1 

# Modeling Committee Update
OTC Air Directors’ Meeting

April 24 th 

### , 2012 Washington, DC2



# Overview
1. Impact of NAAQS schedules 

## 2. Progress made: design value (DV) update 3. Work left: nonattainment area projections 

## 4. How do we proceed with screening runs?3 

# Ozone Standard Timelines
3/2008 Standard Final 

### 3/2010 Expected Final Designation

Date 

### 5/2012 Final Designations 

### 7 or 12/2015 SIPs Due/Clean Data for

Marginal Nonattainment Areas


### 7 or 12/2018 Clean Data for Moderate

Nonattainment Areas 

### 3/2015 Standard Final



### 3/2017 Final Designations



### 5/2020 SIPs Due/Clean Data for Marginal

Nonattainment Areas 

### 5/2023 Clean Data for Moderate

Nonattainment Areas 

### 2008 - 75ppb Standard Future Standard Review

2008 standard faced delay in designations of 26 months. Additional delays of 17

- 22 months could push designations until after clean data is required for moderate nonattainment areas for 2008 std. Based on EPA’s schedule with a 3 month delay due to 3 rd CASAC review.4 

# 8

- Hour Ozone Trends in OTR

8 - Hour Ozone Exceedance Days in the OTR Number of Days

75ppb 84ppb If 65ppb 140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

Max Concentration5 

# Annual 4 th 

# High Ozone Values for the 3 Design Value Years

– 2009, 2010 and 2011

5 Grey shaded area highlights general areas greater than 75 ppb ozone Parts per Billion (ppb) <71 71 - 73 74 - 75 76 - 85

>85 Data is Preliminary6 

# Preliminary 2011 Ozone Design Values
3

- year average of 

## the 4 th 

## high concentration for 2009, 2010, 2011

Projected nonattainment areas in the OTR7 

# How DVs Changed From 2010 to 2011

Increase Decrease

Ozone throughout most of the OTR improved Except for the heart of the corridor8 

# Eastern U.S. Counties Proposed or 

# Potential Ozone Designation (2010DV)

Areas shaded in black represent locations where the preliminary 2011 DVs exceed 

## 75ppb (but the 2010DV did not) Unclassified/Attainment EPA Proposed Nonatt. EPA Proposed Partial Nonatt.9 

# CMSA/MSAs DV Analysis

• The MSA is in attainment with 2010 DV



## • 1 or more monitors with 2011 DV > 75ppb

• State that impact OTR at 75ppb*

Louisville/Jefferson County, KY

- IN: 78ppb Dayton

- Springfield

- Greenville, OH: 76ppb
Detroit

- Warren

- Flint, MI: 78ppb, 76ppb Grand Rapids

- Muskegon

- Holland, MI: 78ppb, 76ppb Manitowoc, WI: 77ppb Kansas City, MO

- KS: 76ppb *Based on NESCAUM’s analysis of the impact of states on nonattainment in the OTR using CSAPR modeling results10 

# Hypothetical 2012 Design Values

• Hypothetical projection of a 2012 design value is made in order to:

 Assist planning for potential nonattainment

 Account for the very low ozone year of 2009

• Hypothetical 2012 design value is created by averaging the 4th highest ozone values over 2010 and 2011 only

• 2009 was dropped due to abnormally low ozone levels caused by:

 Below normal temperatures at the surface

 Below normal temperatures aloft

 Above normal precipitation

 A deep economic recession

• Justified by long

- range weather forecasts for normal to above normal temperatures over much of the OTR11



# Hypothetical 2012 DV
2011 AQS data not yet certified

Unclassified/Attainment EPA Proposed Nonatt. > 75ppb outside of projected nonattainment areas > 85ppb inside projected nonattainment areas

EPA Proposed Partial Nonatt. Prelim DV > 75ppb12 

# Analysis of 2011 Design Values

Data based on average of 2010 and 2011 4 th high ozone values 

### Removing 2009 from 2011 Design Value

71 to 75 ppb
> 75 ppb13 

# OTR Hypothetical 2012 DVs by MSA Areas with hypothetical 2012 DV > 85ppb (moderate 

### threshold) located within areas with potential marginal nonattainment (2010 DV) New Haven

- Milford

• 86ppb 

### New

- York

- Northern New Jersey

- Long Island

• 87ppb, 87ppb, 86ppb, 86ppb 

### Philadelphia

- Camden

- Wilmington

• 89ppb, 88ppb, 86ppb, 86ppb 

### Washington

- Arlington

- Alexandria

• 88ppb, 87ppb, 86ppb14 

# OTR Hypothetical 2012 DVs by MSA

• Likely attainment/unclassified for 2010 DV



### • 1 or more monitors with hypothetical 2012 DV > 75ppb

Providence

- New Bedford

- Fall River, RI

- MA Youngstown

Warren

Boardman, OH

- PA Harrisburg

Carlisle, PA

York

- Hanover, PA Indiana, PA (not in MSA) Kent County, MD

(not in MSA)

Hagerstown

Martinsburg, MD

WV 

## Many areas outside the OTR15 

# Screening Modeling Schedule

• Completed Level 1 Screening (2007 Inventory & 2020 Control Scenario Using Proxies)

• Completed “Scenario 4”

• “Scenario 5” for Annual Meeting and potentially “Scenario 6” Level 2 Screening (2007 Inventory & 2020 Control Scenario Using Proxies)

• For Fall 2012 Level 3 Screening (Complete 2020 Inventory + Boundary Conditions)

• For SIP submission deadline TBD SIP Quality16



# Scenarios 5 and 6 Requested by Transport Assessment Group



## • Scenario 5 is an OTW 2015 case

• Scenario 6 is an OTW 2018 case Emissions are extrapolated between already developed 

### emission inventory years 

## CMAQ runs will look at inside and outside OTR 

## factors by sector Both scenarios to be compared for 3 summer months. Scenario 5 will also be run for 7 months 

## CALGRID will be run with state

- by

- state factors by sectors on an episodic basis (about 40 days)17 

# Upgrades from Level 2 to 3 Screening

• Upgraded Version 3 of Emission Inventory

 Decrease in NO X 

### for every state from 1

- 5%

 Decrease in VOC for every state except PA & DC



## • 2020 Updates

 MOVES estimate



###  Updated EGU proxy



## • Emissions Outside of the OTR

 Full 2007 SESARM inventory



###  2007 EGU/MOVES for LADCO

 Updated National Emissions Inventory for remaining areas/sectors



## • Boundary Conditions

 Improved from static to modeled time variant18 

# Plan B: 2020 EGU Proxy

• We will not be able to run ERTAC for outside of the 

### OTR, and possibly not within, in time for Level 3 Screening

• Improve the relative accuracy from a flat, across the board, 65% reduction



### • Could be based on:

 Actual 2010 emission Levels

 CSAPR State Level Allocations



###  CSPAR IPM Modeling Runs



### • Would be completed in under 2 months with a minimal level of resources

• Need to determine who will conduct an analysis?19 

# Level 3 Screening Schedule

• Version 3 of OTR+VA Inventory (w/ finalized MOVES)

• 2020 MOVES estimate

• Updated National Emissions Inventory 2008 

# Early Spring

• ERTAC EGU code

• Other Regional Planning Orgs (including % reduction file)

• Category 3 Marine (Ocean going vessels) 

# Late Spring

• ERTAC EGU results

• Boundary Conditions 

# Early Summer

• Start Modeling Runs 

# Mid Summer20 

# Planned Level 3 Screening Activities

• Base Cases

– 2007 and 2020



## • Proposed Control Cases

 OTC “Controlled Inventory”

– update Scenario 4



##  Urban focused VOC Reduction

 Point/Nonroad/Area NOx Reduction

 Tier 3 + Low Sulfur Fuel

 Theoretical CSAPR 2 Program21 

# Other Committee Activities

• Model performance analyses on 2007 base



## • Exploring BenMAP health benefit analysis

 Select modeling scenarios



##  2010 rollback scenario to 75 ppb standard



## • Analysis of transport patterns:

 Meteorological data

 Sensitivity modeling22



# Questions

• Committee Chair:

 Jeff Underhill (NH) jeffrey.underhill@des.nh.gov (603) 271

- 1102



### • Modeling Lead:

 Mike Ku (NY) mku@dec.state.ny.us (518) 402

- 8402



### • Emissions Inventory Lead:

 Susan Wierman (MARAMA) swierman@marama.org (443) 901

- 1882



### • OTC Committee Lead:

 Joseph Jakuta jjakuta@otcair.org (202) 508

- 3839