Update on Monitoring, Modeling & Data Issues

Region 4 Air Pollution Control Agencies

Fall 2012 MeetingRaleigh, NC

October 23, 2102Richard A. “Chet” Wayland, Director

Air Quality Assessment Division

Monitoring

CO NO2 O3 SO2 PM2.5 Pb

2011 No changes at this time

0.5 TPY source monitors; NCore (urban) monitors, Airport study (all by 12/27/11)

2012

2013 Area-wide sites in CBSA’s > 1M;RA40 sites

PWEI sites

2014 First near-road site in CBSA’s > 1M

2015 Near-road monitors in CBSA’s > 2.5M

Second near-road site: CBSA’s > 2.5M; CBSA’s with AADT segments > 250K

Near-road monitors in CBSA’s > 1M

2016

2017 Near-road monitors in CBSA’s > 1M

First near-road site in CBSA’s > 500K

Ambient Monitoring Deployment Schedule (Final or Proposed )•All deployment deadlines by January 1 unless otherwise noted

1st Monitor Jan 2014; 2nd Monitor Jan 2015January 1, 2014January 1, 2017

Near-road NO2 Monitoring

Proposed Deadlines for Near-road NO2 Monitoring

CBSA Name2010

Population Near-road NO2 Proposed Monitoring Deadlines

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Metro Area 5,571,583 1st Monitor - 1/1/2014; 2nd Monitor - 1/1/2015

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Metro Area 5,421,171 1st Monitor - 1/1/2014; 2nd Monitor - 1/1/2015

Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Metro Area 2,768,308 1st Monitor - 1/1/2014; 2nd Monitor - 1/1/2015Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL Metro Area 2,099,977 1/1/2014Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC Metro Area 1,792,914 1/1/2014Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN Metro Area 1,599,489 1/1/2014Jacksonville, FL Metro Area 1,341,061 1/1/2014Memphis, TN-MS-AR Metro Area 1,296,067 1/1/2014Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN Metro Area 1,263,989 1/1/2014Raleigh-Cary, NC Metro Area 1,157,568 1/1/2014Birmingham-Hoover, AL Metro Area 1,130,578 1/1/2014Columbia, SC Metro Area 746,979 1/1/2017Greensboro-High Point, NC Metro Area 721,476 1/1/2017Knoxville, TN Metro Area 707,379 1/1/2017North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL Metro Area 697,972 1/1/2017Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville, SC Metro Area 665,503 1/1/2017Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Metro Area 643,622 1/1/2017Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metro Area 611,629 1/1/2017Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metro Area 598,427 1/1/2017Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC Metro Area 543,239 1/1/2017Jackson, MS Metro Area 542,341 1/1/2017Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Metro Area 540,665 1/1/2017Chattanooga, TN-GA Metro Area 525,357 1/1/2017Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metro Area 506,717 1/1/2017Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metro Area 500,272 1/1/2017

10th Conference on Air Quality Modeling• Presentations posted immediately after conference:

– http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/10thmodconfpres.htm

• Full transcription posted on June 21, 2012:– http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/10thmodconf.htm (Follow Links)

• Summary of Comments document including an overview of next steps and action items posted on October 5, 2012:– http://

www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/10thmodconf/10thMC_Summary_of_Comments-Revised_10-05-2012.pdf

• Response to Comments document projected for delivery at the end of the calendar year 2012.

5U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

Modeling

10th Conference on Air Quality Modeling• Formal plan for updates to Appendix W:

– Goal to have a draft plan available in early 2013.– Discussion at A&WMA specialty conference and the 2013

RSL Modelers’ Workshop in spring 2013 (Information on these meetings on next slide).

– Revised draft plan based on engagement and feedback available soon thereafter.

– Rulemaking proposal for language amendments and updates to Appendix W released for public comment and response in connection with the 11th Conference on Air Quality Modeling (late 2014 / early 2015).

6U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

Upcoming Conferences / Workshops• 2013 A&WMA Specialty Conference:

– “Guideline on Air Quality Models: The Path Forward”– March 19-21, 2013, Sheraton Raleigh Hotel, Raleigh, NC.– http://

boilermact.awma.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/AQ_Models_CFA.pdf

• 2013 Regional, State, and Local Modelers’ Workshop:– April 22-25, 2013, EPA’s Region 6 office in Dallas, TX.– Open (regulatory, industrial, consultant / contractor,

environmental, public) participation day on Tuesday, April 23.– Workshop information will be posted on EPA’s SCRAM

website in December 2012 or early January 2013.7U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

AERMOD Modeling System Updates• Updates based on comments received through the

10th Modeling Conference along with other previously identified needs and ongoing feedback from the regulated modeling community.

• Near-term (updated release in early to mid November):– Addition of a minimum wind speed threshold option and a

few bug fixes to AERMET.– Interim addressing of "low wind speed" issue based on

review of 10th Modeling Conference comments and published literature.

• “Beta option" with EPA evaluations demonstrating appropriateness for use in PSD permitting

8U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

AERMOD Modeling System Updates• Near-term – Continued:

– Considering updates incorporating EPA's Office of Research & Development (ORD) development of enhanced line-source characterization and algorithm.

• ORD delivered drafts to the Air Quality Modeling Group on 9/19/12.

• Longer-term:– Reviewing issues with building characterization and

downwash algorithms, seeking ORD support for wind tunnel and related research.

– Consider other necessary updates based on 10th Modeling Conference comments.

9U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

CALPUFF Modeling System Updates• EPA’s regulatory CALPUFF version 5.8 Modeling

System updated to include newer version of the post processing program, CALPOST, on August 27, 2012:– CALPOST version 6.221 (level 080724) includes the "Method

8" IMPROVE equation revision per the Federal Land Managers' Air Quality Related Values Work Group (FLAG) revised October 2010 Phase 1 Report.

– http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_prefrec.htm#calpuff

• Updates to the regulatory CALPUFF version 5.8 to address known bug fixes– Met with Federal Land Managers and working to modify and

test code updates for provision to TRC by the end of 2012.

10U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

SO2 NAAQS Activities• Reviewing 09/2012 beta release of EPRI funded

variable emissions tool, EMVAP, and related programs for consideration as part of future state attainment demonstrations in determining enforceable limits:– Planning discussions with EPRI immediately following the

CMAS conference in October 2012.– http://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-dispersion/

• Updating SO2 SIP modeling guidance for attainment demonstrations (late 2012 / early 2013) for use by areas to be designated nonattainment.

11U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

SO2 NAAQS Activities• Review and comments on evaluations of AERMOD

modeling of current SO2 sources, ongoing with updated reports by states and/or EPA presentations in future.– EPA review of recently reported AERMOD evaluations by

IDEM have uncovered issues with representativeness of meteorological inputs and input errors that once addressed significantly improves model performance for 1-hour SO2 concentrations with model to monitored ratios of 1.15 to 1.3.

– EPA will continue to pursue opportunities to evaluate AERMOD modeling system to ensure appropriate use for SO2 implementation by state and local agencies.

12U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

NO2 NAAQS Activities• Released NO2 In-Stack Ratio (ISR) database on

EPA’s SCRAM website on August 30, 2012:– Completed through small workgroup of EPA, state, and local

agency modelers.– http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/no2_isr_database.htm

• Continue working with API and their contractors on ARM2 as a modified NO2 Tier 2 method:– Reviewing documentation and evaluations, awaiting updates

with specifics on how to formally implement within AERMOD.– Upon full receipt, EPA will independently verify evaluations

and, as appropriate, write a guidance memorandum on how ARM2 may be used for permitting applications.

13U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

NO2 NAAQS Activities• Engaging with stakeholders on evaluations of NO2

Tier 3 approaches of OLM and PVMRM.

• Continue to advocate for new field studies to allow more full model performance evaluation so these Tier 3 approaches could be characterized as refined methods as part of the planned regulatory update to Appendix W.– As discussed at 10th Modeling Conference, EPA will need

support from the community to fund, design and conduct such field studies so looking for partners for collaboration and/or willing to consult on external efforts.

14U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

PM2.5 NAAQS Activities• As part of proposed PM2.5 NAAQS, completed

technical memorandum demonstrating basis for surrogacy policy to address PSD requirements of potential secondary visibility index standards.

• Completing draft PM2.5 Permit Modeling Guidance for public release (mid/late-October):– Comments will be accepted on the draft guidance document

throughout the remainder of 2012.– Final PM2.5 Permit Modeling Guidance (early 2013)

• Planning discussions on SCICHEM and CMAQ-APT with EPRI and contractors (Sage Management & Environ) during CMAS conference in October 2012.

15U.S. Environmental Protection Agency10/17/2012

Data

2009 2010 2011 20120

100

200

300

400

500

600

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Exeedances per year thru Oct 2, 1012

Reg4 exceedances

Nationwide exceedances

2010 2011 20120

100

200

300

400

500

600

Reg 4 O3 Exceedances, 8-hr NAAQS (thru Oct 2, 2012)2012 Ozone Data: Region 4

States follow the nation-wide trend

Atlanta, GA

Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC

Knoxville, TN

Memphis, TN-MS-AR

65 70 75 80 85 90

4th highest daily max 8-hr Ozone per Year in Region 4 Non Attainment Areas

2012 4th Highest Daily Maximum as of October 2, 2012

2011 4th Highest Daily Maximum

2010 4th Highest Daily Maximum

Concentration, ppm

2012 generally produced more exceedances but not necessarily higher concentrations on peak days

Analysis of Ozone and Meteorology

Atlanta, Charlotte, Chattanooga, Louisville, and Memphis

June – July, 2012

Preliminary Analysis – Please Do Not Quote or Cite

• From June 26 to July 1, 2012, high ozone was measured across the southeast

• During this time period, the region also experienced a record heat wave

• Analysis of meteorological data indicates that the following conditions were present during this period:– High temperature (several all-time high temperatures

were recorded)– Low humidity– Low cloud cover (therefore high solar intensity)

• These conditions are all conducive to ozone formation

Background

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Daily Maximum 8-hr Ozone

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC Chattanooga, TN-GA

Louisville, KY-IN Memphis, TN-MS-AR

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

Daily High Temperature (F)

Atlanta Charlotte Chattanooga Louisville Memphis

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Mean Relative Humidity

Atlanta Charlotte Chattanooga Louisville Memphis

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Cloud Cover

Atlanta Charlotte Chattanooga Louisville Memphis

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

AIRNow 24-hr Average PM2.5

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC Chattanooga, TN-GA

Louisville, KY-IN Memphis, TN-MS-AR

4.78

3.24

1.47

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

1

2

3

4

56/

2/20

12

6/3/

2012

6/4/

2012

6/5/

2012

6/6/

2012

6/7/

2012

6/8/

2012

6/9/

2012

6/10

/201

2

6/11

/201

2

6/12

/201

2

6/13

/201

2

6/14

/201

2

6/15

/201

2

6/16

/201

2

6/17

/201

2

6/18

/201

2

6/19

/201

2

6/20

/201

2

6/21

/201

2

6/22

/201

2

6/23

/201

2

6/24

/201

2

6/25

/201

2

6/26

/201

2

6/27

/201

2

6/28

/201

2

6/29

/201

2

6/30

/201

2

7/1/

2012

7/2/

2012

7/3/

2012

7/4/

2012

7/5/

2012

7/6/

2012

7/7/

2012

7/8/

2012

Ave

rage

conc

entr

ation

at

all s

ites

wit

h a

valid

sam

ple

(μg/

m3 )

PM2.5 Organic Carbon and Sulfate, Selected Southeastern Cities June-July 2012

OC Sample Count

Sulfate Sample Count

Organic Carbon (88370)

Sulfate

OC/SO4 Raio

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

36/

2/20

12

6/3/

2012

6/4/

2012

6/5/

2012

6/6/

2012

6/7/

2012

6/8/

2012

6/9/

2012

6/10

/201

2

6/11

/201

2

6/12

/201

2

6/13

/201

2

6/14

/201

2

6/15

/201

2

6/16

/201

2

6/17

/201

2

6/18

/201

2

6/19

/201

2

6/20

/201

2

6/21

/201

2

6/22

/201

2

6/23

/201

2

6/24

/201

2

6/25

/201

2

6/26

/201

2

6/27

/201

2

6/28

/201

2

6/29

/201

2

6/30

/201

2

7/1/

2012

7/2/

2012

7/3/

2012

7/4/

2012

7/5/

2012

7/6/

2012

7/7/

2012

7/8/

2012

OC

/ SO

4 Ra

tio

μg/m

3

Organic Carbon - Sulfate Ratio by City, June-July 2012

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA

Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC

Chattanooga, TN-GA

Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN

Memphis, TN-MS-AR

Annual Monitoring Network Plan Reviews

• States are required to submit Network Plans to EPA by July 1• Prior to July 1:

EPA develops/updates tools that the agencies can use to evaluate their network to determine if it is meeting the minimum requirements.

EPA encourages questions throughout the drafting phase. When provided drafts, EPA tries (if time allows) to review and

provide comments on them. • After July 1:

Once the final Network Plan is received EPA meets with the states via phone or in person regarding questions EPA has about the plans.

Approval letters are drafted by state contacts and are reviewed by section chief, branch chief and signed by the Division Director.

EPA’s Network Plan Approval / Disapproval Process

• Approval authority for Network Plans was delegated this year from the RA to the APTMD Director.

• Letters with many requested changes generally require more analysis and time.

• Some changes (e.g., shut downs) may require more analysis and time.

• EPA has 120 days to approve Network Plans.• No formal appeal process is outlined in the

regulations; however, EPA is willing to discuss at any time any issue and review any additional information that a state would like it to.

EPA’s Network Plan Approval / Disapproval Process (cont.)

EPA Network Plan Reviews: Take Away Messages

• EPA will discuss adverse responses with you and/or your staff.

• Monitors and sites are evaluated on a case by case basis.

• Statistical test found in 40 CFR Part 58.14(c)(1) is applied to every SLAMS monitor, every year, using the previous 5 years of design values.

• Proposing to discontinue the highest monitor in an area is rarely approved, even if it is a single pollutant site.

• If EPA finds the discontinuance of a monitor will not compromise data collection needed for implementation of a NAAQS, and if the other requirements in Appendix D continue to be met, then EPA is more likely to agree with closing a monitor (or site).

EPA Network Plan Reviews: Take Away Messages (cont.)

• Any monitor listed as SLAMS requires EPA approval for any change associated with that monitor.– Regardless of whether the monitor is in a

MSA/CBSA or whether there are more than the federal minimally required monitors in a MSA/CBSA

EPA Network Plan Reviews: Take Away Messages (cont.)

• Budget constraints are not the best reason to cite for closing a monitor or site.

• If siting criteria and/or site access is an issue, we will be happy to complete a site evaluation with you.

• If a SLAMS monitor is not eligible for removal under any of the criteria listed in 40 CFR Part 58.14(c)(1) through (c)(5), and logistical problems beyond the state’s control make it impossible to continue operation, then the monitor may be moved to a nearby location with the same scale of representation.

EPA Network Plan Reviews: Take Away Messages (cont.)