# 2010 Air Monitoring Network Report

July 1, 20 1 1

Kurt Malone

Michael Bass o Ken Crysler

and Mark Stoelting

Technical Services Division2 

## Table of Contents

Page

List of Figures

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 4

List of Tables

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 4

Definition of Terms

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 5 Overview of Network Operation

................................ ................................ .............................. 7 Network Design

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 7 Minimum Monitoring Requirements for SLAMS Sites

................................ ................... 13

Modifications Made to Network in 2010

................................ ................................ .......... 19 Proposed Modifications to Network in 2011

- 2012

................................ ........................... 21 Removing a NAAQS Compliance Monitor

................................ ................................ ...... 24 Data Submission Requirement

................................ ................................ .......................... 24

Site Information Definitions

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 25

Detailed Site Information for SLAMS Stations

................................ ................................ ...... 28

Bethel Island

................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 29

Concord

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 31

Fairfield

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 34

Fremont

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 36 Gilroy

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 39 Hayward

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 41

Livermore

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 43

Los Gatos

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 47

Martinez

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 49 Napa

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 51

Oakland

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 54

Oakland West

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 56 Point Reyes

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 59

Point Richmond

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 61 Redwood City

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 63

Richmond 7th

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 66

Rodeo

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 68

San Francisco

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 70

San Jose

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 73

San Martin

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 77

San Pabl o

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 79

San Rafael

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 81

Santa Rosa

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 83 Vallejo

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 85

Detailed Site Information for SPM Stations

................................ ................................ ........... 89 Berkeley

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 90

Crockett

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 94 Cupertino

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 96 Cupertino Monte Vista Park

................................ ................................ ............................. 98

Fort Cronkhite

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 1023

Special Monitoring Programs Conducted in 2010

................................ ................................ 104 EPA School Air Toxics Monitoring Program

................................ ................................ . 105 Meteorology Program

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 107 National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) at San Jose

................................ ............. 110 NCore Program

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 113 Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS)

................................ ............. 117

PM 2.5 Speciation Sampling Programs

................................ ................................ ............. 120 Toxics Program

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 122 West Oakland CASS Study

................................ ................................ ............................ 128 West Oakland Measurement Study

................................ ................................ ................. 1314 

## List of Figures

Figure Page

1

. Map of Air District SLAMS and SPM Sites for 2010

................................ ....................... 1 2

2

. Map of Stevens Creek Elementary School in Cupertino

................................ ................. 1 0 6

3. Map of Air District Meteorol ogical Monitoring Sites for 2010

................................ ...... 1 09

4

. Map showing area of Neighborhood S cale at the San Jose NCore station

...................... 1 1 4

5. Map of the three PAMS sites in the Livermore Valley

................................ ................... 1 1 8

6

. Map of Air District Toxics Monitoring Sites for 2010

................................ .................... 1 2 3

7

. Map of CASS Site with Monitoring Locations and Meteorological Station

................... 1 29

8

. West Oakland Measu rement Study S ampling L ocations

................................ ................. 1 3 2



## List of Tables

Table Page

1

. SLAMS Monitoring Objectives and Appropriate Spatial Scales

................................ ........ 9

2

. List of Monitoring Stations within the Air District for 2010

................................ ............. 10

3

. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for Ozone SLAMS Site s

................................ ......... 1 3

4

. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for PM 2.5 SLAMS Sites

................................ .......... 1 4

5

. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for PM 10 SLAMS Sites

................................ ........... 1 5

6. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for S O 2 SLAMS Sites in 2013

................................ 1 6

7

. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for NO 2 SLAMS Sites in 2013

............................... 1 7

8

. Monitor Information and EPA A ir Monitoring Siting Criteria

................................ .......... 2 5

9. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (as of December 31, 2010)

............................... 2 7

10

. List of the 1 5 NATTS HAPs Monitored by the Air District

................................ ............ 1 1 0

1 1

. List of 22 NATTS PAH Compounds Measured by the Air D istrict

................................ 1 1 2

1 2

. NCore Monitors

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 1 1 6

1 3

. List of speciated hydrocarbons m ea sured by Gas Chromatograph

................................ .. 1 19

14. PM 2.5 Speciation Measurements at Air District Sites

................................ ...................... 1 2 1

1 5

. List of Toxic Compounds Measured by the Air District in 2010

................................ .... 1 2 5

1 6

. Metals M easured at Berkeley using ICP

- MS

................................ ................................ ... 1 2 5

1 7

. Metals measured at Cupertino using XRF

................................ ................................ ....... 1 2 6

1 8

. Elements Measured for the West Oakland CASS Study

................................ ................. 1 295 

## Definition of Terms

ADT ............. Average Daily Traffic

AGL ............. Above Ground Level AQS ............. Air Quality System ; the EPA national air quality database

Air District ...... Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)

BAM ............ Beta Attenuation Monitor, a type of continuous PM 2.5 monitor

CARB ............ California Air Resources Board

CFR

............. Code of Federal Regulations

CO ............

... Carbon Monoxide

CH 4

............. Methane

DL ............... (Tree) Drip Line

EPA ............. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

FEM ............. Federal Equivalent Method

FRM ............. Federal Reference Method

GC ............. Gas Chromatograph

GIS ............... Geographic Information Sy stem
HC ............... Hydrocarbons, including CH 4 and NM H C

HiVol ............ High Volum e
H 2 S ................ Hydrogen Sulfide

ICPMS ............ Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

Maintenance Plan

.. A Plan submitted by states to EPA that outlines how the NAAQS will be

maint ained for a particular region

. MSA ............. Metropolitan Statistical Area NAAQS ......... National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NATTS ........... National Air Toxics Trends Stations

NCore ............ National Core ( Monitoring Program )

NM H C

........... Non

- methane Hydroc ar bon s NO ................. Nitric Oxide

NO 2

.............. . Nitrogen Dioxide

NO

x ............... Oxides of Nitrogen

NO y ............... Total Reactive Nitrogen

O 3

................ .. Ozone

PAMS

............. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations PPB ................ Parts per billion

PM ...............

. Particulate Matter

PM 2.5

............... Particulates less than or equal to in size

PM 2.5F

............ PM 2.5 measured using a filter

- based monitor

PM 2.5C

............ PM 2.5 measured using a continuous monitor

PM 10

............... Particulates less than or equal to 10 microns in size

PM 10C

............. PM 10 measured using a continuous monitor

PM 10

- 2.5

........... PM Coarse. P M less than or equal to 10 microns and greater than 2.5

microns in size

SATMP ........... School Air Toxics Monitoring Program6 

## Definition of Terms (continued)

SIP

............... . State Implemen tation Plan

– A Plan submitted by states to EPA that

outlines how the NAAQS will be met for a particular region

. SLAMS .......... State or Local Air Monitoring Station

SO 2

................. Sulfur Dioxide

SPM ............... Special Purpose Monitor

STN ......

......... Speciation Trends N etwork

TAMS............. Total Atmospheric Mercury

VOC ............... Volatile Organic Compoun d7 

## Overview of Network Operation

Network Design

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Air District) is the public agency responsible for air quality management in the nine Bay Area counties: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, southwestern Solano, and southern Sonoma. The Air District operates air monitoring stations in each of these nine counties. The Air District began measuri ng air quality in the San Francisco Bay Area in

1957

. In 2010 there were 2 9 air monitoring stations in the Air District air monitoring

network including one station operated by the California Air Resources Board.

Twenty

- four of the 2 9 stations are classi fied by EPA as State and Local Air Monitoring

Stations ( SLAMS ) that are permanently sited and meet all EPA monitor siting criteria. The remaining five are classified as Special Purpose Monitoring ( SPM ) stations that do not meet EPA siting criteria (Crocke tt), measure a pollutant for which there are no siting criteria (Fort Cronkhite), or are short

- term monitoring sites (Berkeley and Cupertino /Cupertino MV ).

Short

- term monitoring sites are re

- locatable trailers and shelters with a comprehensive set of

air quality instruments to characterize local air quality. I nstruments at these sites are operated on SLAMS sampling schedule s for a minimum of one year allowing data comparison with permanent monitoring sites. Statistical data relationships between short

te rm and nearby permanent sites provides long

- term estimates of air quality at temporary monitoring sites.

The Air District also performs air monitoring as part of other programs. These include programs that the Air District has initiated, such as meteorol ogical monitoring, the ambient toxics program, and the West Oakland studies; or programs required by EPA. EPA programs currently include the Cupertino School Air Toxics Monitoring Program, the National Air

Toxics Trends Stations ( NATTS ) Program, the Natio nal Core ( NC ore ) Program, the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) Program

, and the PM 2.5 Speciation

Trends Network (STN) Program

. Summaries of these programs can be found later in this

report.

The San Francisco Bay Area contains over 100 cities. Although resources do not allow placement of air pollution monitors in every city, it can be demonstrated that air pollution levels, in the absence of significant local sources, are similar within each geographical region of the Bay Area. That is , cities within each of the major valleys of the Bay Area can have similar air quality levels. Consequently, a few sites can characterize an area. Generally, locations for permanent air monitoring sites are initially based on knowledge of population

dens ity and local wind patterns, while the final site selection is determined after analyzing preliminary air quality measurements collected from field studies, temporary monitoring studies, and mobile monitoring data.8

The purpose of the Air District monitor ing network is:

 To provide air pollution data to the general public in a timely manner.

 To support compliance with California and national ambient air quality standards.

When s ites do not meet the standards , attainment plans are developed to attain the

st andards.

 To support air pollution research studies.

To meet its monitoring objectives the Air District monitoring network collects ambient air data at locations with a variety of monitoring site types. These site types, as defined in 40 CFR Part 58, Appe ndix D, Table D

- 1, are intended to characterize air pollution levels in areas of high pollution, high population, transported air pollution, and air po llution near specific sources.

Ambient a ir monitoring at A ir District stations is intended to meet one or more of the following monitoring objectives :

 A determin ation of t ypical concentrations in areas of high population density.

 A determination of the h ighest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the network.

 A determination of i mpact s f rom significant sources.

 A determination of g eneral background concentration levels.

 A determination of t he extent of regional pollutant transport.

U Population Oriented

T he primary purpose of air quality standards is to protect the public health . A ir monitoring

stations are placed in areas with high population density to evaluate exposure to air pollution

. In most cases , stations are located within the largest cities in each county. Because people spend more time at home than at work, air monitoring sites are generally located in

residential areas rather than at downtown locations. To be consistent with EPA’s list of Site Types in Table D

- 1 of 40 CFR Part 58, the term “population orientated” will be used in place of “typical concentrations in areas of high population density”, for clarity in this monitoring objective.

U Highest Concentration
EPA regulations require that air quality in areas where the public has access be reduced to levels below the national ambient air standards. Consequently, monit oring must also be done at locations expected to have the highest concentrations, even if populations are sparse in that area. High concentrations may be found close to major sources, or further downwind if pollutants are emitted from tall stacks. High c oncentrations may also be found at distant downwind locations when the pollutants such as ozone or secondary particulate matter are a result of chemical reactions in the atmosphere.

U Source Impact

There are five refineries within the Air District: Chevro n, Shell, Tesoro, Con oco Phillips, and Valero. Because these sources have the potential to emit significant amounts of SO 2 and9

H 2 S , the Air District operates SO 2 an d H 2 S monitoring stations near these sources. When the

monitors downwind of the source show concentrations above the applicable standards or exceed concentrations listed in Air District Regulation 9, Rules 1 and 2, a notice of violation may be issued to the source. The Port of Oakland also can be a significant source of particulates

, CO

, and to xics and the Oakland West air monitoring station is located downwind of the Port to measure pollution impacts on West Oakland.

U General Background
The Air District operates stations in areas that have no significant emissions from mobile, area, or industr ial sources. At these sites, the measured concentrations reflect the transported air quality levels from upwind areas. When designing control strategies to reduce pollution levels, it is important to know if areas outside the boundaries of the Air Distri ct are contributing to high pollutant levels within the Air District. Where there are no significant emission sources upwind of a site, then the site is considered to be a general background site.

U Regional Transport

The Air District shares a common boun dary with six other air districts: Monterey Bay Unified APCD, San Joaquin Valley APCD, Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD, Yolo

- Solano AQMD, Lake County AQMD, and Northern Sonoma County APCD. When upwind areas have significant air pollution sources, pollutants may be transported into the Bay Area Air

District and result in overall higher air pollution levels in the Bay Area. The Air District operates monitoring stations near the borders of the Air District to measure the air pollution concentrations transporte d into and out of the Bay Area Air District.

Each monitoring objective is associated with a spatial scale for each site. For example, a regional transport site is meant to represent air quality levels over a large area, while a highest concentration si te may represent a spatial scale of no more than a few blocks or so, in size. Spatial scales are defined in 40 CFR, Part 58, Appendix D. They are: micro scale

– having dimensions of several meters up to 100 meters; middle scale

– having dimensions of

10 0 meters to 0.5 km; neighborhood scale

– having dimensions of 0.5 km to 4.0 km; urban

scale

– having dimensions of 4 to 50 km; and regional scale

– having dimensions of up to hundreds of km. Table 1 lists the appropriate scales for each monitoring objecti ve.

Table 1 . SLAMS Monitoring Objectives and Appropriate Spatial Scales.

Monitoring Objective Appropriate Spatial Scale
1. Highest Concentration Micro, middle, neighborhood 2. Population Oriented Neighborhood, urban

3. Source Impact Micro, middle, neighborhood 4. General Background Urban, regional 5. Regional Transport Urban, regional

The desired spatial scale of a monitoring site must conform to established criteria for the distance from roadways, based on traffic volumes. There are different distance requirements10

for each pollutant, which can be found in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E. Additionally, the spatial scale can also be affected if trees or obstructions are too close to the monitoring probe. The goal in si ting monitoring stations is to match the spatial scale with the desired monitoring objective. Table 2 lists the stations, their monitoring objectives, and the pollutants measured at each site.

Table 2

. List of Monitoring S tations within the Air District for 2010

.

Site Station Name Type 1 Monitoring Objective Pollutants Monitored 1

1 Bethel Island SLAMS Regional Transport& Highest Concentration O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO, P M 10 , Toxics

2 Concord SLAMS Population Oriented, Highest Concentration O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO, HC, PM 10 , PM 2.5F , Toxics

3 Fairfield SLAMS Population Oriented & Regional Transport O 3

4 Fremont SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , CO, HC, PM 2.5C , Toxics

5 Gilroy SLAMS Population Oriented, Highest Concentration, & Regional Transport O 3 , PM 2.5C

6 Hayward SLAMS Population Oriented & Regional Transport O 3

7 Livermore SLAMS Population Oriented & Highest Concentration O 3 , NO

x , HC, PM 2.5F , PM 2.5C , Speciated PM 2.5 , Toxics

8 Los Gatos SLAMS Population Oriented & Highest Concentration O 3

9 Martinez SLAMS Source Impact SO 2 , Toxics

1 0 Napa SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , CO, PM 10 , PM 2.5C , Toxics

1 1 Oakland SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , CO

, , PM 2.5C , Toxics

1 2 Oakland West SLAMS Population Oriented & Source Impact O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO

, PM 2.5C

, Speciated PM 2. 5 , Toxics

1 3 P oin t Reyes 2 SLAMS General Background PM 2.5C 1 4 P oin t Richmond SLAMS Source Impact H 2 S

1 5 Redwood City SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , CO, PM 2.5F , PM 2.5C , Toxics

1 6 Richmond 7 th SLAMS Source Impact SO 2 , H 2 S

, Toxics

1 7 Rodeo SLAMS Sour ce Impact H 2 S

1 8 San Francisco SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , CO, HC, PM 10 , PM 2.5C , Toxics

19 San Jose SLAMS Population Oriented & Highest Concentration O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO, HC, PM 10 , PM 2.5 F , PM 2.5 C , Speciated PM 2.5, Toxics

2 0 San Martin SLAMS Highest Concentration O 3 2 1 San Pablo SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO, PM 10 , Toxics11

Site Station Name Type 1 Monitoring Objective Pollutants Monitored 1

2 2 San Rafael SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , CO, PM 10 , PM 2.5C , Toxics

2 3 Santa Rosa SLAMS Population Oriented O 3 , NO

x , CO, PM 2.5C , Toxics

2 4 Vallejo SLAMS Popul ation Oriented O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO, PM 2.5F , PM 2.5C , Speciated PM 2.5 , Toxics

25 Berkeley SPM Population Oriented & Source Impact O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO, HC, PM 10 , PM 2.5C , Toxics

26 Crockett SPM Source Impact SO 2 , Toxics

27 Cupertino SPM Population Oriented & Source Impact PM 10 C

28 Cupertino

Monte Vista Park SPM Population Oriented & Source Impact O 3 , NO

x , SO 2 , CO, PM 10 , PM 2.5C , Toxics , TAMS

29 Fort Cronkhite SPM General Background Toxics

1 See page 5 for acronym definitions.

2 Operated by the California Air Resources Board

.

EPA suggests that the appropriate spatial scale for population oriented sites should be neighborhood or urban. Using the current EPA methodology to determine spatial scales, the air monitoring sites in Napa, Oakland, San Pablo and San Rafael would be characterized as middle scale. However, the Air District believes the spatial scale of the site would be better characterized as neighborhood scale. This is because EPA’s distance requirements from

roads are based on 1979 vehicle emissio n levels. Current fleet average vehicle emission factors in the Bay Area are 95% lower for hydrocarbons , 9 5 % lower for CO, 8 2 % lower for

NO

x , and 4 8 % lower for PM 10 in 200 9 compared to 1979.

Figure 1 is a map of the 2010 Air District SLAMS and SPM monito ring sites. Tables 3 through 7 lis ts the minimum number of monitors required within the network for each pollutant. The section following Table 7 describes recent ch anges to the monitoring network and proposed changes to the monitoring network.

The fina l section provides detailed descriptions of the monitoring objectives for each air monitoring site and a brief explanation for choosing the type of monitor at each site.12

Figure 1. Map of Air District SLAMS and SPM Sites for 2010

.13



### Minim u m Monitoring Req uirements for SLAMS Sites

Minimum Monitoring Requirements for Ozone The number of required ozone monitors for each MSA in the Bay Area is determined by its population and design value, as specified in Table D

- 2 of 40 CFR Part 58 , Appendix D

– SLAMS Minimu m O 3 Monitoring Requirements. Ozone design values are a calculated concentration (see footnote a ) which are used for comparison with the national standard to determine the attainment status of an area for that pollutant. Table 3 shows that the Air

Distri ct monitoring network meets or exceeds the ozone minimum monitoring requirements. No additional monitors have been required in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) or

Maintenance Plan for ozone.

Table 3. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for Ozone SLAMS Si tes

.

MSA County Popula

tion (20 10 ) 8

- hour

Design

Value a
( ppb)

2010 Number of

Monitors Required Number of

Monitors

Active Additional

Monitors

Needed

San

Francisco

Oakland

Fremont SF, Marin,

Alameda, San Mateo,

Contra

Costa 4, 335,391 80 3 8 c 0

San Jose

Sunnyvale

Santa Clara Santa

Clara,

San Benito 1, 836,911 7 5 2 5 0

Santa Rosa

Petaluma Sonoma 483,87 8 5 4 1 2 0

Vallejo

Fairfield Solano 413,344 71 b 2 3 0

Napa Napa 136,484 6 6 1 1 0

a Design values are calculated at each monitoring site by taking the 3

- ye ar mean (200 8

- 20 10 ) of the 4 th highest 8

- hour

concentration. The design values shown for each MSA in this table are the highest design value of monitors in the MSA

. Design values at or below the 0.075 ppm National Ambient Air Quality 8

- hour Ozone Standar d meet the standard.

b The highest 8

- hour design value is from Vacaville which is operated by Yolo

- Solano APCD . Th e highest design value within the BAAQMD in this MSA is 69 ppb at Fairfield

.

c The Fremont station was closed on 10/ 3 1/10 and is not incl uded in this total.

Minimum Monitoring Requirements for PM 2.5 The number of required PM 2.5 monitors for each MSA in the Bay Area is determined by its population and design value, as specified in Table D

- 5 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 58

– PM 2.5 Minimum Mo nitoring Requirements. PM 2.5 design values are a calculated concentration (see footnotes a and b ) which are used for comparison with the national standard to determine the attainment status of an area for that pollutant. Table 4 shows that14

the Air Distri ct monitoring network meets or exceeds the PM 2.5 minimum monitoring requirements.

EPA designated the Bay Area as nonattainment of the PM 2.5 standard on October 8, 2009. The effective date of the designation is December 14, 2009 and the Air District has th ree years to develop a S tate Implementation Plan (SIP) to demonstrate the Bay Area will achieve

the revised standard by December 14, 2014. The SIP for the PM 2.5 standard must be

submitted to EPA by December 14, 2012.

Table 4. Minimum Monitoring Requir ements for PM 2.5 SLAMS Sites

.

MSA County Popula

tion (2010 ) Annual

Design

Value a
( μg/m 3 )

20 10 Daily Design

Value b

( μg/m 3 )

20 10 Number

of

Monitors Required Number

of

Monitors

Active Addi

t ional

Monitors

Needed

San

Francisco

Oakland

Fremont SF, San

Mateo, Alameda, Marin,

Contra

Costa 4, 3 35,391 9.1 3 0 3 6 d 0

San Jose

Sunnyvale

Santa

Clara Santa

Clara,

San

Benito 1, 836,911 1 0. 2 3 0 3 3 0

Santa

Rosa

Petaluma Sonoma 4 83,878 8. 0 2 6 1 1 0

Vallejo

Fairfield Solano 4 13,344 9.1 31 1 1 0

Napa Napa 13 6,484 N/A c N/A c 0 0 0

a Annual design values are calculated at each monitoring site by taking the 3

- year mean (2008

- 2010 ) of the annual averages

for each site

. The design values shown for each MSA in this table are the highest design value of monitors in the MSA.

D esi gn values at or below the national PM 2.5 annual standard of 15 μg/m 3 indicate the area meets the standard.

b Daily design values are calculated by taking the 3

- year mean (2008

- 2010 ) of the 98 th percentiles for each site. The design

values shown for each M SA in this table are the highest design value of monitors in the MSA

. Design values at or below

the national PM 2.5 24

- hour standard of 35 μg/m 3 indicate the area meets the standard.

c There are no FRM or FEM PM 2.5 monitors in Napa County.

d The Fremo nt station was closed on 10/31/10 and is not included in this total.

Minimum Monitoring Requirements for PM 10 The number of required PM 10 monitors for each MSA in the Bay Area is determined by its population and design value, as specified in Table D

- 4 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 58

– PM 10 Minimum Monitoring Requirements. PM 10 design values are a calculated concentration (see footnote a ) which are used for comparison with the national standard to determine the attainment status of an area for that polluta nt. Table 5 shows that the Air15

District monitoring network meets or exceeds the PM 10 minimum monitoring requirements. No additional monitors are required for the State Implementation Plan (SIP) or Maintenance

Plan b ecause the Bay Area has never been desi gnated as non

- attainment for PM 10 , and no SIP

or M aintenance P lans have been prepared for PM 10

.

Table 5. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for PM 1 0 SLAMS S ites

.

MSA County Popula

tion (20 10 ) Design

Value a

2010 Number

of

Monitors Required Number

of

Monitors

Active Addi

t ional

Monitors

Needed

San

Francisco

Oakland

Fremont SF, San

Mateo, Alameda, Marin,

Contra

Costa 4,3 35,391 0 2 5 0

San Jose

Sunnyvale

Santa

Clara Santa

Clara,

San

Benito 1, 836,911 0 2 2 0

Santa

Rosa

Petaluma Sonoma 4 83,878 0 0 1 0

Vallejo

Fairfield Solano 413,344 0 0 1 0

Napa Napa 13 6,484 0 0 1 0

a For PM 10 , t

he design value is defined as the expected number of exceedances per year, which is calculated by averaging the number of exceedances for the past three years (2008

- 20 10 ) . Since the re were no exceedances in the past three years, t he PM 10 design value is zero for all MSA’s within the Bay Area Air Quality Management

District where PM 10 is measured . The 24

- hour standard (150 μg/m 3 ) is attained when the design value is less than or equal to one

.

Minimum Monitoring Requirements for SO 2 In early 20 10

, 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 4.4 state d that there are no minimum requirements for the number of SO 2 monitoring sites. No additional monitors are required

for SIP or Maintenance Plan s, because the Air District has never been designated as non

attainment for SO 2 , and no SIP or maintenance plans have been prepared for SO 2

. At the end of 2010 the Air District operated nine permanent SO 2 monitors in its network.

On June 22, 2010 EPA re vised the monitoring requirements for SO 2 to include source impact monitoring near major SO 2 sources. These changes took effect on August 2 3 , 2010 and are

reflected in Table 6 below.16 Table 6. Minimum Monitoring Requirements for SO 2 SLAMS Sites in 2013

.

MSA County Popula tion (2010) Daily

Design a

Value (ppb)

20 10 Number

of

Monitors Required Number

of

Monitors

Active Addi

t ional

Monitors

Needed

San

Francisco

Oakland

Fremont SF, San

Mateo, Alameda, Marin,

Contra

Costa 4,335,391 19 2 6 0

San Jose

Sunnyvale

- Santa

Clara Santa

Clara,

San

Benito 1, 836,911 N/A b 1 1 0

Santa

Rosa

Petaluma Sonoma 4 83,878

- 0 0 0

Vallejo

Fairfield Solano 413,344 7 0 1 0

Napa Napa 13 6,484

- 0 0 0

a Daily design values are calculated at each monitoring site by taking the 3

- year mean (2008

- 2010) of the 4 th highest daily

maximum 1

- hour concentration. The design values shown for each MSA in this table are the highest design value of monitors in the MSA. Design values at or below the national S O 2 1

- hour standard of 75 ppb meet the standard

. b Insufficient data available for Design Value calculations.

Minimum Monitoring Requirements for NO 2 On February 25, 2010 EPA revised the minimum monitoring requirements for NO 2 in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 4.3 . By January 1, 2013, the Air District must operate
NO 2 monitors at population

- oriented sites and at sites within 50 meters of major freeways

.

Based on Bay Area population and traffic counts , the Bay Area will need to operate at least

two monitors sited to measure the area

- w ide NO 2 concentrations , and at three sites near freeways. No additional monitors were required for the SIP or Maintenance Plans because the Air District had not been designated as non

- attainment for NO 2 and no SIP or maintenance plans were prepared for NO 2

.

In 2010, the Air District operated 1 6 NO 2 monitors in the Bay Area (14 SLAMS sites plus

two SPM sites) because NO 2 is a criteria pollutant and because NO 2 and NO are important precursors in ozone formation. NO and NO 2 are formed from vehicle, power pl ant and other industrial emissions, and contribute to the formation of fine particulate pollution and smog.

Table 7 shows the minimum NO 2 monitoring requirements.17 Table 7 . Minimum Monitoring Requirements for NO 2 SLAMS Sites in 2013

.

MSA County Popula

ti on Annual Design a

Value Daily Design b

Value Number

of Area

wide

Monitors Required Number

of Area

wide

Monitors

Active Addi

tional

Area

wide

Monitors

Needed (2010 ) (ppb)

2010 (ppb)

20 10 Number

of

Roadside

Monitors Required Number

of

Roadside

Monitors

Active Addi

tional

Roadside

Monitors

Needed

San

Francisco

Oakland

Fremont SF, San

Mateo, Alameda, Marin,

Contra

Costa 4,3 35,391 16 6 2 1 8 c 0

2 0 2

San Jose

Sunnyvale

Santa

Clara Santa

Clara,

San

Benito 1,836,911 14 5 2 1 1 0

1 0 1

Santa

Rosa

Petalum a Sonoma 4 83,878 8 3 7 0 1 0

0 0 0

Vallejo

Fairfield Solano 4 13,344 9 41 0 1 0

0 0 0

Napa Napa 136,484 9 37 0 1 0

0 0 0

a Annual design values are determined for each monitoring site by calculating the arithmetic average of all of the r eported

1

- hour values for the most current year . The design values shown for each MSA in this table are the highest design value

of monitors in the MSA . De sign values at or below the national NO 2 annual standard of 53 ppb meet the standard.

b Daily desig n values are calculated at each monitoring site by taking the 3

- year mean (2008

- 2010 ) of the 8 th highest daily

maximum 1

- hour concentration. The design values shown for each MSA in this table are the highest design value of

monitors in the MSA

. Design va lues at or below the national NO 2 1

- hour standard of 100 ppb meet the standard.

c The Fremont station was closed on 10/31/10 and is not included in this total.

Minimum Monitoring Requirements for CO 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 4.2 states that th ere are no minimum requirements for the number of CO monitoring sites. No additional monitors are required for SIP or

Maintenance Plans. The Air District was re

- designated attainment for the 8

- hour average CO NAAQS in 1998. The Air District CO maintenan ce plan is contained within the California Air Resource Board document “2004 Revision to the California State Implementation Plan18

for Carbon Monoxide.” The maintenance plan does not specify the number of CO monitors needed. Generally, the Air District op erates one CO monitor within each of the nine Bay Area counties plus additional CO monitors in large cities. Also, CO monitors provide additional calibration system quality control information at full stations. CO monitoring could take on future importan ce because EPA is expected to review the current CO NAAQS and may revise the NAAQS to be more stringent. The Air District currently operates 1 2 CO

monitors in its SLAMs network.19



### Modifications Made to Network in 20 10

This section discusses specific chang es made to instrumentation at Air District air monitoring stations in 2010. A more complete discussion of all instrumentation operating at the air monitoring stations can be found later in this document.

Concord

The collocated PM 2.5 sampler was changed f rom a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule t o a 1

- in

- 6 day

schedule in April 2010. Although a 1

- in

- 12 schedule is all that is required by regulation, the

Air District plans to continue operating this sampler on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule indefinitely. Collocated samples are taken to obtain an estimate of the precision of the sampling measurement by comparing collocated samples with the sample s from the primary PM 2.5 sampler

.

Cupertino Monte Vista The Air District began a one year ambient air monitoring study in Cupertino in September 2010. The air monitoring station is located in Monte Vista Park. Although the purpose of the study is primarily source

- oriented exposure from the cement plant and the associated truck traffic, the Air District is also monitoring population e xposure to criteria pollutants including ozone, NO 2 , SO 2 , CO , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , toxics, metals, and mercury. An Air District meteorological syste m is also located in the park. The station will operate for a minimum of one year, after which, data will be revie wed and a determination made on how long the project will continue.

Cupertino Prado Vista The Air District began operating a particulate sampler at Cupertino in October 2008 to determine if emissions from the nearby Lehigh Cement Plant and its associated diesel truck traffic could be producing elevated particulate concentrations in nearby neighborhoods. Monitoring ended in July 2010 when roof construction began at the site which required removing the particulate sampler. Because a new Cupertino site was opening at Monte Vista Park in September 2010, the site at Prado Vista was not reopened after the roof construction was completed.

Fremont
With approval from EPA, the Air District closed this station on October 31, 2010. Air quality levels in Fremont wer e similar to nearby stations and exceedances of the NAAQS were rare. Toxics monitoring by CARB at Fremont ended on July 19, 2010.

Hayward

Th e ozone monitor did not operate during 2010 due to a lengthy and major construction project nearby which limited s ite access and posed a safety hazard to staff. The monitor resumed operations on April 1, 2011.

Livermore A gas chromatograph (GC) was a dded to the Livermore station on August 1, 2010 as part of

the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station (PAMS) prog ram. The GC measures 5 520

ozone precursor compounds on an hourly averaged basis. A list of the 5 5 compounds and a description of the PAMS program can be found in the PAMS section of this document.

Oakland West The Air District began monitoring for ozone o n December 13, 2010 to obtain additional pollutant data downwind of the Port of Oakland.

P hotochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS)
EPA is funding hourly VOC speciated hydrocarbon measurements at three sites in the Bay

Area: Livermore, Patterso n Pass, and San Ramon. The Air District is supplementing these measurements with NOx and meteorological measurements at the three sites. The Livermor e site was fully operational on August 1, 2010. The hydrocarbon and NOx monitoring began

at Patterson Pa ss on March 1, 201 1 but meteorological sensors will not be installed until the

summer of 2011. The San Ram on site is expected to be op erational by late summer 2011. A full description of the PAMS program can be found in the PAMS section of this document.

Redwood City

The collocated PM 2.5 sampler was changed from a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule to a 1

- in

- 6 day

schedule in April 2010. Although a 1

- in

- 12 schedule is all that is required by regulation, the

Air District plans to continue operating this sampler on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule indefinitely. Collocated samples are taken to obtain an estimate of the precision of the sampling measurement by comparing collocated samples with measurements from the primary FEM

BAM instrument.

San Francisco

The Air District discon tinued monitoring ozone precursors CH 4 / NMHC on September 30, 2010. Monitoring of these non

- criteria pollutants was discontinued to allow better utilization of Air District resources as monitoring for the PA MS program was brought online.

San Pablo

The San Pablo monitoring site was closed in March 2009 due to heavy damage from a fire in the building. The site was completely rebuilt with new state of the art monitoring equipment

and reopened in May 2010.

San Jose

On December 22, 2010, the Air District cha nged the PM 10 filter

- based monitor from a high

volume t o a low

- volume sampler. This was necessary because of NCore program requirements to report PM coarse (PM 10

- 2.5 ) from low

- flow PM 10 and PM 2.5 samplers. More

information about the NCore program can be found in the NCore section of this document.

School Air Toxics Monitoring Program The Air District operated a sampler a nd meteorological system at Stevens Creek Elementary School in Cupertino starting in June 200 9. The program and the monitoring site wer e closed in August of 2010. During the project , sample rs operated on 1

- in

- 6 day schedule and were analyzed for hexavalent chromium . A description of this monitoring program can be found in the EPA School Air Toxics Monitoring Program section of this docu ment.21



### Proposed Modifications to Network in 2011

- 2012

This section discusses proposed changes to be made to the instrumentation at Air District air monitoring stations in the next 18 months. A more complete discussion of instrumentation and programs oper ating at the air monitoring stations can be found later in this document.

Berkeley The Air District began a three year ambient air monitoring study in Berkeley in December

2007. The site was closed on December 31, 2010. The purpose of the study was to

d etermine the pollution impacts to local residents from vehicular traffic and industry along the Highway 80 corridor. Although the purpose was primarily source

- oriented exposure from the highway and local industry emissions, the Air District also monitored for population exposure to criteria pollutants including ozone, NO 2 , SO 2 , CO , PM 10 , and PM 2.5

. Gaseous toxic compounds and metals were sampled on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule.

Concord

The Air District will discontinue monitoring ozone precursors CH 4 and NMHC on May 31,

2011 . Monitoring of these non

- criteria pollutants is being discontinued to allow better utilization of Air District resources as monitoring for the PAMS program is brought online.

A des cription of the PAMS program can be found in the PAMS sec tion of this document.

Cupertino Monte Vista On April 1, 2011, the Air District began measur ing ozone precursors CH 4 and NMHC at this

site. The Air District intended to measure these compounds when the station opened in September 2010, but the instrument ation requires high pressure hydrogen gas cylinders which were not permitted by the Santa Clara County Fire Department. As an alternative to compressed gas cylinders, new laboratory grade equipment was procured by the Air District. The new equipment requ ired modification of the monitoring trailer thus delaying the start of

CH 4 / NMHC monitoring until April 2011. Lead Monitoring On October 15, 2008, EPA strengthened the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for lead by lowering the standard from 1. 5 μg/m 3 (quarterly average) to 0.15 μg/m 3 (rolling 3

- month average). On December 27, 2010 EPA published a new regulation

for lead monitoring and included monitoring at NCore program sites. The new regulation also require s lead monitoring at airports havi ng lead emissio ns of one ton per year or greater.

NCore Program Lead Monitoring The Air District’s NCore monitoring site was brought fully online at the San Jose monitoring location effective January 1, 2011. Lead m onitoring at San Jose has been

on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule since January 2008 and will continue on this schedule indefinitely. A detailed description of the NCore monitoring program can be found in

the NCore section of this document.22 Airport Lead Monitoring Although no airports in the Bay Area exceed the one ton per year emission threshold, the regulation lists an additional requirement for the Air District to participate in a 1

- year EPA funded lead monitoring study at three airports: San Carlos, Palo Alto, and

Reid

- Hillview. The San Carlos air port will have a primary and a collocated sampler to verify the precision of the measurements . Samples will be taken on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule and on the same dates as lead samples from the San Jose NCore site.

The airports chosen for this study were sele cted because t hey are near heavily populated areas and service piston engine aircraft which still use leaded fuels

. L eaded aviation gas used in piston

- engine aircraft accounts for nearly 50% of the

total lead emissions in the United States annually

.

Airp ort lead m onitoring is sche duled to begin i n December 2011 and end after one year. However, monitoring will be extended if lead concentratio ns are greater than

50% of the 0.15  g/m 3 NAAQS.

Livermore The Air District replaced the filter

- based PM 2.5 sample r at Livermore with a continuous

FEM

- BAM PM 2.5 sampler on March 1, 2011. The new sampler will allow real

- time display of the data on the Air District webpage, and will allow hourly analysis of the data.

NO 2 Monitoring On April 12, 2010 EPA revised the NAAQS for NO 2 by creating a one

- hour standard of 100 ppb. The annual standard was left at 53 ppb. The new regulation also requires that NO 2 monitoring be performed at three sites within 50 meters of major roadways in the Bay Area by January 1, 2013. How ever, the Air District plans to start this monitoring program at a location immediately south of the Bay Bridge toll plaza in Oakland by January 1, 2012. The Air District may also monitor CO and particulates to obtain additional pollutant data near

roadwa ys. Meteorological data from a nearby Air District operated meteorological site will be available to assist in the analyses of the data.

Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) Sites The Air District is considering replacing high

- volume PM 10 samplers with low

- volume P M 10 samplers at all stations in 2011. These samplers use less power and are more accurate than the current high

- volume PM 10 technology. This was done at San Jose in December 2010.

P hotochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS)
EPA is funding hou rly VOC speciated hydrocarbon measurements at three sites in the Bay Area: Livermore, Patterson Pass, and San Ramon. The Livermore site began recording the hydrocarbon data in 2010 and the Patterson Pass site began on March 1, 201 1 . T he San

Ramon site i s e xpected to be operational by late summer 2011 . A full description of the PAMS program can be found in this document.23

San Jose The San Jose station was approved as an NCore program station by EPA in October 2009. The additional monitoring requirements were effective January 1, 2011. To meet NCore program requirements PM coarse (PM 10

- 2.5 ) will be determined every 3 rd day. PM 10

- 2.5 will be calculated (not directly measured ) as the difference between PM 10 and PM 2.5 measurements. Therefore, in January 2 011

, PM 10 sampl ing was changed from a 1

- in

- 6 day

schedule to a 1

- in

- 3 d ay schedule year

- round; and PM 2.5 sampl ing was changed from 1

- in

- 6 day schedule to a 1

- in

- 3 day schedule in summer and will continue to opera te daily in winter. Also, NO y m onitoring be gan on January 1, 2011 to meet NCore requirements. More

information about the NCore program can be found in the NCore section of this document.

SO 2 Monitoring On June 22, 2010 EPA revised the monitoring requirements for SO 2 to include source impact

monit oring near major SO 2 sources. Network changes to meet the new requirements must be in place by January 1, 2013 . The Air District’s air monitoring network already includes three

SLAMS SO 2 monitoring sites at Richmond 7 th St, San Pablo, and Martinez that m eet the new source impact monitoring requirements, so no network modifications will be requi red.

South San Jose As mentioned in the 2009 Annual Network Plan, the A ir District may agree to operate a monitoring station near the Metcalf Energy Center power p lant i n South San Jose. This site may be established as part of an agreement between the City of San Jose and the Metcalf Energy Center , but no progress in the agreement has been made during the past year . The

station would be located in a residential ne ighborhood one mile north west of the power plant

and would monitor ambient levels of pollutants emitted by the power plant. Those pollutants

are PM 10 , NO/NO 2 , and CO. It is intended to be a long

- term site. If the Air District takes

over oper ation of the site, ozone may also be monit ored as part of a special study for two

years.

Vallejo The Air District replaced the filter

- based PM 2.5 sampler at Vallejo with a continuous FEM

BAM PM 2.5 sampler on March 1, 2011. The new sampler will allow real

- time displa y of the data on the Air District webpage, and will allow hourly analysis of the data

.24



### Removing a NAAQS Compliance Monitor

When the Air District proposes changes to the air monitoring network, the proposed changes are included in the annual Monitoring N etwork Plan. The annual Monitoring Network Plan is posted on the Air District web site for 30 days to allow public comment on the proposed changes to the network. After the public comment period, the Air District reviews and

considers the comments before making a final decision. The Air District then submits the Plan and any comments received to the EPA Region 9 Regional Administrator.

Before shutting down a SLAMS (State or Local Air Monitoring Station) monitor, 40 CFR

Part 58.14c require s that the Air District obtain the Regional Administrator’s written approval. The Regional Administrator will normally approve the shutdown of a SLAMS

monitor when any of the following situations apply: 1) Criteria pollutant m onitors which have shown attainment of the nati onal standards during the previous five years may be removed if the probability is less than 10% that the monitor will exceed 80% of NAAQS during the next three years , and if the monitor is not required by an attainment or maintenance plan

. 2) CO, PM 10 , SO 2 , or NO 2 monitors may be removed if the monitor has shown consistently lower concentrations than another monitor for the same pollutant in the same county during the previous five years. 3) Criteria pollutant m onitors that have not violated the national standar ds in the most

recent five years may be removed if the State Implementation Plan (SIP) provides a method of representing the air quality in the applicable county. 4) PM 2.5 monitors may be removed when EPA determines that measurements are not comparable to the relevant NAAQS because of siting issues. 5) Criteria pollutant monitors which are located upwind of an urban area to characterize transport may be removed if the monitor has not recorded violations of the relevant NAAQS in the previous five years, and if the monitor is being replaced by another monitor that characterizes transport. 6) Criteria pollutant monitors not eligible for removal under any of the above criteria may be moved to a nearby location with the same scale of representation if logistical problems beyond the agency’s control make it impossible to continue operation at its

current site.

The closure of a SPM (Special Purpose Monitor) monitor does not require approval from EPA, but a change in the designation of a monitoring site from SLAMS to SPM req uires approval of the Regional Administrator.



### Data Submission Requirement

After all data review procedures are complete, the Air District submits monthly air quality and associated precision and a ccuracy reports t o the EPA AQS database within 90 days of the end of every month. Every year, the Air District submits a letter to Region 9 certifying that the previous calendar years’ data is complete and correct. The certification letter for

2010 data w as submitted to EPA Region 9 o n April 29

, 20 11

.25 

## Site In formation Definitions

The next section describes each air quality station operated within the Bay Area Air Quality Management District

. In 2010 there were 29 stations operating in the Air District : 2 6 long

- term stations ( 24 SLAMS stations and two SPM stat ion s ), and three temporary stations. Long

- term stations are generally operated for decades, while temporary stations are expected to operate for one

to three years. The Fremont station was closed on October 31, 2010 with approval from EPA.

The station d escription includes siting information about the station and the individual monitors at the station. Monitors must be operated following EPA requirements found in 40 CFR Part 58. These regulations also specify monitor siting criteria. Table 8 below list s these siting criteria where applicable.

Table 8

. Monitor Information and EPA Air Monitoring Siting Criteria.

Monitor Information Definition of Terms

Monitoring Objective The purpose for monitoring at that location. Choices include Highest

Concentrati on, Population Oriented, Source Impact, General Background, and Regional Transport. Spatial scale The relative distance over which the air pollution measurements are representative. Choices are Micro, Middle, Neighborhood, Urban, and Regional

scales.

Sa mpling method 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix C, 2.0 : requires that the monitor used must be from EPA's current List of Designated Reference and Equivalent Methods.

PM filter analysis method Describes whether the PM filters are analyzed in

- house by the local agen cy or at an outside laboratory.

Start date The date valid data collection began for that pollutant at that air monitoring

station. Operation schedule Describes if the monitor is operated continuously or intermittently (as for PM).

Sampling season Most m onitors operate all year, but some monitors may only operate during months when pollution potential is highest , e.g. ozone

. Distance to road from gaseous probe 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 6.0 : requires that monitors be located far enough from roadways to m inimize local mobile impacts on measurements.

Recommended distances are found in Table E

- 1 for NO

x and ozone, Table E

- 2 for CO, and Figure E

- 1 for PM.

Ground cover 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 3.0 : states that particulate samplers should not be

located in an unpaved area unless there is vegetative ground cover year round, so that the impact of wind blown dusts will be kept to a minimum

. Probe height (AGL) 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 2.0 : requires that probe height be 2

- 15 meters above ground level (AGL). Probe height above roof 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 2.0 : requires the probe be at least 1 meter vertically or horizontally away from any supporting structure.

Distance from

obstructions on roof 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 4.0 : requires that the distance fro m the obstacle to the probe or inlet must be at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the probe or inlet. PM samplers must have a 2 meter separation from walls, parapets and structures. 4.0 (b)26

Table 8 continued. Monitor Information and EPA Air Monitoring Siting Criteria.

Monitor Information Definition of Terms

Distance from

obstructions not on roof 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 4.0 : requires that the distance from the obstacle to the probe or inlet must be at least twice the height t hat the obstacle protrudes above the probe or inlet. Distance from tree (DL) 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 5.0 : requires that probe be at least 10 meters from the nearest tree drip line.

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix E, 3.0 : requires that scavenging be minimized by keeping the probe away from furnace or incineration flues or other minor sources

of SO 2 or NO. The separation distance should take into account the heights of the flues, type of waste or fuel burned, and the sulf ur content of the fuel.

Distance between

collocated monitors 40 CFR Part 58 appendix A, 3.2.5.6 : requires that PM monitors be 2

- 4 meters apart for flow rates >200L/m and have a 1

- 4 meter separation for flow rates <200

L/m.

Unrestricted airflow 40 CFR Par t 58 Appendix E, 4.0 : requires the probe or inlet to have unrestricted airflow in an arc of at least 180 degrees. This arc must include the predominant wind direction for the season of greatest pollutant concentration potential.

Probe material 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E, 9.0 : requires that either Pyrex glass or FEP Teflon be used for intake sampling lines

. Residence time 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix E, 9.0 : recommend s a residence time of 20 seconds or less for gaseous sampling. Will there be changes

within t he next 18 mos? Describes if any changes are expected to occur to that monitor at that station

within the next 18 months.

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? 40 CFR 58.30 : requires that PM 2.5 d ata that are representative, not of area

- w ide, but rather of relatively unique population

- oriented micro

- scale, localized hot spot, or unique population

- oriented middle

- scale impact sites are only eligible for comparison to the 24

- hour PM 2.5 NAAQS

. Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual

P M samplers 40 CFR 58, Appendix A, 3.3.2 : requires that a one

- point flow rate verification check must be performed at least once every month for l ow

- v ol ume PM samplers and quarterly for h i

- v ol ume PM samplers.

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automa ted PM analyzers 40 CFR 58, Appendix A 3.2.3 : requires a one

- point flow rate verification check must be performed at least once every month.

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A, 3.2.1 : requires that QC checks be performed at least once every two weeks.

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A, 3.2.2 : requires that SO 2 , CO, O 3 , and NO 2 monitors have annual performance evaluations . Section 3.2.7 requires that performance

evaluations of PM moni tors must be performed annually through the PEP (Performance Evaluation Program).

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

m onitors 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A, 3.2.4 (automated methods) and 3.3.3 (manual methods) : require that PM samplers have flow rat e checks every six months.27

Included in each site description is the number of days when a criteria pollutant measurement exceeded the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NA AQS)

. The national standards for hourly and daily averaging times are shown in Table 9 below

. Based on the past ten years of

air monitorin g data, only ozone and PM 2.5 are pollutants of interest to Bay Area residents

because the other pollutants rarely, if ever , exceed the NAAQS

. The table below is abbreviated for clarity. A full list of national and California air quality standards can be

found at: http://hank.baaqmd.gov/pln/air_quality/ambient_air_quality.htm

Table 9. National Ambient Air Quality Sta ndards (as of December 31, 2010)

Pollutant Averaging Time Standard

Ozone 8 hour 0.075 ppm

PM 2.5 24 hour 35 μg/m 3

PM 10 24 hour 150 μg/m 3

Carbon Monoxide 1 hour 35 ppm

8 hour 9 ppm

Sulfur Dioxide 1 hour 75 ppb Nitrogen Dioxide 1 hour 100 ppb28



## Detailed Site Information for SLAMS Stations29



### Bethel Island

Site Name Bethel Island AQS ID 06

- 013

- 1 002

GIS coordinates 38.0063° N, 12 1

. 6419 ° W

Location Trailer in parking lot

Address 5551 Bethel Island Rd

, Bethel Island C A 94511 County Contra C osta

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe Bethel Island Rd : 63 meters

Sandmound Blvd : 110 meters

Traffic count Bethel Island Rd: 5,550 ADT (2009)

Sandmound Blvd: 1,537 ADT (2006)

Groundcover Gravel surrounded by grassy fields Representative Are a San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Bethel Island was chosen for an air monitoring site to measure pollutant transport between

the California Central Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area. The site is 26 miles east of

the only sea

- level gap (the Carqui nez Strait) between the two regions

. Local pollution emissions are low due to the rural nature of the area and the lack of any industrial sources

within six miles of the site. The nearest town is Bethel Island, 0.6 miles to the north, with a population o f 2, 137 according to the 2010 census. The Bethel Island station was operated by

CARB from 1981 until late 1986 and then it was transferred to the Air District.

Ozone and NO 2 are measured because the area is in the transport corridor between the San

Fra ncisco Bay Area and the Central Valley , both of which are major sources of ozone, ozone precursors, and particulates. Traffic volume near the site is low, so CO measurements tend to be representative of natural background levels, or regional transport. S O 2 is measured because the area is downwind from numerous refineries, which can be large sources of SO 2

. PM 10 is measured because easterly winds occasionally transport particulates from the Central Valley, and because the filters can be analyzed to determ ine sulfate and nitrate levels transported from the Central Valley.

Background levels of toxic compounds are also determined from canister sample s taken at
Bethel Island on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and later analyzed in the Air District laboratory.

More in formation about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

During the most recent three years, the national 8

- hour ozone standard was exceeded 11

times at this site. N o exceedances of the national standards f or PM 10 , NO 2

, SO 2 (the new 75 ppb 1

- hour standard) or CO were measured during the last three years.30

Bethel Island Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 SO2 PM 10 Monitoring Objective Regional Transport & Highest Conc. General

Background Regional

Tran sport Regional

Transport Regional

Transport

Spatial scale Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Sampling method TECO 49i TECO 48 i TECO 42C TECO 43C Andersen

GUV

- 16HBLA PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A Weighed by

Air District

Start dat e 01/01/87 * 01/01/87 * 01/01/87 * 01/01/87 * 11/05/86

Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous 1

- in

- 6 Sampling season All year All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 6.7 m 6.7 m 6.7 m 6.7 m 5.2 m Probe height above roof 3.0 m 3.0 m 3.0 m 3.0 m 1.5 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 13.3 m 13.3 m 13.3 m 13.3 m 14.4 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None None None None None

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 270 ° 270 ° 270 ° 270 ° 270 °

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon N/A

Residence time 1 3 s 1 4 s 14 s 14 s N/A Will there be changes

within th e next 18 mos? No No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A Weekly

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 1 1 /0 9 / 10 1 1 /0 9 / 10 1 1 /0 9 / 10 1 1 /0 9 / 10 N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate aud its for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 1 /0 8 / 10

0 5 /2 4 / 10

* Start date of data collected by the Air District. Data was collected by CARB began on March 1, 1981.31



### Concord

Site N ame Concord AQS ID 06

- 013

- 0002

GIS coordinates 37.9360° N, 122.0262° W

Locati on O ne story commercial building

Address 2956

- A Treat Blvd, Concord C A 94518 County Contra Costa

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe Treat Blvd: 1 81 meters

Oak Grove Rd: 24 4 meters

Traffic count Treat Blvd: 41,218 ADT (2005)

Oak Grove Rd: 26,7 42 ADT (2005) Interstate 680 242,000 ADT (2008)

Groundcover Paved Representative A rea San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Concord was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is the largest city in Contra Costa County, with a 20 10 population of 12 2

, 0 67 according to the 2010 census ; and because of the high pollution potential due to locally emitted and transported pollutants into the area. Since Concord is located in the Diablo Valley, locally emitted pollutants can become trapped when winds are light . Large emission sources in the valley include the two major freeways, Interstate 680 and California Highway 4; and two refineries at the north end of the valley.

The air monitoring site is located in the back of a shopping center, near the intersectio n of two major streets, and surrounded by residential neighborhoods. There is no industry in the immediate vicinity. NO/NO 2 and CH 4 / NMHC are measured because of local mobile

emissions. Monitoring of CH 4 / NMHC was discontinued on May 31, 2011 because of t he development of PAMS network (described elsewhere in this report), which is a more

effective allocation of resources. The PAMS network better defines the measurement and sources of ozone precursors, making additional measurements of CH 4 / NMHC at Concord superfluous.

Ozone is measured at the site because hot, inland summertime temperatures combined with precursor pollutants stagnating in the surrounding valley often produces high ozone levels.

Carbon m onoxide is measured because the site is near two ma jor roads, Treat Blvd and Oak

Grove Road. SO 2 is measured because the site is six miles south of the Tesoro and the Shell Refineries, both potential major sources of SO 2 . PM 10 and PM 2.5 are measured because light

winds combined with surface

- based inversi ons during the winter months can cause elevated particulate levels in the valley.

The collocated PM 2.5 sampler operated on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule in January, February, and March of 2010. However, to obtain additional data for comparison with the primary PM 2.5 sampler, the Air District starting operating the collocated sampler on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule starting in April 2010. The Air District intends to continue operating the collocated sampler

on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule indefinitely.32

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Concord on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

During the most recent three years, this site recorded nine exceedances of the national 8

- hour ozone standard, and five exceedances of the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard . N o exceedances of the national standards for PM 10

, N O 2

, SO 2 (the new 75 ppb 1

- hour standard)

or CO were measured during the last three years.

Concord Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 SO2 CH4/ NMHC Monitoring Objective Population

oriented & Highest Conc. Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented

Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhoo d Neighborhood Urban Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49i TECO 48A TECO 42C TECO 43C TECO 55C PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Data Start date 04/08/80 02/21/80 NO2: 0 1 /01/80

NO: 0 3 /01/8 0 02/01/80 CH4:12/31/99

NMHC :0 5/10/06 Operation sc hedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 9.2 m 9.2 m 9.2 m 9.2 m 9.2 m Probe height above roof 3.1 m 3.1 m 3.1 m 3.1 m 3.1 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 24.0 m 24.0 m 24.0 m 24.0 m 24.0 m
Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None None None None None

Distance between

collocated mo nitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360 ° 360 ° 360 ° 360 ° 360 °

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 8 s 9 s 9 s 1 0 s 8 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No Yes

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) E very other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 08/ 26 / 10 08/ 26 / 10 08/ 26 / 10 08/ 26 / 10 08/ 26 / 10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A33

Concord M onitor Information

Pollutant PM 10 FRM PM 2.5 FRM P M 2.5

Collocated Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Andersen

HiVol 1200 Partisol

- Plus

202 5 w/VSCC Partisol

- Plus

2025 w/VSCC PM filter analysis method Weighed by

Air District Weighed by

Air District Weighed by

Air District

Data Start date 11/04/86 03/19/99 03/19/99 Operation schedule 1

- in

- 6 Apr

- Sep: 1

- in

- 3

Oct

- Mar: daily Jan

- Mar : 1

- in

- 12

Apr

- Dec: 1

- in

- 6 Sampling season All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 5.8 m 5.9 m 5.9 m Probe height above roof 1.5 m 2 m 2 m

Distance from obstructions

on roof None None None

Distance from obstructions

not on roof None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 15.0 m 13.1 m 17.4 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None None None

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A 3.2 m 3.2 m

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 monitors 7.5 m 7.5 m 3.2 m

Unrestricted airflow 360 ° 360 ° 360 °

Probe mate rial N/A N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the annual PM 2.5 ? N/A Yes Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Weekly Monthly Monthly

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual flow

rate audits for PM monitors 11/ 15/10

05/ 1 9 / 10 11/ 15/10

05/1 9 / 10 11/ 15/10

05/1 9 / 1034



### Fairfield

Site Name Fairfield AQS ID 06

- 095

- 0005

GIS coordinates 38.227 0 ° N, 122.075 6 ° W

Location S mall trailer in open field

Address 1010 Chadbo u rne Rd, Fairfield CA 94534 County Solano

Distance to r oa d from gaseous probe Cordelia Rd: 194 meters

Chadbourne Rd: 705 meters

Traffic count Cordelia Rd: 3 ,751 ADT ( 2007 )

Chadbourne Rd: 500 ADT (2007)

Groundcover Vegetative Representative A rea Vallejo

- Fairfield MSA

Fairfield was chosen for monitoring ozone transport between the San Francisco Bay Area and the Sacramento Valley. Fairfield lies in the northeast part of the Air District in the Carquinez Strait Region , the only sea level gap between the Bay Area and the Central Valley. Prevailing w esterly winds carry ozone and its precursors into the Sacramento Valley from the Bay Area. Occasionally, easterly winds transport elevated ozone levels into this region from

the Central V alley

.

Over the past decade the Fairfield/Suisun City urban area has grown considerably

. According to the 2010 census the area has a combined population of 13 8,815 , the largest urban area in Solano County

. As a result, Fairfield is also a population oriented ozone monitoring site. The monitoring site is located in a rural are a , situated between the nearby urban area of Fairfield/Suisun City urban area, and the greater Bay Area

. Prevailing winds are west, and the monitor normally measures ozone concentrations coming from the Bay

Area.

Ozone concentrations measured at Fairfiel d exceeded the nationa l 8

- hour ozone standard on

five days during the last three years.35

Fairfield Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 Monitoring Objective Regional transport & Population

oriented Spatial scale Regional Sampling method TECO 49C Analysis m ethod N/A

Start date 05/29/02 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season Apr 1

- Nov 30 Probe height (AGL) 3.7 m Probe height above roof 1.0 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree ( DL) >50 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None

Unrestricted airflow 360°

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 5 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate
verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 11/ 8/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow r ate audits for PM

monitors N/A36



### Fremont

Site Name Fremont AQS ID 06

- 0 01

- 1001

GIS coordinates 3 7 .535 8° N, 121.96 18° W

Location O ne story commercial building

Address 40733 Chapel Way, Fremont CA 94538 County Alameda

Dist ance to road

f rom gaseous p robe Fremont Boulevard: 120.0 meters

Chapel Way: 31.0 meters

Traffic count Fremont Boulevard: 3 3

, 390 ADT (200 8 )

Chapel Way: 500 ADT (estimate)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

The Fremont air monitoring sta tion was closed on October 31 , 2010. Fremont was an important air monitoring location in t he past. Ozone, CO , NO/NO 2 , CH 4 / NMHC and PM 2.5 have been monitored at this site. In the most recent decade, air quality levels and the number

of exceedances of the NAAQS at Fremont have shown a high correlation to nearby sites. This indicates that air quality levels in Fremont are adequately characterized by measurements at sites such as Hayward and San Jose. The Air District completed an

assessment of the Air Moni toring Network in July 2010, and the analysis concluded that air quality measurements at the Fremont station had a comparatively low importance rating. The

closure of the Fremont station allows more effective utilization of limited resources in the

face o f additional monitoring requirements mandated by EPA.

VOC toxic compounds, carbonyls, and metals were sampled at Fremont on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed by the C ARB laboratory. CARB discontinued its toxic monitoring

prog ram at Fremont on July 19

, 2010

. More information about the CARB toxics monitoring program can be found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/toxics.htm . Information about toxics monitoring by the Air District can be found in the Tox ics Program section of this report.

During the most recent three years, the national 8

- hour ozone standard was exceeded twice

and t he national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard was exceeded once at this site

. N o exceedances of

the national NO 2 or CO standards were measured during the last three years.37

Fremont Monitor Information *

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 CH4/ NMHC Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49i TECO 48A TECO 42C TECO 55C PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 07/29/76 01/01/71 NO: 07/01/76

NO2: 04/12/74 CH4: 01/01/94

NMHC : 05/25/06 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Contin uous Sampling season All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 8.4 m 8.4 m 8.4 m 8.4 m Probe height above roof 4.3 m 4.3 m 4.3 m 4.3 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None Non e None None

Distance from tree (DL) 25.9 m 25.9 m 25.9 m 25.9 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 3.7 m 3.7 m 3.7 m 3.7 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 13 s 14 s 12 s 13 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Site closed Site closed Site closed Site closed

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification f

or manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance

Eval uation (gaseous) 10/29/10 10/29/10 10/29/10 07/23/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

* All Fremont monitors closed on October 31, 2010 (except CH4/ NMHC closed July 31, 2010 )38

Fremont Monitor Information *

Pollutant Co ntinuous

PM 2.5 FEM

BAM Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method Met One

BAM FEM

1020 PM filter analysis method N/A

Start date 10/01/09 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height ( AGL) 6.2 m Probe height above roof 2.1 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 28.9 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 4.1 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unres tricted airflow 360°

Probe material N/A

Residence time N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Site closed

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 10/29/10

0 6 / 02 / 10

* All Fremont m onitors closed on October 31, 2010 (except CH4/ NMHC closed July 31, 2010 )39



### Gilroy

Site Name Gilroy AQS ID 06

- 085

- 0002

GIS coordinates 3 6 .999 3 ° N 121.574 9 ° W

Location Air monitoring shelter next to water pump station

Address 9

P th

P and Prince v alle St, Gilroy CA 95020 County Santa Clara

Distance to r oad

f rom gaseous p robe Princevalle St: 1 8 .3 meters

9

P th

P St : 1 5 .7 meters

10 th St. 185.0 meters

Traffic count Princevalle St : 5,000 ADT (2008)

9

P th

P St: 1,400 ADT (estimate)

10 th St. 12,700 ADT (200 8)

Groundcover paved Representative Area San Jose

- Sunnyvale

- Santa Clara MSA

Gilroy was originally chosen as an air monitoring site to measure ozone and particulate transport between the San Francisco and Monterey Bay Area s

. Preva iling northwesterly

a fternoon winds carry ozone and ozone precursors from the San Jose area southward through the Santa Clara Valley. When temperatures are hot, and solar insolation is strong, these precursors react and can form high concentrations of ozone in the Gilroy area . As Gilroy grew in population ( 48,821 according to the 2010 census ) the site was considered not only an ozone transport site but also a population oriented ozone site. PM 2.5 is measured because light winds combined with surface

- based inversions during t he winter months can cause elevated particulate levels in the valley.

The monitor ing site is located in a residential area of Gilroy on the west side of the Santa Clara Valley. Air quality studies have shown that the west side of the valley has high er ozone levels than the east side. This is due to elevated terrain on the west side that shelters the western part of Gilroy from the strong winds in the afternoon produced by the Monterey Bay sea breeze. Residents have preferred the sheltered area and built most of the town on the

west side of the v alley

.

In the m ost recent three years, the national 8

- hour ozone standard was exceeded seven times

at this site . The national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard was exceeded on ce during the last three years and it wa s due to smoke from a wildfire on August 14, 2009.40

Gilroy Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 Continuous

PM 2.5 FEM

BAM Monitoring Objective Regional Transport, Highest Concentration, Population

oriented Population

oriented

Spatial scale Neighborhood Neigh borhood Sampling method TECO 49C Met One

BAM 1020 PM filter analysis method N/A N/A

Data Start date 07/01/80 10/31/09 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Sampling season Apr 1

– Nov 30 All year Probe height (AGL) 4.7 m 2.9 m Probe height above roof 2.6 m N/A

Distance from

obstructions on roof None N/A

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None 1.8 m

Distance from tree (DL) 26 m 26 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 14.3 m 14.3 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A

Unrestr icted airflow 360o 360°

Probe material Teflon N/A

Residence time 13 s N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N /A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 11/ 09 / 10 N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A 0 7/26/10

0 4/13/1041



### Hayward

Site Name Hayward AQS ID 06

- 001

- 2001

GIS coordinates 37.654 5 ° N

, 122.031 5 ° W

Location P ump house near water tank

Address 3466 La Mesa Drive

, Hayward CA 94542 County Alameda

Dist ance to road

f rom gas eous probe Hayward Blvd : 26.2 meters

La Mesa Dr: 38 meters

Traffic count Hayward Blvd : 4

, 400 ADT (2007)

La Mesa Dr: 500 ADT (estimate)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

The Hayward air monitoring site was c hosen to measure ozone at a higher elevation. Located on the east side of Hayward at an elevation of 951 feet, it is the highest elevation air monitoring site in the Air District. Studies had shown that on high ozone days, a cloud of ozone and precursors moves southward from Oakland on the west side of the East Bay Hills.

Because ozone monitoring sites were already in place in the low

- lying areas of the East Bay and South Bay, i.e. in Oakland and San Jose, this site was chosen to be between them, but at a higher elevation. Thus, the site gives an indication of ozone levels aloft. The Hayward site is also important because it provides air quality forecasting information concerning residual ozone from the previous day. Although there is a large water ta nk onsite in the upwind direction, the instrument probe is high enough to avoid the tank being an obstacle. The scale of this site is considered to be regional because it is representative of ozone levels aloft.

The Hayward site was shut down on Novembe r 6, 2009 due to the demolition and reconstruction of the water tank nearby the site . The construction project was completed in

late 2010 and the site re opened at the start of the ozone sampling season on April 1, 2011.

Prior to the temporary shutdown of Hayward in 2010, during the three most recent years of operation of the site (2007

- 2009), the national 8

- hour ozone standard was exceeded four

times.42

Hayward Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented & Regional Transport Spatial scale Regional Sampling method TECO 49 i PM filter analysis method N/A

Start date 05/31/77 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season April 1

- November 30 Probe height (AGL) 6.7 m Probe height above roof 3.1 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 11.4 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue N/A

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360°

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 1 5 s Will th ere be changes

within the next 18

months? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A

Frequency of on e

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 11/03/09 *

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A

* The Hayward site was not in operation during 2010.43



### Livermore

Site Name Livermore AQS ID 06

- 0 01

- 0007

GIS coordinates 37.6875° N, 121.7842° W

Location One story commercial building

Address 793 Rincon Avenue, Livermore CA 94551 County Alameda

Distance to road from gaseous probe Rincon Ave: 67 meters

Pine St: 94 meters Interstate 580: 1,400 meters

Traffic count Rincon Ave: 2,400 ADT (2005) Pine St: 4,800 ADT (2005) Interstate 580 at Portola Ave: 166,000 ADT (2008)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Livermore was chosen for an air monitoring site b ecause it is the largest city in eastern Alameda County, with a 20 10 population of 8 0

, 968 according to the 2010 census , and

because measurements have shown this area can have the highest ozone levels in the Bay

Area. Livermore is located within the Liverm ore Valley, an east

- west oriented inland valley between the San Francisco Bay and the Central Valley. Air flow analyses on high ozone days have shown ozone precursors to move into this valley from the region surrounding the San Francisco Bay through the H ayward and Niles Canyon Gaps to the west, and from the San Ramon Valley to the north.

The air monitoring site is situated west of the city center, in a residential neighborhood. The

station is located in a small one

- story shopping center, with a little

- used parking lot in front of the station and a city park behind it. There are no industrial sources in the immediate vicinity. Ozone and its precursors, CH 4 / NMHC and NO/NO 2 , are measured because the area is downwind of large sources of ozone precursors. PM 2.5 is measured because light winds

combined with surface

- based inversions during the winter months can cause elevated particulate levels.

Continuous PM 2.5 (BAM) monitoring was discontinued after September 7 , 2010 because the Air District was prepar ing to install and test a continuous PM 2.5 FEM

- BAM monitor. Testing was completed in late 2010 and both the new PM 2.5 FEM

- BAM and the existing

PM 2.5 FRM operated daily from January 1, 2011 through February 28, 2011. On March 1,

2011 the continuous FEM

- B AM monitor replaced the FRM monitor and the FRM monitor

was removed.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Livermore on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be fou nd in the Toxics Program section of this report.44

The Livermore site is part of a Bay Area Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) program. This is a program to measure hourly speciated hydrocarbons using a gas chromatograph analyzer at three Bay Area locations . The other two locations are San Ramon

and Patterson Pass. A full description of the PAMS program can be found in this document.

During the most recent three years, this site recorded 1 5 exceedances of the national 8

- hour

ozone stand ard, and six exceedances of the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard. N o exceedances

of the national NO 2 standard were measured during the last three years.45

Livermore Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 NO/NO2 CH4/ NMHC Monitoring Objective Population

oriented & Highest Conc. Population

oriented Population

oriented

Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49i TECO 42C TECO 55C PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A

Data Start date 01/01/00 NO2:12/31/99

NO: 01/01/00 CH4: 12/31/ 99

NMHC :04/20/05 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 6.1 m 6.1 m 6.1 m Probe height above roof 3.3 m 3.3 m 3.3 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 51 m 51 m 51 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 16.5 m 16.5 m 16.5 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360 ° 360 ° 360 °

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 11 s 12 s 1 0 s Will there be changes

within the next 18

months? No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A

Frequenc y of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 08/14/10 08/14/10 08/14/10

Last two semi

- annual

fl ow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A46

Livermore Monitor Information

Pollutant FRM PM 2.5 Continuous

PM 2.5

BAM S peciated

PM 2.5

Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Partisol

- Plus

2025 w/VSCC Met One

BAM 1020 Met One

SASS PM filter analysis

method Weighed by

Air District N/A Weighed by

DRI

Data Start date 12/02/99 07/01/00 06/11/08 Operation schedule Apr

- Sep 1

- in

- 6

Oct

- Mar: daily Con tinuous 1

- in

- 6

Sampling season All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 5.4 m 5.1 m 5.1 m Probe height above roof 2.3 m 2.0 m 2.0 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None

Dist ance from

obstructions not on roof None None None

Dist ance from tree (DL) 53 m 52 m 55 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 16 m 21 m 17 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 monitors PM 2.5 to SASS:

2.7 m

PM 2.5 to BAM:

5.2 m BAM to PM 2.5 :

5.2 m

BAM to SASS:

3.5 m SASS to BAM:

3.5 m

SASS to PM 2.5 : 2.7 m
Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360°

Probe material N/A N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A N/A Will there be changes

w/in the next 18 mos? No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? Yes No

– not
reference or equivalent

method No

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Monthly N/A Monthly

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A Every two

weeks N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last Annual Perform. Evaluation (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 08/03/10

04/22/10 08/03/10

04/22/10 08/03/10

04/22/1047



### Los Gatos

Site Name Los Gatos AQS ID 06

- 085

- 1001

GIS coordinates 37.226 9 ° N 121 .979 8 ° W

Location Top of fire station ’s hose drying tower

Address 306 University Ave , Los Gatos CA 95030 County Santa Clara

Distance to r oad

From gaseous p robe University Ave : 37.2 meters

Bentley Ave : 26.5 meters

State Route 17: 291 meters

Traffic count University Ave: 13,600 ADT (2005 )

Bentley Ave : 400 ADT (estimate)

State Route 17: 6 2, 000 ADT (2008)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Jose

- Sunnyvale

- Redwood City MSA

Los Gatos was chosen for an ozone monitoring site because pre vailing northerly winds transport ozone and ozone precursors from the densely populated area around the s outh Bay

Area to the west side of the Santa Clara Valley. Mobile sampling studies as well as long

term monitoring in the Saratoga and Los Gatos areas showed Los Gatos to have the highest

ozone levels in the area.

H igh ozone levels are in part due to Los Gatos being situated at the base of the Santa Cruz Mountains, which act as a barrier to the movement of polluted air. The monitoring site is

located ne ar the downtown area at a fire station surrounded by residential neighborhoods. The city of Los Gatos has a 20 10 population of 29,413 according to the 2010 census

.

In the most recent three years, this site recorded eight exceedances of the national 8

- hou r ozone standard.48

Los Gatos Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented & Highest

concentration Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49i PM filter analysis method N/A

Data Start date 04/01/72 Operation sc hedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height (AGL) 11.0 m Probe height above roof 3.2 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 15.5 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 4.3 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360o

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 11 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow r ate
verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 07/27/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow r ate audits for PM

monitors N/A49



### Martinez

Site Name Martinez AQS ID 06

- 0 13

- 2 001

GIS coordinates 3 8.0128° N, 122. 1345 ° W

Location Small sampling shelter next to fire station

Address 521 Jones St, Martinez CA 94 553 County Contra Costa

Dist ance to r oa d from gaseous probe Jones St: 22 meters

Alhambra Ave: 19 meters

Traffic count Jones St : 2,000 ADT (2008)

Alhambra Ave : 9,800 ADT (2008)

Groundcover Paved Representative A rea San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Martinez was chosen for SO 2 source impact monitoring because the Shell Oil Refinery is

located on the northern and eastern borders of the city. Th e Tesoro Refinery is also nearby, 2.5 miles to the east. Although the prevailing winds in the area are from the west, east winds

can transport SO 2 emissions from the refineries over populated areas within the city.

The monitoring site is located near downtown Martinez and 0.5 miles from the Shell Refinery property. According to the 2010 census, Martinez has a 20 10 population of 35,824.

Ther e are n o industrial activities or SO 2 sources nearby other than the refineries.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Martinez on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

SO 2 concentrations measured at Martinez did not exceed the national 1

- hour 75

- ppb standard during the last three years

.50

Martinez Monitor Information

Pollutant SO2 Monitoring Objective Source Im pact Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 43C Analysis method N/A

Start date 07/02/73 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height (AGL) 7.2 m Probe height above roof 2.7 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 11.2 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None

Unrestricted airflow 360°

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 13 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suita ble for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other Day

Last Annual P erformance Evaluation (gaseous) 9/15/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A51



### Napa

Site Name Napa AQS ID 06

- 0 55

- 000 3

GIS coordinates 38.31 10 ° N, 122.296 2 ° W

Location One story commercial building

Address 2552 Jefferson St, Napa CA 94558 County Napa

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe Jefferson St: 15 meters

T raffic count Jefferson St: 19,143 ADT (2007)

Groundcover Paved Representative A rea Napa MSA

Napa was chosen for an air monitoring location because it is the la rgest city in Napa County

with a 2010 population of 76,915 according to the 2010 census. The city is located in the

center of Napa Valley where agricultural burning and fireplace usage during the fall and winter can result in high particulate levels. In summer months, Napa can have elevated ozone levels when central Bay Area ozone precursors are transported northward into the valley.

The air monitoring site is situated about a mile north of downtown Napa in a mixed residential and commercial neighborhood . There are no industrial sources in the immedia te vicinity. Ozone and NO / NO 2 are measured because south erly winds carry ozone and its precursors into Napa. Carbon m onoxide is measured because the Napa Valley is a major tourist attraction with resulting high traffic volumes through the city. PM 10 and continuous

PM 2.5 are measured because of agricultural and household wood burning.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Napa on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More i nformation about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

During the most recent three years, this site recorded five exceedances of the national

8

- hour ozone standard

. N o exceedances of the national stand ards for PM 10 , NO 2 or CO were measured during the last three years. The continuous PM 2.5 ( BAM) monitor h as recorded

measurements above the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard on nine days during the most recent

three years and six of those days were during th e northern California wildfire outbreak in the

summer of 2008. T his monitor is not a recognized FRM or FEM method, and the data

cannot be used to determine violations of the national PM 2.5 standards, or its attainment

status. Only FRM or FEM based PM 2.5 measurements may be used for comparison with

national PM 2.5 standards.52

Napa Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Middle Middle Middle Sampling method T ECO 49i TECO 48 i TECO 42C PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A

Start date 07/01/76 07/01/73 07/01/73 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 8.9 m 8.9 m 8.9 m Probe height ab ove roof 5.2 m 5.2 m 5.2 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 25 m 25 m 25 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 5.7 m 5.7 m 5.7 m

Distance between

colloc ated monitors N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360 ° 360 ° 360 °

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 8 s 8 s 9 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A

Fr equency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Perfo rmance Evaluation (gaseous) 09/07/10 09/07/10 09/07/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A53

Napa Monitor Information

Pollutant PM 10 PM 10

C o Collocated Continuous

PM 2.5

BAM Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Populatio n

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Middle Middle Middle Sampling method Tisch Env.

HiVol TE

- 6000 Tisch Env.

HiVol TE

- 6000 Met One

BAM 1020 PM filter analysis method Weighed by

Air District Weighed by

Air District N/A

Start date 11/04/86 06/ 08/04 01/04/07 Operation schedule 1

- in

- 6 1

- in

- 6 Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 5.5 m 5.3 m 5.5 m Probe height above roof 1.8 m 1.8 m 1.8 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None

Distance from

obstr uctions not on roof None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 21 m 20.7 m 26 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 5.0 m 3.4m 8.8 m

Distance between

collocated monitors 3.4 m 3.4m N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 monitors 6.1 m 8.8 m Pri m : 6.1 m

Co l: 8.8 m

Unrestricted airflow 360 ° 360 ° 360 °

Probe material N/A N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A No

– not
reference or equivalent

method Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Weekly Weekly N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last Annual Performance

E valuation (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 11/18/10

05/18/10 11/18/10

05/18/10 11/18/10

05/18/1054



### Oakland

Site Name Oakland AQS ID 0 6

- 001

- 0009

GIS coordinates 37.743 1 ° N, 122.1699 ° W

Location Two

- story comm ercial building

Address 9925 International Blvd

, Oakland CA 94 603 County Alameda

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe International Blvd : 19 meters

99 th St: 23 meters

98 th St: 43 meters

Traffic count International Blvd : 26

, 912 ADT (2006)

99 th St : 100 ADT (estimate)

98 th St: 31

, 340 ADT (2002)

Groundcover Paved Representative A rea San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Oakland is an important area for air pollution monitoring because it is the largest city in Alameda County, with a population est imate of 390,724 according to the 2010 census

. It has large emission sources within its boundaries, such as a major maritime port, an international airport, extensive areas of industry, and a number of major freeways. These sources have the potential to emit significant amounts of CO and ozone precursors, as well as particulates and organic toxic compounds.

The monitoring site is located seven miles southeast of downtown Oakland, on a commercial strip in a residential area. Ozone and NO 2 are measured to monitor population exposure to these pollutants. Carbon monoxide is measured because of the high volume of traffic in the city, which includes several major freeways. PM 2.5 is measured due to the large emission sources in the area, and because light win ds combined with wood burning, vehicular traffic, and surfaced based inversions during winter can cause elevated particulate concentrations.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Oakland on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed

in the Air District laborat ory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

During the most recent three years, the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard was exceeded once at
this site

. N o exceedances of the national s tandards for ozone, NO2 or CO were measured during the last three years.55

Oakland Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 Continuous

PM 2.5 FEM

BAM Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spa tial scale Middle Middle Middle Middle Sampling method TECO 49i API 300E TECO 42i Met One FEM

BAM 1020 Analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 11/01/07 11/01/07 11/01/07 10/01/2009 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Samp ling season All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 10 m 10 m 10 m 8.0 m Probe height above roof 4 m 4 m 4 m 2.4 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None

Distanc e from tree (DL) 21 m 21 m 21 m 21 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 8.2 m 8.2 m 8.2 m 5.0 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon N/A

Residence time 1 3 s 14 s 13 s N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

veri fication for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 11/ 18 / 10 11/ 18 / 10 11/ 18 / 10 N/A

Last two semi

- annu al

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A 08/25/10

05/18/1056



### Oakland West

Site Name Oakland West AQS ID 06

- 001

- 0011

GIS coordinates 37.8148 ° N, 122.2823° W

Location Trailer in parking lot

Address 1100 21 st St, Oakland CA 94607 County Alamed a Distance to road from gaseous probe Grand Ave: 34 meters

Linden St: 33 meters

Adeline St: 168 meters

21 st St: 80 meters

Traffic count Grand Ave: 19,796 ADT (2002)

Linden St: 500 ADT (estimate) Adeline St: 7,586 ADT (2002)

21 st St : 500 ADT (es timate)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

The Air District opened a monitoring station one mile downwind of the Port of Oakland in February 2009 because the Port of Oakland is considered a major area source of die sel particulate matter emissions. Studies have shown that the West Oakland community is exposed to higher concentrations of diesel particulate matter than elsewhere in the Bay Area, resulting in higher potential cancer risks.

Carbon monoxide, NO 2 , and c ontinuous PM 2.5 are measured to determine the impact of

emissions from the Port of Oakland and its associated diesel

- truck traffic, and vehicle traffic from nearby highways. SO

B 2 is measured to determine the impact of e missions from ship

traffic. O zone m onitor ing was added on December 13, 201 0. Measurements of all these criteria pollutants are also used for comparisons to data obtained from non

- standard sampling methodologies employed in West Oakland Measurement Study (WOMS) project, described

later in t his report.

Because the Port of Oakland can be a large source of VOC toxic compounds, the Air District has been sampling for toxics since 2001 at a site several blocks from the current Oakland West monitoring site . Toxics monitoring was moved to the new station when it opened in February 2009. VOC toxic compounds are sampled at Oakland West on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule, and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program secti on of this report.

There have been no exceedance s of the national standards for NO 2 , SO 2 (the new 75 ppb standard) or CO since the site opened in February 2009. There have also been no

measurements above the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard.57

Oakland We st Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 SO2 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Source Impact Source Impact Source Impact

Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49C Teledyne

300E TECO 42C TECO 43C

Analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 12/13/10 02/25/09 02/25/09 02/25/09 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 5.7 m 5.7 m 5.7 m 5.7 m

Probe he ight above roof 3.1 m 3.1 m 3.1 m 3.1 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 40 m 40 m 40 m 40 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue N/A N/A N/A N/ A

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360° 360 °

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 9 s 10 s 10 s 10 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Ev ery other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 12/28/10 07/28/10 07/28/10 07/28/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A58

Oakland West Monitor Information

Pollu tant Continuous

PM 2.5

BAM Speciated

PM 2.5

Monitoring Objective Source Impact Source Impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Met One

BAM 1020 Met One

SASS PM filter analysis

method N/A Weighed by

DRI

Data Start date 02/25/09 02/ 12/09 Operation schedule Continuous 1

- in

- 6 Sampling season All year All year Probe height (AGL) 5.2 m 4.7 m Probe height above roof 2.6 m 2.1 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None

Dist from obstructions

not on roof None None

Dist from tree (DL) 40 m 39 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue N/A N/A

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 monitors BAM to SASS:

1.1 m SASS to BAM:

1.1 m

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360°

Probe material N/A N/A

Residenc e time N/A N/A Will there be changes

w/in the next 18 mos? No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? No

– not
reference or equivalent

method No

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A Monthly

Frequency of flo w rate
verification for automated PM analyzers Every two

weeks N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last Annual Perform. Evaluation (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 11/15/10

01/25/10 11/15/10

05/ 17/1059



### Point Reyes

Site Name P oint Reyes AQS ID 06

- 0 41

- 000 3

GIS coordinates 3 8

. 1228 ° N, 12 2

. 9083 ° W

Location At ground level behind a ranger residence

Address 170 Pierce Point Rd

, P oin t Reyes C A 94956 County Marin

Dist ance to r oad from probe Pierc e Point Rd : 95 meters

Traffic count Pierce Point Rd: 22 5 ADT (estimate)

Groundcover Grass Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Point Reyes was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is representative of background

PM 2.5 leve ls. Air pollution levels at this site are usually low due to the rural nature of the

area and because the upwind air flow is usually from the Pacific Ocean 2.5 miles to the west.

The site is located within the Point Reyes National Seashore. Within the p ark are scattered dairy farms. There are no industrial sources within 20 miles of the park. Between the ocean and the air monitoring site the land is relatively flat with low vegetation. The air monitoring site is located behind a ranger residence at th e north end of the park. The closest towns are Marshall, three miles to the northeast with a population of a few hundred; and Inverness three

miles to the southeast with a population of 1304 according to the 2010 census.

The continuous PM 2.5 (BAM) monit or at Point Reyes recorded two days above the national

24

- hour PM 2.5 standard during the most recent three years. However, this monitor is not a recognized FRM or FEM method, and the data cannot be used to determine violations of the

national PM 2.5 standa rds, or its attainment status. Only FRM or FEM based PM 2.5 measurements may be used for comparison with national PM 2.5 standards. This site is operated by the California Air Resources Board.60

Point Reyes Monitor Information

Pollutant Continuous

PM 2.5 BAM Monitoring Objective General Background Spatial scale Regional Sampling method Met One

BAM 1020 PM filter analysis method N/A

Start date 12/01/00 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height (AGL) 2.1 m Probe height above

g round 2.1 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 35 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue >50 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360 °

Probe mat erial N/A

Residence time N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? No

– not
reference or equivalent

method Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers 2 times per

month

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 09/09/10

10/15/0961



### P oint Richmond

Site Name Point Richmond AQS ID 06

- 013

- 0005

GIS coordinates 37.926 1 ° N, 122.3856° W

Location A ir monitoring shelter next to fire station

Address 140 W. Richmond Ave

, Richmond CA 94801 County Contra Costa

Distance to r oad

From gaseous p robe W. Ri chmond Ave: 10.2 meters

Interstate 580: 266 meters

Traffic count W. Richmond Ave: 1,340 ADT (2003)

Interstate 580: 70 ,000 ADT (200 7 )

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont (MSA)

Point Richmond was chosen for H 2 S so urce i mpact monitoring because the community is at the immediate southern periphery of the Chevron Refinery

. Although prevailing winds in the

area are from the south

- southwest, occasional northerly winds will transport H 2 S emissions from the refinery over the community. H 2 S gases at Chevron can be emitted from the processing units , one mile to the north, or the Chevron Richmond Long Wharf Complex , one mile to the west, where crude oil and other feedstock chemicals from tankers are unloaded.

The monitoring site is located in downtown Point Richmond, 0.2 miles south of the Chevron Refinery boundary . Point Richmond , a neighborhood within the City of Richmond has a population of 3780 according to the 2010 census

.62

Point Richmond Monitor Information

Pollutant H2S Monitoring Objective Source impact

Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 45C PM filter analysis method N/A

Data Start date 01/01/99 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height (AGL) 3.4 m Probe height above ro of 0.9 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 17 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 7.3 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360o

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 6 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for

automated P M analyzers N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every two

weeks

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 11/12/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A63



### Redwood City

Site Name Redwood City AQS ID 06

- 081

- 1001

GIS co ordinates 37.4830° N 122.2036° W

Location On e

- story commercial building

Address 897 Barron Ave

, Redwood City CA 94063 County San Mateo

Distance to r oad

f rom gaseous p robe Barron Ave: 13 meters

Bay Road: 2 4 meters

Wa rr ington Ave: 131 meters US High way 101: 4 55 meters

Traffic count Barron Ave : 1,200 ADT (2009)

Bay Road: 8350 ADT (200 8 )

Wa rr ington Ave: 1140 ADT (2008) US Highway 101: 194,000 ADT (2008)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Redwood City was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is one of the largest cities in San Mateo County, with a population of 76,815 according to the 2010 census . Being approximately midway between San Francisco and San Jose

, it is well positioned to monitor

th e progression of ozone precursors and ozone moving southward down the peninsula as they are channeled by the Santa Cruz Mountains. Generally, Redwood City characterizes an area between South San Francisco and Palo Alto, which has a low air pollution poten tial due to the frequent presence of the sea breeze. Although the sea breeze typically keeps pollution levels low, when winds are light high levels of ozone pr ecursors, ozone, or particulates can

occur due to the large number of sources in the area.

Th e air monitoring site is located in a commercial/industrial zone bordered by US Highway

101 on one side and residential areas on the other three sides. NO, NO 2 and o zone are collected because the area is a large source of ozone precursor emissions and ozo ne . Carbon monoxide is monitored because of the high volume of traffic in the area, and US Highway 101 is only 0.3 miles north of the site. PM 2.5 is collected because light winds combined with

surface

- based inversions during the winter months can cause p articulate levels to become

elevated.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Redwood City on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program sec tion of this report.

An FRM PM 2.5 monitor at this site acts as the collocated monitor for the FEM PM 2.5 monitoring network. The collocated FRM PM 2.5 monitor sampling frequency was 1

- in

- 12 days January through March but was increased to 1

- in

- 6 days from A pril through December in order to obtain a larger sample size to compare the FRM concentrati on to the FEM

- BAM64

concentration. The Air District plans to continue operating this sampler on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule indefinitely.

The national 24

- hour PM 2.5 sta ndard was exceeded on one day during the last three years

. N o exceedances of the national standards for ozone, NO 2 or CO were measured during the last three years.

Redwood City Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 Monitoring Objective Population

or iented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49i TECO 48A TECO 42C

PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A

Data Start date 07/01//76 03/01/67 03/01/67 Operation schedule Con tinuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 6.8 m 6.8 m 6.8 m Probe height above roof 3.6 m 3.6 m 3.6 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 46 m 46 m 46 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 12.7 m 12.7 m 12.7 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360o 360o 360o

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 1 0 s 1 0 s 1 0 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for

automate d PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 08/17/10 08/17/10 08/17/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N /A65

Redwood City Monitor Information

Pollutant Continuous

PM 2.5 FEM

BAM FRM PM 2.5

Collocated

Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Met One

FEM 1020 Partisol

- Plus

2025 w/VS CC PM filter analysis method N/A Weighed by Air

District

Data Start date 10/01/09 10/01/09

Operation schedule Continuous Jan

- Mar: 1

- in

- 12 Apr

- Dec : 1

- in

- 6 Sampling season All year All year Probe height (AGL) 5.5 m 5.3 m Probe height above roof 2.2 m 2.2 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None

Dist from obstructions

not on roof None None

Distance from tree (DL) 47 m 44 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 1 1

. 0 m 14.0 m

Distance between

collocated monitors 4 m 4 m

Distance between PM 2.5 samplers BAM to PM 2.5 : 4.0 m PM 2.5 to FEM

BAM : 4.0 m

Unrestricted airflow 360o 360o

Probe material N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? Yes Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A Monthly

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers Every two

weeks N/A

Frequency of one

- pt QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last Annual Perform. Evaluation (gaseous) N/ A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 08/16/10

02/09/10 08/16/10

02/09/1066



### Richmond 7th

Site Name Richmond 7 th

AQS ID 06

- 013

- 0006

GIS coordinates 37.9481° N, 122.3648° W

Location Fire station

Address 1065 7 th Street, Richmond C A 94801 County Contra Costa

Distance to road from gaseous probe 7 th St: 21.4 meters

Hensley St: 29.8 meters Richmond Parkway: 200 meters

Traffic count 7 th St: 3,125 ADT (2007)

Hensley St: 2,125 ADT (2007) Richmond Parkway: 35,650 ADT (2007)

Grou ndcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Richmond 7 th was chosen for H 2 S and SO 2 source impact monitoring because it is near the eastern boundary of the Chevron Refinery. Normally, monitoring is done downwind of the prevaili ng wind direction. However, the prevailing winds are from the south, and carry emissions over San Pablo Bay. Since it is impractical to monitor over San Pablo Bay, a monitoring site was chosen downwind of the secondary wind direction, on the east side of the refinery. The site is located 0.5 miles east of the refinery boundary, where the monitor is expected to measure the highest concentrations in an area where the public has access.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Richmond 7 th on a 1

- in

- 12 da y schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

SO 2 concentrations measured at Richmond 7 th did no t exceed the new national 1

- hour 75 ppb

standard during the last three years.67

Richmond 7 th Monitor Information

Pollutant SO2 H2S Monitoring Objective Source impact Source impact

Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 43C TECO 43C PM filter analysis method N/A N/A

Start date 07/01/80 01/01/99 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year Probe height (AGL) 8.4 m 8.4 m Probe height above roof 2.8 m 2.8 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None

Distance from

obstructions not o n roof None None

Distance from tree (DL) 10 m 10 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 12.2 m 12.2 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon

Residence time 8 s 9 s

Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every two

weeks

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 10/21/10 10/21/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A68



### Rodeo

Site Name Rodeo AQS ID 06

- 013

- 0007

GIS coordinates 38. 0343o N, 122.2704o W

Location S ingle story storage area at fire station

Address 326 Third Street , Rodeo CA 94572 County Contra Costa

Distance to road

f rom gaseous probe Third St: 13.3 meters

Parker St: 249.0 meters

Traffic count Third St: 500 ADT (estimate)

Parker St: 7,316 ADT (200 8 )

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont (MSA)

Rodeo was chosen for H 2 S source impact monitoring because the ConocoPhillips Refinery is on the eastern boundary of the town of Rodeo. Al though the prevailing winds in the area are from the southwest, northeast winds can transport H 2 S emissions from the refinery over the populated area of the town. The population of Rodeo is 8, 679 according to the 2010 census.

T he monitoring site is loca ted in a residential area 0.6 miles southwest of the ConocoPhillips Refinery boundary.69

Rodeo Monitor Infor mation

Pollutant H2S Monitoring Objective Source impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 45C PM filter analysis method N/A

Start date 04/01/02 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height (AGL) 6.7 m Probe height above roof 2.0 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) >50 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 10.9 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360°

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 15 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2 .5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers audit N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every two

weeks

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 09/0 8 / 10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A70



### San Francisco

Site Name San Francisco AQS ID 06

- 075

- 0005

GIS coordinates 37.7659° N, 122.3990° W

Location One

- story commercial building

Address 10 Arkansas St, Suite N, San Francisco CA 94107 County San Francisco

Distance to road from gaseous probe 16 th St: 32.0 meters

Arkansas St: 17.0 meters

Interstate 280: 300 meters U.S. Highway 101: 504 meters

Traffic count 16 th St: 12,278 ADT (2006) Arkansas St: 500 ADT (estimate)

Inte rstate 280: 88,000 ADT (2009) U.S. Highway 101: 225,000 (2009)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

San Francisco was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is the second largest city in

the San Francisco Ba y Area, with a population of 805,235 according to the 2010 census. Although the sea breeze typically keeps pollution levels low, light wind conditions can result in high levels of ozone precursors or particulates due to the large number of sources in the city. The east side of the city was selected for a monitoring site because it is more densely populated (including a large number of daytime visitors and commuters), has some industry, and as a transportation hub, has generally higher traffic volume. The site is located near the fringe of the central business district, in an area of light industry that is close to a residential area and two major freeways.

Ozone is measured because of the very high population density of the city. NO/NO 2 and

CH 4 / NMHC h ave been measured because this is a source area for these ozone precursors.

C arbon monoxide is measured because of the high traffic volume. PM 10 and PM 2.5 are measured because stagnant days combined with surface based

- based inversions can cause

elevated particulate levels, and because of the contribution of heavy vehicular traffic to PM

levels.

Monitoring of CH 4 / NMHC was discontinued on September 30, 2010 because of the development of PAMS network (described elsewhere in this report), which is a more

ef fective allocation of resources. The PAMS network better defines the measurement and sources of ozone precursors, makin g additional measurements of CH 4 / NMHC at San Francisco superfluous.

VOC toxic compounds are sampled at San Francisco by both the Air District and CARB on a

1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed by their respective laboratories. Carbonyls and metals are also sampled by CARB on the same 1

- in

- 12 day schedule. Information about the CARB toxics monitoring program can be found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/toxics.htm

.71

Information about toxics monitoring by the Air District can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

During the most recent three years, the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard was exceeded on four days. No exceedances of the national standards for ozone, PM 10 , NO 2 , or CO were measured

in the last three years.

San Francisco Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 CH4/ NMHC *
Monitoring Objective Population

ori ented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49C TECO 48 TECO 42i TECO 55C PM Filter Analysis

method N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 01/01/86 01/01/ 86 NO: 12/01/85

NO2: 01/01/86 CH4: 01/01/94

NMHC : 07/12/06 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous *

Sampling season All year All year All year All year *

Probe height (AGL) 10.5 m 10.5 m 10.5 m 10.5 m Probe height above roof 4.4 m 4.4 m 4.4 m 4.4 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 15.3 m 15.3 m 15.3 m 15.3 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 5.2 m 5.2 m 5.2 m 5.2 m

D istance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 10 s 10 s 11 s 11 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No Monitor

closed

Is it suit able for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (ga seous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 09/16/10 09/16/10 09/16/10 09/16/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

* CH4/ NMHC analyzer removed fro m service on September 30, 2010

.72

San Francisco Monitor Information

Pollutant PM 10 Continuous

PM 2.5 FEM

BAM Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Andersen

HiVol 1200 Met One FEM

BAM 1020 PM Filter Analysis

method Weighed by

Air District N/A

Start date 11/16/86 10/01/09 Operation schedule 1

- in

- 6 Continuous Sampling season All year All year Probe height (AGL) 7.6 m 8.3 m Probe height above roof 1.5 m 2.2 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None

Distance from tree (DL) 17.5 m 15.9 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 7.0 m 7.3 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 s amplers 2.3 m 2.3 m

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360°

Probe material N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Weekly N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rat e audits for PM

monitors 12/09/10

06/08/10 12/09/10

06/08/1073



### San Jose

Site Name San Jose AQS ID 06

- 085

- 0005

GIS coordinates 37.348 5 ° N, 121.8949° W

Location Top floor of two

- story commercial building

Address 158 E. Jackson St , San Jose C A 95112 County Santa Clara

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe Jackson St : 15.1 meters

4 th St : 34.7 meters

Traffic count Jackson St: 3,990 ADT (2007)

4 th St: 6,000 ADT (2007)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Jose

- Sunnyvale

- Santa Clara MSA

San Jose was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is the largest city in Santa Clara County and the largest city in the Bay Area, with a population of 945,942 according to the

2010 census

.

Ozone precursors emitted within the central San Francisc o Bay Area are often carried into the San Jose area by the prevailing northwesterly winds. The northern half of the Santa Clara Valley is densely populated and the associated activities of the residents also add significant pollutant emissions into the ai r.

The air monitoring site is located in the center of northern Santa Clara Valley, in a commercial and residential part of downtown San Jose. This area is completely encircled by major freeways, and has a large airport just to the west

- northwest. The air quality in this location is representative of a large part of the valley due to the diurnal up valley and down valley air flow, which mixes the pollutants throughout the valley.

NO/NO 2 , CH 4 / NMHC and ozone are monitored because of the large amount o f ozone precursor emissions near the area as well as from upwind areas. Carbon monoxide is measured because of the significant traffic volume in the area. PM 10 and PM 2.5 are monitored because light winds combined with surface based inversions within the valley during winter months can cause elevated particulate levels.

Gaseous VOC toxic compounds, carbonyls, and metals are sampled at San Jose on a one in six day schedule as part of the NATTS program. Gaseous toxic compounds and carbonyls are analyzed by the Air District laboratory while metals are analyzed by an outside laboratory

. CARB also does sampling for VOC toxic compounds, carbonyls, and metals at San Jose but this sampling is on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and the analysis is done by the

CARB labor atory. More information about the CARB toxics monitoring program can be

found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/toxics.htm . Information about toxics monitoring by

the Air District can be found in the To xics Program section of this report.74

The San Jose station was approved by EPA as a National Core (NCore) multi

- pollutant monitoring station on October 30, 2009 with NCore air monitoring to begin on January 1,

2011

. The NCore program requires reporting of PM coarse (PM 10

- 2.5 ) every 3 rd day. Consequently, in 2011 the PM 10 sampling frequency will change from 1

- in

- 6 days to

1

- in

- 3 days and the PM 2.5 summer frequency will change from 1

- in

- 6 days to 1

- in

- 3 days.

On December 14, 2010, EPA revised the monitor ing requirements for lead and required lead monitoring at NCore sites. The lead measurements at San Jose will come from PM 10 filters

on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule. Because PM 10 is sampled on a 1

- in

- 3 day schedule, only every 2 nd

PM 10 filter will undergo lead measurements starting in January 2011.

Monitoring of NO y began at San Jose on January 1, 2011 to meet NCore requirements. NOy

is total reac tive nitrogen and plays an important role in ozone formation. A full description of the NCore monitoring program can be found in the NCore section of this document.

In the most recent three years, this site recorded five exceedances of the national 8

- hour ozone standard and eight exceedances of the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard. No

exceedances of the national sta ndards for PM 10 , NO 2

, SO 2 (the new 75 ppb 1

- hour standard) or CO were measured during the last three years.75

San Jose Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO * NO/NO2 CH4/ NMHC SO2 *
Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented & Highest

concen tration Population

oriented & Highest

concentration Population

oriented Population

oriented

Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49i TECO 48iTLE TECO 42C TECO 55C TECO 4 3 i TLE

PM filter anal ysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Data start date 11/01/02 11/01/02 11/01/02 CH4: 11/22/02

NMHC : 07/06/06 0 2/10/09

Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year All year

Prob e height (AGL) 11.9 m 11.9 m 11.9 m 11.9 m 11.9 m Probe height above roof 4.3 m 4.3 m 4.3 m 4.3 m 4.3 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 13.1 m 13.1 m 13.1 m 13.1 m 13.1 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 4.6 m 4.6 m 4.6 m 4.6 m 4.6 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360o 360o 360o 360o 360o

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Tefl on Teflon

Residence time 1 1 s 1 2 s 1 1 s 11 s 1 2 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N /A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance

Evaluati on (gaseous) 05 / 05 / 10 08 /2 0 / 10 05/05 / 10 05/05 / 10 08 / 11 / 10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

* H igh sensitivity instruments required for CO and SO 2 at NC ore sites

.76

San Jose Monitor Information

Pollutant PM 10 * F RM PM 2.5 Continuous

PM 2.5 BAM Speciated

PM 2.5 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Partisol 2025 *

without VSCC Partisol

- Plus

2025 w/VSCC Met One

Model 1020 Met One

SASS PM filter analysis method Weighed by

Air District Weighed by

Air District N/A Weighed by

RTI

Data start date 10/15/02 10/05/02 01/01/04 10/05/02 Operation schedule 1

- in

- 6 Apr

- Sep: 1

- in

- 6

Oct

- Mar: daily Continuous 1

- in

- 3

Sampling season All year All year All year All year Probe height 8.9 m 8.9 m 9.8m 8.9 m
Probe height above roof 2.2 m 2.2 m 2.0 m 2.1 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None

Dist from obstructions

not on roof None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 11.0 m 14.9 m 11.9 m 16.1 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 1.5 m 3.0 m 3.4 m 2.4 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 samplers PM 10 to PM 2.5 : 3.2m

PM 10 to SASS:

4.1m

PM 10 to BAM:

3.5 m PM 2.5 to PM 10 :

3.2 m

PM 2.5 to PM 10 : 4.1 m

PM 2.5 to BAM:

3.9 m BAM to PM 10 :

3.5 m

BAM to PM 2.5 : 3.9 m

BAM to SASS:

7.9 m SASS to PM 10 :

4.1 m

SASS to BAM:

7.9 m

SASS to PM 2.5 : 4.1 m
Unrestricted airflow 36 0 o 360o 360o 360o

Probe material N/A N/A N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A Yes No

– not
reference or equivalent

method No

Fre quency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Monthly Monthly N/A Monthly

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A Every two

weeks N/A

Frequency of 1

- pt QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A N/A

Last Annual Perform.

Ev aluation (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 08/10/10

02/02/10 08/10/10

02/02/10 08/10/10

02/02/10 05/04/10

02/02/10

* Partisol 2025 Low Volume replaced Anderson 1200 Hi Vol on 12/22/10.77



### San Martin

Site Name San Martin AQS ID 06

- 085

- 2006

GIS coordinates 37.079 4 ° N 121. 6000 ° W

Location A ir monitoring shelter next to maintenance shed

Address 13030 Murphy Ave, San Martin CA 95046 County Santa Clara

Distance to r oad

f rom gaseous p robe Murphy Ave: 57.0 m eters

US Highway 101 : 455 meters

Traffic count Murphy Ave: 4 00 ADT ( 2009 )

US Highway 101 : 1 07,000 ADT (200 8 )

Groundcover Vegetative Representative Area San Jose

- Sunnyvale

- Santa Clara MSA

San Martin was chosen as an ozone air monitoring site b ecause earlier field measurements showed this area to have the highest ozone concentrations in the Santa Clara Valley. Prevailing winds transport ozone and ozone precursors down the valley from the densely populated San Jose area as well as the surroundin g San Francisco Bay. Because ozone is formed by a chemical reaction between organic and nitrogen oxide gases in the presence of sunlight, the highest ozone concentrations are usually observed tens of miles downwind from the highest concentration of emissi on sources (freeways, power generating facilities, etc .) because the reactions involving the organic gases are relatively slow.

San Martin is located in an agricultural area at the south end of the Santa Clara Valley approximately 24 miles southeast of do wntown San Jose. The town has a small population of

7

, 027 (20 10 Census) and no industrial sources. The monitoring site is located at the So uth County Airport, in the center of the valley and about 0.3 miles west of US Highway 101.

In the most recent thre e years, this site recorded eleven exceedances of the national 8

- hour

ozone standard.78

San Martin Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 Monitoring Objective Highest

concentration Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49C PM filter analysis metho d N/A

Data Start date 04/30/94 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season Apr 1

– Nov 30 Probe height (AGL) 4.8 m Probe height above roof 2.8 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tre e (DL) 23 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue N/A

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360o

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 14 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison again st the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (g aseous) 07/26/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A79



### San Pablo

Site Name San Pablo AQS ID 06

- 013

- 1004

GIS coordinates 37.9604 1 ° N, 122.356 85 ° W

Location One story commercial building

Address 1865

- D Rumrill Blvd, San Pablo C A 94806 County Contra Costa

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe Rumrill Blvd: 15.8 meters

Traffic count Rumrill Blvd: 16,800 ADT (2010)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

San Pablo was chosen for an air monito ring site because the area is in the most populated portion of western Contra Costa County. San Pablo, with a population of 29 ,13 9 (according to the 2010 census), is almost completely surrounded by the city of Richmond . Richmond

has a population of 10 3,7 01 according to the 2010 census. This area has heavy industry, high traffic volume, including two major freeways, and it is very close to the Chevron Refinery.

Ozone and NO 2 are measured because the area is downwind of the central San Francisco Bay
Area, which is a large source of ozone precursor emissions. Carbon monoxide is measured because the high traffic volume in the area. SO 2 is measured because the site is 1.2 miles downwind of the Chevron refinery, which can be a significant source of SO 2 emissi ons.
PM 10 is measured because stagnant days in the fall and winter can result in elevated particulate levels.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at San Pablo on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information abou t the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

The station was temporarily closed from March 2009 to May 2010 due to heavy damage from a fire in the building.

This site recorded one exceedance of the national 8

- hour ozone standard during the last three years (as noted above, operations were suspended during a portion of this period). N o exceedances of the national standards for NO 2 , SO 2 (the new 75 ppb 1

- hour standard), CO or
PM 10 were measured during the past three years.80

San Pablo Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 SO2 PM 10 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Source Impact Population

oriented Spatial scale Middle Middle Middle Neighborhood Middle Sampli ng method TECO 49i TECO 4 8 i TECO 42i TECO 43i Tisch Env.

HiVol TE

- 6000 PM filter analysis

method N/A N/A N/A N/A Weighed by

Air District

Start date 09/13/02 09/13/02 09/13/02 09/13/02 09/23/02 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Contin uous 1

- in

- 6 Sampling season All year All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 9.0 m 9.0 m 9.0 m 9.0 m 6.4 m Probe height above roof 5.6 m 5.6 m 5.6 m 5.6 m 2.2 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None None

Distance from

o bstructions not on roof None None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) >50 m >50 m >50 m >50 m >50 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None None None None None

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360 ° 3 60 ° 360 ° 360 ° 360 °

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon N/A

Residence time 8 s 9 s 8 s 8 s N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A Weekly

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every othe r

day N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 0 6 / 02 / 10 0 6 / 02 / 10 0 6 / 02 / 10 0 6 / 02 / 10 N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A 11/18/10

0 6 / 02 / 1081



### San Rafael

Site Name San Rafael AQS ID 06

- 041

- 0001

GIS coordinates 37.972 4° N, 122.520 0° W

Location Second floor of two

- story commercial building

Address 534 4 th Street, San Rafael CA 94901 County Marin

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe 4 th St: 18 meters

Irwin St: 48 meters US Highway 101: 112 meters

Traffic c ount 4 th St: 4,248 ADT (20 10 )

Irwin St: 17,53 1 ADT (2007) US Highway 101: 150,500 ADT (20 09 )

Groundcover Paved Representative A rea San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

San Rafael was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is the largest city in Marin County with a population of 57,713 according to the 2010 census. The city’s climate and air quality is representative of that found throughout the populous eastern side of the county. Afternoon sea breezes typically keep pollution levels low. H owever, when the sea breeze is absent, local sources can cause elevated pollution levels.

The monitoring site is located in a commercial building about a blo ck east of US Highway 101 and near major highway access ramps. It is one half mile east of the do wntown San Rafael business district. There is no industrial activity in the immediate area. Ozone and

NO/ NO 2 are measured to monitor general population exposure to these pollutants. Carbon

m onoxide and P M 10 are measured because the site is close to a ma jor transportation corridor.

PM 2.5 is measured because light winds combined with wood burning, vehicular traffic, and surfaced based inversions during winter can cause elevated particulate concentrations.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at San Rafae l on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

In October 2009, a continuous Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) PM 2.5 m onitor was added

to this site as the Air District’s PM 2.5 network was expanded to have at least one monitor per

county . The FEM PM 2.5 monitor provides hourly measurements of PM 2.5 concentrations

.

Since PM 2.5 monitoring began in October 2009, four exceeda nces of the national 24

- hour

PM 2.5 standard have been measured. N o exceedances of the national standards for ozone,

PM 10 , NO 2 or CO were measured during the last three years

.82

San Rafael Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 PM 10 Continuous

PM 2.5 FEM

BAM Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Middle Middle Middle Middle Middle Sampling method TECO 49 i TECO 48i TECO 42C Andersen

HiVol 1200 Met One

FEM 10 20 PM filter Analysis

method N/A N/A N/A Weighed by

Air District N/A

Start date 07/01/76 10/01/67 NO: 01/01/68

NO2:10/01/67 11/04/86 10/27/09

Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous 1

- in

- 6 Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 11.9 m 11.9 m 11.9 m 7.0 m 7.1 m Probe height above roof 5.2 m 5.2 m 5.2 m 1.9 m 2.0 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof 21 m 21 m 21 m 20 m 18. 5 m

Distance from tree (DL) 1 4 m 14 m 14 m 1 5 m 12.5 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 3.5 m 3.5 m 3.5 m 2.3 m 3.4 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Distance between

PM 10 and PM 2.5 samplers N/A N/A N/A 3.2 m 3.2 m

Unr estricted airflow 360° 360° 360° 360° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon N/A N/A

Residence time 11 s 1 1 s 1 3 s N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/ A N/A Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A Weekly Every two

weeks

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day N/A N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 09/ 21/10 09/21/10 09/21/10 N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A 12/07/10

06/15/10 12/07/10

06/15/1083



### Santa Rosa

Site Name Santa Rosa AQ S ID 06

- 0 97

- 000 3

GIS coordinates 38.4435° N, 122.7102° W

Location Second floor of two

- story commercial building

Address 837 5 th St, Santa Rosa CA 95404 County Sonoma

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe 5 th St: 24 meters

E St: 79 meters College Ave: 210 meters

Brookwood Ave: 228 meters US Highway 101: 918 meters

Traffic count 5 th St: 2, 347 ADT (200 9 )

E St: 5,876 ADT (200 9 ) College Ave: 1 3,304 ADT (200 9 )

Brookwood Ave: 15,604 ADT (200 9 ) US Highway 101: 1 09,000 ADT (200 9 )

Groundcover Paved Representative A rea San ta Rosa

- Petaluma MSA

Santa Rosa was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is the largest city in Sonoma County with a population of 167,814 according to the 2010 census. The city’s climate is strongly influenced by the P acific Ocean and the marine air flow typically keeps pollution levels low. However, during light winds or strong nighttime temperature inversions, local sources can cause elevated pollution levels. The monitoring site is located just east of the

downtown urban core and 0.5 miles east of US Highway 101.

There are no industrial sources in the immediate area. Ozone and NO/ NO 2 are measured to monitor general population exposure to these pollutants. Carbon m onoxide is measured

because of the local urban tra ffic volume and proximity to the Hig hway 101 transportation artery. PM 2.5 is measured because light winds combined with wood burning, vehicular traffic, and surface based

- based inversions during the winter months can cause elevat ed particulate concentrati ons.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Santa Rosa on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

Pollutant conc entrations measured at Santa Rosa did not exceed the national standards for

ozone , PM 2.5 , NO 2 or CO during the last three years.84

Santa Rosa Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 Continuous

PM 2.5 FEM

BAM Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Popul ation

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49i TECO 48 i TECO 42i Met One

FEM 1020 Analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 04/17/81 04/17/81 NO: 01/01 /82

NO2:04/17/81 10/23/09

Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 10.7 m 10.7 m 10.7 m 8.1 m Probe height above roof 5.2 m 5.2 m 5.2 m 2.0 m

Distance from

ob structions on roof None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof 21 m 21 m 21 m 21 m

Distance from tree (DL) 13.7 m 13.7 m 13.7 m 13.7 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 4.7 m 4.7 m 4.7 m 5.7 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N /A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon N/A

Residence time 8 s 10 s 9 s N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N /A Yes

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A Every two

weeks

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Eve ry other

day N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 12/ 08/10 12/08/10 12/08/10 N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A 12/07/10

06/15/1085



### Vallejo

Site Name Vallejo AQS ID 06

- 0 95

- 0004

GIS coordinates 3 8

. 1025 ° N

, 122. 2380 ° W

Location One story commercial building

Address 304 Tuolumne St, Vallejo CA 94590 County Solano

Dist. to road

f rom probe Tuolumne St: 18 meters

Capitol St: 30 meters
Solano Ave: 3 3 meters
Interstate 80: 700 meters

Traffic count Tuol umne St: 5,100 ADT ( 2008)

Capitol St : 500 ADT (estimate) Solano Ave: 8,600 ADT (2008) Interstate 80: 141,000 ADT (200 9 )

Groundcover Paved Representative A rea Vallejo

- Fairfield MSA

Vallejo was chosen for an air monitoring site because it is the la rgest city in Solano County

with a population of 115,942 according to the 2010 census

. Vallejo has the potential to be impacted by pollution from three directions: southwest winds bringing ozone and ozone precursors from the Sa n Francisco Bay Area, north winds bringing particulates from the Napa Valley, and east winds bringing ozone and particulates from the Central Valley.

The monitoring site is located in a mixed commercial and residential neighborhood one mile

east of downtown and 0.5 miles west of In terstate 80. Ozone and NO/ NO 2 are measured

because south erly winds can transport ozone and its precursors into Vallejo from the heavily populated central Bay Area. Easterly winds can transport ozone from the Central Valley through the Carquinez Strait.

PM 2.5 is measured because high concentrations typically occur during the winter when nighttime valley drainage winds, wood burning, and shallow temperature inversions trap pollutants from local sources and the Napa Valley to the north. East winds can also transport particulate into Vallejo through the Carquinez Strait from the Central Valley.

Carbon monoxide is measured because Interstate 80 passes through the middle of the urban area east of the monitoring site. SO 2 is measured at Vallejo to monitor gen eral population exposure and because refineries located to the south and east can be significant sources of

SO 2

.

Continuous PM 2.5 (BAM) monitoring was discontinued after September 13, 2010 because the Air District was preparing to install and test a conti nuous PM 2.5 FEM

- BAM monitor. Testing was completed in late 2010 and both the new PM 2.5 FEM

- BAM and the existing

PM 2.5 FRM operated daily from January 1, 2011 through February 28, 2011. On March 1,86

2011 the continuous FEM

- BAM monitor replaced the FRM mon itor and the FRM monitor

was removed.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Vallejo on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.

During the most recent three years, this site recorded one exceedance of the national 8

- hour

ozone standard and the national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard was exceeded on twelve days . N o exceedances of the national standards for NO 2 , SO 2 (the ne w 75 ppb 1

- hour standard) or CO

were measured during the last three years

.87

Vallejo Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 SO2 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neigh borhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49 i TECO 48i TECO 42 i TECO 43i PM Filter Analysis

method N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 07/01/76 07/01/76 07/01/76 07/01/76 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 9.6 m 9.6 m 9.6 m 9.6 m Probe height above roof 4.3 m 4.3 m 4.3 m 4.3 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None Non e None

Distance from tree (DL) N/A N/A N/A N/A

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 3.7 m 3.7 m 3.7 m 3.7 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon

Re sidence time 10 s 12 s 12 s 12 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No No No No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 1 1 / 03/10 11/03/10 11/03/10 11/03/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A88

Vallejo Monitor Information

Pollutant FRM PM 2.5 Continuous

PM 2.5 BAM * Speciated

PM 2.5 Monitoring Objective Population

oriented Population

oriented Population

oriented Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Partisol Plus

2025 w/VSCC Met One BAM

1020 Met One

SASS PM Filter Analysis

method Weighed by

Air District N/A Weighed by

DRI

Start date 03/10/99 01/01/04 6/11/08 Operation schedule Ap r

- Sep 1

- in

- 6

Oct

- Mar: daily Continuous 1

- in

- 6

Sampling season All year All year All Year Probe height ( AGL ) 6.5 m 5.8 m 6.6 m Probe height above roof 2.3 m 1.9 m 2.3 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None N one None

Distance from tree (DL) N/A N/A N/A

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 6.3m 2.5 m 5.4m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A

Distance between SASS

and PM 2.5 samplers PM 2.5 to BAM:

3.7 m

PM 2.5 to SASS:

3.1 m BAM to PM 2.5 :

3 .7 m

BAM to SASS:

2.9 m SASS to PM 2.5 :

3.1 m

SASS to BAM:

2.9 m
Unrestricted airflow 360° 360° 360°

Probe material N/A N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Yes Yes No

Is it suitable for comparison agains t the

annual PM 2.5 ? Yes No

– not
reference or equivalent

method No

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Monthly N/A Monthly

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A Every two

weeks N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 11/02/10

05/11/10 08/17/10

05/11/10 11/02/10

05/11/10

* C ontinuous PM 2.5 BAM was discontinued after 9/13 /10

.89



## Detailed Site Information for S PM Stations90



### Berkeley

Site Name Berkeley AQS ID 06

- 0 01

- 2004

GIS coordinates 38.8778° N, 12 2

. 3013 ° W

Location Trailer in parking lot

Address 1398 6 th St

, Berkeley C A 94710 County Alameda

Dist ance to r o ad from gaseous probe Camelia Street: 27 meters

6 th Street: 34 meters

Gilman Street: 164 meters

Interstate 80: 484 meters

Traffic count Camelia Street: 500 ADT (estimate)

6 th Street: 1,500 ADT (estimate) Gilman Street: 21,700 (2000)

Interstate 8 0: 266,500 (2008)

Groundcover Paved Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

The Air District began a t hree year ambient air monitoring study in Berkeley in December

2007 . The purpose of the study is to determine the pollution impacts t o local residents from vehicular traffic and industry along the Highway 80 corridor. According to the 2010 census the City of Berkeley h a s a p opulation of 112,580. The site closed on December 31, 2010.

The west side of Berkeley has the highest pollutan t emission density within the city. Traffic levels are extremely high on Highway 80, with frequent traffic slowdowns during morning and evening commute times, which can produce significant amounts of hydrocarbons and particulates. Industrial sources alon g the highway, particularly Pacific Steel Casting (PSC), have made local residents concerned about possible exposure to particulates and toxic compounds. These sources in the west side of Berkeley transport pollutants to the rest of the city due to prevai ling westerly winds.

The mobile air monitoring station is sited in w est ern Berkeley because this area is expected to have the highest impacts due to close proximity to the sources. Th e trailer is located 0.30

miles east of Highway 80 and 0.25 miles dow nwind from PSC in a residential neighborhood. Although the purpose of the study is primarily source

- oriented exposure from the highway and local industry emissions, t he Air District is also monitoring population exposure to criteria pollutants including ozone, NO 2 , SO 2 , CO, PM 10 , and PM 2.5

.

Gaseous t oxic compounds and metals are sampled at Berkeley by the Air District on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule. In 20 10 , g aseous t oxic compounds were analyzed at the Air District laboratory

and m etals were analyzed by CARB . Information about toxics monitoring by the Air District can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report.91

Pollutant concentrations measured at Berkeley did not e xceed the national standards for

ozone, NO 2 , SO 2 (the new 75 ppb 1

- hour standard), CO , or PM 10 since the site open ed in

December 2007. T he continuous PM 2.5 ( B AM) monitor recorded concentrations above the

national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard on two days in 2008

, one day in 2009 , and no days in 2010

. However, this monitor is not a recognized FRM or FEM method, and the data cannot be used

to det ermine violations of the national PM 2.5 standards, or its attainment status. Only FRM or

FEM based PM 2.5 measurements may be used for comparison with national PM 2.5 standards.

Hourly gaseous concentr ations are available on the Air District web site. Pollutant summaries for all measurements from this study will be made available to local community groups and the City of Berkeley.92

Berkeley Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 SO2 CH4/ NMHC

Mon itoring Objective Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neig hborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49C API 300E TECO 42C TECO 43C TECO 55C PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 12/13/07 12/13/07 12/13/07 12/13/07 CH4: 12/13/07

NMHC : 12/13/07 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Contin uous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 5. 1 m 5. 1 m 5.1 m 5.1 m 5.1 m Probe height above roof 2.5 m 2.5 m 2.5 m 2.5 m 2.5 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 1 8 m 1 8 m 1 8 m 1 8 m 1 8 m
Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 17 m 17 m 17 m 17 m 17 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted airf

low 360 ° 360 ° 360 ° 360 ° 360°

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 10 s 10 s 11 s 10 s 10 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Site closed Site closed Site closed Site closed Site closed

Is it suitable for comparis on against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous ) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 12 /2 9 / 10 12 /2 9 / 10 12 /2 9 / 10 12 /2 9 / 10 12 /2 9 / 10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A93

Berkel ey Monitor Information

Pollutant PM 10 Continuous

PM 2.5 BAM Monitoring Objective Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Tisch Env.

HiVol TE

- 6000 Met One

BAM 1020

PM Filter Analysis

method Weighed by

Air District N/A

Start date 12/14/07 12/18/07 Operation schedule 1

- in

- 6 Continuous Sampling season All year All year Probe height ( AGL ) 4.3 m 4.8 m Probe height above roof 1.5 m 2.2 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None

Distance from tree (DL) 20 m 17 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 20 m 18 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 samplers PM 10 to
BAM: 2.7 m BAM to

PM 10 : 2.7 m

Unrestricted airflow 360° 360°

Probe material N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Site closed Site closed

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A No

– not
reference or

e quivalent

method Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Weekly N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last Annual Performance

Evalua tion (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 04/13/10

12 /2 9 / 10 04/14/10

12 /2 9 / 1094



### Crockett

Site Name Crockett AQS ID 06

- 013

- 1001

GIS Coordinates 38.0549o N, 122.2332o W

Location P ump house

Address End of Kendall Avenu e, Crockett CA 94525 County Contra Costa

Distance to r oad

from gaseous p robe San Pablo Ave: 68.4 meters

Traffic count San Pablo Ave: 8 ,763 ADT (200 7 )

Groundcover Vegetative Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Crockett wa s chosen for SO 2 source impact monitoring because it is downwind of the ConocoPhillips Refinery. Prevailing winds in the area are from the west, which transport

SO 2 emissions from the refinery over the town of Crockett, a predominately residential

communi ty with a population of 3, 0 94 according to the 2010 census . The monitoring site is located on the west side of Crockett 0.9 miles northeast of the refinery boundary. The only other major industry near Crockett is C&H Sugar, which is not a significant sou rce of SO 2 emissions.

VOC toxic compounds are also sampled at Crockett on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule and analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report

.

Crockett is classified as an SPM site. EPA siting criteria specifies that the probe be located at least 10 meters from the drip line of all trees. The closest tree drip line to the probe is 1.2

meters away, but since the tree is located outside of the required 180 degree arc of unrestricted airflow for source impact monitoring as determined by the predominant wind direction and the direction of the refinery, the close proximity of that tree is irrelevant. The closest tree drip line within the 180 degr ee arc is 4.9 meters from the probe, which does not meet siting criteria. The Air District has been unable to negotiate with the local homeowner’s association for the removal of this tree. Even though one of the siting criteria

for a SLAMS site cannot be met, the site is still suitable for source impact monitoring as an SPM site.

During the most recent three years, the national 1

- hour SO 2 standard of 75 ppb was exceeded on two days.95

Crockett Monitor Infor mation

Pollutant SO2 Monitor Objective Sourc e impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 43C PM filter analysis method N/A

Start date 01/01/79 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height (AGL) 6.2 m Probe height above roof 2.4 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 4.9 m *

Distance to furnace or incinerator flue (m) N/A

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflow 270°

Probe material Teflon

Residence time 10 s

W ill there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers audit N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers

audit N/A

Fr equency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 10/ 13 / 10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A

* Closest tree within the 180 degree arc of unrestricted air flow for source impact monitoring.96



### Cupertino

Site Name Cupertino AQS ID N/A

GIS coordinates 37.3216° N, 122.0713° W

Location One story building

Address 22638 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino CA 95014 County Santa Clara

Distance to road

from monitor Stevens Creek Blvd: 40. 2 m

Prado Vista Drive: 36.6 m

Foothill Blvd: 228.6 m

Silver Oak Lane: 152.4 m

Traffic count Stevens Creek Blvd: 4030 ADT (2009)

Prado Vista Drive : 200 ADT (estimate) Foothill Blvd: 8960 ADT (2009)

Silver Oak Lane : 500 ADT (estimate)

Groundcover Gravel Representative Area San Jose

- Sunnyvale

- Santa Clara MSA

In October 2008, the Air District began part iculate monitoring in Cupertino to determine if emissions from the nearby Lehigh Cement Plant and its associated diesel truck traffic could be pr oducing elevated particulate concentr ations in nearby neighborhoods. According to the 2010 census, the City of Cupertino has a population of 58,302.

The monitoring site was in a residential area just east of Permanente Canyon where the Lehigh Cement Pl ant is located. The site was also adjacent to Stevens Creek Boulevard which is the main route for truck traffic using the plant. Because cement plant and diesel truck emissions tend to produce larger

- sized particles, a PM 10 monitor was used to measure

pa rticulate impacts. A continuous monitor was used to correlate concentrations with the hourly emissions from the plant and the truck traffic.

During the period of operation, there were no measured PM 1 0 concentrations above the

national 24

- hour PM 10 stan dard of 150 μg/m 3 . Th e monitor measured concentrations over

the California 24

- hour standard of 50 μg/m 3 on two days in 2008 and on one day in January

2010. However, particulate concentrations at most locations in the Bay Area were high on those days, so the high values may be due to basin

- wide sources rather than local sources. Hourly particulate concentrations and wind data for the Cupertino site can be viewed on the

Air District web site.

Monitoring ended in July 2010 when a new Cupertino monitorin g site became operational at Monte Vista Park. Details about the Cup ertino Monte Vista Park site can be found later in

this section of the document.97

Cupertino Monitor Information

Pollutant Continuous

PM 10 BAM Monitoring Objective Population

Oriented & Source Impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Sampling method Met One

E

- BAM PM Filter Analysis

method N/A

Start date 10/29/08 Operation schedule Continuous Sampling season All year Probe height ( AGL ) 5.0 m Probe height above roof 2.2 m

Distance from

ob structions on roof 5.1 m

Distance from

obstructions not on roof 32.3 m

Distance from tree (DL) 24.3 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue 15.9 m

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 samplers N/A

Unrestricted ai rflow 360°

Probe material N/A

Residence time N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Site closed

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow r ate
verification for automated PM analyzers Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 5/28/ 1098



### Cupertino Monte Vista Park

Site Name Cupertino Monte Vista AQS ID 06

- 085

- 2009

GIS coordinates 37.3184° N, 12 2

. 0697 ° W

Location Trailer in parking lot

Address 22601 Voss Ave

, Cupertino CA 95104 County Santa Clara

Dist ance to r oad from gaseous probe Foothill Blvd: 91 meters

Voss Av e : 63 meters
McKlintock Lane : 118 meters Woodbridge Ct: 70 meters

Traffic count Foothill Blvd: 8,960 ADT (2009)

Voss Ave: 1,000 ADT estimate

McKlintock Lane: 200 ADT (estimate) Woodbridge Ct: 1,000 ADT (estimate)

Groundcover Paved Representati ve Area San Jose

- Sunnyvale

- Santa Clara MSA

The Air District began a one year ambient air monitoring study in Cupertino on September 1,

2010. The purpose of the study is to determine the pollution impacts to local residents from

vehicle traffic and the Lehigh Cement Plant located one mile west of the site. According to

the 2010 census

, the City of Cupertino has a p opulation of 58,302. The Air District plans to close this station on August 31, 2011.

The mobile air monitoring station is located in Monte Vista Park. Although the purpose of the study is primarily source

- oriented exposure from the cement plant and the associated truck traffic, the Air District is also monitoring population exposure to criteria pollutants including ozone, NO 2 , SO 2 , CO , PM 10 , and PM 2.5 , as well as toxics, metals, and mercury. An Air District meteorological system is also located in the park.

Ozone and its precursors ( NO/NO 2 ) will be measured because the area is downwind of

precursor sources during the warmer months. Carb on monoxide will be measured because of car and truck traffic on residential streets and because two freeways pass through Cupertino.

SO 2 will be measured because the cement plant uses petroleum coke as fuel to heat the

cement kiln. Continuous PM 2.5 and filter based PM 10 will be measured because light winds

combined with surface

- based inversions during the winter months may cause elevated particulate levels

. Hourly data collected is posted real

- time on the Air District web site.

In 2011, the Air Distric t will also measure ozone precursors CH 4/ NMHC at Cupertino. These compounds were intended to be measured when the station opened but they require high pressure compressed hydrogen gas cylinders in order to operate. The gas cylinders were not permitted by the Santa Clara County Fire Department. As an alternate to compressed gas cylinders, new laboratory grade equipment was procured by the Air District. The new99

equipment required extensive modification of the monitoring trailer thus delaying the start of

CH 4 / NMHC monitoring until April 1, 2011.

Gaseous toxic compounds and metals are sampled at Cupertino on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule. In 2010, gaseous toxic compounds were analyzed at the Air District laboratory and metals were analyzed by CARB. Information ab out toxics monitoring by the Air District can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report. Total Atmospheric Mercury is sampled for

24

- hour period s on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule with laboratory analysi s done by Frontier

Geosciences. T oxic monitoring results, including mercury, are posted on a monthly basis on

the Air District’s website at: http://www.baaqmd.gov/sitecore

- s/~/media/Files/Technical%2 0Services/Cupertino_toxics.ashx

Si nce opening in September 2010, one exceedance of the national 8

- hr ozone standard has

been measured, but no exceedances of the national standards for PM 10 , NO 2 , SO 2 or CO have

been measured. The continuous PM 2.5 (BAM) m onitor recorded no concentrations above the

national 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard . However, this monitor is not a recognized FRM or FEM method, and the data cannot be used to det ermine violations of the national PM 2.5 standards,

or its attainment status. Only FRM or FEM based PM 2.5 measurements may be used for comparison with national100

Cupertino Monte Vista Monitor Information

Pollutant O3 CO NO/NO2 SO2 Monitoring Objective Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Ori ented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method TECO 49C TECO 48I TECO 42C TECO 43C PM filter analysis method N/A N/A N/A N/A

Start date 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/ 1/10 Operation schedule Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Sampling season All year All year All year All year Probe height (AGL) 4.6 m 4.6 m 4.6 m 4.6 m Probe height above roof 2.0 m 2.0 m 2.0 m 2.0 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None None None

Distance from tree (DL) 5.2 m 5.2 m 5.2 m 5.2 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None None None None

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A

Unrestricted air flow 360 ° 360 ° 360 ° 360 °

Probe material Teflon Teflon Teflon Teflon

Residence time 13 s 14 s 15 s 15 s Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Yes Yes Yes Yes

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of f

low rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) Every other day Every other

day Every other

day Every other

day

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) 9/14/10 9/14/10 9/14/10 9/14/10

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors N/A N/A N/A N/A101

Cupertino Monte Vista Monitor Information

Pollutant PM 10 Continuous

PM 2.5 BAM Monitoring Objective Population

Oriented & Source Impact Population

Oriented & Source Impact Spatial scale Neighborhood Neighborhood Sampling method Tisch Env.

HiVol TE

- 6000 Met One

BAM 1020 PM Filter Analysis

method Weighed by

Air District N/A

Start date 9/9/10 9/15/10 Operation sc hedule 1

- in

- 6 Continuous Sampling season All year All year Probe height (AGL) 4.3 m 4.9 m Probe height above roof 1.5 m 2.2 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None None

Distance from tree (DL) 2 m 3 m
Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue None None

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A N/A

Distance between PM 10

and PM 2.5 samplers PM 10 to
BAM: 2.4 m BAM to

PM 10 : 2.4 m Unrestricted airflow 360° 360°

Probe material N/A N/A

Residence time N/A N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? Yes Yes

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A No

– not
reference or equivalent

method Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers Weekly N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for automated PM analyzers N/A Every two

weeks

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A N/A

Last two semi

- annual

flow rate audits for PM

monitors 12/14/10 12/14/10102



### Fort Cronkhite

Site Name Fort Cronkhite AQS ID 06

- 0 41

- 000 4

GIS coordinates 3 7

. 832 725 ° N, 12 2

. 5276 58 ° W

Location At ground level behind a ranger residence

Address Building 1111, Fort Cronkhite , Sausalito CA County Marin

Dist ance to r oad from probe Bunker Road : 16 meters

Traffic count Bunker Road : 948 ADT (200 7 )

Groundcover Vegetative Representative Area San Francisco

- Oakland

- Fremont MSA

Fort Cronkhite was chosen for an air toxics monitoring site because it is representative of

ambient levels of toxics comp ound s transported into the Bay Area along its western boundary

. The site is 1⁄2 mile east of the Pacific Ocean, on the north side of the Golden Gate

gap which opens into t he San Francisco Bay . The monitor is located within the Golden Gate

National Recreati on Area (GGNRA) near the visitor center at Fort Cronkhite. Because winds in the Bay Area are generally from the west, this site is intended to be representative of local background toxic s concentrations originating from the Pacific Ocean. The low

concent rations from this site provide a baseline to which other toxics measurements in the Bay Area can be compared

.

Toxics concentrations measured at this site should not be considered to be at pristine natural background levels. There are toxics contributions from emissions transported across the Pacific Ocean from Asia, from ships headed to and from Bay Area and Central Valley ports, and from ships sailing up and down the coast. Additionally, there can be a small contribution from vehicle traffic in areas up wind of the site within the GGNRA. In spite of these contributions, when winds are from the west, the toxics levels at this site reflect the lowest levels in the Bay Area.

The closest industrial sources are in San Francisco about eight miles southeast of the site

. The closest towns are Sausalito, three miles to the east northeast with a population of 7, 061

, and Marin City

, three miles to the northeast with a population of 2

, 666

. Populations were

based on the 2010 census. Sausalito and Marin City have l ittle impact on the monitoring site

because w inds are typically from the west so the site is upwind of these towns, and the towns have no significant industrial sources.

This site is operated as part of the Air District’s Toxics Program on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule

. Samples are collected using a Xontech canister a nd later analyzed in the Air District laboratory. More information about the toxics monitoring program can be found in the Toxics Program section of this report

.103

Fort Cronkhite Monitor Informat ion

Pollutant Canister

Toxics Monitoring Objective General Background Spatial scale Regional Sampling method Xontech 910A PM filter analysis method N/A

Start date 3/26/87 Operation schedule 1

- in

- 12 Sampling season All year Probe height (AGL) 7.3 m Probe height above roof 0.9 m

Distance from

obstructions on roof None

Distance from

obstructions not on roof None

Distance from tree (DL) 20 m

Distance to furnace or

incinerator flue N/A

Distance between

collocated monitors N/A

Unrestricted airflo w 360 °

Probe material Teflon

Residence time N/A Will there be changes

within the next 18 mos? No

Is it suitable for comparison against the

annual PM 2.5 ? N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verification for manual PM samplers N/A

Frequency of flow rate

verifi cation for automated PM analyzers N/A

Frequency of one

- point QC check (gaseous) N/A

Last Annual Performance Evaluation (gaseous) N/A104



## Sp e cial Monitoring Programs Conducted in 20 10105



### EPA School Air Toxics Monitoring Program

EPA established the School Air Toxics Monitoring Program (SATMP) in 2009 to understand whether outdoor toxic air pollution poses health concerns to schoolchildren. The program was planned on a national level and the field monitoring activities are being carried out by

exper ienced state and local air monitoring agencies like the Air District under the supervision of EPA Regional Offices. The p rogram seeks to determine if an air toxics exposure problem exists at schools and if so, pursue risk reduction activities and consider longer

- term monitoring efforts where more information is needed. All samples were to be collected

between June and September 2009 . T he Air District elected t o extend the program, a t its cost, through August 2010

.

EPA developed a list of priority area s for an initial round of toxics monitoring. The priority areas were selected based on proximity to sources having a high toxicity potential. In the Bay Area, EPA had concerns about the impacts on nearby school children of hexavalent

chromium emitted fro m the Lehigh Southwest Cement Plant in Cupertino. S tudies in other parts of the country had shown that hexavalent chromium c ould be a significant air toxic released during cement manufacturing.

Daytime winds in Cupertino are generally from the north or northwest, which means the community is frequently upwind and away from impacts from the plant. However, there is potential for hexavalent chromium to reach the community when ever winds are from the

south . There is also a local down

- canyon wind pattern, which can occur at night

, when surface winds travel from the plant down the Permanente Canyon toward Cupertino. The Stevens Creek Elementary School was chosen as a monitoring site because it is close to the Lehigh cement plant (1.6 km) and the entrance to Permanent e Canyon. Figure 2 is a map showing the location of the school and the cement plant.

Chromium is a naturally occurring element found in rocks, animals, plants, and soil. It commonly exists in trivalent (chromium III) or hexavalent (chromium VI ) forms. While trivalent chromium is an essential nutrient that helps the body use fat, sugars, and protein, hexavalent chromium is a highly reactive, colorless, and odorless air toxic that can damage the respiratory system and cause cancer when inhaled at high concentrations.

Hexavalent chromium exists in the atmosphere as tiny particles or aerosols that are measured by drawing ambient air through a special filter for 24 hours on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule. Exposed filters are removed from the sampler by A ir District staff and sent to ERG, a laboratory under contract to EPA/SATMP, for analysis within 30 days of collection. All sampling equipment, technician training, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), filters, and laboratory analysis services and proced ures are provided directly by SATMP to maintain measurement uniformity and quality across the entire program.106 Figure 2 . Map of Stevens Creek Elementary School in Cupertino.

The EPA sponsored SATMP Project at Stevens Creek El ementary School began in J une 2009 and was completed in September 2009. As required by the project, ten primary samples were collected during the period . An additional three samples were also collected in case of possible primary sample invalidation. For the Cupertino site, all 13 samples were analyzed and validated, and all had concentrations that were well below levels of concern for cancer risk and respiratory exposure. Results and technical information for all SATMP monitoring locations are available at http://www.epa.gov/schoolair/schools.html

. ( Follow the navigation link to Stevens Creek Elementary School to view the most current monitoring data available for the school and an explanation of the results. )

Althoug h the EPA sponsored SATMP sampling project ended in September 2009, the Air

District continued the project at Stevens Creek School for an additional 11 months. The additional samples provide d a more complete picture of hexavalent chromium conc entrations

a t the school for an entire year. The extended sampling program was performed by Air District staff, and the Air District contracted with ERG to analyze the filters

. All additional samples were analyzed and validated, and all had concentrations that were well below levels of concern for cancer risk and respiratory exposure. Results of the initial sampling and the extended Air District sampling were submitted to the EPA AQS database (AQS site number

06

- 085

- 5506) and may also be found at: http://www.epa.gov/cgi

bin/broker?_service=data&_program=dataprog.school_keydata.sas&site=060855506107



### Meteorology Program

The Air District operates a meteoro logical monitoring program to provide accurate measurements of ambient meteorological parameters to meet the requirements of many programs within the Air District, and to make these data available to the public. Air District programs which use meteorologi cal data are: air quality forecasting, photochemical modeling, source modeling, and data analysis. T o obtain high quality data that can be used for regulatory applications, the Air District follows EPA recommendations for siting, instrumentation, data ac curacy, and quality assurance of the meteorological network.

The placement of meteorological stations depends on the use of the data. Sites chosen for air quality forecasting are located in areas that show the general wind and temperature patterns

with in the Air District. Photochemical modeling sites are chosen to show boundary conditions, general conditions, and upper air measurements. Source modeling sites are chosen to be representative of the source and receptor domain to be modeled. Sites used f or data analysis are usually located near high pollution areas to determine the trajectories between source areas and downwind high concentration area s , as well as the general atmospheric conditions occurring during the episodes.

Because most Air Distric t air monitoring stations are located in urban or suburban neighborhoods where multistory buildings and trees are nearby, it has not been possible to place meteorological systems at many of the Air District’s air monitoring stations and still

meet EPA mete orological siting recommendations. EPA recommends that wind systems be located at a height of 10 meters or at plume height if the use is source oriented modeling. In addition, the distance between the wind instrument and any obstruction should be at leas t 10 times the height of the obstruction

.

The current meteorological network has 2 3 sites. Figure 3 shows th e locations of the sites in 2010. Eight of these sites are located at or adjacent to air monitoring stations (Bethel Island, Cupertino Monte Vis ta Park, Suisun, Concord, Vallejo, Livermore, Gilroy, and San Martin). The other air monitoring stations have obstructions to air flow nearby, necessitating placement of the meteorological sites further away. Additionally, to meet forecasting or photoche mical modeling needs, some meteorological sites have been placed on ridge s or mountain tops, such as at Chabot, Mt. Tamalpais, and Kregor Peak.

Sensors used in the Air District’s meteorological network are:

• Wind speed and direction (cup and vane)

.

• Tem perature

.

• Relative humidity (at some sites)

.

• Solar radiation (at some sites)

.

• Rainfall (at some sites)

.

• Ambient pressure (at one site)

.

Hourly

- averaged data are made available to District staff and the public on the Air District’s web page, and ar e archived in the Technical Service Division ’s database. An electronic report is generated daily that checks for out of range values, constant values, missing values,108

or rate of change problems. If problems are seen, a technician visits the site to inves tigate. As part of the quality assurance program, each site is visited four times per year, twice for calibrations and twice for audits, and reports are generated for management review. At the end of each quarter, the data are reviewed and edited as need ed. After editing, the data are upload ed into the EPA AQS database, and the preliminary data on the web page are

overwritten with final data.

Data measured at airports and reported by the National Weather Service, as well as data from refineries as requi red under Air District regulations, from sewage treatment plants, from universities, and from private companies are also included in the Technical Services Division

database as long as they meet EPA recommended siting and maintenance specifications. If

re quested by organizations, Air District staff will advised them where to best place their meteorological stations and how to operate the equipment such that the data can be used for regulatory purposes.109 Figure 3 . Map of Air District Meteorol ogical Monit oring Sites for 2010

.110



### National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) at San Jose

EPA established the National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) network in 2003. NATTS was created to expand and improve national toxics monitoring with the major goal

of ident ifying toxics trends in urban and rural settings throughout the United States. EPA and the Air District agreed to include San Jose in the NATTS network because of it s history

of high quality air toxics data back to 199 1 (when canister sampling at San Jose began)

, and because San Jose is the largest city in Northern California with a 2010 population of 945,942.

T he Air District began operat ing a NATTS site at the San Jose air monitoring station on January 1, 2003

. NATTS pollutants can be grouped into thre e categories: h azardous a ir

p ollutants , continuous measurements, and p olycyclic aromatic h ydrocarbons

.

Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP s ) Measurements

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 listed 188 HAPs of interest

. Of these, EPA selected

fifteen HAPs for trends analysis in the original 2003 NATTS monitoring program. These selections were based on toxicity, available measurement methods, cost of measurement, correlation with other important HAPs, and anticipated concentration levels. Table 10 lists

the N ATTS HAPs measured by the Air District along with the year NATTS measurements began. Hexaval e nt ch romium is the only required NATTS airborne toxic compound that th e Air District does not directly measure, because t he current sampling methodology allows

si gnificant deterioration of the compound before the analysis can be performed. C hromium

is measured instead as an estimate of h exavalent chromium concentrations. In the future, the Air District may sample for h exavalent chromium when better sampling techn iques are developed.

Table 10 . List of the 1 5 NATTS HAPs Monitored by the Air District.

Hazardous Air Pollutant or Species Year NATTS

Measurements Began Param eter

Type Sample Source Analyzing

Lab Analysis

equipment

Benzene 2003 VOC SUMMA canister BAAQMD GC

1, 3 Butadiene 2003 VOC SUMMA canister BAAQMD GC

Carbon tetrachloride 2003 VOC SUMMA canister BAAQMD GC

Chloroform 2003 VOC SUMMA canister BAAQMD GC
Tetrachloroethylene 2003 VOC SUMMA canister BAAQMD GC
Trichloroethylene 2003 VOC SUMMA canister BA AQMD GC

Acrolein 2008 Carbonyl SUMMA canister BAAQMD GC/MS
Formaldehyde 2006 Carbonyl cartridge BAAQMD HP LC
Acetaldehyde 2006 Carbonyl cartridge BAAQMD HP LC
Antimony 2008 metal 1⁄4 PM 10 filter 1 ERG ICPMS

Arsenic 2008 metal 1⁄4 PM 10 filter 1 ERG ICPMS

Cadm ium 2008 metal 1⁄4 PM 10 filter 1 ERG ICPMS

Manganese 2008 metal 1⁄4 PM 10 filter 1 ERG ICPMS

Nickel 2008 metal 1⁄4 PM 10 filter 1 ERG ICPMS

C hromium 2 2008 metal 1⁄4 PM 10 filter 1 ERG ICPMS

1 PM 10 Lo

- Vol Teflon filter is sample source effective 12/22/10

2 Chromium is measured as an estimate of hexavalent chromium.111

Emission sources of the NATTS HAPs in Table 10 above :

 B enzene and 1, 3 b utadiene are emitted by mobile sources (cars and trucks).

 Carbon tetrachloride, t etrachloroethylene and trichloroethylene are used fo r cleaning, but Air District regulations have significantly reduced their use.

 Chloroform is produced in the chlorination of water.

 Acrolein is generated by diesel and jet engines.

 Formaldehyde and acetaldehyde are formed during combustion processes. Formaldehyde is also created during the manufacture of some building materials and household products, and continues to off gas after manufacturing.

 Antimony comes from the soil.

 Arsenic compounds originate from soil and the smelting of metals.

 Nickel and c admium compounds are naturally found in some soils and can be emitted from fossil fuel combustion, cement manufacturing and electroplating. Also,

c admium comes from tire wear.

 Manganese compounds naturally occur in some soils and can be emitted fr om steel plants, power plants and coke ovens.

 Hexavalent chromium is emitted during chrome plating operations, and is believed to

be a byproduct of the cement

- making process.

The Air District samples for the 14 NATTS pollutants and chromium on a 1

- in

- 6 day

schedule. Benzene ; 1

, 3 butadiene ; a crolein; trichloroethylene ; carbon tetrachloride ; chloroform ; and trichloroethylene are collected in canisters over a 24

- hour period using a

Xontech 910a sampler. The canister contents are then analyzed in the Ai r District laboratory using a Gas Chromatograph (GC) or a Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer (GC/MS)

. Formaldehyde and acetaldehyde (carbonyls) are collected using a cartridge on one sampling

channel of a Xontech 924 toxics sampler. In the Air District laboratory, exposed cartridges are analyzed for carbonyls using High P erformance Liquid Chromatograph (HPLC). During most of 2010, m etals were collected on a standard PM 10 filter. A quarter section of each

f ilter w as sent to ERG (EPA’s designated contra ct laboratory) for analy sis using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectromet r y (ICPMS)

. With the implementation of the Lo

- Vol

collection method f

or PM 10 in December 2010, a Teflon PM 10 filter is sent to ERG for analysis.

Continuous M easurements As part o f the NATTS program, the Air District makes continuous measurements of CO

. High sensitivity CO is measured as an analysis tool because of correlation to benzene and 1, 3 butadiene, two of the largest contributors to air toxic exposure.

Polycyclic Aroma tic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Measurements In May 2008, the Air District began sampling for a number of PAHs under the NATTS

program

. PAHs are products of incomplete combustion, and are found primarily in soil,

sediment and oily substances, as opposed to in wat er or air. However, they are also a component of concern in particulate matter in air and have probable human carcinogenic (cancer), mutagenic (genetic mutation), and taratogenic (birth defects) properties. The PAH compounds that the Air District measure s are listed in Table 1 1

.112 Table 1 1 . List of 22 NATTS PAH Compounds Measured by the Air District.

9

- Fluorenone Coronene Acenaphthene Cyclopenta ( cd ) pyrene Acenaphthylene Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

Anthracene Fluoranthene Benzo(a)anthracene Fluorene
Benzo( a)pyrene Indeno(1,2,3

- cd)pyrene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Naphthalene Benzo(e)pyrene Perylene Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Phenanthrene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene Pyrene Chrysene Retene

The Air District d oes not have the equipment to meet the specific requirements to p erform the analysis for these compounds , so ERG (EPA’s designated contract laboratory) provide s the filter media and analy sis. PAH compounds are collected on a filter for a 24

- hour period using a standard H i V ol Polyurethane Foam ( PUF ) sampler on the NAT TS 1

- in

- 6 day sampling schedule. Filters are then sent to the ERG laboratory for analysis

. Summary NATTS data are available from the EPA’s AirData web site at http://www.epa.gov/oar/data/index.html

. These data may also be found on the BAAQMD

web site in the T oxic Air Contaminant Control Program Annual Report at http://www.baaq md.gov/Divisions/Engineering/Air

- Toxics/Toxic

- Air

- Contaminant

- Control

Program

- Annual

- Report.aspx

.

In addition to the NATTS analytes discussed in this section, the Air District also samples for

other toxics compounds at San Jose. These are discussed in t he Toxics Program section of this report.113



### NC ore Program

In October 2006 the EPA revised 40 CFR Parts 53 and 58 to enhance ambient air quality monitoring to improve air quality measurement s. One significant revision was the requirement to establish Natio nal Core (NCore) multi

- pollutant monitoring stations . These stations will provide data on several pollutants at lower detection limits and replace the National Air Monitoring Station (NAMS) networks that have existed for several years.

NCore stations wil l also be used to monitor trends of pollutants already in attainment. EPA recognized that pollutants already in attainment, and likely to remain so, did not need to be measured at all sites in a monitoring network. NCore stations are to be located in are as which represent the highest pollution levels for both attainment and non

- attainment pollutants within an agency’s boundaries. By reducing the number of monitors needed in a network, agencies can allocate scarce resources to other monitoring programs.

NCore stations are intended to:

• Report data to the public in a timely manner through AirNOW, air quality forecasting, and other public reporting mechanisms.

• Support development of emissions control strategies through air quality model

evaluation and ot her observational methods.

• Track long

- term trends for accountability of emissions control programs and health assessments that contribute to ongoing reviews and attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

• Support scientific studie s ranging across technological, health, and atmospheric disciplines including ecosystem assessments.

EPA designed the national NCore network to have a mixture of urban and rural sites. In Northern California, EPA desired a monitoring station that would r epresent a large urban area. Recommendations for locating NCore urban sites are found in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D and other EPA publications:

• Urban NCore stations are to be located at neighborhood or urban scale to provide representative exposure level s throughout the metropolitan area population.

• Urban NCore stations should be located where significant pollution levels exist.

• Population oriented monitoring is highly recommended.

• No biasing local pollutant emission sources should be within 500 met ers at urban

stations.

• Collocation with other network programs (such as NATTS, STN, CASTNET, IMPROVE, NADP, PAMS) is encouraged.

• Siting of monitors at NCore sites must meet SLAMS requirements as specified in 40

CFR Part 58.

EPA and the Air District c ooperatively agreed to establish the Northern California NCore station in San Jose. EPA will provide funding and the Air District will operate the station.

The station is operational as of January 1, 2011 . T he city of San Jose was chosen as the

NCore si te because it is the largest city in the Bay Area with over one million residents.

Exceedances of both the ozone and 24

- hour PM 2.5 national standards have been measured in114

San Jose. Consequently, operating an NCore station in the San Jose area would meet the requirement of being in an urban area with significant air pollution problems.

San Jose is located in the southern part of the Bay Area, and lies within the Santa Clara Valley. Wind patterns in the Santa Clara Valley are influenced greatly by the te rrain, resulting in a prevailing flow roughly parallel to the valley's northwest

- southeast orientation. During the daytime a sea breeze commonly carries pollutants from San Francisco, San Mateo and Alameda counties southward into the Santa Clara Valley, w hile a drainage flow carrying pollutants toward the bay, in the opposite direction, occurs during the nighttime hours. This diurnal up valley and down valley air flow mixes pollutants throughout the valley, making San Jose representative of a large part o f the Bay Area.

The monitoring objective for the current San Jose air quality monitoring station is population exposure. Monitoring at a population

- oriented station is intended to represent air quality levels over a large area having a high population d ensity. Consequently, the site cannot be too close to large emission sources such as industrial sources or highways, and the surrounding land use should be relatively

uniform. EPA has defined neighborhood or

urban scale as the appropriate area of

represe ntativeness for population oriented monitoring. Neighborhood scale has

dimensions of 4 km around the monitoring station, and urban scale

has a 50 km radius. Figure 4 shows the

location of the current San Jose monitoring station (as a blue balloon), and a 4 km

circle around the site representing a neighborhood scale area.

Figure 4

. Map showing a rea of N eighborhood S cale at the San Jose NCore station.115

The map shows that the current station is located in a residential/commercial area of San

Jose. The sta tion is located on Jackson Street, 1.6 km NW of the downtown core. The Air District has operated air monitoring stations at various locations near downtown San Jose since 1968, and current station has been in operation since 2002. The downtown area is

en circled by freeways, but the closest freeway to the air monitoring station is 800 meters to the WSW, which is sufficiently distant to prevent vehicular emissions from dominating the general air quality at the San Jose station. The San Jose Airport is 2 to 4 km from the air monitoring station, distant enough that impacts from airport emissions would be relatively low at the monitoring station. There are no large point sources within 500 meters of the

station. The only significant emission sources within a 4 km radius of the San Jose air monitoring station are:

• The Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport, located from 2

- 4 km NW of the site, is a significant source. The airport averaged 256 commercial and 141 general aviation departures and landi ngs per day in 2008.

• R eed & Graham, Inc

. (an asphalt batch plant)

- located 3.7 km SSW of the site

.

• Central Concrete Supply Company, Inc

. - located 1.9 km SSW of the site

.

• San Jose State University Cogen eration Plant

- located 2.6 km SSE of the site

.

The San Jose air monitoring station was located to provide air quality data representative of neighborhood scale monitoring. The station currently monitors all criteria pollutants, toxics, and is part of the EPA NATTS and STN programs. This existing st ation meets all the site

selection criteria for an NCore station.



### NCore Monitors

Table 1 2 lists the NCore monitors operating at the San Jose station as well as the sampling methodology, sampling frequency and spatial scale for the monitors. Because ambie nt concentrations of the criteria pollutants CO and SO 2 are well below the NAAQS at population oriented sites across the U.S., EPA require s NCore sites to use higher sensitivity instruments than conventional instruments for these pollutants (note the use o f TLE type

instruments for CO and sulfur dioxide , meaning Trace Level

- Enhanced )

. PM 10

- 2.5 is measured using the difference between measurements of a pair of Partisol

- Plus Model 2025 Sequential samplers, with one configured as a PM 2.5 sampler and the other configured as a

PM 10 sampler. Lead is collected using the PM 10 Teflon f i lter, which is sent to ERG (EPA’s designated contract laboratory) for analysis using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectromet r y (ICPMS)

.116 Table 1 2

. NCore Monitors

Monitor Type Sam pling Method Sampling Frequency Spatial Scale

Carbon Monoxide (CO) TECO 48i TLE Continuously Neighborhood

Nitrogen Oxide (NO

x ) TECO 42C Continuously Neighborhood

Ozone (O 3 ) TECO 49i Continuously Neighborhood

Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 ) TECO 43i TLE Continuous ly Neighborhood

FRM PM 2.5 Partisol

- Plus 2025

w/VSCC Apr

- Sep: 1

- in

- 3 day

Oct

- Mar: D aily Neighborhood

BAM PM 2.5 Met One Model 1020 Continuously Neighborhood

PM 2.5 Speciation Met One SASS 1

- in

- 3 day Neighborhood

Total Reactive Nitrogen (NO y ) API 200EU C ontinuously Neighborhood

PM 10

- 2.5 Partisol

- Plus 2025

Sequential PM 10

- 2.5 Air Sampler Pair 1

- in

- 3 day Neighborhood

Lead PM 10 Teflon filter

analyzed by ERG using

XRF 1

- in

- 3 day Neighborhood

Meteorological EPA approved a waiver

to use meteorological

dat a from the San Jose Airport as official data

for the NCore site. Continuously N.A.117



### Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS)

T he 1990 Clean Air Act Amendm ents required EPA to promulgate rules for the enhanced

monitorin g of ozone and its precur sors (NOx and VOCs ) because of continued non attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone nationwide . S ubsequent

revisions to EPA’s Air Monitoring regulations, 40 CFR Part 58, required air pollution agencies to establish Photoc hemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) in ozone

nonattainment areas classified as serious, severe, or extreme. The Bay Area is not in any of these categories, but is in marginal nonattainment of the ozone NAAQS. Consequently, the Air District appl ied for and received funding from EPA to conduct measurements of VOC speciated hydrocarbons. Monitoring began in 2010 and will continue for at least three years.

The objectives of the Bay Area PAMS program are to:

 Measure air quality improvement progress

 Track emission trends

 Improve photochemical model performance

 Adjust ozone control strategies

Traditionally, summertime Bay Area ozone concentrations are highest in the Livermore and

Santa Clara Valley s. Meteorological conditions are ideal for ozone for mation in these a reas when precursor NOx and hydrocarbons are present in upwind areas. To better understand the atmospheric chemistry, emissions sources, emission reductions strategies, and pollutant transport, three locations in the Livermore area will m onitor for speciated hydrocarbons.

Each PAMS site will also have meteorological wind and temperature sensors.

Site Parameter Start Date for PAMS Data Collection

Livermore Air Monitoring August 1, 2010

Meteorology August 1, 2010

San Ramon Air Monitori ng July 2011 (approx.)

Meteorology July 2011 (approx.)

Patterson Pass Air Monitoring March 1, 2011

Meteorology Late Summer 2011 (approx.)

The Air District’s Livermore air monitoring station was selected as a PAMS site because

Livermore usually has t he most number of days per year exceeding the ozone NAAQS in the Bay Area. The Livermore site also has meteorological sensors measuring wind, temperature, and solar radiation and the site already has instruments measuring NOx and ozone. As a result, the cost to add speciated hydrocarbon monitoring at Livermore was minimal.

The San Ramon and Patterson Pass sites are new, temporary sites that are being opened solely for the PAMS program. The San Ramon PAMS will provide information on ozone precursors and ozone formation in the San Ramon Valley that may contribute to ozone

concentrations in the Livermore Valley . While the EPA provided funding for speciated hydrocarbon monitoring at San Ramon, the Air District is adding ozone and NOx so that data

from this site can be compared to data collected at Livermore. This site may become a permanent location for ozone and NOx monitoring if these pollutants frequently exceed the118

NAAQS. The Patterson Pass site is located in the hills east of Livermore and will provi de additional information on the potential transport of ozone precursor compounds eas tward from the Bay Area to the Central Valley . EPA funded speciated hydrocarbon monitoring and

the Air District added a NOx monitor at this site. The three PAMS location s are shown in Figure 5

.

Figure 5

. Map of the three PAMS sites in the Livermore Valley

.

EPA identifies 57 organic ozone precursor compounds usually measured at PAMS locations because of their significance in photochemical ozone pollution. The Air D istrict will measure 55 of the 57 compounds hourly using a gas chromatograph (GC) instrument. The GC does not analyze for two compounds EPA considers important ozone precursors: formaldehyde and ac etone. The Air District determined that it was too costl y to measure these compounds hourly. Table 13 below lists the 55 compounds measured by the GC.119 Table 13

. List of speciated hydrocarbons m ea sured by Gas Chromatograph

Ethane n

- decane 2

- methylheptane

Ethylene Cyclopentane m/p xylene

Propane Isoprene Ben zene Propylene 2

- 2

- dimethylbutane Toluene

Acetylene 1

- hexene Ethylbenzene

n

- butane 2

- 4

- dimethylpentane o

- xylene

Isobutane Cyclohexane 1

- 3

- 5

- trimethylbenzene

t

- 2

- butene 3

- methylhexane 1

- 2

- 4

- trimethylbenzene

c

- 2

- butene 2

- 2

- 4

- trimethylpentane n

- propylbe nzene

n

- pentane 2

- 3

- 4

- trimethylpentane Isopropylbenzene

Isopentane 3

- methylheptane o

- ethyltoluene

1

- pentene Methylcyclohexane m

- ethyltoluene

t

- 2

- pentene Methylcyclopentane p

- ethyltoluene

c

- 2

- pentene 2

- methylhexane m

- diethylbenzene

3

- methylpentane 1

- b utene p

- diethylbenzene

n

- hexane 2

- 3

- dimethylbutane Styrene

n

- heptane 2

- methylpentane 1

- 2

- 3

- trimethylbenzene

n

- octane 2

- 3

- dimethylpentane

n

- nonane n

- undecane

The GCs will operate year

- round which is a deviation from EPA protocols that only require these measurements during ozone episodes . Year

- round measurements are desired because

the same hydrocarbons that lead to high ozone in summer also contribute to secondary formation of particulate pollution in winter.

All ozone, NOx, and speciated hydro carbon data are submitted to EPA’s AQS database. When enough data is collected to yield a better understanding of emissions and photochemical processes in the Livermore area , the Air District will evaluate whether

instrumentation should be mo ved to the Sa nta Clara Valley for a similar PAMS program.120



### PM 2.5 

### Speciation Sampling Programs

EPA established a fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) standard in 1997 and required States to install and operate new PM 2.5 samplers to determine where the national ambient PM 2.5 air s tandards are not being met. As part of the PM 2.5 monitoring program, EPA also established a network of speciation monitors at sites expected to exceed the PM 2.5 standard. The primary purpose of the speciation monitors is to provide a chemical compositio n of the particulate matter which will point to the emission sources. This network is known as the Speciation Trends Network (STN).

A PM 2.5 sampler was installed at the San Jose air monitoring station in January 1999 and the first year of data showed ex ceedances of the national standard. Consequently, EPA requested that a Met One Spiral Ambient Speciation Sampler ( SASS ) sampler be installed at San Jose in early 2000 as part of the STN network. Exceedances of the PM 2.5 national

standard have also been recorded at other Bay Area sites, and in 2008 the Air District added SASS samplers at Vallejo and Livermore. In 2009 the Air District added a SASS sampler at the new Oakland West air monitoring station. Knowing the chemical composition of particulates on days over the standard at four Bay Area sites will help determine which emission reduction strategies will most likely lead to attainment of the national standard.

Speciation Trends Network (STN) Program STN sites have the primary objective of defining long

- term concentration trends of the elements, ions, and organic and elemental carbon components that make up PM 2.5 particles. San Jose was chosen as an STN station because it was already collecting PM 2.5 mass, has

recorded exceedances of the PM 2.5 stan dard, and is the largest city in Northern California.

PM 2.5 samples are collected using a SASS sampler

. The sampler operates from midnight to midnight of the next day, and samples are on a 1

- in

- 3 day schedule. In addition to the SASS,

there is an FRM PM 2.5 filter sampler used to measure the total mass of PM 2.5 and to

determine when exceedances of the PM 2.5 standard occur. In 2010, the FRM sampling was

on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule in the summer and daily in the winter . In 2011 , the FRM summer sampling frequ ency will change t o a 1

- in

- 3 day schedule. SASS sampling is scheduled to

coincide with FRM sampling days so that speciation information can be used to help identify sources and develop effective control strategies.

The SASS samplers draw air through size

- selective nozzles that exclude particles greater

than 2.5 microns. SASS samplers uses Teflon, nylon and quartz filters upon which to collect the samples, which are later weighed using a mass balance and analyzed using energy

dispersive X

- ray fluorescence , ion chromatography, and thermal/optical analysis techniques to measure the components. The San Jose filter analysis is done by RTI, an EPA contract laboratory in North Carolina. Sixty

- t wo chemical species listed in Table 1 4 are measured

from each SASS filter sample at RTI. The San Jose data are then submitted to the EPA AQS database by RTI, and can be viewed on the EPA’s AirData web site at http://www.epa. gov/oar/data/index.html

.121

BAAQMD Supplemental Speciation Network Program The Air District also operates SASS samplers at its stations in Vallejo, Livermore, and

Oakland West. Vallejo and Livermore were selected for sampling because there was an

intere st in determining the source of PM 2.5 particles on days that exceed the standard at those

sites. These sites may have a different PM 2.5 composition from that of San Jose because exceedances often occur on days when the air flow is from the Central Valley

. Oakland West was selected because it is downwind of the Port of Oakland, a major source of diesel particulate matter. The samplers, sampling procedures, analysis techniques and species analyzed are the same as for the STN program with the following exce ptions: the collection frequency is 1

- in

- 6 days; DRI provides the filters, does the analysis and submits the data to AQS; and filters from these sites also are analyzed for palladium, thallium and uranium.

Data from the 6 5 chemical species listed in Table 1 4 can be viewed on the EPA’s AirData

web site at http://www.epa.gov/oar/data/index.html

.

The table is color coded with green (the first 13 rows) listing elements, blue (the next two rows) listin g anions and cations, and yellow (the next eight rows) listing organic and elemental carbon types.

Table 1 4

. PM 2.5 Speciation Measurements at Air District Sites.

Antimony Cesium Magnesium Sodium

Arsenic Europium Mercury Strontium

Aluminum Gallium Nicke l Sulfur

Barium Gold Niobium Tantalum

Bromine Hafnium Phosphorous Terbium

Cadmium Iron Potassium Tin

Calcium Indium Rubidium Titanium

Chromium Iridium Samarium Tungsten

Cobalt Lanthanum Scandium Vanadium Copper Lead Selenium Yttrium

Chlorine Manga nese Silicon Zinc

Cerium Molybdenum Silver Zirconium

Palladium 1 Thallium 1 Uranium 1

Ammonium Cation Chloride Anion Potassium Cation Nitrate Anion

Sodium Cation Sulfate Anion Total Organic Carbon (sum of the OC Fractions below)

Elemental Carbon Frac tion 1 (carbon released at 550oC in 10% oxygen/90% helium gas) Elemental Carbon Fraction 2 (carbon released at 700oC in 10% oxygen/90% helium gas) Elemental Carbon Fraction 3 (carbon released at 800oC in 10% oxygen/90% helium gas) Organic Carbon Fractio n 1 (carbon released at 120oC in helium gas) Organic Carbon Fraction 2 (carbon released at 250oC in helium gas) Organic Carbon Fraction 3 (carbon released at 450oC in helium gas) Organic Carbon Fraction 4 (carbon released at 550oC in helium gas)

1 Elements measured only at Vallejo, Livermore , and Oakland West.122



### Toxics Program

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 required EPA to set emission standards for major sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs). The Act also required EPA to ass ess the risks

to human health from HAPs. By 2010 EPA had listed 187 compounds as HAPs. All HAPs listed by EPA are known to cause or are suspected of causing cancer, birth defects, reproduction problems, and other serious illnesses. Exposure time to cert ain levels of some

HAPs can cause difficulty in breat hing, nausea or other illnesses and can even cause death.

Toxic pollutants (HAPs) are emitted daily by industrial and chemical manufacturing processes, commercial activities, refinery operations, gasoli ne marketing and motor vehicles within the Bay Area. Ambient concentrations vary by proximity to sources and current meteorolog ical conditions

.

The Air District established an ambient air toxics monitoring program with the objectives of:

 Establishing tr ends and evaluating the effectiveness of HAP reduction strategies

.

 Characterizing ambient concentrations in local areas

.

 Providing data to support and evaluate dispersion and deposition models

.

 Providing data to the scientific community to support studies to reduce uncertainty about the relationships between ambient levels of HAPs, actual human exposure to air toxics, and health effects from such exposures.

Figure 6 is a map of the 20 toxics monitoring sites operating in 2010

. L ocat ions are at existing Ai r District SLAMS and SPM monitoring stations and were selected to obtain a wide geographical coverage of contaminant levels throughout the Bay Area. The sites are generally located in major population centers or downwind of major industrial sources such

a s refineries. There is also an ambient background site at Fort Cronkhite. The toxics data collected at San Jose are also reported to EPA as part of the NATTS program

. Toxics monitoring at Fremont ended on July 19 , 2010.

Air samples are collected at Air District toxics monitoring sites for a 24 hour period on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule except at special study sites such as Berkeley , Cupertino, and San Jose

where s ampling is on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule as described later in this section

. A 1

- in

- 12 day

schedule allows samples to be taken on a different day of the week over the course of months. This is the same schedule EPA and CARB use for their toxics monitoring program, thereby allowing Bay Area toxics concentrations to be compared to concentrations measur ed elsewhere across the country.

Gaseou s (VOC) toxics are collected in 6

- liter SUMMA stainless steel canisters using

Xontech 910 s amplers. The sampler continuously collects an ambient air sample for 24

- hours to ensure capturing transient and intermittent t oxic releases. All canisters are analyzed within 30 days of sample collection using capillary gas chromatography employing photoionization and electron capture detectors.123 Figure 6 . Map of Air District Toxics Monitoring Sites for 2010

.124

In 1986, the to xics monitoring netwo rk used Tedlar bags t o collect the ambient air samples, which were filled using an Air District designed and constructed sampler. This methodology had several problems including leaks, contamination, and the requirement to perform the laboratory analysis within 48 hours of sample collection. Between 1991 and 1997, the Air District phased in an improved sampling methodology, using a 6

- liter SUMMA stainless steel canister to replace the Tedlar bags, and replacing the Air District sample r with a commercially available Xontech sampler. This was the same system that CARB had been successfully using for a few years. This method also allowed canister contents to be analyzed up to 30 days after sample collection. It also provided more flexi bility in scheduling sample days, conducting the laboratory analysis, and for transportation of the samples. The data collected after the switch to SUMMA canisters is considered to be of higher quality than data collected with Tedlar bags.

Both the Air D istrict and CARB have toxic monitoring programs in the Bay Area. CARB conducts toxic monitoring on a 1

- in

- 12 day schedule at three sites: San Francisco, San Jose,

and Fremont. CARB supplies the canisters and performs the laboratory analyses, while Air

D istrict staff operates the CARB sampler and ships the canisters to CARB. Because the Air

District also does toxic s monitoring at San Francisco and San Jose, the two sets of data allow

calculation of the measurement precision at these sites , and by extrapo lation, an estimate of the precision of the toxics measurement program

. CARB discontinued its toxic monitoring

prog ram at Fremont in July 2010 because the Air District was in the processes of closing the

Fremont station in the fall.

Once a quarter at San Francisco

, an additional canister sample is taken on a scheduled sample day using a collocated sampler. B oth samples are analyzed by the Air District laboratory

, and the results allow an additional measure of precision

.

The Air District laboratory analy zes for the 19 gaseous toxic compounds listed in Table 1 5

. Compounds selected for analysis were those that had high toxicity or were known to have high emissions in the Bay Area, or some combination of the two. Another consideration was

whether the curre nt methodology could accurately detect a compound at reasonable expense, based on previous CARB studies. Some compounds, such as carbon tetrachloride, are measured because their concentration in the ambient air does not change much over time.

This is use ful because carbon tetrachloride or other similar, stable compounds can be used as a control for quality purposes. If the measurement of such a control is unusually high or low, there may be a problem in the sampling, transport, storage or analysis proced ures requiring additional analysis of the accuracy of the affected sample.125 Table 15. List of Toxic Compounds Measured by the Air District in 2010.

Acetone Methyl Ethyl Ketone

Benzene Methylene Chloride

1, 3 Butadiene M/P Xylene

Carbon Tetrachlorid e Perchloroethylene

Chloroform 1,1,2 Trichlorotrifluoroethane
Ethylbenzene Trichloroethylene
Ethylene Dibromide Trichlorofluoromethane
Ethylene Dichloride Toluene

O

- Xylene Vinyl Chloride

Methyl Chloroform

In addition to the gaseous toxics mon itoring done across the Bay Area, the Air District does monitoring for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, metals, and aldehydes at San Jose for the NATTS program. See the NATTS section of this document for more information about the NATTS program.

Toxics Monitoring at Berkeley and Cupertino In 2010, the Air District operated a Xontech 910 sampler to collect toxic samples in canisters at the SPM monitoring site s in Berkeley and Cupertino on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule . In addition to the compounds listed in Tab le 1 4 , there was interest in measuring formaldehyde and acetaldehyde at Berkeley and Cupertino . These compounds are highly reactive and cannot be accurately measured using a canister sample. Instead, they are collected on a chemically treated cartridge u sing a Xontech 924 sampler, operated on the same 1

- in

- 6 day schedule as the Xontech 910 used for sample collection in canisters. Samples are analyzed at the Air District laboratory using High Performance Liquid Chromatography.

At Berkeley, the Xontech 924 sampler was also used to collect metal s on Teflon filters on the

same 1

- in

- 6 day schedule used for other toxics sampling . Samples are analyzed by CARB using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP

- MS). The Berkeley site was

closed on Decemb er 31, 2010 after the three year monitoring program concluded. The metals analyzed for are listed in Table 1 6

.

Table 1 6 . Metals measured at Berkeley using ICP

- MS

Antimony Lead Sulfur

Arsenic Manganese Tin

Cadmium Molybdenum Titanium

Chromium Nickel V anadium

Cobalt Platinum Zinc
Copper Selenium Zirconium

Iron Strontium126

At Cupertino, the Xontech 924 sampler was used to collect meta ls on Teflon filters on the

same 1

- in

- 6 day schedule used for other toxics sampling. Samples are analyzed by CARB

usin g X

- Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (XRF) . The metals analyzed for are listed in Table

1 7

. Results are posted on the BAAQMD web site at: http://www.baa qmd.gov/sitecore

- s/~/media/Files/Technical%20Services/Cupertino_toxics.ashx

Table 1 7 . Metals measured at Cupertino using XRF

Aluminium Chromium Molybdenum Strontium Antimony Cobalt Nickel Sulfur

Arsenic Copper Phosphorus Tin

Barium Iron Potassium Tit anium

Bromine Lead Rubidium Vanddium

Calcium Manganese Selenium Yttrium

Chlorine Mercury Silicon Zinc

In addition to CARB’s measurement of metals, the Air District laboratory began measuring

the m etals listed in Table 16 in January 2011 . The analysi s is done using X RF on the sam e

s amples that CARB analyzes to compare results

. The measurements from b ot h agencies have been comparable and, consequently, t he Air District plans to discontinue the CARB analysis starting with samples collected in April 201 1.

Additional Mercury M onitoring at Cupertino Monte Vista Park Due to public concern about mercury emissions from the nearby Lehigh Southwest Cement Plant in Cupertino, the Air District began monitoring for Total Atmospheric Mercury (TAMS) at the Cupert ino Monte Vista Park site on September 11, 2010.

Total atmospheric mercury includes both vapor and particulate forms of mercury whereas mercury measured on a filter using XRF methods yields solely the particulate form of mercury. Total atmospheric mercur y is colle cted on a carbon trap using a Xontech 924 sampler on the same 1

- in

- 6 day schedule as the particulate mercury collected on Teflon

filters. The carbon trap is analyzed by Frontier Geosciences. Results are posted on the BAAQMD web site at: http://www.baaqmd.gov/sitecore

- s/~/media/Files/Technical%20Services/Cupertino_toxics.ashx

Additional Gaseous Toxics M easured at San Jose

At S an Jose the Air District analyzed for additional gaseous toxics compounds from the

canisters. Acrolein is measured because San Jose is a NATTS program monitoring site and the NATTS program requires a crolein to be measured. T he Air District use s a gas chromatography mas s spectrometry method to measure a crol ei n . This method allow s det ection of three other toxic compounds : a cetonitrile, a crylonitrile, and e thanol

. A crylonitrile is measured because CARB wanted measurements to compare with other parts

of the State. Ethano l is measured because researchers at UC Berkeley wanted to compare

e thanol measurements taken near the Caldecott Tunnel with those taken from other areas of127

the Bay Area. Finally, a cetonitrile is measured because it is a related compound and there

were no other measurements of this compound in the Bay Area

.

Additional Gaseous Toxics monitoring in 201 1 at all sites A modern gas chromatography mass spectrometry instrument was purchased by the Air

District in late 2009 and installed in mid

- 2010

. The Air D istrict intends to measure Acrolein, Acetonitrile, Acroylonitrile, and Ethanol from all canister samples from the new instrument. However, testing found that the instrument failed to yield comparable results for multiple analyses done from the same c anist er sample . As of mid

- 2011, troubleshooting and retesting in consultation with the manufacturer continues

, but a solution must be found before the Air District can start to measure these additional compounds from all canister samples.

Summary toxics data are available from the EPA’s AirData web site at http://www.epa.gov/oar/data/index.html . These data may also be found on the BAAQMD

web site in the T oxic Air Contaminant Control Program Annual Repor t at http://www.baaqmd.gov/Divisions/Engineering/Air

- Toxics/Toxic

- Air

- Contaminant

- Control

Program

- Annual

- Report.aspx

.128



### West Oakland CASS Study

The Air District is conducting an ambient air sampling and modeling study in the area near the Custom Alloy Scrap Sales (CASS) metals recycling facility in West Oakland

. The purpose of the study is to determine if there are elevated co ncentrations of PM and toxic metals in the vicinity of the CASS facility

. There is a mix of residential as well as light and heavy industry near CASS. In addition, two schools are located a few blocks east of the

CASS fence line.

I nitially, the Air Dist rict performed a health risk analysis of impacts from the CASS facility on the surrounding neighborhoods. Inputs to the modeling included stack emissions from

CASS determined from a recent stack test, and meteorology from the nearby East Bay Municipal Uti lity District (EBMUD) meteorological station. Th e modeling showed that the highest concentrations of metals occurred east of the facility. Modeling results were then

used to calculate ca ncer risk for West Oakland residents . The analysis showed that the CASS

emissions increased cancer risk by less than one in a million (0.35 per million) and that the

increased chronic hazard risk index was significantly less than one (0.002). Fugitive emissions were not included in the analysis

. Following that, modeling results were compared

with ambient concentrations.

The objectives of th e sampling part of the study are to:

 Measure PM and metals concentrations ne ar the CASS recycling facility.

 Determine whether PM or toxic metals measurements near CASS are elevated

rel ative to West Oakland and Bay Area backgrounds.

 Compare measurements collected during this study with prior health risk assessment modeling conducted by the Air District.

 E s timate contributions from CASS.

 Use annual data to assess health risk, applying met hods, unit risk factors, and reference exposure levels from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard

Assessment

.

 Compile a report synthesizing all available information and summarizing findings.

Measurements began in August of 2009 at three sites near CASS and will continue for one

year

. One site is located west

— predominantly upwind

— of the facility, another site will be

east

— downwind

— nearer to the CASS facility at the ASA Academy school, and the third site is further east at EXCEL High School. CASS al so funded a second upwind site for the first three month period in 2009. Samples are collected using MiniVol s ampler

, operate d for 24

- hours on a 1

- in

- 6 day schedule. After collection, samples are sent to the Desert Research Institute (DRI) at the Univers ity of Nevada, Reno for analysis. The elements which are analyzed are listed in Table 1 8

.129 Table 1 8

. Elements Measured for the West Oakland CASS Study

. Antimony Europium Nickel Sulfur

Arsenic Gallium Niobium Tantalum

Aluminum Gold Palladium Terbium

B arium Hafnium Phosphorous Thallium

Bromine Iron Potassium Tin

Cadmium Indium Rubidium Titanium

Calcium Iridium Samarium Tungsten

Chromium Lanthanum Scandium Uranium

Cobalt Lead Selenium Vanadium Copper Manganese Silicon Yttrium

Chlorine Molybdenum S ilver Zinc

Cerium Magnesium Sodium Zirconium

Cesium Mercury S trontium

Data from the three sites near CASS, plus the 3

- month CASS site, will be compared with data from seven additional sites operated as part of the West Oakland Monitoring Study (see

de scription of the West Oakland Monitoring Study). CASS data will also be compared with data from the West Oakland, Livermore, Vallejo, and San Jose monitoring sites where similar metals analyses are available.

Figure 7

. Map of CASS Site with Monitoring Locations and Meteorological Station

.130

Attributing air pollutants collected from ambient samples to specific sources can be a challenging task. The success of source attribution will depend on how unique emissions from the CASS facility are relative to surrounding sources. The Air District will examine the relative amounts of metals collected on filters during upwind and downwind periods, using wind data from the Oakland sewage treatment plant.

If there is a statistically significant difference in the relative concentrations of toxic metals between upwind and downwind samples, then further analysis will be undertaken to determine if the downwind sample resembles the stack source samples collected from CASS

in 2007. Other facilities, such as Central Co ncrete and a nearby art studio that operates ceramic kilns, could also be a source of metals but presumably with a distinguishable source

mix.131



### West Oakland Measurement Study

In 2009

- 10, the Air District and the Desert Research Institute (DRI) conducted t he West Oakland Measurement Study (WOMS) to measure diesel emissions and other toxic air

contaminants within the West Oakland area. The Air District invited DRI to collaborate on the project due to DRI’s experience in a similar study in Los Angeles. Alth ough t he principal focus of the study was the measurement of emissions from the Port of Oakland, other significant toxic sources in West Oakland were also included in th is study

. Th e study is part of the Air District’s Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE ) program which

evaluates and reduce s health risks associated with exposures to outdoor toxic air contaminants in the Bay Area.

West Oakland was selected for the study because a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) 1
produced jointly by the Air District and the Ca lifornia Air Resources Board concluded that ambient concentrations of diesel particulate matter in the West Oakland area were almost three times higher than typical levels in the Bay Area. High diesel emissions in that area were also confirmed by the Air District’s emission inventory. Diesel particulate accounts for

80% of the cancer risk from airborne toxics based on findings from the CARE Program . The primary diesel sources include large ships that dock at the Port of Oakland, service trucks

that move shipping containers and other freight around at the port, passenger and freight train service, the Union Pacific and Joint

- Intermodal rail yard s
, the Amtrak passenger service maintenance yard, and concentrated heavy duty trucks that transports goods to or from the port and other industries in or near West Oakland.

Currently, there is no method to directly measure ambient concentrations of diesel particulate. However, black carbon (soot) and organic / elemental carbon measurements can be used as a surrogat e to approximate diesel concentrations. Other toxics compounds associated with diesel combustion including criteria gases such as NO 2 (and NO x ) and SO 2 were also measured.

To build a complete and representative ‘snapshot’ of the air toxic exposure in Wes t Oakland,

the Air District and DRI set up a dense monitoring network which was operated over relatively short periods of time. The three main objectives of the study were to :

 E valuate spatial and seasonal variations of toxic air contaminants and particul ate matter concentrations within West Oakland based on their proximity to known sources including the Port of Oakland, arterial roadways, and California state highways.

 A nalyze the particulate composition and determine the source contribution of gasoline a nd diesel vehicles to ambient particulate concentrations

.

 E valuate community exposure to toxic air contaminants and identify emissions hotspots.

1 California Air Resources Board. (2008). “Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Assessment for the West Oakland Community.” Available on

- line at:

h ttp://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/communities/ra/westoakland/documents/westoaklandreport.pdf132

Local w ind data showed that there are seasonal changes in the wind pattern. To evaluate the

seasonal variati ons, four weeks of sampling were collected to characterize summer conditions from July to August 2009 and winter time conditions from December 2009 to January 2010. Figure 8 shows the West Oakland sampling locations that were used during

both seasonal sam pling periods.

Figure 8 . West Oakland Measurement Study S ampling L ocations.

The WOMS included measurements with continuous, 24

- hour, and 7

- day sampling durations. Continuous measurements were made using a mobile monitoring van that moved from place t o place within West Oakland, recording a set of pollutant concentrations at specific locations and times along a fixed route. The measurement route was preselected based on the preliminary pilot study and driven twice per day in the morning and afternoon on selected days of interest. The van measurements included O 3 , NO /NO 2 , CO, volatile organic carbon (VOC) estimates , black carbon, PM 2.5 mass, particle size distributions and ultrafine particle number concentrations. The study used the data from the Wes t Oakland

m onitoring station at EBMUD as a reference for comparison to measurements collected from the saturation monitoring. West Oakland concentrations were also compared with data from

the Air District’s toxic network and PM 2.5 Speciation Sampling Prog ram to determine how West Oakland compares with the rest of the Bay Area.133

At three WOMS sites (one at the Air District West Oakland air monitoring station), 24

- hour Teflon and quartz filters collected particulate samples on preselected days over the cour se of the four week study using sequential filter samplers. The filters were analyzed for daily

concentrations of PM 2.5 mass, organic and elemental carbon, and organic carbon species.

Another set of 24

- hour glass filters and resin cartridges were exposed on the same days to measure polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, alkanes, hopanes, steranes, and polar compounds. The Chemical Mass Balance receptor model will be applied to these speciated particulate data to estimate the source contributions of diesel par ticulate matter, gasoline combustion, wood smoke, and cooking emissions.

Long

- term exposure (7

- day composite) measurements were made at 15 WOMS locations plus an additional site that was part of a supplemental study being conducted at Custom Alloy Scrap Sales (CASS). These measurements were designed to estimate the exposure of local populations to the different pollutants and show the concentration gradients of these contaminants throughout West Oakland. Active sampling methods were used at eight

measur ement sites where ambient air flow was drawn through quart z or Teflon filters. The quartz filters were analyzed for total PM 2.5 mass, and for organic and elemental carbon concentrations. The Teflon filters were analyzed for PM 2.5 mass as well as metals u sing X

ray fluorescence. The CASS study is a separate year

- long metals exposure measurement study that was conducted at the same time in West Oakland and provides supplemental

metals data. The CASS study is discuss ed previously in this report.

Passive ( diffusion) samplers were employed at 16 study area sites to measure 7

- day integrated samples of NO x , and NO 2 . SO 2 , BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes), and carbonyl compounds (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acrolein) were also

measured usi ng passive samplers at the same eight sites where 7

- day composite samples

were collected. After each 7

- day exposure period ended, passive samplers were analyzed by a laboratory and average pollutant concentrations estimated over the exposure period.

Pass ive sampler performance was evaluated against the co

- located 24

- hour filter samplers during times both sampler methods were used.

Meteorological data for WOMS was provided by the Air District’s meteorological station

located at the EBMUD sewage treatment plant approximately one mile northeast of the study area near the Bay Bridge toll plaza. The station provided high quality hourly wind speed, wind direction, and ambient temperature data representative of the entire WOMS area.