BLM National and State Offices Meeting
on WestJumpAQMS
Ralph Morris, ENVIRON International Corporation
Tom Moore, Western Regional Air Partnership
Template
Millennium Harvest House Hotel
Boulder, Colorado
9:30-11:30 -- July 8, 2013
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 PM2.5, visibility and deposition
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
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 farfield 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.
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 predecisional 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)
7
WestJumpAQMS PGM Inputs for 3 Domains
36 km CONUS
12 km WESTUS
4 km IMWD
8
WRAP RMC vs. WestJumpAQMS
Parameter
Modeling Year
Met Model
36 km CONUS
12 km WESTUS
4 km IMWD
Vertical
Total Grids
WRAP
RMC
2002
MM5
165 x 129
Not Used
NA
34
723,690
AQ Model
36 km
12 km
4 km
Layers
Total Grids
CMAQ
148 x 112
NA
NA
19
314,944
WestJump
AQMS
2008
WRF
165 x 129
235 x 240
325 x 525
37
9,187,470
(13x grids)
(81x resolution)
CAMx & CMAQ
148 x112
227 x 230
164 x 218
25
2,,613,450
(8x grids)
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
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
11
WestJumpAQMS Tasks In-Progress
• State-Specific PM Source Apportionment Modeling
– CAPR-type and state footprint for annual and 24-hour PM2.5
– 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
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
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
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
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
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 WestCARMMS modelers
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
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
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)
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 (R2) and Regression Equation
• By western state for:
– AQS monitors (urban) and CASTNet monitors (rural)
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%
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%
CASTNet DMAX8 overestimations due to modeled stratospheric ozone intrusions
when none occurred [Apr 11 (102), May 8 (129) and Jun 13 (165) – (JDay)]
22
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
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
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 PM2.5 Design Values (DV)
– Spatial extent of contributions to high ozone/PM2.5
 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
27
State-Specific Source Apportionment
21 Source Regions (17 “western” states)
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
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
Denver DVs
2001-2012
30
MATS UAA: Areas with DVC ≥ 76 ppb NAAQS
31
MATS UAA: Areas DVC ≥ 70 ppb
32
MATS UAA: Areas DVC ≥ 65 ppb
33
MATS UAA: Areas DVC ≥ 60 ppb
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
35
CSAPR-type Analysis for 0.075 ppm NAAQS
Number of sites with State contribution to DV ≥ 0.76 ppb
State # Sites Max O3
(ppb)
AZ
CA
CO
24
18
0
1.23
16.65
0.51
KS
ID
MT
OK
4
2
0
18
8.95
1.02
18
6.52
OR
WA
25
1
1.13
1.03
State # Sites Max O3
(ppb)
WY
ND
SD
5
0
0
1.53
0.12
0.13
NE
NV
UT
0
20
5
0.36
1.28
2.53
TX
NM
6
2
10.17
0.82
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
45
Arizona Highest 8-Hour Ozone Contribution
O3 ≥ 0 ppb
O3 ≥ 76 ppb
46
California Highest 8-Hour Ozone Contribution
O3 ≥ 0 ppb
O3 ≥ 76 ppb
47
Colorado Highest 8-Hour Ozone Contribution
O3 ≥ 0 ppb
O3 ≥ 0 ppb
48
WestJumpAQMS Next Steps
• Finish West-CARMMS database development
• Complete State-Specific PM Source Apportionment
– Displays of annual and 24-hour PM2.5 (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 O3, PM2.5 and AQRVs
– Discuss on August 2013 status call
• Final Report and Documentation
– Finish in August 2013
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
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
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
…
…