Table of Contents Page Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... 1 Report Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2 Ambient Air Quality Networks Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Criteria Pollutant Monitoring Networks................................................................................................. 5 Visibility Monitoring Networks in National Parks and Wilderness Areas............................................. 7 Urban Haze Networks ............................................................................................................................ 8 Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations Network (PAMS) ...................................................... 9 National Air Toxics Trends Sites (NATTS)......................................................................................... 10 PM2.5 Chemical Speciation Network (CSN)......................................................................................... 11 Annual Ambient Network Monitoring Plan ......................................................................................... 11 Monitoring Methods............................................................................................................................. 13 Monitoring Data Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 15 Criteria Pollutants - 2007 Data Carbon Monoxide................................................................................................................................. 16 Nitrogen Dioxide.................................................................................................................................. 18 Sulfur Dioxide ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Ozone.................................................................................................................................................... 22 Particulate Matter Smaller Than 10 Microns (PM10) and smaller than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) ............... 28 Criteria Pollutants - Compliance Carbon Monoxide................................................................................................................................. 35 Nitrogen Dioxide.................................................................................................................................. 38 Sulfur Dioxide ...................................................................................................................................... 38 Ozone - One hour ................................................................................................................................. 39 Ozone - Eight hour ............................................................................................................................... 39 Particulate Matter - PM10...................................................................................................................... 43 Particulate Matter - PM2.5 ..................................................................................................................... 50 Visibility Data Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 53 Class I Areas......................................................................................................................................... 54 Urban Haze........................................................................................................................................... 57 Accomplishments and Special Projects Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 60 Miami PM10 Planning Area Maintenance Plan and Pending Redesignation........................................ 60 Five Percent Annual Reasonable Further Progress for Metropolitan Phoenix [Maricopa CountyApache Junction Pinal County] Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area Plan Revision....................... 61 Rillito PM10 Planning Area Limited Maintenance Plan and Pending Redesignation........................... 62 Yuma PM10 Maintenance Plan, Pending Redesignation Request and Exceptional Events Demonstrations .............................................................................................................................. 62 Maricopa 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Plan ............................................................................. 63 Ajo PM10 Clean Data Finding, Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request ................................... 64 Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study (WASBAQS)...................................................... 64 Joint Air Toxics Assessment Project (JATAP) .................................................................................... 64 Regional Haze ...................................................................................................................................... 65 EPA’s Revisions to Eight-Hour Ozone Standard ................................................................................. 65 EPA’s Revisions to Lead Standard....................................................................................................... 66 i Table of Contents Page Trends Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 68 Ozone One-Hour Ozone Concentrations ......................................................................................................... 68 Eight-Hour Ozone Concentrations ....................................................................................................... 69 Particulates PM10...................................................................................................................................................... 74 PM2.5 ..................................................................................................................................................... 80 Visibility............................................................................................................................................... 84 Carbon Monoxide................................................................................................................................. 88 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 90 Appendices Appendix 1 - Site Index ....................................................................................................................... 92 Appendix 2 - Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................... 104 Appendix 3 - Related Web Sites ........................................................................................................ 107 Appendix 4 - Maps ............................................................................................................................. 110 ii Table of Contents Page Tables Table 1 - Monitoring Networks Operating in Arizona ........................................................................... 4 Table 2 - Monitoring Objectives for Air Quality Monitoring Sites........................................................ 5 Table 3 - Measurement Scales for Air Quality Monitoring Sites........................................................... 6 Table 4 - History of PAMS Monitoring in Metropolitan Phoenix ....................................................... 10 Table 5 - 2007 Carbon Monoxide (in ppm).......................................................................................... 17 Table 6 - 2007 Nitrogen Dioxide (in ppm)........................................................................................... 19 Table 7 - 2007 Sulfur Dioxide (in ppm) ............................................................................................... 21 Table 8 - 2007 Ozone (in ppm), One-Hour Averages .......................................................................... 24 Table 9 - 2007 Ozone (in ppm) Eight-Hour Averages ......................................................................... 26 Table 10 - 2007 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) ................................................................................................. 31 Table 11 - 2007 PM2.5 Data (in µg/m3)................................................................................................. 34 Table 12 - 2006 - 2007 One Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) ....................................... 35 Table 13 - 2006 - 2007 Eight Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) ..................................... 37 Table 14 - 2007 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS Compliance Values by County....................................... 38 Table 15 - 2007 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS Compliance Values............................................................. 39 Table 16 - 2005 to 2007 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm)...................................................... 40 Table 17 - 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) ............................................. 43 Table 18 - 2005 to 2007 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance, (in µg/m3)......................... 47 Table 19 - 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM2.5 Compliance, (in µg/m3)............................................ 51 Table 20 - 2005 to 2007 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Compliance, (in µg/m3).......................................... 52 Table 21 - Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1)................................................... 54 Table 22 - Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2007 ......................................................... 57 Table 23 - Three-Year Averages or Annual Fourth-Highest Eight-Hour Ozone Concentrations in Phoenix and Environs .................................................................................................................... 71 Table 24 - Annual PM10 Concentrations in Metropolitian Phoenix (in µg/m3).................................... 76 Table 25a - Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations throughout Arizona (in µg/m3)......................... 81 Table 25b - Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Phoenix Metropolitian Area (in µg/m3) . 82 Table 25c - Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Tucson Metropolitian Area (in µg/m3)... 83 Table 26a - Annual Average Light Extinction in Phoenix (Mm-1)....................................................... 84 Table 26b - Annual Average Light Extinction in Tucson (Mm-1)........................................................ 85 Table 27 - PM10 Expected Exceedences 2005-2007............................................................................. 90 iii Table of Contents Page Figures Figure 1 - South Phoenix monitoring station ......................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 - Top of ADEQ’s JLG Supersite monitoring station.............................................................. 15 Figure 3 - ADEQ’s Vehicle Emissions Laboratory monitoring station ............................................... 15 Figure 4 - Nogales P.O. monitoring station.......................................................................................... 30 Figure 5 - Yuma Courthouse monitoring station.................................................................................. 30 Figure 6 - Pleasant Valley monitoring station ...................................................................................... 53 Figure 7 - Mexico Supersite, Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study .............................. 60 Figure 8 - Map of Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study monitoring locations ............. 64 Figure 9 - Average Best & Average Worst Visibility Impairment in the Phoenix Area...................... 68 Figure 10 - Maximum one-hour Ozone concentrations in three Arizona cities ................................... 69 Figure 11 - Phoenix area eight-hour Ozone trends: three-year averages of the annual fourth-highest concentrations ................................................................................................................................ 70 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 .......................... 70 Figure 13 - Annual fourth-highest eight-hour Ozone concentrations in Tucson.................................. 73 Figure 14 - Annual fourth-highest eight-hour Ozone concentrations in Phoenix ................................ 73 Figure 15 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 at four Phoenix sites ..................... 75 Figure 16 - Three-year moving averages of PM10 at four metropolitan Phoenix sites ......................... 75 Figure 17 - Annual PM10 concentrations in the Salt River area ........................................................... 76 Figure 18 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 at six metropolitan Tucson sites ... 77 Figure 19 - Three-year moving averages of the annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with higher historic concentrations ........................................................................................................ 78 Figure 20 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with lower concentrations at lower elevations ................................................................................................. 79 Figure 21 - Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with lower concentration at higher elevations ................................................................................................. 79 Figure 22 - Statewide annual averages of PM2.5 ................................................................................... 81 Figure 23 - Metropolitan Phoenix annual averages of PM2.5................................................................ 82 Figure 24 - Metropolitan Tucson annual averages of PM2.5 ................................................................. 83 Figure 25 - Visibility trends for Phoenix, three-year moving averages, for all hours ......................... 86 Figure 26 - Visibility trends for Tucson, three-year moving averages, for all hours ........................... 86 Figure 27 - Visibility trends for all hours for Phoenix and Tucson, shown as three-year moving averages ........................................................................................................................................ 87 Figure 28 - Comparison of light scattering on the cleanest 20%, mean, and dirtiest 20% of days for urban and rural areas...................................................................................................................... 88 Figure 29 - Eight hour carbon monoxide maxima at 22nd St. and Alvernon in Tucson ....................... 89 Figure 30 - Eight hour carbon monoxide maxima at 18th St. and Roosevelt in Phoenix...................... 89 iv 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, which 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 quality 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 2007. Their efforts are appreciated as they maneuvered on rooftops and metal towers to operate monitoring equipment in uncomfortable weather conditions and 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 works daily installing, calibrating, maintaining, conducting quality control checks, collecting, processing, performing quality assurance tests, and reviewing and reporting data from a wide variety of ambient air monitoring instruments. These activities are necessary to provide the highest quality data to Arizona's population and to meet EPA program requirements. 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. The phone number is (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 2008, Page 1 Report Introduction This report presents the results of air quality monitoring conducted throughout Arizona in 2007. 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 and federal agencies such as the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service. Their data are summarized in this report too. 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). Visibilityrelated 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 15, 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 Accomplishments and Special Projects, which begins on Page 60, summarizes activities from special monitoring projects undertaken in the last few years for specific purposes. Some of these projects are to understand the regional haze problem in Class I areas, characterize ozone precursors, and conduct intensive ambient monitoring and risk assessment in the Yuma area. The Air Quality Trends report begins on Page 68. Trends of ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and visibility are discussed. EPA changed the NAAQS for particulate matter (both PM10 and PM2.5) in December 2007 and for ozone in June 2008. The NAAQS for lead changed in October 2008. These changes will affect how trends of these pollutants are viewed. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 2 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Networks This section describes the ambient air quality monitoring networks currently operating in Arizona. Monitoring networks for ambient 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. The ambient monitoring networks cover both urban and rural areas of the state. These networks are operated by government agencies and regulated companies. They 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, Figure 1 – South Phoenix monitoring station quality control, and quality assurance parameters for the instruments operated at their various sites. The agency or company also may measure meteorological variables at the monitoring site. 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 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. The networks and their characteristics are shown in Table 1. A list of individual sites and monitoring parameters, based on the best available information at the time of publication, is presented in Appendix 1, page 92. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 3 Table 1: Monitoring Networks Operating in Arizona Geographic Area Monitored Monitoring Objective* Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Arizona Portland Cement Company ASARCO LLC Statewide 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Rillito 1, 3 Hayden 1, 2, 3 Maricopa County Air Quality Department Phoenix urban area, Maricopa County National parks and monuments Miami 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Network Operator National Park Service Freeport McMoRan Copper and Gold Inc. Phoenix Cement Company Pima County Department of Environmental Quality Pinal County Air Quality Control District Tucson Electric Power Company Measurement Scale(s)** Pollutant(s) Monitored Micro, Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, Regional Neighborhood SO2, O3, NO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5 PM10 SO2 3, 4, 5, 6 Middle, Neighborhood Micro, Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, Regional Urban, Regional 1, 2, 3 Neighborhood Clarkdale 1, 3 Neighborhood SO2, O3, NO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5 SO2, O3, NO2, PM10, PM2.5 SO2, PM10, PM2.5 PM10 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, Phoenix urban area Tucson and Springerville 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, Regional Middle, Regional O3, PM10, PM2.5 1, 2, 3 *See Table 2 for a list of monitoring objectives **See Table 3 for a definition of measurement scales ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 4 SO2, NO2, PM10 Criteria Pollutant Monitoring Networks The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) 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. 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. The 1977 federal CAA amendments required each state to implement a visibility monitoring network to cover specified national parks and wilderness areas. The Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas also have year-round visibility monitoring networks to assess urban haze. The networks are designed to satisfy the monitoring objectives and measurement scales defined in Tables 2 and 3. EPA updates monitoring network requirements as necessary in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D. The most recent revision was 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 (O3). In addition, new requirements for sample frequency were made for PM2.5 and PM10. EPA will make revisions to 40 CFR Part 58 to include the new requirements for the revised NAAQS for lead (Pb) and O3. Table 2: Monitoring Objectives for Air Quality Monitoring Sites Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 Definition Determine highest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the network Determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density Determine the impact on ambient pollution levels of significant sources or source categories Determine general background concentration levels Determine the extent of regional pollutant transport among populated areas and in support of secondary standards Determine the welfare-related effects in more rural and remote areas (such as visibility impairment and vegetation damage) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 5 Table 3: Measurement Scales for Air Quality Monitoring Sites Measurement Scale represents concentrations in air volumes within areas defined below Micro (0 to 100 m) Middle (~100 to 500 m) Neighborhood (~0.5 to 4 km) Urban (~4 to 50 km) Regional (~10 to 100s of km) Criteria Pollutant Carbon Monoxide (CO) X X X Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) X X X Ozone (O3) X X X X Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) X X X X Particulate Matter (PM10, PM2.5) Lead (Pb) X X X X X X X X X X Criteria Pollutants – Monitoring Network and NAAQS Changes 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 (FRM) or equivalent (FEM) methods that EPA has certified. In October 2008, EPA established a new primary and secondary NAAQS for Pb. The standards, primary and secondary, are both 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3); the previous standard was 1.5 µg/m3. Primarily due to the introduction of non-leaded gasoline, total particulate Pb levels in Arizona have been very low for years; therefore Pb in total particulates has not been measured. However, Pb in fine particulates (PM2.5) has been monitored as part of the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) Program and Chemical Speciation Network (CSN). Recently, EPA has added PM10 metals to the National Air Toxics Trends Sites (NATTS) program. Pb is one of the metals analyzed in these samples. The new NAAQS will require additional Pb monitoring. EPA is preparing these monitoring guidelines. In June 2008, EPA lowered the eight-hour O3 standard from 0.08 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm. Recommendations for nonattainment areas are to be submitted to EPA by March of 2009. EPA also added a secondary standard to the O3 NAAQS which is identical to the primary standard. The secondary standard is meant to protect plants from O3 damage. EPA will provide new monitoring requirements in the fall of 2008. In December 2006, EPA 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 µg/m3. Nogales was the only designated nonattainment area in Arizona for PM2.5 based on the new NAAQS. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 6 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 visibility maps in 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 for new or major modifications of major industrial sources. Arizona continues to participate in the 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 manmade 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 CAA 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: • Meadview • 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 • Hillside (Site was closed in June of 2005) • 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 2008, 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) Organ Pipe National Monument 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 website 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 with a study in the winter of 1989-1990 in Phoenix and the winter of 1992-1993 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-term 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, and five digital camera systems to record visual characteristics of the urban area. The current Tucson urban haze network includes one transmissometer for measuring light extinction along a fixed path length of about 3 to 5 kilometers, three nephelometers for measuring light scattering, and one 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 area visibility is http://www.airinfonow.org/. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 8 Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations Network (PAMS) Section 182(c)(1) of the 1990 CAA Amendments required the administrator to promulgate rules for the enhanced monitoring of O3, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to obtain more comprehensive, and representative data on O3 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 O3 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 O3 NAAQS and the need for a more comprehensive air quality database for O3 and its precursors. The 2006 40 CFR 58 revisions reduced the monitoring requirements for number of sites (only two sites required for the Phoenix area). The length of the monitoring season was changed from April through October to June through August. The chief objective of the enhanced O3 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 O3 NAAQS. Ambient concentrations of O3 and O3 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 O3 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 midcourse 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 O3 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 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 9 PAMS data include measurements of O3, NOx, a target list of VOCs including several carbonyls, and surface and upper air meteorology. PAMS sites measure 56 target hydrocarbons (HC) on either a daily, hourly, or three-hour basis during the O3 season. The Type 2 sites also collect data on three carbonyl compounds (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acetone) during the O3 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 JLG Supersite 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. See Table 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 JLG Supersite Queen Valley JLG Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix JLG Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix JLG Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix None JLG Supersite 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 JLG Supersite Queen Valley JLG Supersite Queen Valley JLG Supersite JLG Supersite JLG Supersite South Phoenix JLG Supersite South Phoenix JLG Supersite South Phoenix JLG Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix JLG Supersite Queen Valley South Phoenix JLG Supersite Queen Valley JLG Supersite JLG 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, allows EPA to evaluate the need for new NAAQS, and establish associated limits. Data from ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 10 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 JLG 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 Stastical Areas. ADEQ operates one STN speciation sampler at the ADEQ JLG Supersite. Two IMPROVE samplers are also operated at the ADEQ JLG 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 CSN that includes IMPROVE sites. 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). Each government agency operating a monitoring network is required to submit to EPA a detailed network plan by July 1 of each year. The plan must be available to the public for a 30-day comment period prior to submittal to EPA. This plan describes how the monitoring network meets EPA requirements in 40 CFR Part 58 for the next 18 months. 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. Network plans are posted on each agency's website. ADEQ's 2008 Network Monitoring Plan can be found at http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/air/monitoring/download/2008plan.pdf . 40 CFR Part 51 requires states to create, submit, and adopt SIPs to address the various issues and responsibilities involved with creating and implementing air quality programs. Subpart J of Part 51 specifies that 40 CFR Part 58 Subpart C contains the requirements for establishing air quality surveillance systems to monitor ambient air quality. These requirements are addressed in the annual network plan. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 11 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 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 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 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 fifth year in addition to the Annual Assessment, to be made by each agency. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 12 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 multihour 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 a 24-hour sample, 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 FRM or FEM. 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 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) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 13 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 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. Optical measurements of visibility have been made continuously since 1993 in Tucson and since 1994 in Phoenix. 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. Bag is determined by continuously measuring NO2 since it is the only gas normally present in urban or Class I areas that absorbs significant quantities of visible light. Several EPA FRM or FEM NO2 monitors are deployed to verify maintenance of the NAAQS throughout Arizona, including monitoring in Tucson and Phoenix; the National Park Service network tracks NO2 at several national parks in Arizona. 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. 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 2008, Page 14 Monitoring Data Introduction The Environmental Protection Agency (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 with aerodynamic diameter ≤ 2.5 microns (PM2.5). These pollutants are monitored in Arizona by industry, county air pollution districts (Maricopa, Pinal, and Pima), the National Park Service, Forest Service, tribes (not reported in this document), and ADEQ. The Monitoring Data section contains information and data on the criteria pollutants and the visibility networks. The 2007 data measurements are in the data tables and are organized 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) are 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 for Class I areas and urban haze begins on Page 53. Figure 2 – Top of ADEQ’s JLG Supersite monitoring station. Figure 3 – ADEQ’s Vehicle Emissions Laboratory monitoring station. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 15 Criteria Pollutants - 2007 Data 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. In Arizona’s metropolitan areas, about half of CO emissions come from on-road motor vehicles; a little less than half from off-road vehicles, construction equipment, and lawn and garden equipment; with the reminder from point and area sources. This pollutant has low background levels, with highest concentrations next to busy streets, and elevated neighborhood concentrations in locations with significant amounts of emissions transported from upwind areas. Concentrations peak from November to January because emissions are highest in cold weather - automotive emissions of CO vary inversely with temperature - and because the surface layer of the atmosphere is most stable in wintertime. Hourly concentrations tend to be at their maximum during the morning rush hour and between 6 p.m. 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 emissions inspection program (beginning in 1976) and oxygenated fuels (beginning in 1989). CO is monitored continuously with nondispersive infrared instruments that are deployed in urban neighborhoods and near busy roadways or intersections. In 2007, 14 monitors were operated in greater Phoenix, six monitors were operated in metropolitan Tucson, and one monitor was operated in Yuma for a special study. Table 5 presents the 2007 CO data in parts per million (ppm). ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 16 Table 5: 2007 Carbon Monoxide (in ppm) (NAAQS one-hour 35 ppm, eight-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 West Phoenix Pima County 22nd St. & Alvernon 22nd St. & Craycroft Cherry & Glenn S Children’s Park Golf Links & Kolb S Tucson Downtown Yuma County Yuma Supersite SS One-Hour Average Value Max 2nd Value High Eight-Hour Average Value Max 2nd Value High Valid Data Recovery* No. of % Obs. 3.9 4.1 1.8 4.3 4.6 4.6 3.9 3.4 4.9 2.7 3.2 2.7 6.2 6.0 1.6 4.0 1.7 3.3 4.6 4.3 2.5 3.0 4.3 2.6 2.8 2.4 5.7 6.0 1.0 2.9 1.3 1.8 4.0 3.1 2.0 1.7 3.1 1.6 1.9 1.6 5.0 4.6 0.8 2.9 1.3 1.6 3.0 2.9 2.0 1.6 2.3 1.6 1.9 1.5 3.9 4.1 5017 8594 4995 5026 8547 8069 4964 4904 5021 4917 4970 4994 8495 8653 99 98 98 99 98 92 98 96 99 97 98 98 97 99 3.7 2.6 2.8 1.9 2.5 3.4 3.1 2.5 2.7 1.8 2.1 2.7 2.1 1.2 1.9 1.1 1.3 1.9 1.9 1.2 1.5 1.0 1.3 1.4 8640 8708 4339 8616 4351 8655 99 99 85 98 86 99 2.8 2.7 1.5 1.2 1732 96 * 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 percent due to mandatory quality assurance testing requiring the monitors to be offline for several hours at a time). S Seasonal monitor. Maricopa County operational during January 1 to April 1 and September 1 to December 31; 5088 sampling hours in non leap years. Pima County seasonal monitors operated January 1 to April 30 and October 1 to December 31; 5088 sampling hours in non leap years. ss Special Study monitor for WASBAQS, operational during January 1 to March 15 (at 01:00); 1800 sampling hours. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 17 Nitrogen Dioxide NO2 is a reddish-brown gas that is formed by the oxidation of nitric oxide (NO) - a byproduct of all combustion. Adverse health effects associated with NO2 include risk of respiratory illness in children and vary depending on the level of NO2 and exposure time. Short exposure to low levels may result in changes to airway responsiveness and decreased lung function in individuals with pre-existing conditions. Irreversible changes may occur to lungs due to long-term exposure to higher levels. This pollutant is of greater concern in its reduction of visibility (it causes five percent of the visibility reduction in Phoenix), its contributory role in the photochemical formation of ground level O3, and acid rain. Combustion emissions of NO are 95 percent NO and five percent NO2. Because NO is rapidly oxidized to NO2, NO emissions serve as a surrogate for NO2. In a recent Phoenix emissions inventory, the transportation sector dominated NO emissions with 58 percent of the emissions from cars and trucks, 27 percent came from off-road 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. NO and NO2 concentrations are highest near major roadways. NO 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 NO are converted to NO2 under relatively stable atmospheric conditions. Because NO reacts rapidly with O3, nocturnal O3 concentrations in cities are often reduced to near zero levels, while concentrations at background sites remain higher. NO emissions from motor vehicles have been reduced through retardation of spark timing, lowering the compression ratio, exhaust gas recirculation systems, and three-way catalysts. The vehicle inspection program, with its NOx test for light-duty gasoline vehicles 1981 and newer (in Phoenix only) has also helped reduce emissions. Reformulated gasolines also decrease NO 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 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 O3 concentrations tend to be at their maximum. In addition, these monitors are located near major coal-fired electrical power plants. Ten monitors were operated in Arizona in 2007. Table 6 presents the NO2 data available in 2007. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 18 Table 6: 2007 Nitrogen Dioxide (in ppm) (NAAQS Annual Mean 0.053 ppm) Site or City Apache County TEP - Springerville - Coyote Hills Maricopa County Buckeye Central Phoenix Greenwood JLG Supersite South Scottsdale West Phoenix Pima County 22nd St. & Craycroft Children’s Park Yuma County Yuma Game & Fishss Annual Average Maximum Value One-Hour Average Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Obs. 0.0010 0.037 8436 96 0.0102 0.0237 0.0290 0.0206 0.0163 0.0209 0.069 0.077 0.094 0.076 0.068 0.082 7337 8520 8427 8563 8137 8422 84 97 96 98 93 96 0.0134 0.0131 0.058 0.049 8661 8070 99 92 0.0139 0.060 2345 96 * 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 percent due to mandatory quality assurance testing requiring the monitors to be offline for several hours at a time). ss Special Study monitor for WASBAQS, operational during January 1 to April 12 (at 12:00pm); 2436 sampling hours. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 19 Sulfur Dioxide Exposure to 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 constriction of airways 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. 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 is converted 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 0.0006 ppm to 0.0180 ppm, well within the annual standard of 0.03 ppm. 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 2007, 10 reporting monitors were sited near copper smelters, one near a power plant, four in urban areas, and one in Yuma for a special study. Table 7 presents the SO2 data collected in Arizona in 2007. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 20 Table 7: 2007 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 three-hour 0.5 ppm [1300 µg/m3]) Maximum Value Three-Hour 24-Hour Average Average Max 2nd Max 2nd Value High Value High No. of Obs. % 0.0006 0.031 0.010 0.009 0.003 8611 98 0.0180 0.360 0.298 0.088 0.075 8760 100 0.0100 0.240 0.218 0.075 0.067 8760 100 0.0140 0.302 0.160 0.074 0.049 8760 100 0.0070 0.0060 0.0102 0.0070 0.0045 0.164 0.135 0.225 0.020 0.117 0.148 0.100 0.174 0.125 0.097 0.047 0.023 0.043 0.035 0.047 0.033 0.021 0.043 0.024 0.031 8606 8755 7985 8760 8658 98 99 91 100 99 0.0015 0.0024 0.0019 0.011 0.007 0.006 0.009 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 8622 8721 8431 98 99 96 0.0012 0.0023 0.013 0.010 0.008 0.010 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.004 8689 8006 99 91 0.0050 0.167 0.103 0.045 0.024 8760 100 0.0017 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 1735 96 Annual Average Site or City Apache County TEP - Springerville - Coyote Hills Gila County ASARCO - Globe Hwy. ASARCO - Hayden Garfield Ave. ASARCO - Montgomery Ranch FMMI - Miami - Jones Ranch FMMI - Miami - Townsite Hayden Old Jail, ADEQ Hayden Old Jail, ASARCO Miami Ridgeline, ADEQ Maricopa County Central Phoenix JLG Supersite South Scottsdale Pima County 22nd St. & Craycroft San Manuel Pinal County ASARCO - Hayden Junction Yuma County Yuma Supersite ss Valid Data Recovery * * 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 percent due to mandatory quality assurance testing requiring the monitors to be offline for several hours at a time). ss Special Study monitor for WASBAQS, operational during January 1 to March 15 (at 01:00); 1800 sampling hours. Note: Sulfur dioxide conversion factor: ppm = (µg/m3) / 2620. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 21 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 (HC), and NO, 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 HC and NO 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 ppm to 0.4 ppm 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 bronchoconstrictive challenges. Animal studies suggest that O3 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. O3 is formed photochemically by the reaction of VOC and NO. High O3 concentrations are a summer phenomenon caused when sunlight, biogenic emissions, and evaporative HC emissions peak. 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. Urban O3 concentrations are low to near zero at night, rise rapidly through the morning and peak in the afternoon. Controls to reduce the precursors of O3 - 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 HC from vehicles have been reduced through better engineered fuel tanks and auxiliary plumbing combined ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 22 with carbon absorption canisters. Additional reductions of vehicular VOC have come through ADEQ's vehicle emissions inspection program, which tests all gasoline fueled vehicles for HC (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 HC 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 2007, 39 reporting O3 monitors were in operation. Tables 8 and 9 present the 2007 Arizona O3 data. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 23 Table 8: 2007 Ozone (in ppm), One-Hour Averages (NAAQS one-hour 0.12 ppm) Site or City Cochise County Chiricahua Entrance Station Coconino County Grand Canyon NP - The Abyss Gila County Tonto NM S La Paz Alamo Lake S Maricopa County Blue Point Buckeye S Cave Creek S Central Phoenix Dysart S Falcon Field S Fountain Hills Glendale S Humboldt Mountain 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 South Pima County 22nd & Craycroft Children’s Park Coachline Green Valley Rose Elementary Saguaro NP East Tangerine Tucson Downtown Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Valid Data Recovery* No. of Days % 0.075 0.073 0.073 0.073 355 97 0.080 0.080 0.075 0.073 355 97 0.094 0.091 0.087 0.086 209 98 0.088 0.083 0.080 0.076 212 99 0.074 0.078 0.095 0.090 0.080 0.092 0.095 0.092 0.089 0.098 0.096 0.093 0.098 0.094 0.099 0.100 0.097 0.092 0.071 0.078 0.091 0.089 0.079 0.092 0.092 0.086 0.088 0.092 0.095 0.088 0.097 0.089 0.097 0.095 0.092 0.089 0.071 0.076 0.089 0.089 0.077 0.092 0.090 0.086 0.087 0.090 0.095 0.085 0.092 0.084 0.096 0.089 0.092 0.088 0.071 0.073 0.089 0.083 0.075 0.090 0.088 0.086 0.086 0.089 0.095 0.085 0.092 0.083 0.094 0.088 0.089 0.088 364 213 214 364 208 208 360 214 214 365 363 363 210 363 361 209 214 365 99 99 100 99 97 97 99 100 100 100 99 99 98 99 99 98 100 100 0.080 0.077 0.074 0.074 313 86 0.088 0.081 0.077 0.085 0.082 0.084 0.080 0.079 0.083 0.079 0.073 0.074 0.081 0.083 0.076 0.079 0.080 0.077 0.072 0.071 0.081 0.081 0.075 0.076 0.079 0.077 0.070 0.071 0.079 0.081 0.075 0.074 365 361 364 360 363 361 365 362 100 99 99 99 99 99 100 99 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 24 Table 8: 2007 Ozone (in ppm), One-Hour Averages (NAAQS one-hour 0.12 ppm) Site or City Tucson Fairgrounds Pinal County Apache Junction Maintenance Yard Casa Grande Airport Combs School S ## Maricopa County Complex S Pinal Air Park S Queen Valley S Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish S Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Valid Data Recovery* 0.085 0.079 0.078 0.077 No. of Days 359 0.098 0.079 0.075 0.067 0.078 0.089 0.096 0.078 0.072 0.065 0.073 0.088 0.095 0.075 0.071 0.064 0.070 0.088 0.094 0.074 0.070 0.063 0.070 0.087 360 361 213 212 213 214 99 99 99 99 99 100 0.101 0.087 0.087 0.081 212 99 % 98 * 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 2007 was 365. S Seasonal monitor, operational during April 1 to November 1; 214 scheduled sampling days in the season. ## Site also known as Queen Creek ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 25 Table 9: 2007 Ozone (in ppm), Eight-Hour Averages (NAAQS eight-hour changed from 0.08 ppm to 0.075 ppm effective April, 2008) Based on the 0.08 ppm NAAQS there are no exceedances in 2007, however there are several exceedances with the use of the new 0.075 NAAQS. Bold denotes the 4th highest value exceeds the eight-hour 0.075 ppm NAAQS. Site or City Cochise County Chiricahua Entrance Station Coconino County Grand Canyon NP - The Abyss Gila County Tonto NM S La Paz Alamo Lake S Maricopa County Blue Point Buckeye S Cave Creek S Central Phoenix Dysart S Falcon Field S Fountain Hills Glendale S Humboldt Mountain 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 South Pima County 22nd & Craycroft Children’s Park Coachline Green Valley Rose Elementary Saguaro NP East Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Daily Exceedances 0.073 0.070 0.068 0.067 0 352 96 0.072 0.070 0.070 0.069 0 352 96 0.078 0.076 0.076 0.076 6 209 98 0.081 0.076 0.073 0.072 2 212 99 0.066 0.066 0.083 0.073 0.069 0.080 0.083 0.075 0.080 0.077 0.081 0.076 0.082 0.079 0.082 0.084 0.084 0.079 0.066 0.066 0.079 0.073 0.069 0.074 0.078 0.075 0.079 0.076 0.081 0.076 0.082 0.077 0.077 0.077 0.079 0.077 0.059 0.064 0.079 0.070 0.068 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.079 0.076 0.080 0.075 0.080 0.073 0.077 0.077 0.074 0.076 0.058 0.064 0.077 0.070 0.065 0.073 0.074 0.071 0.078 0.076 0.078 0.075 0.079 0.072 0.077 0.076 0.072 0.074 0 0 5 0 0 1 2 0 5 4 7 2 10 2 6 4 2 3 364 213 214 361 207 207 356 214 213 365 362 363 211 363 358 208 214 364 99 99 100 99 97 97 98 100 99 100 99 99 99 99 98 97 100 99 0.074 0.071 0.069 0.069 0 278 76 0.070 0.072 0.068 0.074 0.073 0.075 0.070 0.071 0.067 0.068 0.072 0.073 0.068 0.071 0.066 0.067 0.070 0.073 0.068 0.071 0.064 0.065 0.069 0.073 0 0 0 0 0 0 365 358 363 357 362 358 100 98 99 98 99 98 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 26 Table 9: 2007 Ozone (in ppm), Eight-Hour Averages (NAAQS eight-hour changed from 0.08 ppm to 0.075 ppm effective April, 2008) Based on the 0.08 ppm NAAQS there are no exceedances in 2007, however there are several exceedances with the use of the new 0.075 NAAQS. Bold denotes the 4th highest value exceeds the eight-hour 0.075 ppm NAAQS. Site or City Tangerine Tucson Downtown Tucson Fairgrounds Pinal County Apache Junction Maintenance Yard Casa Grande Airport Combs School S ## Maricopa County Complex S Pinal Air Park S Queen Valley S Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish S Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days 365 100 362 99 353 97 Max Value 2nd High 3rd High 4th High Daily Exceedances 0.071 0.071 0.073 0.070 0.068 0.072 0.069 0.068 0.071 0.069 0.067 0.071 0 0 0 0.083 0.080 0.079 0.077 6 360 99 0.071 0.063 0.061 0.072 0.077 0.071 0.062 0.060 0.071 0.077 0.071 0.061 0.059 0.068 0.076 0.070 0.057 0.059 0.066 0.076 0 0 0 0 4 357 213 211 213 214 98 99 99 99 100 0.085 0.078 0.078 0.074 3 201 94 * 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 was 365. S Seasonal monitor, operational during April 1 to November 1; 214 scheduled sampling days in the season. ## Site also known as Queen Creek ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 27 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. Coarse particulates (2.5 to 10 microns) are formed through mechanical processes such as the grinding of matter and the atomization of liquids. 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. 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 VOCs. 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 inhaled and deposited in the upper parts of the respiratory system. Particles smaller than 2.5 microns are respired 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 small reversible changes in pulmonary function in children. Acidic aerosols have been linked to the inability of the upper respiratory tract and pulmonary system to remove harmful particles. Coarse particulate emissions are mostly geological and are dominated by dust from three activities: the constant grinding (re-entraining) of dust from paved roads, driving on unpaved roads, and earth moving associated with construction. Soil dust from these sources and others contribute more than 70 percent of the coarse particulates in Phoenix. 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. On days with winds in excess of 15 miles per hour, wind erosion of soil contributes to this loading. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 28 With a more diverse chemical composition, fine particulate (PM2.5) emissions are more evenly distributed among a larger number of sources. At the ADEQ JLG Supersite, receptor modeling indicates gasoline and diesel engine exhaust account for more than twothirds of the PM2.5 emissions. Soil dust contributes another 10.5 percent. 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 midmorning. 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, trackout dust from construction sites, and dust from unpaved parking and vacant lots. Efforts to reduce dust resuspended from paved roads have concentrated on eliminating trackout 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 HC 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 best management practices for agricultural activities (AgBMP) to reduce particulate emissions from tilling and harvesting activities of cropland and non-cropland. In a recent PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP), the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) committed to implement 77 new measures, including enhanced enforcement of the county dust rules, implementation of AgBMP, 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 also can 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. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 29 The 2007 PM10 data reported in Table 10 represent 73 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 25o C and 1 atmosphere pressure) as required by EPA. EPA began a nationwide program to measure PM2.5 using federal reference method (FRM) monitors in anticipation of a new federal standard for fine particulates in 1999. Eleven FRM 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. The data are reported in ambient conditions (local temperature and pressure) as required by EPA. Particulate data from the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) Program are not included. In 2006, the EPA changed the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS from 65 μg/m3 to 35 μg/ 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 μg/m3. Figure 4 – Nogales Post Office monitoring station. Figure 5 – Yuma Courthouse monitoring station. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 30 Table 10: 2007 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3) Bold denotes an exceedances, defined as any daily value greater then 150 µg/m3 after rounding to the nearest 10 µg/m3.** Site or City Apache County TEP - Springerville - Coal Yard 1 TEP - Springerville - Coyote Hills 1 Cochise County Douglas Red Cross 4 Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant (1) 4 Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant (2) 4 Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School 4 Sedona Post Office 4 (closed 12/31/2007) Gila County FMMI - Miami - Golf Course (1) 4 # FMMI - Miami - Golf Course (2) 4 # Hayden Old Jail, ADEQ 4 Miami Ridgeline, FMMI 4 Payson Well Site 4 Graham County Safford 4 (closed 12/31/2007) Maricopa County Bethune Elementary School 4 Buckeye 1 Central Phoenix 1 Coyote Lakes 1 # (opened 4/2/2007) Durango Complex 1 Dysart 4 Glendale 4 Greenwood 1 Higley 1 JLG Supersite 4 JLG Supersite 1 Mesa 4 North Phoenix 4 South Phoenix 1 & 4 # (continuous monitor opened 7/1/2007) South Scottsdale 4 West Chandler 4 West Forty Third 1 Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days TEOM TEOM 26.9 11.7 914 49 244 44 361 361 99 99 Partisol Partisol Partisol 28.2 28.8 27.7 94 87 103 73 63 66 59 58 59 98 97 98 Partisol 21.2 56 42 58 97 Partisol 13.7 33 29 55 92 Dichot Dichot Partisol Dichot Partisol 23.0 19.9 34.4 11.9 23.0 64 46 72 51 62 52 45 69 28 43 42 52 58 59 58 70 87 97 98 97 Partisol 22.3 62 54 59 98 Partisol TEOM TEOM TEOM TEOM Hi-Vol Hi-Vol TEOM TEOM Partisol TEOM Hi-Vol Hi-Vol Hi-Vol/ TEOM Hi-Vol Hi-Vol TEOM 53.1 52.5 42.4 47.8 59.5 35.9 34.1 50.0 53.0 34.1 36.2 32.3 33.5 136 195 267 331 155 111 92 124 230 85 521 110 78 133 166 149 273 152 94 74 123 199 70 94 70 77 57 365 365 274 360 58 58 362 352 59 363 60 60 95 100 100 100 99 97 97 99 96 98 99 100 100 55.6 171 160 214 100 30.6 36.4 71.8 73 104 227 61 99 225 60 60 363 100 100 99 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 31 Table 10: 2007 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3) Bold denotes an exceedances, defined as any daily value greater then 150 µg/m3 after rounding to the nearest 10 µg/m3.** Site or City West Phoenix 1 Mohave County Bullhead City 4 Navajo County Show Low 4 (closed 12/31/2007) Pima County Ajo 4 # Broadway & Swan 4 Corona De Tucson 4 Geronimo 1 # (opened 7/1/2007) Green Valley 1 Green Valley Fire Administration 1 # (opened 7/11/2007) Orange Grove 2 Prince Road 4 Rillito, ADEQ 4 Rillito, APCC 3 Santa Clara 4 South Tucson 2 Tangerine 4 Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station 4 Casa Grande Downtown 4 Casa Grande Downtown 1 # (opened March 2007) Combs School 1 # (opened 3/20/2007) Coolidge Maintenance Yard 4 Cowtown 4 Cowtown 1 Eloy City Complex 4 # (closed 3/3/2007) Eloy County Complex 4 # (opened 3/4/2007) Mammoth County Complex 4 Maricopa County Complex1 Pinal Air Park 4 Pinal County Housing Complex (1) 4 Pinal County Housing Complex (2) 4 Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High 124 116 Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days 365 100 TEOM 47 Partisol 20.3 52 51 59 98 Partisol 16 75 47 59 98 Partisol Partisol Partisol TEOM BAM 32.0 26.2 17.1 32.8 20.4 124 80 50 104 123 71 80 48 77 77 53 59 57 177 363 88 98 95 96 99 BAM 14.8 57 48 80 98 Partisol Partisol Partisol Hi-Vol Partisol Partisol Partisol 29.2 31.7 40.7 26.2 28.4 31.4 22.0 95 99 208 65 92 97 88 95 62 124 55 60 96 44 363 59 60 108 59 361 60 99 98 100 89 98 99 100 Hi-Vol Hi-Vol 18.1 35.3 48 112 40 80 54 57 90 95 TEOM 55.2 983 256 275 96 TEOM Hi-Vol RAAS TEOM 89.9 35.5 167.5 181.3 970 82 759 1014 867 76 490 979 282 57 55 362 92 95 92 99 Hi-Vol 25.8 46 36 10 100 Partisol 42.3 136 127 50 100 Hi-Vol TEMO Hi-Vol Hi-Vol Hi-Vol 12.7 73.7 29.5 56.0 62.3 40 724 113 224 341 29 525 61 113 145 56 363 57 59 60 93 99 95 98 100 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 32 Table 10: 2007 PM10 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3) Bold denotes an exceedances, defined as any daily value greater then 150 µg/m3 after rounding to the nearest 10 µg/m3.** Site or City Pinal County Housing Complex 1 Riverside Maintenance Yard 1 Stanfield 4 Stanfield 1 Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office 4 Nogales Post Office 1 Yavapai County PCC Clarkdale - NW 4 PCC Clarkdale - SE 4 Prescott Valley 4 # Yuma County Yuma Courthouse (1) 4 Yuma Courthouse (2) 4 Yuma Courthouse 1 Mexico Agua Prieta Fire Station 4 Nogales Sonora Fire Station 4 Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average Max 2nd Value High 2253 1839 65 53 374 350 1062 482 Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days 354 97 56 93 58 97 358 98 TEOM Hi-Vol RASS TEOM 83.7 23.6 90.9 84.3 Partisol BAM 52.1 65.0 191 233 134 211 58 357 97 98 Dichot Dichot Partisol 14.0 18.5 21.5 50 52 63 30 38 55 60 60 53 100 100 88 Partisol Partisol TEOM 45.7 45.6 51.9 147 195 349 143 165 320 59 60 365 98 100 100 Dichot Dichot 46.8 62.7 104 170 94 159 57 56 95 93 *Valid data recovery shows the number of valid observations and the percentage of scheduled samples that were valid. For continuous monitors (TEOM and BAM), the number of valid days is used for data recovery. 1 Samples collected every hour - 8760 sample hours (365 days) in non leap years Samples collected every day - 365 sample days in non leap years 3 Samples collected every third day - 122 sample days in non leap years 4 Samples collected every sixth day - 61 sample days in non leap years # Indicates the data do not satisfy EPA's summary criteria, usually meaning less than 75 percent valid data recovery available. 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. Exceedances due to Exceptional Events that have been concurred on by the EPA are excluded from the 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 2008, Page 33 Table 11: 2007 PM2.5 Data (in µg/m3) (NAAQS Annual Average 15µg/m3, 24-hour Average 35 µg/m3) Site or City Cochise County Douglas Red Cross 4 Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School 4 Gila County Payson Well Site 4 Maricopa County JLG Supersite 3 Mesa 3 South Phoenix 3 West Phoenix (1) 3 West Phoenix (2) 3 # Pima County Children’s Park 3 Orange Grove 2 Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station 3 Casa Grande Downtown 4 Cowtown 4 Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office (1) 4 Nogales Post Office (2) 4 Method Annual Average 24-Hour Average 2nd Max High Valid Data Recovery * No. of % Days FRM 6.79 32.2 16.9 56 92 FRM 8.00 47.5 30.2 58 95 FRM 9.38 26.8 21.9 59 97 FRM FRM FRM FRM FRM 9.48 9.72 12.27 10.89 10.96 26.1 24.3 32.2 33.0 34.3 25.2 19.7 30.3 31.3 27.5 121 117 118 119 69 99 96 97 98 57 FRM FRM 5.71 5.84 13.4 20.7 12.7 15.9 114 198 93 54 FRM FRM FRM 6.96 10.25 22.50 15.9 26.6 59.7 14.8 25.2 53.9 108 117 55 89 96 90 FRM FRM 12.30 12.11 30.0 30.8 28.2 28.8 59 60 97 100 *Valid data recovery shows the number of valid observations and the percentage of scheduled samples that were valid. 1 Samples collected every hour - 8760 sample hours (365 sample days) in non leap years. Samples collected every day - 365 sample days in non leap years. Samples collected every third day - 122 sample days in non leap years. Samples collected every sixth day - 61 sample days in non leap years. 2 3 4 (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. # Indicates the data do not satisfy EPA's summary criteria, usually meaning less than 75 percent valid data recovery available. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 34 Criteria Pollutants - Compliance Carbon Monoxide There are two NAAQS for CO: a one-hour standard and an eight-hour standard (most critical for compliance). The one-hour standard is 35 ppm and the eight-hour standard is 9 ppm. According to 40 CFR part 50, 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 nonattainment (or monitoring) area by evaluating two calendar years of data from each site. The highest of the second-highest value in a two-year period must not exceed the standard of 35 ppm (greater than or equal to 35.5 ppm) for the one-hour standard or 9 ppm (greater than or equal to 9.5 ppm) for the eight-hour standard. No exceedances of the one-hour or eight-hour standards were recorded in 2006 or 2007. The data are presented in Table 12 and Table 13. Table 12: 2006-2007 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. 2006-2007 One-Hour Carbon Monoxide NAAQS Compliance Values by County County Exceedances Violations 0 0 Maricopa Pima 0 0 Summary: 20 of 20 monitors in compliance Table 12: 2006-2007 One-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in 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 West Phoenix 2006 Max 2nd Value High 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 2007 Max 2nd Value High 3.9 4.1 1.8 4.3 4.6 4.6 3.9 3.4 4.9 2.7 3.2 2.7 6.2 6.0 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 35 1.6 4.0 1.7 3.3 4.6 4.3 2.5 3.0 4.3 2.6 2.8 2.4 5.7 6.0 Compliance Value 1.6 4.8 1.7 3.3 5.2 4.5 3.5 3.3 4.7 3.1 3.4 2.6 7.7 6.5 Table 12: 2006-2007 One-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) Site or City S Pima County 22nd St. & Alvernon 22nd St. & Craycroft Cherry & Glenn S Children’s Park Golf Links & Kolb S Tucson Downtown 2006 Max 2nd Value High 3.4 3.2 3.4 1.7 3.8 2.9 3.4 2.9 3.3 1.7 2.9 2.6 2007 Max 2nd Value High 3.7 2.6 2.8 1.9 2.5 3.4 3.1 2.5 2.7 1.8 2.1 2.7 Compliance Value 3.4 2.9 3.3 1.8 2.9 2.7 Seasonal monitor. Maricopa County monitors operate during January 1 to April 1 and September 1 to December 31. Pima County monitors operate during January 1 to May 1 and October 1 to December 31. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 36 2006-2007 Eight-Hour Carbon Monoxide NAAQS Compliance Values by County Table 13: 2006-2007 Eight-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in ppm) County Maricopa NAAQS for eight-hour carbon monoxide: The highest of the second-highest values in a twoyear period must not exceed 9 ppm. Exceedances Violations 0 0 Pima 0 0 Summary: 20 of 20 monitors in compliance Table 13: 2006-2007 Eight-Hour Carbon Monoxide Compliance (in 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 West Phoenix Pima County 22nd St. & Alvernon 22nd St. & Craycroft Cherry & Glenn S Children’s Park Golf Links & Kolb S Tucson Downtown S 2006 Max 2nd Value High 2007 Max 2nd Value High Compliance Value 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 1.0 2.9 1.3 1.8 4.0 3.1 2.0 1.7 3.1 1.6 1.9 1.6 5.0 4.6 0.8 2.9 1.3 1.6 3.0 2.9 2.0 1.6 2.3 1.6 1.9 1.5 3.9 4.1 0.8 3.2 1.3 1.8 3.5 2.9 2.0 1.9 2.7 1.9 2.4 2.0 4.5 4.6 2.0 1.6 2.3 1.1 1.8 1.4 1.8 1.4 2.0 1.0 1.6 1.2 2.1 1.2 1.9 1.1 1.3 1.9 1.9 1.2 1.5 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.9 1.4 2.0 1.0 1.6 1.4 Seasonal monitor. Maricopa County monitors operate during January 1 to April 1 and September 1 to December 31. Pima County monitors operate during January 1 to May 1 and October 1 to December 31. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 37 Nitrogen Dioxide The NAAQS for NO2 is 0.053 ppm for an Table 14: 2007 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS annual average. The standard is attained Compliance Values by County when the annual arithmetic mean Annual Average concentration in a calendar year is less County Exceedances Violations than or equal to 0.053 ppm. To Maricopa 0 0 demonstrate attainment, the annual mean Pima 0 0 must be based upon hourly data that are at Yuma 0 0 least 75 percent complete. NO2 annual Summary:10 of 10 monitors in compliance averages near Arizona power plants range from 2 percent to 17 percent of the standard and 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 2007 averages. 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), not to 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. The 24-hour average is calculated from midnight to midnight (calendar day); 18 or more valid hours must be present for each calendar day. The maximum and second-highest 24-hour average is used to determine compliance with the standard. The annual average and 24-hour averages must be based on valid hourly data that are at least 75 percent complete in each calendar quarter. 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 2007, the maximum concentration sites - all near copper smelters - comply with these standards; the concentrations ranging from 2 to 60 percent of the three-hour, 1 to 60 percent of the 24-hour and 2 to 54 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 2007 averages. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 38 Table 15: 2007 Sulfur Dioxide Average NAAQS Compliance Values by County County Gila Maricopa Pima Pinal Annual Average Three-Hour Average 24-Hour Average Exceedances Violations Exceedances Violations Exceedances Violations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Summary:15 out of 15 monitors in compliance Ozone - One-hour The NAAQS one-hour standard for O3 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 2007. 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 MAG, demonstrating how the area will maintain compliance with the one-hour 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 O3 standard. The one-hour standard was revoked one year following the effective date of the eight-hour designation on June 15, 2005. However, certain 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 O3 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 O3 standard was 0.08 ppm (0.084 ppm for rounding) for a daily maximum eighthour average. Then in 2008 the eight-hour standard was reviewed and changed to 0.075 ppm, effective April 2008. The eight-hour 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 (0.075 ppm as of April 2008). The data in Table 16 are for those sites in operation in 2005 to 2007 and have been evaluated based on both the 0.08 ppm and the 0.075 ppm standards. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 39 2005 to 2007 Eight-Hour Ozone 1997 NAAQS of 0.080 ppm Compliance Values by County County Eight-Hour Exceedances * Sites in Violation 2005 2006 2007 NAAQS: The three-year average Cochise 0 0 0 0 of the annual fourth-highest daily Coconino 1 0 0 0 maximum eight-hour average Gila 2 2 0 0 ozone concentration is less than La Paz 0 0 0 0 or equal to 0.08 ppm effective in Maricopa 25 17 1 0 1997. Navajo 0 1 0 0 Pima 1 0 0 0 Pinal 3 5 0 0 Yuma 0 0 1 0 Table 16: 2005 to 2007 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) Summary:39 of 39 monitors in compliance for 2005 to 2007 * Includes all eight-hour exceedances. 2005 to 2007 Eight-Hour Ozone 2008 NAAQS of 0.075 ppm Compliance Values by County County Eight-Hour Exceedances * Sites in Violation 2005 2006 2007 NAAQS: The three-year average Cochise 0 1 0 0 of the annual fourth-highest daily Coconino 4 1 0 0 maximum eight-hour average Gila 17 17 6 1 ozone concentration is less than La Paz 1 1 2 0 or equal to 0.075 ppm effective in Maricopa 122 169 53 11 2008. Navajo 2 1 0 0 Pima 15 13 0 1 Pinal 22 26 10 2 Yuma 7 1 3 0 Summary:24 of 39 monitors in compliance for 2005 to 2007 Table 16: 2005 to 2007 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 40 Table 16: 2005 to 2007 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) Bold denotes exceedances and sites in violation of the 2008 NAAQS of 0.075 ppm. Bold with grey background denotes exceedances of the 1997 NAAQS of 0.08 ppm. Fourth-Highest Value Site or City Cochise County Chiricahua Entrance Station Coconino County Grand Canyon NP - The Abyss Gila County Tonto NM S La Paz County Alamo Lake S (opened 05/20/2005) Maricopa County Blue Point Buckeye S Cave Creek S Central Phoenix Dysart S Falcon Field S Fountain Hills Glendale S Humboldt Mountain 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 South Pima County 22nd St. & Craycroft Children’s Park Coachline Green Valley Rose Elementary Saguaro NP East Tangerine Tucson Downtown ThreeYear Average 2005 2006 2007 0.072 0.074 0.067 0.071 0.079 0.070 0.069 0.072 0.084 0.081 0.076 0.080 0.071 0.073 0.072 0.072 0.081 0.065 0.082 0.075 0.066 0.076 0.088 0.076 0.087 0.076 0.084 0.083 0.087 0.076 0.077 0.076 0.075 0.068 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 0.058 0.064 0.077 0.070 0.065 0.073 0.074 0.071 0.078 0.076 0.078 0.075 0.079 0.072 0.077 0.076 0.072 0.074 0.067 0.065 0.079 0.075 0.067 0.076 0.082 0.075 0.081 0.076 0.082 0.078 0.083 0.072 0.078 0.077 0.076 0.074 0.070 0.071 0.069 0.070 0.074 0.075 0.066 0.068 0.067 0.079 0.073 0.070 0.069 0.072 0.071 0.070 0.067 0.076 0.076 0.073 0.068 0.071 0.064 0.065 0.069 0.073 0.069 0.067 0.070 0.072 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.076 0.072 0.070 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 41 Table 16: 2005 to 2007 Eight-Hour Ozone Compliance (in ppm) Bold denotes exceedances and sites in violation of the 2008 NAAQS of 0.075 ppm. Bold with grey background denotes exceedances of the 1997 NAAQS of 0.08 ppm. Fourth-Highest Value Site or City S Tucson Fairgrounds Pinal County Apache Junction Maintenance Yard Casa Grande Airport Combs School S ## Maricopa County Complex S Pinal Air Park S Queen Valley S Yuma County Yuma Game & Fish S 2005 2006 2007 0.073 0.068 0.071 ThreeYear Average 0.070 0.068 0.072 0.067 0.061 0.077 0.084 0.084 0.073 0.071 0.068 0.070 0.079 0.077 0.070 0.057 0.059 0.066 0.076 0.076 0.071 0.065 0.062 0.071 0.079 0.078 0.073 0.074 0.075 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. ## Site also known as Queen Creek N/A - Data are 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 2008, Page 42 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 for historical purposes. 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. 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. 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 rounds 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 2005 to 2007 expected exceedance rates for the PM10 annual arithmetic means and maximum 24-hour average values. Table 17: 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3, Standard Conditions) NAAQS: The expected annual arithmetic mean (average of three most recent annual means) is less than or equal to 50 µg/m3. The expected annual arithmetic mean is rounded to the nearest 1 µg/m3 for comparison to the standard. 2005 to 2007 PM10 Annual Average NAAQS Compliance Values, By County Sites above Standard Sites in County Violation 2005 2006 2007 Apache 0 0 0 0 Cochise 0 0 0 0 Coconino 0 0 0 0 Gila 0 0 0 0 Graham 0 0 0 0 Maricopa 7 7 6 7 Mohave 0 0 0 0 Navajo 0 0 0 0 Pima 0 0 0 0 Pinal 4 4 6 3 Santa Cruz 1 1 1 1 Yavapai 0 0 0 0 Yuma 0 0 1 0 Summary: 57 of 69 monitors in compliance ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 43 Table 17: 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes value above the standard. Site or City Apache County TEP - Springerville - Coal Yard TEP - Springerville - Coyote Hills Cochise County Douglas Red Cross Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School Sedona Post Office (closed 12/31/2007) Gila County FMMI - Miami - Golf Course Hayden Old Jail, ADEQ Miami Ridgeline, FMMI Payson Well Site Graham County Safford (closed 12/31/2007) Maricopa County Bethune Elementary School Buckeye E Central Phoenix - every 6th day monitor (closed 12/31/2005) Central Phoenix E Chandler (closed 12/31/2005) Coyote Lakes (opened 4/2/2007) Durango Complex E Dysart Glendale Greenwood E - continuous monitor beginning 1/1/2006 Higley E JLG Supersite JLG Supersite E Mesa North Phoenix South Phoenix E - continuous monitor beginning 7/1/2007 South Scottsdale West Chandler E West Forty Third E 2005 2006 2007 Expected Annual Mean 15.4 10.3 19.0 11.2 26.9 11.7 20 11 34.4 27.6# 30.9 27.3 28.2 28.8 31 N/A 17.0# 18.0 21.2 N/A 12.2# 13.3 13.7 N/A 21.0 29.9# 12.4 22.1# 20.4 33.4 14.2 23.7 23.0# 34.4 11.9 23.0 N/A N/A 39 N/A 20.8# 22.6 22.3 N/A 58.6 52.7 61.7 53.0 53.1 52.5 58 53 38.5 N/A N/A N/A 37.1 49.4 N/A 66.4 29.0 29.0 42.0 N/A N/A 69.0 32.3 36.3# 42.4 N/A 47.8# 59.5 35.9 34.1 41 N/A N/A 65 32 N/A 51.7 51.7 50.0 51 51.4 30.9 29.3 30.0 29.6 60.4 35.4 36.8 30.5 34.4 53.0 34.1 36.2 32.3 33.5 55 33 34 31 33 54.7 55.0 55.6 55 34.0 34.2 73.9 32.9 33.3 79.8 30.6 36.4 71.8 33 35 75 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 44 Table 17: 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes value above the standard. Site or City West Phoenix - continuous monitor beginning 1/1/2006 Mohave County Bullhead City Navajo County Show Low (closed 12/31/2007) Pima County Ajo Broadway & Swan Corona de Tucson Geronimo (opened 7/1/2007) Green Valley E Green Valley Fire Administration E (opened 7/1/2007) Orange Grove E Prince Road Rillito, ADEQ Rillito, APCC (1-in-3 day schedule) Santa Clara South Tucson Tangerine Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station Casa Grande Downtown Casa Grande Downtown E (opened March 2007) Combs School E (opened 3/20/2007) Coolidge Maintenance Yard Cowtown (opened August 2005) Cowtown E Eloy County Complex Mammoth County Complex Maricopa County Complex E Pinal Air Park Pinal County Housing Complex Pinal County Housing Complex E Riverside Maintenance Yard E Stanfield Stanfield E (opened February 2006) 2005 2006 2007 Expected Annual Mean 44.5 49.8 47.0 47 18.6# 19.3 20.3 N/A 13.7# 15.5 16.0 N/A 22.7 23.7 15.4 N/A 17.4 25.3 26.8 22.6 N/A 16.8 32.0# 26.2 17.1 32.8# 20.4 N/A 26 18 N/A 18.2 N/A N/A 14.8# N/A 29.2 37.0 # 39.1 31.8 35.2 39.7 29.2 31.7 40.7 30 N/A 40 26.8 28.5 26.2 27 26.5 30.2 19.1 35.5 34.3 22.9 28.4 31.4 22.0 30 32 21 19.9 30.9 23.6 35.9 18.1 35.3 21 34 N/A N/A 55.2# N/A N/A 36.0 294.4# 200.4# 33.4 13.6 70.1 22.3 56.7# 68.7 18.1 52.1 N/A N/A 44.0 220.1 230.4 38.8 14.8 78.6 29.5 64.3 87.1 23.3 81.4 82.6# 89.9# 35.5 167.5 181.3 42.3 12.7 73.7 29.5 56.0 83.7 23.6 90.9 84.3 N/A 39 N/A N/A 38 14 74 27 N/A 80 22 75 N/A ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 45 Table 17: 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes value above the standard. Site or City Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office Nogales Post Office E Yavapai County PCC Clarkdale - NW PCC Clarkdale - SE Prescott Valley Yuma County Yuma Courthouse Yuma Courthouse E Mexico Agua Prieta Fire Station Nogales Fire Station 2005 2006 2007 Expected Annual Mean 56.9 65.9 64.0 82.3 52.1 65.0 58 71 14.7 21.8 14.8# 15.3 19.7 18.9# 14.0 18.5 21.5 15 20 N/A 34.9 47.5# 40.1 46.9 45.7 51.9 40 N/A 68.1 62.9 52.7 75.9 46.8 62.7 56 67 # 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/continuous monitoring. N/A - Data are not available 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 percent and 75 percent, data from the Secondary (POC 2) 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 2008, Page 46 2005 to 2007 PM10 Maximum 24-Hour Compliance Values, By County Sites with Exceedances Sites in County Violation 2005 2006 2007 NAAQS: Expected occurrence of Apache 1 1 1 1 exceedances (samples equal to or greater Cochise 0 0 0 0 than 150 µg/m3) is one or less over three Coconino 0 0 0 0 consecutive years. Gila 0 0 0 0 Graham 0 0 0 0 Sample values are rounded to the nearest 10 Maricopa 6 5 8 8 3 µg/m to determine exceedance; values less 3 Mohave 0 0 0 0 than or equal to 154 µg/m are not 0 0 0 0 exceedances; values greater than or equal to Navajo Pima 0 0 1 1 155 µg/m3 are exceedances. Pinal 4 4 6 3 Santa Cruz 1 1 1 1 Yavapai 0 0 0 0 Yuma 0 1 1 0 Summary: 55 of 69 monitors in compliance Table 18: 2005 to 2007 Maximum 24Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3, Standard Conditions) Table 18: 2005 to 2007 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes value above the standard. 2005 Site or City Apache County TEP - Springerville - Coal Yard TEP - Springerville - Coyote Hills Cochise County Douglas Red Cross Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School Sedona Post Office (closed 12/31/2007) Gila County FMMI - Miami - Golf Course Hayden Old Jail, ADEQ Miami Ridgeline, FMMI Payson Well Site Graham County Safford (closed 12/31/2007) 2006 2007 Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. Three-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 198 3.0 298 3.0 914 5.0 3.7 29 0 56 0 49 0 0 86 76# 0 0 87 76 0 0 94 87 0 0 0 N/A 38# 0 37 0 56 0 N/A 34# 0 36 0 33 0 N/A 40 124# 23 81# 0 0 0 0 90 102 106 66 0 0 0 0 64# 72 51 62 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A 0 N/A 50# 0 50 0 62 0 N/A ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 47 Table 18: 2005 to 2007 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes value above the standard. 2005 Site or City Maricopa County Bethune Elementary School Buckeye E Central Phoenix (closed 12/31/2005) Central Phoenix E Chandler (closed 12/31/2005) Coyote Lakes (opened 4/2/2007) Durango Complex E Dysart Glendale Greenwood E - continuous monitor beginning 1/1/2006 Higley E JLG Supersite JLG Supersite E Mesa North Phoenix South Phoenix E - continuous monitor beginning 7/1/2007 South Scottsdale West Chandler E West Forty Third E West Phoenix E - continuous monitor beginning 1/1/2006 Mohave County Bullhead City Navajo County Show Low (closed 12/31/2007) Pima County Ajo Broadway & Swan Corona De Tucson Geronimo (opened 7/1/2007) Green Valley Green Valley Fire Administration E (opened 7/1/2007) 2006 2007 Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. Max 24-Hr Avg Exp. Exc. Three-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 198 169 6.4 2.0 140 272 0 3.0 136 195 0 2.0 2.1 2.3 125 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 116 130 0 0 134 N/A 0 N/A 267 N/A 1.0 N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 313# 2.0 N/A 206 76 84 13.0 0 0 240 67 60# 9.0 0 0 155 111 92 1.0 0 0 7.7 0 N/A 173 6.1 166 1.0 124 0 2.4 142 100 82 86 81 0 0 0 0 0 170 91 148 75 79 2.1 0 0 0 0 230 85 521 110 78 5.1 0 1.0 0 0 2.4 0 0.3 0 0 147 0 132 0 171 7.5 2.5 121 94 233 0 0 13.1 76 77 260 0 0 18.7 73 104 227 0 0 6.0 0 0 12.6 155 6.0 147 0 124 0 2.0 48# 0 72 0 52 0 N/A 37# 0 58 0 75 0 N/A 45 46 33 N/A 54 0 0 0 N/A 0 54 60 144 N/A 81 0 0 0 N/A 0 124# 80 50 104# 123 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 57# 0 N/A ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 48 Table 18: 2005 to 2007 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes value above the standard. 2005 Max 24-Hr Avg 98 88# 84 Exp. Exc. 0 0 0 Max 24-Hr Avg 101 72 122 Exp. Exc. 0 0 0 Max 24-Hr Avg 95 99 208 Exp. Exc. 0 0 11.0 Three-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance 0 N/A 3.7 84 0 86 0 65 0 0 82 73 37 0 0 0 104 109 104 0 0 0 92 97 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 79 0 0 73 81 0 0 48 112 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 983# 7.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 970# 44.6 N/A 81 0 106 0 82 0 0 788# N/A 606 278.2 759 166.2 N/A 770# 73 33 239 122 158# 163 0 0 18 0 6.4 1079 99 31 429 77 153 243.1 0 0 19 0 0 1014 136 40 724 113 224 190.4 0 0 20.1 0 6.5 N/A 0 0 19.0 0 N/A E 326 17 763 31 2253 19.5 22.5 Riverside Maintenance Yard Stanfield Stanfield E (opened February 2006) Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office Nogales Post Office E Yavapai County PCC Clarkdale - NW PCC Clarkdale – SE Prescott Valley Yuma County Yuma Courthouse 35 173 0 6.0 83 182 0 13.1 65 374 0 39.6 0 19.6 N/A N/A 727# 21 1062 25.2 N/A 280 351 18.4 29.6 240 271 20.4 47.9 191 233 6.1 14.0 15.0 30.5 31.5 43.1 53# 0 0 0 27 38 56# 0 0 0 50 52 63 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 94 0 151 0 147 0 0 Site or City Orange Grove E Prince Road Rillito, ADEQ Rillito, APCC (1-in-3 day schedule) Santa Clara South Tucson Tangerine Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station Casa Grande Downtown Casa Grande Downtown E (opened March 2007) Combs School (opened 3/20/2007) Coolidge Maintenance Yard Cowtown (opened August 2005) Cowtown E Eloy County Complex Mammoth County Complex Maricopa County Complex E Pinal Air Park Pinal County Housing Complex Pinal County Housing Complex 2006 2007 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 49 Table 18: 2005 to 2007 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM10 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes value above the standard. 2005 Site or City Yuma Courthouse E Mexico Agua Prieta Fire Station Nogales Fire Station 2006 2007 Max 24-Hr Avg 134# Exp. Exc. 0 Max 24-Hr Avg 198 Exp. Exc. 5.1 Max 24-Hr Avg 349 Exp. Exc. 13.0 Three-Year Avg Expected Rate of Exceedance N/A 172 240 6 10.2 159 195 11.7 14.1 104 170 0 12.3 5.9 12.2 # 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/continuous monitoring. N/A - Data are not available Particulate Matter – PM2.5 The NAAQS for particulate matter 2.5 microns and smaller in diameter (PM2.5) are 15.0 µg/m3 for the annual arithmetic mean concentration and 35 µg/m3 for the 24-hour average concentrations, which changed from 65 µg/m3 December 17, 2006. Appendix N Part 50 of the 40 CFR will be used to assess the compliance of the monitors operating in Arizona during 2007. 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 yearly 98th percentile value is less than or equal to 35 µg/m3. There must also be 75 percent data completeness for each year. Please note that the data in Table 19 are from FRMs. In prior years, the dichot fine measurement was used as an approximate equivalent for PM2.5, but the FRMs 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 tribal areas) be designated attainment/unclassifiable for the PM2.5 NAAQS. A new request was submitted in December 2007 and approved in August 2008, designating nonattainment for Nogales – same area as PM10 nonattainment. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 50 2005 to 2007 PM2.5 Annual Average NAAQS Compliance Values, By County Sites with Exceedances Sites in County Violation 2005 2006 2007 NAAQS: The three-year average of Cochise 0 0 0 0 annual means is less than or equal to Coconino 0 0 0 0 15 µg/m3 Gila 0 0 0 0 Maricopa 0 0 0 0 Pima 0 0 0 0 Pinal 1 1 1 1 Santa Cruz 0 1 0 0 Summary: 12 of 13 federal reference monitors in compliance Table 19: 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3, local conditions) Table 19: 2005 to 2007 Annual Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes a value above the standard. Site or City Federal Reference Monitors Cochise County Douglas Red Cross Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School Gila County Payson Well Site Maricopa County JLG Supersite Mesa (opened 4/28/2005) South Phoenix West Phoenix Pima County Children’s Park Orange Grove Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station Casa Grande Downtown Cowtown Santa Cruz County Nogales Post Office 2005 2006 2007 ThreeYear Average 7.33 6.78 7.69 7.27 6.01 6.61 8.00 6.87 8.38# 9.04 9.38 N/A 9.72 8.92# 12.84 12.91 10.22 9.66 12.69 13.52 9.48 9.72 12.27 10.89 9.81 N/A 12.60 12.44 5.91 6.32 5.79 5.80 5.71 5.84 5.80 5.99 5.52 7.33 33.10 5.31 7.55 22.70 6.96 10.25 22.50 5.93 8.38 26.10 13.10 15.59 12.30 13.66 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. # ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 51 2005 to 2007 PM2.5 24-Hour Average NAAQS Compliance Values, By County Sites with Exceedances Sites in County Violation 2005 2006 2007 Cochise 0 0 0 0 NAAQS: The three-year average of Coconino 0 0 0 0 the 98th percentile values is less than Gila 0 0 0 0 or equal to 35 µg/m3. Maricopa 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pima Note: The three-year average is 3 1 Pinal 1 1 1 rounded to the nearest 1 µg/m for Santa Cruz 0 1 0 1 comparison to the standard. Summary: 11 of 13 federal reference monitors in compliance Table 20: 2005 to 2007 24Hour Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3, local conditions) Table 20. 2005 to 2007 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Compliance (in µg/m3) Bold denotes a vale above the standard. Site or City Federal Reference Monitors Cochise County 2 Douglas Red Cross Coconino County 2 Flagstaff Middle School Gila County 2 Payson Maricopa County 3 JLG Supersite 3 Mesa (opened 4/28/2005) 3 South Phoenix 3 West Phoenix Pima County 3 Children’s Park 1 Orange Grove Pinal County 3 Apache Junction Fire Station 2 Casa Grande Downtown Cowtown 2 Santa Cruz County 2 Nogales Post Office 98th Percentile Samples ** 2005 2006 2007 ThreeYear Average 16.0 14.0 32.2 21 12.7 13.7 30.2 19 22.9 23.4 21.9 23 28.2 17.5 36.4 40.5 24.6 20.1 28.8 28.8 23.5 18.3 29.2 27.2 25 19 31 32 10.7 12.0 12.1 11.2 12.0 13.6 12 12 10.6 16.9 78.9 9.3 15.4 48.9 14.6 22.4 53.9 12 18 61 33.0 56.2 28.2 39 ** 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 non leap years 2 Samples collected every sixth day - 61 sample days in non leap years. 3 Samples collected every third day - 122 sample days in non leap years. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 52 Visibility Data Visibility monitoring is conducted using the following 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 tabulating 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 Figure 6 – Pleasant Valley monitoring measurements are photograph-based with subsequent station. 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. An inverse megameter (Mm-1) (units used by ADEQ) 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. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 53 Class I Areas ADEQ began a visibility monitoring program in 1997, in anticipation of the implementation of a federal regional haze rule. The program is directed at Class I areas in partnership with Arizona's federal land managers. Arizona's Class I areas are participating in the IMPROVE program, which consists of aerosol sampling only. The aerosol samplers collect 24-hour samples every third day and are analyzed to determine the content of the particulate collected. ADEQ added nephelometers for measuring light scattering at some of the sites. The nephelometers are continuous monitors, providing readings every five minutes which are averaged into hourly and 24-hour values. The continuous measurements provide insight into variation in visibility impairment with time as well as 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 2007. 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 Camp Raymond, Ike’s Backbone, and Petrified Forest National Park in 2007, Tucson Mountain in 2002 to 2006, and Pleasant Valley in 2003. Table 21: Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1) Site and Wilderness Area Camp Raymond Sycamore Canyon Wilderness Chiricahua National Monument Greer Water Treatment Plant Mt. Baldy Wilderness Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 2002 2003 2004 2005 Mm-1 (24 hour Averages) Mean of the Mean of the Mean of all Dirtiest 20% Cleanest 20% Sampled Sampled Sampled Hours Hours Hours 28 13 4 28 13 3 28 13 3 30 13 3 32 14 3 25 12 3 33 14 3 32 14 4 50 19 3 18 9 3 21 10 2 18 7 0 31 13 3 26 10 2 26 10 1 17 8 1 23 9 1 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 54 Table 21: Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1) Site and Wilderness Area Hance Camp Grand Canyon NP Humboldt Mountain * Mazatzal Wilderness and Pine Mountain Wilderness Ike’s Backbone Mazatzal/Pine Mountain Wildernesses Indian Gardens Grand Canyon NP Mount Ord * Mazatzal Wilderness McFadden Peak * Sierra Ancha Wilderness Muleshoe Ranch * Chiracahua National Monument Wilderness, Galiuro Wilderness, Chiricahua Forest Service Wilderness Year 2006 2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 1998 1999 1998 1999 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Mm-1 (24 hour Averages) Mean of the Mean of the Mean of all Dirtiest 20% Cleanest 20% Sampled Sampled Sampled Hours Hours Hours 21 9 2 29 12 2 23 10 2 21 9 2 20 8 1 22 9 1 20 9 2 26 11 2 19 9 2 25 10 1 21 9 2 24 11 2 24 9 0 25 12 3 28 13 3 21 9 1 24 8 0 36 16 3 24 10 2 30 12 2 24 11 3 26 12 4 23 12 4 31 15 4 26 10 2 21 9 3 27 11 2 28 12 2 22 11 3 24 10 1 18 7 0 24 11 4 20 11 3 22 11 3 24 12 4 25 12 4 25 11 3 20 8 1 21 10 4 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 55 Table 21: Visibility in Class I Areas (Nephelometer Data in Mm-1) Site and Wilderness Area Organ Pipe National Monument Petrified Forest National Park Pleasant Valley Ranger Station Sierra Ancha Wilderness Rucker Canyon * Chiricahua Wilderness Tucson Mountain Saguaro National Park (Includes both the West facilities support building and the National Park Service well site) Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Mm-1 (24 hour Averages) Mean of the Mean of the Mean of all Dirtiest 20% Cleanest 20% Sampled Sampled Sampled Hours Hours Hours 21 10 3 23 12 4 21 9 1 27 13 4 20 9 3 24 11 3 23 9 1 39 17 4 28 14 5 27 13 3 33 15 4 20 10 3 28 13 4 25 11 2 24 10 1 30 12 3 20 10 4 18 8 1 30 12 2 24 13 6 23 12 5 22 11 3 31 16 6 35 17 6 32 16 5 31 16 5 27 15 6 29 14 5 * Site Closed: Humboldt Mountain closed in 2004; McFadden Peak closed in 2000; Mount Ord closed in 2000; Muleshoe Ranch closed in 2006; Rucker Canyon closed in 2001 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 56 Urban Haze Besides the Class I areas, ADEQ also operates transmissometers and nephelometers in Phoenix and Tucson. Data from these instruments through 2007 are presented in Table 22. The data are separated into categories for all hours and for six-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 average visibility for the 20 percent of the sampled hours. As visual range in miles may be a more familiar unit, the values in Mm-1 in 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 136 100 50 2 18 24 48 1216 Highest in the Table Lowest in the Table Table 22: Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2007 (in Mm-1) 24 Hour Samples Site Year Mesa Transmissometer 2004 2005 2006 2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Phoenix Transmissometer Phoenix Nephelometer (Supersite) Mean of the Dirtiest 20% Sampled Hours 106 121 115 118 133 127 131 118 124 131 121 126 125 121 91 87 93 73 72 79 72 80 Mean of all Sampled Hours 60 72 70 79 78 72 74 69 75 72 69 72 69 78 35 36 39 32 33 34 30 33 Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 24 35 37 46 45 38 38 36 42 36 35 36 32 47 10 11 12 12 12 11 9 9 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. Mean of the Dirtiest 20% Sampled Hours 110 123 117 124 136 128 134 118 125 135 126 128 126 127 77 74 80 66 62 73 61 73 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 57 Mean of all Sampled Hours 65 78 75 86 84 77 80 73 79 78 75 78 76 84 34 36 39 33 33 35 30 33 Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 29 44 42 53 50 42 42 42 46 42 42 43 40 53 13 14 15 15 14 14 11 11 Table 22: Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2007 (in Mm-1) 24 Hour Samples Site Phoenix Nephelometer (Dysart) Phoenix Nephelometer (Estrella Mountain) Phoenix Nephelometer (Vehicle Emissions) Queen Valley Nephelometer Tucson Transmissometer Tucson Nephelometer (U of A Central) Year 2006 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Mean of the Dirtiest 20% Sampled Hours 88 75 46 41 44 37 54 76 50 48 69 76 56 55 26 32 25 28 102 90 98 96 87 88 97 101 83 92 45 43 40 42 38 43 38 45 39 Mean of all Sampled Hours 39 33 22 20 21 18 24 35 23 21 29 35 26 26 11 15 12 15 57 57 56 55 49 52 58 61 47 51 21 23 20 23 20 23 20 24 19 Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 12 11 7 8 6 5 7 12 7 5 9 12 8 9 2 5 3 5 28 35 27 26 24 26 27 31 22 22 4 10 8 10 7 9 8 10 5 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. Mean of the Dirtiest 20% Sampled Hours 80 70 52 41 49 37 68 77 64 58 64 73 53 53 25 31 22 27 119 107 114 109 109 107 113 125 100 103 47 41 40 44 42 45 42 47 40 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 58 Mean of all Sampled Hours 40 33 27 23 25 20 32 39 31 27 31 37 27 27 10 15 11 14 69 65 66 66 61 62 67 76 56 60 23 24 22 25 22 25 22 27 21 Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 14 13 9 10 9 7 10 14 10 7 12 15 11 11 2 5 3 5 34 38 31 33 29 30 32 39 28 28 7 11 9 13 9 11 10 12 7 Table 22: Phoenix and Tucson Urban Haze Data 1998 to 2007 (in Mm-1) 24 Hour Samples Site Tucson Nephelometer (Craycroft) Tucson Nephelometer (Children’s Park) Year 2007 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 Mean of the Dirtiest 20% Sampled Hours 42 38 37 52 42 35 41 39 41 35 38 48 Mean of all Sampled Hours 22 19 18 25 21 19 22 19 20 19 20 24 Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 8 8 7 7 8 7 9 6 8 7 8 9 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. Mean of the Dirtiest 20% Sampled Hours 43 N/A N/A N/A 43 44 40 39 43 35 40 48 N/A - Data are not available ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 59 Mean of all Sampled Hours 24 N/A N/A N/A 22 25 23 21 23 20 23 28 Mean of the Cleanest 20% Sampled Hours 11 N/A N/A N/A 9 11 11 8 10 8 11 13 Accomplishments and Special Projects Introduction This section summarizes some of ADEQ’s accomplishments and special projects during 2007 and 2008. ADEQ is responsible for preparing and submitting documents to EPA which identify nonattainment areas, describe activities that will help the areas reach attainment, and document their attainment status (see Nonattainment and Attainment Areas map in Appendix 4). The ADE Q Air Quality Division Planning Section is responsible for these activities and some of their accomplishments during this period are described in this section. Figure 7 – Mexico Supersite, Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study In addition to ADEQ’s statewide regulatory ambient air monitoring program, the ADEQ Air Quality Division conducts special monitoring projects to provide a better understanding of air pollutant science in 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 (NAAQS) 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 Arizona’s air quality. Miami PM10 Planning Area Maintenance Plan and Pending Redesignation In 1987, EPA designated the combined Hayden/Miami area as a single Group I PM10 nonattainment area. Effective May 29, 2007, EPA finalized a boundary redesignation to divide the single Hayden/Miami PM10 nonattainment area into two separate PM10 nonattainment areas roughly along the ridgeline of the Pinal Mountains [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 Freeport McMoran Copper and Gold Inc. (formerly Phelps Dodge Corporation). Monitoring data collected at the SPMs have been certified by ADEQ as meeting EPA’s quality assurance requirements and entered into the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) for 2003 to present. Freeport McMoran Copper and Gold Inc. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 60 have also made a written commitment to ADEQ to submit its Miami monitoring data 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 (RFP) requirements, an attainment demonstration, and nonattainment area contingency measures are not required. The ADEQ Air Quality Division developed a ten-year Maintenance Plan and submitted it to EPA with a Redesignation Request in June 2008. EPA’s approval is pending. Five Percent Annual Reasonable Further Progress for Metropolitan Phoenix [Maricopa County-Apache Junction, Pinal County] Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area Plan Revision 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 (BACM) and Most Stringent Measures (MSM). Although the control measures address exceedances that occurred in the 32-square-mile Salt River sub-area of the Maricopa Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area, they apply to the entire Nonattainment Area. EPA did not approve the submitted attainment demonstration, however, because of continued PM10 exceedances. In response to EPA’s Finding of Failure to Attain the PM10 standard by December 31, 2006, for Metropolitan Phoenix [June 6, 2007; 72 FR 31183], ADEQ submitted a State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision to EPA in December 2007. Maricopa County is historicaly the second Serious PM10 nonattainment area in the nation subject to the 5 percent annual RFP requirement. San Joaquin Valley was the first and has since been redesignated to attainment status by EPA 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. Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 189(d) required submittal of a SIP revision to EPA by December 31, 2007, demonstrating attainment by 5 percent annual reductions of the emission inventory in PM10 or PM10 precursor emissions until attainment is achieved. Control strategies and reporting requirements were developed by stakeholders through the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) committee process and the 2007 Arizona legislative session culminating in adoption of Senate Bill 1552 (Laws 2007, Chapter 292). Stakeholders included Pinal County, as one of its townships is in the planning area. ADEQ worked with MAG and Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) to finalize the base case emissions inventory with improved Windblown Dust and Agricultural source category emissions estimates. ADEQ also 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. The submitted SIP Revision demonstrates attainment for the years 2008 to 2010. 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 hospitality industry chimineas; primary and secondary paved ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 61 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; 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 (HPA) 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. ADEQ developed the following outreach materials and has posted them on the ADEQ web site: Fact Sheet about the New Off-Highway Vehicle Law; Map of Off-Highway Vehicle Areas with Restrictions; Training for Leaf Blower Operators, Pointers for Operating a Leaf Blower in English and Spanish, and Leaf Blower Frequently Asked Questions. Tracking implementation of the control measures on standardized forms developed by MAG is the continuing responsibility of ADEQ and the other stakeholders to ensure attainment by the end of 2010. Rillito PM10 Planning Area Limited Maintenance Plan and Pending Redesignation The Rillito Group I Area was designated and classified as a moderate PM10 nonattainment area upon enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments, effective November 15, 1990. ADEQ submitted a moderate area PM10 plan for the Rillito area on November 14, 1991, which EPA found to be incomplete. On April 22, 1994, ADEQ submitted a revised PM10 plan for Rillito. EPA also found the revised plan to be incomplete and did not take any further action on it. Effective October 10, 2006, EPA published a Clean Data Finding for the 1992 to 1994 data period and subsequent years [August 8, 2006; 71 FR 44920]. ADEQ developed a 10-year Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) and redesignation request and submitted it to EPA in June 2008, after a stakeholder meeting in the planning area. To qualify for the LMP option, an area should be attaining the NAAQS and the average PM10 design value (DV) for the area, based upon the most recent five years of air quality data at monitors in the area, should be less than 98 μg/m3 for the 24-hour PM10 standard. If the area cannot meet this test, EPA offers another option to qualify for an LMP. To meet this qualification, the average DV of the site must be less than the area’s site specific Critical Design Value (CDV). When that calculation was performed, this area’s average DV (119 μg/m3) was less than the CDV (142 μg/m3), indicating that this area has a very low probability of exceeding the NAAQS in the future and qualified for the LMP option. EPA’s approval is pending. Upon approval, ADEQ must annually demonstrate continued eligibility for the LMP option for this planning area. Yuma PM10 Maintenance Plan, Pending Redesignation Request and Exceptional Events Demonstrations Yuma was designated nonattainment for PM10 in 1990. ADEQ developed a 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, ADEQ convened stakeholders to prepare an attainment demonstration and maintenance plan. EPA made a Clean Data Finding for 1998 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 62 to 2001 and subsequent years for Yuma on March 14, 2006 [71 FR 13021] that became effective May 16, 2006. As a result, RFP requirements, an attainment demonstration, and nonattainment contingency measures were not required. ADEQ continued to work with the stakeholder group and submitted the Redesignation Request and 10-year Maintenance Plan to EPA on August 16, 2006. BACM 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 three 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 ADEQ to quantify the emission reductions from the implementation of AgBMP, 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 CAA Section 175A(d). EPA promulgated an Exceptional Events Rule to replace its Exceptional Events Policy and its Natural Events Policy. In 2007, EPA noted that 12 exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard had occurred at the BAM SPM in Yuma. Because the SPM had been in operation since November 2004, more than 24 months, EPA could consider its ambient monitoring data in its determinations of attainment of the NAAQS pursuant to EPA’s latest monitoring rules [October 17, 2006. 71 FR 61302 revising Title 40 CFR § 58.20(c)]. ADEQ evaluated each of these 12 exceedances for data flagging pursuant to EPA’s Exceptional Events Rule. ADEQ determined that all 12 events qualify for exception, scheduled a Natural Events Stakeholder meeting in Yuma on November 13, 2007, a 30-day public comment period beginning August 11, 2008, and submitted the documentation to EPA in September 2008. Upon concurrence, EPA would be able to complete the redesignation process. Maricopa Eight-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Plan MAG developed a plan that included the Apache Junction why do we say township here? Don't know let's use 'area' instead 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). Quality assured monitoring data for 2005 to 2007 recorded no violations, demonstrating attainment of the ozone (O3) NAAQS. MAG is developing a Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request through its committee process for adoption by ADEQ and submittal to EPA in early 2009. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 63 Ajo PM10 Clean Data Finding, Maintenance Plan, and Redesignation Request EPA made a Clean Data Finding for 2002 to 2004 for Ajo on February 8, 2006 [71 FR 6352] that became effective April 10, 2006. This finding eliminates otherwise applicable requirements for a RFP, an attainment demonstration, and nonattainment contingency measures. ADEQ has completed an emissions inventory and rollback modeling demonstration of continued attainment for the next 12 years. ADEQ will complete development of the Maintenance Plan for submittal to EPA with a Redesignation Request in early 2009. Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study The purpose of this special study is to determine the sources and movement of air pollutants as well as to 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, identified six phases to the study: identifying study requirements and collecting meteorological data; siting study for pollutant monitor locations; monitor deployment; data collection; air quality modeling; and health risk assessment. The monitoring data collection phase of the project was completed in April 2007. Meteorological data from seven sites and air quality data from three sites were collected. Data quality Figure 8 – Map of Western Arizona/Sonora Border Air Quality Study monitoring locations. assurance procedures on all of the meteorological, gases, particulate matter, and four types of chemical data will be completed by December 2008. An emissions inventory has been compiled and will be used in the air quality modeling and health risk assessment phases of the study. Joint Air Toxics Assessment Project The Joint Air Toxics Assessment Project (JATAP) has been a collaborative effort among federal, state, county, city, and tribal air quality agencies. JATAP began in 2000 and was implemented in a number of phases with the primary monitoring phase completed in 2006. Seven monitoring sites were involved using canister and cartridge sample collection. The results from each monitor were compared to each other and to national monitoring and risk assessment results, background concentration estimates, the results from other urban studies, and to cancer and non-cancer health benchmarks. In 2008, EPA provided a staff member on temporary assignment to summarize the monitoring results and coordinate efforts to move the project into a three-part risk assessment phase: stationary source, mobile source, and near roadway exposures. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 64 Regional Haze Regional haze is caused by the emissions of air pollutants from a wide variety of sources located over a large geographic area. The haze obscures scenic vistas, which degrades our parks and wilderness areas and interferes with people’s enjoyment and recreation in those areas. In 1977, the federal CAA set a goal to remedy any existing visibility impairment and prevent any future impairment, from man-made pollution at 158 national parks and wilderness areas known as mandatory Federal Class I areas. The Regional Haze SIP submitted to EPA in December 2003, focused on four of the 12 national parks and wilderness areas in Arizona: Grand Canyon National Park, Petrified Forest National Park, Sycamore Canyon Wilderness, and Mount Baldy Wilderness. Emissions data and modeling related to long-term strategies for large stationary sources are still under analysis throughout the country. Therefore, the remaining eight Class I areas will be addressed in a SIP to be submitted to EPA later how much later? than the December 17, 2007 deadline. Revisions and updates to the 2003 SIP will be sent to EPA either late 2008 or early 2009. The 2003 Regional Haze SIP relied on a demonstration of how the state is implementing the recommendations of the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission to satisfy reasonable progress toward the national visibility goal. All SIPs from this point on will need to assess the current conditions at a Class I area and then determine what strategies would be necessary should the area be found to have impaired visibility. Areas with good visibility will need to determine strategies to assure those areas maintain good air quality. Western states developing SIPs under sections 309(g) and 308 of the Federal Regional Haze Rule will have assistance with the assessment and strategies portion of the SIP from the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP). ADEQ will have an expanded role regarding regional haze. Extensive fire regulations and policy were developed for the 2003 Regional Haze SIP and the now-certified Enhanced Smoke Management Plan will continue to be an important part of regional haze. ADEQ will perform emissions tracking and modeling necessary to determine specific conditions at Arizona Class I areas beyond what WRAP will provide. Arizona will continue to implement the sulfur dioxide (SO2) Milestones and Backstop Trading Program - a voluntary program for stationary sources emitting 100 tons or more per year of SO2 that will be integrated into existing permits, and with emissions tracked annually. The annual SO2 emissions for the stationary sources have been reported to WRAP beginning in 2004; emissions are compiled into a regional Milestone Report for the participating western states and sent to EPA annually. Should a milestone, representing markers on a decreasing regional emissions cap, be exceeded, the backstop trading program would be activated. Strategies for NOx are currently more conventional than trading. Additional information on regional haze can be found at http://www.wrapair.org/309/index.html EPA’s Revisions to Eight-Hour Ozone Standard 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 O3 standards was completed July 18, 1997, at which time the eight-hour standard was set at the level of 0.08 part per million (ppm). ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 65 The average of the most recent three-year fourth-highest measurements is compared to 0.084 ppm to determine compliance with the standard. The secondary standard was set equal to the primary standard. On March 12, 2008, EPA revised the eight-hour primary standard (for protection of public health) to 0.075 ppm. The secondary standard (for protection of public welfare) was made identical to the revised primary standard, 0.075 ppm. EPA selected the levels for the final standards after completing an extensive review of thousands of scientific studies on the impact of ground level O3 on public health and the environment. This newly available evidence identifies important new health end points associated with O3 exposure, including mortality, increased asthma medication use, school absenteeism, and cardiac related effects. Furthermore, studies of asthmatics indicate that they experience larger and more serious responses to O3 that last longer than responses for healthy individuals. In addition, new scientific evidence since the last review of the O3 NAAQS continues to show that repeated exposure to O3 damages sensitive vegetation and trees, including those in forests and parks, leading to reduced growth and productivity, increased susceptibility to disease and pests, and damaged foliage. States must make recommendations to EPA no later than March 2009 for areas to be designated attainment, nonattainment, and unclassifiable. EPA will issue final designations of attainment, nonattainment, and unclassifiable areas no later than March 2010 unless there is insufficient information to make these designation decisions. In that case, EPA will issue designations no later than March 2011. States must submit a SIP outlining how they will reduce pollution to meet the standards by a date that EPA will establish in a separate rule. That date will be no later than three years after EPA’s final designations. If EPA issues designations in 2010, then these plans would be due no later than 2013. States are required to meet the standards by deadlines that may vary based on the severity of the problem in the area. EPA will issue a separate rule to address monitoring requirements necessary to implement the new standards. EPA intends to propose a monitoring rule in 2008 and issue a final rule by March 2009. EPA’s Revisions to Lead Standard On October 15, 2008, EPA substantially strengthened the NAAQS for lead (Pb). The revised standards are 10 times tighter than the previous standards and will improve health protection for at-risk groups, especially children. EPA has revised the level of the primary (health-based) standard from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3), to 0.15 μg/m3, measured as total suspended particles (TSP). EPA has revised the secondary (welfare-based) standard to be identical in all respects to the primary standard. Scientific evidence about Pb and health has expanded dramatically since EPA issued the initial standard of 1.5 μg/m3 in 1978. More than 6,000 new studies on Pb health effects, environmental effects, and Pb in the air have been published since 1990. Evidence from health studies shows that adverse effects occur at much lower levels of Pb in blood than previously thought. Children are particularly vulnerable to the effects of Pb. Exposures to low levels of Pb early in life have been linked to effects on IQ, learning, memory, and behavior. There is no known safe level of Pb in the body. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 66 EPA has revised the averaging time and form of the Pb NAAQS. These are the air quality statistics that are compared to the level of the standards to determine whether an area meets or violates the standards. EPA changed the calculation method for the averaging time to use to a ‘rolling’ three-month period with a maximum (not-to-be-exceeded) form, evaluated over a threeyear period. This replaces the current approach of using calendar quarters. A rolling three-month average considers each of the 12 three-month periods associated with a given year, not just the four calendar quarters within that year. EPA is redesigning the Pb monitoring network to assess compliance with the revised Pb standards. EPA will require state and local monitoring agencies to conduct monitoring taking into account Pb sources that are expected to, or have been shown to, exceed the standards. At a minimum, monitors must be placed in areas with sources of Pb emissions greater than or equal to one ton or more per year, to measure the maximum concentration. EPA also will require a monitor to be operated in each of the 101 urban areas with populations greater than 500,000 to gather information on the general population’s exposure to Pb in air and ensure protection against sources of airborne dust containing Pb. EPA estimates that 236 new or relocated monitoring sites will be necessary nation wide to satisfy these monitoring requirements. Approximately half of all newly required monitors are to be operational by January 1, 2010, with the other half of the monitors operational by January 1, 2011. Currently, no monitors in Arizona are designated for Pb data collection. States are required to make recommendations for areas to be designated attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable by October 2009. If tribes choose to submit recommendations, they must also provide them to EPA by October 2009. Final designations of all attainment, nonattainment, and unclassifiable areas will be effective no later than January 2012. However, EPA intends to complete initial designations as soon as possible where data are sufficient from existing monitoring network. States are required to submit a SIP outlining how they will reduce pollution to meet the standards no later than June 2013. States are required to meet the standards no later than January 2017. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 67 Trends Introduction This section examines the degree to which air quality in Arizona’s cities and counties has been improving or deteriorating during the years that data have been collected, quality assured, and recorded. Compliance with EPA’s National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) is a separate, though related, issue that was explored at length in a separate section of this report. Phasing out leaded gasoline in the mid-1970s Figure 9 – Average Best & Average Worst significantly reduced the concentration of airborne Visibility Impairment in the Phoenix Area lead in Arizona to levels that allowed monitoring to be discontinued and valuable monitoring resources to be reallocated. Installation of effective controls on copper smelters in the 1980s caused concentrations of sulfur dioxide (SO2) to decrease rapidly. Catalytic converters, fuel injection, and the success of the Vehicle Emissions Inspection program produced dramatic reductions in the concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) since the 1970s. Visibility, the aspect of the atmosphere obvious to the population, has been measured continuously in urban and pristine parts of the state long enough to establish clear trends. Ozone (O3) and particulates, PM10 and PM2.5, were the primary concerns in Arizona in 2007 and will likely continue in the future. These are common concerns across much of the United States. O3 concentrations in the greater Phoenix area were already close to the maximum allowed by the NAAQS in 2007. But, in March 2008, the O3 standard was reduced from 0.08 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm. Due to this change, many Phoenix area sites will exceed the NAAQS in 2008. PM10 concentrations already exceed the standards in some areas. These facts emphasize the importance of the trends documented in this section. Ozone One-Hour Ozone Concentrations Maximum one-hour O3 concentrations have declined in Phoenix, Tucson, and Yuma since 1981 (Figure 10). These decreases have been: Phoenix 36 percent, Tucson 31 percent, and Yuma 14 percent. Only one exceedance of the one-hour O3 standard has been recorded after 1996. The one-hour 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 (HC) and nitrogen oxides (NO). 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, ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 68 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, one-hour O3 standard) at one site in the Phoenix area. Concentrations decreased below the standard again in 2006 and much further in 2007. 0.200 0.160 1-Hour Ozone (ppm) Standard = 0.124 0.120 PHOENIX TUCSON YUMA 0.080 0.040 2007 2005 2003 2001 1999 1997 1995 1993 1991 1989 1987 1985 1983 1981 0.000 Figure 10 – Maximum one-hour ozone concentrations in three Arizona 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 ppm. Due to instrument precision and rounding, however, this standard translates into a numerical value of 0.084 ppm: any value 0.085 ppm and above is an exceedance. Illustrated in Figure 11 are the three-year averages from eight of the monitoring sites listed in Table 23 that have extended periods of operation. Although there is considerable site-tosite variability, the recent concentrations are slightly higher, with Apache Junction showing the greatest increase. Reviewing Metro Phoenix sites together (Figure 12), the maximum value fluctuates at or above the standard with a range from 0.085 ppm to 0.089 ppm until the 2002 to 2004 period and then begins a steady decline. The average of these sites follows a similar pattern until the 2005 to 2007 period when the slope increases slightly upward and is now positive. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 69 Figure 11 – Phoenix area eight-hour ozone trends: three-year averages of the annual fourthhighest concentrations Figure 12 – Phoenix area eight-hour ozone trends: three-year averages of the annual fourthhighest concentrations, expressed as the average and maximum of nine long-term sites ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 70 Table 23: Three-Year Averages of the Annual Fourth-Highest Eight-Hour Ozone Concentrations in Phoenix and Environs (Units are in ppm). Bold values in yellow cells equal or exceed the operational standard of 0.084 ppm) Site 19982000 19992001 20002002 20012003 20022004 20032005 20042006 20052007 Apache Junction 0.0813 0.0797 0.0797 0.0763 0.0737 0.069 0.073 0.076 Blue Point 0.0887 0.0853 0.0843 0.0840 0.0823 0.080 0.072 0.072 Cave Creek N/A 0.0830 0.0845 0.0840 0.0817 0.080 0.079 0.080 Falcon Field 0.0817 0.0810 0.0800 0.0813 0.0777 0.075 0.075 0.076 Fountain Hills 0.0817 0.0810 0.0847 0.0840 0.0813 0.082 0.082 0.082 Hillside 0.0833 0.0810 0.0827 0.0773 0.0777 0.072 Closed Closed Humboldt Mt. 0.0863 0.0847 0.0850 0.0873 0.0850 0.084 0.081 0.081 JLG Supersite 0.0727 0.0723 0.0770 0.0766 0.0743 0.074 0.075 0.076 Maryvale 0.0830 0.0783 0.0790 0.0800 0.0835 0.083 Closed Closed North Phoenix 0.0863 0.0853 0.0857 0.0856 0.0837 0.083 0.083 0.082 Pinnacle Peak 0.0817 0.0820 0.0850 0.0840 0.0783 0.078 0.075 0.078 Queen Valley N/A 0.0790 0.0810 0.0830 0.0810 0.081 0.078 0.080 Rio Verde 0.0837 0.0850 0.0847 0.0837 0.0840 0.081 0.081 0.083 South Scottsdale 0.0760 0.0760 0.0787 0.0783 0.0763 0.076 0.076 0.078 Tonto Monument N/A N/A 0.0870 0.0855 0.0827 0.081 0.080 0.080 West Chandler 0.0733 0.0747 0.0793 0.0797 0.0770 0.074 0.075 0.076 West Phoenix 0.0860 0.0823 0.0800 0.0786 0.0777 0.072 0.074 0.075 Maximum 0.0887 0.0853 0.0857 0.0873 0.0850 0.084 0.083 0.082 n > 0.085 ppm 5 3 4 3 1 0 0 0 N/A - Data not available. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 71 In greater Phoenix, 20 of the 33 sites recorded an annual fourth-highest O3 values in excess of 0.084 ppm from 1996 to 2006. During this time the trend is a decrease in O3 exceedances in metropolitan Phoenix. Nine sites that have been in operation since 1996 to 2007 exemplify this trend. In 1996 six sites recorded fourth-highest values greater than 0.084 pmm, compared to no sites recording an exceedance in 2007. In addition to the number of site exceedances decreasing, the recorded concentration values decreased from 1996 to 2007: ADEQ JLG Supersite 0.087 ppm to 0.076 ppm; South Phoenix 0.084 ppm to 0.072 ppm; South Scottsdale 0.089 ppm to 0.077 ppm; and North Phoenix 0.092 ppm to 0.078 ppm. Looking at the specific statistical form of the standard (the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest eight-hour O3 concentration) metropolitan Phoenix did not exceed the standard in the three-year period from 2005 to 2007. In addition, the extent and severity have been decreasing with time. These trends are consistent with the decreasing one-hour maximum O3 trends; however, most of the decrease in eight-hour O3 concentrations occurred since 2000, five years later than the decrease in the one-hour O3 concentrations. This trend suggests that, barring sustained unfavorable meteorological conditions or exceptional events (e.g. major wildfires), attainment of the standard would have continued under the 0.08 ppm standard in greater Phoenix. Long-term trends of the fourth-highest O3 concentrations in Tucson fluctuate greatly. In recent years, 2000 to 2007, the concentrations have become steadier, holding between 0.060 ppm and 0.080 ppm (Figure 13). The fourth-highest values have not exceeded 0.084 ppm since 1998, indicating nine years of attainment of the 0.08 ppm O3 standard. A similar pattern in eight-hour O3 trends also characterizes Yuma. Although the values are slightly higher than Tucson’s, since 2003 the yearly consecration fluctuation has decreased. From 2003 to 2007 the rage of values is between 0.07 ppm and 0.08 ppm (Figure 14). Though overall the values and range are higher than Tucson, Yuma has not recorded an exceedance of the 0.08 ppm standard since 1986. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 72 0.09 Old Standard = 0.084 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 8-Hour Ozone (ppm) New standard = 0.075 Downtown Pom/Ch Pk Craycroft Saguaro Mo. Figure 13 – Annual fourth-highest eight-hour ozone concentrations in Tucson Figure 14 – Annual fourth-highest eight-hour ozone concentrations in Yuma ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 73 Particulates PM10 PhoenixThe long-term trend of PM10 concentrations has decreased at most sites throughout the state in both urban and rural settings. In the short-term concentrations have reversed. For example, annual PM10 concentrations in South Phoenix averaged 63 μg/m3 from 1985 to1987, but only 52 μg/m3 from 2004 to 2006, a decrease of 17 percent. However, the three-year average of 2005 to 2007 increased to 55 μg/m3, which was a 5.7 percent increase over the 2004 to 2006 period. The three-year averages, 2005 to 2007, also increased from 2004 to 2006 concentrations at Central Phoenix (4.3 percent), West Phoenix (6.8 percent), and North Phoenix (10.1 percent). Figure 15 shows three-year moving averages for sites in several areas in Phoenix and all sites show what appears to be trend reversals. While a few years of data may not be sufficient to make a reliable trend, it appears that, for these four sites, and those in Figure 16, there is an upward movement in the average PM10 concentrations in the Phoenix Metropolitan area. The annual concentrations presented in Table 24 are graphically demonstrated in Figure 15 and Figure 16. Some of the concentration increases at sites could be directly related to local activities. South Phoenix and Durango sites are influenced by emissions from sources in the industrial Salt River area. 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. 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 17. The West 43rd Avenue site is the replacement for the Salt River site. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 74 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 Central Phoenix West Phoenix South Phoenix 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 25 North Phoenix Figure 15 – Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 at four Phoenix sites (“2007” is the average of years 2005, 2006, and 2007). 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 Glendale South Scottsdale Greenwood Durango 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 35 Mesa Figure 16 – Three-year moving averages of PM10 at other metropolitan Phoenix sites ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 75 140 3 Annual Avg PM10 (μg/m ) 120 100 Salt Durango W. 43rd 80 60 40 20 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 0 Figure 17 – Annual PM10 concentrations in the Salt River area Table 24: Annual PM10 Concentrations in Metropolitan Phoenix (μg/m3) Bold values in yellow cells exceed the annual standard of 50 µg/m3 Central North South West Year Chandler Glendale Phoenix Phoenix Phoenix Phoenix 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 42 43 43 44 41 44 38* 44 46 38 43 40 37 39 42 42 56 58 50 56 62 61 45 60 57 48 56 50 40 49 Closed 34 35 33 33 34 38 29 36 41 33 40 36 26 29 36 34 35 34 35 36 37 38 29 35 37 30 37 34 25 30 34 34 48 44 44 46 47 55 31* 49 61 50 60 52 46 55 55 56 47 44 43 44 45 51 39 51 53 43 53 46 37 45 50 47 Mesa South Scottsdale Greenwood Durango 29 35 36 35 33 43 29 35 37 30 36 34 23 30 31 32 34 34 38 36 35 41 34 40 40 33 37 36 26 34 33 31 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 61 50 56 61 49 55 51 44 52 52 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 69 70 59 70 62 52 66 69 60 Closed * Does not satisfy EPA summary criteria of 75 percent data recovery. N/A - Date are not available ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 76 TucsonAs seen in Figure 18, the Tucson background site of Corona de Tucson and the rural site of Green Valley have had fairly constant average concentrations of PM10 until recently when the concentrations started to increase. The four long-term urban sites all showed substantial decreases from the mid-1980s until about 2005, at which point higher concentrations were recorded. Orange Grove had a three-year average of 41.7 μg/m3 from 1987 to 1989, but decreased 32 percent to a concentration of 28.3 μg/m3 by the 2003 to 2005 period and then climbed to 30.0 μg/m3 two years later. South Tucson, Prince Road, and Broadway/Swan showed a similar pattern (Figure 18), of an early decrease, followed by a period of increases, a period of decreases, and now what appears to be a period of increases. 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m3) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 South Tucson Green Valley Prince Road Orange Grove 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 10 Corona de Tucson Broadway/Swan Figure 18 – Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 at six metropolitan Tucson sites Other Sites in ArizonaThroughout the rest of the state, PM10 concentrations declined since the late 1980s at many sites until about 2004. Figure 19 presents three-year moving averages for the sites with higher historic concentrations. Favorable long-term trends existed from the late 1980s until the last few years for a group of high-concentration sites outside of the Phoenix area. However, the concentrations have increased in the last two years. These sites include Payson and Paul Spur, where concentrations have been reduced by 60 percent or more; Douglas where concentrations have been reduced by nearly half; Rillito which has decreased 40 percent; and Yuma which has decreased 18 percent. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 77 For most of the sites, nearly all of the improvement took place from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s. The percentage improvement during this 10-year period varied from 24 percent to 65 percent, depending on the site, which is a remarkable decrease. After this period, 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 remained about the same (Douglas and Hayden). Between 2001 and 2005 Nogales and Yuma had a deceasing trend, and Rillito leveled out. 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 (SIP) activities led by the ADEQ. 3 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m ) 100 90 80 Douglas Hayden Nogales Paul Spur Payson Rillito Yuma 70 60 50 40 30 20 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 10 Figure 19 – Three-year moving averages of the annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with higher historic concentrations PM10 concentrations at sites at lower elevations and with lower concentrations have also decreased until recently, 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 20). 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 percent; Flagstaff 50 percent; Prescott 17 percent; and Show Low 38 percent. (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. A shift toward a neutral or positive trend is seen in Figure 21. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 78 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m3) 50 45 Standard = 50 40 35 Ajo Apache Junction Bullhead City Casa Grande Organ Pipe Safford 30 25 20 15 10 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 5 Figure 20 – Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with lower concentrations at lower elevations 30 Clarkdale Flagstaff Prescott Show Low 25 20 15 10 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 3-yr Moving Avg of Annual PM10 (μg/m3) 35 Figure 21 – Three-year moving averages of annual average PM10 concentrations at sites with lower concentrations at higher elevations ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 79 PM2.5 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 in towns in rural areas, in 1994 in Tucson, and 1995 in Phoenix. These data are presented in Tables 25a, b, and c, and Figures 22, 23, and 24. Statewide PM2.5 concentrations are displayed in Table 25a and Figure 22. From these data there are no clear statewide trends, rather only site treads. At Payson the PM2.5 concentrations showed a decrease trend of 48 percent, from 1991 to 1999, followed by a period of more constant concentrations from 2000 to 2007. Nogales has a large fluctuation in concentrations and no clear trend. The Douglas site has a steady range of 6.0 μg/m3 to 7.7 μg/m3 from 1997 to 2007. Flagstaff also has fairly constant concentrations from 2001 to 2006, but has an increase concentration in 2007. In the greater Phoenix area, fine particulate trends decreased from 1995 through 1998, but varied thereafter as seen in Figure 23. Site trends are also important. ADEQ JLG Supersite has a downward treaded in PM2.5 concentrations, with a spike in 2002. West Phoenix showed an increase trend from 2002 to 2006, followed by a year of decreased concentration in 2007. The Mesa site has shown an increase in values since 2005. Apache Junction has the lowest concentration of all the greater Phoenix area sites. This site had a decreasing trend from 1999 to 2006, with an increase in concentration in 2007. In metropolitan Tucson (Figure 24), records show that the PM2.5 concentrations at Orange Grove and Children’s Park have gradually decreased since monitoring began. The concentration range between the two sites is fairly similar with only 0.1 μg/m3 difference in concentration value for 2007. Overall, exceedances of the annual PM2.5 standard occurred for four years in Payson, one year in Higley, and one year in Nogales (Table 25a & b). ADEQ JLG 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. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 80 Table 25a: Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations Throughout Arizona (in μg/m3) Bold values in yellow exceed the annual standard of 15 μg/m3. Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Yuma 7.6 5.7 6.1 8.3 7.2 8.7 6.0 8.3 7.9 8.7 10.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Flagstaff N/A N/A 5.4 4.9 5.8 11.2 5.0 4.7 8.4 6.9 7.1 7.1 5.6 6.8 6.0 6.6 8.0 Payson 17.9 17.2 13.0 15.8 15.7 14.4 12.2 10.9 9.8 10.0 8.8 10.0 8.9 9.5 8.3 9.0 9.4 Nogales 12.3 12.6 9.7 10.4 14.3 13.3 11.3 12.5 12.5 12.8 10.7 12.1 11.3 10.8 13.1 15.6 12.3 Douglas 8.5 7.9 7.9 8.1 7.7 8.3 6.0 6.8 7.9 7.1 7.2 7.4 6.4 7.1 7.3 6.8 7.7 N/A - Data are not available. 18 Standard = 15 3 Annual Average PM2.5 (mg/m ) 15 12 Yuma Flagstaff Payson Nogales Douglas 9 6 3 Figure 22 – Statewide annual averages of PM2.5 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 81 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 0 Table 25b: Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area (in μg/m3) Bold values in yellow exceed the annual standard of 15 μg/m3. Year Higley Tempe Supersite ASU West Estrella West PHX Apache Junction 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 15.4 11.1 10.4 9.4 11.1 10.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10.0 10.0 9.8 9.4 10.7 10.3 9.3 10.3 9.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12.6 13.4 12.1 10.9 12.2 11.4 9.2 11.6 11.2 9.7 9.7 10.2 9.5 11.1 10.5 9.1 8.3 9.1 8.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.7 11.1 7.9 7.1 8.9 7.7 7.4 6.7 7.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.8 10.8 12.5 10.6 11.6 12.9 13.5 10.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.4 7.2 6.2 6.3 6.3 5.5 5.5 5.3 7.0 N/A - Data are not available. 16 3 Annual Average PM2.5 (mg/m ) Standard = 15 12 Apache J. Mesa Tempe 8 Supersite West PHX Estrella 4 Figure 23 – Metropolitan Phoenix annual averages of PM2.5. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 82 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 0 Table 25c: Annual PMfine and PM2.5 Concentrations in the Tucson Metropolitan Area (in μg/m3) Bold values in yellow exceed the annual standard of 15 μg/m3. Orange Year 22/Craycroft Tangerine Fairgrounds Grove 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 9.4 8.9 8.2 8.7 7.3 9.6 7.7 7.6 6.3 6.4 5.8 6.3 5.8 5.8 7.9 8.6 6.4 7.3 6.3 7.5 N/A 6.0 8.6 7.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.3 5.3 4.9 5.1 5.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Central Children’s Park 8.9 8.9 7.7 8.4 7.5 7.2 7.8 7.6 8.3 9.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.7 6.8 6.8 6.6 6.5 6.6 5.9 5.8 5.7 5.8 5.1 4.7 5.5 5.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A - Data are not available. 16 12 Orange Grove 22nd/Craycroft Tangerine 8 Fairgrounds Central Childrens Park 4 Figure 24 – Metropolitan Tucson annual averages of PM2.5 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 83 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 0 1994 Annual Average PM2.5 (mg/m3) Standard =15 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 percent of all hours, the mean of all hours, and the mean of the cleanest 20 percent of all hours, for both the entire day and the 5 a.m. 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 26a and 26b present these light extinction data, while Figures 25 and 26 illustrate visibility trends in more practical measures of Visual Range in miles. Table 26a: Annual Average Light Extinction in Phoenix (Mm-1) All Hours 5 a.m.-11 a.m. Mean of the Mean of the Mean of the Mean of the Dirtiest Mean of all Cleanest Dirtiest Mean of all Cleanest 20% Sampled 20% 20% Sampled 20% Sampled Hours Sampled Sampled Hours Sampled Hours Hours Hours Hours Year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 N/A 141 134 131 133 127 131 118 124 131 121 126 125 121 64 77 78 81 78 72 74 69 75 72 69 72 69 78 29 38 43 48 45 38 38 36 42 36 35 36 32 47 N/A 137 130 136 136 128 134 118 125 135 126 128 126 126 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 84 70 80 80 87 84 77 80 73 79 78 75 78 76 84 33 43 45 53 50 42 42 42 46 42 42 43 40 40 Table 26b: Annual Average Light Extinction in Tucson (Mm-1) All Hours 5-11 a.m. Mean of the Mean of the Mean of the Mean of the Dirtiest Mean of all Cleanest Dirtiest Mean of all Cleanest 20% Sampled 20% 20% Sampled 20% Sampled Hours Sampled Sampled Hours Sampled Hours Hours Hours Hours Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 101 95 104 99 93 102 90 98 96 87 88 97 101 83 92 60 59 62 62 60 57 57 56 55 49 52 58 61 47 51 34 36 35 37 36 28 35 27 26 24 26 27 31 22 22 139 109 116 113 108 119 107 114 109 109 107 113 125 100 103 74 68 69 71 68 69 65 66 66 61 62 67 76 56 60 37 41 38 40 38 34 38 31 33 29 30 32 39 28 28 Distinct trends from these 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 25 and 26, 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 number shown as 2002, for example, is the average of 2000, 2001, and 2002. In Phoenix, the gradual increase in visibility in the 20 percent dirtiest category is evident. The visible range in the most recent period (2005 to 2007) in this category is 11 percent higher than the first full three-year period. The mean and the best 20 percent also increased until the 2004 to 2006 three-year average showed a decrease. What has happened in this period (1996 to 1998 compared to 2005 to 2007) is that visibility has gotten better with 9 percent increase for the dirtiest 20 percent, 8 percent increase for the mean, and 12 percent increase in the cleanest 20 percent. Visibility in Tucson has improved over the 15-year period when considering the three-year averages for all three statistics: the dirtiest, the mean, and the cleanest (Figure 26). The improvement in the 20 percent dirtiest days was 9 percent, which is the same as the improvement in Phoenix. The mean visibility has increased by 14 percent and remarkable improvement has been realized in the 20 percent cleanest category with a 40 percent increase. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 85 3-yr Moving Avg of Visual Range (miles) 80 70 60 50 Dirtiest 20% Mean Cleanest 20% 40 30 20 10 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 0 Figure 25 – Visibility trends for Phoenix, three-year moving averages, for all hours 100 80 Dirtiest 20% 60 Mean Cleanest 20% 40 20 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 0 1995 3-yr Moving Avg of Visual Range (miles) 120 Figure 26 – Visibility trends for Tucson, three-year moving averages, for all hours ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 86 Over all, during the 13-year period, there has been a 9 percent increase in visibility for the dirtiest days in Phoenix and 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. An interesting intercity trend (Figure 27) appears in the cleanest 20 percent 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, a leveling off, an increase, and lastly, a decrease in 2007. In the 2005 to 2007 period, Tucson’s cleanest days were significantly cleaner (54 percent) than in Phoenix. 3-yr Moving Avg of Visual Range (miles) 120 100 80 Phoenix Tucson 60 40 20 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 0 Figure 27 – Visibility trends for all hours for Phoenix and Tucson, shown as three-year moving averages Seasonal patterns vary between the two cites, with the mean and dirtiest 20 percent in Phoenix showing more pronounced winter and fall maxima than Tucson. Both cities show little seasonal variation in the cleanest 20 percent of all hours. The poorer visibility in Phoenix comes as no surprise to those Arizonans familiar with both airsheds. In the following discussion of visibility, light scattering is compared between the urban and rural areas of the state (Figure 28). In each statistical category rural light scattering is considerably lower than urban light scattering. On the dirtiest 20 percent days, light scattering values in Phoenix are about four times higher than in the rural areas, while values in Tucson are about three times as high as rural areas. Values for the mean and 20 percent cleanest days show comparable results. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 87 140 Light Extinction (Mm-1) 120 100 80 dirtiest 20% mean cleanest 20% 60 40 20 0 Ike's Backbone Saguaro West Tucson Mesa Phoenix Figure 28 – Comparison of light scattering on the cleanest 20%, mean, and dirtiest 20% of days for urban and rural areas. 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 ppm in 1978 to 2.1 ppm in 2007, a decrease of 82 percent (Figure 29). In Phoenix at 18th Street and Roosevelt (Central Phoenix), the decline was from 23.0 ppm in 1975 to 2.9 ppm in 2007, a decrease of 87 percent (Figure 30). 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. In 2007, the maximum concentration measured in the Phoenix Area CO network was 6.0 ppm, 33 percent below the NAAQS. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 88 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 8-hr CO Maxima (ppm) 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 8-hr CO Maxima (ppm) 14 12 Standard = 9 10 8 6 4 2 0 Figure 29 – Eight-hour carbon monoxide maxima at 22nd St. and Alvernon in Tucson 25 20 15 Standard = 9 10 5 0 Figure 30 – Eight-hour carbon monoxide maxima at 18th Street and Roosevelt in Central Phoenix ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 89 Conclusions Since monitoring of air pollutants began in the late 1960s in Arizona, considerable progress has been made in reducing concentrations of lead (Pb), SO2, and CO. Pb 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 the 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 O3 concentrations in the 1980s and early 1990s ranged as high as 0.18 ppm (the standard was 0.12 ppm), in contrast to the highest, most recent reading of 0.14 ppm in 1996. In 1995 to 1997, 12 monitoring sites in greater Phoenix exceeded the eight-hour O3 standard; in 2005 to 2007 no sites exceeded the standard. The single most important trend described in this section appears be that the short-term trends for a majority of the PM10 sites are changing in the upward direction. However, because the increasing concentrations have only begun recently, most long-term trends are still downward showing that elevated concentrations of PM10 have been reduced substantially since the mid 1980s. By 2007, violations of the PM10 standard, once a common occurrence at many sites ten years ago, were limited to a few sites in southwest Phoenix, Pinal County, and Nogales. The severity of PM10 problems in these areas is shown in Table 27. Table 27: PM10 Expected Exceedences 2005 - 2007 Site 2005 2006 2007 3-Year Avg. Southwest38.2 28.7 7.0 24.7 Phoenix Sites Pinal County 198.8 274.4 256.6 243.3 (all sites) Nogales 18.4 20.4 6.1 Total 255.4 323.5 269.7 15.0 Fine particulate concentrations (PM2.5) have decreased in Phoenix and Tucson since the mid 1990s. Comparing three-year averages, for example, the centrally located ADEQ JLG Supersite, has decreased 23 percent. Children’s Park in Tucson has decreased 19 percent and 31 percent 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 20 percent, Yuma increased by 48 percent (prior to closure in 2003), and Flagstaff increased by 30 percent. Douglas and Payson have decreased by 13 percent and 44 percent, respectively. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 90 In general, some sites’ 2007 values are higher than 2005 values and could signal a shift in the trend. Most standards are met all of the time, with the exceptions being the eighthour 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 2008, Page 91 Appendix 1 – Site Index Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Apache County Greer Water Treatment Plant (SR 260 & SR 373) Petrified Forest NP (I-40 & Petrified Forest Rd.) TEP - Springerville – Coal Yard (Lower Coyote Rd.) TEP - Springerville - Coyote Hills (Lower Coyote Rd.) 34.058 -109.440 2,503 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16323 None 35.077 -109.769 1,766 IMPROVE NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16473 04-001-0012 34.329 -109.156 2,125 PM10, MET TEP SPM Regional Source Impact 16637 None 34.175 -109.231 2,285 NO2, SO2, PM10, MET TEP SPM Regional Source Impact 16638 None 32.009 -109.389 1,570 ADEQ, EPA, NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16679 04-003-8001 31.349 -109.539 1,231 ADEQ Class I, SLAMS Neighborhood/ Regional Population/ Visibility 16503 04-003-1005 31.365 -109.730 1,278 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS Middle Source Impact 16391 04-003-0011 31.354 -109.737 1,287 MET ADEQ SPM Middle Source Impact 16392 None Cochise County Chiricahua Entrance Station (13063 E. Bonita Canyon Rd.) Douglas Red Cross (1445 E. 15th St.) Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant (SR 80 & Paul Spur Rd.) Paul Spur Chemical Lime Plant South (S. of Stoneridge Rd.) O3, Bscat, MET, CASTNET, NADP, IMPROVE PM10, PM2.5, IMPROVE ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 92 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Coconino County Flagstaff Middle School (755 N. Bonito St.) Grand Canyon NP - Hance Camp (South Rim, 2.5 miles W. of Village) Grand Canyon NP - Hopi Point Fire Tower (South Rim, N. of Village) Grand Canyon NP - In Canyon - Yavapai Museum (South Rim) Grand Canyon NP - Indian Gardens (South Rim, 4.5 miles from Bright Angel trailhead) Grand Canyon NP - The Abyss (South Rim, NW of Village) Ike's Backbone (Fossil Creek Rd. & Childs Rd.) Sedona Post Office (190 W. Hwy. 89A) Sycamore Canyon (Camp Kimball Rd.) 35.206 -111.652 2,120 O3, PM10, PM2.5 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16707 04-005-1008 35.973 -111.984 2,235 SO2, Bscat, MET, IMPROVE NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16682 None 36.071 -112.155 2,152 NADP NPS Class I Regional Visibility 134455 None 36.060 -112.117 2,177 SO2, Visibility (camera), IMPROVE NPS Class I Regional Visibility 134456 None 36.078 -112.126 1,164 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16683 None 36.059 -112.182 2,073 O3, MET, CASTNET NPS Class I Regional Visibility 134458 04-005-8001 34.340 -111.682 1,625 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16421 None 34.866 -111.765 1,279 PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16512 04-005-1010 35.140 -111.969 2,046 Bscat, MET, NADP, IMPROVE ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16476 None 33.002 -110.765 602 SO2 ASARCO SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16593 None Gila County ASARCO - Globe Hwy. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 93 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured ASARCO - Hayden - Garfield 33.002 620 SO2 -110.784 Ave. ASARCO - Montgomery 33.012 709 SO2 -110.798 Ranch FMMI - Miami - Golf Course FMMI - Miami - Jones Ranch (Cherry Flats Rd.) FMMI - Miami - Townsite (Sullivan St.) Hayden Old Jail (Canyon Dr. & Kennecott Ave.) Miami Ridgeline (4030 Linden St.) Payson Well Site (204 W. Aero Dr.) Pleasant Valley Ranger Station (SR 288 & Old Cherry Rd.) Tonto NM (S. of SR 188) 33.419 -110.829 33.385 -110.867 Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number ASARCO SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16590 None ASARCO SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16591 None 1,000 PM10 FMMI SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16629 04-007-8000 1,242 SO2 FMMI SPM Regional Source Impact 16631 None 33.397 -110.874 1,035 SO2 FMMI SPM Regional Source Impact 16632 None 33.006 -110.786 625 SO2, PM10 ADEQ, ASARCO SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16326 04-007-1001 33.399 -110.858 1,085 SO2, PM10 ADEQ, FMMI SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood/ Regional Source Impact 16382 04-007-0009 34.229 -111.329 1,501 PM10, MET ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16317 04-007-0008 34.090 -110.941 1,587 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE ADEQ, USFS Class I Regional Visibility 16446 None 33.635 -111.109 786 O3, IMPROVE ADEQ, USFS SLAMS Regional Transport/ Visibility 16447 04-007-0010 33.074 -109.865 1,173 NADP BLM SPM Regional Population 134496 None 32.833 -109.718 899 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16508 04-009-0001 Graham County Oliver Knoll (NW of Safford) Safford (523 S. 10th Ave.) [closed 12/31/2007] ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 94 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number La Paz County Alamo Lake (Alamo Lake State Park) 34.243 -113.558 403 O3 ADEQ SLAMS Regional Transport 34961 04-012-8000 33.448 -112.087 329 Visibility (camera) ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Visibility 21737 None 33.433 -111.842 454 Visibility (camera), Bext ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Urban Haze/ Visibility 19489 None 33.434 -112.093 325 PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 17786 04-013-8006 33.545 -111.609 480 O3, MET MCAQD SLAMS Urban Maximum Concentration 16417 04-013-9702 33.370 -112.620 256 CO, NO2, O3, PM10, MET MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood/ Urban Population/ Source Impact 21525 04-013-4011 33.821 -112.017 584 O3, MET MCAQD SLAMS Urban 16368 04-013-4008 33.457 -112.046 340 CO, NO2, O3, SO2, PM10, MET MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood 16329 04-013-3002 33.666 -112.310 363 PM10, MET MCAQD SLAMS Middle Source Impact 127530 04-013-4014 33.426 -112.118 480 PM10, PM2.5, MET MCAQD SLAMS Middle Maximum Concentration 16375 04-013-9812 33.637 -112.339 357 CO, O3, PM10, Bscat ADEQ, MCAQD SLAMS, Urban Haze Neighborhood Population 19550 04-013-4010 33.383 -112.372 277 Bscat, MET ADEQ Urban Haze Neighborhood Population 16506 04-013-8005 Maricopa County ADEQ Building (1110 W. Washington St.) Banner Mesa Medical Center (525 W. Brown Rd.) Bethune Elementary School (1310 S. 15th Ave.) Blue Point (Usery Pass Rd. & Bush Hwy.) Buckeye (26449 W. 100th Dr.) Cave Creek (37109 N. Lava Ln.) Central Phoenix (1645 E. Roosevelt St.) Coyote Lakes (20010 N. Coyote Lakes Pkwy.) Durango Complex (2702 RC Esterbrook Blvd.) Dysart (16825 N. Dysart Rd.) Estrella (15099 W. Casey Abbott Rd.) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 95 Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration/ Population Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Estrella Community College 33.483 305 Visibility (camera) -112.350 (3000 N. Dysart Rd.) Falcon Field 33.452 310 O3, MET -111.733 (4530 E. McKellips Rd.) Fountain Hills 33.611 440 O3, MET -111.725 (16426 E. Palisades Blvd.) Glendale 33.569 357 CO, O3, PM10, MET -112.191 (6000 W. Olive Ave.) Greenwood 33.460 338 CO, NO2, PM10, MET -112.117 (1128 N. 27th Ave.) Higley 33.310 396 PM10, MET -111.722 (15400 S. Higley Rd.) Humboldt Mountain 33.982 1,594 O3, MET -111.798 (Pine Mountain Wilderness) CO, NOx, NOy, O3, SO2, VOC, Carbonyls, Hexavalent Chromium, SVOC, PM10, PM2.5, Speciated PM2.5, Bscat, MET, IMPROVE CO, PM10, PM2.5, MET Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Visibility 21736 None MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16381 04-013-1010 MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Maximum Concentration 16376 04-013-9704 MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16378 04-013-2001 MCAQD SLAMS Middle Population 16372 04-013-3010 MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16505 04-013-4006 MCAQD SLAMS Regional Maximum Concentration 16416 04-013-9508 ADEQ CSN, NATTS, NCore, PAMS, SLAMS, SPM, Urban Haze Neighborhood Population 16328 04-013-9997 MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16380 04-013-1003 JLG Supersite (4530 N. 17th Ave.) 33.503 -112.095 354 Mesa (310 S. Brooks Cir.) Mesa City Building (55 N. Center St.) North Mountain Summit (North Mountain) North Phoenix (601 E. Butler Dr.) Phoenix Transmissometer Receiver (3600 N. 2nd Ave.) 33.410 -111.865 372 33.415 -111.830 400 Bext, MET ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Urban Haze 19686 None 33.585 -112.072 625 Visibility (camera) ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Visibility 16480 None 33.560 -112.066 379 CO, O3, PM10, MET MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16390 04-013-1004 33.490 -112.076 337 Bext, MET ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Urban Haze 16829 None ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 96 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Phoenix Transmissometer 33.525 340 Bext Transmitter -112.101 (2000 W. Bethany Home Rd.) Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Urban Haze 16330 None Pinnacle Peak (25000 N. Windy Walk Dr.) 33.712 -111.852 800 O3, MET MCAQD SLAMS Urban Maximum Concentration 16406 04-013-2005 Rio Verde (25608 N. Forest Rd.) 33.718 -111.671 500 O3 MCAQD SLAMS Urban Maximum Concentration 16396 04-013-9706 Salt River Pima DOAS (8805 E. McKellips Rd.) 33.444 -111.891 365 Multiple pollutants ADEQ SPM Middle Transport 128640 None South Phoenix (33 W. Tamarisk St.) 33.403 -112.075 330 CO, O3, Toxics , PM10, PM2.5, MET ADEQ, MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16377 04-013-4003 South Scottsdale (2857 N. Miller Rd.) 33.479 -111.917 374 CO, NO2, O3, SO2, PM10, MET MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood/ Urban Population 16398 04-013-3003 Tempe (1525 S. College Ave.) Vehicle Emissions Laboratory (600 N. 40th St.) West Chandler (275 S. Ellis Rd.) West Forty Third (3940 W. Broadway Rd.) West Indian School (3315 W. Indian School Rd.) West Phoenix (3847 W. Earll Dr.) 33.412 -111.934 360 CO, O3, MET MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16405 04-013-4005 33.455 -111.996 356 Bscat, MET ADEQ PAMS, SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood Population/ Visibility 16363 04-013-9998 33.298 -111.884 360 CO, O3, PM10, MET MCAQD SLAMS Middle/ Neighborhood Population 16478 04-013-4004 33.406 -112.144 314 PM10, MET MCAQD SLAMS Middle Maximum Concentration 16659 04-013-4009 33.494 -112.130 340 CO, MET MCAQD SLAMS Microscale 16393 04-013-0016 33.483 -112.142 334 CO, NO2, O3, PM10, PM2.5, MET MCAQD SLAMS Neighborhood 16477 04-013-0019 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 97 Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration/ Population Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Mohave County Bullhead City (990 Hwy. 95) Meadview (Price Ferry Rd.) 35.153 -114.566 156 PM10 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16365 04-015-1003 36.019 -114.068 902 IMPROVE ADEQ Class I Regional Background 21298 None 34.822 -109.891 1,723 O3, Bsact, MET, CASTNET, NADP ADEQ, NPS Class I Regional Visibility 134093 04-017-0119 34.252 -110.036 1,924 PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16603 04-017-0007 22nd St. & Alvernon (3895 E. 22nd St.) 22nd St. & Craycroft (1237 S. Beverly Ave.) Ajo (N. Well Rd. 1) Broadway & Swan (4625 E. Broadway Blvd.) Cherry & Glenn (2745 N. Cherry Ave.) 32.207 -110.910 767 CO PDEQ SLAMS Microscale Maximum Concentration 16676 04-019-1014 32.204 -110.878 787 CO, O3, NO2, SO2, Bscat, MET ADEQ, PDEQ SLAMS, Urban Haze Neighborhood/ Urban Population/ Visibility 16410 04-019-1011 32.382 -112.857 515 PM10, MET ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16316 04-019-0001 32.222 -110.893 767 PM10 PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16550 04-019-1023 32.256 -110.948 732 CO PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16675 04-019-1021 Children’s Park (400 W. River Rd.) 32.295 -110.982 697 CO, NO2, O3, PM2.5, Speciated PM2.5, Bscat, MET ADEQ, PDEQ NCore, SLAMS, SPM, Urban Haze Neighborhood/ Urban Maximum Concentration/ Population/ Visibility 16551 04-019-1028 Coachline (9597 N. Coachline Blvd.) 32.380 -111.127 679 O3, PM2.5 PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 21580 04-019-1034 Navajo County Petrified Forest NP South (Old SW Entrance on Old Route 180) Show Low (561 E. Deuce of Clubs) Pima County ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 98 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Corona De Tucson 32.004 938 PM10 -110.792 (22001 S. Houghton Rd.) Geronimo 32.251 786 PM10, PM2.5 -110.965 (2498 N. Geronimo Ave.) Golf Links & Kolb 32.191 811 CO -110.840 (2601 S. Kolb Rd.) Green Valley 31.879 885 O3, PM10, PM2.5 -110.996 (601 N. La Canada Dr.) Green Valley Fire 31.827 917 PM10, PM2.5, MET Administration -111.011 (1285 W. Camino Encanto) Orange Grove 32.322 663 PM10, PM2.5 (3401 W. Orange Grove Rd.) -111.037 Organ Pipe Cactus NM (1 mile SSW of visitor center) Prince Road (1016 W. Prince Rd.) Rillito (8840 W. Robinson St.) Rose Elementary (710 W. Michigan St.) Saguaro NP East (3905 S. Old Spanish Trail) Saguaro NP West (N. Sandario Rd. & W. Mile Wide Rd.) Santa Clara (6910 S. Santa Clara Ave.) South Tucson (1601 S. 6th Ave.) Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number PDEQ SLAMS Regional Background 16677 04-019-0008 PDEQ SPM (For AQI Purposes Only) Neighborhood Population 16678 04-019-1113 PDEQ SPM Micorscale Maximum Concentration 19531 04-019-1031 PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16685 04-019-1030 ADEQ SPM Middle Source Impact 128562 04-019-8031 PDEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Maximum Concentration/ Population 16510 04-019-0011 31.950 -112.801 505 Bscat, MET, NADP, IMPROVE ADEQ, NPS Class I Regional Background 16681 04-019-0005 32.272 -110.989 706 PM10 PDEQ SLAMS Microscale Source Impact 16597 04-019-1009 32.414 -111.154 626 PM10, MET ADEQ, APCC SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16499 04-019-0020 32.172 -110.980 701 O3, PM2.5 PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16670 04-019-1032 32.174 -110.736 938 O3, MET, IMPROVE NPS, PDEQ Class I, SPM Neighborhood/ Regional Maximum Concentration/ Visibility 16474 04-019-0021 32.248 -111.217 718 Bscat, MET, IMPROVE ADEQ, NPS Class I Regional Visibility 16475 None 32.125 -110.982 774 PM10 PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16569 04-019-1026 32.201 -110.967 744 PM10 PDEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16635 04-019-1001 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 99 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Tangerine 32.425 804 O3, PM10 (12101 N. Camino de Oeste) -111.063 Tucson Downtown (190 W. Pennington St.) Tucson Fairgrounds (11330 S. Houghton Rd.) Tucson Transmissometer Receiver (150 W. Congress St.) Tucson Transmissometer Transmitter (1501 N. Campbell Ave.) Tucson - U of A Central (1100 N. Fremont Ave.) Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number PDEQ SPM Urban Background/ Maximum Concentration 16669 04-019-1018 32.222 -110.974 721 CO, O3 PDEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16671 04-019-0002 32.047 -110.774 938 O3 PDEQ SPM Urban Background 16672 04-019-1020 32.221 -110.973 722 Bext, MET ADEQ, PDEQ Urban Haze Urban Urban Haze 16826 None 32.240 -110.945 786 Bext ADEQ, PDEQ Urban Haze Urban Urban Haze 16655 None 32.240 -110.955 745 Bscat, MET ADEQ Urban Haze Urban Visibility 16662 04-019-1027 33.420 -111.503 533 PM10, PM2.5 PCAQCD SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood Population 16358 04-021-3002 33.421 -111.543 533 O3, MET PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood/ Urban Population/ Transport 16589 04-021-3001 33.011 -110.811 582 SO2 ASARCO SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16592 None 32.954 -111.762 430 O3, MET PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood/ Regional Population/ Transport 16367 04-021-3003 32.878 -111.752 420 PM10, PM2.5 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16588 04-021-0001 33.219 -111.560 359 O3, PM10 PCAQCD SPM Neighborhood/ Regional Population/ Transport 16657 04-021-3009 Pinal County Apache Junction Fire Station (3955 E. Superstition Blvd. TE) Apache Junction Maintenance Yard (305 E. Superstition Blvd.) ASARCO - Hayden Junction (Hwy. 177) Casa Grande Airport (660 W. Aero Dr.) Casa Grande Downtown (401 Marshall St.) Combs School (301 E. Combs Rd.) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 100 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Coolidge Maintenance Yard 32.978 445 PM10 -111.514 (212 E. Broadway Ave.) Cowtown Road 33.010 370 PM10, PM2.5, MET (37580 W. Maricopa-Casa -111.972 Grande Hwy.) Eloy City Complex 32.755 472 PM10 -111.555 (620 N. Main St.) Eloy County Complex 32.757 472 PM10 -111.554 (801 N. Main St.) Mammoth County Complex 32.719 890 PM10 -110.642 (118 S. Catalina Ave.) Maricopa County Complex 33.059 359 O3, PM10 -112.047 (44625 W. Garvey Rd.) Pinal Air Park 32.508 581 O3, PM10 (Water Well # 2, Pinal Air -111.308 Park Rd.) Pinal County Housing Complex 32.891 440 PM10, MET -111.570 (970 N. Eleven Mile Corner Rd.) Queen Valley (10 S. Queen Anne Dr.) Riverside Maintenance Yard (56964 E. Florence Kelvin Hwy.) San Manuel (1st & Douglas Ave.) [closed 12/31/2007] Stanfield County Complex (36697 W. Papago Dr.) Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 7446 04-021-3004 PCAQCD SPM Microscale Population/ Source Impact 19347 04-021-3013 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 16594 04-021-3005 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Population 134673 04-021-3014 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Background/ Population 16600 04-021-3006 PCAQCD SPM Neighborhood/ Regional Population/ Transport 16656 04-021-3010 PCAQCD SLAMS, SPM Regional Background/ Transport 16552 04-021-3007 PCAQCD SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood Population/ Source Impact 18079 04-021-3011 ADEQ, PCAQCD Class I, PAMS, SLAMS, SPM Regional/ Urban Maximum Concentration/ Transport/ Visibility 16394 04-021-8001 33.293 -111.285 668 NOy, O3, VOC, Bscat, MET, IMPROVE 33.105 -110.974 540 PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS Neighborhood Source Impact 21429 04-021-3012 32.598 -110.633 332 SO2 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Source Impact 16397 04-021-2001 32.881 -111.961 395 PM10 PCAQCD SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood Population 16636 04-021-3008 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 101 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Santa Cruz Nogales Post Office (300 N. Morley Ave.) 31.337 -110.936 1,176 PM10, PM2.5, MET ADEQ SLAMS, SPM Neighborhood Population 16511 04-023-0004 34.737 -112.021 1,010 PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 134096 None 34.786 -112.090 1,234 PM10, MET PCC SPM Regional Source Impact 16626 None 34.772 -112.073 1,141 PM10, MET PCC SPM Regional Source Impact 16628 None 34.546 -112.476 1,591 O3, PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 133011 04-025-8033 34.595 -112.331 1,556 PM10, PM2.5 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 18392 04-025-2002 32.713 -114.708 28 MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 128530 None 32.677 -114.648 40 PM10, PM2.5 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 17027 04-027-0004 32.677 -114.475 60 O3 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 18690 04-027-0006 32.611 -114.633 62 MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 19040 None 32.690 -114.614 60 O3 ADEQ SLAMS Neighborhood Population 113219 04-027-8011 Yavapai County Cottonwood (1995 S. 6th St.) Phoenix Cement Clarkdale NW (#2) (NW of cement plant) Phoenix Cement Clarkdale SE (#1) (SE of CTI fly ash silo) Prescott College AQD (330 Grove Ave.) Prescott Valley (7601 E. Civic Cir.) Yuma County Yuma Agriculture Center Farm (6425 W. 8th St.) 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.) ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 102 Site Index – Current Ambient Air Monitoring Locations in Arizona Lat. Parameters Elev. Site Name and Address (meters) Long. Measured Operator Network/ Program Measurement Scale Monitoring Objective AAAD ID Number AQS ID Number Mexico Agua Prieta Fire Station (Calle 6 & Ave. 15) Sonora Nogales Fire Station (Diaz & Ave. Adolfo Lopez Mateos) 31.328 -109.547 1,200 PM10, MET ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16361 80-026-1000 31.325 -110.944 1,202 PM10 ADEQ SPM Neighborhood Population 16399 80-026-0005 Information in the site index table is based on the best information available at the date of publication. For specific site or monitor information please see ADEQ Air Monitoring Network Plan: For the Year 2008, Maricopa County AQD 2007 Air Monitoring Network Review, Pima County DEQ 2007 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Assessment & Plan, and Pinal County Air Quality Control District 2007 Ambient Monitor Network Plan and Data Summary. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 103 Appendix 2 – Acronyms and Abbreviations ADEQ AgBMP APCC AQS Area A ARM ASARCO ASU Babs BACM Bag BAM Bap Bext Bscat Bsg Bsp CAA CASTNET CDV CFR Class I CMSA CO CSA CSN Delta T DV EPA FEM FMMI FRM HAP HART HC HPA IMPROVE Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Agricultural Best Management Practices Arizona Portland Cement Company Air Quality System Designated Phoenix metropolitan area Approved Regional Method ASARCO LLC - U.S. operating subsidiary of Group Mexico Arizona State University Light absorption Best Available Control Measures Light absorption by gasses Beta Attenuation Mass Monitor Light absorption by particles Light extinction Light scattering Light scattering by gasses Light scattering by particles 1990 Clean Air Act Clean Air Status and Trends Network Critical Design Value Code of Federal Regulations Federally designated park or wilderness area with mandated visibility protection Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area Carbon monoxide Combined Statistical Area Chemical Speciation Network Difference between two levels of temperature measurements Design Value U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Federal Equivalent Method Freeport McMoRan Copper and Gold, Inc. - Miami Federal Reference Method Hazardous Air Pollutant Hazardous Air Response Team Hydrocarbon High Pollution Advisory Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 104 JATAP km LMP m MAG MCAQD MET mm Mm-1 MSA MSM NAAQS NADP NATA NATTS NCore NEAP NM NO NO2 NOX NPS O3 PAMS Pb PCAQCD PCC PDEQ PM PM10 PM2.5 PMfine ppm Pressure PSD RFP RH SIP SLAMS SO2 Joint Air Toxics Assessment Project Kilometers Limited Maintenance Plan Meters Maricopa Association of Governments Maricopa County Air Quality Department Meteorological measurements (wind, temperature, relative humidity) Millimeter Inverse megameter Metropolitan Statistical Area Most Stringent Measures National Ambient Air Quality Standards National Atmospheric Deposition Program National Air Toxics Assessment National Air Toxics Trends Site National Core multipollutant monitoring stations Natural Event Action Plan National Monument Nitric Oxide Nitrogen Dioxide Sum of NO and NO2 National Park Service Ozone Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station Lead Pinal County Air Quality Control District Phoenix Cement Company Pima County Department of Environmental Quality Particulate Matter Particulate Matter < 10 microns Particulate Matter < 2.5 microns Particulate Matter in the region of 2.5 microns parts per million Barometric air pressure Prevention of Significant Deterioration Reasonable Further Progress Relative Humidity State Implementation Plan State and Local Air Monitoring Station Sulfur Dioxide ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 105 SO4 SPM STN TEOM TEP TSP U of A µg/m3 USFS VOC WASBAQS Wind WRAP Sulfate Special Purpose Monitor Speciation Trends Network Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance Tucson Electric Power Company Total Suspended Particulates University of Arizona Micrograms per cubic meter U.S. Forest Service Volatile Organic Compounds Western Arizona/Senora Border Air Quality Study Wind speed and direction Western Regional Air Partnership ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 106 Appendix 3 – Related Web Sites Air Explorer (http://www.epa.gov/airexplorer/) Air Explorer is a collection of user-friendly 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 will 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 107 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. Interagency Real Time Smoke Monitoring (http://www.satguard.com/usfs/default.asp) This web site provides real-time smoke concentration data (along with some other meteorological information) from portable smoke monitors around the United States. Historical data from past monitoring efforts are also available. 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 Atmospheric Deposition Program (http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/) NADP is a nationwide network of monitoring sties collecting data on the chemistry of precipitation for geographical and temporal long-term trends. 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. NOAA Research - Weather and Air Quality (http://www.oar.noaa.gov/weather/) Information on research on all types of weather (hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms, hazardous weather, etc.), weather related topics, and air quality. 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. ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report, Page 108 Pinal County Air Quality Information (http://pinalcountyaz.gov/Departments/AirQuality/Pages/Home.aspx) 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. 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. 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. Weather Underground (http://www.wunderground.com/US/Region/US/AirQuality.html) This web site includes weather forecasts, air quality information, and weather history. Western Regional Air Partnership (www.wrapair.org) WRAP is comprised of western states, tribes, and federal agencies with a focus on visibility in parks and wilderness areas in the western U.S. 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 109 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 are shown on this map. PM2.5 Network The location of PM2.5 particulate monitors are 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 2008, Page 110 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 111 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 112 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 113 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 114 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 115 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 116 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 117 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 118 ADEQ Air Quality Annual Report 2008, Page 119 printed on recycled paper EQR 08-07