1. Template BLM National and State Offices Meeting on WestJumpAQMS Ralph Morris, ENVIRON International Corporation Tom Moore, Western Regional Air Partnership Millennium Harvest House Hotel Boulder, Colorado 9:30-11:30 -- July 8, 2013

2. 2 Background Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) initiated the West-wide Jump Start Air Quality Modeling Study (WestJumpAQMS) to: –Initiate next generation of regional technical analysis for ozone planning in the western U.S.  Develop next generation modeling platforms to address BLM NEPA oil and gas development and other activities for EISs/RMPs –Continue work conducted at the WRAP Regional Modeling Center (RMC) and leverage recent air modeling studies –Provide a preliminary assessment of the role of ozone transport to elevated ozone concentrations across the West  As well as PM 2.5, visibility and deposition

3. Background WestJumpAQMS Website with products to date –http://www.wrapair2.org/WestJumpAQMS.aspx 3

4. Ozone Planning for Oil and Gas Development Prior to ~2007 ozone assessments in O&G EISs were based on qualitative analysis and the 1988 Scheffe Point Source Screening Table –Scheffe Tables denounced by Dr. Scheffe in 2006 Measured ozone exceedances in the Jonah Pinedale Anticline Development (JPAD) O&G area in 2005/2006 SEIS for Pinedale Anticline O&G Exploration and Development Project first to address ozone using a Photochemical Grid Model (PGM) (final Dec 2007) –Leveraged off of the WRAP Regional Model Center (RMC) 2002 database to perform CAMx 2002 4 km ozone modeling 4

5. Continental Divide-Creston (CD-C) EIS April 2007 CD-C Air Kickoff meeting in Cheyenne with WDEQ, EPA R8, BLM, FLMs, Environmentalists, etc. –Unanimous agreement to use CAMx PGM for ozone and far- field air quality and AQRV  CALPUFF not needed –Use existing 2005 (FCAQTF) and 2006 36/12/4 km MM5 meteorological data –Draft EIS released December 2012 Since then numerous other BLM EISs and RMPs have adopted using CAMx PGM ozone and far-field AQ/AQRV –Moxa Arch, Hiawatha, White River, Colorado River Valley, etc. 5

6. BLM EISs/RMPs using PGMs Problems with sharing PGM modeling files among EISs/RMPs –Difficult to share information in a NEPA study that is pre- decisional across different groups –Large size of and no central storage location for databases –Databases poorly documented WRAP RMC 2002 PGM platform leveraged by early EISs WestJumpAQMS developed 2008 modeling database –Developed outside of NEPA so able to share with all –Reusable modeling framework –Distributed via Three State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 6

7. WestJumpAQMS PGM Inputs for 3 Domains 36 km CONUS 12 km WESTUS 4 km IMWD 7

8. WRAP RMC vs. WestJumpAQMS 8

9. WestJumpAQMS Completed Tasks WRF Application/Evaluation –Evaluation report on WRAP website 2008 Oil and Gas Emissions Update –WRAP Phase III plus Permian Basins 16 Emissions Summary Memorandums –Detailed documentation of emissions SMOKE Emissions Modeling –QA/QC following WRAP Protocol CAMx Model Input Development –36 km CONUS BCs from MOZART global model MOZART vs. GEOS-Chem BC Sensitivity Analysis 9

10. WestJumpAQMS Completed Tasks CAMx 2008 36/12 km Base Case –Model Performance Evaluation –Results on WRAP website and presented in June 20, 2013 progress webinar CAMx 2008 State-Specific Ozone Source Apportionment Modeling –Preliminary results presented in June 20, 2013 webinar –CSAPR-type upwind state contribution to downwind state ozone nonattainment analysis –State ozone footprint spatial maps –Contributions of Natural, Anthropogenic and Stratospheric Ozone/International Transport to ozone concentrations 10

11. WestJumpAQMS Tasks In-Progress State-Specific PM Source Apportionment Modeling –CAPR-type and state footprint for annual and 24-hour PM 2.5 –Also used for visibility and deposition Source Category-Specific Ozone and PM Source Apportionment –Separate contributions by: (1) Natural; (2) Oil and Gas Development; (3) Fires; (4) Point Sources; (5) Mobile Sources (on- and non-road); and (6) Area Sources  Full-fills a common FLM request at EISs/RMPs Interagency Meetings to obtain the cumulative impacts due to all oil and gas development, only outside of NEPA 11

12. WestJumpAQMS Tasks In-Progress Develop Basin-average 2011 emission factors for oil and gas sources for WRAP Phase III Basins –Used by EPA for developing oil and gas emissions for the 2011 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) to obtain much more accurate O&G emissions for Rocky Mountain states Transfer WestJumpAQMS database and results to Three State Data Warehouse (3SDW) –3SDW to develop web-based visualization tool for WestJumpAQMS Source Apportionment results –3SDW developing procedures for transfer of data to others on request Draft final report in August 2013 12

13. WestJumpAQMS Tasks In-Progress Development of stand-alone 2008 4 km Impact Assessment Domain (IAD) CAMx Databases Original plan was to develop four 2008 4 km IAD PGM databases –MT-ND: turns out BLM Montana/Dakotas is pursuing a 2013 modeling year –WY: many EISs in progress using 2005/2006 –UT-CO: UT BLM ARMS addressing 2010 –San_Juan: more linked with western Colorado –BLM COSO needs 2008 IAD 4 km PGM database so that was focus of IAD development 13

14. West-CARMMS Western Colorado Air Resource Management Modeling Study (West-CARMMS) –Initiated by BLM COSO to address the individual and cumulative AQ and AQRV impacts due to several RMPs/EISs in western CO:  Jan 2013 Draft RMP for Grand Junction FO  May 2013 Draft RMP for Dominguez-Escalante NCA  Uncompahgre FO RMP in preparation –Rather than deal with each RMP AQ/AQRV impacts individually as in the past, develop unified consistent approach  Leverage off of WestJumpAQMS 2008 CAMx model database development  Initial West-CARMMS 4 km IAD developed to completely include all Class I areas that are within 200 km of a western Colorado BLM planning area 14

15. Mancos Shale Oil Development Planned development of the Mancos Shale Oil region in the NM BLM Farmington FO needs AQ/AQRV analysis –400 wells/year in oil prone area in south starting in 2015 –Development of gas prone area in north to occur later BLM NMSO intends to fund the addition of the Mancos Shale Oil development to West-CARMMS – Cost-effective leveraging of West-CARMMS and WestJumpAQMS 15

16. West-CARMMS 4 km Modeling Domain 4 km Domain to include all Class I areas within 200 km of the Western Colorado and Mancos Shale Oil development areas WestJumpAQMS will set-up CAMx for 2008 base case on 4 km West-CARMMS IAD and conduct 2008 base case simulation –Model performance evaluation –Transfer PGM database to West- CARMMS modelers 16

17. West-CARMMS Tasks 2011 Baseline and future year (2021) emissions development AQ/AQRV impacts of each Western Colorado BLM FO and NM FFO planning area as well as cumulative AQ/AQRV impacts –Task 1: Emissions Calculators –Task 2: 2011 and 2021 Emissions –Task 3: Model Setup –Task 4: Baseline/FY CAMx Modeling  Source apportionment used to obtain individual FO AQ/AQRV impacts –Task 5: Reporting and Meetings 17

18. Example WestJumpAQMS Completed Products On WRAP website (wrapair2.org): –Modeling Protocol  Details on how 2008 modeling will be conducted –WRF meteorological application/evaluation report –16 Technical Memorandums on the 2008 emissions and emissions modeling  Full documentation of emission sources, procedures and limitations review by technical team –June 20, 2013 interim progress report  Ozone and PM model performance evaluation  Preliminary State-Specific Ozone Source Apportionment modeling results 18

19. Summary of CAMx 2008 36/12 km Inputs WRF 2008 36/12 km Meteorology MOZART Global Model Boundary Conditions 2008 Base Case Emissions –WRAP Phase III 2008 Oil and Gas Emissions  2008 NEI O&G outside of WRAP Basins –MEGAN Biogenic Emissions –Hourly CEM for Electrical Generating Units (EGUs) –2008 National Emissions Inventory (NEIv2) –Fire INventory from NCAR (FINN) [Base08a&b] –DEASCO3 Fire Emissions (Base08c) 19

20. Ozone Model Performance Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone (DMAX8) Matched by day and location (grid cell) Scatter Plots of Predicted and Observed DMAX8 with Model Performance Statistics: –Performance Goals  Bias ≤±15% and Error ≤35% –Fractional Bias (FB) and Error (FE) –Normalized Mean Bias (NMB) and Error (NME) –Correlation Coefficient (R 2 ) and Regression Equation By western state for: –AQS monitors (urban) and CASTNet monitors (rural) 20

21. Arizona 36 km (red) and 12 km (blue) DMAX8 AQS Monitors –NMB = 6% & FB = 7% –NME = 13% & FE = 14% CASTNet Monitors – NMB = 2% & FB = 2% – NME = 10% & FE = 10% 21

22. 22 Colorado 36 km (red) and 12 km (blue) DMAX8 AQS Monitors –NMB = 9% & FB = 10% –NME = 16% & FE = 17% CASTNet Monitors –NMB = 9% & FB = 9% –NME = 14% & FE = 14% 22 CASTNet DMAX8 overestimations due to modeled stratospheric ozone intrusions when none occurred [Apr 11 (102), May 8 (129) and Jun 13 (165) – (JDay)]

23. 23 Utah 36 km (red) and 12 km (blue) DMAX8 AQS Monitors –NMB = 7% & FB = 10% –NME = 15 & FE = 17% CASTNet Monitors –NMB = 1% & FB = 1% –NME = 9% & FE = 9% AQS overestimation at low end due to urban monitoring sites and coarse grid. Very good ozone performance at CASTNet (Canyonlands).

24. 24 Wyoming 36 km (red) & 12 km (blue) DMAX8 AQS Monitors –NMB = 4% & FB = 5% –NME = 14% & FE = 13% CASTNet Monitors –NMB = 3% & FB = 3% –NME = 11% & FE = 10% Model not configured to simulate high winter DMAX8 ozone in JPAD (e.g., 122 ppb at Boulder on Feb 21, 2008). CASTNet likely modeled strat ozone in Apr (PND & YEL)

25. Summary Base08c DMAX8 Ozone Performance Mostly reasonable performance with low bias and error (some positive bias tendency) –Larger overestimation bias in WA, NM, OR and MT  MT traced to questionable observed ozone at Glacier CASTNet site going to zero at night –Some occurrences of modeled stratospheric ozone intrusion when none observed (and vice versa) Underestimation of JPAD winter high ozone and highest ozone in California –Model not configured for simulating cold pooling –Coarse (12 km) grid limits urban ozone simulation, especially in marine environment 25

26. State-Specific Ozone Source Apportionment Modeling 2008 36/12 km Base08c (DEASCO3 fires) scenario Source Regions: Western States etc. Source Categories: (1) Natural (Biogenic, Lightning, Sea Salt and WBD); (2) Fire (separately for WF, Rx, AG); and (3) Anthropogenic –CSAPR-type transport analysis  Examine upwind state anthropogenic (Anthro+Rx+Ag) contribution to downwind state ozone and PM 2.5 Design Values (DV) –Spatial extent of contributions to high ozone/PM 2.5  Maximum ozone contribution to daily maximum 8-hour ozone ≥ 76, 70, 65, 60 and 0 ppb –Role of Stratospheric Ozone, International Transport, Natural Emissions, Fires and Anthropogenic Emissions 26

27. State-Specific Source Apportionment 21 Source Regions (17 “western” states) 27

28. CSAPR-type Analysis State-Specific Anthropogenic (Anthro+Rx+Ag) contributions to 8-hour ozone Design Value (DVs) Model Attainment Test Software (MATS) to project current DVs without a selected state’s contribution –Use relative change in model results to scale observed current year DV (DVC) in absence of a state’s anthropogenic emissions –Difference is state’s ozone contribution at each ozone monitoring site As in CSAPR, use two sets of DVCs –AvgDVC = Average of 2006-2008, 2007-2009 & 2008-2010 DVs –MaxDVC = Maximum of 2006-08, 2007-09 & 2008-10 DVs CSAPR used significant contribution threshold of 1% of the NAAQS 28

29. MATS Unmonitored Area Analysis (UAA) Default MATS calculates current year Design Value (DVC) using an average of three Design Values –Design Value (DV) is defined as the three year average of the fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone (DMAX8) –MATS DVC defined as avg of 2006-8, 2007-9 & 2008-10 DVs MATS UAA interpolates DVCs across domain Since low ozone in 2009, ozone has been increasing in west 29 Denver DVs 2001-2012

30. MATS UAA: Areas with DVC ≥ 76 ppb NAAQS 30

31. MATS UAA: Areas DVC ≥ 70 ppb 31

32. MATS UAA: Areas DVC ≥ 65 ppb 32

33. MATS UAA: Areas DVC ≥ 60 ppb 33

34. 2008 36/12 km State-Specific Analysis Example CSAPR-type Analysis using current (March 2008) 0.075 ppm ozone NAAQS –Also looking at 70, 65 and 60 ppb potential future NAAQS 136 ozone monitors in 12 km WESTUS domain with AvgDVC exceeding NAAQS (76 ppb or higher) [86 sites (63%) in CA] For 17 upwind western states examine 2008 contribution to ozone Design Values at ozone monitoring sites in downwind states: –Number of downwind state monitoring sites with contribution to ozone Design Value greater than 1 % of the NAAQS (# Sites ≥ 0.76 ppb) –Maximum contribution to a downwind state 8-hour ozone Design Value 34

35. CSAPR-type Analysis for 0.075 ppm NAAQS Number of sites with State contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb 35 State# SitesMax O3 (ppb) AZ241.23 CA1816.65 CO00.51 KS48.95 ID21.02 MT018 OK186.52 OR251.13 WA11.03 State# SitesMax O3 (ppb) WY51.53 ND00.12 SD00.13 NE00.36 NV201.28 UT52.53 TX610.17 NM20.82

36. Arizona Highest monitor in five states with DV ≥ 76 ppb and AZ contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV AZ AvgDV Contribution –2.35 ppb TX El Paso –1.32 ppb NM Dona Ana –1.23 ppb UT Weber –1.15 ppb CO Jefferson –1.13 ppb NV Clark 36

37. 37 California Highest monitor in five states with DV ≥ 76 ppb and CA contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV CA AvgDV Contribution –16.9 ppb NV Clark –5.3 ppb AZ Pinal –2.16 ppb UT SLC –1.89 ppb CO Jefferson –1.19 ppb TX El Paso 37

38. 38 Idaho Highest monitor in two states with DV ≥ 76 ppb and ID contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV ID AvgDV Contribution –1.37 ppb UT Box Elder –1.02 ppb WY Sublette

39. 39 Nevada Highest monitor in four states with DV ≥ 76 ppb and NV contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV NV AvgDV Contribution –1.27 ppb CA Inyo –1.12 ppb UT SLC –0.99 ppb AZ Maricopa –0.77 ppb CO Jefferson

40. 40 New Mexico Highest monitor in three states with DV ≥ 76 ppb and NM contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV NM AvgDV Contribution –2.69 ppb TX El Paso –1.05 ppb AZ Maricopa –0.73 ppb CO Douglas

41. 41 Utah Highest monitor in one state with DV ≥ 76 ppb and UT contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV UT AvgDV Contribution –2.53 CO Jefferson

42. 42 Washington Highest monitor in one states with DV ≥ 76 ppb and WA contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV WA AvgDV Contribution –1.03 WY Sublette Issues with applying MATS approach for DVs based on winter ozone

43. 43 Wyoming Highest monitor in one state with DV ≥ 76 ppb and WY contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb AvgDV and MaxDV WY AvgDV Contribution –1.53 CO Larimer

44. State-Specific Ozone Foot Prints Examine spatial distribution of state’s highest contribution to modeled daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations for total modeled ozone greater than or equal to several thresholds: –76 ppb (current NAAQS); 70 ppb; 65 ppb; 60 ppb; and 0 ppb (highest contribution in year) Results follow for 0 ppb and 76 ppb –Arizona, California and Colorado presented –Remainder states on WestJumpAQMS website from June 20, 2013 status conference call  http://www.wrapair2.org/pdf/WestJumpAQMS_Progress_Jun20_2013_ Draft2.pdf 44

45. Arizona Highest 8-Hour Ozone Contribution O 3 ≥ 0 ppb O 3 ≥ 76 ppb 45

46. California Highest 8-Hour Ozone Contribution O 3 ≥ 0 ppb O 3 ≥ 76 ppb 46

47. Colorado Highest 8-Hour Ozone Contribution O 3 ≥ 0 ppb 47

48. WestJumpAQMS Next Steps Finish West-CARMMS database development Complete State-Specific PM Source Apportionment –Displays of annual and 24-hour PM 2.5 (CSAPR-type) –Visibility and Sulfur/Nitrogen Deposition –Discuss on July 17, 2013 status call Complete Source Category-Specific Ozone and PM Source Apportionment Modeling –Contributions of Natural, Fires, Oil and Gas, Point, Mobile, and Other Sources to O 3, PM 2.5 and AQRVs –Discuss on August 2013 status call Final Report and Documentation –Finish in August 2013 48

49. Life After WestJumpAQMS Three State Data Warehouse (3SDW) and Air Quality Study (3SAQS): –CO, UT, WY, EPA, NPS, USFS, FWS, BLM –Grant funding from NPS to:  Tom Moore, 3SDW Technical Coordinator  CSU/CIRA develop 3SDW website  UNC/IE perform modeling and analysis and develop 2011 modeling platform 3SDW to archive WestJumpAQMS 2008 modeling databases and results –Repository for emissions, AQ observations and modeling –Already tested data retrieval and ability to duplicate results 49

50. 3SAQS 2013 Scope of Work 2008 modeling and analysis 2011 WRF meteorological modeling 2011 emissions development and modeling Oil and Gas (O&G) emissions updates –2011 baseline O&G following WRAP Phase III –Future year O&G emission projections 2012-2030 Other Future Year emissions projections Air quality monitoring network assessment Development of on-line Source Apportionment tool Development of on-line modeling spatial display tool 50

51. Relationship Between WestJumpAQMS and Other Studies Pre-WestJumpAQMS –WRAP RMC Visibility SIP Modeling –2008 Denver Ozone SIP –WRAP Phase III Oil and Gas –Denver Post SIP MM5/WRF Ozone Sensitivity Modeling –WDEQ WRF Modeling –WRAP MEGAN Enhancements Post-WestJumpAQMS – West-CARMS – 3SAQS – 3SDW – CO FJFO RMP – NM Carlsbad FO RMP – … 51