equitably distributed between Region 4 S/L agencies. • Only monitors whose data are entered into AQS, per 40 CFR, were counted in this analysis. • Weighting factors were developed for each type of PM2.5 monitor (e.g., continuous, FRM, speciation, etc.). Factors were based on OAQPS cost estimates of operating the monitor types.

20. PM2.5 Monitor Analysis: Timeline • Late CY12: Region 4 has pulled PM2.5 monitor data from AQS. • January: S/Ls reviewed the data and provided corrections. S/Ls also evaluate the reasonableness of the weighting factors using their knowledge of the effort needed to operate the monitors. • March: Region 4 corrected the data and sent it back to S/Ls for QA check. • May 21-23: Region 4 to present the data to S/L Directors.

21. PM2.5 Monitor Analysis: Timeline cont’d • June/July: Region 4 Grant Allocation Workgroup convenes to evaluate data and options. It is envisioned that options would include a no action and one or more reallocation options. • August: Workgroup makes recommendation to EPA Region 4 Air Director. • October: If a decision to reallocate funds is made, the reallocation would occur in FY14.