2013 annual monitoring network plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality |
Previous | 1 of 8 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
This page
All
|
G1
2013 ANNUAL MONITORING NETWORK PLAN FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
VOLUME 2
SITE DESCRIPTIONS BY METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA
G. THE WILMINGTON MONITORING REGION
July 1, 2013
North Carolina Division of Air Quality
A Division of the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources
Mail Service Center 1641
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1641G2
Table of Contents
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ G2
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................. G3
G. The Wilmington Monitoring Region ...................................................................................................... G4
(1) The Wilmington MSA ........................................................................................................................ G4
(2) The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA .................................................................... G12
(3) The Jacksonville MSA ...................................................................................................................... G12
(4) The Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region ....................................................... G13
Appendix G.1 Annual Network Site Review Forms for 2011 .................................................................. G16
Appendix G-2. Scale of Representativeness............................................................................................ G33
List of Figures
Figure G1. The Wilmington Monitoring Region ........................................................................................ G4
Figure G2. Castle Hayne Ozone and Fine Particle Monitoring Site (37-129-0002) ................................... G4
Figure G3 Looking North from the Castle Hayne Site ............................................................................... G6
Figure G4. Looking Northwest from the Castle Hayne Site ...................................................................... G6
Figure G5. Looking West from the Castle Hayne Site ............................................................................... G6
Figure G6. Looking Southwest from the Castle Hayne Site ...................................................................... G6
Figure G7. Looking Northeast from the Castle Hayne Site ....................................................................... G6
Figure G8. Looking East from the Castle Hayne Site ................................................................................. G6
Figure G9. Looking Southeast from the Castle Hayne Site ....................................................................... G6
Figure G10. Looking South from the Castle Hayne Site ............................................................................ G6
Figure G11. New Hanover Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Site (37-129-0006) ............................................... G7
Figure G12. Looking North from the New Hanover Site ........................................................................... G7
Figure G13. Looking Northeast from the New Hanover Site .................................................................... G7
Figure G14. Letter from the EPA approving a waiver for a second ozone monitor for the Wilmington MSA .................................................................................................................................................................. G8
Figure G15. Looking Northwest from the New Hanover Site ................................................................... G9
Figure G16. Looking West from the New Hanover Site ............................................................................ G9
Figure G17. Looking Southwest from the New Hanover Site ................................................................... G9
Figure G18. Looking East from the New Hanover Site .............................................................................. G9
Figure G19. Looking Southeast from the New Hanover Site .................................................................... G9 G3
Figure G20. Looking South from the New Hanover Site ........................................................................... G9
Figure G21. The Battle Ship Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Site ............................................................... G10
Figure G22. Looking North from the Battleship Site ............................................................................... G10
Figure G23. Looking Northwest from the Battleship Site ....................................................................... G10
Figure G24. Looking Northeast from the Battleship Site ........................................................................ G10
Figure G25. Looking East from the Battleship Site .................................................................................. G10
Figure G26. Looking West from the Battleship Site ................................................................................ G11
Figure G27. Looking Southwest from the Battleship Site ....................................................................... G11
Figure G28. Looking Southeast from the Battleship Site ........................................................................ G11
Figure G29. Looking South from the Battleship Site ............................................................................... G11
Figure G30. Monitoring Site Location ..................................................................................................... G13
Figure G31. Kenansville Particle Monitoring Site .................................................................................... G13
Figure G32. Looking North from the Kenansville Site ............................................................................. G14
Figure G33. Looking Northwest from the Kenansville Site ..................................................................... G14
Figure G34. Looking West from the Kenansville Site .............................................................................. G14
Figure G35. Looking Southwest from the Kenansville Site ..................................................................... G14
Figure G36. Looking Northeast from the Kenansville Site ...................................................................... G14
Figure G37. Looking East from the Kenansville Site ................................................................................ G14
Figure G38. Looking Southeast from the Kenansville Site ...................................................................... G14
Figure G39. Looking South from the Kenansville Site ............................................................................. G14
List of Tables
Table G1. Site Table for Castle Hayne ....................................................................................................... G5
Table G2. Site Type Appropriate Siting Scales ........................................................................................ G33 G4
G. The Wilmington Monitoring Region
The Wilmington Monitoring Region, shown in Figure G1, consists of four sections: (1) the Wilmington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (New Hanover, and Pender Counties), (2) the North Carolina portion of the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA (Brunswick County) (3) the Jacksonville MSA (Onslow County), and (4) the Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region (Carteret, Columbus, and Duplin Counties).
Figure G1. The Wilmington Monitoring Region
The red dots show the approximate locations of most of the monitoring sites in this region.
(1) The Wilmington MSA
As of February 2013, the Wilmington MSA consists of two counties: New Hanover and Pender. The major metropolitan area is the City of Wilmington. The North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NC-DAQ) currently operates two criteria pollutant monitoring sites and one urban air toxics monitoring site in the Wilmington MSA. The criteria pollutant monitoring sites are the New Hanover and Castle Hayne sites. The urban air toxics monitoring site is the Battleship site.
Figure G2. Castle Hayne Ozone and Fine Particle Monitoring Site (37-129-0002)
At the Castle Hayne (37-129-0002) site the NC-DAQ operates an ozone monitor, a one-in-three day fine particle monitor, and a continuous fine particle monitor. Monitoring information for the site is summarized in Table G1. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G2 through Figure G10. The NC-DAQ completed one Beta Attenuation Monitor (BAM) study in December 2011. At that time the BAM was shut down and the 1-in-3 day fine particle Federal Reference Method (FRM) monitor became a SLAMS. In October 2012, the NC-DAQ installed another special purpose non-regulatory BAM and began a second BAM study at the site on October 23, 2012.G5
Table G1. Site Table for Castle Hayne
Site Name:
Castle Hayne
AQS Site Identification Number:
37-129-0002
Location:
6028 Holly Shelter Road, Castle Hayne, North Carolina
MSA:
Wilmington, NC
MSA #:
9200
Latitude
34.364167
Longitude
-77.838611
Datum:
WGS84
Elevation
12 meters
Parameter Name
Method
Method Reference ID
Sample Duration
Sampling Schedule
Ozone
Instrumental With Ultra Violet Photometry (047)
EQOA-0880-047
1-Hour
April 1 to October 31
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
R & P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential w/WINS – Gravimetric Analysis (118)
RFPS-0498-118
24-Hour
Every Third Day, Year Round
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor w/VSCC (170)
EQPM-0308-170
1-Hour
Year Round
Date Monitor Established:
Ozone
January 1, 1979
Date Monitor Established:
PM 2.5 Local Conditions (Federal Reference Method)
July 1, 2002
Date Monitor Established:
PM 2.5 Local Conditions (Beta Attenuation Monitor)
October 23, 2012
Nearest Road:
Holly Shelter Road
Traffic Count:
2400
Year of Count:
2009
Parameter Name
Distance to Road
Direction to Road
Monitor Type
Statement of Purpose
Ozone
60
North
SLAMS
Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS.
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
60
North
SLAMS
AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS.
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
60
North
Special Purpose Non-Regulatory
Real-time AQI reporting.
Parameter Name
Monitoring Objective
Scale
Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS
Proposal to Move or Change
Ozone
Population Exposure
Urban
Yes
None
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
Population Exposure
Neighborhood
Yes
None
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
Population Exposure
Neighborhood
No
None
Parameter Name
Meets Part 58 Appendix A Requirements
Meets Part 58 Appendix C Requirements
Meets Part 58 Appendix D Requirements
Meets Part 58 Appendix E Requirements
Ozone
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
Yes
Yes
No requirements
Yes
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
Yes
Yes
No requirements
Yes
Parameter Name
Probe Height (m)
Distance to Support
Distance to Trees
Obstacles
Ozone
3.8
1 meter
>20 meters
None
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
2.3
> 2 meters
>20 meters
None
PM 2.5 Local Conditions
2.3
> 2 meters
>20 meters
None G6
Figure G3 Looking North from the Castle Hayne Site
Figure G4. Looking Northwest from the Castle Hayne Site
Figure G5. Looking West from the Castle Hayne Site
Figure G6. Looking Southwest from the Castle Hayne Site
Figure G7. Looking Northeast from the Castle Hayne Site
Figure G8. Looking East from the Castle Hayne Site
Figure G9. Looking Southeast from the Castle Hayne Site
Figure G10. Looking South from the Castle Hayne SiteG7
The NC-DAQ continues to follow the progress of the Titan cement facility closely. If Titan is constructed, the NC-DAQ will reassess the site after Titan begins operation to ensure the site continues to meet siting criteria for the purposes of the monitors located at the site.
When the Office of Management and Budget redefined the Wilmington MSA in February 2013, the estimated population of the Wilmington MSA dropped below 350,000 to 263, 429. Thus, only one ozone monitor is required for the MSA if the ozone design value is above 85 % of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The design value for 2010-2012 for Wilmington is at 83 % of the standard so no monitors are needed in the MSA at this time. However, the NC-DAQ requested and received a waiver for a second ozone monitor for the MSA when its population was above 350,000 from the EPA on November 9, 2011. The waiver is valid until the next 5-year assessment is due in 2015. The waiver is shown in Figure G14.
At the New Hanover (37-129-0006) site the NC-DAQ operates a sulfur dioxide monitor. At the beginning of 2012 the shelter was moved approximately 200 feet across the field to maintain access to the site after the host facility closed. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G11 through Figure G20.
Figure G11. New Hanover Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Site (37-129-0006)
Figure G12. Looking North from the New Hanover Site
Figure G13. Looking Northeast from the New Hanover Site G8
Figure G14. Letter from the EPA approving a waiver for a second ozone monitor for the Wilmington MSA G9
Figure G15. Looking Northwest from the New Hanover Site
Figure G16. Looking West from the New Hanover Site
Figure G17. Looking Southwest from the New Hanover Site
Figure G18. Looking East from the New Hanover Site
Figure G19. Looking Southeast from the New Hanover Site
Figure G20. Looking South from the New Hanover Site
The New Hanover site was established in 1994 to replace the Acme-Delco site in Columbus County, which was shut down in 1995. The Acme-Delco site was located about 15 miles west of the New Hanover site. The site was moved because industrial emissions had decreased in Columbus County and the measured sulfur dioxide concentrations had dropped over the previous 10 years. During the time when both monitors operated, the New Hanover site consistently measured higher concentrations of G10
sulfur dioxide. On January 1, 2013, the New Hanover site will become the required Population Weighted Emission Inventory (PWEI) site for the Wilmington MSA.
Figure G21. The Battle Ship Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Site
At the Battle Ship (37-129-0010) site the NC-DAQ operates a year round air toxics volatile organic compound sampler. Samples are collected in stainless steel canisters and sent to the Toxics Protection Branch laboratory where they are analyzed for 68 compounds using the Compendium Method for Toxic Organics 15. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G21 through Figure G29.
Figure G22. Looking North from the Battleship Site
Figure G23. Looking Northwest from the Battleship Site
Figure G24. Looking Northeast from the Battleship Site
Figure G25. Looking East from the Battleship Site G11
Figure G26. Looking West from the Battleship Site
Figure G27. Looking Southwest from the Battleship Site
Figure G28. Looking Southeast from the Battleship Site
Figure G29. Looking South from the Battleship Site
In 2008 EPA expanded the lead monitoring network to support the lower lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) of 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter promulgated in 2008. The 2010 changes to the lead monitoring requirements focuses monitoring efforts on fence line monitoring located at facilities that emit 0.5 tons or more of lead per year and at National Core (NCore) monitoring sites. These changes to the lead monitoring network requirements will not require lead monitoring in the Wilmington MSA. The MSA does not have an NCore monitoring site and it does not have any permitted facilities located within its bounds that emit more than 0.5 tons per year of lead.1
Any changes to ozone monitoring requirements will not affect the Wilmington MSA because it already has an ozone monitor for urban population exposure monitoring and does not have any Class I Areas.
The Wilmington MSA is not required by the 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring rule to have nitrogen dioxide monitors. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have any roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near roadway monitoring. The Wilmington MSA was not required by the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring rule to add additional sulfur dioxide monitors. The existing sulfur dioxide monitor at the New Hanover site meets the PWEI monitoring requirements for the MSA. This MSA will also not be required to do carbon monoxide monitoring as a result of the
1 Data obtained from the NC-DAQ emission inventory database. G12
changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements because the population is less than one million.
(2) The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA
The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA consists of Brunswick County in North Carolina and Horry County in South Carolina. The principal cities are Myrtle Beach, Conway, and North Myrtle Beach. The NC-DAQ and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC-DHEC) currently do not operate any monitoring sites in this MSA. The MSA has an estimated population as of July 2012 of 394,542 people, which requires it to have an ozone monitor. The NC-DAQ and SC-DHEC are currently working out who will operate the required ozone monitor and where it will be located. More information about ozone monitoring in this MSA will be included in the 2014 network monitoring plan.
Changes to the lead monitoring network requirements in 2010 did not affect this MSA. Changes to the ozone monitoring requirements should not affect the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA
This MSA is also not impacted by the 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have any roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near roadway monitoring. The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA is also not impacted by the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements because there are no large sources of sulfur dioxide in the MSA and the population is not large enough to require a PWEI monitor. This MSA will also not be impacted by the changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements because the population is less than one million.
(3) The Jacksonville MSA
The Jacksonville MSA consists of Onslow County. The principal city is Jacksonville. The NC-DAQ currently does not operate any monitoring sites in the Jacksonville MSA. The Jacksonville particle-monitoring site was shut down on December 31, 2007, because the measured concentrations were less than 80 % of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Changes to the lead monitoring network requirements in 2010 did not affect the Jacksonville MSA. Although the MSA does not have an NCore monitoring site, it had a permitted facility located within its bounds that emitted 0.5 tons or more per year of lead in 2009. However, lead emissions at Camp LeJeune in 2010 were below the 0.5 ton threshold. The EPA concurred that actual emissions from Camp LeJeune were less than 0.5 tons and did not require monitoring at the fence line of the facility. The lead emissions in 2011 are still less than 0.5 tons.
Changes to the ozone monitoring requirements could affect the Jacksonville MSA if the EPA decides to require monitoring in urban areas without design values. Its population is above the threshold for requiring population exposure monitoring in urban areas but monitoring is not required because it does not have an ozone design value. Currently, the NC-DAQ does not monitor for ozone in Jacksonville because the ozone levels measured by the Castle Hayne monitor in New Hanover County indicate that the ozone concentrations on the coast are currently around 85 % of the NAAQS. The Jacksonville MSA G13
would not be affected by rural ozone monitoring requirements because there are no Class I areas in the MSA.
The Jacksonville MSA is not impacted by the 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have any roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near roadway monitoring. The Jacksonville MSA is also not impacted by the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements because there are no large sources of sulfur dioxide in the MSA and the population is not large enough to require a PWEI monitor. This MSA is also not be impacted by the changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements because the population is under one million people.
(4) The Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region
The Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region consists of three counties (Carteret, Columbus, and Duplin). This area does not have any MSAs. The NC-DAQ currently operates one monitoring site in this area at Kenansville shown in Figure G30.
Figure G30. Monitoring Site Location
At the Kenansville general-background monitoring site in Duplin County the NC-DAQ operates a one-in-three day fine particle FRM monitor, a continuous special purpose non-regulatory fine particle beta attenuation monitor (BAM), and a rotating one-in-six day high volume PM10 monitor that operates every third year. At the end of 2013, the NC-DAQ may shut down the FRM monitor and replace it with the BAM, if the BAM and FRM values agree well. Currently, the values do not agree well enough to replace the FRM with the BAM. If the BAM and FRM continue to not agree, the NC-DAQ will shut down the BAM at the end of 2013. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G31 through Figure G39.
Figure G31. Kenansville Particle Monitoring Site
B is the Kenansville particle site. The neighborhood scale (0.5 to 4 Km) is approximately represented by the black square. G14
Figure G32. Looking North from the Kenansville Site
Figure G33. Looking Northwest from the Kenansville Site
Figure G34. Looking West from the Kenansville Site
Figure G35. Looking Southwest from the Kenansville Site
Figure G36. Looking Northeast from the Kenansville Site
Figure G37. Looking East from the Kenansville Site
Figure G38. Looking Southeast from the Kenansville Site
Figure G39. Looking South from the Kenansville SiteG15
The NC-DAQ requires PM10 data in the coastal area for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) modeling for industrial expansion. Because the NC-DAQ shut down the PM10 monitoring site in Jacksonville on December 31, 2007, the NC-DAQ began manual one-in-six day PM10 monitoring at the Castle Hayne site in February 2008 to provide the necessary PM10 data for PSD modeling for the coastal area. However, a wildfire next to the site forced the NC-DAQ to shut down the monitor on March 31, 2008. After the wildfire was extinguished, the NC-DAQ decided not to resume PM10 monitoring at Castle Hayne because of the pending construction of the Titan Cement Facility across the street from the Castle Hayne site. Modeling results indicate that Titan could contribute over 10 % of the NAAQS to the PM10 concentrations measured at Castle Hayne, making Castle Hayne an unsuitable site for obtaining data to use for PSD modeling. As a result the PM10 monitor was located at Kenansville in second quarter 2009. At the end of 2010, the NC-DAQ began operating the monitor on a one-in-three year schedule and made the site one of six rotating background PM10 sites for the state.
The 2010 lead monitoring requirements did not result in lead monitoring in this area because there are no NCore monitoring stations or permitted facilities that emit 0.5 tons or more of lead per year.2 Any new ozone monitoring requirements will also not affect this area. There is no MSA here so population exposure monitoring requirements for urban areas do not apply and rural ozone monitoring requirements will not apply because there are no Class I areas. The 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements also will not add monitors to this area. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near road monitoring. This area will also not need to add monitors to meet the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements because there are no large sources of sulfur dioxide in this area and the population is too small to require a PWEI monitor. The changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements will not impact this area because the population is under one million.
2 ibid. G16
Appendix G.1 Annual Network Site Review Forms for 2012
Castle Hayne
New Hanover in Wilmington
Battle Ship in Wilmington
Kenansville
G17
G18
G19
G20
G21
G22
G23
G24
G25
G26
G27
G28
G29
G30
G31
G32
G33
Appendix G-2. Scale of Representativeness
Each station in the monitoring network must be described in terms of the physical dimensions of the air parcel nearest the monitoring station throughout which actual pollutant concentrations are reasonably similar. Area dimensions or scales of representativeness used in the network description are:
a) Micro-scale - defines the concentration in air volumes associated with area dimensions ranging from several meters up to about 100 meters.
b) Middle scale - defines the concentration typical of areas up to several city blocks in size with dimensions ranging from about 100 meters to 0.5 kilometers.
c) Neighborhood scale – defines concentrations within an extended area of a city that has relatively uniform land use with dimensions ranging from about 0.5 to 4.0 kilometers.
d) Urban scale - defines an overall citywide condition with dimensions on the order of 4 to 50 kilometers.
e) Regional Scale - defines air quality levels over areas having dimensions of 50 to hundreds of kilometers.
Closely associated with the area around the monitoring station where pollutant concentrations are reasonably similar are the basic monitoring exposures of the station.
There are six basic exposures:
a) Sites located to determine the highest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the network.
b) Sites located to determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density.
c) Sites located to determine the impact on ambient pollution levels of significant sources or source categories.
d) Sites located to determine general background concentration levels.
e) Sites located to determine the extent of regional pollutant transport among populated areas.
f) Sites located to measure air pollution impacts on visibility, vegetation damage, or other welfare-based impacts and in support of secondary standards.
The design intent in siting stations is to correctly match the area dimensions represented by the sample of monitored air with the area dimensions most appropriate for the monitoring objective of the station. The following relationship of the six basic objectives and the scales of representativeness are appropriate when siting monitoring stations:
Table G2. Site Type Appropriate Siting Scales
1. Highest concentration
Micro, middle, neighborhood (sometimes urban or regional for secondarily formed pollutants)
2. Population oriented
Neighborhood, urban
3. Source impact
Micro, middle, neighborhood
4. General/background & regional transport
Urban, regional
5. Welfare-related impacts
Urban, regional
Object Description
Description
| Title | 2013 annual monitoring network plan for the North Carolina Division of Air Quality |
| Date | 2013-07-01 |
| Description | Volume 2 - G. THE WILMINGTON MONITORING REGION |
| Digital Characteristics-A | 3.27 MB; 33 p. |
| Digital Format |
application/pdf |
| Related Items | http://worldcat.org/oclc/861792387/viewonline |
| Pres File Name-M | pubs_annualmonitoringnetworkwilmingtonv22013.pdf |
| Full Text | G1 2013 ANNUAL MONITORING NETWORK PLAN FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY VOLUME 2 SITE DESCRIPTIONS BY METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA G. THE WILMINGTON MONITORING REGION July 1, 2013 North Carolina Division of Air Quality A Division of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Mail Service Center 1641 Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1641G2 Table of Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ G2 List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................. G3 G. The Wilmington Monitoring Region ...................................................................................................... G4 (1) The Wilmington MSA ........................................................................................................................ G4 (2) The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA .................................................................... G12 (3) The Jacksonville MSA ...................................................................................................................... G12 (4) The Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region ....................................................... G13 Appendix G.1 Annual Network Site Review Forms for 2011 .................................................................. G16 Appendix G-2. Scale of Representativeness............................................................................................ G33 List of Figures Figure G1. The Wilmington Monitoring Region ........................................................................................ G4 Figure G2. Castle Hayne Ozone and Fine Particle Monitoring Site (37-129-0002) ................................... G4 Figure G3 Looking North from the Castle Hayne Site ............................................................................... G6 Figure G4. Looking Northwest from the Castle Hayne Site ...................................................................... G6 Figure G5. Looking West from the Castle Hayne Site ............................................................................... G6 Figure G6. Looking Southwest from the Castle Hayne Site ...................................................................... G6 Figure G7. Looking Northeast from the Castle Hayne Site ....................................................................... G6 Figure G8. Looking East from the Castle Hayne Site ................................................................................. G6 Figure G9. Looking Southeast from the Castle Hayne Site ....................................................................... G6 Figure G10. Looking South from the Castle Hayne Site ............................................................................ G6 Figure G11. New Hanover Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Site (37-129-0006) ............................................... G7 Figure G12. Looking North from the New Hanover Site ........................................................................... G7 Figure G13. Looking Northeast from the New Hanover Site .................................................................... G7 Figure G14. Letter from the EPA approving a waiver for a second ozone monitor for the Wilmington MSA .................................................................................................................................................................. G8 Figure G15. Looking Northwest from the New Hanover Site ................................................................... G9 Figure G16. Looking West from the New Hanover Site ............................................................................ G9 Figure G17. Looking Southwest from the New Hanover Site ................................................................... G9 Figure G18. Looking East from the New Hanover Site .............................................................................. G9 Figure G19. Looking Southeast from the New Hanover Site .................................................................... G9 G3 Figure G20. Looking South from the New Hanover Site ........................................................................... G9 Figure G21. The Battle Ship Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Site ............................................................... G10 Figure G22. Looking North from the Battleship Site ............................................................................... G10 Figure G23. Looking Northwest from the Battleship Site ....................................................................... G10 Figure G24. Looking Northeast from the Battleship Site ........................................................................ G10 Figure G25. Looking East from the Battleship Site .................................................................................. G10 Figure G26. Looking West from the Battleship Site ................................................................................ G11 Figure G27. Looking Southwest from the Battleship Site ....................................................................... G11 Figure G28. Looking Southeast from the Battleship Site ........................................................................ G11 Figure G29. Looking South from the Battleship Site ............................................................................... G11 Figure G30. Monitoring Site Location ..................................................................................................... G13 Figure G31. Kenansville Particle Monitoring Site .................................................................................... G13 Figure G32. Looking North from the Kenansville Site ............................................................................. G14 Figure G33. Looking Northwest from the Kenansville Site ..................................................................... G14 Figure G34. Looking West from the Kenansville Site .............................................................................. G14 Figure G35. Looking Southwest from the Kenansville Site ..................................................................... G14 Figure G36. Looking Northeast from the Kenansville Site ...................................................................... G14 Figure G37. Looking East from the Kenansville Site ................................................................................ G14 Figure G38. Looking Southeast from the Kenansville Site ...................................................................... G14 Figure G39. Looking South from the Kenansville Site ............................................................................. G14 List of Tables Table G1. Site Table for Castle Hayne ....................................................................................................... G5 Table G2. Site Type Appropriate Siting Scales ........................................................................................ G33 G4 G. The Wilmington Monitoring Region The Wilmington Monitoring Region, shown in Figure G1, consists of four sections: (1) the Wilmington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (New Hanover, and Pender Counties), (2) the North Carolina portion of the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA (Brunswick County) (3) the Jacksonville MSA (Onslow County), and (4) the Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region (Carteret, Columbus, and Duplin Counties). Figure G1. The Wilmington Monitoring Region The red dots show the approximate locations of most of the monitoring sites in this region. (1) The Wilmington MSA As of February 2013, the Wilmington MSA consists of two counties: New Hanover and Pender. The major metropolitan area is the City of Wilmington. The North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NC-DAQ) currently operates two criteria pollutant monitoring sites and one urban air toxics monitoring site in the Wilmington MSA. The criteria pollutant monitoring sites are the New Hanover and Castle Hayne sites. The urban air toxics monitoring site is the Battleship site. Figure G2. Castle Hayne Ozone and Fine Particle Monitoring Site (37-129-0002) At the Castle Hayne (37-129-0002) site the NC-DAQ operates an ozone monitor, a one-in-three day fine particle monitor, and a continuous fine particle monitor. Monitoring information for the site is summarized in Table G1. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G2 through Figure G10. The NC-DAQ completed one Beta Attenuation Monitor (BAM) study in December 2011. At that time the BAM was shut down and the 1-in-3 day fine particle Federal Reference Method (FRM) monitor became a SLAMS. In October 2012, the NC-DAQ installed another special purpose non-regulatory BAM and began a second BAM study at the site on October 23, 2012.G5 Table G1. Site Table for Castle Hayne Site Name: Castle Hayne AQS Site Identification Number: 37-129-0002 Location: 6028 Holly Shelter Road, Castle Hayne, North Carolina MSA: Wilmington, NC MSA #: 9200 Latitude 34.364167 Longitude -77.838611 Datum: WGS84 Elevation 12 meters Parameter Name Method Method Reference ID Sample Duration Sampling Schedule Ozone Instrumental With Ultra Violet Photometry (047) EQOA-0880-047 1-Hour April 1 to October 31 PM 2.5 Local Conditions R & P Model 2025 PM2.5 Sequential w/WINS – Gravimetric Analysis (118) RFPS-0498-118 24-Hour Every Third Day, Year Round PM 2.5 Local Conditions Met One BAM-1020 Mass Monitor w/VSCC (170) EQPM-0308-170 1-Hour Year Round Date Monitor Established: Ozone January 1, 1979 Date Monitor Established: PM 2.5 Local Conditions (Federal Reference Method) July 1, 2002 Date Monitor Established: PM 2.5 Local Conditions (Beta Attenuation Monitor) October 23, 2012 Nearest Road: Holly Shelter Road Traffic Count: 2400 Year of Count: 2009 Parameter Name Distance to Road Direction to Road Monitor Type Statement of Purpose Ozone 60 North SLAMS Real-time AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. PM 2.5 Local Conditions 60 North SLAMS AQI reporting. Compliance w/NAAQS. PM 2.5 Local Conditions 60 North Special Purpose Non-Regulatory Real-time AQI reporting. Parameter Name Monitoring Objective Scale Suitable for Comparison to NAAQS Proposal to Move or Change Ozone Population Exposure Urban Yes None PM 2.5 Local Conditions Population Exposure Neighborhood Yes None PM 2.5 Local Conditions Population Exposure Neighborhood No None Parameter Name Meets Part 58 Appendix A Requirements Meets Part 58 Appendix C Requirements Meets Part 58 Appendix D Requirements Meets Part 58 Appendix E Requirements Ozone Yes Yes Yes Yes PM 2.5 Local Conditions Yes Yes No requirements Yes PM 2.5 Local Conditions Yes Yes No requirements Yes Parameter Name Probe Height (m) Distance to Support Distance to Trees Obstacles Ozone 3.8 1 meter >20 meters None PM 2.5 Local Conditions 2.3 > 2 meters >20 meters None PM 2.5 Local Conditions 2.3 > 2 meters >20 meters None G6 Figure G3 Looking North from the Castle Hayne Site Figure G4. Looking Northwest from the Castle Hayne Site Figure G5. Looking West from the Castle Hayne Site Figure G6. Looking Southwest from the Castle Hayne Site Figure G7. Looking Northeast from the Castle Hayne Site Figure G8. Looking East from the Castle Hayne Site Figure G9. Looking Southeast from the Castle Hayne Site Figure G10. Looking South from the Castle Hayne SiteG7 The NC-DAQ continues to follow the progress of the Titan cement facility closely. If Titan is constructed, the NC-DAQ will reassess the site after Titan begins operation to ensure the site continues to meet siting criteria for the purposes of the monitors located at the site. When the Office of Management and Budget redefined the Wilmington MSA in February 2013, the estimated population of the Wilmington MSA dropped below 350,000 to 263, 429. Thus, only one ozone monitor is required for the MSA if the ozone design value is above 85 % of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The design value for 2010-2012 for Wilmington is at 83 % of the standard so no monitors are needed in the MSA at this time. However, the NC-DAQ requested and received a waiver for a second ozone monitor for the MSA when its population was above 350,000 from the EPA on November 9, 2011. The waiver is valid until the next 5-year assessment is due in 2015. The waiver is shown in Figure G14. At the New Hanover (37-129-0006) site the NC-DAQ operates a sulfur dioxide monitor. At the beginning of 2012 the shelter was moved approximately 200 feet across the field to maintain access to the site after the host facility closed. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G11 through Figure G20. Figure G11. New Hanover Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring Site (37-129-0006) Figure G12. Looking North from the New Hanover Site Figure G13. Looking Northeast from the New Hanover Site G8 Figure G14. Letter from the EPA approving a waiver for a second ozone monitor for the Wilmington MSA G9 Figure G15. Looking Northwest from the New Hanover Site Figure G16. Looking West from the New Hanover Site Figure G17. Looking Southwest from the New Hanover Site Figure G18. Looking East from the New Hanover Site Figure G19. Looking Southeast from the New Hanover Site Figure G20. Looking South from the New Hanover Site The New Hanover site was established in 1994 to replace the Acme-Delco site in Columbus County, which was shut down in 1995. The Acme-Delco site was located about 15 miles west of the New Hanover site. The site was moved because industrial emissions had decreased in Columbus County and the measured sulfur dioxide concentrations had dropped over the previous 10 years. During the time when both monitors operated, the New Hanover site consistently measured higher concentrations of G10 sulfur dioxide. On January 1, 2013, the New Hanover site will become the required Population Weighted Emission Inventory (PWEI) site for the Wilmington MSA. Figure G21. The Battle Ship Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Site At the Battle Ship (37-129-0010) site the NC-DAQ operates a year round air toxics volatile organic compound sampler. Samples are collected in stainless steel canisters and sent to the Toxics Protection Branch laboratory where they are analyzed for 68 compounds using the Compendium Method for Toxic Organics 15. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G21 through Figure G29. Figure G22. Looking North from the Battleship Site Figure G23. Looking Northwest from the Battleship Site Figure G24. Looking Northeast from the Battleship Site Figure G25. Looking East from the Battleship Site G11 Figure G26. Looking West from the Battleship Site Figure G27. Looking Southwest from the Battleship Site Figure G28. Looking Southeast from the Battleship Site Figure G29. Looking South from the Battleship Site In 2008 EPA expanded the lead monitoring network to support the lower lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) of 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter promulgated in 2008. The 2010 changes to the lead monitoring requirements focuses monitoring efforts on fence line monitoring located at facilities that emit 0.5 tons or more of lead per year and at National Core (NCore) monitoring sites. These changes to the lead monitoring network requirements will not require lead monitoring in the Wilmington MSA. The MSA does not have an NCore monitoring site and it does not have any permitted facilities located within its bounds that emit more than 0.5 tons per year of lead.1 Any changes to ozone monitoring requirements will not affect the Wilmington MSA because it already has an ozone monitor for urban population exposure monitoring and does not have any Class I Areas. The Wilmington MSA is not required by the 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring rule to have nitrogen dioxide monitors. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have any roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near roadway monitoring. The Wilmington MSA was not required by the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring rule to add additional sulfur dioxide monitors. The existing sulfur dioxide monitor at the New Hanover site meets the PWEI monitoring requirements for the MSA. This MSA will also not be required to do carbon monoxide monitoring as a result of the 1 Data obtained from the NC-DAQ emission inventory database. G12 changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements because the population is less than one million. (2) The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA consists of Brunswick County in North Carolina and Horry County in South Carolina. The principal cities are Myrtle Beach, Conway, and North Myrtle Beach. The NC-DAQ and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC-DHEC) currently do not operate any monitoring sites in this MSA. The MSA has an estimated population as of July 2012 of 394,542 people, which requires it to have an ozone monitor. The NC-DAQ and SC-DHEC are currently working out who will operate the required ozone monitor and where it will be located. More information about ozone monitoring in this MSA will be included in the 2014 network monitoring plan. Changes to the lead monitoring network requirements in 2010 did not affect this MSA. Changes to the ozone monitoring requirements should not affect the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA This MSA is also not impacted by the 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have any roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near roadway monitoring. The Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach MSA is also not impacted by the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements because there are no large sources of sulfur dioxide in the MSA and the population is not large enough to require a PWEI monitor. This MSA will also not be impacted by the changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements because the population is less than one million. (3) The Jacksonville MSA The Jacksonville MSA consists of Onslow County. The principal city is Jacksonville. The NC-DAQ currently does not operate any monitoring sites in the Jacksonville MSA. The Jacksonville particle-monitoring site was shut down on December 31, 2007, because the measured concentrations were less than 80 % of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Changes to the lead monitoring network requirements in 2010 did not affect the Jacksonville MSA. Although the MSA does not have an NCore monitoring site, it had a permitted facility located within its bounds that emitted 0.5 tons or more per year of lead in 2009. However, lead emissions at Camp LeJeune in 2010 were below the 0.5 ton threshold. The EPA concurred that actual emissions from Camp LeJeune were less than 0.5 tons and did not require monitoring at the fence line of the facility. The lead emissions in 2011 are still less than 0.5 tons. Changes to the ozone monitoring requirements could affect the Jacksonville MSA if the EPA decides to require monitoring in urban areas without design values. Its population is above the threshold for requiring population exposure monitoring in urban areas but monitoring is not required because it does not have an ozone design value. Currently, the NC-DAQ does not monitor for ozone in Jacksonville because the ozone levels measured by the Castle Hayne monitor in New Hanover County indicate that the ozone concentrations on the coast are currently around 85 % of the NAAQS. The Jacksonville MSA G13 would not be affected by rural ozone monitoring requirements because there are no Class I areas in the MSA. The Jacksonville MSA is not impacted by the 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have any roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near roadway monitoring. The Jacksonville MSA is also not impacted by the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements because there are no large sources of sulfur dioxide in the MSA and the population is not large enough to require a PWEI monitor. This MSA is also not be impacted by the changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements because the population is under one million people. (4) The Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region The Non-MSA Portion of the Wilmington Monitoring Region consists of three counties (Carteret, Columbus, and Duplin). This area does not have any MSAs. The NC-DAQ currently operates one monitoring site in this area at Kenansville shown in Figure G30. Figure G30. Monitoring Site Location At the Kenansville general-background monitoring site in Duplin County the NC-DAQ operates a one-in-three day fine particle FRM monitor, a continuous special purpose non-regulatory fine particle beta attenuation monitor (BAM), and a rotating one-in-six day high volume PM10 monitor that operates every third year. At the end of 2013, the NC-DAQ may shut down the FRM monitor and replace it with the BAM, if the BAM and FRM values agree well. Currently, the values do not agree well enough to replace the FRM with the BAM. If the BAM and FRM continue to not agree, the NC-DAQ will shut down the BAM at the end of 2013. A picture of the site as well as views looking north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest are provided in Figure G31 through Figure G39. Figure G31. Kenansville Particle Monitoring Site B is the Kenansville particle site. The neighborhood scale (0.5 to 4 Km) is approximately represented by the black square. G14 Figure G32. Looking North from the Kenansville Site Figure G33. Looking Northwest from the Kenansville Site Figure G34. Looking West from the Kenansville Site Figure G35. Looking Southwest from the Kenansville Site Figure G36. Looking Northeast from the Kenansville Site Figure G37. Looking East from the Kenansville Site Figure G38. Looking Southeast from the Kenansville Site Figure G39. Looking South from the Kenansville SiteG15 The NC-DAQ requires PM10 data in the coastal area for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) modeling for industrial expansion. Because the NC-DAQ shut down the PM10 monitoring site in Jacksonville on December 31, 2007, the NC-DAQ began manual one-in-six day PM10 monitoring at the Castle Hayne site in February 2008 to provide the necessary PM10 data for PSD modeling for the coastal area. However, a wildfire next to the site forced the NC-DAQ to shut down the monitor on March 31, 2008. After the wildfire was extinguished, the NC-DAQ decided not to resume PM10 monitoring at Castle Hayne because of the pending construction of the Titan Cement Facility across the street from the Castle Hayne site. Modeling results indicate that Titan could contribute over 10 % of the NAAQS to the PM10 concentrations measured at Castle Hayne, making Castle Hayne an unsuitable site for obtaining data to use for PSD modeling. As a result the PM10 monitor was located at Kenansville in second quarter 2009. At the end of 2010, the NC-DAQ began operating the monitor on a one-in-three year schedule and made the site one of six rotating background PM10 sites for the state. The 2010 lead monitoring requirements did not result in lead monitoring in this area because there are no NCore monitoring stations or permitted facilities that emit 0.5 tons or more of lead per year.2 Any new ozone monitoring requirements will also not affect this area. There is no MSA here so population exposure monitoring requirements for urban areas do not apply and rural ozone monitoring requirements will not apply because there are no Class I areas. The 2010 nitrogen dioxide monitoring requirements also will not add monitors to this area. It is too small to require area-wide monitors and does not have roadways with average annual daily traffic above the threshold for near road monitoring. This area will also not need to add monitors to meet the 2010 sulfur dioxide monitoring requirements because there are no large sources of sulfur dioxide in this area and the population is too small to require a PWEI monitor. The changes to the carbon dioxide monitoring requirements will not impact this area because the population is under one million. 2 ibid. G16 Appendix G.1 Annual Network Site Review Forms for 2012 Castle Hayne New Hanover in Wilmington Battle Ship in Wilmington Kenansville G17 G18 G19 G20 G21 G22 G23 G24 G25 G26 G27 G28 G29 G30 G31 G32 G33 Appendix G-2. Scale of Representativeness Each station in the monitoring network must be described in terms of the physical dimensions of the air parcel nearest the monitoring station throughout which actual pollutant concentrations are reasonably similar. Area dimensions or scales of representativeness used in the network description are: a) Micro-scale - defines the concentration in air volumes associated with area dimensions ranging from several meters up to about 100 meters. b) Middle scale - defines the concentration typical of areas up to several city blocks in size with dimensions ranging from about 100 meters to 0.5 kilometers. c) Neighborhood scale – defines concentrations within an extended area of a city that has relatively uniform land use with dimensions ranging from about 0.5 to 4.0 kilometers. d) Urban scale - defines an overall citywide condition with dimensions on the order of 4 to 50 kilometers. e) Regional Scale - defines air quality levels over areas having dimensions of 50 to hundreds of kilometers. Closely associated with the area around the monitoring station where pollutant concentrations are reasonably similar are the basic monitoring exposures of the station. There are six basic exposures: a) Sites located to determine the highest concentrations expected to occur in the area covered by the network. b) Sites located to determine representative concentrations in areas of high population density. c) Sites located to determine the impact on ambient pollution levels of significant sources or source categories. d) Sites located to determine general background concentration levels. e) Sites located to determine the extent of regional pollutant transport among populated areas. f) Sites located to measure air pollution impacts on visibility, vegetation damage, or other welfare-based impacts and in support of secondary standards. The design intent in siting stations is to correctly match the area dimensions represented by the sample of monitored air with the area dimensions most appropriate for the monitoring objective of the station. The following relationship of the six basic objectives and the scales of representativeness are appropriate when siting monitoring stations: Table G2. Site Type Appropriate Siting Scales 1. Highest concentration Micro, middle, neighborhood (sometimes urban or regional for secondarily formed pollutants) 2. Population oriented Neighborhood, urban 3. Source impact Micro, middle, neighborhood 4. General/background & regional transport Urban, regional 5. Welfare-related impacts Urban, regional |
| OCLC number | 861792387 |
