2007 AIR QUALITY ANNUAL REPORT (A.R.S. 49-424.10) Table of Contents Page Subject 1 Acknowledgements 2 Introduction 3 Ambient Air Quality Networks 3 Criteria Pollutant Monitoring Networks 7 Visibility Monitoring Networks in National Parks and Wilderness Areas 8 Urban Haze Networks 9 Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations Network 10 National Air Toxics Trends Sites 11 PM2.5 Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) 11 Semi-continuous PM2.5 Speciation Network 11 Annual Ambient Network Monitoring Plan 13 Monitoring Methods 16 Monitoring Data 16 Introduction 16 Criteria Pollutants – 2006 Data 16 Carbon Monoxide 19 Nitrogen Dioxide 21 Sulfur Dioxide 23 Ozone 29 Particulate Matter smaller than 10 Microns (PM10) and smaller than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) 38 Criteria Pollutants – Compliance 38 Carbon Monoxide 41 Nitrogen Dioxide 41 Sulfur Dioxide 43 Ozone 47 Particulate Matter - PM10 56 Particulate Matter - PM2.5 Table of Contents (continued) Page Subject 60 Visibility Data 60 Class I Areas 63 Urban Haze 67 Special Projects 67 Introduction 67 Douglas Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Planning Area Redesignation to Attainment 67 Miami Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Planning Area Redesignation to Attainment 68 San Manuel Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Planning Area Pending Redesignation to Attainment 68 Ajo PM10 Clean Data Finding 68 Miami PM10 Planning Area Boundary Redesignation and Clean Data Finding 69 5% Annual Reasonable Further Progress Maricopa Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area Emission Inventory and Attainment Demonstration Development 70 Yuma PM10 Nonattainment Area Pending Designation 72 Maricopa 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Plan 72 Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study 73 Rillito PM10 Clean Data Finding 73 EPA’s Proposed Revisions to 8-Hour Ozone Standard 73 Primary Standard – 0.070 to 0.079 ppm Ozone 74 Secondary Standard - 7 to 21 ppm – hours in Highest 3-Month Period Tables Page 4 Table 1 – Monitoring Objectives for Air Quality Monitoring Sites 5 Table 2 – Measurement Scales for Air Quality Monitoring Sites 6 Table 3 – Monitoring Networks Operating In Arizona Table of Contents (continued) Tables Page 10 Table 4 – History of PAMS Monitoring in Metropolitan Phoenix 18 Table 5 – 2006 Carbon Monoxide (in ppm) 20 Table 6 – 2006 Nitrogen Dioxide (in ppm) 22 Table 7 – 2006 Sulfur Dioxide (in ppm) 24 Table 8 – 2006 Ozone (in ppm), One-Hour Averages 27 Table 9 – 2006 Ozone (in ppm) Eight-Hour Averages 30 Table 10 – 2006 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) 36 Table 11 – 2006 PM2.5 Data (in µg/m3) 38 Table 12 – 2005 - 2006 One Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) 40 Table 13 - 2005 - 2006 Eight Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) 41 Table 14 – 2006 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS Compliance Values by County 42 Table 15 – 2006 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS Compliance Values 44 Table 16 – 2004-2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) 48 Table 17 – 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 52 Table 18 – 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance, (in µg/m3) standard conditions 57 Table 19 - 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Compliance, (in µg/m3) local conditions 58 Table 20 - 2004 to 2006 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Compliance, (in µg/m3) local conditions 61 Table 21 - Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1) 64 Table 22 - Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2006. 75 Table 23 – 2004 - 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Average vs. Proposed Primary Standard And 2006 Maximum 3-Month W126 Totals vs. Proposed Secondary Standard 83 Table 24 - Three-Year Averages or Annual Fourth Highest Eight-Hour Ozone Concentrations in Phoenix and Environs Table of Contents (continued) Tables Page 88 Table 25 - Annual PM10 Concentrations in Metropolitan Phoenix (in µg/m3) 93 Table 26a - Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations throughout Arizona (in µg/m3) 94 Table 26b - Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Phoenix Metropolitian Area (in µg/m3) 95 Table 26c - Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Tucson Metropolitian Area (in µg/m3) 98 Table 27a - Annual Average Light Extinction in Phoenix (Mm-1) 99 Table 27b - Annual Average Light Extinction in Tucson (Mm-1) Figures Page 3 Figure 1 - Greer visibility monitoring site, located at 8,255 feet elevation in the Mt. Baldy Wilderness Area 16 Figure 2 - ADEQ’s Phoenix James L. Guyton Supersite monitoring station 67 Figure 3 - Yuma West Monitoring Station, Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study 72 Figure 4 - Map of Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study monitoring locations 78 Figure 5 - Average Best & Average Worst Visibility Impairment in the Phoenix Area 79 Figure 6 - Eight-hour carbon monoxide maxima at 22nd Street and Alvernon Way in Tucson 79 Figure 7 - Eight-hour carbon monoxide maxima at 18th Street and Roosevelt in central Phoenix 80 Figure 8 - Maximum one-hour ozone concentrations in three cities Table of Contents (continued) Figures Page 81 Figure 9 - Annual fourth-highest eight-hour Ozone concentrations in Tucson 81 Figure 10 - Annual fourth-highest eight-hour Ozone concentrations in Yuma 84 Figure 11 - Phoenix area eight-hour ozone trends: three-year averages of the annual fourth highest concentrations 85 Figure 12 - Phoenix area eight-hour Ozone trends: three-year averages of the annual fourth-highest concentrations, expressed as the average and maximum of nine long-term sites 86 Figure 13 - Three-Year Moving Averages of Annual Average PM10 at four metropolitan Phoenix sites with moderate PM10 levels (each data point is the average of the three years ending in that year (e.g. “2006” is the average of 2004, 2005, and 2006) 87 Figure 14 - Three-Year Moving Averages of PM10 at four metropolitan Phoenix sites with higher PM10 concentrations 89 Figure 15 - Annual PM10 concentrations in the Salt River area 90 Figure 16 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 at six metropolitan Tucson sites 91 Figure 17 - Three-year moving averages of the annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with higher concentrations 91 Figure 18 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at lower concentration sites at lower elevations 92 Figure 19 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with low concentration at higher elevations Table of Contents (continued) Figures Page 96 Figure 20 - Statewide three-year moving averages of annual averages of PM2.5 96 Figure 21 - Metropolitan Phoenix annual averages of PM2.5 97 Figure 22 - Metropolitan Tucson annual averages of PM2.5 100 Figure 23 - Visibility trends for Phoenix, shown as three-year moving averages, for all hours 101 Figure 24 - Visibility trends for Tucson, shown as three-year moving averages, for all hours 102 Figure 25 - Visibility trends for all hours for Phoenix and Tucson, shown as three-year moving averages, for all hours and the cleanest 20% days 103 Figure 26 - Seasonal variation in light extinction of the 20% cleanest and 20% dirtiest days in Tucson and Phoenix 103 Figure 27 - Comparison of light scattering on the 20% cleanest, mean, and 20% dirtiest days for urban and rural areas Appendices Page 105 Appendix 1 - Site Index 125 Appendix 2 - Acronyms and Abbreviations 127 Appendix 3 - Related Web Sites 130 Appendix 4 - Maps Air Quality Report A.R.S. §49-424.10 Acknowledgments Numerous agencies, companies, individuals and organizations have collected the ambient air quality monitoring data presented in this report. The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) publishes data from these various sources to provide a picture that is as complete as possible of air quality conditions throughout Arizona and gratefully acknowledges the efforts of all involved. Generally, ambient data presented in this report are collected, processed and reported following U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policies and procedures. Air quality data that ADEQ staff and contract operators collect have also received internal and external quality control and assurance checks. Data provided by other sources have been checked by the responsible organization but not by ADEQ. Private individuals and companies under contract to ADEQ provided invaluable field sampler operation and data processing services in support of monitoring activities during 2006. Their efforts are appreciated as they maneuvered on rooftops and metal towers to operate monitoring equipment in uncomfortable weather conditions or review instrument performance and ambient monitoring data for technical accuracy. Field staff from other public agencies also operated numerous ambient monitoring sites in Arizona, providing spatial resolution and temporal coverage of air quality conditions statewide. ADEQ recognizes the efforts of these other monitoring and reporting agencies, and appreciates the opportunity to publish their data. Several industrial facilities collected and reported ambient air quality data to ADEQ, usually to satisfy permit requirements; their efforts are also acknowledged. Finally, ADEQ staff work daily installing, calibrating, maintaining, conducting quality control checks, collecting, processing, performing quality assurance tests and reporting data from a wide variety of ambient air monitoring instruments. ADEQ management wishes to thank these staff members for their dedication to maintaining and improving the quality of our program. This report was prepared by ADEQ's Air Quality Assessment Section, which can be contacted at 1110 W. Washington St., Phoenix, AZ 85007, (602) 771-2274 or, toll free in Arizona at (800) 234-5677, then enter 771-2274. Our Web site is located at http://www.azdeq.gov/. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 1 Introduction This report presents the results of air quality monitoring conducted throughout Arizona in the 2006 calendar year. Data from more than 100 monitoring sites are included in this report. In addition to the ADEQ monitoring network, air quality agencies in Maricopa, Pima and Pinal counties also operated networks, as did several industrial facilities. Their data are summarized in this report. Many of the sites have multiple instruments measuring a variety of gaseous, particulate and visibility parameters. The majority of the air quality measurements are for criteria pollutants (ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide) for which EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Visibility-related measurements are included from a statewide network of operators. The report on Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Networks, which begins on Page 3, discusses the purpose, measurement methods and the specific scale of geographic resolution of each network of various air monitoring networks in Arizona. Beginning on Page 16, the Monitoring Data report summarizes the monitoring data and shows the compliance status for criteria pollutants. It consists of three sections: measurement of traditional criteria pollutants, compliance status of the criteria pollutants, and visibility characterization. The text describes how the measurements are made and how they relate to compliance with the NAAQS. The report on Special Projects and Accomplishments, which begins on Page 65, summarizes activities from special monitoring projects undertaken in the last few years which have continued into 2006. Some of the projects presented in this report are the Class I visibility monitoring network for larger national parks and wilderness areas, characterization of ozone precursors, and an intensive ambient monitoring and risk assessment project in the Yuma area. The Air Quality Trends report begins on Page 78. Air quality trends at most of the long-term monitors reveal improved air quality. Concentrations of carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide have improved dramatically since measurements began in the 1970s, and all monitors for these pollutants have shown compliance with health standards in recent years. Particulate matter (PM10) concentrations have also improved in rural and industrial areas where controls have been implemented, while less dramatic improvements have occurred in the neighborhoods of Phoenix and Tucson. Ozone concentrations have been fairly steady in Tucson and Yuma (see Figures 11 and 12 in the Trends Section) but have generally decreased since 1997 in Phoenix. Recently, however, some sites such as West Phoenix and Apache Junction show an increasing trend (see Figure 13 in the Trends Section). On May 30, 2001, Maricopa County reached attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard. Effective June 15, 2004, the Phoenix area was designated basic nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. Shorter periods of record for visibility in the urban and national parks and wilderness areas make trend assessments less definitive. Visibility trend assessments are shown for the urban areas of Phoenix and Tucson. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 2 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Networks The federal Clean Air Act of 1970 required EPA to assist states and localities in establishing ambient air quality monitoring networks to characterize human health exposure and public welfare effects of criteria pollutants. The 1977 federal Clean Air Act (CAA) amendments required each state to implement a visibility monitoring network to cover specified national parks and wilderness areas. The Phoenix and Tucson Figure 1 – Greer visibility monitoring site, metropolitan areas also have year-round located at 8,255 feet elevation in the Mt. visibility monitoring networks to assess Baldy Wilderness Area. urban haze. All of these networks are composed of individual monitoring sites; they are operated to collect ambient air quality data to ensure that Arizona citizens are able to know local air quality conditions and help ADEQ and local air quality control agencies identify the causes of polluted air. Criteria Pollutant Monitoring Networks The criteria pollutants are presently defined as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3), suspended particulate matter (PM), and total particulate lead (Pb). These pollutants are monitored with federal reference or equivalent methods that EPA has certified. Primarily due to the introduction of non-leaded gasoline, total particulate lead levels have been very low for years and lead is no longer monitored. In December 2006, the Environmental Protection Agency made changes to both the PM10 and PM2.5 NAAQS. The annual PM10 NAAQS was revoked and the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS was reduced from 65 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. In addition, EPA is currently soliciting comments on its proposed changes to the primary and secondary ozone NAAQS (see the Special Projects Section for details). The revised ozone NAAQS are scheduled to take effect in the spring of 2008. Ambient monitoring networks for air quality are established to sample pollution in a variety of representative settings to assess health and welfare effects and to assist in determining air pollution sources. For each criteria pollutant, EPA specifies the monitoring objectives that define the parameters by which health exposure and public welfare are assessed and the measurement scale classifications that describe the influence of atmospheric movement at a given location. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 3 The ambient monitoring networks cover both urban and rural areas of the state. The networks are designed to satisfy monitoring objectives and measurement scales defined in Tables 1 and 2. Additional monitoring network requirements were included in the revision of 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D December 17, 2006. These requirements are based on Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and Combined Statistical Areas (CSAs) and apply to PM2.5, PM10, and ozone. In addition, new requirements for sample frequency were made for PM2.5 and PM10. The ambient monitoring networks are operated by government agencies and regulated companies. These networks are composed of one or more monitoring sites whose data are compared to the NAAQS for compliance and statistically analyzed in various ways for trends. The agency or company operating a monitoring network also tracks data recovery, quality control and quality assurance parameters for the instruments operated at their various sites. The agency or company may also measure meteorological variables at the monitoring site. Table 1. Monitoring Objectives for Air Quality Monitoring Sites Number Definition 1 Determine highest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the network 2 Determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density 3 Determine the impact on ambient pollution levels of significant sources or source categories 4 Determine general background concentration levels 5 Determine the extent of regional pollutant transport among populated areas and in support of secondary standards 6 Determine the welfare-related effects in more rural and remote areas (such as visibility impairment and vegetation damage) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 4 Table 2. Measurement Scales for Air Quality Monitoring Sites Measurement Scale represents concentrations in air volumes within areas defined below Criteria Pollutant Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Ozone (O3) Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Particulate Matter (PM10, PM2.5) Lead (Pb) X X Micro (0 to 100 m) X Middle (~100 to 500 m) X X X X X X Neighborhood (~0.5 to 4 km) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Urban (~4 to 50 km) Regional (~10 to 100s of km) In addition to sampling for criteria pollutants, some of the agencies do special continuous monitoring for the optical characteristics of the atmosphere and manual sampling of ozone-forming compounds and other hazardous air pollutants. Maricopa, Pima and Pinal counties operate networks primarily to monitor urban air pollution. In contrast, the industrial networks are operated to determine the effects of their emissions on local air quality. The National Park Service's network tracks conditions in and around national parks and monuments. The ADEQ state network monitors a wide variety of pollutant and atmospheric characteristics, including urban, industrial, rural and background surveillance. The monitoring networks and their characteristics are shown in Table 3. A list of individual sites and monitoring parameters, based on the best available information at the time of publication, is presented in Appendix 1. Table 3. Monitoring Networks Operating in Arizona Network Operator Geographic Area Monitored Monitoring Objective* Measurement Scale(s)** ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 5 Pollutant(s) Monitored Table 3. Monitoring Networks Operating in Arizona Geographic Area Monitored Monitoring Objective* Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Statewide 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Micro, Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, Regional SO2, O3, NO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5 Arizona Portland Cement Company Rillito 1, 3 Neighborhood PM10 ASARCO LLC Hayden 1, 2, 3 Middle, Neighborhood SO2 Maricopa County Air Quality Department Phoenix urban area, Maricopa County 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Micro, Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, Regional SO2, O3, NO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5 National Park Service National parks and monuments 3, 4, 5, 6 Urban, Regional SO2, O3, NO2, PM10, PM2.5 Phelps Dodge Miami Inc. (PDMI) Miami 1, 2, 3 Neighborhood SO2, PM10, PM2.5 Phoenix Cement Company Clarkdale 1, 3 Neighborhood PM10 Pima County Department of Environmental Quality Tucson urban area, Pima County 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Micro, Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, Regional SO2, O3, NO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5 Pinal County Air Quality Control District Pinal County, Phoenix urban area 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, Regional O3, PM10, PM2.5 Salt River Project Page 1, 3 Urban, Regional NO2, O3, SO2, PM10, PM2.5 Tucson Electric Power Company Tucson and Springerville 1, 2, 3 Middle, Regional SO2, NO2, PM10, PM2.5 Network Operator Measurement Scale(s)** *See Table 1 for a list of monitoring objectives **See Table 2 for a definition of measurement scales ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 6 Pollutant(s) Monitored Visibility Monitoring Networks in National Parks and Wilderness Areas The intent of the Class I visibility monitoring program is to characterize long-term trends as completely as possible using ambient visibility measurements within constraints of an area's size, terrain or logistics for each of the 12 federally protected Class I areas in Arizona (see Appendix 4). The objectives of the visibility monitoring network are to track short-term and long-term trends in Arizona Class I areas, to assist in identifying any visibility impairment caused by existing major industrial sources, and to provide monitoring data if necessary for new or major modifications of major industrial sources. Arizona continues to participate in the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) Program as part of the overall national visibility monitoring effort. IMPROVE is a cooperative measurement effort between EPA, federal land management agencies and state air agencies. The objectives of IMPROVE are: • To establish current visibility and aerosol conditions in mandatory Class I areas • To identify chemical species and emission sources responsible for existing man-made visibility impairment • To document long-term trends for assessing progress towards the national visibility goal • With the enactment of the regional haze rule, to provide regional haze monitoring representing all visibility-protected federal Class I areas Class I areas were designated based on an evaluation required by Congress in the 1977 federal Clean Air Act amendments. The evaluation, which the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service performed, reviewed the wilderness areas of parks and national forests which were designated as wilderness before 1977 were more than 6,000 acres in size and have visual air quality as an important resource for visitors. Of the 156 Class I areas designated across the nation, 12 are located in Arizona. The Arizona Class I visibility network consists of a combination of visibility monitoring sites established by ADEQ and those established by the IMPROVE committee. Monitoring has been conducted near or in the following Class I areas: • Grand Canyon National Park - Hance Camp • Grand Canyon National Park - Indian Gardens • Petrified Forest National Park • Mt. Baldy Wilderness - Greer Water Treatment Plant • Sycamore Canyon Wilderness - Camp Raymond • Mazatzal/Pine Mountain Wildernesses - Ike's Backbone • Sierra Ancha Wilderness - Pleasant Valley Ranger Station • Superstition Wilderness - Tonto National Monument • Superstition Wilderness - Queen Valley ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 7 • • • • • • • Saguaro National Park - West Unit Saguaro National Park - East Unit Chiricahua National Monument - Entrance Station Galiuro Wilderness - Muleshoe Ranch (Site was closed in June of 2005) Hillside (Site was closed in June of 2005) Organ Pipe National Monument Meadview Each IMPROVE site includes PM2.5 sampling with subsequent analysis for the fine particle mass and major aerosol species, as well as PM10 sampling and mass analysis. Many of the sites also include optical monitoring with nephelometers or transmissometers and color photography to document scenic appearance. More information about the IMPROVE procedures, sites and data can be found on the IMPROVE Web site at http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/. Urban Haze Networks ADEQ monitors the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas with a network of instruments to characterize and quantify the extent of urban haze. There are no established federal or state standards for acceptable levels of urban haze. ADEQ began studying the nature and causes of urban hazes by conducting a study in the winter of 1989-90 in Phoenix and the winter of 1992-93 in Tucson. These studies recommended long-term, year-round monitoring of visibility. In 1993, ADEQ began deploying visibility monitoring equipment in Phoenix and Tucson. These visibility monitoring data are needed to provide policymakers and the public with information, track short- and long-term trends, assess source contributions to urban haze and better evaluate the effectiveness of air pollution control strategies. The current Phoenix urban haze network includes two transmissometers (located in Phoenix and Mesa) for measuring light extinction along a fixed path length of about 3 to 5 kilometers, four nephelometers for measuring light scattering, 5 digital camera systems to record visual characteristics of the urban area, and particulate filters for quantifying and characterizing particulate matter. The current Tucson urban haze network includes one transmissometer for measuring light extinction along a fixed path length of about 3 to 5 kilometers, 3 nephelometers for measuring light scattering, and a digital camera system operated by Pima County to record visual characteristics of the urban area. Operation of Phoenix and Tucson area urban haze particulate monitors was discontinued at the close of 2004. Data from active PM10 and PM2.5 samplers will be used to characterize chemical composition and seasonal variation on an as needed basis. The Web site for Phoenix area visibility is http://www.phoenixvis.net/ . The Web site for the Tucson camera system is http://www.airinfonow.org/. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 8 Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations Network Section 182(c)(1) of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments required the administrator to promulgate rules for the enhanced monitoring of ozone, oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to obtain more comprehensive and representative data on ozone air pollution. Immediately following the promulgation of those rules, the affected states were to begin actions necessary to adopt and implement a program to improve ambient monitoring activities and the monitoring of emissions of NOx and VOCs. Each state implementation plan (SIP) for the affected areas must contain commitments to implement the appropriate ambient monitoring network for such air pollutants. The subsequent revisions to 40 CFR 58 (1993) required states to establish photochemical assessment monitoring stations (PAMS) as part of their SIP monitoring networks in ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious, severe or extreme. The principal reasons for requiring the collection of additional ambient air pollutant and meteorological data are the nationwide lack of attainment of the ozone NAAQS and the need for a more comprehensive air quality database for ozone and its precursors. The chief objective of the enhanced ozone monitoring requirements is to provide air quality data that will assist air pollution control agencies in evaluating, tracking the progress of and, if necessary, refining control strategies for attaining the ozone NAAQS. Ambient concentrations of ozone and ozone precursors are used to make attainment and nonattainment determinations, aid in tracking VOC and NOx emission reductions, better characterize the nature and extent of the ozone problem, and examine air quality trends. In addition, data from the PAMS network provide an improved database for evaluating photochemical model performance, especially for future control strategy mid-course corrections as part of the continuing air quality management process. The data are particularly useful to states in ensuring the implementation of the most cost-effective regulatory controls. The PAMS network array for an area should be fashioned to supply measurements that will assist states in understanding and solving ozone nonattainment problems. EPA has defined a number of important monitoring objectives with the following five site types: • Type 1 Site: Upwind and Background Characterization • Type 2 and 2a Sites: Maximum Ozone Precursor Emissions Impact • Type 3 Site: Maximum Ozone Concentration • Type 4 Site: Extreme Downwind Monitoring PAMS data include measurements of O3, NOx, a target list of VOCs including several carbonyls, and surface and upper air meteorology. Most PAMS sites measure 56 target hydrocarbons on either an hourly or three-hour basis during the ozone season. The Type 2 sites also collect data on three carbonyl compounds ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 9 (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acetone) during the ozone monitoring period. Included in the monitored VOC species are 10 compounds classified as hazardous air pollutants. All stations must measure O3, NOx and surface meteorological parameters on an hourly basis. Beginning in 2007, ADEQ will operate three PAMS sites: the ADEQ Phoenix Supersite (located near 17th Avenue and Campbell) in Central Phoenix (a Type 2 site); the wind profiler (upper air meteorology) site; and the Queen Valley site (Type 3). The South Phoenix site was changed to a toxics-monitoring site in 2007. SeeTable 4 for a history of PAMS data collection in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Table 4: History of PAMS Monitoring in Metropolitan Phoenix Year VOCs Carbonyls 2007 Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix None Phoenix Supersite 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley 2001 Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley Phoenix Supersite Phoenix Supersite 2000 1999 Phoenix Supersite South Phoenix Phoenix Supersite South Phoenix Phoenix Supersite South Phoenix Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix Phoenix Supersite Queen Valley Phoenix Supersite Phoenix Supersite National Air Toxics Trend Sites (NATTS) The NATTS network was designed to document the concentration of certain air toxics on a national scale. ADEQ accepted Federal funding in 2003 for participation in this program. Data from EPA’s national monitoring activities will establish an estimate of national average concentrations for these air toxics compounds, allow ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 10 EPA to evaluate the need for new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and establish associated limits. Data from sites in this trends network will be used to identify the probability that long-term changes or trends in ambient air concentrations are occurring. Using this information, EPA, states, and local agencies can estimate changes in the risks of human exposure. These changes can then be used to anticipate changes in environmental policy and to establish a regulatory stance. As part of the overall National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) process, ambient air quality data are important to help assess the national toxics inventory and long-term hazardous air pollutant (HAP) trends. ADEQ’s NATTS monitoring is conducted at the ADEQ Phoenix Supersite. PM2.5 Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) The Speciation Trends Network (STN) was established to meet the regulatory requirements for monitoring PM2.5 to determine the chemical composition of these particles. The network was established in 2000 with approximately 54 STN sites across the nation, as well as additional SLAMS speciation sites. The purpose of the network is to determine, over a period of several years, trends in concentration levels of selected ions, metals, carbon species, and organic compounds in PM2.5. Locations are primarily in or near larger Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). ADEQ operates one STN speciation sampler at the ADEQ Supersite. Two IMPROVE samplers are also operated at the ADEQ Supersite for the purpose of providing precision information for the IMPROVE network and to make comparisons between the speciation results from both programs. The STN is part of the larger Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) that includes IMPROVE sites. Semi-continuous PM2.5 Speciation Network ADEQ is a participant in an EPA pilot study of semi-continuous speciation monitors being evaluated at five Speciation Trends Network (STN) sites in the United States. The pilot study began early in 2002 with newly established monitoring in Seattle, Washington; Phoenix, Arizona; Houston, Texas; Chicago, Illinois; and Indianapolis, Indiana. The goals of the pilot study are to assess the operational characteristics and performance of semi-continuous carbon, nitrate, and sulfate monitors for routine application at STN sites; to work with the pilot participants and the vendors to improve the measurement technologies used; and to evaluate the use of an automated data collection and processing system for real time display and reporting. ADEQ currently operates a Sunset Labs OC/EC carbon analyzer and 8400 Nitrate analyzer at the Supersite. Annual Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan In December 2006, EPA expanded the requirements of the former network review in the revisions to 40 CFR §58.10(a). The requirements describe a network plan that ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 11 must be available to the public for a thirty day comment period followed by approval by EPA. The plan includes detailed descriptions of sites and monitors to determine if siting requirements are met. The plan must also ensure that the revised minimum monitoring requirements for the network are met and must describe any proposed changes to the network to be made during the coming year. This annual plan must be submitted to EPA Region 9 by July 1 of each year for approval. 40 CFR, Part 51 requires states to create, submit and adopt State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to address the various issues and responsibilities involved with creating and implementing air quality programs. Subpart J of Part 51 specifies that Part 58 Subpart C contains the requirements for establishing air quality surveillance systems to monitor ambient air quality. Air quality surveillance systems consist of networks of monitors at carefully-chosen physical locations referred to as sites or stations. Some of the networks, sites and monitors are: • • • • • • • • • • • • State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) National Core multipollutant monitoring stations (NCore) Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) Speciation Trends Network (STN) National Air Toxics Trends Sites (NATTS) Special Purpose Monitors (SPM) Urban Haze monitoring sites Interagency Monitoring of PROtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) ADEQ visibility stations located in or near mandatory Class I areas (national parks, wilderness areas). Class I monitoring sites are subject to specific siting and operational guidance developed by the IMPROVE Steering Committee AIRNow information sites Source-oriented monitoring sites operated independently by permittees (Industry) Meteorological sites. The Annual Monitoring Network Plan identifies the purpose(s) of each monitor and provides evidence that both the siting and the operation of each monitor meet the requirements in 40 CFR Part 58 appendices A, C, D, and E as follows: • Appendix A – Quality Assurance Requirements for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) Air Monitoring • Appendix C – Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Methodology • Appendix D – Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring • Appendix E – Probe and Monitoring Path Siting Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Results of the annual network review and planning are used to determine how well the network is achieving its required air monitoring objectives, how well it meets data ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 12 users’ needs, and how it should be modified (through termination of existing stations, relocation of stations, establishment of new stations, monitoring of additional parameters, and/or changes to the sampling schedule) in order to continue to meet its objectives and data needs. The network review and planning are performed for the purpose of improving the network and ensuring that it provides adequate, representative, and useful air quality data. The regulations also require a network assessment to be made every 5th year. This assessment includes specific operational details such as cost and labor to determine how effective the monitoring network is. Monitoring Methods The gaseous criteria pollutants (SO2, O3, NO2 and CO), PM10 and PM2.5 (TEOMs and BAMs), and optical characteristics of the atmosphere (total light extinction, light absorption by gases, light scattering by particles and light absorption by particles), are monitored with continuous analyzers taking approximately one pollutant sample per second. These values are averaged on an hourly basis and recorded to the correct number of significant digits, based on the form of the air quality standards and the detection limits of the instrument. In most cases, the hourly data are summarized into the appropriate multi-hour averages. The agency or company network operators conduct regular checks of the stability, reproducibility, precision, bias and accuracy of these instruments. Precision, bias and accuracy of ambient data are assessed across an entire network using statistical tests required by EPA. Particulate matter, PM10 and PM2.5, is usually sampled for 24 hours, from midnight to midnight, most often on every sixth day. Using a timer, ambient air is drawn through an inlet of a specified design at a known flow rate onto a filter that collects all PM less than a diameter specified by the inlet design. The filters are weighed before and after the sample period to determine the difference in mass and then divided by the product of the flow rate with the elapsed time to arrive at a mass per unit volume concentration. Some filters are subjected to chemical analysis to determine the amount of various analytes and integrated with the flow rate and timer information to calculate their concentrations. These data are summarized into the appropriate quarterly or annual averages. These samplers are also certified as federal reference or equivalent methods. The agency or company network operators perform regular checks of the stability, reproducibility, precision, bias and accuracy of the samplers and laboratory procedures. Again, precision, bias and accuracy of ambient data are assessed across an entire network using statistical tests that EPA requires. Visibility monitoring methods are generally divided into the three groups of optical, scene and aerosol (PM). Monitoring of visibility requires qualitative and quantitative information about the causes of haze (e.g., what is in the air, the formation, transport and deposition of pollutants) and the nature of haze (the optical effects of those ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 13 pollutants to the observer). Scene conditions of visual air quality associated with haze are recorded with a camera. To document scene conditions in the Phoenix area, ADEQ is currently utilizing digital camera systems reported to the public via a Web site. Quantitative measurement of light extinction (Bext) has four components: • Light scattering by gases (Bsg) • Light absorption by gases (Bag) • Light scattering by particles (Bsp) • Light absorption by particles (Bap) Mathematically, the relationship is expressed as Bext = Bsg + Bag + Bsp + Bap, where the units are inverse megameters (Mm-1), or the amount of light removed per million meters of distance a viewer looks through. Total optical light extinction (Bext) is measured directly with a device called a transmissometer. The transmissometer generates visible light in the same wavelength (550 nanometers) as the human eye detects and then transmits that light beam over a sight path of several kilometers to a photocell detector. The transmissometer's design and operation allow its data to be directly correlated with human perception of visibility through the atmosphere. Transmissometer data are also used to check the general accuracy of the sum of the components of light extinction as measured by other continuous monitors. Transmissometers have been operated in Phoenix and Tucson since 1993. Light scattering by gases (Bsg) is a function of air density and is unrelated to air pollution sources. This parameter is derived and does not require measurement. In contrast, the other three components of light extinction are human-caused and require measurement with continuous monitors. Light absorption by gases (Bag) is determined by continuously measuring nitrogen dioxide (NO2) since it is the only gas normally present in urban or Class I areas that absorbs significant quantities of visible light. Several EPA reference or equivalent method NO2 monitors are deployed to verify maintenance of the NAAQS throughout Arizona, including monitoring at Tucson, Phoenix, Queen Valley and Tonto National Monument, while the National Park Service network tracks NO2 at several national parks in Arizona. Light scattering by particles (Bsp) is determined by continuously, directly measuring particle scattering variation in a calibrated ambient sampling chamber called a nephelometer. The nephelometer samples air at ambient temperature and relative humidity conditions. Routine monitoring with this instrument began in both the Class I area and urban haze networks during 1996. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 14 Light absorption by particles (Bap) is determined continuously utilizing an aethalometer, which measures the quantity of light transmitted through a filter tape. Routine data collection using the aethalometer began in December 1996 in Phoenix and February 1998 in Tucson. Bap is also measured intermittently using the PM sample filters collected in the Class I area networks. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 15 Monitoring Data Introduction Air quality measurements in Arizona can be divided into categories: criteria pollutants, visibility, and photochemical monitoring. Each category is discussed below. EPA has set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the criteria air pollutants monitored in Arizona: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter ≤ 10 microns (PM10), and particulate matter ≤ 2.5 microns (PM2.5). These pollutants are monitored in Arizona by industry, county air pollution districts, the National Park Service, tribes and ADEQ. The 2006 data measurements by criteria pollutant begin below. The data Figure 2 – ADEQ’s Phoenix James L. Guyton Supersite tables in this section are organized monitoring station. by county. Site operator information can be found in the Site Index tables in Appendix 1. Data recovery information (valid samples as a percent of total scheduled samples) is included in the tables. The number and the percentage of valid samples are important for determining the representativeness of the average data calculations. Information about the compliance requirements and status for the criteria pollutants begins on Page 36. Visibility monitoring information is presented beginning on Page 58. Criteria Pollutants - 2006 Data Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide (CO) - a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas that is produced in the incomplete combustion of fuels - has a variety of adverse health effects that arise from its ability to chemically bind to blood hemoglobin. CO successfully competes with oxygen for binding with hemoglobin and thereby impairs oxygen transport. This impaired transport leads to several central nervous system effects, such as the impairment of time interval discrimination, changes in relative brightness thresholds, increased reaction time, headache, fatigue, and dizziness. Chronic CO exposures also contribute to or exacerbate arteriosclerotic heart disease. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 16 In Arizona’s metropolitan areas, about half of the CO emission comes from on-road motor vehicles; somewhat less than half from off-road vehicles, construction equipment, lawn and garden equipment; with the remainder from point and area sources. This pollutant has low background levels, with highest concentrations next to busy streets, and has elevated neighborhood concentrations in locations that have significant amounts of emissions transported from upwind areas. Its concentrations peak from November to January because its emissions are highest in cold weather automotive emissions of CO vary inversely with temperature - and because the surface layer of the atmosphere is at its most stable in wintertime. Hourly concentrations tend to be at their maximum during the morning rush hour and between 6 PM and midnight. Controls have reduced CO emissions, and the standards have been achieved in the metropolitan Phoenix area since 1996, in stark contrast to the first half of the 1980s, when more than 100 exceedances were recorded each year. Similar improvements have occurred in Tucson, where the last eight-hour exceedances were recorded in 1988. Equipping vehicles with catalytic converters and electronic ignition systems was the most effective control, but significant reductions can also be attributed to the vehicle inspection program (beginning in 1976) and oxygenated fuels (beginning in 1989). CO is monitored continuously with non-dispersive infrared instruments that are deployed in urban neighborhoods and near busy roadways or intersections. In 2006, 14 monitors were operated in greater Phoenix; 6 monitors were operated in metropolitan Tucson. Monitors in Apache Junction and Casa Grande were closed during 2002. Table 5 presents the 2006 CO data. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 17 Table 5: 2006 Carbon Monoxide (in ppm) (NAAQS 1-hour 35 ppm, 8-hour 9 ppm) Site or City Maricopa County Buckeye S Central Phoenix Dysart S Glendale S Greenwood JLG Supersite Mesa S North Phoenix S South Phoenix S South Scottsdale S Tempe S West Chandler S West Indian School RD West Phoenix Pima County 22nd St. & Alvernon 22nd St. & Craycroft Cherry & Glenn S Children’s Park Golf Links & Kolb S Tucson Downtown One-Hour Average Value Max 2nd Value High Eight-Hour Average Value Max 2nd Value High Valid Data Recovery* No. of % Obs. 1.2 6.0 1.3 3.8 6.3 5.3 4.1 3.5 5.2 5.5 3.7 2.7 7.8 7.2 1.2 4.8 1.3 2.9 5.2 4.5 3.5 3.3 4.7 3.1 3.4 2.6 7.7 6.5 0.7 3.8 0.9 1.9 3.6 3.0 2.8 2.0 3.2 2.1 2.5 2.2 5.3 5.0 0.6 3.2 0.8 1.8 3.5 2.9 2.0 1.9 2.7 1.9 2.4 2.0 4.5 4.6 4674 8576 5004 4996 8345 8721 5012 5031 5025 5009 5022 5027 8541 8598 92 98 98 98 95 99 99 99 99 98 99 99 98 98 3.4 3.2 3.4 1.7 3.8 2.9 3.4 2.9 3.3 1.7 2.9 2.6 2.0 1.6 2.3 1.1 1.8 1.4 1.8 1.4 2.0 1.0 1.6 1.2 8716 8723 5044 8713 5076 8717 99 99 99 99 99 99 * Valid Data Recovery shows the number of valid observations and the percentage of the possible 8760 hourly samples during the year (always less than 100% due to mandatory quality assurance testing requiring the monitors to be off-line for several hours at a time). S Seasonal monitor, operational during January 1 to April 1 and September 1 to December 31; 5088 sampling hours in non leap years. Exceptions: Pima County seasonal monitors operated January 1 - April 30 and October 1 - December 31; 5088 sampling hours in non leap years. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 18 Nitrogen Dioxide Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is a reddish-brown gas that is formed by the oxidation of nitric oxide (NO) -- a byproduct of all combustion. At the lowest NO2 exposure levels at which adverse health effects have been detected, respiratory damage has been observed: destruction of cilia, alveolar tissue disruption and obstruction of the respiratory bronchioles. Animal studies suggest that NO2 may be a causal or aggravating agent in respiratory infections. However, community exposure studies to lower ambient levels of NO2 have demonstrated no significant links with respiratory symptoms or disease. This pollutant is of greater concern in its reduction of visibility (it causes 5 percent of the visibility reduction in Phoenix) and in its contributory role in the photochemical formation of ozone. Combustion emissions of nitrogen oxides are 95 percent nitric oxide and 5 percent NO2. Because nitric oxide is rapidly oxidized to nitrogen dioxide, nitric oxide emissions serve as a surrogate for NO2. In a recent Phoenix emissions inventory, the transportation sector dominated nitric oxide emissions: 58 percent of the emissions came from cars and trucks, 27 percent came from offroad vehicles such as trains and diesel-powered construction vehicles, and 15 percent from other sources, including power plants, biogenic emissions from soil and stationary combustion sources. Nitric oxide and NO2 concentrations are highest near major roadways. Nitric oxide concentrations decrease rapidly with distance from the roadway, whereas NO2 concentrations are more evenly distributed because of their formation through oxidation and their subsequent transport. Concentrations of NO2 are highest in the late afternoon and early evening of winter, when rush hour emissions of nitric oxide are converted to NO2 under relatively stable atmospheric conditions. Because nitric oxide reacts rapidly with ozone, nocturnal ozone concentrations in cities are often reduced to near-zero levels. This nitric oxide scavenging of ozone does not occur in remote areas. Nocturnal ozone concentrations at background sites are high compared with the urban concentrations. Nitrogen oxides emissions from motor vehicles have been reduced through retardation of spark timing, lowering the compression ratio, exhaust gas recirculation systems and threeway catalysts. The vehicle inspection program, with its NOx test for light-duty gasoline vehicles 1981 and newer (in Phoenix only) has also helped. Reformulated gasolines also decrease nitrogen oxides emissions: Federal Phase II gasoline, by 1.5 percent for vehicular and 0.5 percent for off-road equipment; California Phase 2 gasoline, by 6.4 percent for vehicular and 7.7 percent for off road equipment. NO2 is monitored continuously with chemiluminescence instruments, which also determine nitric oxide (NO) concentrations and NOx (the sum of NO2 and NO) concentrations. These instruments are located in urban neighborhoods where either the emissions are dense or where ozone concentrations tend to be at their maximum. In addition, these monitors are ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 19 located near major coal-fired electrical power plants. Eleven monitors were operated in Arizona in 2006. Table 6 presents the NO2 data available in 2006. Table 6: 2006 Nitrogen Dioxide (in ppm) (NAAQS Annual Mean 0.053 ppm) Site or City Annual Average Maximum Value One-Hour Average Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. 0.0010 0.018 8550 98 0.0026 0.013 5091 99 0.0111 0.0251 0.0306 0.0224 0.0192 0.0238 0.047 0.085 0.111 0.067 0.065 0.092 8152 8533 8330 8672 8086 8474 93 97 95 99 92 97 0.0157 0.0148 0.051 0.054 8643 8611 99 98 0.0104 0.067 8483 97 Apache County Springerville – Coyote Hills La Paz Alamo Lake S Maricopa County Buckeye Central Phoenix Greenwood JLG Supersite South Scottsdale West Phoenix Pima County 22nd St. & Craycroft Children’s Park Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish * Valid Data Recovery shows the number of valid observations and the percentage of the possible 8760 hourly samples during the year (always less than 100% due to mandatory quality assurance testing requiring the monitors to be off-line for several hours at a time). S Seasonal Monitor: April through October – 5136 hours ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 20 Sulfur Dioxide Exposure to sulfur dioxide (SO2), a colorless gas with a pungent, irritating odor at elevated concentrations, alters the mechanical function of the upper airway, including increasing the nasal flow resistance and decreasing the nasal mucus flow rate. Short-term exposures result in an exaggerated air flow resistance in about 10 percent of the subjects tested and produce acute bronchioconstriction in strenuously exercising asthmatics. In Arizona, the principal source of SO2 emissions has been the smelting of sulfide copper ore. Most fuels contain trace quantities of sulfur, and their combustion releases both gaseous SO2 and particulate sulfate (SO4--). A recent emissions inventory for Phoenix shows 32 percent of SO2 emissions come from point sources, 26 percent from area sources, 23 percent from off-road vehicles and equipment, and 19 percent from on-road motor vehicles. SO2 is removed from the atmosphere through dry deposition on plants and its conversion to sulfuric acid and eventually to sulfate. SO2 has extremely low background levels, with elevated concentrations found downwind of large point sources. Concentrations in urban areas are low and are homogeneously distributed, with annual averages varying from 3 to 10 µg/m3, well within the annual standard of 80 µg/m3. Major controls were installed in Arizona's copper smelters in the 1980s, which reduced SO2 emissions substantially. Vehicular emissions of SO2 and sulfate have been reduced through lowering the sulfur content in diesel fuel and gasoline. SO2 is monitored continuously with pulsed fluorescence instruments, most of which are clustered around copper smelters or coal-fired electric power plants. In 2006, ten reporting monitors were sited near copper smelters, one near a power plant and four in urban areas. Table 7 presents the SO2 data collected in Arizona in 2006 from the monitors near copper smelters and in urban areas. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 21 Table 7: 2006 Sulfur Dioxide (in ppm) (Primary NAAQS Annual Average 0.030 ppm [80 μg/m3], 24-hour Average 0.14 ppm [365 μg/m3] Secondary NAAQS 3-hour 0.5 ppm [1300 μg/m3]) Maximum Value Annual Average Site or City Apache County TEP – Springerville – Coyote Hills Valid Data Recovery * 3-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High No. Obs. % 0.0003 0.011 0.009 0.004 0.003 8523 97 0.0150 0.402 0.381 0.092 0.083 8623 98 0.0080 0.325 0.310 0.106 0.100 8660 99 0.0170 0.261 0.258 0.081 0.069 8606 98 0.0084 0.170 0.161 0.045 0.039 8700 99 0.0060 0.256 0.238 0.036 0.033 8638 99 0.0048 0.111 0.099 0.032 0.031 8620 99 0.0060 0.184 0.168 0.043 0.041 8690 99 0.0060 0.127 0.099 0.028 0.022 8758 99 0.0021 0.0023 0.0018 0.015 0.009 0.017 0.013 0.008 0.011 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.006 0.006 8421 8709 8350 96 99 95 0.0011 0.009 0.009 0.004 0.003 8669 99 0.0050 0.0020 0.151 0.015 0.129 0.014 0.023 0.007 0.021 0.005 8605 8668 98 99 Gila County ASARCO – Globe Hwy. ASARCO – Hayden – Garfield AVE ASARCO – Montgomery Ranch Hayden– Old Jail, ADEQ Hayden– Old Jail, ASARCO Miami – Ridgeline PDMI – Miami – Jones Ranch PDMI –Miami–Town Site Maricopa County Central Phoenix JLG Supersite South Scottsdale Pima County 22nd St. & Craycroft Pinal County ASARCO - Hayden Jct. San Manuel * Valid Data Recovery shows the number of valid observations and the percentage of the possible 8760 hourly samples during the year (always less than 100% due to mandatory quality assurance testing requiring the monitors to be off-line for several hours at a time). Note: Sulfur dioxide conversion factor: ppm = (µg/m3) / 2620. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 22 Ozone Ozone (O3) - a colorless, slightly odorous gas - is both a natural component of the atmosphere, through its photochemical formation from natural sources of CO, hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides, and an important air contaminant in urban atmospheres. In the stratosphere, O3 blocks harmful ultraviolet radiation. In the urban atmosphere, its formation from anthropogenic emissions of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides leads to concentrations harmful to people, animals, plants and materials. O3 causes significant physiological and pathological changes in both animals and humans at concentrations present in many urban environments. Short-term (one to two hours) exposures to concentrations in the range of 0.1 to 0.4 parts per million induce changes in lung function, including increased respiratory rates, increased pulmonary resistance, decreased tidal volumes and changes in lung mechanics. Symptomatic responses in exercising adults include throat dryness, chest tightness, substernal pain, cough, wheeze, pain on deep inspiration, shortness of breath and headache. These symptoms also have been observed at lower concentrations for longer exposures. Evidence suggests that O3 exposure makes the respiratory airways more susceptible to other bronchioconstrictive challenges. Animal studies suggest that ozone exposure interferes with or inhibits the immune system. O3 at ambient concentrations injures the stomates, which are the cells that regulate plant respiration, resulting in flecks on the upper leaf surfaces of dichotomous plants and the death of the tips of coniferous needles. O3 is considered by plant scientists to be the most important of all of the phytotoxic air pollutants, causing over 90 percent of all plant injury from air pollution on a global basis. There is no limit below which no plant damage occurs. O3, formed photochemically by the reaction of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides, has elevated concentrations only in the summer. Volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in greater Phoenix come from cars and trucks (31 percent), off-road vehicles and equipment such as lawn mowers (27 percent), small stationary sources (20 percent), biogenic emissions from grass, shrubs and trees (17 percent) and point sources (5 percent). NOx comes from cars and trucks (58 percent), off-road vehicles such as construction equipment and trains (27 percent), electric power plants (7 percent), small stationary sources (4 percent) and biogenic emissions from soil (4 percent). O3 has relatively high background levels, with the daily maximum in remote areas being about one-half to three-quarters of the daily maximum in the urban areas. In an urban area, the highest O3 concentrations tend to occur on the downwind edge, although high concentrations do occur less frequently in the central city. High O3 concentrations are a summer phenomenon caused when sunlight, biogenic emissions, and evaporative hydrocarbon emissions peak. Urban O3 concentrations are low to near zero at night, rise rapidly through the morning and peak in the afternoon. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 23 Controls to reduce the precursors of ozone - VOC and NOx - have been successfully implemented for years. NOx and VOC from vehicular exhaust have been reduced through engine modifications and three-way catalytic converters. Evaporative hydrocarbons from vehicles have been reduced through better engineered fuel tanks and auxiliary plumbing combined with carbon absorption canisters. Additional reductions of vehicular VOC have come through ADEQ's vehicle inspection program, which tests all gasoline vehicles for hydrocarbons (Phoenix and Tucson), through vapor-capturing equipment for gasoline tankers, vapor recovery systems at retail gas stations (Phoenix area only) and cleaner burning gasoline (Phoenix area only). Stationary source hydrocarbons have been reduced through a variety of better control equipment required by stricter regulations. Despite these efforts, the continued population growth in Arizona combined with the high natural background O3, may make achieving the eight-hour standard difficult. Ultraviolet absorption instruments monitor O3 continuously in urban neighborhoods for population exposure, areas downwind of urban areas for maximum concentration, and remote areas for background. In 2006, 35 reporting O3 monitors were in operation; five for background, 25 for urban neighborhoods and 10 for maximum concentrations downwind of urban areas. Tables 8 and 9 present the 2006 Arizona O3 data. Table 8: 2006 Ozone (in ppm), One-Hour Averages (NAAQS 1-hour 0.12 ppm) Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Cochise County Chiricahua NM Entrance 0.081 0.081 0.078 Coconino County Grand Canyon NP Hance 0.081 0.078 0.099 Site or City Valid Data Recovery* No. Of Days % 0.076 355 97 0.076 0.076 362 99 0.097 0.096 0.096 214 100 0.079 0.078 0.078 0.075 214 99 0.076 0.082 0.102 0.075 0.080 0.102 0.074 0.075 0.096 0.071 0.074 0.089 363 213 214 99 99 100 Gila County Tonto NM S La Paz Alamo Lake S Maricopa County Blue Point Buckeye S Cave CreekS ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 24 Table 8: 2006 Ozone (in ppm), One-Hour Averages (NAAQS 1-hour 0.12 ppm) Site or City Central Phoenix Dysart S Falcon Field S Fountain Hills Glendale S Humboldt Mt. S JLG Supersite North Phoenix Pinnacle Peak Rio Verde S South Phoenix South Scottsdale Tempe S West Chandler S West Phoenix Navajo County Petrified Forest NP Pima County 22nd & Craycroft Children’s Park Coachline Green Valley Rose Elementary Saguaro National Park East Tangerine Tucson Downtown Tucson Fairgrounds Pinal County Apache Junction Maintenance Yard Casa Grande Airport Queen Creek S ## Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High 0.111 0.086 0.104 0.105 0.097 0.099 0.103 0.111 0.097 0.118 0.083 0.108 0.107 0.103 0.117 0.099 0.085 0.100 0.102 0.094 0.091 0.097 0.109 0.095 0.101 0.080 0.100 0.105 0.100 0.100 0.097 0.083 0.099 0.101 0.091 0.086 0.097 0.103 0.089 0.100 0.077 0.099 0.095 0.099 0.098 0.093 0.080 0.082 0.082 0.083 0.083 0.075 0.087 0.088 0.082 0.083 Valid Data Recovery* No. Of Days % 0.097 0.083 0.098 0.100 0.091 0.086 0.095 0.099 0.089 0.098 0.074 0.098 0.091 0.099 0.098 364 214 214 365 202 212 365 364 357 213 359 364 213 214 359 99 100 100 100 94 99 100 99 98 99 98 99 99 100 98 0.079 0.077 311 85 0.079 0.081 0.082 0.079 0.075 0.086 0.086 0.082 0.082 0.078 0.080 0.080 0.077 0.075 0.085 0.083 0.078 0.077 0.078 0.079 0.079 0.075 0.074 0.081 0.081 0.078 0.075 365 362 365 365 362 365 365 365 362 100 99 100 100 99 100 100 100 99 0.106 0.105 0.104 0.097 358 98 0.083 0.095 0.083 0.091 0.082 0.089 0.080 0.086 348 213 95 99 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 25 Table 8: 2006 Ozone (in ppm), One-Hour Averages (NAAQS 1-hour 0.12 ppm) Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Maricopa S Pinal Air Park S Queen Valley S 0.087 0.083 0.110 0.080 0.079 0.103 0.074 0.077 0.094 Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish S 0.088 0.087 0.083 Site or City Valid Data Recovery* No. Of Days % 0.074 0.076 0.091 204 213 214 95 99 100 0.080 214 100 * Valid Data Recovery shows the number of days with at least 75 percent (18 or more hours) of valid data recovery. It also shows the percentage of the total number of scheduled sampling days that meet that criterion. Scheduled sampling days for non-seasonal monitors in 2006 was 365. S Seasonal monitor, operational during April 1 to November 1; 214 scheduled sampling days in the season. ## Formerly “Combs” ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 26 Table 9: 2006 Ozone (in ppm), Eight-Hour Averages (NAAQS 8-hour 0.08 ppm) Bold denotes the 4th highest value exceeds the eight-hour NAAQS. Site or City Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Daily ExceedAnces Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days 0.076 0.075 0.075 0.074 0 351 96 0.077 0.074 0.071 0.070 0 360 99 0.089 0.085 0.081 0.081 2 214 100 0.076 0.074 0.073 0.073 0 214 100 0.064 0.072 0.088 0.089 0.079 0.085 0.089 0.084 0.084 0.085 0.094 0.082 0.086 0.075 0.086 0.087 0.089 0.096 0.063 0.068 0.083 0.083 0.076 0.082 0.086 0.083 0.084 0.084 0.087 0.079 0.084 0.072 0.081 0.082 0.089 0.088 0.062 0.067 0.082 0.081 0.075 0.082 0.086 0.079 0.082 0.083 0.086 0.077 0.083 0.072 0.080 0.081 0.083 0.085 0.062 0.067 0.080 0.080 0.072 0.079 0.084 0.078 0.079 0.076 0.085 0.076 0.083 0.069 0.080 0.079 0.081 0.082 0 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 0 1 4 0 1 0 1 1 2 3 363 210 214 362 214 214 364 201 212 365 364 356 213 359 359 213 214 359 99 98 100 99 100 100 100 94 99 100 100 98 100 98 98 100 100 98 0.085 0.073 0.071 0.071 1 307 84 Cochise County Chiricahua NM Entrance Coconino County Grand Canyon NP Hance Gila County Tonto NM S La Paz Alamo Lake S Maricopa County Blue Point Buckeye S Cave CreekS Central Phoenix Dysart S Falcon Field S Fountain Hills Glendale S Humboldt Mt. S JLG Supersite North Phoenix Pinnacle Peak Rio VerdeS South Phoenix South Scottsdale Tempe S West Chandler S West Phoenix Navajo County Petrified Forest NP ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 27 Table 9: 2006 Ozone (in ppm), Eight-Hour Averages (NAAQS 8-hour 0.08 ppm) Bold denotes the 4th highest value exceeds the eight-hour NAAQS. Site or City Pima County 22nd & Craycroft Children’s Park Coachline Green Valley Rose Elementary Saguaro NP East Tangerine Tucson Downtown Tucson Fairgrounds Pinal County Apache Junction Maintenance Yard Casa Grande Airport Queen Creek S ## Maricopa S Pinal Air Park S Queen Valley S Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Daily ExceedAnces 0.075 0.076 0.076 0.073 0.069 0.080 0.083 0.074 0.075 0.071 0.074 0.076 0.072 0.069 0.076 0.080 0.073 0.070 0.070 0.073 0.072 0.072 0.067 0.076 0.076 0.073 0.068 0.069 0.072 0.071 0.070 0.067 0.076 0.076 0.073 0.068 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 362 362 363 365 360 363 364 364 361 99 99 99 100 99 99 100 100 99 0.087 0.084 3 358 98 0.094 0.090 Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days 0.077 0.079 0.082 0.075 0.090 0.076 0.073 0.077 0.072 0.087 0.074 0.072 0.068 0.071 0.080 0.073 0.071 0.068 0.070 0.079 0 0 0 0 2 344 212 202 211 214 94 99 94 99 100 0.078 0.074 0.073 0.073 0 214 100 Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish S * Valid Data Recovery shows the number of days with at least 75 percent (18 or more hours) of valid data recovery. It also shows the percentage of the total number of scheduled sampling days that meet that criterion. Scheduled sampling days for non-seasonal monitors in 2006 was 365. S Seasonal monitor, operational during April 1 to November 1; 214 scheduled sampling days in the season. ## Formerly “Combs” ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 28 Particulate Matter smaller than 10 Microns (PM10) and smaller than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) Particulate matter is a collective term describing very small solid or liquid particles that vary considerably in size, geometry, chemical composition and physical properties. Produced by natural processes (pollen and wind erosion) and by human activity (soot, fly ash, and dust from paved and unpaved roads), particulates contribute to visibility reduction, pose a threat to public health and cause economic damage through soil disturbance. Some fine particulates (PM2.5) are formed by the condensation of vapors or by their subsequent growth through coagulation or agglomeration. Others are emitted directly from the sources, either by combustion or from mechanical grinding of soils. Coarse particulates (2.5 to 10 microns) are formed through mechanical processes such as the grinding of matter and the atomization of liquids. Fine particulates can also be classified as primary - produced within and emitted from a source with little subsequent change - or secondary - formed in the atmosphere from gaseous emissions. Secondary particulate nitrates and sulfates, for example, form in the atmosphere from the oxidation of gaseous SO2 and NO2. In contrast, most atmospheric carbon is primary, having been emitted directly from combustion sources, although some of the organic carbon in the aerosol is secondary, having been formed by the complex photochemistry of gaseous volatile organic compounds. The size, shape and chemical composition of particulates determine their health effects. Particles larger than 10 microns are deposited in the upper respiratory tract. Particles from 2.5 to 10 microns are inhalable and are deposited in the upper parts of the respiratory system. Particles smaller than 2.5 microns are respirable and enter the pulmonary tissues to be deposited there. Particles in the size range of 0.1 to 2.5 microns are most efficiently deposited in the alveoli, where their effective toxicity is greater than larger particles because of the higher relative content of toxic heavy metals, sulfates and nitrates. Epidemiological studies have shown causal relationships between particulates and excess mortality, aggravation of bronchitis, and, in children, small, reversible changes in pulmonary function. Acidic aerosols have been linked to the inability of the upper respiratory tract and pulmonary system to remove harmful particles. The Arizona Comparative Environmental Risk Project - a multi-disciplinary investigation into human exposure to all environmental risks completed in 1995 - ranked outdoor air quality in general and particulate matter in particular as the highest environmental risk in the state. In this study, annual premature deaths from exposure to PM10 concentrations in Arizona were estimated at 963, which included 667 in Maricopa County and 88 in Tucson. Increased percentages of hospital admissions for respiratory disease (1 to 4 percent, ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 29 depending on the city), of asthma episodes (5 to 14 percent), of lower respiratory symptoms (5 to 15 percent) and of coughs (2 to 6 percent) were attributed to the prevailing annual PM10 concentrations in 1991. Chronically high particulate concentrations in the ambient air continue to pose a serious health threat to many Arizonans. Coarse particulate emissions are mostly geological and are dominated by dust from three activities: re-entraining dust from paved roads, driving on unpaved roads and earthmoving associated with construction. Soil dust from these sources and others contribute more than 70 percent of the coarse particulates in Phoenix. On days with winds in excess of 15 miles per hour, wind erosion of soil contributes to this loading. With a more diverse chemical composition, fine particulate (PM2.5) emissions are more evenly distributed among a larger number of sources. At the Phoenix JLG Supersite, receptor modeling indicates gasoline and diesel engine exhaust account for more than two-thirds of the PM2.5 emissions. Soil dust contributes another 10.5 percent. In other urban and rural areas, this mixture of sources will vary. Agricultural and mining areas, for example, will be more heavily influenced by emissions from these activities. PM2.5 concentrations tend to be at their highest in the central portions of urban areas, diminishing to background levels at the urban fringe. In contrast, PM10 concentrations are not spatially distributed smoothly because each monitoring site is strongly influenced by the degree of localized emissions of coarse particulates. Background concentrations of PM10 are about 40 percent of the urban maxima (20 μg/m3 for an annual average background versus about 50 μg/m3 for the urban maximum). Background concentrations of PM2.5 are about 5 μg/m3, in contrast to the urban maxima of 12 to 15 μg/m3. Concentrations of both size ranges of particulates tend to be higher in the late fall and winter, when atmospheric dispersion is at a seasonal low. PM10 maximum concentrations can occur in any season, provided nearby sources of coarse particulates are present or when strong and gusty winds suspend soil disturbed by human activities. Hourly concentrations of particulates tend to peak during those hours of the worst dispersion, which is from sunset to mid-morning. Controls to reduce particulates have been in place for decades, beginning with an ordinance that required watering to reduce dust from construction in Pima County in the 1960s. Maricopa County's umbrella dust abatement rule, Rule 310, has been revised many times through the years and now regulates construction dust, track-out dust from construction sites, and dust from unpaved parking and vacant lots. Efforts to reduce dust resuspended from paved roads have concentrated on eliminating track-out from construction sites, curbing and stabilizing road shoulders, and investigating more efficient street sweepers. Secondary fine particulates have been reduced by vehicular emission controls, which have reduced their precursor gases. Reducing gaseous hydrocarbon emissions, for example, has led to reductions in ambient concentrations of secondary organic carbon. In Maricopa County, the Governor's Agricultural Best Management Practices Committee developed a rule containing ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 30 best management practices for agricultural activities to reduce particulate emissions from tilling and harvesting activities of cropland and non-cropland. In a recent PM10 SIP, the Maricopa Association of Governments committed to implement 77 new measures, including enhanced enforcement of the county dust rules, implementation of agricultural best management practices, diesel engine replacement and retirement programs and requirements for cleaner burning fireplaces. Particulates are monitored by pulling ambient air through a filter, generally for 24 hours every sixth day, weighing the filter before and after, and measuring the volume of air sampled. The monitoring instruments are fitted with different aerodynamic devices to segregate particle size fractions. Particulates can also be monitored continuously with a tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) instrument or a beta attenuation mass monitor (BAM) which utilizes a beam sensing through a paper tape. The 2006 PM10 data reported in Table 10 represent 60 monitors throughout Arizona and two in Mexico, located in Agua Prieta and Nogales, Sonora. TEOM data are included for those sites in the Phoenix metropolitan area that were required to change to everyday monitoring from every sixth day. BAM data are included for sites in Pima County. Data from collocated monitors are included; these data are for precision purposes as a quality control measure. The data are reported in standard conditions adjusted to 25oC and 1 atmosphere pressure) as required by EPA. EPA began a nationwide program to measure PM2.5 using federal reference method monitors in anticipation of a new federal standard for fine particulates in 1999. Eleven federal reference method samplers were located in Arizona. The fine particulate portion of the PM10 measurement made by dichot monitors has been measured for many years in Arizona and has served as an approximation for the PM2.5 measurement; however it is not exactly equivalent to that measurement. Table 11 lists only the federal reference method measurements for 2006. The data are reported in ambient conditions (local temperature and pressure) as required by EPA. Particulate data from the IMPROVE network are not included. In 2006, the EPA changed the PM2.5 NAAQS for 24hours from 65 ug/m3 to 35 ug/ m3, with the effective date of December 16, 2006. The EPA also eliminated the annual standard for PM10 but retained the 24-hour standard of 150 ug/m3. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 31 Table 10: 2006 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3) Bold denotes an exceedance, defined as any daily value greater then 150 µg/m3 after rounding to the nearest 10 µg/m3.** Site or City Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. Apache County TEP – Springerville – Coalyard 2 TEOM 19 298 259 355 97 TEOM 11 56 49 351 96 Douglas Red Cross Partisol 31 87 75 60 98 Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant (1) Partisol 27 76 65 59 97 Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant (2) Partisol 30 91 84 59 97 Flagstaff Middle School Partisol 18 37 35 59 97 Sedona Post Office Partisol 13 36 31 58 95 Hayden – Old Jail, ADEQ Partisol 33 102 68 59 97 PDMI – Miami – Golf Course (1) Dichot 20 90 34 58 95 PDMI – Miami – Golf Course (2) Dichot 22 42 37 59 97 Miami – Ridgeline, PDMI Dichot 14 106 25 58 95 Payson Well Site Partisol 24 66 62 58 95 Partisol 23 50 50 56 92 Partisol 62 140 124 57 93 TEOM 53 272 192 363 99 TEOM 42 134 99 363 99 TEOM 69 240 183 361 99 Hi-Vol 32 67 55 59 97 TEP – Springerville – Coyote Hills 2 Cochise County Coconino County Gila County Graham County Safford Maricopa County Bethune Elementary School Buckeye 2 Central Phoenix 2 Durango Complex Dysart 2 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 32 Table 10: 2006 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3) Bold denotes an exceedance, defined as any daily value greater then 150 µg/m3 after rounding to the nearest 10 µg/m3.** Site or City Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. Glendale Greenwood (changed to continuous monitoring 01/01/ 2006) 3 Higley 2 Hi-Vol 36 60 59 44 72 TEOM 52 166 141 354 97 TEOM 60 170 166 357 98 JLG Supersite Partisol 35 91 70 59 97 Mesa Hi-Vol 31 75 59 59 97 North Phoenix Hi-Vol 34 79 62 61 100 South Phoenix Hi-Vol 55 132 100 61 100 South Scottsdale Hi-Vol 33 76 60 61 100 West Chandler Hi-Vol 33 77 68 61 100 TEOM 80 260 204 353 97 TEOM 50 147 122 362 99 Partisol 19 72 49 61 100 Partisol 16 58 50 60 98 Ajo Partisol 25 54 51 54 89 Broadway & Swan Partisol 27 60 55 61 100 Corona De Tucson Partisol 23 144 70 59 97 BAM 17 81 50 361 99 Partisol 32 101 88 365 100 Prince Road Partisol 35 72 71 55 90 Rillito, ADEQ Partisol 40 122 95 58 95 West Forty Third West Phoenix 2 2 Mohave County Bullhead City Navajo County Show Low Pima County Green Valley Orange Grove 2 1 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 33 Table 10: 2006 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3) Bold denotes an exceedance, defined as any daily value greater then 150 µg/m3 after rounding to the nearest 10 µg/m3.** Site or City Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. Rillito, APCC 4 Hi-Vol 29 86 73 115 94 Santa Clara Partisol 36 104 93 61 100 Partisol 34 85 73 364 100 Partisol 23 104 59 59 97 Apache Junction Fire Station Hi-Vol 24 73 53 59 97 Casa Grande Downtown Hi-Vol 36 81 81 60 98 Coolidge Maintenance Yard Hi-Vol 44 106 84 58 95 Cowtown RAAS 221 606 531 57 93 TEOM 231 1079 794 310 85 Eloy City Complex Hi-Vol 39 99 96 54 89 Mammoth County Complex Hi-Vol 15 31 28 55 90 Pinal Air Park Hi-Vol 30 77 67 57 93 Pinal County Housing Complex (1) Hi-Vol 64 153 152 58 95 Pinal County Housing Complex (2) Hi-Vol 63 210 170 58 95 Riverside Maintenance Yard Hi-Vol 23 83 45 56 92 Stanfield Hi-Vol 81 182 161 58 95 Partisol 64 240 169 57 93 Clarkdale – NW Dichot 15 27 24 60 98 Clarkdale – SE Dichot 20 38 35 60 98 Prescott Valley # Partisol 19 56 48 45 74 South Tucson 1 Tangerine Pinal County Cowtown 2 Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office Yavapai County Yuma County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 34 Table 10: 2006 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3) Bold denotes an exceedance, defined as any daily value greater then 150 µg/m3 after rounding to the nearest 10 µg/m3.** Site or City Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. Yuma Courthouse (1) Partisol 40 151 114 57 93 Yuma Courthouse (2) Partisol 39 119 115 57 93 Agua Prieta Fire Station Dichot 76 195 188 55 90 Sonora Nogales Fire Station Dichot 53 159 149 59 97 Mexico 1 2 3 4 Samples collected every day - 365 sample days in 2006. Samples collected every hour - 8760 sample hours in 2006. Samples changed from every 6th day with a Hi-Vol sampler to every hour with a TEOM. Samples collected every third day – 122 sample days in 2006. (1) Indicates the Primary monitor (used for NAAQS compliance) in a collocated pair of monitors. (2) Indicates the Secondary monitor (used for precision and accuracy) in a collocated pair of monitors. *Valid data recovery shows the number of valid observations during 2006 and the percentage of scheduled samples that were valid. There were 61 monitoring days scheduled in 2006 for monitors on the every 6th day schedule. Rillito - APCC was the only site following the every 3rd day schedule (122 observations in 2006). For continous monitors (TEOM and BAM), the number of valid days is used for data recovery. Exceedances due to Natural Events are excluded from annual statistics. ** The NAAQS requirement for the annual average value to be less than 50 µg/m3 was removed as of December 17, 2006. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 35 Table 11: 2006 PM2.5 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS Annual Average 15µg/m3, 24-hour Average 65 µg/m3 changed to 35 µg/m3effective December 16, 2006 ) 24-Hour Avg City or Site Method Annual Average Max 2nd High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. Cochise County Douglas Red Cross 2 FRM 6.78 15.7 14.0 59 97 FRM 6.61 28.2 13.7 59 97 FRM 9.04 25.2 23.4 59 97 JLG Supersite 3 FRM 10.22 54.8 39.9 118 97 Mesa 3 FRM 9.66 29.1 22.1 116 95 FRM 12.69 76.2 49.1 116 95 (1) FRM 13.52 76.7 52.4 121 99 West Phoenix 3 (2) FRM 13.45 66.4 55.2 120 98 Children’s Park 3 FRM 5.79 16 15 119 98 Coachline 4 BAM ++ 7.95 20 18 365 100 Geronimo 4 BAM ++ 8.50 23 20 361 99 Green Valley 4 BAM ++ 2.79 9 8 362 99 Orange Grove 1 FRM 5.80 19 17 337 92 Rose Elementary 4 BAM ++ 9.02 35 29 347 95 Apache Junction Fire Station 3 FRM 5.31 10.7 10.2 106 87 Casa Grande Downtown 2 FRM 7.55 16.1 15.4 57 93 Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School 2 Gila County Payson Well Site 2 Maricopa County South Phoenix West Phoenix 3 3 Pima County Pinal County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 36 Table 11: 2006 PM2.5 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS Annual Average 15µg/m3, 24-hour Average 65 µg/m3 changed to 35 µg/m3effective December 16, 2006 ) 24-Hour Avg City or Site Method Annual Average Max 2nd High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office 2 (1) FRM 16.19 79.8 56.2 61 100 Nogales Post Office 2 (2) FRM 15.57 103.2 55.7 61 100 *Valid data recovery shows the number of valid observations during 2006 and the percentage of scheduled samples that were valid. ++ Non Reference method. 1 Samples collected every day – 365 sample days in 2006. Samples collected every sixth day - 61 sample days in 2006. 3 Samples collected every third day - 122 sample days in 2006. 4 Samples collected every hour - 8760 sample hours in 2006. 2 (1) Indicates the Primary monitor (used for NAAQS compliance) in a collocated pair of monitors. (2) Indicates the Secondary monitor (used for precision and accuracy) in a collocated pair of monitors. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 37 Criteria Pollutants - Compliance Carbon Monoxide There are two NAAQS for CO: an eight-hour standard (most critical for compliance) and a one-hour standard. The eight-hour standard is 9 ppm and the one-hour standard is 35 ppm. According to the Code of Federal Regulations, compliance for both standards is determined by having no more than one exceedance per calendar year. EPA determines attainment of the standard at all sites in the non-attainment (or monitoring) area by evaluating two calendar years of data from each site. The highest of the second-highest values in a two-year period must not exceed the standard of 9 ppm (greater than or equal to 9.5 ppm to adjust for rounding) for the eight-hour standard or 35 ppm (greater than or equal to 35.5 ppm) for the one-hour standard. No exceedances of the one-hour or eight-hour standards were recorded in 2005 or 2006. The data are presented in Table 12 and Table 13. 2005-2006 One-Hour Carbon Monoxide NAAQS Compliance Values by County Table 12. 2005-2006 One-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) NAAQS for one-hour carbon monoxide: The highest of the second-highest values in a twoyear period must not exceed 35 ppm. NOTE: Pinal County monitors closed in 2002. County Exceedances Violations Maricopa 0 0 Pima 0 0 Summary: 20 of 20 monitors in compliance Table 12: 2005-2006 One-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) 2005 2006 Compliance Max 2nd Max 2nd City or Site Value High Value High Value Buckeye S 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 Central Phoenix 5.2 5.1 6.0 4.8 5.1 Dysart S 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.7 3.2 3.1 3.8 2.9 3.1 Greenwood 5.9 5.4 6.3 5.2 5.4 JLG Supersite 5.6 5.1 5.3 4.5 5.1 S 3.4 3.3 4.1 3.5 3.5 Maricopa County Glendale Mesa S ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 38 Table 12: 2005-2006 One-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) 2005 2006 Compliance Max 2nd Max 2nd City or Site Value High Value High Value 3.8 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 4.7 5.2 3.2 3.1 5.5 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.0 3.7 3.4 3.4 West Chandler S 3.5 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.7 West Indian School 6.8 6.5 7.8 7.7 7.7 West Phoenix Pima County 7.2 7.0 7.2 6.5 7.0 22nd St. & Alvernon 4.1 3.6 3.4 3.4 3.6 22nd St. & Craycroft 3.5 3.3 3.2 2.9 3.3 3.8 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.4 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.8 3.3 3.2 3.8 2.9 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.9 2.6 2.8 North Phoenix S South Phoenix S South Scottsdale Tempe S S Cherry & Glenn S Children’s Park Golf Links & Kolb Downtown S S Seasonal monitor. Maricopa County monitors operate during January 1 to April 1 and September 1 to December 31; 5088 hours in 2006. Pima County monitors operate during January 1 to May 1 and October 1 to December 31; 5088 hours in 2006. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 39 Table 13. 2005-2006 Eight-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) 2005-2006 Eight-Hour Carbon Monoxide NAAQS Compliance Values by County County NAAQS for eight-hour carbon monoxide: The highest of the second-highest values in a twoyear period must not exceed 9 ppm. NOTE: Pinal County monitors closed in 2002. Exceedances Violations Maricopa 0 0 Pima 0 0 Summary: 20 of 20 monitors in compliance Table 13: 2005-2006 Eight-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) 2005 2006 City or Site Max 2nd Max 2nd Compliance Value Value High Value High Maricopa County Buckeye S 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.9 Central Phoenix 4.1 3.8 3.8 3.2 3.8 S 1.3 1.2 0.9 0.8 1.2 2.4 2.3 1.9 1.8 2.3 Greenwood 4.2 4.1 3.6 3.5 4.1 JLG Supersite 3.7 3.6 3.0 2.9 3.6 Mesa S 2.4 2.4 2.8 2.0 2.4 North Phoenix S 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.9 2.2 South Phoenix S 3.8 3.2 3.2 2.7 3.2 South Scottsdale S 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.9 2.4 Tempe S 2.6 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.4 West Chandler S 2.4 2.0 2.2 2.0 2.0 West Indian School 5.3 4.8 5.3 4.5 4.8 West Phoenix 5.8 4.6 5.0 4.6 4.6 22nd St. & Alvernon 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.8 2.1 22nd St. & Craycroft 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.5 Cherry & Glenn S 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.0 2.4 Dysart Glendale S Pima County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 40 Table 13: 2005-2006 Eight-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) 2005 2006 City or Site Max 2nd Max 2nd Compliance Value Value High Value High Children’s Park 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.1 S Golf Links & Kolb S 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.6 2.1 Tucson Downtown 1.9 1.7 1.4 1.2 1.7 Seasonal monitor. Maricopa County monitors operate during January 1 to April 1 and September 1 to December 31; 5088 hours in 2006. Pima County monitors operate during January 1 to May 1 and October 1 to December 31; 5088 hours in 2006 . Nitrogen Dioxide The NAAQS for NO2 is 0.053 parts per million (ppm) for an annual average. The standard is attained when the annual arithmetic mean concentration in a calendar year is less than or equal to 0.053 ppm. To demonstrate attainment, the annual mean must be based upon hourly data that are at least 75 percent complete. NO2 annual averages near Arizona power plants range from 2 percent to 17 percent of the standard; in the urban areas, from 20 percent to 60 percent. All Arizona sites were in compliance with the NAAQS. Refer to Table 6 for the 2006 averages. Table 14: 2006 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS Compliance Values by County Annual Average County Exceedances Violations La Paz 0 0 Maricopa 0 0 Pima 0 0 Pinal 0 0 Summary: 11 of 11 monitors in compliance Sulfur Dioxide There are three NAAQS for SO2, two primary (annual average and 24-hour block average) and one secondary (three-hour block average). The annual average standard is 0.030 ppm (80 µg/m3) and cannot be exceeded in a calendar year. The 24-hour block average standard is 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3), not to be exceeded more than once per calendar year. A 24-hour block average is considered valid if at least 75 percent of the hourly averages for the 24-hour period are available. The 24-hour averages are determined from successive non-overlapping 24-hour blocks which begin at midnight each day. To demonstrate attainment, the second highest 24-hour block average must be based on hourly data that are at least 75 percent complete in each calendar quarter. A 24-hour block average is considered valid if 18 or more valid hourly averages are available. The sum of the valid averages is divided by the number of valid hours to determine the 24-hour average. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 41 The secondary three-hour standard is 0.5 ppm (1300 µg/m3), not to be exceeded more than once per calendar year. The three-hour averages are determined from successive, nonoverlapping three-hour blocks starting at midnight each calendar day. To demonstrate attainment the second highest three-hour average must be based upon hourly data that are at least 75 percent complete in each calendar quarter. All three hours of the block must be available to calculate a valid average. However, if only one or two hourly averages are available and the three-hour average would exceed the level of the standard when zeroes are substituted for the missing hours, the block would be considered valid. In Arizona in 2006, the maximum concentration sites - all near copper smelters - comply with these standards; the concentrations ranging from 2 to 51 percent of the three-hour, 3 to 76 percent of the 24-hour and 1 to 57 percent of the annual average standards. Sites near power plants are close to background levels, with annual averages near 1 µg/m3. See Table 7 for the 2006 averages. Table 15: 2006 Sulfur Dioxide Average NAAQS Compliance Values by County County Annual Average Three Hour Average 24-Hour Average Exceedances Violations Exceedances Violations Exceedances Violations Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 Maricopa 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pima 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summary:15 out of 15 monitors in compliance ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 42 Ozone -- One-hour The NAAQS one-hour standard for ozone is 0.12 ppm. Compliance with this standard is attained when, for a three-year period, the expected number of days per calendar year with maximum hourly average concentrations above 0.12 ppm (0.124 ppm for rounding) is equal to or less than one. An exceedance day is defined as any day having one or more hourly averages equal to or greater than 0.125 ppm. Hourly averages for at least 75 percent of the hours sampled (18-24 hours per day) must be present. There were no exceedances of the one hour standard in Arizona in 2006. As there have been no violations of the one-hour O3 standard since 1996, on May 15, 2001, EPA found that Maricopa County had reached attainment for the one-hour O3 standard. A maintenance plan and redesignation request developed by Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), demonstrating how the area will maintain compliance with the onehour standard, was submitted to EPA on April 21, 2004. Ozone -- Eight-hour On April 15, 2004, the Phoenix area was designated nonattainment for the new, more stringent, eight-hour ozone standard. The one-hour standard was revoked one year following the effective date of the eight-hour designation or June 15, 2005. However, certain of the control measures developed and implemented for the one-hour standard are required to remain in place to ensure continued progress toward attainment of the new eight-hour standard. EPA developed the eight-hour O3 standard in response to human exposure studies that showed adverse health effects occur at lower ozone concentrations extending over several hours. After its proposal in 1997 and after a protracted legal battle, the eight-hour standard was officially promulgated in 2003 and nonattainment area boundaries established. The eight-hour ozone standard is 0.08 ppm (0.084 for rounding) for a daily maximum eight-hour average. This standard is met when the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour average O3 concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The data in Table 16 are for those sites in operation in 2004 – 2006. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 43 2004 to 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone NAAQS Compliance Values by County Table 16: 2004 to 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) County NAAQS: The three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. Eight-Hour Exceedances * Sites in Violation 2004 2005 2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 Gila 17 0 Maricopa 1 25 1 0 0 0 Navajo 0 Pima 0 1 0 5 Pinal 0 3 0 0 Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 Yuma 0 0 Summary: 41 of 41 monitors in compliance for 2004 to 2006 Cochise Coconino * Includes all eight-hour exceedances above fourth highest value. Table 16: 2004 to 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) Bold denotes exceedances and sites in violation. Fourth-Highest Value City or Site ThreeYear Average 2004 2005 2006 0.070 0.072 0.074 0.072 0.072 0.079 0.070 0.073 0.077 0.084 0.081 0.080 N/A 0.075 0.073 N/A 0.075 0.081 0.062 0.072 0.058 # 0.065 0.067 N/A 0.076 0.082 0.080 0.079 Cochise County Chiricahua NM Entrance Station Coconino County Grand Canyon NP – Hance Gila County Tonto NM S La Paz County Alamo Lake (Opened 05/20/05) Maricopa County Blue Point Buckeye S (Opened 08/01/04) Cave Creek S ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 44 Table 16: 2004 to 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) Bold denotes exceedances and sites in violation. Fourth-Highest Value 2004 2005 2006 Central Phoenix 0.074 0.075 0.080 ThreeYear Average 0.076 Dysart S 0.065 0.066 0.072 0.067 Falcon Field S 0.070 0.076 0.079 0.075 Fountain Hills 0.075 0.088 0.084 0.082 Glendale S 0.076 0.076 0.078 0.076 Humboldt Mt. S 0.078 .087 0.079 0.081 JLG Supersite 0.072 0.076 0.076 0.074 North Phoenix 0.080 0.084 0.085 0.083 0.072 N/A N/A 0.072 0.068 0.083 0.076 0.075 0.074 0.087 0.083 0.081 South Phoenix 0.072 0.076 0.069 0.072 South Scottsdale 0.073 0.077 0.080 0.076 Tempe S 0.072 0.076 0.079 0.075 West Chandler S 0.070 0.075 0.081 0.075 West Phoenix 0.072 0.068 0.082 0.074 0.071 0.070 0.071 0.070 22nd St. & Craycroft 0.069 0.074 0.069 0.070 Children’s Park 0.068 0.075 0.072 0.071 Coachline 0.068 0.066 0.071 0.068 Green Valley 0.066 0.068 0.070 0.068 Rose Elementary 0.064 0.067 0.067 0.066 Saguaro NP East 0.073 0.079 0.076 0.076 City or Site S Palo Verde (Closed 10/31/2004) Pinnacle Peak Rio Verde S Navajo County Petrified Forest NP Pima County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 45 Table 16: 2004 to 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) Bold denotes exceedances and sites in violation. Fourth-Highest Value 2004 2005 2006 Tangerine 0.068 0.073 0.076 ThreeYear Average 0.072 Tucson Downtown 0.063 0.070 0.073 0.068 Tucson Fairgrounds 0.064 0.073 0.068 0.068 Apache Junction - Maintenance Yard 0.069 0.068 0.084 0.073 Casa Grande - Airport 0.070 0.072 0.073 0.071 Queen Creek S ## 0.059 0.067 0.071 0.065 Maricopa S 0.064 0.061 0.068 0.064 Pinal Air Park S 0.067 0.077 0.070 0.071 Queen Valley 0.073 0.084 0.079 0.078 0.077 0.074 N/A N/A 0.073 0.078 0.073 0.074 City or Site Pinal County Yavapai County Hillside S (Closed 6/3/2005) Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish S Seasonal monitor, operational during April 1 to Nov. 1. # Indicates the data do not satisfy EPA's summary criteria, usually meaning less than 75 percent valid data recovery available. ## Formerly “Combs” N/A - Data not available Notes: Data follow EPA truncation and averaging rules. Data published in previous annual reports may be slightly different. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 46 Particulate Matter - PM10 The NAAQS for particulate matter 10 microns and smaller in diameter (PM10) were changed December 17, 2006. The annual NAAQS was eliminated; the 24-hour NAAQS of 150 µg/m3 was retained. In this year's report, the annual NAAQS statistics are included since the standard change occurred near the end of the three year compliance period. The annual standard was attained when, for a three-year period, the expected annual arithmetic mean concentration was less than or equal to 50µg/m3. Annual arithmetic means are determined by calculating quarterly (three month) averages of the samples collected during that quarter; a minimum of 75 percent of the samples must be valid to produce the annual mean. This mean is rounded to the nearest 1 µg/m3 for comparison to the standard. Compliance with the 24-hour PM10 standard is attained when the expected exceedance rate is one or less per year measured over three years. A sample value is rounded to the nearest 10 µg/m3 for comparison with the standard to determine if it is an exceedance (i.e., a sample value of 154 µg/m3 is not an exceedance because it round to 150 µg/m3; a sample value of 155 µg/m3 is an exceedance because it rounds to 160 µg/m3). Since the majority of monitoring sites do not collect daily samples, the expected exceedance rate must be calculated by quarter following EPA guidelines. The same requirements of 75 percent completeness and three consecutive years of data apply. Tables 17 and 18 present the 2004 to 2006 expected exceedance rates for the PM10 annual arithmetic means and maximum 24-hour average values. 2004 to 2006 PM10 Annual Average NAAQS Table 17: 2004 to 2006 Annual Compliance Values, By County Average PM10 Compliance (in 3 County Sites in Sites above Standard µg/m , Standard Conditions) Violation 2004 2005 2006 NAAQS: The expected annual arithmetic Apache 0 0 0 0 mean (average of three most recent Cochise 0 0 0 0 annual means) is less than or equal to 50 Coconino 0 0 0 0 µg/m3. Gila 0 0 0 0 The expected annual arithmetic mean is Graham 0 0 0 0 rounded to the nearest 1 µg/m3 for Maricopa 2 4 6 5 comparison to the standard. Mohave 0 0 0 0 Navajo 0 0 0 0 Pima 0 0 0 0 Pinal 2 4 4 3 Santa Cruz 0 1 1 1 Yavapai 0 0 0 0 Yuma 0 0 0 0 Summary: 51 of 59 monitors in compliance ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 47 Table 17: 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 2006 Expected Annual Mean 13.4 15.4 19.0 16 10.2 10.3 11.2 11 Douglas – Red Cross 26.3 34.4 30.9 31 Paul Spur 14.7 27.6 # 27.3 N/A Flagstaff – Middle School 16.0 17.0 # 18.0 N/A Sedona 11.1 12.2 # 13.3 N/A Hayden – Old Jail 27.5 29.9 # 33.4 N/A Miami – Golf Course 16.9 21.0 20.4 19 Miami – Ridgeline 10.2 12.4 14.2 12 Payson 18.9 22.1# 23.7 N/A 17.0 20.8# 22.6 N/A Bethune Elementary School 42.4 58.6 61.7 54 Buckeye E (Opened 8/01/2004) Central Phoenix – every 6th day monitor (Closed 12/31/2005) Central Phoenix E 39.9 # 52.7 53.0 N/A 32.3 38.5 N/A N/A 36.6 37.1 42.0 39 39.6 49.4 N/A N/A City or Site Apache County TEP – Springerville – Coalyard TEP – Springerville – Coyote Hills Cochise County Coconino County Gila County Graham County Safford Maricopa County Chandler (Closed 12/31/2005) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 48 Table 17: 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 2006 Durango Complex E 51.6 66.4 69.0 Expected Annual Mean 62 Dysart 27.3 29.0 32.3 30 Glendale Greenwood – continuous monitor beginning 1/1/2006 Higley E JLG Supersite (Closed 12/31/2003 – urban haze program; Reopened 1/1/2005) Mesa 25.7 29.0 36.3# N/A 44.3 52.3 51.7 49 47.9 51.4 60.4 53 N/A 32.3 35.4 N/A 23.2 30.0 30.5 28 North Phoenix Palo Verde (Closed 12/31/2004) South Phoenix 24.8 29.6 34.4 30 14.5 N/A N/A N/A 45.6 54.7 55.0 52 South Scottsdale 26.1 34.0 32.9 31 West Chandler 29.9 34.2 33.3 32 West Forty Third E West Phoenix – continuous monitor beginning 1/1/2006 Mohave County 61.1 73.9 79.8 72 36.9 44.5 49.8 44 Bullhead City 18.2 18.6 # 19.3 N/A 14.9 13.7 # 15.5 N/A Ajo 19.3 22.7 25.3 22 Broadway & Swan 20.7 23.7 26.8 24 Corona de Tucson 12.4 15.4 22.6 17 Green Valley E 13.6 17.4 16.8 16 Orange Grove 26.8 29.2 31.8 29 City or Site Navajo County Show Low Pima County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 49 Table 17: 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 2006 Prince Road 28.4 37.0 # 35.2 Expected Annual Mean N/A Rillito, ADEQ Rillito, APCC (1-in-3 day schedule) Santa Clara 32.2 39.1 39.7 37 26.9 26.8 28.5 27 20.4 26.5 35.5 27 South Tucson 29.2 30.2 34.3 31 Tangerine 14.7 19.1 22.9 19 Apache Junction Fire Station 18.4 19.9 23.6 21 Casa Grande Downtown 24.4 30.9 35.9 30 Coolidge Maintenance Yard Cowtown (Opened August 2005) Cowtown E 24.5 36.0 44.0 35 N/A 294.4 220.6 N/A 132.2 200.4 230.5 188 Eloy 27.8 33.4 38.8 33 Mammoth 11.8 13.6 14.8 13 Pinal Air Park Pinal County Housing Complex Riverside Maintenance Yard 20.2 22.3 29.5 24 47.1 56.7 # 64.3 N/A 15.2 18.1 23.3 19 Stanfield 33.9 52.2 81.4 56 42.6 56.9 64.0 55 Clarkdale – NW 14.7 14.7 15.3 15 Clarkdale – SE 19.8 21.8 19.7 20 Prescott Valley 12.9 14.8 # 18.9# N/A City or Site Pinal County Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office Yavapai County Yuma County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 50 Table 17: 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 2006 Expected Annual Mean 35.5 # 34.9 40.1 N/A Agua Prieta – Fire Station 60.5 68.1 52.7 60.4 Nogales – Fire Station 50.2 62.9 75.9 63.0 City or Site Yuma – Juvenile Center/Courthouse Mexico Bold denotes value above the standard. N/A – Not available # Indicates the data do not satisfy EPA’s summary criteria, usually meaning less than 75 percent valid data recovery available in one or more calendar quarters. E Indicates every day monitoring. Notes: For collocated sites, data from the Primary monitor (POC 1) are used for the Annual Average calculations. However, if valid data recovery is between 50% and 75%, data from the Secondary (POC2) monitor can be used. If no Secondary data are available, data substitution can be made following the EPA document, ‘Guideline on Exceptions to Data Requirements for Determining Attainment of Particulate Matter Standards.’ ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 51 2004 to 2006 PM10 Maximum 24-Hour Compliance Values, By County Sites with Exceedances Sites in Violation 2004 2005 2006 NAAQS: Expected occurrence of Apache 0 1 1 0 exceedances (samples equal to or greater Cochise 0 0 0 0 than 150 µg/m3) is one or less over three consecutive years. Coconino 0 0 0 0 Gila 0 0 0 0 Sample values are rounded to the nearest 10 0 0 0 0 µg/m3 to determine exceedance; values less Graham 3 Maricopa 1 6 5 6 than or equal to 154 µg/m are not exceedances; values greater than or equal to Mohave 0 0 0 0 155 µg/m3 are exceedances. Navajo 0 0 0 0 Pima 0 0 0 0 Pinal 2 2 2 2 Santa Cruz 0 1 1 1 Yavapai 0 0 0 0 Yuma 0 0 0 0 Table 18: 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3, Standard Conditions) Summary: 50 of 59 monitors in compliance Table 18: 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. 3-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 198 1 298 1 <1 0 29 0 56 0 0 56 0 86 0 87 0 0 44 0 76 0 76 0 0 42 0 38 0 37 0 0 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg 129 0 69 Douglas Red Cross Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant City or Site Apache County TEP – Springerville – Coalyard TEP – Springerville – Coyote Hills 2006 Max 24-Hr Avg Cochise County Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 52 Table 18: 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 2006 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. 3-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 34 0 36 0 0 0 124 0 102 0 0 40 0 40 0 90 0 0 PDMI - Miami – Ridgeline 26 0 23 0 106 0 0 Payson Well Site 52 0 81 0 66 0 0 99 0 50 0 50 0 0 122 0 198 6.4 140 0 2.1 82 # 0 169 2.0 272 3.0 N/A 81 0 125 0 N/A N/A N/A 94 0 116 0 134 0 0 Chandler (Closed) 150 0 94 0 N/A N/A N/A Durango Complex E 139 0 206 13.0 240 9.0 7.3 Dysart 94 0 76 0 67 0 0 Glendale 69 0 84 0 60 0 0 Greenwood E 100 0 173 6.0 166 1.0 2.3 159 1.0 142 0 170 2.1 1.0 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg 32 0 Hayden – Old Jail 55 PDMI - Miami – Golf Course City or Site Sedona Post Office Max 24-Hr Avg Gila County Graham County Safford Maricopa County Bethune Elementary School Buckeye E (Opened 8/01/2004) Central Phoenix (Closed 12/31/2005) Central Phoenix – continuous monitor E Higley E ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 53 Table 18: 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 2006 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. 3-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 138 0 91 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A 49 0 86 0 75 0 0 North Phoenix 46 0 81 0 79 0 0 Palo Verde (Closed 01/05/2005) 42 0 N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A South Phoenix 132 0 147 0 132 0 0 South Scottsdale 77 0 121 0 76 0 0 West Chandler E 70 0 94 0 77 0 0 West Forty Third E West Phoenix E Continuous 1/1/2006 145 0 233 13.0 260 18.7 10.6 100 0 155 6.0 147 0 2.0 48 0 48 0 72 0 0 41 0 37 0 58 0 0 Ajo 43 0 45 0 54 0 0 Broadway & Swan 35 0 46 0 60 0 0 Corona De Tucson 37 0 33 0 144 0 0 Green Valley 127 0 54 0 81 0 0 119 0 98 0 101 0 0 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg N/A N/A 46 # Mesa City or Site JLG Supersite (Closed 12/31/2003 – urban haze program; Reopened 1/1/2005) Maryvale (Closed 4/1/2004) Max 24-Hr Avg Mohave County Bullhead City Navajo County Show Low Pima County Orange Grove E ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 54 Table 18: 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 2006 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. 3-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 88 0 72 0 0 0 84 0 122 0 0 130 0 83.7 0 86 0 0 Santa Clara 41 0 82 0 104 0 0 South Tucson 149 0 73 0 109 0 0 Tangerine 125 0 34 0 104 0 0 Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station 35 0 47 0 73 0 0 Casa Grande Downtown 52 0 79 0 81 0 0 57 0 81 0 106 0 0 N/A N/A 787.9 N/A 606 278.2 N/A Eloy 46 0 73 0 99 0 0 Mammoth 30 0 33 0 31 0 0 Pinal Air Park 39 0 122 0 77 0 0 Pinal County Housing Complex 155 6.0 179 12.0 153 0 6.0 Riverside Maintenance Yard 34 0 35 0 83 0 0 Stanfield 80 0 173 6.0 182 13.1 6.4 140 0 280 12.0 240 20.4 10.8 Max 24-Hr Avg Prince Road Rillito , ADEQ Rillito, APCC (1-in-3 day schedule) City or Site Coolidge Maintenance Yard Cowtown (Opened August 2005) Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg 67 0 93 Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office Yavapai County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 55 Table 18: 2004 to 2006 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) 2004 2005 Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. 3-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 31.5 0 27 0 0 0 43.1 0 38 0 0 31 0 53 0 56 0 0 114 # 0 94 0 151 0 0 Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Clarkdale – NW 36 0 Clarkdale – SE 41 Prescott Valley City or Site 2006 Yuma County Yuma – Juvenile Center/Courthouse Bold denotes value above the standard. N/A – Not available # Indicates the data do not satisfy EPA’s summary criteria, usually meaning less than 75 percent valid data recovery available in one or more calendar quarters. E Indicates every day monitoring. Phoenix area sites which began every day monitoring in 2004 include: Buckeye, Durango Complex, Higley, and West Forty Third. Particulate Matter – PM2.5 The NAAQS for particulate matter 2.5 microns and smaller in diameter (PM2.5) are 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) for the annual arithmetic mean concentration and 65 µg/m3 for the 24-hour average concentrations. The 24-hour NAAQS was changed to 35 µg/m3 December 17, 2006. Appendix N to Part 50 of the 40 CFR will be used to assess the compliance of the monitors operating in Arizona during 2006. The annual PM2.5 standard is met when the three-year average of annual means is less than or equal to 15.0 µg/m3. This three-year average is determined by calculating the quarterly averages for each year (with 75 percent data recovery in each quarter) to determine the calendar year average and then averaging the three years together. The 24-hour standard is met when the three-year average of the 98th percentile values is less than or equal to 65 µg/m3 in 2006. There must also be 75 percent data completeness for each year. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 56 Please note that the data in Table 19 are from federal reference monitors. In prior years, the dichot fine measurement was used as an approximate equivalent for PM2.5, but the federal reference monitors provide a more accurate measurement of this pollutant. Data are collected and reported in local conditions. In February of 2004, Arizona requested that all parts of the State (except for Indian Country) be designated attainment/unclassifiable for the PM2.5 NAAQS. Table 19: 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3, local conditions) 2004 to 2006 PM2.5 Annual Average NAAQS Compliance Values, By County Sites in Sites with Exceedances Violation 2004 2005 2006 NAAQS: The three-year average of Cochise 0 0 0 0 annual means is less than or equal to 3 Coconino 0 0 0 0 15 µg/m 0 Gila 0 0 0 Maricopa 0 0 0 0 Pima 0 0 0 0 Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 Summary: 13 of 13 federal reference monitors in compliance Table 19: 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3) City or Site Federal Reference Monitors 2004 2005 2006 ThreeYear Average 7.11 7.33 6.78 7 6.77 6.01 6.61 6 9.54 8.38 # 9.04 N/A JLG Supersite 9.73 9.72 10.22 10 Mesa (Opened 4/28/2005) N/A 8.35 # 9.66 N/A Cochise County Douglas Red Cross Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School Gila County Payson Well Site Maricopa County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 57 Table 19: 2004 to 2006 Annual Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3) City or Site Federal Reference Monitors 2004 2005 2006 ThreeYear Average N/A 12.84 12.69 N/A 7.30 # N/A N/A N/A 11.60 11.87 13.52 12 Children’s Park 5.57 5.91 5.79 6 Orange Grove 5.79 6.32 5.80 6 5.51 # 5.52 5.31 N/A 7.13 7.33 7.55 7 10.83 13.1 16.19 13 South Phoenix (Opened 1/1/2005) Tempe Community Center (Closed 7/26/2004) West Phoenix Pima County Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station Casa Grande Downtown Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office # Indicates the data do not satisfy EPA’s summary criteria, usually meaning less than 75 percent valid data recovery available in one or more calendar quarters. 2004 to 2006 PM2.5 24-Hour Average NAAQS Compliance Values, By County Table 20: 2004 to 2006 24Hour Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3, local conditions) Cochise NAAQS: The three-year average of the 98th percentile values is less than Coconino or equal to 65 µg/m3. Gila Note: The three-year average is rounded to the nearest 1 µg/m3 for comparison to the standard. Maricopa Pima Santa Cruz Sites with Exceedances 2003 2004 2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sites in Violation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summary: 13 of 13 federal reference monitors in compliance ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 58 Table 20. 2004 to 2006 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3) 98th Percentile City or Site Federal Reference Monitors Samples ** ThreeYear Average 2004 2005 2006 22.5 16.0 14.0 18 20.7 12.7 13.7 16 19.3 22.9 23.4 22 27.6 28.2 24.6 27 N/A 17.5 20.1 N/A South Phoenix (opened 1/1/2005) N/A 36.4 28.8 N/A Tempe Community Center (Closed 7/26/2004) 14.8 N/A N/A N/A 29.9 40.5 28.8 33 10.3 10.7 12.1 11 13.3 13.7 16.3 14 10.3 10.6 9.3 10 13.7 16.9 15.4 15 25.1 33.0 56.2 38 Cochise County Douglas Red Cross 2 Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School 2 Gila County Payson 2 Maricopa County JLG Supersite 3 Mesa (Opened 4/28/2005) 3 3 West Phoenix 3 Pima County Children’s Park Orange Grove 3 1 Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station Casa Grande Downtown 2 3 Santa Cruz County Nogales – Post Office 2 ** The 98th percentile value will be the second highest value for sites on an every 6th day sample schedule. The 98th percentile value will be the 3rd highest value for sites on an every 3rd day sample schedule. 1 Samples collected every day – 365 sample days in 2006. 2 Samples collected every sixth day - 61 sample days in 2006. 3 Samples collected every third day - 122 sample days in 2006. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 59 Visibility Data Visibility monitoring is conducted using methods: aerosol, optical and scene. Aerosol measurements include the physical properties of the ambient atmospheric particles (chemical composition, size, shape, concentration, temporal and spatial distribution and other physical properties) through which a scene is viewed. The chemical species that comprise a particulate sample have different extinction efficiencies. Extinction efficiency is the extent to which an individual or a specific particle will either scatter or absorb light, thus blocking the light’s path to one’s eye. The overall impact of particles can be estimated by summing the effect of all the component species. This method is the primary approach used in the national regional haze rule for estimating present visibility and charting trends for future plan reviews. Optical methods measure either light scattering or light extinction continuously. Scene measurements are photograph-based with subsequent analysis. ADEQ operates several types of monitors designed to characterize different optical phenomena. Visibility data from these monitors can be expressed by several different measurement units: deciview, inverse megameters, and visual range. Inverse megameters is a representation of the ratio between how much light is not received by a sensor compared to the amount of light that leaves a source. Higher numbers mean worse visibility. Class I Areas In anticipation of the federal regional haze rule, ADEQ, in 1997, undertook development of a visibility monitoring program directed at Class I areas in partnership with Arizona’s federal land managers. The aim is to collect data at all of Arizona’s Class I areas. Based on the regional haze rule, five years of data will be needed to determine baseline and projected visibility conditions. Since the IMPROVE program consists of aerosol sampling only, ADEQ included nephelometers for measuring light scattering at its jointly operated sites. IMPROVE aerosol samplers operate every three days and represent 24-hour averages. Taking continuous measurements provides insight into variation in visibility impairment with time, along with advancing the understanding of the relationship between particles and light scattering. Table 21 summarizes the nephelometer data from locations in or near Arizona Class I areas from 1998 to 2006. The data are summarized into three categories for all hours (24 hours a day): the average visibility of the dirtiest 20 percent of the sampled hours, the mean visibility of all hours and the average visibility of the cleanest 20 percent of the sampled hours. As natural background levels are 15 Mm-1, this table shows that on average most sites are within background, with the exceptions being Tucson Mountain in 2002 – 2006 and Pleasant Valley in 2003. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 60 Table 21: Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1) Mm-1 (24 hour Averages) Mean of the 20% Dirtiest Sampled Hours Mean of all Sampled Hours Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 2002 26 10 2 2003 26 10 1 2004 17 8 1 2005 23 9 1 2006 21 9 2 1998 24 9 0 1999 25 12 3 2000 28 13 3 2001 21 9 1 2002 24 8 0 2003 36 16 3 2002 24 10 2 2003 30 12 2 2004 24 11 3 2005 26 12 4 2006 23 12 4 1998 28 12 2 1999 22 11 3 McFadden Peak Sierra Ancha Wilderness (site closed in 2000) 1998 24 10 1 1999 18 7 0 Muleshoe Ranch Chiracahua National 1998 24 11 4 1999 20 11 3 Site and Wilderness Area Greer Water Treatment Plant Mt. Baldy Wilderness Humboldt Mountain Mazatzal Wilderness and Pine Mountain Wilderness (Site closed in 2004) Ike’s Backbone Mazatzal/Pine Mountain Wildernesses Mount Ord Mazatzal Wilderness (site closed in 2000) Year ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 61 Table 21: Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1) Mm-1 (24 hour Averages) Site and Wilderness Area Monument Wilderness, Galiuro Wilderness, Chiricahua Forest Service Wilderness Rucker Canyon Chiricahua Wilderness (site closed in 2001) Pleasant Valley Ranger Station Sierra Ancha Wilderness Camp Raymond Sycamore Canyon Wilderness Mean of the 20% Dirtiest Sampled Hours Mean of all Sampled Hours Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 2000 22 11 3 2001 24 12 4 2002 25 12 4 2003 25 11 3 2004 20 8 1 2005 21 10 4 1998 30 12 3 1999 20 10 4 2000 18 8 1 2001 28 14 5 2002 27 13 3 2003 33 15 4 2004 20 10 3 2005 28 13 4 2006 25 11 2 1999 28 13 4 2000 28 13 3 2001 28 13 3 2002 30 13 3 2003 32 14 3 2004 25 12 3 2005 33 14 3 2006 32 14 4 Year ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 62 Table 21: Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1) Mm-1 (24 hour Averages) Site and Wilderness Area Tucson Mountain Saguaro National Park (Includes both the West facilities support building and the National Park Service well site) Chiricahua National Monument Organ Pipe National Monument Petrified Forest National Park Mean of the 20% Dirtiest Sampled Hours Mean of all Sampled Hours Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 1998 30 12 2 1999 24 13 6 2000 23 12 5 2001 22 11 3 2002 31 16 6 2003 35 17 6 2004 32 16 5 2005 31 16 5 2006 27 15 6 2004 18 9 3 2005 21 10 2 2006 18 7 0 2004 21 10 3 2005 23 12 4 2006 21 9 1 2004 20 9 3 2005 24 11 3 2006 23 9 1 Year Urban Haze Besides the Class I areas, ADEQ also operates transmissometers and nephelometers in Phoenix and Tucson. Data from these instruments through 2006 are presented in Table 22. The data are separated into categories for all hours and for 6-hours. Each category is further summarized into the average visibility for the dirtiest 20 percent of the sampled hours, the mean visibility of all hours and the cleanest 20 percent of the sampled hours. As visual range in miles may be a more familiar unit, the values in inverse megameters (Mm-1) in ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 63 Table 22 can be converted to visual range in miles by the expression (2431/bext). A few conversions are given here: Mm-1 Miles Comment 133 100 50 7 18 24 48 347 Highest in Table 22 Lowest in the Table Table 22. Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2006 (in Mm-1) 24 Hour Samples Site 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. Year Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% Mesa 2004 106 60 24 110 65 29 Transmissometer 2005 121 72 35 123 78 44 2006 115 70 37 117 75 42 1998 133 78 45 136 84 50 1999 127 72 38 128 77 42 2000 131 74 38 134 80 42 2001 118 69 36 118 73 42 2002 124 75 42 125 79 46 2003 131 72 36 135 78 42 2004 121 69 35 126 75 42 2005 126 72 36 128 78 43 2006 125 69 32 126 76 40 1998 91 35 10 77 34 13 1999 87 36 11 74 36 14 2000 93 39 12 80 39 15 2001 73 32 12 66 33 15 Phoenix Transmissometer Phoenix Nephelometer (Supersite) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 64 Table 22. Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2006 (in Mm-1) 24 Hour Samples Site Phoenix Nephelometer (Dysart) Phoenix Nephelometer (Estrella Mountain) Phoenix Nephelometer (Vehicle Emissions) Tucson Transmissometer 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. Year Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% 2002 72 33 12 62 33 14 2003 79 34 11 73 35 14 2004 72 30 9 61 30 11 2005 80 33 9 73 33 11 2006 88 39 12 80 40 14 2004 46 22 7 52 27 9 2005 41 20 8 41 23 10 2006 44 21 6 49 25 9 2004 54 24 7 68 32 10 2005 76 35 12 77 39 14 2006 50 23 7 64 31 10 2004 69 29 9 64 31 12 2005 76 35 12 73 37 15 2006 56 26 8 53 27 11 1998 102 57 28 119 69 34 1999 90 57 35 107 65 38 2000 98 56 27 114 66 31 2001 96 55 26 109 66 33 2002 87 49 24 109 61 29 2003 88 52 26 107 62 30 2004 97 58 27 113 67 32 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 65 Table 22. Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2006 (in Mm-1) 24 Hour Samples Site Tucson Nephelometer (U of A Central) Tucson Nephelometer (Craycroft) Tucson Nephelometer (Children’s Park) 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. Year Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% 2005 101 61 31 125 76 39 2006 83 47 22 100 56 28 1998 45 21 4 47 23 7 1999 43 23 10 41 24 11 2000 40 20 8 40 22 9 2001 42 23 10 44 25 13 2002 38 20 7 42 22 9 2003 43 23 9 45 25 11 2004 38 20 8 42 22 10 2005 45 24 10 47 27 12 2006 39 19 5 40 21 7 2001 38 19 8 N/A N/A N/A 2002 37 18 7 N/A N/A N/A 2003 52 25 7 N/A N/A N/A 2004 42 21 8 43 22 9 2005 35 19 7 44 25 11 2006 41 22 9 40 23 11 2004 41 20 8 43 23 10 2005 35 19 7 35 20 8 2006 38 20 8 40 23 11 N/A – Not available ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 66 Special Projects and Accomplishments Introduction This section summarizes some of ADEQ's accomplishments and special projects during 2006 and the first half of 2007. A discussion of EPA's proposed changes to the ozone NAAQS is also included. In addition to ADEQ’s statewide regulatory ambient air monitoring program, the Air Quality Division undertook several special projects. All of these studies go beyond data collection and seek to provide a better Figure 3 - Yuma West Monitoring Station, Western understanding of air pollutant science in Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study Arizona and the Southwest. Data are employed in advanced computer models that help to explain and predict the relationship between emissions and air pollutant concentrations under a variety of conditions. Control strategies are modeled to predict the most effective methods to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards in Arizona. Issues related to the international border, identification of potential air pollution hotspots, improved visibility and reduction of regional haze, and appropriate responses to smoke and other air pollution hazards to protect public health fall under special projects. The knowledge gained from these studies can then be used by decision-makers to choose the most effective control strategies that will continue to improve the State’s air quality. Douglas Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Planning Area Redesignation to Attainment On December 18, 2001, ADEQ submitted a plan demonstrating attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2 in the Douglas area. EPA subsequently advised ADEQ that alternative test methods employed by Phelps Dodge at its smelter, the primary source of SO2 in this planning area, would have to be included in ADEQ’s rules. The Air Quality Division updated its rules to include an Alternative Test Methods Rule and submitted it on December 23, 2005. EPA approved the redesignation effective May 1, 2006 [February 28, 2006; 71 FR 9941]. This was the third of five Arizona SO2 areas officially redesignated to attainment status, reflecting improved air quality and matching the official label to monitored air quality. Miami Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Planning Area Redesignation to Attainment On June 27, 2002, ADEQ submitted a plan demonstrating attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2 in the Miami area. EPA subsequently advised ADEQ that alternative test methods employed by Phelps Dodge would have to be included in ADEQ’s rules. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 67 The Air Quality Division updated its rules to include an Alternative Test Methods Rule and submitted it on December 23, 2005. ADEQ also worked with EPA to correct the boundary description for this planning area to remove T1N, R16E from the description; to correct T1S, R14 ¼ E to T1S, R14 ½ E, and to remove Indian Country because Arizona does not have jurisdiction over Indian Country. EPA approved the redesignation and the boundary correction pursuant to Section 110(k)(6) of the Clean Air Act effective March 26, 2007 [January 24, 2007; 72 FR 3061]. This was the fourth of five Arizona SO2 areas officially redesignated to attainment status, reflecting improved air quality and matching the official label to monitored air quality. San Manuel Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Planning Area Pending Redesignation to Attainment On June 20, 2002, ADEQ submitted a plan demonstrating attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2 in the San Manuel area. Subsequently, the operator of the smelter that was the primary source of SO2 emissions in this planning area canceled its air quality permits for the smelter in March 2005. The stacks were dismantled thereafter. The Air Quality Division updated the Emission Inventory by removing all the emissions related to the smelter, revised portions of the plan affected by closure of the smelter, and submitted a Supplement to EPA on June 7, 2007. ADEQ has also proposed in its Annual Monitoring Network Plan, submitted to EPA in September 2007, removal of its ambient air quality monitor in San Manuel on December 31, 2007. Upon EPA’s expected approval of that request, ADEQ expects EPA to publish a Direct Final redesignation to attainment status for this planning area, the fifth of the five Arizona SO2 planning areas. Ajo PM10 Clean Data Finding Effective April 10, 2006, EPA published a Clean Data Finding for the 2002-2004 data period for this planning area [February 8, 2006; 71 FR 6352]. Therefore, no reasonable further progress requirements, attainment demonstration, or nonattainment area contingency measures are necessary. The Air Quality Division is developing a 10-year Maintenance Plan and a redesignation request for submittal in FY 2008. Miami PM10 Planning Area Boundary Redesignation and Clean Data Finding In 1987, EPA designated the combined Hayden/Miami area as a single Group I PM10 nonattainment area. On October 16, 1989, ADEQ submitted a nonattainment plan for the Hayden portion only and asked that the Miami portion be excluded. EPA did not act on the submittal. On November 10, 1994, ADEQ submitted a Petition for rulemaking to realign the Hayden/Miami PM10 nonattainment area boundary by correcting EPA’s 1987 inclusion of the Miami area in the Group I area in 1987 to EPA and instead excluding the Miami portion from the Hayden/Miami planning requirements. EPA did not act on the Petition and instead proposed a limited approval for the Hayden portion and a limited disapproval for the Miami portion, which the Plan had not addressed, on July 15, 1994, that was never finalized [59 FR 36116]. On June 20, 2006, the Air Quality Division submitted a request for boundary redesignation pursuant to ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 68 Clean Air Act Section 107(d)(3)(D), superseding the 1994 Petition. The supporting documentation covered meteorology, topography, locations of emission sources, local air transport patterns, and overall planning considerations. This request was to divide the single PM10 nonattainment area into two separate PM10 nonattainment areas roughly along the ridgeline of the Pinal Mountains. Effective May 29, 2007, EPA finalized the boundary redesignation [March 28, 2007; 72 FR 14422]. No violations had been monitored in the Miami PM10 nonattainment area since monitoring began there in 1987. ADEQ discontinued its last Miami PM10 monitoring site (known as Nolan Ranch, Miami South or Jones Ranch) in 1994. Since 1991, two monitors have continued operating in this area, both Special Purpose Monitors (SPMs) operated by Phelps Dodge Corporation. Monitoring data collected at SPMs are not routinely certified and entered into the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). To provide for the Clean Data Finding, ADEQ worked with Phelps Dodge Corporation to certify the SPM data and enter it into AQS for the 2003-2005 period. The data met EPA’s requirements in Title 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, and ADEQ certified that the data met EPA’s quality assurance requirements. Phelps Dodge Corporation has also made a written commitment to ADEQ to submit its Miami monitoring data that complies with EPA’s regulatory requirements to ADEQ on a quarterly basis in the future. EPA finalized its Clean Data Finding for this area in the same Federal Register notice as the boundary redesignation. This finding means that reasonable further progress requirements, an attainment demonstration, and nonattainment area contingency measures are not required. The Air Quality Division will develop a 10-year Maintenance Plan to submit with a redesignation request in FY 2009. 5% Annual Reasonable Further Progress Maricopa Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area Emission Inventory and Attainment Demonstration Development On June 6, 2007, EPA published in the Federal Register [72 FR 31183] a Finding of Failure to Attain the PM10 standard by December 31, 2006, for Maricopa County. The area had obtained a 5-year extension of the attainment deadline for Serious Areas pursuant to Section 188(e) to December 31, 2006. The Finding requires Arizona to submit by December 31, 2007, a SIP revision to provide for attainment and 5% annual reductions in PM10 or PM10 precursor emissions until attainment is achieved, as required by Clean Air Act Section 189(d). Maricopa County is only the second PM10 nonattainment area in the nation subject to the 5% annual RFP requirement. San Joaquin Valley was the first, and Owens Valley, California, is the third. San Joaquin Valley’s exceedances occur during high wind events, and Owens Valley exceedances have resulted from the draining of Owens Lake. In contrast, Maricopa County PM10 exceedances occur primarily during stagnant wintertime morning conditions. ADEQ worked with the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and the Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) on MCAQD’s new base case emissions inventory to improve the Windblown Dust and Agricultural source category emissions estimates. On August 21, 2007, EPA published in the Federal Register [72 FR 43537] a Final Rule effective September 20, 2007, approving a number of Maricopa County rules and measures as Best Available Control Measures and Most Stringent Measures. Although the measures address ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 69 exceedances that occurred in the 32-square-mile Salt River sub-area of the Maricopa Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area, the control measures apply to the entire Nonattainment Area. ADEQ worked with EPA, MCAQD, MAG, and Sierra Research to refine the attainment modeling demonstration to simulate ambient conditions and to show the air quality benefits of the strategies adopted to achieve the NAAQS. Control strategies were developed by stakeholders through the MAG committee process and the 2007 Arizona legislative session, culminating in adoption of Senate Bill 1552. Stakeholders included Pinal County, as one of its townships is in the planning area. Selected control measures target many categories of pollution sources: agriculture; commercial and residential construction; road construction; sand and gravel mining; leaf blowing; off-road vehicles; open burning, including residential, hospitality industry, outdoor fires; primary and secondary paved roads; unpaved parking lots, ingress and egress areas at residential and commercial buildings meeting size thresholds; unpaved public roads and shoulders; and windblown dust from disturbed land (including areas in the river bottom) and vacant lots. Public education, training of paid leaf blower operators, basic training of water truck and water pull drivers as well as superintendents of sites meeting size thresholds, comprehensive training of Dust Control Coordinators at sites meeting other size thresholds, and expanded distribution of High Pollution Advisories are other important control strategies. MCAQD is also improving enforcement by adding 51 inspectors for construction sites and vacant lands and 40 additional support employees, including supervisors. Yuma PM10 Nonattainment Area Pending Redesignation Yuma was designated nonattainment for PM10 (particulate matter 10 microns or smaller) in 1990. ADEQ developed a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Yuma in 1991 that demonstrated the area could meet the federal NAAQS by December 1994. After several consecutive years of clean monitoring data, a stakeholder process to prepare an attainment demonstration and maintenance plan was convened in July 2001. ADEQ met with local stakeholders to review the control measures already in place and hired a contractor to assist in developing an emissions inventory for the 1999 base year and future year emissions estimates. After air quality modeling for 1999 was completed successfully, ADEQ staff learned that incomplete monitoring data for 2001 would necessitate using the 2002-2004 monitoring data for the attainment demonstration, with a SIP submittal in early 2005. On August 18, 2002, however, an unusually large and intense thunderstorm with blowing dust over east-central Sonora moved northwesterly through Yuma. For this day there were three hours with wind speeds above the dust re-suspension threshold of 15 mph. The Yuma PM10 monitor registered 170 ug/m3, exceeding the National Ambient Air Quality Standard of 150 µg/m3. Data from nearby meteorological sites were tested to determine whether the exceedance date in question was considered meteorologically exceptional. These tests are described in an ADEQ document, “Technical Criteria Document for Determination of Natural Exceptional Events for Particulate Matter Equal to or Less than Ten Microns in Aerodynamic Diameter (PM10)”, May 31, 2000. The August 18, 2002 date met the criteria for a natural exceptional ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 70 event in EPA’s policy, and qualified for treatment through a Natural Events Action Plan (NEAP). ADEQ submitted a NEAP to EPA on February 19, 2004, which did not require EPA approval. EPA made a Clean Data Finding for 1998-2001 and subsequent years for Yuma on March 14, 2006 [71 FR 13021] that became effective May 16, 2006. As a result, reasonable further progress requirements, an attainment demonstration and nonattainment contingency measures were not required. ADEQ continued to work with the stakeholder group and submitted the request for redesignation and 10-year Maintenance Plan to EPA on August 16, 2006. All Best Available Control Measures (BACM) in the NEAP were adopted and implemented by August 18, 2005, and have been included in the Maintenance Plan. Best Available Control Measures for all significant sources of PM10 contributing to the PM10 concentrations in Yuma County include enforcement to prevent traffic and trespass on unpaved Irrigation District canal roads, Agricultural Best Management Practices (AgBMP) for windblown dust, control measures for other disturbed land and vacant lots, and requirements for uncovered trucks hauling particulate matter. A public outreach campaign was developed involving bilingual brochures, a public service announcement, and a video for the general public. Dust Control Action Forecasts are provided 3 days in advance by ADEQ to sources, including construction site contractors, public works, and agricultural sources notified by the Department of Agriculture, to enable them to reschedule activities that would disturb soils or to add control measures. Additional analyses were prepared by the Air Quality Division to quantify the emission reductions from the implementation of Agricultural Best Management Practices, which began in Yuma August 1, 2005. This work was accomplished with the help of Yuma farmers, conservation agents, and Arizona Department of Agriculture personnel. In 2007, ADEQ adopted the Yuma AgBMP rule as a supplemental contingency measure in the Maintenance Plan to meet the requirements of Clean Air Act Section 175A(d). This was necessary because the requirement for a NEAP ended after EPA promulgated an Exceptional Events Rule to replace its Exceptional Events Policy and its Natural Events Policy. Also in 2007, EPA noted that sixteen exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard had occurred at the Special Purpose BAMS monitor in Yuma. Because the Special Purpose Monitor had been in operation since November 2004, more than 24 months, EPA could compare its ambient monitoring data to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards [October 17, 2006. 71 FR 61302 revising Title 40 CFR § 58.20(c)]. The Air Quality Division has evaluated each of these sixteen exceedances for data flagging pursuant to EPA’s Exceptional Events Rule. ADEQ anticipates that all eleven events will qualify for exception and has conducted a Natural Events Stakeholder meeting in Yuma on November 13, 2007. If the stakeholders concur with ADEQ’s analysis, ADEQ would submit the documentation to EPA. Thereafter, EPA would be able to complete the redesignation process. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 71 Maricopa 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Plan MAG developed a Plan that included the Apache Junction township in Pinal County and submitted it to ADEQ on June 12, 2007. ADEQ submitted it to EPA on June 14, 2007, with the understanding that it would have to be supplemented after EPA responds to a court remand of its Phase I Implementation Rule (South Coast Air Quality Management District, et al. v. U.S. EPA, No. 04-1200, issued December 22, 2006). Preliminary monitoring data for 2007 indicated no exceedances or violations through September 30th. If quality assurance confirms the data, then 2005-2007 air quality data would demonstrate attainment of this National Ambient Air Quality Standard. Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study (WASBAQS) The purpose of this study is to determine the sources and movement of air pollutants as well as assess their health impacts on residents of far southwestern Arizona and adjacent regions of Mexico. To accomplish this, ADEQ, in partnership with local, state, federal, and tribal governments will follow methodology similar to the Ambos Nogales and Douglas/Agua Prieta risk assessments. This study consists of four components: measuring meteorological variables and sampling air pollutant Figure 4 – Map of Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality concentrations, constructing an Study monitoring locations. inventory of the emissions, simulating the concentrations with an air quality model, and conducting personal exposure and risk assessment analyses. Its area of interest is from Yuma, Arizona to the border, San Luis, Rio Colorado, Sonora, and portions of Baja California del Norte and California. This project began with the establishment of meteorological sites in the Yuma/San Luis area, with five Arizona sites in summer 2003 and three Mexico sites in June 2004. Measurements consisted of wind speed, wind direction, solar radiation, pressure, temperature, relative humidity, and delta-T. In addition to this meteorological network, two “supersites” with both gaseous and particulate monitoring were established in March 2006: one in northeastern Yuma and the other in northwestern San Luis, Rio Colorado. These sites were run until April 2007. In 2006 ADEQ staff and its contractor began building the emissions inventory, completed in November, 2007. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 72 The WASBAQS also included three special purpose monitoring studies: the pollution from the brick kilns of San Luis, elevated particulates associated with unpaved roads, and the spatial distribution of pollutants in neighborhoods. As envisioned by ADEQ staff, the WASBAQS, or “Yuma/San Luis border study,” then, would incorporate the elements of the Nogales and Douglas/Aqua Prieta studies, but will expand to issues of cross-border transport, brick kilns, and agricultural emissions. Rillito PM10 Clean Data Finding Effective October 10, 2006, EPA published a Clean Data Finding for the 1992-1994 data period and subsequent years [August 8, 2006; 71 FR 44920]. The Air Quality Division is developing a 10-year Maintenance Plan and redesignation request for submittal to EPA in FY 2008. EPA’s Proposed Revisions to 8-Hour Ozone Standard National Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are reviewed periodically to incorporate current scientific knowledge and to provide a review process for public and scientific input. The last review of the ozone standards was completed July 18, 1997, at which time the 8hour standard was set at level of 0.08. The average of the most recent three year’s fourth highest measurements is compared to 0.084. The secondary standard was set equal to the primary standard. The EPA initiated the current review in September 2000. After a series of delays for study workgroups, public review and comment, and litigation, the Court decreed that a final rulemaking by EPA must be completed no later than March 12th, 2008. Written comments on the proposed rule were required to be submitted to the EPA by October 9th, 2007. ADEQ was one of thousands of organizations, government agencies and individuals to submit comments by this deadline. Primary Standard – 0.070 to 0.079 ppm Ozone As stated in the Code of Federal Regulations Part 50.2, “the national primary ambient air quality standards define levels of air quality which the Administrator judges are necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health. The selection of any particular approach to providing an adequate margin of safety is a policy choice left specifically to the Administrator’s judgment”. Choosing an adequate margin of safety is subjective and requires consideration of available scientific evidence drawn from clinical studies as well as the size and risk levels of the various at-risk populations such as asthmatics and persons with pulmonary function deficiencies. Based on research that has been done on ozone-related adverse health effects since the standard was last revised, EPA proposed strengthening the current 0.08 parts-per-million 8-hour annual ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 73 primary standard to one that is within a range of 0.070 to 0.079 ppm. The three-year averaging of the fourth highest measurement would not be changed. Because of the rounding convention adopted in 1997, ozone concentrations up to and including 0.084 meet the current standard. The proposed standards do not permit the “extra” 0.004. An 8-hour standard of either 0.070 or 0.075 ppm, would change the attainment status of many areas in Arizona, since the monitors that represent conditions in those areas are currently just slightly below the current 0.08 ppm standard. Table 16: 2004-2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance shows that only a small percentage of the sites in Arizona would meet the 0.075 standard and many more would likely not meet a 0.070 standard. Secondary Standard – 7 to 21 ppm-hours in Highest 3-Month Period EPA proposed to revise the secondary standard for ozone to provide increased protection against ozone-induced adverse impacts on vegetation and forested ecosystems. These include growth impairment of the seedlings of sensitive tree species, visible foliar damage, impaired root growth in mature trees such as Ponderosa pine, and reduced crop yields. Two proposals are being considered: 1. Make the new secondary standard the same as the new primary standard. This approach would ignore the considerable amount of evidence derived from studies of agricultural yields and documented impacts on non-agricultural herbs, shrubs and trees. 2. Base the secondary standard on a method designed to estimate the total effect of cumulative exposure of plants and wildlife to ozone during daylight hours over the ozone season. The “W126” function was recommended for the estimation measure of ozone exposure. The members of EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) were unanimous in recommending a secondary standard different than the primary standard and one that adequately gauged ozone exposure. They recommended a secondary standard based on the sum of the weighted hourly ozone concentrations at a site over the highest 3-month period of the season. The sigmoidal (S-shaped) weighting function, W126, is defined for the daytime hours as: 7 pm W126 = max ∑ w*Ci 8 am where Ci = hourly ozone concentration over 3 consecutive months, w = 1/(1 + 4403e-126Ci) While this function looks complicated, it is widely accepted as a preferred approach because it measures total ozone exposure during daylight hours and weights hourly ozone concentrations lowest at lower concentrations and increases the weight as ozone concentration increases. To illustrate this, experiments on plants have shown that an ozone concentration of 0.07 ppm does more than two times as much damage as a concentration of 0.035 ppm. So the W126 function assigns the weight for a 0.07 ppm concentration more than twice that for a 0.035 ppm concentration. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 74 The recommended secondary standard range for the W126 sum is 7 to 21 ppm hours for the three months during ozone season that maximizes the W126 sum. For most sites in Arizona, the maximum months are May through July, but some maximize in the April through June period. Unfortunately, many of the sites in Arizona do not meet the 21 ppm-hour total and few would be likely to meet a secondary standard of 7 ppm-hours total for the maximum consecutive threemonth ozone monitoring season. For each ozone-monitoring site in Arizona, Table 23 shows that site’s 2004-2006 data to compare its 3-year average of the 4th highest concentrations with the proposed range of primary standards. It also shows each site’s 2006 data to compare its maximum 3-consecutive-months sum of W126 values with the proposed range of 7 to 21. Table 23: 2004 - 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Average vs. Proposed Primary Standard And 2006 Maximum 3-Month W126 Totals vs. Proposed Secondary Standard Proposed Proposed 3-Yr Avg. Max 3-Mo Primary Secondary Site th 4 Highest W126 Range Range Cochise County Chiricahua NM Entrance Station Coconino County .070 – .079 0.072 7 - 21 12.5 .070 – .079 0.073 7 - 21 21.7 .070 – .079 0.080 7 - 21 26.5 .070 – .079 N/A 7 - 21 21.5 .070 – .079 0.072 7 - 21 6.2 .070 – .079 N/A 7 - 21 8.8 Cave Creek .070 – .079 0.079 7 - 21 27.1 Central Phoenix .070 – .079 0.076 7 - 21 22.1 Dysart .070 – .079 0.067 7 - 21 N/A Falcon Field .070 – .079 0.075 7 - 21 8.1 Fountain Hills .070 – .079 0.082 7 - 21 33.1 Glendale .070 – .079 0.076 7 - 21 17.3 Grand Canyon NP : Hance Gila County Tonto NM La Paz County Alamo Lake (Opened 05/20/05) Maricopa County Blue Point Buckeye (Opened 08/01/04) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 75 Table 23: 2004 - 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Average vs. Proposed Primary Standard And 2006 Maximum 3-Month W126 Totals vs. Proposed Secondary Standard Proposed Proposed 3-Yr Avg. Max 3-Mo Primary Secondary Site th 4 Highest W126 Range Range Humboldt Mt. .070 – .079 0.081 7 - 21 27.9 JLG Supersite .070 – .079 0.074 7 - 21 19.3 North Phoenix .070 – .079 0.083 7 - 21 29.2 Pinnacle Peak .070 – .079 0.075 7 - 21 7.5 Rio Verde .070 – .079 0.081 7 - 21 32.0 South Phoenix .070 – .079 0.072 7 - 21 12.1 South Scottsdale .070 – .079 0.076 7 - 21 22.0 Tempe .070 – .079 0.075 7 - 21 23.0 West Phoenix .070 – .079 0.074 7 - 21 23.7 .070 – .079 0.070 7 - 21 21.1 22nd St. & Craycroft .070 – .079 0.070 7 - 21 11.8 Children’s Park .070 – .079 0.071 7 - 21 15.2 Coachline .070 – .079 0.068 7 - 21 14.3 Green Valley .070 – .079 0.068 7 - 21 13.2 Rose Elementary .070 – .079 0.066 7 - 21 8.8 Saguaro NP East .070 – .079 0.076 7 - 21 19.4 Tangerine .070 – .079 0.072 7 - 21 20.6 Tucson Downtown .070 – .079 0.068 7 - 21 12.1 Tucson Fairgrounds .070 – .079 0.068 7 - 21 12.3 .070 – .079 0.073 7 - 21 23.3 .070 – .079 0.071 7 - 21 17.8 Queen Creek .070 – .079 0.065 7 - 21 12.0 Maricopa .070 – .079 0.064 7 - 21 9.3 Navajo County Petrified Forest NP Pima County Pinal County Apache Junction Maintenance Yard Casa Grande - Airport ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 76 Table 23: 2004 - 2006 Eight-Hour Ozone Average vs. Proposed Primary Standard And 2006 Maximum 3-Month W126 Totals vs. Proposed Secondary Standard Proposed Proposed 3-Yr Avg. Max 3-Mo Primary Secondary Site th 4 Highest W126 Range Range Pinal Air Park .070 – .079 0.071 7 - 21 12.8 Queen Valley .070 – .079 0.078 7 - 21 27.5 Yavapai County Hillside .070 – .079 N/A 7 - 21 N/A .070 – .079 0.074 7 - 21 12.4 Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 77 Trends Introduction Whether air quality meets the standards is a central question, explored at length in the second chapter of this report, but one posed more often is whether it is improving or deteriorating. In Arizona, because of the phasing out of leaded gasoline in the mid-1970s and the installation of effective controls on Figure 5 - Average Best & Average Worst Visibility copper smelters in the 1980s, the Impairment in the Phoenix Area concentrations of both lead and SO2 decreased rapidly. Although improvements have also been made in the concentrations of CO, O3 and particulates, O3 concentrations in the greater Phoenix area are virtually equal to the maximum allowed by the NAAQS standard. PM10 concentrations exceed the standards in Nogales, Phoenix, Buckeye, and Casa Grande. Visibility - the aspect of the atmosphere most obvious to the population - has been measured continuously in urban and pristine parts of the state long enough to establish trends. The following discussions examine the trends in these three common air pollutants and visibility in Arizona. Carbon Monoxide Since the mid to late 1970s, CO concentrations have declined dramatically. In Tucson, the maximum annual eight-hour concentration at 22nd Street and Alvernon declined from 12.0 in 1978 to 2.0 parts per million (ppm) in 2006 – a decrease of 82% (Figure 6). In Phoenix at 18th Street and Roosevelt (Central Phoenix), the decline was from 23.0 ppm in 1975 to 3.8 ppm in 2006 – a decrease of 83% (Figure 7). The number of exceedances of the eight-hour standard in Phoenix decreased from 75 to 0 at Central Phoenix. The entire Phoenix network of CO monitors recorded over 100 exceedances each year from 1981 through 1986, with an average of 134 per year. The last recorded exceedance was in 1999. Most of this improvement can be attributed to Federal new-vehicle emission standards, augmented by emission reductions from the vehicle inspection and maintenance program, which began in 1976, the use of oxygenated fuels in the winter, beginning in 1989, and cleaner burning gasoline, beginning in 1997. As of 2006, the maximum concentration measured in the Phoenix Area CO network was 5.3 ppm, 41% below the NAAQS. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 78 14 12 8-hr CO Maxima (ppm) Standard = 9 10 8 6 4 2 2006 2004 2002 2000 1998 1996 1994 1992 1990 1988 1986 1984 1982 1980 1978 0 Figure 6 - Eight-hour carbon monoxide maxima at 22nd Street and Alvernon Way in Tucson 25 15 Standard = 9 10 5 2005 2003 2001 1999 1997 1995 1993 1991 1989 1987 1985 1983 1981 1979 1977 0 1975 8-hr CO Maxima (ppm) 20 Figure 7 - Eight-hour carbon monoxide maxima at 18th Street and Roosevelt in Central Phoenix ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 79 Ozone One-Hour Ozone Concentrations Maximum one-hour O3 concentrations have remained steady in Yuma, but have declined in Phoenix and Tucson since 1980 (Figure 8). These decreases have been 30% and 23%, for Phoenix and Tucson, respectively. The Phoenix decrease in O3 concentrations since 1980 has been nowhere near as pronounced as its declining CO trend, but the net result has been similar: Only one exceedance of the O3 standard has been recorded after 1996. The onehour standard was officially declared attained on May 16, 2001. Changes in emissions would not be expected to produce proportional changes in concentration because of the relatively high background level of O3 and its photochemical formation from hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides. Yuma and Tucson have met the one-hour standard consistently since monitoring began. In the Phoenix airshed, the standard was exceeded regularly through the mid 1990s, with a gradual decrease to 1996, after which the concentrations remained steady and just below the standard until 2005. In 2005, the network maximum one-hour O3 concentration increased in the Phoenix area beyond the exceedance level (but did not constitute a violation, see Chapter 2, 1-hr O3 standard) at one site in the Phoenix area. It decreased below the standard again in 2006. 0.200 1-Hour Ozone (ppm) 0.160 Standard = 0.124 0.120 PHOENIX TUCSON YUMA 0.080 0.040 2006 2004 2002 2000 1998 1996 1994 1992 1990 1988 1986 1984 1982 1980 0.000 Figure 8 - Maximum one-hour ozone concentrations in three cities Eight-Hour Ozone Concentrations The eight-hour O3 standard, adopted by EPA in 1997, but not officially implemented until 2003 because of litigation, is expressed as the three-year average of the annual fourthhighest concentration, not to exceed 0.08 parts per million. Due to instrument precision and rounding, however, this standard translates into a numerical value of 0.085 ppm: any value 0.085 ppm and above is an exceedance. Long-term trends of the fourth-highest ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 80 ozone concentrations in Tucson fluctuate between 0.060 and 0.080 ppm, but, overall, are steady (Figure 9). A similar pattern in eight-hour ozone trends also characterizes Yuma, where, although the values are slightly higher than Tucson’s, the nearly constant trend is apparent (Figure 10). 0.1 Standard = 0.085 8-Hour Ozone (ppm) 0.08 0.06 Downtown Pom/Ch Pk Craycroft Saguaro Mo. 0.04 0.02 2006 2004 2002 2000 1998 1996 1994 1992 1990 1988 1986 1984 1982 1980 0 Figure 9 - Annual fourth-highest eight-hour ozone concentrations in Tucson 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 Figure 10 - Annual fourth-highest eight-hour ozone concentrations in Yuma ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 81 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 0 In contrast to the within-standard concentrations in Tucson and Yuma, 20 of the 33 sites in greater Phoenix recorded annual fourth-highest O3 values in excess of 0.084 ppm from 1996 to 2006. In metropolitan Phoenix, there was one site with an annual fourth-highest eight-hour O3 concentration in excess of 0.084 ppm in 2006. On the bright side, elevated values of the annual fourth-highest eight-hour O3 concentration occurred at fewer monitoring sites and at lower values in 2006 than in 1996, with most of the improvement taking place since the 2000 to 2002 period. For instance, of the nine sites operational both in 1996 and 2006, six recorded fourth-highest values greater than 0.084 ppm in 1996, but there was only one in 2006. The values have decreased through time as well, with typical fourth-highest concentrations decreasing from 1996 to 2006: Phoenix Supersite, 0.087 ppm to 0.076 ppm; South Phoenix, 0.084 ppm to 0.069 ppm; South Scottsdale, 0.089 ppm to 0.080 ppm, and North Phoenix, 0.092 ppm to 0.085 ppm. Looking at the specific statistical form of the standard -- the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest eight-hour ozone concentration -- metropolitan Phoenix did not exceed the standard in the three year period from 2004 to 2006, and, as with the annual fourth-highest values, the extent and severity have been decreasing with time. ADEQ reviewed the three-year periods ending with 1998 through 2006: the first being 1996 to 1998 and the last being 2004 to 2006. In the first two three-year periods 1996 to1998, and 1997 to1999 (Table 24); thirteen and five monitoring sites, respectively, had average fourth-highest values equal to or exceeding 0.085 ppm. In the last two periods, the numbers of such sites had decreased to zero. The magnitude of these three-year averages has decreased substantially, as well. The highest average for the period ending in 1998 was 0.0923 ppm; the highest average in 2006 was ten percent lower at 0.083 ppm. These trends are consistent with the decreasing one-hour maximum ozone trends; however, most of the decrease in eight-hour ozone concentrations occurred since 2000, five years later than the decrease in the one-hour concentrations. This trend suggests that, barring unfavorable meteorological conditions or exceptional events (like major wildfires), attainment of the standard will continue. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 82 Table 24. Three-Year Averages of the Annual Fourth Highest Eight-Hour Ozone Concentrations in Phoenix and Environs (Units are in parts per million (ppm). Bold values in yellow cells equal or exceed the operational standard of 0.085 ppm) 19971999 19982000 19992001 20002002 20012003 20022004 20032005 20042006 North Phoenix 0.0880 0.0863 0.0853 0.0857 0.0856 0.0837 0.083 0.083 Phoenix Supersite 0.0737 0.0727 0.0723 0.0770 0.0766 0.0743 0.074 0.075 Blue Point 0.0860 0.0887 0.0853 0.0843 0.0840 0.0823 0.080 0.072 Apache Junction 0.0817 0.0813 0.0797 0.0797 0.0763 0.0737 0.069 0.073 Pinnacle Peak 0.0810 0.0817 0.0820 0.0850 0.0840 0.0783 0.078 0.075 Fountain Hills 0.0823 0.0817 0.0810 0.0847 0.0840 0.0813 0.082 0.082 Falcon Field 0.0823 0.0817 0.0810 0.0800 0.0813 0.0777 0.075 0.075 South Scottsdale 0.0753 0.0760 0.0760 0.0787 0.0783 0.0763 0.076 0.076 West Phoenix 0.0853 0.0860 0.0823 0.0800 0.0786 0.0777 0.072 0.074 Maryvale 0.0813 0.0830 0.0783 0.0790 0.0800 0.0835 0.083 Closed Humboldt Mt. 0.0860 0.0863 0.0847 0.0850 0.0873 0.0850 0.084 0.081 0.0870 0.0855 0.0827 0.081 0.080 Site Tonto Monument Queen Valley 0.0790 0.0810 0.0830 0.0810 0.081 0.078 Cave Creek 0.0830 0.0845 0.0840 0.0817 0.080 0.079 Hillside 0.0810 0.0833 0.0810 0.0827 0.0773 0.0777 0.072 Closed Rio Verde 0.0833 0.0837 0.0850 0.0847 0.0837 0.0840 0.081 0.081 West Chandler 0.0733 0.0733 0.0747 0.0793 0.0797 0.0770 0.074 0.075 Maximum 0.0880 0.0887 0.0853 0.0857 0.0873 0.0850 0.084 0.083 5 5 3 4 3 1 0 0 n > 0.085 ppm ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 83 Illustrated in Figure 11 are the three-year averages from nine monitoring sites, listed in Table 24, that have a long period of operation and have recorded one or more averages above the standard. Although there is considerable site-to-site variability, the overall trend was downward until recently. While a few sites have continued this downward trend, others have leveled out or slightly increased in the most recent three-year periods. 0.095 Standard = 0.085 8-Hour Ozone (ppm) 0.090 0.085 0.080 0.075 0.070 0.065 1996- 1997-99 19981998 2000 Blue Point North Phoenix West Phoenix 19992001 20002002 20012003 Fountain Hills Pinnacle Peak Apache Junction 20022004 20032005 20042006 Humboldt Mt. Rio Verde Hillside closed 6/4/2005 Figure 11 - Phoenix area eight-hour ozone trends: three-year averages of the annual fourth highest concentrations Reviewing these sites together (Figure 12), the maximum value fluctuates at or just above the standard for all of the periods except the first, with a range from 0.085 to 0.088 ppm. The average of these sites, after a steady trend for the first half of the record, moves decidedly down in the latter half. These sites seem capable of producing maximum values at or slightly above the standard throughout the period of record; but their average is displaying a robust decline since 2000 to 2002. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 84 3-yr Avg of 8-hr Ozone (ppm) 0.095 0.090 Standard = 0. 085 Average Maximum 0.085 0.080 0.075 06 05 04 03 02 01 00 98 99 720 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 9 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 96 19 20 20 20 20 20 19 19 19 Figure 12 - Phoenix area eight-hour ozone trends: three-year averages of the annual fourth-highest concentrations, expressed as the average and maximum of nine long-term sites While the trend of the maximum values has been clearly downward, the slope of the trend line of the average values is becoming less negative, indicating that the rate of decrease is slowing. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 85 Particulates PM10 PM10 concentrations have decreased considerably at most sites throughout the state in both urban and rural settings. Nonetheless, this pollutant, more than any other, continues to exceed its standards and there is a small reversal of the long-term trend at several sites in the Phoenix metropolitan area – notably in the west valley. For example, annual PM10 concentrations in South Phoenix averaged 68.7 μg/m3 from 1985 to 1987, but only 52.0 μg/m3 in 2004 to 2006, a decrease of 26 percent. Figures 13 and 14, which show the three-year moving averages, have two distinct similarities: First, one or more sites shows dramatic improvement in the earliest part of the record; and, second, all sites show improvement in the latter part until the most recent three-year period where the downward trend flattens. Standard = 50 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) 70 60 50 Central Phoenix Chandler Glendale North Phoenix 40 30 20 10 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 0 Figure 13 - Three-Year Moving Averages of Annual Average PM10 at four metropolitan Phoenix sites with moderate PM10 levels (each data point is the average of the three years ending in that year (e.g. “2006” is the average of 2004, 2005, and 2006). ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 86 70 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) Standard = 50 60 50 South Phoenix West Phoenix Greenwood Durango Central Phoenix 40 30 20 10 2006 2004 2002 2000 1998 1996 1994 1992 1990 1988 0 Figure 14 - Three-Year Moving Averages of PM10 at four metropolitan Phoenix sites with higher PM10 concentrations Despite these improvements, unlike the trends for CO and O3, PM10 standards continue to be violated. Annual concentrations for the last 14 years, presented in Table 25, demonstrate that some sites in metropolitan Phoenix have been above the standard for one or more years: Chandler, South Phoenix, West Phoenix and Greenwood. Of these four sites there have been 17 exceedances of the annual standard over the last 9 years (1998 to 2006). Each of these sites presents a different mix of localized emission sources. Chandler’s emissions had gone from agricultural to earthmoving for residential and road construction so the site was closed at the end of 2005 and replaced by the more agricultural Higley monitor. South Phoenix and Durango, near the industrial Salt River area, are influenced by emissions from the industrial sources there. Without any nearby industrial or earthmoving activity, West Phoenix PM10 concentrations would appear to be the result of the transport of metropolitan wide emissions into this part of town. Two miles southeast of West Phoenix, Greenwood combines the high regional concentrations with its close proximity to a major arterial street and freeway. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 87 Table 25: Annual PM10 Concentrations in Metropolitan Phoenix (μg/m3) Year Central Phoenix Chandler Glendale North Phoenix South Phoenix West Phoenix Mesa South Scottsdale 1992 42 56 34 35 48 47 29 34 1993 43 58 35 34 44 44 35 34 1994 43 50 33 35 44 43 36 38 1995 44 56 33 36 46 44 35 36 1996 41 62 34 37 47 45 33 35 1997 44 61 38 38 55 51 43 41 61 1998 38* 45 29 29 31* 39 29 34 50 1999 44 60 36 35 49 51 35 40 56 69 2000 46 57 41 37 61 53 37 40 61 70 2001 38 48 33 30 50 43 30 33 49 59 2002 43 56 40 37 60 53 36 37 55 70 2003 40 50 36 34 52 46 34 36 51 62 2004 37 40 26 25 46 37 23 26 44 52 2005 39 49 29 30 55 45 30 34 52 66 2006 42 Closed in 2005 36 34 55 50 31 33 52 69 Bold values in yellow cells exceed the annual standard of 50 µg/m3. * Does not satisfy EPA summary criteria of 75% data recovery. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 88 Greenwood Durango The highest PM10 concentrations in metropolitan Phoenix are in southwest Phoenix, along the Salt River from about 7th Street to 59th Avenue. Although most of the area is industrial, there are many residential areas. The PM10 record in this area since 1994 is shown in Figure 15. The West 43rd Avenue site is the replacement for the Salt River site. Concentrations have exceeded the standard every year of monitoring in this area. 140 Annual Avg PM10 (μg/m3) 120 100 Standard = 50 Salt Durango W. 43rd 80 60 40 20 6 20 0 5 20 0 20 0 4 3 20 0 2 20 0 1 20 0 0 20 0 9 19 9 8 19 9 7 5 6 19 9 19 9 19 9 19 9 4 0 Figure 15 - Annual PM10 concentrations in the Salt River area In Tucson, the background site of Corona de Tucson and the rural site of Green Valley have had fairly constant average concentrations of PM10, but the four long-term urban sites all show substantial decreases since the mid 1980s. Orange Grove had a three year average of 43.3 μg/m3 in 1985 to 1987, but decreased 35 percent to a concentration of 28.3 μg/m3 by 2003-2005. It increased very slightly to 29.3 in 2004-2006. South Tucson, Prince Road and Broadway/Swan showed smaller, but substantial, decreases (Figure 16), with similar patterns of an early decrease, followed by a period of gradual increases, and ending with decreasing trends in the last five years. They also experienced slight increases in the most recent three-year period. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 89 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m3) 45 40 35 30 South Tucson Prince Road Corona de Tucson Green Valley Orange Grove Broadway/Swan 25 20 15 10 5 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 0 Figure 16 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 at six metropolitan Tucson sites These PM10 reductions in the urban settings can be attributed to a reduction of coarse particulate emissions from paving roads, alleys and road shoulders, and better controls of dust emissions from construction sites. Throughout the rest of the state, PM10 concentrations have declined since 1985 at many sites. Figure 17 presents these trends as three-year moving averages. Favorable trends over the last 20 years for a group of high concentration sites outside of the Phoenix area include Payson and Paul Spur where concentrations have been reduced by more than 70 percent, Douglas where concentrations have been reduced by nearly half, Rillito which has decreased 40 percent and Yuma which has decreased 26 percent. For most of the sites, nearly all of the improvement took place from the mid 1980s to the mid 1990s. The percentage improvement during this ten-year period varied from 24% to 65%, depending on the site, a remarkable decrease. After this point, two sites continued to decrease (Paul Spur and Payson); three sites (Nogales, Yuma, and Rillito) increased until the early part of 2000; and two sites have remained about the same (Douglas and Hayden). Between 2001 and 2005 Nogales and Yuma have had a deceasing trend, and Rillito has leveled out. At the beginning of the period, six of the seven sites were above the standard; all have been within the standard since the mid 1990s. In each of these localities, road paving, better industrial dust controls, and (in Payson only) cleaner fireplaces and woodstoves can be given credit for the improvement. All of these PM10 emission reductions were accomplished through State Implementation Plan activities led by the Air Quality Division. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 90 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) 100 90 80 70 Standard = 50 60 50 40 30 Douglas Hayden Nogales Paul Spur Payson Rillito Yuma 20 10 2003 2004 2005 2006 2000 2001 2002 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 0 Figure 17 - Three-year moving averages of the annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with higher concentrations PM10 concentrations at sites with lower concentrations have also decreased with Ajo concentrations reduced by 44 percent, Bullhead City by 56 percent, and Safford by 50 percent. Other sites with lower concentrations at lower elevations were steady or slightly decreasing until recently (Figure 18). 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) 50 45 Standard = 50 40 35 Ajo Apache Junction Bullhead City Casa Grande Organ Pipe Safford 30 25 20 15 10 5 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 0 Figure 18 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at lower concentration sites at lower elevations ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 91 Low-concentration sites at higher elevations - all within the 50 µg/m3 annual standard for their periods of record - have also noticeably declined since the mid 1980s. Clarkdale decreased 20%; Flagstaff, 50%; Prescott, 17%; and Show Low, 38%. (The site in Prescott was moved to Prescott Valley in 2002.) Part of these decreases can be attributed to cleaner-burning wood stoves and fireplaces (Figure 19). A shift toward a neutral or positive trend is seen in Figure 19, however. 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) 40 35 30 25 Clarkdale Flagstaff Prescott Show Low 20 15 10 5 2006 2004 2005 2001 2002 2003 1999 2000 1996 1997 1998 1994 1995 1992 1993 1989 1990 1991 1987 1988 0 Figure 19 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with low concentration at higher elevations. PM2.5 As was discussed earlier, PM2.5 has not been monitored as long as PM10. Measurements of this fine particle fraction were taken with dichotomous samplers at all sites until the late 1990s, when monitoring with PM2.5 reference instruments began. The dichotomous samplers give an approximate cutpoint between fine and coarse particles somewhere in the range of 2.5 to 3.0 microns. Consequently, measurements taken with these samplers should be termed “fine particulates” or “PMfine”, and not “PM2.5.” In Arizona, the earliest measurements began in 1991 towns in rural areas, in 1994 in Tucson, and the following year in Phoenix. These data are presented in Tables 26a, b, and c, and Figures 21, 22, and 23. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 92 Table 26a. Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations Throughout Arizona (in μg/m3) Statewide Year Yuma Flagstaff Payson Nogales Douglas 1991 7.6 N/A 17.9 12.3 8.5 1992 5.7 N/A 17.2 12.6 7.9 1993 6.1 5.4 13.0 9.7 7.9 1994 8.3 4.9 15.8 10.4 8.1 1995 7.2 5.8 15.7 14.3 7.7 1996 8.7 11.2 14.4 13.3 8.3 1997 6.0 5.0 12.2 11.3 6.0 1998 8.3 4.7 10.9 12.5 6.8 1999 7.9 8.4 9.8 12.5 7.9 2000 8.7 6.9 10.0 12.8 7.1 2001 10.0 7.1 8.8 10.7 7.2 2002 N/A 7.1 10.0 12.1 7.4 2003 N/A 5.6 8.9 11.3 6.4 2004 N/A 6.8 9.5 10.8 7.1 2005 N/A 6.0 8.3 13.1 7.3 2006 N/A 6.6 9.0 15.6 6.8 Bold values in yellow exceed the annual standard of 15 μg/m3. N/A - Data are not available. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 93 Table 26b. Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area (μg/m3) Year Higley Tempe Supersite ASU West Estrella West PHX Apache Junction 1995 15.4 10.0 12.6 11.1 11.7 N/A N/A 1996 11.1 10.0 13.4 10.5 11.1 N/A N/A 1997 10.4 9.8 12.1 9.1 7.9 N/A N/A 1998 9.4 9.4 10.9 8.3 7.1 N/A N/A 1999 11.1 10.7 12.2 9.1 8.9 N/A 7.4 2000 10.0 10.3 11.4 8.5 7.7 13.8 7.2 2001 N/A 9.3 9.2 N/A 7.4 10.8 6.2 2002 N/A 10.3 11.6 N/A 6.7 12.5 6.3 2003 N/A 9.6 11.2 N/A 7.3 10.6 6.3 2004 N/A N/A 9.7 N/A N/A 11.6 5.5 2005 N/A N/A 9.7 N/A N/A 12.9 5.5 2006 N/A N/A 10.2 N/A N/A 13.5 5.3 Bold values in yellow exceed the annual standard of 15 μg/m3. N/A - Data are not available. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 94 Table 26c. Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Tucson Metropolitan Area (μg/m3) Year Orange Grove 22/Craycroft Tangerine Fairgrounds Central Children’s Park 1994 9.4 7.9 5.3 5.8 8.9 N/A 1995 8.9 8.6 5.3 5.1 8.9 N/A 1996 8.2 6.4 4.9 4.7 7.7 N/A 1997 8.7 7.3 5.1 5.5 8.4 N/A 1998 7.3 6.3 5.0 5.0 7.5 N/A 1999 9.6 7.5 N/A N/A 7.2 8.7 2000 7.7 N/A N/A N/A 7.8 6.8 2001 7.6 6.0 N/A N/A 7.6 6.8 2002 6.3 8.6 N/A N/A 8.3 6.6 2003 6.4 7.5 N/A N/A 9.7 6.5 2004 5.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.6 2005 6.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.9 2006 5.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.8 Bold values in yellow exceed the annual standard of 15 μg/m3. N/A - Data are not available. Figure 20 shows the three-year moving averages of five sites located at various locations throughout the state. Douglas has shown a flat trend, while Payson’s trend is significantly down by 54 percent but has now flattened. Nogales shows an increase in PM2.5 concentration from 2005 to 2006 and it now exceeds the standard. Exceedances of the annual PM2.5 standard occurred for four years in Payson and for one year in Higley (Figure 21). Phoenix Supersite, Nogales, and the central area of Phoenix have the highest concentrations of fine particulates. Flagstaff and the urban fringe of Tucson (the Tangerine and Fairgrounds sites) have the lowest concentrations. Fine particulate trends in metropolitan Phoenix decreased from 1995 through 1998 but increased thereafter through 2006, as seen in Figure 21. Inconsistent with this latter trend, Apache Junction concentrations have decreased steadily since 1999. In metropolitan Tucson (Figure 22), records show that the PM2.5 concentrations at Orange Grove and Children’s Park have decreased significantly since monitoring began and that the Central site concentrations increased from 2001 to 2004. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 95 18 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM2.5 (μg/m ) Standard = 15 15 12 Yuma Flagstaff Payson Nogales Douglas 9 6 3 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 0 Figure 20 - Statewide three-year moving averages of annual averages of PM2.5 16 12 Apache J. Higley Tempe Supersite West PHX Estrella W. 43rd 8 4 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 0 1995 3 Annual Average PM2.5 (μg/m ) Standard = 15 Figure 21 – Metropolitan Phoenix annual averages of PM2.5 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 96 16 3 Annual Average PM2.5 (μg/m ) Standard = 15 12 Orange Grove 22nd/Craycroft Tangerine Fairgrounds Central Childrens Park 8 4 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 0 Figure 22 – Metropolitan Tucson annual averages of PM2.5 Visibility Optical measurements of visibility have been made continuously since 1993 in Tucson and since 1994 in Phoenix. Light extinction, the degree to which light is reduced by its interaction with particles and gases in the atmosphere, is measured continuously with transmissometers. These measurements have been divided into six categories: the mean of the dirtiest 20% of all hours, the mean of all hours and the mean of the cleanest 20% of all hours, for both the entire day and the 5 to 11 a.m. period. The units of measurement are inverse megameters (Mm-1): The higher the light extinction value in Mm-1, the more visibility is reduced. Tables 27a and b present these light extinction data, while Figures 23 and 24 illustrate visibility trends in more practical measures of Visual Range in miles. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 97 Table 27a: Annual Average Light Extinction in Phoenix (Mm-1) All Hours Year Dirtiest 20% 1994 5-11 a.m. Mean Cleanest 20% Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% N/A 64 29 N/A 70 33 1995 141 77 38 137 80 43 1996 134 78 43 130 80 45 1997 131 81 48 136 87 53 1998 133 78 45 136 84 50 1999 127 72 38 128 77 42 2000 131 74 38 134 80 42 2001 118 69 36 118 73 42 2002 124 75 42 125 79 46 2003 131 72 36 135 78 42 2004 121 69 35 126 75 42 2005 126 72 36 128 78 43 2006 125 69 32 126 76 40 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 98 Table 27b: Annual Average Light Extinction in Tucson (Mm-1) All Hours Year Dirtiest 20% 1993 5-11 a.m. Mean Cleanest 20% Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% 101 60 34 139 74 37 1994 95 59 36 109 68 41 1995 104 62 35 116 69 38 1996 99 62 37 113 71 40 1997 93 60 36 108 68 38 1998 102 57 28 119 69 34 1999 90 57 35 107 65 38 2000 98 56 27 114 66 31 2001 96 55 26 109 66 33 2002 87 49 24 109 61 29 2003 88 52 26 107 62 30 2004 97 58 27 113 67 32 2005 101 61 31 125 76 39 2006 83 47 22 100 56 28 Distinct trends from these tabular data are somewhat difficult to discern, partly because of the year-to-year variability and partly because the long-term changes for most categories are rather small. In Figures 23 and 24, these light extinction data have been plotted as three-year moving averages and converted to the more practical units of Visual Range in miles. The first year shown, 1996, is the average of 1994, 1995, and 1996, and so on. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 99 80 3-yr Moving Avg of Visual Range (miles) 70 60 50 Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% 40 30 20 10 06 20 05 20 04 20 03 20 02 20 01 20 00 20 99 19 98 19 97 19 19 96 0 Last Year of Averaging Period Figure 23 – Visibility trends for Phoenix, shown as three-year moving averages, for all hours In Phoenix, the steady improvement through 2002 in the 20% dirtiest category is evident. The most recent period (2004 to 2006) in this category is 8% higher than the first full three-year period. For both the mean and 20% cleanest days, however, the steady upward trend of the dirtiest 20% category is replaced by a more complicated trend – one in which the first two three-year periods decrease through 1998, but the subsequent periods gradually increase and eventually level out by 2001. What has happened in this thirteen-year period (1994 to 1996 compared to 2004 to 2006) is that visibility has gotten somewhat better with 8% increase for the dirtiest 20%, 11% increase for the mean, and 20% increase in the cleanest 20%. Visibility in Tucson has improved over the fourteen-year period when considering the three-year averages for all three statistics: the dirtiest, the mean, and the cleanest (Figure 24). The improvement in the 20% dirtiest days was 6%, which is 2% less than the improvement in Phoenix. Comparable improvement has been realized in the 20% cleanest category with a 20% increase. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 100 120 3-yr Moving Avg of Visual Range (miles) 100 80 Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% 60 40 20 20 06 20 05 20 04 20 03 20 02 20 01 20 00 19 99 19 98 19 97 19 96 19 95 0 Last Year of Averaging Period Figure 24 – Visibility trends for Tucson, shown as three-year moving averages, for all hours Since it is impossible for an observer to distinguish between the various grades of the cleanest 20%, perhaps the overall Phoenix-Tucson trends appear the same to their respective residents. That is, over this 12 or 13 year period, there has been an 8% increase in visibility for the dirtiest days in Phoenix and a 6% increase in Tucson. While the worst of the brown clouds are still quite evident, especially on winter mornings, their frequency and severity over both cities have diminished slightly. An interesting intercity trend (Figure 25) appears in the cleanest 20% category, where, in the first years of monitoring, Tucson and Phoenix had equal values. As the 1990s progressed, however, Tucson’s cleanest days grew decidedly cleaner, while Phoenix’s cleanest days saw decreased visibility for the first half of the period, followed by a gradual increase and leveling off in the later part of the record. In 2004 – 2006, Tucson’s cleanest days were 33% cleaner than in Phoenix. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 101 120 3-yr Moving Avg of Visual Range (miles) 100 80 Phoenix Tucson 60 40 20 0 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 9 19 9 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 Last Year of Averaging Period Figure 25 – Visibility trends for all hours for Phoenix and Tucson, shown as three-year moving averages Seasonal patterns also vary between the two cites, with the mean and dirtiest 20% of all hourly light extinction values in Phoenix showing more pronounced winter and fall maxima than the Tucson counterparts (Figure 26). Both cities show little seasonal variation in the cleanest 20% of all hours. Seasonal visibility in Phoenix is considerably lower than Tucson’s: for the dirtiest 20% of all hours, 52% lower in winter, 19% lower in spring, 13% lower in summer and 49% lower in fall. The poorer visibility in Phoenix comes as no surprise to those Arizonans familiar with both airsheds. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 102 100 Visual Range (miles) 20% Cleanest 20% Dirtiest Tucson 50 Phoenix 0 winter spring summer fall winter spring summer fall Season Figure 26 – Seasonal variation in visibility of the 20% cleanest and 20% dirtiest days in Tucson and Phoenix In the following, final, discussion of visibility, light scattering is compared between the urban and rural areas of the state (Figure 27). In each statistical category rural light scattering is considerably lower than urban light scattering. On the dirtiest 20% days, light scattering values in Phoenix are 3.5 times higher than in the rural areas, while values in Tucson are nearly twice as high as rural areas. Values for the mean and 20% cleanest days show similar results. An interesting comparison between urban and rural areas is that the light scattering values on the worst 20% days in the rural areas are roughly equal to the mean of the urban areas. 140 120 Light Scattering (Mm-1) 100 dirtiest 20% mean cleanest 20% 80 60 40 20 0 Humboldt Saguaro West Tucson Mesa Phoenix Figure 27 – Comparison of light scattering on the 20% cleanest, mean, and 20% dirtiest days for urban and rural areas. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 103 Conclusions Since monitoring of air pollutants began in the late 1960s in Arizona, considerable progress has been made in reducing concentrations of lead, SO2, and CO. Lead has been reduced to near background levels; SO2 concentrations near copper smelters, which chronically exceeded the standards until the mid-1980s, are now well within these standards; and CO concentrations, which regularly exceeded standards in neighborhoods and near busy intersections in Phoenix (and to a far lesser extent in Tucson), now meet the standards. One-hour O3 concentrations in Phoenix have met the standard since 1997, the first years since monitoring began. Phoenix one-hour ozone concentrations in the 1980s and early 1990s ranged as high as 0.18 parts per million (the standard was 0.12 ppm), in contrast to the highest, most recent reading of 0.14 ppm in 1996. In 1995-1997, 12 monitoring sites in greater Phoenix exceeded the eight-hour O3 standard; in 2004 - 2006 no sites exceeded the standard. Elevated concentrations of PM10 have been reduced substantially since the mid-1980s, with decreases of 20 to 70% in the urban areas and in most rural towns. PM10 concentrations have been reduced by as much as two-thirds in Payson and at some industrial sites. By 2006, monitored violations of the PM10 standard -- a once common occurrence at many sites only ten years ago were limited to a few sites in southwest Phoenix, Pinal County, and in Nogales. The severity of the PM10 problems in these areas, exemplified by the 24 expected exceedances of the 24-hour standard in southwest Phoenix in 2006 and the total of 48 in the three areas mentioned, points out the need for further controls on emissions. Fine particulate concentrations (PM2.5) have decreased in Phoenix and Tucson since the mid 1990s: comparing three-year averages, for example, at the centrally located Phoenix Supersite, the decrease has been 23%; at Children’s Park in Tucson, the decrease has been 17% and 30% at Orange Grove north of Tucson. Fine particulate trends in rural Arizona, however, have not shown consistency from site to site: Nogales has increased by 16%, Yuma increased by 48% (prior to closure in 2003) and Flagstaff increased by 23%. Douglas and Payson have decreased by 12% and 44%, respectively. In spite of the continued growth in Arizona, not a single air pollutant at any site showed a consistent upward trend through 2005. At a few sites, however, 2006 values are higher than 2005 and could signal a shift in the trend. Most standards are met all of the time, with the exceptions being the eight-hour O3 standard on occasional summer days in Phoenix and the PM10 standards on both an episodic and annual basis at those sites affected by localized dense emissions. This improved air quality -- resulting from emission control programs at the federal, state and local levels -- has benefited the respiratory health of the citizenry and can be considered a consequence of the public support for a cleaner environment. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 104 Appendix 1 – Site Index Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Greer Water Treatment Plant (Mt Baldy) 34.058 -109.44 8252 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16323 N/A Petrified Forest NP 35.08 -109.77 5796 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16473 N/A TEP – Springerville Coalyard 34.33 -109.154 6898 PM10 TEP SPM Unknown Source Impact 16637 N/A TEP – Springerville Coyote Hills 34.172 -109.229 6599 NO2, PM10, SO2 TEP SPM Unknown Source Impact 16638 N/A Chiricahua NM Entrance Station (3.5 miles west of monument headquarters) 32.009 -109.388 5130 CASTNET, Bscat, IMPROVE, MET, O3 NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16679 04-003-8001 Douglas Red Cross (1445E 15th St.) 31.348 -109.538 IMPROVE, PM10, PM2.5 ADEQ SLAMS (PM10, PM2.5), Class I Neighborhood Population 16503 04-003-1005 City/Site and Address Apache County Cochise County 4100 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 105 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number 31.365 -109.73 4192 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS (PM10) Middle Source Impact 16391 04-003-0011 31.353 109.736 4101 MET ADEQ SLAMS (PM10) Middle Source Impact 16392 N/A Flagstaff Middle School (755 N. Bonito) 35.206 -111.652 6904 PM10, PM2.5 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16707 04-005-1008 Grand Canyon NP Hance (South Rim, 2.5 miles west of village) 35.97 -111.98 7436 O3, MET, Bscat, IMPROVE, CASTNET NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16682 N/A 36.077 -112.128 3795 NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16683 N/A 34.340 111.682 5232 ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16421 N/A City/Site and Address Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant - South Coconino County Grand Canyon NP Indian Garden (4.5 miles from Bright Angel trailhead) Ike's Backbone (Pine Mountain Wilderness) IMPROVE, Bscat, IMPROVE, Bscat ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 106 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number 36.90 -111.391 3647 O3, NO2, PM10, SO2 SRP SPM Urban Source Impact 16634 N/A 34.866 -111.76 4195 PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16512 04-005-1010 35.140 -111.968 Bscat, IMPROVE, MET ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16476 N/A ASARCO Globe Highway 32.999 -110.766 1948 SO2 ASARCO SPM Regional Source Impact 16593 N/A ASARCO Hayden Garfield AVE 33.004 -110.783 2089 SO2 ASARCO SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16590 N/A 33.012 -110.798 2326 SO2 ASARCO SPM Regional Source Impact 16591 N/A 33.006 -110.785 2050 PM10, SO2 ADEQ, ASARCO SLAMS (ADEQ SO2 and PM10) SPM (ASARCO SO2) Neighborhood Source Impact 16326 04-007-1001 City/Site and Address SRP – Page – Navajo Generating Station (3 miles east of Page) Sedona Post Office (190 W. Highway 89A) Sycamore Canyon (Camp Raymond) Lat. 6691 Gila County ASARCO Montgomery Ranch Hayden - Old Jail (Canyon Drive) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 107 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number PDMI - Miami Golf Course 33.413 -110.830 3319 PM10 PDMI SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16629 04-007-8000 PDMI - Miami Jones Ranch (Cherry Flats Rd.) 33.385 -110.866 4093 SO2 PDMI SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16631 N/A PDMI - Miami Town Site (Sullivan St.) 33.396 -110.873 3388 SO2 PDMI SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16632 N/A Miami Ridgeline (4030 Linden St.) 33.399 -110.858 3559 PM10, SO2 ADEQ, PDMI SLAMS (ADEQ SO2) SPM (PDMI PM10) Neighborhood Source Impact 16382 04-007-0009 Payson Well Site (204 W. Aero Dr.) 34.229 -111.329 4910 PM10, PM2.5 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16317 04-007-0008 Pleasant Valley Ranger Station (Sierra Ancha USFS Wilderness) 34.090 110.941 5133 IMPROVE, Bscat, MET ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16446 N/A ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 108 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Tonto NM (Tonto Natl Park) Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number 33.654 -111.106 2460 IMPROVE, NOTL, O3 ADEQ, NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16447 04-007-0010 32.833 -109.718 2949 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16508 04-009-0001 34.243 -113.558 1282 NOTL, O3 ADEQ SLAMS Regional Background 34961 04-012-8000 33.448 -112.087 1082 Visibility (camera) ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 21737 N/A 33.433 -111.842 1489 Visibility (camera & Bext) ADEQ Urban Urban Haze 19489 N/A 33.436 -112.091 1063 PM10, Speciated PM2.5 ADEQ Neighborhood Population 17786 04-013-8006 Graham County Safford (523 Tenth Ave.) La Paz County Alamo Lake Maricopa County ADEQ Building (1110 W Washington) Banner Mesa Medical Center (525 W Brown AVE) Bethune Elementary School (1310 S. 15th Ave.) SPM (Urban Haze) SPM, STN ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 109 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Blue Point (Usery Pass and Bush Highway) Buckeye (SR 85 & Buckeye RD) Cave Creek (37109 N. Lava Lane) Central Phoenix (1845 E. Roosevelt) Durango Complex 2702 AC Esterbrook Blvd. Dysart 16825 N Dysart Estrella 15099 W. Casey Abbott Dr., Goodyear Estrella Community College 3000 N Dysart Rd. Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number 33.552 -111.606 1574 MET, O3 MCAQD SLAMS (MET) NAMS (O3) Urban Maximum Concentration 16417 04-013-9702 33.369 -112.620 840 CO, MET, NO2, O3, PM10 MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 21525 04-013-4011 33.825 -112.017 1916 MET, O3 MCAQD SLAMS Urban Maximum Concentration 16368 04-013-4008 33.458 -112.041 1115 CO, MET, NO2, O3, PM10, SO2 MCAQD SLAMS (MET) NAMS (CO, NO2, O3, PM10, SO2) Neighborhood Population 16329 04-013-3002 33.426 -112.118 1574 MET, PM10, PM2.5 MCAQD SLAMS Middle Maximum Concentration 16375 04-013-9812 33.637 -112.339 1099 CO, O3, ADEQ(Bscat) MCAQD ADEQ SPM, Bscat (Urban Haze) Neighborhood Population 19550 04-013-4010 33.383 -112.372 1000 Bscat ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Neighborhood Population 16506 04-013-8005 33.483 -112.350 1000 Visibility (camera) ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 21736 N/A ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 110 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Falcon Field (4530 E. McKellips) 33.452 -111.732 1017 MET, O3 MCAQD SLAMS Urban Population 16381 04-013-1010 Fountain Hills (16426 E. Palisades) 33.610 -111.724 1443 MET, O3 MCAQD SLAMS (MET) NAMS (O3) Neighborhood Maximum Concentration 16376 04-013-9704 33.569 -112.190 1171 CO, MET, O3, PM10 MCAQD SLAMS (CO, MET, O3), NAMS (PM10) Neighborhood Population 16378 04-013-2001 33.460 -112.116 1109 CO, MET, NO2, PM10 MCAQD SLAMS Microscale Maximum Concentration 16372 04-013-3010 Higley (15500 S. Higley Rd.) 33.310 -111.722 1250 MET, PM10 MCAQD SLAMS (MET) SPM (PM10) Neighborhood Population 16505 04-013-4006 Humboldt Mountain (Pine Mountain Wilderness) 33.980 -111.796 5228 O3 MCAQD SLAMS Regional Background/ Transport 16416 04-013-9508 ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) SLAMS (CO, NO2, O3, PM2.5) PAMS (Type 2) STN Neighborhood Population 16328 04-013-9997 MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16380 04-013-1003 City/Site and Address Glendale (6000 W. Olive) Greenwood (I-10 and 27th Avenue) JLG Supersite (4530 N. 17 Ave.) 33.503 -112.09 1135 Bscat, CO, NO2, Met, O3, PM10, PM2.5, VOC, Speciated PM2.5 Mesa (370 S. Brooks) 33.410 -111.864 1220 CO, MET, PM10, PM2.5, ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 111 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Mesa Transmissomete r Receiver - City Building (Lewis & Main) 33.415 -111.830 1378 Bext ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 19686 N/A Mesa Transmissomete r Transmissomete r – Banner Mesa Medical Center 33.433 -111.842 1489 Bext ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 19489 N/A North Mountain Summit (North Mountain) 33.585 -112.071 1640 Visibility (camera) ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 16480 N/A North Phoenix (601 E. Butler) 33.560 -112.065 1243 CO, MET,O3, PM10, MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16390 04-013-1004 Phoenix Transmissomete r Receiver (3600 N 2nd AVE) 33.490 -112.076 1106 Bext ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 16829 N/A ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 112 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Phoenix Transmissomete r Transmitter (2000 W Bethany RD) 33.53 -112.10 1115 Bext ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 16330 N/A Pinnacle Peak (25000 N. Windy Walk) 33.711 -111.851 2624 MET, O3 MCAQD SLAMS Urban Maximum Concentration 16406 04-013-2005 Rio Verde (25608 N. Forest Rd.) 33.718 -111.671 1640 O3 MCAQD SLAMS Urban High Downwind Concentration 16396 04-013-9706 Salt River Pima DOAZ (N. Pima Road) 33.443 -111.891 1197 Multiple pollutants ADEQ SPM Urban Source 128640 N/A South Phoenix (33 W. Tamarisk) 33.403 -112.074 1082 CO, MET, O3, PM10 MCAQD NAMS (PM10) SLAMS (CO, MET, O3) Neighborhood Population 16377 04-013-4003 South Scottsdale (2857 N. Miller) 33.479 -111.916 1227 CO, MET, NO2, O3, PM10, SO2 MCAQD SLAMS (CO, MET) NAMS (NO2, O3, PM10, SO2) Urban/ Neighborhood Population 16398 04-013-3003 Tempe (1525 S College AVE) 33.411 -111.93 1181 CO, MET, O3 MCAQD SPM Neighborhood Population 16405 04-013-4005 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 113 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Vehicle Emissions Laboratory (600 N 40th ST) 33.455 -111.996 1050 MET, Bscat ADEQ SPM Urban Haze (Bscat) Urban Meteorology 16363 04-013-9998 West Chandler (163 S. Price) 33.298 -111.883 1181 CO, MET, O3, PM10 MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16478 04-013-4004 33.406 -112.144 1030 MET, PM10, MCAQD SPM (PM10), Neighborhood Maximum Concentration 16659 04-013-4009 33.494 -112.130 1115 CO, MET MCAQD NAMS (CO) SLAMS (MET) Neighborhood Maximum Concentration/ Source Impact 16393 04-013-0016 MCAQD SPM (ADEQ PM2.5) SLAMS (MET, NO2, O3) NAMS (CO, PM10) Neighborhood Population 16477 04-013-0019 City/Site and Address West Forty Third (3940 W Broadway) West Indian School (3315 W. Indian School Rd.) West Phoenix (3847 W. Earll) 33.483 -112.141 1096 CO, MET, NO2, O3, PM10, PM2.5, Bullhead City (990 Hwy 95) 35.153 -114.566 561 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16365 04-015-1003 Meadview 36.019 -114.068 2959 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE ADEQ Class I Regional Visibility 21298 N/A Mohave County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 114 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Kingman Praxair NE #1 (I-40 and Griffith Road) 35.029 -114.133 2401 PM10 Praxair SPM Middle Source Impact 16554 N/A Kingman Praxair SW #2 (I-40 and Griffith Road) 35.027 -114.135 2358 PM10 Praxair SPM Middle Source Impact 16555 N/A 34.82 -109.89 5778 O3 NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16473 04-017-0119 City/Site and Address Navajo County Petrified Forest National Park south portion Show Low (561 E Deuce of Clubs) 34.252 -110.036 6311 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 32.206 -110.909 2516 CO PDEQ NAMS Neighborhood Maximum Concentration 16676 04-019-1014 ADEQ, PDEQ SPM (ADEQ Urban Haze Bscat) SLAMS (PDEQ CO, O3, NO2, SO2) Neighborhood Population 16410 04-019-1011 ADEQ SLAMS (PM10) Neighborhood Population 16316 04-019-0001 16603 04-017-0007 Pima County 22nd St. & Alvernon (3895 E. 22nd) 22nd St. & Craycroft (1237 S. Beverly) Ajo (Well Road) 32.204 -110.877 2581 Bscat, CO, O3, NO2, SO2, MET 32.382 -112.857 1801 PM10, MET ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 115 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Broadway & Swan (4625 E. Broadway) 32.222 -110.892 2516 PM10 PDEQ NAMS Middle Maximum Concentration 16550 04-019-1023 Cherry & Glenn (2745 N. Cherry) 32.261 -110.947 2401 CO PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16675 04-019-1021 ADEQ, PDEQ SPM ( PM2.5 & ADEQ Urban Haze Bscat) SLAMS ( NO2, O3) NAMS (CO), STN Urban, Neighborhood Population 16551 04-019-1028 City/Site and Address Children's Park (400 W. River Rd.) 32.295 -110.981 2286 Bscat, CO, NO2, O3, PM2.5, Speciated PM2.5 32.380 -111.127 2227 O3, PM2.5 PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 21580 04-019-1034 32.004 -110.791 3077 PM10 PDEQ SLAMS (PDEQ) Regional Background 16677 04-019-0008 Geronimo (2498 N. Geronimo) 32.248 -110.965 2578 PM10 PDEQ SPM (For AQI Purposes Only) Neighborhood Population 16678 N/A Golf Links & Kolb (2601 S. Kolb Rd) 32.191 -110.841 2660 CO PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 19531 04-019-1031 Coachline (9597 N Coachline Blvd) Corona De Tucson (22000 S. Houghton Rd.) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 116 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Green Valley (601 N. La Canada Dr.) 31.875 -110.993 2903 O3, PM2.5, PM10 PDEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population Exposure 16685 04-019-1030 Orange Grove (3401 W. Orange Grove Road) 32.322 -111.036 2175 PM10, PM2.5 PDEQ SLAMS (PDEQ PM10, PM2.5) Neighborhood Maximum Concentration/ Population 16510 04-019-0011 Organ Pipe Cactus NM (1 mile SSW of visitor center) 31.949 -112.801 1847 IMPROVE, Bscat ADEQ SLAMS (PM10) Regional Background/ Transport, Visibility 16681 04-019-0005 Prince Road (1016 W. Prince Rd.) 32.270 -110.987 2316 PM10 PDEQ NAMS Neighborhood Source Impact 16597 04-019-1009 32.414 -111.154 2053 PM10, MET ADEQ, APCC SLAMS (ADEQ) SPM (APCC) Neighborhood Source Impact 16499 04-019-0020 32.170 -110.98 2299 O3, PM10 PDEQ SPM Urban Population 16670 04-019-1032 Saguaro NP East (3905 S. Old Spanish Trail) 32.174 -110.686 3080 O3, IMPROVE PDEQ, NPS SPM, Class I Urban Visibility 16474 04-019-0021 Saguaro NP West 32.254 -110.193 2621 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE ADEQ, NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16475 N/A City/Site and Address Rillito (8820 W. Water) Rose Elementary (710 W. Michigan St.) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 117 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Santa Clara (6910 S. Santa Clara Ave.) 32.133 -110.975 2539 PM10 PDEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16569 04-019-1026 32.202 -110.967 2440 PM10 PDEQ SLAMS (PDEQ) Neighborhood Population 16635 04-019-1001 32.425 -111.070 2637 O3, PM10 PDEQ SLAMS Urban Population 16669 04-019-1018 32.222 -110.977 2365 CO, O3 PDEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16671 04-019-0002 32.040 -110.773 3077 O3 PDEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16672 04-019-1020 32.221 -110.973 N/A Bext PDEQ, ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 16826 N/A South Tucson (1601 S. 6th Ave.) Tangerine (12101 N. Camino De Oeste) Tucson Downtown (190 W. Pennington) Tucson Fairgrounds (11330 S. Houghton) Tucson Transmissomete r Receiver (150 W. Congress) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 118 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number 32.240 -110.945 N/A Bext PDEQ, ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Urban Urban Haze 16655 N/A 32.24 -110.955 2578 Bscat, MET ADEQ SPM (Urban Haze) Neighborhood Population 16662 04-019-1027 Apache Junction Fire Station (3955 E. Superstition Blvd. TE) 33.421 -111.502 PM2.5, PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16358 04-021-3002 Apache Junction Maintenance Yard (305 E. Superstition) 33.421 -111.543 1750 O3, MET, PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16589 04-021-3001 ASARCO Hayden Junction (Hwy 177) 33.01 -110.808 1925 SO2 ASARCO SPM Unknown Source Impact 16592 N/A City/Site and Address Tucson Transmissomete r Transmitter (1501 N. Campbell AVE) Tucson - U of A Central (1100 N. Fremont Ave.) Pinal County 1748 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 119 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Casa Grande Airport 660 W. Aero Dr. 32.954 -111.761 1410 O3, MET PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population/ Transport 16367 04-021-3003 Casa Grande Downtown (401 Marshall Rd.) 32.877 -111.751 1378 PM10, PM2.5 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16588 04-021-0001 Combs (301 E. Combs Rd.) 33.219 -111.561 1178 O3 PCAQCD SPM Neighborhood Population 16657 04-021-3009 Coolidge Maintenance Yard (212 E. Broadway) 32.978 -111.513 1460 PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 7446 04-021-3004 Cowtown Road (37580 W. Maricopa) 33.01 -111.99 1214 MET, PM10 PCAQCD SPM Neighborhood Population 19347 04-021-3013 Eloy City Complex (620 N. Main St.) 32.755 -111.554 1548 PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16594 04-021-3005 Mammoth County Complex (118 S. Catalina) 32.719 -110.642 2919 PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population/ Background 16600 04-021-3006 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 120 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Maricopa (44625 W. Garvey Rd.) 33.054 -112.047 1178 O3 PCAQCD SPM Neighborhood Population/Exposure 16656 04-021-3010 Pinal Air Park (Water Well # 2, Marana) 32.508 -111.307 1906 O3, PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS Regional Background/ Transport 16552 04-021-3007 Pinal County Housing Complex (970 N Eleven Mile Corner Rd.) 32.89 -111.57 1443 PM10 PCAQCD SPM Microscale Source Impact 18079 04-021-3011 Queen Valley (10 S. Queen Anne Dr.) 33.293 -111.285 2080 Bscat, IMPROVE, VOC, NOTL, O3 PCAQCD, ADEQ SPM (NOTL, O3) PAMS (VOC),Class I Regional Visibility 16394 04-021-8001 Riverside Maintenance Yard (56964 E. Florence) 33.105 -110.974 1771 PM10 PCAQCD SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 21429 04-021-3012 San Manuel (1st & Douglas Ave.) 32.598 -110.633 1089 SO2 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16397 04-021-2001 Stanfield (36697 W. Papago Dr.) 32.881 -111.961 1296 PM10 PCAQCD SPM Neighborhood Population 16636 04-021-3008 City/Site and Address ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 121 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number 31.337 -110.936 3857 PM10, PM2.5, MET ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16511 04-023-0004 34.782 -112.092 4198 PM10, NOx, MET PCC SPM Unknown Source Impact 16626 N/A 34.773 -112.073 3598 PM10, NOx, MET PCC SPM Unknown Source Impact 16628 N/A 34.594 -112.331 5104 PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 18392 04-025-2002 32.750 -114.332 180 MET ADEQ SPM N/A Special Study 19483 N/A Santa Cruz Nogales Post Office (300 N. Morley Ave.) Yavapai County Phoenix Cement Clarkdale - NW (#2) (northwest of cement plant) Phoenix Cement Clarkdale - SE (#1) (southeast of CTI fly ash silo) Prescott Valley (7601 E. Civic Circle) Yuma County Dome Valley (5110 S. Avenue 18 E) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 122 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 City/Site and Address Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number -114.78 112 MET ADEQ SPM N/A Special Study 18250 N/A 32.677 -114.648 98 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 17027 04-027-0004 32.677 -114.475 197 O3, NOx ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Maximum Concentration 18690 04-027-0006 32.611 -114.633 190 MET ADEQ SPM N/A Special Study 19040 N/A 32.690 -114.614 167 CO, SO2, PM10, VOCs ADEQ SPM N/A Special Study 113219 N/A 32.620 -114.765 89 MET ADEQ SPM N/A Special Study 19041 N/A 32.736 -114.700 118 MET ADEQ SPM N/A Special Study 18247 N/A 31.328 -109.547 3936 PM10, MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16361 80-026-1000 Lat. Long. San Luis (767 N. 1st Ave.) 32.491 Yuma Courthouse (2440 W. 28th St.) Yuma Game & Fish (9140 E. 28th St.) Yuma Mesa (2186 W. County 15th St.) Yuma Supersite (2323 S Arizona Ave) Yuma Valley (11486 S. Farm Rd.) Yuma West Mexico Agua Prieta Fire Station (Calle 6 & AVE 15) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 123 Site Index - Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona in 2006 Lat. Long. Elev. (feet) Parameters Measured Operator Classification Scale Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Baja 32.570 -115.000 45 MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 22242 N/A Cortez 32.376 -114.866 69 MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 22240 N/A Mexico Supersite 32.466 -114.768 MET, CO, PM10 ADEQ SPM N/A Special Study 113221 N/A Sonora Nogales Fire Station (Northwest corner of Lopaz and Mantels) 31.325 -110.944 3943 PM10, MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16399 80-026-0005 Sonora 32.424 -114.797 109 MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 22243 N/A City/Site and Address 125 Sites shown in the site index table are based on the best information available at the date of publication. N/A – Not available ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 124 Appendix 2 – Acronyms and Abbreviations ADEQ ADOT AgBMP APCC APS Area A ASARCO ASU Babs Bag Bap Bext Bscat Bsg Bsp BACM BHP CAAA CASTNET CFR Class I CMSA CO CTOC Delta T EPA FMIC FRM GRIC HAPs HART HC IMPROVE ITEP km m MAG MCAQD MET mm Mm-1 MSA Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Arizona Department of Transportation Agricultural Best Management Practices Arizona Portland Cement Co. Arizona Public Service Designated Phoenix metropolitan area ASARCO LLC - U.S. operating subsidiary of Grupo Mexico Arizona State University Light absorption Light absorption by gasses Light absorption by particles Light extinction Light scattering Light scattering by gasses Light scattering by particles Best Available Control Measures BHP Copper, Inc. 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments Clean Air Status and Trends Network Code of Federal Regulations Federally designated park or wilderness area with mandated visibility protection Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area Carbon monoxide Cap and Trade Oversight Committee Difference between two levels of temperature measurements U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ft. McDowell Indian Community Federal Reference Method Gila River Indian Community Hazardous Air Pollutants Hazardous Air Response Team Hydrocarbon Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals Kilometers Meters Maricopa Association of Governments Maricopa County Air Quality Division Meteorological measurements (wind, temperature, relative humidity) Millimeter Inverse megameter Metropolitan Statistical Area ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2006, Page 125 :g/m3 MSM NAAQS NAMS NEAP NM NO NO2 NOX NPS O3 PAMS Pb PCC PDEQ PDMI PCAQCD PM PM2.5 PM10 ppb ppm Pressure RH SCE SIP SLAMS SO2 SO4-SPM SRP SRPMIC STN TEOM TEP TSP U of A USFS VOC VIOC Wind WMAT Micrograms per cubic meter Most Stringent Measures National Ambient Air Quality Standards National Air Monitoring Station Natural Event Action Plan National Monument Nitric Oxide Nitrogen Dioxide Sum of NO and NO2 National Park Service Ozone Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station Lead Phoenix Cement Company Pima County Department of Environmental Quality Phelps Dodge Miami Inc. Pinal County Air Quality Control District Particulate Matter Particulate Matter < 2.5 microns Particulate Matter < 10 microns parts per billion parts per million Barometric air pressure Relative Humidity Southern California Edison State Implementation Plan State and Local Air Monitoring Station Sulfur Dioxide Sulfate Special Purpose Monitor Salt River Project Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Speciation Trends Network Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance Tucson Electric Power Total Suspended Particulates University of Arizona U.S. Forest Service Volatile Organic Compounds Visibility Index Oversight Committee Wind speed and direction White Mountain Apache Tribe ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2006, Page 126 Appendix 3 – Related Web Sites Air Explorer (http://www.epa.gov/airexplorer/) Air Explorer is a collection of userfriendly visualization tools for air quality analysts. It is linked directly to the EPA’s Air Quality Subsystem database. AirWeb: Protecting Air Quality (http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/) Learn about how the National Park Service Air Resources Division and the Fish and Wildlife Service Air Quality Branch strive to preserve, protect, enhance and understand the air quality and other resources of our national parks and refuges. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (www.azdeq.gov) ADEQ’s Web site contains information on air quality, news releases, public meetings and many other services that can provided that help to protect a safe and healthy environment. Earth 911: Making Every Day Earth Day! (www.earth911.org) That’s their mission “to make every day an earth day!” so you can act on today’s environmental issues, in order to preserve and maintain for today and tomorrow. Earth’s Biggest Environment Search Engine (www.webdirectory.com) This Web site is a directory to numerous environmental subjects, from air to wildlife. Environmental Protection Agency (www.epa.gov) On EPA’s Web site, you can find information about the federal government’s role in environmental protection. EPA – Air and Radiation (www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps) You’ll breathe easier when you see EPA’s air quality planning and standards Web site. They have from what’s new in air to the latest projects, programs and contracts. EPA’s – AIRNow (airnow.gov/) Easy access to local air quality forecasts, real-time data, air quality index (AQI), animated color contours of measured AQI values for geographic areas and more. EPA’s Air Quality Database (www.epa.gov/air/data/index.html) EPA’s air quality database contains extensive air data. On this site, you can find the sources that contribute to emissions, the equipment and facilities that monitor the air, maps on air-related information, and contact information for experts on specific issues regarding air and environment. EPA – Region 9 (http://www.epa.gov/region09/) Learn about EPA activities in Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada and the Pacific Islands at the Region 9 website. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report, Page 127 FirstGov (www.firstgov.gov) Through this Web site, you can find more than 1,000 federal and state environmental agencies with details about the environment. The Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments Project (http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/) On this site, you can take a look at photos of what haze (pollution) can do to the beautiful views of our nation. You can also take a look at what is being done and how you can get involved to improve the views of our nation. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (www.itcaonline.com) The site lists the member tribes and includes information about environmental monitoring programs. Maricopa County Air Quality Information (http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/) Maricopa County’s Environmental Services’ Web site has specific descriptions plus current and historical data on the county’s air monitors. National Tribal Environmental Council (www.ntec.org) NTEC is a tribal government membership organization with 160 member tribes that work to protect and preserve the reservation environment. National Weather Service (www.nws.noaa.gov) Dive into the latest occurrences and studies of your weather and atmosphere. There are links to local weather service agencies in each state. Visibility Web Cameras (http://www.phoenixvis.net) This page provides an overview of all Phoenix Visibility Web Cameras. Digital images from Web-based cameras are updated every 15 minutes. Pima County Air Quality Information (www.deq.co.pima.az.us) The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality’s Web site has information about air, water and waste programs, and the latest news and regulations that affect Pima County. Pinal County Air Quality Information (http://co.pinal.az.us/airqual/monitoring.asp) Current air quality information from the Pinal County Air Quality Control District. Pollen Information (www.pollen.com) Does it feel like something is in the air? Visit pollen.com to find out about what kinds of allergens are in your air and when they are there. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report, Page 128 The United States National Park Service (www.nps.gov) Information about our national parks. Visibility Information Exchange Web System (VIEWS) (http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/views/) The Visibility Information Exchange Web System is an online exchange of visibility data, research, and ideas designed to support the Regional Haze Rule enacted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reduce regional haze in national parks and wilderness areas. In addition to this primary goal, VIEWS supports global efforts to better understand the effects of air pollution on visibility and to improve air quality in general. Weather and Air Quality in the Southwest (www.weathersmith.com) This site contains weather forecasts and air quality information for Phoenix and Tucson. Western States Air Resources Council (www.westar.org) WESTAR is composed of 15 western states that have come together to discuss and exchange information on western regional air quality issues. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report, Page 129 Appendix 4 – Maps This section contains maps displaying monitor locations and location information. Ambient Air Monitors This map shows the location of monitors operated by ADEQ, county agencies, private industry and federal agencies. Criteria Pollutant Monitoring (Phoenix and Tucson Metropolitan Areas) These maps identify the locations of monitors of criteria pollutants in Arizona’s two largest metropolitan areas. Nonattainment and Attainment Areas This map identifies the areas in Arizona that are nonattainment for PM10, SO2, CO and O3. Ozone Network This map shows the location of ozone monitors operated by ADEQ, private industry, county agencies, and the National Park Service. PM10 Network The location of PM10 particulate monitors is shown on this map. PM2.5 Network The location of PM2.5 particulate monitors is shown on this map. SO2 Network This map shows the location of the SO2 monitors and includes the maintenance and nonattainment areas. Visibility Network Urban and regional haze visibility monitoring sites are shown on this map. Nephelometers, Transmissometers, Cameras This map shows the location of each of these types of monitors that ADEQ operates for the study of urban and regional visibility. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 130 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 131 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 132 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 133 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 134 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 135 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 136 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 137 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 138 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2007, Page 139 printed on recycled paper EQR 07-07