United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA-454/R-98-003
March 1998
Air
SLAMS / NAMS / PAMS
&EPA NETWORK REVIEW
GUIDANCE
-------
SLAMS/NAMS/PAMS NETWORK REVIEW GUIDANCE
REVISED FINAL REPORT
Prepared for:
Edward Hanks (MD-14)
Monitoring and Quality Assurance Group
Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
March 27, 1998
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
List of Tables iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 PURPOSE OF GUIDANCE DOCUMENT 1-2
1.2 ORGANIZATION 1-3
2.0 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DATA NEEDS 2-1
2.1 APPENDIX D REQUIREMENTS 2-1
2.1.1 Monitoring Objectives and Spatial Scales 2-1
2.1.2 Number of SLAMS Sites 2-4
2.1.3 Core SLAMS Monitoring Stations for PM25 2-5
2.1.4 NAMS PM25 Design Criteria 2-7
2.1.5 PAMS Design Criteria 2-10
2.2 APPENDIX E REQUIREMENTS 2-12
2.3 OTHER AMBIENT AIR MONITORING DATA NEEDS 2-14
3.0 NETWORK REVIEW PROCEDURE 3-1
3.1 NETWORK REVIEW TEAM AND PREPARATION 3-1
3.2 NETWORK MODIFICATIONS 3-3
3.3 GUIDANCE TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH APPENDIX D
AND SPECIAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 3-5
3.3.1 Number and Location of Monitors 3-5
3.3.2 Checklists and Other Discussion Topics 3-7
3.4 GUIDANCE TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH APPENDIX E
REQUIREMENTS 3-8
3.5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 3-9
4.0 NETWORK REVIEW CHECKLISTS 4-1
5.0 REFERENCES 5-1
APPENDIX A EXAMPLE AIRS REPORTS
APPENDIX B EXAMPLE MAPS SHOWING EMISSION SOURCES
APPENDIX C REENGINEERING AIR MONITORING NETWORKS
APPENDIX D REFERENCE AND EQUIVALENT METHOD ANALYZERS
11
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
2-1 Relationship Among Monitoring Objectives and
Scales of Representativeness 2-2
2-2 Summary of Spatial Scales for SLAMS and Required Scales for NAMS 2-3
2-3 State and Local Air Monitoring Stations Criteria for SO2 2-4
2-4 Required Number of Core SLAMS for PM2 5 Sites According to MSA Population ... 2-5
2-5 NAMS Monitoring Network Criteria 2-8
2-6 National Air Monitoring Station Criteria for SO2 2-9
2-7 Goals of Number of PM2 5 NAMS by Region 2-9
2-8 PAMS Minimum Monitoring Network Requirements 2-11
2-9 Summary of Probe and Monitoring Path Siting Criteria 2-13
in
-------
Statement
At the date of the fmalization of this document (March 1998), revisions to the Ambient
Air Quality Surveillance regulations as contained in CFR40 part 58 for the criteria pollutants
sulfur dioxide (SO2) and lead (Pb) were in the final process of being implemented. Promulgation
of the revision to the Pb regulation is expected by June 1998 and the revised SO2 regulation by
December 1998. Please note, in order to be expedient in the preparation of this document, the
proposed revisions to the guidance for Pb and SO2 were incorporated into the content.
IV
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 581 (40 CFR Part 58) contains the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) ambient air quality surveillance regulations. Section 58.20
requires States to provide for the establishment of air quality surveillance systems in their State
Implementation Plans (SIP). The air quality surveillance system consists of a network of monitoring
stations designated as State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS), which measure ambient
concentrations of those pollutants for which standards have been established in 40 CFR Part 50.
SLAMS, National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS), which are a subset of SLAMS, and
Photochemical Monitoring Stations (PAMS) must meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part 58,
Appendices A (Quality Assurance Requirements), C (Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Methodology),
D (Network Design Criteria), and E (Probe and Path Siting Criteria). Conformance with the
requirements of Appendices A and C is determined in part through periodic systems audits and
national performance audits which are required in Section 2.4 of Appendix A. Conformance with the
requirements of Appendices D and E is determined during the annual review of the air quality
surveillance system which States are required to provide for in 40 CFR 58.20(d). It is important to
note that this guidance focuses on an annual review of ambient monitoring networks (that is, the
number of monitoring stations, the types of stations, location of stations, and specific probe and open
path siting criteria). Guidance on agencies' quality assurance programs is not intended as part of this
network review guidance.
The annual network review is used to determine how well the network is achieving its
required air monitoring objectives, how well it is meeting data users needs, and how it should be
modified (e.g., through termination of existing stations, relocation of stations, or establishment of new
stations) to continue to meet its monitoring objectives and data needs. The main purpose of the
review is to improve the network to ensure that it provides adequate, representative, and useful air
quality data. Ambient air quality data from the network are used for a variety of purposes including
making national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) attainment/nonattainment designations;
determining maximum concentration locations; determining the effectiveness of air pollution control
programs; evaluating the effects of air pollution levels on public health; tracking the progress of SIPs;
1-1
-------
providing dispersion modeling support; developing responsible, cost-effective control strategies;
reconciling emission inventories; and developing air quality trends. In addition to these data uses or
needs, the annual network review should consider the adequacy of the network in meeting additional
performance objectives, including providing data for tracking State performance, measuring acidic
deposition and species concentrations in rainfall, measuring visibility and related parameters,
providing research information, and providing public information in general. These additional data
needs are discussed in more detail in Section 2.3.
1.1 PURPOSE OF GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
Because 40 CFR Part 58 does not specify network review criteria, the nature of the network
review has differed from Region to Region. The purpose of this network review guidance is to
provide the Part 58 regulatory background and appropriate technical criteria which form the basis for
the network review as well as to provide EPA's plans and strategies concerning non-regulatory data
needs which should be considered during the conduct of the annual network review. This guidance
is intended for Regional Office use in evaluating State and local agency networks, and it may also be
useful to State and local agencies in preparing for a network review. This guidance represents a
compilation of approaches currently practiced in the Regions. Its contents should not be viewed as
a prescriptive requirement that must be followed in its entirety but rather as a framework for
promoting national uniformity in the evaluation of State and local agency monitoring networks. EPA
Regional Offices and State and local agencies may identify additional items that need to be addressed
during the network review that will supplement this guidance and allow for dealing, on a case-by-case
basis, with significant network deficiencies which are identified during the course of the network
review. This guidance should be reviewed periodically to ensure that the policies and procedures
remain current and appropriate, and revised whenever the network design and siting criteria are
changed or more cost-effective and innovative procedures are developed.
1-2
-------
1.2 ORGANIZATION
Section 2.0 of this guidance contains a summary of the regulatory requirements contained in
Appendices D and E as well as a description of other ambient air monitoring data needs that should
be considered during the network review. Section 3.0 provides an overview of network review
procedures to determine conformance with Appendix D and E requirements. Section 4.0 contains
an example checklist for conducting a network review. Section 5.0 includes a list of references.
1-3
-------
2.0 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DATA NEEDS
2.1 APPENDIX D REQUIREMENTS
This section highlights the network design requirements and guidance included in Appendix
D of Part 58.2 Appendix D contains information on the concepts of ambient air monitoring network
design for establishing the SLAMS, NAMS, and PAMS. It addresses monitoring objectives, criteria
for selecting general locations for monitoring stations, and guidance on the number and location of
NAMS, PAMS, and core stations for PM2 5. The concepts and guidance contained in Appendix D
as well as other non-regulatory EPA data needs should be considered in evaluating the adequacy of
the SLAMS/NAMS/PAMS networks.
2.1.1 Monitoring Objectives and Spatial Scales
Appendix D of Part 58 calls for the SLAMS monitoring network to be designed to meet a
minimum of six basic ambient air monitoring objectives. These six primary SLAMS objectives are
as follows:
(1) to determine highest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the
network;
(2) to determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density;
(3) to determine the impact on ambient pollution levels of significant sources or source
categories;
(4) to determine general background concentration levels;
(5) to determine the extent of Regional pollutant transport among populated areas, and
in support of secondary standards; and
(6) to determine the welfare-related impacts in more rural and remote areas (such as
visibility impairment and effects on vegetation).
The goal in designing the SLAMS networks is to establish monitoring stations that will provide data
to meet these monitoring objectives and as input to EPA and States to improve environmental
decisions.
2-1
-------
Appendix D also provides guidance concerning the concept of spatial scales of
representativeness that individual stations in a SLAMS network should represent. Ideally, the
SLAMS monitor should be located such that the air quality of the volume of sampled air be
representative of the air quality over the entire area that the monitoring station is intended to
represent. The typical spatial scales of representativeness associated with most ambient monitoring
objectives are microscale, middle scale, neighborhood scale, urban scale, and regional scale. During
the station selection process, the goal is to match the spatial scale represented by the sample of
monitored air at a given location with the spatial scale most appropriate for the monitoring objective
of that respective station.
Table 2-1 shows the relationship among monitoring objectives and scales of
representativeness. Additional details are provided in Appendix D, Section 2, concerning the types
of areas that specific spatial scales should characterize. For example, for SO2 monitoring, a
neighborhood scale station applies to areas where the SO2 concentrations gradient is relatively flat
(mainly suburban areas surrounding the urban center or in large sections of small cities and towns.)
Such areas are homogeneous in terms of SO2 emission rates and population density. Similar
examples are provided for the other criteria pollutants. In addition, references to EPA guidance
documents to assist in designing and siting monitoring stations for specific pollutants are provided
in Appendix D.3 Table 2-2 shows a summary of spatial scales applicable for SLAMS and required
for NAMS for each pollutant.
TABLE 2-1. RELATIONSHIP AMONG MONITORING OBJECTIVES AND
SCALE OF REPRESENTATIVENESS
Monitoring Objectives
Highest concentration
Population
Source impact
General/B ackground
Regional transport
Welfare-related impacts
Appropriate Siting Scales
Micro, Middle, neighborhood (sometime
urban1)
Neighborhood, urban
Micro, middle, neighborhood
Neighborhood, urban, regional
Urban/regional
Urban/regional
2-2
-------
TABLE 2-2. SUMMARY OF SPATIAL SCALES FOR SLAMS AND REQUIRED SCALES FOR NAMS
Spatial Scale
Scales Applicable for SLAMS
SO, CO
O
NO
Pb PM,,
PM.5
SO
Scales Required for NAMS
CO O NO Pb
PM
PM,,
Micro
Middle
Neighborhood
Urban
Regional
'Only permitted if representative of many such micro-scale environments in a residential district (for middle scale, at least two).
2Either urban or regional scale for regional transport sites.
2-3
-------
2.1.2 Number of SLAMS Sites
Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 58 does not contain criteria for determining the total number of
stations in the SLAMS networks except that a minimum number of SLAMS lead,4 SO2,5 and PM2 56
sites are prescribed. Concerning the number of lead SLAMS monitors,4 EPA is requiring State and
local agencies to focus their network design efforts on establishing lead monitoring stations around
lead stationary sources which generate or have the potential to generate exceedances of the quarterly
lead NAAQS. A number of these sources have been identified through EPA's ongoing lead NAAQS
attainment strategy, and ambient air monitoring stations have already been established around them.
Sources around which lead monitoring networks should be established are those emitting five or more
tons per year or smaller stationary sources which may be problematic based on the size of the facility
and their proximity to populated neighborhoods. EPA recommends a minimum of two lead sites per
source, one to measure stack impacts and the second to measure fugitive emissions. Other factors
such as topography, source type, proximity and locations of nearby populations may affect the
number of stations in the network.
Concerning the number of SLAMS SO2 monitors,5 a minimum number are required for those
counties not within the boundaries of any Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area/Metropolitan
Statistical Area (CMS A/MS A). In addition, as listed in Table 2-3, a minimum number of SO2
SLAMS are required for targeted sources of SO2 emissions. Other than these requirements, EPA
believes that the optimum size of a particular SLAMS network involves tradeoffs among data needs
and available resources which can best be resolved during the network design process.
TABLE 2-3. STATE AND LOCAL AIR MONITORING STATIONS CRITERIA
FOR SO,
Area
SO2 Emissions (tons/year)
Minimum Number of SO2
Stations
Counties (or parts of
counties) not included in any
CMSA/MSA
>100,000
20,000-100,000
<20,000
2
1
0
2-4
-------
2.1.3 Core SLAMS Monitoring Stations for PM2 5
Community-oriented core SLAMS PM25 sites are a subset of the SLAMS PM2 5 network that
are sited to represent community-wide air quality and are located within monitoring planning areas
(MPAs). Such sites are located where people live, work, and play, as opposed to areas of expected
maximum concentrations from specific source emissions. MPAs are generally oriented toward areas
with populations greater than 200,000, but those portions of a State that are not associated with
MSAs can be considered as a single MPA. Within each MPA, the responsible air pollution control
agency shall install the following core PM2 5 sites:
(a) At least two core PM2 5 SLAMS per MSA with population greater than 500,000
sampling everyday, unless exempted by the Regional Administrator, including at least
one station in a population-oriented area of expected maximum concentration and at
least one station in an area of poor air quality and at least one additional core monitor
collocated at a PAMS site if the MPA is also a PAMS area.
(b) At least one core PM25 SLAMS per MSA with population greater than 200,000 and
less than or equal to 500,000 sampling every third day.
(c) Additional core PM2 5 SLAMS per MSA with population greater than 1 million,
sampling every third day, as specified in Table 2-4.
TABLE 2-4. REQUIRED NUMBER OF CORE SLAMS PM2 5 SITES
ACCORDING TO MSA POPULATION
MSA Population Minimum Required No. of Core Sites1
>1M 3
>2M 4
>4M 6
>6M 8
>8M 10
SLAMS at PAMS are in addition to these numbers.
2-5
-------
The site situated in the area of expected maximum concentration is termed a category a core
SLAMS site. The site located in the area of poor air quality with high population density or
representative of maximum population impact is analogous to NAMS, "category b." This second site
is a category b core SLAMS site.
Those MPAs that are substantially impacted by several different and geographically disjoint
local sources of fine paniculate should have separate core sites to monitor each influencing source
region.
Within each MPA, one or more required core SLAMS may be exempted by the Regional
Administrator. This may be appropriate in areas where the highest concentration is expected to occur
at the same location as the area of maximum or sensitive population impact, or areas with low
concentrations (e.g., highest concentrations are less than 80 percent of the NAAQS). When only one
core monitor for PM2 5 is included in an MPA or optional Community Monitoring Zone (CMZ),
however, a "category a" core site is strongly preferred to determine community-oriented PM2 5
concentrations in areas of high average PM2 5 concentration.
In addition to the required core sites described in section 2.8.1.3 of 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix
D, the State shall also install and operate on an every third day sampling schedule at least one
SLAMS to monitor for regional background and at least one SLAMS to monitor regional transport.
These monitoring stations may be at a community-oriented site and their requirement may be satisfied
by a corresponding SLAMS monitor in an area having similar air quality in another State. The State
shall also be required to establish additional SLAMS sites based on the total population outside the
MSA(s) associated with MPAs that contain required core SLAMS. There shall be one such
additional SLAMS for each 200,000 people. The minimum number of SLAMS may be deployed
anywhere in the State to satisfy the SLAMS monitoring of small scale impacts which may not be
community-oriented or for regional transport. Detailed guidance on designing monitoring networks
for PM2 5 is contained in reference 7. The document defines concepts and terms of network design,
presents a methodology for defining planning areas and community monitoring zones, identifies data
2-6
-------
resources and the uses of those resources for network design, and provides some practical examples
of applying the guidance.
A table showing the required minimum number of CORE PM2 5 SLAMS and other PIV^ 5
SLAMS monitoring sites by State and by MSA/PMSA/Remainder of State is contained on EPA's
Ambient Monitoring Technology Information Web page. The table is listed under the PM2 5
Monitoring/Network Design area. The address is www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/pmstg.html.
2.1.4 NAMS Design Criteria
Appendix D also describes monitoring objectives and criteria for determining the number and
location of NAMS and PAMS. The primary objective of the NAMS is to monitor in areas where the
pollutant concentration and population exposure are expected to be the highest consistent with the
averaging time of the NAAQS. The NAMS are a subset of SLAMS that focus on urban and
multisource areas. Criteria for determining the number of stations in the NAMS network are
specified in Appendix D and summarized in Table 2-5 and 2-6.
The PM2 5 NAMS are a subset of the core SLAMS and other regional transport SLAMS.
They are intended as long-term monitoring stations concentrated in metropolitan areas. A target
range of 200 to 300 NAMS PM2 5 stations nationwide has been specified in the regulations. MS As
with a population greater than 1 million must have at least one PM2 5 NAMS. The total number is
based on recommendations of EPA Regional Offices in partnership with State and local agencies.
Criteria for selecting the stations include the number and type of sources, ambient concentration of
particulate matter, and regional transport. Table 2-7 shows the target number of NAMS PM25
stations per Region.
In addition to the range of NAMS sites, States are required to establish about 50 sites for
routine chemical speciation of PM2 5. The 50 sites will include approximately 25 sites collocated at
PAMS sites and 25 other core SLAMS selected by the Administrator.
2-7
-------
TABLE 2-5. NAMS MONITORING NETWORK CRITERIA
Pollutant
CO
Lead
NO2
Ozone
PNV
UA/CMS A/MSA
>500,000
first or second largest
CMSA/MSA within each EPA
Region
>1, 000,000
>200,000
>1, 000,000
500,000-1,000,000
250,000 - 500,000
100,000-250,000
Approximate Number of Stations Per Area
>2
lb
>2
>2
__
__
__
High Concentration a
NA
NA
NA
NA
6-10
4-8
3-4
1-2
Medium Concentration a
NA
NA
NA
NA
4-8
2-4
1-2
0-1
Low Concentration a
NA
NA
NA
NA
2-4
1-2
0-1
0
TorPM,,
24 Hr 1st MAX Value I>g/m31
> 180
> 120
< 119
(high)
(medium)
(low)
Annual Arithmetic Mean
> 60
>40
< 39
bln addition, one NAMS population-oriented site is required in each populated area (either a MSA/CMSA, town or county) where lead violations have been measured
over the most recent 8 calendar quarters.
2-8
-------
TABLE 2-6. NATIONAL AIR MONITORING STATION CRITERIA FOR SO,
CMSA/MSA Population
>1,000,000
200,000-1,000,000
50,000-200,000
SO, Emission (tons/year)
200,000
100,000-200,000
0-100,000
>200,000
100,000-200,000
20,000-100,000
>20,000
>100,000
20,000-100,000
<20,000
Minimum Required
Number SO, Stations
3
2
1
O
2
1
0
2
1
0
TABLE 2-7. GOALS FOR NUMBER OF PM, ^ NAMS BY REGION
EPA Region
1
2
o
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total
Number of NAMSa
15 to 20
20 to 30
20 to 25
35 to 50
35 to 50
25 to 35
10 to 15
10 to 15
25 to 40
10 to 15
205-295
Percent of National Total
6 to 8
8 to 12
8 to 10
14 to 20
14 to 20
10 to 14
4 to 6
4 to 6
10 to 16
4 to 6
100
aEach region will have one to three NAMS having the monitoring of regional transport as a primary
objective.
2-9
-------
2.1.5 PAMS Design Criteria
The PAMS also constitute a subset of the SLAMS and may be located coincident to SLAMS
or NAMS sites, as appropriate. 40 CFR Part 58 requires States to establish PAMS as part of their
SIP monitoring networks in the most problematic ozone nonattainment areas. While the SLAMS and
NAMS address only criteria pollutants, the PAMS stations sample for speciated volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including carbonyls, ozone, oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and surface (10-meter)
and upper air meteorological parameters. The principal reasons for requiring the collection of
additional ambient air pollutant and meteorological data are the lack of attainment of the ozone
NAAQS nationwide and the need for a more comprehensive air quality database for ozone and its
precursors.
The PAMS monitoring objectives are to supply information sufficient to (1) develop
responsible and cost-effective ozone control strategies; (2) provide appropriate data support for
photochemical grid modeling efforts; (3) allow the reconciliation of emissions inventories; (4) enable
characterization of ozone, ozone precursor, and meteorological trends; (5) provide for improved
assessments of ozone attainment; and (6) provide a measure of information for determining
population exposure.
In contrast to the SLAMS and NAMS network design and siting criteria, which are pollutant
specific, PAMS design considerations are site specific. Design criteria for PAMS are based on
selection of an array of site locations relative to ozone precursor source areas and predominant wind
directions associated with high ozone events. A maximum of five PAMS sites is required in an
affected nonattainment area depending on the population of the MSA/CMS A or nonattainment area,
whichever is larger. Minimum network requirements are outlined in Table 2-8. As noted in the table,
the use of sampling frequencies C or F requires the submittal of an ozone event (peak day) forecasting
scheme. The ozone event forecasting and monitoring scheme should be submitted as part of the
PAMS network description required by Sections 58.40 and 58.41 and should be reviewed during each
annual network review specified in 58.20(d). More specific guidance on PAMS network design is
provided in the Updates to sections of the Implementation Manual which are regularly issued. For
2-10
-------
TABLE 2-8. PAMS MINIMUM MONITORING NETWORK REQUIREMENTS3
Population of MSA/CMSA or
Nonattainment Areab
Less than 500,000
500,000 to 1,000,000
1,000,000 to 2,000,000
More than 2,000,000
Required Site Type0
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
2
3
1
2
2
3
4
Minimum Speciated VOC
Sampling Frequency1*
AorCe
AorCe
AorCe
B
AorCe
AorCe
B
B
AorCe
AorCe
B
B
AorCe
AorCe
Minimum Carbonyl Sampling
Frequency1*
DorFe'f
E
E
E
E
E
3O3 and NOX (including NO and NO2) monitoring should be continuous measurements.
bWhichever area is larger.
cSee Figure 1 in 40 CFR 58, Appendix D.
''Frequency requirements are as follows: A—Eight 3-hour samples ever third day and one additional 24-hour sample every sixth day during the monitoring period; B—Eight
3-hour samples, every day during the monitoring period and one additional 24-hour sample every sixth day year-round; C—Eight 3-hour samples on the 5 peak O3 days
plus each previous day, eight 3-hour samples every sixth day, and one additional 24-hour sample every sixth day, during the monitoring period; D—Eight 3-hour samples
every third day during the monitoring period; E—Eight 3-hour samples every day during the monitoring period; F—Eight 3-hour samples on the 5 peak O3 days plus each
previous day and eight 3-hour samples every sixth day during the monitoring period. (NOTE: multiple samples taken on a daily basis must begin at midnight and consist
of sequential, nonoverlapping sampling periods.)
The use of frequencies C or F requires the submittal of an ozone event forecasting scheme.
fCarbonyl sampling frequency must match the chosen speciated VOC frequency.
2-11
-------
example, Appendix N, the PAMS Technical Assistance Document, was last issued in October 1994
in draft form, but updates to sections of the TAD have been ongoing. A major revision of the TAD
is to be issued in 1998. Check EPA's website for the most current version available.
2.2 APPENDIX E REQUIREMENTS
Appendix E8 contains siting criteria to be applied to ambient air quality analyzers or samplers
after the general site location has been selected based on the monitoring objectives and spatial scales
of representativeness presented in Appendix D and summarized in Section 2.1 of this guidance. The
siting criteria presented in Appendix E are summarized in Table 2-9.
EPA believes that most sampling probes or monitors can be located so that they meet the
Appendix E siting requirements. Some existing stations, however, may not meet these requirements
and yet still produce useful data for some purposes. EPA will consider written requests from the
State to waive one or more siting criteria for some monitoring stations provided that the State can
demonstrate the following: (1) the site is as representative of the monitoring area as it would be if
siting criteria were met; and (2) the siting criteria cannot be met because of physical constraints (e.g.,
inability to locate the required type of station the necessary setback distance from roadways or
obstructions). Waivers may be granted to existing SLAMS if one of these criteria are met; waivers
may be granted for new SLAMS only if both criteria are met. Written requests for waivers must be
submitted to the Regional Administrator. For NAMS, the request will be forwarded to the
Administrator or the Administrator's designee.
For all SLAMS or NAMS sites the sampling lines and probe material must be borosilicate
glass, FEP teflon, or their equivalent. For those SLAMS designated as PAMS for VOC and carbonyl
sampling, only borosilicate glass, stainless steel, or their equivalent are acceptable probe materials.
Also, sampling probes for reactive gas monitors at SLAMS or NAMS must have a sample residence
time less than 20 seconds.
2-12
-------
TABLE 2-9. SUMMARY OF PROBE AND MONITORING PATH SITING CRITERIA
Pollutant
SO9c'd'e'f
COd'e'8
O3c'd'e
Ozone precursors (for
PAMS)c'd'e
NO2c'd'e
puc,d,e,f,h
PM10c'd'e'f'h
Scale [maximum
monitoring path length,
meters]
Middle [300m]
Neighborhood, Urban, and
Regional [1km].
Micro Middle [300m]
Neighborhood [1km].
Middle [300m]
Neighborhood, Urban, and
Regional [1km].
Neighborhood and Urban
[1km]
Middle [300m]
Neighborhood and Urban
[1km].
Micro; Middle,
Neighborhood, Urban and
Regional.
Micro; Middle,
Neighborhood, Urban and
Regional.
Height from ground to
probe or 80% of
monitoring path3
(meters)
3-15
3±05- 3-15
3-15
3-15
3-15
2-7 (Micro); 2- 15 (All
other scales).
2-7 (Micro); 2- 15 (All
other scales).
Horizontal and vertical
distance from supporting
structures*1 to probe or
90% of monitoring path3
(meters)
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>2 (All scales, horizontal
distance only).
>2 (All scales, horizontal
distance only).
Distance from trees to
probe or 90% of
monitoring path3
(meters)
>10
>10
10
>10
>10
>10 (All scales)
>10 (All scales)
Distance from roadways
to probe or monitoring
path3 (meters)
N/A
2-10- See Table 21 for
middle and neighborhood
scales.
See Table I1 for all scales
See Table 41 for all scales
See Table I1 for all scales.
5-1 5 (Micro); See Table
31 for all other scales.
2-10 (Micro); See Figure
21 for all other scales.
N/A-Not applicable.
^Monitoring path for open path analyzers is applicable only to middle or neighborhood scale CO monitoring and all applicable scales for monitoring SO2, O3, O3 precursors, and NO2.
bWhen probe is located on a rooftop, mis separation distance is in reference to walls, parapets, or penthouses located on roof.
GShould be >20 meters from the dripline of tree(s) and must be 10 meters from the dripline when the tree(s) act as an obstruction.
T)istance from sampler, probe, or 90% of monitoring path to obstacle, such as a building, must be at least twice the height the obstacle protrudes above the sampler, probe, or monitoring path. Sites not meeting this criterion may be classified
as middle scale (see text).
eMust have unrestricted airflow 270° around the probe or sampler; 180° if the probe is on the side of a building.
The probe, sampler, or monitoring path should be away from minor sources, such as furnace or incineration flues. The separation distance is dependent on the height of the minor source's emission point (such as a flue), the type of fuel or waste
burned, and the quality of the fuel (sulfur, ash, or lead content). This criterion is designed to avoid undue influences from minor sources.
spor microscale CO monitoring sites, the probe must be >10 meters from a street intersection and preferably at a midblock location.
hFor collocated Pb and PM10 samplers, a 2-4 meter separation distance between collocated samplers must be met.
'Tables and Figure are in Appendix E of 40 CFR Part 58.
2-13
-------
2.3 OTHER AMBIENT AIR MONITORING DATA NEEDS
In addition to the 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D and E regulatory network requirements
pertaining to the number and location of ambient air monitoring stations established by State and local
agencies, there are a number of other ambient air monitoring data needs and uses that should be
considered when conducting State annual network reviews. EPA addresses some of these additional
ambient air data needs in its 1997 strategic plan, "Preparing for a New Era of Environmental
Protection,"9 which was developed in response to the Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA). The strategic plan addresses EPA's mission, goals, strategies to meet those goals, and
performance measures for determining progress towards those goals.
EPA's clean air objectives focus on improving ambient air quality and visibility, reducing
emissions of toxic and other air pollutants, bringing all areas of the country into compliance with
national air quality standards, and reducing acid rain. EPA will measure performance in these areas
by directly measuring concentrations of air pollutants, calculating and estimating emissions of air
pollutants, measuring acidic deposition and concentrations in rainfall, measuring visibility, and
tracking the number and status of nonattainment areas.
Examples of additional monitoring data needs or performance measures and indicators to be
used or reported include trends in air quality for each of the criteria pollutants; number of days when
one or more air quality standards is exceeded in the nation's largest metropolitan areas, change in
average annual visibility impairment in national parks and wilderness areas (Class I areas), average
annual sulfate and nitrate concentrations in rainfall, and concentration and dry deposition of sulfate
and nitrate in particles. To help meet these data needs, the EPA, in conjunction with the
Environmental Commission of the States (ECOS), has established the National Environmental
Performance Partnership System (NEPPS). In 1997, nearly half the States have Performance
Partnership Agreements (PPAs) in place with EPA. Through these agreements, EPA and States
determine together what work, including the collection of ambient air quality data, will be performed
on an annual basis and how that work will be accomplished. Conformance with the air monitoring
performance measures contained in these PPAs should also be determined during the annual review.
2-14
-------
A checklist for determining conformance with (non-regulatory) special monitoring program
requirements such as these is included in Section 4.
2-15
-------
3.0 NETWORK REVIEW PROCEDURE
3.1 NETWORK REVIEW TEAM AND PREPARATION
Network review participants should include Regional Office and State agency personnel who
are experienced in conducting network reviews and are familiar with the procedures described in this
guidance. Regional Office participants might include the State Programs or Air Monitoring Section
or Branch Chief; the SLAMS, NAMS, and/or PAMS Coordinators; the AIRS contact; and the
Quality Assurance Officer. State agency participants might include field technicians, engineers,
chemists, air modelers, AIRS data processors, and other computer specialists.
Depending on available resources, network reviews may be conducted off-site (when
resources are limited) or on-site (when resources permit). In either case, sufficient information must
be provided to determine conformance of the network with regulatory network design and siting
requirements specified in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendices D and E as well as to determine conformance
of the network design and siting requirements specified for all special ambient air monitoring
networks.
Because the conduct of comprehensive network reviews is resource-intensive, it may be
necessary to prioritize agencies and/or pollutants to be reviewed. The following criteria are suggested
for the selection process:
• Determine if the agency is operating and maintaining the required number of monitors as
described in 40 CFR Part 58 in a manner which reflects the regulation's intent
• Determine if the agency is meeting the number of monitors required by all special monitoring
networks (e.g., visibility, wet and dry deposition)
• Determine if the agency is operating existing special network monitors in accordance with
applicable documented requirements
• Consider when the last review was conducted
• Consider areas where attainment/nonattainment redesignations are taking place or are likely
to take place
• Consider results of special studies, saturation sampling, point source oriented ambient
monitoring, etc.
• Consider agencies which have proposed network modifications since the last network review
3-1
-------
Consider agencies and networks which have not had any modifications or reviews in recent
history that may have experienced significant population or emissions increases
In addition, pollutant-specific priorities may be considered (e.g., newly designated ozone
nonattainment areas, PM10 "problem areas", etc.).
Once the agencies have been selected for review, significant data and information pertaining
to the review should be compiled and evaluated. Such information might include the following:
1. network files for the selected agency (including updated site information and site photographs)
A. AIRS reports (See Appendix A)
AMP220, Monitoring Network Report
- AMP225, PAMS Network Report
AMPS80, Site Description Inventory
- AMPS 90, Site Monitor Status
- AMP450, Quick Look Report
AIRS Graphics Maps
B. air quality summaries for the past five years for the monitors in the network
C. emissions trends reports for major metropolitan area
D. emission information, such as emission density maps for the region in which the monitor is
located, and emission maps showing the major sources of emissions (see Appendix B)
E. National Weather Service summaries for monitoring network area
F. Topographical maps
2. Check information for last revision data
3. Check information for consistency
4. Note discrepancies on checklist and resolve with agency during network review. Any
discrepancies between the Agency network description and AIRS network description should
5-2
-------
be noted and resolved with the agency during the review. Files and/or photographs that need
to be updated should also be identified.
5. Note whether the description of the network included in the QA Plan(s) is (are) correct. If not,
the description(s) should be updated.
AIRS Executive may be used to provide an executive summary of AIRS information that can
be viewed quickly and easily on a PC. AIRS Executive contains a subset of data extruded from AIRS
and is a useful tool in looking at certain site and air quality data.
3.2 NETWORK MODIFICATIONS
Modifications to the SLAMS, NAMS, and PAMS networks are addressed in 40 CFR 58.25,
58.36, and 58.46, respectively. Under Section 58.25, States are required to annually develop and
implement schedules to modify the SLAMS network to eliminate any unnecessary stations or to
correct any inadequacies indicated by the annual network review required by 58.20(d). During the
annual review, any changes to the NAMS network identified by the EPA and/or proposed by the
State and agreed to by the EPA will also be evaluated. As specified in Section 58.36, the State is
given one year (until the next annual review) to implement the appropriate changes to the NAMS
network. As part of the annual network review, evaluations of the special networks established as
partnership agreements between EPA and States should also be conducted. Modifications to these
networks should be recommended as a result of this annual review.
An important objective of the network modification process is determining whether or not
sufficient ambient air quality information and data are being provided by the regulatory and other
special monitoring networks to satisfy the principal data needs. If sufficient air quality data are not
being collected, the deficient areas must be identified and corrective action taken to resolve the
problem. Conversely, if it is determined that excessive data are being collected (e.g., there are
redundant sites resulting in data that agree closely), then efforts need to be taken to determine where
disinvestment should be made and on what schedule.
-------
Network modifications may be initiated by the Regional Offices or proposed by the State and
agreed to by the EPA. Network modifications may result from revisions to the Part 58 regulations,
systems audits, site visits, or performance evaluations; special studies/saturation sampling; population
increases/decreases; air quality concentrations consistently recorded below the NAAQS; loss of
permission to use a site; demolition of a building which is used for monitoring; building construction;
growth of trees; changes in roadways; change in neighborhood type of use, etc. In addition,
modification may result from revisions to EPA/State PPAs.
In 1996, the Emissions, Monitoring and Analysis Division of EPA's Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards initiated a series of meetings, conference calls, and other correspondence with
EPA Regions and State and local agencies for the purpose of "Re-Engineering" or restructuring the
ambient air monitoring program. The first phase of this re-engineering process was designed to
identify ambient monitoring program elements that could be modified over the short-term to generate
cost savings to be directed toward new PM2 5 monitoring efforts.
The EPA, with input from Regional Offices and State and local agencies, identified a number
of actions to be considered to generate savings which could be directed towards new monitoring
efforts such as PM2 5 or expanded ozone monitoring.
The full report of the Reengineering Air Monitoring Networks Phase I results is included as
Appendix C. The report includes a summary of the work group efforts to provide suggestions for
modifying or reengineering the existing air monitoring networks. The report also includes a
discussion on potential savings for PAMS and criteria pollutants, the need for an improved oxides
of nitrogen database, and the need for implementing a new PM2 5 monitoring network. Additional
topics addressed include the operation of several NARSTO Northeast sites by government and
private sector/academic groups, the management of the CASTNET program, the development of a
population-based exposure network for monitoring radioactivity of atmospheric aerosols, and the
importance of an increased emphasis on PAMS data analysis. The report closes with a discussion of
the topic "Continuing Reengineering Objectives."
5-4
-------
3.3 GUIDANCE TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH APPENDIX D AND
SPECIAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
With regard to Appendix D requirements, the network reviewer must determine the adequacy
of the network in terms of number and location of monitors. Specifically, (1) is the agency meeting
the number of monitors required by the Part 58 Appendix D design criteria requirements?; and (2)
are the monitors properly located based on the monitoring objectives and spatial scales of
representativeness presented in Appendix D? For special monitoring networks, conformance
determinations would be conducted in accordance with program documents applicable to the special
networks.
3.3.1 Number and Location of Monitors
For SLAMS, which are not identified as NAMS or PAMS, the number of monitors required is
not specified in the regulations but rather is determined by the Regional Office and State agencies on
a case-by-case basis to meet the monitoring objectives specified in Appendix D. Adequacy of the
network may be determined by using a variety of tools, including the following:
analyses of historical monitoring data
maps of emission densities
dispersion modeling
special studies/saturation sampling
best professional judgement
SIP requirements
revised monitoring strategies (e.g., new regulations, lead strategy, reengineering air monitoring
network)
monitoring network maps and network descriptions with site objectives defined
Information needed to make these determinations includes the following types of data:
emission inventory
State based
- AIRS
3-5
-------
meteorological
climatological
traffic
topographical
historical
population
economic activity
projections
population
economic activity
photographs of current and potential sites
citizen complaints and public interest in monitoring network
enforcement actions
For NAMS, areas to be monitored must be selected based on urbanized population and pollutant
concentration levels. To determine whether the number of NAMS is adequate, the number of NAMS
operating is compared to the number of NAMS specified in 40 CFR 58 Appendix D and summarized
in Table 2-5 in this guidance. The number of NAMS operating can be determined from the AMP220
report in AIRS. The number of monitors required based on concentration levels and population can
be determined from the AMP450 report and the latest census population data.
For PAMS, the required number and type of monitoring sites and sampling requirements are
based on the population of the affected MSA/CMSA or ozone nonattainment area (whichever is
larger). PAMS minimum monitoring network requirements are summarized in Table 2-8.
For SLAMS, the location of monitors is not specified in the regulations, but is determined by
the Regional Office and State agencies on a case-by-case basis to meet the monitoring objectives
specified in Appendix D. Adequacy of the location of monitors can only be determined on the basis
of stated objectives. Many, if not all, of the tools and data listed in Section 3.3.1 for assessing the
adequacy of the number of monitors are also useful for assessing the adequacy of monitor locations.
In particular, maps, graphical overlays, and GIS-based information is extremely helpful in visualizing
or assessing the adequacy of monitor locations. Plots of potential emissions and/or historical
monitoring data versus monitor locations are especially useful. When questions arise about the
5-6
-------
adequacy of a particular location, modeling or special studies (including saturation monitoring
studies) may be appropriate.
For NAMS, locations are based on the objectives specified in Appendix D, Section 3. Most
often, these locations are those that have high concentrations and large population exposure.
Population information may be obtained from the latest census data and ambient monitoring data from
the AMP450 Quick Look Report. If the zip codes for various monitoring locations are obtained, use
of electronic media census information and GIS-based information can be more easily combined with
ambient monitoring data.
For PAMS, there is considerable flexibility when locating each PAMS within a nonattainment
area or transport region. The three fundamental criteria which need to be considered when locating
a final PAMS site are: (1) sector analysis - the site needs to be located in the appropriate downwind
(or upwind) sector (approximately 45°) using appropriate wind directions; (2) distance - the sites
should be located at distances appropriate to obtain a representative sample of the areas precursor
emissions and represent the appropriate monitoring scale; and (3) proximate sources.
For special monitoring for PPA, visibility, wet and dry deposition, etc., program documents
applicable to the network must be reviewed to determine the goals and specific siting criteria for the
network. Conformance with monitoring objective determinations of the special network should be
conducted using procedures similar to those used for Appendix D evaluations (i.e., are the number
of monitors appropriate and are the monitors properly located).
3.3.2 Checklists and Other Discussion Topics
Checklists are provided in Section 4.0 to assist network reviewers (SLAMS, NAMS, and PAMS
and special monitoring) in conducting the review. In addition to the items included in the checklists,
other subjects for possible discussion as part of the network review and overall adequacy of the
monitoring program include:
5-7
-------
installation of new monitors
relocation of existing monitors
siting criteria problems and suggested solutions
problems with data submittals and data completeness
maintenance and replacement of existing monitors and related equipment
data quality and other quality assurance problems
air quality studies and special monitoring programs
other issues
proposed regulations
funding
etc.
3.4 GUIDANCE TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH APPENDIX E
REQUIREMENTS
Applicable siting criteria for SLAMS, NAMS, and PAMS are specified in 40 CFR 58, Appendix
E. Because of limited travel funds, the number of on-site visits may have to be distributed as
resources permit (e.g., 5 to 20 percent of sites visited per year). The on-site visit itself consists of
the physical measurements and observations needed to determine compliance with the Appendix E
requirements, such as height above ground level, distance from trees, paved or vegetative ground
cover, etc.
Prior to the site visit, the reviewer should obtain and review the following:
most recent hard copy of site description (including any photographs)
data on the seasons with the greatest potential for high concentrations for specified pollutants
predominant wind direction by season
The following materials should be brought to the site under review:
1. field notebook
2. tape measure, measuring wheel, and/or range measuring system
3. compass or clinometer
4. camera with normal lens or video camcorder
5. most recent hard copy of site description
-------
6. copy of Appendix E probe siting criteria regulations
7. review checklist for applicable pollutant(s)
8. data on seasons for greatest pollutant concentrations and predominant wind direct!on(s) by
season
The checklist provided in Section 4.0 is also intended to assist the reviewer in determining
conformance with Appendix E. In addition to the items on the checklist, the reviewer should also do
the following:
ensure that the manifold and inlet probe are clean
estimate probe and manifold inside diameters and lengths
inspect the shelter for weather leaks, safety, and security
check equipment for missing parts, frayed cords, etc.
check that monitor exhausts are not likely to be reentrained by the inlet
record findings in field notebook and/or checklist
take photographs/videotape in the 8 directions
document site conditions, with additional photographs/videotape
3.5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Upon completion of the network review, a written network evaluation should be prepared. The
evaluation should include any deficiencies identified in the review, corrective actions needed to
address the deficiencies, and a schedule for implementing the corrective actions. The kinds of
discrepancies/deficiencies to be identified in the evaluation include discrepancies between the Agency
network description and the AIRS network description; and deficiencies in the number, location,
and/or type of monitors. The network evaluation should also highlight examples of what the network
does well, especially if deficiencies are relatively minor. Regions are encouraged to send copies of
the SLAMS, NAMS, and PAMS network reviews to OAQPS's Monitoring and Quality Assurance
Group.
5-9
-------
4.0 NETWORK REVIEW CHECKLISTS
The following checklists are intended to assist reviewers in conducting a network review. The
checklist will help the reviewer to determine if the NAMS/SLAMS/PAMS regulatory network
conforms with the network design and siting requirements specified in Appendices D and E and with
other special monitoring requirements. Section I of the checklist includes general information on the
network. Section II addresses conformance with Appendix D requirements. Section III includes
pollutant-specific evaluation forms to address conformance with Appendix E requirements. Section
IV addresses conformance with special monitoring program requirements. In addition to completing
the checklist during the network review, the action items cited in Section 3.4 should also be used as
a guide during an onsite visit of a monitoring station.
4-1
-------
NETWORK REVIEW CHECKLIST
SECTION I - GENERAL INFORMATION
Reviewer:
Review Date:
1. State or Local Agency:
Address
Contact
Telephone Number
2. Type of network review (check all that apply)
n SLAMS QNAMS QPAMS nSPM
n Other3
3. Network Summary Description
Number of sites currently operating or temporarily inoperative (<30 days)
Site type
SLAMS
(excluding
NAMS/PAMS)
NAMS
PAMS
SPM
Other3
TOTAL
Collocated
Index
CO
Pb
NO,
PM7.,
PM
10
SO,
voc
Carbonyls
NO,,
Surface Met
Upper Air
Met
4. Network Description
Date of most current official network description?
Copy available for review?
For each site, are the following items included:
AIRS Site ID
Sampling and Analysis Method
Operative Schedule
Monitoring Objective
Scale of Representativeness
Zip Code
Information on three closest roads
Any Proposed Changes
Yes
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
No
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
5. Date of last network review?
4-2
-------
Modifications made since last network review
Number of Monitors
CO
Pb
NO7
0,
PM9,
PMin
SO7
Total Suspended Particulate
ForPAMS:
VOC
Carbonyls
NOV
Surface Met
Upper Air Met
Added
Deleted
Relocated
7. Network Design and Siting
Summarize any nonconformance with the requirements of 40 CFR 58, Appendices D and E found in
Sections II and III, and/or with other requirements found in Section IV.
AIRS Site ID
Site Type
Reason for Nonconformance
CO
Pb
NO2
03
PM
-2.5
10
PM
SO2
VOC
Carbonyls
N0y
Surface Met
Upper Air Met
8. List problems found, actions to be taken, corrective measures, etc. called for in the last network review
that still have not been addressed.
"Visibility, wet/dry deposition, etc.
-------
SECTION II - EVALUATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH APPENDIX D REQUIREMENTS
Yes No"
1. Is the Agency meeting the number of monitors required based on 40 CFR Part 58
requirements?
SLAMS n n
NAMS n n
PAMS n n
If no, explain:
Yes No
2. Is the Agency operating existing monitors according to 40 CFR Part 58 requirements?
SLAMS n n
NAMS n n
PAMS n n
If no, explain:
Yes No
3. Are monitors properly located based on monitoring objectives and spatial scales of
representativeness specified in Appendix D?
SLAMS n n
NAMS n n
PAMS n n
If no, explain:
Yes No
4. For PAMS, when C or F sampling frequency is used, has an ozone event forecasting n n
scheme been submitted and reviewed?
If no, explain:
Network Design/Review Determined by (check all that apply)
n Dispersion modeling n Special studies (including saturation sampling)
n Best professional judgement n Other (specify )
Comment (for example, SO2 dispersion modeling for urbanized area A; PM10 saturation study for urbanized
area B, etc.)
Evaluation was based on the following information (check all that apply):
n emission inventory data n traffic data n AIRS site reports
n meteorological data n topographic data n site photographs, videotape, etc.
n climatological data n historical data n other (specify )
4-4
-------
SECTION III - EVALUATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH APPENDIX E REQUIREMENTS
IIIA - CARBON MONOXIDE NAMS/SLAMS SITE EVALUATION
Agency Site Name :
Make and Model # :
of Instrument
Site Address :
Citv & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed bv :
CRITERIA*
Horizontal and Vertical
Probe Placement (Par. 4.1)
Spacing from Obstructions
(Par. 4.2)
Spacing from Roads
(Par. 4.3)
Spacing from Trees (Par 4.4)
REQUIREMENTS*
3 ±l/2 m for microscale
3-15 m for middle and
neighborhood scale
>270° or 180° if on side of
building
2-10 m from edge of nearest
traffic lane for microscale;
>10 m from intersection,
preferably at midblock
See Table 1 for middle and
neighborhood scale
Should be > 10 m from
dripline of trees if tree is >5m
above sampler and is between
the probe and the road
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes No
N/A
Comments
*Citations from 40 CFR 58, Appendix E.
4-5
-------
IIIB - LEAD NAMS/SLAMS SITE EVALUATION
Agency Site Name :
Make and Model # :
of Instrument
Site Address :
Citv & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed by :
CRITERIA*
Vertical Probe Placement
(Par. 7.1)
Obstructions on Roof
(Par. 7.2)
Obstacle Distance (Par. 7.2)
Unrestricted Airflow
(Par. 7.2)
Furnace or Incinerator Flues
(Par. 7.2)
Spacing from Station to
Road (Par. 7.3)
Spacing from Trees
(Par. 7.4)
REQUIREMENTS*
2-7 m above ground for
microscale
2-15 m above ground for other
scales
> 2 m from walls, parapets,
penthouses, etc.
2 x height differential
At least 270° (except for street
canyon sites)
Recommended that none are in
the vicinity
5-15 m for microscale
See Table 4 for other scales
Microscale and middle scale
must not be any trees between
source (vehicles) and sampler
Neighborhood scale should be >
20 m from dripline of trees
Neighborhood scale must be
> 10 m if trees are an
obstruction
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes
No
N/A
N/A
Comments
*Citations from 40 CFR 58, Appendix E.
4-6
-------
IIIC - NITROGEN DIOXIDE NAMS/SLAMS SITE EVALUATION
Agency Site Name :
Make and Model # :
of Instrument
Site Address :
Citv & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed bv :
CRITERIA*
Vertical Probe Placement
(Par. 6.1)
Spacing from Supporting
Structure (Par. 6.1)
Obstacle Distance (Par. 6.2)
Unrestricted Airflow
(Par. 6.2)
Spacing between Station and
Roadway (Par. 6.3)
Spacing from Trees
(Par. 6.4)
Probe Material (Par. 9)
Residence Time (Par. 9)
REQUIREMENTS*
3-15 m above ground
Greater than 1 m
> Twice the height the
obstacle protrudes above
probe
Must be 270° or 180° if on
side of building
See Table 3
Should be > 20 m from
dripline of trees
Must be > 10 m from dripline
if trees are an obstruction**
Teflon or pyrex glass
Less than 20 seconds
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes
No
N/A
Comments
*Citations from 40 CFR 58, Appendix E.
**A tree is considered an obstruction if it protrudes above the height of the probe by 5 meters or more.
4-7
-------
HID - OZONE NAMS/SLAMS SITE EVALUATION
Agency Site Name :
Make and Model # :
of Instrument
Site Address :
Citv & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed bv :
CRITERIA*
Vertical Probe Placement
(Par. 5.1)
Spacing from Supporting
Structure (Par. 5.1)
Obstacle Distance (Par. 5.2)
Unrestricted Airflow
(Par. 5.2)
Spacing between Station and
Roadway (Par. 5.3)
Spacing from Trees
(Par. 5.4)
Probe Material (Par. 9)
Residence Time (Par. 9)
REQUIREMENTS*
3-15 m above ground
Greater than 1 m
> Twice the height the
obstacle protrudes above
probe
Must include predominant
wind. 180° if on side of
building. Otherwise 270°
See Table 2
Should be > 20 m from
dripline
Must be > 10 m if blocking
daytime wind from urban
core
Teflon or pyrex glass
Less than 20 seconds
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes
No
N/A
Comments
*Citations from 40 CFR 58, Appendix E.
4-8
-------
HIE - PM7 , NAMS/SLAMS SITE EVALUATION
Agency Site Name :
Make and Model # :
of Instrument
Site Address :
Citv & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed bv :
CRITERIA*
Vertical Probe Placement
(Par. 8.1)
Obstructions on Roof
Spacing from Trees
(Par. 8.2)
Obstacle Distance (Par. 8.2)
Unrestricted Airflow
(Par. 8.2)
Furnace or Incinerator Flues
(Par. 8.2)
Distance between Collocated
Monitors (Appendix A,
Par. 3.5.2)
Spacing from Station to
Road (Par. 8.3)
Paving (Par. 8.4)
REQUIREMENTS*
2-7 m above ground for
microscale
2-15 m above ground for other
scales
> 2 m from walls, parapets,
penthouses, etc.
Should be > 20 m from dripline
of trees
Must be > 10m from dripline if
trees are an obstruction**
2 x height differential (street
canyon sites exempt)
At least 270° including the
predominant wind direction
Recommended that none are in
the vicinity
1 to 4 m
See Par. 8.3 and/or Figure 2 of
Appendix E
Area should be paved or have
vegetative ground cover
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
Comments
*Citations from 40 CFR 58, Appendix E.
**A tree is considered an obstruction if the distance between the tree(s) and the sampler is less than the height that
the tree protrudes above the sampler.
4-9
-------
IIIF - PMin NAMS/SLAMS SITE EVALUATION
Agency Site Name :
Make and Model # :
of Instrument
Site Address :
Citv & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed bv :
CRITERIA*
Vertical Probe Placement
(Par. 8.1)
Obstructions on Roof
Spacing from Trees
(Par. 8.2)
Obstacle Distance (Par. 8.2)
Unrestricted Airflow
(Par. 8.2)
Furnace or Incinerator Flues
(Par. 8.2)
Distance between Collocated
Monitors (Appendix A,
Par. 3.3)
Spacing from Station to
Road (Par. 8.3)
Paving (Par. 8.4)
REQUIREMENTS*
2-7 m above ground for
microscale
2-15 m above ground for other
scales
> 2 m from walls, parapets,
penthouses, etc.
Should be > 20 m from dripline
of trees
Must be > 10m from dripline if
trees are an obstruction**
2 x height differential (street
canyon sites exempt)
At least 270° including the
predominant wind direction
Recommended that none are in
the vicinity
2 to 4m
See Par. 8.3 and/or Figure 2 of
Appendix E
Area should be paved or have
vegetative ground cover
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
Comments
*Citations from 40 CFR 58, Appendix E.
**A tree is considered an obstruction if the distance between the tree(s) and the sampler is less than the height that
the tree protrudes above the sampler.
4-10
-------
IIIG - SULFUR DIOXIDE NAMS/SLAMS SITE EVALUATION
Agency Site Name :
Make and Model #
of Instrument :
Site Address :
Citv & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed bv :
CRITERIA*
Horizontal and Vertical
Probe Placement (Par. 3.1)
Spacing from Obstructions
(Par. 3.2)
Spacing from Trees
(Par. 3.3)
REQUIREMENTS*
3-15 m above ground
> 1 m from supporting
structure
Away from dirty, dusty areas
If on side of building, should
be on side of prevailing
winter wind
> 1 m from walls, parapets,
penthouses, etc.
If neighborhood scale, probe
must be at a distance > twice
the height the obstacle
protrudes above probe
>270° arc of unrestricted
airflow around vertical
probes and wind during peak
season must be included in
arc
180° if on side of building
No furnace or incineration
flues or other minor sources
of SO7 should be nearby
Should be > 20 m from
dripline of trees
> 10 m when trees act as an
obstruction
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
*Citations from 40 CFR 58, Appendix E.
4-11
-------
SECTION IV - EVALUATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH SPECIAL MONITORING PROGRAM
REQUIREMENTS
Applicable Program
(e.g., visibility, wet
deposition, dry deposition) :
Make and Model #
of Instruments :
Agency Site Name :
Site Address :
City & State :
AIRS Site ID :
Date :
Observed by :
References for Requirements :
(e.g., visibility, SOPs including siting criteria)
Are checklists, review forms included in references for requirements?
n Yes
QNo
n Some
If some or yes, give number of forms
Include additional criteria below.
_. Attach complete forms to sheet.
CRITERIA
REQUIREMENT
REFERENCE
OBSERVED
CRITERIA MET?
Yes No N/A
Comments
4-12
-------
5.0 REFERENCES
1. Code of Federal Regulations., Title 40, Part 58, "Ambient Air Quality surveillance and Data
Reporting," U.S. Government Printing Office, 1997.
2. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 58, Appendix D, Network Design for State and
Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS), National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS), and
Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS), U.S. Government Printing Office,
1997.
3. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 58, Appendix D, Section 6. References, Network
Design for State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS), National Air Monitoring Stations
(NAMS), and Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS), U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1997.
4. "Ambient Air Quality Surveillance for Lead," Proposed Direct Final Rule. Contained in EPA's
AMTIC web page, under Regulations/Proposed Regulations Parts 50, 53, 58, document
description is "Revision to Lead NAAQS will be final 15 days after comment period if no
adverse comments are received."
5. "Requirements for Implementation Plans and Ambient Air Quality Surveillance for Sulfur Oxides
(Sulfur Dioxide) National Ambient Air Quality Standards," Federal Register, Vol. 60, No. 44,
March 7, 1995, pp. 12492-12519.
6. "Revised Requirements for Designation of Reference and Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
Ambient Air Quality Surveillance for Particulate Matter; Final Rule," Federal Register, Vol. 62,
No. 138, July 18, 1997.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance for Network Design and Optimum Site
Exposure for PM2 5 and PM,0 . Prepared by Desert Research Institute, U.S. EPA/OAQPS,
NOAA, December 15, 1997.
8. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 58, Appendix E, Probe Siting Criteria for Ambient
Air Quality Monitoring, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1997.
9. "Preparing for a New Era of Environmental Protection," U.S. EPA, 1997.
5-1
-------
APPENDIX A
AMP220
AMP225
AMP380
AMP390
AMP450
-------
DATE 03/19/98
AMP220
MONITOR TYPE (1): NAMS
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
MONITORING NETWORK REPORT
PAGE
STATE: 34 NEW JERSEY
REGION: 02
URBANIZED AREA (6160)
SITE ID
POLL POC
34-007-0003 S02
03
PM
34-007-0005 PM
34-007-1007 PM
PHILADELPHIA, PA-NJ
REQD ADDRESS
SAMP MONITORING OBJECTIVE
FREQ MEASUREMENT SCALE
COPEWOOD E. DAVIS STS; TRAILER
POPULATION EXPOSURE
NEIGHBORHOOD - 500 M TO 4KM
COPEWOOD E. DAVIS STS; TRAILER
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
URBAN SCALE - 4 KM TO 50 KM
6 COPEWOOD E. DAVIS STS; TRAILER
POPULATION EXPOSURE
NEIGHBORHOOD - 500 M TO 4KM
6 LIBRARY,RUTGERS UNIV., NORTH F
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
NEIGHBORHOOD - 500 M TO 4KM
6 PENNSAUKEN TWP; MORRIS-DELAIR
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
NEIGHBORHOOD - 500 M TO 4KM
MET-APP:A OPER SITE-CRIT PROBE
DATE DATE MET DATE HT (M)
81/01 68/01/01 YES 68/01 5
81/01 68/01/01 YES 68/01
91/08 91/08/04 YES 91/08
87/04
87/04/09 YES 87/04 10
87/05 87/05/30 YES 87/05
ACTION
TAKEN
REASON
APP
APP
APP
APP
APP
—ROAD DESCRIPTION
STREET DIST TRAFFIC
NUM (M) (ADT)
3 150 3000
430
14000
2
1
1
2
1
2
430
915
120
120
460
120
14000
45000
68000
60000
10000
2000
DATE 03/19/98
AMP220
MONITOR TYPE (1): NAMS
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
MONITORING NETWORK REPORT
STATE: 34 NEW JERSEY
REGION: 02
URBANIZED AREA (8480)
SITE ID
POLL POC
34-021-0005 03
34-023-0006 O3
TRENTON, NJ-PA
REQD ADDRESS
SAMP MONITORING OBJECTIVE
FREQ MEASUREMENT SCALE
RIDER COLLEGE;LAWRENCE TOWNSHI
POPULATION EXPOSURE
NEIGHBORHOOD - 500 M TO 4KM
RYDERS LANE & LOG CABIN ROAD
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
URBAN SCALE - 4 KM TO 50 KM
MET-APP:A
DATE
81/06
OPER
DATE
81/06/01
SITE-CRIT
MET DATE
YES 81/06
PROBE
HT (M)
4
81/03 81/03/18 YES 81/03
ACTION
TAKEN
REASON
APP
APP
—ROAD DESCRIPTION
STREET DIST TRAFFIC
NUM (M) (ADT)
1 183 64000
320
63000
A-l
-------
DATE 03/23/98 EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
AMP225 AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
PAMS MONITORING NETWORK REPORT
MONITOR TYPE (6) : PAMS METEORLOGICAL AND VOC
REGION: 09
STATE (06) : CALIFORNIA
( ) :
Q T TTT TTVTTT'Pt'R'M'S T1 T ("1TVT TVTPlTVr T Ti^T? TTVTTT'i^'P'M'A T1 T ("1TVT
o ± 1 Hj -LlMr UKlYLrt.1 -LU1M lYUJlM ± 1 UK XlMr UruYLrt.1 ±U1M
SITE-ID
ADDRESS
CITY, STATE
TYPE SITE / DESCRIPTION
PARAMETER / DESCRIPTION
ROAD (#) / NAME / TRAFFIC FLOW SAMPLING FREQUENCY DESCRIPTION
06-019-4001 (42600) REACTIVE OXIDES OF N
9240 S. RIVERBEND, PARLIER 93648 DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
PARLIER, CA
(3) MAX OZONE CONCENT (42601) NITRIC OXIDE
DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
(1) SMITH, 000500 ADT (42603) OXIDES OF NITROGEN
(2) MANNING AVE . , 013051 ADT DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
(43101) TOTAL HYDROCARBONS
DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
- - - (61101) WIND SPEED
9240 S. RIVERBEND, PARLIER 93648 DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
PARLIER, CA
(61102) WIND DIRECTION
DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
(62101) OUTDOOR TEMPERATURE
DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
(62201) RELATIVE HUMIDITY
DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
9240 S. RIVERBEND, PARLIER 93648 (63301) SOLAR RADIATION
PARLIER, CA DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
(63302) ULTRVIOLET RADIATION
DAILY: 24 - 1 HR SAMPLES -PAMS
(64101) BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
(AIRS)
ROAD # /
POC
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DISTANCE
ROAD
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(M)
10
800
10
800
800
10
800
10
800
10
800
10
800
10
800
10
800
10
800
10
800
10
PROBE
HT (M)
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
DATE
SAMPLING
BEGAN
06/07/95
01/01/94
01/01/94
06/07/95
07/21/87
07/21/87
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
EFFECTIVE
APP DATE
AS PAMS
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
06/07/95
PAGE 1
SITE CRIT MET
ACTION TYPE
ACTION REASON
Y
APP
96
Y
96
96
APP
Y
APP
96
Y
APP
96
Y
APP
96
Y
APP
96
Y
APP
96
Y
APP
Y
APP
96
Y
APP
96
Y
A-2
-------
DATE 03/23/98
AMP380
EPA REGION: 05
SITE ID: 17-031-0025
CITY POPULATION
AQCR POPULATION
ADDRESS:
3,005,072
7,917,109
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
SITE DESCRIPTION INVENTORY
STATE (17): ILLINOIS
KENWOOD HIGH SCHOOL 5015 S BLACKSTONE AV STATE/LOCAL ID:
MET SITE:
SITE ID
DISTANCE SITE M
DIRECTION SITE
TYPE SITE ( )
AQCR
CMSA LOCATED IN
LAND USE
LOCATION SETTING
MSA LOCATED IN
SITE COMMENT 1
SITE COMMENT 2
URBAN AREA REPRESENTED
SITE ID: 17-031-0025
PARAMETER 42101
POC 1
MONITOR TYPE 0
REPORTING ORGANIZ
COLLECTING LAB 000
ANALYZING LAB 000
UNRESTRIC AIR FLOW
MONITOR COMMENTS 1 11
PARAMETER 42401
POC 1
MONITOR TYPE 0
REPORTING ORGANIZ
COLLECTING LAB 000
ANALYZING LAB 000
UNRESTRIC AIR FLOW
DOMINANT SOURCE (1)
MONITOR COMMENTS 1 13
PARAMETER 42401
POC 2
MONITOR TYPE 0
REPORTING ORGANIZ
COLLECTING LAB 000
ANALYZING LAB 000
UNRESTRIC AIR FLOW
DOMINANT SOURCE (1)
MONITOR COMMENTS 1 14
CITY (14000)
COUNTY (031)
DATE ESTABLISHED
DATE TERMINATED
DATE LAST UPDATE
HQ EVAL DATE
REGN EVAL DATE
CHICAGO
COOK CO
1997/05/05
(067):
(0014)
(1)
(2)
(1600)
(0000)
METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
CHI-GARY-KENOSHA,IL-IN-WI
RESIDENTIAL
SUBURBAN
CHICAGO, IL
IEPA OPERATES OZONE MONITOR
TAMN SO2, WD, WS, COH, NO2,
NOT IN AN URBAN AREA
DATE SAMPLING BEGAN
DATE SAMPLING ENDED
DATE TYPE EFFECTIVE
RO EFFECTIVE DATE
AUDIT DATE
PROBE LOCATION ( )
PROBE HEIGHT
DATE SAMPLING BEGAN
DATE SAMPLING ENDED
DATE TYPE EFFECTIVE
RO EFFECTIVE DATE
AUDIT DATE
PROBE LOCATION ( )
PROBE HEIGHT
POINT
DATE SAMPLING BEGAN
DATE SAMPLING ENDED
DATE TYPE EFFECTIVE
RO EFFECTIVE DATE
AUDIT DATE
PROBE LOCATION ( )
PROBE HEIGHT
POINT
1978/01/01
1987/12/31
1978/01/01
16 M
1974/01/01
1980/12/31
1974/01/01
16 M
1975/01/01
1980/12/31
1975/01/01
16 M
DIST CITY:
DIFF GMT :
ELEV MSL :
COMP SECT:
NO STARTED 12/71
SITE CRITERIA MET
REF MTHOD USED
QA PLAN
ACTION TYPE
MONITOR OPEN PATH NUM
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE
SITE CRITERIA MET
REF MTHOD USED
QA PLAN
ACTION TYPE
MONITOR OPEN PATH NUM
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE
SITE CRITERIA MET
REF MTHOD USED
QA PLAN
ACTION TYPE
MONITOR OPEN PATH NUM
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE
K UTM ZONE :
06 UTM NORTH:
196 M UTM EAST :
LATITUDE :
LONGITUDE:
PAGE
16
4628086
450808
+41:48:18
-087:35:32
DATE SITE CRITERIA MET
REF METHOD USED DATE
QA EFFECTIVE DATE
ACTION TYPE REASON
PROJECT CLASS
VERTICAL DISTANCE
DATE SITE CRITERIA MET
REF METHOD USED DATE
QA EFFECTIVE DATE
ACTION TYPE REASON
PROJECT CLASS
VERTICAL DISTANCE
DATE SITE CRITERIA MET
REF METHOD USED DATE
QA EFFECTIVE DATE
ACTION TYPE REASON
PROJECT CLASS
VERTICAL DISTANCE
/
/
89/10
01
/
/
89/10
02
/
/
89/10
02
A-3
-------
0
(0)
(0)
MET AIRS ID:
(1) 1
DAN RYAN
(2) EXPRESSWAY
261200
1991
E
12136-1
0 - 1986/01/01
DATE 03/23/98
AMP390
CURRENT VALUES FOR SITE 17-031-0026
REGION: 05 STATE: ILLINOIS
COMPASS SECTOR SE
UTM ZONE 16
MSA: (1600) CHICAGO, IL
LAND USE: (7) MOBILE
HQ EVAL DATE: / /
PAMS INFORMATION:
TYPE PAMS SITE (1)
MSA REP.
CMSA REP.
PAMS MET SITE TYPE:
TANGENT STREET NUM
STREET NAME
TYPE ROAD
TRAFFIC FLOW
YR OF TRAF FLOW
DIR TO STREET
PARAMETER-POC
MONITOR TYPE-DATE
NON-ATTAINMENT AREA
URBAN AREA REPRESENTED
ACTION TAKEN
ACTION REASON
COLLECTING LAB
ANALYZING LAB
REPORT ORGANIZATION
REPORT ORG DATE
DOMINANT SOURCE
MEASUREMENT SCALE
PROBE HEIGHT 8 METERS
PROBE LOCATION
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 0 METERS
VERTICAL DISTANCE 0 METERS
SITING CRITERIA-DATE - /
REF METHOD-DATE - /
QA PLAN-DATE
DATE SAMPLING BEGAN
DATE SAMPLING ENDED / /
AUDIT DATE / /
MONITORING OBJECTIVE
PAMS REQ SF
UNRESTRICTED AIR FLOW
TYPE OBSTRUCTION: (1) (2)
HEIGHT OBSTRUCTION: 0 M
DISTANCE: 0 M
DIRECTION:
STREET NUMBER (1) (2)
DISTANCE ROAD 0 M
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
SITE MONITOR STATUS REPORT
ADDRESS: CERMAK PMG STATION 735 W HARRISON
LONGITUDE 87:38:42 W LATITUDE 41:52:24 N
UTM EASTING 446469 UTM NORTHING 4635707
AQCR: (067) METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
DISTANCE
METHOD
SCALE:
CITY:
CITY: 001
OF DET:
PAGE
KM ELEVATION MSL:
180 M
(14000)
EST OF ACC:
CHICAGO
LOCATION-SETTING: (1) URBAN AND
RG EVAL DATE:
CENTE
/ /
SUPPORT AGENCY: (001) ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT
(2) 2
HARRISON
(5) THRU ST
8600
1979
N
(1601) CHICAGO, IL-NORTHWESTERN
003 - COOK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
003 - COOK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
003 - COOK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
1995/01/01
89/10
1986/01/01
0 M
0 M
0 M
(3)
(3)
0 M
0 M
0 M
(2)
0
(0)
(0)
(3)
(4)
OR
12154-1
3 - 1988/09/01
(1601) CHICAGO, IL-NORTHWESTERN
ENVIRONMENTAL PR
ENVIRONMENTAL PR
ENVIRONMENTAL PR
001 - ILLINOIS
001 - ILLINOIS
001 - ILLINOIS
1988/09/01
0 METERS
0 METERS
0 METERS
89/10
1988/09/01
(1) MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
(1)
(1)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(5)
0
(0)
(0)
(6)
12164-1
3 - 1990/01/05
(1601) CHICAGO, IL-NORTHWESTERN
001 - ILLINOIS
001 - ILLINOIS
001 - ILLINOIS
1990/01/05
ENVIRONMENTAL PR
ENVIRONMENTAL PR
ENVIRONMENTAL PR
METERS
METERS
METERS
89/10
1990/01/05
(1)
(1)
0 M
0 M
0 M
0 M
0 M
0 M
(2)
(2)
0 M
0 M
0 M
(3)
(3)
0 M
0 M
0 M
A-4
-------
DATE 03/23/98
AMP450EX
TSP RECORDS EXTRACTED: 0
PB RECORDS EXTRACTED: 0
CO RECORDS EXTRACTED: 0
SO2 RECORDS EXTRACTED: 0
NO2 RECORDS EXTRACTED: 0
O3 RECORDS EXTRACTED: 0
PM10 RECORDS EXTRACTED: 160
OTHER RECORDS EXTRACTED: 0
DATE 03/23/98
AMP450
PM-10 TOTAL 0-10UM (81102)
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
QUICK LOOK PROCESSING SUMMARY REPORT
PAGE
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
QUICK LOOK REPORT
ALABAMA
(AIRS)
PAGE
UNITS: 001 UG/CU METER (25 C)
SITE ID
01-015-0001
01-015-0001
01-015-0001
01-015-0001
01-033-1002
01-033-1002
01-033-1002
01-033-1002
01-049-1002
01-049-1002
01-049-1002
01-049-1002
01-053-0002
01-053-0002
01-053-0002
01-053-0002
01-055-0008
01-055-0008
01-055-0008
01-055-0008
01-055-0008
01-055-0008
01-055-0008
01-055-0008
01-059-0001
01-059-0001
01-059-0001
01-059-0001
01-069-0002
? INDICATES
P
O
C
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
M
T
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
CITY
ANNISTON
ANNISTON
ANNISTON
ANNISTON
MUSCLE SHO
MUSCLE SHO
MUSCLE SHO
MUSCLE SHO
FORT PAYNE
FORT PAYNE
FORT PAYNE
FORT PAYNE
BREWTON
BREWTON
BREWTON
BREWTON
GADSDEN
GADSDEN
GADSDEN
GADSDEN
GADSDEN
GADSDEN
GADSDEN
GADSDEN
RUSSELLVIL
RUSSELLVIL
RUSSELLVIL
RUSSELLVIL
DOTHAN
COUNTY
CALHOUN CO
CALHOUN CO
CALHOUN CO
CALHOUN CO
COLBERT CO
COLBERT CO
COLBERT CO
COLBERT CO
DE KALB CO
DE KALB CO
DE KALB CO
DE KALB CO
ESCAMBIA C
ESCAMBIA C
ESCAMBIA C
ESCAMBIA C
ETOWAH CO
ETOWAH CO
ETOWAH CO
ETOWAH CO
ETOWAH CO
ETOWAH CO
ETOWAH CO
ETOWAH CO
FRANKLIN C
FRANKLIN C
FRANKLIN C
FRANKLIN C
HOUSTON CO
ADDRESS
309 EAST 8TH STREET
309 EAST 8TH STREET
309 EAST 8TH STREET
309 EAST 8TH STREET
WILSON DAM RD AND 2ND
WILSON DAM RD AND 2ND
WILSON DAM RD AND 2ND
WILSON DAM RD AND 2ND
1500 WILLIAMS AVE . N.
1500 WILLIAMS AVE. N.
1500 WILLIAMS AVE. N.
1500 WILLIAMS AVE. N.
BELLVILLE AVE . BREWTON
BELLVILLE AVE . BREWTON
BELLVILLE AVE . BREWTON
BELLVILLE AVE . BREWTON
3200 WALNUT ST
3200 WALNUT ST
3200 WALNUT ST
3200 WALNUT ST
3200 WALNUT ST
3200 WALNUT ST
3200 WALNUT ST
3200 WALNUT ST
NORTH ALABAMA HOSPITA
NORTH ALABAMA HOSPITA
NORTH ALABAMA HOSPITA
NORTH ALABAMA HOSPITA
EAST HIGHLAND ST., BO
YR
94
95
96
97
94
95
96
97
94
95
96
97
94
95
96
97
94
95
96
97
94
95
96
97
94
95
96
97
94
REP
ORG
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
SCHEDULED
NUM NUM % NUM -
DBS DBS DBS REQ
56
59
53
57
55
57
54
59
53
52
44
52
60
61
60
61
59
60
59
55
52
48
49
42
57
60
60
61
56
56
59
53
57
55
57
54
59
53
51
44
52
60
61
60
61
59
60
59
55
52
48
49
42
57
60
60
61
56
89
94
83
90
87
90
84
94
84
81
69
83
95
97
94
97
94
95
92
87
83
76
77
67
90
95
94
97
89
63
63
64
63
63
63
64
63
63
63
64
63
63
63
64
63
63
63
64
63
63
63
64
63
63
63
64
63
63
MAXIMUM VALUE S-
1ST 2ND 3RD
46
68
40
51
57
55
48
44
50
71
50
51
69
63
50
55
73
65
55
63
69
72
57
56
61
57
50
49
97
44
62
31
49
39
49
46
41
45
68
45
49
52
51
41
51
57
60
47
58
51
63
50
51
44
45
45
43
63
43
56
29
47
39
42
32
39
38
49
42
49
44
47
40
46
50
53
43
53
50
46
45
47
43
43
34
41
55
\T
4TH M
42
43
29
47
38
41
31
39
37
48
39
47
44
46
40
46
49
51
42
52
48
45
40
44
42
42
33
40
53
WTD
ALS > 150 ARITH
EAS EST MEAN METH
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
24?
23
19?
23
20?
22
18
19
25?
26?
21?
23?
27
27
24
26
31
30
23
28
29?
29?
24?
25?
22
23
19
21
28
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
063
THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
A-5
-------
APPENDIX B
COUNTY EMISSIONS SUMMARY MAPS
MAPS OF MONITORS AND EMISSION SOURCES
-------
c
<
D c
CM O
O
o
m H
D_ D_
o o
o o o
o o o
O
in
0)
a
B-l
-------
< z % m
o o tr
= O - O CL LU
CO CD CO CD [TJ
LU
CL
en
en
O
O
CO
QJ
B-2
-------
Q_
I—
in
o
O
C/)
in
c
o
CM
CD
B-3
-------
CD
CO
O ^- O
o
„ o
0^3
C/l S 3 ^
TQ
: T3
i D
B-4
-------
o
UJ
o
o
(D
D _ a -t;
B-5
-------
APPENDIX C
REENGINEERING AIR MONITORING NETWORKS
-------
Reengineering Air Monitoring Networks
Phase I results - [Short-term measures which may be implemented immediately (FY-97), or
shortly thereafter]:
Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS)
Many commenters on the reengineering project noted that significant savings could be realized by reducing
the sampling frequency for carbonyl compounds at the PAMS #2 Sites. For example, decreasing the carbonyl
sampling frequency to four 3-hour samples every third day, retaining the year-round 24-hour sample, and adding
a component to monitor on five peak ozone days plus each previous day, could save an agency as much as 60%
on their carbonyl sampling alone. Additionally, reductions in VOC sampling at the PAMS #1, #3, and #4 canister
Sites to a similar frequency, could save approximately 25% at each of those sites. To effect such changes, an
agency would need to apply for a revision to its PAMS Network Plan; this request could minimally take the form
of a letter proposing the adoption of these changes and specifying the particular 3-hour periods which would be
monitored. It would be important, however, to maintain the same monitoring frequencies/periods at #1, #3 and
#4 Sites in the same network and/or transport area. It also should be noted that there are some questions on the
quality of carbonyl data. Efforts need to be extended to improve data quality.
For the FY-97 season, the following action is therefore recommended:
Solicit PAMS plan amendment letters from the affected PAMS States and local agencies which reduce
carbonyl sampling at PAMS #2 Sites; and, reduce VOC sampling at other PAMS Sites using canisters.
Criteria Pollutants
Most State and local agencies who commented on the reengineering straw man indicated that they had already
conducted analyses to optimize their monitoring networks, eliminating unnecessary sites where possible and
retaining sites necessary for their programs (e.g., assessing air quality violations, conducting trend analyses,
addressing citizen complaints, and maintaining geographic coverage). Only those State and local agencies who
have not completed this type of network modification will realize savings from implementing the straw man
recommendations for their State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS). The EPA would encourage any
agency who has not conducted such network evaluation and modification to implement similar optimization
measures.
Substantial decreases in ambient lead levels and reduced sulfur dioxide emissions are the basis for ongoing
modifications to the monitoring regulations for lead (e.g., virtual elimination of mobile source oriented lead
monitoring) and sulfur dioxide, respectively. These modifications are in varying stages of progress and have the
potential to free resources for emerging monitoring needs. Similarly, very few violations of the nitrogen dioxide
standard have been recorded. Combined with the fact that existing NAMS/SLAMS Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
instruments are biased high (i.e., they record values higher than true Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), it is reasonable to
initiate reductions in NO2 monitoring used for comparisons to the NAAQS (as opposed to PAMS locations where
estimates of ozone precursors are desired). We do not feel that a rule change is needed for reducing NO2 sites
as the requirements are minimal, and some number of sites are needed for air quality trends and emissions
C-l
-------
tracking. Accordingly, we still require retaining existing NAMS and PAMS NOx monitoring sites. Similarly,
several CO sites have been recording very low values on a consistent basis. Although specific guidance is not
yet available, we will be receptive to common sense case-by-case recommendations that are based on situations
where measurements reflect high repetitions (i.e., several sites in a well-mixed air basin), low values, and /or low
population densities. Our suggested targets in Table 1 assume that those sites consistently measuring less than
60% of the NAAQS would be removed.
Finally, the PM-10 monitoring efforts must be reduced (not eliminated) as greater emphasis (and resources)
will be required for PM2.5 monitoring. A basic guideline for PM-10 is to retain all NAMS sites for long-term
trends, and only those other sites that measure greater than 60% of the annual PM-10 standard to reach a national
goal of roughly 494 NAMS/SLAMS PM-10 sites for 2000 and beyond. A similar approach could be used for
special purpose PM-10 sites.
We recognize that our national goals do not fit precisely with the State by State plans, and many of our
assumptions fall short in addressing local situations. Clearly, we need strong communications for us to
collectively meet these National targets. Guidance for reconfiguring the networks is underway, and we will meet
with Regional Office and State/local agencies to tailor modifications that balance the realities of State/local
programs with a shift in National priorities. In addition, many commenters pointed out that we should not expect
major resource savings from these criteria pollutant monitoring programs because several changes had been
initiated by State and local agencies.
Rural PAMS, Reactive Oxides of Nitrogen (NOy), speciated PM-2.5 and data
analysis
Nitrogen/NOy
The PAMS program produces a wealth of VOC measurements, but has only marginally improved our nitrogen
(NOx, NOy) data base. Given the importance of NOx and NOy in detecting emissions trends for NOx control
strategies and assisting the use of observational based models and other characterization methods, we suggested
that improved nitrogen measurements be considered as part of our reengineering proposal. It remains our opinion
that improved nitrogen measurements are a worthwhile enhancement to PAMS. However, we received very little
feedback in this area. Our level of proactivity is dictated largely on your responses and needs. Consequently,
without strong support from the user community, we can effect only minor changes. At this time, measurements
of total reactive oxides of nitrogen (NOy) are encouraged at PAMS, but are not required. Conceivably, reduction
in carbonyl and VOC sampling and analysis frequencies could free resources for NOy monitoring. However,
implementing a new PM-2.5 monitoring network is the highest priority across monitoring programs. The EPA
recognizes the limitation of many of the current NOx instruments as well as the value of NOy data. Nitrogen
measurements clearly are valuable for emissions tracking and characterization analysis (e.g., observational
modeling). The EPA will explore identifying grant support for NOy monitoring in future allocations of PAMS
§105 grant monies.
Rural/background stations
Some comments were received regarding the need for the addition of "rural" monitoring sites. Given the
resource load arising from implementing PM-2.5 monitoring, resources for additional PAMS rural sites are not
C-2
-------
the highest priority. Nevertheless, revisions to PAMS network plans which optimize a cadre of urban and rural
stations are encouraged.
Very good news is available as we understand that operation of several North American Research Strategy for
Tropospheric Ozone ( NARSTO) Northeast sites (which are rural complements to PAMS sites) will be assumed
by government and private sector/academic groups. Following is a tentative listing of groups that may operate
the NARSTO Northeast sites:
Narsto Northeast Site Operator (tentative)
1. Kunkeltown, PA Pennsylvania DEP
2. Holbrook, PA Pennsylvania DEP
3. Truro, MA Massachusetts DEP
4. Arendtsville, PA Pennsylvania DEP/CASTNET
5. Brookhaven, NY Brookhaven National Lab
6. Pinnacle Park, NY SUNY/ESEERCO
7. Whiteface Mountain, NY SUNY/ESEERCO
8. Loudonville, NY SUNY/NYDEC/ESEERCO
9. Harvard Forest, MA Harvard
10. Shenandoah N.P., VA U of MD
Most of the surface level ambient monitoring for NOy, ozone and meteorology will be retained at the first six
sites, which were new sites added as part of NARSTO-Northeast. The remaining sites had been in existence for
other special study needs and were consolidated as part of the NARSTO-NE network; various monitoring
approaches and special studies are likely to be conducted at sites 5-9. Varying levels of VOC monitoring are
expected at most of the sites. Certain decisions regarding the operation of NARSTO-Northeast radar profilers
are under discussion within the NARSTO Northeast organization. A great deal of appreciation should be
expressed to NARSTO-Northeast, and particularly the utility industries which provided most of the capital costs
for these monitoring platforms and the operation and funding for the field programs. At this time, these sites are
not formally part of the PAMS network, an option that is available to States through revisions to PAMS network
plans.
Discussions concerning management of the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) program
probably will lead to a switch of oversight from Assistant Administrator for Research and Development (ORD)
to Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation (OAR). Regardless of what organization has oversight
responsibility, the maintenance and integration of CASTNET as a more recognizable component of our national
networks will strengthen not only our ability to assess the effectiveness of the acid precipitation control program,
but also enhance the rural component of our networks. CASTNET will benefit many air programs, as
measurements of ozone, speciated PM and visibility often are included at many sites. The combination of
CASTNET and Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) networks provide broad
coverage of several rural and remote regions.
In addition, EPA's National Air and Radiation Laboratory plans to develop a population based exposure
network for monitoring radioactivity of atmospheric aerosols (i.e., as fallout material). Many similarities in
instrumentation (filter based particle samplers) and network design exist between this program and the proposed
PM-2.5 network, which has a strong population exposure orientation. Consequently, we are exploring ways by
C-3
-------
which both of our programs may benefit from cost reductions (e.g., shared monitoring site locations platforms)
and other common needs.
PAMS data analysis
Several commented on the importance of allotting sufficient resources for PAMS data analysis, reasoning that
it is difficult to modify a network without appropriate levels of analysis to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses
of the existing design. The PAMS data analysis is a high priority and has lagged behind implementation of the
network. Since implementation is well underway, we expect a shift in emphasis toward analysis that will assist
us in our ongoing network review. Currently, several PAMS analysis workshops are being conducted throughout
the country. These workshops are designed to introduce analysis methods and assist the development of data
analysis plans for various regions. We seek support from the Regional Offices, States and the research
community in extracting value from this important data set. We believe the PAMS data has been virtually
untapped, and that its importance will emerge clearly over time. Particularly important is your use of the data
to relate ambient emissions to predicted emissions, and eventually to assess trends in emissions. The recent ability
of the PAMS data in identifying significant reductions in benzene and other species illustrates the successful
implementation of the reformulated fuel program.
More importantly, the most logical approach to redesigning a particular network involves analysis of existing
data to determine the strengths, gaps and redundancies of a network. Such analyses are strongly encouraged, and
should provide the basis for implementing intelligent reconfiguration actions.
SpeciatedPM-2.5
Our proposed regulations do not require speciated PM-2.5. However, we realize that chemically speciated PM-
2.5 data is necessary to formulate credible control strategies and track the progress of implementation programs.
We will provide guidance and resources for sampling and analysis for speciated PM-2.5.
Continuing reengineering objectives
As we close out this first phase of network reengineering, it has become apparent that constant evaluation of
our monitoring networks must be imbedded in our thinking and actions. Several active organizational groups
and partnerships are placing enormous demands on our monitoring networks. A partial list includes Ozone
Transport and Assessment Group (OTAG), Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), and NARSTO; all
multistakeholder groups which rely on relevant and high quality monitoring data. The expectations of monitoring
networks are substantial, and we must be careful not to overstate the value of our programs. New demands placed
on the monitoring program must be balanced by a continued commitment to the principal objectives of regulatory
networks - NAAQS compliance and population-oriented exposure monitoring. While these objectives can provide
a large degree of infrastructure for characterization purposes, by themselves the regulatory networks cannot be
expected to fulfill all needs. Nevertheless, communication linkages across multiple stakeholder groups should
improve network evaluation and optimization.
Research Community
C-4
-------
The relationship to NARSTO-Northeast, as described above, has provided benefits by expanding PAMS
compatible networks into rural locations and adding quality nitrogen measurements. The NARSTO national
assessment will produce two especially relevant papers, one on monitoring methods and a second on networks.
While these papers will take a highly critical look at our regulatory programs, the insight from and our
participation in these efforts (expected in mid-1998) should provide valuable guidance commensurate with that
provided by the 1991 National Academy of Sciences Report.
We should not overlook the very important contributions from the Southern Oxidant Study (SOS) community.
Monitoring methods development (particularly NOy), observational analysis approaches and the importance of
the rural component in the interacting spatial and temporal scales affecting air quality are a small sample of the
SOS contributions that impact our work in a very direct way. To further strengthen the dialogue with the
monitoring research community, Dr. James Price of the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Committee
(TNRCC) will organize a workshop of experts in the Fall of 1997, after the PAMS data analysis workshops have
been conducted. Our objective is to establish a more continuous and organized dialogue with the expert
community to assist us in regular evaluation and improvement of our networks toward improved regulatory
decisionmaking.
OTAG/FACA
While the analysis phase of OTAG is winding down during this transition period to decision making, the wide
array of data analysis and model evaluation studies should serve as examples for continued analysis that is
required for intelligent reengineering. Consistent with OTAG and the advice from the scientific community, the
FACA activities demand a critical look at the monitoring networks ability to characterize air quality over broad
and interacting spatial and temporal scales. In addition, FACA demands that we address the integration of
networks across pollutant categories. While monitoring is germane to nearly every FACA topic, several specific
FACA subtopic groups or issue papers address the role of monitoring, monitoring incentives, areas of violation
(AOV), and monitoring State Implementation Plan System (SIPs).
State/Local agency/EPA activities
We will continue our communications with State/local agencies and regional EPA offices through State and
Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators (STAPPA)/ Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials
(ALAPCO), Standing Air Monitoring Work Group (SAMWG), and other meeting venues to solicit advice on
monitoring networks. Several PAMS data analysis workshops for EPA regional office and State/local staff are
scheduled for this spring and summer. The Winter Monitoring workshop for EPA Regional Offices in late
February and the April SAMWG meeting in upstate New York focus on PM-2.5, reengineering, quality assurance
and PAMS data analysis. Several recent and upcoming STAPPA/ALAPCO, (Mid-Atlantic Regional Air
Management Association (MARAMA), Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
and Western States Air Resources Council (WESTAR) meetings have or will include monitoring topics as key
agenda items. In addition, we will continue to explore partnerships with the private sector, and try to build on
the successful NARSTO-Northeast program. High quality monitoring data benefits all stakeholders as it directly
improves our basis for understanding and decision making. Such an advantage is well worth the costs attendant
with data collection and analysis.
C-5
-------
APPENDIX D
REFERENCE AND EQUIVALENT METHOD ANALYZERS
-------
Non-Specific
Code
Carbon Monoxide Analyzers
Description
Specific
Code
Description
Oil
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
008
012
018
033
041
048
050
051
054
066
067
088
093
Non Dispersive Infra-Red Bendix
8501-5CA
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Beckman 866
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
MSA 202S
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
HonbaAQM-1 0,1 1,12
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Monitor Labs 83 10
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Honba 300E/300SE
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Mass CO-1
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Dasibi 3003
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Thermo Electron 48
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Monitor Labs 8830
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Dasibi 3008
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
Monitor Labs ML 9830
Non Dispersive Infra-Red
API Model 300 Gas Filter
D-l
-------
NO2 Analyzers
Non-Specific Specific
Code Description Code Description
Oil
014
Colorimetric
Chemiluminescence
084
098
021
022
025
031
034
035
037
038
040
042
074
082
083
089
090
104
102
Sodium Arsenite Method
TGS-ANSA Method
Chemiluminescence
Monitor Labs 8440E
Chemiluminescence
Bendix8101-C
Chemiluminescence
CSI 1600
Chemiluminescence
Meloy NA530R
Chemiluminescence
Beckman 952A
Chemiluminescence
Thermo Electron 14B/E
Chemiluminescence
Thermo Electron 1 4D/E
Chemiluminescence
Bendix8101-B
Chemiluminescence
Philips PW9762/02
Chemiluminescence
Monitor Labs 8840
Chemiluminescence
Thermo El Model 42
Chemiluminescence
API Model 200
Chemiluminescence
Monitor Labs 8841
Chemiluminescence
DasibiECModel2108
Chemiluminescence
Lear Siegler or Monitor Labs ML9841, 9841 A
Chemiluminescence
Environment S.A. AC31M
Open Path DOAS
Opsis Model AR500
D-2
-------
Ozone Analyzers
Non-Specific Specific
Code Description Code Description
Oil
014
--
Chemiluminescence
Ultra Violet
--
003
004
007
016
017
020
023
036
514
515
019
047
053
055
056
078
087
091
103
Chemiluminescence
Meloy OA325-2R
Chemiluminescence
Meloy OA350-2R
Chemiluminescence
Bendix 8002
Chemiluminescence
McMillan 100-3
Chemiluminescence
Monitor Labs 8410E
Chemiluminescence
Beckman 950A
Chemiluminescence
Philips PW9771
Chemiluminescence
CSI 2000
Chemiluminescence
McMillan 11 00-1
Chemiluminescence
McMillan 11 00-2
Ultra Violet
Dasibi 1003-AH,PC,RS
Ultra Violet
Thermo Electron 49
Ultra Violet
Monitor Labs 8810
Ultra Violet
PCI 03 Corp. LC-12
Ultra Violet
Dasibi 1008-AH
Ultra Violet
Environics Series 300
Ultra Violet
Model 400 O3 Analyzer
Ultra Violet
Monitor Labs 9810, 9811,9812
Open Path DOAS
Opsis Model AR500
D-3
-------
SO2 Analyzers
Non-Specific Specific
Code Description Code Description
014
016
020
022
023
--
Coulometric
Flame Photometric
Pulsed Fluorescent
Conductance Asarco
UV Stimulated
Fluorescence
--
010
511
006
030
032
513
009
060
077
024
029
039
046
061
075
077
084
092
095
100
101
Coulometric
Philips PW9755
Coulometric
Philips PW9700
Flame Photometric
Meloy SA185-2A
Flame Photometric
Bendix 8303
Flame Photometric
Meloy SA285E
Flame Photometric
Monitor Labs 8450
UV Fluorescent
Thermo Electron 43
UV Fluorescent
Thermo Electron 43A or 43B
UV Fluorescent
API Model 100
Conductance
Asarco 500
UV Fluorescence
Beckman 953
UV Fluorescence
Monitor Labs 8850
UV Fluorescence
Meloy SA700
UV Fluorescence
Dasibi4108
UV Fluorescence
Monitor Labs 8850S
UV Fluorescence
API Model 100
UV Fluorescence
Environment S.A. AF21M
UV Fluorescence
Lear Siegler or Monitor Labs Model ML9850
UV Fluorescence
C SI Model 5700
UV Fluorescence
API Model 100A
Open Path DOAS
Opsis Model AR 500
D-4
------- |