2014

ANNUAL MONITORING NETWORK PLAN

New York State Ambient Air Monitoring Program

Bureau of Air Quality Surveillance Division of Air Resources New York State Department of Environmental ConservationAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 2 of 207

Table of Contents

Section Page

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... ........ 8 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................ ........ 8 1.2 Topography and Climate of New York State .................................................................. 11 1.3 Population and Demographics ......................................................................................... 12 2. Chronology of Air Monitoring in New York State .............................................15 2.1 Monitoring Related Research and Investigations ............................................................ 17 2.1.1 Publications ............................................................................................................... 18 2.1.2 Posters/Presentations ................................................................................................... ..... 23 3. Monitoring Sites ........................................................................................................... ... 29 3.1 Northern Monitoring Site Listings ................................................................................... 31 3.2 Southern Monitoring Site Listings ................................................................................. 94 4. Criteria Contaminants .................................................................................................... 1 43 4.1 Carbon Monoxide .......................................................................................................... 145 4.2 Nitrogen Dioxide ........................................................................................................... 148 4.3 Lead ...................................................................................................................... .......... 153 4.4 Particulate Matter ........................................................................................................ ... 156 4.4.1 Total Suspended Particulate ........................................................................................... 156 4.4.2 PM 10

............................................................................................................................... 157 4.4.3 PM 2.5

............................................................................................................................... 159 4.4.4 Continuous PM Monitoring ........................................................................................... 164 4.4.5 Speciation .............................................................................................................. ......... 168 4.4.6 Continuous Speciation ................................................................................................... 169 4.4.7 Additional Monitoring Initiatives ................................................................................. 170 4.4.7.1 PM 2.5 Technology Assessment and Characte rization Study-New York Supersite ........ 170 4.4.7.2 Organic Carbon: Molecular Ma rker Characterization ................................................... 171 4.4.7.3 PM Coarse Monitoring .................................................................................................. 171 4.4.8 Air Pollution and Environmental Conditions ................................................................ 172 4.4.8.1 NYC Microscale Street Canyon Monitoring ................................................................. 172 4.4.8.2 Rochester PM Center Clarkson, Univ. of Rochester Medical Center ............................ 172 4.4.8.3 Air Pollution Microscopy ....................................................................................... 172 4.4.8.4 Ultrafine Particulate Monitoring .................................................................................... 173 4.5 Sulfur Dioxide ................................................................................................................ 175 4.6 Ozone ..................................................................................................................... ........ 178 5. EPA’s National Toxics Program .................................................................................... 182 5.1 National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) ............................................................. 183 5.2 NY Toxics Monitoring Network .................................................................................... 184 5.3 Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) ............................................ 193 6. NCore Sites ................................................................................................................ .... 198 7. Acid Deposition Network .............................................................................................. 200Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 3 of 207

Table of Contents (continued)

Section Page

8. Anticipated Changes in the Next 18 Months ................................................................. 202 8.1 Lead Monitoring ............................................................................................................ 202 8.2 Special Purpose Monitors .............................................................................................. 203 8.2.1 Tonawanda Community Air Quality Study ................................................................... 203 8.2.2 New York State Ambient Mercury Baseline Study ....................................................... 203 8.2.3 Community Air Screen .......................................................................... 204 8.2.4 Airport Lead Monitoring ........................................................................ 205 8.2.5 Peace Bridge Air Quality Study ................................................................. 206 8.3 Proposed Changes at Existing Sites ............................................................................... 207 8.3.1 Division St. and Buffalo ................................................................................................ 207Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 4 of 207

List of Tables

Table Page

1.1 2010 Census Population for Major Metropoli tan Statistical Areas in New York ......... 12 3.1 Location Listing for Northern Monitoring Sites ............................................................. 31 3.2 Location Listing for Southern Monitoring Sites .............................................................. 94 4.1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards ...................................................... 143 4.2 CBSAs in NYS Required to have Near-Road NO 2 Monitors................................151 4.3 Buffalo Near-Road Site Characteristics.........................................................152 4.4 FEM Data Availability in New York (2013 Data)............................................166 4.5 FEM Data Comparison with Collocation FRM (2013 Data)................................166 5.1 NATTS Pollutants of Concern ....................................................................................... 183 5.2 Target List of Volatile Organic Compounds ................................................................ 184 5.3 Information on PAMS Sites .......................................................................................... 193 5.4 Instrumentation for Gaseous Pollutants ......................................................................... 194 5.5 Equipment for Meteorological Measurements .............................................................. 194 5.6 Target Compound List for Carbonyl Sampling ............................................................ 195 5.7 VOC Methods and Sampling Frequencies ..................................................................... 195 5.8 PAMS Target Compounds List ...................................................................................... 195 8.1 2013 3-Month Rolling Average Lead Concentrations for Urban Sites.......................... 202Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 5 of 207

List of Figures

Figure Page

1.1 Population Density in New York State by County ............................................ 13 1.2 Potential Environmental Justice Areas in New York State .................................. 14 2.1 Location Map of Monitoring Sites in New York State Excluding NYC ......................... 16 2.2 Location Map of Ambient Air Monitoring Sites in NYC ..................................... 17 3.1 Site Locations for Northe rn Monitoring Operation ......................................................... 29 3.2 Site Locations for Southe rn Monitoring Operation ......................................................... 30 4.1 Carbon Monoxide Monitors and Concentration Trends................................................. 146 4.2 Location Map for Carbon Monoxi de Monitoring Sites ................................................. 147 4.3 Nitrogen Dioxide Monitors and Concentration Trends ................................................. 149 4.4 Location Map for NO x Monitoring Sites ...................................................................... 150 4.5 Lead Monitors and Concentration Trends ..................................................................... 157 4.6 Total Suspended Particulate Monito rs and Concentration Trends ................................ 157 4.7 PM 10 Monitors and Concentration Trends ..................................................................... 158 4.8 Location Map of Manual PM 10 Monitoring Sites .......................................................... 159 4.9 Location Map of Manual PM 2.5 Monitoring Sites ......................................................... 163 4.10 PM 2.5 Monitors and Concentration Trends ................................................................... 164 4.11 Location Map of Continuous TEOM Monitoring Sites ................................................. 165 4.12 2013 Queens College 1405DF vs. Daily FRM ............................................... 167 4.13 EPA FEM Test Criteria for slope, inte rcept, and correlation coefficient ................. 167 4.14 Location Map of Speciation Trends Network Sites ....................................................... 168 4.15 Sulfur Dioxide Monitors a nd Concentration Trends .................................................... 176 4.16 Location Map of Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Sites ....................................................... 177 4.17 Ozone Monitors and 1 hr Concentration Trends ........................................................... 180 4.18 Ozone Monitors and 8 hr Concentration Trends ........................................................... 180 4.19 Location Map of Ozone Monitoring Sites ..................................................................... 181 5.1 Annual Averages for Benzene ..................................................................................... 186 5.2 Annual Averages for Toluene ................................................................................. 187 5.3 Annual Averages for m,p -Xylene .............................................................................. 187 5.4 Annual Averages for o -Xylene ................................................................................... 188 5.5 Annual Averages for 1,3-Butadiene .............................................................................. 188 5.6 Annual Averages for Dichloromethane ......................................................................... 189 5.7 Annual Averages for Chloroform .................................................................................. 189 5.8 Annual Averages for 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ................................................................... 190 5.9 Annual Averages for Formaldehyde .............................................................................. 190 5.10 Annual Averages for Acetaldehyde ............................................................................. 191 5.11 Location Map of Toxics Monitoring Sites ..................................................................... 192 7.1 Location Map of Acid Deposition Monitoring Sites .................................................... 201 8.1 Annual Averages for Benzene at Tonawanda Sites .......................................... 203Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 6 of 207

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System AQI Air Quality Index AQS Air Quality System AMoN Ammonia Gas Monitoring Network ARM Approved Regional Method ASRC Atmospheric Sciences Research Center BAQS Bureau of Air Quality Surveillance CAMR Clean Air Mercury Rule CASTNet Clean Air Status and Trends Network CBSA Core-Based Statistical Area CCNY City College of New York CFR Code of Federal Regulations CMSA Consolidated Metr opolitan Statistical Area CO Carbon Monoxide Cr Chromium CSN Chemical Speciation Network CTDEP Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection DNPH 2,4-Dinitrophenyl hydrazine EAC Early Action Compact EC Elemental Carbon EPA Environmental Protection Agency FEM Federal Equivalent Method FRM Federal Reference Method GC Gas Chromatography GCMS Gas Chromatogr aphy/Mass Spectrometry HAPs Hazardous Air Pollutants HPLC High Performan ce Liquid Chromatography ICP-MS Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry IMPROVE Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments MDN Mercury Deposition Network NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NADP National Atmospheric Deposition Program NATTS National Air Toxics Trends Stations NCore National Core NESCAUM New England States Co ordinated Air Use Management NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection NO Nitric oxide NO 2 Nitrogen dioxide NO x Nitrogen oxides NO y Sum of reactive nitrogen oxides NSR New Source Review NYC New York City NYCRR New York State Code s, Rules and RegulationsAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 7 of 207

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations (continued)

NYSERDA New York State Energy Res earch and Development Authority O 3 Ozone OC Organic Carbon ORD Office of Research and Development (EPA) PAHs Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons PAMS Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations Pb Lead PM Particulate Matter PM 10 Particulate Matter with an aer odynamic diameter of 10 microns or less PM 2.5 Particulate Matter with an aer odynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less PMTACS PM 2.5 Technology Assessment and Characterization Study ppb Parts per billion ppm Parts per million PUF Polyurethane Foam PWEI Population Weighted Emissions Index SADCA State Acid Deposition Control Act SIP State Implementation Plan SLAMS State and Local Air Monitoring Stations SO 2 Sulfur dioxide SOAP Speciation of Orga nics for Apportionment of PM 2.5 SO x Sulfur oxides SPM Special Purpose Monitors SUNY State University of New York TEOM Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance TSP Total Suspended Particulate UV Ultra Violet VOCs Volatile Organic CompoundsAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 8 of 207

1. Introduction

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA ) finalized amendments to the ambient air monitoring regulations on October 17, 2006. The am endments revise the technical requirements for certain types of sites, a dd provisions for monitoring of PM 10-2.5 , and reduce certain monitoring requirements for crit eria pollutants. Monitoring ag encies are required to submit annual monitoring network plans, conduct networ k assessments every 5 years, perform quality assurance activities, and, in certain inst ances, establish NCore sites by January 1, 2011.

Starting in July 2007, each State, or where app licable local, agency is required to “adopt and submit to the Regional Administrator an annual m onitoring network plan which shall provide for the establishment and maintenance of an air quality surveillance system that consists of a network of SLAMS monitoring stat ions including FRM, FEM, and ARM monitors that are part of SLAMS, NCore stations, CSN stations, State speciation stati ons, SPM stations, and/or, in serious, severe and extreme ozone nonattainme nt areas, PAMS stations, and SPM monitoring stations.” This document is prepared and submitted as part of the fulfillment to these requirements.

1.1 Background

New York State began a concerted effort to cont rol the air pollution problem back in 1957, when the State Legislature enacted one of the nation’s first comprehensive air pollution control laws. An Air Pollution Control Board was established to develop and direct a public information program for monitoring contaminant levels, and to conduct area studies and inventories outlining major problems. In December 1964, New York Stat e developed air quality standards to protect its citizens against adverse health effects. Thes e standards provided a long-range planning tool and established numerical air qua lity limits for the following contaminants: particulates, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, oxidants, hydrogen sulfide, fluoride, beryllium and sulfuric acid mist.

In 1966 the Legislature responded to the incr easing pollution levels by restructuring the administrative authority into the Department of Health, under which the Division of Air Resources was created. Major legislation was also introduced to provide increased efficacy of rules and regulations. That year also marked the severe New York City Thanksgiving holiday air pollution episode brought upon by a temperature i nversion that lasted through the weekend.

By the time when the first Earth Day was held in 1970, it had become apparent that pollution abatement strategies in place were inadequate , and air quality—along with water quality and solid waste—became cornerstones of the emer ging U.S. environmental conscience. The 1970 Clean Air Act Extension, and the establishment of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in that same year, were defining moments in th e history of air qual ity in this country.

Another development which has had a major effect on air pollution control in New York State was the creation of the Department of Environm ental Conservation in 1970. The Division of Air Resources was transferred to the new Department and its administrative functions restructured and streamlined. Nine new regional offices were es tablished to carry out responsibilities relating to pollution control of s ources within their respec tive part of the State.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 9 of 207

In 1977, the first set of Clean Air Act amendmen ts was adopted because many states failed to meet mandated targets. One of the most effective of these wa s the New Source Review (NSR), which addresses older facilities that had been "grandfathered" by the original law. In 1990, additional amendments to the Clean Air Act incl uded provisions for attainment and maintenance of national ambient air quality standards, mobile sources, air toxics, acid deposition control, permits, stratospheric ozone and global climate protection, enforcement; visibility improvement near National Parks, and other provisions relating to research, development and air monitoring.

In 1997, EPA announced more strict national ambient air quality st andards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone, the primary constituent of smog. After a lengthy scientif ic review process, including extensive external scientific revi ew, EPA determined that these changes were necessary to protect public hea lth and the environment. The new standard was intended to be more protective of the health of children and adults who play and work outdoors in the summer. In establishing the 8-hour standard, EPA set the standard at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) as an average over an 8-hour period and defines the ne w standard as a "concentration-based" form, specifically the 3-year aver age of the annual 4th-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations. EPA also added new standards, using PM 2 5 as the indicator for fine particles (with PM 2 5 referring to particles with a nominal m ean aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 μ m), and retained PM 10 standards for the purpose of regul ating the coarse fraction of PM 10 (referred to as thoracic coarse particles or coarse-fraction particle s, generally incl uding particles with a nominal mean aerodynamic diameter greater than 2.5 μ m and less than or equal to 10 μ m, or PM 10-2.5 ). EPA established two new PM 2.5 standards: an annual standard of 15 μ g/m 3 based on the 3-year average of annual arithmetic mean PM 2.5 concentrations from single or multiple community-oriented monitors; and a 24-hour standard of 65 μ g/m 3 , based on the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour PM 2.5 concentrations at each population-oriented monitor within an area. These new standards were chal lenged by industry and in May of 1999 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Court ruled that U.S. EPA must reconsider the new 8-hr ozone and fine particulate standards. The court did not throw out the standards, but ruled that U.S. EPA could not enforce th em. On February 27, 2001, the Supreme Court substantially reversed the ruling of the lower court. The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for resolution of any remaining issues that had not b een addressed in that court’s earlier rulings. In March 2002, the Court of Appeals reject ed all remaining challenges to the standards.

In December 2006, EPA issued the final rule re vising the NAAQS for PM to provide increased protection of public health and welfare, resp ectively. EPA revised the level of the 24-hour PM 2.5 standard to 35 micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ) and retained the le vel of the annual PM 2.5 standard at 15 μ g/m 3 . With regard to PM 10 , the 24-hour standard was retained, but the annual PM 10 standard was revoked.

The current 8-hr ozone standard of 0. 075 ppm, effective since May 27, 2008 is under reconsideration and may be revised to a lower value.

In November 2008 EPA revised the NAAQS for lead from the previous quarterly average of 1.5μg/m 3 to the more protective 3-mont h rolling average of 0.15μg/m 3 . As part of the lead monitoring requirements, monitoring agencies ar e required to monitor ambient air near lead sources which are expected to or have been shown to have a potential to contribute to a 3-monthAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 10 of 207

average lead concentration in ambient air in ex cess of the level of the NAAQS. At a minimum, monitoring agencies must monitor near lead sour ces that emit 1.0 ton per year (tpy) or more. Monitoring is also required in each Core-Based Statistical Area (CBSA) with a population equal to or greater than 500,000 people as determined by the latest available cen sus figures. Revisions to the monitoring requirements pertaining to wher e State and local monitoring agencies would be required to conduct lead monitoring were finali zed and became effective January 26, 2011. The new regulations replaced the popul ation oriented monitoring require ment with a requirement to add Pb monitors to the urban NCore monitors. The EPA also lowered the emission threshold from 1.0 tpy to 0.50 tpy for industrial sources of lead (e.g., lead smelters and foundries). However, the emission threshold for airports was maintained at 1.0 tpy. In addition, an airport monitoring study has been implemented to determin e the need for monitoring of airports which emit less than 1.0 tpy of lead. Under this new rule lead monitoring is required for a minimum of one year at 15 additional airports that have been identified as having characteristics that could lead to ambient lead concen trations approaching or exceed ing the lead NAAQS. Brookhaven and Republic airports in Suffo lk County, New York have been designated as such. The Brookhaven study was completed in October, 2012, and the Republic Airport monitoring concluded in October 2013.

The annual NAAQS for NO 2 is set at 0.053 ppm. In 2010 EPA revised the NAAQS to include an hourly standard of 0.100 ppm

. Under the new NO 2 rule that became effective January 22, 2010 each MSA with population larger than 500,000 will be required to operate a near-road monitor beginning in 2013. On March 7, 2013, EPA issu ed a final rule to re vise the deadlines by which the near-road monitors within the NO 2 monitoring network are to be operational. States and local agencies are requi red to begin operating the ne ar-road component of the NO 2 network in phases between January 1, 2014 and January 1, 2017. This replaces the 2010 rule requirement that originally required all new NO 2 monitors to begin operating on January 1, 2013. The nearroad site in Buffalo commenced operation in April, 2014. Preparations are under way for the two remaining sites in Rochester and Queens. Th e details will be published in an addendum to this plan when they are finalized.

In June, 2010, EPA established a new 1-hour SO 2 standard at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), based on the 3-year average of the annua l 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. Additionally, both the 24-hour and annual primary SO 2 standards were revoked. EPA also established requirements for SO 2 monitoring in areas where there is an increased coincidence of population and SO 2 emissions.

On Dec. 14, 2012 the U.S. Environmental Protecti on Agency (EPA) strengthened the nation’s air quality standards for fine particle pollution to improve public health protection by revising the primary annual PM 2.5 standard from 15 to 12 micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ) and retaining the 24-hour fine partic le standard of 35 μ g/m 3 . The new standards became effective on March 18, 2013.

Through the years, ambient monitoring has always been an important and integral part of the overall effort to manage our environmental resources. The Bureau of Air Quality Surveillance, which was originally established in the Divi sion of Air Resources unde r the Department of Health in 1966, has been performi ng ambient air monitoring since.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 11 of 207

1.2 Topography and Climate of New York State

New York State contains 49,576 square miles, incl usive of 1,637 square miles of inland water, but exclusive of the boundary-wat er areas of Long Island So und, New York Harbor, Lake Ontario, and Lake Erie. The Adirondacks cover most of the northeast and occupy about onefourth of the state's total area. The Appalachia n Highlands, including the Catskill Mountains and Kittatinny Mountain Ridge (or Shawangunk Mountains), extend across the southern half of the state, from the Hudson River Valley to the basin of Lake Erie. Be tween these two upland regions, and also along the state' s northern and eastern borders, lies a network of lowlands, including the Great Lakes Plain; the Huds on, Mohawk, Lake Champlain, and St. Lawrence valleys; and the coastal areas of New York City and Long Island.

The climate of New York State is broadly representative of th e humid continental type, which prevails in the northeastern United States, but its diversity is not usually encountered within an area of comparable size. The geographical position of the state and the usual course of air masses, governed by the large-scal e patterns of atmospheric circul ation, provide general climatic controls. Differences in latitude , character of the topography, and proximity to large bodies of water have pronounced effects on the climate.

The planetary atmospheric circulation brings a gr eat variety of air masses to New York State. Masses of cold, dry air frequently arrive from the northern interior of th e continent. Prevailing winds from the south and southwest transport warm, humid air, which has been conditioned by the Gulf of Mexico and adjacent subtropical wa ters. These two air masses provide the dominant continental characteristics of the climate. The third great air mass flows inland from the North Atlantic Ocean and produces cool, cloudy, a nd damp weather conditions. This maritime influence is important to New York's climatic re gime, especially in the southeastern portion of the state, but it is secondary to that of the mo re prevalent air mass flow from the continent.

The prevailing wind is generally from the west in New York State. A southwest component becomes evident in winds during the warmer months while a northwest component is characteristic of the colder one-half of the year. The climate of the state features much cl oudy weather during the months of November, December, and January in upstate New York, esp ecially those regions that adjoin the Great Lakes and Finger Lakes and includ e the southern tier of counties. From June through September, however, about 60 to 70 percent of the possible sunshine hours are received. In the Atlantic coastal region, the sunshine hours increases from 50 percent of possible in the winter to about 65 percent of possibl e in the summer.

The Atlantic Coastal Plain and lower Hudson Valley experience conditions of high temperature and high humidity with some frequency and dur ation during the summer. By comparison, such conditions occur less frequently in the broad interior of New York State where they are usually shortened by the arrival of cooler, drier air masses from the northwest.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 12 of 207

1.3 Population and Demographics

The US Census Bureau data for 2010 provide the following information for the State and 13 Metropolitan Areas of New York. The New York portion of the NY--NJ--CT--PA CMSA population numbered 13,038,826, constituting 69% of the State’s total residents.

Table 1.1 2010 Census Population for Major Met ropolitan Statistical Areas in New York

MSA 2000 2005* 2010 2013* Difference (2000-2013) %

AlbanySchenectadyTroy 875,583 848,879 870,716 877,905 2,322 0.27

Binghamton 252,320 248,422 251,725 247,777 -4,543 -1.8BuffaloNiagara Falls 1,170,111 1,147,711 1,135,509 1,134,115 -35,996 -3.08

Elmira 91,070 89,512 88,830 88,506 -2,564 -2.82 Glens Falls 124,345 128,572 128,923 128,430 4,085 3.29 Ithaca 96,501 100,018 101,564 103,617 7,116 7.37 Kingston 177,749 182,693 182,493 180,998 3,249 1.83PoughkeepsieNewburghMiddletown 621,517 667,742 670,301 672,508 50,991 8.2

NassauSuffolk 2,753,913 2,808,064 2,832,882 2,851,884 97,971 3.56

New YorkWhite Plains 9,314,235 9,477,427 9,908,456 10,071,134 756,899 8.13

Rochester 1,098,201 1,039,028 1,054,323 1,083,278 -14,923 -1.36 Syracuse 732,117 651,763 662,577 661,934 -70,183 -9.59 Utica-Rome 299,896 297,885 299,397 297,766 -2,130 -0.71 State Total 18,976,457 18,976,457 19,378,102 19,651,127 674,670 3.56 * Census Bureau estimation

According to Census Bureau, the NYS popul ation in 2010 totaled 19,378,102, the third most populous state in the nation. The population chan ge from 2000 indicates a net increase of 674,670 for the entire State. The State saw a mo dest growth overall in the 13-year period, mostly in the downstate areas at the expense of the western MS As. A population density map by county based on the 2010 data is depicted in Figure 1.1Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 13 of 207

Figure 1.1 Population Density in New York State by County

Environmental Justice Areas Environmental justice (EJ) is defined as the fa ir treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of envir onmental laws, regulations, and policies.

Environmental justice efforts focus on improving the environment in communities, specifically minority and low-income communities, and addr essing disproportionate adverse environmental impacts that may exist in those communities.

A map of potential EJ areas in the State is shown in Figure 1.2. Approximately 37% of New York’s population resides in potential EJ areas. In our network, there are 19 air monitors, 14 of which downstate, sited within areas designated as such. The number of air monitoring sites located in potential EJ areas is commensurate with the population percentage residing therein. In the populous downstate area, 61% of the network monitors are loca ted in potential EJ areas, in which 52% of the population lives.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 14 of 207

Figure 1.2 Potential Environmental Justice Areas in New York State

Sensitive Sub-Populations

Children, the elderly, and people wi th underlying health issues ma y be more susceptible to the deleterious effects associated with air pollution, and are considered to be under the sensitive subpopulations category. Sixteen monitoring sites in the network are located on public school grounds, where attending st udents are of grade school to high school age.

Citizens groups often bring a ttention to NYSDEC the areas wh ere they believe have high incidences of health related problems due to ai r pollution, such as asthma, respiratory diseases, and cancer clusters. Where possible we try to accommodate concerned citizens by providing air quality data from nearby monitoring sites. Fo r example, IS 143 serves the Lower Washington Heights Neighborhood Association; and IS 74 serves the Nos Quedamos Community Development Corporation. In the case of the Cl ean Air Coalition of W NY, we were able to obtain EPA funding to carry out the Tonawa nda Community Air Quality Study. In the Community Air Screen Program that began in the fall of 2012, 90% of the selected community groups are in or within half mile of potential EJ areas.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 15 of 207

2. Chronology of Air Monito ring in New York State

Manual sampling programs began in 1958. Most of the early sampling stations measured suspended particulates, settleable particulates, and sulfation (a n indicator of sulfur dioxide concentration). The early monitoring system employed high volume samplers, and for the first year, operated on a daily basis. Subsequently sa mpling was reduced to a 1-in-6 day schedule, after statistical analysis of the first year’s da ta indicated that such sampling frequency would provide an adequate represen tation of particulate polluti on. By 1964, the manual monitoring system had evolved to 104 full-time stati ons, 140 stations by 1970, and 250 by the mid 70's.

New York was among the first to install and ope rate a continuous air quality monitoring system. The parameters monitored in the early 70's incl uded: sulfur dioxide, ni tric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, carbon monoxide, total hydroca rbons, soiling, and meteorological data.

Trace metal analysis of high volume sampler filte rs was initiated in 1979. Historically the NYS Department of Health provided laboratory serv ices until 2003, when the positions funded by our Department for the analysis work were eliminated due to a statewide workforce reduction. The lead analysis continued until 2005. The lack of formal funding mechanisms between the two state agencies precluded the continuation of laboratory analysis support. The necessary laboratory work is now provide d by a contract laboratory.

In 1986, New York began measuring inhalable particulates using high volume air samplers with a 0-10 micron size selective inlet. In the same year the Acid Deposition Monitoring Network was also established. In 1987, EPA revise d the PM standard to regulate PM 10

.

In 1988, the NYS ambient monitoring networ ks consisted of 85 TSP sites, 16 PM 10 , 15 carbon monoxide monitors, 27 sulfur dioxide sites, 20 ozone stations, 8 NO x monitors, and 18 lead sampling sites. There were 17 operational acid depos ition sites statewide, and the initial phase of the toxics network was completed with the establ ishment of six toxic monitors in Staten Island. By 1990, the networks had the following make up: 58 TSP, 60 PM 10 , 25 SO 2 , 16 CO, 26 ozone, 7 NO x , 16 lead, 18 acid deposition, 10 toxics, an d 8 trace metals si tes, respectively.

In accordance with the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendm ents, in 1994 BAQS established the first of two ambient air monitoring sites for enhan ced ozone monitoring called Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) to collec t and report detailed data for volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, ozone and meteorological parameters.

BAQS began implementing the PM 2.5 monitoring networks of FRM and TEOM monitors in 1998. At its peak, there were 46 FRM instruments deployed. After sufficient data were obtained for attainment determination, FRM sites were reduced and some sites were augmented with TEOM instruments in order to provide realtime inputs for EPA’s AIRNow website for Air Quality Index (AQI) reporting.

BAQS currently operates the following monitors: 28 ozone, 18 SO 2 , 7 NO x (including 3 NO y ), 7 CO, 19 FRM PM 2.5 , 26 TEOM PM 2.5 , 5 FRM PM 10 , 3 TEOM 1405-DF(PM 2.5, PM 10 , PMcourse), 8 CSN, 2 speciated carbon, 2 black carbon (aetha lometer), 2 speciated mercury, 4 particulate sulfate, 7 acid deposition, 3 TSP-lead, 1 PM 10 -lead, 2 PM 10 metals, 11 toxics, 8 carbonyls, 2Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 16 of 207

PAMS, 2 PAHs, and 20 meteorol ogical stations. Figures 2.1 a nd 2.2 below show the geographic locations of monitoring sites in all nine regions of the State.

Figure 2.1 Location Map of Monitoring Sites in New York State Excluding NYCAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 17 of 207

Figure 2.2 Location Map of Ambien t Air Monitoring Sites in NYC

2.1 Monitoring Related Research and Investigations

In addition to the routine monitoring work, bureau staff collaborate with researchers from other agencies and academic institutions on a multitude of air pollution related studies. Over the years we have participated in research projects with the following partners: New York State Department of Health, New Jersey Departme nt of Environmental Protection, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Stat e University of New York, Albany, Clarkson University, Massachusetts Institute of Tec hnology, Rutgers University, Drexel University, University of Rochester Medical Center, Desert Research Institute, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, City University of New York, and Columbia University. These endeavors provided valuable data for the regulatory, scientific, a nd health research communities. Study findings are communicated through journal publica tions, as well as presentations at technical meetings and conferences. Listings of peer-reviewed scientific articles and oral/poster presentations resulting from recent BAQS monitoring act ivities are provided below.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 18 of 207

2.1.1 Publications

Kevin L. Civerolo, Oliver V. Rattigan, H. Dirk Felton, Matthew J. Hirsh and Steven DeSantis. Mercury wet deposition and speciat ed air concentrations from tw o urban locations in New York State: temporal patterns and re gional context. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, Accepted May 2014.

Oliver V. Rattigan, Kevin Civerolo, Prakash Doraiswamy, H. Dirk Felton and Philip K. Hopke. Long term black carbon measurements at two ur ban locations in New York. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 13, 1181-1196, 2013.

Thomas D. Matte, Zev Ross, Iyad Kheirbek, Ho lger Eisl, Sarah Johnson, John E. Gorczynski, Daniel Kass, Steven Markowitz, Grant Pezeshki and Jane E. Clougherty. Monitoring intra-urban spatial patterns of multiple combustion air pollutants in New York City: Design and implementation. Journal of Exposure Scien ce and Environmental Epidemiology, 23, 223-231, 2013.

Jane E. Clougherty, Iyad Kheirbek, Holger M. Eisl, Zev Ross, Grant Pezeshki, John E. Gorczynski, Sarah Johnson, Steven Markowitz, Daniel Kass and Thomas Matte. Intra-urban spatial variability in wintertime street-level concentrations of multiple combustion-related air pollutants: The New York City Community Air Survey (NYCCAS), Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, 23, 232-240, 2013.

Yungang Wang, Jiaoyan Huang, Philip K. Hopke, Oliver V. Rattigan, David C. Chalupa, Mark J. Utell, Thomas M. Holsen. Effect of the shutdown of a la rge coal-fired power plant on ambient mercury species. Chemosphere, 92, 360-367, 2013.

Hyun-Deok Choi, Jiaoyan Huang, Sumona Monda l, Thomas M. Holsen. Variation in concentrations of three mercury (Hg) forms at a rural and a suburban site in New York State. Science of the Total Environment, 448, 96-106, 2013.

Zheming Tong, Yan Jason Wang, Molini Patel, Patr ick Kinney, Steven Chrillrud and K. Max Zhang. Modeling Spatial Variations of Black Car bon Particles in an Urban Highway-Building Environment. Environmental Science & Technology, 46, 312-319, 2012.

Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, Oliver V. Rattiga n, David C. Chalupa, Mark J. Utell. Multiyear black carbon measurement and source appo rtionment using Delta-C in Rochester, NY. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 62, 880-887, 2012.

Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, Oliver V. Rattiga n, A new Indicator of Firework Emissions in Rochester, New York. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 184, 7293-7297, 2012.

Yu Chi Lin, James J. Schwab, Kenneth L. Deme rjian, Min-Suk Bae, Wei-Nai Chen, Yele Sun, Qi Zhang, Hui-Ming Hung, and Jacqueline Perry , Summertime formaldehyde observations in New York City: Ambient levels, sources and it s contribution to HOx radicals. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, D08305, 14 PP., 2012 doi:10.1029/2011JD016504Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 19 of 207

Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, Xiaoyan Xia, Oliver V. Rattigan, David C. Chalupa, Mark J. Utell. Source apportionment of airborne particulate matter using inorganic and organic species as tracers. Atmospheric Environment, 55, 525-532, 2012.

Jiaoyan Huang, Philip K. Hopke, Hyun-Deok Choi , James R. Laing, Huailue Cui, Tiffany J. Zananski, Sriraam Ramanathan Chandrasekaran, Oliver V. Rattigan and Thomas M. Holsen, Mercury (Hg) emissions from domestic biom ass combustion for space heating, Chemosphere 84, 1694-1699, 2011.

Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, Oliver V. Rattigan and Yifang Zhu, Characterization of ambient black carbon and wood burning particles in two urban areas, Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 13, 1919-1926, 2011.

Y.-L. Sun, Q. Zhang, J. J. Schwab, K. L. Demerjian, W.-N. Chen, M.-S. Bae, H.-M. Hung, O. Hogrefe, B. Frank, O. V. Rattigan, and Y.-C. Li n, Characterization of the sources and processes of organic and inorganic aerosols in New York city with a high-re solution time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1581–1602, 2011.

Min-Suk Bae, James J. Schwab, Wei-Nai Che n1, Chuan-Yao Lin, Oliver V. Rattigan, Kenneth L. Demerjian. Identifying pollutant source directions using multiple analysis at a rural location in New York, Atmospheric Environment, 45, 2531-2540, 2011.

Oliver V. Rattigan, H. Dirk Felton, Min-Suk B ae, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian Comparison of long-term PM 2.5 carbon measurements at an urban and rural location in New York. Atmospheric Environment, 45, 3228-3236, 2011.

Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, Oliver V. Rattig an and Xiaoyan Xia. Characterization of residential wood combustion part icles using the two-wavelength aethalometer, Environmental Science & Technology, 45, 7387-7393, 2011.

Oliver V. Rattigan, H. Dirk Felton, Min-Suk B ae, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, Multi-year hourly PM 2.5 carbon measurements in New York: Diurnal, day of week and seasonal patterns, Atmospheric Environment, 44, 2043-2053, 2011. Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, David C. Chalupa, Mark J. Utell. Long-term study of urban ultrafine particles and ot her pollutants. Atmospheric Environment, 45, 7672-7680, 2011.

Vincent A. Dutkiewicz, Liaquat Husain, Utpal K. Roychowdhury, Kenneth L. Demerjian. Impact of Canadian wildfire smoke on air quality at two rural sites in NY State, Atmospheric Environment, 45, 2028-2033, 2011.

Vincent A. Dutkiewicz, Liaquat Husain, Utpal K. Roychowdhury, Kenneth L. Demerjian, Black carbon transport to a remote mountaintop in the northeastern US and relationship with other pollutants, Atmospheric Environment, 45, 2011-2019, 2011.

Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, Mark. J. Utell, Ur ban-scale Spatial-temporal Variability of Black Carbon and Winter Resi dential Wood Combustion Particle s, Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 11, 473–481, 2011.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 20 of 207

Yungang Wang, Jiaoyan Huang, Ti ffany J Zananski, Philip K Hopke, Thomas M Holsen, Impacts of the Canadian forest fires on atmo spheric mercury and carbonaceous particles in Northern New York. Environmenta l Science & Technology, vol 44, 8435-8440, 2010.

Ozone, Trace Gas, and Particulate Matter Measurements at a Rural Site in Southwestern New York State: 1995–2005, James J. Schwab, John B. Sp icer, and Kenneth L. Demerjian, J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 59:293–309, 2009.

Dirk Felton, Is it Time to Upgrade the PM 2.5 Federal Reference Method? Air & Waste Management EM Magazine, February, 2009.

Haider A. Khwajaa, Pravin P. Parekha, Adil R. Khana , Daniel L. Hershey, Ronaq R. Naqvie, Abdul Malikf, Khalid Khanf, In-Depth Charac terization of Urban Aerosols Using Electron Microscopy and Energy-Dispersive X-ray Analysis, CLEAN, 37(7), Pages 544-554, 2009.

Valerie B Haley, Thomas O Talbot and Henry D Felton, Surveillance of the Impact of Air Pollution on Cardiovascular Disease in New York State, Environmental Health, 2009. 8 : 42 (22 September 2009).

Stephen R. McDow, Monica A. Mazurek, Min Li , Lee Alter, John Graham, H. Dirk Felton, Thomas McKenna, Charles Pietarinen, Alan Leston, Steve Bailey, Sania W. Tong Argao, Speciation and Atmospheric Abundance of Organic Compounds in PM 2.5 from the New York City Area. I. Sampling Network, Sampler Ev aluation, Molecular Level Blank Evaluation. Aerosol Science and Technology, 42:50–63, 2008.

Vincent A. Dutkiewicz, Sumizah Qureshi, Adil R. Khan, Liaquat Husain, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, Field test data for 42 liter per minute PM 2.5 aerosol sampler used during the PMTACS-NY intensives held at Queens Coll ege, Queens, NY, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 40, Supplement 2, 2006, Pages 182-191.

Sumizah Qureshi, Vincent A. Dutkiewicz, Adil R. Khan, Kamal Swami, Karl X.Yang, Liaquat Husain, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, Elemental composition of PM 2.5 aerosols in Queens, New York: Solubility and temporal trends, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 40, Supplement 2, 2006, Pages 238-251.

Vincent A. Dutkiewicz, Sumizah Qureshi, Liaq uat Husain, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, Elemental composition of PM 2.5 aerosols in Queens, New York: Evaluation of sources of fine-particle mass, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 40, Supplement 2, 2006, Pages 347-359.

Min-Suk Bae, Kenneth L. Demerjian and James J. Schwab, Seasonal estimation of organic mass to organic carbon in PM 2.5 at rural and urban locations in New York state, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 40, I ssue 39, December 2006, Pages 7467-7479.

Oliver V. Rattigan, Olga Hogrefe, H.D. Fe lton, James J. Schwab, Utpal K. Roychowdhury, Liaquat Husain, Vincent A. Dutkiewicz and Kenn eth L. Demerjian, Multi-year urban and rural semi-continuous PM 2.5 sulfate and nitrate measurements in New York state: Evaluation andAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 21 of 207

comparison with filter based measurements, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 40, Supplement 2, 2006, Pages 192-205.

Xinrong Ren, William H. Brune, Jingqiu Mao, Michael J. Mitchell, Robert L. Lesher, James B. Simpas, Andrew R. Metcalf, James J. Schwa b, Yongquan Li, Kenneth L. Demerjian, Henry D. Felton, Garry Boynton, Allen Adams, Jacqueline Perry, Yi He, Xianliang Zhou, and Jian Hou, Behavior of OH and HO 2 in the Winter Atmosphere in New York City, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 40, Supplement 2, 2006, Pages 252-263.

Liming Zhou, Philip K. Hopke and Prasanna Venkat achari, Cluster analysis of single particle mass spectra measured at Flushing, NY, Analytica Chimica Acta, Volume 555, Issue 1, 5 January 2006, Pages 47-56.

Schwab J.J., Felton H.D., Rattigan O.V., Deme rjian K.L., New York State Urban and Rural Measurements of Continuous PM 2.5 Mass by FDMS, TEOM and BAM, Journal Air & Waste Management Assoc. 2006, Volume 56:372-383.

Schwab, J.J., O. Hogrefe, K. L. Demerjian, V. A. Dutkiewicz, L. Husain, O. V. Rattigan, and H. D. Felton, Field and Laboratory Evaluation of the Thermo Electron 5020 Sulfate Particulate Analyzer, Aerosol Science & Technology, 2006, 40, S1, 36-44.

Venkatachari P., Zhou L., Hopke P.K., Felton D., Rattigan O.V., Schwab J.J., Demerjian K.L., Spatial and Temporal Variability of Black Carbon in New York City, Journal of Geophysical Research, 2006, Vol 111, D10S05, 1-9.

Venkatachari P., Zhou L., Hopke P.K., Schwab J. J., Demerjian K.L., Weimer, S., Hogrefe O., Felton D., Rattigan O.,., An Intercomparis on of Measurement Methods for Carbonaceous Aerosol in the Ambient Air in New York City, Aerosol Science & Technology, 2006, 40, 788- 795.

Nenad Aleksic, Garry Boynton, Gopal Sistla, Jacqueline Perry, Concentrations and Trends of Benzene in Ambient Air over New York St ate during 1990-2003 Atmospheric Environment Volume 39 (2005) 7894-7905.

Zheng Li, Philip K. Hopke, Liaquat Husain, Sumizah Qureshi, Vincent A. Dutkiewicz, James J. Schwab, Frank Drewnick and Kenneth L. Demer jian, Sources of fine particle composition in New York city, Atmospheric Environment, Volume 38, Issue 38, December 2004, Pages 6521- 6529.

Drewnick, F., J. J. Schwab, J. T. Jayne, M. Canagaratna, D.R. Worsnop, and K.L. Demerjian, Measurement of ambient aerosol composition during the PMTACS-NY 2001 campaign using an aerosol mass spectrometer. Part I: Mass c oncentrations, Aerosol Science and Technology, 38(SI), 92-103, 2004.

Drewnick, F., J.T. Jayne, M. Canagaratna, D. R. Worsnop and K.L. Demerjian, Measurement of ambient aerosol composition during the PMTA CS-NY 2001 campaign using an aerosol massAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 22 of 207

spectrometer. Part II: Chemically speciated mass distribution, Aerosol Science and Technology, 38(SI):104-117, 2004.

Dutkiewicz, V. A., S.Qureshi, A.R. Khan, V. Ferr ara, J. Schwab, K. Demerjian, and L. Husain , Sources of fine particulat e sulfate in New York”. Atmos. Environ., 38, 3179-3189, 2004.

Hogrefe, O., F. Drewnick, G.G. Lala, J. J. Schwab, and K.L. Demerjian , Development, operation and applications of an aerosol generation, calibrati on and research facility, new instruments and data inversion methods, Ae rosol Science and Technol.ogy, 38(SI): 196-214, 2004.

Hogrefe, O., J. Schwab, F. Drewnick, K. Rhoads, G.G. Lala, H.D. Felton, O.V. Rattigan, L. Husain, V.A. Dutkiewicz, S. Peters, and K.L. Demerjian , Semi-continuous PM 2.5 sulfate and nitrate measurements at an urban and a rura l location in New York: PMTACS-NY Summer 2001 and 2002 campaigns., J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 54, 1040-1060, 2004.

Schwab, J.J., H.D. Felton, and K.L. Demerjian, Ae rosol chemical composition in New York state from integrated filter samples: Urban/rura l and seasonal contrasts”. J. Geophys. Res., 109, D16S05, doi:10.1029/2003JD004078, 2004.

Schwab, J.J., J. Spicer, K.L. Demerjian, J. L. Ambs, and H.D. Felton, Long-term field characterization of TEOM and modified TEOM sa mplers in urban and rural New York State locations”. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 54, 1264-1280, 2004.

Schwab, J.J., O. Hogrefe, K.L. Demerjian, a nd J.L. Ambs, Laboratory characterization of modified TEOM samplers”, J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 54, 1254-1263, 2004.

Schwab, J.J., Y.-Q. Li, and K.L. Demerjian, Semi-continuous formaldehyde measurements with a diffusion scrubber/liquid fluorescence analyzer . In Symposium on air quality measurement methods and technology – 2004 [CD-ROM in press] , Air and Waste Management Association, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2004. Canagaratna, M. J., J. T. Jayne, D. Ghertner, S. Herndon, Q. Shi, J. L. Jimenez , P.J. Silva, P. Williams, T. Lanni, F. Drewnick, K. L. Demer jian, C. Kolb, D. Worsnop, Chase Studies of Particulate Emissions from inuse New York C ity Vehicles, Aerosol Science & Technology, 38, 555-573, 2004. Li, Z., P.K. Hopke, L.Husain, S. Qureshi, V.A. Dutkiewicz, J.J. Schwab, F. Drewnick, and K.L. Demerjian, Sources of Fine Par ticle Composition in New York City, Atmospheric Environment, 38, 6521-6529, 2004.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 23 of 207

2.1.2 Posters/Presentations

Everything but Routine: Air Monitoring from Se pt 11 to Sandy, Dirk Felton, Central New York A&WMA Conference, March 2014.

Interim Report: Phase 1 of the Air Quality Study of the Impact of the Peace Bridge Plaza on the Surrounding Neighborhood, A&WMA Annual Confer ence, Dirk Felton, Rochester, NY, February 2014.

The Air Quality Impact of Super Storm Sandy a nd the Mitigation Strategies That Could Have Helped, Dirk Felton, NYSERDA EMEP Conference, November 6-7, 2013.

The following posters were presented at the EMEP Conference, Nov 6-7, 2013, Albany.

1) Long-term trends of air pollutants in New York State: urban-rural co ntrasts, Oliver V. Rattigan, Kevin L. Civerolo, H. Dirk Felton, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian.

2) 25 Years of Atmospheric Monitoring at Whiteface Mo untain Observatory: A Data Set Available for the Environmental Research Community. R. E. Brandt, J. J. Schwab, K. L. Demerjian, O. V. Rattigan and H.D. Felton.

3) Correlation Between Ambient Ultrafine Particle Events at Two Geog raphically Displaced Monitors in New York City. Brian P. Frank, H.D. Felton, Oliver V. Rattigan, Robert C. Anderson, Jacqueline Perry, Olga Hogrefe, Brian Aho, Gil LaDuke, and Hamza Hafeez.

Appropriately Interpreting Air Quality Data in an Emergency Response, 8th Annual Interagency Workshop Using Environmental Information to Prepare and Respond to Emergencies, Dirk Felton, New York University Kimmel Center, July 2013.

Enhancements to acid deposition monitoring in New York State. KL Civerolo, HD Felton, KM Roy, and GG Lampman. Presented at the Nort heastern Ecosystem Research Cooperative Meeting in Saratoga Springs, NY (March 2013 ) and the Adirondack Research Consortium Annual Conference on the Adirondack s in Lake Placid, NY (May 2013).

Ultrafine Particle Measurements and Evaluati on of Mobile Source Contribution in New York City. Brian P. Frank, James J. Schwab, G. Garland Lala, Oliver V. Rattigan, H. D. Felton, Kenneth L. Demerjian, Robert C. Anderson , Gil LaDuke, and Hongyu Li. 23rd CRC Real World Emissions Workshop, San Diego, CA, April 7-10, 2013.

Ultrafine Particle Monitor (TSI 3031) Measuremen ts and Evaluation in New York City, James J. Schwab, G. Garland Lala, Kenneth L, Demerjian, Brian P. Frank, H. D. Felton, Oliver V. Rattigan, Presented at the American Association for Aerosol Research 31st Annual Conference, October 8-12, 2012, Minneapolis, MN.

Spatial Extent of New Particle Formation and Gr owth Events, James J. Schwab, G. Garland Lala, Kenneth L, Demerjian, Brian P. Frank, H. D. Felton, Oliver V. Rattigan, Presented at the American Association for Aerosol Research 31st Annual Conferen ce, October 8-12, 2012, Minneapolis, MN.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 24 of 207

The Age Old Question: Continuous or 24-hr Integrated Measurements , Oliver V. Rattigan, Kevin L. Civerolo, H. D. Felton and James J. Schwa b, Presented at the American Association for Aerosol Research 31st Annual Conferen ce, October 8-12, 2012, Minneapolis, MN.

NYSDEC Collaborative Community Air Screening, Dirk Felton, Randi Walker, National Air Monitoring Conference, Denver, CO May, 2012.

Temporal Patterns of Air Pollutants at Urba n Locations, Oliver V. Rattigan, 30th Regional Meeting on Kinetics and Dynamics, Wadsworth Center, Albany, Jan 28, 2012.

The following 4 Posters were presented at the EMEP Conference, November 15-16, 2011.

Behavior of ultrafine particles and related particulate and gaseous species at two geographically distributed sites in new york city, B.P. Frank, H.D. Felton, O. Hogrefe, J. Perry, O.V. Rattigan, and R.A. Anderson.

A method to extract and interpret additional aerosol organic carbon fractions from thermal optical analysis of filter-based data, M. Bae, J.J. Sc hwab, O.V. Rattigan, K.L. Demerjian, M. Choe, and S. Kim.

PM 2.5 Class III FEMS: performance evaluation at Qu eens College, New York, O. V. Rattigan, D. H. Felton, and M. Christophersen.

Variations and trends in PM 2.5 mass, sulfate, and carbon concentrati ons at a rural a nd an urban site in new york state , J. J. Schwab, K. L. Demerjian, O. V. Rattigan, and H. D. Felton.

Variations and trends in PM 2.5 mass, sulfate, and carbon concentrati ons at a rural a nd an urban site in New York State, James J. Schwab, Kenneth L. Demerjian, Oliver V. Rattigan, and H. D. Felton, Presented at the American Geophysical Union Annual meeting, San Francisco, November 2011.

A Method to Extract and Interpret Additional Ae rosol Organic Carbon Fractions from Thermal Optical Analysis of Filter-Based Data, Min-Suk Bae, James J. Schwab, Oliver V. Rattigan, Kenneth L. Demerjian, American Association for Aerosol Research, 30th annual conference October 3-7, 2011, Orlando, FL.

Characterization of residential wood combustion pa rticles using the two-wa velength aethalometer, Yungang Wang, Philip K. Hopke, Oliver V. Rattigan and Xiaoyan Xia, American Association for Aerosol Research, 30th annual conf erence October 3-7, 2011, Orlando, FL.

Comparison of Long-Term and Seasonal Behavior of Ultrafine Particle s and Related Species Between Urban Near-Road and Area-Wide Mon itors in New York City. Brian P Frank, HD Felton, Olga Hogrefe, Jacqueline Perry, ROBE RT A ANDERSON. American Association for Aerosol Research, 30th annual conf erence October 3-7, 2011, Orlando, FL.

Establishing an Ambient Mercury Baseline in Ne w York State: Results from an EPA Community Assessment Grant, National Air Toxics Monito ring and Data Analysis Workshop Dallas, TX, April 4-7, 2011.

The View From Ground Level, a Perspective from the States, Well, at Least the Ambient Air Monitoring Perspective from one State, Dirk Felton, P.E., Health Effects Institute Annual Conference, May 1-3, 2011 Boston, MA.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 25 of 207

Comparison of new and old CSN carbon with collocated measurements in New York. Oliver V. Rattigan and H. Dirk Felton, Min-Suk Bae, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, 29 th Annual AAAR Conference, Portland OR, October 25-29, 2010.

Life in the Big City: Evolution of Particle C oncentration, Size Distribu tion, and Composition on a “Typical” Summer Day in Qu eens, New York City. Schwab et al., (co-authors; ASRC and DEC) 29 th Annual AAAR Conference, Po rtland OR, October 25-29, 2010.

Intercomparison of Long-Term Ambient Ultrafine Particle Size Distribution Measurements at a Near-Roadway and a Representative Urban Site in New York City. Bria n P. Frank, Jacqueline Perry, H. D. Felton, Robert A. Anderson, Oliver V. Rattigan. 29 th Annual AAAR Conference, Portland OR, October 25-29, 2010.

Urban Mercury Monitoring: Data Review and Oper ational Notes: A Year Spent with the Tekran Speciated Ambient Mercury Analyzer at Two Urba n Locations in New York State and an update of the AMNET program, Dirk Felton, Kevi n Civerolo, Matt Hirsh: NYSDEC, MARAMA Monitoring Conference, February 23, 2010.

NYSDEC Experience with the Synspec BTEX In strument, Paul Sierzenga, NYS Dept of Environmental Conservation, 2009 EPA National Ambient Air Monitoring Conference.

A Year Spent with the Tekran Speciated Ambien t Mercury Analyzer at Two Urban Locations in New York State, Dirk Felton, Kevin Civerol o, Matt Hirsh: NYSDEC Bureau of Air Quality Surveillance, 2009 EPA National Ambi ent Air Monitoring Conference.

Tonawanda New York Community Air Qual ity Study, Paul Sierzenga, NYS Dept of Environmental Conservation, 2009 EPA National Ambient Air Monitoring Conference.

Calibration System for Low Range GPT Calibrations of High Sensitivity NO x and NO y Monitors, Dirk Felton, Malcolm Baker: NYSDEC Bureau of Air Quality Surveillance Kirk Lovewell, Mark Cogan: Teledyne AP I, 2009 EPA National Ambient Air Monitoring Conference.

Aerosol Carbon Measurements Using Different Techniques in New York: Comparison of Total Carbon, Oliver Rattigan, Atmospheric Sciences Research Center Seminar, December 9, 2008.

Aerosol Optical Properties Obtained from Continuous Mass, Composition and Scattering Measurements, James J. Schwab, Min-Suk Bae, Ol ga Hogrefe, Qi Zhang, G. Garland Lala, Ken Demerjian and Oliver Rattigan, American Associ ation for Aerosol Research Annual Conference, Orlando, FL, October 20-24, 2008.

Effect of Particle Properties on Determination of Mean Particle Size Using the Electrical Aerosol Detector, Brian P. Frank, Olga Hogrefe, Dani el Hershey, American Association for Aerosol Research 27th Annual Conferen ce, Orlando, FL, October 20-24, 2008.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 26 of 207

Aerosol Carbon Measurements Using Different T echniques in New York, Oliver Rattigan, Dirk Felton, James Schwab, Min-Suk Bae and Kenneth Demerjian, American Association for Aerosol Research Annual Conference, Orlando, FL, October 20-24, 2008.

Continuous PM 2.5 Speciation Measurements in New York, Oliver V. Rattigan, H. Dirk Felton, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, Extended Abstract # 524, Air & Waste Management Association Annual Conf erence, Portland, OR, June 24-27, 2008.

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring and Health Rese arch Workshop to Discuss Key Issues, Session 1: Elemental and Organic Carbon Measurements, Chemical Speciation Ne twork: Carbon Issues, Eastern and Western Perspectives on Air Quality Monitoring, Dirk Felton, EPA – RTP, April 16- 17, 2008.

Air Quality Monitoring in New York State, Northeast/New England Regional Air Quality Conference, Dirk Felton, April, 2008.

Why continuous PM 2.5 FEM III data may not be appropriate for attainment demonstrations, National Air Quality Conference, Dirk Felton, Portland, OR, April 6-9, 2008

Results of PM 2.5 Continuous Speciation Measurements in New York, Oliver Rattigan, NYSDEC PE Seminar, March 11, 2008.

Air Quality Data Summit, Session: Inventory of Data Systems, Data provider perspectives, Dirk Felton, RTP, NC, February 12-13, 2008.

Predicting near real-time PM2.5 FRM Concentr ations from Continuous Mass and Species Measurements in New York City. Dirk H. Felton, Oliver V. Rattigan, James J. Schwab, Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR, Reno, NV, Sept 25, 2007.

Highlights of PM 2.5 Continuous Speciation Measurements in New York, Oliver, V. Rattigan, AAAR 26 th Annual Conference, Reno, NV, Sept 25, 2007.

PM 2.5 Carbon Measurements in New York; Comp arison of Techniques and Seasonal, Weekday and Diurnal Patterns, Oliver V. Rattigan, Air & Waste Management Association Symposium on Air Quality Measurement Methods a nd Technology, San Francisco, May 2, 2007.

Multi-Year Measurements of Black Carbon at two Urban Locations in New York: Comparison with Elemental Carbon, Oliver V. Rattigan, H. (D irk) Felton, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR 2006.

Speciated PMcoarse by Difference: A look at a year of XRF data in New York City and in Niagara Falls, New York , Dirk Felton, Kevin Civerolo and Oliver Rattigan, EPA National Monitoring Conference, 2006.

Semi-Continuous Measurements of PM 2.5 Carbon at the South Bronx, NY: Comparison with Filter Measurements, Oliver Rattigan, EPA National Monitoring Conference, 2006. ( http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/am bient/2006conference/schwabsemi.pdf )Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 27 of 207

Concentrations of PM 2.5 and Selected Trace Metals Acro ss the NYC Metropolitan Region, Kevin Civerolo, EPA National Monitoring Conference, 2006.

Modifying 50 oC TEOM Data to be more "FRM like" for AQI Reporting using a Non-linear Correction based on the Julian Day, Dirk Felton, Oliver Rattigan, EPA National Monitoring Conference, 2006.

Multiyear Evaluations of PMcoarse by Difference Utilizing Low and High Volume Samplers and Collocated 50 Deg. C TEOMs, Dirk Felton, Oliver V. Rattigan, Robert Baker and Paul Sierzenga, EPA National Monitoring Conference, 2006.

Level 1 Data Validation - Validation at the Gr ass Roots Level, Paul Sierzenga, EPA National Monitoring Conference, 2006.

Measurement of Ambient Aerosol Composition Using an Aerodyne Aerosol Mass Spectrometer in New York City: Winter 2004 Intensive Study, Silke Weimer, Frank Drewnick, James J. Schwab, Kevin Rhoads, Douglas Orsini, Kenneth L. Demerjian, Douglas R. Worsnop, Qi Zhang, Jose J. Jimenez, Dirk Felton, AAAR, 2005.

Continuous Sulfate, Carbon, and PM 2.5 Mass at Addison, NY dur ing the Summer 2004 NEAQS/ITCT Field Intensive, James J. Schwab,J ohn Spicer, Olga Hogrefe, Oliver V. Rattigan, H. D. Felton, Kevin Rhoads, Silke Weimer, Yongquan Li, G. Garland Lala, and Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR, 2005.

Measurement Uncertainty in the Determination of Fine Particle Mass, Sulfate, and Selected Transition Metals, James J. Schwab, H. D. Fe lton, Liaquat Husain, and Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR, 2005.

Urban and Rural Chemical Composition of Fine Part iculate Matter in New York State, James J. Schwab, H. D. Felton, Kevin Civerolo, Lia quat Husain, and Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR, 2005.

Continuous PM 2.5 Sulfate and Carbon at Addison in Rural New York State: Measurements from and Evaluations of the Thermo 5020 Sulfate and th e Sunset Labs OCEC Instruments, James J. Schwab, Olga Hogrefe, Oliver V. Rattigan, H. D. Felton, Vincent Dutkiewicz, Liaquat Husain and Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR, Atlanta, February 7-11, 2005.

Semi-continuous PM 2.5 Sulfate and Nitrate Measurements in New York: Routine Field Measurements and Intensive Field Campaigns, Ol ga Hogrefe, Oliver V. Rattigan, James J. Schwab, Frank Drewnick, Silke Weimer, Kevin R hoads, Kenneth L. Demerjian, PM Supersites AAAR Conference, February 7-11, 2005, Atlanta, GA.

Intercomparison and Evaluation of Semi-Conti nuous PM-2.5 Nitrate and Sulfate Instruments During PMTACS-NY Summer 20 01 Campaign in New York City, Olga Hogrefe, Frank Drewnick, James J. Schwab, Henry D. Felton, Kenneth L. Demerjian, AGU 2004.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 28 of 207

Semi-Continuous PM 2.5 Sulfate and Nitrate Measurements in New York: Routine Field Measurements and Intensive Field Campaigns, Ol ga Hogrefe, Oliver V. Rattigan, James J. Schwab, Utpal Roychowdhury, Frank Drewnick, S ilke Weimer, Kevin Rhoads and Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR, Atlanta, 2005.

Relationship Between NOy, PM, Nitrate And PM 2.5 At A Mountain Site In Upstate New York During The PMTACS-NY Program, U. K. Roychow dhury, R. A. Lamica, J. Schwab and K. L. Demerjian, O. Rattigan, H.D. Felton. AAAR, Atlanta, February 7-11, 2005.

Estimates Of PM 2.5 Aerosol Acidity From Inorganic Ion Balance Measurements At Urban And Rural New York State Locations From CSN Integrat ed Filters, James Schwab, Rachelle Jenkins, Kenneth Demerjian, Dirk Felton, AAAR, Atlanta, February 7-11, 2005

.

Highlights And Lessons Learned: PM 2.5 Technology Assessment And Characterization Study In New York – PMTACS-NY Supersite Program, Kenne th L. Demerjian, J. Schwab, G. Lala, O. Hogrefe, Y. Li, S. Weimer, AAAR 2005.

Real-time PM 2.5 Black Carbon Measurements at Roch ester and the South Bronx, NY, O. V. Rattigan, H. D. Felton and K. L. Ci verolo, EMEP, NYSERDA, October 25, 2005. ( http://www.nyserda.org/programs/Environm ent/EMEP/conference 2005/Rattigan post.pdf )

New York State Urban and Rural Measurements of Continuous PM 2.5 Mass by FDMS TEOM and BAM: Evaluation and Comparisons with the FRM, D. Felton, O.V. Rattigan, K.L. Demerjian, J.J. Schwab,.AAAR 2005, February 7-11, 2005.

Air Quality and Related Health Research: Partic ulates (PM) and Co-Pollutants: What is in Ambient Particulate Matter?, Dirk Felton, NYSERDA EMEP Conference, 2005.

A Review and Update of PM-2.5 Mass and Species Monitoring in New York State, Dirk Felton, NYSDOH Division of Environmental Health Assessment, 2005

Measurements of PM 2.5 Carbon in New York City, Oliver V. Rattigan and H. D. Felton, James J. Schwab and Kenneth L. Demerjian, Orga nic Speciation Workshop, Las Vegas, 2004. ( http://www.wrapair.org/APACE/SPECIATION/VegasOC_2004_Rattigan.pdf )

Semi-Continuous Measurements of PM 2.5 Sulfate, Nitrate and Co-Pollutants at an urban and a rural location. Oliver V. Rattiga n, Olga Hogrefe, D.H. Felton, James J. Schwab, and Kenneth L. Demerjian, AAAR 2004.

R&P 8400S and R&P 8400N Ambient Particulate Sulfate and Nitrate M onitors: Performance during PMTACS-NY Intensive Field Campaigns a nd Routine Measurements, O. Hogrefe, O.V. Rattigan, James J. Schwab, Frank Drewnick, Kevi n Rhoads, Silke Weimer, Douglas Orsini, and Kenneth L. Demerjian, EM EP NYSERDA Conference, 2004.

FDMS Instrument Evaluation, Dirk Felton, National Supersit e Data Review Meeting, 2004Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 29 of 207

3. Monitoring Sites

The Bureau’s tasks and responsibil ities are carried out by staff in four Sections. While the field operators are stationed throughout the State, the managers are phys ically located in the Central Office in Albany (Northern Monitoring, Network Operations), our Regi on 2 Office in Long Island City (Southern Monitoring), and the S UNY East Campus in Rensselaer (Monitoring Support). Functionally, the Northern Monitori ng Section is responsible for ambient air monitoring sites in upstate New York north of and including the counties of Rockland and Putnam. The Southern Monitoring Section is resp onsible for ambient air monitoring sites in the counties of Westchester, Nassau, Suffolk, and t hose counties comprising the City of New York. Currently there are 55 active site s statewide. Figures 3.1 and 3.2 show monitoring site locations for the two monitoring operations, respectively.

Figure 3.1 Site Locations for Northern Monitoring OperationAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 30 of 207

Figure 3.2 Site Locations for Southern Monitoring Operation

Information pertaining to each monitoring si te including site photo, location, parameters monitored, sampling frequency, and analysis methodologies is provided below for the two monitoring operations.

Most of the monitoring sites meet the siting crite ria requirements for the parameters monitored as specified in Appendix E of 40 CFR Part 50. For the few sites that do not meet all of the siting requirements, we have demonstrated to EPA that in all instances the site is as representative of the monitoring area as it would be if the siting crit eria were being met, and that the monitor or probe cannot reasonably be located so as to meet the siting criteria because of physical constraints. Waivers have been granted by the Regional Administrator for these sites.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 31 of 207

3.1 Northern Monitoring Site Listings

Table 3.1 Location Listing for Northern Monitoring Sites

DEC Region AIRS # DEC # Site Name County Location

3 36-027-0007 1328-01 Millb rook Dutchess Forest Research Station 3 36-071-0002 3502-04 Newburgh Orange Public Safety Building 3 36-071-5001 3527-01 Valley Central Or ange Valley Central High School

3 36-071-3001 3566-02 Wallkill Ball ard Orange Ballard Road

3 36-071-3002 3566-09 Wallkill Wakefe rn Orange Wakefern Food 3 36-071-3004 3566-11 Scotchtown Orange 27 Industrial Drive 3 36-079-0005 3951-01 Mt. Ninham Putnam NYSDEC Headquarters 3 36-087-0005 4353-02 Rockland County Rockland Conklin Orchard 4 36-001-0005 0101-13 Albany Albany Al bany County Health Department

4 36-001-0012 0101-33 Loudonv ille Albany Reservoir

5 36-031-0002 1567-03 Whiteface Summit Essex Summit Building

5 36-031-0003 1567-04 Whiteface L odge Essex ASRC (Base Lodge)

5 36-041-0005 2050-01 Piseco Lake Hamilton Airport

5 36-091-0004 4567-01 Stillwater Sarat oga Saratoga Historical Park 6 36-033-0004 1655-01 Paul Smiths Franklin Paul Smith College 6 36-043-0005 2167-03 Nick's Lake Herkimer Campground 6 36-045-0002 2223-01 Perch River Jefferson Game Management Building

6 36-065-2001 3202-01 Utica Oneida Utica Health Dept

6 36-089-0005 4458-05 Wanakena St . Lawrence Ranger Station 7 36-053-0006 2655-01 *Camp Georgetown Madison Rural site 7 36-067-1015 3353-09 E. Syracuse Onondaga Enterprise Parkway

7 36-075-0003 3754-01 Fulton Oswego 820 County Rt. 8

8 36-015-0003 0701-05 Elmira Chemung Water Treatment Plant

8 36-055-1007 2701-22 Rochester Monroe Yarmouth Rd (RG&E Substation)

8 36-101-0003 5001-04 Pinnacle Steuben Pinnacle State Park 8 36-117-3001 5863-01 Williamson Wayne Wa yne County Occupational Center

9 36-029-0002 1451-03 Amherst Erie 450 Maple Rd, Amherst Parks Dept

9 36-029-1014 1472-14 Tona wanda II Erie 192 Brookside Terrace West 9 36-063-1006 3120-02 Middleport Niagara Sewage Treatment Plant

9 36-013-0006 0601-04 Dunkirk Chautauqua Sewage Treatment Plant

9 36-029-0005 1401-18 Buffalo Erie Off Dingens Street, near Weiss

9 36-029-0023 1455-02 Buffalo Near-Road Erie I90 Mile Post 424.6 East Bound Side

*Inactive site due to l ack of utility service.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 32 of 207 

# Albany County Health Dept. 36-001-0005

South Ferry and Green Streets Albany, NY 12202Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 33 of 207



### Albany County Health Department Address: South Ferry and Green Streets Albany, NY 12202

AQS Number: 36-001-0005 DEC Number: 0101-13 County: Albany Statistical Area: Albany-Schenectady-Troy Coordinates: Lat: 42.64225 Lon: -73.75464

This site was established in 1973 as a T SP site. Over time, it has progressed to PM 10 and is now a collocated PM 2.5 FRM site. A continuous R&P TEOM is also operated at the Albany County Health Department. This site is used for AI RNow reporting. Speciati on sampling was added in January 2008.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3

PM 2.5 Collocated Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

PM 2.5 Speciation Ions and Elements Met One SASS Method 811 XRF 1 in 3

PM 2.5 Speciation Carbon URG 3000

Method 838 IMPROVE TOR 1 in 3Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 34 of 207 

# Amherst 36-029-0002

450 Maple Road Amherst, NY 14221Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 35 of 207



### Amherst

Address: Town of Am herst Parks Department & Audubon Golf Course 450 Maple Road Amherst, NY 14221

AQS Number: 36-029-0002 DEC Number: 1451-03 County: Erie Statistical Area: Buffalo - Niagara Falls, NY Coordinates: Lat: 42.99328 Lon: -78.77153

This site was established in July 1972. Amherst is a permanent ozone and nitrogen dioxide site. It is located on land behind the Town of Amherst Parks Department Maintenance building and alongside the Audubon Golf Course in a suburban area. This site measures ozone for the Buffalo area and transport from points we st. It is reported on the AIRNow system. Acid deposition and PM 2.5 monitoring were relocated here from the Ni agara Falls site foll owing its closure.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3

Acid Deposition NCON Bucket Style Collector Model 00- 120-2 Central Analytical Laboratory at the Illinois Water Survey: IC, ICP-OES, FIA Weekly

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 36 of 207 

# Buffalo 36-029-0005

185 Dingens Street Buffalo, NY 14206Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 37 of 207



### Buffalo Address: New York State Thruway Authority Bridge Maintenance Facility Access Road Buffalo, NY 14206

AQS Number: 36-029-0005 DEC Number: 1401-18 County: Erie Statistical Area: Buffalo - Niagara Falls, NY Coordinates: Lat: 42.87691 Lon: -78.80981

This site was originally established in January 1969 and is considered an urban scale site. Buffalo is the main monitoring site for the Buffalo area. It is located on the access road to the New York State Thruway Authority Bridge Maintena nce Facility in an urbanized area. It is in close proximity to interstate 190 and was downw ind of significant industrial sources in the 1970s. The impact from industrial sources had be en drastically reduced over the past two decades. The continuous PM 2.5 data is reported to the AIRNow system.

Toxics and filter based PM 10 monitoring were relocated here from the Niagara Falls upon site closure. The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Oxides of Nitrogen (NO, NO 2 , NO X ) TEI 42C Method 074 Chemiluminescence Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Carbon Monoxide TEI 48C Method 054 Non Dispersive Infrared Continuous

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3 Day

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

PM 2.5 Speciation Ions and Elements Met One SASS Method 811 IC, XRF RTI Laboratory Every Sixth Day

PM 10 R&P Partisol 2025

Method 127 Gravimetric Every Third Day

Toxics Canister

Method 150 GC/MS 1 day in 6Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 38 of 207

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 Speciation Carbon URG 3000 Method 838 IMPROVE TOR Every Sixth Day

Wind Speed/direction Climatronics Sonic Method 020 Continuous

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 Continuous

Proposed changes: reduce PM 10 sampling frequency to 1 day in 6.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 39 of 207 

# Buffalo Near-Road 36-029-0023

I90 Mile Post 424.6 East Bound Side Cheektowaga, NY 14225Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 40 of 207



### Buffalo Near-Road

Address: I90 Mile Post 424.6 East Bound Side Cheektowaga, NY 14225

AQS Number: 36-029-0023 DEC Number: 1455-02 County: Erie Statistical Area: Buffalo - Niagara Falls, NY Coordinates: Lat: 42.921111 Lon: -78.766111

This site was established in 2013 under the new NO x rule that became effective January, 2010. After a brief shake-down period, valid NO 2 measurements were reported beginning April, 2014. A PM 2.5 TEOM, a 1 in 3 day FRM sampler, and a CO instrument are scheduled to begin operation in the 3 rd quarter of 2014, well ahead of the 1/1/2017 required start date.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Oxides of Nitrogen

(NO, NO 2 , NO x ) TEI 42C Method 074 Chemiluminescence ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 41 of 207 

# Camp Georgetown 36-053-0006

Camp Georgetown Crumb Hill Road Georgetown, NY 13072Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 42 of 207



### Camp Georgetown

Address: Crumb Hill Road Georgetown, NY 13072

AQS Number: 36-053-0006 DEC Number: 2655-01 County: Madison Statistical Area: Syracuse, NY Coordinates: Lat: 42.73036 Lon: -75.78442

This site was established in 1987 as part of the NYSDEC Acid Deposition program in the Syracuse area of Central New Yo rk. The surrounding area is prim arily forest and rural. The O 3 and SO 2 are both operated continuously without seasonal interruption. SO 2 data are used by analysts in conjunction with the data from the acid deposition program. Ozone readings are reported to AIRNow. Currently th e site is not in operation as pow er was shut off when the state facility was closed in April, 2012. This site wi ll remain inactive until a power line is brought in by the local utility.

The parameters to be monitored once site operati on resumes are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 43 of 207 

# Dunkirk 36-013-0006

City of Dunkirk Sewage Treatment Plant Wright Park Drive Dunkirk, NY 14048Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 44 of 207



### Dunkirk Address: City of Dunkirk Sewage Treatment Plant Wright Park Drive Dunkirk, NY 14048

AQS Number: 36-013-0006 DEC Number: 0601-04 County: Chautauqua Statistical Area: Buffalo - Niagara Falls, NY Coordinates: Lat: 42.49963 Lon: -79.31881

The Dunkirk monitoring trailer wa s established in 1999 as a regional transport site. It is located at the western edge of New York on the shores of Lake Erie at the City of Dunkirk’s Sewage Treatment Plant. It is approxi mately 200 feet from Lake Erie in a suburban neighborhood. With the predominant wind direction from the west, this site measures the background levels of pollution entering the state. Ozone levels are report ed to AIRNow.

PM 2.5 monitoring was relocated here from the Westfield site upon its closure.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3 days, 24- hour

Wind Speed/direction Climatronics Sonic Method 020 Continuous

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 45 of 207 

# East Syracuse

36-067-1015

East Syracuse 5895 Enterprise Parkway Syracuse, NY 13202Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 46 of 207



### East Syracuse Address: 5895 Enterprise Parkway Syracuse, NY 13202

AQS Number: 36-067-1015 DEC Number: 3353-09 County: Onondaga Statistical Area: Syracuse Coordinates: Lat: 43.05235 Lon: -76.05921

This site was established in 1991 in commercial area of suburban Syracuse. It is the primary air monitoring site in the Syracuse metropolitan area. In 1999 the site became part of the original PM 2.5 FRM monitoring network. Ozone read ings are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3 days, 24- hour

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Wind Speed/direction Climatronics Sonic Method 020 Continuous

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 020 Continuous

Precipitation Belfort Ra in Gauge Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 47 of 207 

# Fulton 36-075-0003

820 County Route 8 Fulton, NY 13069Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 48 of 207



### Fulton Address: Granby Community Center 820 County Route 8 Fulton, NY 13069

AQS Number: 36-075-0003 DEC Number: 3754-01 County: Oswego Statistical Area: Syracuse, NY Coordinates: Lat: 43.28428 Lon: -76.46324

The Fulton site was initiate d on October 3, 2002 to measure the Ozone downwind of the Rochester area. Fulton is a seas onal automated ozone site, requiring minimal operator attention. The location in the Granby Community Center o ffers easy and secure access for DEC staff to perform site maintenance.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 49 of 207 

# Loudonville 36-001-0012

300 Albany Shaker Road Albany, NY 12211Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 50 of 207



### Loudonville Address: 300 Albany Shaker Road Albany, NY 12211

AQS Number: 36-001-0012 DEC Number: 0101-33 County: Albany Statistical Area: Albany-Schenectady-Troy Coordinates: Lat: 42.68075 Lon: -73.75733

This site was established in 1986 as a neighborhood scale, population exposure site. The site was expanded as part of the NYSDEC Acid Deposition Network. It is located in suburban Albany, in close proximity to Interstate 90. Ozone readings are reported to AIRNow and it is the only ozone monitor in Albany County. PM 2.5 sampling was added in January 2008.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Carbon Monoxide TEI 48C Method 054 Non Dispersive Infrared Continuous

PM 2 5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3

Wind Speed/Direction Climatronics Sonic

Method 020 Continuous

Relative Humidity Met One 083D Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 51 of 207 

# Middleport 36-063-1006

3825 North Hartland Road Middleport, NY 14105Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 52 of 207



### Middleport Address: Middleport Sewage Treatment Plant 3825 North Hartland Road Middleport, NY 14105

AQS Number: 36-063-1006 DEC Number: 3120-02 County: Niagara Statistical Area: Buffalo - Niagara Falls, NY Coordinates: Lat: 43.22386 Lon: -78.47888

This site was established in 1980 as a Buffal o downwind site. Middleport is a seasonal ozone site, operating between April and November. It is located on land adj acent to the Middleport Sewage Treatment Plant in a rural and largely agri cultural area. Ozone is measured for regional transport from Buffa lo and points west.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 53 of 207 

# Millbrook 36-027-0007

Millbrook Institute of Ecosystem Studies Millbrook, NY 12545Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 54 of 207



### Millbrook Address: Institute of Ecosystem Studies Forest Road Millbrook, NY 12545

AQS Number: 36-027-0007 DEC Number: 1328-01 County: Dutchess Statistical Area: Dutchess County, NY Coordinates: Lat: 41.78555 Lon: -73.74136

This site was established in 1990 as a replacemen t for the site in the city of Poughkeepsie. The site was suggested by researchers at the Institute of Ecosystem Studies when they suspected that the ozone values in the rural and agricultural area might be higher than th ose of the high traffic city monitor. The site is shared by the scientis ts at IES, and researchers there value the data. Ozone readings are reported to AIRNow. Sulf ur dioxide measurements were added in June, 2011.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Wind Speed/Direction Climatronics Sonic Method 020 Continuous

Ambient Temperature Met One Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Novalynx 230-276-8 Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 55 of 207 

# Newburgh 36-071-0002

Public Safety Building 55 Broadway Newburgh, NY 12550Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 56 of 207



### Newburgh Address: Public Safety Building 55 Broadway Newburgh, NY 12550

AQS Number: 36-071-0002 DEC Number: 3502-04 County: Orange Statistical Area: New York, NY Coordinates: Lat: 41.49916 Lon: -74.00885

Newburgh was established in 2000 as part of the NYS PM 2.5 FRM network. It currently has both a 1 in 3 day FRM and continuous R&P 1400 TEOM. Th is site has been used to calculate the “FRM Like” values that are re ported to the AIRNow system for the TEOMs in New York City, Albany, Newburgh and Utica.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 3

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 57 of 207 

# Nick’s Lake 36-043-0005

Nick’s Lake Campground 278 Bisby Road Old Forge, NYAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 58 of 207



### Nick’s Lake Campground Address: 278 Bisby Road Old Forge, NY

AQS Number: 36-043-0005 DEC Number: 2167-03 County: Herkimer Statistical Area: Utica-Rome, NY Coordinates: Lat: 43.68578 Lon: -74.98538

This site was established in 1987 at the Nick’s Lake Campground as part of the Acid Deposition program in the Adirondack Park. The O 3 and SO 2 are both operated continuously without seasonal interruption. SO 2 data are used by analysts in conjun ction with the data from the acid deposition program. Ozone readi ngs are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Gaseous SO 2 , HNO 3 ; particulate SO 4 2- , NO 3 , NH 4 + ; elemental Ca, Na, Mg, Cl CASTNet filter pack NADP’s Central Analytical Laboratory Weekly

Ammonia AMoN sampler NADP’s Central Analytical Laboratory Biweekly

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 59 of 207 

# Mt. Ninham 36-079-0005

Mt. Ninham NYSDEC Multiple Use Area Gypsy Trail Road

Kent, NY 10512Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 60 of 207



### Mt Ninham Address: NYSDEC Multiple Use Area Gypsy Trail Road Kent, NY 10512

AQS Number: 36-079-0005 DEC Number: 3951-01 County: Putnam Statistical Area: New York, NY Coordinates: Lat: 41.45589 Lon: -73.70977

This site was established in 1987 as part of the NYSDEC Acid Deposition program in the lower Hudson Valley. The surrounding area is pr imarily forest and rural. The O 3 and SO 2 are both operated continuously without seasonal interruption. The O 3 data show transport from the metropolitan area of NY and NJ. Ozone readings are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 61 of 207 

# Paul Smith’s College 36-033-0004

Route 86 and 30 Paul Smith’s, NY 12970Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 62 of 207



### Paul Smith’s College

Address: Route 86 and 30 Paul Smith’s, NY 12970

AQS Number: 36-033-0004 DEC Number: 1655-01 County: Franklin Coordinates: Lat: 44.43426 Lon: -74.24593

This site was established in 2003 in partnership with Paul Smith’s College. The site is used as a teaching center by the school. It is maintained an d operated by employees of the college with QA and technical support provided by DEC.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 Continuous

Acid Deposition NCON Bucket Style Collector Model 00- 120-2 Central Analytical Laboratory at the Illinois Water Survey: IC, ICP-OES, FIA WeeklyAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 63 of 207 

# Perch River 36-045-0002

Vaadi Road LaFargeville, NY 13656Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 64 of 207



### Perch River Address: Perch River Game Management Area Vaadi Road LaFargeville, NY 13656

AQS Number: 36-045-0002 DEC Number: 2223-01 County: Jefferson Statistical Area: Coordinates: Lat: 44.08747 Lon: -75.97316

This site was established in 1992 as an Easter n Lake Ontario Ozone site. Perch River is a seasonal automated ozone site, requiring minimal ope rator attention It is located in the Game Management Building at a DEC owned site, whic h allows BAQS easy and secure access. Perch River is used for AIRNow reporting.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 65 of 207 

# Pinnacle 36-101-0003

Pinnacle State Park 1904 Pinnacle Road Addison, NY 14801Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 66 of 207



### Pinnacle

Address: Pinnacle State Park 1904 Pinnacle Road Addison, NY 14801

AQS Number: 36-101-0003 DEC Number: 5001-04 County: Steuben Statistical Area: Coordinates: Lat: 42.09142 Lon: -77.20978

This site was originally esta blished in the mid 1990s by the Atmospheric Sciences Research Center to provide PAMs data upwind of th e Northeast corridor. The NYSDEC has been collaborating on research initiatives at this site and now is responsible for many routine parameters reported from this site. The site wa s part of the NY PMTACS Supersite program and many research monitoring projects are on-going at th is site. This site has been selected by EPA and DEC as a rural NCore site. Ozone, Low Level SO 2 , NO y and continuous PM 2.5 and PM 10 from this site are reported to AIRNow. Ca nister sampling for VOCs commenced in August, 2012 to establish baseline levels in anticipation of potential Marcellus shales natural gas drillings in the Southern Tier region.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Low Level SO 2 TEI 43i TLE Method 560 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Low Level CO API 300EU Method 593 Non Dispersive Infrared Continuous

NO y API 200EU Method 082 Chemiluminescence Continuous

PM 2 5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3

PM 2 5 , PMcourse, PM 10 TEI 1405 DF Method 790 TEOM 30oC

Gravimetric Continuous

PM 2 5 Speciation Ions and Elements Met One SASS Method 811 IC, XRF RTI Laboratory 1 day in 3Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 67 of 207

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2 5 Speciation Carbon URG 3000 Method 838 IMPROVE TOR 1 day in 3

Sulfate TEI 5020i Pulsed Fluorescence Semi-continuous

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 in 6

Wind Speed/direction Method 020 --- Continuous

Temperature Method 040 --- Continuous

Barometric Pressure Method 011 --- Continuous

Relative Humidity Method 011 --- ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 68 of 207 

# Piseco Lake 36-041-0005

Piseco Lake Piseco Airport Piseco Lake, NY 12139Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 69 of 207



### Piseco Lake Address: Piseco Airport Piseco Lake, NY 12139

AQS Number: 36-041-0005 DEC Number: 2050-01 County: Hamilton Statistical Area: Coordinates: Lat: 43.44957 Lon: -74.51625

This site was established in 1988 at the Piseco Ai rport as part of the Acid Deposition program in the southern Adirondacks. The O 3 and SO 2 are both operated con tinuously without seasonal interruption. Ozone readings are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 Continuous

Acid Deposition NCON Bucket Style Collector Model 00- 120-2 Central Analytical Laboratory at the Illinois Water Survey: IC, ICP-OES, FIA WeeklyAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 70 of 207 

# Rochester 36-055-1007

Rochester RG&E Substation

Yarmouth Road Rochester, NY 14610Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 71 of 207



### Rochester

Address: RG&E Substation 30 Yarmouth Road Rochester, NY 14610

AQS Number: 36-055-1007 DEC Number: 2701-22 County: Monroe Statistical Area: Rochester Coordinates: Lat: 43.14618 Lon: -72.54822

This site was established in 2004 to consolidat e monitoring operations in the Rochester area. This is the major site in upstate Ne w York and has been selected as a PM 2.5 Speciation Trends site, a NATTs site and an NCORE site. The Ozone and continuous PM 2.5 readings from this site are reported to AIRNow. The site is also used by researchers from several universities for short term monitoring studies. Current research monitoring includes Me rcury speciation and ultra-fine particle counting. Data from this site is often in tegrated in the work from the PM Health Center which is located at the University of Rochester Medical Center. The Rochester PM Center is one of 5 in the country.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Low Level CO API 300EU Method 593 Non Dispersive Infrared Continuous

NO y API 200EU Method 082 Chemiluminescence Continuous

PM 2 5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 in 6

PM 2 5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

PM 10 R&P Partisol 2025 Method 127 Gravimetric 1 in 6

PM 10 - Metals Method 907 ICPMS 1 in 6Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 72 of 207

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2 5 Speciation Met One Super SASS Method 851 RTI Laboratory 1 in 3

PM 2 5 Speciation Carbon URG 3000 Method 838 IMPROVE TOR 1 in 3

Black Carbon Magee Scientific Aethalometer Method 866 Optical Absorption Continuous

Mercury Elemental Reactive Gas Mercury Particle Bound Mercury Tekran 2537B

Tekran 1130

Tekran 1135 In situ cold vapor atomic fluorescence 5 minute average 2 hr avg every 3 hr 2 hr avg every 3 hr

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 in 6

Carbonyl DNPH Cartridge Method 202 HPLC - Ultraviolet Absorption 1 in 6

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) Tisch TE 5007 Method 118 GC/MS EPA/ERG Lab 1 in 6

Mercury Wet Deposition NCON Model 00-125-2 automatic sampler Frontier Geosciences: cold vapor atomic fluorescence Weekly

Wind Speed/direction Climatronics Sonic Method 020 Continuous

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 Continuous

Precipitation NAOH IV Continuous

Acid Deposition NCON Bucket Style Collector Model 00-120- 2 Central Analytical Laboratory at the Illinois Water Survey: IC, ICP-OES, FIA WeeklyAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 73 of 207 

# Rockland County

36-087-0005

Conklin Orchard South Mountain Rd. Pomona, NY 10970Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 74 of 207



### Rockland County

Address: Conklin Orchard South Mountain Road Pomona, NY 10970

AQS Number: 36-087-0005 DEC Number: 4353-02 New York State County: Rockland Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: Lat: 41.18208 Lon: -74.02819

The Rockland County site was originally establ ished as a demonstration study requested by the Rockland County Department of Health. This is the third and permanent location for the Rockland County monitor. Data are reported to AIRNow for ozone and PM 2.5

.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 701 Method 702 TEOM Gravimetric 50oC ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 75 of 207 

# Stillwater 36-091-0004

Saratoga National Historical Park Stillwater, NY 12170Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 76 of 207



### Stillwater Address: Saratoga Na tional Historical Park Stillwater, NY 12170

AQS Number: 36-091-0004 DEC Number: 4567-01 County: Saratoga MSA: Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Coordinates: Lat: 43.01209 Lon: -74.64890

This site was established in 1988 in rural east ern Saratoga County north of Albany, NY. It is located in a room adjacent to the library at the Sa ratoga National Historical Park. The site offers insight into transport up the main travel co rridor in the region and along the Hudson River valley. The data gathered at this site is reported to AIRNow.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 77 of 207 

# Tonawanda II

36-029-1014

192 Brookside Terrace West Tonawanda, NY 14150Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 78 of 207



### Tonawanda II
Address: 192 Brookside Terrace West Tonawanda, NY 14150

AQS Number: 36-029-1014 DEC Number: 1472-14 County: Erie Statistical Area: Buffalo - Niagara Falls, NY Coordinates: Lat: 42.99813 Lon: -78.89926

The Tonawanda monitoring site was originally established in 1968 on the grounds of the Town of Tonawanda Sewage Treatment Plant as a so urce impact site for Sulfur Dioxide. In 2007 the sulfur dioxide monitor was moved to this current location as pa rt of the Tonawanda Community Air Quality Study. Th is site borders a residentia l neighborhood and the industrial complex, and is approximately 0.2 mile north east of the original historic site.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 in 6

Carbonyl DNPH Cartridge

Method 202 HPLC - Ultraviolet Absorption 1 in 6Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 79 of 207 

# Utica 36-065-2001

406 Elizabeth Street

Utica, NY 13501Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 80 of 207



### Utica Address: Utica Health Department 406 Elizabeth Street Utica, NY 13501

AQS Number: 36-065-2001 DEC Number: 3202-01 County: Oneida Statistical Area: Utica- Rome, NY Coordinates: Lat: 43.09892 Lon: -75.22506

The Utica Health Department site was established in 1957 as a TSP site. The site monitored PM 10 between 1991 and 1998. In 2003, a continuous PM 2.5 was installed at the Utica site. The data collected is a part of the AIRNow report and is one of only eight continuous PM sites in upstate New York.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 81 of 207 

# Valley Central High School 36-071-5001

1175 route 17K Montgomery, NY 10940Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 82 of 207



### Valley Central H.S.

Address: 1175 Route 17 K Montgomery, NY 10940

AQS Number: 36-071-5001 DEC Number: 3527-01 County: Orange MSA: Newburgh, NY-PA CMSA: New York-N New Jersey-Long Island, NY,NJ,CT,PA Coordinates: Lat: 41.52375 Lon: -74.21534

This site was established in 1995 in suburban Newburgh in Montgomery, Or ange County. It is a single parameter Ozone monitoring site. It is th e only ozone monitor in Orange County and the data is reported to AIRNow. The public has shown gr eat interest in the data generated in this area of the state.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 83 of 207 

# Wallkill Lead Monitoring

Wallkill Ballard Road Wallkill Wakefurn Food 36-071-3001 36-071-3002



### Scotchtown

36-071-3004Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 84 of 207

These sites are the only routine lead monitoring sites in upstate New York. They are located in the vicinity of RSR Corporation and were established as high priority SLAMS lead monitors. They are source oriented monitoring sites. Th e two sites on Ballard Road are upwind and the Scotchtown site is downwind of RSR. In August 2011 an additional low volume PM 10 sampler was put in place for daily mass and lead analysis at the Wakefern site when measurements from the prior winter showed unusually high va lues for a couple of sample dates.



### Ball Corp

. Address: 95 Ballard Rd. Middletown NY 10941

AQS Number: 36-071-3001 DEC Number: 3566-02 County: Orange Statistical Area: Newburgh, NY-PA Coordinates: Lon: 41.46107 Lat: -74.36343



### Wakefern Food Corp.

Address: 260 Ballard Rd. Middletown, New York 10941

AQS Number: 36-071-3002 DEC Number: 3566-09 County: Orange Statistical Area: Newburgh, NY-PA Coordinates: Lon: 41.45869 Lat: -74.35404



### Scotchtown

Address: 27 Industrial Drive Middletown, NY 10941

AQS Number: 36-071-3004 DEC Number: 3566-11 County: Orange Statistical Area: Newburgh, NY-PA Coordinates: Lon: 41.46964 Lat: -74.37217

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Lead Hi-Vol TSP Method 803 Atomic Absorption 1 day in 6

Low-Vol PM 10 Method 811 XRF Daily

PM 10 Method 127 Gravimetric DailyAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 85 of 207 

# Wanakena 36-089-0005

New York State Ranger School 257 Ranger School Road

Wanakena, NY 13695Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 86 of 207



### Wanakena Address: Ranger Station New York State Ranger School 257 Ranger School Road Wanakena, NY 13695

AQS Number: 36-089-0005 DEC Number: 4458-05 County: St. Lawrence Statistical Area: Coordinates: Lat: 44.14998 Lon: -74.89980

This site is a stand-alone Acid Deposition Monitor in the Adirondack region.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Acid Deposition NCON Bucket Style Collector Model 00- 120-2 Central Analytical Laboratory at the Illinois Water Survey: IC, ICP-OES, FIA WeeklyAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 87 of 207 

# Whiteface Lodge 36-031-0003

Whiteface Lodge University at Albany ASRC Field Station Wilmington, NY 12997Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 88 of 207



### Whiteface Lodge Address: University at Albany Atmospheric Science Research Center Field Station Wilmington, NY 12997

AQS Number: 36-031-0003 DEC Number: 1567-04 County: Essex Statistical Area: Coordinates: Lat: 44.39308 Lon: -73.85890

This site was established in 1974 at the Atmosphe ric Science Research Ce nter field station at Whiteface Mountain. This site is run in coopera tion with the ASRC at UAlbany. The site was used as the site of th e 2002 summer intensive PM 2.5 field study to provide detailed real time chemical and physical data for PM and its co-pollutants. Ozone and continuous PM 2.5 readings are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 6

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

PM 2.5 Speciation Met One Super SASS RTI Laboratory 1 day in 6

Sulfate TEI 5020i Pulsed Fluorescence Semi-continuous

Carbon URG 3000 Method 838 IMPROVE TOR 1 day in 6

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 day in 6Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 89 of 207

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Carbonyl DNPH Cartridge Method 202 HPLC - Ultraviolet Absorption 1 day in 6

Relative Humidity Teledyne RH200 Method 011 Continuous

Temperature Teledyne RH200 Method 040 Continuous

Barometric Pressure Teledyne BP300 Method 011 Continuous

Acid Deposition NCON Bucket Style Collector Model 00- 120-2 Central Analytical Laboratory at the Illinois Water Survey: IC, ICP-OES, FIA Weekly

Gaseous SO 2 , HNO 3 ; particulate SO 4 2- , NO 3 - ,NH 4 + ; elemental Ca, Na, Mg, Cl CASTNet filter pack NADP’s Central Analytical Laboratory Weekly

Ammonia Radiello Diffusive Sampler NADP’s Central Analytical Laboratory BiweeklyAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 90 of 207 

# Whiteface Summit 36-031-0002

Whiteface Summit Wilmington, NY 12997Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 91 of 207



### Whiteface Summit Address: Wilmington, NY 12997

AQS Number: 36-031-0002 DEC Number: 1567-03 County: Essex Statistical Area: Coordinates: Lat: 44.36608 Lon: -73.90312

This site was established in 1980 at the Atmosphe ric Science Research Ce nter Lab at the Summit of Whiteface Mountain. It is a sp ecial purpose Ozone site run in cooperation with the ASRC at the University at Albany. Data from this site s hould not be used for NAAQS comparison as it is a high altitude re search site.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 92 of 207 

# Williamson 36-117-3001

Wayne County Occupational Center

4440 Ridge Road Williamson, NY 14589Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 93 of 207



### Williamson Address: Wayne County Occupational Center 4440 Ridge Road Williamson, NY 14589

AQS Number: 36-117-3001 DEC Number: 5863-01 County: Wayne Statistical Area: Rochester, NY Coordinates: Lat: 43.23086 Lon: -77.17136

This site was established in 1979 as a downwind Ozone site for the Rochester metropolitan area. Williamson is a seasonal ozone site, located in a storage building at the Wayne County Occupational Center. The site is lo cated in a rural, mostly agricu ltural area and is an important location used to verify the attainment status of the Rochester region.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 94 of 207

3.2 Southern Monitoring Site Listings

Table 3.2 Location Listing for Southern Monitoring Sites

DEC Region AIRS # DEC # Site Name County Location

1 36-059-0005 2950-10 Eisenhower Park Nassau 740 Merrick Avenue 1 36-103-0002 5150-02 Baby lon Suffolk 72 Gaza Blvd - Water Authority

1 36-103-0009 5150-10 Holtsville Suffolk 57 Division St. Sagamore Junior High

1 36-103-0004 5155-01 Riverhead Suffolk 39 Sound Avenue

2 36-005-0080 7094-05 Morrisania II Bronx Family Care Ctr, 1225-57 Gerard Ave

2 36-005-0112 7094-08 IS 74 Bronx 730 Bryant Avenue 2 36-005-0133 7094-10 Pfizer Lab (NYBG) Bronx 200th Street & Southern Boulevard

2 36-005-0110 7094-07 IS 52 Bronx 681 Kelly Street, E 156th Street

2 36-047-0052 7095-07 PS 314 Kings 330 59th Street

2 36-047-0122 7095-43 JHS 126 Kings 424 Leonard Street

2 36-047-0118 7095-98 PS 274 Kings 800 Bushwick Ave

2 36-061-0079 7093-08 JHS 45 New York 2351 1st Avenue

2 36-061-0115 7093-15 IS 143 New York 511 W 182nd Street

2 36-061-0128 7093-21 PS 19 New York 185 1st Avenue

2 36-061-0134 7093-24 Division Street New York Division Street

2 36-061-0135 7093-25 CCNY New York 160 Convent Avenue 2 36-081-0120 7096-13 Maspeth Library Queens 69-70 Grand Avenue 2 36-081-0124 7096-15 Queens College II Queens NYSDEC Monitoring Building 2 36-085-0067 7097-01 Susan Wagner Richmond 1200 Manor Road (near Brielle Ave)

2 36-085-0055 7097-03 Port Richmond Richmond 364 Port Richmond Avenue

2 36-085-0111 7097-17 Fresh Kills West Richmond 310 West Service Road

3 36-119-2004 5902-04 White Plains Westches ter Water District Pumping StationAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 95 of 207 

# BABYLON

36-103-0002

Farmingdale Water District 72 Gazza Blvd. Babylon, NY 11735Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 96 of 207



### Babylon Address: Farmingdale Water District 72 Gazza Blvd. Babylon, NY 11735

AQS Number: 36-103-0002 DEC Number: 5150-02 New York State County: Suffolk Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.74529 N -73.41919 W

The Babylon air monitoring station was originally established in the 1970's as a continuous sulfur dioxide and ozone site. Located on Long Island, downwind from New York City, the site continues to measures urban ozone levels in the New York City metropolitan area.

In 1999 a Federal Reference Me thod fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) sampler was added to the site. This PM 2.5 monitor is part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

The ozone data are reported to the AIRNow system.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 97 of 207 

# CCNY

36-061-0135

City College of New York The City Universit y of New York Administration Building 160 Convent Avenue New York, NY 10031Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 98 of 207



### CCNY Address: City College of New York Administration Building 160 Convent Avenue New York, NY 10031

AQS Number: 36-061-0135 DEC Number: 7093-25 New York State County: New York Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.81976 N -73.94825 W

The City College of New York - CCNY air mon itoring site was established during the summer of 2007. This site includes an ozone analyzer and a con tinuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) sampler. Fine particulate monitoring utilizes a PM 2.5 R&P Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM).

In addition to Department monitoring equi pment the CCNY School of Engineering operate ambient air monitoring equipment in the same location. Data from this equipment are not reported or certified by the Department.

Data from this site is repo rted to the AIRNow system.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photom etric Continuous

Carbon Monoxide TEI 48C Method 054 Non Dispersive Infrared Continuous

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400a Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 99 of 207 

# DIVISION STREET

36-061-0134

New York City Department of Education Public School 124 40 Division Street New York, NY 10002Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 100 of 207



### Division Street Address: New York City Department of Education Public School 124 40 Division Street New York, NY 10002

AQS Number: 36-061-0134 DEC Number: 7093-24 County: New York Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.71436 N -73.99518 W

This site was established in September 2006. In itially the site contai ned a continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) Tapered Element Oscillating Microba lance (TEOM). In March 2007, the FRM PM 2.5 , PM 10 and MetOne Speciation samplers were added following the emergency shutdown of the Canal Street Post Office (36-061- 0062). Reference EPA letter: Ruvo to Lavin dated: March 14, 2007. The URG 3000 Ca rbon sampler was added in May 2007.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

R&P Partisol 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3

PM 2.5 Speciation Met One SASS Method 811 XRF 1 day in 3

Carbon URG 3000 Method 838 IMPROVE TOR 1 day in 3

PM 10 R&P Partisol 2025 Method 127 Gravimetric 1 day in 3

Proposed changes: reduce PM 10 sampling frequency to 1 day in 6.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 101 of 207 

# EISENHOWER PARK

36-059-0005

Nassau County Parks, Recreation and Museums Eisenhower Park 740 Merrick Avenue Westbury, NY 11590Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 102 of 207



### Eisenhower Park Address: Nassau County Park, Recreation and Museums Eisenhower Park 740 Merrick Avenue Westbury, NY 11590

AQS Number: 36-059-0005 DEC Number: 2950-10 New York State County: Nassau Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.74316 N -73.58549 W

The Eisenhower Park air monitoring station wa s originally establis hed as a Nassau County Health Department air monitoring site. It was operated with support from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation un til 2000 when the Department took over complete control of the site. The c ontinuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring data from this site are reported to AirNow.

NO 2 monitoring was terminated at this site on March 31, 2011. Ultrafine Pa rticle monitoring was discontinued in June 2010.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1405 Method 790 TEOM Gravimetric Continuous

Meteorological Method 020 Continuous Relative Humidity Method 011 Continuous Temperature Method 040 Continuous Barometric Pressure Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 103 of 207 

# FRESH KILLS WEST

36-085-0111

310 West Service Road

Fresh Kills Landfill Staten Island, NY 10314Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 104 of 207



### Fresh Kills West

Address: 310 West Service Road Fresh Kills Landfill Staten Island, NY 10314

AQS Number: 36-085-0111 DEC Number: 7097-17 New York State County: Richmond Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.58027 N -74.19832 W

The Fresh Kills West air monitoring station was esta blished in July 1999 as pa rt of an air quality study of the Fresh Kills Landfill and the start up of the methan e gas flare at the landfill. Following the end of the Landfill study, the Fresh Kills West site became part of the Department’s core ambient air monitoring program.

The continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring data from this site are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400a Method 701 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 in 6 days

Carbonyl DNPH Cartridge Method 202 HPLC - Ultraviolet Absorption 1 in 6 days

Barometric Pressure Spectra 276 Method 011 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 105 of 207 

# HOLTSVILLE

36-103-0009

Sagamore Junior High School 57 Division Street Holtsville, NY 11742Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 106 of 207



### Holtsville Address: Sagamore Junior High School 57 Division Street Holtsville, NY 11742

AQS Number: 36-103-0009 DEC Number: 5151-10 New York State County: Suffolk Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.82799 N -73.05754 W

The Holtsville air monitoring station was establ ished by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services - Division of Environmenta l Quality in the late 1990s. The Department established an ozone analyzer at the site during the 2006 ozone season. In June of 2010 the Department took over control of the site, following personnel changes in the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. The Depart ment expanded its monitoring by added sulfur dioxide and fine particulate matter.

The parameters monitored and certified by NYS DEC are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous (During NYS O 3 Season)

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

PM 2.5 Thermo Scientific TEOM 1405 Method 790 TEOM Gravimetric Continuous

Meteorological MetOne Sonic Method 020 Continuous

Barometric Pressure MetOne Method 011 Continuous

Relative Humidity MetOne Method 011 Continuous

Temperature MetOne Method 040 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 107 of 207 

# IS 143

36-061-0115

New York City Department of Education Junior High School 143

511 West 182 nd 

### Street New York, NY 10033Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 108 of 207



### IS 143 Address: New York City Department of Education Junior High School 143 511 West 182 nd Street New York, NY 10033

AQS Number: 36-061-0115 DEC Number: 7093-15 County: New York Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.84888 N -73.93059 W

The IS143 site was established in 2000 as a continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring site. The site utilizes a R&P Tapered Element Oscilla ting Microbalance (TEOM). This site is located in an urbanized, residential ar ea of Manhattan. Data from this site are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 701

Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 109 of 207



# IS 52

36-005-0110

New York City Department of Education Public School 52/Middle School 302 681 Kelly Street Bronx, NY 10455Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 110 of 207



### IS 52 Address: New York City Department of Education Public School 52/Middle School 302 681 Kelly Street Bronx, NY 10455

AQS Number: 36-005-0110 DEC Number: 7094-07 County: Bronx Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.8162 N -73.9020 W

This site was established in 1999 as a replacemen t site for Public School 155. Initially the site contained ozone, oxides of nitroge n, sulfur dioxide, continuous PM 2.5 and continuous PM 10

. Following an upgrade of the electricity, additiona l monitoring parameters were added, creating one of the premier particulate sampling sites in New York City. The site contains criteria pollutant parameters and methods along with many experimental methods.

This site was temporarily shut down June 2010 until July 2012 due to extensive construction at the school. The monitoring for NATTS parameters was moved to Morrisania II during that period. This site is now back to full operation.

The parameters normally monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Oxides of Nitrogen TEI 42C Method 074 Chemiluminescence Continuous

PM 2.5, PM 10 , PM course Thermo Scientific 1405 DF FDMS TEOM Gravimetric 50oC Continuous

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric Daily 1 day in 3

PM 2.5 Speciation Ions and Elements Met One SASS Method 811 IC,XRF 1 day in 3

PM 2.5 Speciation Carbon URG 3000 Method 838 IMPROVE TOR 1 day in 3Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 111 of 207

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 10 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 127 Gravimetric 1 day in 6 a

PM 10 - Metals Method 907 ICPMS 1 day in 6 a

Sulfate Thermo Scientific 5020i Sulfate Particulate Pulsed Florescence Continuous

Black Carbon Magee Scientific Aethalometer Method 866 Optical Absorption Continuous

Elemental Carbon/ Organic Carbon Sunset Laboratory Method 5040 Thermal Optical Semi-Continuous

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons-PAH Tisch TE 5007 Method 118 GC/MS EPA/ERG Lab 1 day in 6

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 day in 6 a

Carbonyl DNPH tube Method 202 HPLC - Ultraviolet Absorption 1 day in 6

Wind Speed/direction Climatronics Method 020 Sonic Continuous

a Collocated unitAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 112 of 207 

# IS 74

36-005-0112

New York City Department of Education Intermediate School 74 (MS 201) 730 Bryant Avenue

Bronx, NY 10474Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 113 of 207



### IS 74 Address: New York City Department of Education Intermediate School 74 (MS 201) 730 Bryant Avenue Bronx, NY 10474

AQS Number: 36-005-0112 DEC Number: 7094-08 County: Bronx Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.81551 N -73.88553 W

The Intermediate School 74 site was establishe d in 2000 as a continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring station. The site ut ilizes a R&P Tapered Element Os cillating Microbalance (TEOM). This site is located in an urba nized, residential area of the Hunt s Point area of the Bronx. Data from this site are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 114 of 207 

# JHS 126

36-047-0122

New York City Department of Education Junior High School 126 424 Leonard Street Brooklyn, NY 11222Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 115 of 207



### JHS 126 Address: New York City Department of Education 424 Leonard Street Junior High School 126 Brooklyn, NY 11222

AQS Number: 36-047-0122 DEC Number: 7095-43 New York State County: Kings Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.71961 N -73.94771 W

The JHS 126 air monitoring station was established in 2000 as a Hi-Volume PM 10 and Lead monitoring site. In January, 2001, a Federal Reference Meth od fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) sampler was added. This PM 2.5 sampler is part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. PM 10 sampling was discontinued December 2005. TSP-lead sampling was termin ated at the end of 2009. The necessary monitoring is conducted at IS 52 in the Bronx.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P Partisol 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 116 of 207 

# JHS 45

36-061-0079

New York City Department of Education Junior High School 45 2351 First Avenue New York, NY 10035Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 117 of 207



### JHS 45 Address: New York City Department of Education Junior High School 45 2351 First Avenue New York, NY 10035

AQS Number: 36-061-0079 DEC Number: 7093-08 New York State County: New York Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.79970 N -73.93432 W

The JHS 45 air monitoring station wa s originally establis hed in 1981 as a sulfur dioxide, fine and coarse particulate (dichotomous samplers) and Total Suspended Particulate site. The site was shut down in 1985 and then reestablished as a Federal Reference Method fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring site in January 2000. A duplicate PM 2.5 sampler was installed in January 2006 after being removed from the PS 59 station to continue to provide accuracy data for the PM 2.5 network. The FRM PM 2.5 samplers at JHS 45 are part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 1 R&P Partisol 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3

1 Collocated samplersAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 118 of 207 

# MASPETH LIBRARY

36-081-0120

Queens Public Library - Maspeth 69-70 Grand Avenue Maspeth, NY 11378Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 119 of 207



### Maspeth Library Address: Queens Public Library - Maspeth 69-70 Grand Avenue Maspeth, NY 11378

AQS Number: 36-081-0120 DEC Number: 7096-13 County: Queens Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.72698 N -73.89313 W

The Maspeth Library was established as a continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring site in 2000. The site utilizes a R&P Tapered Element Osci llating Microbalance (TEOM). This site is located in an urbanized, residen tial area in the vicinity of two major New York City roadways, the Long Island Expressway and the Brooklyn- Queens Expressway. The continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring data from this site are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 120 of 207 

# MORRISANIA II

36-005-0080

Morrisania Diagnostic and Treatment Center 1225-57 Gerard Avenue Bronx, NY 10452Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 121 of 207



### Morrisania II Address: Morrisania Diagnos tic and Treatment Center 1225-57 Gerard Avenue Bronx, NY 10452

AQS Number: 36-005-0080 DEC Number: 7094-05 New York State County: Bronx Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.83606 N -7N -73.92009 W

The Morrisania II air monitoring st ation was originally established in 1989 as a Hi-Volume PM 10 site. In 1990 ozone, sulfur dioxide and oxi des of nitrogen analyzers were added. PM 10 was subsequently discontinued. A Federal Re ference Method fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) sampler was added in 1999. In May of 2000 all continuous analyz ers were discontinued and the site became a stand-alone PM 2.5 site. The FRM PM 2.5 sampler at Morrisania II is part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Following the construction at school where the IS 52 monitoring station is located, equipment for the National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) program was moved to Morrisania II. This equipment was returned to th e IS 52 site in July 2012.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2 5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 701 Method 702 TEOM Gravimetric 50oC ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 122 of 207



# NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN

Pfizer Plant Research Laboratory 36-005-0133

200th Street and Southern Blvd. Bronx, NY 10458-5126Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 123 of 207



### Pfizer Plant Research Laboratory

Address: 200 th Street and Southern Blvd. Bronx, NY 10458-5126

AQS Number: 36-005-0080 DEC Number: 36-005-0133 New York State County: Bronx Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.86790 N -73.87809 W

This site was established in the Harding Laboratory at the New York Botanical Garden in January 1995. This site was originally es tablished for the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station (PAMS) progr am with some summa canister sampling beginning in June 1994. During the summer of 2006, the New York Botanical Garden completed construction on the Pfizer Plant Research Laboratory. This is a state of the art laboratory and research facility that replaced the Harding laboratory. Th rough an agreement with the Department, NYBG provided space in the new facility for the Depa rtment’s ambient air monitoring station.

Starting with the 2006 PAMS season the continuous GC was moved to th e new monitoring site at the Pfizer Lab. The ozone, sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, methane/nonmethane, canisters, and carbonyl samplers were moved to the Pfizer Lab the end of December 2006. The FRM PM 2.5 sampler was moved to the Pfizer Laboratory on January 1, 2008. The FRM fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) sampler installed at the Pfizer Laboratory is part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

On January 9, 2008 the Mercury Deposition Netw ork (MDN) Automatic Precipitation Sampler and the ETI Instrument Systems NOAH IV To tal Precipitation Measurement System was installed as part of establishi ng a MDN site at Pfizer Laboratory. The Tekran Elemental and Reactive Gas Mercury equipment was installed in August, 2008.

This site is being utilized for the New York City Community Air Survey as part of the PlaNYC initiative.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 124 of 207

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following tables: Pfizer Plant Research Laboratory

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Sulfur Dioxide TEI 43C Method 060 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Low Level SO 2 TEI 43i TLE Method 560 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Oxides of Nitrogen (NO, NO 2 , NO x ) TEI 42C Method 074 Chemiluminescence Continuous

Carbon Monoxide TEI 48C Method 054 Non Dispersive Infrared Continuous

PM 2.5 R&P Partisol 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3

PAMS precursor Method 128 GC/FID Continuous

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 day in 6

Carbonyl DNPH Cartridge Method 202 HPLC - Ultraviolet Absorption 1 day in 6 Daily (PAMS)

Mercury Elemental

Reactive Gas Mercury

Particle Bound Mercury Tekran 2537B

Tekran 1130

Tekran 1135 In situ cold vapor atomic fluorescence 5 minute average 2 hr avg every 3 hr 2 hr avg every 3 hr

Mercury Wet Deposition N-CON Systems MDN 00-125-2 Automatic Sampler, NOAH IV Total Precipitation Measurement System Frontier Geosciences: cold vapor atomic fluorescence Weekly collectionAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 125 of 207

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Acid Deposition NCON Bucket Style Collector Model 00- 120-2 Central Analytical Laboratory at the Illinois WaterSurvey: IC, ICPOES, FIA Weekly collection

Wind Speed/direction Met hod 020 --- Continuous

Relative Humidity Method 011 --- Continuous

Temperature Method 040 --- Continuous

Barometric Pressure Method 011 --- ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 126 of 207 

# PORT RICHMOND

36-085-0055

United States Post Office - Port Richmond Station 364 Port Richmond Avenue Staten Island, NY 10302Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 127 of 207



### Port Richmond

Address: United States Post Office - Port Richmond Station 364 Port Richmond Avenue Staten Island, NY 10302

AQS Number: 36-085-0055 DEC Number: 7097-03 New York State County: Richmond Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.63307 N -74.13719 W

The Port Richmond air monitoring station was originally establishe d as a Hi-Volume PM 10 site in 1984. In December 1999, a Federal Refe rence Method fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) sampler was installed. This FRM PM 2.5 sampler is part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In April 2011 a TEOM was added to this site following the shutdown of the PS 44 monitoring station.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 701 Method 702 TEOM Gravimetric 50oC Continuous

Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 128 of 207 

# PS 19

36-061-0128

New York City Department of Education Public School 19 185 First Avenue New York, NY 10003Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 129 of 207



### PS 19 Address: New York City Department of Education Public School 19 185 First Avenue New York, NY 10003

AQS Number: 36-061-0128 DEC Number: 7093-21 New York State County: New York Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.73000 N -73.98446 W

The PS 19 air monitoring station was established as a Federal Reference Method fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring site in October 2001. The FRM PM 2.5 samplerat PS 19 is part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to th e National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The continuous PM 2.5 TEOM was added in June, 2007.

Following the shutdown of PS59, the low volume PM 10 R&P 2025 instrument was added to this site, however electrical power problems have delayed the start up of this sampler.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 Low volume FRM R&P 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric 1 day in 3

R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 130 of 207 

# PS 274

36-047-0118

New York City Department of Education Public School 274 800 Bushwick Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11221Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 131 of 207



### PS 274 Address: New York City Department of Education Public School 274 800 Bushwick Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11221

AQS Number: 36-047-0118 DEC Number: 7095-98 County: Brooklyn Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.69454 N -73.92769 W

The Public School 274 site was established in 2000 as a continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring station. The site util izes a R&P Tapered Element Os cillating Microbalance (TEOM). This site is located in an ur banized, residential/industrial area of Brooklyn. The continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring data from this site are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 701

Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric Continuous

Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 in 6 daysAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 132 of 207 

# PS 314

36-047-0052

New York City Department of Education Public School 314 330 59 th 

### Street Brooklyn, NY 11220Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 133 of 207



### PS 314 Address: New York City Department of Education Public School 314 330 59 th Street Brooklyn, NY 11220

AQS Number: 36-047-0052 DEC Number: 7095-07 County: Brooklyn Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.64182 N -74.01871 W

The Public School 314 site was first establishe d in 1982 as a Hi-Volume inhalable particulate (PM 10 ) station. In 2003 the site became a continuous fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitoring site with the installation of a R&P Tapered Element Os cillating Microbalance (TEOM). This site is located in an urbanized, residential/industrial area in the vicinity of the Gowanus Expressway. Data from this site are reported to AIRNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

PM 2.5 R&P TEOM 1400 Method 702 TEOM 50oC Gravimetric ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 134 of 207 

## QUEENS COLLEGE II AMBIENT AIR MONITORING STATION

Queens College II 36-081-0124

CUNY - Queens College Campus 65-30 Kissena Blvd. Flushing, NY 11367Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 135 of 207



### Queens College II Address: NYS DEC Air Monitoring Building CUNY - Queens College Campus 65-30 Kissena Blvd. Flushing, NY 11367

AQS Number: 36-081-0124 DEC Number: 7096-15 County: Brooklyn Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.73614 N -73.82153 W

The Department originally began monitoring at Queens College for ozone and sulfur dioxide in 1978. This continued until 1997 when the monitoring equipment was removed from Queens College during a major building renovation proj ect on the campus. The AQS number for the original Queens College site was 36-081-0004. The Queens College II site was originally established during the summer of 2001 for an intensive air pollu tion study that was coordinated with the State University of Ne w York - University of Albany - Atmospheric Sciences Research Center. In September 2006 the site was redesigned and expanded in a newly constructed building on the Queens College campus. In the futu re, this site will be one of three NCore sites in New York State.

The FRM fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) monitor located at Queens Colle ge is part of the overall PM 2.5 monitoring network used for comparison to the Nati onal Ambient Air Quality Standards. This is monitoring location is in a highly populated residential area. The site is in close proximity to sensitive groups, primarily young children, at Public School 219. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station program sampling began in 2001, however, continuous monitoring with Gas Chromatography for PAMS is not done at this site , as it is conducted at the Pfizer Lab station in the Bronx.

This site is being utilized for the New York City Community Air Survey as part of the PlaNYC initiative.

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photom etric Continuous

Low Level SO 2 TEI 43i TLE Method 560 Pulsed Fluorescence Continuous

Oxides of Nitrogen (NO, NO 2 , NO x ) TEI 42C Method 074 Chemiluminescence ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 136 of 207

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

NO y API 200EU Method 082 Chemiluminescence Continuous

Low Level CO API 300EU Method 593 Non Dispersive Infrared Continuous

PM 2.5 R&P Partisol 2025 Method 118 Gravimetric Daily

PM 2.5 Speciation Ions and Elements MetOne SASS Method 811 IC, XRF 1 day in 3

PM 2.5 , PMcoarse, PM 10 Thermo Scientific 1405 DF FDMS Method 790 TEOM 30°C Gravimetric Continuous

PM 10 R&P Partisol 2025 Method 127 Gravimetric Daily

Carbon URG 3000 Method 838 IMPROVE TOR 1 day in 3

Sunset Laboratory Method 5040 Thermal Optical Semi-continuous

Sulfate TEI 5020i Pulsed Fluorescence Semi-continuous Toxics Canister Method 150 GC/MS 1 day in 6

Carbonyl DNPH Cartridge Method 202 HPLC - Ultraviolet Absorption 1 day in 6

Wind Speed/direction Met hod 020 --- Continuous Temperature Method 040 --- Continuous Barometric Pressure Method 011 --- Continuous Relative Humidity Method 011 --- ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 137 of 207


# RIVERHEAD

36-103-0004

Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Long Island Horticultural Research Center 3059 Sound Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 138 of 207



### Riverhead Address: Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Long Island Horticultu ral Research Center 3059 Sound Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901

AQS Number: 36-103-0004 DEC Number: 5155-01 New York State County: Suffolk Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.96078 N -72.71238 W

The Riverhead air monitoring station was establis hed in 1992 as a seasonal ozone site. It is utilized as a regional ozone site, given its dow nwind proximity to New York City. The ozone data are reported to the AIRNow system.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous (during the NYS Ozone Season)Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 139 of 207 

# SUSAN WAGNER

36-085-0067

New York City Department of Education Susan E. Wagner High School 1200 Manor Avenue Staten Island, NY 10314Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 140 of 207



### Susan Wagner Address: New York City Department of Education Susan E. Wagner High School 1200 Manor Avenue Staten Island, NY 10314

AQS Number: 36-085-0067 DEC Number: 7097-01 New York State County: Richmond Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 40.59664 N -74.12525 W

The Susan Wagner ambient air monitoring station was established in the 1970's. This site is one of the long term ozone trends sites in New York City. The site is a year-round ozone site. The ozone data from this site are reported to AirNow.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table: Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

Meteorological Method 020 Continuous Barometric Pressure Method 011 Continuous Relative Humidity Method 011 Continuous Temperature Method 040 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 141 of 207 

# WHITE PLAINS

36-119-2004

White Plains Water Pump Station Garage 240 Orchard Street White Plains, NY 10601Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 142 of 207



### White Plains

Address: White Plains Wa ter Pump Station Garage 240 Orchard Street White Plains, NY 10601

AQS Number: 36-119-2004 DEC Number: 5902-04 New York State County: Westchester Statistical Area: New York City Metropolitan Area Coordinates: 41.05192 N -73.76366 W

The White Plains ambient air monitoring station wa s originally established in the 1970's. The ozone data are reported to the AirNow system.

The parameters monitored are indicated in the following table:

Parameter Sampling Method Analysis Method Schedule

Ozone TEI 49C Method 047 Ultraviolet Photometric Continuous

PM 2.5 Thermo Scientific TEOM 1405 Method 079 TEOM Gravimetric Continuous

Meteorological Method 020 ContinuousAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 143 of 207

4. Criteria Contaminants

EPA is required to set National Ambient Ai r Quality Standards (NAAQS) for wide-spread pollutants from numerous and di verse sources considered harm ful to public health and the environment. The Clean Air Act established two t ypes of national air quality standards. Primary standards set limits to protect pub lic health, including the health of "sensitive" populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protection against visi bility impairment, damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. The Clean Air Act requires periodic re view of the science upo n which the standards are based and the standards themselves. List ed below are the NAAQS for six principal pollutants, which are called "criteria" pollutants.

Table 4.1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Pollutant Primary Standards Secondary Standards

Level Averaging Times Level Averaging Times

Carbon Monoxide 9 ppm (10 mg/m 3 ) 8-hour (1) None 35 ppm (40 mg/m 3 ) 1-hour (1)

Lead 0.15μg/m 3(2) Rolling 3-month Average Same as Primary

Nitrogen Dioxide 53 ppb Annual (Arithmetic Mean) Same as Primary

100 ppb 1-hour (3) None

Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) 150μg/m 3 24-hour (4) Same as Primary

Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) 12.0μg/m 3 Annual (5) (Arith. Mean) Same as Primary

35μg/m 3 24-hour (6) Same as Primary

Ozone 0.075 ppm (2008 std) 8-hour (7) Same as Primary

0.08 ppm (1997 std) 8-hour (8) Same as Primary

0.12 ppm 1-hour (9) Not applicable in NYS Same as Primary

Sulfur Oxides 75 ppb 1-hour (10) 3-hour (1) 0.5 ppm (1300μg/m 3 )Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 144 of 207

(1) Not to be exceeded more than once per year.

(2) Effective 1/12/2009, replaces the previous quarterly averag e value of 1.5μg/m 3

.

(3) To attain this standard, th e 3-year average of the 98th pe rcentile of the daily maximum 1-hour average at each monitor within an area must not exceed 100 ppb (effective January 22, 2010).

(4) Not to be exceeded more than once per year on average over 3 years.

( 5 ) To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the weighted annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations from single or multiple co mmunity-oriented monitors must not exceed 12.0μg/m 3 . Effective March 18, 2013.

( 6 ) To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations at each population-oriented monitor within an area must not exceed 35μg/m 3 (effective December 17, 2006).

( 7 ) To attain this standard, the 3-year averag e of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations measured at ea ch monitor within an area over each year must not exceed 0.075 ppm (effective May 27, 2008).

( 8 ) (a) To attain this standard, the 3-year av erage of the fourth-hi ghest daily maximum 8- hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor within an area over each year must not exceed 0.08 ppm. (b) The 1997 standard—and the implementation rules for that standard—will remain in place for implementation purposes as EPA undertakes rulemaking to address the transition from the 1997 ozone standa rd to the 2008 ozone standard. ( c) EPA is in the process of reconsider ing these standards (set in March 2008).

( 9 ) (a) The standard is attained when the exp ected number of days per calendar year with maximum hourly average concentr ations above 0.12 ppm is < 1. (b) As of June 15, 2005 EPA revoked the 1-hour ozone standard in all areas except the 8-hour ozone nonattainment Earl y Action Compact (EAC) Areas.

(10) Effective August 23, 2010. To attain this st andard, the 3-year average of the 99th percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour averag e at each monitor within an area must not exceed 75 ppb.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 145 of 207

4.1 Carbon Monoxide

Carbon monoxide, a colorless and odorless gas, is produced as a primary pollutant during the combustion of fossil and biomass fuels. Vege tation also can emit CO directly into the atmosphere as a metabolic by-product. Sources such as motor vehicles, non-road combustion engines or vehicles, and biomass burning can cau se high concentrations of CO in the outdoor environment. Indoor sources include unvent ed, malfunctioning, or misused combustion appliances, combustion engines in garages or basements, and tobacco combustion. In both of these environments, CO is of direct concern becau se of the health effects that can result from human exposure to thes e high concentrations.

CO enters the bloodstream through the lungs and reduces oxygen delivery to the body’s organs and tissues. The health threat from levels of CO sometimes found in the ambient air is most serious for those who suffer from cardiovascular disease such as a ngina pectoris. At much higher levels of exposure not commonly found in ambien t air, CO can be poisonous, and even healthy individuals may be affected. Visual impairment, reduced work capacity, reduced manual dexterity, poor learning ability, and difficulty in performing complex tasks are all associated with exposure to elevated CO levels.

There are two primary NAAQS for ambient CO : a 1-hour average of 35 ppm and an 8-hour average of 9 ppm. These concentrations are not to be exceeded more than once per year. There currently are no secondary standards for CO.

Motor vehicle exhaust contributes about 60 pe rcent of all CO emi ssions nationwide. High concentrations of CO generally occur in areas with heavy tra ffic congestion. Other sources of CO emissions include industrial processes, non-transportation fuel combustion, and natural sources such as wildfires. Peak CO concentratio ns typically occur during the colder months of the year when CO automotive emissions are great er and nighttime inversion conditions are more frequent.

Technological advancements in pollution contro l have brought about a downward trend for ambient CO concentrations over the past few de cades. According to EPA estimates, annual CO emissions decreased from 197.3 million tons in 1970 to 89 million tons in 2005 nationally.

The number of monitors and concentration trends chart over the years in New York State are depicted in Figure 4.1. It clearly demonstrates that the current am bient levels of CO are well below the NAAQS, in spite of the continual incr ease in automobiles and vehicle-miles traveled in the State. As of 2002, all counties in the State have ach ieved attainment designation.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 146 of 207

Figure 4.1 Carbon Monoxide Monitors and Concentration Trends

NYSDEC uses TEI Model 48C instruments that employ the NDIR gas filter correlation method for the continuous measurement of CO. Currently there are seven CO m onitors in operation statewide as shown in Figure 4.2.

Near-Road Monitoring

The EPA updated the monitoring regulations fo r CO in August, 2011. The regulation added a requirement to perform CO monitoring at one location on a busy roadway in each city (CBSA) with a population over 1 million. Th e near-road CO monitor is expe cted to be collocated with the near-road monitor established for monitoring NO 2 . A CO monitor is required to be operational at a near-road site in CBSAs over 2.5 million by January 1, 2015 and in the CBSAs over 1 million by January 1, 2017.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 147 of 207

Figure 4.2 Location Map for Carb on Monoxide Monitoring SitesAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 148 of 207

4.2 Nitrogen Dioxide

Many chemical species of nitrogen oxides (NO x ) exist, but the air pollutant species of most interest from the point of view of human health is nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ). Nitrogen dioxide is soluble in water, reddish-brown in color, and a strong oxidant.

Nitrogen dioxide is an important atmospheric trace gas, not only because of its health effects but also because (a) it absorbs visible solar radi ation and contributes to impaired atmospheric visibility; (b) as an abso rber of visible radiation it could ha ve a potential dire ct role in global climate change if its co ncentrations were to become high eno ugh; (c) it is, along with nitric oxide (NO), a chief regulator of the oxidizing capacity of the free troposphere by controlling the buildup and fate of radical species, in cluding hydroxyl radicals; and (d) it plays a critical role in determining ozone (O 3 ) concentrations in the troposphere because the photolysis of nitrogen dioxide is the only key initiator of the photochemical formation of ozone, whether in polluted or unpolluted atmospheres.

Natural sources include intrusion of stratospheri c nitrogen oxides, bact erial and volcanic action, and lightning. The major source of anthropoge nic emissions of nitrogen oxides into the atmosphere is the combustion of fossil fuels in stationary sources (h eating, power generation) and in motor vehicles (internal combustion engines).

In most ambient situations, nitric oxide is emitted and transformed into nitrogen dioxide in the atmosphere. Oxidation of nitric oxide by atmos pheric oxidants such as ozone occurs rapidly, even at the low levels of reactants present in the atmosphere. Conseque ntly, this reaction is regarded as the most important route for n itrogen dioxide producti on in the atmosphere. Other contributions of nitrogen dioxide to the atmosphere come from specific non-combustion industrial processes, such as th e manufacture of nitric acid, the use of explosives and welding. Indoor sources include tobacco smoking and the us e of gas-fired appliances and oil stoves.

Nitrogen dioxide is the most widespread and co mmonly found nitrogen oxi de and is a matter of public health concern. The most troubling health effects associated with short term exposures (i.e., less than 3 hours) to NO x at or near the ambient NO x concentrations seen in the United States include cough and increase d changes in airway responsive ness and pulmonary function in individuals with preex isting respiratory illnesses, as well as increases in respiratory illnesses in children 5 to 12 years old. Evidence sugge sts that long-term exposures to NO x may lead to increased susceptibility to respir atory infection and may cause stru ctural alterations in the lungs.

Atmospheric transformation of NO x can lead to the formation of ozone and nitrogen-bearing particles (e.g., nitrates a nd nitric acid). As discussed in the ozone and particulate matter sections of this document, exposure to both PM and O 3 is associated with adverse health effects.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 149 of 207

Nitrogen oxides contribute to a wide range of effects on public welfare and the environment, including global warming and stratospheric ozon e depletion. Deposition of nitrogen can lead to fertilization, eutrophication, or acidification of terrestrial, wetl and, and aquatic (e.g., fresh water bodies, estuaries, and co astal water) systems. These eff ects can alter competition between existing species, leading to changes in the num ber and type of species (composition) within a community. For example, eutrophic conditions in aquatic systems can produce explosive algae growth leading to a depletion of oxygen in the water and/or an increase in levels of toxins harmful to fish and other aquatic life.

The level for both the primary and secondary NAAQS for NO 2 is 0.053 ppm annual arithmetic average (mean), not to be exceeded. In Ja nuary, 2013, the EPA revised the NAAQS to include an hourly standard of 0.100 ppm. Figure 4.3 shows the number of m onitoring sites and NO 2 concentration trends over the years. The current ambient levels of NO 2 observed in New York State are well below the NAAQS.

Figure 4.3 Nitrogen Dioxide Monito rs and Concentration Trends

In New York, the TEI Model 42C instru ments are deployed for continuous NO 2 measurements using the gas phase chemiluminescence method. Currently there are four NO x monitoring sites statewide, and NO/NO y monitors in Rochester, Pinn acle, and Queens College (both NO 2 and NO y ) as shown in Figure 4.4. NO/NO y measurements are included within the NCore multipollutant site requirements a nd the PAMS program. These NO/NO y measurements will produce conservative estimates for NO 2 that can be used to ensure tracking continued compliance with the NO 2 NAAQS. NO/NO y monitors are used at these sites b ecause it is important to collect data on total reactive n itrogen species fo r understanding O 3 photochemistry. Starting in 2012, we discontinued using the (NO/NO y ) values as NO 2 from these three site s for statewide annualAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 150 of 207

average calculations. The uptick in the trend line is a result of excluding the low concentration sites Pinnacle and Rochester, and not an indication of a statewide increase.

The EPA considered setting a secondary standard for NO x and SO x that would specifically target the impact of acidic deposition on wilderness areas. The EPA ultimately decided that there was not enough information at this time to tie speci fic water quality thresholds with ambient air concentrations. In the July 2011 final rule for NO x and SO x , the EPA stated that they would set up a monitoring program in sensitive areas to coll ect information to link water quality impacts to ambient air quality measurements. The NYSDEC is participating in this pilot monitoring program in the Adirondacks. Additional monitoring equipment has been inst alled at several sites to determine the concentrations of gasses and pa rticles including ammonia. These data will be used in the future to inform the next review of the NO x /SO x standard. Although ambient NO 2 levels are not expected to contravene th e NAAQS, monitoring is necessary due to NO 2 being an ozone precursor, and the need to track the effectiveness of emission reduction programs.

Figure 4.4 Location Map for Nitr ogen Oxides Monitoring Sites

Near-road NO 2 MonitoringAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 151 of 207

Under the new NO x rule that became effective Januar y, 2010, each MSA with population larger than 500,000 will be required to operate a near -road monitor beginning in 2013. An additional monitor was required in CBSAs larger than 2.5 m illion or if the city contained a road segment with annual average daily traffic (AADT) c ounts exceeding 250,000 vehicles. The regulation retained the existing annual standard. The EPA was not able to provide funds to implement the new monitoring program in 2011 and 2012 and decide d to change the impl ementation dates in the NO 2 monitoring regulation.

In March 2013, EPA issued a final rule to revise the deadlines by which the near-road monitors within the NO 2 monitoring network are to be operational. States and local agencies were required to begin operating the near-road component of the NO 2 network in phases between January 1, 2014 and January 1, 2017. This replaced the 2010 rule requirement that originally required all new NO 2 monitors to begin operating on January 1, 2013. New York is working closely with EPA Region 2 to implement this rule. A near-road site has been established in Buffalo and data collection is underway. Potentia l monitoring locations ha ve been identified in New York City and in Rochester and these sites should be operat ional later in 2014.

The near-road NO 2 monitors are being established with the following considerations. The road segment must have high annual average daily traf fic (AADT), it must be accessible, be located away from obstructions, and be located on the do wnwind side of the roadway if possible. New York State will need to establish such a site in each of the following areas: Albany-SchenectadyTroy, Buffalo-Niagara Falls, Poughkeepsie-New burgh-Middletown, Nassau-Suffolk, New YorkWhite Plains, Rochester and Syracuse.

The following table provides a list of the CBSAs in New York required to have a near-road NO 2 monitor:

Table 4.2 CBSAs in NYS Required to have Near-Road NO2 Monitors

Name of CBSA Population (2010 Census) Highest AADT (NYSDOT 2011) Required Monitor Date for Implementation Albany-Schenectady-Troy 853,919 119,500 1 Jan 2017 Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls 1,124,309 129,600 1 Jan 2014 New York-New Jersey-PA 19,006,798 280,700 2 Jan 2014, 2015Poughkeepsie –NewburghMiddletown 672,525 67,800 1 Jan 2017

Rochester 1,034,090 134,100 1 Jan 2014 Syracuse 643,794 114,100 1 Jan 2017

The primary objective of the near-road NO 2 network is to monitor where peak, ambient NO 2 concentrations are expected to occur as a result of on-road mobile source emissions. In the past, these locations would be considered to be Micro- scale locations. The EPA has since stated that the area alongside a major road is similar to th e areas alongside th e entire road segment and this area should be considered to be Middle–scale be cause one location is repr esentative of a larger “line source” shaped area. The sites will also represent the worst case for population exposure for each CBSA since the sites are at locations where NO 2 concentrations are expected to be high for one or more hours at a time. We have requested the New York State Department ofAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 152 of 207

Transportation to provide the updated Fleet Equiva lent AADT statistics for the three near-road sites. The site characteristics of the Queens and Rochester sites wi ll be detailed in an addendum to this plan later this year.

Table 4.3 Buffalo Near-Road Site Characteristics

Buffalo Site Segment Parameters Buffalo Near-road NO 2 site Location I90 Mile Post 424.6 East Bound Side Road segment name I90 between Exit 51 and Exit 52 Road type (controlled access highway, limited access freeway, arterial, etc) Controlled Access highway

Road segment end points (latitude & longitude) 42.928689 -78.766331 42.913499 -78.766494 AADT 131,019 (http://gis.dot.ny.gov/tdv/) Horizontal spacing 20m from Traffic Lane Vertical spacing Terrain flat, inlets at approx 4 m Meteorology I90 in this segment runs N/S and monitor is installed on the east shoulder (downwind)Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 153 of 207

4.3 Lead

Elemental lead (Pb) possesses an array of usef ul physical and chemical properties, making it among the first metals to be extracted and used by humankind. It has a relatively low melting point (327.5 ̊ C), is a soft, malleable, and ductile metal, a poor electrical conduc tor, and is easily cast, rolled and extruded. Although sensitive to environmental acids, after exposure to environmental sulfuric acid (H 2 SO 4 ), metallic Pb becomes impe rvious to corrosion due to weathering and submersion in water. This effect is due to the f act that Pb lead sulfate (PbSO 4 ), the relatively insolubl e precipitate produced by reaction of Pb with H 2 SO 4 , forms a protective barrier against further chemical reactions. This aspect of its chemistry made Pb especially convenient for protective surface coatings (e.g. pain t), roofing, containment of corrosive liquids, and (until the discovery of its adverse health effects), construction of water supply systems.

Pb will only exist in the vapor phase at or a bove 1750°C. Therefore, at ambient atmospheric temperatures, elemental Pb will de posit to surfaces or exist in th e atmosphere as a component of atmospheric aerosol.

Exposure to lead occurs through ingestion of l ead in food, water, soil, or dust and through inhalation. It accumulates in the blood, bones, and so ft tissues. Lead can also adversely affect the kidneys, liver, nervous system, and other or gans. Excessive exposure to lead may cause neurological impairments such as seizures, mental retardation, and/or beha vioral disorders. Even at low doses, Pb exposure is associated with ch anges in fundamental enzymatic, energy transfer, and homeostatic mechanisms in the human body. Additionally, even low levels of Pb exposure may cause central nervous system damage in fetuses and children. Recent studies show that neurobehavioral changes may result from Pb exposure during the child’s first years of life and that lead may be a factor in high blood pressure and subsequent heart disease.

Airborne lead can also have adverse impacts on the environment. Wild and domestic grazing animals may ingest lead that has deposited on plan t or soil surfaces or that has been absorbed by plants through leaves or roots. Animals, however , do not appear to be more susceptible or more sensitive to adverse effects from lead than ar e humans. Therefore, the secondary standard for lead is identical to the primary standard.

In November of 2008 EPA published the final rule for the revision of the NAAQS for lead. The primary lead standard was revised to 0.15 μ g/m 3 in total suspended particles (Pb-TSP). The averaging time was changed to a rolling 3-month period with a maximum (not-to-be-exceeded) form, evaluated over a 3-year period. The revised s econdary standard was set to be identical in all respects to the new primary standard. Th ese new standards became effective on January 12, 2009, superseding the old standard of quarterly average concentration not to exceed 1.5 μ g/m 3

. As part of the lead monitoring requirements, monitoring agencies are required to monitor ambient air near lead sources which are expected to or have been shown to have a potential to contribute to a 3-month average lead concentratio n in ambient air in exces s of the level of the NAAQS. At a minimum, monitoring agencies must monitor near lead sources that emit 1.0 ton per year (tpy) or more. Monitoring is also required in each CBSA with a population equal to or greater than 500,000 people as determined by the la test available census fi gures. Revisions toAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 154 of 207

the monitoring requirements pertaining to where State and local monitoring agencies would be required to conduct lead monitoring were finali zed and became effective January 26, 2011. The new regulations replaced the popul ation oriented monitoring require ment with a requirement to add Pb monitors to the urban NCore monitors. The EPA also lowered the emission threshold from 1.0 tpy to 0.50 tpy for industrial sources of lead (e.g., lead smelters and foundries). However, the emission threshold for airports was maintained at 1.0 tpy. In addition, an airport monitoring study will be implemented to determin e the need for monitoring of airports which emit less than 1.0 tpy of lead. Under this new rule lead monitoring is required for a minimum of one year at 15 additional airports that have been identified as having characteristics that could lead to ambient lead concen trations approaching or exceed ing the lead NAAQS. Brookhaven and Republic airports in Suffolk County, New York have been designated as such. A 12-month monitoring study at Brookhaven Airport concluded in October, 2012 and all data were submitted to AQS. The Republic Airport monitoring did not st art until October, 2012 due to protracted site lease negotiations.

Particulate lead samples are collected on glass fiber filters using a standard TSP high volume sampler which are subsequently analyzed by the laboratory using atomic absorption spectroscopy. Under the new rule, EPA is allowing Pb-PM 10 in lieu of Pb-TSP where the maximum 3-month arithmetic mean Pb concen tration is expected to be less than 0.10 μ g/m 3 (i.e., two thirds of the NAAQS) and where sources are not expected to emit ultra-coarse Pb. The population oriented Pb monitors at the NCore or NATTS site s are located away from known sources of Pb and will utilize Pb-PM 10 samplers.

Figure 4.5 depicts the number of monitoring sites and lead concentration trends for New York State over the years.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 155 of 207

Figure 4.5 Lead Monitors and Concentration Trends

Currently there are four Pb-TSP monitors (one collocated) in operation in Middletown, where a lead acid battery recycling f acility is located, and two urba n CBSA monitors (low volume PM 10 ) at the NATTS sites in the Bronx and Rochester. The source oriented monitoring sites (AQS site ID # 36-071-3001

, 36-071-3002

, 36-071-3004) are in place as the facility has th e potential to contribute to a 3-month average lead concentratio n in ambient air in exces s of the level of the NAAQS. Routine data review showed that duri ng the first quarter of 2011, there were a couple of sample dates that showed high levels of lea d, which would lead to co ntravention of the new standard. Investigations at the facility led to enforcement actions although specific causes for the observed values were not discovered. C onsequently an additional low volume PM 10 sampler was put in place to collect daily filter samples for ma ss measurement and lead analysis using XRF in August 2011. The PM 10 mass data collected at this site was low and mass determination was discontinued in November 2012. The highest 3 Month rolling average PM 10 lead concentration at the downwind site (36-071-3002) was 0.107 μgPb/m 3 in 2013.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 156 of 207

4.4 Particulate Matter

4.4.1 Total Suspended Particulate

Particulate matter is the generic term for a br oad class of chemically and physically diverse substances that exist as discrete particles (liquid droplets or solid s) over a wide range of sizes. Particles originate from a variety of anthropoge nic stationary and mobile sources as well as natural sources. Particles may be emitted directly or formed in the atmosphere by transformations of gaseous emissions such as su lfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. The chemical and physical properties of PM vary greatly with time, location, meteorology, and source category, thus complicati ng the assessment of health and welfare effects.

EPA first established national ambient air qual ity standards for PM in 1971. The reference method specified for determining attainment of the original standard s was the high-volume sampler, which collects PM up to a nominal size of 25 to 45 micrometers ( μ m), referred to as total suspended particles or TSP. The primary standards (measured by the indicator TSP) were 260 μ g/m 3 24-hour average, not to be exceeded more than once per year, and 75 μ g/m 3 annual geometric mean. The secondary standard was 150 μ g/m 3 24-hour average, not to be exceeded more than once per year. These standards we re in place until 1987 when EPA changed the particle indicator from TSP to PM 10 , the latter referring to par ticles with a mean aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to10 μ m.

Figure 4.6 shows the number of mo nitoring sites and the composite annual geometric means of TSP over the years. Trace metal analysis wa s also performed on the TSP filters until 1998. NYSDEC terminated the TSP sampling program when DOH could no longer provide laboratory analysis support.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 157 of 207

4.6 Total Suspended Particulate Monitors and Concentration Trends

4.4.2 PM 10

In 1987 EPA revised the 1971 standards in order to protect against adverse health effects of inhalable airborne particles that can be deposit ed in the lower (thoracic) regions of the human respiratory tract, with PM 10 as the indicator. EPA establishe d identical primary and secondary PM 10 standards for two averaging times: 150 μ g/m 3 (24-h average, with no more than one expected exceedance per year) and 50 μ g/m 3 (expected annual arithmetic mean, averaged over three years). These standards remained in eff ect until 2002, when the courts finally upheld the 1997 revisions put forth by EPA as a result of the mandated periodic scien tific review. After the most recent scientific review on PM, EPA issued the final rule in December, 2006 revising the PM 2.5 standards, at the same time revoking the PM 10 annual standard while retaining the 24 hr standard at 150 μ g/m 3

.

Wedding & Associates PM 10 Critical Flow High Volume Sampler (WED PM 10 sampler) were employed for the NYSDEC network. The quartz filters were collected and submitted to the Department of Health for laboratory analysis until 2005, when support services were terminated. Figure 4.7 shows the number of monitors and the composite annual arithmetic mean for PM 10

. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005μg/m^3# of Moniotrs TSP in NYS - # Monitors vs. Statewide Geometric Mean

# TSP Monitors Statewide Geo. Mean Air Quality StandardAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 158 of 207

Starting in 2004, the R&P Partisol 2025 samplers were used for manual PM 10 collection by removing the PM 2.5 size selective inlet. The filter cartr idges are submitted to RTI (EPA contract laboratory) for mass analysis.

Figure 4.7 PM 10 Monitors and Concentration Trends

Currently there are five such sites in operation, as shown in Figure 4.8. The sites in Rochester, Bronx and Queens operate on a one day in six schedul e. The sites in Buffalo and in Manhattan on Division Street operate on a one day in thr ee schedule. The NYSDEC is planning to reduce the frequency of sampling at Division Stre et and Buffalo to one day in six.

The EPA in CFR 58.12(e) permits PM 10 monitors to reduce monitoring frequency from one day in three to one day in six if the maximum 24-hr value in the past year is below 70% of the NAAQS of 150 μ g/m 3 . The maximum value in 2013 for Division St. was 47.2 μ g/m 3 and 45.5 at Buffalo, repectively, whic h is well below 70% of the annual standard, 105 μ g/m 3

.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 159 of 207

Figure 4.8 Location Map for PM 10 Monitoring Sites

Continuous PM 10 data are also obtained using Thermo Scientific 1405-DF instruments that simultaneously measure PM 2.5 , PM Coarse (PM 10 - PM 2.5 ) and PM 10 mass concentrations at the IS 52, Queens College, and Pi nnacle State Park sites.

4.4.3 PM 2.5

In July 1997, EPA Administrator promulgated significant revisions to the PM NAAQS, after taking into account scie ntific information and assessments presented by staff, Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committ ee advice and recommendations, a nd public comments. While it was determined that the PM NAAQS should continue to focus on particles less than or equal to 10 μ m in diameter, it was also determined th at the fine and coarse fractions of PM 10 should be considered separately. New standards were added, using PM 2.5 as the indicator for fine particles; and PM 10 standards were retained for the purpose of regulating coarse-fraction particles. Two new PM 2.5 standards were set: an annual standard of 15 μ g/m 3 , based on the 3-year average of annual arithmetic mean PM 2.5 concentrations from single or multiple community-oriented monitors; and a 24-hr standard of 65 μ g/m 3 , based on the 3-year averag e of the 98th percentile ofAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 160 of 207

24-hr PM 2.5 concentrations at each popul ation-oriented monitor within an area. To continue to address coarse-fraction particles, the annual PM 10 standard was retained, and the form, but not the level, of the 24-hr PM 10 standard was revised to be ba sed on the 99th perc entile of 24-hr PM 10 concentrations at each monitor in an ar ea. The secondary standards were revised by making them identical in all respects to the PM 2.5 and PM 10 primary standards.

EPA lowered the NAAQS for PM in December of 2006 to provide increased protection of public health and welfare, respectively. EP A revised the level of the 24-hour PM 2.5 standard from 65 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ) and retained the le vel of the annual PM 2.5 standard at 15 μ g/m 3 . With regard to PM 10 , the 24-hour standard was retained, but the annual PM 10 standard was revoked. On Dec. 14, 2012 EPA further stre ngthened the nation’s air quality standards for fine particle pollution to by revising the primary annual PM 2.5 standard from 15 to 12 micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ) and retaining the 24-hour fine particle standard of 35 μ g/m 3

. The new standards became effective on March 18, 2013.

The 2012 PM NAAQS added a networ k monitoring requirement for PM 2.5 . A PM 2.5 monitor must be installed in CBSAs with populations ove r 1 Million near a busy road segment. The monitor deployments are staged with the mon itors required in CBS As over 2.5 Million by 1/1/2015 and the rest by 1/1/2017. The data from th ese sites will be used to evaluate the impact of emissions from busy roadways in urban ar eas. The NYSDEC plans to install near-road PM 2.5 monitors in Queens, Buffalo and in Rochester.

The NYSDEC PM 2.5 monitoring network deploys a combination of filter based Federal Reference Method (FRM) samplers, continuous mass monitors, filter based speciation samplers and continuous speciation samplers. The data fro m the FRM samplers are used to determine if the State’s air quality meets the National Am bient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The continuous mass sampler data are used for the re porting of near real-time air quality data for health related warnings and forecasts. The speciat ion filter sampler data are used to determine the chemical constituents that make up PM 2.5 . The continuous speciation data are used to examine the short term fluctuations in the con centrations of individua l species or components that make up PM 2.5

.

PM Monitoring Objectives

The principal objective of the PM 2.5 monitoring network is to de termine the exposure of the State’s population to ambient PM 2.5 . This objective is the primary focus of the FRM filter based samplers as well as for the continuous mass monitoring network. The protocols and equipment used for the FRM network are meticulously specifi ed in the Code of Fe deral Regulations (CFR) to insure that the measurements are consistent from one State to another. The continuous mass monitoring instruments cannot accurately provide data for direct comp arison with the NAAQS but these instruments actually provide the mo st useful data for population exposure. The continuous PM 2.5 data is updated every hour for near real-time health related warnings, PM 2.5 forecasts and updates as to cu rrent pollution concentrations.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 161 of 207

The NYSDEC has attempted to adjust the PM 2.5 network in light of EPA expectations, updated regulations and prioritized f unding. The FRM network consisted of 40 sites when it was fully established using the original de sign criteria from 1998. Since then the number of sites have been reduced because fewer sites were required to determine compliance with the Annual PM 2.5 NAAQS. The latest revisions to the Federal regulations have reduced the number of required monitors even further. These new requirements base the number of required monitors on population and the expected PM 2.5 concentration. The NYSDE C network exceeds these requirements in all areas that ar e expected to be near or above either the Annual or Daily PM 2.5 standard.

The other monitoring objectives for the PM 2.5 network include tran sport and background monitoring. Transport monitoring sites are sites that are situated so that the data are representative of the air masses moving into the State fr om areas upwind. These sites are important because the sources of PM 2.5 that are outside of New York can contribute to New York’s PM 2.5 ambient concentration. Background m onitoring sites are sites that are representative of PM 2.5 concentrations that are generally not related to specific sources but impact wide areas. The concentrations measured at these background site s generally represent the lowest expected PM 2.5 concentrations in New York State.

Monitoring Scale and Representativeness

The geography of New York State encompasses a la ke shore to the west, plateaus and rolling hills in the center, mountains to the northeast a nd south and sea shores to the southeast. All of these areas have varying population densities and meteorology. The populations living in these areas are exposed to PM 2.5 that is generated locally as well as from PM 2.5 that is transported from areas outside of their region.

The actual design of the network is a compromi se that minimizes the number of monitoring locations while ensuring that the measured con centrations for each area are indicative of actual population exposures. Each sampler is assigned a scal e or “zone of representativeness” when it is installed. The scale determines how large a geographical area the re sulting data will represent. EPA has defined ambient monitoring scales as:

Microscale: Represents (10 - 100 meters) Middle Scale: Repres ents (100 - 500 meters) Neighborhood Scale: Represents (500 meters - 4 km) Urban Scale: Represents (4 - 100 km) Regional Scale: Represents (100 to 1000 km)

The scale of the FRM monitoring sites that ha ve population exposure as their objective is Neighborhood or Urban. The definiti ons of scale primarily serve to identify the site’s sensitivity to individual sources. A monitori ng site that is routinely imp acted by a specific source has a much smaller “scale” than a site that only sees an effect from numerous widespread sources. The FRM sites in New York State are located in places that will likely have high concentrations andAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 162 of 207

large monitoring scales. This ensures that th e public is not exposed to higher ambient PM 2.5 concentrations than the concentrations from the FRM network reported for their area.

The PM 2.5 monitoring network works well for determin ing average ambient exposures for most of the State’s population. The limitations of the ne twork stem from the inability to monitor in smaller scales such as Middle and Microscale. An example of an urban microscale influence not addressed by the network would be PM 2.5 emissions from traffic in a street canyon. Certainly if New York residents spent much of their time in this type of confined area, then their exposure to ambient PM 2.5 would be considerably higher than th at indicated by the closest neighborhood or urban scale monitor. Similarly, a person in a rural valley area s ubject to daily woodsmoke would also be exposed to higher PM 2.5 concentrations than those m easured at the nearest Neighborhood or Urban scale monitor.

The PM 2.5 ambient monitoring network is also not able to determine the population’s overall exposure to PM 2.5 . Personal habits such as smoking and occupations such as mining, farming and construction can lead to mu ch higher exposures to PM 2.5 than that of the majority of the population. Other factors such as widely varying indoor PM 2.5 concentrations can lead to uncertainty in overall PM 2.5 exposures.

PM 2.5 Monitoring Instrumentation

The filter based FRM samplers used in New York are the Model 2025 sequential samplers made by the Thermo Environmental Company (Franklin, MA). The sampler has been designated by EPA as a reference method instrument for PM 2.5 particle collection. The designation is: RFPS0498-118.

Currently there are 19 FRM monitors in ope ration statewide, as shown in Figure 4.9.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 163 of 207

Figure 4.9 Site Location Map of Manual PM 2.5 (FRM) Monitoring Network

Figure 4.10 below shows the number of manual PM 2.5 monitoring sites and the composite annual arithmetic means in New York State si nce the network was implemented in 1998.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 164 of 207

Figure 4.10 PM 2.5 Monitors and Concentration Trends

The continuous mass monitoring instruments us ed in New York are the TEOM 1400ab also made by the Thermo Environmental Company. Th ese instruments have received designation by EPA for PM 10 but not for PM 2.5 . PM 2.5 is more difficult to measure than PM 10 with automated samplers because PM 2.5 contains a higher fraction of volatile components. The heated measurement sensor for the TEOM reduces the am ount of volatile mass measured as compared to filter based FRMs. The NYSDEC utilizes non-lin ear data adjustments to make the TEOM data more comparable with the FRM data. The adju sted data are used for public reporting and forecasts of PM 2.5 concentrations.

The NYSDEC uses eight MetOne SuperSass an d URG 3000N samplers for the collection of samples for the speciation of PM 2.5 . The samplers collect 3 and 1 filter samples respectively every third day or sixth day for a period of 24 hours. The samples are then sent to an EPA contract laboratory for chemical analysis. There are over fifty species cons isting of ions, metals and carbon species quantified by the analyses.

4.4.4 Continuous PM Monitoring

Continuous mass monitoring is performed pr imarily with a network of TEOM 1400ab instruments. In addition, there are three Thermo Scientific 140 5-DF’s deployed (IS 52, Queens College, and Pinnacle) to simultaneously measure PM 2.5 , PM Coarse (PM 10 - PM 2.5 ) and PM 10 mass concentrations. This element of the PM 2.5 monitoring network provides the data used for public reporting purposes includ ing; the NYSDEC website, the AIRNow website and for PM 2.5 forecasting. The data from the TEOMs are polled a nd reported every hour to insure that the public has access to the most r ecent air quality information.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 165 of 207

The TEOM data are compared to the filter base d FRM data on an annual basis. The comparison allows the analysts to create non-linear correction factors that modify the TEOM data to more closely resemble FRM data. This is necessary be cause FRM data is not available for near realtime public reporting purposes. EPA has recently r ecognized the value of these data adjustments and has created new method codes so this adjusted data can be submitted to the AQS database. The NYSDEC now submits TEOM data from each site in its original unadjusted format as well as the adjusted data to matc h more closely with the FRM.

There are 26 continuous PM 2.5 monitoring sites as shown in Figure 4.11.

Figure 4.11 Site Location Map of Continuous PM 2.5 (TEOM) Monitoring Network

The NYSDEC also operates some of the newe st continuous mass monitors which have undergone Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) desi gnation. These instruments collect more of the volatile PM mass that the filter based FRM may or may not retain depending on the environmental conditions during and after the peri od in which the filter sample was collected. The Department has been evaluatin g the technological improvements that have led to the current PM 2.5 continuous FEMs for more than 10 years. The Thermo Scientific 1405-DF FEM performed better than the other instruments in on-site deployme nts at urban and rural locations in the state. The Department purchased several of these but they have not operated reliably andAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 166 of 207

have not produced data that compares acceptably with the FRM. The equipment manufacturer is aware of the issues and seems to be worki ng towards resolutions of the problems. The Department will continue to rely on the FRM network to provide data for comparison with the ambient PM 2.5 air quality standards. Currently, there are three 1405-DF’s deployed (IS 52, Queens College, and Pinnacle) to simultaneously measure PM 2.5 , PM Coarse (PM 10 - PM 2.5 ) and PM 10 mass concentrations. The Department does not intend to use data collected by the FEMs for comparison to the NAAQS.

Use of FEMs:

The Department does not intend to use data collected by the FEMs for comparison to the NAAQS in 2014. Of the 3 FEMs operating in NY in 2013, only the instrument at Queens College met the minimum data availability necessary for regulatory use. The data availability for compliance PM monitors must be at least 75% for each quarter.

Table 4.4 FEM Data Availability in New York (2013 Data) 1 s t Qtr 2 n d Qtr 3 r d Qtr 4 t h Qtr Annual Queens College 99% 94% 99% 82% 94% Bronx 99% 97% 42% 16% 63% Pinnacle St Park 94% 47% 98% 11% 62%

The data from FEMs must also meet statistical be nchmarks for comparisons with the filter based FRMs before the FEM data can be used for regul atory purposes. The specifications in CFR 40 Part 53 include acceptance limits for slope, intercep t and correlation coefficient. The FEM at Queens closely matches the FRM on an annual ba sis when the FEM channel is reported. The agreement between the FEM and the FRM va ries seasonally. NYSDEC will report the PM 2.5 FEM channel to AQS in 2014 and will continue the ev aluation of the FEM. The reliability of the FEMs will need to improve before they can be utilized for regulatory purposes.

Table 4.5 FEM Data comparison with Collocated FRM (2013 Data) Queens College FEM Correlation Equation

PM 2.5 MC Channel Y(TEOM) = 1.07(FRM) + 0.63 R 2 = 0.93
PM 2.5 FEM Channel Y(TEOM) = 1.00(FRM) R 2 = 0.93Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 167 of 207

Figure 4.12 2013 Queens College 1405DF FEM vs. Daily FRM

Figure 4.13 EPA FEM Test Criteria for slop e, intercept and correlation coefficientAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 168 of 207

4.4.5 Speciation

Speciation monitoring is performe d with a network of eight MetOne SuperSass samplers. There are eight sites in New York State operating with the Speciation Trends Network (CSN) sampling protocol. Five operate on a 1/3 day schedule and two operate on a 1/6 day schedule. All of these sites host collocated FRM and continuous mass monitoring instruments. A rural and an urban site also host collocated IMPROVE protocol samplers. The data from these sites is used to assist in the comparison between CSN and IMPROVE data sets. The goal of the urban installation will be to further relate the mostly rural IMPROVE network to the mostly urban CSN network.

In order to address inconsiste ncies in carbon sampling and analys is procedures used in urban CSN/SLAMS and rural IMPROVE programs, EPA de termined that the URG sampler would be used at all CSN sites. The conversion was completed 2008 for all of the NY sites.

Figure 4.14 shows the eight CSN s ites currently in operation.

Figure 4.14 Location Map of Speciation Sampling SitesAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 169 of 207

4.4.6 Continuous Speciation

The NYSDEC recognizes the value of high tempor al measurements (hourly or higher) of PM 2 5 species. This data is useful for the examination of pollutant trends (and temporal patterns) and can provide information necessary for identificati on of pollutant sources. This is critically important for areas facing non-attainment for the PM 2.5 NAAQS. Identifying seasonality of species is necessary to develop control strategies. Long term mon itoring is vital to this effort because in addition to changes in source emissions, variations in meteorology also affect ambient pollutant concentrations (e.g. wett er than average conditions lead to a washout of pollutants and a lowering of ambient concentrations).

The NYSDEC continuous speciation program is expanding and currently includes monitoring at urban and rural locations. Sulf ate, nitrate, organic carbon, el emental carbon and black carbon species data are collected at hour ly or higher frequency. In this manner both the regional and inter-urban variability of these species are being investigated. The NYSDEC uses instruments to examine the species of PM 2.5 on a higher frequency than what is available from the filter based speciation sampling network. This continuous specia tion data is useful in the examination of source strengths and the relationship between pol lutant concentrations and meteorology. The operation of continuous speciation equipment is also less expensive than long term filter species measurements due to the high cost s associated with filter lab an alysis. Operation of continuous speciation in conjunction with 24-hr CSN sampling is beneficial in accounting for biases in measurements when a change to the CSN method occurs. This is demonstrated in the case of CSN carbon which was changed to the IMPR OVE method in 2007. Long-term collocated continuous carbon measurements prior to and follow ing this change are being used to assess the bias between the old and the new carbon methods. This data will be important in determining the long term trends in PM 2.5 carbon species.

NYSDEC has been using the continuous speciation data in NYC to examine temporal patterns such as diurnal and day of week patterns of aerosol species related to source strengths and meteorology. For example elemental carbon, black carbon and primary pollutant NO x in NYC track throughout the day with p eak concentrations in the morn ing coincident with the early commute period. Mobile emissions in the earl y morning occur into a shallow boundary layer which concentrates pollutants near ground level. An elevation in boundary layer height during the day leads to a dispersion of pollutants and a less pronoun ced afternoon/evening peak. Concentrations of these species are also higher on weekdays compared to weekends indicating that local mobile emissions are a significant source of these species. During winter months organic carbon sometimes shows similar patterns to EC and NO x reflecting the primary organic component most likely from mobile emissi ons. Throughout the year however organic carbon does not track the primary pollutant s but is more correlated with PM 2.5 mass (and sulfate during summer months) indicating that there is a si gnificant regional or non-local contribution to organic carbon measured in NYC . Our continuous speciation measurements also reveal temporal patterns in particle nitrate. In cooler months PM 2.5 nitrate has a broader peak than EC which appears later in the morning, consiste nt with photochemical and secondary aerosol production. During the warm season nitrate concentr ations are significantly lower and the late morning nitrate peak (observed in winter) is not observed in the warm season because asAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 170 of 207

temperatures rise during the day aerosol nitrate reverts back to its precursors (nitric acid and ammonia).

Continuous data can also be used to capture the fu ll extent of regional or local plumes that would normally be missed by the 24-hr filter sampling ne twork. It allows us to study plume events and how meteorology can affect measurements. One can also differentiate between plumes which are short term of a few hours long (e.g. plumes from oil boiler emissions) likely driven by carbon versus those that are more regionally driven by sulfate in summer. High temporal pollutant data is also beneficial for public hea lth effect studies that often re quire resolving c onfounding factors.

Recently concerns have been raised regarding po tential adverse health effects associated with residential wood burning. Wood sm oke contains fine particulate matter which can cause shortterm effects such as eye, nose, throat a nd lung irritation, coughing, sneezing, runny nose and shortness of breath. Exposure to PM 2.5 also can affect lung function and worsen medical conditions such as asthma, allergies and heart disease. Long term exposure to fine PM may increase the risk from chronic bronchitis, reduc e lung function and increase mortality from lung cancer and heart disease. In addition, wood smoke contains kn own human carcinogens including benzene, formaldehyde, dioxins a nd polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

BAQS staff in collaboration with Clarkson University researchers were able to successfully characterize the ambient impact of residentia l wood combustion using dual wavelength (370 and 880 nm) aethalometer measurements in conjunction with filter measurements of levoglucosan and potassium, markers for wood smoke. The study, which was conducted from October 2009 to October 2010 in Rochester, showed that the wo od smoke component of black carbon is most evident from October to March during the la te evening hours on cold weekend nights. Residential wood combustion was estimat ed to contribute 17% to the PM 2.5 mass during winter at the Rochester study site.

4.4.7 Additional Monitoring Initiatives

The NYSDEC has been active in additional research and monitoring beyond the mandated Federal requirements. Some of this work ha s been collaborative with goals ranging from collecting data with the newest technologies, to providing support fo r health studies to evaluating new monitoring instruments. Other projects undertaken by the NYSDEC such as adding additional monitoring after the World Trade Center attack or monitoring before and after the cap was installed on the Fresh Kills landfill could not have been undertaken by other Agencies.

4.4.7.1 PM 2.5 Technology Assessment and Characte rization Study-New York Supersite

The largest collaborative monito ring project undertaken by the NYS DEC and State University of New York‘s Atmospheric Science Research Ce nter (SUNYA-ASRC) was the Supersite program known as PMTACS. The 5 year monitoring in itiative leveraged re sources from EPA, NYSERDA and the NYS Environmental Bond Act to obtain detailed highly resolved pollutant measurements from NYC, Whiteface Mountain and an upwind rural site south-west of Corning, NY. This monitoring project also involved participants from the NYSDOH, Penn StateAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 171 of 207

University, Aerodyne Research Inc. and Clarkson University. The project’s website lists many of the program details: http://www.asrc.cestm.alb any.edu/pmtacsny/index.html

Some of the instrument method development wo rk initiated under this program has continued after the conclusion of the PMTA CS program. This shared effo rt includes method development work on trace gas monitors, continuous organic carbon monitors, continu ous particulate sulfate instruments, continuous particul ate nitrate and ammoni a instruments. All of these instruments will be needed as NYSDEC designs PM control st rategies for non-attainment areas within New York State.

The current research undertaken by this collabor ation involves small particle and precursor gas concentration measurements from rural and urban locations in NY State. NYSERDA has provided funds for this work which includes an intensive monitoring campaign over several weeks this summer in New York City. The pa st summer measurements in conjunction with some on-going measurements are being used to compare with data taken at an urban NYSDEC monitor and those from a mobile van traveling on nearby highways. These studies will help to determine the impacts of mobile sour ces at fixed neighborhood monitors.

4.4.7.2 Organic Carbon: Molecular Marker Characterization

The NYSDEC collaborated with Rutgers, Drex el, NESCAUM, NJDEP and CTDEP on a project called the Speciation of Organics for Apportionment of PM 2.5 in the New York City Area (SOAP). The field portion of the project was conducted from May 2002 to May 2003. It operated at four sites: Queens, NYC (high density urban residential); Elizabeth, NJ (adjacent to the NJ Turnpike); Westport, CT (dow nwind NYC); and a regional b ackground site in Chester, NJ (upwind NYC). The study’s chief objectives were to expand the chemical characterization of organic compounds and to estimate the source cont ributions of carbonaceous fine particles at urban and background monitoring sites.

This project continued at a site in NYC and a rural site in Addison, south-west of Corning, NY during 2005 to 2007. Sampling for this project has b een completed. The data from this project will provide information about the significance of sources of organic carbon particulate in both urban and rural areas in New York. This type of information will be used to assess the potential viability of local and wide range PM 2.5 control strategies.

4.4.7.3 PM Coarse Monitoring

The NYSDEC is taking an active role in advanc e of an upcoming EPA di rective to monitor for PM Coarse (PM 10 - PM 2.5 ). Filter based monitoring was initiated in NYC and in Niagara Falls to determine approximate concentrations of PM Co arse. This information was used to assess PM Coarse elemental concentrations. The NYSDEC ha s also used this data to comment on the proposed PM Coarse standard and network design th at were recently part of the draft CFR Parts 53 and 58. Filter based 1 day in 6 PM Coarse m onitoring is also underway at the Rochester and IS52 NATTs sites and at th e NCore site in Queens.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 172 of 207

The NYSDEC has also supported the developmen t of new automated near real-time PM instruments. The NYSDEC is evaluating the 140 5-DF Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) PM Coarse instruments at 3 locations in New York St ate. Data from the filter based samplers already operating at the site will be used to evaluate the performance of these instruments. The benefit of this work for the NYSDEC is that if successful, the instruments can provide high frequency data that can also be used for comparison to the PM 2.5 and PM 10 NAAQS.

4.4.8 Air Pollution and Environmental Conditions

4.4.8.1 NYC Micro-scale Street Canyon Monitoring The NYSDEC responded to a request by EPA to install 2 street level monitors in an urban area in NYC. The areas are known as canyons due to the tall buildings on either side of the street. The PM 10 data collected at the one remaining site is used to evaluate the differences between data collected at very low elevations, close to hi gh traffic roadways, and the monitors that are properly sited in the rest of the monitoring network.

4.4.8.2 Rochester PM Center Clarkson, Univ. of Rochester Medical Center

The NYSDEC collaborates with researchers from the University of Rochester Medical Center and Clarkson University who have been awarded a second PM health research grant from EPA. Their work focuses on the pathways and effects from PM pollution on the cardiovascular system. The NYSDEC provides data and support for a fine pa rticle classifying inst rument at a monitoring location near the University of Rochester.

4.4.8.3 Air Pollution Microscopy

In addition to performing toxics and acid de position laboratory analyses, BAQS Monitoring Support Section at the Rensselaer fa cility operates a variety of anal ytical microscopes for particle analysis. These instruments include: Smiths De tection Inc. IlluminatIR Fourier Transform microscope; JEOL 6490LV Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) with an EDAX “TEAM” Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) System. T ogether with optical microscopes, staff can provide data on size, morphology, elemental, chemical, and other physical properties of particulate samples of size down to 1 μm in diam eter. The information obtained is valuable for the understanding of source origin and provides important input for apportionment analysis.

Ultra fine particles (<0.1 μ m), primarily generated from combustion processes, including stationary fossil-fuel electric power generation, industrial processes, boilers, and gasoline and diesel engines, are an important component of PM 2.5 . Scientists are becoming increasingly more interested in these ultra fine or "Nano" size particles. Recently NYSDEC acquired a VEECO Nanoscope Multimode Atomic Force Microscope (AFM) for the analysis of these extremely small particles. With the addition of this new in strument, we are now able to look at particulate an order of magnitude smaller than what th e Scanning Electron Micr oscope (300,000× mag vs. 3,000,000× mag) can provide. Whereas the SEM specia lizes in particles in the 2.5 micron range, the Nanoscope is currently analyzing particles in the 25-50 nanometer range. Particle size,Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 173 of 207

surface texture and roughness are now available on su ch particles as diesel exhaust, wood smoke, and other products of combustion.

Recently NYSDEC acquired the Olympus LEXT Lase r Confocal Microscope (LCM). It is designed to obtain images of ultraf ine particles at ranges smaller th an what can be seen with our Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and larger than what we can see with Atomic Force Microscope (AFM). It is the perfect fit betw een these two pieces of instrumentation and will complement both the AFM and SEM. Each method can “see” in the size range that the other cannot. The LCM works on particle s between 500 nm and 200 micr ons, so it works in between the two.

The intended use of this instrument will provide information:

• on the use of alternative fuels such as biodi esel and ethanol, as well as their use with different emission after-treatment strategies . Little to no information is currently available on the effect of such fuels on particle morphology.

• to refine our methodologies fo r acquiring filter samples for microscopic examination and in performing these examinations. Future samples could potentially be taken both from direct mobile source emissions and also from ambient samplers deployed in the monitoring network.

• to re-evaluate our earlier ultrafine particle measurements. For example, earlier results suggest the presence of a sec ondary small particle mode in biodiesel emissions (smaller particles pose greater risks of health effects). Microsc opic examination could provide evidence to either support or dismiss this finding.

4.4.8.4 Ultrafine Particulate Monitoring

NYSDEC first began ultrafine pa rticulate monitoring with the deployment of a TSI Model 3031 Ultrafine Particle Monitor (UPM) at Queens Colle ge in June of 2009. Th is instrument provides continuous measurements of size di stribution and particle number c oncentrations of fine particles below1 micron, in the range from to 20 to 500 na nometers. The Queens College NCore site was selected for the UPM so as to complement a suite of parameters already being measured there. Concurrently a demo UPM unit on loan for one year from the manufacturer was installed at the Eisenhower Park location in Nassa u County, which is expected to have a significant impact from mobile sources. Preliminary data suggest that the ultrafine particles are to a large extent regional in nature and less impacted by lo cal mobile sources. The partic le counts and size distributions for the two sites are similar, and also track the PM 2.5 profile in some cases. It is possible that the mobile signal is damped out due to the siting of the monitor, as the inlet probe height may not be optimal and there may be interference from nearby trees. In addition, a resource recovery facility located about 1⁄4 mile west of the site , as well as other local sources (wood-fired pizza ovens, etc.) may influence the measurements. Alternate explanations may be that mobile ultrafine emissions are predominan tly smaller than the 20 nanomete r cut-off point or affect the measurements only on a short time scale. Data on particle size distri bution and concentration will provide valuable information for the understanding of PM 2.5 formation mechanisms, as well as source apportionment determination.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 174 of 207

It appears worthwhile to conduct short dura tion intensive studies in the future that simultaneously employ a suite of particle countin g instruments including the Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS), Fast Mobility Particle Sizer (FMPS), Condensation Particle Counter (CPC), and our UPM to further evaluate the mobile component. The new NO x rule requiring the establishment of near-roadway monitors in populated areas starting in 2013 (see NO 2 Section) will afford an opportunity to collocate UPMs to fu rther investigate the mobile contribution to the overall ultrafine concentration. The recent esta blishment of initial regulations intended to address ultrafine particle emissions from mobile sources (LEV-3 in California, Euro V-VII in the EU) is an early indicator of more extensive regulation of ultrafine particle emissions from mobile sources expected in the future, and suggests the potential emerge nce of regulations for ambient ultrafine particles as well.

In our Air Pollution Microscopy laboratory, three particle characterizatio n techniques (Laser Scanning Confocal Microscopy, Scanning Electron Microscopy, and Atomic Force Microscopy) are used to investigate the morphology of real world ultrafin e particles, such as those from mobile source emissions and other industrial sources. As an exam ple, the changes in ultrafine particle morphology resulting from the use of two strategies for reducing diesel emissions, i.e., exhaust after-treatment and the us e of alternative diesel fuels were studied. These activities complement the ambient monitoring data in understanding the forma tion, distribution and transport of ultrafine particulate.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 175 of 207

4.5 Sulfur Dioxide

Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), a colorless, reactive gas, is produced during the burning of sulfurcontaining fuels such as coal a nd oil, during metal smelting, and by other industrial processes. It belongs to a family of ga ses called sulfur oxides (SO x ). Major sources include power plants, industrial boilers, petroleum refineries, smelte rs, iron and steel mills. Generally, the highest concentrations of sulfur dioxide are f ound near large fuel combustion sources.

High concentrations of SO 2 can result in temporary breathi ng impairment for asthmatic children and adults who are active outdoors. Short-term e xposures of asthmatic individuals to elevated SO 2 levels while at moderate exertion may re sult in reduced lung function that may be accompanied by symptoms such as wheezing, ches t tightness, or shortness of breath. Other effects that have been associated with longe r-term exposures to hi gh concentrations of SO 2 , in conjunction with high levels of PM, include respiratory illn ess, alterations in the lungs’ defenses, and aggravation of existing cardiovascular disease. The subgroups of the population that may be affected under these conditions incl ude individuals with cardiovascular disease or chronic lung disease, as well as children a nd the elderly.

Additionally, there are a variety of environmental concerns associ ated with high concentrations of SO 2 . Because SO 2 , along with NO x , is a major precursor to acidic deposition (acid rain), it contributes to the acidification of soils, lakes, and streams and the associated adverse impacts on ecosystems. Sulfur dioxide exposure to vegeta tion can increase foliar injury, decrease plant growth and yield, and decrease the number and variety of plan t species in a given community. Sulfur dioxide also is a major precursor to PM 2.5 (aerosols), which is of significant concern to human health, as well as a main polluta nt that impairs vi sibility. Finally, SO 2 can accelerate the corrosion of natural and man-made materials (e. g., concrete and limestone) that are used in buildings and monuments, as we ll as paper, iron-containing meta ls, zinc, and other protective coatings.

Figure 4.15 shows the number of SO 2 monitors and the composite annual means in New York State over the years.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 176 of 207

Figure 4.15 Sulfur Dioxide Monito rs and Concentration Trends

Based on its most review of the air quality criteria fo r oxides of sulfur and the primary national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for oxides of sulfur as measured by sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), EPA replaced the existing 24-hour and annual standa rds with a new short-term standard based on the 3-year average of the 99 th percentile of the yearly distri bution of 1-hour daily maximum SO 2 concentrations. EPA set the level of this new standard at 75 ppb, which became effective August 23, 2010. EPA is also establishing requirements for an SO 2 monitoring network. These new provisions require monitors in areas where there is an increa sed coincidence of population and SO 2 emissions. In order to do this, EPA deve loped a Population Weighted Emissions Index (PWEI) that uses population and em issions inventory data at the CBSA level to assign required monitoring for a given CBSA (with population and emissions being obvious relevant factors in prioritizing numbers of required monitors). The PWEI for a particular CBSA was proposed to be calculated by multiplying the population (using the latest Census Bureau estimates) of a CBSA by the total amount of SO 2 emissions in that CBSA. The CBSA SO 2 emission value would be in tons per year, and calculated by aggregating th e county level emissions for each county in a CBSA. The PWEI values are being develope d using the 2010 Census numbers. The final network design requires that any SO 2 monitors required in a particular CBSA as determined based on PWEI values shall satisfy the minimum monitoring requirements if they are sited at locations where they can meet any one or more of the monitoring objec tives: Source-Oriented Monitoring, Highest Concentration, Populati on Exposure, General Background, and Regional Transport. EPA is expected to provide additi onal guidance for the implem entation of this rule.

There are 19 SO 2 monitors in operation currently, as shown in Figure 4.16. TEI Model 43C instruments using the pulsed fluoresce nce method are deployed in the network.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 177 of 207

The EPA considered setting a secondary standard for NO x and SO x that would specifically target the impact of acidic deposition on wilderness areas. The EPA ultimately decided that there was not enough information at this time to tie speci fic water quality thresholds with ambient air concentrations. In the July 2011 final rule for NO x and SO x , the EPA stated that they would set up a monitoring program in sensitive areas to coll ect information to link water quality impacts to ambient air quality measurements. The NYSDEC is participating in this pilot monitoring program in the Adirondacks. Additional monitoring equipment has been inst alled at several sites to determine the concentrations of gasses and pa rticles including ammonia. These data will be used in the future to inform the next review of the NO x /SO x standard.

Figure 4.16 Location Map for Sulfu r Dioxide Monitoring SitesAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 178 of 207

4.6 Ozone

Ozone is a molecule made up of three oxygen atoms (O 3 ), a very reactive gas, and even at low concentrations it is irritating and toxic. It occurs naturally in small amounts in the earth's upper atmosphere, and in the air of the lower atmosphe re after a lightning storm. In the stratosphere, between 10km and 50km above the earth’s surfac e it forms the Ozone Layer. This is an important protective layer which filters out most of the high energy ultra-violet radiation from the sun which would damage much of the life on earth. When ozone is present at ground level and in the troposphere (10-18 km above earth’s surface) it is considered a pollutant and a greenhouse gas. Ozone is used both industrially a nd commercially due mainly to its reactivity. It is used as a clean way of purif ying water both in industry and in the home in hot-tubs and fish tanks. It is also used to disinfect la undry both in hospitals and in the home.

Ground-level O 3 remains a pervasive pollution problem in the United States. Ozone is readily formed in the atmosphere by the reaction of volatile organic co mpounds (VOCs) and NO x in the presence of heat and sunlight, which are most abundant in the summer. VOCs are emitted from a variety of sources, including motor vehicles, chemical plants, refineries, factories, consumer and commercial products, other industries, and natu ral (biogenic) sources. Nitrogen oxides (a precursor to ozone) are emitted from motor vehicles, power plants, and other sources of combustion, as well as natural sources includi ng lightning and biological processes in soil. Changing weather patterns contribut e to yearly differences in O 3 concentrations. Ozone and the precursor pollutants that cause O 3 also can be transported into an area from pollution sources located hundreds of miles upwind.

Ozone occurs naturally in the stratosphere and provides a prot ective layer high above the earth. However, at ground level, it is the prime ingred ient of smog. Short-term (1- to 3-hour) and prolonged (6- to 8-hour) exposures to ambient O 3 concentrations have been linked to a number of health effects of concern. For example, in creased hospital admissions and emergency room visits for respiratory causes have been associated with ambient O 3 exposures.

Exposures to O 3 result in lung inflammation, aggravate pr eexisting respiratory diseases such as asthma, and may make people more susceptible to respiratory infection. Other health effects attributed to short-term and prolonged exposures to O 3 , generally while individuals are engaged in moderate or heavy exertion, include signifi cant decreases in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms such as chest pain and cough. Children active outdoors during the summer when O 3 levels are at their highest are most at risk of experiencing such effects. Other at-risk groups include adults who are active outdoors, su ch as outdoor workers, and individuals with preexisting respiratory disorders such as asthma and chronic obstructive lung disease. Within each of these groups are individual s who are unusually sensitive to O 3 . In addition, repeated long-term exposure to O 3 presents the possibility of irreve rsible changes in the lungs, which could lead to premature aging of the lungs and/or chronic resp iratory illnesses. Ozone also affects sensitive vegeta tion and ecosystems. Specifically, O 3 can lead to reductions in agricultural and commercial forest yields, reduce d survivability of sensitive tree seedlings, and increased plant susceptibility to disease, pests, and other environmental stresses such as harsh weather. In long-lived sp ecies, these effects may become eviden t only after several years or evenAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 179 of 207

decades. As these species are out-competed by ot hers, long-term effects on forest ecosystems and habitat quality for wildlife and endangere d species become evident. Furthermore, O 3 injury to the foliage of trees and other plants can decrea se the aesthetic value of ornamental species as well as the natural beauty of our national parks and recreation areas.

EPA initially established primary and seconda ry NAAQS for photochemical oxidants on April 30, 1971. Both primary and secondary standards were set at an hourly average of 0.08 parts per million (ppm), total photochemical oxidants, not to be exceeded more than one hour per year.

On February 8, 1979, EPA completed its first periodi c review of the criteria and standards for O 3 and other photochemical oxidants and made significant revisions to the original standard: the level of the primary and secondary NAAQS was ch anged to 0.12 ppm; the indicator was changed to O 3 ; and the form of the standard s was changed to be based on th e expected number of days per calendar year with a maximum hourly average co ncentration above 0.12 ppm (i.e., attainment of the standard occurs when that numbe r is equal to or less than one).

In July, 1997 EPA revised the primary and secondary O 3 standards on the basis of the then latest scientific eviden ce linking exposures to ambient O 3 to adverse health and welfare effects at levels allowed by the 1-hr average standards. The O 3 standards were revised by replacing the existing primary 1-hr average standard with an 8-hr average O 3 standard set at a level of 0.08 ppm. The form of the primary standard was chan ged to the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hr average concentration, averaged over three years. The secondary O 3 standard was changed by making it identical in all respects to the revised primary standar d. These standards were challenged in the courts and the litigation last ed until March, 2002 when the D.C. Circuit Court issued its final deci sion, finding the 1997 O 3 NAAQS to be “neither ar bitrary nor capricious,” and denying the remaining petitions for revi ew. As of June 15, 2005 EPA revoked the 1-hour ozone standard in all areas except the four teen 8-hour ozone nonattainment Early Action Compact (EAC) Areas (none in NY).

After the most recent review of the ozone NAAQS, EPA revised the 8 hr ozone standard (primary and secondary) to 0.075 ppm, which we nt into effect on May 27, 2008, at which time the 1-hr standard was revoked.

The number of ozone monitors and concentration trends for both the 1 hr, and 8 hr standards in New York State for the past three decades are shown in Figures 4.17 and 4.18, respectively.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 180 of 207

Figure 4.17 Ozone Monitors and 1 hr Concentration Trends

Figure 4.18 Ozone Monitors and 8 hr Concentration TrendsAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 181 of 207

At present NYSDEC operates 29 TEI Model 49C ozone monitors statewide, which use the UV photometric method for detection. The site lo cations are depicted in Figure 4.19 below.

Figure 4.19 Location Map fo r Ozone Monitoring SitesAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 182 of 207

5. EPA’s National Toxics Program

In general, EPA plans to use ambient air toxics monitoring to support th e air toxics program’s efforts to reduce human exposure an d health risks from air toxics . The monitoring data provided by the ambient air toxics monitoring program is intended to support four major objectives:

• Establish trends and evaluate the effec tiveness of air toxics emissions reduction strategies.

• Characterize ambient concentrations (and deposi tion) in local areas. Air toxics originate from local sources and can concentrate in relatively small geographical areas, producing the greatest risks to human health.

• Provide data to support, eval uate, and improve air quality models. Air quality models are used to develop emission control strategies, perform exposure assessments, and assess program effectiveness.

• Provide data to support scientific studies to better understand the relationship between ambient air toxics concentrations, human exposure, and health effects from these

exposures.

EPA’s national air toxics monitoring program is co mprised of four different monitoring efforts:

• National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS)

• EPA funded local-scale projects to assess conditions at the local level

• Existing State and local program monitoring

• Persistent bio-accumulative toxics monitoring

The objective for the NATTS network is to prov ide long-term monitoring data for certain priority air toxics acro ss representative areas of the country in order to establish overall trends for these pollutants. Currently there are 23 NATTS established in 22 cities. The two New York NATTS sites are located in the Bronx, and Rochester, respectively.

EPA’s initial ambient air toxics monitoring pilot studies disclosed that significant variations in pollutant concentrations occurred across a city and that these va riations cannot be characterized by a single monitoring site. As a result, EPA deci ded that local-scale pr ojects consisting of several monitors operated for a period of 1 to 2 years should be incorporat ed into the national air toxics monitoring strategy. In 2006 New York wa s awarded a grant for a community air quality air study in Tonawanda which began in July 2007. Hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and fine particulate matter are measured at 4 locations in the Tonawanda commun ity to address citizen concerns. The field sampling portion of th is study was completed in July, 2008.

New York State has been operating a toxics monitoring network since 1990, funded entirely by State monies. Currently there are 11 sites statew ide collecting 24 hr canister samples for VOC analysis in a 1 in 6 days interval. Se e section on NY Toxics Monitoring Network The monitoring program for persistent bio-accumula tive toxics primarily consists of deposition monitoring, not ambient air monitoring. Seve ral monitoring programs operated by various Federal agencies have been established to measur e the presence of toxics in various media. InAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 183 of 207

2010 New York completed an EPA funded community grant study titled “New York State Ambient Mercury Baseline Study” for the measurem ent of speciated mercury in ambient air, as well as mercury in wet deposition. Instruments at the two study sites are st ill operating with other funding sources and additional funding is being s ought to continue this important monitoring.

In addition to air toxic-specific monitoring activities, several othe r monitoring programs that are primarily intended to address other air pollution c oncerns incorporate some aspects of air toxics monitoring. For example, the Photochemical A ssessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) collect data on certain volatile organic compound and carbonyl air toxics. Further, the results of some particulate matter monitoring is speciated (i.e., the individual compounds comprising the particulate matter are analyzed) to identify certain ai r toxics compounds.

5.1 National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS)

EPA’s Urban Air Toxics Program identified 33 high- priority urban air toxics. From these 33 air toxics EPA developed a list of 19 “core” air to xics representing the pollutants for which EPA eventually wants to develop trends informati on. However, because of limitations in available methodologies, EPA decided that at a minimum, in starting the network, each of the NATTS should monitor for at least 6 of these 19 pollutant s. These six pollutants are considered national air toxics “drivers” (i.e., pollutants of concern in all areas of the country).

Table 5.1 NATTS Pollutants of Concern

Required Monitoring Desired Monitoring 1,3-butadiene trichloroethylene

acrolein tetrachloroethylene

arsenic beryllium formaldehyde nickel

benzene cadmium hexavalent chromium acetaldehyde 1,2-dichloropropene

carbon tetrachloride

lead

chloroform

manganese methylene chloride vinyl chloride

For the two NATTS sites, New York will perf orm analysis of 42 VOCs (Table 5.2), and 12 carbonyls (Table 5.6). More details on the sampling and analysis are provided in the NY Toxics Monitoring, and Photochemical Assessment Monito ring Stations sections, respectively. In addition, low volume PM 10 teflon filters are collected for trace metals analysis using ICP-MS.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 184 of 207

The targeted metals include: arsenic, beryl lium, cadmium, lead, manganese, nickel, antimony, cobalt, and selenium, with the last three being potential futu re HAPs. Hexavalent chromium sampling commenced in November 2007 at the Rochester and Bronx sites. The cellulose filter samples are shipped to EPA/ERG for laboratory analysis. Recently, EPA determined that area wide Chromium VI monitoring should only be applicable in areas with known sources. Sampling at New York NATTS sites wa s suspended at the end of June, 2013.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) sampli ng at the Rochester and IS 52 sites began in July, 2008. The collection media consists of one 110 mm diameter glass microfiber filter and a tubular glass cartridge containing a combination of Polyuret hane Foam (PUF) and XAD-2 resin. The exposed samples are shipped to an EPA contract laboratory (ERG) for analysis.

Due to roof construction work at IS 52, sampli ng for NATTS parameters was temporarily moved to the Morrisania site, 1.7 miles NW of the original loca tion beginning in mid June, 2010. The relocation interrupted some sa mple collection. The EPA was notified of the temporary relocation prior to the move and the data wi ll be submitted using the AQS code for the Morrisania site: 36-005-0080. The cons truction work at IS 52 was completed in the summer of 2012, and monitoring resumed at this site in July, 2012.

5.2 NY Toxics Monitoring Network

The NY ambient air toxics monitoring program wa s first established in 1985 as part of the Governor's Air Monitoring Modernization Capi tal Budget Program. This monitoring network measures Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) acr oss the State. The ini tial development of the network and analytical capabilities was part of a joint Staten Isla nd/New Jersey Urban Air Toxics Assessment Project (SI/NJ Study) c oordinated with U.S. EPA Region II from 1987 through 1989. The network expanded in 1990 to a statewide network.

The goal is to monitor air quality related to toxics in the State's urban, industrial, residential, and rural areas. Implementation of this program star ts the development of a long-term toxics air quality database for New York State. The database will be used to defi ne, attain, and preserve good air quality in New York State. The data defi nes actual air quality im pacts of the VOCs. The data is used in the design and management of New York's air quality, including risk assessment, modeling, planning and trend analysis.

Initially, only seventeen VOCs were monitored. In 1995, the number of analytes was increased to nineteen. In 2002, the list of VOCs was furt her expanded to include 42 compounds as shown in Table 5.2 below: Table 5.2 Target List of Volatile Organic Compounds

CHEMICAL CAS # Methylene Chloride 75-09-2 Chloroform 67-66-3 1,2 Dichloroethane 107-06-2Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 185 of 207

CHEMICAL CAS # 1,1,1 Trichloroethane 71-55-6 Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 Trichloroethylene 79-01-6 1,1,2 Trichloroethane 79-00-5 Tetrachloroethylene 127-18-4 Acrolein 107-02-8 Benzene 71-43-2 Toluene 108-88-3 Ethylbenzene 100-41-4

m,p -Xylene 1330-20-7

o -Xylene 95-47-6 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 1,2 Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 1,3 Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 1,4 Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 Vinyl Chloride 75-01-4 1,2 Dichloropropane 78-87-5 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108-67-8 1,1-Dichloroethylene 75-35-4 Hexachloro-1,3-Butadiene 87-68-3 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 Chloromethane 74-87-3 Chloroethane 75-00-3 cis1,2-Dichloroethylene 156-59-2 cis 1,3-Dichloropr opene 542-75-6 trans 1,3-Dichloropropene 542-75-6 Dichlorodifluoromethane 75-71-8 Trichlorofluoromethane 75-69-4 Trichlorotrifluoroethane 76-13-1 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane 76-14-2 1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 A-chlorotoluene (Benzylchloride) 100-44-7

1,1,2,2 Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 Bromomethane 74-83-9 Styrene 100-42-5 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 1,3 Butadiene 106-99-0 Methyl Tert Butyl Ether 1634-04-4 1,2,4 Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1

Volatile organic compounds are collected in stainless steel canisters contained in a sampler known as an ambient air canister sampler. The samp ler is an air flow calibrated sampling deviceAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 186 of 207

that pumps ambient air into the canister. A special stainless steel diaphragm pump provides a constant pressure to push the sample through the sampler. A relief valve is used to maintain a steady pressure for the sample flow controller. Samples are co llected at a one in six days frequency and shipped back to the Rensse laer laboratory facility for analysis.

The analysis methodology is a modified version of EPA method TO-15. An aliquot of air sample is taken from the canister at a controlled fl ow and temperature onto an Entech Model 7100A preconcentrator. The preconcentration process involves a series of step s. The first trap consists of glass beads/Tenax held at -110 ̊ C which is then heated to room temperature in order to remove water/moisture in the sample. The next trap in line consists of Tenax held at - 30 ̊ C. The contaminants of interest are then desorbed at 150 ̊ C and collected on the cryofocuser held at -150

̊ C. The sample is then rapidly heated for colu mn injection using a Vari an GC coupled with a Saturn MS detection. This method of analysis allows positive identification by retention time and molecular mass.

Concentration trends charts for some ubiquitous VOCs are provided below.

Note that for 2011, the values shown for IS 52 actually represent those from the site at Morrisania, as all monitoring at IS 52 was relocat ed to Morrisania in Ju ly of 2010 due to roof construction work. In August, 2012 all equipment for NATTS was relocated back to IS 52. The values presented for 2012 represent a composite of the two locations.

Figure 5.1 Annual Averages for BenzeneAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 187 of 207

Figure 5.2 Annual Averages for Toluene

Figure 5.3 Annual Averages for m,p-XyleneAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 188 of 207

Figure 5.4 Annual Averages for o-Xylene

Figure 5.5 Annual Averages for 1,3-ButadieneAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 189 of 207

Figure 5.6 Annual Averages for Dichloromethane

Figure 5.7 Annual Averages for ChloroformAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 190 of 207

Figure 5.8 Annual Averages for 1,4-Dichlorobenzene

Figure 5.9 Annual Averages for Formaldehyde †Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 191 of 207

Figure 5.10 Annual Aver ages for Acetaldehyde †

†Note that the toxics monitori ng operation at IS 52 was temporar ily moved to the Morrisania II site in mid June 2010 due to extensive constr uction work. In late July 2012, work was completed and monitoring resumed at IS 52. The values shown for 2010 and 2012 represent partial year average only.

Currently there are 11 toxics monitoring sites in operation for the measurement of VOCs, and 8 sites for carbonyls statewide. These lo cations are shown in Figure 5.11 below.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 192 of 207

Figure 5.11 Location Map of Toxics Monitoring SitesAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 193 of 207

5.3 Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS)

The 1993 revisions to 40 CFR Part 58 provide for the establishment and ma intenance of network of air monitoring stations called Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) which will supplement the existing State and Local Ai r Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) network. The selection of parameters to be measured at a PAMS site varies with the s ite’s ozone nonattainment designation and whether a site is upwind or downwind from O 3 precursor source areas. These parameters are O 3 , total oxides of nitrogen (NO x ), nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), speciated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and specific meteorological measurements.

The purpose of the PAMS program is to provide an air quality database that will assist in evaluating and modifying control strategies for attaining the O 3 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). PAMS data will also be used to better charac terize the nature and extent of the O 3 problem, track VOC and NO x emission inventory reductions, assess air quality trends and determine whether areas of New York remain in nonattainment of the O 3 NAAQS.

NYSDEC is required to operate and maintain two sites for metropolitan New York. The New York Botanical Gardens PAMS site (located in Northern Bronx) has been operational since 1994. The Queensborough Community College PAMS station (located in Queens) began monitoring of some species in late 1997. The Queens site wa s fully operational for the 1998 ozone monitoring season. This site moved to Qu eens College in the spring of 2001 as the QBCC building was undergoing a major renovation and the equipment had to be removed from the site. The Table 5.3 lists the chronology of monitoring at these sites.

Table 5.3 Information on PAMS Sites

Site Name Parameters Implementation Date New York Botanical Garden NOx Jun-94 CO Jun-94 O 3 Jun-94 VOCs Jun-94 Carbonyls Jun-94

NMOC Jun-99 Meteorology Jun-94 NMOC Sep-99 Queens Community College closed 12/2001 NOx May-98 CO May-98 O 3 May-98 SO 2 May-98 VOCs Jun-98 Carbonyls Sep-97

NMOC Aug-98 Queens College NOx Jun-01 CO Jun-01Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 194 of 207

Site Name Parameters Implementation Date O 3 Jun-01 SO 2 Jun-01 Carbonyls Jun-01

NMOC Jun-01

For gaseous parameters, Table 5.4 lists the sampling instruments and analysis methods.

Table 5.4 Instrumentation for Gaseous Pollutants

Parameter Instrument Analysis Method Frequency

NO TECO 42C Chemiluminescent Continuous

NO 2 TECO 42C Chemiluminescent Continuous

NO x TECO 42C Chemiluminescent Continuous

O 3 TECO 49C Ultraviolet Continuous

CO TECO 48C Infrared Continuous

The following applies to mete orological measurements.

Table 5.5 Equipment for Met eorological Measurements

Parameter Instrument or Sampling Method Frequency

Wind Speed SONIC Continuous

Wind Direction SONIC Continuous Temperature Thermistor Continuous Relative Humidity Hydroscopic Capacitor Continuous

Barometric Pressure Piezoresistive Sensor Continuous

Carbonyls are sampled using DNP H cartridges and analyzed w ith HPLC according to EPA Method TO-11a. The target compound list is provided in Table 5.6 below.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 195 of 207

Table 5.6 Target Compound List for Carbonyl Sampling

Compound AIRS Code acetaldehyde 43503

acetone 43551

acrolein 43505 benzaldehyde 45501 crotonaldehyde 43516 formaldehyde 43502

hexanal 43511

methacrolein 43515 m-tolualdehyde 45504 n-butyraldehyde 43510 propionaldehyde 43504 valeraldehyde 43518

Volatile organic compounds are monitored using Summa canisters samples followed by laboratory GCMS analysis as well as by an on-site realtime GC. The methods and sampling frequencies are provided in Table 5.7 below.

Table 5.7 VOC Methods and Sampling Frequencies

Sampling Method Analytical Method Frequency

Method TO-14a GC/FID Hourly

TO-15 (24-hr) GC/MS Every 6 day

TO-15 (40 min) GC/MS Once a week

The targeted compounds are listed below:

Table 5.8 PAMS Target Compounds List

Compound AIRS #

ethene 43203 acetylene 43206

ethane 43202

propene 43205

propane 43204Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 196 of 207

Compound AIRS #

isobutane 43214

1-butene 43280

n-butane 43212

trans-2-butene 43216

cis-2-butene 43217 3-methyl-1-butene dropped 1995 43282 isopentane 43221 1-pentene 43224

n-pentane 43220 isoprene 43220 trans-2-pentene 43226 cis-2-pentene 43227 2-methyl-2-butene dropped 1995 43227 2,2-dimethylbutane 43227 cyclopentane 43242 4-methyl-1-pentene dropped 1995 43234 cyclopentene dropped 1995 43283 2-,3-dimethylbutane 43284 2-methylpentane 43285 3-methylpentane 43230 2-methyl-1-pentene dropped 1997 43246

n-hexane 43231 trans-2-hexene dropped 1995 43289 cis-2-hexene dropped 1995 43290

n-hexene added 1997 43245 methylcyclopentane 43262 2,4-dimethylpentane 43247

benzene 45201 cyclohexane 43248 2-methylhexane 43263 2,3-dimethylpentane 43291 3-methylhexane 43249 2,2,4-trimethylpentane 43250 n-heptane 43232 methylcyclohexane 43261Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 197 of 207

Compound AIRS # 2,3,4-trimethylpentane 43252

toluene 45202 2-methylheptane 43960 3-methylheptane 43253

n-octane 43233 ethylbenzene 45203

m,p -xylene 45109

styrene 45220

o -xylene 45204

nonane 43235 isopropylbenzene 45210 n-propylbenzene 45209 m-ethyltoluene added 1995 45212 p-ethyltoluene added 1995 45213 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 45207 o-ethyltoluene added 1995 45211 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 45208

n-decane 43238 1,2,3 trimethylbenzene added 1995 45225 1,3-diethylbenzene added 1995 45218 1,4 diethylbenzene added 1995 45219

n-undecane 43954

dodecane added 1997 45218

tnmoc 43102 pamshc 43000

All parameters except for the summer inte nsive VOCs and carbonyls are run on a continuous basis year round. VOC system startup is scheduled for May 15th each year. The carbonyl's schedule of eight (3 hour) sample s every third day ended in September 2005 as the requirement was dropped by EPA to reduce overall cost of the PAMS program. The VOC intensive sampling ends in September after the final system audit. Twenty-four hour carbonyl and canister samples are continued on a six day schedule throughout the year.

The on-site GC system consists of a Markes Unity Air Server-Thermal Desorber System integrated with an Agilent GC. The Summa canis ters are shipped to th e Rensselaer laboratory facility and analyzed with an Entech pr econcentrator with a Varian GCMS System.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 198 of 207

6. NCore Sites

The National Core Monitoring Program (NCore) is an EPA initiative to redesign a portion of the National air monitoring network. The existing compliance oriented network is set up with a parameter specific design that is targeted at th e relatively high concen trations near the NAAQS. The data from this network is not as accurate at the low levels needed for trends analysis and model validation. The single parameter design is al so not well suited to multi-pollutant health studies, integrated model assessme nt or the analysis of source attribution through comparisons of co-pollutants from s ources to receptors.

The NCore program has been designed around appr oximately 75 sites Nati onwide that are sited to represent large urban areas away from significan t individual sources. A smaller subset of these sites will be located in rural areas. The NYSDE C in conjunction with EPA Region 2 office has suggested 3 of the NYSDEC monitoring sites for in clusion in this new ne twork. The sites are:

AQS ID # Site Name General Location 36-081-0124 Queens College Located in Kew Gardens in Queens, NYC 36-055-1007 Rochester Located Southeast of Rochester, NY 36-101-0003 Pinnacle Located 15 mi. Southwest of Corning, NY

Pinnacle is the only rural site of the three and it was also selected as one of ten pilot NCore sites. This site has hosted monitoring appropriate for the objectives of the NCore program due to its involvement with several research programs so it was well suited to take on the more difficult monitoring parameters required from the NCore monitoring program. SUNY Albany ASRC researchers have been making low level trace gas meas urements at this site for the past ten years. Home built analyzers for low level CO and NO y were employed. These prototype instruments required extensive post sampling data processing. They measured “true” NO 2 using direct photolysis method. Commercially av ailable instruments are used for monitoring low level SO 2 , continuous particulate sulfate, and OC/EC particulate carbon. In addition, realtime ammonia data are collected using two different methods—NO chemiluminescence with catalytic conversion, and ion mobility spectrometer. The Queens site which was recently established is preparing to monitor for some of th e NCore parameters.

NCore Monitoring Objectives

a.) Timely Reporting of Data to the Public b.) Support for Development of Emission Strategies c.) Accountability of Emission Strategy Progress d.) Support for Long-Term Health Assessments e.) Compliance f.) Support to Scientific Studies g.) Support to Ecosystem AssessmentsAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 199 of 207

NCore Primary Monitoring Parameters

The NCore sites are required to be sited in conjunction with the PM 2.5 FRM network, the PM 2.5 speciation network and the PMcoarse network. Th ese parameters will be supplemented with the NCore specific parameters that currently include NO y , Low Level CO and Low Level SO 2

. NO y which is defined as the sum of all r eactive nitrogen oxides includes NO, and NO 2 , and other nitrogen oxides referred to as NO z . The NCore program requires NO y monitoring because it is the best indicator of the results from NO x reduction strategies, it is valuable for ecosystem assessments, it is important for model evaluation and it supports NO 2 estimates for health effects studies.

CO is important to the NCore program because it is used in model evaluation, it is a surrogate for many combustion related pollutants, it is included in health effect studies and it can be used to assess control programs. CO is also monitored u nder the existing criteria monitoring program but NCore requires more accuracy at lower concentr ations and siting that makes the data more representative of wider areas than the existing network.

SO 2 is important for model evaluation because of its role in sulfate formation which is a large percentage of PM 2.5 mass particularly in the Northeast. SO 2 is also important for some health effect studies and like CO it must be monitored accurately at low concentrations to meet the objectives of the NCore program.

Nitric acid (HNO 3 ) and ammonia (NH 3 ) are both compounds of in terest in EPA’s NCore program but they are not yet required becau se the sampling methodol ogy is not yet fully developed. Both compounds are useful for model evaluation because of their contribution to PM formation.

To meet the monitoring requirement s, trace level instruments for SO 2 and CO as well as NO y measurements were all operational at the three NCore sites since the beginning of 2011.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 200 of 207

7. Acid Deposition Monitoring Network

At the end of 2012, the Department discont inued the existing acid rain monitoring program and transitioned 7 monitoring lo cations to the National Acid Deposition Program (NADP). The old acid deposition pr ogram was established in response to the State Acid Deposition Contro l Act (SADCA) in 1985. This program was designed to provide measurements of acid deposition and related quantities nece ssary to assess the effectiveness of sulfur contro l policy and other stra tegies aimed at reducing the effects of acid rain. By all measures, the monitoring program, as well as the NO x and SO x control strategies has improved the environment. For example, the deposition of Sulfate statewide has decreased by more than 60% since the monitoring program began and the concentrations of acidic polluta nts continue to decline.

The transition to the NADP program will resu lt in savings to the Department, provide better and more useful data for use in re gulation development and will allow for the comparison of data from New York with othe r acid sensitive regions across the country. Additionally, because the NADP program provides a uniform operational framework, the data from existing NADP sites within New York and in neighboring states can be utilized in the analysis of deposition in New York.

The NADP program uses IC, ICP and FIA to determin e the concentrations of free acidity (H+ as pH), conductance, calcium (Ca 2+ ), magnesium (Mg 2+ ), sodium (Na + ), potassium (K + ), sulfate (SO4 2- ), nitrate (NO3 + ), chloride (Cl - ), and ammonium (NH4 + ). The data and reports from this program from the 7 NYSDEC sites as well as othe r sites in New York and in the United States can be obtained from: http ://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/data/

The NYSDEC monitoring locations that were converted to the NADP in January 2013:

NY06 Bronx NY28 Piseco Lake NY43 Rochester (Established 2013) NY59 Wanakena NY92 Amherst (Established 2013) NY93 Paul Smith's College

The other NADP sites currently operating in New York but sponsored by other organizations:

NY01 Alfred NY08 Aurora Research Farm NY10 Chautauqua NY20 Huntington Wildlife NY22 Akwesasne Mohawk-Fort CovingtonAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 201 of 207

NY29 Moss Lake NY52 Bennett Bridge NY67 Ithaca (NADP/AirMoN) NY68 Biscuit Brook NY96 Cedar Beach, Southold NY98 Whiteface Mountain (Pre viously operated by NYSDEC) NY99 West Point

Figure 7.1 shows NADP sites operated by DEC as well as other collaborating partners in New York State.

Figure 7.1 Location Map of Acid Depositi on Monitoring Sites in New York StateAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 202 of 207

8. Anticipated Changes in the Next 18 Months

8.1 Lead Monitoring

Revisions to the monitoring requirements became effective January 26, 2011. The new regulations replaced the population oriented mon itoring requirement with a requirement to add Pb monitors to the urban NCore monitors. The EPA also lowered the emission threshold from 1.0 tpy to 0.50 tpy for industrial sources of lead (e.g., lead smelters and foundries). One source located in Orange County was determined to have the potential to violate the standard due to the amount of lead processed at the facility and th e past results from nearby ambient monitoring. The NYSDEC will continue to operate the ambient lead monitor that is already operating near that facility. Routine data re view showed that during the fi rst quarter of 2011, there were a couple of sample dates that showed high levels of lead, which woul d lead to contravention of the new standard. Investigations at the facility led to enforcement actions although specific causes for the observed values were not discovered. Consequently an additional low volume PM 10 sampler was put in place to collect daily filter samples for mass measurement and lead analysis using XRF in August, 2011.

The NYSDEC currently has two urban lead monito rs at the NATTS site s (Rochester, Bronx). The Rochester site is also a designated NCore site . It is the Regional Ad ministrator’s discretion to approve site substitution for the population oriented monitoring requirement. These monitors will take advantage of the allowance for the submission of PM 10 lead data in place of TSP lead data. The 2013 3-month rolling average for lead values are provided in the following table.

Table 8.1 2013 3-Month Rolling Average Lead Concentrations for Urban Sites.

2013 PM 10 Lead 3-Month Rolling Average, μg/m 3

Month Rochester IS 52 January 0.0020 0.0052 February 0.0019 0.0051

March 0.0019 0.0048 April 0.0022 0.0049 May 0.0026 0.0047

June 0.0028 0.0050 July 0.0027 0.0043 August 0.0026 0.0038 September 0.0026 0.0046

October 0.0027 0.0047

November 0.0020 0.0041

December 0.0018 0.0033Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 203 of 207

The data clearly demonstrate that the urban PM 10 concentrations at the NATTS sites are significantly below th e NAAQS of 0.15 μg/m 3

.

8.2 Special Purpose Monitors

8.2.1 Tonawanda Community Air Quality Study

Although the original study funded by EPA co ncluded in 2008, NYSDEC has continued sampling at two of the four study sites with St ate funding. The Tonawanda II site at Brookside Terrace will remain in operation as part of th e permanent network, while the Grand Island Blvd. industrial site will be maintained as a special purpose monitor, resources permitting. Figures 8.1 shows the trend chart for benzene demonstrating emission reductions.

Figure 8.1 Annual Averages for Benzene at Tonawanda Sites

8.2.2 New York State Ambient Mercury Baseline Study

New York has established regulations to control mercury from coal-fired powered plants in a two-phase approach, with Phase I taking effect on January 1, 2010 and Phase II taking effect on January 1, 2015. The goal of Phase I is to reduce power plant emissions by 50% from 1999 levels, and preliminary indications are that thes e emissions have actually been reduced by about 65%. Phase II calls for 90% emission cuts. In or der to track the progress of in- and out-of-stateAnnual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 204 of 207

emissions reductions, the NYSDEC seeks to conti nue operation and maintenance of mercury wet deposition samplers and speciated Tekran systems.

In 2008, NYSDEC was awarded an EPA grant to c onduct this study at two existing urban sites: New York Botanical Garden in the Bronx ( AQS Number: 36-005-0083), and Rochester (AQS Number: 36-055-1007) for a period of two year s. The Tekran Model 2537B, 1130 and 1135 Mercury Speciation Units were used to measure elemental, reactive gaseous and particle bound mercury species in the ambient air. The wet deposition collector syst em, manufactured by NCON Systems Co. Inc., and equipped with an ETI NOAH IV Precipitation Gauge was collocated at each site. The field data coll ection concluded in the fall of 2010. The results of the study were presented at the National Air Toxics Monitoring and Data Analysis Workshop in April 2011. The final report was submitted to the EPA in May 2011. The NYSDEC has utilized funds from the Grea t Lakes Acid Deposition (GLAD) Program which focuses on tracking persistent biological toxins to continue the opera tion of these sites.

8 .2.3 Community Air Screen Program

The New York State Department of Envir onmental Conservation (DEC), through funding provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), implemented a community-based screening program for toxic ai r pollutants. The purpose of DEC's Community Air Screen program is to conduct air quality survei llance at the community-level with the help of local community groups a nd interested citizens.

DEC provides the sampling equipment, trains people on how to use the equipment and work with the community to determine the best locati on and time period for sampling. All air sampling equipment are returned to the DEC offices in Albany for analysis of the samples and interpretation of the results.

The deadline for application was May 24, 2012 and app licants were notified of the selection June 25, 2012. Of the 42 applications received, 23 app lications were select ed statewide covering locations in the following counties: Suffolk, Queens, Kings, Ulster, Du tchess, Albany, Warren, St. Lawerence & Franklin, Onondaga, Ontario & Seneca, Niagara, and Erie. Some of the applicants with similar concerns and from th e same community were combined resulting in a final tally of 21 organizations and individuals include d in the study. Except for one group which never returned the waiver form even after rep eated requests, sampling efforts including followup investigations concluded in all other cases. Twelve comple ted reports and other pertinent information are available on the DEC we bsite: http://www.dec.ny.gov/ public/81629.html . Additional reports will be posted when finalized.

BAQS staff also carried out canister sampling fo r VOCs in communities that were not part of this study due to environmental and public health concerns. Various duration samples such as grab, 1-hr, as well as 24-hr, were obtained and analyzed by our laboratory. Areas studied included Throgs Neck, Attica, Camillus, and Albany South End.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 205 of 207

8 .2.4 Airport Lead Monitoring

Under the 2011 lead NAAQS, States and local mon itoring agencies were required to establish lead monitors at airports where piston-engine aircraft are estimat ed to emit 1.0 or more tons of lead per year. Additionally, the EPA specified that monitoring would be required at 73 airports with inventories of 0.50 tons per year or more. However, in light of the limited available data, and in consideration of the comments received on the proposed monitoring requirements, the EPA decided to select 15 of the 73 airports w ith estimated Pb emissions of between 0.50 and 1 ton per year to evaluate the need for additional monitoring at air ports nationwide. The EPA used criteria in addition to expected emissions to select the 15 airports including runway configuration, meteorology and proxi mity to locations where the ge neral public has access. The 15 airports where Pb monitoring was require d included Brookhaven (HWV) (36-103-0024) and Republic (FRG) (36-103-0005) airports in Suffolk County, New York.

The EPA required the NYSDEC to conduct TSP l ead monitoring at one location at Republic (FRG) and at Brookhaven (HWV) for a period of 12 consecutive months. Samples were collected for 24 hours every sixth day. The regulati on stated that if data averages were higher than 50 percent of the NAAQS for any consecutive 3-month period during the monitoring study, the collection of data at that lo cation would have to continue be yond the initial 12-month period.

The NYSDEC proposed several locations for monitoring at both Republic and Brookhaven airports. Discussions were held with EPA Region 2, EPA OAQPS and EPA OTAQ staff and one location was approved for each airport. Sampling commenced at Brookhaven in October, 2011, and at Republic in October, 2012. Both sites have a complete year of data. The summary table below includes the monthly av erage as well as the rolling 3 month averages for both sites.

Airport Lead Concentrations, μg/m 3

Month Brookhaven Republic Average 3-Month Rolling Average 3-Month Rolling October 0.033 -- 0.010 -- November 0.024 -- 0.015 -- December 0.042 0.033 0.003 0.009 January 0.016 0.027 0.007 0.008 February 0.020 0.026 0.011 0.007 March 0.016 0.018 0.010 0.009 April 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.013 May 0.003 0.013 0.010 0.013 June 0.009 0.010 0.007 0.012 July 0.028 0.013 0.010 0.009 August 0.031 0.023 0.013 0.010 September 0.014 0.024 0.008 0.010Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 206 of 207

8 .2.5 Peace Bridge Air Quality Study

The DEC undertook a six month air monitori ng campaign beginning in late August 2012. The data collection was the first step in a tw o part program designed to assess changes in local air quality resulting from the redesign of the Peace Bridge Plaza. Once the Plaza reconstruction is complete, another six months of data collection will be undertaken. A final report will be prepared that provides an analysis of the air quality impact of the new Plaza configuration on the surrounding neighborhood. The Phase 1 report provides a summary of the data collected in phase one of th e project. All of the data collected in this program are available on the NYSDEC website: http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/83984.html

Two monitoring locations were utilized to a ssess the impact of the current configuration of the Peace Bridge Plaza on the surrounding neighborhood. One site was situated in the predominant downwind direction from the Pl aza on a vacant lot on Busti Avenue at the intersection with Vermont Street. The other si te was located in the Southwest corner of Front Park just downwind of I-190 and upwind of the Plaza.

The DEC installed filter based and continuous PM 2.5 monitoring devices as well as Black Carbon (BC) monitors at both sites, and me teorological equipment at the Busti Avenue site. The sites were used to collect data from late August 2012 through mid-March 2013. The data collected at the tw o sites were very similar a nd, during most of the sampling period, the PM 2.5 concentrations were slightly higher at the Front Park site while the BC concentrations on average were equal at the two sites. There were a few short periods when concentrations of both PM 2.5 and BC were higher at the Busti Avenue site. The only pollutant measured in this campaign with a NAAQS was PM 2.5 and at no time did measured concentrations at either site exceed the standards. The average PM 2.5 at Front Park was 8.3μg/m 3 and 8.2μg/m 3 at Busti Avenue. The average BC at both Front Park and Busti Avenue was 0.53μg/m 3 . The analysis of BC data originating from the direction of the Plaza showed that there was a small increase in the co ntribution of BC to local PM in the neighborhood downwind of the Plaza in the afternoons when truck activity is highest.

The data collected in phase one of the study indicate that the PM 2.5 collected at the two sites in this study correlate very well with the two monitors in Buffalo and Niagara Falls. This indicates that on average, there is no significant source of PM 2.5 impacting the neighborhood around the Peace Bridge that is not also imp acting the sites in Niagara Falls and Buffalo. This result is not surprising due to the heavy influence of mobile sources in the region. Hi storically, the DEC has used the PM 2.5 monitoring site in Buffalo on Dingens Street to assess the air quality for the region. The average PM 2.5 in Buffalo for the same period as this study was 8.3μg/m 3

.Annual Monitoring Network Plan Revision 1.1 Date: May 15, 2014 Page 207 of 207

8.3 Proposed Changes at Existing Sites

As part of the new requirements specified in the revised Monitoring Re gulations Parts 53 and 58, a network assessment was performed to dete rmine “if the network meets the monitoring objectives defined in appendix D to this part, whether new sites are needed, whether existing sites are no longer needed and can be terminate d, and whether new technol ogies are appropriate for incorporation into the ambient air monitoring network.” As a result of this exercise, NYSDEC is proposing the following modi fications to the existing network.

8.3.1 Division St. and Buffalo

Under CFR 58.12(e) EPA allows for reduced PM 10 sampling frequency from one day in three to one day in six if the maximum 24-hr value in the past year is belo w 70% of the NAAQS of 150 μ g/m 3 . The maximum value in 2013 for Division St. was 47.2 μ g/m 3 and 45.5 μ g/m 3 at Buffalo, respectively, which is well below 105 μ g/m 3 , 70% of the annual standard.