Measurable Outcomes of a Woodstove Changeout 

on the Nez Perce Reservation 

Final Report

September 8, 2009 

by 

Tony J. Ward, Ph.D. 

The University of Montana – Missoula 

Center for Environmental Health Sciences 

Skaggs Building 160 

Missoula, MT 59812 

Office: (406) 243-4092 

Fax: (406) 243-2807 
1.0 Executive Summary

During the winters of 2006/2007, 2007/2008, and 2008/2009, a woodstove changeout program

was conducted in Kamiah and Lapwai, Idaho on the Nez Perce Reservation. In addition to the 

replacement of old stoves with EPA-certified stoves, air sampling was conducted within 16 

homes to measure the improvement in air quality before and after the changeouts on a home-byhome basis. A second objective of this project was to educate participating households on the 

health effects of being exposed to smoke from wood burning stoves, and how to operate the new 

stoves most efficiently. 

PM2.5 samples were collected within the common area (rooms where the stoves were located) of 

16 homes both before and after the installation of the cleaner burning EPA- certified stoves. 

During the sampling, indoor PM2.5 mass, Organic Carbon (OC), Elemental Carbon (EC), and 

chemical markers of woodsmoke (vanillin, acetovanillone, guaiacol, 4-ethylguaiacol, 

levoglucosan, abietic acid, and dehydroabietic acid) were measured. For the first winter season 

(2006/2007), the study established baseline PM2.5 concentrations within five homes in 

Lapwai/Kamiah. For the 2007/2008 winter, baseline (pre-changeout) PM2.5 measurements were 

collected within 11 additional homes. The old woodstoves in these 16 homes were then removed 

and new EPA-certified woodstoves were installed. The majority of post changeout air quality 

measurements were conducted during the winter of 2008/2009. 

For the 15 homes (note that Home 14 did not have a complete dataset), the median prechangeout PM2.5 mass (as measured by TSI DustTraks) was 39.2±45.7 μg/m3

, with a median 

post-changeout concentration of 19.0±47.5μg/m3

. This resulted in a 52% reduction in indoor 

PM2.5 (including a 60% reduction in PM2.5 spikes) when the old stoves were replaced with EPAcertified stoves. OC/EC results show that the PM2.5 mass measured within the homes was 

heavily enriched with the OC fraction, with a minimal contribution from the EC fraction. Out of 

the seven chemical markers of woodsmoke tracked in this program, levoglucosan had the highest 

measured concentrations. Levoglucosan showed a 63% reduction following the changeout, 

confirming that woodsmoke – related PM2.5 were reduced within the homes as a result of the 

woodstove changeout. It is also unlikely that ambient PM2.5 contributed to indoor levels of 

PM2.5 measured within the homes, as the indoor levels were much more elevated when 

compared to outdoor levels. 

Another significant finding of the project was that targeted education and outreach is a critical 

component of the overall success of the program. Homeowners need to be provided with 

specific instructions on how to operate their new stove, and additional visits may need to be 

made to the home in an effort to ensure that the residents learn best burn practices for their new 

stoves. In summary, the results of the Nez Perce woodstove changeout program suggest that 

replacing old, polluting woodstoves with EPA-certified stoves can be used to improve the indoor 

air quality within woodstove homes. 

2
2.0 Introduction 

In several rural valley locations throughout the northern Rocky Mountains, the major source of 

wintertime ambient PM2.5 has been identified as woodsmoke from residential woodstoves (Ward 

and Smith, 2005; Ward et al., 2006). In many of these valley communities, woodstoves also 

serve as the primary source of home heating throughout the cold winter months. The Consumer 

Product Safety Commission estimates that there are 8.9 million woodstoves in use in the U.S., 

and they are the most intensively used type of space heater with an average annual usage per 

heater of 2100 hours (Zamula, 1989; AQMWG, 2005). 

 

One strategy of reducing ambient emissions of residential woodsmoke PM2.5 is by changing out 

old woodstoves with new, cleaner-burning EPA-certified woodstoves. An EPA certified 

woodstove is defined as a stove that has been independently tested by an accredited laboratory, 

and meets a PM emissions limit of 7.5 g/hr for noncatalytic wood stoves and 4.1 g/hr for 

catalytic wood stoves. While older uncertified stoves and fireplaces release 40 to 60 grams of 

smoke per hour, new EPA-certified stoves typically produce only 2 to 5 grams of smoke per 

hour. 

Even though old woodstoves are considered significant sources of ambient PM2.5, they have also 

been shown to be significant sources of indoor PM2.5. In a 20-home study conducted in Libby, 

Montana, indoor PM2.5 samples were collected to evaluate the effectiveness of a woodstove 

changeout on the indoor environment. Results from this study showed that average PM2.5

concentrations and maximum PM2.5 concentrations were reduced by 71% and 76%, respectively 

(as measured by TSI DustTraks) when old stoves were replaced with EPA-certified stoves (Ward 

et al., 2008). The results from this study suggested that replacing an old stove with a new EPAcertified stove can be an effective tool in improving indoor residential air quality. 

The goal of the Nez Perce project was to evaluate the effectiveness of a woodstove changeout on 

indoor air quality within 16 homes in Lapwai and Kamiah. In this report, we present the 

methodologies used throughout the project, results, and a summary of our findings. 

3.0 Experimental Design 

Indoor PM2.5 samples were collected within 16 homes in Lapwai and Kamiah throughout the 

winters of 2006/2007, 2007/2008, and 2008/2009, respectively. Both of these communities have 

populations of approximately 1,100 inhabitants, and rely heavily on the use of woodstoves for 

residential home heating. To participate in the study, homes had to be non-smoking, occupied by 

a tribal member, have an asthmatic child, and use older model woodstoves as the primary source 

of heat. The Nez Perce Tribe’s Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (ERWM) 

Air Quality Program promoted the project and recruited homes through a number of outreach 

methods. These include: articles and advertisements in the local and tribal newspapers, letters to 

tribal members with woodstoves, presentations to community groups, and informational booths 

at community events. Also, by working closely with Nimiipuu Health, short questionnaires were 

available at both clinics in Lapwai and Kamiah. Originally, the intent was to sample 8 homes in 

each community for a total of16 homes. However, due to recruitment challenges, 9 homes were 

sampled in Lapwai, with 7 homes in Kamiah. 

3
3.1 Residential Air Sampling

Students from the Northwest Indian College (Distance Learning Center), as well as an intern 

from ERWM were trained by The University of Montana to collect air samples. ERWM staff 

also received training on sampler operation. Sixteen homes were measured for PM2.5 mass, 

Organic Carbon (OC), Elemental Carbon (EC), and chemical markers of wood smoke both 

before and after the changeout. 

In each home there were two samplers: a DustTrak (Model 8520) that continuously measured 

PM2.5 mass averaged over 60-second intervals, and a SKC, Inc. Leland pump/Personal 

Environmental Monitor (PEM) sampler fitted with a 37-mm quartz filter for OC/EC and 

chemical marker of wood smoke analyses. The goal of the sampling program was to collect 

samples within each home at least twice during the winter period (November - March), with each 

sampling episode consisting of 24 to 48 hours. For each of the homes, indoor samples were 

collected within the same room of the residence that the woodstove was located, usually in the 

common area (living room). Both the DustTrak and Leland/PEM were co-located during the 

sampling event, and placed approximately 3-5 feet off of the ground. 

From January through March 2007, indoor PM2.5 samples were collected within 5 homes in 

Lapwai and Kamiah to establish a baseline for indoor PM2.5 concentrations before a woodstove 

changeout. For the 2007/2008 winter, baseline (pre changeout) PM2.5 measurements were 

collected within 11 additional homes. The majority of post changeout measures were conducted 

during the winter of 2008/2009. 

A comprehensive Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) program was employed 

throughout the sampling program. Using a Bios DryCal flow meter, the flow rate on the Leland 

pump/PEM was measured both before and after each sampling event. Quartz filter field blanks 

were collected for approximately every 10 samples (10%). Field personnel followed the 

recommended maintenance and cleaning schedules for the DustTrak and Leland/PEM as 

described in their respective manuals throughout the program. The DustTrak was zeroed prior to 

each sampling event, with results documented on datasheets. 

3.2 Activity Logs 

In order to accurately assess the air sampling results within each of the homes, it is important to 

consider the many variables that may contribute to PM2.5 exposures. During each sampling 

event, the home owner was asked to record some of the activities that occurred in the home 

during the day of sampling. Data collected in these home activity logs included the recording of 

wood burning, cooking, any cigarette smoking, and cleaning activities. 

3.3 Ambient Air Data 

At both the Kamiah and Lapwai ambient monitoring sites, a tapered element oscillating 

microbalance (TEOM) continuously measures ambient PM2.5. Ambient PM2.5 data were 

provided by ERWM to The University of Montana to investigate the possibility of ambient 

PM2.5 influences on the indoor environments. 

4
3.4 PM2.5 Analyses 

Analyses conducted on the 37-mm prefired quartz filters provided information on how much of 

the indoor PM resulted specifically from wood combustion, and not from other types of 

combustion sources such as diesel exhaust. All quartz filter samples, field blanks, and trip 

blanks were delivered to The University of Montana’s Center for Environmental Health Sciences 

(UM-CEHS) in Missoula, MT for processing. At UM-CEHS, the filters were split into two equal 

halves. 

For the OC/EC analyses, one half of the exposed PM2.5 filters were shipped in coolers to Chester 

LabNet (Tigard, Oregon) for analysis by Thermal Optical Reflectance. Chester LabNet employs 

a comprehensive analytical laboratory QA/QC program. The other half of the quartz filter was 

analyzed for chemical markers of woodsmoke including vanillin, acetovanillone, guaiacol, 4-

ethylguaiacol (all methoxyphenols), levoglucosan (a sugar anhydride), abietic acid, and 

dehydroabietic acid (resin acids) at The University of Montana following an analytical method 

refined by Bergauff et al. (Bergauff et al., 2008). This method was adapted from methods 

reported previously by Schauer et al. (2001) and Simpson et al. (2005) Briefly, half of each 

filter is spiked with deuterated recovery standards, placed in a vial, and extracted by 

ultrasonication using ethyl acetate containing 3.6 mM triethylamine. The extract is filtered, 

reduced in volume to approximately 500 μL and split into two equal fractions. One fraction is 

evaporated to dryness and derivatized with N-O-bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide, 

trimethylchlorosilane and trimethylsilylimidazole to convert the sugar anhydrides and the abietic 

acids to their trimethylsilyl derivatives. The second fraction is treated with a 2:3 mixture of 

acetic anhydride:triethyl amine to generate the acetate derivatives of the methoxyphenols. Both 

sample fractions were analyzed by GC/MS on a Hewlett-Packard GC/MSD (GC Model 6890, 

MSD Model 5973) using an HP-5ms capillary column or equivalent. A comprehensive QA/QC 

program was employed throughout the analytical program, including the analysis of blanks to 

address artifact contamination (both from sampling and analytical activities), and spikes to 

address analyte recovery. 

We were especially interested in measuring the levels of levoglucosan in this study. 

Levoglucosan (1,6-anhydro-β-D-glucopyranose) is a pyrolysis product of cellulose (Simoneit et 

al., 1999; Nolte et al., 2001), and is generally a major organic component of biomass 

combustion-related particulate matter (Simoneit and Elias, 2001; Lee et al., 2005). It is 

frequently used as a tracer for biomass burning because it is produced at relatively high levels, 

and is stable in the atmosphere (Simoneit et al., 1999). 

3.5 Purchase and Installation of EPA Woodstoves 

The first five EPA-certified woodstoves were installed by Anderson’s Masonry Hearth & Home 

(Missoula, Montana) on October 26, 2007. The second set (11) of EPA-certified stoves were 

installed in April 2008. It should be noted that the stoves were “burned off” (i.e. the first burn in 

the stove occurred outdoors for at least 8 hours) before installation within the homes. Also, the 

old stoves were recycled after they were removed. An external consultant (Mr. Jerry Marquez) 

was then used to ensure that the 16 installations were conducted according to code. Mr. Marquez 

originally traveled to Lapwai and Kamiah on November 10-11, 2007 to inspect the first five 

installations conducted by Anderson’s. He traveled back to Lapwai and Kamiah in April 2008, 

following the second set of installations. During each visit, Mr. Marquez spoke to the home5
owners about best operating practices for the new stoves. Mr. Marquez also submitted short 

reports summarizing his findings. 

4.0 Results 

The goal of the sampling program was to collect as many samples as possible within the 16 

homes both before and after the stove changeout in an effort to evaluate the potential 

improvement in indoor air quality. Some homes had only one 24-hour sample collected pre- and 

post changeout, while other homes had up to five 24-hour samples collected. As the DustTrak 

was often set to run for 48-hours (while the Leland samplers ran for 24 hours), the DustTrak data 

had to be formatted in an effort to make the applicable comparisons. Therefore, during data 

analysis, the 48-hour DustTrak runs were separated out into individual 24-hour events so they 

could be directly compared with the 24-hour OC/EC and chemical markers of woodsmoke 

concentrations. When comparing the pre- and post- change in indoor concentrations within each 

of the homes, the average of the 24-hour pre- and post-changeout concentrations were used. 

Before final concentrations were calculated for PM2.5, OC/EC, and chemical markers of 

woodsmoke, each 24-hour sample run collected in each of the 16 houses was carefully 

scrutinized to ensure that the data was of the highest technical quality. Any sample run that did 

not have adequate collection times (24 or 48 hours) or sufficient flow rates (~10 L/min for the 

Leland/PEM) was discarded from the final dataset. Additional results were excluded from the 

final calculations when abnormal events occurred during the sampling events (pitch on stove or 

blocked chimney), when the new stove was not operated correctly during the sampling event, or 

when the woodstove was not used at all during the sampling event. Appendix A lists all of the 

DustTrak and Leland sample runs that were excluded from the final data calculations, while 

Appendix B lists all of the DustTrak and Leland sample run parameters collected throughout the 

program. 

Though the goal of each sampling event was to collect both a DustTrak (PM2.5 mass) and 

Leland/PEM (OC/EC and chemical markers of woodsmoke) sample, there were several 

occasions where only a successful DustTrak run was collected. Therefore, in this report, we 

present the final results in three ways: 1) only PM2.5 mass (medians, maximums, and minimums) 

for all pre- and post-changeout sample runs (not including those sample runs that had poor 

QA/QC, and/or had some type of malfunction or abnormal event), 2) those sample days that had 

complete data sets (i.e. mass, OC/EC, and chemical markers of woodsmoke), and 3) those homes 

that had some type of additional education and outreach training within the home following the 

changeout. As there is a large standard deviation when looking at the pre- and post-changeout 

PM2.5 results (because of high PM2.5 levels in some of the sample runs), results are presented in 

median concentrations (instead of averages) when evaluating the impact of the woodstove 

changeout. 

4.1 PM2.5 Mass Results for all Pre- and Post-Changeout Sampling Episodes 

Table 1 presents the overall PM2.5 sampling program results, including the pre- and postchangeout medians, minimum, and maximum mass concentrations. Figure 1 presents the preand post-changeout average PM2.5 concentrations measured within each of the 16 homes in a 

graphical format, while Appendix C presents all of the PM2.5 results measured within each of the 

homes. None of the results are blank corrected. Note that Tables 1 and Appendix C (and Figure 

6
1) do not include those sample runs that had poor QA/QC, and/or had some type of malfunction 

or abnormal event. 

Table 1: PM2.5 Concentration ± Standard Deviation Sampling Results

Median of the 

24-hour PM2.5

Concentrations 

(μg/m3

) 

Minimum PM2.5

(μg/m3

) 

Maximum 

PM2.5 (μg/m3) 

Pre Changeout Concentrations 39.2±45.7 4.5±6.2 437.5±572.4 

Post Changeout Concentrations 19.0±47.5 3.5±11.6 175.5±354.0 

Difference -52% -22% -60% 

Figure 1: Indoor Residential PM2.5 Mass Comparisons (μg/m3

) 

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

200.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Home

PM2.5 Concentration (ug/m3

)

Avg PM2.5 Pre (ug/m3)

Avg PM2.5 Post (ug/m3)

4.1.1 PM2.5 Mass Results 

When comparing the median pre- and post-changeout results, there was a 52% reduction in 

indoor PM2.5, while maximum spike concentrations were reduced by 60%. Prior to the Nez 

Perce changeout, eight of the homes had 24-hour average PM2.5 concentrations above 35 μg/m3

(EPA 24-hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for comparison), with 

the maximum observed 24-hour average concentration of 188.0 μg/m3 measured in Home 16. 

Following the changeouts, four homes still had 24-hour average concentrations above 35 μg/m3. 

The maximum observed 24-hour average concentration in the post-measurements was 197.4 

μg/m3

 (Home 16). Home 14 did not have a complete dataset to allow comparison. 

Unlike the Libby woodstove changeout program where there were substantial reductions in 

average and maximum PM2.5 within each of the study homes, not all of the Nez Perce homes 

showed clear reductions following the changeout. When looking at the final results, five of the 

16 homes had higher PM2.5 concentrations following the changeout. Some of these results can 

be explained by looking at the notes documented in the sample run datasheets, as well as in the 

activity logs for each of the homes. The datasheets and activity logs included the following 

notations: 

7
 Home 2 (Post): This home had issues with pitch on top of the stove. A further 

discussion is provided on page 10. 

 Home 5 (Post): On 2/10/09, the PM2.5 concentrations rose between 18:00 and 18:30. 

The homeowner noted “frying” at 18:30. The homeowner also loaded their woodstove at 

18:00, and stoked the woodstove at 18:30. The DustTrak recorded PM2.5 spikes between 

~19:20 and 19:45. The homeowner stoked the woodstove at 19:45. 

 Home 9 (Post): The datasheet recorded that the wood was “wet, some dry” during the 

2/23/09 and 2/24/09 sample dates. 

o On 2/23/09, PM2.5 concentrations spiked between 11:00-11:30. This could be 

explained by the incense burning and smudging recorded on the home activity 

log. 

o At ~12:45, PM2.5 concentrations spiked to ~4000 μg/m3. As there was a notation 

in the datasheets that the windows were opened with the “door propped open”, 

some unknown event occurred resulting in elevated levels of indoor PM2.5. 

o At 15:55, PM2.5 concentrations spiked during the boiling of kouse kouse. 

o On 2/24/09, the monitor spiked at around 01:23am. The homeowner recorded 

“stoked” at ‘023’. It is possible that this event caused the spike. 

 Home 16: Both pre- and post-changeout concentrations were elevated within Home 16. 

During the post-sampling events, the homeowner said that everything in the home was 

normal, yet the indoor levels were still consistently high. It should be noted that the 

homeowner only operated the stove during the first 24 hours on 2/17/09, and the stove 

was not used at all on 2/18/09. Therefore, the 24-hour concentration (109.1 μg/m3

) for 

2/18/09-2/19/09 was removed from the final calculations. The homeowner also described 

their burning as “light” compared to a “typical winter day”. From the home activity log, 

“open windows-all day and night” was recorded. This suggests the likelihood of other 

indoor air quality issues in the home unrelated to woodstove usage. These might include: 

o (Pre): From home activity log: “A pot of orange peels, cloves, and cinnamon on 

the woodstove.” 

o (Post): On 2/17/09, the DustTrak began running at 11:30. There was a spike of 

838 μg/m3

 at that time. The home activity log indicated “frying” at 11:00. The 

levels remained above 600 μg/m3 for the next two hours. 

o The presence of a dog within the residence. 

 Participants such as Home 4 (10.2 μg/m3) and Home 5 (8.2 μg/m3) had low prechangeout PM2.5 concentrations, making it difficult to achieve an overall reduction when 

comparing with the post-changeout sampling events. 

4.2 PM2.5 Mass, OC/EC, and Woodsmoke Marker Results for Sample Days with Complete 

Datasets 

Table 2 presents the PM2.5 and OC/EC results for those homes (pre- and post-changeout) with 

complete data sets, while Table 3 presents the program medians for the chemical markers of 

woodsmoke. A complete dataset is defined as a successful DustTrak sample (PM2.5 mass, 

maximum PM2.5, and minimum PM2.5) and quartz filter (OC/EC and chemical markers of 

woodsmoke) collected. None of the results are blank corrected. Note that the units in Table 2 

are in μg/m3

, while the units in Table 3 are in ng/m3. The PM2.5 mass, OC/EC/TC for each of 

the homes with complete data sets are presented in Appendix D. 

8
Table 2: Results for PM2.5 and OC/EC/TC – Homes with Complete Datasets

Median 

PM2.5

(μg/m3

) 

Minimum 

PM2.5

(μg/m3

) 

Maximum 

PM2.5

(μg/m3

) 

OC 

(μg/m3

) 

EC 

(μg/m3) 

TC 

(μg/m3) 

Pre Changeout 21.6±57.5 5.0±6.6 254.0±731.1 16.9±15.3 0.3±0.4 17.2±15.5 

Post Changeout 18.4±54.1 4.0±13.4 145.0±278.3 13.4±11.0 0.7±0.4 14.0±11.3 

Difference -15% -20% -43% -21% +120% -19% 

Table 3: Results for Chemical Markers of Woodsmoke – Homes with Complete Datasets

Levoglucosan 

(ng/m3

) 

Dehydroabietic 

acid (ng/m3) 

Abietic acid 

(ng/m3) 

Vanillin 

(ng/m3) 

Acetovanillone 

(ng/m3) 

Guaiacol 

(ng/m3) 

4-

Ethylguaiacol 

(ng/m3

) 

Pre 

Changeout 645.1±1315.3 113.0±147.7 11.3±118.7 0.5±2.3 0.3±9.2 0.9±256.0 0.8±0.8

Post 

Changeout 238.1±310.1 0.3±37.1 41.5±40.3 0.5±4.4 0.3±0.0 0.3±0.4 0.1±0.4

Difference -63% -100% +267.0% No Change No Change -62% -92% 

4.2.1 PM2.5 Mass and OC/EC Results (Homes with Complete Datasets) 

When looking at the PM2.5 mass results in those homes with compete data sets, there was a 15% 

reduction in indoor PM2.5, while maximum spike concentrations were reduced by 43%. OC/EC 

results show that the PM2.5 mass measured within the homes is heavily enriched with the OC 

fraction, with a minimal contribution from the EC fraction. Even though there was an overall 

increase in EC following the changeout, levels were still extremely low when compared to OC. 

The 21% reduction in OC correlates with the 15% reduction in PM2.5 mass, suggesting that the 

introduction of the EPA certified woodstoves directly impacts the OC fraction of PM2.5. 

4.2.2 Chemical Markers of Woodsmoke (Homes with Complete Datasets) 

Out of the seven chemical markers of woodsmoke tracked in this program, levoglucosan was 

found in the highest concentrations. Levoglucosan showed a 63% reduction in concentrations 

following the changeout, with dehydroabietic acid showing nearly a 100% reduction. Abietic 

acid actually increased following the changeout, which is a trend we have observed in the Libby 

woodstove changeout program (Ward et al., 2008). Very low levels of methoxyphenols were 

measured in this program, likely due to low levels found in the particle phase within the homes. 

The levoglucosan results confirm that woodsmoke – related PM2.5 were reduced within the 

homes as a result of the woodstove changeout. 

4.3 Impact of Education and Outreach Following the Changeout 

Following the installation of EPA-certified woodstoves, some of the homes had higher PM2.5

concentrations measured inside the homes after the changeout when compared to pre-changeout 

levels. After determining the causes of these elevated concentrations, ERWM staff worked with 

the home owners to deliver additional training. As a result of this education/outreach effort, 

PM2.5 concentrations were lowered within four homes as demonstrated by followup sampling 

events. Both Table 4 and Figure 2 present the pre-changeout results, the initial post-changeout 

measurements (Post 1), and then those results measured within each of the four homes following 

9
the outreach/education provided to the homeowner (Post 2). A discussion of the issues within 

each of the four homes is presented below. 

Table 4: PM2.5 and OC/EC/TC Results Following Outreach/Education

Pre-Changeout 

Average PM2.5

(μg/m3

) 

Post 1 Changeout 

Average PM2.5

(μg/m3

) 

Post 2 Changeout 

Average PM2.5

(μg/m3

) 

Home 2 20.8 322.7 58.2 

Home 6 42.4 63.1 18.4 

Home 11 14.0 125.9 12.1 

Home 13 47.9 2412.0 12.0

Figure 2: PM2.5 Mass (μg/m3) Measured in Homes Following Outreach/Education 

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

Pre Post 1 Post 2

Sampling Event

PM2.5 Concentration (ug/m 3

)

Home 2

Home 6

Home 11

Home 13

Note: The bars in Figure 2 for Post 1, Home 2 (322.7 μg/m3) and Post 1, Home 13 (2412.0 

μg/m3

) are modified to fit the graph. 

Home 2. The homeowner was drying wood on top of their new stove, and a layer of pitch was 

deposited on the top of the stove. This resulted in elevated PM2.5 concentrations measured 

during the Post 1 event. ERWM staff worked with the homeowner to get most of it removed. 

Following the removal of the pitch, PM2.5 levels within the home were dramatically reduced 

(Post 2). 

Home 6. The homeowners were not opening the draft completely when using their woodstove, 

therefore shutting down the fire too quickly. The glass door was dirty and creosote built up in 

their chimney. ERWM staff met with the homeowner to discuss proper burning techniques using 

their new stove. Following this additional training, the second post-sample (Post 2) showed a 

reduction when compared to the first post-sample event (Post 1). 

Home 11. The homeowner was leaving the woodstove door cracked when using the new stove. 

ERWM staff met with the homeowner, and explained that the stove operated differently than the 

10
old stove. Following this additional training, a dramatic improvement in air quality was 

achieved as demonstrated by the Post 2 sample event. 

Home 13. The homeowner had not recently cleaned the chimney, therefore smoke accumulated 

within the home while using the new woodstove. ERWM staff met with the homeowner and 

explained that the chimney needed to be cleaned. Following the cleaning, the PM2.5

concentrations were reduced within the home. 

The results from these four homes demonstrate that education and outreach strategies following 

the changeout can greatly improve the operation (and therefore reduce the levels of PM2.5 within 

the homes) of the newly installed stoves. 

4.4 Ambient PM2.5 Impact on the Indoor Environment 

Ambient PM2.5 levels vary widely by season in Lapwai and Kamiah. Before the project began, 

we had intended to compare the ambient and indoor mass to determine if ambient PM2.5

influenced indoor PM2.5 concentrations. After reviewing both the indoor and ambient PM2.5 data 

sets, it is likely that the ambient PM2.5 had an insignificant influence on the indoor PM2.5

measured in this study. As shown in Appendix C, the indoor levels are far more elevated when 

compared to the ambient levels during the same time periods. The results from this study 

suggest that indoor sources (i.e. cooking, cleaning, and woodstove use) dominate the indoor 

PM2.5 levels within each of the 16 homes. 

4.5 QA/QC Results 

Quartz filter field blanks were analyzed for approximately every 10 samples (10%) collected in 

the field. Results of these analyses showed no artifact contamination in the blanks. Table 5 

presents the blank results, as well as the minimum detection limits (MDLs) for each of the 

parameters measured throughout the program. For PM2.5 mass, MDLs are reported in the 

DustTrak manual. MDLs for OC and EC were reported by the contracted laboratory in μg. To 

calculate the final MDLs, the values for OC and EC, respectively, were divided by the average 

volume collected with the Leland pump / PEM during each sample run (14 L/min). 

Table 5: Minimum Detection Limits 

Parameter Blank Results MDLs 

PM2.5 0.000 mg/m3 0.001 mg/m3

OC 0.5 μg/m3 0.098 μg/m3

EC 0.02 μg/m3 0.007 μg/m3

Levoglucosan 52.0 ng/m3 7.7 ng/m3

Dehydroabietic Acid 48.6 ng/m3 0.6 ng/m3

Abietic Acid 0.02 ng/m3 0.5 ng/m3

Vanillin 0.03 ng/m3 0.9 ng/m3

Acetovanillone 0.02 ng/m3 0.5 ng/m3

Guaiacol 0.8 ng/m3 0.03 ng/m3

4 Ethyl Guaiacol 0.4 ng/m3 0.1 ng/m3

5.0 Challenges Faced and Lessons Learned 

In addition to the finding that indoor air quality was improved as a result of the woodstove 

changeout, another significant finding of the project was that targeted education and outreach is a 

critical component of the overall success of the program. Homeowners need to be given specific 

11
instructions on how to operate their new stove, and additional visits may need to be made to the 

home to ensure that the residents learn best burn practices for their new stoves. 

For the Nez Perce woodstove changeout, initial outreach/education/training was conducted by 

Mr. Jerry Marquez shortly after each home received their new stove. In addition to inspecting 

the stove installations, he talked with the homeowners about their new stove and burning 

practices, and also provided them with a handout on best burn practices. In addition to this 

effort, ERWM staff provided the homeowners with a packet of information (DVD, wood smoke 

information, asthma information, materials for kids, and manual for the stove). Although 

important, this outreach and education strategy did not work for every home, and additional 

strategies were needed. 

After some of the post-changeout measurements showed an increase in PM2.5 levels, ERWM 

staff decided to provide a “new stove refresher” to the homes. They met with homeowners to 

show them an Environment Canada film on burning techniques, with each home receiving a 

specific, step-by-step protocol on how to use their new stove. It was also learned that directions 

need to be clearly spoken and written down, and that providing too much educational material 

can overwhelm the homeowner. The materials need to be concise, and should be reviewed in 

detail with the homeowner during the home visit. 

Additional lessons were learned in this project, including the results from Home 13 that 

demonstrated that new stoves do not operate properly when the chimney has not been cleaned. 

In addition, Home 9’s data indicated that burning wet wood can create high levels of smoke 

within the home. Finally, for future changeouts, it is recommended that when people sign up to 

participate in a stove changeout, they should go to a mandatory meeting where videos are shown 

on burning practices and wood storage, with handouts provided to the homeowner describing 

best burn practices. After the new stoves have been installed, it is recommended that additional 

in-home training be conducted to ensure that the homeowner is successfully using their new 

stove. 

6.0 References 

Air Quality Management Work Group (AQMWG). (2005). Recommendations to the Clean Air 

Act Advisory Committee. Washington, D.C. 

Bergauff, M., Ward, T., Noonan, C., and Palmer C.P., (2008). Determination and evaluation of 

selected organic chemical tracers for wood smoke in airbourne particulate matter, Int. J. 

Environ. Anal. Chem., 88(7): 473-486. 

Lee, S., Baumann, K., Schauer. J.J., Sheesley, R.J., Naeher, L.P., Meinardi, S., et al., (2005) 

Gaseous and particulate emissions from prescribed burning in Georgia. Environ. Sci. 

Tech., 39, 9049-9056. 

Nolte, C.G., Schauer, J.J., Cass, G.R., and Simoneit, B.R., (2001). Highly polar organic 

compounds present in wood smoke and in the ambient atmosphere. Environ. Sci. 

Technol., 35, 1912-1919. 

12
Schauer, J.J., Kleeman, M.J., Cass, G.R., and Simoneit, B.R., (2001). Measurement of emissions 

from air pollution sources. 3. C1-C29 organic compounds from fireplace combustion of 

wood. Environ. Sci. Technol., 35, 1716-1728. 

Simoneit, B., Schauer, J., Nolte, C., Oros, D., Elias, V., Fraser, M., et al., (1999). Levoglucosan, 

a tracer for cellulose in biomass burning and atmospheric particles. Atmos. Environ. 33, 

173-182. 

Simoneit, B.R., and Elias, V.O., (2001). Detecting organic tracers from biomass burning in the 

atmosphere. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 42, 805-810. 

Simpson, C.D., Paulsen, M., Dills, R.L., Liu, L.J., and Kalman, D.A., (2005). Determination of 

methoxyphenols in ambient atmospheric particulate matter: tracers for wood combustion. 

Environ. Sci. Technol., 39, 631-637. 

Ward, T.J., and Smith, G., (2005). The 2000/2001 Missoula valley PM2.5 chemical mass balance 

study, including the 2000 wildfire season - seasonal source apportionment. Atmos. 

Environ., 39, 709-717. 

Ward, T.J., Rinehart, L., and Lange, T., (2006). The 2003/2004 Libby, Montana PM2.5 source 

apportionment research study. Aero. Sci. Tech., 40, 166-177. 

Ward, T.J., Palmer, C., Bergauff, M., Hooper, K., and Noonan, C., (2008). Results of a 

Residential Indoor PM2.5 Sampling Program Before and After a Woodstove Changeout, 

Indoor Air, 18: 408–415. 

Zamula, W.W., (1989). Room heating equipment exposure survey. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, Directorate for Economic Analysis, Report No.: 

OMB Control No. 3041-0083. 

13
14

Appendix A 

DustTrak samples that were excluded from the overall dataset. 

Home Sample Date Reason 

11 – Pre Changeout 12/20/06 1-second averages instead of 1-minute. 

11 - Pre Changeout 1/9/07 Only ran 533 minutes 

11 – Pre Changeout 2/7/07 Only ran 29 minutes. 

12 – Pre Changeout 1/16/08-1/17/08 Only ran 987 minutes. 

12 – Pre Changeout 1/19/08 1-second averages instead of 1-minute – ran 516 minutes. 

13 – Pre Changeout 12/5/07-12/6/07 Only ran 476 minutes 

14 – Pre Changeout 1/29/08 Only ran 1 minute. 

14 – Pre Changeout 2/29/08 Only ran 210 minutes. 

16 – Pre Changeout 1/15/07 1-second averages instead of 1-minute – ran 533 minutes. 

1 - Post Changeout 2/5/09-2/6/09 No fire built on 2/5/09 

2 - Post Changeout 2/2/09–2/4/09 Pitch on stove was causing lots of smoke.

5 - Post Changeout 2/9/09 Only ran 619 minutes. 

6 - Post Changeout 1/30/09–2/1/09 Homeowner was not using stove correctly. 

11 - Post Changeout 3/17/08–3/19/08 Homeowner was not using stove correctly. Leaving the door open. 

13 - Post Changeout 1/22/09-1/23/09 Homeowner had not yet cleaned the chimney. 

14-Post Changeout 2/24/09-2/26/09 Did not use their woodstove. 

14 – Post Changeout 3/5/2009 Only ran 257 minutes. 

16 – Post Changeout 1/13/09-1/15/09 No data recorded. 

16-Post Changeout 2/18/09-2/19/09 Woodstove not used on this sample day. 

Quartz filter (Leland/PEM) samples that were excluded from the overall dataset. 

Home Sample Date Reason 

7 – Pre Changeout 2/19/08-2/20/08 From Datasheet: “Put two filters into the PEM” 

8 – Pre Changeout 1/22/07 From Datasheet: “Battery died” 

8 – Pre Changeout 1/23/07 From Datasheet: “Pump died” 

11 – Pre Changeout 2/5/07-2/6/07 Initial and final flows too low. 

11 – Pre Changeout 2/7/07-2/8/07 Initial and final flows too low. 

16 – Pre Changeout 1/31/07-2/1/07 No final flow rate or Leland final flow rate recorded. 

6 – Post Changeout 2/26/09-2/27/09 No final sample time recorded. 

11 – Post Changeout 3/18/08-3/19/08 No final sample time recorded. 

14 – Post Changeout 3/18/08-3/19/08 No final sample time recorded. 
Appendix B 

DustTrak Sampler Data: Pre Changeout Sample Runs 

Home Start Date Start Time End Date End Time 

Total 

sample 

time 

(min) 

Logging 

Interval 

(sec) 

Avg. 

PM 2.5 

(mg/m3) 

Min 

PM2.5 

(mg/m3) 

Date Min Time Min Max PM 2.5 (mg/m3) Date Max Time Max 

1 11/27/2007 9:04 11/29/2007 9:04 2880 60 0.12 0.007 11/27/2007 11:15 1.844 11/27/2007 12:16 

11/29/2007 9:37 11/30/2007 9:37 1440 60 0.022 0.008 11/29/2007 15:20 0.16 11/30/2007 4:25 

2 11/19/2007 9:34 11/21/2007 9:34 2880 60 0.021 0.005 11/19/2007 9:35 0.165 11/20/2007 17:33 

3 12/3/2007 9:44 12/6/2007 9:44 4320 60 0.019 0.004 12/5/2007 6:16 0.254 12/5/2007 9:52 

4 1/8/2008 19:09 1/10/2008 19:09 2880 60 0.01 0.001 1/9/2008 13:44 0.05 1/10/2008 11:08 

5 1/14/2008 13:45 1/16/2008 13:45 2880 60 0.008 0 1/14/2008 13:46 0.087 1/14/2008 13:47 

6 1/29/2007 14:09 1/31/2007 14:09 2880 60 0.05 0.011 1/31/2007 6:54 0.573 1/30/2007 14:29 

1/31/2007 14:50 2/2/2007 14:47 2877 60 0.035 0.007 2/2/2007 3:33 0.377 2/1/2007 16:10 

7 2/18/2008 9:45 2/20/2008 9:45 2880 60 0.043 0.004 2/19/2008 12:32 2.037 2/18/2008 17:08 

3/18/2008 15:30 3/19/2008 15:30 1440 60 0.032 0.003 3/18/2008 15:30 0.318 3/18/2008 20:09 

8 1/22/2007 13:14 1/24/2007 13:14 2880 60 0.026 0.003 1/24/2007 6:42 0.602 1/23/2007 16:50 

3/5/2007 15:44 3/7/2007 15:44 2880 60 0.079 0.005 3/5/2007 17:35 4.03 3/6/2007 20:02 

9 1/24/2007 14:35 1/26/2007 14:35 2880 60 0.045 0.003 1/25/2007 13:40 1.44 1/24/2007 16:45 

10 12/11/2007 16:29 12/14/2007 16:37 4328 60 0.071 0.016 12/12/2007 1:56 2.772 12/12/2007 17:20 

11 12/20/2006 14:07 12/20/2006 23:05 533 1 

1/8/2007 10:11 1/8/2007 

15
1/9/2007 12:40 12:50 

1/10/2007 13:07 

1/9/2007 12:56 1/9/2007 21:49 533 1 0.007 0.001 1/9/2007 21:02 0.564 1/9/2007 21:22 

, 13:07 

2/5/2007 9:40 2/7/2007 9:40 2880 60 0.016 0.004 2/6/2007 16:40 0.2 2/7/2007 9:38 

2/7/2007 19:40 2/7/2007 20:09 29 60 0.015 0.012 2/7/2007 19:49 0.3 2/7/2007 20:09 

2/8/2007 12:29 2/9/2007 12:29 1440 60 0.01 0.004 2/8/2007 15:54 0.064 2/9/2007 9:45 

12 1/8/2008 10:00 1/9/2008 10:00 

1/16/2008 18:59 1/17/2008 11:26 987 60 0.023 0.016 1/16/2008 19:00 0.122 1/16/2008 20:47 

1/19/2008 13:02 1/19/2008 21:38 516 1 0.029 0.016 1/19/2008 20:49 4.401 1/19/2008 15:12 1/28/2008 17:29 1/29/2008 17:29 1440 60 0.027 0.012 1/29/2008 15:32 0.29 1/28/2008 22:29 3/20/2008 19:59 3/22/2008 19:59 2880 60 0.007 0.002 3/22/2008 18:43 0.035 3/20/2008 20:20 

13 12/5/2007 16:29 12/6/2007 0:25 476 60 0.037 0.012 12/5/2007 23:58 0.104 12/5/2007 17:29 

12/11/2007 16:29 12/14/2007 16:37 4328 60 0.071 0.016 12/12/2007 1:56 2.772 12/12/2007 17:20 

2/26/2008 17:59 2/28/2008 17:59 2880 60 0.013 0.004 2/28/2008 15:51 0.038 2/27/2008 18:21 

14 1/29/2008 19:29 1/29/2008 19:30 1 60 0.012 0.012 1/29/2008 19:30 0.012 1/29/2008 19:30 

2/29/2008 11:34 2/29/2008 15:04 210 60 0.005 0.004 2/29/2008 12:13 0.007 2/29/2008 11:46 

2/29/2008 18:59 3/2/2008 18:59 2880 60 0.036 0.006 3/1/2008 8:04 1.717 3/1/2008 17:48 

15 3/3/2008 16:59 3/5/2008 16:59 2880 60 0.022 0.002 3/4/2008 6:30 0.278 3/4/2008 16:26 

16 1/15/2007 12:33 1/15/2007 21:27 533 1 0.449 0.052 1/15/2007 15:31 3.434 1/15/2007 14:38 

1/16/2007 13:29 1/17/2007 13:29 1448 60 0.154 0.072 1/16/2007 21:29 0.585 1/16/2007 16:29 

1/30/2007 9:10 2/1/2007 9:10 2880 60 0.192 0 1/30/2007 9:10 0.465 1/31/2007 15:53 

2/1/2007 10:20 2/3/2007 10:20 2880 60 0.201 0.017 2/2/2007 12:23 0.91 2/1/2007 18:24 

16
DustTrak Sampler Data: Post Changeout Sample Runs 

Home Start Date Start Time End Date End Time 

Total 

sample 

time 

(min) 

Logging 

Interval 

(sec) 

Avg. 

PM 2.5 

(mg/m3) 

Min 

PM2.5 

(mg/m3) 

Date Min Time Min Max PM 2.5 (mg/m3) Date Max Time Max 

1 2/4/2009 10:55 2/6/2009 10:55 2880 60 0.033 0.007 2/5/2009 5:09 0.303 2/5/2009 12:29 

3/11/2009 10:55 3/13/2009 10:55 2880 60 0.037 0.004 3/12/2009 17:39 1.716 3/11/2009 14:03 

2 2/2/2009 9:50 2/4/2009 9:50 2880 60 0.323 0.012 2/4/2009 9:35 3.808 2/2/2009 19:58 

3/4/2009 9:14 3/6/2009 9:14 2880 60 0.058 0.002 3/5/2009 7:10 0.77 3/4/2009 20:55 

3 1/26/2009 13:40 1/28/2009 13:40 2880 60 0.014 0.003 1/28/2009 2:02 0.374 1/27/2009 9:38 

4 12/19/2008 10:24 12/21/2008 10:24 2880 60 0.02 0.004 12/21/2008 4:23 0.228 12/21/2008 6:03 

5 2/9/2009 12:29 2/9/2009 22:48 619 60 0.034 0.005 2/9/2009 20:56 0.157 2/9/2009 13:04 

2/10/2009 12:50 2/11/2009 12:50 1440 60 0.049 0.002 2/11/2009 6:11 0.719 2/10/2009 19:19 

6 1/30/2008 13:59 2/1/2008 13:59 2880 60 0.063 0.003 2/1/2008 6:50 2.302 2/1/2008 13:37 

2/26/2009 10:59 2/28/2009 2:30 2371 60 0.017 0.003 2/26/2009 16:11 0.242 2/27/2009 20:54 

7 1/28/2009 14:39 1/30/2009 14:39 2880 60 0.018 0.002 1/30/2009 3:25 0.166 1/28/2009 20:13 

8 2/11/2008 13:24 2/13/2008 13:24 2880 60 0.018 0.003 2/13/2008 5:35 0.187 2/12/2008 21:36 

9 12/29/2008 12:24 12/31/2008 12:24 2880 60 0.014 0 12/30/2008 3:05 0.538 12/29/2008 19:05 

17
2/23/2009 10:29 2/25/2009 10:29 2880 60 0.127 0.002 2/24/2009 17:35 4.141 2/23/2009 12:49 

10 1/28/2009 18:40 1/30/2009 18:40 2880 60 0.033 0.004 1/29/2009 15:39 0.365 1/30/2009 10:03 

11 3/17/2008 18:59 3/19/2008 18:59 2880 60 0.126 0.004 3/17/2008 19:02 2.781 3/19/2008 12:26 

1/26/2009 10:40 1/28/2009 10:40 2880 60 0.012 0.002 1/27/2009 7:38 0.114 1/27/2009 8:09 

12 2/19/2009 14:29 2/21/2009 14:29 2880 60 0.01 0.003 2/20/2009 16:01 0.052 2/21/2009 7:49 

13 1/22/2009 16:30 1/23/2009 16:14 1425 60 2.412 0.027 1/23/2009 16:08 7.819 1/22/2009 17:04 

2/12/2009 17:59 2/14/2009 17:59 2880 60 0.012 0.001 2/14/2009 17:43 0.175 2/13/2009 16:32 

14 2/24/2009 10:59 2/26/2009 9:43 2804 60 0.065 0.006 2/26/2009 5:53 0.407 2/25/2009 13:39 

3/5/2009 12:29 3/5/2009 16:46 257 60 0.11 0.002 3/5/2009 12:30 0.204 3/5/2009 13:17 

15 2/10/2009 12:58 2/12/2009 12:58 2880 60 0.019 0.002 2/10/2009 17:24 0.074 2/12/2009 10:50 

16 1/13/2009 11:10 1/15/2009 11:10 

2/17/2009 11:29 2/19/2009 11:29 2880 60 0.153 0.032 2/19/2009 8:17 0.838 2/17/2009 11:32 

18
Leland/PEM Sampler Data: Pre Changeout Sample Runs 

Home Start Date Start Time End Date End Time 

Initial 

Measured 

Flow Rate 

(LPM) 

Final 

Measured 

Flow Rate 

(LPM) 

Avg Calc 

Measured 

Flow 

Rate 

(LPM) 

Avg Flow 

Rate From 

Leland 

(LPM) 

Total Time 

from Leland 

(min) 

Total Calc 

Measured 

Volume (m3) 

Total 

Volume, 

from Leland 

(L) 

1 11/27/2007 9:05 11/28/2007 9:05 9.929 9.785 9.857 10 1440 14.19 14400 

11/28/2007 9:25 11/29/2007 9:25 9.905 9.884 9.895 10 1440 14.25 14400 11/29/2007 9:20 11/30/2007 9:20 10.03 9.989 10.010 10 1440 14.41 14400 

2 11/19/2007 9:35 11/20/2007 9:35 9.99 9.531 9.761 10 1440 14.06 14400 

11/20/2007 9:40 11/21/2007 9:40 9.83 10.13 9.980 10 1440 14.37 14400 

3 12/3/2007 9:50 12/4/2007 9:50 9.99 9.53 9.760 10 1440 14.06 14400 

12/4/2007 10:15 12/5/2007 10:15 10.04 9.98 10.010 10 1440 14.41 14400 12/5/2007 10:35 12/6/2007 10:35 9.745 9.42 9.583 10 1440 13.80 14400 

4 1/8/2008 19:15 1/9/2008 19:15 9.738 9.33 9.534 10 1440 13.73 14400 

1/9/2008 19:30 1/10/2008 19:30 9.53 9.989 9.760 10 1440 14.05 14400 

5 1/14/2008 13:45 1/15/2008 13:45 10.01 9.89 9.950 10 1440 14.33 14400 

1/15/2008 14:00 1/16/2008 14:00 9.956 10.68 10.318 10 1440 14.86 14400 

6 1/29/2007 1/30/2007 

1/30/2007 1/31/2007 

1/31/2007 14:10 2/1/2007 14:10 9.515 9.197 9.356 11.5 1440 13.47 16560 

2/1/2007 14:25 2/2/2007 14:25 9.197 9.021 9.109 11.5 1440 13.12 16560 

7 2/18/2008 9:45 2/19/2008 9:45 10.008 9.982 9.995 10 1440 14.39 14400 

2/19/2008 9:55 2/20/2008 9.863 8.649 9.256 10 823 7.62 6161 

3/18/2008 14:20 3/19/2008 14:20 10.035 9.971 10.003 10 1440 14.40 14400 

8 1/22/2007 13:15 1/23/2007 10.04 10.040 9.5 12883 

1/23/2007 1/24/2007 

19
3/5/2007 15:30 3/6/2007 15:30 8.41 8.371 8.391 12 1440 12.08 17014 

3/6/2007 3/7/2007 

9 1/24/2007 1/25/2007 

1/25/2007 1/26/2007 

10 12/12/2007 15:16 12/13/2007 15:16 10.02 9.873 9.947 10 1440 14.32 14400 

12/13/2007 17:18 12/14/2007 17:18 10.01 9.556 9.783 10 1440 14.09 14400 

11 12/20/2006 14:07 12/21/2006 14:07 10.02 9.463 9.742 10.7 1440 14.03 15408 

1/8/2007 10:00 1/9/2007 10:00 11.5 9.44 10.470 11.5 1440 15.08 

1/9/2007 12:50 1/10/2007 12:50 1440 

1/10/2007 13:06 1/11/2007 13:06 1440 

2/5/2007 9:15 2/6/2007 9:15 8.684 6.854 7.769 11.6 1440 11.19 16704 

2/6/2007 9:22 2/7/2007 9:22 9.684 8.761 9.223 11.1 1440 13.28 15984 

2/7/2007 9:44 2/8/2007 9:44 7.083 9.717 8.400 11.1 1440 12.10 15984 

2/8/2007 10:11 2/9/2007 10:11 9.992 9.901 9.947 11.1 1440 14.32 15984 

12 1/8/2008 16:35 1/9/2008 16:35 10.01 9.436 9.723 10 1440 14.00 14400 

1/28/2008 17:30 1/29/2008 17:30 10.03 9.481 9.756 10 1440 14.05 14400 

13 2/26/2008 17:50 2/27/2008 17:51 10.01 9.6 9.805 10 1441 14.13 14410 

2/27/2008 18:40 2/28/2008 18:19 9.99 9.68 9.835 10 1419 13.96 14194 

14 2/29/2008 18:05 3/1/2008 18:05 9.991 9 9.496 10 1440 13.67 14400 

3/1/2008 18:10 3/2/2008 18:10 10.02 8.92 9.470 10 1440 13.64 14400 

15 3/3/2008 16:30 3/4/2008 16:30 10 8.67 9.335 10 1440 13.44 14400 

3/4/2008 17:23 3/5/2008 17:23 9.99 8.93 9.460 10 1440 13.62 14400 

16 1/15/2007 12:31 1/16/2007 12:31 10.01 10.01 10.010 10.7 1440 14.41 

1/16/2007 

20
1/31/2007 9:03 2/1/2007 9:03 9.408 9.408 11.4 1440 13.55 

2/1/2007 10:12 2/2/2007 10:12 9.389 9.389 11.6 1440 13.52 14365 2/2/2007 12:12 2/3/2007 12:12 8.164 9.339 8.752 11.6 1440 12.60 16704 

15 3/3/2008 16:30 3/4/2008 16:30 10 8.67 9.335 10 1440 13.44 14400 

3/4/2008 17:23 3/5/2008 17:23 9.99 8.93 9.460 10 1440 13.62 14400 

16 1/15/2007 12:31 1/16/2007 12:31 10.01 10.01 10.010 10.7 1440 14.41 

1/16/2007 

Leland/PEM Sampler Data: Post Changeout Sample Runs 

Home Start Date Start Time End Date End Time 

Initial 

Measured 

Flow Rate 

(LPM) 

Final 

Measured 

Flow Rate 

(LPM) 

Avg Calc 

Measured 

Flow Rate 

(LPM) 

Avg Flow 

Rate From 

Leland 

(LPM) 

Total Time 

from Leland 

(min) 

Total Calc 

Measured 

Volume (m3) 

Total 

Volume, 

from Leland 

(L) 

1 2/4/2009 10:50 2/5/2009 10:50 10.022 10.076 10.049 10 1440 14.47 14400 

2/5/2009 11:16 2/6/2009 11:16 10.068 9.648 9.858 10 1440 14.20 14400 

2 2/2/2009 9:43 2/3/2009 9:43 10.047 10.149 10.098 10 1440 14.54 14400 

2/3/2009 9:57 2/4/2009 9:57 9.986 10.208 10.097 10 1440 14.54 14400 

3/4/2009 9:15 3/5/2009 9:15 10.013 10.013 10 1440 14.42 14400 3/5/2009 9:30 3/6/2009 9:30 9.768 9.51 9.639 10 1440 13.88 14400 

3 1/26/2009 13:30 1/27/2009 13:30 10.024 9.646 9.835 10 1440 14.16 14400 

1/27/2009 13:50 1/28/2009 13:50 10.013 9.883 9.948 10 1440 14.33 14400 

4 12/19/2008 10:24 12/20/2008 10:24 10.105 9.185 9.645 10 1440 13.89 14400 

5 2/9/2009 12:10 2/10/2009 12:10 10.072 9.77 9.921 10 1440 14.29 14400 

2/10/2009 12:45 2/11/2009 12:45 9.927 9.88 9.904 10 1440 14.26 14400 

21
6 1/30/2008 13:50 1/31/2008 13:50 9.952 9.721 9.837 10 1440 14.16 14400 

1/31/2008 14:05 2/1/2008 14:05 9.998 10.153 10.076 10 1440 14.51 14400 

2/26/2009 11:00 10.089 10.182 10.136 10 1440 

2/27/2009 11:10 2/28/2009 11:10 10.011 9.579 9.795 10 1440 14.10 14400 

7 1/28/2009 14:30 1/29/2009 14:30 10.013 9.907 9.960 10 1440 14.34 14400 

1/29/2009 14:48 1/30/2009 14:48 9.969 9.754 9.862 10 1440 14.20 14400 

8 2/11/2008 13:15 10.002 9.679 9.841 10 1440 14.17 14400 

2/12/2008 13:20 2/13/2008 13:20 9.917 10.81 10.364 10 1440 14.92 14400 

9 12/29/2008 12:20 12/30/2008 12:20 10.005 10.35 10.178 10 1440 14.66 14400 

12/30/2008 12:50 12/31/2008 12:50 10.061 9.926 9.994 10 1440 14.39 14400 

2/23/2009 10:20 2/24/2009 10:20 10.01 9.756 9.883 10 1440 14.23 14400 

10 1/28/2009 19:05 1/29/2009 19:05 9.949 9.403 9.676 10 1440 13.93 14400 

1/29/2009 19:25 1/30/2009 19:25 9.99 9.651 9.821 10 1440 14.14 14400 

11 3/17/2008 18:03 3/18/2008 18:03 9.99 9.87 9.930 10 1440 14.30 14400 

3/18/2008 3/19/2008 10.01 10.010 10 14400 

1/26/2009 10:40 1/27/2009 10:40 10 9.509 9.755 10 1440 14.05 14400 1/27/2009 11:03 1/28/2009 11:03 9.902 9.301 9.602 10 1440 13.83 14400 

12 2/19/2009 13:30 2/20/2009 13:30 9.93 9.35 9.640 10 1440 13.88 14400 

2/20/2009 18:00 2/21/2009 18:00 10 9.653 9.827 10 1440 14.15 14400 

13 1/22/2009 16:20 1/23/2009 16:20 10 9.53 9.765 10 1440 14.06 14400 

1/23/2009 16:45 1/24/2009 16:45 9.966 9.912 9.939 10 1440 14.31 14400 

14 2/24/2009 10:35 2/25/2009 10:35 10.01 9.65 9.830 10 1440 14.16 14400 

2/25/2009 2/26/2009 10.02 10.020 10 1440 14.43 14400 

22
23

15 2/10/2009 13:30 2/11/2009 13:30 9.9 9.51 9.705 10 1440 13.98 14400 

2/11/2009 13:50 2/12/2009 13:50 9.95 9.568 9.759 10 1440 14.05 14400 

16 1/13/2009 11:10 1/14/2009 11:10 9.9 9.565 9.733 10 1440 14.01 14400 

1/14/2009 11:20 1/15/2009 11:20 9.9 9.5 9.700 10 1440 13.97 14400 2/17/2009 11:12 2/18/2009 11:12 9.945 9.306 9.626 10 1440 13.86 14400 

2/18/2009 11:24 2/19/2009 11:24 9.96 9.5 9.730 10 1440 14.01 14400 
Appendix C 

Individual Home and Ambient PMR2.5R Results (μg/mP3P) – Mass Only

Home 

Ambient 

PM2.5 

(24-hr 

Average) 

Indoor 

Average 

PM2.5

Indoor 

Minimum 

PM2.5

Indoor 

Maximum 

PM2.5

Home 

Ambient 

PM2.5 

(24-hr 

Average) 

1 –Pre 4.1 87.0 8.3 1205.3 9 –Pre 3.3 

1 –Post 2.3 30.1 6.3 607.7 9 –Post 1.4 

Difference NA -65% -24% -50% Difference NA 

2 –Pre 6.3 20.8 6.5 108.5 10 –Pre 14.5 

2 –Post 1.1 58.2 2.5 535.0 10 –Post 8.1 

Difference NA +180% -62% +393% Difference NA 

3 –Pre 2.5 19.0 4.0 254.0 11 –Pre 6.4 

3 –Post 4.0 14.3 3.5 218.0 11 –Post 7.6 

Difference NA -25% -13% -14% Difference NA 

4 –Pre 1.9 10.2 2.0 36.0 12 –Pre 3.3 

4 –Post 5.6 19.8 5.0 175.5 12 –Post 5.1 

Difference NA +95% +150% +388% Difference NA 

5 –Pre 1.8 8.2 1.5 68.5 13 –Pre 9.9 

5 –Post 2.0 49.0 2.0 719.0 13 –Post 7.0 

Difference NA +494% +33% +950% Difference NA 

6 –Pre 2.7 42.4 10.3 437.5 14 –Pre 3.6 

6 –Post 1.9 18.4 3.5 157.5 14 –Post No Data 

Difference NA -57% -66% -64% Difference NA 

7 –Pre 3.3 39.2 4.0 1350.0 15 –Pre 3.9 

7 –Post 2.5 18.3 3.0 102.0 15 –Post 5.5 

Difference NA -53% -25% -92% Difference NA 

8 –Pre 3.0 52.1 4.5 1278.8 16 –Pre 7.6 

8 –Post 1.2 18.4 4.0 145.0 16 –Post 5.1 

Difference NA -65% -11% -89% Difference NA 
Appendix D 

Individual Home PMR2.5R and OC/EC/TC Results (μg/mP3P) - Homes wiDatasets

Home 

Average 

PM2.5

(μg/m3) 

Minimum 

PM2.5

(μg/m3) 

Maximum 

PM2.5 (μg/m3) 

OC 

(μg/m3) 

E

(μg

1 –Pre 87.0 8.3 1205.3 26.7 11 –Post 16.5 7.0 60.0 12.4 0 Difference -81% -16% -95% -53% -52 –Pre 20.8 6.5 108.5 9.8 02 –Post 58.2 2.5 535.0 31.4 0 Difference +180% -62% +393% +219% +93 –Pre 19.0 4.0 254.0 11.7 03 –Post 14.3 3.5 218.0 14.9 1 Difference -25% -13% -14% +27% +54 –Pre 10.2 2.0 36.0 16.9 04 –Post 15.0 6.0 123.0 13.4 0 Difference +48% +200% +242% -21% +15 –Pre 8.2 1.5 68.5 10.1 05 –Post 49.0 2.0 719.0 23.1 0 Difference +494% +33% +950% +129% +427 –Pre 52.4 5.0 2037.0 17.0 17 –Post 18.3 3.0 102.0 12.3 1 Difference -65% -40% -95% -28% -28 –Pre 47.7 5.0 440.0 34.1 08 –Post 18.4 4.0 145.0 10.5 0 Difference -61% -20% -67% -69% -510 –Pre 92.9 22.5 1841.5 28.7 010 –Post 32.5 4.0 233.5 8.6 0 Difference -65% -82% -87% -70% +7
11 –Pre 16.0 4.0 200.0 8.8 0

11 –Post 12.1 4.0 95.0 10.4 0 Difference -25% No Change -53% +18% +115 –Pre 21.6 3.0 186.0 13.9 015 –Post 19.0 2.0 74.0 16.9 0 Difference -12% -33% -60% +22% +1116 –Pre 201.0 17.0 910.0 60.2 016 –Post 197.4 48.0 838.0 44.7 1Difference -2% +182% -8% -26% +7

Note that the following homes did not have matched pairs: 6, 9, 12, 13, Individual Home Chemical Markers of Woodsmoke Results (ng/m3

Complete Datasets

Home Levoglucosan Dehydroabietic acid Abietic acid Vanillin Acetova

1 –Pre 4707.1 0.3 162.8 0.5 01 –Post 294.7 0.3 0.3 0.5 0 Difference -94% No Change -100% 

No 

Change No Ch

2 –Pre 963.5 334.6 84.9 0.5 02 –Post 344.0 0.3 18.0 14.9 0 Difference -64% -100% -79% +3212% No Ch3 –Pre 585.6 113.0 66.9 5.3 213 –Post 136.2 0.3 41.5 0.5 0 Difference -77% -100% -38% -92% -994 –Pre 876.7 162.0 4.1 2.8 224 –Post 3.9 0.3 0.3 0.5 0 Difference -100% -100% -94% -84% -995 –Pre 647.8 158.2 5.9 6.9 135 –Post 176.2 0.3 41.6 0.5 0 Difference -73% -100% +607% -94% -987 –Pre 1609.3 532.0 395.5 0.5 0
7 –Post 310.9 16.8 55.3 0.5 0

 Difference -81% -97% -86% 

No 

Change No Ch

8 –Pre 3.9 88.6 4.7 0.5 08 –Post 3.9 16.8 0.3 0.5 0 Difference No Change -81% -95% 

No 

Change No Ch

10 –Pre 382.0 100.2 112.7 0.5 010 –Post 807.5 33.5 46.8 0.5 0 Difference 111% -67% -58% 

No 

Change No Ch

11 –Pre 379.5 133.6 11.3 0.5 011 –Post 125.7 98.1 123.8 0.5 0 Difference -67% -27% +994% 

No 

Change No Ch

15 –Pre 3.9 63.5 0.3 0.5 015 –Post 238.1 92.4 86.9 0.5 0 Difference +6084% +45% +34670% 

No 

Change No Ch

16 –Pre 645.1 105.0 7.9 0.5 016 –Post 971.9 0.3 0.3 0.5 0Difference +51% -100% -97% 

No 

Change No Ch

Note that the following homes did not have matched pairs: 6, 9, 12, 13,