Loading...
AQ_AM_20230628_BP_AnnPln_Final 2023-2024 Volume 2-C Mooresville Monitoring Region_Final 2023-2024 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality Volume 2 Site Descriptions by Division of Air Quality Regional Office and Metropolitan Statistical Area C. The Mooresville Monitoring Region June 28, 2023 C2 Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ 2 List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................. 3 C. The Mooresville Monitoring Region .......................................................................................................... 4 (1) Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA .......................................................................................................... 4 (2) Cleveland County – Shelby Micropolitan Statistical Area ................................................................... 14 (3) Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord MSA ...................................................................................................... 15 (4) Stanly County – Albemarle Micropolitan Statistical Area ................................................................... 25 Appendix C.1 Annual Network Site Review Forms for 2021 ........................................................................ 27 List of Figures Figure C1. The Mooresville monitoring region .............................................................................................. 4 Figure C2. Locations of monitors in the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA ..................................................... 4 Figure C3. Taylorsville Liledoun ozone and particle monitoring site, 37-003-0005 ....................................... 5 Figure C4. Looking north from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site ........................................................................ 6 Figure C5. Looking west from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site ......................................................................... 6 Figure C6. Looking east from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site .......................................................................... 6 Figure C7. Looking south from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site ........................................................................ 6 Figure C8. Relationship between old Waggin Trail site (north) and Taylorsville-Liledoun site (south) .......... 7 Figure C9. Lenoir ozone and sulfur dioxide monitoring site .......................................................................... 8 Figure C10. Looking north from the Lenoir site ............................................................................................. 9 Figure C11. Looking northwest from the Lenoir site ..................................................................................... 9 Figure C12. Looking west from the Lenoir site .............................................................................................. 9 Figure C13. Looking northeast from the Lenoir site ...................................................................................... 9 Figure C14. Looking east from the Lenoir site ............................................................................................... 9 Figure C15. Looking southeast from the Lenoir site ...................................................................................... 9 Figure C16. Looking southwest from the Lenoir site ................................................................................... 10 Figure C17. Looking south from the Lenoir site ........................................................................................... 10 Figure C18. Hickory fine particle monitoring site ........................................................................................ 10 Figure C19. Looking north from the Hickory site ......................................................................................... 11 Figure C20. Looking northwest from the Hickory site ................................................................................. 11 Figure C21. Looking west from the Hickory site .......................................................................................... 11 Figure C22. Looking southwest from the Hickory site ................................................................................. 11 Figure C23. Looking northeast from the Hickory site .................................................................................. 11 Figure C24. Looking east from the Hickory site ........................................................................................... 11 Figure C25. Looking southeast from the Hickory site .................................................................................. 11 Figure C26. Looking south from the Hickory site ......................................................................................... 11 C3 Figure 27. Aerial view of the Hickory fine particle monitoring site showing relative positions of the current location and proposed location ................................................................................................................... 13 Figure C28. Emissions of Lead and Lead Compounds to the Air in the Hickory MSA from 2009 to 2020 ... 14 Figure C30. Monitoring sites in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA ....................................................... 16 Figure C31. Crouse ozone monitoring site .................................................................................................. 17 Figure C32. Looking north from the Crouse site .......................................................................................... 18 Figure C33. Looking northwest from the Crouse site .................................................................................. 18 Figure C34. Looking west from the Crouse site ........................................................................................... 18 Figure C35. Looking northeast from the Crouse site ................................................................................... 18 Figure C36. Looking east from the Crouse site ............................................................................................ 18 Figure C37. Looking southeast from the Crouse site ................................................................................... 18 Figure C38. Looking southwest from the Crouse site .................................................................................. 19 Figure C39. Looking south from the Crouse site ......................................................................................... 19 Figure C40. The Rockwell ozone and fine particle site, 37-159-0021 .......................................................... 20 Figure C41. Looking north from the Rockwell site ....................................................................................... 21 Figure C42. Rockwell site looking northwest ............................................................................................... 21 Figure C43. Looking west from the Rockwell site ........................................................................................ 21 Figure C44. Looking northeast from the Rockwell site ................................................................................ 21 Figure C45. Looking east from the Rockwell site ......................................................................................... 21 Figure C46. Looking southeast from the Rockwell site ................................................................................ 21 Figure C47. Looking southwest from the Rockwell site ............................................................................... 22 Figure C48. Looking south from the Rockwell site ...................................................................................... 22 Figure C49. Monroe ozone monitoring site, 37-179-0003 .......................................................................... 22 Figure C50. Looking north from the Monroe site ........................................................................................ 23 Figure C51. Looking west from the Monroe site ......................................................................................... 23 Figure C52. Looking east from the Monroe site .......................................................................................... 23 Figure C53. Looking south from the Monroe site ........................................................................................ 23 Figure C54. Lead and Lead Compound Emissions in the Charlotte MSA from 2009 to 2020 ..................... 24 Figure C55. Lead and lead compounds emitted in Stanly County from 2009 to 2020 ............................... 25 List of Tables Table C1. Site Table for Taylorsville-Liledoun ................................................................................................ 5 Table C2. Site Table for Lenoir ....................................................................................................................... 8 Table C3. Site Table for Hickory ................................................................................................................... 12 Table C4. Site Table for Crouse .................................................................................................................... 17 Table C5. Site Table for Rockwell ................................................................................................................. 19 Table C6. Site Table for Monroe Middle School .......................................................................................... 23 C4 C. The Mooresville Monitoring Region The Mooresville monitoring region, shown in Figure C1, consists of four areas: (1) the eastern portion of the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton metropolitan statistical area, or MSA, (Alexander and Catawba counties); (2) Cleveland County; (3) the Charlotte MSA - Cabarrus, Gas- ton, Iredell, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan and Union counties; and (4) Stanly County. Figure C1. The Mooresville monitoring region The dots show the approximate locations of most monitoring sites in this region (1) Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA The Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA consists of four counties: Alexander, Burke, Caldwell and Catawba County. The major urban areas are the Cities of Hickory, Lenoir and Morganton. The North Carolina Divi- sion of Air Quality, or DAQ, currently operates three monitoring sites in the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA. These sites are located at Taylorsville-Liledoun in Alexander County, Lenoir in Caldwell County, and the Hickory Water Tower in Catawba County. Figure C2 shows the locations of these monitors. Figure C2. Locations of monitors in the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA A is the Lenoir ozone monitor- ing site; B is the Taylorsville- Liledoun ozone monitoring site; C is the Hickory particle monitoring site. Circles around the monitors show the scale of representation: Lenoir is regional – 50-plus km; Taylorsville-Liledoun is ur- ban - 4 to 50 km; Hickory is neighborhood – 0.5 to 4 km. C5 At the Taylorsville-Liledoun site, DAQ operates a seasonal ozone monitor and a rotating PM10 monitor that operates 12-months every third year. Figure C3 shows the site. Table C1 summarizes monitoring information for the site. Figure C4 through Figure C7 show views looking north, east, south and west. DAQ established this site as the downwind site for the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA in 2013 to re- place the Taylorsville-Waggin Trail site. The division requested and received permission to combine the 2014 and 2015 data from the Liledoun site with the 2013 data from the Taylorsville site to provide a valid design value for recommended designations due in 2016. This site is the design value monitor for the MSA. Until 2021, the regulations at 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D required the Hickory-Lenoir-Morgan- ton MSA to have two ozone monitoring sites. The 2018-2020 and 2019-2021 design values are less than 85 percent of the national ambient air quality standard, or NAAQS, so the regulations currently require only one monitor for the MSA. The DAQ does not plan to shut down either of the two ozone monitors in the MSA at this time. Figure C3. Taylorsville Liledoun ozone and particle monitoring site, 37-003-0005 Table C1. Site Table for Taylorsville-Liledoun Site Name: Taylorsville-Liledoun AQS Site Identification Number: 37-003-0005 Location: 700 Liledoun Road, Taylorsville, North Carolina CBSA: Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC CBSA #: 25860 Latitude 35.9138 Longitude -81.1910 Datum: WGS84 Elevation 365 meters Parameter Name Method Method Refer- ence ID Sample Duration Sampling Schedule Ozone Instrumental with ultraviolet photometry, 047 EQOA-0880-047 1-Hour March 1 to Oct. 31 PM10 total 0-10um STP Met One Beta Attenuation BAM-1020, 122 EQPM-0798-122 1-hour Year-round, every third year Date Monitor Established: Ozone Aug. 2, 2013 PM10 total 0-10um STP March 23, 2016 C6 Table C1. Site Table for Taylorsville-Liledoun Nearest Road: Liledoun Road Traffic Count: 6100 Year of Count: 2021 Parameter Name Distance to Road Direction to Road Monitor Type Statement of Purpose Ozone 219 meters Southeast SLAMS Real-time AQI reporting and fore- casting. Compliance w/NAAQS. PM10 total 0- 10um STP 219 meters Southeast Special pur- pose Prevention of significant deteriora- tion, PSD, Modeling Parameter Name Monitoring Objec- tive Scale Suitable for Com- parison to NAAQS Proposal to Move or Change Ozone General Background Urban Yes None PM10 total 0-10um STP General Background Urban Yes Will operate 6/28/2022 to 7/2/2023 Parameter Name Meets Part 58 Requirements for: Appendix A Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Ozone Yes Yes Yes Yes PM10 total 0-10um STP Yes Yes Yes – not required Yes Parameter Name Probe Height Distance to Support Distance to Trees Obstacles Ozone 3.65 meters 1.06 meters > 20 meters None PM10 total 0-10um STP 2.3876 meters 2.032 meters > 20 meters None Figure C4. Looking north from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site Figure C5. Looking west from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site Figure C6. Looking east from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site Figure C7. Looking south from the Taylorsville-Liledoun site DAQ established the Taylorsville-Liledoun site on Aug. 2, 2013, after the division discovered in January 2013 that Alexander County planned to establish a vehicle maintenance facility at the Waggin Trail site. Because these construction plans, once implemented, made the Waggin Trail site unacceptable for C7 ozone monitoring, DAQ identified the Taylorsville-Liledoun site for the ozone monitor. As shown in Fig- ure C8, the Taylorsville-Liledoun site is located almost exactly 1 mile south of the former Waggin Trail site, behind the Alexander County Board of Education building, 700 Liledoun Road, Taylorsville. The State Climate Office operates a meteorological tower in the same area where the ozone monitor is lo- cated. The Waggin Trail and Taylorsville-Liledoun site operated simultaneously from Aug. 2 through Oct. 31, 2013. Figure C8. Relationship between old Waggin Trail site (north) and Taylorsville-Liledoun site (south) At Lenoir, 37-027-0003, the DAQ operates a seasonal ozone monitor. In 2013, DAQ added a special pur- pose sulfur dioxide monitor at Lenoir that operates every third year to provide data for prevention of C8 significant deterioration, PSD, modeling for industrial expansion. Figure C9 shows the site. Table C2 sum- marizes monitoring information for the site. Figure C10 to Figure C17 provide views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest from the site. Before the start of the 2021 ozone season, DAQ replaced the shelter at the site. Figure C9. Lenoir ozone and sulfur dioxide monitoring site Table C2. Site Table for Lenoir Site Name: Lenoir AQS Site Identification Number: 37-027-0003 Location: 291 Nuway Circle, Lenoir, North Carolina MSA: Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC CBSA #: 25860 Latitude 35.935833 Longitude -81.530278 Datum: WGS84 Elevation 366 meters Parameter Name Method Method Reference ID Sample Duration Sampling Schedule Ozone Instrumental with ultraviolet photometry, 047 EQOA-0880-047 1-Hour March 1 to Oct. 31 Sulfur dioxide Instrumental with pulsed flu- orescence, 060 EQSA-0486-060 1-Hour Year-round; every third year Date Monitor Established: Ozone Jan. 1, 1981 Sulfur dioxide Jan. 1, 2013 Nearest Road: Nuway Circle Traffic Count: 5500 Year of Count: 2021 Parameter Name Distance to Road Direction to Road Monitor Type Statement of Purpose Ozone 146 meters East SLAMS Real-time AQI reporting & fore- casting. Compliance w/NAAQS. Sulfur dioxide 146 meters East Special purpose Prevention of significant deteriora- tion, PSD, Modeling Parameter Name Monitoring Objective Scale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS Proposal to Move or Change Ozone General background Regional Yes None Sulfur dioxide General background Regional Yes Operated from 1/1/22 to 12/31/22 Parameter Name Meets Part 58 Requirements: Appendix A Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Ozone Yes Yes Yes Yes C9 Table C2. Site Table for Lenoir Sulfur dioxide Yes Yes Yes – not required Yes Parameter Name Probe Height Distance to Support Distance to Trees Obstacles Ozone 4.46 meters 1.60 meters >20 meters None Sulfur dioxide 4.39 meters 1.5748 meter >20 meters None Figure C10. Looking north from the Lenoir site Figure C11. Looking northwest from the Lenoir site Figure C12. Looking west from the Lenoir site Figure C13. Looking northeast from the Lenoir site Figure C14. Looking east from the Lenoir site Figure C15. Looking southeast from the Lenoir site C10 Figure C16. Looking southwest from the Lenoir site Figure C17. Looking south from the Lenoir site At the Hickory site, DAQ operates collocated continuous fine particle monitors. The division shut down the collocated one-in-six-day federal reference method or FRM fine particle monitor on June 12, 2019. DAQ shut down the speciation fine particle SASS and University Research Glass, or URG, monitors and the two one-in-six-day high-volume PM10 monitors in 2014. In 2015, DAQ added a second continuous fine particle monitor that recently received equivalency status to the site so DAQ could evaluate its per- formance. On Jan. 1, 2017, the division made the second continuous monitor the primary monitor and shut down the primary FRM monitor at the site. Figure C18 through Figure C26 show the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west and northwest. Table C3 sum- marizes monitoring information for the site. Figure C18. Hickory fine particle monitoring site C11 Figure C19. Looking north from the Hickory site Figure C20. Looking northwest from the Hickory site Figure C21. Looking west from the Hickory site Figure C22. Looking southwest from the Hickory site Figure C23. Looking northeast from the Hickory site Figure C24. Looking east from the Hickory site Figure C25. Looking southeast from the Hickory site Figure C26. Looking south from the Hickory site C12 Table C3. Site Table for Hickory Site Name: Hickory AQS Site Identification Number 37-035-0004 Location: 1650 1st Street, Hickory, North Carolina MSA: Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC CBSA #: 25860 Latitude 35.728889 Longitude -81.365556 Datum: WGS84 Elevation 333 meters Parameter Name Method Method Refer- ence ID Sample Du- ration Sampling Schedule PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, primary Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor w/ VSCC EQPM-1013-209 1-Hour Year Round PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, collocated Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor w/ VSCC EQPM-1013-209 1-Hour Year Round Date Monitor Established: PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, primary Sept. 14, 2015 PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, collocated July 14, 2019 Nearest Road: 2nd Avenue SW Traffic Count: 3100 Year of Count: 2021 Parameter Name Distance to Road Direction to Road Monitor Type Statement of Purpose PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, primary 21.34 meters South southeast SLAMS Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. SIP required monitor. PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, collocated 22.25 meters South southeast SLAMS, QA Collocated Compliance w/NAAQS. AQI reporting. SIP required monitor. Parameter Name Monitoring Ob- jective Scale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS Proposal to Move or Change PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, primary Population Expo- sure Neighborhood Yes None PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, collocated Population Expo- sure Neighborhood Yes None Parameter Name Meets Part 58 Appendix A Re- quirements Meets Part 58 Appendix C Requirements Meets Part 58 Appendix D Re- quirements Meets Part 58 Appendix E Re- quirements PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, primary Yes Yes Yes Yes PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, collocated Yes Yes Yes Yes Parameter Name Probe Height Distance to Support Distance to Trees Obstacles PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, primary 2.4892 meters 2.1082 meters >20 meters None PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022, collocated 2.3368 meters 2.0574 meters >20 meters None DAQ shut down both one-in-six-day PM10 monitors on Dec. 31, 2014. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D did not require the PM10 monitor, the division did not use the PM10 data from this site for permit model- ing and the monitor was no longer needed to ensure an adequate PM10 network. The United States Envi- ronmental Protection Agency, or EPA, ended the funding for the analysis of the SASS and URG samples in January 2015. Thus, DAQ also shut down these monitors in 2014. At the end of December 2015, DAQ replaced the well impactor ninety-six, or WINS, on the FRM with a very sharp cut cyclone, or VSCC. DAQ made this change because the VSCC is easier and less expensive to maintain. In the future, Highway US 321 going past the site will be widened. Construction will dictate some tempo- rary changes and rerouting of traffic lanes, closure of an overpass near the site, as well as the striking of C13 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 approxi- mately 25 meters northward towards 1st Avenue SW as shown in Figure 27. The monitors will remain at least 17 meters from the nearest travel lane on all sides. As shown in the wind rose in the inset of Figure 27, the predominant winds at the Hickory airport are from the south and northwest. DAQ completed this move on January 26, 2023. Figure 27. Aerial view of the Hickory fine particle monitoring site showing relative positions of the current location and proposed location The Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA did not need to do lead monitoring to meet the 2010 lead monitor- ing requirements. As indicated in Figure C28, it has no facilities within the MSA reporting over 0.5 tons of lead emissions to the air. 1 1 United States Environmental Protection Agency. United States Environmental Protection Agency. The 2020 EPA Toxics Release Inventory Tracker available at https://edap.epa.gov/public/extensions/TRIToxicsTracker/TRIToxic- sTracker.html#. C14 Figure C28. Emissions of Lead and Lead Compounds to the Air in the Hickory MSA from 2009 to 2020 The 2015 ozone monitoring requirements do not require additional monitors in the Hickory-Lenoir-Mor- ganton MSA. The MSA has the minimum number of monitors required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D for population exposure monitoring in urban areas. Seasonal ozone monitoring starts on March 1 instead of April 1 beginning in 2017. The Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA did not need additional monitors to comply with the 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements. It is too small to require area-wide monitors or near-roadway moni- toring. DAQ will not need to add source-oriented monitors in the Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton MSA to comply with the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements for source-oriented monitoring. No additional monitors were required to comply with the population weighted emission index, PWEI, monitoring re- quirements because the total sulfur dioxide emissions in this MSA multiplied by the total MSA popula- tion does not result in a high enough index to require monitoring. This area will also not operate any near-road carbon monoxide and fine particle monitors because the population is under 1,000,000. (2) Cleveland County – Shelby Micropolitan Statistical Area Cleveland County is part of the Charlotte-Concord combined statistical area. The micropolitan statistical area (MiSA) of Shelby is in the county. DAQ currently does not operate any monitors in Cleveland County. The December 2010 revisions to the lead monitoring network regulations did not result in addi- tional monitoring in Cleveland County because there are no significant emissions of lead in the county. 2 This county is not required to add ozone monitors because the area does not have any MSAs that must 2 United States Environmental Protection Agency. United States Environmental Protection Agency. The 2020 EPA Toxics Release Inventory Tracker available at https://edap.epa.gov/public/extensions/TRIToxicsTracker/TRIToxic- sTracker.html#. C15 meet the minimum number of monitors required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D for population exposure monitoring in urban areas. Cleveland County is too small to require area-wide nitrogen dioxide monitors or near-roadway monitoring for nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide and fine particles. The 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements also did not result in additional monitoring in this area because there are no large sources of sulfur dioxide in this county. This county is also not required to monitor for car- bon monoxide because the population is too small to require near-road carbon monoxide monitoring. (3) Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord MSA The Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord MSA consists of 11 counties: Anson, Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan and Union in North Carolina and Chester, Lancaster and York in South Carolina. The major urban areas are Charlotte, Gastonia and Concord in North Carolina and Rock Hill in South Car- olina. This MSA is one of the fastest growing areas in North Carolina. Currently, DAQ operates three monitoring sites in the Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord MSA; Mecklenburg County Air Quality, MCAQ, oper- ates five; the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Conservation, DHEC, operates one; and the Catawba Indian Nation operates one. These sites are located at Crouse in Lincoln County; Friendship Park, Ramblewood Park, Remount Road, Garinger High School and University Meadows in Charlotte in Mecklenburg County; Rockwell in Rowan County; Monroe in Union County; and York Landfill and Avenue of the Nations in York County, South Carolina. MCAQ shut down the Montclaire site on April 1, 2019, after receiving a notice that Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools would evict them in mid-April. MCAQ moved the fine particle monitor to Friendship Park and the PM10 monitor to Ramblewood Park in late 2019. Figure C29 displays the locations of these monitors. C16 Figure C29. Monitoring sites in the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA DAQ shut down the Enochville seasonal ozone monitor in Rowan County at the end of the 2013 ozone season and the Grier Middle School fine-particle monitoring site in Gaston County in February 2015. The NAAQS and AQI monitors at the Grier Middle School site were not required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D. DAQ no longer needed the continuous monitor at the site for air quality forecasting and because of the lower fine particle concentrations throughout the state, the monitors were no longer needed to en- sure an adequate fine particle network. At the end of the 2014 ozone season, the property owner evicted MCAQ from the Arrowood site in Mecklenburg County and at the end of the 2015 ozone season, the property owner evicted MCAQ from the County Line site. Mecklenburg County Air Quality estab- lished the University Meadows site on April 1, 2016, to replace the County Line site. MCAQ also shut down the Fire Station #11 PM10 site on June 29, 2016, due to issues at the site, and the Oakdale fine-particle monitoring site at the end of 2016, so MCAQ could move the monitor to the Re- mount Road near-road site. On February 13, 2019, Metric Construction, a construction contractor working for Charlotte-Mecklen- burg Schools, notified MCAQ that they would need to remove their Montclaire air monitoring station from the premises of Montclaire Elementary School to make way for construction of a new school build- C17 ing on the property. Metric Construction commenced construction around May 1, 2019. Pre-construc- tion work at the site required removal of power from the monitoring station as early as mid to late April 2019. Thus, MCAQ terminated monitoring at the Montclaire air monitoring station on April 1, 2019. Appendix B to Volume 1 discusses the MCAQ sites and monitors. Only the three DAQ sites (Crouse in Lincoln County, Rockwell in Rowan County and Monroe in Union County) are further discussed in this subsection. At the Crouse site in Lincoln County, DAQ operates a seasonal ozone monitor. Figure C30 shows the site. Table C4 summarizes monitoring information for the site. Figure C31 through Figure C38 provides views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west and northwest. The division estab- lished the site in 1993 as the secondary downwind site for the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia MSA. Today, it provides valuable information on ozone concentrations in Lincoln County, which DAQ may use to keep parts of the county from receiving a nonattainment designation for the ozone standard. Figure C30. Crouse ozone monitoring site Table C4. Site Table for Crouse Site Name: Crouse AQS Site Identification Number 37-109-0004 Location: 1487 Riverview Road, Lincolnton, North Carolina CBSA: Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC CBSA #: 16740 Latitude 35.438556 Longitude -81.276750 Datum: WGS84 Elevation 270 meters Parameter Name Method Method Reference ID Sample Duration Sampling Schedule Ozone Instrumental with ultravi- olet photometry, 047 EQOA-0880-047 1-Hour March 1 to Oct. 31 Date Monitor Established: Ozone July 1, 1993 Nearest Road: Riverview Road Traffic Count: 2500 Year of Count: 2021 Parameter Name Distance to Road Direction to Road Monitor Type Statement of Purpose Ozone 62 meters Southwest SLAMS Compliance w/NAAQS. Real-time AQI reporting & forecasting. C18 Table C4. Site Table for Crouse Parameter Name Monitoring Objective Scale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS Proposal to Move or Change Ozone General background Urban Yes None Parameter Name Meets Requirements of 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Ozone Yes Yes Yes Yes Parameter Name Probe Height (m) Distance to Support Distance to Trees Obstacles Ozone 3.5 1.3 meter >20 meters None Figure C31. Looking north from the Crouse site Figure C32. Looking northwest from the Crouse site Figure C33. Looking west from the Crouse site Figure C34. Looking northeast from the Crouse site Figure C35. Looking east from the Crouse site Figure C36. Looking southeast from the Crouse site C19 Figure C37. Looking southwest from the Crouse site Figure C38. Looking south from the Crouse site At Rockwell, DAQ operates a year-round ozone monitor and a continuous fine particle monitor. On March 12, 2019, the division added a rainwater collection sampler to the site. DAQ shut down the con- tinuous fine-particle nitrate monitor and aethalometer as well as a reactive-oxides-of-nitrogen monitor that operated year-round at this site in 2016. DAQ operated these monitors to provide information for planning purposes and to evaluate state regulations. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D or any other EPA regulations did not require these monitors. DAQ made the decision to shut down these monitors based on staffing considerations, the age of the equipment and the decision that the division did not need the additional data provided by these monitors for planning purposes. DAQ shut down the aethalometer on Aug. 8, 2016, (because the monitor was broken and removed from service); the reactive oxides of nitro- gen monitor on Nov. 3, 2016; and the nitrate monitor on Nov. 4, 2016. DAQ shut down the one-in-three-day fine particle FRM monitor, one-in-six day collocated fine particle monitor and continuous fine particle monitor at the end of 2015. The division shut down the one-in-six- day speciation fine particle monitors in January 2015 because the EPA stopped funding the sample anal- ysis for the state. On Oct. 24, 2019, the DAQ resumed fine particle monitoring at the site to provide background data for PSD modeling. In October 2020, DAQ added a nitrogen dioxide monitor to the site. Table C5 summarizes monitoring information for the site. Figure C39 through Figure C47 provide pictures of the site as well as views look- ing north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west and northwest. Table C5. Site Table for Rockwell Site Name: Rockwell AQS Site Identification Number 37-159-0021 Location: 316 West Street, Rockwell, North Carolina CBSA: Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC CBSA #: 16740 Latitude 35.551868 Longitude -80.395039 Datum: WGS84 Elevation 240 meters Parameter Name Method Method Refer- ence ID Sample Duration Sampling Schedule Ozone Instrumental with ultraviolet photometry, 047 EQOA-0880-047 1-Hour Year-round PM 2.5 local condi- tions, BAM 1022 Met One BAM-1022 Mass Monitor w/ VSCC EQPM-1013-209 1-Hour Year Round C20 Table C5. Site Table for Rockwell Nitrogen dioxide, CAPS Teledyne Advanced Pollution Instrumentation, Model T500U cavity attenuated phase shift spec- troscopy Nitrogen Dioxide Analyzer Automated EQNA-0514-212 1-Hour Year Round Date Monitor Established: Ozone April 1, 1993 PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022 Oct. 24, 2019 Nitrogen dioxide, CAPS Oct. 22, 2020 Nearest Road: Gold Hill Road Traffic Count: 600 Year of Count: 2021 Parameter Name Distance to Road Direction to Road Monitor Type Statement of Purpose Ozone 17 meters North Special purpose Ozone precursor monitoring. Com- pliance w/NAAQS. Modeling. PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022 18 meters North Special purpose Compliance w/NAAQS. Modeling. Nitrogen dioxide, CAPS 17 meters North Special purpose PSD modeling/permitting Parameter Name Monitoring Objective Scale Suitable to Com- pare to NAAQS Proposal to Move or Change Ozone Highest concentration Urban Yes Site may be relocated PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022 Population Exposure Neighborhood Yes Site may be relocated Nitrogen dioxide, CAPS General Background Urban Yes Site may be relocated Parameter Name Meets 40 CFR Part 58 Requirements for: Appendix A Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Ozone Yes Yes Yes – the monitor is not required Yes PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022 Yes Yes Yes – the monitor is not required Yes Nitrogen dioxide, CAPS Yes Yes Yes – the monitor is not required Yes Parameter Name Probe Height (m) Distance to Support Distance to Trees Obstacles Ozone 3.5 1.1 meters > 20 meters None PM 2.5 local conditions, BAM 1022 2.4 2.1 meters > 20 meters None Nitrogen dioxide, CAPS 3.5 1.1 meters > 20 meters None Figure C39. The Rockwell ozone and fine particle site, 37-159-0021 C21 Figure C40. Looking north from the Rockwell site Figure C41. Rockwell site looking northwest Figure C42. Looking west from the Rockwell site Figure C43. Looking northeast from the Rockwell site Figure C44. Looking east from the Rockwell site Figure C45. Looking southeast from the Rockwell site C22 Figure C46. Looking southwest from the Rockwell site Figure C47. Looking south from the Rockwell site At the Monroe Middle School site, DAQ operates a seasonal ozone monitor. Figure C48 shows the site. Table C6 summarizes monitoring information for the site. Figure C49 through Figure C52 provide views looking north, east, south and west. This ozone-monitoring site is one of seven for the MSA. Title 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D requires the Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord MSA to have two ozone monitoring sites. The site is located at the goal end of a soccer field, so soccer balls sometimes damage the probe. DAQ has investigated moving the site to another part of Monroe; however, this site meets the siting criteria in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E better than any nearby alternative location. DAQ has also added a fence on the roof of the building between the probe and soccer field to protect the probe. Figure C48. Monroe ozone monitoring site, 37-179-0003 C23 Figure C49. Looking north from the Monroe site Figure C50. Looking west from the Monroe site Figure C51. Looking east from the Monroe site Figure C52. Looking south from the Monroe site Table C6. Site Table for Monroe Middle School Site Name: Monroe Middle School AQS Site Identification Number 37-179-0003 Location: 701 Charles Street, Monroe, North Carolina CBSA: Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC CBSA #: 16740 Latitude 34.973889 Longitude -80.540833 Datum: WGS84 Elevation 184 meters Parameter Name Method Method Reference ID Sample Duration Sampling Schedule Ozone Instrumental with ultravi- olet photometry, 047 EQOA-0880-047 1-Hour March 1 to Oct. 31 Date Monitor Established: Ozone April 7, 1999 Nearest Road: Charles Street Traffic Count: 3300 Year of Count: 2021 Parameter Name Distance to Road Direction to Road Monitor Type Statement of Purpose Ozone 71.3 meters West Special Pur- pose Compliance w/NAAQS. Real-time AQI reporting & forecasting. Parameter Name Monitoring Objective Scale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS Proposal to Move or Change Ozone Population Exposure Neighborhood Yes None Parameter Name Meets Part 58, Appendix A Requirements Meets Part 58, Appendix C Requirements Meets Part 58, Appendix D Requirements Meets Part 58, Appendix E Re- quirements Ozone Yes Yes Yes Yes Parameter Name Probe Height (m) Distance to Support Distance to Trees Obstacles Ozone 3.9 1.1 meter >20 meters None DAQ continues to operate the Monroe site because it provides valuable information for developing non- attainment boundaries and the division has used the data from this site in the past to keep the EPA from designating parts of Union County as being in nonattainment with the ozone standard. C24 Changes to the lead monitoring requirements in 2010 resulted in additional monitoring in the Charlotte- Gastonia-Concord MSA. This MSA has an NCore monitoring site. Monitoring for lead in the ambient air at that site began Dec. 27, 2011. This lead monitoring ended on April 30, 2016, when new monitoring regulations became effective.3 No source-oriented monitoring was required in this MSA because, as shown in Figure C53, there are no facilities emitting over 0.5 tons of lead. 4 Figure C53. Lead and Lead Compound Emissions in the Charlotte MSA from 2009 to 2020 The 2015 ozone monitoring requirements did not result in additional monitoring in the Charlotte-Gas- tonia-Concord MSA. The MSA currently exceeds the minimum number of monitors required by 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D for population exposure monitoring in urban areas. Beginning in 2017, seasonal ozone monitoring starts on March 1 instead of April 1. The 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements required additional monitoring in the Charlotte- Gastonia-Concord MSA. The MSA was required to have an area-wide monitor starting in 2013 and a near-roadway monitor starting in 2014. In 2017, the population estimates for the Charlotte-Gastonia- Concord MSA exceeded 2.5 million, requiring the need for a second near-road monitoring station. MCAQ plans to install a second near-road station whenever the EPA provides the funding to do so. The 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements also required additional monitoring in the Charlotte- Gastonia-Concord MSA. Originally, the EPA required this MSA to have two population-weighted emis- sion index, or PWEI, monitors within the MSA because the MSA had large sources of sulfur dioxide as 3 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. 4 United States Environmental Protection Agency. United States Environmental Protection Agency. The 2020 EPA Toxics Release Inventory Tracker available at https://edap.epa.gov/public/extensions/TRIToxicsTracker/TRIToxic- sTracker.html#. C25 well as large numbers of people. These PWEI monitors were located at the Garinger High School moni- toring site in Charlotte and at the York monitoring site in York, South Carolina. However, a decline in sul- fur dioxide emissions resulted in only one PWEI monitor being required. Thus, the York sulfur dioxide monitor shut down in June 2014. However, when South Carolina moved the York site, sulfur dioxide monitoring resumed in York County at the new site. The changes in the carbon monoxide monitoring requirements also resulted in more monitoring in this MSA. Because the population in the MSA is over 1,000,000 people, both a near-road carbon monoxide monitor and fine particle monitor started operating at Remount Road in 2017. (4) Stanly County – Albemarle Micropolitan Statistical Area Stanly County is part of the Charlotte-Concord combined statistical area. The Albemarle MiSA is in Stanly County. DAQ does not operate any monitoring sites in this county. The expansion of the lead monitoring network to support the lower lead NAAQS did not result in moni- toring in Stanly County because as shown in Figure C54 there are no facilities that emit a half ton or more of lead. 5 The 2015 ozone monitoring requirements also did not result in more monitoring in this area. This area does not have any MSAs requiring a minimum number of monitors by 40 CFR Part 58, Ap- pendix D for population exposure monitoring in urban areas. Figure C54. Lead and lead compounds emitted in Stanly County from 2009 to 2020 The 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements did not result in additional monitoring in Stanly County. The area is too small to require area-wide monitors or near-roadway monitoring. The 2010 sul- fur dioxide monitoring requirements did not require any additional monitoring in this area because the 5 United States Environmental Protection Agency. United States Environmental Protection Agency. The 2020 EPA Toxics Release Inventory Tracker available at https://edap.epa.gov/public/extensions/TRIToxicsTracker/TRIToxic- sTracker.html#. C26 population and sulfur dioxide emissions do not exceed the required threshold for monitoring. The 2011 changes to the carbon monoxide monitoring requirements also did not require additional monitors in this area because the population is too small. C27 Appendix C.1 Annual Network Site Review Forms for 2021 Taylorsville-Liledoun Lenoir Hickory Crouse Rockwell Monroe Middle School in Monroe C28 C29 C30 C31 C32 C33 C34 C35 C36 C37 C38 C39