# THE NEW HAMPSHIRE

AMBIENT AIR MONITORING PROGRAM

201 4 /201 5 ANNUAL

NETWORK REVIEW & PLAN

July 201 4

**New Hampshire Department of Environmental**

**Services**R

- ARD

- 14

- 1



## THE NEW HAMPSHIRE

AMBIENT AIR MONITORING PROGRAM

201 4 /201 5 ANNUAL NETWORK REVIEW & PLAN

prepared by

the

Air Monitoring Program

State of New Hampshire

Department of Environmental Services

Air Resources Division

29 Hazen Drive

Concord, NH 033020095

(603) 271

- 3503

www.des.nh.govTable of Contents

List of Tables

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 2

List of Figures

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 3

Acknowledgemen ts

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 3

Introductio n

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

Part 1: 201 4 /201 5 Annual Network Review and Plan

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

Monitoring Objectives

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

Network Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 5

Beta Attenuation Federal Equivalency Method (FEM) Monitoring

................................ . 8

Network Modifications

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

Future Plans

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

Purchasing/Expenses

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 11

Personnel

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

Cooperative Air Monitoring Initiatives

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

Monitoring Trends

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

Part 2: Individual Station Information

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

Camp Dodge, Green’s Grant

................................ ................................ .......................... 26

Mt. Washington Summit

................................ ................................ ................................ . 27

Hubbard Brook, Woodstock

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

Lebanon Airport, Lebanon

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

Green Street, Laconia

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 30

Hazen Station, Concord

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

Exchange Street, Pembroke

................................ ................................ ............................ 32

Pierce Island, Portsmouth

................................ ................................ ............................... 33

Seacoast Science Center, Rye

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

Water Street, Keene

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 35

Moose Hill, Londonderry

................................ ................................ ............................... 36

Pack Monadnock Mountain

................................ ................................ ............................ 37

Crown Street, Nashua

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 38

Gilson Road, Nashua

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 39

List of Tables

Table 1.0 : Equipment

– (Method)

................................ ................................ ...................... 11

Table 1.1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards

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

Table 1.2: NAAQS Exceedences in New Hampshire (2008

- 201 3 )

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

Table 1. 3 : Ozone Design Values

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

Table 1.4 : Carbon Monoxide Design Values

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

Table 1.5 : Sulfur Dioxide Design Values

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

Table 1.6 : Nitrogen Dioxide Design Values

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

Table 1.7 : Fine Particle Matter Design Values...................................................1 7

Table 1. 8 : New Hampshire State and Local Air Monitoring Stations Network

– 201 3 /201 4

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 22

Table 1. 9 : New Hampshire Particulate Matter Network

– 201 3 /201 4

............................. 2 3

Table 1. 10 : New Hampshire PAMS Network

– 201 3 /201 4

................................ ............. 23

Table 1. 11 : New Hampshire NCore Network

– 201 3 /201 4

................................ ............. 23NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 3

Table 1 .1 2 : Seasonal Maximum 24

- hour Averages at Gilson Road in Nashua

for Toxi c PAMS Species vs Ambient Allowable Limit (AAL),

200 5

- 201 3

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 2 4

Table 1.1 3 : Seasonal Maximum 24

- hour Averages at Pack Monadnock in

Miller State Park for Toxic PAMS Species Compared to the

Ambient Allowable Limit (AAL), 200 5

- 201 3

................................ ................. 2 4

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Correlation for Nashua and Londonderry FRM PM 2.5 Data

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

Figure 1. 2 : Correlation for Pembroke and Londonderry FRM PM 2.5 Data

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

Figure 1. 3 : Current Air Monitoring Program Organizational Chart

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

Figure 1.4 : Ozone trends for the 8

- Hour NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 )

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

Figure 1.5 : Ozone trends for the 8

- Hour NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 )

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

Figure 1.6 : Carbon Monoxide trends for the 1

- hour NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 )

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

Figure 1.7 : Carbon Monoxide trends for the 8

- hour NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 )

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

Figure 1.8 : PM 2.5 trends for the 24

- Hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

................................ ....... 1 9

Figure 1.9 : PM 2.5 trends for the 24

- Hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

................................ ....... 1 9

Figure 1.10 : PM 2.5 trends for the annual NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

................................ ........ 1 9

Figure 1.11 : PM 2.5 trends for the annual NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

................................ ........ 1 9

Figure 1.12 : Nitrogen Dioxide trends for the 1

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

..................... 20

Figure 1.13 : Nitrogen Dioxide trends for the annual NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

..................... 20

Figure 1.14 : Sulfur Dioxide trends for the 1

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

......................... 20

Figure 1.15 : Sulfur Dioxide trends for the 3

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

......................... 20

Figure 1.16 : PM 10 trends for the 24

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

................................ ....... 21

Figure 1.17 : PM 10 trends for the 24

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

................................ ....... 21

Figure 1.1 8 : Lead trends for the primary NAAQS (201 3 )

................................ ................. 21

Acknowledgements

DES would like to thank the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for their

continued grant funding and staff support for efforts to operate, maintain, and improve New

Hampshire’s Air Monitoring Network. Special thanks to Alan VanArsdale, Robert Judge and

Chris St. Germain fo r their continued help and support with air monitoring in New Hampshire.

DES would also like to acknowledge the efforts of the following individuals for their dedication

and efforts to operate New Hampshire’s network and collect quality data in all types of

c onditions , data analysis, and contributions to this report;

• Jessica Sheldon for her steadfast work analyzing AMP data, using Assessment Tools

, and

her review of and contribution to preparation of this report

.

• Thanks to all staff of the AMP including Tim Verville, Jim Poisson, Tom Fazzina, Craig

Thoroughgood, Mike Little, Scott Klose, Lara Stumpo and Kendall Perkins for overall

program operations

.

• Dr. Jeff Underhill for overall program technical analysis and review of this reportNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 4

Introduction

The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) is p leased to submit this

201 4 / 201 5 Ambient Air Monitoring Program Annual Network Review Plan in accordance with

the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, PART 58. Pa rt 1 of this Plan reviews structure,

objectives, history and data trends associated with DES’ Air Monitoring Program (AMP). Part 2

of th is Plan details individual air monitoring station information.

P ART 1

DES continually revisits and stresses basic air monitoring fundamentals and efficiency initiatives

to allow for reliable, high quality data capture and analysis within a strained budget. K ey

objectives remain to provide quality ambient air data in order t o :

• determine attainment status with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS,

see Table 1.1),

• guide future air quality policy decisions at the state and national level, and

• protect public health through real

- time mapping and air pollution alert i nitiatives.

Tables 1. 8 through 1. 1 1, presented later in this section summarize the current status of the New

Hampshire ambient air monitoring network

– July 201 3 through June 201 4

.

Monitoring Objectives

In accord ance with the DES mission “ to help sustain a high quality of life for all citizens by

protecting and restoring the environment and public health in New Hampshire ”

, DES operates a

network of air monitoring sites throughout the state. These sites facilitate monitoring of ambient

ozone (O 3 )

, sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) , nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) , volatile and semi

- volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) , carbon monoxide (CO)

, lead ( P b) and particulate matter chemistry (PM,

PM 2.5 , PM 10 )

. Air monitoring data from DES’ network helps assess air quality within Ne w

Hampshire

, evaluate the status of air quality coming from areas upwind and also helps assess our

contribution to downwind areas . These data allow DES to predict air pollution episodes, enact

protective actions and warnings, develop and assess effectiven ess of emission reduction

strategies and support health assessments and NAAQS reviews.

Ambient air pollution monitoring began in New Hampshire in the 1970s at a few locations . Over

subsequent years, it grew to the point where each of the state’s ten counties hosted monitoring

stations for air pollutants known to exist in the area. Over time, local industrial facilities either

established pollution controls or shut down, resulting in improvements in air quality in those

c ounties. For example, paper mills in Coos County emit ted fairly high levels of sulfur dioxide

and particles, resulting in periodic unhealthy air quality. Most of these facilities have since shut

down and the air quality has improved to the point that the re is a reduced need for monitoring in

the area . Accordingly, DES has reallocated monitoring resources

. However, DES continues to

track emission inventories and reports of health concerns in these areas in order to assess any

potential need to reestablis h air monitoring infrastructure. In recent years, DES has coordinated

with EPA to streamline the monitoring network in order to meet demands for ever increasing

efficiency with limited resources . DES has given careful consideration to how the need for

ef

ficiency would affect network consolidation while maintaining adequate public protection and

the ability to track progress.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 5

The current New Hampshire ambient air monitoring network is carefully configured to provide

air quality data in populated area s which are potentially at risk for unhealthy air quality of one or

more pollutants. Most populated areas are represented by an air monitoring station unless

previous monitoring has demonstrated that either the community is not at risk or can be

adequatel y represented by a nearby monitor. DES also considered t opography, geographic

coverage, and air pollution modeling in the current network design.

Now, i n 201 4 , most of the major pollution sources that are in operation in New Hampshire are

generally well controlled. Areas of continued concern are mobile and area sources where

population density and highway networks are dense enough to multiply the emissions of

relatively small individual sources hundreds of thousand s of times over. The cumulative

emissio ns are greatest in the southeastern portion of the state where population and highway

densities are greatest. This region is generally bounded by the Massachusetts state line to the

south, Nashua and Manchester to the west, Concord to the north, and Roche ster and Portsmouth

to the east. This same region is also the most exposed portion of the state to air pollution

transport which generally crosses the southeastern part of the state from southwest to the

northeast and along the New Hampshire coastline.

Pollutants of most concern in this area include ozone, ozone precursors (nitrogen oxides (NOx)

and VOCs ), PM 2.5 and SO 2 . The monitoring network is most dense in th e southeastern New

Hampshire region to reflect these air quality concerns and the dense population. While the

greatest risk of unhealthy air quality occurs in th is portion of New Hampshire, unhealthy air

quality events can occur anywhere in the state for ozone and small particles

. Accordingly, the

monitoring network for these pollutants extend s into all portions of the state. Small particles also

lead to visibility impairment

, and there are federal regulations to track visibility progress with a

special kind of speciation monitorin g (IMPROVE) near the Class I airsheds (Great Gulf

Wilderness and Presidential Dry

- River Wilderness) located adjacent to Mt. Washington in

northern N ew H ampshire

.

Network Summary

Below is a brief summary of the New Hampshire Air Monitoring network and the role each

station plays for public protection. The list is presented alphabetically by community.

Concord

The Concord monitoring site is primarily intended to track ozone and sulfur dioxide , the only

criteria pollutant s for which recent air monitoring a nd modeling have indicated possible

population exposure to unhealthy levels. A previous Concord monitoring station was located in

the valley near I

- 93, but was moved to reduce the risks of NOx scavenging caused by nearby

freeway traffic emissions , effecti vely lowering the measured ozone levels in the immediate area.

This site has the advantage of being in close proximity to the DES main office, for both outreach

opportunities and ease of maintenance. I t is also in the proximity of residential neighborhoo ds,

retirement communities and schools. DES initiated SO 2 monitoring at this station during

October 2010 to help quantify local SO 2 levels relative to the new SO 2 NAAQS. This station

represents population on a neighborhood scale.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 6

Greens Grant

– Mt. Washington base

The Greens Grant, Camp Dodge ozone monitor at the base of Mt. Washington is now the

primary monitor representing the northern portion of N ew Hampshire . Th is monitoring location

is also important since it represents two federally recognize d Class I airsheds which also require

IMPROVE visibility monitoring

. DES tracks PM 2.5 levels measured by the IMPROVE monitor

for the purpose of estimating current exposures and the demand for more comprehensive PM 2.5 monitoring. DES consolidated p revious monitoring in the North Country (Pittsburg and

Conway) at Camp Dodge due to the high correlation between sites, low population densities, and

low risk of exposure to unhealthy air quality. This research oriented station represents

population exposure on a regional scale.

Keene

The monitoring station in the city of Keene tracks ozone and PM 2.5 on a continuous basis. The

southwest portion of the state experiences a few days per year whe n ozone levels have the

potential to reach unhealthy levels

. Similarly, DES is concerned about PM 2.5 levels at this

station , especially during the winter months

. DES installed a continuous PM 2.5 monitor at this

station in September 2007 to better track the risks of wintertime wood smoke buildup. Keene is

a prime e xample of a city distinguished by the factors, such as population density, woodstove

use, and valley topography, that are necessary for these winter events, and other nearby

communities may be similarly affected. The continuous PM 2.5 equipment has been in valuable in

better understanding the winter PM 2.5 events and improving air pollution forecasts for the area.

The data measured for ozone and non

- winter PM 2.5 are considered valuable on a regional basis

, and the data for winter PM 2.5 is considered non

- regi onal. This station represents population

exposure on a neighborhood scale

.

Laconia

The Laconia monitor tracks ozone and PM 2.5 in the “Lakes Region ” of the state . The population

of this area swells during the summer months with tourists. The monitor r epresents the very

northern edge of the Boston C MS A (combined metropolitan statistical area) and periodically

experiences elevated ozone levels. This station represents population exposure on a regional

scale.

Lebanon

The Lebanon monitoring station is sited to provide population and regional based monitoring for

the Lebanon/White River Junction (VT) metropolitan area with information on regional ozone

and PM 2.5 . Th is site is also important since it represents the consolidation of the closed

Claremont ( ozone) and Haverhill (ozone and PM 2.5 ) monitoring stations. The station is located

on a ridge at the Lebanon airport, just above the river valley. The site was chosen primarily to

represent the regional exposure

, and the station is important to the New H ampshire network for

its geographic coverage.

L ondonderry

The Londonderry station ca me online January 1, 2011 as an NC ore superstation measuring a

wide selection of pollutants. DES worked closely with EPA to carefully select this site for its

central p roximity to the highly populated southeastern suburban portion of New Hampshire. The

site has no nearby emission sources of significance, but lies in the air pollution transport corridor

that crosses the southern portion of the state. T he site is expected to track a number of

potentially unhealthy ozone events each year. Being a multi

- parameter station located in an area

representative of a large population living in the northern suburbs of Boston, as well as betweenNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 7

the major population centers of Nashua and Manchester, the data collected at this site will be

ideal for future research and health

- related analysis. This station represents population exposure

on a regional scale.

Mt. Washington

– Sum mit

The Mt. Washington summit monitoring site is of special value for scientific research for

tracking ozone transport. The summit is located at 6288 feet above sea level and is far away

from any significant pollution sources ; thus it is ideal for picking up long

- range pollution

transport into the northern portion of the state. The data are often compared to the data collected

at Greens Grant (Camp Dodge) located at the base of the mountain, just a few miles to the east

, to give a vertical gradient perspe ctive. Ozone levels measured at the summit are normally higher

than measured at the base and occasionally reach unhealthy levels. This station provides

valuable high elevation data on a regional scale.

Nashua

– Crown Street

The Crown S treet monitoring station represents urban PM 2.5 within the city of Nashua. This

station track s urban population

- based PM 2.5 exposure

.

Nashua

– Gilson Road

In recent years, the Nashua area has often seen the highest ozone concentrations in the state and

there is an ongoin g need to continue tracking ozone in this area

. The Gilson Road monitoring

station also includes p hotochemical a ssessment m onitoring (PAMS) , which measures important

precursors to the development of ozone. These precursors include a wide variety of volat ile

organic compounds and nitrogen oxides. While this station is on the upwind side of the city of

Nashua, it is critical to the network for tracking transport into the state and into the city of

Nashua from the southwest. This station also pairs with the Pack Monadnock station to give the

low elevation perspective as compared to Pack Monadnock’s high elevation data for similar air

masses transport ed into the area. This station represents popu lation exposure on a regional scale.

P eterborough, P ack Monadnock M ountain

– Summit (Miller State Park)

DES has monitored several parameters at the Pack Monadnock station since 2002 and became

the state's second NCore site in 2011. The site ’ s true value lies in the fact that it is located on a

rural mountain top in the south

- central portion of the state. At 2288 feet above sea level, the

station is ideally located to pick up the transport airflow from the heavily populated northeast

urban corridor (Wash ington, D.C. to Boston, MA.) and is at the northern terminus of the low

level jet that begins near the middle of Virginia. This non

- population

- based monitor does not

have nearby sources of significance. This site measures a wide variety of pollutants, in cluding

PAMS ozone precursors, IMPROVE

, ozone, and PM 2.5

. Due to its location and elevation, DES

considers this station to be of high scientific value for transport measurements on a regional

scale. When paired with data collected at Nashua and Londonder ry, Peterborough PAMS and

PM 2.5 data provide a critical high

- low cross section for regional photochemical models.

Pembroke

The Pembroke monitoring station is located along the Merrimack River, just to the south of

Merrimack Station power plant. The power plant is a large coal burning source which until

recently caused relatively high levels of SO 2 at this monitor

. While the power plant recently

complet ed pollution control upgrades for SO 2 , this station track s progress in reducing emissions

and measures exposure to SO 2 in a nearby community . This station represents population

exposure to SO 2 and PM 2.5 on a local scale.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 8

Portsm outh

The Portsmouth monitoring station is located on Pierce Island on the Piscataqua River just to the

east of downtown Portsmouth. DES has been successful in establishing a long

- term agreement

for siting at its current location and has found the location to be suitable for tracking emissions

from around the Portsmouth and Kittery (ME) areas. The station also picks up some sea breeze

ozone events that work their way up the river. This station represents population exposure on a

limited regional scale.

R

ye

The Rye Monitoring station is located at Odiorne State Park

. Its purpose is primarily to track

summertime ozone events brought ashore by sea breeze s . Past experience monitoring ozone in

Rye found that these events sometimes result in measurements of ozone among the highest in the

state. These events affect the coastline area and rarely penetrate more than a few miles inland.

The data from this site are of scientific interest for air pollution flow dynamics when compared

with data from Portsmouth st ation

. This station represents a specific and limited population

along the New Hampshire coastline for these periodic high ozone events.

PM 2.5 B eta Attenuation Federal Equivalency Method (FEM) Monitoring

DES operates several Met One 1020 BAMs and one AP I 602 BAM covering a total of five

stations. To date, DES operates BAMs and Federal Reference Method (FRM) filter based

samplers at Keene, Lebanon, Londonderry, P eterborough

, and Portsmouth stations. Please note

the following relative to data comparabili ty assessments (FEM vs FRM) and declaration of

primary sampler type for each station.

Keene

- The Met One 1020 BAM at Keene will remain primar y toward the NAAQS

. Any FRM

data generated at Keene will be considered secondary when BAM data are available. Individual

seasonal data (spring, summer and winter) are outside acceptability limits, but when looking at

the complete data set, all valid FRM and FEM data from Keene for the past three years fal ls

within additive vs. multiplicative bias acceptability limits for FEM testing. This data set

correlates with an overall R = 0.89 and an intercept of

- 0.56 micrograms per cubic meter

(μg/m 3 ).

Lebanon

- The Met One 1020 BAM at Lebanon will remain prim ary toward the NAAQS . Any

FRM data generated at Lebanon will be considered secondary when BAM data are available.

Individual yearly data ( 2012 and 2013 ) are outside acceptability limits, but when looking at the

complete data set, all valid FRM and FEM d ata from Lebanon for the past three years falls

within additive vs. multiplicative bias acceptability limits for FEM testing. This data set

correlates with an overall R = 0.8 8 and an intercept of

- 0. 71 μg/m 3

. DES will monitor this data

set closely (the l atest two years of data are outside acceptability limits) and restore the FRM as

primary if appropriate.

Londonderry

- The FRM (PQ200) at Londonderry will be primary toward the NAAQS . Any

F EM data generated at Londonderry should be excluded from NAAQS comparisons. All

seasonal and yearly data except 2011 are outside acceptability limits . A ll valid FRM and FEM

data from L ondonderry for the past three years are well outside additive vs. multiplicative bias

acceptability lim its for FEM testing. This data set correlates with an overall R = 0. 71 and an

intercept of 2.37 μg/m 3

. For more information, s ee data comparability assessments at the

following link: http://www.epa.gov/airquality/airdata/ad_rep_frmvfem.html

.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 9

Peterborough, Pack Monadnock Mountain

– Summit (Miller State Park)

- The Met One 1020

BAM at Peterborough will remain primary toward the NAAQS . Any FRM data generated at

Peterborough will b e considered secondary when BAM data are available. Unfortunately, this

decision is based primarily on resources and not comparability assessment testing. While better

than Londonderry, a ll seasonal and yearly data

, except winter, are outside acceptabili ty limits.

All valid FRM and FEM data from Peterborough for the past three years are outside additive vs.

multiplicative bias acceptability limits for FEM testing. This data set correlates with an overall

R = 0. 83 and an intercept of 1.43 μg/m 3

. DES would prefer to use the FRM (Partisol 2025) as

primary toward the NAAQS, but doing so would require collocation of another Partisol 2025 in

Peterborough. DES does not have the resources for the additional sampling. Since PM 2.5 data at

Peterborough are typically lower than all other stations and well below the NAAQS, there is little

concern that this decision would introduce a public PM 2.5 exposure risk or a failure capture a

violation of the NAAQS.

Portsmouth

- API 602 BAM and Met One 1020 BAM dat a at Portsmouth will be primary toward

the NAAQS , w ith the API 602 BAM taking precedence, w hen operating . Any FRM data

generated at Portsmouth will be considered secondary when BAM data are available. The API

602 BAM has correlated quite well with the FR M, although its operation has been limited

. Met

One 1020 BAM/FRM data compara bility assessment is not as favorable as the API 602

BAM/FRM. Individual yearly and seasonal data , except spring and 2002, are outside

acceptability limits

. All valid FRM and FE M (Met One 1020) data from Portsmouth for the past

three years are just outside additive vs. multiplicative bias acceptability limits for FEM testing.

This data set correlates with an overall R = 0. 88 and an intercept of

- 0.46 μg/m 3

.

Network Modifications

DES made relatively few modifications to the air monitoring network b etween July 1, 201 3 and

June 30, 201 4 . Modifications consisted of completing and shutting down special monitors

associated with the Wood Smoke Study, including; all equipme nt at the Stickney Avenue site in

Concord, and the CO and SO 2 monitors in Keene. DES also initiated special project temporary

monitoring in Portsmouth in response to numerous PM complaints concerning an industrial

facility near Market Street

. This monito ring began in September of 2013 and completed in May

of 2014.

Future Plans

In Support of continuous efforts to improve performance and maximize network efficiency under

a constrained budget, DES continue s to seek efficiencies where possible within the ne twork

. Planned changes for the upcoming year

– July 201 4 through June 201 5

– are as follows:

Move Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station (PAMS) from Gilson Road in Nashua to

Moose Hill School in Londonderry

– DES plans relocate PAMS monitoring from the Gilson

Road, Nashua station to the Moose Hill School, Londonderry NCore station at the conclusion of

the 2014 ozone season . With EPA’s approval of this move, DES intends to fully become

operational for PAMS monitoring in Londonderry for the 2015 ozone season . This move further

builds the Londonderry NCore site and creates a unique high

- low elevation for nearly all NCore

parameters at the northern edge of the low

- level

- jet air pollution transport phenomenon. This

realignment will also improve ope rational efficiencies for the DES network. Maintaining PAMS

at Gilson Road was becoming logistically challenging which will be reconciled when moved toNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 10

the state of the art station in Londonderry. The Gilson Road location will continue to monitor

ozone a nd meteorology during the near

- term, however DES may explore its relocation to a

Nashua high school athletic complex.

Shut down PM 2 .5 sampling at Crown Street in Nashua

– DES intends to shut down PM 2.5 monitoring at Crown Street in Nashua on December 31, 2014. Data comparability assessments

between the Nashua and Londonde rry stations , including correlation data presented in Figure

1.1, demonstrate that Londonderry PM 2.5 reasonably tracks Nashua PM 2.5

. While Nashua PM 2.5 trends slightly higher than Londonderry, both site are well below the PM 2.5 NAAQS and relying

on PM 2.5 data from the Londonderry NCore site provides reasonable public protection.

Figure 1.1 : Correlation for Nashua and Londonderry F RM PM 2.5 Data

Shut down PM 2.5 sampling at Exchange Street in Pembroke

– DES intends to shut down PM 2.5 monitoring at the Pembroke station on December 31, 2014

. Similar to correlation data for

Nashua vs. Londonderry, Pembroke PM 2.5 correlates with Londonderry . While Pembroke does

run slightly higher in PM 2.5 , Pembroke PM 2.5 is well below the standard . The use of

Londonderry PM 2.5 is sufficient for protection of public health

. In conjunction with this move,

DES will relocate the PQ200 colocation sampling to the Londonderry station.

Figure 1.2 : Correlation for Pembroke and Londonderry FRM PM 2.5 DataNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 11

Source Specific SO 2 Monitoring

– On April 17, 2014, EPA proposed the Data Requirements

Rule for the 1

- Hour Sulfur Dioxide Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard detailing

modeling and monitoring guidance for standard implementation. DES and EPA have begun a

dialog regarding future SO 2 monitoring needs , although no changes are currently planned.

Purchasing/Expenses

DES’ budget cycle runs from July 1 through June 30 each year. DES did not have funding for

significant equipment procurement during this budget cycle. Instead, DES focused its resources

for personnel, consumables, parts and supplies to operate the air mo nitoring network.

Additionally, DES maintains fleet vehicles, updates maintenance and station contracts, pays

utilities for existing facilities, and enhances air monitoring stations as needed throughout the

network. Other key expenses include calibrating , repairing

, and maintaining equipment to meet

EPA and safety standards.

Please note that a number of analyzers and samplers in DES’ network are old and require

frequent maintenance in order to assure adequate data capture

. Of note , most of DES’ filter

based particle samplers are near the end of their lifetime . Table 1. 0 presents equipment,

analyzers

, and samplers that DES currently uses for ambient air quality monitoring.

Table 1. 0 : Equipment

– (Method)

SO 2

Teledyne

– API 100A and EU

– (Automated Equivalent Method EQSA

- 0495

- 100)

Teco 43A

– (Automated Equivalent Method EQSA

- 0486

- 060)

Teco 43C

– (Automated Equivalent Method EQSA

- 0486

- 060)

Thermo 43i

– (Automated Equivalent Method EQSA

- 0486

- 060)

CO

Teco 48C

- (Automated Reference Method RFCA

- 0981

- 054)

Thermo 48i

– (Automated Reference Method RFCA

- 0981

- 054)

Teledyne

– API 300 EU

– (Automated Equivalent Method RFCA

- 1093

- 093)

O 3

Teledyne

– API 400E

- (Automated Equivalent Method EQOA

- 0992

- 087)

Teco 49

- (Automated Equivalent Method EQOA

- 0880

- 047 )

Teco 49C

- (Automated Equivalent Method EQOA

- 0880

- 047 )

Thermo 49i

- (Automated Equivalent Method EQOA

- 0880

- 047 )

Teco 49C PS

– (Lab Standard EQOA

- 0880

- 047 )

NO 2

Teledyne

– API 200E

– (Automated Reference Method RFNA

- 0691

- 082)

Teco 42C

– (A utomated Reference Method: RFNA

- 1289

- 074 )

Thermo 42i

– (Automated Reference Method RFNA

- 1289

- 074)

NO y

Ecotech Model 9843 NOy

Particulate Matter

R&P Partisol Model 2000 (filter based)

R&P Partisol Model 2025 (filter based)

BGI Model PQ200 (filter based)

R&P TEOM Model 1400NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 12

Table 1. 0 : Equipment

– (Method)

Met One BAM Model 1020

API 602 BAM

IMPROVE Visibility Speciation Monitor

Calibrator (multiple parameter)

Monitor Labs Model 8500

TECO 165 Multi Gas Calibrator

Teledyne

– API Model 700, 700E and 700U Gas Calibrators

Environics Series 6103 Multi Gas Calibrator

Data Acquisition System

Environmental Systems Corporation (ESC) Data Logger Model 8816

ESC Data Logger Model 8832

Agilaire Software and support Agreement

PAMS

Perkin Elmer Ozone Precursor System

- Clarus 500 Gas Chromatograph, TurboMatrix

100 Thermal Desorber / TM50

Perkin Elmer Total Chrom Software

- version 6.2.1

Parker Balston TOC Gas Generator

Parker Balston Hydrogen Generator

Uninterrupted Power Supply

- APC Model SURT8000XLT

Personnel

The AMP continues to operate with one full

- time technical position vacant as well as one

technical position previously eliminated. Due to limited budget, DES is unable to fill the vacant

position during the next year

. In order to fulfil requirements, DES assigns some technical

support duties to individuals outside the official AMP organizational structure, including

continuous PM 2.5 management and PAMS management dutie s which are supported by the

Atmospheric Science and Analysis section of the Air Resources Division , as illustrated in Figure

1. 3

. Figure 1. 3 : Current Air Monitoring Program Organizational Chart

CRAIG WRIGHT

DIRECTOR

AIR RESOURCES

T. VERVILLE

SUPERVI SOR IV K. PERKINS

AIR MONITORING

ADMINISTRATOR II VACANT

ADMINISTRATOR

IV

J. POISSON

ENV III

C.

THOROUGHGOOD

ELEC TECH II T. FAZZINA

AP TECH II S. KLOSE

AP TECH II VACANT

AP TECH I M. LITTLE

DATA ANALYST INTERN PAMS

Manager

Lara Stumpo BAM

Management

Jessica SheldonNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 13

Cooperative Air Monitoring Initiatives

DES is involved in numerous cooperative air monitoring initiatives with local, state

, and private

entities.

For over 2 4 years now, the Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC) and DES have been joining

resources to conduct ozone monitoring in Coos County. Since 1990, AMC and DES have been

cooperatively monitoring ozone on the summit of Mount Washington to determine the exposure

of hikers and other visitors to this pollutant and to quantify ozone transport from upwind areas.

Significant levels of ozone have been measured on the summit during the summer months

throughout this time. Also, AMC and DES began cooperatively managing a second monitoring

station near the base of Mount Wash ington (Camp Dodge) in 1996, a White Mountain National

Forest Class I Wilderness visibility monitoring station. AMC’s involvement in air monitoring

activities saves DES significant resources.

DES also partner s with the United States Department of Agricul ture (Forest Service) in a

Challenge Cost Share Agreement relative to air monitoring activities at Camp Dodge in Green’s

Grant. This agreement provides a framework of cooperation for station work such as upgrades,

tree trimming

, and routine costs. The Fo rest Service operates an IMPROVE (Interagency

Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments) sampler at this s tation . DES and AMC currently

maintain ozone sampling, upkeep

, and routine site inspections at this station.

Until 2014, DES partnered with CAST NET to quality assure, track, and publically post current

ozone data for Woodstock on the DES website. Unfortunately, this partnership was severed in

early 2014 at the request of CAMD, which oversees the CASTNET network. As a result, this

data will no lo nger be available through DES.

DES provides critical real

- time rainfall data from the Laconia station f or the protection of public

health. When rainfall at the Laconia station exceeds a specific amount over a specific time

period, an automated notificati on system operated by DES facilitates closing of a public beach

and alerts o f possible bacterial dangers. S imilar notification system s incorporating our real

- time

meteorology data have been used to enact erosion control inspections at various New Hampshir e

Department of Transporta tion road construction projects.

Monitoring Trends

Each year, DES reviews its monitoring data and calculates design values for comparison to the

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

– Table 1.1. EPA establishes the se standards

to protect public health and welfare. In general, design values consider the three most recent

years for an averaging period in the form of the NAAQS, such as looking at the 3

- year average

of the annual 4 th highest ozone 8

- hour value.

New Hampshire air quality data trends reveal the important progress that has been made in

improving air quality in New Hampshire. Cleaner vehicles, fuels, power plants, industry, and

small engines located throughout the region have all contributed to much imp roved air quality

since the 1980s. More recent trends show that additional progress is still being made, but the

task becomes more difficult as there are becoming fewer pollution sources that remain

uncontrolled. It is also important to note that while p rogress has been made, the NAAQS have

been lowered in some cases to be more protective, thus we have more progress to make.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 14

Figures 1. 4 through 1.1 8 present monitoring trends for the key criteri a pollutants for the period

1995 through 201 3 . In all cases, air quality is significantly improved from the 1970s and 1980s.

Currently monitored levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), PM 10 , lead (Pb) and carbon monoxide

(CO) are safely below the current levels of the NAAQS. However, the NAAQS for ozone

, PM 2.5 , and SO 2 have all recently been tightened (lowered) to levels near what is currently being

measured in New Hampshire. T wo of these pollutants (ozone and PM 2.5 ) have drawn significant

attention by DES as a focus for network monitoring and SIP planning. For SO 2 , 1

- hour NAAQS

was recently added with a threshold of 0.075 parts per million (ppm) and DES is assessing its

monitoring focus on a source

- specific basis in order to address attainment requirements.

Existing SO 2 monitoring indicates that all areas of New Hampshire meet the 3

- hour sulfur

dioxide secondary NAAQS. M onitoring also indicates that Londonderry 1 , Pack Monadnock,

Manchester and Portsmouth are below the new 1

- hour primary SO 2 NAAQS. The Pembroke

monitoring station historically measur ed 1

- hour SO 2 concentrations above the 0.075 ppm

threshold until 2012

. This station was sited as a source

- specific monitor, located near a coal

burning power plant . In 2012 the power plant began operations of a new SO 2 scrubber which has

significantly lowered its SO 2 emissions . As a result, the Pembroke monitor recorded a decrease

from 57 daily maximum 1

- hour SO 2 exceedances of 0.075 ppm in 2011 to just on e exceedance

of the same threshold in 2012 and none in 2013 . Exceedances of NAAQS thresholds during

recent y ears are summarized in Table 1.2.

Tables 1. 3 through 1. 7 provide the five

- year maximum and most recent (201 3 ) design values for

each criteria pollutant. These are also expressed as percentages of the current NAAQS. CO

, NO 2 , and 3

- hour SO 2 design value s are all under 50% of the NAAQS. T he highest SO 2 site,

Pembroke, exceed ed the 1

- hour NAAQS for the period of 2011 to 201 3 , but is expected to metin

the standard for the period of 2012 to 2014 . With the lower ozone standard of 0.075 ppm, Rye

and Pack Mon adnock summit just bare ly exceeded the standard during the period of 2007 to

2009, but since then these and all other sites have been un der the standard, including in 2013

.

New Hampshire operates two Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS): Pack

Monadnock and Nashua. Tables 1.1 2 and 1.1 3 show that none of the toxic PAMS parameters

are near their Ambient Allowable Limits (AAL) at either site. Benzene has the lowe st AAL, 5.7

μ g/m 3 . At Nashua and Pack Monadnock , the maximum 24

- hour averages for benzene over the

full period were about 0.2 and 0.4 μ g/m 3

, respectively, or about 4

- 7 % of the AAL. Maximum

values for all the other parameters for both sites are consistent ly less than 1% of their AAL.

1 Data capture for the 3 rd quarter of 2013 was 67%, which is below the 75% data completeness requirement.

Londonderry 2013 SO 2 data is presented in the ch art based on data available and is believed to be a reliable

representation as nearby SO 2 source emissions did not show unusual fluctuations during this period.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 15

Table 1.1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Pollutant

[final rule cite] Primary/

Secondary Averaging Time Level Form

Carbon Monoxide

[ 76 FR 54294, Aug 31, 2011 ] primary 8

- hour 9 ppm Not to be exceeded more than once per

year 1

- hour 35 ppm

Lead

[ 73 FR 66964, Nov 12, 2008 ] primary and

secondary Rolling 3 month

average 0.15 μg/m 3 (1) Not to be exceeded

Nitrogen Dioxide

[ 75 FR 6474, Feb 9, 2010 ]

[ 61 FR 52852, Oct 8, 1996 ] primary 1

- hour 100 ppb 98th percentile, averaged over 3 years

primary and

secondary Annual 53 ppb (2) Annual Mean

Ozone

[ 73 FR 16436, Mar 27, 2008 ] primary and

secondary 8

- hour 0.075 ppm (3) Annual fourth

- highest daily maximum

8

- hr concentration, averaged over 3

years

Particle

Pollution

Dec 14, 2012 PM 2.5 primary Annual 12 μg/m 3 annual mean, averaged over 3 years

secondary Annual 15 μg/m 3 annual mean, averaged over 3 years

primary and

secondary 24

- hour 35 μg/m 3 98th percentile, averaged over 3 years

PM 10 primary and

secondary 24

- hour 150 μg/m 3 Not to be exceeded more than once per

year on average over 3 years

Sulfur Dioxide

[ 75 FR 35520, Jun 22, 2010 ]

[38 FR 25678, Sept 14, 1973] primary 1

- hour 75 ppb (4) 99th percentile of 1

- hour daily

maximum concentrations, averaged over

3 years

secondary 3

- hour 0.5 ppm Not to be exceeded more than once per

year

as of October 2011

(1) Final rule signed October 15, 2008. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 μg/m3 as a quarterly average) remains in effect until one

year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1978, the 1978

standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2008 standard are approved.

(2) The official level of the annual NO2 standard is 0.053 ppm, equal to 53 ppb, which is shown here for the purpose of clear er

comparison to the 1

- hour standard.

(3) Final r ule signed March 12, 2008. The 1997 ozone standard (0.08 ppm, annual fourth

- highest daily maximum 8

- hour

concentration, averaged over 3 years) and related implementation rules remain in place. In 1997, EPA revoked the 1

- hour ozone

standard (0.12 ppm, not to be exceeded more than once per year) in all areas, although some areas have continued obligations

under that standard (“anti

- backsliding”). The 1

- hour ozone standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar

year with maximum hourly av erage concentrations above 0.12 ppm is less than or equal to 1.

(4) Final rule signed June 2, 2010. The 1971 annual and 24

- hour SO 2 standards were revoked in that same

rulemaking. However, these standards remain in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except in

areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards, where the 1971 standards remain i n effect until implementation plans to

attain or maintain the 2010 standard are approved.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 16

Table 1.2: NAAQS Exceedences (Days) in New Hampshire (2008

- 201 3 )

(Includes all monitoring stations in operation since 2008)

Parameter/Location Number o f Exceedances

Most Recent 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

CO

1

- Hour (1971) 0 0 0 0 0 0 None

8

- Hour (1971) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996

Lead

Quarterly (2008) 0 0 0 0 0 0 None

NO 2

1

- Hour (2010) // // 0 0 0 0 None

Annual (1971) 0 0 // // // // None

Ozone

8

- Hour (2008)

Camp Dodge 0 0 0 0 0 0 None

Claremont 1

-- -- -- -- -- 2008

Concord 0 0 1 0 0 0 2010

Keene 1 0 0 0 0 0 2008

Laconia 0 0 2 0 0 0 2010

Lebanon 1 0 0 0 0 0 2008

Londonderry

-- -- -- 2 2 0 2012

Manchester 0 0 1 0

-- -- 2010

Miller 4 0 4 0 2 0 2012

Mt. Washington 4 0 2 0 0 2 2013

Nashua 0 0 2 1 2 0 2012

Portsmouth 1 1 2 1 1 1 2013

Rye 3 2 1 2 2 0 2012

Woodstock 0 0 0 0 0 0 None

PM 10

24

- Hour (1987) 0 0 0 0 0 0 None

PM 2.5

Annual (1997) 0 0 0 0 0 0 None

24

- Hour ( 2006 )

Keene 1 1* 1* 4* 1* 3* 2013

Laconia 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005

Lebanon 0* 0* 0* 0* 0* 0* None

Manchester

-- -- -- -- -- -- 2005

Miller 0* 0* 0* 0* 0* 0* 2002

Nashua 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007

Pembroke 1 0 1 0 0 0 2010

Portsmouth 0* 0* 1* 0* 0* 0* 2010

SO 2

Annual (1971) 0 0 0 0 0 0 None

24

- Hour (1971) 0 0 // // // // 1980

1

- Hour (2010) // //

Concord

-- -- -- 4 0 0 2011

Londonderry

-- -- -- 0 0 0 None

Manchester

-- -- 1 1

-- -- 2011

Miller

-- -- 0 0 0 0 None

Pembroke

-- -- 95 57 1 0 2012

Portsmouth

-- -- 0 0 0 0 20 08

*

- Denotes measured by FEM equipment. Otherwise measured by FRM methods

//

- Denotes NAAQS cited is not val i d for this period

Notes: Claremont station closed in late 2008, Manchester closed in 2012, and Londonderry opened January 1, 2011. Concord

station began SO 2 monitoring in 2011.NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 17

Table 1. 3 : 2011

– 201 3 Ozone Design Values (ppb)

Ozone Design Value (DV)

Description NAAQS 5

- Year

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location 201 1

- 13

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location

8

- Hour 3

- year average of 4th

highest daily maximum

8

- hour averages 75 76 10 1 % Rye , Pack

Monadnock 69 9 2 % Mount

Washington

Table 1. 4 : 2011

– 201 3 Carbon Monoxide Design Values (ppm)

CO Design Value (DV)

Description NAAQS 5

- Year

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location 201 1

- 13

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location

1

- Hour 2nd maximum over 2

years 35 6.0 17 % Manchester 2.1 6 % Keene

8

- Hour 2nd maximum over 2

years 9 3.5 39% Manchester 1.1 12 % Keene

Table 1. 5 : 20 11

– 201 3 Sulfur Dioxide Design Values (ppb)

SO 2 Design Value (DV)

Description NAAQS 5

- Year

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location 201 1

- 13

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location

1

- Hour 3

- year average of 99th

percentile of daily

maximum 1

- hour

averages 75 221 2 95 % Pembroke 89 11 9 % Pembroke

3

- H our 2nd maximum 500 221 44 % Pembroke 19 4 % Portsmouth

Table 1. 6 : 201 1

– 201 3 Nitrogen Dioxide Design Values (ppb)

NO 2 Design Value (DV)

Description NAAQS 5

- Year

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location 201 1

- 13

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location

1

- Hour 3

- year average of 98th

percentile of daily

maximum 1

- hour

averages 100 46 4 6 % Manchester 10 10 % Nashua

Annual Annual average over 3

years 53 11 21% Manchester 2 4 % Nashua

Table 1. 7 : 201 1

– 201 3 Fine Particulate Matter Design Values ( μ g/m 3 )

PM 2 .5 Design Value (DV)

Description NAAQS 5

- Year

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location 201 1

- 13

Max DV % of

NAAQS Location

24

-

Hour 3

- year average of 98 th

percentile of midnight

to

- midnight 24

- hour

averages 35 29 83% Keene 2 9 83 % Keene

Annual Ann ual average over 3

years 1 2 10.6 88 % Keene 9.2 76 % KeeneNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 18

Figure 1. 4 : Ozone trends for the 8

- h our NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 ) Figure 1. 5 : Ozone trends for the 8

- h our NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 )

Figure 1. 6 : Carbon Monoxide trends for the 1

- hour NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 ) Figure 1. 7 : Carbon Monoxide trends for the 8

- hour NAAQS (1997

- 201 3 )NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 19

Figure 1. 8 : PM 2.5 trends for the 24

- h our NAAQS (2 001

- 201 3 ) Figure 1. 9 : PM 2.5 trends for the 24

- h our NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

Figure 1. 10 : PM 2.5 trends for the annual NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 ) Figure 1. 11 : PM 2.5 trends for the annual NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 20

Figure 1.1 2 : Nitrogen Dioxide trends for the 1

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 ) Figure 1.1 3 : Nitrogen Dioxide trends for the annual NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )

Figure 1.1 4 : Sulfur Dioxide trends for the 1

- h our NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 ) Figure 1.1 5 : Sulfur Dioxide trends for the 3

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 201 3 )NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 21

Figure 1.1 6 : PM 10 trends for the 24

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 2013 ) Figure 1.1 7 : PM 10 trends for the 24

- hour NAAQS (2001

- 2013 )

Figure 1.1 8 : Lead trends for the primary NAAQS (201 3 )NHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 22

Table 1. 8 : New Hampshire State and Local Air Monitoring Stations Network

– 201 3 /201 4

SO 2

Town Name AIRS # Frequency Scale Objective

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 Continuous Regional Population

Pembroke Pembroke

Highway Dept. 33 013 1006 Continuous Neighborhood High

Concentration

Peterborough Pack Monadnock 33 011 5001 Continuous Regional Research

Portsmouth Pierce Island 33 015 0014 Continuous Neighborhood Population

Concord Hazen Drive 33 013 1007 Continuous Neighborhood Population

CO

Town Name AIRS # Frequency Scale Objective

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 Continuous Regional Population

Peterborough Pack Monadnock 33 011 5001 Continuous Regional Research

O 3

Town Name AIRS # Frequency Scale Objective

Concord Hazen Drive 33 013 1007 April

- Sept Neighborhood Population

Greens Grant Camp Dodge 33 007 4002 April

- Sept Regional Research

Keene Water Street 33 005 0007 Continuous Neighborhood Population

Laconia Lakes Region 33 001 2004 April

- Sept Regional Population

Lebanon Lebanon 33 009 0010 Continuous Neighborhood Population

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 Continuous Regional Population

Mount

Washington Mt. Washington

Summit 33 007 4001 Continuous Regional Research

Nashua Gilson Road 33 011 1011 April

- Sept Regional Population

Peterborough Pack

Monadnock 33 011 5001 Continuous Regional Research

Portsmouth Pierce Island 33 015 0014 Continuous Neighborhood Population

Rye, Odiorne Seacoast

Science Center 33 015 0016 April

- Sept Neighborhood High

Concentration

NO 2/ NO y

Town Name AIRS # Frequency Scale Objective

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 Continuous Regional Population

Nashua Gilson Road 33 011 1011 June

- Sept Neighborhood Population

Peterborough Pack

Monadnock 33 011 5001 Continuous Regional ResearchNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 23

Table 1. 9 : New Hampshire P articulate M atter Network

– 201 3 /201 4

PM 2.5

Town Name AIRS # Frequency Scale Objective

Keene Water Street 33 005 0007 1 in 12 filter Neighborhood Population

Keene Water Street 33 005 0007 Continuous

-

BAM Neighborhood Population

Laconia Green Street 33 001 2004 1 in 6 filter Regional Population

Lebanon Lebanon Airport 33 009 0010 1 in 12 filter Neighborhood Population

Lebanon Lebanon Airport 33 009 0010 Continuous

-

BAM Neighborhood Population

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 1 in 3 filter Regional Population

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 Continuous

-

BAM Regional Population

Nashua Crown Street 33 011 1015 1 in 6 filter Urban High

Concentration

Pembroke Pembroke

Highway Dept. 33 013 1006 1 in 3 filter Neighborhood High

Concentration

Pembroke Pembroke

Highway Dept. 33 013 1006 1 in 6 filter Neighborhood Collocate

Audit

Peterborough Pack Monadnock 33 011 5001 Continuous

-

BAM Regional Research

Peterborough Pack Monadnock 33 011 5001 1 in 3 filter Regional Research

Portsmouth Pierce Island 33 015 0014 1 in 12 filter Regional Population

Portsmouth Pierce Island 33 015 0014 Continuous

-

BAM Regional Population

PM 2.5 Speciation

Peterborough Pack M o nadnock 33 011 5001 1 in 3

IMPROVE Regional Research

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 1 in 3

IMPROVE Regional Population

PM10

Londonderry Moose Hill School 33 015 0018 1 in 3 filter Regional Population

Peterborough Pack Monadnock 33 011 5001 1 in 3 filter Regional Research

Portsmouth Pierce Island 33 015 0014 1 in 6 filter Neighborhood Population

Portsmouth Pierce Island 33 015 0014 1 in 6 filter Neighborhood Audit

Table 1. 10 : New Hampshire PAMS Network

– 201 3 /201 4

Town Name AIRS # Frequency Scale Objective

Nashua Gilson Road 33 011 1011 June

- Sept Regional Population

Peterborough Pack Monadnock 33 011 5001 June

- Sept Regional Research

Table 1. 1 1 : New Hampshire NCore Network

– 201 3 /201 4

Town Name AIRS # Status Scale Objective

Londonderry Moose Hill

School 33 015 0018 Operational on

Jan 1, 2011 Regional Population

Peterborough Pack Monadnock 33 011 5001 Operational on

Jan 1, 2011 Regional ResearchNHDES 201 4 /201 5 Annual Review Plan Page 24

Table 1 .1 2 : Seasonal Maximum 24

- hour Averages at Gilson Road in Nashua for Toxic PAMS

Species Compared to the Ambient Allowable Limit (AAL), 2005

- 201 3

PAMS Parameter AAL

μ g/m 3 Max 24

- h our Avg. ( μ g/m 3 ) 3

- Year

Max as

% of

AAL 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201 2 2013

P ROPYLENE (43205) 35,833 0.55 0.34 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.20 1.29 1.49 0.28 0.00%

CYCLOPENTA NE (43242) 25,595 0.23 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.15 0.10 0.30 1.12 0.07 0.00%

ISOPENTANE (43221) 36,875 2.04 2.50 1.56 1.41 1.23 1.13 4.58 11.95 0.75 0.03%

PENTANE (4 3220) 36,875 3.13 1.39 0.85 0.74 0.76 0.61 1.99 6.05 0.47 0.02%

2

- METHYLPE NTANE (43285) 36,875 0.60 0.78 0.21 0.35 0.25 0.18 0.45 2.26 0.09 0.01%

3

- METHYLPENTANE (43230) 36,875 0.41 0.48 0.20 0.30 0.20 0.25 0.44 1.65 0.09 0.00%

HEXANE (43 231) 885 0.59 0.58 0.47 0.74 0.51 1.18 1.17 1.89 0.21 0.21%

BENZENE (4 5201) 5.7 0.51 0.74 0.36 0.42 0.37 0.29 1.11 1.23 0.21 21.58%

CYCLOHEXANE (43248) 6,000 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.48 0.19 0.29 0.41 0.47 0.06 0.01%

HEPTANE (4 3232) 8,249 0.56 0.34 0.18 0.32 0.25 0.12 0.43 1.37 0.07 0.02%

METHYLCYCL OHEXANE (43261) 23,958 0.21 0.21 0.11 0.16 0.10 0.06 0.30 0.85 0.03 0.00%

TOLUENE (4 5202) 5,000 2.37 2.67 1.39 1.97 1.60 1.77 2.18 5.10 0.67 0.10%

OCTANE (43233) 7,000 0.32 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.09 0.07 0.25 2.04 0.03 0.03%

ETHYLBENZE NE (45203) 1,000 0.36 0.36 0.18 0.39 0.57 0.14 0.47 1.14 0.09 0.11%

M & P

- XYLE NES (45109) 1,550 0.88 0.96 0.68 1.15 2.04 0.45 1.22 3.49 0.24 0.23%

STYRENE (45220) 1,000 0.88 0.13 0.22 0.07 0.06 0.13 0.19 0.89 0.06 0.09%

O

- XYLENE ( 45204) 1,550 0.32 0.36 0.26 0.40 0.40 0.16 0.56 1.26 0.10 0.08%

NONANE (43 235) 15,625 0.21 0.13 0.21 0.10 0.11 0.07 0.33 0.35 0.04 0.00%

1,3,5

- TRIMETHYLBENZENE (45207) 619 0.11 0.12 0.09 0.32 0.17 0.09 0.44 0.61 0.08 0.10%

1,2,4

- TRIM ETHYLBENZENE (45208) 619 0.32 0.39 0.32 0.39 0.31 0.18 0.47 1.25 0.19 0.20%

Table 1.1 3 : Seasonal Maximum 24

- hour Averages at Pack Monadnock in Miller State Park for

Toxic PAMS Species Compared to the Ambient Allowable Limit (AAL), 2006

- 201 3

PAMS Parameter AAL

( μ g/m 3 ) Max 24

- h our Avg. ( μ g/m 3 ) 3

- Year

Max as

% of

AAL 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201 2 2013

PROPYLENE (43205) 35,833 0.28 0.25 0.46 0.15 0.20 0.59 0.38 0.17 0.00%

CYCLOPENT ANE (43242) 25,595 0.42 0.53 1.63 0.09 0.29 0.17 0.21 0.13 0.00%

ISOPENTANE (43221) 36,875 1.03 1.09 0.70 0.89 0.75 1.84 2.32 0.95 0.01%

PENTANE ( 43220) 36,875 45.41 7.63 0.55 0.45 0.38 0.86 0.76 0.48 0.00%

2

- METHYLP ENTANE (43285) 36,875 0.19 0.27 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.30 0.25 0.06 0.00%

3

- METHYLPENTANE (43230) 36,875 0.13 0.17 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.21 0.19 0.03 0.00%

HEXANE (4 3231) 885 0.21 0.27 0.19 0.32 1.36 1.01 0.48 0.28 0.11%

BENZENE ( 45201) 5.7 0.31 0.33 0.32 0.41 0.73 1.09 0.45 0.38 19.12%

CYCLOHEXANE (43248) 6,000 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.48 0.15 0.06 0.01%

HEPTANE ( 43232) 8,249 0.71 0.16 0.15 0.17 0.13 0.79 0.21 0.14 0.01%

METHYLCYC LOHEXANE (43261) 23,958 1.23 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.16 0.49 0.14 0.07 0.00%

TOLUENE (45202) 5,000 1.00 1.05 1.11 1.01 0.77 2.48 1.36 0.80 0.05%

OCTANE (4 3233) 7,000 0.91 0.17 0.27 0.11 0.06 0.40 0.23 0.07 0.01%

ETHYLBENZ ENE (45203) 1,000 0.35 0.20 0.59 0.21 0.15 0.42 0.18 0.13 0.04%

M & P

- XYLENES (45109) 1,550 1.88 0.37 2.38 0.46 0.23 1.22 0.42 0.42 0.08%

STYRENE ( 45220) 1,000 1.03 1.13 1.80 0.40 0.08 0.18 0.14 0.05 0.02%

O

- XYLENE (45204) 1,550 0.60 0.13 0.67 0.15 0.08 0.45 0.20 0.16 0.03%

NONANE (4 3235) 15,625 8.83 1.33 0.57 0.23 0.08 0.16 0.20 0.36 0.00%

1,3,5

- TRIMETHYLBENZENE (45207) 619 1.75 0.08 0.29 0.13 0.04 0.10 0.12 0.08 0.02%

1,2,4

- TRI METHYLBENZENE (45208) 619 3.91 1.34 0.79 0.53 0.14 0.38 0.26 0.08 0.06%P ART 2 : Individual Station I nformation



### July 2014

25Page 26

Camp Dodge, Green’s Grant

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 007

- 4002

Green’s Grant

Route 16

Coos

Regional Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 44.308119

- 71. 217658

335

1995

Site Description

This air monitoring station is located in a rural forested area off

Route 16 in Green’s Grant. This wood clad, stick built shelter is

approximately 7’ wide by 10’ long. This station is representative of

a Class 1 Typ e Airshed. DES operates this station in cooperation

with the Appalachian Mountain Club and the US Forest Service.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

– Temperature

– IM PROVE. The US Forest Service operates the IMPROVE sampler.

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 27

Mt. Washington Summit

General Information

AQS ID:

Town :

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 007

- 4001

Sargents

Purchase

Yankee Bld.

Coos

Regional Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 44.270086

- 71.303844

1,917

1990

Site Description

This air monitoring station is located at the top of Mt. Wa shington

in the Yankee Building.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

– Temperature

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant change s to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 28

Hubbard Brook, Woodstock

General Information

` AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 009

- 8001

Woodstock

Mirror Lake Rd.

Grafton

Regional Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est. : 43.944544

- 71.700772

250

1989

Site Description

This air monitoring station is located in a rural area in the White

Mountain National Forest. This pre

- fabricated structure is

specifically designed for climate

- controlled scientific operations. It

m easures approximately 8’ wide by 10’ long. This is a CASTNET

station and DES’ involvement is limited to capturing ozone data for

real

- time mapping purposes. An EPA Contractor operates this site.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

– Temperature

– CA STNET

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 29

Lebanon Airport, Lebanon

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 009

- 0010

Lebanon

Airport Road

Grafton

Neighborhood Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 43.6296

- 72.309533

167

2005

Site Description

This 8’ wide by 10’ long insulated trailer is located at the northeast

edge of the Lebanon Municipal Airport in a commercial area. The

filter based PM 2.5 sampler is located on a deck on top of the trailer.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

- Continuous PM 2.5 (BAM)

– filter based PM 2.5 (1 every 12 days)

- Wind Speed

- Wind

Direction

- Temperature

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station i nto the foreseeable future.Page 30

Green Street, Laconia

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 001

- 2004

Laconia

Green Street

Belknap

Regional Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 43.566111

- 71 .496322

216

2001

Site Description

This 10’ wide by 12’ long cedar clad, stick

- built air monitoring

station is located in an open field in a rural residential area. The

f ilter

- based PM 2.5 sampler is located on a platform approximately

30m from the st ructure.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

– filter based PM 2.5 ( 1 every 6 days)

– Wind Speed

– Wind Direction

– Temperature

- Precipitation

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Pl anned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 31

Hazen Station, Concord

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 013

- 1007

Concord

27 Hazen Dr.

Merrimack

Neighb orhood Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 43.218478

- 71.514533

100

2004

Site Description

This site has the advantage of being in close proximity to the DES

main office, for both outreach opportunities and ease of

maintenance. I t is also in the proximity of residential

neighborhoods, retirement communities and schools. The Station

measures 8’ wide by 18’ long. Its insulated, box

- type structure is

specifically designed for climate

- controlled scientific functions.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

– Sulfur Dioxide

– Temp erature

– Wind Speed

– Wind Direction. DES also uses this station as

an air monitoring laboratory and a staging area for field

- ready equipment.

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 32

Exchange Street, Pembroke

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 013

- 1006

Pembroke

Pleasant St.

Merrimack

Neighborhood Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 43.132444

- 71.458270

100

2002

Site Description

This station is located in a suburban residential area southeast of the

coal burning Merrimack station power p lant. It is the ideal location

for improving our understanding of near

- field emissions from the

Merrimack Station power plant. This insulated, box

- type structure

is specifically designed for climate

- controlled scientific functions

and measures approximate ly 8’ wide by 10’ long. The filter based

PM 2.5 samplers are located on a deck on top of the structure.

Pollutants/Parameters

Sulfur Dioxide

– filter based PM 2.5 ( 1 every 3 days)

– filter based PM 2.5 Audit ( 1 every 6 days)

– Temperature

– Wind Speed

– Wind Direction.

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is planning to discontinue PM2.5 monitoring at this site on December 31, 2014.Page 33

Pierce Island, Ports mouth

General Information

` AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 015

- 0014

Portsmouth

Pierce Island

Rockingham

Neighborhood Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 43.075367

- 70.748014

4

2001

Site Description

This station i s located in an urban commercial/residential area. It is

strategically position to capture air quality data from the

Portsmouth Shipyard (northeast), the urban center of Portsmouth

(southwest), the industrialized Piscataqua River (northwest) and

ocean fetc h

- type events (southeast) depending on wind direction.

The cedar clad, stick built shelter is approximately 10’ wide by 12’

long. Filter based PM 2.5 samplers are located on platforms

approximately 8m from the shelter.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

– PM 2.5 Continuous ( BAM )

– filter based PM 2.5 (1 every 12 days)

– filter based PM 10 ( 1 every 6

days)

– filter based PM 10 Colocation ( 1 every 6 days)

– Sulfur Dioxide

– Temperature

– Wind Speed

–

Wind Direction

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 34

Seacoast Science Center, Rye

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

Co unty:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 015

- 0016

Rye

Seacoast

Science Ctr.

Rockingham

Neighborhood Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 43.045267

- 70.713953

10

2003

Site Description

This station is located in a rural neighborhood on the seacoast in

dire ct exposure to the Atlantic Ocean. The station is located inside a

modified corner of the main facility building at the Seacoast

Science Center. DES established this station to measure coastal

ozone episodes as well as to promote public understanding of air

pollution and monitoring.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

- Temperature

– Wind Speed

– Wind Direction.

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not plan ning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 35

Water Street, Keene

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 005

- 0007

Keene

Water Street

Cheshire

Neighborhood Latitude:

Long itude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 42.930517

- 72.272372

145

1989

Site Description

This 8’ wide by 10’ long air monitoring station is situated in a

commercial area, close to the center of the city of Keene. The

filter

- based PM 2.5 sampler is located o n the rooftop deck.

Pollutants/Parameters

Ozone

- PM 2.5 Continuous (BAM)

– filter based PM 2.5 (1 every 12 days)

– Wind Speed

- Wind

Direction

- Temperature

Recent Changes

DES discontinued SO 2 , CO and black carbon analyzers on March 2013 for a sp ecial study.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 36

Moose Hill, Londonderry

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 015

- 0018

Londonderry

Moose Hill Sch.

Rockingham

Neighborhood Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 42.862522

- 71.380153

104

2009

Site Description

Proposed:

This 12’ wide by 16’ long wood clad, stick

- built air monit oring station

is located in a very open field in the heart of suburban New

Hampshire, approximately halfway between the state’s two largest

cities (Manchester and Nashua). It has virtually zero local

interferences from nearby pollution sources or obstruct ions, making it

an ideal location to measure regional air quality. Filter

- based PM 2.5 samplers are located on platforms approximately 15 m from the

structure.

Pollutants/Parameters

NCORE: PM 2.5 Continuous (BAM)

- filter based PM 2.5 (1 every 3 days)

– IMPROVE

– PM Course (1

every 3 days)

– filter based PM 10 (1 every 3 days)

– Oxides of Nitrogen (NOy)

– Ozone

– Sulfur Dioxide

(trace)

– Carbon Monoxide (trace)

– Lead

– Temperature

– Wind Speed

– Wind Direction

– Relative

Humidity

– Precipitation

– Barom etric Pressure

.

Recent Changes

DES i nitiated lead monitoring on January 1, 2012.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 37

Pack Monadnock Mountain

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 011

- 5001

Peterborough

Miller State

Park

Hillsborough

Regional Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 42.861901

- 71.878613

694.6

2002

Site Description

This station is located in an elevate d forest environment on the summit of

Pack Monadnock Mountain. DES recently renovated this 27 ’ by 10 ’

structure to include many efficiency initiatives. The location of this

station is scientifically significant because it is the highest accessible peak

th at lies directly within the primary air pollution transport corridor into

the central part of the state. This allows this site to be the ideal location

for improving our understanding of air pollution transport into the heavily

populated Merrimack Valley a nd beyond. The Filter based PM 2.5 sampler

is located on a deck on top of the structure.

Pollutants/Parameters

NCORE : PM 2.5 Continuous (BAM)

- f ilter based PM 2.5 (1 every 3 days)

– IMPROVE

– PM Course (1

every 3 days)

– filter based PM 10 (1 every 3 da ys)

– Oxides of Nitrogen (NOy)

– Ozone

– Sulfur

Dioxide (trace)

– Carbon Monoxide (trace)

– Te mperature

– Wind Speed

– Wind Direction

– Relative

Humidity

– Precipitation

– Barometric Pressure

– Solar Radiation

. Recent Changes

DES did not make any signi ficant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is not planning any significant changes to this station into the foreseeable future.Page 38

Crown Street, Nashua

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

Coun ty:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 011

- 1015

Nashua

Crown Street

Hillsborough

Urban Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 42.762028

- 71.444572

33.5

2005

Site Description

This air monitoring station is located in an urban commercial and

residential neigh borhood. It is located approximately 30 meters

from the Merrimack River and consists of a small fenced

- in

platform approximately 12’ long by 8’ wide.

Pollutants/Parameters

Filter based PM 2.5 ( 1 every 6 days)

Recent Changes

DES did not make any sig nificant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES planning to discontinue this site on December 31, 2014.Page 39

Gilson Road, Nashua

General Information

AQS ID:

Town:

Address:

County:

Spatial Scale: 33

- 011

- 1011

Nashua

57 Gilson Rd.

Hillsborough

Neighborhood Latitude:

Longitude:

Elevation (m):

Year Est.: 42.718656

- 71.522428

59

2003

Site Description

This air monitoring station is located in a suburban residential

neighborhood near a Su perfund site. DES requires two 8’ wide by

16’ long trailers to accommodate the equipment needed to measure

ambient air parameters, including PAMS. DES collects

meteorological data from a tower located on an adjacent building.

Pollutants/Parameters

O zone

- Nitrogen Dioxide

– PAMS

– Temperature

– Wind Speed

– Wind Direction.

Recent Changes

DES did not make any significant changes to this station during this review period.

Proposed/Planned Changes

DES is planning on moving the PAMS monitoring t o the Londonderry site before the 2015 PAMS

season.