1. The Southeast Michigan Air Quality Study Group (SEMAQS) George Wolff - AIR, Inc. Joan Weidner - SEMCOG Chuck Hersey - SEMCOG

2. SEMAQS History Early days (pre 1990s): Command and Control Communications began after decisions were made A model ripe for confrontation

3. History: Lessons Learned Confrontation wastes: – Time – Relationship building opportunities – Opportunity to leverage human knowledge and resources

4. History: The New Age Tap human knowledge and resources in public and private sector Work from ground up instead of top down Create welcoming atmosphere for exchange of information and interpretations of data SEMOS, now SEMAQS, was formed and working for over 20 years Resulted in: – Human infrastructure network on regional air quality – Track record of timely NAAQS compliance

5. Membership Government – SEMCOG: Local government representative and group facilitator – Michigan Department of Environmental Quality – U.S. EPA Industry – Autos – Utilities – Other stakeholders (e.g., steel mills) Other Resources – LADCO – Universities – Canadian national & provincial government – Consultants

6. Mission Achieve air quality standards as efficiently, effectively, and swiftly as possible Develop specific strategies that pass 2 tests: – good science – good policy Recognize science is rarely deterministic: Focus on weight of evidence Enjoy and learn from what we do

7. SEMCOG 7-County Planning Area Population: 4,705,000 Detroit Ann Arbor

8. Pollutants of Concern for SEMAQS Ozone – Attainment area but 2011 and 2012 violations and lower NAAQS in 2014 possible Sulfur dioxide – violation at a Detroit site, sparse monitoring in SE MI and modeled violations possible; size of nonattainment area in question PM 2.5 – Awaiting redesignation to attainment, but a probable new NAAQS in 2013 could throw us back into nonattainment Nitrogen dioxide – Unclassifiable/attainment status – No measured violations but data are sparse – Near roadway monitoring underway – Need more data

9. Overarching Areas of Interest Spatial distribution of pollutions – What can be measured from space? – What is the spatial resolution? – What is the correlation between the vertical slices and surface measurements? – What is the temporal resolution? – What is the analytical resolution? Effectiveness of emission controls – Are there historical satellite data that can be used to construct pollution trends?

10. PM 2.5 Trend is down and we expect to meet possible new annual NAAQS in near future with no additional control measures 24-hour NAAQS is more problematic – Winter episodes poorly understood – High OC and NO3 – Fog appears to contribute to high NO3 – Emission inventories for condensable is woeful My understanding is that satellite based column profiles correlate poorly with surface measurements (Paciorek & Liu, 2012)

11. SO 2 SE MI will be declared nonattainment for the new 1-hour NAAQS based on 1 monitor in Detroit Unlike any other pollutant, an SO2 violation can be based solely on modeling Therefore spatially resolved data is a high priority

12. O3O3 SE MI barely in attainment with 75 ppb NAAQS in 2008-10 Violation at 1 site occurred in 2011 and in 2012 Will be in serious difficulty if NAAQS is lowered

13. Ingredients for High O 3 in SE MI All These Conditions Are Necessary Persistent S to SW synoptic air flow Sunny hot days LAKE BREEZE LAKE BREEZES are inadequately resolved in current Photochemical Grid Models

14. Other Key Issues -Background O 3 North American Background (NAB) – US concentrations in the absence of NA anthropogenic emissions NAB sets a limit on the amount of risk that can be reduced. – The lower the NAB, the more risk reduction EPA can claim by lowering the NAAQS – i.e. - If EPA used NAB of 40 ppb instead of 15-35, 92-100% of risk would have disappeared. NAB establishes the O 3 level that can be achieved from State and Federal control Programs – An underestimation of actual NAB will result in failed control strategies.

15. EPA’s Definition of Background Inappropriate NAB should not be used USB should be used because US has no control over Canadian and Mexican emissions In 1997 O 3 review, EPA used modeled mean monthly diurnal NAB profiles (MI ~ 22 ppb) This grossly underestimates USB daily variability and

16. Measurement Model NAB USB Canadian/Mexican enhancement Max USB = 44 ppb (CME = 30; total O 3 = 75 ppb) 5 x’s total O 3 ≥ 75 ppb and Canadian enhancement ≥ 10 ppb. 2x’s Canadian enhancement ≥ 30 ppb. (from Wang et al., 2009)

17. Background O 3 Need help getting USB with latest models Need help convincing EPA that USB not NAB should be used

18. Are We Calculating USB Correctly? EPA Zeroing out US anthropogenic emissions creates unrealistic conditions A more realistic way to determine the impact of upwind emissions on US O 3 concentrations would be to zero out upwind emissions and determine the impact by difference

19. Summary O 3 – Background – Lake breeze SO 2 – Spatial distribution PM 2.5 – Winter episodes NO 2 – Spatial distribution