Preliminary Results of Particulate Matter Screening in Chanute, KS, April 9, 2012

EPA Report

Preliminary Results of Particulate Matter Screening in Chanute, KS

April 9, 2012

In response to community reports of episodic releases of particulate matter (PM), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment
(KDHE) designed a PM monitoring campaign to sample and identify potential PM concentration
gradients in the community.

In order to comprehensively monitor for PM, both particles 10 microns in size (PMio) and
particles 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5) were measured with screening level instruments.

PM monitoring commenced on December 1, 2011 at two locations (Attachment 4) and no 24-
hour PM10 concentrations greater than 70 |ig/m3 have been measured to date. For comparative
purposes, the 24-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for PM10 is 150 |ig/m3.
(Attachment 1) PM2.5 monitoring also commenced on December 1, 2011 at one location. The

maximum 24-hour PM2.5 value measured with screening instruments to date is 35 |ig/m . (See
discussion below and Attachment 2) The 24-hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) is calculated based upon the three year average of 98th percentile values of monitoring data
collected at a particular site in a year. This means that the eighth highest 24-hour value is used in a
year for a monitoring site that collects daily 24-hour data to calculate a three year average for
comparison to the 35 |ig/m3 NAAQS.

Evaluation of Data:

Attachment 1 shows a graph of daily PM10 data collected by EPA screening monitors combined with
KDHE PM10 data collected by their approved federal reference method (FRM) monitor located at 1500
West Seventh Street in Chanute. The data collected to date are very comparable and well below the
PM10 NAAQS.

Attachment 2 shows a graph of daily PM2.5 data collected the EPA screening monitor located in Central
Park. The data are typical of PM2 5 data collected at other continuous monitoring sites with periodic
peak concentrations that rise and fall over a number of days. This behavior in PM2.5 data is seen
because PM2.5 is typically a very large scale pollutant which varies over time with passage of weather
fronts. It is not uncommon to see multiple counties and even multiple states affected simultaneously by
large scale plumes of PM2 5. Example data are presented in Attachment 3 which shows the December
Central Park PM2.5 data compared to continuous FRM PM2.5 data collected in Tulsa, the two sets of
data track very closely. The Chanute screening level data will be continue to be evaluated against
additional continuously operating PM2.5 federal reference monitor data in surrounding communities
when it becomes available. It is important to note that screening level data are used as a relative
indicator of PM concentrations and that only FRM data should be directly compared to the NAAQS for
compliance purposes.

1 For a complete description of the proposed environmental screening in Chanute, KS, the reader is referred to
the "Chanute Air Monitoring Proposal" published on the EPA Region 7's webpage
http://www.epa.gov/region07/air/quality/chanute.htm.

-------
Conclusion:

The PMio data collected Central Park does appear to be somewhat higher than the Highland Park
observations. Regardless, both the screening level and FRM PMio data collected to date has all been
less than fifty percent of the NAAQS.

The PM2.5 data collected to date do show some higher daily concentrations, yet the Chanute screening
data tracks very closely with continuous FRM data collected in Tulsa, OK during the month of
December. Comparison of the Chanute screening level data set will be performed with additional
quality assured continuous PM2.5 FRM data from surrounding metropolitan areas when it becomes
available.

The sampling design obj ectives of the Chanute Air Monitoring Proposal included a goal that PM
concentrations be assessed under wind direction conditions that represent typical yearly wind patterns.
In order to fulfill the PM monitoring objectives of the Chanute Air Monitoring Proposal, EPA
recommends that data collection continue to be sustained for three months to assess PM concentrations
under additional seasonal meteorological conditions.

-------
ATTACHMENT 1

170

160

Chanute PM10 Particulate Data

150 -
140

PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (150

130

120
110
100
90
80

¦Central Park Screening Level PM10 Data

•Highland Park Screening Level PM10 Data

• KDHE PM10 Federal Reference Monitor (Sampling every 6 days)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10

a? W? v J?

-------
ATTACHMENT 2

Central Park Screening Level PM2.5 Data

U Central Park Screening Level PM2.5 Data

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard

1





I





ffll '

II

II

1

¦ ¦

o o- o- o	0 
-------
ATTACHMENT 3

Chanute PM2.5 screening data with Tulsa, OK FRM data

~ Central Park Screening Level PM2.5 Data % Tulsa, OK PM2.5 Federal Reference Monitor

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (35 ng/m3

<0* 'O* O"	fJV -/V is^V A	rJV A

Jtj*	jS" J? Jp J$>	
-------
ATTACHMENT 4

Particulate Matter Monitoring Sites

;W;BeecivSli

LGeriefaliStorej

Martin fltngl

lafan Mufteurr.]

£ofle5>kx#5ej

-------