Approved Regional Method (ARM) Demonstration

1
Approved Regional Method (ARM) Demonstration

• Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
• Mike Gilroy, Erik Saganic

2
Overview

• Definition of the ARM
• Sites and Instruments that may apply
• ARM Tools
• Preliminary Results

3
What is the ARM?

• The Approved Regional Method
• EPA established in 40 CFR 58, Appendix C, Section
  2.4
• Defined in CFR as Approved regional method (ARM)
  means a continuous PM2.5 method that has been
  approved specifically within a State or local air
  monitoring network for purposes of comparison to
  the NAAQS and to meet other monitoring
  objectives.

4
Pertinent Information (Source 40 CFR 58,
Appendix C, Section 2.4)

• Applications can be accepted as of 09/28/06 to
  EPA-ORD.
• Must meet Class III FEM guidelines. However, if
  low levels are typical, may approve large bias.
• 30 collocation of required FRM/FEM/ARM sites
  rounded up with 1 in 6 collocated frequency
• 7.5 of sites for the comparison requires a
  collocated candidate ARM for Coefficient of
  Variation (CV) calculations.

5
Pertinent Information (Source 40 CFR 58,
Appendix C, Section 2.4)

• Data can be recalculated in non-linear fashion
• Details must be included in Agency QAPP and ARM
  application to ORD.
• Section 2.4.2.4 The ARM must be capable of
  providing for flow audits, unless by its inherent
  measurement principle, measured flow is not
  required.
• Need 1-2 FRMs and 1-2 candidate monitors for
  each ARM. Validate periodically with changing
  aerosols and instrument performance.

6
Pertinent Information (Source 40 CFR 58,
Appendix C, Section 2.4)

• Yearly assessments
• Network assessments every 5 years
• Data Duration 1 year (seasons)
• 90 sample sets required
• 20 per season required
• Up to 2 CBSA/CSA 1 Rural or MSA, 1 of each in
  areas already approved
• If WA DoE already accepted, than can go straight
  to Region X office for approval
• External audits are required as an FEM.

7
Our Objectives

• Collect 1-year of precision collocated data for
  all perspective ARM samplers
• To package all our applicable data for analysis
• Determine if the data meets regulations
• To compile all the necessary QAPPs
• Submit the data package for approval if all the
  data meets regulations

8
PSCAA Sites with Recent FRM Data

• Snohomish County (Possibly non-attainment)
• Marysville (Wood Smoke Aerosol)
• Darrington (Wood Smoke Aerosol)
• Lynnwood (Wood Smoke Aerosol) Analysis no
  longer on-going
• Pierce County (Will be non-attainment)
• South Tacoma (Wood Smoke Aerosol)
• King County (Attainment)
• Lake Forest Park (Wood Smoke Aerosol)
• Seattle Duwamish (Industrial Aerosol)

9
Other Recent FRM Data Available in Washington

• Clark County
• Vancouver (Urban Residential Aerosol Wood
  smoke)
• Data good only through 2004
• King County
• Seattle Beacon Hill (Urban Residential Aerosol)
• Okanogan
• Twisp Rural site (Wood smoke/Forest fire
  Aerosol?)
• Data good only through 2004
• Spokane County
• Spokane Ferry Street (Aerosol type -
  Industrial?)
• Yakima County
• Yakima (Aerosol type Industrial/Agricultural?)
• Data good only through 2004

10
Sites in WA since 2004 with FRM data that does
not meet ARM requirements

• Benton County
• Kennewick (Discontinued after 2005, ran only 1/6
  sampling)
• Spokane County
• Spokane Monroe Street (Discontinued after 2005,
  ran only 1/6 sampling)

11
PSCAA Potential Candidate ARMs by Site

• Darrington
• Nephelometer (ongoing)
• Lake Forest Park
• Nephelometer (ongoing)
• TEOM (ongoing)
• Lynnwood
• Nephelometer (Old Data)
• FDMS-TEOM (Old Data)
• TEOM (Old Data)
• Marysville
• Nephelometer (ongoing)
• TEOM (ongoing)
• Seattle Duwamish
• Nephelometer (ongoing)
• FDMS-TEOM (after a year of data completion)

12
Other WA Potential Candidate ARMs by Site

• Beacon Hill
• Nephelometer (ongoing)
• TEOM (ongoing)
• Spokane Ferry Street
• Nephelometer (ongoing)
• TEOM (ongoing)
• Vancouver
• TEOM (2004 only)
• Yakima
• Nephelometer (2004 only)
• Twisp
• Nephelometer (2004 only)

13
Tools for the ARM

• Templates are available that contain all the
  details necessary to apply for the application
• Excel file with calculations built in
• Word Document to describe the sites, methods,
  descriptions, QA procedures, etc.

14
Example of Excel Summary Tab Marysville
Nephelometer
15
Will any instruments be approved?

• Preliminary correlations indicate yes.
• However, as aerosols change overtime, there may
  be difficulty for surrogate analyzers (like the
  nephelometer).
• There is a 30 collocated FRM requirement in the
  network that would monitor this issue.

16
Word Document Example
17
Summary

• In Washington state, we have a few analyzers that
  we will aim to achieve ARM status
• Nephelometer
• TEOM
• TEOM-FDMS
• Preliminary analysis indicates the data fits the
  criteria, but we are at the mercy of EPA-ORD
• Evolving aerosols are still of some concern and
  sites may loose ARM status