WAQA Washington Air Quality Advisory
Presented to the 2007 National Air Quality Conferenceby Sean Lundblad
Washington State Department of EcologyAir Quality Program February 13, 2007
Orlando, FL
What is WAQA?
• The Washington Air Quality Advisory (WAQA) is Washington’s “AQI-like” public information tool
• WAQA is not AQI
• Our website will state WAQA is not AQI
• Why we wanted an alternative to the AQI
• What options we looked at
• How we came up with the options
• What the final choice was
• Implementation (fingers crossed)
What you will hear
Policy Implications• The Good
– New 24-hour standard of 35 ug/m3 is more protective– Ecology has an air quality goal of 20 ug/m3 – The public is familiar with AQI
• The Bad– New standard at the highest end of range of what
CASAC recommended– EPA did not revise the annual standard
• The Ugly – EPA has not updated the PM2.5 AQI– Current AQI is misleading in that it downplays health
risks– Washington State has winter PM problems
Policy Drivers
• Health concerns should drive our actions
• Providing accurate near-real-time information to the public is critical for the health of the citizens
The Policy Choice:
Washington wants a way to inform the public of PM2.5 health effects at lower
levels than EPA
How we got to WAQA
• Examined logic behind current AQI breakpoints
• Created new breakpoints based on CFR logic
• Factored in results of health studies
• Air Quality Program weighed policy issues and selected an option
Examined logic behind current PM2.5 AQI Breakpoints
AQI Category
Estimated mid-point 24-hour
concentration Breakpoints
AQI Score
Good 0 to 15.4 ug/m3 0 to 50
Moderate 15.5 to 40.4 ug/m3 51 to 100
Unhealthy for sensitive groups
40.5 to 65.4 ug/m3 101 to 150
Unhealthy 65.5 to 150.4 ug/m3 151 to 200
Very unhealthy 150.5 to 250.4 ug/m3 201 to 300
Hazardous > 250.4 301 - 500
Annual standard
Old 24-hr standard
Examined breakpoints
• As % of old standard• As % change between categories• Tried to deviate as little as possible
WAQA Options
• Option 1: “Classic” interpretation of CFRs that is more protective than AQI
• Options 2 & 3: Increasingly protective scenarios that reflect research indicating health effects; implement program goal
• Option 4: Very protective scenario
How did these options compare graphically?
Nephelometer/Correlated PM2.5 Monitoring Sites
Nephelometer Sites w/correlated PM2.5Nephelometer Sites
2005
Seattle
Lacey
Nephelometer/Correlated PM2.5 Monitoring Sites
Nephelometer Sites w/correlated PM2.5
Nephelometer Sites
2005
Nephelometer/Correlated PM2.5 Monitoring Sites
Nephelometer Sites w/correlated PM2.5
Nephelometer Sites
2005
Cheeka Peak
Lacey
Seattle
Twisp
Twisp (9/4/06 - 9/10/06) Wildfires - very "dirty" air
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
11:00PM
2:00PM
5:00AM
8:00PM
11:00AM
2:00AM
5:00PM
8:00AM
11:00PM
2:00PM
5:00AM
8:00PM
Time
AQ
I
Current AQI
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
=3.5 ug/m3Estimated mid-point 24-hr concentration = 126.6 ug/m3
Lacey (10/21/06 - 10/24/06) "typical" impaired air
0
50
100
150
200
2:00PM
12:00AM
10:00AM
8:00PM
6:00AM
4:00PM
2:00AM
12:00PM
10:00PM
8:00AM
6:00PM
Time
AQ
I
Current AQI
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Estimated mid-point 24-hr concentration = 24.2 ug/m3 = 11.6 ug/m3
Cheeka Peak (10/21/06 - 10/24/06) "clean" site
0
50
100
150
200
2:00PM
12:00AM
10:00AM
8:00PM
6:00AM
4:00PM
2:00AM
12:00PM
10:00PM
8:00AM
6:00PM
Time
AQ
I
Current AQI
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Estimated mid-point 24-hour concentration = 6.5 ug/m3
=36.7 ug/m3
Would we ever be in the green (Good) with any of these
options?
YES!
# days per option for continuous PM2.5 monitors in 2005
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Good Moderate USG Unhealthy VeryUnhealthy
Hazardous
Category
Cou
nt o
f Day
s Current AQI
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
What Ecology elected to do
• Combination of Option 3 and Option 2
Why combine Options 3 & 2?
• Option 4 harder to defend scientifically
• Breakpoints of Option 3 more defensible except for Good/Mod breakpoint
• CASAC-recommended annual standard (13 ug/m3 ) of Option 2 as Good/Mod breakpoint protective and defensible
• Program goal of 20 ug/m3 for Mod/USG breakpoint
When will it happen? SOON!!!
• Decided to tie it to our new data acquisition system and website coming online very soon and– We have been letting our many partners know
of the change – Ironing out how we will present WAQA on
website
Thank you:
• Phyllis Baas – Ecology Air Quality Program Technical Services Section Manager
• Sarah Rees – Ecology Air Quality Program Program Development Section Manager
• Stan Rauh – SWRO & Air Quality Operations Unit Supervisor• Ecology Air Quality Program Leadership Team• Mike Dubois – Airshed Coordinator, Idaho Department of
Environmental Quality• Rachel Sakata - Air Quality Planner, Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality• 2007 National Air Quality Conference Planning Committee• Darby Veeck – Ecology GIS – Photos