(2004/470/EC:COMMISSION DECISION of 29 April 2004 concerning guidance on a provisional reference method for the sampling and measurement of PM 2.5 (notified under document number C(2004) 1713) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2004-04-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: anhydride, atmospheric pollutant, dangerous substance, lead, measuring equipment, metrology, oxide, pollution control

30.4.2004 

EN 

Official Journal of the European Union 

L 160/53 

___ 

COMMISSION DECISION 

of 29 April 2004 

concerning guidance on a provisional reference method for the sampling and 
measurement of PM2.5 

(notified under document number C(2004) 1713) 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

(2004/470/EC) 

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, 

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, 

Having regard to Council Directive 1999/30/EC of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values for 
sulphur  dioxide,  nitrogen  dioxide  and  oxides  of  nitrogen,  particulate  matter  and  lead  in 
ambient air1, and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 7(5) and Section V of Annex 
IX thereof, 

After consulting the Committee instituted by Article 12 (2) of Council Directive 96/62/EC2, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

1 

2 

3 

Pending the establishment by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) of a 
reference method for the sampling and measurement of PM2.5 guidance concerning a 
provisional reference method for such sampling and measurement should e provided;  

Commission  Decision  2003/37/EC  of  16  January  2003  gives  guidance  on  a  such 
provisional reference method3; 

Decision 2003/37/EC should be amended due to an omission in its Annex concerning 
the  sampling  devices  used  in  field  validation  campaigns;  at  the  same  time  other 
information  in  that  Annex  with  regard  to  measurement  methods  and  the  state  of 

OJ L 163, 29.6.1999, p. 41. Directive as amended by Commission Decision 2001/744/EC (OJ L 278, 
23.10.2001, p. 35) 
OJ L 296, 21.11.1996, p. 55. Directive as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 of the European 
Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 284, 31.10.2003, p. 1) 
OJ L 12, 17.1.2003, p. 31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
validation  work  should  be  updated  for  clarification  and  to  take  account  of  technical 
progress; 

(4) 

Decision 2003/37/EC should be replaced in the interests of clarity, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:  

Guidance  concerning  a  provisional  reference  method  for  the  sampling  and  measurement  of 
PM2.5 is set out in the Annex. 

Article 1 

Decision 2003/37/EC is hereby repealed. 

Article 2 

Article 3 

This Decision is addressed to the Member States. 

Done at Brussels, 29 April 2004. 

For the Commission 
Margot WALLSTRÖM 
Member of the Commission 

 
 
 
ANNEX 

GUIDANCE ON PM2.5 MEASUREMENT UNDER DIRECTIVE 1999/30/EC 

The  purpose  of  this  document  is  to  give  recommendations  to  air  quality  managers  and 
network  operators  on  the  selection  of  PM2.5  measurement  devices  required  by  Directive 
1999/30/EC  for  fine  particles.  These  recommendations  do  not  apply  to  other  possible 
applications  with  different  measurement  objectives,  as  for  example  in  the  case  of  research 
activities, or in the case of indicative measurements. 

Background and CEN standardisation work 

Directive  1999/30/EC  states  in  Article  5  that  “Member  States  shall  ensure  that  measuring 
stations  to  supply  data  on  concentration  of  PM2.5  are  installed  and  operated.  Each  Member 
State shall choose the number and the siting of the stations at which PM2.5 is to be measured 
as  representative  of  concentrations  of  PM2.5  within  that  Member  State.  Where  possible 
sampling  points  for  PM2.5  shall  be  co-located  with  sampling  points  for  PM10.”  Article  7 
further mentions that “The provisional reference method for the sampling and measurement of 
PM2.5  shall  be  laid  down  in  Section  V  of  Annex  IX.”  Annex  IX  finally  asks  for  the 
preparation of a guideline to be developed by the European Commission in consultation with 
the committee referred to in Article 12 of Directive 96/62/EC. 

DG  Environment  has  given  a  mandate  to  CEN  to  develop  a  standard  European  reference 
method for the measurement of PM2.5. This method is based on the gravimetric determination 
of the PM2.5 fraction of particles in air, sampled at ambient conditions. CEN TC 264/WG 15 
started its work in 2000. Field validation campaigns have been carried out in eight European 
countries,  namely  Spain,  Germany,  The  Netherlands,  Austria,  Italy,  Sweden,  the  United 
Kingdom  and  Greece  and  have  been  completed  in  summer  2003.  The  final  CEN  standard 
method will therefore not be available before 2004. 

CEN  WG  15  is  currently  testing  various  candidate  devices  based  on  the  gravimetric 
determination  method  and  equipped  with  different  inlet  types  from  European  manufacturers 
as well as the US Federal Reference sampler: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

MINI-WRAC,  single  filter  sampler,  from  Fraunhofer  Institute  for  Toxicology  and 
Aerosol Research (FhG-ITA), Germany 

US-Federal 

sampler, 

single 

RAAS 
Partisol FRM Model 2000, from Rupprecht and Patashnick, USA 

Thermo 

from 

Reference 
2.5-1, 

filter 
Andersen, 

sampler: 
USA 

Partisol plus Model 2025-SCC, sequential sampler, from Rupprecht and Patashnick, 
USA 

LVS-3D, single filter sampler, from Derenda, Germany 

SEQ 47/50, sequential sampler, from Leckel Company, Germany 

HVS-DHA 80, sequential sampler, from Digitel, Switzerland 

In addition, CEN is  also  testing  a  number of  automated  measurement  devices,  based  on  the 
beta  ray  attenuation  method  and  the  tapered  element  oscillating  microbalance  (TEOM),  to 
develop test procedures for equivalency with the reference gravimetric method: 

 
 
– 

– 

– 

– 

ADAM, beta ray attenuation, sequential, from OPSIS, Sweden 

FH 62 I-R, beta ray attenuation, filter tape, from ESM Andersen Company, Germany  

BAM 1020, beta ray attenuation, filter tape, from Met One, USA 

TEOM SES, sharp cut cyclone, from Rupprecht and Patashnick, USA 

Problems in mass concentration measurements of PM2.5 

Several problems, partially known from previous experiences with PM10 measurements, have 
to  be  taken  into  consideration  when  determining  PM2.5  mass  concentrations.  Preliminary 
inter-comparison  studies  carried  out  in  a  number  of  EU  countries  have  shown  significant 
differences between the results of manual PM2.5 samplers, ranging up to ±30%. Reasons for 
the observed differences between the samplers are complex and can be divided into: 

– 

– 

– 

artefacts on the filter, e.g. evaporative losses during sampling or conditioning of the 
filter; 

artefacts in the size fractionating inlet, e.g. poor design, changes of the cut-off due to 
poor volume flow control and particle deposition on the impaction plate; 

artefacts due to the sampling system set-up; e.g. particle deposition in the sampling 
tube (especially for long or curved tubes). 

It has to be noted that the chemical composition of PM2.5 is significantly different from that of 
PM10  especially  the  semi-volatile  particulate  matter  (e.g.  ammonium  nitrate,  organic 
compounds) is enriched in the fine PM2.5 size fraction. The particulate matter in the size range 
between PM10 and PM2.5 mainly consists of inert components such as silica, metal oxides, etc. 
Hence the problems with losses of semi-volatile matter already observed when sampling PM10 
may be even more pronounced for PM2.5 measurements. 

Losses will essentially depend on the composition of the aerosols and the presence of volatile 
particulate matter, as well as on the difference between ambient and sampling temperatures. 
The  losses  may  therefore  present  important  seasonal  and  geographical  variations.  As  an 
example  of  this,  losses  close  to  0  %  were  reported  in  Scandinavia  during  a  spring  episode 
(aerosols  from  road  sanding),  whereas  losses  up  to  70  %  were  observed  in  Central  Europe 
during a winter episode (aerosols with high ammonium nitrate content). 

With this background it can be anticipated that any heating of the sampling system will show 
significantly lower PM2.5 mass concentrations than a system kept under ambient conditions.  

Recommendations for monitoring PM2.5 

In  the  absence  of  conclusions  from  the  CEN  standardisation  activities,  the  following 
recommendations for PM2.5 can be given: 

Regarding the measurement method: 

The mandate given by the Commission to CEN specified that the measurement method to be 
standardised  is  based  on  the  gravimetric  determination  of  the  PM2.5  mass  fraction  of 
particulate matter collected on a filter under ambient conditions. Other methods, such as the 
beta  ray  attenuation  method  and  the  tapered  element  oscillating  microbalance  (TEOM),  are 
currently tested for equivalence with the gravimetric method by CEN WG15. 

Regarding the PM2.5 specific inlet: 

Currently there are two main inlet designs available and in use  for monitoring and research 
purposes: the impactor type inlet and the sharpcut-cyclone type. Various inlets of both types 
are currently under testing e.g. within the framework of CEN WG 15. The size fractionation 
efficiency of the inlet needs to ensure that 50% of the particles with an aerodynamic diameter 
of 2.5 µm are collected on the filter. 

Regarding the instruments: 

Theory  and  former  experience  gained  in  the  PM10  validation  work  suggests  that  the  use  of 
devices  whereby  the  sampling  probe  and/or  filter  is  heated  during  collection  should  be 
avoided for the measurement of PM2.5. In order to limit as far as possible the losses of volatile 
particles,  instruments  sampling  as  close  as  possible  to  ambient  temperature  should  be 
preferred for PM2.5. 

Considering the incomplete manner and the lack of coherence of the results obtained thus far 
from the various studies, it is impossible for the present to select candidate instruments for the 
monitoring  of  PM2.5.  When  it  comes  to  the  selection  of  a  particular  measurement  device,  a 
careful  approach  is  recommended.  Preference  should  be  given  to  an  approach  that  does  not 
entail  important  resource  investment  and  that  allows  for  the  adaptation  of  the  measurement 
requirements  to  future  developments  (e.g.  the  forthcoming  European  standard  method  on 
PM2.5  measurements,  technical  developments  by  instrument  manufacturers,  the  upcoming 
regulation on heavy metals). 

When  reporting  PM2.5  data,  it  is  essential  to  document  fully  the  measurement  methodology 
that was used to generate the data