08 August 2017 FREEDOM of INFORMATION REQUEST – 921/17

Rutland County Council telephone: 01572 722 577 Catmose fax: 01572 758 307 Oakham email: [email protected] Rutland web: www.rutland.gov.uk LE15 6HP DX: 28340 Oakham

08 August 2017

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST – 921/17

Dear Sir/Madam

Your request for information has now been considered and the information requested is provided below.

Request:

1. Please provide your authority’s air quality data for 2014/2015/2016 as supplied by the laboratory that analysed the figures.

Answer: Please find attached three pdf documents containing our nitrogen dioxide ambient air quality monitoring results as provided by the laboratory for 2014, 2015 and 2016.

2. Please provide the air quality data that your authority supplied to DEFRA in 2014/2015/2016.

Answer: Please find attached ‘reports’ containing air quality data supplied to Defra in 2014/2015/2016.

3. Please provide the number of air collection tubes that were declared void – and the reasons for that – in 2014/2015/2016.

Answer: We monitor for nitrogen dioxide using diffusion tubes. The numbers of tubes that are declared void and reasons are as follows:

2014 2, 1 tube was taken without consent, one tube was not exposed 2015 2, both tubes were taken without consent 2016 Nil

You are free to use any documents supplied for your own use, including for non- commercial research purposes. The documents may also be used for news reporting. However, any other type of re-use, for example by publishing the documents or issuing copies to the public will require the permission of the copyright owner, where copyright exists. Such a request would be considered separately in accordance with the relevant Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations 2005 and is not automatic. Therefore, no permission is implied in the re-use of this information, until such a request to re-use it has been made and agreed, subject to any appropriate conditions. Any request to re-use the information should be made to me at the address below.

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request please contact the Head of Corporate Governance, Rutland County Council, Catmose, Oakham, Rutland LE15 6HP You can also complain to the Information Commissioner at:

The Information Commissioner's Office Wycliffe House, Water lane Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF Tel: 01625 545700

Yours faithfully

FOI Administrator Corporate Support Team, Rutland County Council

2014 Air Quality Progress Report for Rutland County Council District Council

In fulfillment of Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 Local Air Quality Management

August 2014

Rutland County Council

Local Authority Andrew Woodhouse Officer Department Environmental Health Rutland County Council, Catmose, Address Oakham, Rutland LE15 6HP Telephone (01572) 720977 e-mail [email protected]

Report Reference 2014 PR V1.0 number Date 28 August 2014

LAQM Progress Report 2014 1 Rutland County Council

Executive Summary

Previous assessments of air quality in Rutland have found it to be generally good and findings and conclusions of this report, show this has been sustained. The assessment of monitoring results and predicted changes in local air quality, associated with local changes and developments indicates that the local air quality objectives are being met and currently it is not necessary to progress to a detailed air quality assessment.

Although in 2013 there was a reduction in the number of developments and planning applications that could have an impact on air quality, there continues to be a focus on these developments. Maintaining a proactive approach enables potential impacts to be assessed and where necessary, mitigation measures can be implemented, before local air quality is significantly impacted, this also avoids unexpected costs and delays being imposed on developers or businesses.

This Progress Report details the latest results of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) monitoring undertaken in 2013. Although for most sites there has been an increase in NO2 concentrations, the monitoring indicates that the annual average air quality objective for NO2 has not been exceeded. In addition there are currently no locations, where the air quality objectives are close to being exceeded and are experiencing increases in NO2, that would indicate a likely breach of the air quality objective, in the near future.

The next report on air quality in Rutland will be the 2015 Updating Screening and Assessment Report.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 2 Rutland County Council

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 5 1.1 Description of Local Authority Area 5 1.2 Purpose of Progress Report 5 1.3 Air Quality Objectives 6 1.4 Summary of Previous Review and Assessments 8 2 New Monitoring Data 10 2.1 Summary of Monitoring Undertaken 10 2.2 Comparison of Monitoring Results with Air Quality Objectives 13 3 New Local Developments 18 4 Planning Applications 19 4.1 Developments where planning permission is pending 20 5 Conclusions and Proposed Actions 21 5.1 Conclusions from New Monitoring Data 21 5.2 Conclusions relating to New Local Developments 21 5.3 Other Conclusions 21 5.4 Proposed Actions 22 6 References 23

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Air Quality Objectives included in Regulations for the purpose 7 of LAQM in England

Table 1.2 Summary of previous reports on local air quality 8

Table 2.1 Details of Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites 12

Table 2.2 Results of NO2 Diffusion Tubes 2013 14

Table 2.3 Results of NO2 Diffusion Tubes (2009 to 2013) 15

LAQM Progress Report 2014 3 Rutland County Council

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Map(s) of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites 10 Figure 2.2 Trends in Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations 16 2009 to 2013 Measured at Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites

Appendices

Appendix 1: NO2 diffusion tube QA:QC Data

Appendix 2: Monthly NO2 diffusion tube results

LAQM Progress Report 2014 4 Rutland County Council 1 Introduction 1.1 Description of Local Authority Area

Rutland is located in the midlands and is predominantly rural area with much of the county being used for arable farming and livestock. The 2013 mid year estimate for the population of Rutland was reported by the Office of National Statistics as being 37,369. There are two small towns, Oakham and Uppingham, with populations of around eleven thousand and five thousand respectively, the rest of the county’s population are distributed in rural villages and hamlets. Towns and villages in Rutland have expanded naturally over time and as such there are a number of town and village centre locations where housing was built next to what are now busy A roads and B roads. Traffic on roads is the principal source of pollutants that impact on local air quality in the County.

1.2 Purpose of Progress Report

This report fulfils the requirements of the Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) process as set out in Part IV of the Environment Act (1995), the Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 2007 and the relevant Policy and Technical Guidance documents. The LAQM process places an obligation on all local authorities to regularly review and assess air quality in their areas, and to determine whether or not the air quality objectives are likely to be achieved. Where exceedances are considered likely, the local authority must then declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and prepare an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) setting out the measures it intends to put in place in pursuit of the objectives.

Progress Reports are required in the intervening years between the three-yearly Updating and Screening Assessment reports. Their purpose is to maintain continuity in the LAQM process.

They are not intended to be as detailed as Updating and Screening Assessment Reports, or to require as much effort. However, if the Progress Report identifies the risk of exceedance of an Air Quality Objective, the Local Authority (LA) should

LAQM Progress Report 2014 5

Rutland County Council undertake a Detailed Assessment immediately, and not wait until the next round of Review and Assessment.

1.3 Air Quality Objectives

The air quality objectives applicable to LAQM in England are set out in the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 (SI 928), The Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002 (SI 3043), and are shown in Table 1.1. This table shows the objectives in units of micrograms per cubic metre µg/m3 (milligrams per cubic metre, mg/m3 for carbon monoxide) with the number of exceedences in each year that are permitted (where applicable).

LAQM Progress Report 2014 6

Rutland County Council

Table 1.1 Air Quality Objectives included in Regulations for the purpose of LAQM in England Air Quality Objective Date to be Pollutant Concentration Measured as achieved by Running annual 16.25 µg/m3 31.12.2003 Benzene mean 5.00 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2010 Running annual 1,3-Butadiene 2.25 µg/m3 31.12.2003 mean Running 8-hour Carbon monoxide 10 mg/m3 31.12.2003 mean 0.50 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2004 Lead 0.25 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2008 200 µg/m3 not to be exceeded more 1-hour mean 31.12.2005 Nitrogen dioxide than 18 times a year 40 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2005 50 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more Particulate Matter 24-hour mean 31.12.2004 (PM10) than 35 times a (gravimetric) year 40 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2004 350 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more 1-hour mean 31.12.2004 than 24 times a year 125 µg/m3, not to Sulphur dioxide be exceeded more 24-hour mean 31.12.2004 than 3 times a year 266 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more 15-minute mean 31.12.2005 than 35 times a year

LAQM Progress Report 2014 7

Rutland County Council

1.4 Summary of Previous Review and Assessments

The first stage of assessing air quality in Rutland was completed in 1999. The Stage I report and all subsequent assessments of air quality as summarised in table 1.2 have shown that there have been no predicted or monitored breaches of the air quality objectives set out in table 1.1.

Table 1.2 Summary of previous reports on local air quality Report Year Outcome Updating, Screening & 2003 All air quality objective met. Assessment Progress Report 2004 Update revealed no changes or developments that would significant affect air quality Progress Report 2005 Update revealed no changes or developments Updating, Screening & 2006 All air quality objectives met with no predicted breaches of the Assessment objectives Progress Report 2007 Update revealed no breach of air quality objectives. The completion of Oakham bypass was noted. Progress Report 2008 No breach of the air quality objectives. The positive impact of Oakham bypass was assessed Updating, Screening & 2009 No breach of air quality objectives. Assessment The positive effect of Oakham Bypass on local air quality was confirmed. Progress Report 2010 Monitoring showed NO2 objective continued to be met and no developments were identified that would significantly affect air quality Progress Report 2011 No breaches of air quality of objectives were identified and no detailed assessments were required. Updating, Screening & 2012 No breaches of the air quality objectives were identified or Assessment predicted. No developments or applications were put forward that were likely to have a significant impact on air quality. Updating, Screening & 2013 No breaches of the air quality objectives were identified or Assessment predicted. Two developments proposed in 2012 as part of the pre-planning and planning process were assessed, Sainsbury’s supermarket in Oakham and FCC (UK) Environment Waste Transfer Station near Cottesmore. Both assessments concluded any impacts would be insignificant.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 8

Rutland County Council having to assess and retrospectively mitigate against impacts when the development(s) are complete.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 9

Rutland County Council

2 New Monitoring Data 2.1 Summary of Monitoring Undertaken

2.1.1 Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations are monitored at 11 sites in the county, their geographical location is shown in figure 2.1. More details regarding the precise diffusion tube location and the type of environment it is monitoring i.e. rural or kerbside (within 1m of kerb of busy road) are provided in table 2.1. There have been no changes in the locations used for diffusion tube monitoring since 2011.

Figure 2.1 Map(s) of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites

Oakham inset

LAQM Progress Report 2014 10

Rutland County Council

Monitoring of local air quality in Rutland is achieved through a program of passive nitrogen dioxide diffusion tubes supplied by Gradko International Ltd, further details are included in Appendix 1. The diffusion tubes are exposed for monthly periods of between 4 or 5 weeks and are changed in accordance with dates set in the diffusion tube network calendar. No routine monitoring for the six other pollutants specified in the air quality objectives is undertaken.

Rutland County Council does not have a chemiluminescent analyser (reference method) with which to perform a co-location study with the diffusion tubes i.e. comparing diffusion tube results at the same location as a fully automated analyser.

The bias adjustment factor applied to NO2 diffusion tube results has therefore been obtained from the National Diffusion Tube Bias Adjustment Spreadsheet, for the analysing laboratory (Gradko) and preparation method (20% Triethanolamine in de-ionised water). The bias adjustment factor used for 2013 is 0.95, further details of how this factor was obtained are provided in Appendix 1.

Appendix 1 also includes details regarding Quality Assurance and Quality Control procedures that allow confidence to be placed in the concentrations of NO2 that have been measured using diffusion tubes. The laboratory performance for Gradko during 2013 was determined as ‘Good’, further details are given in Appendix 1.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 11

Rutland County Council

Table 2.1 Details of Non- Automatic Monitoring Sites Relevant Exposure? Is Monitoring Distance to (Y/N with Does this Co-located Kerb of Site distance (m) Location Site X OS Grid Y OS Grid Pollutants In with a Nearest Site Name Site Type Height from Represent ID Reference Reference Monitored AQMA? Continuous Road (m) (m) monitoring Worst-Case Analyser (N/A if not site to Exposure? (Y/N) applicable) relevant exposure) 1 Caldecott Kerbside 486720 293460 2.2 NO2 N N Y (2.0m) 1.0m Y 2 Uppingham Roadside 486630 299640 2.2 NO2 N N Y (0.3m) 1.5m Y 3 Ketton Roadside/other 498490 305100 2.2 NO2 N N Y (2.0m) 4.0m Y 4 Tickencote Rural 499060 309650 2.0 NO2 N N Y (20.0m) N/A Y Oakham, 5 Uppingham Kerbside 486300 308490 2.2 NO2 N N Y (4.0m) 0.2m Y Rd Oakham, 6 Kerbside 486130 308570 2.2 NO N N Y (0.4m) 1.0m Y Brooke Rd 2 Oakham, 7 Kerbside 485760 308890 2.2 NO N N Y (1.2m) 0.2m Y Melton Rd 2 Oakham 8 Kerbside 486640 309710 2.2 NO N N Y (6.3m) 1.4m Y Burley Pk Wy 2 9 Egleton Rural 487910 307540 1.5 NO2 N N N N/A Oakham, 10 Kerbside 486206 308740 2.2 NO N N Y (0.3m) 1.0m Y High St 2 Oakham, 11 Kerbside 485850 308690 2.2 NO N N Y (0.1) 1.0m Y New St 2

LAQM Progress Report 2014 12 Rutland County Council

2.2 Comparison of Monitoring Results with Air Quality Objectives

2.2.1 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Diffusion Tube Monitoring Data

The diffusion tube monitoring results for the annual average concentration of NO2, during 2013 are shown below in table 2.2. None of the results exceeded the annual average air quality objective of 40 µg/m3. The highest results have been obtained at those sites close to A roads, namely Uppingham, 32.8 µg/m3, Oakham Burley Park Way, 32.0 µg/m3. The next highest concentration was 29.2 µg/m3 in Oakham High Street at its junction with Mill Street and Burley Road, which although they are no longer A Roads still form a relatively busy junction.

Data capture was good with only two sites missing 1 months results, this has been taken into account when calculating the annual average concentration, but as data capture is above 75% there has been no need to adjust the results through ‘annualising’ them. The full monthly results for all diffusion tubes can be found in Appendix 2.

Eight sites in Rutland have at least five years of data, including 2013, for those sites the annual average NO2 concentration for the five years leading up to and including

2013, is shown in table 2.3. The longer term trends of NO2 in Rutland are discussed below. …

LAQM Progress Report 2014 13 Rutland County Council

Table 2.2 Results of NO2 Diffusion Tubes 2013 2013 Annual Mean Triplicate or Full Calendar Year Within Concentration (µg/m3) - Site ID Location Site Type Co-located Data Capture 2013 AQMA? Bias Adjustment factor = Tube (Number of Months) 0.95 1 Caldecott Kerbside N N 12 25.8 2 Uppingham Roadside N N 12 32.8 3 Ketton Roadside/other N N 12 20.6 4 Tickencote Rural N N 12 20.6 Oakham, 5 Kerbside N N 12 23.8 Uppingham Rd Oakham, Brooke 6 Kerbside N N 12 25.0 Rd Oakham, Melton 7 Kerbside N N 12 23.1 Rd Oakham Burley 8 Kerbside N N 11 32.0 Park Way 9 Egleton Rural N N 12 11.3 10 Oakham, High St Kerbside N N 12 29.2 11 Oakham, New St Kerbside N N 11 20.1

LAQM Progress Report 2014 14 Rutland County Council

Table 2.3 Results of NO2 Diffusion Tubes (2009 to 2013) Annual Mean Concentration (µg/m3) - Adjusted for Bias Within 2009 (Bias 2010 (Bias 2011 (Bias 2012 (Bias 2013 (Bias Site ID Site Type AQMA? Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment Factor =0.90) Factor =0.92) Factor =0.89) Factor =0.97) Factor = 0.95) 1 Kerbside N 24.0 25.2 22.7 23.5 25.8 2 Roadside N 33.5 36.5 33.4 29.8 32.8 3 Roadside/other N 19.8 21.7 19.8 19.9 20.6 4 Rural N 19.8 22.7 17.7 14.6 20.6 5 Kerbside N 23.2 25.2 21.9 23.2 23.8 6 Kerbside N 27.5 29.0 26.1 25.5 25.0 7 Kerbside N 22.2 23.8 22.8 22.7 23.1 8 Kerbside N 29.3 31.5 28.1 29.5 32.0

LAQM Progress Report 2014 15 Rutland County Council

Figure 2.2 Trends in Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations 2009 to 2013 Measured at Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites

Caldecott 40 Uppingham 35 Ketton 30 Tickencote 25 Oakham, Uppingham Rd µg/m3 20 Oakham, Brooke Rd

15 Oakham, Melton Rd

10 Oakham, Burley Pk Wy

5 Air Quality Objective (40 µg/m3)

0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year

The trend of broadly decreasing levels of NO2 between 2010 and 2012 has at most monitoring sites stopped and in some cases NO2 levels have increased in 2013. It should be noted that none of the monitoring sites are close to exceeding the annual air quality objective of 40 µg/m3, also the results for 2013 are not significantly different from the range of concentrations seen at these sites in previous years.

Of the monitoring sites that have seen the greatest increases all are likely to have been influenced by road traffic as they are on the kerbside, road side or relatively close to the larger A class roads in Rutland. Uppingham recorded a 3.0µg/m3 increase and it is positioned on the kerbside of the A6003, Caldecott is positioned next to the same road and saw a 2.3 µg/m3 increase. The monitoring site on the Oakham bypass (A606) showed a 3.4 µg/m3 increases between 2012 and 2013. Tickencote recorded the largest increase of 6.0 µg/m3 and although the side is not classified as Kerbside or Roadside it is approximately 100m from the centre of the A1 dual carriageway and as such will be influenced by the traffic emissions on the A1.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 16 Rutland County Council

Three other sites within the centre of Oakham, Uppingham Road, Melton Road and Brooke Road that are ‘kerbside’ sites but on B class roads have shown much smaller changes and even a small decrease at Brooke Road, when compared to sites affected by A class roads. Ketton which is a ‘roadside’ site near the A 6121 is the only exception to this trend showing a small 0.7 0µg/m3 increase in 2013.

The increases seen at sites close to A Class roads may not be significant, unless they become a sustained trend, then there could be an increased risk of the annual average air quality objective being exceeded. The increase in concentrations at these roadside sites figures should also been seen in the context of monitoring results at

Egleton which is a rural site and isolated from roads and other sources of NO2, 3 however that site also recorded a small increase in NO2 levels of 0.9 µg/m .

2.2.2 Summary of Compliance with AQS Objectives

Rutland County Council has examined the results from monitoring in the County. Concentrations are all below the objectives, therefore there is no need to proceed to a Detailed Assessment.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 17 Rutland County Council

3 New Local Developments

During 2013 there have been no developments or changes that would significantly affect local air quality. The only new roads that have been built are minor residential and access roads, mostly to serve the mixed residential development to the north west of Oakham, none of the roads will have sufficient vehicle movements to be classed as ‘busy’

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new or newly identified local developments which may have an impact on air quality within the Local Authority area.

Rutland County Council confirms that all the following have been considered:

 Road traffic sources  Other transport sources  Industrial sources  Commercial and domestic sources  New developments with fugitive or uncontrolled sources.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 18 Rutland County Council

4 Planning Applications

During 2013 no planning applications were received where potential impacts on Local Air Quality were anticipated.

Previous rounds of the Local Air Quality review process have identified planning applications and proposals which could have an impact on local air quality. This section provides updates for those developments that were identified in previous reports, but the developments have not yet been completed.

4.1.1 Tesco Supermarket expansion, South Street, Oakham

The 2010 Progress Report identified that the proposed expansion of Tesco supermarket in Oakham could affect local air quality on South Street, New Street, John Street and Westgate. Planning permission (FUL/2010/0388) was granted but with a condition attached requiring the potential impacts on air quality to be assessed, prior to the development commencing. In early 2014 the permission was renewed, (2014/0134/FUL) planning condition 19 has carried forward the requirement to assess any impacts on local air quality, prior to the first use of the extension.

4.1.2 Hawksmead residential development including Combined Heat and Power Plant to north west of Oakham

The 2010 Progress Report recorded that an Outline Planning application (OUT 2009/1306) had been granted. The permission was for mixed residential development to the north west of Oakham and included provision for a centralised combined heat and power plant (CHP). The details of this scheme have been subsequently amended and no longer include provision for a CHP plant.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 19 Rutland County Council 4.1 Developments where planning permission is pending

There are currently no planning applications pending that could have a significant impact on local air quality.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 20 Rutland County Council

5 Conclusions and Proposed Actions

5.1 Conclusions from New Monitoring Data

None of the sites where NO2 monitoring is conducted have indicated that the annual air quality objective of 40 µg/m3 has or is likely to be exceeded. Although generally there has been an increased in measured NO2 during 2013, compared to 2012, the results are all with the range of results obtained over the last five years

5.2 Conclusions relating to New Local Developments

During 2013, no new local developments commenced, were granted planning permission or had planning permission pending that potentially could have a significant impact on Local Air Quality.

5.3 Other Conclusions

There were two proposed developments identified in the 2013 Progress Report where planning permission has been granted, but the development had not commenced. The plans for the Combined Heat and Power Plant on the Hawksmead development site in Oakham have been superseded and the development will no longer include a CHP plant. The planning permission for the proposed expansion of the Tesco supermarket was renewed early in 2014 and planning conditions are still imposed requiring impact on local air quality to be assessed. The potential impacts on local air quality will be re-examined in the 2015 Air Quality report.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 21 Rutland County Council 5.4 Proposed Actions

This report has identified that there is no need to proceed to a Detailed Assessment of air quality, the next report that will be produced will be the 2015 Updating Screening and Assessment Report.

LAQM Progress Report 2014 22 Rutland County Council

6 References

Defra (2009) Local Air Quality Management – Technical Guidance (LAQM.TG09)

LAQM Progress Report 2014 23 Rutland County Council Appendices

Appendix 1: Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) Data

Appendix 2: Monthly NO2 diffusion tube results

LAQM Progress Report 2014 24 Rutland County Council

Appendix 1: NO2 diffusion tube QA:QC Data

Monitoring of NO2 by diffusion tube, provides an important tool in the assessment of local air quality. However the results obtained can be affected by the monitoring, deployment and collection procedures, they can also be affected by the tube preparation method and performance of the analysing laboratory. To increase the confidence that can be placed in the monitoring results obtained, the following appendix details what procedures have been used to quantify and adjust monitoring results.

Diffusion Tube Bias Adjustment Factors

Different laboratory tube preparation methods can have a tendency to consistently over or under record NO2 concentrations, when compared to the true concentration, determined by an automatic chemiluminescent analyser. This is termed ‘laboratory bias’, the diffusion tube results can be adjusted using a correction factor, the following section details how the monitoring results presented in this report have been adjusted for laboratory bias.

The Nitrogen Dioxide diffusion tubes used are supplied and analysed by:

Gradko International, St Martins House, Winchester,

The tube preparation method is 20% (Triethanolamine)TEA / Water and analysis is performed using U.V. Spectrophotometry.

Nitrogen Dioxide diffusion tubes Bias Adjustment Factors

Rutland County Council does not have an automatic chemiluminescent analyser monitoring concentrations of NO2, as a consequence it is not possible to undertake a local co-location study with the diffusion tubes. The National bias adjustment factor has been selected from the ‘LAQM Tools’ Website. The following criteria were selected to ensure the bias adjustment factor was representative for the diffusion tubes used in Rutland:

LAQM Progress Report 2014 25 Rutland County Council

Laboratory: Gradko Method: 20%TEA/water Year: 2013 Bias adjustment factor (cm/Dm) = 0.95 based on 35 studies version 06/14 (updated June 2014)

QA/QC of diffusion tube monitoring

Gradko International has confirmed that their NO2 diffusion tube procedures follow the guidelines of the DEFRA document ‘Diffusion Tubes for Ambient NO2 Monitoring: Practical Guidance for Laboratories and Users’. In addition Gradko’s internal analysis procedures are assessed by United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) on an annual basis for compliance to ISO17025 ‘General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories’.

NO2 diffusion tubes are stored, handled and deployed by Rutland County Council in accordance with the relevant guidance in, Diffusion Tubes for Ambient NO2 Monitoring: Practical Guidance for laboratories and users. The diffusion tubes are exposed for periods of one month in accordance with the annual calendar provided by Defra under the Local Air Quality Support Program.

Diffusion tube Precision

The precision of diffusion tubes is an assessment of diffusion tubes ability to produce the same result, when exposed to the same concentration of NO2. Precision is determined using studies of duplicate or triplicate diffusion tubes, exposed in the same location, the tubes should record the same concentration of NO2. In reality there is variation in the results obtained, where variation is large the precision is poor and where the results agree closely, precision is good. No local precision studies are undertaken, however the results of other studies are recorded in the National Diffusion Tube Bias Adjustment Spreadsheet v6/14

Precision for Gradko, 20 TEA in water, during 2013 was GOOD based on 35 studies

LAQM Progress Report 2014 26 Rutland County Council

Workplace Analysis Scheme Proficiency

Gradko International participate in the Workplace Analysis Scheme for Proficiency (WASP), that is operated by the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL). The precision and accuracy of the laboratory is assessed on a quarterly basis, by providing the laboratory with diffusion tubes that have been ‘spiked’ with a known amount (concentration) of nitrate. The laboratory analyses the tubes and reports the results back to HSL, this allows the laboratory’s performance to be assessed.

Gradko International’s performance during 2013 (WASP rounds 120 to 123) was assessed as ‘Satisfactory’ for a 100% of results submitted by Gradko to HSL. This performance meets the requirement of Defra set out in technical guidance note (TG 09).

LAQM Progress Report 2014 27 Rutland County Council

Appendix 2: Monthly NO2 diffusion tube results

Site Location Monthly results µg/m3 Annual Annual Id Mean Mean µg/m3 µg/m3 (Bias - factor 0.95) Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 1 Caldecott 30.5 21.76 29.46 22.8 20.09 26.35 26.17 31.42 20.04 24.86 36.3 35.7 27.1 25.8 2 Uppingham 32.45 33.17 34.07 28.78 27.73 34.15 34.78 46.39 27.46 29.59 43.19 42.3 34.5 32.8 3 Ketton 29.17 24.27 23.64 17.33 15.63 22.06 9.19 21.05 18.25 19.51 27.95 31.54 21.6 20.6 4 Tickencote 25.5 24.3 35.46 24.87 15.57 26.52 21.37 15.04 15.42 15.21 21.77 18.95 21.7 20.6 5 Oakham, Uppingham Rd 29.41 28.81 24.71 18.65 16.88 20.66 20.84 26.13 20.54 23.21 34.9 36.42 25.1 23.8 6 Oakham, Brooke Rd 31.93 30.43 27.56 18.92 17.98 27.45 14.74 28.73 20.09 23.49 37.07 37.01 26.3 25.0 7 Oakham, Melton Rd 28.69 25.98 26.37 20.91 17.08 27.44 17.27 27.51 20.18 21.52 27.49 31.66 24.3 23.1 8 Oakham, Burley Pk Wy 38.18 33.94 37.77 24.7 23.03 38.01 39.74 33.23 23.81 41.25 37.33 33.7 32.0 9 Egleton 21.03 13.8 13.59 7.92 7.12 8.89 7.02 9.87 11.54 8.09 15.34 18.2 11.9 11.3 10 Oakham, High St 34.27 33.31 33.97 25.59 22.58 34.07 24.98 38.25 24.13 28.77 38.53 30.06 30.7 29.2 11 Oakham, New St 26.32 25.55 28.3 22.04 14.64 22.9 21.52 7.97 17.49 17.92 27.85 21.1 20.1 Note: Months where diffusion tubes results are missing are highlighted in red

LAQM Progress Report 2014 28

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I00625R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I00625 DESPATCH NOTE SOR012372 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 12/02/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 271169 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 598.83 21.06 10.99 0.92 2 Uppingham 271155 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 599.00 22.84 11.92 0.99 3 Kelton 271168 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 598.42 17.87 9.33 0.78 4 Tickencate 271167 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 598.33 13.28 6.93 0.58 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 271160 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 596.83 18.11 9.45 0.79 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 271159 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 596.83 15.73 8.21 0.68 7 Oakham Melton Rd 271157 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 596.83 16.69 8.71 0.72 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 271161 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 596.75 18.18 9.49 0.79 9 Egleton 271164 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 599.75 10.91 5.69 0.48 11 Oakham New St 271158 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 596.83 16.00 8.35 0.69 10 Oakham High St 271156 10/01/2014 04/02/2014 596.92 24.37 12.72 1.06

Laboratory Blank 599.75 0.30 0.16 0.013

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 18/02/2014 Date of Report 18/02/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 4 – September 2012 Report Number I00625R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I00868R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I00868 DESPATCH NOTE SOR012372 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 07/03/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 284706 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.17 25.47 13.29 1.29 2 Uppingham 284708 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.67 30.59 15.97 1.55 4 Tichencate 284720 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.75 14.81 7.73 0.75 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 284714 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.67 23.47 12.25 1.19 6 Brooke Rd Oak 284713 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.67 22.36 11.67 1.13 7 Melton Rd Oak 284711 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.75 20.85 10.88 1.06 8 Burley Pk Wg Oak 284715 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 701.08 26.01 13.58 1.33 9 Egleton 284709 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.25 12.71 6.63 0.64 10 Oakham High St 284710 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.67 33.70 17.59 1.71 11 New Street, Oakham 284712 04/02/2014 05/03/2014 696.67 18.35 9.58 0.93

Laboratory Blank 701.08 0.10 0.05 0.005

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Laura Digby

Date of Analysis 12/03/2014 Date of Report 12/03/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I01326R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I01326 DESPATCH NOTE SOR012372 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 07/04/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 298394 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 672.50 30.14 15.73 1.47 2 Uppingham 298395 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 672.00 34.59 18.06 1.69 3 Felton 298393 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 671.92 27.57 14.39 1.35 4 Tichencate 298392 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 672.00 26.00 13.57 1.27 5 Uppingham Rd, Oakham 298396 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 671.58 27.56 14.38 1.35 6 Brooke Rd, Oakham 298397 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 671.58 31.01 16.19 1.51 7 Melton Rd, Oakham 298399 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 671.50 23.93 12.49 1.17 8 Burley Pk Way, Oakham 298405 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 667.17 31.53 16.46 1.53 9 Egleton, Oakham 298401 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 672.42 19.93 10.40 0.97 10 High St, Oakham 298400 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 671.58 40.22 20.99 1.96 11 New St, Oakham 298398 05/03/2014 02/04/2014 671.58 26.05 13.59 1.27

Laboratory Blank 672.50 0.37 0.19 0.018

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 298401 contained a spider and a web. Result may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 15/04/2014 Date of Report 16/04/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I02102R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I02102 DESPATCH NOTE SOR012372 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 02/06/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 312859 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 671.42 26.56 13.86 1.30 2 Uppingham 312858 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 671.33 33.76 17.62 1.65 3 Belton 312860 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 671.58 22.59 11.79 1.10 4 Tichencate 312865 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 671.50 23.88 12.47 1.17 5 Uppingham Rd 312852 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 672.00 23.36 12.19 1.14 6 Brooke Rd 312854 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 672.00 25.15 13.13 1.23 7 Melton Rd 312856 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 672.00 26.83 14.01 1.31 8 Burley Road Oakham 312851 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 674.00 32.11 16.76 1.57 9 Egleton 312857 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 671.33 3.40 1.77 0.17 10 Oakham High St 312853 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 671.75 32.93 17.19 1.61 11 New St, Oakham 312855 02/04/2014 30/04/2014 672.25 23.31 12.17 1.14

Laboratory Blank 674.00 0.20 0.11 0.010

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 312865 contained a spider and web. Result may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 12/06/2014 Date of Report 12/06/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7 The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 4 – September 2012 Report Number I02102R Page 1 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I02580R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I02580 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 07/07/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 336680 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 696.58 23.75 12.40 1.20 2 Uppingham 336679 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 697.00 31.02 16.19 1.57 3 Kelton 336681 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 695.50 19.14 9.99 0.97 4 Tichencate 336685 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 695.08 18.28 9.54 0.92 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 336672 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 697.75 21.57 11.26 1.09 6 Brooke Rd 336673 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 697.75 22.53 11.76 1.14 7 Melton Rd 336675 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 697.75 22.12 11.55 1.12 8 Burley Pk Wg Oak 336677 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 696.73 28.77 15.02 1.46 9 Egleton 336678 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 698.50 12.89 6.73 0.65 11 New st, Oakham 336674 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 697.92 16.97 8.86 0.86 10 Oakham High St 336676 30/04/2014 29/05/2014 697.58 29.72 15.51 1.51

Laboratory Blank 698.50 0.14 0.07 0.007

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 09/07/2014 Date of Report 10/07/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I02610R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I02610 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 07/07/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 352571 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 815.75 23.74 12.39 1.41 2 Uppingham 352572 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 815.50 31.85 16.63 1.89 3 Kelton 352570 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 816.75 17.17 8.96 1.02 4 Tichencate 352569 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 817.08 21.32 11.13 1.27 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 352563 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 814.00 20.58 10.74 1.22 6 Brooke Rd, Oakham 352564 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 814.00 22.35 11.67 1.32 7 Melton Rd, Oakham 352566 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 814.00 24.48 12.77 1.45 8 Burley Pk Wy Oakham 352568 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 818.10 28.68 14.97 1.71 9 Egleton 352576 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 812.50 <0.34 <0.18 <0.02 20 High St Oakham 352567 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 814.08 24.66 12.87 1.46 11 New St Oakham 352565 29/05/2014 02/07/2014 814.00 19.04 9.94 1.13

Laboratory Blank 818.10 0.15 0.08 0.009

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results reported as < 0.02 on tube are below the reporting limit. The exposure times were calculated from start and finish times given on the exposure sheet. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2

Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550

Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 10/07/2014 Date of Report 11/07/2014

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I03233R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I03233 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 14/08/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 367277 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 695.92 33.65 17.56 1.70 2 Uppingham 367276 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 695.75 46.71 24.38 2.36 3 Kelton 367278 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 696.25 20.64 10.77 1.04 4 Tickencate 367279 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 696.33 21.43 11.18 1.08 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 367270 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 697.50 20.73 10.82 1.05 6 Brooke Rd 367271 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 697.50 27.51 14.36 1.39 7 Melton Rd 367273 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 697.58 30.91 16.13 1.57 8 Burley Pk Wy 367283 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 694.00 38.58 20.14 1.95 9 Egleton 367275 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 697.17 15.42 8.05 0.78 11 New St 367272 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 697.58 21.03 10.98 1.07 10 Oakham High St 367274 02/07/2014 31/07/2014 697.58 33.25 17.36 1.69

Laboratory Blank 697.58 0.04 0.02 0.002

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Exposure times were calculated from start and finish times given on the exposure sheet. Tube 367275 was dirty when received and contained a spider web. Result may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Laura Digby

Date of Analysis 28/08/2014 Date of Report 29/08/2014

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I03671R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I03671 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 11/09/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 402497 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 648.25 16.01 8.35 0.75 2 Uppingham 402498 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 648.25 24.10 12.58 1.14 3 Kelton 402499 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 648.17 11.97 6.25 0.56 4 Tichencate 402500 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 648.25 8.18 4.27 0.39 5 Uppingham Rd Oakham 402501 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 647.00 13.30 6.94 0.63 6 Brooke Rd Oakham 402502 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 647.00 15.69 8.19 0.74 7 Melton Rd Oakham 402503 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 646.92 15.37 8.02 0.72 8 Burley Park Wg Oakham 402504 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 647.50 15.60 8.14 0.73 9 Egleton 402505 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 647.33 4.82 2.52 0.23 10 High St Oakham 402506 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 646.92 19.21 10.03 0.90 11 New St Oakham 402507 31/07/2014 27/08/2014 646.92 9.99 5.21 0.47

Laboratory Blank 648.25 0.19 0.10 0.009

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 19/09/2014 Date of Report 22/09/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I03971R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I03971 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 03/10/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 380564 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 839.75 28.56 14.90 1.74 2 Uppingham 380565 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 839.83 36.01 18.80 2.20 3 Belton 380566 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 839.83 20.78 10.84 1.27 4 Tichencate 380567 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 839.67 24.93 13.01 1.52 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 380568 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 841.42 24.75 12.92 1.51 6 Brooke Rd 380569 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 841.25 24.79 12.94 1.52 7 Melton Rd 380571 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 840.92 29.36 15.32 1.79 8 Burley Park Wg 380573 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 840.67 34.59 18.06 2.11 9 Egleton 380577 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 843.75 7.94 4.15 0.49 10 Oakham High St 380572 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 840.58 30.87 16.11 1.89 11 New St 380570 27/08/2014 01/10/2014 841.08 23.87 12.46 1.46

Laboratory Blank 843.75 0.02 0.01 0.001

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 380577 contained a spider and spider web. Result may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Laura Digby

Date of Analysis 07/10/2014 Date of Report 08/10/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7 The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 4 – September 2012 Report Number I03971R Page 1 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER I04754R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE I04754 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 12/11/2014

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 437158 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.67 29.82 15.57 1.46 2 Uppingham 437159 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.67 34.85 18.19 1.70 3 Kelton 437160 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.67 22.60 11.79 1.10 4 Tickencate 437161 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.67 15.90 8.30 0.78 5 Uppingham Rd, Oakham 437162 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.08 25.00 13.05 1.22 6 Brooke Rd, Oakham 437163 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.25 22.64 11.81 1.10 7 Melton Rd, Oakham 437164 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.58 23.04 12.03 1.12 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 437165 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 673.67 28.78 15.02 1.41 9 Egleton 437166 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 669.00 10.48 5.47 0.51 10 High Street, Oakham 437167 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.92 31.45 16.41 1.54 11 New Street, Oakham 437168 01/10/2014 29/10/2014 671.42 19.01 9.92 0.93

Laboratory Blank 673.67 0.27 0.14 0.013

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 18/11/2014 Date of Report 18/11/2014

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J00023R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J00023 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 05/01/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 451895 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 840.33 30.06 15.69 1.84 2 Uppingham 451896 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 840.33 32.61 17.02 1.99 3 Kelton 451897 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 840.50 22.11 11.54 1.35 4 Tichencate 451898 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 840.42 25.94 13.54 1.58 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 451899 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 839.00 33.65 17.56 2.05 6 Brooke Rd 451900 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 839.00 24.09 12.58 1.47 7 Melton Rd 451901 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 839.00 25.62 13.37 1.56 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 451902 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 838.33 27.37 14.29 1.67 9 Egleton 451903 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 838.50 14.17 7.39 0.86 11 New St 451904 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 839.00 26.78 13.98 1.63 10 High Street, Oakham 451905 29/10/2014 03/12/2014 839.00 27.08 14.13 1.65

Laboratory Blank 840.50 0.05 0.03 0.003

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 451903 contained a spider and a spider web. Result may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Laura Digby

Date of Analysis 07/01/2015 Date of Report 09/01/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7 The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 4 – September 2012 Report Number J00023R Page 1 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J00252R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J00252 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 12/01/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 417360 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.00 27.32 14.26 1.72 2 Uppingham 417361 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.00 30.23 15.78 1.90 3 Belton 417362 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 863.92 25.91 13.52 1.63 4 Tichencate 417363 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 863.92 11.93 6.23 0.75 5 Uppingham Rd 417364 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.83 28.34 14.79 1.78 6 Brooke Rd 417365 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.83 28.55 14.90 1.79 7 Melton Rd 417366 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.33 23.16 12.09 1.45 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 417368 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 861.33 26.73 13.95 1.67 9 Egleton 417367 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.00 15.28 7.97 0.96 10 High Street, Oakham 417369 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.58 33.08 17.26 2.08 11 New St 417370 03/12/2014 08/01/2015 864.08 19.61 10.24 1.23

Laboratory Blank 864.83 0.02 0.01 0.001

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Laura Digby

Date of Analysis 15/01/2015 Date of Report 16/01/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

Rutland County Council

2015 Air Quality Annual Status Report (ASR)

In fulfilment of Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 Local Air Quality Management

November 2016

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 Rutland County Council

Local Authority Craig Howat Officer Andrew Woodhouse Department Public Protection Rutland County Council Catmose Address Oakham LE15 6HP Telephone 01572 722577

E-mail [email protected] Report Reference ASR 2015 v1.0 number Date November 2016

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 Rutland County Council

Executive Summary: Air Quality in Our Area Air Quality in Rutland County Council

Air pollution is associated with a number of adverse health impacts. Air pollution plays a role in many of the major health challenges of our day, and has been linked to cancer, asthma, stroke and heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and changes linked to dementia1. This damage occurs across a lifetime, from a baby’s first weeks in the womb all the way through to the years of older age1.

Gestation, infancy and early childhood are vulnerable times because the young body is growing and developing rapidly1. We know that the heart, brain, hormone systems and immunity can all be harmed by air pollution1. Research is beginning to point towards effects on growth, intelligence, and development of the brain and coordination1. Recent research has shown a link with depression especially in young people at even moderate levels of air pollutants and dementia in older people1.

Harm to babies and children will have an impact that lasts far into the future1. For the same reason, any air quality improvements we make now will have long-lasting benefits1. Older people, and adults with long-term conditions, are also vulnerable to the effects of air pollution1.

Improving air quality will help them to stay independent and well, benefiting individuals and easing the pressure on our NHS and social services.1 Additionally, air pollution particularly affects the most vulnerable in society: children and older people, and those with heart and lung conditions 1.

Each year in the UK, around 40,000 deaths are attributable to exposure to outdoor air pollution, with more linked also to exposure to indoor pollutants.1 The annual health cost to society of the impacts of particulate matter alone in the UK is estimated

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 i Rutland County Council to be around £16 billion1. There is also often a strong correlation with equalities issues, because areas with poor air quality are also often poorer areas1 .

Local Air Quality in Rutland is generally good and there is no evidence to suggest that the Air Quality Objectives are being exceeded. The principal pollutant of concern is Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) which is generally associated with road traffic. In 2015 the monitored concentrations of NO2 decreased by 2 to 24 % compared with 2014, although limited significance can perhaps be drawn from this reduction over 1 year it is noticeable because the reduction has been observed at all monitoring sites.

Rutland is predominantly a rural area with a population of 38,046 (2015 mid-year estimate). The two largest towns of Oakham and Uppingham have a mix of retail, commercial, service and light industrial businesses. Rural areas support a broad range of agricultural activities arable, livestock including a number of free range poultry units. The mineral resources of limestone are quarried and processed locally and there is a wide range of business from the Cement Works at Ketton to individual stone masons.

No major sources of air pollution were introduced in 2015. Consultation with Development Control is used to identify potential sources of air pollution at the Planning and Pre-Planning phases. This consultation allows potentially significant impacts on Local Air Quality to be identified, assessed and if appropriate changes designed into proposals before either development commences or Planning Permission is granted.

1 Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air pollution. Royal College of Physicians 2016

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 ii Rutland County Council

1.1 Local Priorities and Challenges

It is hoped that in the near future the Environment Strategy will confirm Rutland County Council’s commitment to protect Local Air Quality. The Strategy should be the basis for actions and policies to give greater detail on how Local Air Quality will be maintained. In addition maintaining the consultation service with Development Control regarding proposed developments is an important local priority to ensure Local Air Quality is protected.

The NO2 diffusion tube monitoring program will continue with the aim of identifying locations where there may be an increases in NO2 that could result in exceedances of the Air Quality Objectives.

How to Get Involved

The Travel4Rutland program is a free service for residents and people working in Rutland to identify opportunities for car sharing. This can help save on fuel and parking costs as well as helping reduce emissions from vehicles, thereby helping to improve local air quality.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 iii Rutland County Council Table of Contents

Executive Summary: Air Quality in Our Area ...... i Air Quality in Rutland County Council ...... i 1.1 Local Priorities and Challenges ...... iii How to Get Involved...... iii 2 Local Air Quality Management ...... 1 3 Actions to Improve Air Quality ...... 2 3.1 Air Quality Management Areas ...... 2 3.2 Progress and Impact of Measures to address Air Quality in Rutland County Council ...... 2

3.3 PM2.5 – Local Authority Approach to Reducing Emissions and or Concentrations...... 4 4 Air Quality Monitoring Data and Comparison with Air Quality Objectives and National Compliance ...... 5 4.1 Summary of Monitoring Undertaken ...... 5 4.1.1 Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites...... 5 4.2 Individual Pollutants ...... 5

4.2.1 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)...... 5 Appendix A: Monitoring Results ...... 7 Appendix B: Full Monthly Diffusion Tube Results for 2015 ...... 10 Appendix C: Supporting Technical Information / Air Quality Monitoring Data QA/QC ...... 11 Appendix D: Map(s) of Monitoring Locations ...... 13 Appendix E: Summary of Air Quality Objectives in England ...... 19 Glossary of Terms ...... 20 References ...... 21

List of Tables Table 3.1 – Progress on Measures to Improve Air Quality ...... 3

List of Figures

Chart 3.1 Monitored Annual Average NO2 concentrations in Rutland 2011 to 2015 ... 6

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 iv Rutland County Council

2 Local Air Quality Management

This report provides an overview of air quality in Rutland during 2015. It fulfils the requirements of Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) as set out in Part IV of the Environment Act (1995) and the relevant Policy and Technical Guidance documents.

The LAQM process places an obligation on all local authorities to regularly review and assess air quality in their areas, and to determine whether or not the air quality objectives are likely to be achieved. Where an exceedance is considered likely the local authority must declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and prepare an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) setting out the measures it intends to put in place in pursuit of the objectives. This Annual Status Report (ASR) is an annual requirement showing the strategies employed by Rutland County Council to improve air quality and any progress that has been made.

The statutory air quality objectives applicable to LAQM in England can be found in Table E.1 in Appendix E.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 1 Rutland County Council

3 Actions to Improve Air Quality 3.1 Air Quality Management Areas

Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) are declared when there is an exceedance or likely exceedance of an air quality objective. After declaration, the authority must prepare an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) within 12-18 months setting out measures it intends to put in place in pursuit of the objectives.

Rutland County Council currently does not have any AQMAs.

3.2 Progress and Impact of Measures to address Air Quality in Rutland County Council

Rutland County Council has taken forward a number of measures during the current reporting year of 2015 in pursuit of improving local air quality. Details of all measures completed, in progress or planned are set out in Table 3.1.

Key completed measures are:

 Development Control Consultations – this is a ongoing process to identify where proposed developments have the potential for adverse air quality impacts, however no specific sites came through Development Control in 2015.

Rutland County Council’s priorities for the coming year are;

 Review and assess potential impacts on Local Air Quality from Planning Applications.

 Maintain the NO2 diffusion tube monitoring program.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 2 Rutland County Council

Table 3.1 – Progress on Measures to Improve Air Quality

Key Target Pollution Estimated Measure EU Planning Implementation Progress Measure EU Category Lead Authority Performance Reduction in the Completion Comments No. Classification Phase Phase to Date Indicator AQMA Date Alternatives to Travel 4 Car and lift Rutland County 1 private vehicle N/A Complete No of users N/A Ongoing N/A Rutland sharing scheme Council use Proactive Policy Guidance No of Planning Developme and Rutland County 2 Other policy N/A Complete Applications N/A Ongoing N/A nt Control Development Council considered consultation Control

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 3 Rutland County Council

3.3 PM2.5 – Local Authority Approach to Reducing Emissions and or Concentrations

As detailed in Policy Guidance LAQM.PG16 (Chapter 7), local authorities are expected to work towards reducing emissions and/or concentrations of PM2.5 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5µm or less). There is clear evidence that PM2.5 has a significant impact on human health, including premature mortality, allergic reactions, and cardiovascular diseases.

Rutland County Council doesn’t monitor for PM2.5 or PM10. Previous rounds of the Air

Quality Review and Assessment process have indicated that particulates (PM10) aren’t a significant problem in the county. It is recognised that where possible work should seek to reduce emissions of particulate emissions. The following measures should help reduce emissions of particulates

 Review and assess potential impacts on Local Air Quality from proposed Planning Applications.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 4 Rutland County Council

4 Air Quality Monitoring Data and Comparison with Air Quality Objectives and National Compliance 4.1 Summary of Monitoring Undertaken

There are no Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) in Rutland. The results of the monitoring data for 2015 show a slight reduction since 2014 which supports the decision that it isn’t necessary to declare an AQMA.

4.1.1 Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites

Rutland County Council undertook non- automatic (passive) monitoring of NO2 at 11 sites during 2015. Table A.1 in Appendix A shows the details of the sites.

Maps showing the location of the monitoring sites are provided in Appendix D. Further details on Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) and bias adjustment for the diffusion tubes are included in Appendix C.

4.2 Individual Pollutants

The air quality monitoring results presented in this section are, where relevant, adjusted for “annualisation” and bias. Further details on adjustments are provided in Appendix C.

4.2.1 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Most NO2 monitoring sites are situated in close proximity to roads. The locations are chosen to be indicative of worse case public exposure, typically close to junctions, level crossings and similar where vehicles are more likely to be queuing or accelerating.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 5 Rutland County Council

Monitoring for NO2 in Rutland using diffusion tubes at 11 sites has shown no exceedance of the annual air quality objective of 40 µg/m3 in 2015. The full 2015 dataset of monthly mean values is provided in Appendix B.

Table A.2 in Appendix A and Chart 3.1 below, compare the ratified and adjusted monitored NO2 annual mean concentrations for the past 5 years with the air quality objective of 40µg/m3.

Chart 3.1 Monitored Annual Average NO2 concentrations in Rutland 2011 to 2015

Annual Air Quality Objective 40 µg/m3

Over the five year period since 2011 there have been slight declines in NO2 concentrations for most sites. This is most distinctly seen from 2013 when all sites have shown reduced concentrations of NO2 over the two years to 2015. None of the monitoring sites have found any significant unexpected changes in NO2 concentrations.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 6 Rutland County Council

Appendix A: Monitoring Results

Table A.1 – Details of Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites Tube Distance to Distance to X OS Y OS In collocated Site Pollutants Relevant kerb of Site ID Site Type Grid Grid AQMA with a Height (m) Name Monitored Exposure nearest Ref Ref ? Continuous (m) (1) road (m) (2) Analyser?

1 Caldecott Kerbside 486720 293460 NO2 N 2.0m 1.0m No 2.2m

2 Uppingham Roadside 486630 299640 NO2 N 0.3m 1.5m No 2.2m

Roadside/ot 3 Ketton 498490 305100 NO N 2.0m 4.0m No 2.2m her 2

4 Tickencote Rural 499060 309650 NO2 N 20.0m N/A No 2.0m

Oakham, 5 Uppingham Kerbside 486300 308490 NO2 N 4.0m 0.2m No 2.2m Rd

Oakham, 6 Kerbside 486130 308570 NO N 0.4m 1.0m No 2.2m Brooke Rd 2

Oakham, 7 Kerbside 485760 308890 NO N 1.2m 0.2m No 2.2m Melton Rd 2

Oakham 8 Burley Pk Kerbside 486640 309710 NO2 N 6.3m 1.4m No 2.2m Wy

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 7 Rutland County Council

Tube Distance to Distance to X OS Y OS In collocated Site Pollutants Relevant kerb of Site ID Site Type Grid Grid AQMA with a Height (m) Name Monitored Exposure nearest Ref Ref ? Continuous (m) (1) road (m) (2) Analyser?

9 Egleton Rural 487910 307540 NO2 N N/A N/A No 1.5m

Oakham, 10 Kerbside 486206 308740 NO N 0.3m 1.0m No 2.2m High St 2

Oakham, 11 Kerbside 485850 308690 NO N 0.1m 1.0m No 2.2m New St 2

(1) 0m if the monitoring site is at a location of exposure (e.g. installed on/adjacent to the façade of a residential property).

(2) N/A if not applicable.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 8 Rutland County Council

Table A.2 – Annual Mean NO2 Monitoring Results Valid Data 3 (3) NO2 Annual Mean Concentration (µg/m ) Site ID Site Type Monitoring Type Capture 2015 (%) (2) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 1 Caldecott Kerbside 100 22.7 23.5 25.8 24.0 21.8 2 Uppingham Roadside 100 33.4 29.8 32.8 29.5 26.6 3 Ketton Roadside/other 83 19.8 19.9 20.6 18.9 18.4 4 Tickencote Rural 100 17.7 14.6 20.6 17.1 14.1 Oakham, Uppingham 5 Kerbside Rd 100 21.9 23.2 23.8 21.3 20.0 6 Oakham, Brooke Rd Kerbside 100 26.1 25.5 25.0 21.4 19.9 7 Oakham, Melton Rd Kerbside 100 19.5 22.0 23.1 21.4 19.6 Oakham Burley Pk 8 Kerbside Wy 100 28.1 28.6 32 25.6 23.5 9 Egleton Rural 100 7.0 10.4 11.3 10.6 8.1 10 Oakham, High St Kerbside 100 26.4 29.1 29.2 27.3 24.9 11 Oakham, New St Kerbside 100 20.2 18.4 20.1 18.2 15.4 3 Notes: Exceedances of the NO2 annual mean objective of 40µg/m are shown in bold. 3 NO2 annual means exceeding 60µg/m , indicating a potential exceedance of the NO2 1-hour mean objective are shown in bold and underlined. (1) all monitoring at all sites was carried for the whole year. (2) data capture for the full calendar year (e.g. if monitoring was carried out for 6 months, the maximum data capture for the full calendar year is 50%). (3) Means for diffusion tubes have been corrected for bias. All means have been “annualised” as per Technical Guidance LAQM.TG16 if valid data capture for the full calendar year is less than 75%. See Appendix C for details.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 9 Rutland County Council

Appendix B: Full Monthly Diffusion Tube Results for 2015

Table B.1 – NO2 Monthly Diffusion Tube Results - 2015 3 NO2 Mean Concentrations (µg/m ) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Mean Site ID Bias Raw Adjusted Data (1) 29.68 31.48 32.28 17.89 23.01 19.92 25.90 25.8 24.92 28.07 15.98 25.32 1 25.0 21.8 35.19 38.54 38.29 21.43 30.68 27.38 30.68 29.77 30.43 33.78 23.76 27.04 2 30.6 26.6 24.11 23.38 27.24 13.82 17.30 - - 18.64 20.61 21.49 22.01 23.35 3 17.7 15.4 19.28 17.45 22.24 13.70 10.81 12.88 11.25 12.67 21.82 24.86 12.01 14.81 4 16.1 14.0 28.03 28.94 30.07 16.26 21.20 16.43 20.59 21.56 21.96 27.37 26.79 22.15 5 23.4 20.4 32.73 26.25 30.9 15.57 22.62 16.51 19.8 21.14 22.70 25.9 23.08 17.81 6 22.9 19.9 26.62 27.52 31.04 14.30 20.57 19.84 20.54 21.76 25.05 27.30 18.07 17.47 7 22.5 19.6 34.01 25.63 39.10 20.55 26.97 23.40 25.64 27.94 29.58 31.92 25.3 14.24 8 27.0 23.5 11.07 16.51 12.83 6.19 7.17 4.76 5.82 6.54 7.54 11.82 10.69 10.10 9 9.3 8.1 35.93 36.00 39.12 19.69 26.31 23.78 26.84 27.02 28.31 30.61 21.79 28.11 10 28.6 24.9 22.78 21.9 26.31 14.40 14.26 14.17 15.46 8.81 9.67 24.26 20.31 19.34 11 17.6 15.3 (1) See Appendix C for details on bias adjustment

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 10 Rutland County Council

Appendix C: Supporting Technical Information / Air Quality Monitoring Data QA/QC Diffusion tubes bias adjustment

The diffusion tubes used in 2015 were supplied and analysed by Gradko International. The tube preparation method is 20% (Triethanolamine)TEA / Water.

The bias adjustment factor for 2015 has been taken from Defra’s UK national bias adjustment spreadsheet (version 09/16). 30 studies were used to derive the bias adjustment factor, so there is a reasonable good degree of confidence in using the bias adjustment factor. The Bias adjustment facors used in the last five years are shown in table C1.

Table C1 2011 – 2015 Bias Adjustment Factors

Year National bias adjustment factor

2011 0.89

2012 0.97

2013 0.95

2014 0.91

2015 0.87

QA/QC of diffusion tube monitoring

Gradko International are accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS). They comply with ISO17025 ‘General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories’.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 11 Rutland County Council

NO2 diffusion tubes are stored, exposed and collected by Rutland County Council in accordance with the ‘NO2 Diffusion Tube Calendar’ and the relevant guidance in, ‘Diffusion Tubes for Ambient NO2 Monitoring: Practical Guidance for laboratories and users’.

Diffusion tube Precision

The results of 29 of 30 colocation studies recorded ‘Good’ precision in the National Diffusion Tube Bias Adjustment Spreadsheet v09/16.

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 12 Rutland County Council

Appendix D: Map(s) of Monitoring Locations

Site 1 Caldecott

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 13 Rutland County Council

Site 2 Uppingham

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 14 Rutland County Council

3 Ketton

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 15 Rutland County Council

4 Tickencote

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 16 Rutland County Council

Oakham, 5 Uppingham Road, 6 Brooke Road, 7 Melton Road, 8 Burley Park Way, 10 High Street and 11 New Street

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 17 Rutland County Council

9 Egleton

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 18 Rutland County Council

Appendix E: Summary of Air Quality Objectives in England

Table E.1 – Air Quality Objectives in England Air Quality Objective2 Pollutant Concentration Measured as 200 µg/m3 not to be exceeded more Nitrogen Dioxide 1-hour mean than 18 times a year (NO ) 2 40 µg/m3 Annual mean 50 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more Particulate Matter 24-hour mean than 35 times a year (PM ) 10 40 µg/m3 Annual mean 350 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more 1-hour mean than 24 times a year Sulphur Dioxide 125 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more 24-hour mean (SO2) than 3 times a year 266 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more 15-minute mean than 35 times a year

2 3 The units are in microgrammes of pollutant per cubic metre of air (µg/m ).

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 19 Rutland County Council

Glossary of Terms

Abbreviation Description

AQAP Air Quality Action Plan - A detailed description of measures, outcomes, achievement dates and implementation methods, showing how the local authority intends to achieve air quality limit values’

AQMA Air Quality Management Area – An area where air pollutant concentrations exceed / are likely to exceed the relevant air quality objectives. AQMAs are declared for specific pollutants and objectives

ASR Air quality Annual Status Report

Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges – Air quality screening tool produced by Highways England

EU European Union

FDMS Filter Dynamics Measurement System

LAQM Local Air Quality Management

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

NOx Nitrogen Oxides

PM10 Airborne particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10µm (micrometres or microns) or less

PM2.5 Airborne particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5µm or less

QA/QC Quality Assurance and Quality Control

SO2 Sulphur Dioxide

… …

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 20 Rutland County Council

References 1) Royal College of Physcians (2016) Every breath we take The lifelong impact of air pollution

LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 21 Rutland County Council

2015 Updating and Screening Assessment for Rutland County Council

In fulfillment of Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 Local Air Quality Management

October 2015

LAQM USA 2015 1 Rutland County Council

Local Authority Andrew Woodhouse Officer Department Public Protection Section Rutland County Council, Catmose, Address Oakham, Rutland LE15 6HP Telephone 01572 720977 e-mail [email protected] Report Reference USA 2015 V1.0 Rutland number Date October 2015

LAQM USA 2015 2 Rutland County Council

Executive Summary

The 2015 Updating Screening and Assessment report finds that local air quality in Rutland is good. None of nitrogen dioxide diffusion tube monitoring data or the screening of developments and changes within the county have indicated potentially significant impacts on local air quality. As a consequence it isn’t necessary to undertake a detailed assessment of air quality.

This report provides the latest results of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) monitoring undertaken in 2014. The annual average air quality objective for NO2 has not been exceeded, in fact at most sites there has been a slight decrease in NO2 concentrations since 2013, which continues a gradual longer term downward trend.

Most resources for local air quality are focused on planning applications and pre-application enquiries. This enables the Authority to identify potential developments that could have potentially significant impacts and give the developer or applicant the opportunity to assess and propose their own control measures. This proactive approach helps protect residents health and allows developments to progress with greater certainty.

LAQM USA 2015 3 Rutland County Council Table of contents

1 Introduction ...... 3 1.1 Description of Local Authority Area ...... 3 1.2 Purpose of Report ...... 3 1.3 Air Quality Objectives ...... 4 1.4 Summary of Previous Review and Assessments ...... 5 2 New Monitoring Data ...... 7 2.1 Summary of Monitoring Undertaken ...... 7 2.1.1 Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites ...... 7 2.2 Comparison of Monitoring Results with Air Quality Objectives ...... 10 2.2.1 Nitrogen Dioxide ...... 10 3 Road Traffic Sources ...... 17 3.1 Narrow Congested Streets with Residential Properties Close to the Kerb ...... 17 3.2 Busy Streets Where People May Spend 1-hour or More Close to Traffic ...... 17 3.3 Roads with a High Flow of Buses and/or HGVs...... 17 3.4 Junctions ...... 17 3.5 New Roads Constructed or Proposed Since the Last Round of Review and Assessment ...... 18 3.6 Roads with Significantly Changed Traffic Flows ...... 18 3.7 Bus and Coach Stations ...... 18 4 Other Transport Sources ...... 19 4.1 Airports ...... 19 4.2 Railways (Diesel and Steam Trains) ...... 19 4.2.1 Stationary Trains ...... 19 4.2.2 Moving Trains ...... 19 4.3 Ports (Shipping) ...... 19 5 Industrial Sources ...... 20 5.1 Industrial Installations ...... 20 5.1.1 New or Proposed Installations for which an Air Quality Assessment has been Carried Out ...... 20 5.1.2 Existing Installations where Emissions have Increased Substantially or New Relevant Exposure has been Introduced ...... 20 5.1.3 New or Significantly Changed Installations with No Previous Air Quality Assessment ...... 20 5.2 Major Fuel (Petrol) Storage Depots ...... 20 5.3 Petrol Stations...... 21 5.4 Poultry Farms...... 21 6 Commercial and Domestic Sources ...... 23 6.1 Biomass Combustion – Individual Installations ...... 23

LAQM USA 2015 1 Rutland County Council

6.2 Biomass Combustion – Combined Impacts ...... 23 6.3 Domestic Solid-Fuel Burning ...... 23 7 Fugitive or Uncontrolled Sources ...... 24 8 Conclusions and Proposed Actions ...... 25 8.1 Conclusions from New Monitoring Data ...... 25 8.2 Conclusions from Assessment of Sources ...... 25 8.3 Proposed Actions ...... 25 9 References ...... 26

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Air Quality Objectives included in Regulations for the purpose of LAQM in England 4 Table 1.2 Summary of previous reports on local air quality 6 Table 2.1 Details of Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites 9 Table 2.2 Results of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes in 2014 12 Table 2.3 Results of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes (2010 to 2014) 14

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Map(s) of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites 8 Figure 2.2 Trends in Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations measured at Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites 15 Figure 5.1 New Petrol Station on Hackamore Way, Barleythorpe, Oakham 21

Appendices Appendix A QA/QC Data Appendix B Monthly NO2 Diffusion tube results for 2014

LAQM USA 2015 2 Rutland County Council

1 Introduction 1.1 Description of Local Authority Area

Rutland is located in the midlands and is predominantly rural area with much of the county being used for arable farming and livestock. Areas of the county are underlain by Limestone and four smaller quarries produce limestone blocks and aggregates. The largest quarry in the county is at Ketton and is operated by Hanson Heidelberg Cement Group and predominantly produces cement. The are also a diverse range of small and medium sized businesses involved in diverse sectors such as Tourism, Information Technology as well as retail and service industries.

The population of Rutland was reported in the mid year estimate for 2014 by the Office of National Statistics as growing to 38,022. There are two small towns, Oakham and Uppingham, with populations of around eleven thousand and five thousand respectively, the rest of the county’s population are distributed in rural villages and hamlets. Towns and villages in Rutland have expanded naturally over time and as such there are a number of town and village centre locations where housing was built next to what are now busy A roads and B roads. Traffic on roads is the principal source of pollutants that impact on local air quality in the County. Start writing here….

1.2 Purpose of Report

This report fulfils the requirements of the Local Air Quality Management process as set out in Part IV of the Environment Act (1995), the Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 2007 and the relevant Policy and Technical Guidance documents. The LAQM process places an obligation on all local authorities to regularly review and assess air quality in their areas, and to determine whether or not the air quality objectives are likely to be achieved. Where exceedences are considered likely, the local authority must then declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and prepare an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) setting out the measures it intends to put in place in pursuit of the objectives.

LAQM USA 2015 3 Rutland County Council

The objective of this Updating and Screening Assessment is to identify any matters that have changed which may lead to risk of an air quality objective being exceeded. A checklist approach and screening tools are used to identify significant new sources or changes and whether there is a need for a Detailed Assessment. The USA report should provide an update of any outstanding information requested previously in Review and Assessment reports.

1.3 Air Quality Objectives

The air quality objectives applicable to LAQM in England are set out in the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 (SI 928), The Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002 (SI 3043), and are shown in Table 1.1. This table shows the objectives in units of microgrammes per cubic metre g/m3 (milligrammes per cubic metre, mg/m3 for carbon monoxide) with the number of exceedences in each year that are permitted (where applicable).

Table 1.1 Air Quality Objectives included in Regulations for the purpose of LAQM in England Air Quality Objective Date to be Pollutant Concentration Measured as achieved by Running annual 16.25 µg/m3 31.12.2003 mean Benzene Running annual 5.00 µg/m3 31.12.2010 mean Running annual 1,3-Butadiene 2.25 µg/m3 31.12.2003 mean Running 8-hour Carbon monoxide 10.0 mg/m3 31.12.2003 mean 0.5 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2004 Lead 0.25 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2008 200 µg/m3 not to be exceeded more than 1-hour mean 31.12.2005 Nitrogen dioxide 18 times a year 40 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2005 50 µg/m3, not to be 31.12.2004 Particles (PM10) exceeded more than 24-hour mean (gravimetric) 35 times a year 40 µg/m3 Annual mean 31.12.2004 Sulphur dioxide 350 µg/m3, not to be 1-hour mean 31.12.2004

LAQM USA 2015 4 Rutland County Council

exceeded more than 24 times a year 125 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more than 24-hour mean 31.12.2004 3 times a year 266 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more than 15-minute mean 31.12.2005 35 times a year

1.4 Summary of Previous Review and Assessments

Since the 2009 Updating Screening and Assessment report, greater emphasis has been put on recording planning applications, both received and determined, where a potential impact on air quality is suspected and an evaluation has been made, or has been required of the developer. The Authority has also been receiving an increasing number of pre-planning applications where applicants put forward an outline of their proposals. This has allowed potential impacts on local air quality to be identified early in the development process. This early scoping of proposals allows businesses and developers to anticipate what impact assessments maybe required and develop mitigation schemes that they can apply to their operations and prevent adverse impacts on local air quality.

LAQM USA 2015 5 Rutland County Council

Table 1.2 Summary of previous reports on local air quality Report Year Outcome Updating, Screening & 2003 All air quality objective met. Assessment Progress Report 2004 Update revealed no significant changes or developments that would significant affect air quality Progress Report 2005 Update revealed no significant changes or developments Updating, Screening & 2006 All air quality objectives met with no predicted breaches of the Assessment objectives Progress Report 2007 Update revealed no breach of air quality objectives. The completion of Oakham bypass was noted. Progress Report 2008 No breach of the air quality objectives. The positive impact of Oakham bypass was assessed Updating, Screening & 2009 No breach of air quality objectives. Assessment The positive effect of Oakham Bypass on local air quality was confirmed. Progress Report 2010 Update revealed no significant changes or developments Progress Report 2011 Update revealed no significant changes or developments Updating, Screening & 2012 No breaches of the air quality objectives were identified or Assessment predicted. No developments or applications were completed that were likely to have a significant impact on air quality. Progress Report 2013 No breaches of the air quality objectives were identified or predicted. Two developments proposed in 2012 as part of the pre-planning and planning process were assessed, Sainsbury’s supermarket in Oakham and FCC (UK) Environment Waste Transfer Station near Cottesmore. Both assessments concluded any impacts would be insignificant. Progress Report 2014 No breaches of the air quality objectives were identified or predicted. One proposed development ‘The Hawksmead Combined Heat and Power Plant’ was confirmed as no longer being progressed and so was removed from the list of potential developments that could affect local air quality.

LAQM USA 2015 6 Rutland County Council

2 New Monitoring Data 2.1 Summary of Monitoring Undertaken

Of the seven pollutants for which Air Quality Objectives exist, Rutland County Council undertakes routine monitoring for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). Monitoring is performed using passive diffusion tubes and is generally focussed on locations where local road traffic will have the greatest impact, further details are provided in section 2.1.1.

2.1.1 Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations are monitored at 11 sites in the county; their geographical location is shown in figure 2.1. More details regarding the precise diffusion tube location and the type of environment it is monitoring i.e. rural or kerbside (within 1m of kerb of busy road) is provided in table 2.1. There have been no changes in the locations used for diffusion tube monitoring since 2011

Monitoring of local air quality in Rutland is achieved through a program of passive nitrogen dioxide diffusion tubes supplied by Gradko International Ltd, further details are included in Appendix A. The diffusion tubes are exposed for monthly periods of between 4 or 5 weeks and are changed in accordance with dates set in the diffusion tube network calendar. No routine monitoring for the six other pollutants specified in the air quality objectives is undertaken

The NO2 diffusion tube bias adjustment factor used for 2014 is 0.91,

Further details of how this factor was obtained are provided in Appendix A.

LAQM USA 2015 7 Rutland County Council

Appendix A also includes details regarding Quality Assurance and Quality Control procedures that allow confidence to be placed in the concentrations of nitrogen dioxide that have been measured using diffusion tubes.

The laboratory performance for Gradko during 2014 was determined as; ‘Satisfactory’

Figure 2.1 Map(s) of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites

Oakham inset

LAQM USA 2015 8 Rutland County Council

Table 2.1 Details of Non-Automatic Monitoring Sites Relevant Exposure? Is Monitoring Distance to (Y/N with Does this Co-located Kerb of Site distance (m) Location Site X OS Grid Y OS Grid Pollutants In with a Nearest Site Name Site Type Height from Represent ID Reference Reference Monitored AQMA? Continuous Road (m) (m) monitoring Worst-Case Analyser (N/A if not site to Exposure? (Y/N) applicable) relevant exposure) 1 Caldecott Kerbside 486720 293460 2.2 NO2 N N Y (2.0m) 1.0m Y 2 Uppingham Roadside 486630 299640 2.2 NO2 N N Y (0.3m) 1.5m Y 3 Ketton Roadside/other 498490 305100 2.2 NO2 N N Y (2.0m) 4.0m Y 4 Tickencote Rural 499060 309650 2.0 NO2 N N Y (20.0m) N/A Y Oakham, 5 Uppingham Kerbside 486300 308490 2.2 NO2 N N Y (4.0m) 0.2m Y Rd Oakham, 6 Kerbside 486130 308570 2.2 NO N N Y (0.4m) 1.0m Y Brooke Rd 2 Oakham, 7 Kerbside 485760 308890 2.2 NO N N Y (1.2m) 0.2m Y Melton Rd 2 Oakham 8 Kerbside 486640 309710 2.2 NO N N Y (6.3m) 1.4m Y Burley Pk Wy 2 9 Egleton Rural 487910 307540 1.5 NO2 N N N N/A Oakham, 10 Kerbside 486206 308740 2.2 NO N N Y (0.3m) 1.0m Y High St 2 Oakham, 11 Kerbside 485850 308690 2.2 NO N N Y (0.1) 1.0m Y New St 2

LAQM USA 2015 9 Rutland County Council

2.2 Comparison of Monitoring Results with Air Quality Objectives

2.2.1 Nitrogen Dioxide

As there are very few significant industrial or commercial sources of Nitrogen Dioxide in Rutland, most NO2 diffusion tube monitoring sites in Rutland are positioned to capture NO2 from road traffic. The monitoring locations are described individually and in more detail below;

Caldecott – The A6003 runs through this village. The monitoring position is closer to the edge of the highway than the houses adjacent to this road in the village and its positioned close to traffic lights, which are the only permeant feature in the village that requires all vehicles to regularly stop and wait.

Uppingham – The A6003 is again the only major road that passes through this town. The monitoring position is set back the same distance from the edge of the highway as houses that are closest to the A6003 in the town. It is positioned close to the top of a major incline on the road, approximately 15m from a Pelican Crossing and 120m from a traffic light controlled junction, it is therefore in a position where it will be subject to NO2 concentrations that will be at least equal to or above those at permanent residential dwellings next to the A6003.

Ketton – The monitoring position is set back approximately 5m from the edge of the A6121, approximately 70m from the HGV entrance to Ketton Cement and on a section of road that is used by HGVs travelling between the A1 and the Pit Lane Industrial Estate and other access used by Castle Cement HGVs. Although the monitoring position is not as close to the road as some houses in the centre of the village, it is adjacent to one of the most heavily trafficked sections of the A6121 in Ketton, where HGVs will be routinely accelerating.

Tickencote – The monitoring position is set back approximately 55 m from the edge of the northbound carriage way of the A1, this corresponds with distance of the

LAQM USA 2015 10 Rutland County Council closest home from the same carriageway, it therefore represents the closest point to the A1 at which relevant public exposure will occur.

Uppingham and Brooke Road, Oakham – Both these monitoring positions are sited adjacent to traffic light controlled junctions, they are positioned very close to the kerb of the highway and in both cases closer than the houses.

New Street, Oakham – The monitoring location is set back from the kerb of New Street by the width of a footpath, so it is at the same distance from the road as the closest terraced houses that front onto New Street. The monitoring position is located on the section of New Street where HGVs arriving at and leaving Tesco will have to pass by, as well as a significant proportion of customer vehicles.

Melton Road, Oakham – This monitoring location is positioned very close to the kerb of the B640 (Melton Road) and within 50m of a railway level crossing, so on a section of road where traffic delays can occur. Being on the kerbside it is significantly closer due than houses and flats were relevant exposure may occur, as the houses and flats are set back by the width of a path and in some locations a front garden.

High Street, Oakham – The monitoring position is within 5m of the kerb of the mini roundabout junction of High Street (B640), Mill Street, Burley Road (B668) and Catmose Street (B640). It is as close to the kerbside of the junction as the nearby flats where relevant public exposure will occur.

Oakham Burley Park Way – This monitoring position is set back approximately 1m from the kerb of the A606 (Oakham Bypass), the nearest housing is set back approximately 8m from the kerbside of the A606. The monitoring position should therefore be exposed to higher concentrations of NO2 than the nearest relevant location

Egleton – This monitoring location is meant to be a remote, rural location, not affected by local sources of NO2 such as roads or urban areas, there is no relevant public expose at this location.

LAQM USA 2015 11 Rutland County Council

Diffusion Tube Monitoring Data

During 2014 none of the monitoring sites for nitrogen dioxide exceeded the annual mean air quality objective of 40 µg/m3 and currently none of the sites are within a margin of the objective that would suggest that an exceedance of the objective was likely.

The highest concentrations of nitrogen dioxide were found at those sites close to A roads or junctions. The Uppingham monitoring position is close to the A 6003 and near a small traffic light controlled junction, this produced the highest concentration of 29.5 µg/m3. The Oakham High Street site is also close to a junction which tends to be one of the busier in Oakham, this site had an annual mean concentration of 27.3 µg/m3, while Burley Parkway (A606), Oakham produced the next highest concentration of 25.6 µg/m3. These are the same three sites that showed the highest mean concentrations of nitrogen dioxide in 2013.

The results of the Nitrogen Dioxide monitoring in Rutland during 2014 are presented below in table 2.2. At two of the sites, Ketton and Egleton one month of data was lost as the diffusion tube was missing at Ketton in February and the tube for Egleton in June was missing. The results for Ketton and Egleton have been calculated on the average of 11 months of results, as there was no indication in the results for other sites that the monthly data in February or June was significantly outside the typical range of results. The monthly results for all sites are reproduced in Appendix B

LAQM USA 2015 12 Rutland County Council

Table 2.2 Results of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes in 2014 Site Location Site Type Within Triplicate Data Data with Confirm if Annual mean ID AQMA? or Capture less than 9 data has concentration Collocated 2014 months has been (Bias Adjustment Tube (Number been distance factor =0.91) of annualised corrected 2014 (g/m3) Months) (Y/N) (Y/N) 1 Caldecott Kerbside No No 12 N N 24.0 2 Uppingham Roadside No No 12 N N 29.5 3 Ketton Roadside/other No No 11 N N 18.9 4 Tickencote Rural No No 12 N N 17.1 Oakham, 5 Kerbside N Uppingham Rd No No 12 N 21.3 Oakham, Brooke 6 Kerbside N Rd No No 12 N 21.4 Oakham, Melton 7 Kerbside N Rd No No 12 N 21.4 Oakham Burley 8 Kerbside N Park Way No No 12 N 25.6 9 Egleton Rural No No 11 N N 10.6 10 Oakham, High St Kerbside No No 12 N N 27.3 11 Oakham, New St Kerbside No No 12 N N 18.2

LAQM USA 2015 13 Rutland County Council

Table 2.3 Results of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes (2010 to 2014) Annual mean concentration (adjusted for bias) g/m3 2010* 2011* 2012* 2013* 2014 Site Within (Bias Adjustment (Bias Adjustment (Bias Adjustment (Bias Adjustment (Bias Adjustment ID Site Type AQMA? Factor = XX) Factor = XX) Factor = XX) Factor = XX) Factor = XX) 1 Kerbside N 25.2 22.7 23.5 25.8 24.0 2 Roadside N 36.5 33.4 29.8 32.8 29.5 3 Roadside/other N 21.7 19.8 19.9 20.6 18.9 4 Rural N 22.7 17.7 14.6 20.6 17.1 5 Kerbside N 25.2 21.9 23.2 23.8 21.3 6 Kerbside N 29.0 26.1 25.5 25.0 21.4 7 Kerbside N 23.8 22.8 22.7 23.1 21.4 8 Kerbside N 31.5 28.1 29.5 32.0 25.6

LAQM USA 2015 14 Rutland County Council Figure 2.2 Trends in Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations measured at Diffusion Tube Monitoring Sites

30 Caldecott Uppingham 25 Ketton

3 Tickencote 20 Oakham, Uppingham Rd ug/m Oakham, Brooke Rd 15 Oakham, Melton Rd Oakham, Burley Pk Wy 10

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Year

LAQM USA 2015 15 Rutland County Council

The trend for NO2 concentrations shown in table 2.3 and figure 2.2 at monitoring sites between 2013 and 2014 has been downwards, as 2013 saw a slight peak, most sites are back to concentrations similar to those seen in 2012. Currently none of the monitoring sites are close to exceeding the annual mean air quality objective and the gradual and generally downward trend in concentrations, suggests that an exceedance of air quality objective over the next year is unlikely.

The monitoring sites on Uppingham Road, Melton Road and Brooke Road in Oakham that saw improvements in local air quality from 2007 following the completion of the Oakham Bypass have shown that these improvements have continued to be sustained.

Rutland County Council has examined the results from monitoring in the County. Concentrations are all below the objectives, therefore there is no need to proceed to a Detailed Assessment.

LAQM USA 2015 16 Rutland County Council

3 Road Traffic Sources 3.1 Narrow Congested Streets with Residential Properties Close to the Kerb

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new/newly identified congested streets with a flow above 5,000 vehicles per day and residential properties close to the kerb, that have not been adequately considered in previous rounds of Review and Assessment.

3.2 Busy Streets Where People May Spend 1-hour or More Close to Traffic

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new/newly identified busy streets where people may spend 1 hour or more close to traffic.

3.3 Roads with a High Flow of Buses and/or HGVs.

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new/newly identified roads with high flows of buses/HDVs.

3.4 Junctions

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new/newly identified busy junctions/busy roads.

LAQM USA 2015 17 Rutland County Council 3.5 New Roads Constructed or Proposed Since the Last Round of Review and Assessment

The only new roads constructed or proposed since the 2013 Air Quality Progress Report have been minor residential roads. None of these roads will have traffic flows in exceedance of 10,000 vehicles per day. The new roads will not increase traffic flows on any existing roads where the annual average NO2 concentration is equal to or above 36 µg/m3, or where there are more than 30 exceedances per year of the 24 hour PM10 objective 50 µg/m3 .

Rutland County Council has assessed new/proposed roads meeting the criteria in Section A.5 of Box 5.3 in TG(09), and concluded that it will not be necessary to proceed to a Detailed Assessment.

3.6 Roads with Significantly Changed Traffic Flows

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new/newly identified roads with significantly changed traffic flows.

3.7 Bus and Coach Stations

There is one bus station in Oakham that was assessed in previous rounds of the Air Quality Assessment process. The number of vehicles using the bus station was below the threshold at which a detailed assessment would be required; there have been no significant increases in the number of bus services, any impacts on Local Air Quality are considered low.

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no relevant bus stations in the Local Authority area.

LAQM USA 2015 18 Rutland County Council

4 Other Transport Sources 4.1 Airports

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no airports in the Local Authority area. .

4.2 Railways (Diesel and Steam Trains)

4.2.1 Stationary Trains

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no locations where diesel or steam trains are regularly stationary for periods of 15 minutes or more, with potential for relevant exposure within 15m.

4.2.2 Moving Trains

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no locations with a large number of movements of diesel locomotives, and potential long-term relevant exposure within 30m.

4.3 Ports (Shipping)

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no ports or shipping that meet the specified criteria within the Local Authority area.

LAQM USA 2015 19 Rutland County Council

5 Industrial Sources 5.1 Industrial Installations

5.1.1 New or Proposed Installations for which an Air Quality Assessment has been Carried Out

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new or proposed industrial installations for which planning approval has been granted within its area or nearby in a neighbouring authority.

5.1.2 Existing Installations where Emissions have Increased Substantially or New Relevant Exposure has been Introduced

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no industrial installations with substantially increased emissions or new relevant exposure in their vicinity within its area or nearby in a neighbouring authority.

5.1.3 New or Significantly Changed Installations with No Previous Air Quality Assessment

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no new or proposed industrial installations for which planning approval has been granted within its area or nearby in a neighbouring authority.

5.2 Major Fuel (Petrol) Storage Depots

There are no major fuel (petrol) storage depots within the Rutland County Council’s area.

LAQM USA 2015 20 Rutland County Council 5.3 Petrol Stations

Since the 2014 Air Quality Progress Report one new petrol service station has been opened by BP at Hackamore Way, Barleythorpe, Oakham. LE15 7FS (as shown in figure 5.1). The service station includes a Stage II Vapour Recovery System (pump to vehicles) which significantly reduces emissions of petrol vapour as vehicle tanks are filled. Defra’s technical guidance indicates that because of Stage II Vapour Recovery, air quality impacts for benzene from petrol vapour will not be significant.

Figure 5.1 New Petrol Station on Hackamore Way, Barleythorpe, Oakham

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no petrol stations meeting the specified criteria.

5.4 Poultry Farms

There are multiple sites in Rutland where poultry is farmed to produce eggs. The size of the sites fall significantly below the Defra guidance threshold of 200,000 birds where a detailed assessment would be necessary to evaluate the impacts of PM10 on local air quality.

LAQM USA 2015 21 Rutland County Council

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no poultry farms meeting the specified criteria.

LAQM USA 2015 22 Rutland County Council

6 Commercial and Domestic Sources 6.1 Biomass Combustion – Individual Installations

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no biomass combustion plant in the Local Authority area.

6.2 Biomass Combustion – Combined Impacts

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no biomass combustion plant in the Local Authority area.

6.3 Domestic Solid-Fuel Burning

The potential impacts from domestic solid fuel were evaluated in the 2009 Air Quality Universal Screening and Assessment Report. The assessment found that use of solid fuels as the principal means of providing heating was low and Defra technical guidance indicated that there should be no exceedance of air quality objectives as a result of domestic solid fuel burning. Since the 2009 assessment, there has been no significant increase in the use of solid fuels in domestic properties or new large developments where solid fuel is the primary source of heating. . …

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no areas of significant domestic fuel use in the Local Authority area.

LAQM USA 2015 23 Rutland County Council

7 Fugitive or Uncontrolled Sources

Rutland County Council confirms that there are no potential sources of fugitive particulate matter emissions in the Local Authority area.

LAQM USA 2015 24 Rutland County Council

8 Conclusions and Proposed Actions 8.1 Conclusions from New Monitoring Data

The nitrogen dioxide monitoring data for all sites has shown that the annual air quality objective of 40 g/m3 was not exceeded during 2014. The general trend from

2009 to 2014 has been a gradual decrease in monitored NO2 concentrations, suggesting that an exceedance is unlikely, provided that there are no significant changes or local developments that could adversely affect local air quality.

8.2 Conclusions from Assessment of Sources

A number of new developments in Rutland have been considered in this assessment, however none have had the potential to impact significantly on local air quality.

There is currently one development where planning permission has been granted, but the development has not yet commenced at Tesco Oakham. Planning permission for the proposed expansion of Tesco was renewed early in 2014, planning conditions were carried forward from the previous permission and impose a requirement to assess and mitigate any significant impacts on local air quality.

8.3 Proposed Actions

This report has identified that there is no need to proceed to a Detailed Assessment of air quality, the next report that will be produced will be the 2016 Progress Report. There will be a review of the nitrogen dioxide diffusion tube monitoring locations to determine whether any monitoring sites could be changed to areas where monitoring has not previously taken place.

LAQM USA 2015 25 Rutland County Council

9 References

Defra (2009) Local Air Quality Management – Technical Guidance (LAQM.TG09)

LAQM USA 2015 26 Rutland County Council

Appendices

Appendix A: QA/QC Data Appendix B: Monthly NO2 Diffusion tube results for 2014

LAQM USA 2015 27 Rutland County Council

Appendix A: QA/QC Data

Diffusion Tube Bias Adjustment Factors

The Nitrogen Dioxide diffusion tubes used are supplied and analysed by:

Gradko International, St Martins House, Winchester,

The tube preparation method is 20% (Triethanolamine)TEA / Water and analysis is performed using U.V. Spectrophotometry.

Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes Bias Adjustment Factors Discussion of Choice of Factor to Use

LAQM USA 2015 28 Rutland County Council

Laboratory: Gradko Method: 20%TEA/water Year: 2014 Bias adjustment factor (cm/Dm) = 0.91 based on 21 studies version 06/15 (updated June 2015)

QA/QC of diffusion tube monitoring

Diffusion tube Precision

Precision for Gradko, 20 TEA in water, during 2014 was GOOD

LAQM USA 2015 29 Rutland County Council based on 21 studies

Workplace Analysis Scheme Proficiency and AIR-PT

Gradko International participate in the Workplace Analysis Scheme for Proficiency (WASP), that since April 2014 has been replaced by an independent analytical proficiency testing (PT) scheme known as AIR-PT. The precision and accuracy of the laboratory is assessed on a quarterly basis, by providing the laboratory with diffusion tubes that have been ‘spiked’ with a known amount (concentration) of nitrate. The laboratory analyses the tubes and reports the results back to AIR-PT, this allows the laboratory’s performance to be assessed.

Gradko International’s performance during 2014 (WASP round 124 and AIR PT Rounds AR001 to AR 004) was assessed as ‘Satisfactory’ for a 100% of results submitted by Gradko . This performance meets the requirement of Defra set out in technical guidance note (TG 09).

LAQM USA 2015 30 Rutland County Council Appendix B: Monthly NO2 Diffusion tube results for 2014

Site Id Location Monthly results µg/m3 Annual Annual Mean Mean µg/m3 µg/m3 (Bias - factor 0.91) Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 1 Caldecott 21.06 25.47 30.14 26.56 23.75 23.74 33.65 16.01 28.56 29.82 30.06 27.32 26.3 24.0 2 Uppingham 22.84 30.59 34.59 33.76 31.02 31.82 46.71 24.10 36.01 34.85 32.61 30.23 32.4 29.5 3 Ketton 17.87 27.57 22.59 19.14 17.17 20.64 11.97 20.78 22.60 22.11 25.91 20.8 18.9 4 Tickencote 13.28 14.81 26.00 23.88 18.28 21.32 21.43 8.18 24.93 15.90 25.94 11.93 18.8 17.1 5 Oakham, Uppingham Rd 18.11 23.47 27.56 23.36 21.57 20.58 20.73 13.30 24.75 25.00 33.65 28.34 23.4 21.3 6 Oakham, Brooke Rd 15.73 22.36 31.01 25.15 22.53 22.35 27.51 15.69 24.79 22.64 24.09 28.55 23.5 21.4 7 Oakham, Melton Rd 16.69 20.85 23.93 26.83 22.12 24.48 30.91 15.37 29.36 23.04 25.62 23.16 23.5 21.4 8 Oakham, Burley Pk Wy 18.18 26.01 31.53 32.11 28.77 28.68 38.58 15.60 34.59 28.78 27.37 26.73 28.1 25.6 9 Egleton 10.91 12.71 19.93 3.40 12.89 15.42 4.82 7.94 10.48 14.17 15.28 11.6 10.6 10 Oakham, High St 24.37 33.70 40.22 32.92 29.72 24.66 33.25 19.21 30.87 31.45 27.08 33.08 30.0 27.3 11 Oakham, New St 16.00 18.35 26.05 23.31 16.97 19.04 21.03 9.99 23.87 19.01 26.78 19.61 20.0 18.2 Note: blank red cells indicate diffusion tube was missing/ result excluded

LAQM USA 2015 31 Rutland County Council

LAQM USA 2015 32

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J00834R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J00834 DESPATCH NOTE SOR015655 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 11/02/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 464572 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.75 29.68 15.49 1.40 2 Uppingham 464571 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.67 35.19 18.37 1.66 3 Kelton 464573 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.67 24.11 12.59 1.14 4 Tichencate 464577 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.75 19.28 10.06 0.91 5 Uppingham Rd 464568 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.17 28.03 14.63 1.32 6 Brooke Rd 464569 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.17 32.73 17.08 1.54 7 Melton Rd 464566 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.67 26.62 13.89 1.25 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 464564 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.42 34.01 17.75 1.60 9 Egleton 464570 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 648.50 11.07 5.78 0.52 10 High Street, Oakham 464567 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.67 35.93 18.75 1.69 11 New St 464565 08/01/2015 04/02/2015 647.67 22.78 11.89 1.07

Laboratory Blank 648.50 0.08 0.04 0.004

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 24/02/2015 Date of Report 24/02/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J00834R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J01636R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J01636 DESPATCH NOTE 19360 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 25/03/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 478137 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 719.42 31.48 16.43 1.65 2 Uppingham 478138 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 719.42 38.54 20.12 2.02 3 Kelton 478136 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 719.17 23.38 12.20 1.22 4 Tickencate 478135 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 719.17 17.45 9.11 0.91 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 478139 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 720.67 28.94 15.11 1.52 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 478140 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 720.58 26.25 13.70 1.38 7 Oakham Melton Rd 478141 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 720.58 27.52 14.36 1.44 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 478142 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 722.25 25.63 13.37 1.35 9 Egleton 478143 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 724.00 16.51 8.62 0.87 10 Oakham High St 478144 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 720.58 36.00 18.79 1.89 11 Oakham High St 478145 04/02/2015 06/03/2015 720.58 21.90 11.43 1.15

Laboratory Blank 724.00 0.25 0.13 0.013

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 27/03/2015 Date of Report 27/03/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J01636R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J02292R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J02292 DESPATCH NOTE 19361 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 29/04/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 493579 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 648.17 32.28 16.85 1.52 2 Uppingham 493570 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 648.25 38.29 19.99 1.80 3 Kelton 493578 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 648.17 27.24 14.22 1.28 4 Tichencate 493577 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 648.17 22.24 11.61 1.05 5 Uppingham Rd, Oakham 493576 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 647.33 30.07 15.69 1.41 6 Brooke Rd, Oakham 493575 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 647.42 30.90 16.13 1.45 7 Melton Rd, Oakham 493573 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 647.42 31.04 16.20 1.46 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 493571 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 646.83 39.10 20.41 1.84 9 Egleton 493569 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 643.67 12.83 6.70 0.60 10 High Street, Oakham 493572 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 647.42 39.12 20.42 1.84 11 New St, Oakham 493574 06/03/2015 02/04/2015 647.42 26.31 13.73 1.24

Laboratory Blank 648.25 0.19 0.10 0.009

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 05/05/2015 Date of Report 05/05/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J02292R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J03074R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J03074 DESPATCH NOTE 19362 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 04/06/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 510593 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 672.08 17.89 9.34 0.87 2 Uppingham 510594 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 672.00 21.43 11.19 1.05 3 Kelton 510595 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 672.08 13.82 7.22 0.68 4 Tichencate 510596 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 672.08 13.70 7.15 0.67 5 Uppingham Rd, Oakham 510597 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 676.50 16.26 8.48 0.80 6 Brooke Rd, Oakham 510598 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 676.50 15.57 8.13 0.77 7 Melton Rd, Oakham 510599 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 676.50 14.30 7.46 0.70 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 510600 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 676.83 20.55 10.72 1.01 9 Egleton 510601 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 672.58 6.19 3.23 0.30 10 High Street, Oakham 510603 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 676.42 19.69 10.28 0.97 11 New Street, Oakham 510604 02/04/2015 30/04/2015 676.50 14.40 7.51 0.71

Laboratory Blank 676.83 0.14 0.07 0.007

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. ±5.8% Limit of Detection 0.010 gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 08 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 17/06/2015 Date of Report 17/06/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J03074R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J03236R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J03236 DESPATCH NOTE 22007 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 12/06/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 524511 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 692.25 23.01 12.01 1.16 2 Uppingham 524512 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 692.33 30.68 16.01 1.54 3 Kelton 524513 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 692.33 17.30 9.03 0.87 4 Tickencate 524514 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 692.33 10.81 5.64 0.54 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 524515 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 693.58 21.20 11.07 1.07 6 Brooke Rd 524516 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 693.58 22.62 11.81 1.14 7 Melton Rd 524517 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 693.58 20.57 10.73 1.04 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 524518 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 688.92 26.97 14.08 1.35 9 Egleton 524519 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 695.25 7.17 3.74 0.36 10 High Street, Oakham 524520 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 693.58 26.31 13.73 1.33 11 New St 524521 30/04/2015 29/05/2015 693.58 14.26 7.44 0.72

Laboratory Blank 695.25 0.20 0.10 0.010

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. ±5.8% Limit of Detection 0.010 gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 08 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chelsea Gemmell

Date of Analysis 23/06/2015 Date of Report 23/06/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J03236R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J03951R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J03951 DESPATCH NOTE 22773 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 27/07/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 540004 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 796.83 19.92 10.40 1.15 2 Uppingham 540005 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 796.83 27.38 14.29 1.59 4 Tichencate 540007 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 797.25 12.88 6.72 0.75 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 540008 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 792.92 16.43 8.58 0.95 6 Brooke Rd 540009 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 792.92 16.51 8.62 0.95 7 Melton Rd 540010 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 792.92 19.84 10.36 1.14 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 540011 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 797.08 23.40 12.21 1.36 9 Egleton 540012 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 796.50 4.76 2.49 0.28 10 High Street, Oakham 540014 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 793.00 23.78 12.41 1.37 11 New St 540015 29/05/2015 01/07/2015 792.92 14.17 7.40 0.82

Laboratory Blank 797.25 0.21 0.11 0.012

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chris Fraser

Date of Analysis 29/07/2015 Date of Report 29/07/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J03951R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J04245R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J04245 DESPATCH NOTE 22774 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 07/08/2015

JOB NUMBER July 15 Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 557504 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 672.08 25.90 13.52 1.26 2 Uppingham 557505 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 672.08 30.68 16.01 1.50 4 Tickencate 557507 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 671.83 11.25 5.87 0.55 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 557508 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 672.42 20.59 10.74 1.01 6 Brooke Rd 557509 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 672.42 19.80 10.33 0.97 7 Melton Rd 557510 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 672.42 20.54 10.72 1.00 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 557511 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 671.67 25.64 13.38 1.25 9 Egleton 557512 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 671.67 5.82 3.04 0.28 10 High Street, Oakham 557513 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 671.50 26.84 14.01 1.31 11 New St 557514 01/07/2015 29/07/2015 671.50 15.46 8.07 0.75

Laboratory Blank 672.42 0.10 0.05 0.005

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chris Fraser

Date of Analysis 13/08/2015 Date of Report 13/08/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J04245R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J04947R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J04947 DESPATCH NOTE 22775 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 14/09/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 574425 29/07/2015 28/08/2015 720.83 25.80 13.47 1.35 2 Uppingham 574426 29/07/2015 28/08/2015 720.75 29.77 15.54 1.56 3 Kelton 574427 29/07/2015 28/08/2015 720.98 18.64 9.73 0.98 4 Tickencate 574428 29/07/2015 28/08/2015 721.08 12.67 6.61 0.66 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 574429 29/07/2015 27/08/2015 693.75 21.56 11.25 1.09 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 574430 29/07/2015 27/08/2015 693.75 21.14 11.04 1.07 7 Oakham Melton Rd 574431 29/07/2015 27/08/2015 693.83 21.76 11.36 1.10 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 574432 29/07/2015 27/08/2015 694.08 27.94 14.58 1.41 9 Egleton 574433 29/07/2015 27/08/2015 691.50 6.54 3.41 0.33 10 Oakham High St 574434 29/07/2015 27/08/2015 693.83 27.02 14.10 1.36 11 Oakham New St 574435 29/07/2015 27/08/2015 693.83 16.88 8.81 0.85

Laboratory Blank 721.08 0.06 0.03 0.003

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chris Fraser

Date of Analysis 22/09/2015 Date of Report 22/09/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J04947R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J05432R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J05432 DESPATCH NOTE 22776 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 05/10/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 587970 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 814.33 24.92 13.01 1.47 2 Uppingham 587971 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 814.33 30.43 15.88 1.80 3 Belton 587972 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 814.50 20.61 10.76 1.22 4 Tichencate 587973 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 814.75 21.82 11.39 1.29 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 587974 27/08/2015 01/10/2015 840.75 21.96 11.46 1.34 6 Brooke Rd 587975 27/08/2015 01/10/2015 840.75 22.70 11.85 1.39 7 Melton Rd 587976 27/08/2015 01/10/2015 840.75 25.05 13.08 1.53 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 587977 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 819.75 29.58 15.44 1.76 9 Egleton 587978 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 820.83 7.54 3.93 0.45 10 High Street, Oakham 587979 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 817.00 28.31 14.78 1.68 11 New st, Oakham 587980 28/08/2015 01/10/2015 817.00 18.52 9.67 1.10

Laboratory Blank 840.75 0.13 0.07 0.008

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Exposure times were calculated from start and finish times given on the exposure sheet. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Blazej Fiser

Date of Analysis 12/10/2015 Date of Report 12/10/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7 The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J05432R Page 1 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J05432R Page 2 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J06075R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J06075 DESPATCH NOTE 22777 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 02/11/2015

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 605366 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 649.25 28.07 14.65 1.32 2 Uppingham 605367 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 649.67 33.78 17.63 1.60 3 Kelton 605368 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 647.50 21.49 11.22 1.01 4 Tickencate 605369 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 646.50 24.86 12.97 1.17 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 605370 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 652.00 27.37 14.28 1.30 6 Brooke Rd 605371 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 652.00 25.90 13.52 1.23 7 Melton Rd 605372 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 651.92 27.30 14.25 1.29 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 605373 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 647.75 31.92 16.66 1.50 9 Egleton 605374 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 648.00 11.82 6.17 0.56 10 High Street, Oakham 605375 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 651.67 30.61 15.97 1.45 11 New St 605376 01/10/2015 28/10/2015 651.67 24.26 12.66 1.15

Laboratory Blank 652.00 0.04 0.02 0.002

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 605369 contained insects. Results may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. ±5.8% Limit of Detection 0.010 gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 08 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Blazej Fiser

Date of Analysis 11/11/2015 Date of Report 11/11/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J06075R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER J07018R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE J07018 DESPATCH NOTE 22778 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 14/12/2015

JOB NUMBER Nov'15 Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 620273 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 839.25 15.98 8.34 0.98 2 Uppingham 620274 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 838.92 23.76 12.40 1.45 3 Kelton 620275 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 840.50 22.01 11.49 1.34 4 Tuckencate 620276 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 841.33 12.01 6.27 0.73 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 620277 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 835.50 26.79 13.98 1.63 6 Brooke Rd 620278 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 835.50 23.08 12.05 1.40 7 Melton Rd 620279 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 835.50 18.07 9.43 1.10 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 620280 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 840.25 25.30 13.20 1.54 9 Egleton 620281 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 840.00 10.69 5.58 0.65 10 High Street, Oakham 620282 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 835.50 21.79 11.37 1.32 11 New Street, Oakham 620283 28/10/2015 02/12/2015 835.50 20.31 10.60 1.23

Laboratory Blank 841.33 0.07 0.03 0.004

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. ±5.8% Limit of Detection 0.010 gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 08 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Blazej Fiser

Date of Analysis 18/12/2015 Date of Report 18/12/2015

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number J07018R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K00458R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K00458 DESPATCH NOTE 22779 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 14/01/2016

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 635684 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 839.58 25.32 13.22 1.55 2 Uppingham 635685 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 839.42 27.04 14.11 1.65 3 Belton 635686 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 839.42 23.35 12.19 1.42 4 Tichencate 635687 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 839.25 14.81 7.73 0.90 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 635688 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 841.83 22.15 11.56 1.36 6 Brooke Rd 635689 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 841.83 17.81 9.30 1.09 7 Melton Rd 635690 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 841.83 17.47 9.12 1.07 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 635692 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 836.50 14.24 7.43 0.87 9 Egleton 635693 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 839.00 10.10 5.27 0.62 10 High Street, Oakham 635691 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 841.83 28.11 14.67 1.72 11 New St 635694 02/12/2015 06/01/2016 841.83 19.34 10.09 1.18

Laboratory Blank 841.83 0.10 0.05 0.006

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tubes 635690 & 635689 each contained an insect. Results may be compromised. Tube 635693 contained a spider. Results may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chris Fraser

Date of Analysis 27/01/2016 Date of Report 27/01/2016

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K00458R Page 1 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K00458R Page 2 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K01104R BOOKING IN REFERENCE K01104 DESPATCH NOTE 22780 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 15/02/2016 JOB NUMBER JAN'16

Exposure Data TOTAL 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off Time (hr.) µµµg/m * ppb * µg NO 2

1 Caldecalt 651081 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 671.92 27.63 14.42 1.35 2 Uppingham 651082 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 672.00 35.18 18.36 1.72 3 Kelton 651083 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 672.08 25.63 13.38 1.25 4 Tickencate 651084 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 672.17 16.68 8.71 0.82 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 651085 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 670.33 31.52 16.45 1.54 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 651086 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 670.33 27.83 14.52 1.36 7 Oakham Melton Rd 651087 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 670.33 23.80 12.42 1.16 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 651088 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 671.83 31.06 16.21 1.52 9 Egleton 651089 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 673.00 14.38 7.51 0.70 10 Oakham High St 651090 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 670.50 34.01 17.75 1.66 11 Oakham New St 651091 06/01/2016 03/02/2016 670.33 21.33 11.13 1.04

Laboratory Blank 673.00 0.14 0.07 0.007

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017 µgNO 2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Anna Paczosa

Date of Analysis 19/02/2016 Date of Report 19/02/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K01104R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K01474R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K01474 DESPATCH NOTE 22781 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 04/03/2016

JOB NUMBER Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 667510 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.00 22.75 11.88 1.07 2 Uppingham 667511 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.00 25.03 13.07 1.18 3 Ketton 667512 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.00 20.09 10.48 0.94 4 Tickencote 667513 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.00 15.62 8.15 0.73 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 667514 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.42 21.00 10.96 0.99 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 667515 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.42 20.13 10.51 0.95 7 Oakham Melton Rd 667516 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.42 19.87 10.37 0.93 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 667518 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 646.25 24.63 12.85 1.16 9 Egleton 667519 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 648.00 11.98 6.25 0.56 10 High Street, Oakham 667522 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.25 23.29 12.16 1.10 11 New st, Oakham 667523 03/02/2016 01/03/2016 647.42 17.45 9.11 0.82

Laboratory Blank 648.00 0.17 0.09 0.008

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Blazej Fiser

Date of Analysis 09/03/2016 Date of Report 09/03/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K01474R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K02235R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K02235 DESPATCH NOTE 22782 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 06/04/2016

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 682944 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 695.75 32.72 17.07 1.65 2 Uppingham 682945 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 695.67 37.59 19.62 1.90 3 Kelton 682946 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 695.58 23.68 12.36 1.20 4 Tickencote 682947 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 695.67 26.35 13.75 1.33 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 682948 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 695.92 30.28 15.80 1.53 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 682949 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 695.92 26.77 13.97 1.35 7 Oakham Melton Rd 682950 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 696.00 25.24 13.18 1.28 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 682951 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 697.33 32.98 17.22 1.67 9 Egleton 682952 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 696.00 12.59 6.57 0.64 10 Oakham High St 682953 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 696.00 36.12 18.85 1.83 11 Oakham High St 682954 01/03/2016 30/03/2016 696.00 20.34 10.61 1.03

Laboratory Blank 697.33 0.18 0.09 0.009

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. ±5.8% Limit of Detection 0.010 gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 08 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Blazej Fiser

Date of Analysis 15/04/2016 Date of Report 15/04/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K02235R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY

REPORT NUMBER K03052R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K03052

DESPATCH NOTE 22783 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse

(For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 18/05/2016

Sample Exposure Data TOTAL 3 Location Number Date On Date Off Time (hr.) µµµg/m * ppb * µg NO 2

1 Caldecalt 695379 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.58 26.06 13.60 1.37 2 Uppingham 695380 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.75 29.23 15.25 1.53 3 Kelton 695381 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.92 19.39 10.12 1.02 4 Tichencate 695382 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.75 21.55 11.25 1.13 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 695383 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.58 24.13 12.60 1.27 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 695384 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.58 23.00 12.00 1.21 7 Oakham Melton Rd 695385 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.50 24.48 12.78 1.28 8 Oakham, Burley Park Way 695386 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.25 26.42 13.79 1.39 9 Egleton 695387 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 720.33 9.62 5.02 0.50 10 Oakham High St 695388 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.50 28.89 15.08 1.52 11 Oakham New St 695389 30/03/2016 29/04/2016 721.50 15.90 8.30 0.83

Laboratory Blank 721.92 0.04 0.02 0.002

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 695385 contained a spider and webs. Results may be compromised. Tube 695387 contained a nest. Results may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017 µgNO 2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Blazej Fiser

Date of Analysis 24/05/2016 Date of Report 24/05/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K03052R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K04475R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K04475 DESPATCH NOTE 29564 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 18/07/2016

JOB REFERENCE May'16 Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 716565 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.17 32.01 16.71 1.51 2 Uppingham 716566 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.17 41.60 21.71 1.96 3 Kelton 716567 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.17 26.06 13.60 1.23 4 Tichencate 716568 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.25 40.98 21.39 1.93 5 Oakham Uppingham Road 716569 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.42 32.02 16.71 1.51 6 Oakham Brooke Road 716570 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.42 32.64 17.04 1.54 7 Oakham Melton Road 716571 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.42 35.39 18.47 1.67 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 716572 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 650.33 42.73 22.30 2.02 9 Egleton 716573 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.50 10.57 5.52 0.50 10 Oakham High Street 716574 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.42 38.68 20.19 1.82 11 Oakham High Street 716575 29/04/2016 26/05/2016 647.42 28.46 14.86 1.34

Laboratory Blank 650.33 0.30 0.15 0.014

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 716573 contained a spider and a nest. Results may be compromised. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Chris Fraser

Date of Analysis 29/07/2016 Date of Report 29/07/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7 The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K04475R Page 1 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K04475R Page 2 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K04476R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K04476 DESPATCH NOTE 30119 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 18/07/2016

JOB REFERENCE June'16 Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time ppb 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 725389 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 865.42 15.75 8.22 0.99 2 Uppingham 725390 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 865.42 18.66 9.74 1.17 3 Ketton 725391 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 865.17 9.33 4.87 0.59 4 Tickencate 725392 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 865.25 4.48 2.34 0.28 5 Oakham Uppingham Road 725393 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 864.50 12.09 6.31 0.76 6 Oakham Brooke Road 725394 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 864.50 10.37 5.41 0.65 7 Oakham Melton Road 725395 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 864.50 12.39 6.47 0.78 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Way 725396 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 862.58 13.68 7.14 0.86 9 Egleton 725397 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 864.17 3.06 1.60 0.19 10 Oakham High Street 725398 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 864.50 15.95 8.32 1.00 11 Oakham High Street 725399 26/05/2016 01/07/2016 864.50 7.53 3.93 0.47

Laboratory Blank 865.42 0.25 0.13 0.016

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Jess Crow

Date of Analysis 29/07/2016 Date of Report 29/07/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K04476R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K05421R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K05421 DESPATCH NOTE 30120 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 30/08/2016

Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time ppb 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 740416 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 624.83 14.87 7.76 0.68 2 Uppingham 740417 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 624.75 18.35 9.57 0.83 3 Kelton 740418 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 624.83 11.09 5.79 0.50 4 Tickencate 740419 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 624.67 6.73 3.51 0.31 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 740420 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 625.58 13.96 7.29 0.63 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 740421 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 625.42 13.05 6.81 0.59 7 Oakham Melton Rd 740422 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 625.08 14.33 7.48 0.65 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 740423 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 625.08 13.84 7.22 0.63 9 Egleton 740424 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 624.00 4.73 2.47 0.21 10 Oakham High St 740425 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 624.75 18.51 9.66 0.84 11 Oakham New St 740426 01/07/2016 27/07/2016 625.25 8.92 4.66 0.41

Laboratory Blank 625.58 0.00 0.00 0.000

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV05 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Charlotte Grove

Date of Analysis 09/09/2016 Date of Report 09/09/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K05421R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K05418R

BOOKING IN REFERENCE K05418 DESPATCH NOTE 30121 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ

DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 30/08/2016

JOB NUMBER Aug-16 Exposure Sample Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecalt 754345 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 671.67 21.52 11.23 1.05 2 Uppingham 754346 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 671.67 24.08 12.57 1.18 3 Kelton 754347 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 671.58 14.72 7.68 0.72 4 Tichencate 754348 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 671.58 11.78 6.15 0.57 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 754349 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 669.92 17.09 8.92 0.83 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 754350 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 670.08 17.50 9.13 0.85 7 Oakham Melton Rd 754351 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 670.42 20.50 10.70 1.00 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 754352 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 671.67 20.26 10.57 0.99 9 Egleton 754353 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 672.00 6.04 3.15 0.30 10 Oakham High St 754354 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 670.75 21.74 11.35 1.06 11 Oakham High St 754355 27/07/2016 24/08/2016 670.25 14.70 7.67 0.72

Laboratory Blank 672.00 0.04 0.02 0.002

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017gNO2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water

Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Jess Crow

Date of Analysis 08/09/2016 Date of Report 08/09/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk. Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 6 – February 2015 Report Number K05418R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K06689R BOOKING IN REFERENCE K06689 DESPATCH NOTE 30122 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 21/10/2016 JOB NUMBER Sept '16 Exposure Data TOTAL 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off Time (hr.) µµµg/m * ppb * µg NO 2

1 Caldecott 769861 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 887.67 25.96 13.55 1.67 2 Uppingham 769862 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 887.75 30.89 16.12 1.99 3 Kelton 769863 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 887.67 19.16 10.00 1.24 4 Tichencote 769864 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 887.75 18.74 9.78 1.21 5 Uppingham Rd 769865 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 889.58 24.94 13.02 1.61 6 Brooke Rd 769866 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 889.58 20.76 10.84 1.34 7 Melton Rd 769872 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 889.58 19.06 9.95 1.23 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 769868 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 887.75 28.50 14.87 1.84 9 Egleton 769869 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 888.00 9.66 5.04 0.62 10 High Street, Oakham 769871 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 889.83 29.18 15.23 1.89 11 New Street Oakham 769874 24/08/2016 30/09/2016 889.58 20.27 10.58 1.31

Laboratory Blank 889.83 0.08 0.04 0.005

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 7.8% +/- Limit of Detection 0.017 µgNO 2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550

Analyst Name Jess Crow Report Checked By Adam Robinson

Date of Analysis 02/11/2016 Date of Report 03/11/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk (*). Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 7 – Oct 2016 Report Number K06689R Page 1 of 1

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K06949R BOOKING IN REFERENCE K06949 DESPATCH NOTE 30123 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 31/10/2016

Exposure Data TOTAL Time 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off (hr.) g/m * ppb * µg NO2

1 Caldecott 785469 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 623.08 20.85 10.88 0.94 2 Uppingham 785470 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 623.08 20.33 10.61 0.92 3 Ketton 785471 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 623.33 15.72 8.20 0.71 4 Tickencote 785472 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 623.25 21.84 11.40 0.99 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 785473 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 622.42 18.94 9.89 0.86 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 785474 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 622.42 18.70 9.76 0.85 7 Oakham Melton Rd 785475 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 622.42 19.62 10.24 0.89 8 Oakham Burnley Pk Wy 785476 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 623.08 25.17 13.14 1.14 9 Egleton 785477 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 624.17 7.50 3.91 0.34 10 Oakham 785478 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 622.08 22.47 11.73 1.02 11 Oakham, New St 785479 30/09/2016 26/10/2016 622.42 17.98 9.39 0.81

Laboratory Blank 624.17 0.15 0.08 0.007

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. 5.2% +/- Limit of Detection 0.010gNO2 Analysed on UV05 Camspec Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water M550 Analyst Name Duncan Ben Whitmarsh Report Checked By Wilson

Date of Analysis 10/11/2016 Date of Report 10/11/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in -house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk (*). Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 7 – Oct 2016 Report Number K06949R Page 1 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk (*). Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 7 – Oct 2016 Report Number K06949R Page 2 of 2

(A division of Gradko International Ltd.) 2187 St. Martins House, 77 Wales Street Winchester, Hampshire SO23 0RH tel.: 01962 860331 fax: 01962 841339 e-mail:[email protected]

LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN DIFFUSION TUBES BY U.V.SPECTROPHOTOMETRY REPORT NUMBER K07914R BOOKING IN REFERENCE K07914 DESPATCH NOTE 30124 CUSTOMER Peterborough City Council Attn: Andrew Woodhouse (For Rutland County Council) P.O. Box 456, Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 9GQ DATE SAMPLES RECEIVED 19/12/2016 JOB REFERENCE NOV '16 Exposure Data TOTAL 3 Location Sample Number Date On Date Off Time (hr.) µµµg/m * ppb * µg NO 2

1 Caldecott 796910 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 840.67 34.75 18.14 2.12 2 Uppingham 796911 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 840.58 40.71 21.25 2.49 3 Ketton 796912 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 840.75 27.46 14.33 1.68 4 Tickencote 796913 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 841.08 23.26 12.14 1.42 5 Oakham Uppingham Rd 796914 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 841.50 34.16 17.83 2.09 6 Oakham Brooke Rd 796915 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 841.50 32.35 16.88 1.98 7 Oakham Melton Rd 796916 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 841.50 31.91 16.66 1.95 8 Burley Park Way, Oakham 796917 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 839.33 39.91 20.83 2.43 9 Egleton 796918 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 832.83 17.40 9.08 1.05 10 Oakham High Street 796919 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 842.00 41.31 21.56 2.53 11 Oakham New St 796920 26/10/2016 30/11/2016 841.50 27.65 14.43 1.69

Laboratory Blank 842.00 0.07 0.03 0.004

Comment: Results are not blank subtracted Tube 796918 contained two sets of grids. Results have been corrected to a temperature of 293 K (20°)

Overall M.U. ±7.8% Limit of Detection 0.017 µgNO 2 Tube Preparation : 20% TEA / Water Analysed on UV 04 Camspec M550 Analyst Name Eva Habjan Report Checked By Adam Robinson

Date of Analysis 21/12/2016 Date of Report 21/12/2016

Analysis carried out in accordance with documented in-house Laboratory Method GLM7

The Diffusion Tubes have been tested within the scope of Gradko International Ltd. Laboratory Quality Procedures calculations and assessments involving the exposure procedures and periods provided by the client are not within the scope of our UKAS accreditation. Those results obtained using exposure data shall be indicated by an asterisk (*). Any queries concerning the data in this report should be directed to the Laboratory Manager Gradko International Ltd. This report is not to be reproduced, except in full, without the written permission of Gradko International Ltd. Form LQF32b Issue 7 – Oct 2016 Report Number K07914R Page 1 of 1