1. Performance of NOAA-EPA air quality predictions, 2007 - 2009 Jerry Gorline and Pius Lee Overview of the National Air Quality Forecasting Capability with recent examples.Overview of the National Air Quality Forecasting Capability with recent examples. Evaluation of experimental ozone predictions for summer 2007, 2008, 2009.Evaluation of experimental ozone predictions for summer 2007, 2008, 2009. Evaluation of developmental aerosol predictions for January 2008 to August 2009.Evaluation of developmental aerosol predictions for January 2008 to August 2009. Issues for multi-year evaluation: Unusually cool weather in the East in 2009.Unusually cool weather in the East in 2009. CB05 replaced CBIV.CB05 replaced CBIV. AERO4 introduced.AERO4 introduced. NAM updates.NAM updates.

2. National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) - Model predictions (8-h avg ozone, 1-h avg aerosols): - Model predictions (8-h avg ozone, 1-h avg aerosols): Jeff McQueen, Youhua Tang, Marina Tsidulko Jeff McQueen, Youhua Tang, Marina Tsidulko Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - Point observations: (ozone: ~1300, aerosols: ~600): - Point observations: (ozone: ~1300, aerosols: ~600): Brad Johns, Phil Dickerson, Scott Jackson Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) Daewon Byun, Pius Lee Meteorological Development Laboratory (MDL): Jerry Gorline et al. National Air Quality Forecast Capability (NAQFC) Program Manager: Paula Davidson

3. 3 National Air Quality Forecast Capability Current and Planned Capabilities, 10/09 Improving the basis for AQ alertsImproving the basis for AQ alerts Providing AQ information for people at riskProviding AQ information for people at risk Near-term Operational Targets: Ozone, smoke coverage extended Nationwide Higher resolution prediction (4km) Longer range: Quantitative PM 2.5 predictionQuantitative PM 2.5 prediction Extend air quality forecast range to 48-72 hoursExtend air quality forecast range to 48-72 hours Include broader range of significant pollutantsInclude broader range of significant pollutants FY09 Prediction Capabilities: Operations:Operations: Ozone, expanded from EUS to CONUS, 9/07 Smoke implemented over CONUS, 3/07 and AK, 9/09 Experimental testing:Experimental testing: - Ozone upgrades Smoke predictions over HI in 2009 Developmental testing:Developmental testing: Ozone over AK and HI - Components for particulate matter (PM) forecasts 2005: O 3 2007 : O 3, & smoke 6 2010: smoke 2010: O 3 AK,HI 2009: smoke

4. Other products: Smoke Predictions Station Fire, California Aug-Sept 2009 Intense wild-land fire north of LA 2 fatalities Smoke impacts closed roads, national parks in CA; extended throughout Southwest US 8/26- 9/12 (still active; 84% contained) > 160,000 acres burned

5. 2x2 contingency table definitions Categorical performance metrics:  FC = (a + d)/(a + b + c + d)  TS = a/(a + b + c) Thresholds used:  POD = a/(a + c) ozone: 76 ppb  FAR = b/(a+b) aerosols: 35 ug/m 3

6. Real-time Testing, Summer 2009: Experimental vs Operational O 3 at 76 ppb FC lower for experimental predictions OperationalCBIV-based ExperimentalCB05-based

7. 2008 ozone activity a + c bca Less active in 2009, less under- prediction in June 2009 2009 ozone activity a + c bca outbreak no outbreaks

8. 8-h ozone bias, three-year comparison August 2007, 2008, 2009 CONUS, 1200 UTC cycle experimental: slightly higher bias in 2009 2007: CBIV 2008: CB05 2009: CB05

9. Daily max, 8-h ozone, July 18, 2008 1200 UTC experimental FC=0.773 TS=0.362 POD=0.766 FAR=0.593 predicted in dark blue observed as red dots Four-day outbreak of 2008, day 3, 188 observed cases above 76 ppb

10. Daily max, 8-h ozone, July 1, 2009 1200 UTC experimental FC=0.898 TS=0.341 POD=0.838 FAR=0.635 predicted in dark blue observed as red dots Most active day of 2009, 68 observed, Performance similar to July 18, 2008

11. Number of observed values higher than 76 ppb threshold, 1200 UTC experimental 8-h ozone, by region Fewer cases in the East in 2009, compared to 2007 and 2008

12. Threat Score (TS) 8-h ozone, by region 2007 to 2009, Th=76 ppb Lower TS in the East in 2009, the unusually cool summer, fewer cases above threshold, may have played a role here.

13. Seasonal variation of activity 8-h ozone vs. 1-h aerosols June 2008 to August 2009 Theshold: 76 ppb (ozone) 35 ug/m 3 (aerosols) Aerosols are active in both winter and summer

14. Regional monthly bias of aerosols Jan 2008 to Aug 2009, 35 ug/m 3 lower bias in winter 2009 compared to winter 2008, except PC region CB05AERO-4

15. July 4, 2009 Aerosols from fireworks, not in emissions inventory FC=0.600 TS=0.024 POD=0.024 FAR=0.167 under-prediction

16. Summary: ozone and aerosols  2008 ozone performance similar to 2007, lower TS in 2009 in the East with fewer observed cases above threshold (unusually cool summer, possibly emission issues, economy?).  Slightly higher and more consistent ozone bias in 2009 (CB05) compared to 2008 (CBIV).  Aerosol over-prediction in cool season (Oct- Mar), under-prediction in warm season (Apr-Sep).  Seasonal aerosol biases smaller in 2009 than in 2008.  Plan to include verification of AK and HI in 2010.

17. Acknowledgments: AQF Implementation Team Members OST Paula Davidson Program manager OCWWS Jannie Ferrell Outreach, Feedback OCIO Cindy Cromwell, Dan Starosta, Bob BungeData Communications OST/MDL Jerry Gorline Dev. Verification OST/MDL Marc Saccucci, Tim Boyer, Dave RuthNDGD Product Development OSTKen Carey, Ivanka StajnerProgram Support NESDIS/NCDCAlan HallProduct Archiving NOAA/OARJim MeagherNOAA AQ Matrix Manager NCEP Jeff McQueen, Youhua Tang, Marina Tsidulko, EMC AQF model interface development, testing and integration Jianping Huang, Dongchul Kim *Sarah Lu, Ho-Chun Huang Global data assimilation and feedback testing (NASA, NESDIS) *Brad Ferrier, *Dan Johnson, *Eric Rogers, *Hui-Ya ChuangWRF/NAM coordination Geoff ManikinSmoke Product testing and integration John Ward, Brent Gordon, Chris MageeNCO transition and systems testing Robert Kelly, Bob Bodner, Andrew OrrisonHPC coordination and AQF webdrawer * Guest Contributors NOAA/OAR Daewon Byun, Pius Lee, Rick Saylor, Hsin-Mu Lin, CMAQ development, adaptation of AQ simulations for AQF Daniel Tong, Tianfeng Chai, Fantine Ngan Roland Draxler, Glenn Rolph, Ariel SteinHYSPLIT adaptations NOAA/NESDIS Shobha Kondragunta, Jian ZengSmoke Verification product development Matt Seybold, Mark RuminskiHMS product integration with smoke forecast tool EPA/OAQPS Chet Wayland, Phil Dickerson, Scott Jackson, Brad JohnsAIRNow development, coordination with NAQFC EPA/ORD Rohit Mathur, Ken Schere, Jon Pleim, Tanya Otte, CMAQ development, adaptation of AQ simulations for AQF Jeff Young, George Pouliot, Brian Eder, David Wong

18. Background slides http://wwwt.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/aq/AQChangelogE.html

19. Meteorological Development Lab / OST / National Weather Service Fraction Correct (FC), Threat Score (TS) summer 2008 (85 vs. 76 ppb) 1200 UTC cycle Ozone: higher TS with lower threshold Red: 85 ppb Blue: 76 ppb

20. Meteorological Development Lab / OST / National Weather Service Probability Of Detection (POD) 8-h ozone, 1200 UTC experimental by region, 76 ppb, 2007 to 2009 Higher uncertainty in 2009, too few cases for reliable 95% CI higher uncertainty in 2009 not enough cases > threshold

21. Meteorological Development Lab / OST / National Weather Service Number of observed 1-h aerosol cases above 35 ug/m 3 by region, monthly average PC region more active in winter 2009 compared to winter 2008

22. NCEP Air Quality Forecast 2009 Verification (1 hr Max ozone vs NAM 2 m Max Temperature) BIAS West U.S. NAM 2m Max Temperature 1 hr daily Max Ozone Max temp bias improves slightly by August but ozone errors increased in East U.S. East U.S.