Presentation on theme: "1 State Implementation Plan (SIP) Modeling for 8-hour Ozone Preliminary 2009 Results For Metrolina and Great Smoky Mountain National Park Stakeholders."— Presentation transcript:
1 State Implementation Plan (SIP) Modeling for 8-hour Ozone Preliminary 2009 Results For Metrolina and Great Smoky Mountain National Park Stakeholders Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Bebhinn Do, NCDAQ June 28, 2005
2 Outline Review / Background 15% VOC Requirements Typical 2002 and Future 2009 emissions Attainment test – How does it work? Attainment test – Preliminary Results Next steps –Emissions changes anticipated in next set of modeling (2002 & 2009) –Menu of possible control options
3 Background 8-hour ozone standard –If a monitored design value is > 0.08 ppm (84 ppb), that monitor is violating the standard –The design value is defined as: 3-year average of the annual 4 th highest daily maximum 8-hour average
4 NC 8-hr Ozone Nonattainment Areas
5 Ozone Nonattainment Timeline Definitions for Metrolina Area Effective date = June 15, 2004 Transportation conformity date = June 15, 2005 SIP submittal date = June 15, 2007 Attainment date = June 15, 2010* Data used to determine attainment = (Modeling) Attainment year = 2009 * Or as early as possible
6 Modeling Application Process Select areas or domains of interest Select representative ozone season/episodes Prepare and refine meteorological simulations Prepare and refine emission model inputs Apply air quality modeling system Performance evaluation of air quality modeling system Prepare current and future year emissions Re-apply air quality modeling system Apply the attainment test May 26 th Today
7 Modeling Domains 36 km 12 km
8 Modeling Season / Episode Full Year of 2002 selected for VISTAS modeling –Regional Haze / Fine Particulate: Full Year –Ozone: Late May – End Of August The higher portion of the 2002 ozone season selected for the Ozone SIP and Attainment Demonstration modeling.
9 Air Quality Modeling System Meteorological Model Emissions Processor Air Quality Model MM5 SMOKE CMAQ Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions Community Multiscale Air Quality System Temporally and Spatially Gridded Air Quality Output predictions
10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) Need a SIP submittal to EPA within three years –Attainment Demonstration that details the States plan to bring the area into attainment of the Federal standard –For Metrolina area…must include: 15% VOC Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) Plan VOC & NOX Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance programs (I/M)
11 15% VOC Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) Plan Calculated from the 2002 base year Cannot substitute other emissions for the first plan Phase 2 implementation guidance should say what can and cannot be counted towards the 15% plan Includes reductions from all man-made emissions, i.e. point, area, highway mobile and off-road mobile
12 15% VOC RFP for NC Portion of Metrolina Nonattainment Area* Source2002 (tons/day)2009 (tons/day)% Reduction Point Area Nonroad Mobile Highway Mobile Total * Does not include Iredell County
13 15% VOC RFP for SC Portion of Metrolina Nonattainment Area* Source2002 (tons/day)2009 (tons/day)% Reduction Point Area Nonroad Mobile Highway Mobile Total Total w/o Point * All of York County, not just the partial area
14 VOC & NOX RACT All existing point sources with potential to emit 100 tons/year (TPY) NC has pre-adopted VOC RACT rules (2D.0900) and NOx RACT rule (2D.1413) –Will have to update to include entire Metrolina 8-hour ozone nonattainment area –Will have to activate these rules SC has a statewide VOC rule for new sources with actual emissions 100 TPY and statewide NOx rule for large boilers (>10 MBTU/hour) Starting to identify potential sources subject to RACT requirements
15 Other Requirements RACM Requirements –Applies to all source sectors (point, area, highway mobile & off-road mobile sources) –Only what is necessary to attain NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable –NC has already adopted some RACM type rules Open burning ban during ozone events Expanded I/M program –SC has adopted some RACM type rules Open burning Degreasers Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance programs (I/M) –NC has already met this requirement in Metrolina area –SC working on a program for the nonattainment area in York Co.
Typical and 2009 Emissions Overview Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Environmental Engineer II
17 Emissions Inventory Definitions ActualActual = the emissions inventory developed to simulate what happened in 2002 TypicalTypical = the emissions inventory developed to characterize the current (2002) emissions… It doesnt include specific events, but rather averages or typical conditions (e.g. EGUs and fires) FutureFuture = the emissions inventory developed to simulate the future (e.g for Metrolina modeling) ***Remember… Actual is used for model performance evaluation only! Typical and Future are used to determine future attainment status.
31 Union County 2002 VMT 2009 VMT 2002 NOx emissions = 14.9 tpd 2009 NOx emissions = 6.9 tpd
32 ONROAD Mobile NOx 2009 minus 2002 (max difference) Reductions only Scale 0 to –0.5 moles/s
33 Air Quality Modeling Results Bebhinn Do, NCDAQ Meteorologist
34 What is a Modeled Attainment Demonstration? Analyses which estimate whether selected emissions reductions will result in ambient concentrations will meet NAAQS An identified set of control measures which will result in the required emissions reductions Use the Modeled Attainment Test to estimate emissions reduction needed to demonstrate attainment
35 What is the Attainment Test ? An exercise in which an air quality model is used to simulate current and future air quality near each monitoring site. Model estimates are used in a relative rather than absolute sense. Future ozone design values are estimated at existing monitoring sites by multiplying a modeled relative reduction factor at locations near each monitor times the observed monitor-specific ozone design value. The resulting projected site-specific future design value is compared to NAAQS. If all such future site-specific design values are 84 ppb, the test is passed.
36 Attainment Test DVF = RRF * DVC DVF = Future Design Value RRF = Relative Reduction Factor DVC = Current Design Value
37 Attainment Test DVF = RRF * DVC RRF is based on modeled data Future modeled values Current modeled values DVC is based on observed data If DVF is 84 ppb, the test is passed.
38 Attainment Test Step 1: Compute a current site-specific design value (DVC) from monitored data Step 2: Use air quality modeling results to estimate a site- specific relative reduction factor (RRF) Step 3: Multiply the relative reduction factor obtained in step 2 times the site-specific design value in step 1… The result is a predicted site-specific future design value (DVF)… If DVF is 84 ppb, the test is passed. DVF = RRF * DVC
39 Attainment Test Step 1: Compute the current design value (DVC) The DVC is calculated for each monitoring site within a nonattainment area. EPA Draft Final Guidance for the 8-hour Ozone standard suggests a few possible methods for calculating the DVC.
40 Method 1 Use the design value corresponds to the period used in the attainment designation. Same steps as determining a design value for designation: –Step 1: Sort all daily 8-hour average maximums in order from highest to lowest into a list for 2001 –Step 2: Repeat Step 1 for the next two consecutive years (2002 & 2003) creating a total of three lists –Step 3: Average the 4 th highest from each list or across the 3-year span
41 Method 2 Use the design value period that straddles the baseline inventory year. Our baseline year is 2002; the corresponding DVC would be the average of the 4 th highest 8- hour ozone concentrations from 2001, 2002, Results in the same value for Method 1 for our modeling.
43 Method 3 Average of the three design value period which include the baseline inventory year. Average of the , , design value. This method represents the baseline concentrations while taking into account the variability in meteorology and emissions. EPA recommended method.
45 Method 4 Average of the design values for the 5 year period that straddles the baseline inventory year. Average of the 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 design value. This method takes into account the variability in meteorology and emissions without giving one year a higher weight than another.
47 Attainment Test Step 1: Compute a current site-specific design value (DVC) from monitored data Step 2: Use air quality modeling results to estimate a site- specific relative reduction factor (RRF) Step 3: Multiply the relative reduction factor obtained in step 2 times the site-specific design value in step 1… The result is a predicted site-specific future design value (DVF)… If DVF is 84 ppb, the test is passed. DVF = RRF * DVC
48 Relative vs. Absolute Why use model estimates in a relative rather than absolute sense? –The form of the 8-hr standard (4th highest averaged over 3 years) makes it difficult to tell whether or not a modeled exceedance obtained on one or more days selected from a limited sample of days is consistent with meeting the NAAQS –Problems with model performance are reduced (although good model performance remains a prerequisite for use of a model in an attainment demonstration)
49 Attainment Test
50 Attainment Test Step 2 (cont)... Definition of near a monitor –EPA guidance recommends considering an array of values near each monitor –Assume a monitor is at the center of the grid cell in which it is located and that cell is the center of an array of nearby cells –Using a grid with 12 km grid cells, nearby is defined by a 3 x 3 array of cells, with the monitor located in the center cell
51 Attainment Test Step 2 (cont)... Days used in RRF calculation EPA has established cutoff value for model values to be used in the calculation of the RRF The predicted baseline (2002 typical) maximum 8- hour concentrations < 70 ppb are excluded. It is expected that future guidance will use 85 ppb as a cutoff value with the stipulation that 10 days are needed to calculate a RRF. If the monitoring site does not have 10 days above 85 ppb, the cutoff is lowered until 10 days are obtained for the calculation.
52 Attainment Test Step 2 (cont)... Computing the RRF Once the days in the baseline year that meet the cutoff value are identified, the peak value for each grid cell is determined for the day. The maximum of the peak daily values from the 3x3 grid array are then identified. The maximum from the array are averaged for all days identified to determine the Current Mean Peak 8-hour Daily Maximum.
53 Attainment Test Step 2 (cont)... Computing the RRF This is then repeated for the same set of days from the Future year modeling. The maximum averaged value from the array is referred to as the Future Mean Peak 8-hour Daily Maximum. To obtain the RRF the Future Mean Peak 8-hour Daily Maximum is divided by the Current Mean Peak 8-hour Daily Maximum.
54 Example Calculation
55 Attainment Test Step 1: Compute a current site-specific design value (DVC) from monitored data Step 2: Use air quality modeling results to estimate a site- specific relative reduction factor (RRF) Step 3: Multiply the relative reduction factor obtained in step 2 times the site-specific design value in step 1… The result is a predicted site-specific future design value (DVF)… If DVF is 84 ppb, the test is passed. DVF = RRF * DVC
56 Attainment Test Step 3: Compute the future design value (DVF) DVF = RRF * DVC Example: DVF x(09) = Mean projected peak 8-hr daily max "near" monitor "x" DVC x X Based on observed O3 data 2002 Meteorology 2002 Emissions, processed with 2002 Meteorology 2002 Meteorology 2009 Emissions, processed with 2002 Meteorology
57 Preliminary Results
58 Attainment Test DVF = RRF * DVC How sure are we that were going to attain? Test the following: 1.Use the various DVC calculation methods DVC, Weighted Average, Average 2.Use both minimum thresholds (>70 ppb, >85ppb ) for excluding certain modeled days
59 DVCs used Just as a reminder: 01-03: The 2001 – 2003 design value. Weighted Average: (DV(00–02) + DV(01-03) + DV(02-04))/3 OR (4h(00)+ 2*4h(01)+ 3*4h(02)+ 2*4h(03)+ 4h(04))/9 Average (4h(00)+ 4h(01)+ 4h(02)+ 4h(03)+ 4h(04))/5
60 Preliminary Results -- Metrolina
61 Preliminary Results -- Metrolina
62 Preliminary Results -- GRSM
63 The different methods can be used in conjunction with the test… OR Some could be used as supplemental analyses in a Weight Of Evidence determination… Attainment Test
64 Inventory Improvements Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Environmental Engineer II
Point Source Inventory Improvements Initial 2009 Electric Generating Unit (EGU) emissions were developed using assumptions in the Integrated Planning Model (IPM). –Those assumptions at facilities subject to the NC Clean Smokestacks Act (CSA) were not consistent with the CSA compliance plan. Changes upcoming –Final 2009 run will include unit specific emissions as specified in the June 1, 2005 NC CSA Compliance Plan submitted by Progress Energy and Duke Energy –Kannapolis Energy shut down reflected appropriately
Typical and 2009 Area & Nonroad Inventory Improvements Area & Nonroad sources –No significant changes
Typical and 2009 Onroad Mobile Source Inventory Improvements 2002 VMT updated to reflect latest CDOT and NCDOT data used in recent transportation conformity analysis 2009 VMT will not change
68 Control Strategy Discussion Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Attainment Planning Chief
69 Additional Controls Discussion Based on EPAs expected final modeling guidance: –The preliminary results show that the Metrolina area will pass the attainment test –Several monitors are predicted to be close to the standard in 2009 Do not know what the final modeling results will show –Several emission improvements –Cannot predict how the DVFs will change Therefore, need to be thinking about what additional controls may be needed
70 What Has Already Been Done? Clean Smokestacks Act –Results in reductions of NOx & SO2 year round Vehicle emissions testing –Expanded from 9 to 48 Counties; all of the NC Metrolina counties have I/M program Ultra-Low sulfur fuels Cleaner engines
71 What else can be controlled? Requirements still to address –Potential NOx reductions due to RACM –Potential NOx reductions due to RACT –NCDAQ still assessing these potential reductions Whats Left?
73 Need Stakeholders Input Point Sources –Already controlling utilities with CSA –Large industrial NOx sources with NOx RACT –What else can be controlled? Area Sources –Not a significant source of NOx –Already have rule prohibiting open burning for forecasted code orange days and above
74 Need Stakeholders Input Nonroad Mobile Sources –Voluntary/Mandatory diesel retrofits –Idle reduction policies –Need innovative local measures Highway Mobile Sources –Idle reduction policies –VMT reduction programs –Need innovative local measures
75 Next Steps/Schedule Emission Inventory improvements… ~June 2005 New/refined 2002 and 2009 emissions and air quality modeling… ~Aug/Sept 2005 Until then… Discussion will continue on: –RFP, RACT, RACM –Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) –Follow latest updates to EPA Modeling Guidance After new/refined 2002 & 2009 emissions & air quality modeling is complete… –Summarize emissions changes –Present latest attainment test results –Have more detailed discussions on RFP, RACT, RACM, MVEBs
76 Contributors South Carolina Department of Health and Environment Control Pat Brewer, VISTAS Greg Stella, Alpine Geophysics Cyndi Loomis, Alpine Geophysics Don Olerud, Baron Advanced Meteorological Systems Bill Barnard, MACTEC Ed Sabo, MACTEC Kristen Theising, PECHAN Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Gail Tonneson, University of California-Riverside Dennis McNally, Alpine Geophysics Jim Boylan, Georgia Environmental Protection Department Sheila Holman, NCDAQ Bebhinn Do, NCDAQ Nick Witcraft, NCDAQ Phyllis Jones, NCDAQ Vicki Chandler, NCDAQ Pat Bello, NCDAQ Bob Wooten, NCDAQ Matt Mahler, NCDAQ Janice Godfrey, NCDAQ Ming Xie, NCDAQ Mildred Mitchell, NCDAQ VISTAS Stakeholders
77 Questions/Comments Laura Boothe, Chief of Attainment Planning Mike Abraczinskas, Environmental Engineer II Bebhinn Do, Meteorologist