Loading...
AQ_AM_20230628_BP_AnnPln_Draft 2023-2024 Volume I Network Descriptions_Final 2023-2024 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality Volume 1 Network Descriptions June 28, 2023 North Carolina Division of Air Quality A Division of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Mail Service Center 1641 Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1641 2 CERTIFICATION By the signatures below, the North Carolina Division of Air Quality, or DAQ, certifies that the information contained in the 2023-2024 Annual Monitoring Network Plan is complete and accurate at the time of submittal to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, Region 4. However, due to circumstances that may arise during the sampling year, some network information may change. DAQ will submit a notification of change and a request for approval to EPA Region 4 at that time. Signature __________________________________________ Date ______ Roy Patrick Butler Ambient Monitoring Section Chief, DAQ Signature __________________________________________ Date ______ Michael Abraczinskas Director, DAQ 6/28/23 6/28/23 3 I. Introduction The North Carolina Division of Air Quality, or DAQ, works with the state's citizens to protect and improve outdoor, or ambient, air quality in North Carolina for the health, benefit and economic well-being of all. To carry out this mission, DAQ has programs for monitoring air quality, permitting and inspecting air emissions sources, developing plans for improving air quality and educating and informing the public about air quality issues. DAQ, which is part of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, or DEQ, also enforces state and federal air pollution regulations. In North Carolina, the General Assembly enacts state air pollution laws, and the Environmental Management Commission adopts most regulations dealing with air quality. In addition, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, has designated DAQ as the lead agency for enforcing federal laws and regulations dealing with air pollution in North Carolina. The Ambient Monitoring Section, or AMS, of the division operates an air quality- monitoring program for the state. The AMS is responsible for measuring levels of regulated pollutants in the outdoor air by maintaining a network of 40 monitoring stations across the state to measure the concentration of pollutants such as ozone, lead, particles (i.e., dust), nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide. The AMS provides these monitoring services in accordance with EPA regulatory requirements. EPA and DAQ have designed the criteria pollutant monitoring system to make measurements to assess compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, or NAAQS, as set by the EPA. The NAAQS specify concentration level thresholds for criteria air pollutants to protect the public health and welfare. The law as defined in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, or CFR, Section 58.10 Annual Monitoring Network Plan and Periodic Network Assessment requires an annual monitoring network plan. This plan must provide the following information for each monitoring station in the network: • The Air Quality System, or AQS, site identification number. • The location, including street address and geographical coordinates. • The sampling and analysis method(s) for each measured parameter. • The operating schedules for each monitor. • Any proposals to remove or move a monitoring station within a period of 18 months following plan submittal. • The monitoring objective and spatial scale of representativeness for each monitor as defined in Appendix D to part 40 CFR Part 58. • The identification of any sites that are suitable and sites that are not suitable for comparison against the annual fine particle, or PM2.5, NAAQS as described in Section 58.30; and • The metropolitan statistical area, or MSA, core-based statistical area, or CBSA, combined statistical area, or CSA, or other area represented by the monitor. • The designation of any lead, or Pb, monitors as either source-oriented or non- source-oriented as required in Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 58. 4 • Any source-oriented monitors for which a waiver has been requested or granted by the EPA regional administrator as allowed for under paragraph 4.5(a)(ii) of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 58. • Any source-oriented or non-source-oriented site for which a waiver has been requested or granted by the EPA regional administrator for the use of Pb-PM10 monitoring in lieu of Pb-TSP monitoring as allowed for under paragraph 2.10 of Appendix C to 40 CFR Part 58. • The identification of required nitrogen dioxide, or NO2, monitors as either near- road or area-wide sites in accordance with Appendix D, Section 4.3 of 40 CFR Part 58; and • The identification of any PM2.5 federal equivalent methods, or FEMs and/or approved regional methods, or ARMs, used in the monitoring agency's network where the data are not of sufficient quality such that data are not to be compared to the NAAQS. This plan contains information on the criteria and other pollutant monitoring networks operated by DAQ. It continues in the following sections as outlined below: II. Summary of Proposed Changes III. Carbon Monoxide, or CO, Monitoring Network IV. Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network V. Ozone Monitoring Network VI. Particle Monitoring Network for Particles with Aerodynamic Diameters of 10 Micrometers or Less, or PM10 VII. Fine Particle, PM2.5, Monitoring Network VIII. Lead Monitoring Network IX. Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Network X. DAQ NCore Monitoring Network XI. Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network XII. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station, PAMS, Network XIII. Background Atmospheric Deposition Network XIV. EPA Approval Dates for Quality Management Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plans XV. Equipment Condition of North Carolina Monitoring Sites Appendix A. Summary of Monitoring Sites and Types of Monitors provides a table summarizing the monitoring network and providing the types of monitors operated at each station. DAQ and the Asheville-Buncombe Air Quality Agency fill out annual network review forms each year for each operated monitoring site. Volume 2 includes these annual network review forms as an appendix to each regional section. They are also available for review at the Division of Air Quality, 217 West Jones Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27603. Appendix B provides the Mecklenburg County Air Quality 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan. Appendix C provides the Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan. 5 Volume II of the Annual Network Plan discusses the monitoring network by metropolitan statistical areas, or MSAs, organized by the area of the state in which they are located. Regional office monitoring personnel manage the day-to-day operations of the monitors. Monitoring personnel are in each of the seven regional DAQ offices in Asheville, Mooresville, Winston-Salem, Raleigh, Fayetteville, Washington, and Wilmington. Volume II of the monitoring plan discusses the monitoring network for each regional office starting with Asheville in the west and moving to Wilmington in the east. The plan further subdivides each region into sections based on MSAs. Volume II discusses the current monitoring as well as future monitoring plans or needs. In February 2013, the Office of Management and Budget revised the definitions of MSAs based on the 2010 census.1 Due to these revisions, North Carolina gained two MSAs in the eastern part of the state: Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach and New Bern. Three MSAs gained additional counties and, thus, additional people – Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News and Winston- Salem. Two MSAs lost counties and, thus, people – Greenville and Wilmington. In September 2018, the Office of Management and Budget revised the definitions of MSAs again as shown in Figure 1.2 Due to these revisions four MSAs gained additional counties and, thus, additional people – Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia gained Anson County, Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News gained Camden County, Durham gained Granville County and Fayetteville gained Harnett County. The discussions in this network monitoring plan use the September 2018 MSA definitions. Figure 1. North Carolina metropolitan statistical areas based on September 2018 MSA definitions 1 Office of Management and Budget, OMB BULLETIN NO. 13-01: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas, Feb. 28, 2013, available on the worldwide web at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/bulletins/2013/b13-01.pdf, accessed May 18, 2017. 2 Office of Management and Budget, OMB BULLETIN NO. 18-04: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas, Sept. 14, 2018, available on the worldwide web at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Bulletin-18-04.pdf, accessed April 25, 2020. 6 From 2007 through March 2015, the EPA considered DAQ and the three local programs in North Carolina to be one primary quality assurance organization, or PQAO. In 2014, the EPA determined the state and local programs did not meet the PQAO requirements listed in Section 3 of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A.3 Forsyth County Environmental Assistance and Protection and Mecklenburg County Air Quality decided to become separate PQAOs starting March 19, 2015. The Asheville-Buncombe Air Quality Agency, or ABAQA, formerly known as the Western North Carolina Regional Air Quality Agency, elected to remain with DAQ as a joint PQAO. In 2016, Duke Energy Progress decided to operate two sulfur dioxide sites as part of the DAQ PQAO to meet the data requirements rule. On December 31, 2020, Duke shut down its last monitor required as part of the data requirements rule; therefore, it is no longer part of the DAQ PQAO. In 2021, Congress provided the EPA with funds from the American Rescue Plan (ARP). The EPA was tasked with investing these funds in upgrading the fine particle monitoring network and expanding monitoring into underserved communities. DAQ applied for these funds. DEQ is committed to the principles of environmental justice, including ensuring equitable ambient air quality monitoring in communities across North Carolina, especially in underserved and overburdened communities. As a result of this commitment and applying for the grant funds, DEQ conducted an analysis to determine the current locations of air quality monitors across North Carolina and how many of those monitors are within potentially underserved block groups. The results of this analysis are provided in Appendix D. Current Air Quality Monitor Locations and Potentially Underserved Communities. 3 Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. Appendix A to Part 58 – Quality Assurance Requirements for Monitors used in Evaluations of National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, May 21, 2020, Section 1.2, available at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- idx?SID=015f68b199e846c0109ec441406fa05b&mc=true&node=ap40.6.58.0000_0nbspnbspnbsp.a&rgn= div9, accessed May 23, 2020. 7 Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 Contents ............................................................................................................................. 7 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 9 List of Figures .................................................................................................................. 12 II. Summary of Proposed Changes................................................................................ 17 A. Monitors Scheduled to Start Up or Shut Down in 2022, 2023 or 2024 that were included in the 2022-2023 Network Plan ..................................................................... 20 1. Monitoring Changes in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA ....................... 23 2. Monitoring Changes in the Raleigh MSA ........................................................ 24 3. Monitoring Changes in the Winston-Salem MSA ............................................ 25 4. Monitoring Changes in the Durham MSA ........................................................ 26 5. Monitoring Changes in the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA 27 6. Monitoring Changes in the Asheville, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs ...... 28 7. Monitoring Changes in Areas Not in MSAs ..................................................... 28 B. Sites to be Relocated or Moved................................................................................ 30 1. Potential Relocation of the Rockwell site in the Charlotte MSA ..................... 31 2. Replacement of Monitoring Shelter and Possible Relocation of the Bethany site in the Greensboro MSA ............................................................................................ 32 3. Replacement of Monitoring Shelter and Possible Relocation of the Butner site in the Durham MSA .................................................................................................. 33 4. Relocation of the Board of Education site in the Asheville MSA .................... 34 5. Relocation of the Wade site in the Fayetteville MSA....................................... 34 6. Monitor Relocations in the Hickory MSA ........................................................ 35 Monitor Relocations in the Areas Outside of MSAs ................................................ 36 C. Changes to the Methods Used to Measure Fine Particles for Comparison to the NAAQS ......................................................................................................................... 37 D. Rotating Background Monitors ................................................................................ 41 E. Addition of Nafion Dryers to the Ozone Monitoring Probes at Linville Falls and Monroe .......................................................................................................................... 41 F. Waiver Requests ....................................................................................................... 45 III. Carbon Monoxide, or CO, Monitoring Network ................................................. 46 IV. Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network ....................................................................... 51 Population Weighted Emissions Index Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring ............................. 54 A. Temporary Special Purpose Background Monitors .............................................. 58 B. Facilities Subject to the SO2 Data Requirements Rule, DRR .............................. 58 V. Ozone Monitoring Network ...................................................................................... 65 A. Analysis of Existing Monitors .............................................................................. 65 1. Analysis of Measured Concentrations Compared to NAAQS .............................. 65 2. Analysis of Operating Monitors Compared to Appendix D Requirements .......... 69 B. Analysis of Unmonitored Areas with Rapid Population Growth ......................... 75 1. Brunswick County ................................................................................................ 75 2. Cabarrus County ................................................................................................... 76 3. Camden County .................................................................................................... 76 4. Currituck County .................................................................................................. 77 5. Franklin County .................................................................................................... 77 8 6. Iredell County ....................................................................................................... 78 7. Pender County ....................................................................................................... 78 C. Changes to Existing Monitors ............................................................................... 79 D. DAQ Recommendations ....................................................................................... 79 E. Network Description ............................................................................................. 80 VI. Particle Monitoring Network for Particles with Aerodynamic Diameters of 10 Micrometers or Less, or PM10........................................................................................ 95 VII. Fine Particle, PM2.5, Monitoring Network .......................................................... 107 A. The Federal Reference Method and Federal Equivalent Method Network ........ 107 B. Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network................................................... 127 C. Manual Speciation Fine Particle Monitoring Network ....................................... 139 VIII. Lead Monitoring Network .................................................................................. 142 IX. Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Network ................................................................ 146 X. DAQ NCore Monitoring Network .......................................................................... 153 A. Overview ................................................................................................................ 153 B. Monitor Siting Considerations ............................................................................... 153 C. Monitors/Methods .................................................................................................. 154 D. Readiness Preparation ............................................................................................ 155 E. Waiver Requests ..................................................................................................... 156 1. Millbrook Meteorological Tower ....................................................................... 156 2. NOy Probe Placement ......................................................................................... 158 3. Teledyne T640x Temperature Control Daily Standard Deviation Measurement 158 XI. Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network ................................................................ 160 A. Near-Road Monitoring ........................................................................................ 161 B. Area wide sites .................................................................................................... 163 C. Regional Administrator Required Monitoring .................................................... 164 D. Other Monitoring ................................................................................................ 164 XII. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station, PAMS, Network ................... 169 A. PAMS Implementation Process ............................................................................. 169 B. Major Objectives .................................................................................................... 170 C. Monitors/Methods .................................................................................................. 172 XIII. Background Atmospheric Deposition Network ................................................ 174 XIV. EPA Approval Dates for Quality Management Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plans .................................................................................................................. 178 XV. Equipment Condition of North Carolina Monitoring Sites .............................. 190 XVI. Resources .............................................................................................................. 194 Appendix A. Summary of Monitoring Sites and Types of Monitors ....................... 199 Appendix B. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality ............................................................................................................................ 203 Appendix C. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection .................................................................. 204 Appendix D. Current Air Quality Monitor Locations and Potentially Underserved Communities .................................................................................................................. 205 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 205 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 205 Results ......................................................................................................................... 205 9 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network ...................................................... 206 NO2 ......................................................................................................................... 207 NOy ......................................................................................................................... 207 Ozone ...................................................................................................................... 207 PM2.5 ....................................................................................................................... 208 PM10 ........................................................................................................................ 209 Urban Air Toxics .................................................................................................... 209 SO2 .......................................................................................................................... 210 CO ........................................................................................................................... 210 Other ....................................................................................................................... 210 Appendix E. Hickory Data Analysis For Relocating the Fine Particle Monitors on the Site ............................................................................................................................ 211 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 211 Detailed Siting Information on the Proposed Location .............................................. 212 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 218 Appendix F. Bryson City Data Analysis for Relocating the Fine Particle Monitor on the Site ............................................................................................................................ 219 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 219 Detailed Siting Information on the Proposed Location .............................................. 221 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 225 Appendix G. Approved Waivers and Other Requests .............................................. 226 1. Waiver Renewals ............................................................................................ 226 2. Approved 2020 Requests ................................................................................ 237 Appendix H. Monitoring Agreement between Virginia and North Carolina for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News Metropolitan Statistical Area ................... 252 Appendix I. NCore Monitoring Plan Approval Letter .............................................. 256 Appendix J. 2010 Network Plan EPA Approval Letter ............................................ 258 Appendix K. Monitoring Agreement for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Metropolitan Statistical Area....................................................................................... 265 Appendix L. Scale of Representativeness ................................................................... 273 Appendix M – 2023 Annual Report for EPA’s Data Requirements Rule to Demonstrate Attainment with the 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS ................................. 274 Appendix N. Public Notice of Availability of Network Plan ..................................... 277 Appendix O. Public Comments Received and Response ........................................... 281 Glossary ......................................................................................................................... 282 List of Tables Table 1 Alphabetical list of fastest-growing counties in North Carolina based on population change between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020, or July 1, 2021, and July 1, 2022. .............................................................................................................. 17 Table 2 Summary of Monitors Scheduled to Start Up or Shut Down in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024 Updated information previously included in the 2021-2022 Network Plan 20 Table 3 Updated Summary of Monitors Scheduled to Relocate or Move in 2022, 2023 or 2024 previously listed in the 2021-2022 Network Plan............................................ 31 Table 4 Primary Monitoring Methods at Fine Particle Monitoring Sites ......................... 38 Table 5 The 2022-2025 Rotating Background Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network ...... 42 10 Table 6 The 2022-2025 Rotating Background PM10 Monitoring Network ...................... 43 Table 7 The 2023-2024 Carbon Monoxide Monitoring Network for the Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia MSA a ......................................................................................... 49 Table 8 The 2023-2024 Carbon Monoxide Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA a .. 50 Table 9 Population-Weighted Emission Indices Using the 2014/2017 National Emissions Inventory and 2021 Population Estimates for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas ......................................................................................................................... 56 Table 10 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia and Raleigh MSAs a ................................................................................... 61 Table 11 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and Fayetteville MSAs a ................................................................. 62 Table 12 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill, Asheville, and Hickory MSAs .......................................................................... 63 Table 13 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for areas outside MSAs a ................................................................................................................................... 64 Table 14 Design Values and Required Ozone Monitors for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas, MSA .............................................................................................. 70 Table 15 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a .. 81 Table 16 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA a ................................... 83 Table 17 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Greensboro-High Point MSA a .......... 84 Table 18 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Winston-Salem MSA a ...................... 85 Table 19 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA a .............. 86 Table 20 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Asheville MSA a ................................ 87 Table 21. The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Fayetteville MSA a ........................... 88 Table 22 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Hickory MSA a .................................. 89 Table 23 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Wilmington, Greenville and Rocky Mount MSAs a .......................................................................................................... 90 Table 24 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Mountain Tops a ................................ 91 Table 25 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA (Part 1) a ...................................................................................... 93 Table 26 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA, Part 2 a ....................................................................................... 94 Table 27 Ambient Concentrations and Required Number of PM10 Monitors for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas, MSA ......................................................... 98 Table 28 PM10 Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a ......... 101 Table 29 PM10 Monitoring Network for the Raleigh-Durham-Cary CSA a ................... 102 Table 30 The PM10 Monitoring Network for the Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point CSA ......................................................................................................................... 103 Table 31 The PM10 Monitoring Network for the Fayetteville, Hickory, and Wilmington MSAs a .................................................................................................................... 104 Table 32 The PM10 Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a ................................................................................................. 105 Table 33 Design Values and Required Fine Particle Monitors for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas, MSA ...................................................................... 117 Table 34 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the ................................. 119 Table 35 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA a ......... 120 11 Table 36 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Winston-Salem and Greensboro-High Point MSAs a .............................................................................. 121 Table 37 2022-2023 NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill, Asheville and Hickory MSAs a ....................................................................... 123 Table 38 The 2022-2023 NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Fayetteville, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs a ....................................................................... 124 Table 39 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a .................................................................... 126 Table 40 The Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia MSA a ...................................................................................................... 130 Table 41 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Raleigh and Greensboro-High Point MSA a ........................................................................ 132 Table 42 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Winston- Salem MSA a ........................................................................................................... 134 Table 43 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Durham- Chapel Hill, Asheville, Fayetteville and Hickory MSAs a .................................... 135 Table 44 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Wilmington, Greenville, and Rocky Mount MSAs a .............................................. 137 Table 45 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a ............................................. 138 Table 46 The 2022-2023 Fine Particle Manual Speciation Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, Raleigh, and Winston-Salem MSAs a ..................... 140 Table 47 List of Measured and Reported Urban Air Toxic ........................................... 146 Table 48. List of Measured and Reported Urban Air Toxic Carbonyl Compounds ....... 147 Table 49 The Air Toxics Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, Raleigh, and Winston-Salem MSAs ....................................................................... 150 Table 50 The Air Toxics Monitoring Network for the Asheville, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs .................................................................................................... 151 Table 51 The Air Toxics Monitoring Network for Areas not in MSAs ......................... 152 Table 52. Specifics for the East Millbrook Middle School NCore Site.......................... 153 Table 53. Specifics for the East Millbrook Middle School NCore Site.......................... 154 Table 54. Fleet Equivalent Average Annual Daily Traffic for Selected Road Segments in the Raleigh Metropolitan Statistical Area ............................................................... 161 Table 55 The 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia MSA a ....................................................................................... 166 Table 56 The 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA 167 Table 57 The Winston-Salem MSA Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network a .............. 167 Table 58 The 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network for Areas not in MSAs a ................................................................................................................................. 168 Table 59 The 2022-2023 Atmospheric Deposition Network for the Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia and Raleigh MSAs a ................................................................................. 175 Table 60 The 2022-2023 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network for the Greensboro and Asheville MSAs a ......................................................................... 175 Table 61 The 2022-2023 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network for the Wilmington and Greenville MSAs a ....................................................................... 176 12 Table 62 The 2022-2023 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network for Areas not in MSAs a .................................................................................................................... 177 Table 63 Dates the EPA Approved the Quality Management Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plans............................................................................................................ 178 Table 64. Demographic overview for Background Atmospheric Deposition Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities .......................................... 206 Table 65. Demographic overview for NO2 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities ................................................................... 207 Table 66. Demographic overview for NOy Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities ................................................................... 207 Table 67. Demographic overview for Ozone Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities ................................................................... 207 Table 68. Demographic overview for PM2.5 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities ................................................................... 208 Table 69. Demographic overview for PM10 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities ................................................................... 209 Table 70. Demographic overview for Urban Air Toxics Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities .................................................... 209 Table 71. Demographic overview for SO2 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities ................................................................... 210 Table 72. Demographic overview for CO Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities ................................................................... 210 Table 73. Other considerations in site selection ............................................................. 216 Table 74. Other considerations in site selection for Bryson monitor relocation ............ 224 Table 75 Raleigh Air Quality Index (AQI) Summary for 2011 to 2019 ....................... 228 Table 76 Sites to be Combined for Ozone Design Value Calculations ......................... 238 List of Figures Figure 1. North Carolina metropolitan statistical areas based on September 2018 MSA definitions ................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2. Estimated Growth by County from July 1, 2020, to July 1, 2021 ..................... 19 Figure 3. Estimated Rate of Growth by County from April 2010 to April 2020 .............. 20 Figure 4. The Rockwell ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and particle monitoring site................ 24 Figure 5. The Millbrook PAMS and NCore-monitoring site ............................................ 25 Figure 6. The Lexington particle monitoring site ............................................................. 26 Figure 7. The Durham Armory multi-pollutant monitoring site ....................................... 27 Figure 8. The Bayview Ferry sulfur dioxide monitoring site ........................................... 28 Figure 9. The Candor particle, air toxics and atmospheric deposition monitoring site .... 29 Figure 10. The Bryson City ozone and particle monitoring site ....................................... 30 Figure 11. Aerial view of the Rockwell site (upper righthand corner) in relationship to proposed new location at the abandoned wastewater treatment plant ...................... 32 Figure 12. Aerial view of the Bethany site (orange balloon) ............................................ 33 Figure 13. Aerial view of the Butner site (red balloon) .................................................... 33 Figure 14. Locations of current and proposed monitoring stations .................................. 34 Figure 15. Location of the Wade School site relative to the Wade site ............................ 35 Figure 16. Aerial view of the Hickory fine particle monitoring site showing relative positions of the current location and proposed location ........................................... 36 13 Figure 17. Relocation of the continuous fine particle monitor at Bryson City ................. 37 Figure 18. Location of carbon monoxide monitoring sites ............................................... 46 Figure 19. Statewide 8-hour carbon monoxide levels through 2019 ................................ 47 Figure 20. Maximum 1-hour carbon monoxide concentrations measured in North Carolina from 2011 to 2021 ...................................................................................... 47 Figure 21. Maximum 8-hour carbon monoxide concentrations measured in North Carolina from 2011 to 2021 ...................................................................................... 48 Figure 22. Statewide trends for sulfur dioxide.................................................................. 51 Figure 23. Sulfur dioxide 1-hour design value trends for SLAMS monitors ................... 52 Figure 24. Background Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations ................................................... 53 Figure 25. Location of the Bayview Ferry Site, B, Relative to the Aurora Site, A .......... 54 Figure 26. Location of North Carolina PWEI monitors ................................................... 58 Figure 27. Statewide trends for ozone .............................................................................. 65 Figure 28. Ozone design values in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA ...................... 66 Figure 29. Ozone design values in the Raleigh and Durham-Chapel Hill MSAs ............. 66 Figure 30. Ozone design values for the Greensboro-High Point and Winston-Salem MSAs ........................................................................................................................ 67 Figure 31. Ozone design values for the Asheville MSA and North Carolina mountains . 67 Figure 32. Ozone design values in the Fayetteville, Greenville, Rocky Mount and Wilmington MSAs and at other coastal sites ............................................................ 68 Figure 33. Ozone design values in the Hickory MSA and at other monitors in the piedmont area ............................................................................................................ 68 Figure 34. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-2................................................ 69 Figure 35. Ozone monitors in the Charlotte area .............................................................. 72 Figure 36. Ozone monitors in the Durham-Chapel Hill area ............................................ 73 Figure 37. Probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA ................................................... 75 Figure 38. Probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA. ........................................................ 77 Figure 39. Ozone monitors in the Raleigh MSA .............................................................. 78 Figure 40. Probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in the Wilmington MSA...................................................................................................... 79 Figure 41. Location of 2022 ozone monitoring stations ................................................... 80 Figure 42. Statewide trends for PM10 ............................................................................... 95 Figure 43. Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA .......................................................................................................................... 96 Figure 44. Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentrations in North Carolina urban areas ........ 96 Figure 45. Maximum PM10 concentrations for rotating background monitors in North Carolina ..................................................................................................................... 97 Figure 46. Table D-4 from 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D ................................................ 97 Figure 47. 2022-2023 PM10 Monitor Locations ............................................................. 100 Figure 48. Statewide trends for fine particles ................................................................. 107 Figure 49. Measured daily fine particle design values in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA ........................................................................................................................ 108 Figure 50. Annual design values measured in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA .. 109 Figure 51. Daily fine-particle design values measured in the Raleigh-Durham CSA .... 109 14 Figure 52. Annual fine-particle design values measured in the Raleigh-Durham CSA . 110 Figure 53. Daily fine-particle design values measured in the Greensboro-Winston-Salem CSA ......................................................................................................................... 110 Figure 54. Annual fine-particle design values measured in the Greensboro-Winston- Salem CSA .............................................................................................................. 111 Figure 55. Daily fine-particle design values measured in western North Carolina ........ 111 Figure 56. Annual fine-particle design values measured in western North Carolina ..... 112 Figure 57. Daily fine-particle design values measured in central North Carolina .......... 112 Figure 58. Annual fine-particle design values measured in central North Carolina ....... 113 Figure 59. Daily design values measured in eastern North Carolina .............................. 113 Figure 60. Annual fine-particle design values measured in eastern North Carolina ...... 114 Figure 61. Current 2023 and proposed 2024 federal reference and equivalent method monitoring network ................................................................................................. 116 Figure 62. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-5.............................................. 117 Figure 63. 2022-2023 Fine Particle Continuous Monitor Network ................................ 128 Figure 64. Statewide 24-hour lead levels through 2019 ................................................. 142 Figure 65. Maximum annual lead concentrations measured at North Carolina NCore Stations .................................................................................................................... 145 Figure 66. Millbrook NCore Site .................................................................................... 157 Figure 67. Millbrook T640x Temperature Data from June 2022 to January 2023 ......... 159 Figure 68. Statewide 1-hour and annual NO2 levels through 2019 ................................ 160 Figure 69. 2020 Map of Average Annual Daily Traffic in the Raleigh MSA ................ 162 Figure 70 Wake County Near-Road Monitoring Station Location, red circle ................ 163 Figure 71. 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network ...................................... 164 Figure 72. Locations of the Background Atmospheric Deposition Network ................. 174 Figure 73. Signature Page from the DEQ Quality Management Plan ............................ 179 Figure 74. Approval Letter for the PAMS QAPP ........................................................... 181 Figure 75. Approval letter for the NCore QAPP ............................................................ 182 Figure 76. Approval letter for the Near Road Monitoring QAPP................................... 183 Figure 77. Approval Letter for the Urban Air Toxics QAPP ......................................... 184 Figure 78. Approval letter for the Ozone QAPP............................................................. 185 Figure 79. Approval letter for the Northampton County Background Monitoring QAPP ................................................................................................................................. 186 Figure 80. Approval letter for the Background Monitoring Program QAPP ................. 187 Figure 81. Approval letter for the SLAMS Sulfur Dioxide and Nitrogen Dioxide QAPP ................................................................................................................................. 188 Figure 82. Approval letter for the PM QAPP ................................................................. 189 Figure 83. Aerial view of the Hickory fine particle monitoring site showing relative positions of the current location and proposed location ......................................... 211 Figure 84. New monitoring location ............................................................................... 212 Figure 85. Looking north from proposed location .......................................................... 212 Figure 86. Looking west from the new location ............................................................. 212 Figure 87. Looking south from the new location ............................................................ 212 Figure 88. 2019 Traffic count map for Hickory (from DOT) ......................................... 213 Figure 89. Location of the proposed monitoring station relative to the population of Hickory ................................................................................................................... 214 15 Figure 90. Wind rose for Hickory using last six years of data (from NC State Climate Office) ..................................................................................................................... 214 Figure 91. Hickory springtime wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) ................... 215 Figure 92. Hickory summertime wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) ................ 215 Figure 93. Hickory fall-time wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) ....................... 215 Figure 94. Hickory wintertime wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) ................... 215 Figure 94. Figure E-1 from Appendix E used to determine spatial scale of representativeness for particle monitors ................................................................. 216 Figure 96. Location of new monitoring location relative to facilities regulated by DAQ ................................................................................................................................. 217 Figure 97. Relocation of the continuous fine particle monitor at Bryson City ............... 219 Figure 98. Current fine particle monitor location with trees in the background............. 220 Figure 99. Location of new platform relative to current platform and trees of concern . 221 Figure 100. Looking west at the new fine particle monitoring location ......................... 221 Figure 101. Looking northwest at the new location ....................................................... 221 Figure 102. Location of new platform relative to roadway ............................................ 221 Figure 103. Traffic count map (from DOT).................................................................... 222 Figure 104. Location of the monitoring station relative to the population of Bryson City ................................................................................................................................. 222 Figure 105. Wind rose for Bryson City using last five years of data .............................. 223 Figure 106. Figure E-1 from Appendix E used to determine spatial scale of representativeness for particle monitors ................................................................. 224 Figure 107. Location of monitoring location relative to facilities regulated by DAQ ... 225 Figure 108. PM10 concentrations measured in Raleigh from 2004 through 2020 .......... 227 Figure 109. PM10 Emissions in the Raleigh MSA from 2008 to 2018 ........................... 229 Figure 110. Millbrook NCore Site .................................................................................. 230 Figure 111. Site diagram showing locations of trees relative to the fine particle monitoring location. ................................................................................................ 232 Figure 112. Wind Rose for the Raleigh-Durham Airport for 2015-2019. ...................... 233 Figure 113. Trees to the north of the site. ....................................................................... 234 Figure 114. Taken from the fine particle monitor towards the east, showing trees and access road. ............................................................................................................. 235 Figure 115. Taken from fine particle monitor. Shows the trees to the south and the interstate highway. .................................................................................................. 235 Figure 116. Taken from the fine particle monitor towards the west. .............................. 236 Figure 117. Relationship between the Taylorsville, Waggin Trail and Taylorsville Liledoun Sites ......................................................................................................... 240 Figure 118. Comparison of Maximum 8-Hour Averaged Ozone Concentrations at Waggin Trail and Taylorsville ................................................................................ 241 Figure 119. Comparison of maximum daily 8-hour ozone concentrations .................... 241 Figure 120. Location of the Linville Falls Site (old site) and Linville Falls (new site).. 242 Figure 121. Location of Honeycutt, Golfview and Hope Mills Police Department sites 243 Figure 122. Location of the Fork Recreational Center, Cooleemee and Mocksville sites ................................................................................................................................. 244 Figure 123. Locations of the Durham Armory and Duke Street sites in Durham County ................................................................................................................................. 245 16 Figure 124. Locations of the Mendenhall and McLeansville sites in Guilford County . 246 Figure 125. Comparison of 8-Hour Averaged Daily Maximum Concentrations at Mendenhall and McLeansville ................................................................................ 246 Figure 126. Locations of the Haywood County Health Department and Waynesville School sites ............................................................................................................. 247 Figure 127. Locations of the West Johnston Site on Highway 301 (old site) and West Johnston Site on Jack Road (new site) .................................................................... 248 Figure 128. Relationship between State Route 1315 site and Crouse Site ..................... 248 Figure 129. Comparison of 8-Hour Averaged Ozone Concentrations at the Crouse and State Route 1315 Sites ............................................................................................ 249 Figure 130. Locations of the Bushy Fork Site (old site) and Bushy Fork (new site) ..... 250 Figure 131. Location of Farmville and Pitt County Agricultural Sites........................... 250 Figure 132. Locations of the State Highway 128 Site (old site) and Mount Mitchell (new site) .......................................................................................................................... 251 17 II. Summary of Proposed Changes This section lists the known changes to the network expected to occur during the next 18 months. Table 1 contains a list of the fastest-growing counties in North Carolina for reference in the discussions in this section and the following sections of the plan, which describe monitoring changes required because of population growth in the MSA. Figure 2 is a map that shows which counties grew the fastest during the past year by percentage and Figure 3 is a map that shows which counties grew the fastest during the past decade by percentage. Appendix D. Current Air Quality Monitor Locations and Potentially Underserved Communities contains an analysis of current air quality monitors and potentially underserved communities. This section organizes the discussion as follows: • Monitors scheduled to start up or shut down in 2022, 2023 or 2024 that were previously included in the 2022-2023 network plan; • Sites to be relocated, moved, or upgraded in 2023 or 2024; • Changes to the methods used to measure fine particles for comparison to the NAAQS; • Rotating background monitors and their operating schedules; • Addition of a Nafion dryer to the Linville Falls and Monroe ozone monitoring sites; and • Waiver and other requests. Table 1 Alphabetical list of fastest-growing counties in North Carolina based on population change between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020, or July 1, 2021, and July 1, 2022. County Name Population Estimate July 1, 2022 State Ranking of Counties by 2022 Estimate Reason for Selection as one of the Fastest-Growing Counties in North Carolina Brunswick 153,064 19 Fastest growing county in NC percentagewise. Growth of 8,257 people (5.7%) percent from 2021 to 2022 and 27.2% from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 30th (percentagewise) and 70th (in population) fastest-growing county. Cabarrus 235,797 9 17th fastest growing county in NC percentagewise. Growth of 4,071 people (1.8%) from 2021 to 2022 and 26.8% from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 97th fastest-growing county in population. Camden 11,088 94 7th fastest growing county percentagewise. Growth of 272 people (2.5%) from 2021 to 2022 and 3.8% from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 39th fastest-growing county percentagewise. 18 Table 1 Alphabetical list of fastest-growing counties in North Carolina based on population change between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020, or July 1, 2021, and July 1, 2022. County Name Population Estimate July 1, 2022 State Ranking of Counties by 2022 Estimate Reason for Selection as one of the Fastest-Growing Counties in North Carolina Currituck 31,015 70 2nd fastest growing county percentagewise. Growth of 1,301 people (4.4%) from 2021 to 2022 and 19.3% from April 1, 2010, to July 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 29th fastest-growing county percentagewise. Durham 332,680 6 Growth of 2,981 people (0.9%) from 2021 to 2022 and 21.4 % from April 1, 2010 to April 1, 2020. 6th largest county in NC by population. Franklin 74,539 37 4th fastest growing county in NC. Growth of 2,742 people (3.8%) between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022 and 13.1% between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 52nd fastest-growing county percentagewise. Iredell 195,897 14 8th fastest growing county in NC in population. Growth of 3,679 people (1.9%) between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022, and 17.1 % between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 94th fastest-growing county in population. Johnston 234,778 11 6th fastest growing county in NC percentagewise. Growth of 7,465 people (3.3%) from 2021 to 2022 and 27.9 % from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. North Carolina’s 2nd fastest growing county percentagewise. Annually, it’s the nation’s 45th (percentagewise) and 38th (in population) fastest-growing county. Lincoln 93,095 31 5th fastest growing county in NC percentagewise. Growth of 3,225 people (3.6%) from 2021 to 2022, and 10.9 % from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. Mecklenbur g 1,145,392 2 2nd most populous county in NC. Growth of 19,583 people (1.7%) between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022, and 21.3 % between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020. Nation’s 41st largest county in 2021. Pender 65,737 41 3rd fastest growing county in NC percentagewise. Growth of 2,665 people (4.2%) from 2021 to 2022, and 15.3 % from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 57th fastest-growing county percentagewise. Union 249,070 8 6th most populous county in NC. Growth of 4,810 people (2.0%) from 2021 to 2022 and 18.4 % from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. Annually, it’s the nation’s 93rd fastest-growing county in population. 19 Table 1 Alphabetical list of fastest-growing counties in North Carolina based on population change between April 1, 2010, and April 1, 2020, or July 1, 2021, and July 1, 2022. County Name Population Estimate July 1, 2022 State Ranking of Counties by 2022 Estimate Reason for Selection as one of the Fastest-Growing Counties in North Carolina Wake 1,175,021 1 Growth of 22,664 people (2.0%) from 2021-2022 and 25.4 % from April 1, 2010, to April 1, 2020. North Carolina’s fastest growing county based on number of people. Nation’s 39th largest county in 2021. Annually, it’s the nation’s 14th fastest-growing county in population. Figure 2. Estimated Growth by County from July 1, 2020, to July 1, 2021 20 Figure 3. Estimated Rate of Growth by County from April 2010 to April 2020 A. Monitors Scheduled to Start Up or Shut Down in 2022, 2023 or 2024 that were included in the 2022-2023 Network Plan Table 2 presents a list of monitors DAQ either expects to, or has already, started up or shut down in 2022, 2023 or 2024 that were not included in the 2021-2022 network plan listed by metropolitan statistical area, or MSA and Air Quality System, or AQS, site identification number. Appendix B. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality discusses changes to the monitors operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality. Appendix C. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection discusses changes to the monitors operated by Forsyth County. This section discusses the changes listed in the table applying to monitoring sites operated by DAQ, Duke and ABAQA. Table 2 Summary of Monitors Scheduled to Start Up or Shut Down in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024 Updated information previously included in the 2021-2022 Network Plan Metropolitan Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Monitor or Pollutant Proposed Change Time Frame Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia 371190041 Garinger UAT VOCs Sampling suspended 02/06/2023 Awaiting replacement staff PAMS Hydrocarbons Monitoring started 5/29/2021 PAMS Carbonyls Monitoring expected to start 6/1/2023 True NO2 Monitoring started 8/1/2022 UV Radiation Monitoring started 8/1/2022 371190050 Equipment Drive True NO2 Monitoring will start Around 1/1/2023 21 Table 2 Summary of Monitors Scheduled to Start Up or Shut Down in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024 Updated information previously included in the 2021-2022 Network Plan Metropolitan Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Monitor or Pollutant Proposed Change Time Frame 371590021 Rockwell Barometric Pressure Monitoring started 6/1/2021 Air Temperature Monitoring started 6/01/2021 Relative Humidity Monitoring started 6/01/2021 Raleigh 371830014 Millbrook UAT VOCs Sampling Suspended 02/06/2023 Awaiting replacement staff NO2 Monitoring method changed 5/19/2021 NOx Monitoring ended 7/16/2021 PAMS Hydrocarbons Monitoring expected to start Awaiting replacement staff PAMS Carbonyls Monitoring started 5/1/2021 Winston- Salem 370670022 Hattie Avenue PM10 Collocated sequential monitor added 9/1/2021 UAT VOCs Sampling Suspended 02/06/2023 Awaiting replacement staff 370570002 Lexington PM2.5 BAM1022 will replace BAM 1020 Around 8/1/2023 Durham 370630015 Durham Armory PM2.5 When funds allow the T640X will replace the BAM 1020 coarse Around 06/30/2023 PM10 PM10-2.5 22 Table 2 Summary of Monitors Scheduled to Start Up or Shut Down in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024 Updated information previously included in the 2021-2022 Network Plan Metropolitan Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Monitor or Pollutant Proposed Change Time Frame Myrtle Beach- Conway- North Myrtle Beach 450510008 Coastal Carolina PM2.5 South Carolina added a T640 in Horry County on February 23, 2023. POC 88101-3 PM2.5 began 2/23/23; PM10 to start EOY 2023 PM10 37019xxxx To be determined Ozone If needed based on ozone design values To be determined Asheville 370210035 AB Tech UAT VOCs Monitoring Suspended 02/06/2023 Awaiting replacement staff Wilmington 371290010 Eagles Island UAT VOCs Monitoring Suspended 02/06/2023 Awaiting replacement staff Greenville 371470010 Pitt County Agricultural Center UAT VOCs Monitoring suspended 02/06/2023 Awaiting replacement staff 23 Table 2 Summary of Monitors Scheduled to Start Up or Shut Down in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024 Updated information previously included in the 2021-2022 Network Plan Metropolitan Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Monitor or Pollutant Proposed Change Time Frame Not in an MSA 370119991 Cranberry Ozone EPA suspended monitoring 5/10/2022 370130151 Bayview Ferry Wind speed Monitoring method changed to Met One All in One 2 6/01/2021 Wind direction Air Temperature Monitoring started 6/01/2021 Relative Humidity Barometric Pressure 370990006 Cherokee PM2.5 Monitoring ended 11/01/2021 371230001 Candor UAT VOCs Monitoring Suspended 02/06/2023 Awaiting replacement staff PM2.5 BAM1022 will replace BAM 1020 Around 8/1/2023 Air Temperature Monitoring method changed to Met One All in One 2 6/01/2021 Relative Humidity Wind speed Wind direction Barometric Pressure Monitoring started 6/01/2021 371730002 Bryson PM2.5 BAM1022 will replace BAM 1020 Fall 2023 Air Temperature Monitoring method changed to Met One All in One 2 6/01/2021 Relative Humidity Wind speed Wind direction Barometric Pressure Monitoring started 6/01/2021 371730007 Old High School PM2.5 Collocated monitoring started 11/1/2021 1. Monitoring Changes in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA The changes Mecklenburg County Air Quality made in the Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia MSA to the monitors it operates are discussed in Appendix B. 2022 Annual 24 Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality. In addition to the changes reported in Appendix B, DAQ discontinued the UAT VOC program on February 6, 2023, due to staffing shortages. The UAT Carbonyl program is unaffected by this change. The rest of this subsection discusses the Rockwell site in this MSA where DAQ made changes in 2021 or plans to make changes in 2023 or 2024. To meet the need for background data for prevention of significant deterioration modeling and permitting, DAQ added a nitrogen dioxide monitor on October 22, 2020. In addition, DAQ added a Met One All-in-One meteorological station to the site and started reporting the data from it on June 1, 2021. The All-in-One collects wind speed and direction data as well as air temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure. Discussions are also underway concerning the potential for having to relocate this site. No firm plans are in place at the present time and no move is currently planned for the 2023-24 time period. Figure 4. The Rockwell ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and particle monitoring site 2. Monitoring Changes in the Raleigh MSA Several changes occurred at the Millbrook site in 2021 and 2022. The DAQ purchased a CAPS monitor to replace the photolytic NO2 monitor. The CAPS monitor was added to the monitoring shelter and started operating on May 19, 2021. The photolytic monitor was shut down on July 16, 2021. DAQ continued to make changes to the site to prepare for PAMS seasonal monitoring from June 1 to August 31 each year. The DAQ added a gas chromatograph to collect hydrocarbon data, which was expected to be operational by the start of the 2023 PAMS season until the PAMS Chemist resigned in February 2023. The DAQ is working to hire a PAMS Chemist. The sequential carbonyl sampler to collect eight-hour carbonyl samples started operating on May 1, 2021, and should operate during each subsequent PAMS season. DAQ discontinued the UAT VOC program on February 3, 2023, due to the retirement of a veteran Chemist and ensuing difficulties in hiring a replacement Chemist. Optimistically, new staff will be available and trained by the end of 2023. UAT Carbonyl program is unaffected by staffing problems and continues to operate. No additional changes are proposed for 2023-24 time period. 25 Figure 5. The Millbrook PAMS and NCore-monitoring site 3. Monitoring Changes in the Winston-Salem MSA The changes Forsyth County made in the Winston-Salem MSA to the monitors they operate are discussed in Appendix C. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection. In addition to the changes reported in Appendix C, DAQ suspended the VOC UAT program due to lack of trained staff. Optimistically new staff will be available and trained by the end of 2023. The rest of this subsection discusses the Lexington site in this MSA where DAQ plans to make changes in 2023. To simplify the fine particle monitoring network and reduce the types of monitors used in the network to two FEMs and one FRM, DAQ requested American Rescue Plan (ARP) funds from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to purchase Met One BAM 1022s to replace the standalone Met One BAM 1020s in the network. This funding request was approved by the EPA and the EPA granted the funds on August 10, 2022, to purchase a BAM 1022 to place at the Lexington site. However, a similar request for funds to purchase a T640X to replace the BAM1020 at Durham Armory was not approved. As the Lexington BAM1020 is collocated with an FRM, the Lexington BAM1020 will continue in operation until after all other BAM1020s have been replaced. DAQ anticipates replacing the BAM 1020 at Lexington with a BAM 1022 sometime in late 2023 or 2024 if funds are made available for the purchase of a T640x to replace the BAM1020 at Durham Armory. 26 Figure 6. The Lexington particle monitoring site 4. Monitoring Changes in the Durham MSA DAQ monitors for ozone, sulfur dioxide, fine particles, particles with aerodynamic diameters of 10 microns or less and coarse particles at the Durham Armory site in Durham County. To simplify the fine particle monitoring network and 27 reduce the types of monitors used in the network to two FEMs and one FRM, DAQ requested American Rescue Plan (ARP) funds from the EPA to purchase a Teledyne T640X to replace Met One BAM 1020 coarse unit at this site. This funding request was not approved by the EPA. The DAQ plans to replace the BAM 1020 coarse unit with a T640X monitor whenever funding to do so becomes available. This monitor must be replaced before the BAM 1020 monitor at Lexington can be replaced with a BAM 1022 because the Lexington site is the collocated BAM 1020 – FRM site. Figure 7. The Durham Armory multi-pollutant monitoring site 5. Monitoring Changes in the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA In February 2013, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) combined Horry County with Brunswick County, NC to establish the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC MSA. In conjunction with the DAQ, local government, and stakeholders, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) established the Coastal Carolina Monitoring Site to be representative of expected maximum ozone concentrations in northeast South Carolina. To meet the minimum monitoring criteria in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, at least one ozone monitor is required in the MSA. DAQ and DHEC have started the process of finding an appropriate site for a second ozone monitor in the MSA, should it be required in accordance with Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 58. According to the U.S. Census 2022 population estimate, the population in the 28 MSA is above the threshold, requiring one PM10 and one PM2.5 monitor. DHEC has begun monitoring PM2.5 at the Coastal Carolina Site and has plans to establish a PM10 monitor at the Coastal Carolina site before the end of 2023. 6. Monitoring Changes in the Asheville, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs DAQ suspended the UAT VOC program on February 3, 2023, due to the retirement of a veteran Chemist. Optimistically a replacement Chemist can be hired and trained, and the program will recommence by late 2023. This change effected VOC collection at A-B Tech, Eagles Island, and Pitt County Agricultural Center sites. 7. Monitoring Changes in Areas Not in MSAs This subsection discusses the monitoring changes in areas not in MSAs, including changes to CASTNET and tribal monitors. Monitoring Changes at the CASTNET Site in Avery County On May 10, 2022, EPA suspended operations of several CASTNET monitoring locations throughout the country for the remainder of the federal fiscal year due to budgetary constraints (see https://www.epa.gov/castnet). This suspension included the Cranberry (37-011-9991) ozone monitor in Avery County. The EPA did not indicate if this suspension will be temporary or permanent. The DAQ believes suspending operation of the Cranberry sites will not have implications on modeling for attainment designations or for future regional haze or the PM2.5 NAAQS and upcoming designations. Monitoring Changes at the Bayview Ferry Site in Beaufort County As noted previously, in 2021, DAQ added a Met One All-in-One meteorological station to the Bayview Ferry site to replace the wind sensors at the site and add relative humidity, ambient temperature and barometric pressure. No additional changes are planned for the 2023-2024 period. Figure 8. The Bayview Ferry sulfur dioxide monitoring site 29 Monitoring Changes for the Tribal Monitors in Jackson and Swain Counties On Nov. 1, 2021, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians shut down the collocated sequential fine particle monitors at the Cherokee (37-099-0006) monitoring site in Jackson County. One of the sequential fine particle monitors was moved to the Old School site in Swain County and started monitoring as a collocated monitor for the T640 primary monitor at the site on Nov. 1, 2021. Monitoring Changes at the Candor Site in Montgomery County In 2021, DAQ added a Met One All-in-One meteorological station to the Candor site to replace the wind, relative humidity, and ambient temperature sensors at the site and add barometric pressure. As of June 1, 2021, the relative humidity and ambient temperature are measured at 10 meters instead of 2 meters above ground level. DAQ suspended the UAT VOC collection program due to lack of trained staff. DAQ hopes to reestablish this program in late 2023 as trained staff become available. As stated earlier, to simplify the fine particle monitoring network and reduce the types of monitors used in the network to two FEMs and one FRM, DAQ requested ARP funds from the EPA to purchase Met One BAM 1022s to replace the standalone Met One BAM 1020s in the network. This funding request was approved by the EPA and the EPA granted the funds on August 10, 2022, to purchase a BAM 1022 to place at the Candor site. DAQ anticipates replacing the BAM 1020 at Candor with a BAM 1022 sometime in late 2023. Figure 9. The Candor particle, air toxics and atmospheric deposition monitoring site Monitoring Changes at the Bryson City Site in Swain County In 2021, DAQ added a Met One All-in-One meteorological station to the Bryson City site to replace the wind, relative humidity, and ambient temperature sensors at the 30 site and add barometric pressure. As of June 1, 2021, the relative humidity and ambient temperature are measured at 10 meters instead of 2 meters above ground level. As stated earlier, to simplify the fine particle monitoring network and reduce the types of monitors used in the network to two FEMs and one FRM, DAQ requested ARP funds from the EPA to purchase Met One BAM 1022s to replace the standalone Met One BAM 1020s in the network. This funding request was approved by the EPA and the EPA granted the funds on August 10, 2022, to purchase a BAM 1022 to place at the Bryson City site. DAQ anticipates replacing the BAM 1020 at Bryson City with a BAM 1022 sometime in 2023. Figure 10. The Bryson City ozone and particle monitoring site B. Sites to be Relocated or Moved Table 3 presents an updated list of monitors DAQ either expects to, or has already relocated, in 2022, 2023 or 2024. These were included originally in the 2021-2022 network plan listed by MSA and AQS site identification number. Appendix B. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality discusses changes to the monitors operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality. Appendix C. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection discusses changes to the monitors operated by Forsyth County. This section primarily discusses the changes listed in the table applying to monitoring sites operated by DAQ and ABAQA. 31 Table 3 Updated Summary of Monitors Scheduled to Relocate or Move in 2022, 2023 or 2024 previously listed in the 2021-2022 Network Plan Metropolitan Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Monitor or Pollutant Proposed Change Time Frame Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia 371590021 Rockwell Ozone NO2 PM2.5 Site may be relocated due to future development After 12/31/2023 Greensboro 371570099 Bethany Ozone SO2 Site may shut down to be relocated to add new shelter After 12/31/2023 Durham 37770001 Butner Ozone Site may shut down to be relocated to add new shelter After 12/31/2023 Asheville 370210034 Board of Education PM2.5 Site was relocated from the roof onto the ground April 2022 Speciated PM2.5 Fayetteville 370510011 Wade School Ozone Site started in operation 03/1/2022 Hickory 370350004 Hickory PM2.5 Monitors were relocated on the existing site 01/26/2023 Not in an MSA 371730002 Bryson PM2.5 BAM 1022 will be relocated on existing site Late 2023 DAQ completed the relocation of the Wade site to the Wade School site in time for the start of the 2022 ozone season. DAQ had planned to replace shelters at Bethany in the Greensboro MSA and Butner in the Durham MSA in the 2022-23 time period, but funding has not been available. ABAQA relocated the PM2.5 monitors at the Board of Education in April 2023. Due to public roadway expansion, the monitors at Hickory were moved on 01/26/2023. The replacement/relocation of the PM2.5 monitor at the Bryson site has not been completed but is expected to take place by midsummer of 2023. While the property owners at the Rockwell site have informed DAQ of plans to expand the facility which will require the monitoring station to be relocated, no firm date for such a move has been established. The following subsections provide more information on these sites. 1. Potential Relocation of the Rockwell site in the Charlotte MSA During the EPA National Performance Audit Program (NPAP) audit on Aug. 22, 2022, at Rockwell Mr. Paul Chappin was approached by Mr. Tim Linker, head of maintenance and public works for the Town of Rockwell. Mr. Linker indicated there are discussions in Rockwell government about expanding the Rockwell maintenance facilities to the point where DAQ may need to move the entire Rockwell site. The Town of Rockwell has not made any definite plans yet. Mr. Linker also stated that there are two locations where the city could accommodate a new site within a mile of the current site. The best location 32 would be at the abandoned wastewater treatment plant in Rockwell (see Figure 11). The other was further to the West. If DAQ decides to move the site, DAQ will submit an Addendum to Volume 1 of the NC DEQ 2023-2024 Network Monitoring Plan. Figure 11. Aerial view of the Rockwell site (upper righthand corner) in relationship to proposed new location at the abandoned wastewater treatment plant 2. Replacement of Monitoring Shelter and Possible Relocation of the Bethany site in the Greensboro MSA After the 2023 ozone season, DAQ plans to replace the ozone and sulfur dioxide monitoring shelter at Bethany, 37-157-0099 if funding becomes available to purchase a new shelter. If a concrete pad cannot be installed at the current location or if the DAQ anticipates being unable to remain at the current location long term, DAQ may have to relocate the site. The property it is on belongs to the Rockingham County School, but the school there has been empty for many years now. If DAQ decides to move the site, DAQ will submit an Addendum to Volume 1 of the NC DEQ 2023-2024 Network Monitoring Plan. 33 Figure 12. Aerial view of the Bethany site (orange balloon) 3. Replacement of Monitoring Shelter and Possible Relocation of the Butner site in the Durham MSA After the 2023 ozone season, DAQ plans to replace the ozone monitoring shelter at Butner, 37-077-0001 if funding becomes available to purchase a new shelter. If a concrete pad cannot be installed at the current location or if the DAQ anticipates being unable to remain at the current location long term, DAQ may have to relocate the site. The property it is on belongs to the South Granville Water and Sewer Authority. If DAQ decides to move the site, DAQ will submit an Addendum to Volume 1 of the NC DEQ 2023-2024 Network Monitoring Plan. Figure 13. Aerial view of the Butner site (red balloon) 34 4. Relocation of the Board of Education site in the Asheville MSA Mr. Ryan Brown, with the Air and Radiation Division (ARD) of the EPA Region 4, called the ABAQA to inform them about the availability of a collocation shelter for sensor studies for installation at the Board of Education site (37-021-0034) located in Asheville, North Carolina. Further conversations with Mr. Brown and the property owners at the Board of Education site indicated that for the collocation shelter to be properly installed and accessible to the public, the current monitoring site would need to be relocated from the roof of the building to the ground. As a result, ABAQA contacted the maintenance staff at the Board of Education Building to see if the rooftop monitors could be relocated on the ground approximately 168 meters east of the current location as shown in Figure 14. The Board of Education maintenance staff has agreed to this location and the move occurred in April of 2023. Information on this site relocation is available in the 2023-2024 Annual Network Monitoring Plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality Volume 1 Addendum 1. Board of Education Information for Relocating the Fine Particle (PM2.5) Monitors.4 Figure 14. Locations of current and proposed monitoring stations 5. Relocation of the Wade site in the Fayetteville MSA After the 2021 ozone season, DAQ relocated the ozone monitoring station at Wade, 37-051-0008, to the Wade School site, 37-051-0011. More information on the 4 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 2021-2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Volume 1, Addendum 1 Board of Education Information for Relocating the Fine Particle (PM2.5) Monitors, May 13, 2022, available on the worldwide web at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=15698 35 Wade School site is available in Addendum 1 to Volume 1 of the NC DEQ 2019-2020 Final Network Monitoring Plan: Wade Relocation Siting Analysis and Site Information.5 The new site at District 7 Elementary School is 2.23 kilometers southeast of the old Wade site as shown in Figure 15. After successfully obtaining power to the site, DAQ established the new Wade School site in early 2022 in time for the start of the 2022 ozone season. Figure 15. Location of the Wade School site relative to the Wade site 6. Monitor Relocations in the Hickory MSA On May 5, 2020, Mr. David Leonetti with the City of Hickory contacted DAQ about the monitors located at the Hickory water tower. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) is widening US-321, which will dictate some temporary changes and rerouting of traffic lanes, closure of an overpass near the site, as well as the striking of new right of ways near the site on the two roads that border the water tower property. The road itself will not increase, just the right of way distance and maybe some area for a sidewalk and improvements would increase. On May 12, 2021, Mr. Leonetti contacted DAQ again about moving the monitors approximately 38 meters northward towards 1st Avenue SW as shown in Figure 16. The new location allows the monitors to remain at least 17 meters from the nearest travel lane on all sides. As shown in the wind rose in the inset of Figure 16, the predominant winds at the Hickory airport are from the south southwest and west northwest. DAQ completed the relocation of the monitors on January 26, 2023. For additional information on the relocation of these monitors see Appendix E. Hickory Data Analysis For Relocating the Fine Particle Monitors on the Site. 5 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 2019-2020 Final Network Monitoring Plan, Volume 1 Network Descriptions, Addendum 1 Wade Relocation Siting Analysis and Site Information, March 31, 2020, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=12992. 36 Figure 16. Aerial view of the Hickory fine particle monitoring site showing relative positions of the current location and proposed location Monitor Relocations in the Areas Outside of MSAs During the 2021 annual network review, Mr. Steve Ensley noted that the tree located 10.97 meters to the southwest of the continuous fine particle monitor inlet would soon become an obstacle to air flow. DAQ has completed plans for the relocation to the proposed location shown in Figure 17 below. The relocation is expected to be completed by mid-summer 2023. DAQ expects to replace the existing BAM 1020 with a BAM 1022 at that time. As stated previously, this relocation will not require a change in AQS identification number or address because the monitor is remaining on the same property. For more information on the relocation of this fine particle monitor see Appendix F. Bryson City Data Analysis For Relocating the Fine Particle Monitor on the Site. 37 Figure 17. Relocation of the continuous fine particle monitor at Bryson City C. Changes to the Methods Used to Measure Fine Particles for Comparison to the NAAQS Table 4 lists the primary monitoring method for fine particles at all currently operating fine particle monitoring sites for all years a fine particle monitor operated at the site. From 1999 until the end of 2015, DAQ used an Ruprecht & Patshneck (R&P) Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential Monitor with a well impactor ninety-six (WINS) impactor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 118 and EPA reference method designation RFPS- 0498-118 for determining compliance with the fine particle NAAQS for all but three of its sites. Starting on Jan. 1, 2016, DAQ switched to using an R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential Monitor with a very sharp cut cyclone, AQS method code 145 and EPA reference method designation RFPS-1006-145. 38 Table 4 Primary Monitoring Methods at Fine Particle Monitoring Sites Metropolita n Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Primary Monitor Method Time Frame Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia 371590021 Rockwell R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/2005 to 12/31/2015 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 10/24/2019 to present Raleigh 371010002 West Johnston R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/2009 to 12/30/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 12/31/2015 to 12/31/2017 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 1/1/2018 to present 371830014 Millbrook R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/1999 to 12/31/2010 Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor with VSCC (170) 1/1/2011 to 12/31/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 1/1/2016 to 9/30/2020 Teledyne T640X at 16.67 LPM (238) 10/1/2020 to present 371830021 Triple Oak Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 1/4/2017 to present Greensboro- High Point 370810013 Mendenhall R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 12/14/2001 to 12/29/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 12/30/2015 to 12/28/2017 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 12/29/2017 to present Winston- Salem 370570002 Lexington R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/1999 to 12/31/2015 Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor with VSCC (170) 1/1/2016 to present Durham- Chapel Hill 370630015 Durham Armory R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 4/1/2007 to 12/30/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 12/31/2015 to 9/30/2020 Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor with VSCC (170) 10/1/2020 to present 39 Table 4 Primary Monitoring Methods at Fine Particle Monitoring Sites Metropolita n Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Primary Monitor Method Time Frame Asheville 370210034 Board of Education R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/1999 to 12/31/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2018 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 1/1/2019 to present Fayetteville 370510009 William Owen R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/1999 to 12/30/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 12/31/2015 to 12/31/2019 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 1/1/2020 to present Hickory 370350004 Hickory Water Tower R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/1999 to 12/30/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 12/31/2015 to 12/31/2016 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 1/1/2017 to present Wilmington 371290002 Castle Hayne R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 7/1/2002 to 12/31/2015 Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor with VSCC (170) 10/1/2016 to present Greenville 371470006 Pitt County Agricultural Center R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/1999 to 12/31/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 1/1/2016 to 6/30/2019 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 7/1/2019 to present Not in a MSA 371210004 Spruce Pine Hospital R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/9/2014 to 12/31/2015 R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with VSCC (145) 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2017 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 1/1/2018 to present 371230001 Candor R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 7/16/1999 to 6/30/2015 Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor with VSCC (170) 7/1/2015 to present 40 Table 4 Primary Monitoring Methods at Fine Particle Monitoring Sites Metropolita n Statistical Area AQS Site Id Number Site Name Primary Monitor Method Time Frame 371310003 Northampton County Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor with VSCC (209) 7/24/2019 to present 371730002 Bryson City R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential with WINS (118) 1/1/1999 to 3/31/2011 Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor with VSCC (170) 4/1/2011 to present DAQ used an R&P Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM) Series 1400a for continuous, averaged-on-an-hourly-basis measurement of fine particles until January 2016. This model of TEOM was ineligible to become a federal equivalent method or FEM, for fine particles because it did not work as well in other parts of the nation as it does in North Carolina. Reference and equivalent methods need to work the same throughout the nation. In addition, the manufacturer stopped supporting this model of TEOM, so its continued operation was no longer feasible. In early 2008, the EPA approved the Met One BAM 1020, as a FEM. Since 2008, DAQ purchased numerous BAM 1020s. In 2014, DAQ established a site at Blackstone in Lee County, which shut down in 2018, and added BAM 1020s at the Lexington and Hickory sites. In 2015, the division added a BAM 1020 at the Durham Armory and BAM 1022s at the Hickory, Mendenhall, and William Owen sites. In 2016, DAQ added BAM 1022s at the Pitt County Agricultural Center, Spruce Pine, and West Johnston sites. After one-to-two-year studies, the division replaced five R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 sequential monitors with BAM 1020s. Four of these BAM monitors are located at the Lexington, 37-057-0002, Candor, 37-123-0001, Castle Hayne, 37-129-0002, and Bryson City, 37- 173-0002, monitoring sites. DAQ replaced the Hickory R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 sequential monitor with a BAM 1022. In 2018, the division replaced three more R&P Model 2025 PM2.5 sequential monitors with BAM 1022s at Mendenhall, 37-081-0013, West Johnston, 37-101-0002, and Spruce Pine, 37-121-0004. In 2019, ABAQA replaced the primary Thermo Model 2025i PM2.5 sequential monitor at the Board of Education, 37-021-0034, with a BAM 1022 and designated the sequential monitor as a collocated monitor. Also in 2019, DAQ replaced the Thermo Model 2025i PM2.5 sequential monitor at the Pitt County Agricultural Center, 37-147-0006, with a BAM 1022. In 2020 DAQ replaced the Thermo Model 2025i PM2.5 sequential monitor at the William Owen site, 37- 051-0009, with a BAM 1022 and the Thermo Model 2025i PM2.5 sequential monitor at the Durham Armory, 37-063-0015, with a BAM 1020. Also in 2020, DAQ made the Teledyne T640X at Millbrook, 37-183-0014, the primary monitor. DAQ requested and received permission to exclude data from operating BAMs from comparison to the NAAQS. On Dec. 15, 2016, the EPA approved operating the 41 Raleigh Millbrook BAM 1020 as an air quality index, or AQI, monitor only.6 The DAQ shut down the BAM 1020 at Millbrook in 2022. D. Rotating Background Monitors DAQ operates two rotating background monitoring networks to provide background concentration data for prevention of significant deterioration, PSD, modeling. PSD modeling is a federal requirement necessitating the collection of one calendar year of background data.7 Monitors for SO2 or PM10 rotate to these sites every three years. DAQ selects these rotating sites to provide the greatest possible spatial coverage from the coastal plain to the foothills. Table 5 and Table 6 provide the background monitoring sites with their operating schedules. In 2020, the DAQ decided to start operating the SO2 rotating monitors on a calendar year schedule starting in 2022. DAQ made this change to facilitate obtaining NPAP audits for the monitors as the monitors need to be operating in January to get on the NPAP schedule. However, since data from the rotating monitors cannot be used to determine a three-year design value, the EPA has concluded that NPAP Audits are not required on the rotating monitors. E. Addition of Nafion Dryers to the Ozone Monitoring Probes at Linville Falls and Monroe After extensive testing of the Nafion dryer system used by the EPA on the CASTNET sites in North Carolina, the DAQ moved forward with installing the dryer at the Linville Falls site on Sep. 26, 2019, and the Monroe site on Oct. 2, 2019. Both ozone monitoring systems were evaluated by completing through-the-probe audits before and after installation of the dryer. The addition of the Nafion dryer assembly appeared to have no impact on the ambient monitoring data. The DAQ contacted EPA Region 4 to request permission to use the Nafion dryers for the 2020 ozone season. Region 4 referred our request to the Office of Research and Development, or ORD. DAQ worked with ORD by providing them with information to help them with moving forward to grant nationwide approval for the use of the Nafion dryer system for ozone monitoring. While waiting for approval, the DAQ flagged all the ozone data collected at these two sites with a 6 flag in AQS. On Feb. 19, 2021, the EPA approved the use of the Nafion dryer nationwide. DAQ did not reinstall the Nafion dryer at these sites in 2022. 6 2016 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p11, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=8964. 7 42 U.S.C. United States Code, 2013 Edition Title 42 - THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE CHAPTER 85 - AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL SUBCHAPTER I - PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES Part C - Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality subpart i - clean air Sec. 7475 - Preconstruction requirements, available on the worldwide web at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2013-title42/html/USCODE-2013-title42-chap85-subchapI- partC-subparti-sec7475.htm. 42 Table 5 The 2022-2025 Rotating Background Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network AQS Site Id Number: 37-157-0099 37-051-0010 37-027-0003 37-117-0001 Site Name: Bethany Honeycutt E.S. Lenoir Jamesville Street Address: 6371 NC 65 4665 Lakewood Drive 291 Nuway Circle 1210 Hayes Street City: Bethany Fayetteville Lenoir Jamesville Latitude: 36.308889 35.00 35.935833 35.810690 Longitude: -79.859167 -78.99 -81.530278 -76.897820 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Greensboro-High Point Fayetteville Hickory Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly- every third year Hourly- every third year Hourly – every third year Hourly – every third year Statement of Purpose: Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Monitoring Objective: General/ background Population exposure General/ background Upwind/ background general/ background Scale: Urban Neighborhood Regional Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQSA-0486-060 Yes: EQSA-0486- 060 Yes: EQSA-0486-060 Yes: EQSA-0486-060 Meets Requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D: No No No No 43 Table 5 The 2022-2025 Rotating Background Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network Meets Requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Operating 1/1/2023 to 12/31/2023 Will operate 1/01/2024 to 12/31/2024 Operated 1/1/2022 to 12/31/2022 Operated 1/1/2022 to 12/31/2022 Table 6 The 2022-2025 Rotating Background PM10 Monitoring Network AQS Site Id Number: 37-003-0005 37-129-0002 37-033-0001 37-107-0004 37-117-0001 371230001 Site Name: Taylorsville- Liledoun Castle Hayne Cherry Grove Lenoir Community College Jamesville Candor Street Address: 700 Liledoun Road 6028 Holly Shelter Road 7074 Cherry Grove Road 231 Highway 58 S 1210 Hayes Street 112 Perry Drive City: Taylorsville Castle Hayne Reidsville Kinston Jamesville Candor Latitude: 35.9139 34.364167 36.307033 35.231459 35.810690 35.263165 Longitude: -81.191 -77.838611 -79.467417 -77.568792 -76.897820 -79.836636 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Hickory Wilmington Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose Special Purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Statement of Purpose: Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling 44 Table 6 The 2022-2025 Rotating Background PM10 Monitoring Network AQS Site Id Number: 37-003-0005 37-129-0002 37-033-0001 37-107-0004 37-117-0001 371230001 Site Name: Taylorsville- Liledoun Castle Hayne Cherry Grove Lenoir Community College Jamesville Candor Monitoring Objective: General/ background General/ background Population exposure general/ background Population exposure general/ background Upwind/ background general/ background Population exposure general/ background Scale: Urban Urban Urban Neighborhood Urban Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: EQPM-0798- 122 EQPM-0798- 122 EQPM-0798- 122 EQPM-0798-122 EQPM-0798-122 EQPM-0798- 122 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Operating 6/24/2022 to 6/30/2023 Will operate 10/23/2023 to 10/31/2024 Operating 12/18/2022 to 01/07/2024 Will operate 10/1/2023 to 9/30/2024 Operated 7/1/2021 to 6/30/2022 Will operate 9/24/2023 to 9/30/2024 45 F. Waiver Requests DAQ has one waiver request as noted below. Waivers that were renewed or granted in 2020 are provided in Appendix G. Approved Waivers and Other Requests. Waiver request for Teledyne T640x Temperature Control Daily Standard Deviation Measurement DAQ requests a waiver from the requirement listed in the Teledyne T640x Continuous PM2.5 Local Conditions and PM10 Standard Temperature and Pressure Validation Template regarding the standard deviation for temperature control. The template states that daily temperature control should exhibit a standard deviation of <2.1 ºC over a 24-hour period. DAQ replaced the BAM 1020 primary particulate monitor at the Millbrook Site (37-183-0014) with the Teledyne T640x on 10/01/20. The placement of the T640x meets all criteria specified in the validation template in the QA Handbook Volume II, Appendix D Revision No. 1.0 and in the manufacturer’s operations manual. As shown below, the 24 hour standard deviation for the instrument, as recorded between 06/22 and 01/23, exceeds the current template requirement for standard deviation over the entire period. During this time period the T640x operated within the acceptable temperature range of 0- 50 ºC, listed in the template. The T640x currently in use at the Millbrook site was purchased complete from the manufacturer with the recommended outdoor enclosure. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Standard Devia�onDate Millbrook T640x Box Temp. (○C) 24hr. Standard Devia�on 46 III. Carbon Monoxide, or CO, Monitoring Network The DAQ and Mecklenburg County Air Quality, or MCAQ, conduct carbon monoxide monitoring in two of the major urban areas of the state, the Raleigh and Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia metropolitan statistical areas, also known as MSAs. As shown in Figure 18, the 2023-2024 state-operated network consists of two monitors in Raleigh operated by DAQ and two monitors in Charlotte operated by MCAQ. All four monitors collect data using a federal reference method for comparison to the national ambient air quality standards, also known as NAAQS. Figure 18. Location of carbon monoxide monitoring sites Until the end of 2015, the local program agency in Forsyth County also operated a carbon monoxide monitor in Winston-Salem. However, because statewide carbon monoxide levels have fallen so far below the standard, as shown in Figure 19, and the state has maintained the standard for more than 20 years, the Peters Creek Winston- Salem micro-scale site is no longer required, and Forsyth County shut down this site at the end of 2015. 47 Figure 19. Statewide 8-hour carbon monoxide levels through 2019 (from Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, October 2020, located at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water-quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina- 2020/open) One monitor in Raleigh and one monitor in Charlotte are located near the interstate highway. The other sites in Raleigh and Charlotte are middle and neighborhood scale sites that are part of the national core, also known as NCore, network. As shown in Figure 20 and Figure 21, none of the currently operating sites reported exceedances of the 1- or 8-hour ambient air quality standards from 2017 to 2022. Figure 20. Maximum 1-hour carbon monoxide concentrations measured in North Carolina from 2011 to 2021 48 Figure 21. Maximum 8-hour carbon monoxide concentrations measured in North Carolina from 2011 to 2021 As of the end of 2015, the state has met all the monitoring requirements in the DAQ carbon monoxide maintenance state implementation plans, also known as SIPs, for Mecklenburg, Forsyth, Durham, and Wake counties. The SIP required the state to operate at least one carbon monoxide monitor in Mecklenburg, Forsyth and either Durham or Wake counties through the end of 2015 so the data from the monitor could trigger contingency requirements.8 Figure 20 provides the maximum 1-hour and Figure 21 provides the maximum 8- hour concentrations for all operating sites for 2011 through 2021. All measured carbon monoxide concentrations during the past five years have been well below 80% of the standards. The maximum 1-hour concentration during the past five years was 7 percent of the standard and occurred at the Garinger site in 2018. The maximum 8-hour concentration during the past five years was 19 percent of the standard and occurred at Remount Road in 2018. Currently the state and local programs are operating the minimum required carbon monoxide network, that is, one carbon monoxide monitor at each NCore and each near-road site. The state and the MCAQ local program started operating a carbon monoxide monitor at the near road stations in Raleigh and Charlotte in late 2016 to meet the Jan. 1, 2017, start date.9 Table 7 provides the location, the statement of purpose, the status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets 8 “Carbon Monoxide (CO) Limited Maintenance Plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham & Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas”, Aug. 2, 2012, available at http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality/air- quality-planning/state-implementation-plans/carbon-monoxide-limited-maintenance-plans. 9 “Appendix D to Part 58—Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring,” 4.2 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Design Criteria, 4.2.1 General Requirements, available at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi- bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&r=PART&n=40y6.0.1.1.6#ap40.6.58_161.d, accessed on April 22, 2017. 49 the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58 and a summary of proposed and planned changes to the carbon monoxide monitoring network in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA. Table 8 provides the location, the statement of purpose, the status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58 and a summary of proposed and planned changes to the carbon monoxide monitoring network in the Raleigh MSA. Table 7 The 2023-2024 Carbon Monoxide Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041 37-119-0045 Site Name: Garinger High School Remount Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 1030 Remount Road City: Charlotte Charlotte Latitude: 35.2401 35.212657 Longitude: -80.7857 -80.874401 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Compliance with NAAQS; ozone and fine particle precursor monitoring Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Highest Concentration Scale: Neighborhood Micro-scale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: RFCA-0981-054 Yes: RFCA-0981- 054 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes - NCore Yes - near road Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a Both monitors use an Instrumental nondispersive infrared Thermo Electron 48 i-TLE method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 554 and are operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS primary quality assurance and reporting agency 0669 50 Table 8 The 2023-2024 Carbon Monoxide Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-183-0014 37-183-0021 Site Name: Millbrook School Triple Oak Road Street Address: 3801 Spring Forest Road 2826 Triple Oak Road City: Raleigh Cary Latitude: 35.8561 35.8654 Longitude: -78.5742 -78.8195 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Raleigh Raleigh Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Compliance with NAAQS; ozone and fine particle precursor monitoring Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure; general/ background; maximum ozone concentration Source-oriented Scale: Middle Micro-scale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: RFCA-0981-054 Yes: RFCA-0981- 054 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes - NCore Yes - near road Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a Both monitors use an Instrumental nondispersive infrared Thermo Electron 48 i-TLE method, AQS method code 554 51 IV. Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network Sulfur dioxide, or SO2, monitoring is conducted in North Carolina at 10 sites, 8 operated by the DAQ and at two sites operated by local programs. In addition, from January 1, 2012, through April 15, 2015, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, or DHEC, operated an upwind background special purpose SO2 monitor in York County, South Carolina, part of the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Metropolitan Statistical Area, MSA. At the end of 2016, DHEC moved this York County monitoring site from 2316 Chester Highway to the York Landfill at 310 Langrum Road. DHEC operated this upwind background special purpose SO2 monitor at the York Landfill site from May 22, 2018 to January 13, 2023. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality also operates two SO2 monitors in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA. One monitor has operated since June 23, 2010, at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) - Langley Research Center in Hampton City. The other monitor, located at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) facility in Norfolk City has operated continuously since January 6, 2011. The EPA and DAQ use the data collected to determine human health effect exposures in MSAs with more than one million people, to collect background levels for prevention of significant deterioration, also known as PSD, permit modeling and to determine the impact on SO2 levels from facilities that burn large quantities of fossil fuels or manufacture sulfuric acid. Currently, the DAQ and local programs monitor four major cities (Charlotte, Raleigh, Winston-Salem, and Durham) for SO2. Data from previous years, as shown in Figure 22, indicate statewide levels of sulfur dioxide in most areas are well below the 1-hour standard established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA. Figure 22. Statewide trends for sulfur dioxide (from Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, October 2020, located at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water-quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina- 2020/open) 52 Figure 23 and Figure 24 show the design value or the 99th percentile of daily maximum one-hour concentrations of SO2 measured in North Carolina between 2011 and 2021 as compared to the national ambient air quality standards, NAAQS. Although the design value exceeded the standard in Wilmington in 2011, in 2015 all measured design values in the state were less than 28 percent of the standard. The source-oriented monitor at Canton reported 2017-2019 and 2018-2020 design values over the standard. DAQ worked with this facility to reduce its SO2 emissions so that the 2020-2022 design value is only 49 percent of the standard. Early in 2023 the Evergreen Packaging Mill, the source of the SO2 emissions, announced plans to shut down in 2023. Once the shutdown occurs, the Canton SO2 monitor will no longer be needed. Should this happen the DAQ will determine the appropriate time to shut down the Canton SO2 monitoring site. For the rotating and special purpose monitors the maximum 99-percentile 1-hour concentration during the past five years was 17% of the standard and occurred at the Bethany site in 2018. Figure 23. Sulfur dioxide 1-hour design value trends for SLAMS monitors 53 Figure 24. Background Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations The division operates one trace-level SO2 monitor on a 100-ppb scale because low levels of SO2 are a precursor for fine particle formation. The current network consists of one site in Wake County. The Wake County site is a national core, also known as NCore, monitoring site. DAQ monitors for these trace-level-particle precursor pollutants year- round because monitoring for fine particles is required on a year-round basis. Mecklenburg County Air Quality also operates a trace-level SO2 monitor at the Garinger NCore site in Mecklenburg County. When an industry or business wants to expand or begin operations in an area, the federal government requires the business to conduct 12 consecutive months of background monitoring to use in modeling to demonstrate the addition or expansion of the facility will not contribute to the significant deterioration of air quality in that area. In 2010, DAQ modified the rotating PSD network by shutting down the Bryson City SO2 monitor in Swain County and adding rotating PSD SO2 monitors at Lenoir in Caldwell County and Bethany in Rockingham County. Assessment of the SO2 monitoring network indicated that these changes could improve the ability of DAQ to meet its obligation to provide relevant background SO2 data for PSD modeling. In 2015, the division decided to shut down the rotating PSD SO2 monitor at Pittsboro. DAQ no longer needed the monitor because of the monitor at the Durham Armory. 54 In 2011, DAQ moved the Aurora monitor across the Pamlico River to the Bayview Ferry station because more people live there, and the new site is downwind of the PCS facility. Figure 25 shows the relative location of the two sites. The Bayview Ferry site began operating in January 2011. Figure 25. Location of the Bayview Ferry Site, B, Relative to the Aurora Site, A Population Weighted Emissions Index Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring In 2010, the EPA changed the monitoring regulations for sulfur dioxide to support the lower sulfur dioxide NAAQS.10 For the SO2 monitoring network the EPA developed 10 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide, Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 119, June 22, 2010, available on the worldwide web at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/fr/20100622.pdf, accessed on May 13, 2017. 55 the population weighted emissions index, PWEI. The EPA calculates a PWEI for each core-based statistical area, or CBSA by multiplying the population of each CBSA, using the most current census data or estimates, by the total amount of SO2 in tons per year emitted within the CBSA, using an aggregate of the most recent county level emissions data available in the national emissions inventory, or NEI, for each county in each CBSA. The EPA then divides the resulting product by 1,000,000, providing a PWEI value. The units for the PWEI value are million person-tons per year. For any CBSA with a calculated PWEI value equal to or greater than 1,000,000, a minimum of three SO2 monitors are required within that CBSA. For any CBSA with a calculated PWEI value equal to or greater than 100,000, but less than 1,000,000, a minimum of two SO2 monitors are required within that CBSA. For any CBSA with a calculated PWEI value equal to or greater than 5,000, but less than 100,000 a minimum of one SO2 monitor is required within that CBSA. The SO2 monitoring site required because of the calculated PWEI in each CBSA satisfies minimum monitoring requirements if the monitor is sited within the boundaries of the parent CBSA and is one of the following site types as defined in section 1.1.1 of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D: population exposure, highest concentration, source impacts, general background, or regional transport. An SO2 monitor at an NCore station may satisfy minimum monitoring requirements if that monitor is located within a CBSA that is required to have one or more PWEI monitors. In 2013, the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements required North Carolina to add three PWEI sulfur dioxide monitors to three MSAs in North Carolina: Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia, Durham-Chapel Hill, and Wilmington. In February 2020, the EPA released updated 2017 point-source emissions and non-road emissions for the 2017 NEI.11 DAQ calculated new PWEI values for each MSA using a combination of the 2014 and 2017 NEIs and 2021 population estimates.12 Table 9 presents these PWEI values. Due to lower emissions in the Wilmington area, the Wilmington PWEI monitor is no longer required so DAQ shut down the monitor at the end of 2017. Figure 26 shows the locations of the two required PWEI sulfur dioxide monitoring sites based on the 2014 and 2017 NEI and 2021 population estimates. 11 2017 National Emission Inventory, February 2020 Version: The August 2019 point sources have been improved to include rail yards, offshore sources, and other minor updates. The released NEI now also includes nonroad sources (except commercial marine and rail lines), wildfires, and prescribed burning, available online at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2017-national-emissions-inventory-nei- data. Accessed April 25, 2020. 12 Cumulative Estimates of Resident Population Change and Rankings for Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the United States and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019, U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Released March 2020, available online at https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-kits/2020/pop- estimates-county-metro.html 56 Table 9 Population-Weighted Emission Indices Using the 2014/2017 National Emissions Inventory and 2021 Population Estimates for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas Metropolitan Statistical Area a SO2 Emissions, tons b Estimated Population, July 1, 2022 e Population Weighted Emission Index Number of SO2 Monitors Required 2017 Point b 2017 Non- Road b 2014 On Road c 2014 Non- Point c 2017 Fire Events d Total Asheville 6,706.66 2.30 56.82 196.94 9.70 6,972.42 476,072 3,319.37 0 Burlington 12.97 0.90 17.33 27.85 0.51 59.56 176,353 10.50 0 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord 5,097.18 13.16 281.37 340.02 62.42 5,794.15 2,756,069 15,969.08 1 Durham Chapel Hill 7,778.44 2.92 65.10 78.66 27.46 7,952.57 664,310 5,282.98 1 Fayetteville 104.93 1.80 50.65 48.87 140.39 346.65 529,318 183.48 0 Goldsboro 77.14 0.60 12.63 19.50 2.19 112.07 117,286 13.14 0 Greensboro-High Point 78.17 4.02 72.33 162.68 7.35 324.55 784,101 254.48 0 Greenville 59.13 0.96 16.22 21.04 0.50 97.85 173,542 16.98 0 Hickory 4,581.36 2.21 40.75 142.63 156.20 4,923.16 368,347 1,813.43 0 Jacksonville 239.75 0.77 17.98 183.31 59.75 501.58 207,298 103.97 0 Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach 3,705.14 2.75 46.48 604.51 89.38 4,448.27 536,165 2,385.00 0 New Bern 744.57 1.24 13.04 165.66 100.05 1024.56 122,488 125.50 0 Raleigh 264.39 6.64 127.57 113.37 8.73 520.71 1,484,338 772.89 0 Rocky Mount 52.24 0.84 20.23 30.24 7.53 111.09 144,090 16.01 0 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News 2,113.58 10.12 159.38 2,123.08 34.03 4,440.18 1,806,840 8,022.71 1 Wilmington 177.13 1.45 27.57 350.96 64.73 621.84 300,658 186.96 0 Winston-Salem 5,096.99 3.01 58.86 186.99 10.71 5,356.55 688,471 3,687.84 0 a Office of Management and Budget, OMB BULLETIN NO. 18-04: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas, Sept. 14, 2018, available on the worldwide web at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Bulletin-18-04.pdf, accessed April 25, 2020. 57 b Source: 2017 National Emission Inventory, February 2020 Version: The August 2019 point sources have been improved to include rail yards, offshore sources, and other minor updates. The released NEI now also includes nonroad sources (except commercial marine and rail lines), wildfires, and prescribed burning, available online at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2017-national- emissions-inventory-nei-data. Accessed April 25, 2020. c Source: 2014 National Emission Inventory, Version 2, available online at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014- national-emissions-inventory-nei-data. Accessed April 25, 2020. d Source: 2017 National Emission Inventory, Additional Summary Data, Events-Fires, April 2020 Version, available online at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2017-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data. Accessed April 26, 2020. e Source: Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Counties: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2022 (CBSA-MET-EST2022-POP), U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Released March 2023, available online at https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time- series/demo/popest/2020s-counties-total.html. 58 Figure 26. Location of North Carolina PWEI monitors A. Temporary Special Purpose Background Monitors In 2014, the EPA came out with guidance for modeling and monitoring around specific facilities emitting over certain quantities of sulfur dioxide. The modeling and/or monitoring is required to demonstrate compliance with the NAAQS. The modeling guidance requires agencies to consider background levels of sulfur dioxide. DAQ anticipated that the Roxboro coal-fired electric generating facility in Person County would require modeling. DAQ had not collected background sulfur dioxide data in Person County within the last three years. Thus, the division collected background sulfur dioxide data at the Bushy Fork site from May 21, 2014, through late May 2015 to meet the federally required modeling protocols. For similar reasons, from August 2014 through August 2015, DAQ operated a sulfur dioxide monitor at Bryson City in Swain County. The division anticipated that the Asheville coal-fired electric generating plant in Buncombe County would also be a facility for which the division would need to do modeling. B. Facilities Subject to the SO2 Data Requirements Rule, DRR On Jan. 15, 2016, DAQ submitted to the EPA a list identifying all facilities within North Carolina with SO2 emissions that exceeded the 2,000 tons per year threshold based on the most recent emissions data. The division’s list also includes facilities for which DAQ received third-party SO2 modeling information even though the emissions for the facilities were below the 2,000 tons per year threshold. By July 15, 2016, DAQ submitted to the EPA documentation specifying the compliance path – modeling or monitoring – for each of the affected facilities. 59 The division used ambient monitoring to characterize air quality for the following facilities: • Duke Energy Progress, Roxboro Plant, Facility ID 7300029; • Duke Energy Progress, Asheville Plant, Facility ID 37-021-00628 (this facility is regulated by the Western North Carolina Regional Air Quality Agency); • Blue Ridge Paper Products, Canton Mill, also known as Evergreen, Facility ID 4400159; • PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. – Aurora, Facility ID 0700071; and • CPI USA North Carolina – Southport Plant, Facility ID 1000067. DAQ established a single SO2 monitor at each of these facilities. Specific details for each facility were included in the appendices or an addendum to Volume 1 of the 2016-2017 North Carolina Final Network Monitoring Plan.13 Note that: • Duke Energy operated the monitor at Roxboro and Asheville as part of DAQ’s primary quality assurance organization, or PQAO. Duke provided full access to all data on an hourly basis for reporting to AirNow and DAQ’s real-time website. Duke quality assured, or QA’d, the data on a daily and monthly basis. DAQ performed additional QA activities, including performance evaluations, technical system audits and annual certification of the data. The EPA granted DAQ and Duke permission to shut down these two monitors in 2020. 14 • DAQ operated the monitors at Evergreen’s Canton mill, PCS Phosphate and CPI Southport. DAQ requested permission to shut down the monitor at CPI Southport in the 2021-2022 network plan (see section II.A.4. Monitoring Changes in the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA). The EPA 13 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 2016-2017 Final Network Monitoring Plan, Appendix D. Duke Energy Roxboro Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, July 1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13173; Appendix E. Evergreen Packaging Canton Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, July 1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13137; Appendix K. PCS Phosphate, Inc. - Aurora Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, July 1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13149; Appendix L. CPI Southport Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, Sep.1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=9275; and Addendum 2 Duke Progress Energy Skyland Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, Dec, 28, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13136. 14 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2020-2021 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p11, available at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13593 60 granted DAQ permission to shut down this monitor in 2021. 15 DAQ has received notification that Evergreen’s Canton Paper Mill will cease operations in mid-summer 2023. DAQ will continue to operate this monitor until final disposition of the facility is made. At that time the DAQ will decide on whether to continue to operate this monitor or not. DAQ plans to continue operating the monitor at Bayview Ferry indefinitely. • DAQ reports the data to AirNow-Tech and EPA’s Air Quality System, or AQS, and certifies data for these monitors. DAQ provided modeling input and output files for siting the monitors to the EPA in 2016 outside of the network plan. A Region 4 representative visited each monitoring site except the existing site at Bayview. The EPA visited all the sites including Bayview during the March 2019 EPA triennial technical systems audit. Table 10 through Table 13 provide the following information for the sulfur dioxide monitoring networks in the various MSAs throughout North Carolina: (1) The location; (2) The statement of purpose; (3) The status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58; and (4) A summary of proposed and planned changes. 15 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2021-2022 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p2, available at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=15697 61 Table 10 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia and Raleigh MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041 37-183-0014 Site Name: Garinger Millbrook Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 3801 Spring Forest Road City: Charlotte Raleigh Latitude: 35.2401 35.8561 Longitude: -80.7857 -78.5742 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Raleigh Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly – every year Hourly – every year Statement of Purpose: Compliance with the NAAQS; required monitor for NCore & PWEI. Required monitor for NCore. SO2 fine particle precursor monitoring. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure General/ background Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQSA-0486-060 Yes: EQSA-0486-060 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – NCore & PWEI Yes - NCore Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a Both monitors use an instrumental pulsed fluorescence method using a Thermo Electron 43i TLE, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 560. b Operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS reporting agency 0669 62 Table 11 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and Fayetteville MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-157-0099 37-067-0022b 37-051-0010 b Site Name: Bethany Hattie Avenue Honeycutt E.S. Street Address: 6371 NC 65 1300 block of Hattie Avenue 4665 Lakewood Drive City: Bethany Winston-Salem Fayetteville Latitude: 36.308889 36.110556 35.00 Longitude: -79.859167 -80.226667 -78.99 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Greensboro-High Point Winston-Salem Fayetteville Monitor Type: Special purpose Other Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly- every third year Hourly- every year Hourly- every third year Statement of Purpose: Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Compliance with the NAAQS; PWEI Monitor Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Monitoring Objective: General/ background Population exposure Population exposure; general/background Scale: Urban Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQSA- 0486-060 Yes: EQSA- 0486-060 Yes: EQSA-0486- 060 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Will cease operation on 12/31/23 None Will operate again in 2024 a All monitors use an instrumental pulsed fluorescence method using a Thermo Electron 43i, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 060. b Operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0403 63 Table 12 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill, Asheville, and Hickory MSAs AQS Site Id Number: 37-063-0015 a 37-087-0013 b 37-027-0003 a Site Name: Durham Armory Canton DRR Lenoir Street Address: 801 Stadium Drive Pace Street, Evergreen Plant 291 Nuway Circle City: Durham Canton Lenoir Latitude: 36.032944 35.534 35.935833 Longitude: -78.905417 -82.853 -81.530278 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Durham-Chapel Hill Asheville Hickory Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly – every year Hourly Hourly – every third year Statement of Purpose: PWEI monitor for Durham-Chapel Hill MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Maximum concentration site near the Evergreen Plant. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Source-oriented General/ background Scale: Urban Middle Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQSA-0486- 060 Yes: EQSA-0486- 060 Yes: EQSA- 0486-060 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes - PWEI Yes – Required by Data Requirements Rule Yes – not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Decision pending final disposition of facility Ended 12/31/22 a Monitors use an instrumental pulsed fluorescence method using a Thermo Electron 43i, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 060. b Monitor uses an instrumental pulsed fluorescence method using a Thermo Electron 43i TLE, AQS method code 560. 64 Table 13 The 2023-2024 Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Network for areas outside MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 370130151 b 37-117-0001 Site Name: Bayview Jamesville Street Address: 229 NC Highway 306N 1210 Hayes Street City: Bath Jamesville Latitude: 35.428 35.810690 Longitude: -76.74 -76.897820 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: None Not in an MSA Monitor Type: SLAMS Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly – every year Hourly – every third year Statement of Purpose: Fenceline monitoring at PCS Phosphate facility to ensure compliance with the NAAQS Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Monitoring Objective: Source-oriented Upwind/ background general/ background Scale: Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQSA-0486-060 Yes: EQSA-0486-060 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – DRR monitor Yes – rotating PSD background monitor not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Ended 12/31/22 a Both monitors use an instrumental pulsed fluorescence method using a Thermo Electron 43i, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 060. b This monitor is in Beaufort County across the river from the PCS Phosphate facility. It replaced the New Aurora Site, 370130007, which was dislocated by nearby current land clearing and future mining activities. 65 V. Ozone Monitoring Network The DAQ operates an extensive ozone network covering the state from large urban areas to smaller rural areas and from valley communities to mountain top recreation and wilderness areas. This strong network has greatly benefited the state by enabling DAQ to learn how ozone is transported to and within the state, to identify the parts of the state where the formation of ozone results in peak concentrations and to know where ozone concentrations do and do not exceed the national ambient air quality standards, NAAQS. By having sufficient monitors to provide understanding of ozone formation in an area, DAQ could make strong arguments with the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, to prevent certain areas of the state from being designated as nonattainment and could develop effective state implementation plans. Data from previous years, as shown in Figure 27, indicate statewide levels of ozone are below the 8-hour standard established by the EPA in 2015. Figure 27. Statewide trends for ozone (from Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, October 2020, located at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water-quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina- 2020/open) A. Analysis of Existing Monitors 1. Analysis of Measured Concentrations Compared to NAAQS Figure 28 through Figure 33 graphically display the ozone design values for the monitors in the North Carolina state-operated network for at least the past five years. This information is important because 40 CFR Section 58.14(c)(1) requires a monitor to be attaining the NAAQS for the past five years before the monitor can be shut down. On Oct. 1, 2015, the EPA lowered the 8-hour ozone standard to 0.070 parts per million. Currently all the 34 monitors operated by the state, local and tribal programs in 2021 have met an 8-hour ozone design value of 0.070 parts per million for the past five years. 66 Figure 28. Ozone design values in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA Figure 29. Ozone design values in the Raleigh and Durham-Chapel Hill MSAs 67 Figure 30. Ozone design values for the Greensboro-High Point and Winston-Salem MSAs Figure 31. Ozone design values for the Asheville MSA and North Carolina mountains 68 Figure 32. Ozone design values in the Fayetteville, Greenville, Rocky Mount and Wilmington MSAs and at other coastal sites Figure 33. Ozone design values in the Hickory MSA and at other monitors in the piedmont area 69 None of these 34 monitors has a design value less than 80%of the NAAQS so none will meet the additional requirement of having less than 10% probability of exceeding 80% of the NAAQS during the next three years. Thus, DAQ does not propose to shut down any ozone monitors based on design values alone. 2. Analysis of Operating Monitors Compared to Appendix D Requirements Other ozone monitors DAQ can consider for shut down are those monitors that exceed the minimum number of monitors required in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-2 provided in Figure 34. The latest estimated population of the MSA and the most recent ozone 8-hour design value for the area determines the number of required monitors for an area. Figure 34. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-2 Table 14 provides the 2021-estimated population for the MSAs in North Carolina, the design values for 2020-2022, the number of required monitors based on Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 58 and the number of current monitors operated by DAQ and the local programs. Currently, the division and the local programs operate at least the minimum number of required monitors in every MSA except for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk- Newport News and the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSAs. DAQ has a written agreement with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, VDEQ, Office of Air Quality Monitoring, that VDEQ will maintain the minimum required number of monitors for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA.16 16 See Appendix H. Monitoring Agreement between Virginia and North Carolina for the Virginia Beach- Norfolk-Newport News Metropolitan Statistical Area. 70 Table 14 Design Values and Required Ozone Monitors for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas, MSA MSA Population Estimate, 2022 a 2020-2022 Ozone 8-Hour Design Value (As percent of NAAQS) b Number of Monitors operated in North Carolina Required Current Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia 2,756,069 91 2 5 c Virginia Beach-Norfolk- Newport News, VA-NC 1,806,840 83* 1 0 d Raleigh 1,484,338 86 2 2 Greensboro-High Point 784,101 89 2 2 Winston-Salem 688,471 90 2 3 Durham-Chapel Hill 664,310 83 1 3 Fayetteville 529,318 93 2 2 Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC 536,165 84* 1 0 e Asheville 476,072 83 1 2 Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton 368,347 81 1 2 Wilmington 300,658 83 0 1 Jacksonville 207,298 Not Available 0 0 Greenville 173,542 84 0 1 Burlington 176,353 Not Available 0 0 Rocky Mount 144,090 84 0 1 New Bern 122,488 Not Available 0 0 Goldsboro 117,286 Not Available 0 0 a Source: Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Counties: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2022 (CBSA-MET-EST2022-POP), U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Released March 2023, available online at https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time- series/demo/popest/2020s-counties-total.html. b The national ambient air quality standard for an 8-hour period is 0.070 parts per million. The EPA bases attainment on the average of the 4th highest value over three consecutive ozone seasons. Values of 0.070, which is equivalent to 100 percent, and below are attaining the national ambient air quality standard. c South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control and the Catawba Indian Nation each operate a monitor in York County, South Carolina. d Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, VDEQ, Office of Air Quality Monitoring operates three monitors in this MSA. e South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control operates a monitor in Horry County, South Carolina, starting in July 2016. *Denotes 2019-2021 Design Values The Office of Management and Budget changed the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA definition in February 2013 to include Brunswick County in North Carolina. Adding Brunswick County to the MSA resulted in the MSA exceeding the 71 350,000 population-threshold for a required ozone monitor. In May 2015, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, DHEC, proposed operating a monitor in Horry County. DHEC started operating this monitor on July 27, 2016. DAQ worked with DHEC to develop an appropriate monitoring agreement.17 Brunswick County was formerly part of the Wilmington, NC, MSA and for many years was characterized by the Castle Hayne ozone monitor. As shown in Figure 32, Castle Hayne’s highest design value during the past five years was 59 ppb. The Castle Hayne monitor has never violated the ozone standard. The Coastal Carolina ozone monitor in the Myrtle Beach area collected its first complete ozone design value in 2019. Its design value for 2017-2019 was at 86 percent of the NAAQS, requiring the MSA to have a second ozone monitor according to Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 58 (see Figure 34). Since this design value was the first complete design value for the monitor and the 2017-2019 design value was so close to the 85- percent threshold, DAQ and DHEC are working with EPA Region 4 to determine the appropriate ozone monitoring for this MSA. The 2018-2020 design value was at 84 percent of the NAAQS, but the design value was not valid because the three-year completeness was less than 90 percent. The 2019-2021 design value is also at 84 percent of the NAAQS and is valid. According to the AQS AMP480 report for the 2020- 2022 period, that latest valid design value for the Coastal Carolina ozone monitor is .058 or 83% of the NAAQS. DAQ has decided to delay analysis of this MSA for the location of a second ozone monitor until a valid design value above 85 percent of the standard is measured. DAQ evaluated each MSA where there are more monitors operating than required by the regulations. This evaluation determined whether all the current monitors in the MSA are still needed and providing valuable information. The local program monitors were not included in this analysis. The local program monitors were excluded because the decision on whether to continue to operate them or shut them down is up to the local program and not DAQ. Thus, DAQ considered 10 monitors in this evaluation. Monroe Middle School, 37-179-0003 Monroe Middle School, shown in Figure 35, is in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA, also known as the Metrolina area. This monitor provides valuable information for ozone forecasting in the Metrolina area. Because it is attaining the standard, these data can also be used to justify excluding part of Union County from the Metrolina nonattainment area should the area fail to attain the 2015 ozone standard at any time in the future. Union County is one of the fastest-growing counties in North Carolina and is one of the fastest-growing counties in the nation. It is also located in the state’s largest MSA. DAQ will retain this site because this monitor is important for attainment and maintenance plan development for the Metrolina area especially if the ozone standard is lowered later this year. 17 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on Criteria Monitoring Between SCDHEC and NCDENR DAQ, July 1, 2015, Available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=6786. 72 Figure 35. Ozone monitors in the Charlotte area Crouse, 37-109-0004 As shown in Figure 35, Crouse is in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA. This monitor provides valuable spatial information for ozone forecasting in the Charlotte area. Elimination of the Crouse monitor would leave a hole in the ozone network in the area to the west of Charlotte. The data from this monitor are also valuable in helping to determine nonattainment boundaries and keeping Lincoln County or parts of Lincoln County from being designated as nonattainment should the Metrolina area in the future ever fail to attain the 2015 ozone standard. Lincoln County is one of the fastest-growing counties in North Carolina and is one of the fastest-growing counties in the nation. It is also located in the state’s largest MSA. DAQ will retain this site because this monitor is important for attainment and maintenance plan development for the Metrolina area especially if the ozone standard is lowered later this year. Rockwell, 37-159-0021 As shown in Figure 35, Rockwell is in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA. The ozone concentrations measured at Rockwell are sometimes among the highest ozone concentrations measured in the MSA. DAQ believes the information collected at Rockwell is important for adding to the understanding of pollution formation and transport in the piedmont area. Rockwell is downwind of Charlotte and provides information on the pollution being transferred out of Charlotte into the Winston-Salem area. The division views this monitor as being a significant monitor for attainment and maintenance plan development, especially if the ozone standard is lowered later this year. Thus, DAQ plans to retain the Rockwell monitor. The Rockwell site is furthest to the northeast; the Monroe site is furthest to the southeast; and the Crouse site is furthest to the northwest. The color of the map indicates the probability of having at least one exceedance of the 2015 ozone standard of 0.070 parts per million. 73 Butner, 37-077-0001 Butner, shown in Figure 36, is in the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA. This monitor is the third monitor in the Durham area. Because it is attaining the standard, not the design value monitor for the MSA and is not required by Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 58, the DAQ may consider shutting this monitor down sometime in the future. As shown in Figure 36, the exceedance probability is low and does not vary throughout this area, so the Butner area is probably well represented by the other monitors in the MSA. Eventually, DAQ will need to replace the monitoring shelter and the site will need to be relocated at that time. The DAQ may decide to deploy these resources in other parts of the state where more need for ozone monitoring exists but does not contemplate such a change in during the 2023 Ozone season. Figure 36. Ozone monitors in the Durham-Chapel Hill area Durham Armory, 37-063-0015 As shown in Figure 36, the Durham Armory site is in the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA. The ozone concentrations measured at the Durham Armory are sometimes among the highest ozone concentrations measured in the MSA. The Durham Armory site is a 74 multiple pollutant site located in Durham County, one of the fastest growing counties in the state. DAQ believes the information collected at the Durham Armory monitor is important for providing real-time air quality information to the residents of Durham and for air quality forecasting. The division also views this monitor as being a significant monitor for attainment and maintenance plan development, especially if the ozone standard is lowered later this year. Thus, DAQ plans to retain the Durham Armory monitor. Waynesville School, 37-087-0008 The Waynesville School monitor is in the Asheville MSA. This monitor is the second monitor in the Asheville area. Because the design value for this MSA is less than 85 percent of the NAAQS and is attaining the standard and usually reports a design value that is less than or equal to the design value reported by the Bent Creek monitor, DAQ could consider shutting this site down. However, since the EPA is reconsidering the ozone standard and the standard could be lowered requiring a second monitor in the MSA, DAQ does not plan to shut this site down at this time as it would be expensive to restart a site if the design value for the MSA goes back up over 85 percent of the standard next year. Thus, DAQ plans to retain the Waynesville School monitor at this time. Lenoir, 37-027-0003 The Lenoir monitor is in the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA. This monitor is the second monitor in the Hickory area. Because the design value for this MSA is less than 85 percent of the NAAQS and the Lenoir monitor is attaining the standard and not the design value monitor, DAQ could consider shutting this site down. However, since the EPA is reconsidering the ozone standard and the standard could be lowered requiring a second monitor in the MSA, DAQ does not plan to shut this site down at this time as it would be expensive to restart a site if the design value for the MSA goes back up over 85 percent of the standard next year. Thus, DAQ plans to retain the Lenoir monitor currently. Castle Hayne, 37-129-0002 The Castle Hayne monitor is in an area where there is a great deal of interest in the air quality because there were once plans to build a cement facility across the road from the monitor. DAQ believes it is important to maintain a monitor at this location. In addition, nearby Pender County grew rapidly during the last decade. Pender County is the 57th fastest-growing county in the nation percentagewise in 2021- 2022.18 Thus, DAQ plans to retain the Castle Hayne monitor. Pitt County Agricultural Center, 37-147-0006 The Pitt County Agricultural Center monitor is in the Greenville MSA. DAQ believes it is important to maintain a monitor at this location to provide real-time air quality data to the public due to Eastern Carolina University, the medical school and hospital. Thus, DAQ plans to retain the Pitt County Agricultural Center monitor. 18 Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Counties in the United States: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021 (CO-EST2021-POP), Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Release Date: March 2022. 75 Leggett, 37-065-0099 The Leggett monitor is in the Rocky Mount MSA. The monitor is valuable for forecasting and providing real-time air quality information for the area. Thus, DAQ plans to retain the Leggett monitor. B. Analysis of Unmonitored Areas with Rapid Population Growth DAQ also evaluated the state’s fastest-growing areas based on 2021 population estimates. Of the 13 fastest-growing counties in North Carolina listed in Table 1, seven of those counties lack an ozone monitor. 1. Brunswick County Brunswick County, the 30th fastest-growing county in the nation percentagewise between July 1, 2020 and July 1, 2021. It was the fastest-growing county in the North Carolina last year, increasing by 5.7%. This county is impacted by growth in the Wilmington, North Carolina and North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, areas. As of February 2013, Brunswick County is one of two counties making up the Myrtle Beach- Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA. Before then, this county was part of the Wilmington MSA. The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA population exceeds 350,000, requiring an ozone monitor. The 2020 to 2022 design value for the MSA is less than 85% of the standard. As shown in Figure 37, the probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard is less than 20%. DAQ has a monitoring agreement with the SCDHEC, which in July 2016 established the Coastal Carolina monitoring site in this MSA. Figure 37. Probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA 76 2. Cabarrus County Cabarrus County, the 17th fastest-growing county in the state during the past year, percentagewise, grew by 4,071 people or 1.7% between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022, according to the latest census estimates. Cabarrus County is in the Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia MSA. Currently, DAQ is required to operate two monitors in the MSA. As shown in Figure 35, this MSA currently has seven ozone monitors, with one monitor to the south in Union County, one to the north in Rowan County, and two to the southwest in Mecklenburg County. The ozone exceedance probability for Cabarrus County indicates the probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in this county is as likely as the probability of having one exceedance at either of the two monitors in Mecklenburg County. Thus, the existing monitors should adequately characterize the air quality here. Currently, DAQ has no plans to monitor ozone here. 3. Camden County The census bureau estimates Camden County grew by 272 people or 2.5% between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022. It is the 7th fastest-growing county in the state during July 1 2021- July 1 2022 period percentagewise. Camden County is in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA. Currently, DAQ is required to operate two monitors in this MSA. As shown in Figure 38, VDEQ currently operates three ozone monitors in this MSA. The ozone exceedance probability for this county indicates the probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard here is similar to the probability of having an exceedance at one of these three monitors. Thus, the existing monitors should adequately characterize the air quality in this county. DAQ has no plans to monitor ozone here. 77 Figure 38. Probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA. 4. Currituck County The census bureau estimates Currituck County grew by 1,301 people or 4.4% between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022. It was the 29th fastest-growing county in the nation during the 2020- 2021 time period. Currituck County, like Camden County, is in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA as shown in Figure 38. Like Camden County, the ozone exceedance probability for this county indicates the probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard here is similar to the probability of having an exceedance at one of the three monitors operated by VDEQ. Thus, the existing monitors should adequately characterize the air quality in this county. DAQ has no plans to monitor ozone here. 5. Franklin County The census bureau estimates Franklin County to have grown by 2,742 people or 3.8 percent between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022. As shown in Figure 39, Franklin County is part of the Raleigh MSA. Currently, there are two monitors in the Raleigh MSA –Millbrook, 37-183-0014, and West Johnston, 37-101-0002. The 2020-2022 ozone design value for the Raleigh MSA is at 86% of the standard. Based on the probability of exceeding the standard shown in Figure 39, the division expects the ozone concentrations in Franklin County to be the same as or lower than the ozone concentrations measured at the two monitors in the MSA. Thus, the existing monitors should adequately characterize the air quality in Franklin County. DAQ has no plans to monitor for ozone there. 78 Figure 39. Ozone monitors in the Raleigh MSA 6. Iredell County Iredell County, was the 8th fastest-growing county in the state during the past year and grew by 3,679 people or 1.9% between July 1, 2021 and July 1, 2022, according to the 2022 census estimates. Iredell County is in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA. Currently, DAQ is required to operate two monitors in the MSA. As shown in Figure 35, this MSA currently has seven ozone monitors, with one monitor to the southwest in Lincoln County, one to the southeast in Rowan County, and two to the south in Mecklenburg County. The ozone exceedance probability for Iredell County indicates the probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in this county is as likely or less likely as the probability of having one exceedance at either of the two monitors in Mecklenburg County. Thus, the existing monitors should adequately characterize the air quality here. Currently, DAQ has no plans to monitor ozone here. 7. Pender County Pender County grew by 2,665 people or 4.2% between July 1, 2021, and July 1, 2022, and is the 3rd fastest-growing county in the state during the last year, percentagewise. Pender County is in the Wilmington MSA. Currently, DAQ is not required to operate any ozone monitors in the MSA. However, the division operates an ozone monitor at Castle Hayne in New Hanover County. The Castle Hayne monitor indicates the ozone concentrations on the coast are currently at 83% of the NAAQS. The ozone exceedance probability for Pender County shown in Figure 40 indicates the probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in Pender County is similar to the probability of having an exceedance at Castle Hayne. As a result, DAQ has no plans to monitor for ozone in Pender County. 79 Figure 40. Probability of having one exceedance of the 70-ppb ozone standard in the Wilmington MSA C. Changes to Existing Monitors As described in Section II. Summary of Proposed Changes, DAQ replaced shelters at Wade and Lenoir. When funds become available, DAQ plans to replace shelters at Butner (see Replacement of Monitoring Shelter and Possible Relocation of the Butner site in the Durham MSA), and Bethany (see Replacement of Monitoring Shelter and Possible Relocation of the Bethany site in the Greensboro MSA). At the end of the 2019 ozone season, DAQ also added Nafion dryers to the ozone sampling probes at Linville Falls and Monroe. DAQ used the dryers at these sites during the 2020 and 2021 ozone seasons and discontinued their use in 2022. D. DAQ Recommendations The division recommends: • Maintaining the current size of the network and all the currently operating sites until after the reconsideration of the ozone standard; • Not establishing any new ozone sites in 2023 or 2024; • Evaluating the Butner site to determine if it should be maintained long- term before the site is relocated and a new shelter is installed; and 80 E. Network Description Figure 41 shows the locations of the ozone monitors operating in 2023. Table 15 through Table 26 lists the locations, monitor type, operating schedules, monitoring objectives, scales, statement of purpose and any proposed change to the monitor or site. All monitors listed in these tables are suitable for comparison to the national ambient air quality standards and meet the requirements of Appendices A, C, D and E of Part 58. All these monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. All seasonal monitors operate on an hourly schedule from March 1 through Oct. 31 each year, except for the mountain top monitors, which will operate as soon after March 1 as the weather will allow through Oct. 31. DAQ requested and received a waiver for the start of the monitoring season for the mountaintop sites because authorities often close the roads going to the sites during February. Several of the monitors operate year-round. Figure 41. Location of 2022 ozone monitoring stations 81 Table 15 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-109-0004 37-119-0041 b 37-119-0046 b 37-159-0021 37-179-0003 Site Name: Crouse Garinger University Meadows Rockwell Monroe Middle School Street Address: 1487 Riverview Road 1130 Eastway Drive 1660 Pavilion Blvd 301 West Street 701 Charles Street City: Lincolnton Charlotte Charlotte Rockwell Monroe Latitude: 35.438556 35.2401 35.314158 35.551868 34.973889 Longitude: -81.276750 -80.7857 -80.713469 -80.395039 -80.540833 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS / NCore SLAMS Special purpose Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly Year round Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly Year round Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Compliance w/NAAQS; SIP development . Compliance w/ NAAQS; AQI reporting; ozone precursor monitoring AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Modeling; compliance w/NAAQS. Forecasting. Compliance w/NAAQS. SIP Development Monitoring Objective: General/ background Highest concentration Highest concentration Highest concentration Population exposure Scale: Urban Neighborhood Urban Urban Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 82 Table 15 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a of Part 58, Appendix A: Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes - NCore Yes Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None Site may relocate after 12/31/2023 Nafion dryer removed in 2022 a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. b Operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0669 83 Table 16 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-101-0002 37-183-0014 Site Name: West Johnston Millbrook Street Address: 1338 Jack Road c 3801 Spring Forest Road City: Clayton Raleigh Latitude: 35.590833 35.8561 Longitude: -78.461944 -78.5742 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Raleigh Raleigh Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS / NCore Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly Year round Statement of Purpose: Real-time AQI reporting for the Raleigh MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. SIP development Maximum Concentration Site for Raleigh MSA. Ozone precursor monitoring Site. Real-time AQI reporting for the Raleigh MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: General/background Maximum ozone concentration/ population exposure Scale: Urban Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes - NCore Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. 84 Table 17 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Greensboro-High Point MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-081-0013 37-157-0099 Site Name: Mendenhall Bethany Street Address: 205 Willoughby Blvd. 6371 NC 65 City: Greensboro Bethany Latitude: 36.109167 36.308889 Longitude: -79.801111 -79.859167 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Greensboro-High Point Greensboro-High Point Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Maximum concentration site downwind of the Greensboro- High Point MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Real-time AQI reporting for the Greensboro- Winston-Salem-High-Point CSA Maximum ozone concentration site downwind of the Winston- Salem MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Greensboro- Winston-Salem-High-Point CSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Highest concentration Scale: Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Shelter may be replaced; site may be relocated to accommodate shelter a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. 85 Table 18 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Winston-Salem MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-067-0022b 37-067-0030 b 37-067-1008 b Site Name: Hattie Avenue Clemmons School Union Cross Street Address: 1300 block of Hattie Avenue Fraternity Church Road 3656 Piedmont Memorial Drive City: Winston-Salem Clemmons Union Cross Latitude: 36.110556 36.026000 36.050833 Longitude: -80.226667 -80.342000 -80.143889 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Winston-Salem Winston-Salem Winston-Salem Monitor Type: Other SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly; 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly; 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly; 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Urban center city site for modeling. Real- time AQI reporting for the Greensboro- Winston-Salem-High Point CSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. . Real-time AQI reporting for the Greensboro-Winston- Salem-High Point CSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, AQS method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. b Operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0403 86 Table 19 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-063-0015 37-077-0001 37-145-0003 Site Name: Durham Armory Butner Bushy Fork Street Address: 801 Stadium Drive 800 Central Ave 7901 Burlington Road City: Durham Butner Hurdle Mills Latitude: 36.032944 36.141111 36.306965 Longitude: -78.905417 -78.768056 -79.091970 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Durham-Chapel Hill Not in an MSA Durham-Chapel Hill Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Maximum concentration site in the Durham- Chapel Hill MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Maximum concentration site downwind for the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA. Modeling. Real- time AQI reporting for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill CSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Highest concentration General/background Scale: Neighborhood Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Yes – Not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Shelter may be replaced; site may be relocated None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. 87 Table 20 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Asheville MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-021-0030 b 37-087-0008 Site Name: Bent Creek Waynesville E.S. Street Address: Route 191 South 2236 Asheville Road City: Asheville Waynesville Latitude: 35.500102 35.507224 Longitude: -82.599860 -82.963625 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Asheville Asheville Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance with the NAAQS. Low elevation, i.e., valley, site for Haywood County. Real- time AQI reporting. Modeling. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Maximum ozone concentration/ Highest concentration Population exposure Scale: Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. b Operated by Western North Carolina Regional Air Quality Agency, AQS reporting agency 0779. 88 Table 21. The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Fayetteville MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-051-0011 37-051-0010 Site Name: Wade School Honeycutt E.S. Street Address: 5721 Smithfield Road 4665 Lakewood Drive City: Wade Fayetteville Latitude: 35.1487 35.00 Longitude: -78.7068 -78.99 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Fayetteville Fayetteville Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly - 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly - 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Maximum concentration site in the Fayetteville MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Fayetteville MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS. Upwind site in the Fayetteville MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Fayetteville MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS Monitoring Objective: Highest concentration Population exposure Scale: Urban Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Site was relocated from Wade and started on 3/1/2022 None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. 89 Table 22 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Hickory MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-003-0005 37-027-0003 Site Name: Taylorsville-Liledoun Lenoir Street Address: 700 Liledoun Road 291 Nuway Circle City: Taylorsville Lenoir Latitude: 35.9139 35.935833 Longitude: -81.191 -81.530278 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Hickory Hickory Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Compliance w/NAAQS. Highest ozone-precursor concentration site for Hickory MSA. Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: General/ background General/ background Scale: Urban Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Monitoring shelter was replaced in 2021 a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, AQS method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. 90 Table 23 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Wilmington, Greenville and Rocky Mount MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-129-0002 37-147-0006 37-065-0099 Site Name: Castle Hayne Pitt County Ag Center Leggett Street Address: 6028 Holly Shelter Road 403 Government Circle 7589 NC Hwy 33-NW City: Castle Hayne Greenville Leggett Latitude: 34.364167 35.638610 35.988333 Longitude: -77.838611 -77.358050 -77.582778 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Wilmington Greenville Rocky Mount Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure General/ background Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Monitoring shelter was replaced in 2020 None None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. 91 Table 24 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Mountain Tops a AQS Site Id Number: 37-075-0001b 37-087-0035 37-087-0036 37-199-0004 Site Name: Joanna Bald Frying Pan Purchase Knob Mount Mitchell Street Address: Forest Road 423 Spur State Rd 450, Blue Ridge Pkwy Mile 409 6905 Purchase Road 2388 State Hwy 128 City: Robbinsville Pisgah Forest Waynesville, in the GSMNP Burnsville Latitude: 35.2578 35.379167 35.590000 35.765413 Longitude: -83.7955 -82.792500 -83.077500 -82.264944 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Other Other Other Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly 4/1 to 10/31 Hourly 4/1 to 10/31 Hourly 4/1 to 10/31 Hourly 4/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Operated in cooperation with the USFS. Located in a Class I area. Provides ozone data for PSD modeling for industrial expansion. Provides AQI data for recreational users. Modeling. Compliance w/NAAQS. Operated in cooperation with the USFS. Located in a Class I area and collocated at an IMPROVE site. Provides ozone data for PSD modeling for industrial expansion. Provides AQI data for recreational users. Modeling. Compliance w/NAAQS. Operated in cooperation with the NPS. Located in a Class I area. Provides ozone data for PSD modeling for industrial expansion. Provides AQI data for recreational users. Modeling. Compliance w/NAAQS. Provides ozone data for PSD modeling for industrial expansion. Provides AQI data for recreational users. Modeling. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Welfare related impacts/ general/ background/ regional transport Welfare related impacts/ general/ background/regio nal transport Welfare related impacts/ general/ background Welfare related impacts/ general/ background/ regional transport Scale: Regional Regional Regional Regional 92 Table 24 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Mountain Tops a AQS Site Id Number: 37-075-0001b 37-087-0035 37-087-0036 37-199-0004 Site Name: Joanna Bald Frying Pan Purchase Knob Mount Mitchell Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: ozone season starts when weather allows ozone season starts when weather allows ozone season starts when weather allows ozone season starts when weather allows a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. b This monitor is owned by the United States Forest Service and operated by the North Carolina Division of Air Quality. 93 Table 25 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA (Part 1) a AQS Site Id Number: 37-011-0002 37-033-0001 Site Name: Linville Falls Cherry Grove Street Address: 100 Linville Falls Road 7074 Cherry Grove Road City: Linville Falls Reidsville Latitude: 35.972222 36.307033 Longitude: -81.933056 -79.467417 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Other Other Operating Schedule: Hourly 4/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Operated in cooperation with the USFS. Located in a Class I area and collocated at an IMPROVE site. Provides ozone data for PSD modeling for industrial expansion. Provides AQI data for recreational users. Modeling. Compliance w/NAAQS. Extreme downwind site for the Greensboro-High Point MSA. Modeling. Real-time AQI reporting for the Greensboro-Winston- Salem-High Point CSA. Compliance w/ NAAQS Monitoring Objective: Welfare related impacts/ general/ background General/ background Scale: Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880-047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Nafion dryer removed in 2022 None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. b This monitor is owned by the United States Forest Service and operated by the North Carolina Division of Air Quality. 94 Table 26 The Ozone Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA, Part 2 a AQS Site Id Number: 37-107-0004 37-117-0001 37-173-0002 Site Name: Lenoir Community College Jamesville Bryson City Street Address: 231 Highway 58 S 1210 Hayes Street Parks & Rec Building, Center Street City: Kinston Jamesville Bryson City Latitude: 35.231459 35.810690 35.434767 Longitude: -77.568792 -76.897820 -83.442133 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Other SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Hourly 3/1 to 10/31 Statement of Purpose: Compliance w/NAAQS. Compliance w/NAAQS. Regional transport and general background site. Low elevation, i.e. valley, mountain site on the NC side of the GSMNP. Modeling. Forecasting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: General/ background General/ background General/ background Scale: Neighborhood Regional Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQOA- 0880-047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Yes: EQOA-0880- 047 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – no required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None a All monitors use an instrumental ultraviolet method, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 047. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQOA-0880-047. 95 VI. Particle Monitoring Network for Particles with Aerodynamic Diameters of 10 Micrometers or Less, or PM10 The DAQ monitors for particles of 10 micrometers or less aerodynamic diameter, or PM10, in North Carolina at four permanent sites (Raleigh, Greensboro, Durham and Fayetteville) and six rotating sites. The local programs operate PM10 monitors at three sites. In addition, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, or VDEQ, operates PM10 monitors at two sites in the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News Metropolitan Statistical area, or MSA. Analysts and modelers use these data to determine human health effect exposures in MSAs with over 500,000 people and to collect background levels for prevention of significant deterioration, also known as PSD. DAQ also uses PM10 as a surrogate for PSD modeling for the state standard for total suspended particulates, also known as TSP. Data from previous years, as shown in Figure 42, indicate statewide levels of PM10 are well below the 24-hour standard. Figure 42. Statewide trends for PM10 (from Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, October 2020, located at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water-quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina-2020/open) Figure 43 through Figure 45 provide the highest PM10 concentrations measured in North Carolina for the 10-year period ending in 2021. The high values in 2020 were due to the Saharan dust storm in June. The monitoring regulations currently require a monitor to be attaining the national ambient air quality standards, NAAQS, for the past five years before the operating agency can shut down the monitor. All PM10 monitors operated in North Carolina in the last five years have attained the NAAQS and have reported values less than 80 percent of the standard. Thus, the only monitors the EPA requires the state to operate are the ones required to meet the minimum monitoring requirements in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-4 provided in Figure 46 and those used to provide background data for PSD modeling. 96 Figure 43. Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA Figure 44. Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentrations in North Carolina urban areas 97 Figure 45. Maximum PM10 concentrations for rotating background monitors in North Carolina Figure 46. Table D-4 from 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D The estimated 2021 population of the MSA and the most recent PM10 ambient concentration values for the area determines the number of required monitors for an area. Table 27 provides the 2021 estimated total population for the MSAs in North Carolina, the maximum ambient daily concentration values as percentage of the NAAQS for 2021, the number of required monitors based on 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-4 and the number of current monitors operated by DAQ and the local programs. Currently, the division and the local programs are operating the minimum number of required monitors in every MSA except for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, and the Raleigh MSA. DAQ has a written agreement with the VDEQ, Office of Air Quality Monitoring, that VDEQ will maintain the minimum required number of monitors for the Virginia Beach- 98 Norfolk-Newport News MSA.19 DAQ also has a monitoring agreement with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control.20 SC has proposed starting PM10 monitoring at the Coastal Carolina Monitoring site by the end of 2023. Table 27 Ambient Concentrations and Required Number of PM10 Monitors for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas, MSA MSA Population Estimate, 2021 a 2022 PM10 24-Hour Maximum Ambient Concentration, as percent of NAAQS Number of Monitors operated in North Carolina Required b Current Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia 2,701,046 26 2-4 2 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC 1,803,328 31 2-4 0 c Raleigh 1,448,411 21 2-4 1d Greensboro-High Point 778,848 17 1-2 1 Winston-Salem 681,438 22 1-2 1 Durham-Chapel Hill 654,012 19 1-2 1 Fayetteville 524,588 28 1-2 1 Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC- NC 509,794 Not Available 1-2 0 Asheville 472,341 20 e 0-1 0 Hickory 366,441 16* 0-1 rotating Wilmington 291,833 30 0-1 rotating Jacksonville 206,160 25 g 0 0 Burlington 173,877 Not Available 0 0 Greenville 172,169 Not Available 0 0 Rocky Mount 143,535 30 h 0 0 New Bern 122,273 Not Available 0 0 Goldsboro 116,835 21 g 0 0 a Source: Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the United States and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021 (CBSA-MET-EST2021-POP), U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Released March 2022, available online at https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time- series/demo/popest/2020s-total-metro-and-micro-statistical-areas.html. b 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-4 c The Virginia Department of Environment operates two PM10 monitors d DAQ received a waiver in 2008, renewed in 2015 and 2020, for the second required PM10 monitor e PM10 24-hour maximum ambient concentration is from 2009 *PM10 24-hour maximum ambient concentration is from the rotating monitor in Taylorsville which collected data for 49 percent of the days in 2020. g PM10 24-hour maximum ambient concentration is from 2007 h PM10 24-hour maximum ambient concentration is from 2006 19 See Appendix H. Monitoring Agreement between Virginia and North Carolina for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk- Newport News Metropolitan Statistical Area. 20 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on Criteria Monitoring Between SCDHEC and NCDENR DAQ, July 1, 2015, Available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=6786. 99 DAQ received a waiver from the EPA for the second required monitor in the Raleigh MSA. The EPA granted the waiver because PM10 values recorded in the Raleigh MSA have been less than 50 percent of the NAAQS except when exceptional events on June 12, 2008 (smoke from a fire), and June 28, 2020 (dust from Africa), or asphalt paving of the next-door parking lot on April 8, 2021, affected the monitor at the Millbrook School site. DAQ shut down the PM10 monitor at Hickory at the end of 2014 because the division did not use the data for PSD modeling, the measured concentrations were less than 40 percent of the standard and trending downward, and the population in Hickory is less than 500,000. In 2011, DAQ modified its PM10 PSD monitoring network by establishing a network of rotating background PM10 sites. One to three PM10 monitors operate each year, and each site operates once every 39 months. Because the division shut down the Grier-School particle monitoring site in Gastonia at the end of 2014, DAQ replaced the rotating PM10 monitor at Grier School with a rotating PM10 monitor at the Taylorsville Liledoun site. Likewise, when DAQ shut down the Marion and Kenansville particle monitoring sites, DAQ moved the rotating PM10 monitors at those sites to the Lenoir Community College, or LCC, site in Kinston and the Castle Hayne site in Wilmington. Thus, the six PM10 rotating background sites are: • Castle Hayne, Candor and LCC, which operated from October 1, 2020, to November 2, 2021; and which are scheduled to run from 09/23/23 through 10/31/24 • Jamesville, which operated from July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022; • Cherry Grove, which operated in 2020 and which has operated since 12/18/22 and will continue to operate through 01/07/24 and • Taylorsville Liledoun, which operated from July 2019 through June 2020 and restarted operation on 06/24/22 and will operate through 06/30/23. Two of these six sites, Candor and Castle Hayne, are also fine particle monitoring sites. The other four sites are ozone-monitoring sites. The monitoring regulations promulgated in 2006 include a method for measuring coarse particles. The coarse particle monitoring method measures coarse particles by the difference between the measured PM10 concentration and the fine particle concentration measured using the same sampling and analytical method. DAQ purchased two coarse particle BAM monitors and two coarse-particle optical monitors. After May 5, 2021, DAQ will shut down the coarse particle BAM monitor at Millbrook and only operate the coarse particle optical monitor at that site. Currently, DAQ is collecting coarse particle data at three sites, Millbrook (37-183-0014), Durham Armory (37-063-0015) and Castle Hayne (37-129-0002), a rotating PM10 site. By mid- January 2016, the division had converted all manual PM10 high volume samplers to continuous PM10 low volume samplers. Figure 47 provides the locations of the SLAMS and rotating PM10-monitoring sites. In addition, Figure 47 shows the sites that measure PM10-2.5 also known as coarse particles. The three Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) sites in North Carolina, at Swanquarter, Frying Pan Mountain and Linville Falls, not shown on the map, also measure PM10-2.5. Table 28 through Table 32 list the locations, monitor type, operating schedules, monitoring objectives, scales, statement of purpose, status for each current and proposed monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58 and any proposed changes to the network. All monitors listed in these tables are suitable for comparison to the 100 NAAQS. All monitors meet the requirements of Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58. All monitors operate year-round. Figure 47. 2022-2023 PM10 Monitor Locations 101 Table 28 PM10 Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041 b 371190047 b Site Name: Garinger High School Ramblewood Park Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 10200 Nations Ford Road City: Charlotte Charlotte Latitude: 35.2401 35.12395 Longitude: -80.7857 -80.90758 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Required by Appendix D. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling Required by Appendix D. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQPM-0798-122 Yes: EQPM-0798-122 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a Both monitors are a Met One 1020 beta attenuation monitor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 122. It uses the EPA equivalent method designation EQPM-0798-122. b Operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0669 102 Table 29 PM10 Monitoring Network for the Raleigh-Durham-Cary CSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-063-0015 37-183-0014 Site Name: Durham Armory Millbrook Street Address: 801 Stadium Drive 3801 Spring Forest Road City: Durham Raleigh Latitude: 36.032944 35.8561 Longitude: -78.905417 -78.5742 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Durham-Chapel Hill Raleigh Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Required by Appendix D. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Required by Appendix D. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQPM-0798-122 Yes: EQPM-0516-239 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a The Durham Armory monitor is a Met One 1020 beta attenuation monitor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 122. It uses the EPA equivalent method designation EQPM-0798- 122. The Millbrook monitor is a Teledyne T640X monitor. The Teledyne API T640X operates at 16.67 LPM, AQS Method Code 239, U.S. EPA equivalent method designation EQPM- 0516-239. Both monitors are also used to calculate and report PM10-2.5. 103 Table 30 The PM10 Monitoring Network for the Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point CSA AQS Site Id Number: 37-067-0022a 37-081-0013b Site Name: Hattie Avenue Mendenhall School Street Address: 1300 block of Hattie Avenue 205 Willoughby Blvd. City: Winston-Salem Greensboro Latitude: 36.110556 36.109167 Longitude: -80.226667 -79.801111 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Winston-Salem Greensboro-High Point Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Required by Appendix D. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Required by Appendix D. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure/ general/ background Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood/urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes: EQPM-0516-239 EQPM-0798-122 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a Operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0403. Monitor uses a Teledyne API T640X at 16.67 LPM, AQS Method Code 239, U.S. EPA equivalent method designation EQPM-0516-239. This monitor also reports PM10-2.5. b This monitor uses a Met One 1020 beta attenuation monitor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 122. This monitor uses the EPA equivalent method designation EQPM-0798-122. 104 Table 31 The PM10 Monitoring Network for the Fayetteville, Hickory, and Wilmington MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 370510009 37-003-0005 37-129-0002 Site Name: William Owen Taylorsville- Liledoun Castle Hayne Street Address: 4533 Raeford Road 700 Liledoun Road 6028 Holly Shelter Road City: Fayetteville Taylorsville Castle Hayne Latitude: 35.041416 35.9139 34.364167 Longitude: -78.953112 -81.191 -77.838611 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Fayetteville Hickory Wilmington Monitor Type: SLAMS Special purpose Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Statement of Purpose: Required by Appendix D. Compliance w/NAAQS. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling. Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling Monitoring Objective: Population exposure General/ background General/ background Scale: Urban Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes, but only operated for one year at a time Yes, but only operated for one year at a time Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: EQPM-0798-122 EQPM-0798-122 EQPM-0516-239 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Monitoring started on 06/24/22 and will end on 06/30/23 Monitoring will start 10/23/23 a The William Owen and Taylorsville Liledoun monitors use a Met One 1020 beta attenuation monitor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 122. The EPA equivalent method designation is EQPM-0798-122. The Castle Hayne monitor is a Teledyne T640X monitor. The Teledyne API T640X operates at 16.67 LPM, AQS Method Code 239, U.S. EPA equivalent method designation EQPM-0516-239. This monitor is also used to calculate and report PM10-2.5. 105 Table 32 The PM10 Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-033-0001 37-107-0004 37-117-0001 37-123-0001 Site Name: Cherry Grove Lenoir Community College Jamesville Candor Street Address: 7074 Cherry Grove Road 231 Highway 58 S 1210 Hayes Street 126 Perry Drive City: Reidsville Kinston Jamesville Candor Latitude: 36.307033 35.231459 35.810690 35.263165 Longitude: -79.467417 -77.568792 -76.897820 -79.836636 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Not in an MSA but in the Kinston, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Hourly 3-year rotation Statement of Purpose: Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling for northern piedmont areas Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling for coastal areas Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling for northern coastal areas Industrial expansion monitoring for PSD modeling for sand hill areas Monitoring Objective: General/ background General/ background General/ background General/ background; welfare related impacts Scale: Urban Urban Urban Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes, but only operated for one year at a time Yes, but only operated for one year at a time Yes, but only operated for one year at a time Yes, but only operated for one year at a time Meets Part 58, Appendix A Requirements: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Part 58, Appendix C Requirements: EQPM-0798- 122 EQPM-0798-122 EQPM-0798-122 EQPM-0798- 122 Meets Part 58, Appendix D Requirements: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D 106 Table 32 The PM10 Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-033-0001 37-107-0004 37-117-0001 37-123-0001 Site Name: Cherry Grove Lenoir Community College Jamesville Candor Meets Part 58, Appendix E Requirements: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Monitoring started on 12/18/22 and will end 01/07/24 Monitoring will resume on 10/01/23 Monitoring ended on 06/30/22 Monitoring will resume on 09/24/23 a All monitors use a Met One 1020 beta attenuation monitor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 122. All monitors use the EPA equivalent method designation EQPM-0798-122. The Castle Hayne monitor is a Teledyne T640X monitor. The Teledyne API T640X operates at 16.67 LPM, AQS Method Code 239, U.S. EPA equivalent method designation EQPM- 0516-239. 107 VII. Fine Particle, PM2.5, Monitoring Network This section contains three subsections. The first discusses the network of federal reference method, or FRM, and federal equivalent method, or FEM, fine particle monitors used to determine compliance with the national ambient air quality standards, or NAAQS. The second section discusses the continuous fine particle monitors used for air quality forecasting, real-time reporting and air quality index reporting. Sixteen of these monitors are FEMs that are also part of the FRM/FEM network. The third section discusses the fine particle manual speciation monitors. A. The Federal Reference Method and Federal Equivalent Method Network The DAQ currently operates 15 FRM or FEM fine particle monitoring sites, the local programs operate six, and a tribal program operates one. The United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, has approved the monitors at these sites so DAQ can use them to determine compliance with the NAAQS. DAQ believes this network is sufficient: • To protect the health and welfare of the people and environment in North Carolina, as well as • To provide information on how fine particles are transported to and within the state, • To identify the parts of the state with the highest concentrations of fine particles and • To know where fine particle concentrations do and do not exceed the NAAQS. Data from previous years, as shown in Figure 48, indicate statewide levels of fine particles are below the 24-hour and annual standards established by the EPA. Figure 48. Statewide trends for fine particles (from Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, October 2020, located at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water-quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina-2020/open) Figure 49 through Figure 60 provides the fine-particle design values for the monitors in North Carolina for the past 10 years. This information is important because the monitoring 108 regulations require a monitor to be attaining the NAAQS for the past five years before the operating agency can shut down the monitor. See 40 CFR Section 58.14(c)(1). All the currently operating FRM/FEM monitors meet this requirement. The regulations at 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D Section 4.7 requires ten monitors: • Garinger and Remount Road in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA; • Millbrook and Triple Oak in the Raleigh MSA; • Mendenhall in the Greensboro MSA; • Hattie Avenue in the Winston-Salem MSA; • Durham Armory in the Durham MSA; • William Owen in the Fayetteville MSA; • Bryson City as a transport monitor; and • Candor as a background monitor. Two monitors, Hickory and Lexington, are required in the December 2009 Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for Fine Particulate Matter.21 Figure 49. Measured daily fine particle design values in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA 21 “Redesignation Demonstration and Maintenance Plan for the Hickory and Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Areas” State Implementation Plan (SIP), Dec. 18, 2009, available online at http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality/air-quality-planning/state-implementation-plans/hickory-area. 109 Figure 50. Annual design values measured in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA Figure 51. Daily fine-particle design values measured in the Raleigh-Durham CSA 110 Figure 52. Annual fine-particle design values measured in the Raleigh-Durham CSA Figure 53. Daily fine-particle design values measured in the Greensboro-Winston-Salem CSA 111 Figure 54. Annual fine-particle design values measured in the Greensboro-Winston-Salem CSA Figure 55. Daily fine-particle design values measured in western North Carolina 112 Figure 56. Annual fine-particle design values measured in western North Carolina Figure 57. Daily fine-particle design values measured in central North Carolina 113 Figure 58. Annual fine-particle design values measured in central North Carolina Figure 59. Daily design values measured in eastern North Carolina 114 Figure 60. Annual fine-particle design values measured in eastern North Carolina The remaining ten monitors are less than 80% of the standard and may meet the additional requirement of having less than 10% probability of exceeding 80% of the NAAQS during the next three years, as required in 40 CFR Section 58.14(c)(1), based on design value trends and model predictions. Thus, there are 10 monitors, two operated by local programs that are not part of the DAQ PQAO, one operated by the tribal program, and seven operated by the DAQ PQAO, that are not required by Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 58 or by the state implementation plan and that could potentially meet all the requirements of 40 CFR Section 58.14(c)(1) to be shut down. DAQ reviewed the seven monitors operated by the division and ABAQA as well as their current monitoring objectives and determined these seven monitors are still required to meet state objectives and provide an adequate background network for prevention of significant deterioration permitting and modeling. These seven monitors are: • 37-021-0034 at the Board of Education in the Asheville MSA; • 37-101-0002 at West Johnston in the Raleigh MSA; • 37-121-0004 at Spruce Pine in Mitchell County • 37-129-0002 at Castle Hayne in the Wilmington MSA; • 37-131-0003 in Northampton County; • 37-147-0006 at the Pitt County Ag Center in the Greenville MSA; and • 37-159-0021 at Rockwell in Rowan County and the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA. 115 DAQ and ABAQA decided to continue operating these seven monitors for the following reasons: • The Board of Education, 37-021-0034, monitor is needed to provide AQI data and real time data for the Asheville MSA. Also, the Asheville MSA will soon cross the 500,000-population threshold that will require the MSA to have a monitor. • The West Johnston, 37-101-0002, monitor is in one of the fastest-growing areas of the state as well as the nation. Johnston County is North Carolina’s 2nd fastest growing count percentagewise and the nation’s 45th fastest-growing county percentagewise on an annual basis and 38th fastest-growing county in population. • The Spruce Pine, 37-121-0004, monitor is in a mining community and monitors potential mining activity impacts. • The Castle Hayne, 37-129-0002, monitor is in an area where there is a great deal of interest in the air quality because there were once plans to build a concrete facility across the road from the monitor. DAQ believes it is important to maintain a design value monitor at this location. In addition, nearby Pender County grew rapidly during the past decade. Pender County is the 57th fastest-growing county in the nation for the last year. • The Northampton County, 37-131-0003, monitor is needed to provide background data for Northampton County. • The Pitt County Agricultural Center, 37-147-0006, monitor is in Greenville, one of the largest urban areas in northern coastal North Carolina. Having a fine particle monitor here is important when there are wildfires in the area. DAQ also does air quality forecasting for this area. • The Rockwell, 37-159-0021, monitor is needed to maintain adequate spatial coverage for the fine particle monitoring network. Without it, there is a hole in coverage for the corridor between Charlotte and Winston-Salem. DAQ needs the data from this monitor for PSD modeling. The reasons for continued operation of these monitors are consistent with the federal guidelines in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 1.1.1, which states: “…a network must be designed with a variety of types of monitoring sites. Monitoring sites must be capable of informing managers about many things including the peak air pollution levels, typical levels in populated areas, air pollution transported into and outside of a city or region and air pollution levels near specific sources.” These monitors are necessary for the staff of DAQ to make informed decisions and provide air quality information to the public to inform public health and welfare decisions. Thus, the current network continues to meet the goals of DAQ to protect the public health and welfare. Thus, DAQ believes the 2022 fine particle network shown in Figure 61 is an adequate network to protect human health and environmental welfare and DAQ should continue to operate this network in 2023 and 2024. 116 Figure 61. Current 2023 and proposed 2024 federal reference and equivalent method monitoring network Other fine particle monitors that DAQ could consider shutting down are those monitors that exceed the minimum number of monitors required in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D- 5 provided in Figure 62. The latest estimated population of the metropolitan statistical area, or MSA, and the most recent fine particle 24-hour and annual design value for the area determines the number of required monitors for an area. Table 33 provides the 2021 population estimates for the MSAs in North Carolina, the design values for 2020-2022, the number of required monitors based on Appendix D and the number of current monitors operated by DAQ and the local programs. Currently, DAQ and the local programs are operating at least the minimum number of required monitors in all but the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA and the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA. DAQ has a written agreement with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, VDEQ, Office of Air Quality Monitoring, that VDEQ will maintain the minimum required number of monitors for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk- Newport News MSA.22 According to the U.S. Census 2021 population estimate, the population in the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA is above the threshold, requiring one PM2.5 monitor. The PM2.5 and the PM10 monitors have been approved by EPA to be located at the Coastal Carolina site. In 2022, the annual and daily fine-particle design values in North Carolina remained the same or showed some small increase, maintaining the number of required monitors in MSAs throughout the state. 22 See Appendix H. Monitoring Agreement between Virginia and North Carolina for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk- Newport News Metropolitan Statistical Area. 117 Figure 62. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Table D-5 Table 33 Design Values and Required Fine Particle Monitors for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas, MSA MSA Population Estimate, 2021 a 2020-2022 Fine Particle Design Value, as percent of NAAQS Number of Monitors operated in North Carolina b 24-Hour Annual Required c Current Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC 2,701,046 54 73 2 4 Virginia Beach-Norfolk- Newport News, VA-NC 1,803,328 39 54 2 0 d Raleigh, NC 1,448,411 54 70 2 3 Greensboro-High Point 778,848 46 62 1 1 Winston-Salem 681,438 54 70 1 3 Durham- Chapel Hill 654,012 46 61 1 1 Fayetteville 524,588 51 63 1 1 Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC 509,794 Not available 1 0 Asheville 472,341 40 48 0 1 118 Table 33 Design Values and Required Fine Particle Monitors for North Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Areas, MSA MSA Population Estimate, 2021 a 2020-2022 Fine Particle Design Value, as percent of NAAQS Number of Monitors operated in North Carolina b 24-Hour Annual Required c Current Hickory 366,441 51 68 0 1 Wilmington 291,833 34 37 0 1 Jacksonville 206,160 Not available 0 0 Burlington 173,877 Not available 0 0 Greenville 172,169 40 51 0 1 Rocky Mount 143,535 Not available 0 0 New Bern 122,273 Not available 0 0 Goldsboro 116,835 Not available 0 0 a Source: Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the United States and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021 (CBSA-MET-EST2021-POP), U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Released March 2022, available online at https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-total-metro-and-micro- statistical-areas.html. b Includes monitors operated by DAQ and the local programs. c Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 Protection of the Environment, Part 58 Ambient Air Quality Surveillance, Appendix D Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring, Table D-5, available on the worldwide web at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- idx?SID=f4ac6b967f32490f3a03543735a756fc&mc=true&node=ap40.6.58_161.d&rgn=div9. d Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, VDEQ, Office of Air Quality Monitoring operates three monitors in this MSA. The following tables provide the information required by 40 CFR Part 58 to be included in the network plan. Table 34 through Table 39 provide the locations of the current FRM/FEM fine particle-monitoring sites, the monitor type, operating schedules, monitoring objectives, scales and statement of purpose for all the current and proposed monitors in the North Carolina fine particle monitoring network. All monitors listed in these tables are suitable for comparison to the NAAQS. All the monitors meet the requirements of Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58. On Oct. 1, 2020, the Durham Armory, 37-063-0015, site stopped using the EPA reference method designation RFPS-1006-145, AQS method code 145 and started using the EPA automated equivalent method EQPM-0308-170, AQS method code 170 (that is a Met One BAM 1020 monitor). Also, on Oct. 1, 2020, the Millbrook, 37-183-0014, site stopped using the EPA reference method as the primary method and started using the EPA automated equivalent method EQPM-0516-238, AQS method code 238 (that is a Teledyne T640X monitor). A collocated FRM monitor also operates at the Millbrook site. 119 Table 34 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041b 37-119-0045 b 37-119- 0048 b 37-159-0021 Site Name: Garinger Remount Road Friendship Park Rockwell Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 902 Remount Road 2310 Cindy Lane 301 West Street City: Charlotte Charlotte Charlotte Rockwell Latitude: 35.2401 35.212657 35.281791 35.551868 Longitude: -80.7857 -80.874401 -80.851473 -80.395039 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia Monitor Type: SLAMS / NCore SLAMS SLAMS Special Purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly, collocated with a 1-in-3 day Hourly, collocated with a 1-in-12 day Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: 1 of 2 required monitors in Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia MSA. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. 1 of 2 required monitors in Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia MSA. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Source-oriented Population exposure General/ background Scale: Neighborhood Microscale Neighborho od Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM- 0308-170 Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 120 Table 34 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041b 37-119-0045 b 37-119- 0048 b 37-159-0021 Site Name: Garinger Remount Road Friendship Park Rockwell Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes- NCore, 1 of 2 required monitors for the Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia MSA. Yes –near road, 1 of 2 required monitors for the Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia MSA Yes, not required by Appendix D Yes, not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None Site may be relocated after 12/31/2023 a All monitors that are not NCore use a Met One BAM-1022 Monitor, AQS method code 209. The NCore monitor uses a BAM 1020, AQS method code 170. All monitors operate year- round. b Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS reporting agency 0669, operates these monitors. Table 35 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-101-0002 37-183-0014 37-183-0021 Site Name: West Johnston Millbrook Triple Oak Road Street Address: 1338 Jack Road c 3801 Spring Forest Road 2826 Triple Oak Road City: Clayton Raleigh Cary Latitude: 35.590833 35.8561 35.8654 Longitude: -78.461944 -78.5742 -78.8195 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Raleigh Raleigh Raleigh Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS / NCore SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Collocated w/1-in-3 day Hourly Statement of Purpose: AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. 1 of 2 required monitors in Raleigh MSA. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Air quality forecasting Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Source-oriented Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Micro-scale 121 Table 35 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-101-0002 37-183-0014 37-183-0021 Site Name: West Johnston Millbrook Triple Oak Road Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes, collocated with RFPS-1006- 145 Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes - EQPM-0516-238 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes - 1 of 2 required monitors for the Raleigh MSA. Also required for NCore Yes – near road; 1 of 2 required monitors for the Raleigh MSA. Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes No, but DAQ has a waiver for trees behind the monitor Proposal to Move or Change: None Monitoring method changed on 10/1/2020 None a The monitor at Millbrook uses a Teledyne-API T640X at 16.67 LPM, Air Quality System, AQS method code 238. This monitor is collocated with a Thermo Model 2025i PM2.5 Sequential Monitor with a very sharp cut cyclone, Air Quality System, AQS method code 145. The monitors at West Johnston and Triple Oak use a Met One BAM-1022 Monitor, AQS method code 209. Table 36 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Winston-Salem and Greensboro-High Point MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 370570002 37-067-0022b 37-067-0030 b 37-081-0013 Site Name: Lexington Water Tower Hattie Avenue Clemmons Middle School Mendenhall Street Address: 938 South Salisbury Street 1300 block of Hattie Avenue Fraternity Church Road 205 Willoughby Blvd. City: Lexington Winston- Salem Winston-Salem Greensboro Latitude: 35.814444 36.110556 36.026 36.109167 Longitude: -80.262500 -80.226667 -80.342 -79.801111 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Winston-Salem Winston- Salem Winston-Salem Greensboro- High Point Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS 122 Table 36 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Winston-Salem and Greensboro-High Point MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 370570002 37-067-0022b 37-067-0030 b 37-081-0013 Site Name: Lexington Water Tower Hattie Avenue Clemmons Middle School Mendenhall Operating Schedule: Hourly Collocated w/1-in-6 day Hourly Collocated w/1-in-3 day Hourly Collocated w/1- in-6 day Hourly Statement of Purpose: Required monitor for maintenance area & the Winston-Salem MSA. Compliance w/NAAQS AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Required monitor in Greensboro- High Point MSA. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure / general / background Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM- 0308-170 Yes - EQPM- 0516-238 Yes - EQPM- 0516-236 Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes- Required monitor by maintenance SIP Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes- Required monitor for the Winston-Salem MSA. Yes - required monitor for the Greensboro- High Point MSA. Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes 123 Table 36 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Winston-Salem and Greensboro-High Point MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 370570002 37-067-0022b 37-067-0030 b 37-081-0013 Site Name: Lexington Water Tower Hattie Avenue Clemmons Middle School Mendenhall Proposal to Move or Change: Monitoring method will change in 2023 None None None a The Hattie Avenue and Clemmons Middle School monitors use either a Teledyne-API T640 at 5.0 LPM or a Teledyne-API T640X at 16.67 LPM, Air Quality System, AQS method codes 236 and 238, respectively. The Lexington monitor uses a BAM 1020, AQS method code 170. This monitor is collocated with a Thermo 2025i PM2.5 Sequential Monitor with a very sharp cut cyclone, AQS method code 145. The monitor at Mendenhall uses a Met One BAM-1022 Monitor, AQS method code 209. All monitors operate year-round. b Operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0403 Table 37 2022-2023 NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill, Asheville and Hickory MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-063-0015 37-021-0034b 37-035-0004 Site Name: Durham Armory Board of Education Hickory Street Address: 801 Stadium Drive 175 Bingham Road 1501 1st Avenue, SW City: Durham Asheville Hickory Latitude: 36.032944 35.607500 35.728889 Longitude: -78.905417 -82.583333 -81.365556 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Durham-Chapel Hill Asheville Hickory Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly, collocated w/1-in-6 day Hourly, collocated with continuous monitor Statement of Purpose: Design value monitor for the Durham- Chapel Hill MSA. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Maintenance monitor for the Hickory MSA. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes 124 Table 37 2022-2023 NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill, Asheville and Hickory MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-063-0015 37-021-0034b 37-035-0004 Site Name: Durham Armory Board of Education Hickory Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM-0308- 170 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Yes – EQPM-1013-209 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – Required monitor for the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA. Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – Not required by Appendix D; Maintenance monitor for the Hickory MSA. Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Monitoring method may change in 2023 Monitors were moved off the roof to the ground in April 2023 Monitors were moved 38 meters north a The Durham Armory monitor uses BAM 1020, AQS method code 170. The Board of Education and Hickory monitors use a Met One BAM-1022 Monitor, AQS method code 209. All monitors operate year-round. b Operated by the Western North Carolina Regional Air Quality Agency, AQS reporting agency 0779. Table 38 The 2022-2023 NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Fayetteville, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-051-0009 37-129-0002 37-147-0006 Site Name: William Owen Castle Hayne Pitt County Ag Center Street Address: 4533 Raeford Road 6028 Holly Shelter Road 403 Government Circle City: Fayetteville Castle Hayne Greenville Latitude: 35.041416 34.364167 35.638610 Longitude: -78.953112 -77.838611 -77.358050 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Fayetteville Wilmington Greenville Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: hourly hourly hourly Statement of Purpose: AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes 125 Table 38 The 2022-2023 NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Fayetteville, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs a Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes – EQPM-0308- 170 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None a The monitors at William Owen and the Pitt County Ag Center use a Met One BAM-1022 Monitor, AQS method code 209. The Castle Hayne monitor uses a BAM 1020, AQS method code 170, collocated with a Teledyne- API T640x at 16.67 LPM, AQS method code 238. All monitors operate year-round. 126 Table 39 The NAAQS Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-121-0004 37-123-0001 37-173-0002 Site Name: Spruce Pine Candor Bryson City Street Address: 138 Highland Avenue 112 Perry Drive Parks & Rec Building, Center Street City: Spruce Pine Candor Bryson City Latitude: 35.912487 35.263165 35.434767 Longitude: -82.062082 -79.836636 -83.442133 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Compliance with NAAQS. Required general/ background monitor for North Carolina Required transport monitor for North Carolina; compliance w/NAAQS; air quality forecasting. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Welfare related impacts/ general/ background Regional transport/ population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Regional Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes – EQPM-0308- 170 Yes – EQPM-0308-170 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes –required background monitor. Yes – required transport monitor Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Method will change in 2023 Monitor will be moved in 2023 & monitor method will change in 2023 a The Spruce Pine monitor uses a Met One BAM-1022 Monitor, AQS method code 209. The other monitors use a Met One BAM-1020 Monitor, AQS method code 170. All monitors operate year-round. 127 The monitors at the Durham Armory, 37-063-0015, Bryson, 37-173-0002, Lexington, 37- 057-0002, Candor, 37-123-0001 and Castle Hayne, 37-129-0002, use the EPA automated equivalent method: EQPM-0308-170, AQS method code 170. The monitors at the Board of Education, 37-021-0034, Spruce Pine, 37-121-0004, Hickory, 37-035-0004, Rockwell, 37-159- 0021; Mendenhall, 37-081-0013, Triple Oak Road, 37-183-0021; Northampton County, 37-131- 0003; Pitt County Agricultural Center, 37-147-0006 and West Johnston, 37-101-0002, use the EPA automated equivalent method EQPM-1013-209, AQS method code 209. These 14 monitors collect data each hour. Collocated FRM monitors operate at the Lexington and Board of Education sites. A collocated FEM operates at the Hickory site. All the monitors operate year-round. Table 34 through Table 39 also summarize the status for each current and proposed monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendices A, C, D and E. These tables also provide the proposed changes to the network. DAQ evaluated each MSA operating more monitors than required by the regulations to determine if all the current monitors in the MSA are still needed and providing valuable information. There are seven MSAs in 2020 with more than the required number of monitors. DAQ does not operate monitors in one of these MSAs so the division did not evaluate that MSA and monitor. The six MSAs DAQ evaluated are the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, Raleigh, Winston-Salem, Hickory, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs. The monitors are the Rockwell monitor, 37-159-0021, West Johnston monitor, 37-101-0002, the Lexington monitor, 37-057- 0002, the Hickory monitor, 37-0035-0004, the Castle Hayne monitor, 37-129-0002, and the Pitt County Agricultural Center monitor, 37-147-0006. The West Johnston monitor is in one of the fastest-growing areas in the state. The Lexington monitor is in a fine-particle maintenance area. Thus, DAQ determined the Lexington monitor is necessary to demonstrate continuing maintenance of the standard and for the staff of DAQ to make informed decisions regarding development of state implementation plans and to provide air quality information to the public to ensure public health and welfare. Earlier in this subsection, DAQ discussed the rationale for keeping the Rockwell, Castle Hayne and Pitt Ag monitors. The Hickory monitor is also in a fine- particle maintenance area. Thus, the state implementation plan requires DAQ to operate this monitor. B. Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network As shown in Figure 63, DAQ currently operates 16 continuous fine-particle monitoring sites, the local programs operate six, and the tribal program operates one. DAQ and local programs use these monitors to meet federal requirements for air quality forecasting, providing real-time data to the public and meeting air quality index reporting requirements. The EPA approved 22 of these monitors for determining compliance with the national ambient air quality standards, or NAAQS. Six of these monitors are also required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D Section 4.7.2, which states: “Requirement for Continuous PM2.5 Monitoring. The state, or where appropriate, local agencies must operate continuous PM2.5 analyzers equal to at least one-half (round up) the minimum required sites listed in Table D-5 of this appendix. At least one required continuous analyzer in each MSA must be collocated with one of the required FRM/FEM/ARM monitors, unless at least one of the required 128 FRM/FEM/ARM monitors is itself a continuous FEM or ARM monitor in which case no collocation requirement applies.” Based on Table 33, a continuous monitor collocated with an FRM or a continuous FEM is required in: • Charlotte, which is operated by the local program, • Raleigh, • Greensboro, • Winston-Salem, which is operated by the local program, • Fayetteville and • Durham. Figure 63. 2022-2023 Fine Particle Continuous Monitor Network Besides being required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 4.7.2, continuous fine particle monitors are also required for real-time reporting (40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 1.1(a)), air quality forecasting and air quality index reporting (40 CFR Part 58, Appendix G, Section 3). DAQ is required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix G to do air quality index reporting in two MSAs that are not required to have a continuous monitor by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D: Asheville (operated by the local program) and Hickory. Thus, DAQ needs these two continuous monitors to meet Appendix G of 40 CFR Part 58 requirements. Of the 14 remaining continuous monitors, 10 are FEMs - Bryson City, Spruce Pine, Lexington, Rockwell, West Johnston, Northampton County, Castle Hayne, Triple Oak, Pitt Ag Center, and Candor - included in the FRM/FEM network and the division evaluated them earlier as part of that network. The local programs operate three. DAQ evaluated the remaining continuous monitor operated by the division to determine if it still adds value to the network and should continue operating. This fine particle monitor is at Leggett. The Leggett fine particle continuous monitor is required for air quality forecasting in the Rocky Mount area, thus DAQ cannot shut this monitor down while air quality forecasting continues for this area. 129 Table 40 through Table 45 lists the sites in the North Carolina fine-particle monitoring network with continuous monitors, their sampling schedules, monitoring objectives, scale of representation and statement of purpose. These tables also indicate whether the monitor is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS, it meets 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A, C, D and E requirements and any proposed changes. 130 Table 40 The Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041 37-119-0045 37-119-0048 37-159-0021 Site Name: Garinger Remount Road Friendship Park Rockwell Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 902 Remount Road 2310 Cindy Lane 301 West Street City: Charlotte Charlotte Charlotte Rockwell Latitude: 35.2401 35.212657 35.281791 35.551868 Longitude: -80.7857 -80.874401 -80.851473 -80.395039 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Monitor Type: SLAMS / NCore SLAMS SLAMS Special Purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Required by Appendix D for NCore sites. Required monitor for the Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia MSA. Real-time data reporting. Fine particle forecasting. Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Source-oriented Population exposure General/background Scale: Neighborhood Microscale Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM-0308-170 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes- 1 of 1 required monitors for the Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia MSA. Also required for NCore Yes –near road Yes, not required by Appendix D Yes, not required by Appendix D 131 Table 40 The Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None site may move after 12/31/2023 a The Garinger monitor uses a Met One BAM 1020 monitor. The other sites use a BAM 1022. All monitors operate year-round and provide real-time air quality data to the public through AIRNow and the state and local program websites. Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS reporting agency 0669 operates all these monitors except the Rockwell monitor. 132 Table 41 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Raleigh and Greensboro-High Point MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-101-0002 37-183-0014 37-183-0021 37-081-0013 Site Name: West Johnston Millbrook Triple Oak Road Mendenhall Street Address: 1338 Jack Road c 3801 Spring Forest Road 2826 Triple Oak Road 205 Willoughby Blvd. City: Clayton Raleigh Cary Greensboro Latitude: 35.590833 35.8561 35.8654 36.109167 Longitude: -78.461944 -78.5742 -78.8195 -79.801111 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Raleigh Raleigh Raleigh Greensboro-High Point Monitor Type: SLAMS Special purpose / NCore SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Required monitor for the Raleigh MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Raleigh MSA. Forecasting Required monitor for the Raleigh MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Raleigh MSA. Forecasting Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Required monitor for the Greensboro-High Point MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Greensboro-Winston-Salem- High-Point CSA. Forecasting Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Source-oriented Population exposure / general / background Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Micro-scale Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: No No Yes No Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Yes – EQPM-0516- 238 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Yes – EQPM-1013-209 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes - NCore Yes –near road Yes 133 Table 41 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Raleigh and Greensboro-High Point MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-101-0002 37-183-0014 37-183-0021 37-081-0013 Site Name: West Johnston Millbrook Triple Oak Road Mendenhall Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None None a Monitors at West Johnston, Triple Oak and Mendenhall use a BAM 1022 monitor. The monitor at Millbrook is a Teledyne T640X monitor. 134 Table 42 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Winston-Salem MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 370570002 37-067-0022b 37-067-0030 b Site Name: Lexington Water Tower Hattie Avenue Clemmons School Street Address: 938 South Salisbury Street 1300 block of Hattie Avenue Fraternity Church Road City: Lexington Winston-Salem Clemmons Latitude: 35.814444 36.110556 36.026000 Longitude: -80.262500 -80.226667 -80.342000 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Winston-Salem Winston-Salem Winston-Salem Monitor Type: SLAMS Other SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Real-time data reporting. Fine particle forecasting. Required monitor for the Winston-Salem MSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Greensboro- Winston-Salem-High Point CSA. Real-time AQI reporting for the Greensboro- Winston-Salem- High Point CSA. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: No No No Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM-0308- 170 Yes – EQPM-0516-238 Yes – EQPM- 0516-236 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – required monitor Yes – not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Monitoring method may change None None a The Forsyth County monitors use either a Teledyne-API T640 at 5.0 LPM or a Teledyne-API T640X at 16.67 LPM. The Lexington monitor is a BAM 1020. All monitors operate year- round. All monitors provide real-time air quality data to the public through AIRNow and the state and local program websites. b Operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0403 135 Table 43 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill, Asheville, Fayetteville and Hickory MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-063-0015 37-021-0034b 37-051-0009 37-035-0004 Site Name: Durham Armory Board of Education William Owen Hickory Street Address: 801 Stadium Drive 175 Bingham Road 4533 Raeford Road Water Tank 15 First Avenue City: Durham Asheville Fayetteville Hickory Latitude: 36.032944 35.607500 35.041416 35.728889 Longitude: -78.905417 -82.583333 -78.953112 -81.365556 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Durham-Chapel Hill Asheville Fayetteville Hickory Monitor Type: Special purpose Special purpose Special purpose SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Required monitor for the Durham- Chapel Hill MSA Real-time AQI reporting for the Durham-Chapel Hill MSA. Air quality index reporting. Fine particle forecasting. Air quality index reporting. Fine particle forecasting. Air quality index reporting. Fine particle forecasting. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM-0308-170 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes – EQPM-1013-209 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – required monitor Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – not required by Appendix D Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes 136 Table 43 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Durham-Chapel Hill, Asheville, Fayetteville and Hickory MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-063-0015 37-021-0034b 37-051-0009 37-035-0004 Site Name: Durham Armory Board of Education William Owen Hickory Proposal to Move or Change: Monitoring method may change in 2023 Monitors were moved to the ground in April 2023 None Monitors have moved 38 meters north a The WNC monitor, the Fayetteville monitor and the Hickory monitors are BAM 1022s. The Durham monitor is a BAM 1020. All monitors operate year-round. All monitors provide real-time air quality data to the public through AIRNow and the state websites. b Operated by the Asheville-Buncombe Air Quality Agency, AQS reporting agency 0779. 137 Table 44 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Wilmington, Greenville, and Rocky Mount MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-129-0002 37-147-0006 37-065-0099 Site Name: Castle Hayne Pitt County Ag Center Leggett Street Address: 6028 Holly Shelter Road 403 Government Circle 7589 NC Hwy 33- NW City: Castle Hayne Greenville Leggett Latitude: 34.364167 35.638610 35.988333 Longitude: -77.838611 -77.358050 -77.582778 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Wilmington Greenville Rocky Mount Monitor Type: SLAMS Special purpose Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Real-time AQI reporting. Fine particle forecasting. Real-time AQI reporting. Fine particle forecasting. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure General/ background Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes No Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM- 0308-170 Yes – EQPM-1013- 209 No – AQS method code 171 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None a The Castle Hayne monitor is a BAM 1020. The other monitors are BAM 1022s. The Leggett BAM is a Met-one BAM-1022 with a PM2.5 sharp cut cyclone. 138 Table 45 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-121-0004 37-123- 0001 37-131-0003 37-173-0002 Site Name: Spruce Pine Candor Northampton Bryson City Street Address: 138 Highland Avenue 112 Perry Drive 152 Hurricane Drive Parks & Rec Building, Center Street City: Spruce Pine Candor Gaston Bryson City Latitude: 35.912487 35.263165 36.511708 35.434767 Longitude: -82.062082 -79.836636 -77.655389 -83.442133 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Special purpose SLAMS Special purpose SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Real-time AQI reporting. General background site. Real- time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. General/ background site for Northampton County Regional transport site. Low elevation, i.e. valley, mountain site on the NC side of the Great Smokey Mountains National Park. Forecasting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure General background/ population exposure General/ background Regional transport/ population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Regional Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes – EQPM- 0308-170 Yes – EQPM- 1013-209 Yes – EQPM- 0308-170 139 Table 45 The 2022-2023 Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring Network for the Valley, Piedmont and Coastal Sites that are not in an MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-121-0004 37-123- 0001 37-131-0003 37-173-0002 Site Name: Spruce Pine Candor Northampton Bryson City Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – required background monitor. Yes – not required by Appendix D Yes – required transport monitor Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None Monitoring method will change in 2023 None Monitor will move in 2023 and method will change. a The Spruce Pine and Northampton monitors are BAM 1022s. The other monitors are BAM 1020s. C. Manual Speciation Fine Particle Monitoring Network DAQ operates one manual speciation fine-particle monitoring site. The local programs operate two. These monitors operate to meet federal requirements for the speciation trend network, or STN, and for national core, or NCore, monitoring stations as well as to provide information on the composition of fine particles in Winston-Salem. The regulations in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 4.7.4, which requires the agency to continue operating STN monitors, make the monitor at Garinger a required monitor. The monitors at Garinger and Millbrook are required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 3(b), which lists required monitors at NCore sites. In January 2015, the EPA ended funding for monitors in Asheville, Rockwell, Lexington and Hickory. The operators shut down the monitors in Asheville, Rockwell and Lexington in January 2015. The Hickory Super Speciation Air Sampling System, SASSTM, malfunctioned during the first half of 2014 so DAQ shut it down in June 2014. Table 46 lists the sites in the North Carolina manual speciation fine-particle monitoring network with sampling schedules, monitoring objectives, scale of representation and statement of purpose. Table 46 also indicates if the monitor is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A, C, D and E requirements and proposed changes. 140 Table 46 The 2022-2023 Fine Particle Manual Speciation Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, Raleigh, and Winston- Salem MSAs a QS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041 b 37-183-0014 37-067-0022 c Site Name: Garinger Millbrook Hattie Avenue Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 3801 Spring Forest Road 1300 block of Hattie Avenue City: Charlotte Raleigh Winston-Salem Latitude: 35.2401 35.8561 36.110556 Longitude: -80.7857 -78.5742 -80.226667 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Raleigh Winston-Salem Monitor Type: Speciation Trend Network / NCore Supplemental Speciation / NCore Supplemental Speciation Operating Schedule: 1-in-3 day, 24-hour 1-in-3 day, 24-hour 1-in-6 day, 24-hour Statement of Purpose: Required Monitor for NCore Required Monitor for NCore Provide speciation data for Winston- Salem Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: No No No Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: No – AQS method codes 810-812, 838-842 No – AQS method codes 810-812, 838-842 No – AQS method codes 810-812, 838- 842 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes- NCore & speciation trend network site Yes - NCore Yes – not required by Appendix D 141 Table 46 The 2022-2023 Fine Particle Manual Speciation Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, Raleigh, and Winston- Salem MSAs a Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None None a All monitors use a Met One SuperSASS for metals and ions and an URG 3000N for elemental and organic carbon. b Operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS reporting agency 0669 c Operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS reporting agency 0403 142 VIII. Lead Monitoring Network The DAQ currently does not operate any lead monitors. DAQ shut down the lead monitor located at the Raleigh Millbrook National Core, also known as NCore, monitoring site on April 30, 2016. As shown in Figure 64 statewide lead levels have fallen and currently remain below the standard, near or below the detection limit of the method. The 2013-2015 design values for lead in Raleigh and in Charlotte were zero. Figure 64. Statewide 24-hour lead levels through 2019 from Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, October 2020, located at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water-quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina- 2020/open) On Nov. 12, 2008, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, lowered the lead national ambient air quality standard, also known as NAAQS, to 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter and expanded the lead monitoring network to support the new standard.23 On Dec. 27, 2010, the EPA finalized changes to the lead monitoring network.24 These changes included lowering the threshold for fence line monitoring for lead-emitting facilities from one ton of lead per year to 0.5 ton of lead per year and changing the population oriented monitoring from urban areas with populations greater than 500,000 to NCore monitoring sites in urban areas with populations greater than 500,000. Fence line monitoring at facilities emitting more than one ton of lead per year or 23 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead, Federal Register, Vol. 73, No. 219, \ Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2008, p. 66964, available on the worldwide web at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008-11- 12/pdf/E8-25654.pdf. 24 Revisions to Lead Ambient Air Monitoring Requirements, Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 247, Monday, Dec. 27, 2010, p. 81126, available on the worldwide web at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12- 27/pdf/2010-32153.pdf#page=1. 143 that impact the ambient concentrations surrounding the facility such that ambient levels are at one half of the NAAQS or greater started on Jan. 1, 2010. Fence line monitoring at facilities emitting more than 0.5 ton of lead per year and population-oriented monitoring at required NCore sites started on Dec. 27, 2011. On March 28, 2016, the EPA finalized changes to ambient monitoring quality assurance and other requirements, which removed the requirement for lead monitoring at NCore monitoring stations in urban areas with populations greater than 500,000.25 In 2009, DAQ requested and received permission to forgo fence line lead monitoring at three facilities, which were listed in the 2005 National Emission Inventory, also known as NEI, or the 2007 Toxic Release Inventory, also known as TRI, as emitting over one ton of lead per year. These facilities are: • International Resistive Company, IRC, located in Boone, • Nucor Steel located in Cofield and • Carolina Power and Light Company, Progress Energy, Roxboro Steam Station located in Semora. The EPA granted the request and did not require DAQ to monitor at any of these facilities because none of the facilities emitted one ton or more of lead per year. In 2011, the EPA listed eight facilities in North Carolina as emitting over 0.5 tons of lead per year based on the 2008 NEI or the 2009 TRI. These facilities are: • Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC - Belews Creek Steam Station, located in Stokes County; • Duke Energy Progress- Roxboro Plant, located in Person County; • Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC - Marshall Steam Station, in Catawba County; • U.S. Army Fort Liberty (formerly Fort Bragg), located in Cumberland County; • Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc., located in Canton, in Haywood County; • Duke Power Company, LLC - Allen Steam Station, located in Gaston County; • Royal Development Co., located in High Point, in Guilford County; and • U.S. Marine Corps Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, located in Onslow County. In addition to the eight facilities on the EPA list, DAQ identified an additional facility, Saint-Gobain Containers, now doing business as Ardagh Glass, Incorporated, located in Wilson, in Wilson County, with reported 2009 lead emissions greater than 0.5 tons. As mentioned earlier, DAQ received permission not to monitor at one of these facilities, Progress Energy - Roxboro Plant in 2009. In 2011, DAQ requested that this 25 Revisions to Ambient Monitoring Quality Assurance and Other Requirements, Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 59, Monday, March 28, 2016, p. 17248, available on the worldwide web at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-03-28/pdf/2016-06226.pdf. 144 facility and six other of these facilities be removed from the list because they emit less than 0.5 tons per year: • Fort Liberty, • Camp Lejeune, • Royal Development Co., • the Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC - Belews Creek Steam Station, • the Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC - Marshall Steam Station and • the Duke Power Company, LLC - Allen Steam Station, The division also requested waivers for the other two, Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., and St. Gobain Containers, based on results of modeling. The EPA granted this request and did not require DAQ to monitor at any of these facilities.26 In 2013, Fort Liberty again reported over 0.5 tons of fugitive lead emissions in the TRI. Calculation of the 2014 fugitive lead emissions using AP-42 emission factors resulted in 2014 emissions of less than 0.5 tons. Thus, in 2015 DAQ requested a waiver from lead monitoring at Fort Liberty. The EPA did not grant the waiver because the lead emissions were less than 0.5 tons. However, in 2015 the EPA did renew the waiver for Saint-Gobain Containers even though its lead emissions are currently less than 0.5 tons. In 2018, Fort Liberty again reported over 0.5 tons of fugitive lead emissions in the TRI.27 As a result, DAQ requested a waiver for monitoring at the facility.28 In its response to the 2020-2021 network plan,29 the EPA agreed with the rationale DAQ provided; however, the EPA asked to work with DAQ and Fort Liberty to further determine if base activities have the potential to cause elevated ambient lead concentrations. Thus, the EPA neither required lead monitoring nor granted a waiver of lead monitoring requirements for the area near Fort Liberty. Instead, the EPA requested that DAQ work with the EPA to provide supplemental information in the next network plan on whether Fort Bragg would be expected to potentially contribute to elevated lead concentrations. DAQ met internally after receiving EPA’s request and determined we have done all we have the authority to do regarding monitoring at Fort Liberty. Under the 2010 lead monitoring rule, North Carolina was required to operate two population-oriented lead monitors located at the NCore monitoring sites, in Charlotte at Garinger High School and in Raleigh at Millbrook East Middle School. Both monitors started operation on Dec. 27, 2011. The first sampling day was Dec. 29. These monitors 26 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2011 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p3, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=7843. 27 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). TRI Explorer (2018 National Analysis Dataset (released November 12, 2019)) [Internet database]. Retrieved from https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_release.chemical, https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/, (April 11, 2020). 28 2020-2021 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Volume 1, July 2, 2020, Section II.G.2, https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=14029 (accessed May 5, 2021). 29 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2020-2021 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p14, available at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13593 145 operated on a 1-in-6-day schedule and measured lead concentrations by analyzing the filters from the low volume PM10 monitors that operated at the site. DAQ delivered the filters to RTI in batches of 50-80 where RTI analyzed them using x-ray fluorescence, which is the federal reference method for the low-volume PM10 lead monitoring method. Figure 65 shows the maximum PM10 lead concentrations measured at the two sites. Figure 65. Maximum annual lead concentrations measured at North Carolina NCore Stations As mentioned earlier, in 2016 the EPA finalized changes to ambient monitoring quality assurance and other requirements to remove the requirement for lead monitoring at NCore monitoring stations. The measured lead concentrations at the North Carolina NCore stations are well below 50% of the standard as Figure 65 clearly demonstrates. Because the measured lead levels were so low, EPA Region 4 granted DAQ permission to end the lead monitoring at the Millbrook NCore station as soon as the new requirements became effective on April 27, 2016. 146 IX. Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Network The DAQ previously monitored for urban air toxics, or UAT, at four sites operated by DAQ and at three sites operated by local programs. Currently, DAQ has been forced to suspend the VOC portion of the UAT program due to a veteran Chemist retirement. The Reedy Creek Laboratory supervisor is currently working to hire and train a replacement Chemist. This suspension of the VOC program began in February of 2023 and is expected to continue for the remainder of the year. DAQ hopes to reestablish the program in 2023 when staffing and training issues are resolved. DAQ continues to operate the UAT Aldehydes program in conjunction with the local programs. VOC collection involved the use of six-liter- pressurized canisters at all seven sites. The division analyzed the samples using pre-concentration gas chromatography with mass- spectrometric detection, or GC/MS, via the Compendium Method for Toxic Organics 15, or TO-15, for the 66 compounds in Table 47. Table 47 List of Measured and Reported Urban Air Toxic Volatile Organic Compounds, VOC Propene Freon 12 Freon 22 Freon 114 Chloromethane Isobutene Vinyl chloride 1,3-Butadiene Bromomethane Chloroethane Freon 11 Pentane Isoprene Acrolein 1,1-Dichloroethene Freon 113 Methyl Iodide Carbon Disulfide Acetonitrile Methylene chloride Cyclopentane MTBE Hexane Methacrolein 1,1-Dichloroethance Vinyl Acetate Methyl Vinyl Ketone 1,2-Dichloroethene Methyl Ethyl Ketone Chloroform 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Cyclohexane Carbon Tetrachloride Benzene 1,2-Dichloroethane Trichloroethylene 2-Pentanone 1,2-Dichloropropane 3-Pentanone 1,4-Dioxane Bromodichloromethane trans-1,3 Dichloropropene Methyl Isobutyl Ketone Toluene cis-1,3 Dichloropropene 1,1,2-Trichloroethane Ethylpropylketone(3-h) Tetrachloroethylene Methyl Butyl Ketone(2-h) Dibromoethane Chlorobenzene Ethylbenzene m- & p-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Bromoform 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene m-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene p-Dichlorobenzene Benzyl chloride o-Dichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1-Bromopropane DAQ collects aldehyde air samples on silica-2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine, or DNPH, cartridges with potassium iodide, or KI, ozone scrubbing at Millbrook and Candor. The cartridges are extracted and analyzed using ultra high-performance liquid chromatography, or UHPLC, with ultraviolet, or UV, detection for the list of compounds in Table 48. This program has been unaffected by the cessation of the UAT VOC program. 147 Table 48. List of Measured and Reported Urban Air Toxic Carbonyl Compounds Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde Propionaldehyde Benzaldehyde Hexaldehyde Tolualdehyde(-m) Butyraldehyde Methacrolein Valeraldehyde Crotonaldehyde Methyl Ethyl Ketone The division established the UAT monitoring network in conjunction with a national program originally proposed and designed by the EPA in 1999. DAQ has long recognized the importance of this network and has supported the continuation of the program. The North Carolina program had six urban sites and one rural site. The EPA stated the following objectives for the network it proposed in 1999: 1. Measure pollutants of concern to the air toxics program; 2. Use scientifically sound monitoring protocols to ensure nationally consistent data of high quality; 3. Collect sufficient data to estimate annual average concentrations; 4. Complement existing national and state/local monitoring programs; 5. Reflect “community-oriented,” i.e. neighborhood-scale, population exposure; and 6. Represent geographic variability in annual average ambient concentrations. DAQ developed the North Carolina network with these objectives in mind to focus on the urban areas within the state and to work in collaboration with the three local air quality agencies that regulate air quality programs in the metropolitan areas within their respective jurisdictions. The network was designed to complement the air toxics programs of each agency, to provide a “flexible approach” to address air toxics issues in the local areas and to provide a framework to conduct more dedicated monitoring to characterize the spatial concentration patterns of specific toxic air pollutants within an urban area and to concentrate on problem areas. DAQ chose the number of monitoring sites based on available funds, equipment and personnel including those in local programs and regional offices. The division chose the locations based on size of metropolitan statistical areas, or MSAs, in North Carolina, existing sites in urban areas and support of local programs. DAQ established sites for the North Carolina UAT network in urban areas as designated by the US Census Bureau, 2000 census. The EPA defines an “urban” area as a county with either a MSA population of at least 250,000 or a county with at least 50% urbanization as described by the census. The EPA defines a “rural” county as a county that has less than 50% urbanization as designated by the census. Because there are no NAAQS for UAT, the EPA does not require DAQ and local programs to operate a minimum number of required monitors. DAQ made the following changes during the last few years to the UAT monitoring network: 1. DAQ moved the Asheville site from the Health and Social Services building on Woodfin Street to a site at Asheville-Buncombe Technical College in 148 November 2004. Sampling for VOCs occurred at the Health and Social Services building from Jan.1, 2002, through Nov. 2, 2004. On May 4, 2022, DAQ replaced the walk-in shelter at the site with a smaller doghouse type shelter large enough to accommodate the sampler and its associated equipment. 2. DAQ closed the Research Triangle Park site, shared with EPA, when a major road project forced the EPA to move the building. When the EPA re- established the site a safe distance from the road construction, DAQ decided to seek other possibly better located sites for the UAT monitoring that might be more representative of urban populations in North Carolina. This site operated from June 26, 2004, through Dec. 31, 2009. 3. DAQ stopped monitoring for semi-volatile organic compounds, or SVOCs, by method TO-13 at all North Carolina UAT sites. 4. DAQ monitored for carbonyl compounds by method TO-11 at all North Carolina UAT sites from Aug. 3, 2006, through Dec. 9, 2009. However, sampling for carbonyl compounds by TO-11a resumed in July 2013 at two sites – Millbrook in Raleigh and Candor. The division collected carbonyl compounds by TO-11a at the Blackstone site from Nov. 12, 2013, through July 31, 2018. 5. DAQ upgraded one GC/MS system used for VOCs analysis by method TO-15 to lower detection limits. 6. The Blackstone site was a special-purpose monitoring site for monitoring VOCs and aldehyde concentrations prior to any shale gas development in the Sanford area. DAQ operated this site from Nov. 12, 2013, until July 31, 2018. 7. DAQ added a VOC monitor in Greenville at the Pitt County Agricultural Center monitoring site in 2018. 8. DAQ started reporting 1-Brompropane (AQS parameter code 43853) to AQS July 1, 2021, using AQS method code 150 at all UAT monitoring sites collecting 6-liter canisters. 9. DAQ suspended the program due to the retirement of a veteran staff and have not been able to fill the position. The program was suspended on Feb 2023. Table 49 through Table 51 provide locations, the monitor type, operating schedules, monitoring objectives, scales and statement of purpose of the current air toxic- monitoring sites, as well as the status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58. These tables also provide any proposed changes to the existing network. Sometime in the future DAQ may add a VOC monitoring site in Greensboro or Durham. The division has not yet identified a specific location, so the proposed site is not included in the table. All monitors meet the requirements of Appendices A and E of 40 CFR Part 58. Appendix C of 40 CFR Part 58 requirements do not apply to UAT monitoring. All monitors meet the applicable requirements in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, although this appendix does not require DAQ to operate any of these monitors. All monitors are special purpose, non-regulatory monitors because there 149 are no NAAQS for air toxic compounds. All monitors operate year-round on the EPA’s national 1-in-6-day schedule. 150 Table 49 The Air Toxics Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, Raleigh, and Winston-Salem MSAs AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041 a 37-183-0014 37-067-0022 b Site Name: Garinger Millbrook Hattie Avenue Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 3801 Spring Forest Road 1300 block of Hattie Avenue City: Charlotte Raleigh Winston-Salem Latitude: 35.2401 35.8561 36.110556 Longitude: -80.7857 -78.5742 -80.226667 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte- Concord-Gastonia Raleigh Winston-Salem Monitor Type: Non-regulatory Non-regulatory Non-regulatory Operating Schedule: 24-hour, midnight to midnight, 1-in- 6 day 24-hour, midnight to midnight, 1-in-6 day 24-hour, midnight to midnight, 1-in- 6 day Statement of Purpose: Monitor as many HAPs as possible. Monitor as many HAPs as possible. Monitor as many HAPs as possible. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure; general/ background Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Not applicable – uses AQS method code 150 c Not applicable – uses AQS method code 150 and 202 d Not applicable – uses AQS method code 150 c Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: VOC collection suspended 02/03/23 VOC collection suspended 02/03/23 VOC collection suspended 02/03/23 a Operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0669 b Operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS primary quality assurance organization and reporting agency 0403. c AQS method code 150, sample collection in a stainless steel 6-liter- pressurized canister and analysis using pre-concentration gas chromatography with mass spectrometric detection, for VOCs. d AQS method code 150, sample collection in a stainless steel 6-liter pressurized canister and analysis using pre-concentration gas chromatography with mass spectrometric detection, for VOCs and 202, sample collection on a silica-DNPH-cartridge with KI O3 scrubber and analysis using HPLC ultraviolet absorption, for carbonyls. 151 Table 50 The Air Toxics Monitoring Network for the Asheville, Wilmington and Greenville MSAs AQS Site Id Number: 37-021-0035 c 37-129-0010 37-147-0006 Site Name: AB Tech a Eagles Island Pitt County Ag Center Street Address: AB Tech College Battleship Drive 403 Government Circle City: Asheville Wilmington Greenville Latitude: 35.572222 34.235556 35.638610 Longitude: -82.558611 -77.955833 -77.358050 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Asheville Wilmington Greenville Monitor Type: Non-regulatory Non-regulatory Non-regulatory Operating Schedule: 24-hour, midnight to midnight, 1-in- 6 day 24-hour, midnight to midnight, 1-in- 6 day 24-hour, midnight to midnight, 1-in- 6 day Statement of Purpose: Monitor as many HAPs as possible. Monitor as many HAPs as possible. Monitor as many HAPs as possible. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Population exposure Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Not applicable – uses AQS method code 150 b Not applicable – uses AQS method code 150 b Not applicable – uses AQS method code 150 b Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: VOC collection suspended 02/03/23 VOC collection suspended 02/03/23 VOC collection suspended 02/03/23 a Operated by the Asheville Buncombe Air Quality Agency, AQS reporting agency 0779. b AQS method code 150, sample collection in a stainless steel 6-liter pressurized canister and analysis using pre-concentration gas chromatography with mass spectrometric detection, for VOCs. 152 Table 51 The Air Toxics Monitoring Network for Areas not in MSAs AQS Site Id Number: 37-123-0001 Site Name: Candor Street Address: 112 Perry Drive City: Candor Latitude: 35.263165 Longitude: -79.836636 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Non-regulatory Operating Schedule: 24-hour, midnight to midnight, 1-in-6 day Statement of Purpose: Monitor as many HAPs as possible. Monitoring Objective: General/ background Scale: Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Not applicable – uses AQS method code 150 and 202 a Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Proposal to Move or Change: VOC collection suspended 02/02/23 a AQS method code 150, sample collection in a stainless steel 6-liter pressurized canister and analysis using pre-concentration gas chromatography with mass spectrometric detection, for VOCs and 202, sample collection on a silica-DNPH-cartridge with KI O3 scrubber and analysis using HPLC ultraviolet absorption, for carbonyls. 153 X. DAQ NCore Monitoring Network This section provides information on the DAQ national core, or NCore, monitoring network. For information on the NCore site operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, see Appendix B. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality. The United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, approved the East Millbrook Middle School NCore site on Oct. 30, 2009. See Appendix I. NCore Monitoring Plan Approval Letter. A. Overview The NCore site operated by DAQ is located at the East Millbrook Middle School site. Specifics for this site are provided in Table 52. Table 52. Specifics for the East Millbrook Middle School NCore Site Parameter Description A) AQS identification number 37-183-0014 B) Site Name Millbrook C) Address 3801 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, N.C. D) Longitude/Latitude -78.574167/ 35.856111 decimal degrees E) Scale of Representation Neighborhood F) Monitoring Objective Population oriented G) Proximity to Local Emissions None within 500 meters H) MSA Description Raleigh I) Land Use Urban DAQ has been operating monitors at this site since April 17, 1989, and has no plans to relocate this site. The site is located at a school and the school has been very cooperative in allowing DAQ to make necessary changes at the site so that the site will meet 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E requirements. The school property is fully developed, and the division does not anticipate that the Wake County School System will need to develop the area where the monitoring site is located or will evict DAQ from its property anytime in the foreseeable future. B. Monitor Siting Considerations DAQ modified this site as necessary to meet the entire EPA monitor siting criteria in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E. The division addressed the following issues: 1) DAQ removed or trimmed the trees such that all probe inlets are greater than 10 meters from any tree drip line. 2) All particulate matter monitors, filter-based and continuous, are located on a 16-foot by 16-foot; wooden deck constructed in 2009 and maintained as needed. All inlets are within 1 to 4 meters of each other, all inlets are within one meter vertically of each other, all inlets are between 2 and 15 meters above ground and all inlets are more than 20 meters from any roadway. 3) DAQ installed all continuous gaseous monitors, SO2, NOy, CO and O3, in a temperature-controlled walk-in shelter, which meets all EPA siting criteria. 154 With the changes made to the monitoring site by removing the trees and building the deck, the site is suitable for monitoring for fine particles for comparing the measured concentrations to the national ambient air quality standards. The platform is far enough from the road so the site will meet the necessary neighborhood scale requirements for population-oriented monitoring. C. Monitors/Methods This NCore site has the following monitors in place and operating since Jan. 1, 2011, or before, except for lead, which began Dec. 27, 2011, and ended April 30, 2016, and nitrogen dioxide, or NO2, which began Dec. 10, 2013: Table 53. Specifics for the East Millbrook Middle School NCore Site Parameter Monitoring Objective Scale of Representation Operating Schedule AQS Method Code Trace level sulfur dioxide, SO2 Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 560 Trace level carbon monoxide, CO Population exposure Middle Hourly data year- round 554 Trace level reactive oxides of nitrogen, NOy Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 674 Nitrogen dioxide, NO2 Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 212 Ozone, O3 Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 047 PM2.5, fine PM, filter- based Population exposure Neighborhood 24-hour data on a 1-in-3-day schedule year-round 145 PM2.5, fine PM, continuous Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 238 Speciated PM2.5, filter based Population exposure Neighborhood 24-hour data on a 1-in-3-day schedule year-round 810-812, 838-842 PM10, continuous low volume sampler Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 239 PM10-2.5, coarse PM, by difference, PM10- PM2.5 Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 240 Meteorological measurements of: Wind speed Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 020 Wind direction Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 020 155 Parameter Monitoring Objective Scale of Representation Operating Schedule AQS Method Code Relative humidity Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 020 Ambient temperature Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year- round 020 The EPA modified the monitor regulations in 2012 to remove the requirement that all NCore sites monitor for speciated PM10-2.5, or coarse PM, filter-based. DAQ has no plans to add a speciated PM10-2.5 monitor to the site. In 2016, the EPA modified the monitoring regulations to remove the requirement that all NCore sites monitor for PM10 lead.30 As a result, and with EPA permission, DAQ ended the PM10 lead analysis on April 30, 2016. On June 1, 2021, the primary NO2 monitoring method at the site changed from a Teledyne-API Model T200UP photolytic-chemiluminescence monitor to a Teledyne Model T500U cavity attenuated phase shift spectroscopy monitor to accommodate the requirements of the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station (PAMS) program. On Jan. 26, 2022, the cable on the tower supporting the catalytic converter for the NOy monitor broke. The probe was at a height of approximately 5 meters instead of the desired 10 meters until the tower was repaired. The DAQ worked with a contractor to obtain the necessary parts to repair the tower. On June 21, 2022, the tower was repaired and the NOy probe was restored to a height of 10 meters above ground level. D. Readiness Preparation In preparation for the installation of the NCore monitors, DAQ addressed the following tasks: Parameter Status A) Acquisition of trace level gaseous monitors Completed B) Acquisition of low concentration gas dilution calibrators Completed C) Certification of clean air generators Completed D) Method detection limit studies for trace level monitors Completed E) Installation of 10-meter NOy Tower Completed F) Installation of filter based and continuous PM monitors Completed G) Installation of trace level gaseous monitors Completed H) Preparation of trace level gaseous monitor QAPP/SOPs Completed 30 Revisions to Ambient Monitoring Quality Assurance and Other Requirements, Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 59, Monday, March 28, 2016, available on the worldwide web at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 2016-03-28/pdf/2016-06226.pdf. 156 I) Meteorological tower Existing J) Ozone monitor Existing E. Waiver Requests Subject to the review of the administrator, DAQ requested and received the following waivers from the specific minimum requirements for NCore sites. Appendix I. NCore Monitoring Plan Approval Letter provides the EPA approval letter. 1. Millbrook Meteorological Tower The EPA designated the sampling site located at the Millbrook Middle School as an EPA NCore site. In addition to specified monitor types, the collection of meteorological data is also required and includes, at a minimum, wind speed, wind direction, relative humidity, and ambient temperature. The Millbrook site has been in operation since 1989 and the meteorological tower has the required sensors in place. The tower is located approximately due south and 15.5 meters from the shelters that house the various monitors, see Figure 66. The wind direction/speed sensors are located at a height of 10 meters above ground. Starting on June 1, 2021, the relative humidity sensor was relocated from 2 meters above ground level to 10 meters to accommodate the use of a Met One All In One (AIO2) meteorological station. At the same time, the ambient temperature sensor located at 2 meters as well as the delta temperature values were discontinued. The temperature sensor at 10 meters above ground was replaced with the AIO2. The division requested a waiver for the 2-meter height for the relative humidity and air temperature sensors in the 2021-2022 network plan. The tower is in an open, grassy area that is free from any obstructions in a 270º arc to the prevailing winds that come from the south/west direction. DAQ positioned the tower 15.5 meters from the shelters on a 3 percent uphill grade. This grade adds approximately one meter to the height of the tower above the shelters. This siting does not meet the EPA requirement for the tower being at a distance 10 times the height of the shelter, which is 3.7 meters. The EPA approved the waiver for the met tower when they approved the site as an NCore site. 157 Figure 66. Millbrook NCore Site (from City of Raleigh and Wake County iMAPS, http://maps.raleighnc.gov/iMAPS/ ) 158 Additionally, a single tree, approximately 7 meters tall, is located 18 meters to the south southwest of the tower. Since the position of the meteorological tower is free from any obstructions in a 270º arc to the prevailing winds that come from the south and west direction, DAQ is confident the measurements provided will be representative of meteorological conditions in the area of interest. The state, therefore, requested and the EPA granted a waiver and deemed the position of the tower to be acceptable. 2. NOy Probe Placement NCore probe siting guidance for NOy is a suggested probe inlet height of 10 meters. DAQ initially mounted the NOy probe inlet at a height of 5.08 meters from the ground at the proposed NCore site. DAQ requested and received a waiver of the 10-meter probe height requirement primarily for safety considerations and to facilitate maintenance on the sampling inlet, that is cleaning of the cross fitting, and to provide access for performance of calibration test points under reduced multi-gas calibrator system pressures that are near ambient conditions. The monitoring site is located at a middle school and elementary school and next to a day care. The converter box for the NOy monitor is very heavy and requires a special tower to support the weight in winds above 40 miles per hour or a tower with guy wires. Because the tower needs to be located next to the monitoring shelter to minimize the length of tubing involved to transport sample from the converter box to the monitor, there is no space at the site for guy wires to stabilize the tower. The guy wires would block ingress and egress from the monitoring shelter and create a safety hazard for the monitoring technicians. DAQ was concerned that placing the converter box on a 10-meter tower without guy wires at this site would be too dangerous because winds often gust to over 40 miles per hours during thunderstorms, hurricanes and other severe weather events. Later, the division decided to invest resources in the installation of a new tower at the site. The difference in cost between properly grounding the existing tower and installing a new tower rated to hold the weight of the converter box without guy wires was small compared to the cost of properly grounding the tower. Thus, after DAQ installed the new tower in late 2010, the height of the probe inlet was increased from 5.08 meters to 10 meters. 3. Teledyne T640x Temperature Control Daily Standard Deviation Measurement This year DAQ requests a waiver from the requirement listed in the Teledyne T640x Continuous PM2.5 Local Conditions and PM10 Standard Temperature and Pressure Validation Template regarding the standard deviation for temperature control. The template states that daily temperature control should exhibit a standard deviation of <2.1 ºC over a 24 hour period. DAQ replaced the BAM 1020 primary particulate monitor at the Millbrook Site (37-183-0014) with the Teledyne T640x on 10/01/20. The placement of the T640x meets all criteria specified in the validation template in the QA Handbook Volume II, Appendix D Revision No. 1.0 and in the manufacturer’s operations manual. As shown below, the 24 hour standard deviation for the instrument, as recorded between 06/22 and 01/23, exceeds the current template requirement for standard deviation over the entire period. During this time period the T640x operated within the acceptable temperature range of 0- 50 ºC, listed in the template. The T640x currently in use at the Millbrook site was purchased complete from the manufacturer with the recommended outdoor enclosure. 159 Figure 67. Millbrook T640x Temperature Data from June 2022 to January 2023 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Standard Devia�onDate Millbrook T640x Box Temp. (○C) 24hr. Standard Devia�on 160 XI. Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network The DAQ currently operates four nitrogen dioxide, or NO2, monitors. Mecklenburg County Air Quality operates two NO2 monitors and Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, or Forsyth County, operates one NO2 monitor. As shown in Figure 68 statewide NO2 levels have fallen and currently remain below the standard. Figure 68. Statewide 1-hour and annual NO2 levels through 2019 (from Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, October 2020, located at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water- quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina-2020/open) In 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, changed the NO2 primary national ambient air quality standards, or NAAQS, from an annual to an hourly standard of 100 parts per billion and established a new NO2 monitoring network to support the new standard.31 On Dec. 30, 2016, the EPA removed the requirement to establish near-road NO2 monitoring stations in core-based statistical areas, or CBSAs, having populations between 500,000 and 1,000,000 persons.32 The 2010 NO2 network, as modified in 2016, has three types of monitoring sites: • Near-road sites – micro-scale near-road NO2 monitoring stations in each CBSA with a population of 1,000,000 or more persons to monitor a location of expected maximum hourly concentrations sited near a major road with high average annual daily traffic, or AADT, counts. An additional near-road NO2 monitoring station is required for any CBSA with a population of 2,500,000 persons or more or in any CBSA with a population of 1,000,000 or more persons that has one or more roadway segments with 250,000 or greater AADT counts to monitor a second location of expected maximum hourly concentrations. 31 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide, Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 26, Feb. 9, 2010, available on the worldwide web at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf. 32 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Revision to the Near-road NO2 Minimum Monitoring Requirements, Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 251, Dec. 30, 2016, available on the worldwide web at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-12-30/pdf/2016-31645.pdf. 161 • Area-wide sites – monitoring stations in each CBSA with a population of 1,000,000 or more persons to monitor a location of expected highest NO2 concentrations representing the neighborhood or larger spatial scales. • Regional administrator required monitoring – additional NO2 monitoring stations nationwide in any area, inside or outside of CBSAs, above the minimum monitoring requirements, selected by regional administrators, in collaboration with states, with a primary focus on siting these monitors in locations to protect susceptible and vulnerable populations. North Carolina has two CBSAs with 1,000,000 or more persons, not counting Virginia Beach- Norfolk-Newport News. DAQ has a written agreement with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, VDEQ, Office of Air Quality Monitoring, that VDEQ will maintain the minimum required number of monitors for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA.33 Thus, North Carolina is required to have near-road monitoring stations and area wide sites in the Charlotte and Raleigh areas. Besides the near-road and area-wide sites, the Region 4 administrator selected the Hattie Avenue site, operated by Forsyth County, for regional administrator required monitoring.34 A. Near-Road Monitoring For information on the existing and proposed near-road monitoring site in the Charlotte area, see Appendix B. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality. The discussion below describes the Raleigh area site. The EPA approved the Triple Oak Road near-road site for the Raleigh CBSA in 2012.35 For details on the selection of Triple Oak Road and other considered locations, see the 2012 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for DAQ. Table 52 provides the 2019 traffic information for the area from the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Figure 68 presents a map showing the 2020 average annual daily traffic for the Raleigh MSA using assorted colors to depict different traffic volumes. The highest traffic volumes are shown in purple and red. The traffic volumes on the map are not adjusted for the fleet (number of diesel vehicles versus passenger vehicles). Table 54. Fleet Equivalent Average Annual Daily Traffic for Selected Road Segments in the Raleigh Metropolitan Statistical Area 36 Location ID Route Location Station Percent Passenger 2019 AADT Fleet Equivalent AADT 920000319 I-40 From Exit 287 to 289 09MC0031 94 177,000 272,580 33 See Appendix H. Monitoring Agreement between Virginia and North Carolina for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk- Newport News Metropolitan Statistical Area. 34 The list of NO2 monitors selected for regional administrator required monitoring is available on the worldwide web at https://www.epa.gov/amtic/no2-monitoring-susceptible-and-vulnerable-populations. 35 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2012 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p5, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=4599. 36 Average annual daily traffic data is available from the North Carolina Department of Transportation at https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/State-Mapping/Pages/Traffic-Monitoring-Reports-Statistics.aspx. 162 Table 54. Fleet Equivalent Average Annual Daily Traffic for Selected Road Segments in the Raleigh Metropolitan Statistical Area 36 Location ID Route Location Station Percent Passenger 2019 AADT Fleet Equivalent AADT 920000265 I-40 From Exit 285 to 287 09MC0031 94 176,000 271,040 920000971 I-40 From Exit 297 to 298 09MC0033 92 142,000 244,240 920000522 I-40 From Exit 283 to 284 09MC0031 94 157,000 241,780 920000548 I-40 From Exit 284 to 285 09MC0031 94 153,000 235,620 920001036 US 1- 64 From Exit 101 to I- 40 10MC0009 95 149,000 216,050 920000809 I-40 From Exit 303 to 306 10MC0021 91 112,000 202,720 920000351 I-440 From Exit 7 to 8 09MC0048 96 149,000 202,640 Figure 69. 2020 Map of Average Annual Daily Traffic in the Raleigh MSA 163 NC DOT provides DAQ with hourly traffic data for a location on I-40 east of Harrison Boulevard, between exits 287 and 289, which is about three to four miles from the monitoring site. The average daily traffic measured by this traffic sensor for 2021 was 134,294, ranging from a low of 67,554 on New Year’s Day, Jan. 1, 2021, to a high of 178,633 on the Friday before Thanksgiving, Nov. 19, 2021, for 361 of the 365 days in 2021. This number is about 20,000 more than what NC DOT reported for that segment in 2020 and 40,000 less than what NC DOT reported for that segment in 2019. Figure 70 shows an aerial view of the location. The monitoring probe is located 18 meters from the edge of I-40 and 4.3 meters above the ground. The monitoring station is approximately one kilometer from I-540 and 0.5 kilometers from Airport Boulevard. The Airport Boulevard ramp ends approximately 300 meters southeast from the monitoring site. The location is at grade with the roadway. There are no barriers between the road and the monitoring station. There are trees behind the monitoring station for which DAQ could not receive permission from the property owner to cut down. The DAQ requested and received a waiver from the EPA for these trees. More information on the waiver is available in Appendix G. Approved Waivers and Other Requests, Waiver Renewals, Waiver renewal request for the trees at Triple Oak Road. Figure 70 Wake County Near-Road Monitoring Station Location, red circle B. Area wide sites The area wide sites are located at the NCore sites in Charlotte and Raleigh. Mecklenburg County Air Quality has operated a nitrogen dioxide monitor at the Garinger site since Nov. 12, 1999. DAQ began operating a nitrogen dioxide monitor at the Millbrook site on Dec. 10, 2013. 164 C. Regional Administrator Required Monitoring For information on the Hattie Avenue regional administrator required monitoring site see Appendix C. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection. D. Other Monitoring Besides the monitoring required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, DAQ also operated a background monitor at the Blackstone monitoring site in Lee County as part of a shale-gas extraction background study from Dec. 9, 2014, to Aug. 1, 2018. Because the division finished the background study, DAQ shut down this monitor and moved it to Northampton County to collect background data there. The Northampton County monitor started collecting data on July 29, 2019. DAQ also added a background monitor to the ozone-monitoring site at Rockwell on Oct. 22, 2020. Figure 71 provides the location of the nitrogen dioxide monitors throughout North Carolina. Figure 71. 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network Table 53 and Table 54 provide: • The location, • The statement of purpose, • The status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58 and • A summary of proposed and planned changes to the nitrogen dioxide monitoring network in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia and Raleigh MSAs, respectively. Table 55 and Table 56 provide: • The location, • The statement of purpose, 165 • The status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58 and • A summary of proposed and planned changes to the nitrogen dioxide monitoring network in the Winston-Salem MSA and in other areas in North Carolina that are outside of MSAs, respectively. 166 Table 55 The 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA a AQS Site Id Number: 37-119-0041 b 37-119-0045 b 37-119-0050 b 37-159-0021 Site Name: Garinger High School Remount Equipment Drive Rockwell Street Address: 1130 Eastway Drive 1030 Remount Road Equipment Drive 301 West Street City: Charlotte Charlotte Charlotte Rockwell Latitude: 35.2401 35.27831 35.212657 35.551868 Longitude: -80.7857 -80.79698 -80.874401 -80.395039 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte-Concord- Gastonia Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia Charlotte- Concord- Gastonia Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS SLAMS Special Purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Area wide site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Highest concentration Highest concentration General/ background Scale: Neighborhood Microscale Microscale Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – RFNA-1194- 099 Yes – EQNA- 0512-200 Yes – EQNA- 0320-256 Yes – EQNA- 0514-212 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes- area wide Yes –near road Yes –near road Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: Method changed in 2022 None May start Jan. 1, 2024 Converted to a SLAMS a The area-wide monitor uses a Teledyne API 200 EU/501, AQS method code 599. The Remount near road monitor uses a chemiluminescence detector with a photolytic convertor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 200. The Equipment Drive near road monitor uses a Teledyne Model N500, AQS method code 256, which uses Cavity Attenuated Phase Shift Spectroscopy to measure NO2 directly. The Rockwell monitor uses a Teledyne Model T500U, AQS method code 212, which uses Cavity Attenuated Phase Shift Spectroscopy to measure NO2 directly. b The near-road and area-wide monitors are operated by Mecklenburg County Air Quality, AQS primary quality assurance and reporting agency 0669. 167 Table 56 The 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network for the Raleigh MSA AQS Site Id Number: 37-183-0014 a 37-183-0021 b Site Name: Millbrook School Triple Oak Street Address: 3801 Spring Forest Road 2826 Triple Oak Drive City: Raleigh Cary Latitude: 35.8561 35.8654 Longitude: -78.5742 -78.8195 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Raleigh Raleigh Monitor Type: SLAMS SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Hourly Statement of Purpose: Area wide site in Raleigh MSA. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Near road monitoring site. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Source-oriented Scale: Neighborhood Microscale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQNA-0514-212 Yes – EQNA-0512- 200 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes- area wide Yes –near road Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a The Millbrook monitor uses a Teledyne Model T500U, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 212, which uses Cavity Attenuated Phase Shift Spectroscopy to measure NO2 directly. b The Triple Oak monitor uses a chemiluminescence detector with a photolytic convertor, AQS method code 200 Table 57 The Winston-Salem MSA Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network a AQS Site Id Number: 37-067-0022 Site Name: Hattie Avenue Street Address: Corner of 13th & Hattie Avenue City: Winston-Salem Latitude: 36.110556 Longitude: -80.226667 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Winston-Salem Monitor Type: SLAMS Operating Schedule: Hourly Statement of Purpose: Regional administrator required monitor for Region 4. AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Monitoring Objective: Population exposure Scale: Neighborhood Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes 168 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – RFNA-1194-099 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – required regional administrator monitor. Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None a The monitor uses a Teledyne API chemiluminescence detector with a catalytic convertor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 599 and is operated by Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection, AQS reporting agency 0403. Table 58 The 2022-2023 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring Network for Areas not in MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-131-0003 Site Name: Northampton County Street Address: 152 Hurricane Drive City: Gaston Latitude: 36.511708 Longitude: -77.655389 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Roanoke Rapids Micro-MSA Monitor Type: Special purpose Operating Schedule: Hourly Statement of Purpose: General/background site for Northampton County Monitoring Objective: General/ background Scale: Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Yes Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: Yes – EQNA-0512-200 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None a Monitor uses a chemiluminescence detector with a photolytic convertor, Air Quality System, AQS, method code 200 169 XII. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station, PAMS, Network On Oct. 26, 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, published a revised national ambient air quality standard, or NAAQS, for ozone. See 80 Federal Register 65,291 (2015). In addition to establishing a revised NAAQS for ozone, the EPA also finalized revisions to the photochemical assessment monitoring station, or PAMS, network requirements. The EPA originally established the PAMS network requirements in 1993. They required areas in certain ozone nonattainment areas to gather ambient monitoring data that would be useful in evaluating control strategies and better understand ozone formation. See 58 Federal Register 8452 (Feb. 12, 1993). The 2015 revisions to the PAMS monitoring requirements significantly changed the program and imposed for the first time PAMS ambient monitoring requirements at National Core, or NCore, sites in ozone attainment areas to begin June 1, 2019. On Jan. 8, 2020, the EPA published a rule to provide state and local agencies an additional two years until June 1, 2021, to implement the PAMS program requirements. See 85 Federal Register 834 (Jan. 8, 2020). The EPA needed this extension to provide all agencies the funding and equipment necessary to implement the program. Absent granting of a waiver, North Carolina is required to install two PAMS stations – one in Charlotte at the Garinger NCore monitoring station, 37-119-0041, and one in Raleigh at the Millbrook NCore monitoring station, 37-183-0014, by June 1, 2021. DAQ has continued preparing to implement the program as funding and personnel resources allowed with the goal of full implementation on or before June 1, 2021. Information on the Charlotte Garinger NCore monitoring station is available in Appendix B. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality. DAQ submitted a PAMS monitoring plan to the EPA regional administrator by July 1, 2018, as required by 40 CFR Section 58.10 (a) (10). The DAQ PAMS monitoring plan follows: DAQ operates an NCore monitoring station in accordance with Section 3 of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D. The division’s NCore station, 37-183-0014, is in the Raleigh MSA, which has a population of 1,000,000 or more. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 5(a) requires PAMS at NCore stations located in core-based statistical areas with populations of 1,000,000 or more. Title 40 CFR Section 58.13 (h) states “…The Photochemical Assessment Monitoring sites required under [40 CFR part 58,] Appendix D…, section 5(a) must be physically established and operating under all of the requirements of …part [58], including the requirements of appendix A, C, D and E of …part [58], no later than June 1, 2021.” A. PAMS Implementation Process DAQ participates in the PAMS implementation process directed by the EPA and associated EPA contractors (currently EPA and Battelle, collectively – EPA). The PAMS implementation process consisted of a series of conference calls directed by EPA to disseminate and discuss monitoring requirements, monitoring methods, monitoring logistics, quality assurance requirements and general implementation processes, i.e., national contracts, funding, etc., relevant to PAMS monitoring. EPA conducted the calls from 2016 to 2022. The PAMS conference calls have introduced and provided a series of guidance documents, draft quality assurance procedures and information on available systems for collecting PAMS data. 170 EPA has provided a PAMS gas chromatographic instrument and limited additional funding to DAQ for operations, maintenance, other equipment, and capital expenditures in support of the PAMS implementation. The division continues to work toward implementation of all of the required parameters while continuing to anticipate a possible delay in establishment and operation of some of the PAMS requirements at the DAQ NCore station. DAQ worked with EPA through the implementation process. The division will continue to work with EPA to implement the requirements as soon as it is practical and based on the availability of resources and the ability to get all of the processes, procedures and equipment up and operational so as to be able to begin operations within a reasonable timeframe for as many of the PAMS parameters as possible. B. Major Objectives Listed below are major objectives from 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 5(a) of the PAMS program with a description of the objective and DAQ’s plan to implement the stated objective. 1. PAMS Monitoring Location: The PAMS monitoring location for selected PAMS parameters is the NCore station operated by DAQ at East Millbrook Middle School, AQS ID – 37-183-0014. EPA has not allocated all the necessary funding for required modifications and equipment for the monitoring station, i.e. – modifying cabinetry and shelving, ventilation for auto GC, additional electrical circuitry, etc. DAQ has worked to purchase equipment and make required modifications to the monitoring station and as of April 17, 2023, equipment is installed and operational at the site. The auto-GC, which was installed two years ago has suffered a series of problems which has precluded its operation. Previous contamination issues have been resolved and, if current staffing issues are resolved in time, it may begin operation for the 2023 PAMs season. 2. Development of a PAMS Quality Assurance Project Plan: The EPA provided a national “PAMS Quality Assurance Project Plan,” or QAPP, for agencies to implement. EPA distributed the QAPP to monitoring agencies in 2019 and posted it on the AMTIC website. DAQ revised and adapted the EPA-provided QAPP for use in the DAQ program and the EPA-approved DAQ’s QAPP on March 30, 2021. Subsequently, DAQ had to greatly modify the EPA- approved QAPP to redress several issues. The amended QAPP has been resubmitted and approved by LSASD on February 20, 2023. 3. Measurement of hourly averaged speciated volatile organic compounds, or VOCs: DAQ received a Markes/Agilent autoGC in late 2018. The division installed the system in the shelter at Millbrook in January 2021. The system has undergone extensive repair to address contamination problems in the sample collection and delivery component of the system and to date is operational. The auto-GC is functional but the PAMS operator resigned in February, 2023. DAQ is short-handed currently and is in the process of hiring an operator for the auto-GC system. 4. Three 8-hour averaged carbonyl samples per day on a 1-in-3-day schedule or hourly averaged formaldehyde: 171 As of April 29, 2021, DAQ had installed the sampler and written SOPs in support of PAMS carbonyls monitoring. DAQ currently collects 24-hour carbonyl samples at Millbrook in support of DAQ’s urban air toxics monitoring program. To implement PAMS carbonyl monitoring the division upgraded its carbonyl equipment. DAQ began operation of PAMS carbonyl monitoring in the DAQ program on May 1, 2021. The DAQ has audited the mass flow controllers in the samplers with a second source flow transfer standard to obtain an intolerance flow and documented the results in the site logbook. 5. Hourly averaged ozone: DAQ currently conducts ozone monitoring at the Millbrook NCore, monitoring location in accordance with this requirement. 6. Hourly averaged nitrogen oxide, or NO, true nitrogen dioxide, or NO2, and total reactive nitrogen, or NOy: DAQ currently operates an NO and NOy monitor at the Millbrook NCore monitoring location in accordance with this requirement. In May 2021, DAQ replaced the photolytic NO2 monitor at the Millbrook NCore site with a CAPS monitor and conducted the MDL study as required in the PAMS QAPP. 7. Hourly averaged ambient temperature: DAQ currently collects hourly averaged ambient temperatures at the Millbrook NCore monitoring location in accordance with this requirement. On June 1, 2021, the ambient temperature sensor was relocated from 2 meters above ground level to 10 meters above ground level. The site does not meet the requirement for the ambient temperature and relative humidity sensor to be 30 meters horizontally from a paved surface. The met tower at Millbrook is approximately 12 meters from a parking lot on one side and a driveway on the other side and 21 meters from Spring Forest Road. 8. Hourly vector-averaged wind direction: DAQ currently collects hourly vector-averaged wind direction at the Millbrook NCore monitoring location in accordance with this requirement. 9. Hourly vector-averaged wind speed: DAQ currently collects hourly vector-averaged wind speed at the Millbrook NCore monitoring location in accordance with this requirement. 10. Hourly average atmospheric pressure: The division added a Met One AIO2 sensor to the site to collect this measurement and began reporting the data to AQS on June 1, 2021. The sensor is located 10 meters above ground level. 11. Hourly averaged relative humidity: DAQ currently collects hourly averaged relative humidity at the Millbrook NCore monitoring location. On June 1, 2021, the relative humidity sensor was relocated from 2 meters above ground level to 10 meters above ground level. The site does not meet the requirement for the ambient temperature and relative humidity sensor to be 30 meters horizontally from a paved 172 surface. The met tower at Millbrook is approximately 12 meters from a parking lot on one side and a driveway on the other side and 21 meters from Spring Forest Road. 12. Hourly precipitation: DAQ currently collects hourly precipitation measurements at the Millbrook NCore monitoring location in accordance with this requirement. 13. Hourly averaged mixing-height: As of April 29, 2021, DAQ has installed a ceilometer at the site and has written an SOP for its operation. DAQ continues to work with the University of Maryland Baltimore County to report the hourly averaged mixing height data. 14. Hourly averaged solar radiation: DAQ currently collects hourly averaged solar radiation at the Millbrook NCore monitoring location in accordance with this requirement. 15. Hourly averaged ultraviolet radiation: As of April 29, 2021, DAQ has purchased and installed equipment to provide hourly averaged ultraviolet radiation monitoring. DAQ will work to get the equipment up and reporting hourly averaged ultraviolet radiation data in the DAQ program as soon as it is practical and plans to have the equipment reporting data to AQS in time for the 2023 PAMs season. C. Monitors/Methods The Millbrook NCore site has the following PAMS monitors in place and operating since Jan. 1, 2011, or before, except for NO2, which began Dec. 10, 2013: Parameter Monitoring Objective Scale of Representation Operating Schedule AQS Method Code Trace level reactive oxides of nitrogen, NOy, including NO Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 674 Nitrogen dioxide, NO2, including NO Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 200 Ozone, O3 Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 047 Meteorological measurements of: Wind speed Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 020 Wind direction Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 020 Relative humidity Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 020 Ambient temperature Population exposure Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 020 Solar radiation Maximum ozone concentration Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 011 173 Parameter Monitoring Objective Scale of Representation Operating Schedule AQS Method Code Rain melt precipitation Maximum ozone concentration Neighborhood Hourly data year-round 011 174 XIII. Background Atmospheric Deposition Network In 2018, the DAQ started a background atmospheric deposition network. The network consists of seven sites generally oriented near DAQ’s regional offices as shown in Figure 72. Figure 72. Locations of the Background Atmospheric Deposition Network (from NC DAQ Background PFAS Rainwater Network, located at PowerPoint Presentation (nc.gov)) Table 57 and Table 58 provide: • The location, • The statement of purpose, • The status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58 and • A summary of proposed and planned changes to the background atmosphere deposition network in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia and Raleigh MSAs, and Greensboro and Asheville MSAs, respectively. Table 59 and Table 60 provide: • The location, • The statement of purpose, • The status for each monitoring site regarding whether it is suitable for comparison to the NAAQS and meets the requirements in Appendices A, C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 58 and • A summary of proposed and planned changes to the background atmospheric deposition network in the Wilmington and Greenville MSAs and in other areas in North Carolina that are outside of MSAs, respectively. 175 Table 59 The 2022-2023 Atmospheric Deposition Network for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia and Raleigh MSAs a Table 60 The 2022-2023 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network for the Greensboro and Asheville MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-081-0013 37-021-0038 Site Name: Mendenhall Asheville Street Address: 205 Willoughby Blvd. 2826 Triple Oak Road City: Greensboro Cary Latitude: 36.109167 35.8654 Longitude: -79.801111 -78.8195 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Greensboro-High Point Asheville Monitor Type: Special purpose Special purpose AQS Site Id Number: 37-159-0021 37-183-0014 Site Name: Rockwell Millbrook Street Address: 301 West Street 3801 Spring Forest Road City: Rockwell Raleigh Latitude: 35.551868 35.8561 Longitude: -80.395039 -78.5742 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Raleigh Monitor Type: Special purpose Special purpose Operating Schedule: Weekly samples collected each month from the first to second Tuesday of the month Weekly samples collected each month from the first to second Tuesday of the month Statement of Purpose: General/ background monitor General/ background monitor Monitoring Objective: General/background Population exposure; general/ background Scale: Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: No, not applicable No, not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Not applicable Not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: No – not applicable No – not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a These sites use N-CON Model 125-110, wet/dry deposition samplers with ETI NOAH-IV rain gauges. 176 Table 60 The 2022-2023 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network for the Greensboro and Asheville MSAs a Operating Schedule: Weekly samples collected each month from the first to second Tuesday of the month Weekly samples collected each month from the first to second Tuesday of the month Statement of Purpose: General/ background monitor General/ background monitor Monitoring Objective: Population exposure; general/ background General/ background monitor Scale: Urban Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: No, not applicable No, not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Not applicable Not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: No – not applicable No – not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a These sites use N-CON Model 125-110, wet/dry deposition samplers with ETI NOAH-IV rain gauges. Table 61 The 2022-2023 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network for the Wilmington and Greenville MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-129-0010 37-147-0006 Site Name: Eagles Island Pitt County Ag Center Street Address: Battleship Drive 403 Government Circle City: Wilmington Greenville Latitude: 34.235556 35.638610 Longitude: -77.955833 -77.358050 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Battleship Drive Greenville Monitor Type: Special purpose Special purpose Operating Schedule: Weekly samples collected each month from the first to second Tuesday of the month Weekly samples collected each month from the first to second Tuesday of the month Statement of Purpose: General/ background monitor General/ background monitor Monitoring Objective: Population exposure; General/ background Population exposure; General/ background Scale: Urban Urban Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: No, not applicable No, not applicable 177 Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Not applicable Not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: No – not applicable No – not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None None a These sites use N-CON Model 125-110, wet/dry deposition samplers with ETI NOAH-IV rain gauges. Table 62 The 2022-2023 Background Atmospheric Deposition Network for Areas not in MSAs a AQS Site Id Number: 37-123-0001 Site Name: Candor Street Address: 112 Perry Drive City: Candor Latitude: 35.263165 Longitude: -79.836636 MSA, CSA or CBSA represented: Not in an MSA Monitor Type: Special purpose Operating Schedule: Weekly samples collected each month from the first to second Tuesday of the month Statement of Purpose: General/ background monitor Monitoring Objective: Welfare related impacts/ general/ background Scale: Regional Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS: No, not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix A: Not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix C: No – not applicable Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix D: Yes – not required Meets Requirements of Part 58, Appendix E: Yes Proposal to Move or Change: None a This site uses a N-CON Model 125-110, wet/dry deposition sampler with an ETI NOAH-IV rain gauge. 178 XIV. EPA Approval Dates for Quality Management Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plans Table 61 provides the dates the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, approved the quality management plan, or QMP, and quality assurance project plans, or QAPPs, for the DAQ. Table 63 Dates the EPA Approved the Quality Management Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plans Document Date Approved by EPA Quality Management Plan August 12, 2019 Quality Assurance Project Plan for PM Monitoring June 16, 2022 Quality Assurance Project Plan for PAMS Monitoring February 24, 2023 Quality Assurance Project Plan for NCore Monitoring June 21, 2023 Quality Assurance Project Plan for Urban Air Toxics Monitoring December 21, 2022 Quality Assurance Project Plan for SLAMS for Sulfur Dioxide and Nitrogen Dioxide Monitoring August 3, 2022 Near-road Monitoring QAPP November 1, 2022 Ozone QAPP March 25, 2022 PM 2.5 Speciation Jan. 16, 2002 Northampton County Background Monitoring QAPP October 3, 2022 Background Monitoring Program QAPP January 4, 2023 The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, or DEQ, submitted a QMP to EPA Region 4 in 2019. On August 12, 2019, the EPA formally approved the QMP. In 2023, DAQ worked on updating its QAPPs and addressed the items where the NCore QAPP was conditionally approved. The NCore QAPP was approved on June 21, 2023 and was the last conditionally approved QAPP belonging to the NCDAQ. The division is revising the speciation PM2.5 QAPP to comply with the EPA’s latest guidance. DAQ is also writing a QAPP for meteorological data collection. DAQ will submit outstanding QAPPs as resources allow. 179 Figure 73. Signature Page from the DEQ Quality Management Plan 180 181 Figure 74. Approval Letter for the PAMS QAPP 182 Figure 75. Approval letter for the NCore QAPP 183 Figure 76. Approval letter for the Near Road Monitoring QAPP 184 Figure 77. Approval Letter for the Urban Air Toxics QAPP 185 Figure 78. Approval letter for the Ozone QAPP 186 Figure 79. Approval letter for the Northampton County Background Monitoring QAPP 187 Figure 80. Approval letter for the Background Monitoring Program QAPP 188 Figure 81. Approval letter for the SLAMS Sulfur Dioxide and Nitrogen Dioxide QAPP 189 Figure 82. Approval letter for the PM QAPP 190 XV. Equipment Condition of North Carolina Monitoring Sites Ozone analyzers Thermo 49i and calibrators Thermo 49i-PS are in good condition. DAQ purchased them in 2013 and 2014. The division acquired 45 each and have had them deployed to the field since the beginning of the 2015 ozone season. Currently, DAQ operates 28 sites and audits eight sites for the local and tribal programs. The Electronics and Calibration Branch, or ECB, uses two 49i-PS units for primary and backup lab standards and two 49i-PS units for primary and backup audit devices. Thermo will no longer support the i-Models after 2025. Several 49i and 49-iPS have been damaged beyond repair and have been used for parts. DAQ purchased one Q-model calibrator and monitor in 2021 for testing and deployment for comparisons to the current iModels. Programming issues with the Envidas software are currently being worked through. DAQ has applied for IRA Grant funding and the plan is to purchase 8 analyzers and 7 calibrators if the money is awarded. Future replacement of the iModels with the Q-Models will be dependent upon funding. Environics Model 7000 Zero Air Generators, ZAG, are in good condition. DAQ purchased them in 2014. The ECB has five units. The division uses them in the maintenance lab at the technician’s work benches. API Teledyne Model 701 ZAGs are in good condition, having been purchased in 2014 and 2015. The ECB has 74 of these ZAGs and deployed them starting in 2015 to all DAQ sites requiring zero air. The first 50 Model 701’s are no longer supported by the manufacturer and will gradually be phased out when each unit fails beyond repair. Teledyne’s recommendation is to upgrade to the newer supported models. API Teledyne Model 751H Portable ZAGs are in good condition. The DAQ purchased them in 2014 and 2015. The ECB has two of these ZAGs and uses them to conduct audits. Our current model is no longer supported by the manufacturer and will gradually be phased out when each unit fails beyond repair. Teledyne’s recommendation is to upgrade to the newer supported models. SO2 analyzers Thermo 43i are in good condition. The DAQ purchased them in 2015. The ECB has 11 - 43i’s and eight - 43i-TLE analyzers. They are currently supporting five year-round sites, of which two are time-limited source-oriented sites, established to meet the data requirement rule, four three-year rotating sites and two audit sites for the data requirements rule. DAQ has applied for IRA Grant funding and the plan is to purchase one Q-model analyzer for testing. Additional purchases are being considered to replace the iModels when funding will allow. CO analyzers Thermo 48i-TLE (three in 2007, one in 2012, two in 2015, two in 2016 and one in 2018) are in fair to like new condition. Parts are hard to acquire for the older 48i’s. The analyzers support two sites in DAQ and one in Mecklenburg County. NOy Reactive Nitrogen Thermo 42i-Y analyzers (three in 2007, one in 2012) are in fair to good condition. One additional analyzer was purchased with awarded ARP Grant money, and we are currently waiting for delivery. 191 Thermo 146i calibrators used with SO2, CO and NOy are new (2015) and in good condition. The division has 15 and replaced the last 146C model in 2017. DAQ has applied for IRA Grant funding and the plan is to purchase one Q-model calibrator for testing. Future Q- model calibrators are being considered to replace the iModels when funding will allow for the purchase. NH3 Ammonia monitors - Model 17C: DAQ stopped monitoring for this pollutant in June 2015. DAQ sent the older three pieces of equipment to surplus in 2015. The ECB has two newer units for any future requirements. NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide Teledyne T200UP analyzers are in good condition. The DAQ has five units (three purchased in 2012, one purchased in 2013 and one purchased in 2014). The ECB has 2 CAPS monitors deployed at Rockwell and Millbrook PAMS. One new unit was purchased for the PAMS project, which allows for a spare unit at the ECB. Funding requests were made to purchase a Teledyne N500 analyzer and were denied. Future purchases will be determined by available funding. NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide Teledyne T700U calibrators are in good condition. The DAQ has eight (four in 2013, two in 2014 and two in 2018) units. The DAQ is working to purchase additional units in the future as funding allows. NO3 nitrate analyzers and generators – R&P Model 8400N: DAQ owns two each (2003). The Millbrook continuous speciation site (CSS) was shut down on March 6, 2020 and both units are at the ECB. These units are in poor condition and will be sent to surplus when time allows. SO4 sulfate analyzers – Thermo Model 5020c: DAQ owns two (2005) and they are in poor condition. Thermo stopped supporting them in 2015. The DAQ buys maintenance parts annually for this equipment. The ECB replaced the Model 5020c SO4 monitor at the Millbrook CSS with the new unit in late 2013. The Millbrook CSS site has been shut down and the unit was removed in 2020. These units will be sent to surplus when time allows. Anderson particulate machines: The DAQ has kept two (1987) in its inventory, they are in poor condition and will be sent to surplus when time allows. Total suspended particulate, TSP: The DAQ has kept six (1996) in its inventory, they are in poor condition and will be sent to surplus when time allows. Wedding PM10 monitors: The DAQ has kept one (1991) in its inventory and it is in poor condition. This unit will be sent to surplus when time allows. URG 3000N particulate monitors: The DAQ owns five (2010); two are in good condition and the other three are used as spares to support the remaining units. Met One SASS 9800 particulate monitors: The DAQ owns five older units and one (2016) is in fair condition to new condition. The ECB uses the older units as spares to maintain the remaining unit. 192 Met One Super SASS-110: The DAQ purchased one unit in 2018. This unit has been deployed at Millbrook to replace a faulty unit. Thermo Partisol 2025 PM2.5 units: DAQ owns 40 (1998 – 2001); while showing some age, they are in poor condition. These units are no longer supported by the manufacturer and will be gradually replaced beginning in 2017. There are no units remaining in the field. These units will be sent to surplus when time allows. Thermo Partisol 2025i PM2.5 units: The DAQ owns four; they are in fair condition. The two received in 2015 do not have cold weather kits and it is too expensive to upgrade them; the ECB will use them for spare parts. The two received in 2016; ECB installed one at the Millbrook site and the second one went to Mecklenburg County. The DAQ has purchased seven units in 2017 and has replaced all old 2025 units. Beta attenuation monitors, BAM, Model 1020: The DAQ owns 24; units were acquired between 2008 and 2015; equipment is in good to new condition. Five touchscreen units were purchased in 2021 and will be deployed as older units fail. There is a plan to gradually replace the 1020’s with 1022’s when funding and siting criteria allows. Beta attenuation monitors, BAM, Model 1022: The DAQ owns 18, equipment was new (2015 and 2016) and in good condition. The DAQ purchased four additional units in 2017. Several units have been sent back to the manufacturer for an overhaul and have been returned in like new condition. Three new units were recently purchased through the ARP Grant and are scheduled to replace the 1020’s at Bryson City, Lexington and Candor. E-BAM monitors: The DAQ currently owns six E-BAMS, one is deployed at a DAQ atmospheric deposition site and four are stored at the Reedy Creek Lab ready for deployment as necessary and one is on extended loan at the Asheville Regional Office. Two units are older and in good working condition, while two units were purchased in 2017 and two were purchased in late 2020. All units are in good working condition. Xontek 911 VOC samplers need constant reconditioning. Nearly all obsolete pumps have been replaced. Heaters for the flow controller are in desperate need. There are 11 units that are over 20 years old that are in service and six that DAQ purchased in 2014 for a total of 17. The DAQ is working to purchase additional units in the future as funding allows. ATEC 2200-1C aldehyde samplers are in good condition. The DAQ owns 4 that are in service and one 8CH-8000 sampler to support the PAMS monitoring requirements, collecting three 8-hour samples during a 24-hour period purchased in 2020. DAQ is working to purchase additional units in the future. Magee Scientific Aethalometer AE33 is in storage at the ECB. The unit is in poor condition because of a bad pump. No Aethalometers are currently deployed in the field. API T640x: The DAQ owns three monitors purchased between 2016 and 2017. DAQ is testing one unit at Millbrook and one at Castle Hayne. Two spare units at the ECB in good 193 condition. One to two new units were requested to be purchased in 2022 to replace some of the BAM Coarse sites or old PM10 sites. Met One AIO2 sensors were purchased in 2018. 11 units were purchased for WS, WD, BP, AT, RH, SG. Currently these units are being tested alongside current Met Towers and sensors for performance and data comparisons. Several units have been deployed and software programming with different versions have caused issues with other types of equipment. An audit procedure is currently being worked on for future use. N-CON Model 00-120, wet/dry deposition samplers: The DAQ owns 14 samplers, 13 are deployed at 12 atmospheric deposition sites across NC and one is a spare stored at the DAQ Reedy Creek Lab. There are 2 Model 00-125 at mercury deposition sites that were purchased in 2014. The model 00-120 were purchased in 2018 and 2019. All are in good working condition. ETI NOAH-IV rain gauge: The DAQ owns 15 units, 12 are deployed at 12 atmospheric deposition sites across NC, two are deployed at mercury deposition sites, and one is stored at the DAQ Reedy Creek Lab. Mercury rain gauges were purchased in 2014; all others were purchased in 2018 and 2019. All are in good working condition. Ceilometer: The DAQ owns one (1) Vaisala CL-51 Ceilometer and accessories purchased in 2020. The ceilometer is deployed at the PAMS site in Raleigh, NC. It is in excellent condition. AutoGC: The DAQ owns one (1) Markes-Agilent automated gas chromatograph with dual flame ionization detectors to support PAMS monitoring. The unit was purchased by the EPA and delivered at the end of 2018. It was installed at the Reedy Creek Laboratory in 2019 for system development, training, and shakedown. In January 2021, it was deployed at the PAMS monitoring site in Raleigh, NC. A contamination problem occurred with the instrument and was repaired and put back into service in January 2023. The chemist responsible for the operation left state service February 2023 and hiring a replacement chemist has been difficult. The instrument is operational and idled at this time until a chemist and/or contractor can be brought on board to operate the system. Pyranometers: The DAQ owns one (1) MetOne Li-200R solar radiator sensor and one (1) Kipp & Zonene CUV-5 UV radiation sensor. These sensors are deployed at the PAMS monitoring site in Raleigh, NC. They are in good condition. DAQ also owns one (1) Cooper Environmental Xact 625i Ambient Metals Monitoring System and accessories purchased in 2020. It is in good condition. DAQ also owns one (1) Fluke Calibration Molbox and accessories. It is in good condition. DAQ has purchased 40 Alicat FP-25 Flow Calibrators for Particulate Air Samplers with awarded ARP grant money to replace the aging Tetracals. Deployment will take place after testing and procedures can be verified, and a new SOP implemented. 194 XVI. Resources 1. Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. Part 58 and Part 58 Amended: Federal Register/Vol. 71 No. 200/Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2006/Rules and Regulations. 2. Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. APPENDIX A TO PART 58—QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR MONITORS USED IN EVALUATIONS OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS: Electronic Code Of Federal Regulations, Aug. 22, 2019, available at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- idx?SID=8cf0ba493f2c7a2ea70ba156ac578363&mc=true&node=pt40.6.58&rgn=div5#ap40. 6.58.0000_0nbspnbspnbsp.a. 3. Title 40: Protection of Environment, PART 58—AMBIENT AIR QUALITY SURVEILLANCE, Appendix D to Part 58—Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring, available at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- idx?SID=8cf0ba493f2c7a2ea70ba156ac578363&mc=true&node=pt40.6.58&rgn=div5#ap40. 6.58.0000_0nbspnbspnbsp.d. 4. State of North Carolina, Department of Transportation. Traffic Count Information. https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/State-Mapping/Pages/Traffic-Volume-Maps.aspx 1500 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1500. 5. List of Designated Reference and Equivalent Methods. Issue Date: Dec. 15, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-12/List_of_FRM_and_FEM.pdf. United States Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Human Exposure & Atmospheric Sciences Division (MD-D205-03), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. 6. Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on Criteria Monitoring Between SCDHEC and NCDENR DAQ, July 1, 2015, Available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=678 6. 7. Office of Management and Budget, OMB BULLETIN NO. 13-01: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas, Feb. 28, 2013, available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/bulletins/2013/b13-01.pdf, accessed May. 18, 2017. 8. Office of Management and Budget, OMB BULLETIN NO. 15-01: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas, July. 15, 2015, available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/bulletins/2015/15-01.pdf, accessed May 18, 2017. 9. Office of Management and Budget, OMB BULLETIN NO. 17-01: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas, Aug. 15, 2017, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/bulletins/2017/b- 17-01.pdf, accessed May 05, 2022. 195 10. Office of Management and Budget, OMB BULLETIN NO. 18-04: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas, Sept. 14, 2018, available on the worldwide web at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Bulletin-18- 04.pdf, accessed April 25, 2020. 11. Data Requirements Rule for the 2010 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Federal Register of Aug. 21, 2015, (80 FR 51052) (FRL-9928-18-OAR), 2015-20367, available at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/FR-2015-08-21/2015-20367. 12. SO2 NAAQS Designations Source-Oriented Monitoring Technical Assistance Document, U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, December 2013, Draft. 13. Notification of Change – Addendum to the “2015 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality” - Relocation of County Line (37-119-1009) Ozone Monitoring Station to 35.314158, -80.713469 (proposed site name: University Meadows), Feb. 10, 2016, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=780 5. 14. 42 U.S.C. United States Code, 2013 Edition Title 42 - THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE CHAPTER 85 - AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL SUBCHAPTER I – PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES Part C - Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality subpart i - clean air Sec. 7475 - Preconstruction requirements, available at https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title42/chapter85&edition=prelim. 15. 2011 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=784 3. 16. 2015 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=744 0. 17. U.S. EPA AirData, Air Quality Index Report, available at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air- quality-data/air-quality-index-report. 18. NC DAQ - North Carolina Point Source Emissions Report, available at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/ToxicsReportServlet?ibeam=true&year=2014&physical=byCoun ty&overridetype=All&toxics=263&sortorder=103. 19. “Redesignation Demonstration and Maintenance Plan for the Hickory and Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Areas” State Implementation Plan (SIP), Dec. 18, 2009, available at http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air- quality/air-quality-planning/state-implementation-plans/hickory-area. 20. “Carbon Monoxide (CO) Limited Maintenance Plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham & Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas”, Aug. 2, 2012, available at 196 http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality/air-quality-planning/state-implementation- plans/carbon-monoxide-limited-maintenance-plans. 21. National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead, Federal Register, Vol. 73, No. 219, \ Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2008, p. 66964, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008- 11-12/pdf/E8-25654.pdf. 22. Revisions to Lead Ambient Air Monitoring Requirements, Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 247, Monday, Dec. 27, 2010, p. 81126, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 2010-12-27/pdf/2010-32153.pdf#page=1. 23. Revisions to Ambient Monitoring Quality Assurance and Other Requirements, Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 59, Monday, March 28, 2016, p. 17248, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-03-28/pdf/2016-06226.pdf 24. Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide, Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 26, Feb. 9, 2010, available at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf. 25. Duke Energy Progress, Sutton Plant implosion showcases Duke Energy transition to cleaner energy in the Carolinas, Nov. 9, 2016, available at https://news.duke- energy.com/releases/sutton-plant-implosion-showcases-duke-energy-transition-to- cleaner-energy-in-the-carolinas, accessed May 12, 2017. 26. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 2012 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for The North Carolina Division of Air Quality, available at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/networkplans/NCNetwork2012plan.pdf. 27. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 2016-2017 Final Network Monitoring Plan, Appendix D. Duke Energy Roxboro Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, July 1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=131 73; Appendix E. Evergreen Packaging Canton Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, July 1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=131 37; Appendix K. PCS Phosphate, Inc. - Aurora Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, July 1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=131 49; Appendix L. CPI Southport Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, Sep.1, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=927 5; and Addendum 2 Duke Progress Energy Skyland Siting Analysis and Additional Site Information, Dec, 28, 2016, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=131 36. 28. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 2019-2020 Final Network Monitoring Plan, Volume 1 Network Descriptions, Addendum 1 Wade Relocation Siting Analysis and Site Information, March 31, 2020, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=129 92. 197 29. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 2019-2020 Final Network Monitoring Plan Volume 1 Network Descriptions, Addendum 2. Skyland Data Requirements Rule (DRR) and Semora DRR Data Analysis for Shutting Down the DRR Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Monitors, April 8, 2020, available on the worldwide web at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=130 23. 30. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 2020-2021 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Volume 1, July 2, 2020, https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=14 029 (accessed May 5, 2021). 31. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Trends in North Carolina, available at https://www.deq.nc.gov/water-quality/planning/air-quality-trends-north-carolina- 2020/open. 32. United States Census Bureau, Population Division. Cumulative Estimates of Resident Population Change and Rankings for Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the United States and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019. Released March 2020, available online at https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-kits/2020/pop-estimates-county-metro.html. 33. United States Census Bureau, Population Division. Resident Population Estimates for the 100 Fastest-Growing U.S. Counties with 10,000 or More Population in 2010: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019 (CO-EST2019-CUMGR), Release Date: March 2020. 34. United States Census Bureau, Population Division. Resident Population Estimates for the 100 Fastest-Growing U.S. Counties with 10,000 or More Population in 2018: July 1, 2018 to July 1, 2019 (CO-EST2019-ANNGR), Release Date: March 2020. 35. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2011 National Emission Inventory, NEI, Data, available at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2011-national- emissions-inventory-nei-data. 36. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2012 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p5, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=459 9. 37. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2014 National Emission Inventory, Version 1, All Sectors: National-County/Tribe aggregated, Released December 2016, available at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data. Accessed Jan. 4, 2017. 38. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2016 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, Dec. 16, 2016, p 2-5, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=896 4. 38. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017 National Emission Inventory, February 2020 Version: The August 2019 point sources have been improved to include rail 198 yards, offshore sources, and other minor updates. The released NEI now also includes nonroad sources (except commercial marine and rail lines), wildfires, and prescribed burning, available online at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2017-national-emissions- inventory-nei-data. Accessed April 25, 2020. 39 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p7, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=981 9. 40. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2020-2021 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, available at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13 593. 40. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Near-road NO2 Monitoring Technical Assistance Document, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 09/documents/nearroadtad.pdf. 41. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Outdoor Air Quality Data, Air Quality Index Report, available at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/air-quality-index- report. 42. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Revision to the Near-road NO2 Minimum Monitoring Requirements, Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 251, Dec. 30, 2016, available on the worldwide web at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-12-30/pdf/2016-31645.pdf. 43. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Susceptible and Vulnerable Populations - NO2 Monitoring, available at https://www.epa.gov/amtic/no2-monitoring-susceptible-and- vulnerable-populations. 44. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). TRI Explorer (2018 National Analysis Dataset (released November 12, 2019)) [Internet database]. Retrieved from https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_release.chemical, https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_text.background, (April 11, 2020). 45. Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide, Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 119, Jun. 22, 2010, available at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/fr/20100622.pdf, accessed on May 23, 2020 46. Ambient Air Monitoring Network Assessment Guidance, Analytical Techniques for Technical Assessments of Ambient Air Monitoring Networks, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, Research Triangle Park, NC; available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-01/documents/network-assessment- guidance.pdf. 199 Appendix A. Summary of Monitoring Sites and Types of Monitors Table A-1 Summary of Monitoring Sites and Types of Monitors Site ID Site Name CO SO2 NOy NO2 O3 PAMS PM10 PM10-2.5 PM2.5 Meteorology UAT ADN T R T T Auto GC ALD M C S WS/ WD AT/ RH BP RF SR/ UVR CM 370030005 Taylorsville- Liledoun X X 370110002 Linville Falls X SR 370130151 Bayview Ferry X X X X 370210030a Bent Creek X 370210034 a Board of Ed P P X X 370210035 a AB Tech College VOC 370210038 Asheville X 370270003 Lenoir X X 370330001 Cherry Grove X X 370350004 Hickory Water Tower 2 370510009 Wm Owen X P X 370510010 Honeycutt X X 370510011 Wade School X 200 Table A-1 Summary of Monitoring Sites and Types of Monitors Site ID Site Name CO SO2 NOy NO2 O3 PAMS PM10 PM10-2.5 PM2.5 Meteorology UAT ADN T R T T Auto GC ALD M C S WS/ WD AT/ RH BP RF SR/ UVR CM 370570002 Lexington Water Tower X X 370630015 Durham Armory X X X X X 370650099 Leggett X X 370670022b Hattie Ave. X X X X X X X X SR VOC 370670030 b Clemmons X X X 370671008 b Union Cross X X AT 370750001c Joanna Bald X 370770001 Butner X 370810013 Mendenhall X X P X SR X 370870008 Waynesville E.S. X 370870013 Canton DRR X 370870035 Fry Pan X 370870036 Purchase Knob X 371010002 West Johnston X X 371070004 Lenoir Community College X X 201 Table A-1 Summary of Monitoring Sites and Types of Monitors Site ID Site Name CO SO2 NOy NO2 O3 PAMS PM10 PM10-2.5 PM2.5 Meteorology UAT ADN T R T T Auto GC ALD M C S WS/ WD AT/ RH BP RF SR/ UVR CM 371090004 Crouse X 371170001 Jamesville X X X 371190041 d Garinger X X X X X X P X X X X X X X X X X X VOC 371190045 d Remount Rd X X X X 371190046d University Meadows X SR 371190047 d Ramblewood Park X 371190048 d Friendship Park X 371190050 d Equipment Drive P 371210004 Spruce Pine Hospital X 371230001 Candor X X X X X VOC ALD X 371290002 Castle Hayne X X P X 371290010 Eagles Island VOC X 371310003 Northampton X X 371450003 Bushy Fork X 371470006 Pitt Co Ag Cen X X VOC X 202 Table A-1 Summary of Monitoring Sites and Types of Monitors Site ID Site Name CO SO2 NOy NO2 O3 PAMS PM10 PM10-2.5 PM2.5 Meteorology UAT ADN T R T T Auto GC ALD M C S WS/ WD AT/ RH BP RF SR/ UVR CM 371570099 Bethany X X 371590021 Rockwell X X X X X X SR X 371730002 Bryson City X X X X X 371790003 Monroe M. S. X P P P P 371830014 Millbrook X X X X X P X X X X X X X X X X X X VOC ALD X 371830021 Triple Oak Rd X X X 371990004 Mt Mitchell X CO = Carbon monoxide SO2 = Sulfur dioxide NOy = Reactive oxides of nitrogen NO2 = Nitrogen dioxide O3 = Ozone PM2.5 = Fine particles X = monitor operating at site E = monitor at site will end P = monitoring proposed to start at site R = 43i monitor for SO2 M = 2025 or 2025i Sequential C = BAM1020 or 1022 or T640 or T640X PM10 = Particles of 10 micrometers or less in aerodynamic diameter T = 48i-TLE or Teledyne API (TAPI) 300EU monitor for CO, 43i TLE monitor for SO2 S = Met One SASS monitor and URG 3000N WS/WD = Wind speed & direction AT/RH = air temperature & relative humidity RF = Rainfall BP = barometric pressure SR/UVR = solar radiation & ultraviolet radiation CM = ceilometer UAT = Urban air toxics ADN = atmospheric deposition network VOC = Volatile organic compounds ALD = Aldehydes and ketones a Operated by the Western North Carolina Regional Air Quality Agency b Operated by the Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection c This monitor is owned by the United States Forest Service and operated by the North Carolina Division of Air Quality d Operated by the Mecklenburg County Air Quality 203 Appendix B. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Mecklenburg County Air Quality Available at: https://mecknc.widen.net/s/zffkfwgbq2/mc-doc-aq-annual-monitoring-network-plan 204 Appendix C. 2022 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for Forsyth County Office of Environmental Assistance and Protection Available at: https://deq.nc.gov/air-quality/ambient/networkdocs/forsythfinal-network-monitoring-plan06-29- 2022bpmp/open 205 Appendix D. Current Air Quality Monitor Locations and Potentially Underserved Communities Introduction The purpose of this analysis is to determine the current locations of Air Quality monitors across North Carolina and how many of those monitors are within potentially underserved block groups. The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is committed to the principles of environmental justice, including ensuring equitable ambient air quality monitoring in communities across North Carolina, especially in underserved and overburdened communities. The following analysis looks at the locations of all regulatory air monitors across North Carolina to begin identifying potential gaps in locations of air quality monitors. This analysis has not been ground-truthed. Methodology The demographic data overlaid with the locations of air monitors for this analysis is the American Community Survey (ACS), 2019 block group level data. The selected block groups identified as Potentially Underserved meet the following definition/criteria: • Racial composition:  Share of nonwhites is over fifty percent OR  Share of nonwhites is at least ten percent higher than county or state share AND • Poverty rate:  Share of population experiencing poverty is over twenty percent AND  Share of households in poverty is at least five percent higher than the county or state share Two different geospatial analyses were conducted. The first selected only monitors located within an underserved block group. The second selected monitors located both within the block group and within 1-mile of the block group. A total of 108 air quality monitors across the state were included in this analysis. Of those, there are 11 types of monitors: atmospheric deposition, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), reactive oxides of nitrogen (NOy), ozone, fine particles (PM2.5), particles with aerodynamic diameters of 10 microns or less (PM10), Urban Air Toxics, sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET), and Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMROVE). Results Out of the 108 total monitors, 26 (24%) of them are located within a potentially underserved block group. When the analysis was expanded to also include any monitors within a potentially underserved block group or within 1-mile of potentially underserved block groups, the number of monitors considered to represent air quality in or near underserved communities increased to 62% (67 of the 108). The following figure shows the locations of those monitors, sorted out by type, across the state. 206 The following sections include the demographic data (obtained through EJScreen) by type of air monitor. Data included is for the one-mile radius surrounding the air monitor. Low-Income in these tables shows percent with an income level below $25,000 37. Background Atmospheric Deposition Network For air monitors across the state that monitor background atmospheric deposition, 4 out of 7, or 57%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 64). Table 64. Demographic overview for Background Atmospheric Deposition Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Eagles Island New Hanover 37% 34% 1% Mendenhall Guilford 22% 15% 5% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% 37 Low-Income data obtained through EJScreen is a different dataset than the Poverty data set used for the potentially underserved communities’ definition so discrepancies may occur. 207 Table 64. Demographic overview for Background Atmospheric Deposition Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Pitt County Ag Center Pitt 75% 46% 5% NO2 For air monitors across the state that monitor NO2, 5 out of 9, or 55%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 65). Table 65. Demographic overview for NO2 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Hattie Ave. LP Ozone Forsyth 95% 57% 4% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% Remount Road Mecklenburg 58% 24% 2% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% Northampton Northampton 78% 48% 0% NOy For air monitors across the state that monitor NOy, 2 out of 2, or 100%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 66). Table 66. Demographic overview for NOy Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% Ozone For air monitors across the state that monitor Ozone, 14 out of 33, or 42%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 67). Table 67. Demographic overview for Ozone Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Taylorsville Liledoun Alexander 28% 28% 3% 208 Table 67. Demographic overview for Ozone Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Lenoir Caldwell 23% 22% 2% Honeycutt Cumberland 50% 18% 4% Durham Armory Durham 63% 25% 0% Hattie Ave. LP Ozone Forsyth 95% 57% 4% Butner Granville 52% 22% 0% Mendenhall Guilford 22% 15% 5% Lenoir Community College Lenoir 45% 14% 0% Jamesville Martin 44% 23% 0% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% University Meadows Mecklenburg 61% 34% 5% Pitt County Ag Center Pitt 75% 46% 5% Monroe Union 67% 28% 18% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% PM2.5 For air monitors across the state that monitor PM2.5, 14 out of 22, or 63%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 68). Table 68. Demographic overview for PM2.5 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Board of Education Bldg Buncombe 30% 35% 12% Hickory Water Tower Catawba 50% 43% 11% William Owen School Cumberland 55% 30% 5% Durham Armory Durham 63% 25% 0% Hattie Ave. LP Ozone Forsyth 95% 57% 4% Lexington Water Tower Davidson 59% 44% 9% Mendenhall Guilford 22% 15% 5% Remount Road Mecklenburg 58% 24% 2% Spruce Pine Hospital Mitchel 14% 37% 5% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% Northampton Northampton 78% 48% 0% 209 Table 68. Demographic overview for PM2.5 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Pitt County Ag Center Pitt 75% 46% 5% Friendship Park Mecklenburg 95% 30% 6% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% PM10 For air monitors across the state that monitor PM10, 10 out of 13, or 76%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 69). Table 69. Demographic overview for PM10 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Taylorsville Liledoun Alexander 28% 28% 3% William Owen School Cumberland 55% 30% 5% Durham Armory Durham 63% 25% 0% Hattie Ave. LP Ozone Forsyth 95% 57% 4% Mendenhall Guilford 22% 15% 5% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% Lenoir Community College Lenoir 45% 14% 0% Jamesville Martin 44% 23% 0% Ramblewood Park Mecklenburg 99% 33% 12% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% Urban Air Toxics For air monitors across the state that monitor Urban Air Toxics, 6 out of 7, or 85%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 70). Table 70. Demographic overview for Urban Air Toxics Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” AB Tech College Buncombe 34% 40% 1% Eagles Island New Hanover 37% 34% 1% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% Hattie Ave. LP Ozone Forsyth 95% 57% 4% Pitt County Ag Center Pitt 75% 46% 5% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% 210 SO2 For air monitors across the state that monitor SO2, 8 out of 10, or 80%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 71). Table 71. Demographic overview for SO2 Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Lenoir Caldwell 23% 22% 2% Honeycutt Cumberland 50% 18% 4% Durham Armory Durham 63% 25% 0% Hattie Ave. LP Ozone Forsyth 95% 57% 4% Canton DRR Haywood 9% 26% 5% Jamesville Martin 44% 23% 0% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% CO For air monitors across the state that monitor CO, 3 out of 4, or 75%, of the monitors are within one mile of a potentially underserved community (Table 72). Table 72. Demographic overview for CO Ambient Air Monitors in North Carolina Potentially Underserved Communities Monitoring Station County Percent Non-White Percent Low- Income Speak English “Less than very well” Remount Road Mecklenburg 58% 24% 2% Garinger Mecklenburg 65% 26% 14% Millbrook Wake 75% 18% 15% Other The last two types of ambient monitoring station for CASNET and IMPROVE do not have any stations within one mile of a potentially underserved community. CASNET has 0 out of 4 monitors and IMPROVE with 0 out of 3 monitors. 211 Appendix E. Hickory Data Analysis For Relocating the Fine Particle Monitors on the Site Introduction In the future, Highway US 321 going past the site will be widened. Construction will dictate some temporary changes and rerouting of traffic lanes, closure of an overpass near the site, as well as the striking of new rights-of-way near the site on the two roads that border the water tower property. The road itself will not increase, just the right-of-way distance, and maybe some sidewalk/improvements area would increase. On May 12, 2021, the City of Hickory contacted DAQ about moving the monitors approximately 38 meters to the north towards 1st Avenue SW as shown in Figure 83. The monitors will remain at least 17 meters from the nearest travel lane on all sides. DAQ has staked out the new location for the platform and is working on getting electricity to the site. Figure 83. Aerial view of the Hickory fine particle monitoring site showing relative positions of the current location and proposed location The monitors affected by this relocation are 37-035-0004-88101-3 and 37-035-0004-88101-4. The DAQ operates these monitors to ensure the air in the Hickory area complies with the national ambient air quality standards. Both fine particle monitors are suitable for comparison to the annual fine particle national ambient air quality standard. Figure 84 shows a view of the new location relative to the existing location at the site. Views from the proposed site looking north, south, and west are shown in Figure 85 through Figure 87. 212 Figure 84. New monitoring location Figure 85. Looking north from proposed location Figure 86. Looking west from the new location Figure 87. Looking south from the new location Detailed Siting Information on the Proposed Location There are no trees within 30 meters of the new location. There are two buildings 35 meters east of the new site. One building is 6 meters tall and the other is 3 meters tall so they will also not be an obstacle to air flow. The nearest road is 15th Street SW, approximately 18 meters east southeast of the new location. 1st Avenue SW is approximately 26 meters north northwest of the new location. US 321 is approximately 135 meters east northeast of the new location. As shown in Figure 88, in 2019 the average annual daily traffic (AADT) count was 4,100 to the north northeast of the new location on 1st Avenue SW, 3,200 to the southeast of the new location on 2nd Avenue SW, and 39,500 to the southeast of the new location on US 321. The inlet heights at the new location will be the same as the inlet heights for the current monitoring location, approximately 2.3 meters. Figure 88. 2019 Traffic count map for Hickory (from DOT) The Air Quality System identification number and street address for the site will remain the same: 37-035-0004 and 1501 1st Avenue, SW, Hickory, North Carolina 28602. The new latitude and longitude will be 35.729358 and -81.365685 (subject to change slightly depending on the exact placement of the monitors). The sampling and analysis methods (AQS codes 209) and operating schedules (hourly) will remain the same. The monitoring objective for both monitors will continue to be population exposure. Figure 89 shows the location of the monitoring station relative to the population center of Hickory. Based on the wind roses in Figure 90 through Figure 94, the predominate winds are from the south southwest throughout the year except for in the fall when the predominate winds are from the west northwest. The spatial scale of representativeness for both monitors will remain neighborhood based on the location of the roadways and the amount of traffic on those roads. (See Figure 94.) Figure 89. Location of the proposed monitoring station relative to the population of Hickory Figure 90. Wind rose for Hickory using last six years of data (from NC State Climate Office) 215 Figure 91. Hickory springtime wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) Figure 92. Hickory summertime wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) Figure 93. Hickory fall-time wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) Figure 94. Hickory wintertime wind rose (from NC State Climate Office) 216 Figure 95. Figure E-1 from Appendix E used to determine spatial scale of representativeness for particle monitors These two monitors are representative of air quality in the Hickory metropolitan statistical area. Table 73 summarizes other factors DAQ evaluated when choosing the new location for the monitors. Location of permitted facilities are shown in Figure 96. Table 73. Other considerations in site selection Factor Evaluation Long-term Site Commitment The City of Hickory is willing to provide DAQ with a long-term lease agreement and does not plan to develop the current area any time in the near future Sufficient Operating Space 30 plus meter diameter open area free of trees and buildings Access and Security Current monitors have not been vandalized while within the fenced in area. The monitors will remain inside the locked fence at their new location. Safety Appropriate electrical permits will be obtained. Power Power is readily accessible from the nearby power poles. Environmental Control Both monitors are designed to operate in situ, so no environmental control is required at this time. 217 Table 73. Other considerations in site selection Factor Evaluation Exposure The monitoring station will be at least 17 meters from the roadways, 20 meters from the driplines of trees and will not be near any trees or buildings that could be an obstacle to air flow. The monitors will be placed such that the water tower will not block the predominate winds from the south and west. Distance from Nearby Emitters There are six facilities with air permits within 2 km of the proposed location. Traditions Woodcarvings and Frames, Inc., is located 960 meters to the northeast and reported no emissions of fine particles in 2014. Century Furniture Plant 1 is located 1090 meters to the north northeast and reported 2020 emissions of fine particles of 11 tons. Century Furniture Plant 11 is located 2 kilometers to the west northwest and did not report any pollutants. Unifour Finishers, Inc. is located 1.87 kilometers to the west and did not report any fine particle emissions. Synthetics Finishing Longview is located 1160 meters to the southwest and reported 0.3 tons of fine particle emissions in 2013. TSG Finishing, LLC – Combeau Industries is located 1230 meters to the south southwest and reported no emissions of fine particles in 2014. Proximity to Other Measurements The proposed monitoring station is located 2.45 kilometers southeast from the Hickory Regional Airport. Figure 96. Location of new monitoring location relative to facilities regulated by DAQ 218 Summary DAQ is requesting EPA’s approval for relocating this site on the Town of Hickory property where the current site is located. This relocation of the monitors on the site property is necessary to get them out of the way of future DOT construction plans. Plus, the new location on the property meets all the necessary siting criteria in Appendices A, D and E of 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 58. Because the proposed location is remaining on the same property and will retain the same AQS identification number, there will be no impact on the ability to determine fine particle design values for the Hickory Metropolitan Statistical Area. Thus, there are no negative impacts expected based on relocation of the monitors and only positive impacts for the community and regulatory agencies involved. If the monitors are not relocated on this property, they will need to be moved to an alternate location in Hickory. Based on past searches for alternate monitoring sites near this location, DAQ does not expect to find alternate locations that better meet the siting criteria. 219 Appendix F. Bryson City Data Analysis for Relocating the Fine Particle Monitor on the Site Introduction During the 2021 annual network review, Mr. Steve Ensley noted that the tree located 10.97 meters to the southwest of the continuous fine particle monitor inlet would soon become an obstacle to air flow. As a result, Mr. Ensley investigated the possibility of relocating the monitor elsewhere on the property. In the fall of 2022, DAQ plans to relocate the continuous fine particle monitor from its current location to a new location at the site placing it between the met tower and the rain gage to move the monitor further away from the dripline of a nearby tree as shown in Figure 97. When the monitor is relocated, DAQ may also change the continuous fine particle monitoring method from a BAM 1020 to a BAM 1022, if a BAM 1022 is available at that time. This relocation will not require a change in AQS identification number or address because the monitor is remaining on the same property. Figure 97. Relocation of the continuous fine particle monitor at Bryson City 220 The monitor affected by this relocation is 37-173-0002-88101-3. The DAQ operates this monitor as a transportation monitor to monitor the air leaving and entering the state and ensure the air quality complies with the national ambient air quality standards. This fine particle monitor is suitable for comparison to the annual fine particle national ambient air quality standard. Figure 98 shows a view of the current monitor inlet with the tree in the background and Figure 99 shows the new platform relative to the trees and current monitor location. A view of the new fine particle monitoring location looking west is shown in in Figure 100 and views looking northwest with and without the new platform are shown and Figure 101 and Figure 102. Figure 98. Current fine particle monitor location with trees in the background 221 Figure 99. Location of new platform relative to current platform and trees of concern Figure 100. Looking west at the new fine particle monitoring location Figure 101. Looking northwest at the new location Figure 102. Location of new platform relative to roadway Detailed Siting Information on the Proposed Location The closest tree dripline will be 17.37 meters west of the relocated fine particle monitor. This tree’s approximate height is 6.61 meters so this tree will not be an obstacle to air flow. The dripline of the taller tree behind it is 21 meters away. There are no buildings within 80 meters of the site. The nearest road is Recreation Park Road, 25 meters east of the monitor location. West Deep Creek Road is 96 meters northeast of the site. US 19 is 416 meters south southeast of the site. As shown in Figure 103, in 2019 the average annual daily traffic (AADT) count was 1,500 to the southeast of the site on West Deep Creek Road, and 7200 in 2018 to the south of the site on US 19. The inlet height for the new monitoring location will be the same as for the current monitoring location, approximately 2.39 meters above ground level. 222 Figure 103. Traffic count map (from DOT) The Air Quality System identification number and street address for the site will remain the same: 37-173-0002 and 30 Recreation Park Drive, Bryson City, North Carolina 28806. The latitude (35.43804) and longitude (-83.442195) for the site will not change. The sampling and analysis method AQS code 170 for the BAM 1020 will remain the same until it is replaced with the BAM 1022, which has the method code 209. The operating schedule (hourly) will remain the same. The monitoring objective for the monitor will continue to be regional transport. Figure 104 shows the location of the monitoring station relative to the population center of Bryson City. Based on the wind roses in Figure 105, the predominant winds are from the north northeast and west. The spatial scale of representativeness for the monitor will be neighborhood based on the location of the roadways and the amount of traffic on those roads. (See Figure 106.) Figure 104. Location of the monitoring station relative to the population of Bryson City 223 Figure 105. Wind rose for Bryson City using last five years of data 224 Figure 106. Figure E-1 from Appendix E used to determine spatial scale of representativeness for particle monitors This fine particle monitor is DAQ’s required transport monitor. Table 74 summarizes other factors DAQ evaluated when choosing the proposed location for the fine particle monitoring station. Location of permitted facilities are shown in Figure 107. Table 74. Other considerations in site selection for Bryson monitor relocation Factor Evaluation Long-term Site Commitment The Swain County Recreation Park is willing to provide DAQ with a long-term lease agreement and does not plan to develop the current area any time soon Sufficient Operating Space 17-meter diameter open area free of trees and buildings Access and Security Current monitors at this site have not been vandalized at this site and there is no reason to expect them to be vandalized in the future. Safety Appropriate electrical permits will be obtained. Power Power is readily accessible from the nearby meter. Environmental Control The current monitor requires a temperature controlled shelter which can be accommodated at this location. 225 Table 74. Other considerations in site selection for Bryson monitor relocation Factor Evaluation Exposure The monitoring station will be at least 17 meters from the driplines of trees and will not be near any trees or buildings that could be an obstacle to air flow. Distance from Nearby Emitters There are three facilities with air permits within 4 km of the Swain County Recreation Park. Consolidated Metco, Inc. – Bryson City is located 3.28 kilometers to the south southwest. Beasley Flooring Company, Inc. – Bryson City Division is located 2.91 kilometers to the south southwest. Fortner Contracting Incorporated is located 3.15 kilometers to the south southwest. None of these facilities report emitting fine particles. Proximity to Other Measurements The new fine particle monitoring site is located 1.71 kilometers northeast from Sossamon Field in Bryson City. Figure 107. Location of monitoring location relative to facilities regulated by DAQ Summary DAQ is requesting EPA’s approval for relocating this site at the Swain County Recreation Park where the current site is located. This relocation will benefit DAQ and EPA by providing a location where the fine particle monitor will be less impacted by nearby trees. The new location meets all the necessary siting criteria in Appendices A, D and E of 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 58. Because the proposed location is remaining on the same property and will retain the same AQS identification number, there will be no impact on the ability to determine fine particle design values for the Swain County area. Thus, there are no negative impacts expected based on relocation of the monitor and only positive impacts for the community and regulatory agencies involved. 226 Appendix G. Approved Waivers and Other Requests Every five years DAQ is required to request that the EPA renew any existing waivers. The first part of this subsection lists all of the waiver requests that DAQ asked the EPA to renew in 2020 and that the EPA renewed that continue to be applicable in 2023 and 2024. The second part of this subsection contains 2020 requests for waivers and other actions that the EPA approved in 2020. 1. Waiver Renewals In 2020, DAQ requested, and the EPA renewed, the following waivers: • Waiver for the second PM10 monitor in Raleigh; • Waiver request of the siting requirements for the meteorological tower at the Millbrook NCore site; • Waiver request for a late start of the ozone season at remote sites; • Waiver for the trees behind the monitoring station at Triple Oak • A waiver to install the relative humidity and ambient temperature sensors at 10 meters at the Millbrook NCore site; Waiver for the Second PM10 Monitor in Raleigh In 2015, DAQ requested the EPA renew the waiver for the second PM10 monitor in Raleigh. Other than changing to a low volume method in 2009 to meet NCore requirements and a low-volume continuous method in 2016, nothing changed with PM10 in the Raleigh area within the past decade. As shown in Figure 108, all the measured concentrations are less than 80 percent of the NAAQS and all but three concentrations measured in the past 15 years are less than 40 percent of the NAAQS. As such, there is no danger of exceeding the NAAQS. 227 Figure 108. PM10 concentrations measured in Raleigh from 2004 through 2020 In addition, as shown in Table 75, PM10 has not been responsible for determining what the air quality index will be in the Raleigh MSA during 2011 through 2019.38 Thus, the division does not expect the PM10 concentrations in Raleigh to cause any harm to people’s health and wellbeing. The DAQ point source emission inventory for PM10 reports 107 facilities in the Raleigh MSA emitting 882.4 tons of PM10 in 2018. Figure 109 shows the fluctuation of PM10 emissions and facilities reporting PM10 emissions from 2008 to 2018.39 Although the number of facilities reporting PM10 emissions is down, the 38 Air quality index summary information is available on the worldwide web at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/air-quality-index-report. 39 North Carolina DAQ - North Carolina Point Source Emissions Report, Available online at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/ToxicsReportServlet?ibeam=true&year=2014&physical=byCounty&overridety pe=All&toxics=263&sortorder=103. 228 Table 75 Raleigh Air Quality Index (AQI) Summary for 2011 to 2019 Year # Day s with AQI Good Moderate Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups Unhealthy AQI Maximu m AQI 90th Percentile AQI Median Number of Days CO NO2 O3 PM2.5 PM10 2011 365 202 139 22 2 156 87 47 . . 203 162 . 2012 366 240 117 8 1 177 67 45 . . 183 183 . 2013 365 246 119 . . 97 64 44 . . 129 236 . 2014 365 215 150 . . 100 64 47 . 3 140 222 . 2015 365 228 134 3 . 105 67 46 . 2 175 188 . 2016 366 231 132 3 . 135 66 46 . . 164 202 . 2017 365 242 123 . . 100 61 45 . 2 156 207 . 2018 361 240 121 . . 90 63 45 1 . 136 224 . 2019 365 239 126 . . 93 61 46 1 . 161 203 . CO = carbon monoxide NO2 = nitrogen dioxide O3 = ozone PM2.5 = fine particles PM10 = particles with aerodynamic diameters of 10 microns or less 229 Figure 109. PM10 Emissions in the Raleigh MSA from 2008 to 2018 PM10 emissions have remained about the same as they were in 2008. For these reasons, as well as because the state is working with limited resources to meet additional monitoring requirements for PAMS in 2021, DAQ requests that the waiver for the second PM10 monitor in the Raleigh MSA be renewed for five more years. The EPA granted a waiver of the requirement for a second PM10 monitor in the Raleigh MSA in 2015 because the PM10 levels have been significantly lower than the NAAQS for many years.40 Waiver Request for Millbrook Meteorological Tower As in 2015, DAQ again requests that the waiver for the meteorological tower at the East Millbrook Middle School NCore and PAMS site be renewed. This site has been in operation since 1989. The tower is located approximately due south and 15.5 meters from the shelters that house the various monitors, see Figure 110. The wind direction/speed sensors are located at a height of 10 meters above ground. Currently the relative humidity sensor is located at 2 meters but it will be moved to 10 meters when DAQ switches to using an all-in-one meteorological sensor. Ambient temperature sensors are currently located at 2 meters and 10 meters above ground, but the 2-meter sensor will end when DAQ switches to using an all in one meteorological sensor. The tower is in an open, grassy area that is free from any obstructions in a 270º arc to the prevailing winds that come from the south/west direction. The tower is positioned 15.5 meters from the shelters 40 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2015 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p7, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=7440. 230 on a 3 percent uphill grade. This grade adds approximately one meter to the height of the tower above the shelters. This siting does not meet the EPA requirement for the tower being a distance 10 times the height of the shelter, which is 3.7 meters. Additionally, a single tree, approximately 7 meters tall, is located 18 meters to the south southwest of the tower. Since the position of the meteorological tower is free from any obstructions in a 270º arc to the prevailing winds that come from the south and west direction, DAQ is confident the measurements are representative of meteorological conditions at the site. The state, therefore, requests that the EPA renew the waiver and deem the position of the tower to be acceptable. Figure 110. Millbrook NCore Site (from City of Raleigh and Wake County iMAPS, http://maps.raleighnc.gov/iMAPS/ ) 231 Waiver Request for March 1 Start of the Ozone Season at Remote Sites The 2016 ozone monitoring season for North Carolina was April through October. EPA's 2015 ozone rule extended this season from March through October. In 2016, North Carolina requested that the ozone season for the high elevation mountain sites remain in April through October. The EPA approved DAQ’s request and granted a waiver due to accessibility issues and since temperatures are typically colder in March at these sites than at other sites in the network.41 However, the EPA requested that the division begin monitoring at these sites as soon as access and weather permits but no later than April 1 of each year. Although DAQ has successfully installed the monitors and had them up and operational by March 1 for the 2017 through 2020 ozone season, DAQ requests that this waiver be renewed. DAQ’s concern is that the remote high elevation sites might not be accessible for a March start date. The roads are sometimes not passable or closed by federal or local authorities well into March due to winter weather conditions, e.g., ice, snow, fallen trees or rocks, damage to the driving surface, etc. The earlier start date would require DAQ to get to the mountain tops in February to calibrate equipment and perform other quality assurance, or QA, functions. Depending on the weather, it may be possible in some years. In other years, it is questionable whether it could be done safely, if at all. The specific sites covered by this request and their elevations above sea level: • Linville Falls, AQS site 37-011-0002, 3,238 feet. • Joanna Bald, AQS site 37-075-0001, 4,688 feet; • Frying Pan, AQS site 37-087-0035, 5,200 feet; • Purchase Knob, AQS site 37-087-0036, 5,085 feet; • Mt. Mitchell, AQS site 37-199-0004, 6,502 feet. The current regulation, 40 CFR Part 58. Appendix D, Section 4.1(i) gives Region 4 the authority to approve a deviation to the ozone monitoring season. In EPA’s "Guideline for Selecting and Modifying the Ozone Monitoring Season Based on an 8-hour Ozone Standard" (EPA-454R-98-001), it is noted: “For the initial formulation of the ozone monitoring season … The basic premise was that areas with monthly mean maximum temperatures predominantly below 55 degrees Fahrenheit (F) are expected to have hourly concentrations less than 0.08 ppm…” North Carolina used to operate meteorology stations at two of the five sites, Joanna Bald and Linville. The monthly mean maximum temperature for March for 2007 to 2011 was 53 degrees F at Joanna Bald and 55 degrees F at Linville, the lowest elevation of the five sites. Additionally, data from the North Carolina State Climate Office show the highest monthly mean maximum temperatures are about 9 degrees Fahrenheit colder in February 41 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2016 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, Dec. 16, 2016, p 2-5, available at http://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=8964. 232 when DAQ would be accessing these remote mountain areas to recalibrate equipment and perform other QA functions. DAQ does operate three of these sites year-round, Purchase Knob, Joanna Bald and Frying Pan. However, DAQ cannot always get to the sites to perform QA functions during the winter, so DAQ does not report or certify the off-season data. The monitors run simply to provide raw, invalidated data for public information on the National Park Service’s Great Smoky Mountains National Park and U.S. Forest Service’s websites. Based on these considerations, DAQ requests that Linville Falls, Joanna Bald, Frying Pan, Purchase Knob and Mount Mitchell continue to be exempt from ozone monitoring earlier than April. This waiver to the ozone monitoring requirements will ensure a measure of safety to DAQ staff and assist DAQ in planning and managing limited resources. Waiver renewal request for the trees at Triple Oak Road DAQ requests a waiver for the trees that are on the northeast side of the building because they are an obstruction to air flow. The waiver is necessary because the trees are on private property belonging to an out-of-state trust and the owner has not provided permission to DAQ to remove the trees. Figure 111 is an aerial photograph of the site showing the location of the monitor with regards to the surrounding trees. The building to the southeast has been removed. The trees are 20 meters from the monitoring location to the southeast and northwest and there are no trees between the monitor and the roadway. Figure 111. Site diagram showing locations of trees relative to the fine particle monitoring location. 233 The monitor is 11 meters from the trees to the northeast. These trees are 30 meters tall. The inlet of the PM2.5 monitor is 4.9 meters from the ground. Thus, the trees would need to be 50.2 meters away to not act as an obstruction. Predominant winds at the site are from the southwest most of the year. Figure 112 provides a wind rose using the 2015 to 2019 wind data from the Raleigh Durham Airport, which is about 2.5 Kilometers northeast of the site. Based on the wind rose, the winds come from the south, southwest and west almost half of the time and from the north, northeast and east less than a third of the time. Figure 112. Wind Rose for the Raleigh-Durham Airport for 2015-2019. Figure 112 show the trees to the north of the site. This tree line is 30 meters in height and located 11 meters from the PM 2.5 inlet. There is a berm that starts to rise about approximately 7 meters from where the monitoring station is located. The trees are growing on top of this berm. They are an obstruction because (a) they are less than twice the distance, 50.2 meters, from the monitor inlet than the difference between the height of 234 the probe, 4.9 meters, and the height of the trees, 30 meters and (b) they obstruct more than 90 degrees. Because the site is a source-oriented site and the trees do not create an obstruction between the source, that is the roadway and the inlet, the trees should not impact the ability of the site to monitor fine particle emissions from the interstate highway. Thus, DAQ requests a waiver of siting criteria regarding the trees to the northeast of the site. The other trees meet siting criteria and do not require a waiver. They are shown in Figure 114 through Figure 116. Figure 113. Trees to the north of the site. 235 Figure 114. Taken from the fine particle monitor towards the east, showing trees and access road. Figure 115. Taken from fine particle monitor. Shows the trees to the south and the interstate highway. 236 Figure 116. Taken from the fine particle monitor towards the west. Waiver Renewal Request to Install the Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Sensors at 10 Meters at the Millbrook NCore and PAMS site DAQ requests permission to install the ambient temperature and relative humidity sensors at the Millbrook NCore and PAMS site at 10 meters instead of 2 meters. The division needs to make this change to the meteorological equipment because DAQ changed to a new electronic data acquisition system, or DAS, in 2017. The new DAS is not compatible with the meteorological equipment DAQ was using. Thus, DAQ decided to purchase new all-in-one meteorological sensors that can be directly interfaced with the new DAS. However, because these sensors are all-in-one, all the meteorological components must be installed at the same height. Rather than install two all-in-one units at the Millbrook site, one at 10 meters for wind speed and wind direction and one at 2 meters for relative humidity and ambient temperature, DAQ requests a waiver so that one all-in-one unit at 10 meters could be used at the site. Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations 58, Appendix D states only that sites must measure relative humidity and ambient temperature: 3(b) The NCore sites must measure, at a minimum, PM2.5 particle mass using continuous and integrated/filter-based samplers, speciated PM2.5, PM10-2.5 particle mass, O3, SO2, CO, NO/NOY, wind speed, wind direction, relative humidity and ambient temperature. 5(b) PAMS measurements include: 237 (5) Hourly averaged ambient temperature; … (9) Hourly averaged relative humidity; The regulation does not state at what height the relative humidity and ambient temperature should be measured. Since the 2-meter height for measuring relative humidity and ambient temperature is provided in EPA guidance and not in the regulations, DAQ requests a waiver for measuring relative humidity at 2 meters so that one all-in-one unit may be used at 10 meters. 2. Approved 2020 Requests DAQ requested approval to combine data from the sites listed in Table 75 for calculating a design value for a relocated site in accordance with 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix U(2)(c): “In certain circumstances, including but not limited to site closures or relocations, data from two nearby sites may be combined into a single site data record for the purpose of calculating a valid design value. The appropriate Regional Administrator may approve such combinations after taking into consideration factors such as distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features.” The EPA reviewed and approved or has previously approved all the NC DAQ’s requested O3 data site combinations, except for the combination of data from the Farmville (AQS ID 37-147-0099) and Pitt Agricultural Center (AQS ID 37-147-0006) sites. 42 The EPA believes that the monitors from these two sites may have measured slightly different airsheds based on their distance from each other (about 14 miles) and the differences in land use near each site. The Farmville site was in a small town more than ten miles outside of Greenville, NC, whereas the Pitt Agricultural Center is located near the city center of Greenville, NC, a city of almost 100,000 people. Table 75 lists the sites numerically by county so the following discussion will follow the order in the table. Taylorsville area in Alexander County As shown in Figure 117, DAQ has operated three sites in the Taylorsville area, Taylorsville, Waggin Trail and Taylorsville Liledoun. All three sites are within 3 kilometers of one another. The monitors at Taylorsville and Waggin Trail operated simultaneously from Aug. 11, 2004 through Oct. 30, 2004, and the monitors at Waggin Trail and Taylorsville – Liledoun operated simultaneously from Aug. 2, 2013 through Oct. 30, 2013. Figure 118 and Figure 119 demonstrate that these three monitors are representative of the same air shed in the Hickory area. Thus, the relocation of these monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these three sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). 42 United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2020-2021 State of North Carolina Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, The U. S. EPA Region 4 Comments and Recommendations, p14, available at https://xapps.ncdenr.org/aq/documents/DocsSearch.do?dispatch=download&documentId=13593 238 Table 76 Sites to be Combined for Ozone Design Value Calculations Original Site Name Original Monitor ID Dates of Operation New Site Name New Monitor ID Cutover Date Status Taylorsville 37-003-0003- 44201-1 May 1, 1982 to Oct. 31, 2004 Waggin Trail 37-003-0004- 44201-1 Nov. 1, 2004 Done Waggin Trail 37-003-0004- 44201-1 Aug 11, 2004 to Oct. 31, 2013 Taylorsville - Liledoun 37-003-0005- 44201-1 Nov. 1, 2013 Done Linville Falls Site 37-011-0001- 44201-1 April 24, 1998 to July 31, 1999 Linville Falls 37-011-0002- 44201-1 Aug. 1, 1999 Done Hope Mills Police Department 37-051-1002- 44201-1 April 1, 1989 to Oct. 31, 1996 Golfview 37-051-1003- 44201-1 April 1, 1997 Not done Golfview 37-051-1003- 44201-1 April 1, 1997 to Oct. 31, 2014 Honeycutt Elementary School 37-051-0010- 44201-1 May 9, 2015 Done Cooleemee 37-059-0002- 44201-1 April 15, 1996 to Oct. 31, 2009 Mocksville 37-059-0003- 44201-1 March 30, 2010 Done Duke Street 37-063-0013- 44201-1- April 1, 1993 to Oct. 31, 2006 Durham Armory 37-063-0015- 44201-1 April 1, 2007 Done McLeansville 37-081-0011- 44201-1 Jan. 1, 1979 to July 6, 2005 Mendenhall 37-081-0013- 44201-1 April 15, 2005 Done Haywood County Health Department 37-087-0004- 44201-1 April 1, 1999 to Oct. 31, 2010 Waynesville School 37-087-0008- 44201-1 April 1, 2011 Done West Johnston – Highway 301 37-101-0099- 44201-1 Jan. 1, 1983 to Oct. 31, 1994 West Johnston – Jack Road 37-101-0002- 44201-1 Jan. 1, 1995 Not done SR1315 37-109-0099- 42401-1 Jan. 1, 1982 to Oct. 31, 1993 Crouse 37-109-0004- 44201-1 Nov. 1, 1993 Not done 239 Table 76 Sites to be Combined for Ozone Design Value Calculations Original Site Name Original Monitor ID Dates of Operation New Site Name New Monitor ID Cutover Date Status Bushy Fork Site 37-145-0099- 44201-1 Jan. 1, 1982 to Oct. 31, 1997 Bushy Fork 37-145-0003- 44201-1 April 1, 1998 Done Farmville 37-147-0099- 44201-1 Jan. 1, 1982 to Oct. 31, 2007 Pitt County Agricultural Center 37-147-0006- 44201-1 April 1, 2008 Not done Mount Mitchell – State Highway 128 37-199-0003- 44201-1 May 6, 1992 to May 31, 2006 Mount Mitchell Education Center 37-199-0004- 44201-1 June 2, 2006 Done 240 Figure 117. Relationship between the Taylorsville, Waggin Trail and Taylorsville Liledoun Sites 241 Figure 118. Comparison of Maximum 8-Hour Averaged Ozone Concentrations at Waggin Trail and Taylorsville Figure 119. Comparison of maximum daily 8-hour ozone concentrations 242 Linville Falls in Avery County As shown in Figure 120, DAQ has operated two sites in Linville Falls. The two sites were within about 40 meters of one another. Unfortunately, it was not possible to operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, due to the limited distance of the move, the relocation of this monitor meets the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 120. Location of the Linville Falls Site (old site) and Linville Falls (new site) Hope Mills area in Cumberland County As shown in Figure 120, DAQ has operated three sites in the Hope Mills area, the Hope Mills Police Department, Golfview and Honeycutt Elementary School. All three 243 sites are within 4.5 kilometers of one another. Because of the timing of the evictions and the time it took to get approval for the new sites and get the sites up and operational, the division could not operate the monitors simultaneously. However, the three monitors are representative of the same air shed in the Hope Mills area based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features. Thus, the relocation of these monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these three sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 121. Location of Honeycutt, Golfview and Hope Mills Police Department sites 244 Cooleemee and Mocksville in Davie County As shown in Figure 122, DAQ operated three sites in Davie County over the years. The Mocksville site was located within 10 Kilometers of the Cooleemee site. Because of the timing of the request and the time it took to get approval for the Mocksville site and get the site up and operational, the division could not operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, the two monitors are representative of the same air shed in Davie County based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features. Thus, these two sites meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 122. Location of the Fork Recreational Center, Cooleemee and Mocksville sites Duke Street and Durham Armory in Durham County As shown in Figure 123, the Durham Armory site is within 300 meters of the Duke Street site. Because of the timing of the request and the time required to obtain permission and set up the new site, the division could not operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, the two monitors are representative of the same air shed in the Durham area based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features. Thus, this request meets the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from 245 these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 123. Locations of the Durham Armory and Duke Street sites in Durham County McLeansville and Mendenhall in Guilford County As shown in Figure 124, the Mendenhall site is within 8 Kilometers of the McLeansville site. The monitors operated simultaneously from April 15, 2005 through July 5, 2005, and as shown in Figure 125 are representative of the same air shed in the Greensboro area. Thus, these two monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 246 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 124. Locations of the Mendenhall and McLeansville sites in Guilford County Figure 125. Comparison of 8-Hour Averaged Daily Maximum Concentrations at Mendenhall and McLeansville Haywood County Health Department and Waynesville School in Haywood County As shown in Figure 126, the Waynesville School site is within 150 meters from where the Haywood County Health Department site was located. Because of the timing of the eviction and the time involved in establishing a new site, the division could not operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, the two monitors are representative of the same air shed in Waynesville based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features. Thus, this request meets the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). 247 Figure 126. Locations of the Haywood County Health Department and Waynesville School sites West Johnston Sites in Johnston County As shown in Figure 126, the West Johnston site on Jack Road is within 25 kilometers from where the West Johnston site on Highway 301 was located. Because of the time involved in establishing a new site, the division could not operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, the two monitors are representative of the same air shed in west Johnston County based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and 248 terrain features. Thus, these two monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 127. Locations of the West Johnston Site on Highway 301 (old site) and West Johnston Site on Jack Road (new site) State Route 1315 and Crouse Sites in Lincoln County As shown in Figure 128, the Crouse site is 9 kilometers west from where the State Route 1315 site was located. The monitors operated simultaneously from July 11, 1993 through Oct. 30, 1993, and as shown in Figure 129 are representative of the same air shed in the Lincolnton area. Thus, these two monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 128. Relationship between State Route 1315 site and Crouse Site 249 Figure 129. Comparison of 8-Hour Averaged Ozone Concentrations at the Crouse and State Route 1315 Sites Bushy Fork Sites in Person County As shown in Figure 131, Bushy Fork is 4.3 kilometers from where the old Bushy Fork site was located. Because of the time involved in establishing a new site, the division could not operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, the two monitors are representative of the same air shed in the Hurdle Mills area of Person County based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features. Thus, these two monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). 250 Figure 130. Locations of the Bushy Fork Site (old site) and Bushy Fork (new site) Farmville and Pitt County Agricultural Center Sites in Pitt County As shown in Figure 131, the Pitt County Agricultural Center site is 23 Kilometers from where the Farmville site was located. Because of the time involved in establishing a new site, the division could not operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, the two monitors are representative of the same air shed in Pitt County based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features. Thus, two monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58. I 4(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 131. Location of Farmville and Pitt County Agricultural Sites 251 Mount Mitchell Sites in Yancey County As shown in Figure 18, the Mount Mitchell site is 3 kilometers from where the State Highway 128 site was located. Because of the timing of the request to relocate the monitor, the division could not operate the two monitors simultaneously. However, the two monitors are representative of the same air shed in the Mount Mitchell area based on distance between sites, spatial and temporal patterns in air quality, local emissions and meteorology, jurisdictional boundaries and terrain features. Thus, these two monitors meet the relocation requirements of 40 CFR § 58.14(c)(6) and the data from these two sites should be eligible to be combined for design value calculations as described in 40 CFR § 50 Appendix U(2)(c). Figure 132. Locations of the State Highway 128 Site (old site) and Mount Mitchell (new site) 252 Appendix H. Monitoring Agreement between Virginia and North Carolina for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News Metropolitan Statistical Area 253 254 255 256 Appendix I. NCore Monitoring Plan Approval Letter 257 258 Appendix J. 2010 Network Plan EPA Approval Letter 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 Appendix K. Monitoring Agreement for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia Metropolitan Statistical Area 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 Appendix L. Scale of Representativeness Each agency must describe each station in the monitoring network in terms of the physical dimensions of the air parcel nearest the monitoring station throughout which actual pollutant concentrations are reasonably similar. Area dimensions or scales of representativeness used in the network description are: a) Micro-scale - defines the concentration in air volumes associated with area dimensions ranging from several meters up to about 100 meters. b) Middle scale - defines the concentration typical of areas up to several city blocks in size with dimensions ranging from about 100 meters to 0.5 kilometers. c) Neighborhood scale – defines concentrations within an extended area of a city that has relatively uniform land use with dimensions ranging from about 0.5 to 4.0 kilometers. d) Urban scale - defines an overall citywide condition with dimensions on the order of 4 to 50 kilometers. e) Regional Scale - defines air quality levels over areas having dimensions of 50 to hundreds of kilometers. Closely associated with the area around the monitoring station where pollutant concentrations are reasonably similar are the basic monitoring exposures of the station. There are six basic exposures: a) Sites located to determine the highest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the network. b) Sites located to determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density. c) Sites located to determine the impact on ambient pollution levels of significant sources or source categories. d) Sites located to determine general background concentration levels. e) Sites located to determine the extent of regional pollutant transport among populated areas. f) Sites located to measure air-pollution impacts on visibility, vegetation damage or other welfare-based impacts and in support of secondary standards. The design intent is to match the area dimensions represented by the sample of monitored air with the area dimensions most appropriate for the monitoring objective of the station. When siting monitoring stations, the following relationship of the objectives and scales of representativeness are appropriate: Table J1. Site Type Appropriate Siting Scales 1. Highest concentration Micro, middle, neighborhood, sometimes urban or regional for secondarily formed pollutants 2. Population oriented Neighborhood, urban 3. Source impact Micro, middle, neighborhood 4. General/background & regional transport Urban, regional 5. Welfare-related impacts Urban, regional 274 Appendix M – 2023 Annual Report for EPA’s Data Requirements Rule to Demonstrate Attainment with the 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS 275 276 A copy of this report is available for public inspection at https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality/air-quality-data/annual-network- plan/annual-monitoring-network-plan-for-north-carolina-air-quality. The report is also available for public inspection at 217 West Jones Street, Raleigh, NC 27603. 277 Appendix N. Public Notice of Availability of Network Plan Public notice of availability of the network plan was provided on the North Carolina Division of Air Quality website from May 25th to June 26th, 2023. In addition, notification was sent out via public e-mail distribution lists maintained for permitting and rules. 278 279 280 281 Appendix O. Public Comments Received and Response No public comments were received. The following changes were made to the monitoring plan after it went out for public comment: • Appendices N and O were added. • The NCore QAPP had been approved since the public comment period closed and the approval date was updated. A Table was removed that listed this QAPP as conditionally approved. • Fort Bragg was changed to Fort Liberty. • Rockwell was corrected to the classification of a special monitoring site. 282 Glossary ADN – atmospheric deposition network AMS – Ambient Monitoring Section AQS - air quality system AQI - air quality index ARM - approved regional method BAM - beta attenuation monitor CSS - continuous speciation site CO - carbon monoxide CFR - Code of Federal Regulations DHEC – Department of Health and Environmental Concerns DRR – Data Requirements Rule ECB – Electronics and Calibration Branch EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency F - Fahrenheit FEM – federal equivalent method FRM - federal reference method GSMNP – Great Smokey Mountains National Park IMPROVE - Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments MCAQ – Mecklenburg County Air Quality MMIF – Mesoscale Model Interface MOA – Memorandum of Understanding MSA - metropolitan statistical area NAAQS - national ambient air quality standards DAQ - North Carolina Division of Air Quality NCore - national core ambient monitoring network station NO2 - nitrogen dioxide NOy – reactive oxides of nitrogen O3 – ozone PAMS – photochemical assessment monitoring station Pb - lead PM - particulate matter PM 2.5 - fine particulate or particles with aerodynamic diameters of 2.5 microns and below PM 10 - particles with aerodynamic diameters of 10 microns and below PSD - prevention of significant deterioration PWEI – population weighted emission index QA – Quality Assurance RRO – Raleigh Regional Office SASSTM – Speciation Air Sampling System SEMAP – Southeastern Modeling, Analysis and Planning SIP – state implementation plan SLAMs - state and local air monitoring station SO2 - sulfur dioxide SPM - special purpose monitor TECO - Thermo Environmental, Incorporated 283 TEOM - tapered element oscillating microbalance TLE - trace level enhanced (monitor) TSP – total suspended particulate UCI – Upper Confidence Interval URG – University Research Glass VDEQ - Virginia Department of Environmental Quality WINS - well impactor ninety-six, a type of PM 2.5 separator WRF - Weather Research and Forecasting ZAG – zero air generator ZAS – zero air supply