air quality update wind river mountains

Air Quality UpdateAir Quality Update

Wind River Mountains Wind River Mountains

Shoshone and Bridger-Teton National Forests

May, 2008

ObjectivesObjectives

• GYACAP and assessment• Wind River Range network • Monitoring network data analysis

– NADP– high elevation lakes– bulk deposition– visibility

• Ozone challenges and modeling results• Status of coordination efforts• Workload• Discussion and questions

GYACAP and AssessmentGYACAP and Assessment

• GYACAP and purpose– Technical advisory group to GYCC– Forum for communication– Coordination of monitoring

• Assessment and purpose– Identify and address issues– Foster partnerships and secure funding

Assessment SummaryAssessment Summary

• Membership– Park Service, Forest Service, BLM, Fish and

Wildlife Service, State DEQs (ID, MT, WY)

• Issues– Urban and industrial emissions– Oil and gas development in SW Wyoming– Prescribed fire and wildfire smoke– Snowmobile emissions

Wind River MountainsWind River Mountains

Monitoring NetworkMonitoring Network

• NADP– Gypsum Creek– Pinedale– South Pass– Mercury (South Pass)

• Other Monitoring– CASTNet (Pinedale)– WARMS (Pinedale)– Quasi-IMPROVE (South

Pass)– WY DEQ Ambient Air

Monitors and Cameras (3)

• Long-term Lakes– Hobbs– Black Joe– Deep– Upper Frozen– Saddlebag– Ross

• IMPROVE– Aerosol (Pinedale)– Transmissometer (Pinedale)– Camera (Pinedale)

• Bulk Deposition– Hobbs– Black Joe

North Winds NetworkNorth Winds Network

Middle Winds NetworkMiddle Winds Network

South Winds NetworkSouth Winds Network

2008 Status of Oil & Gas2008 Status of Oil & GasDevelopments in SW WYDevelopments in SW WY

NADPNADP

NADP TrendNADP Trend

Site NH4 NO3 SO4 Inorg-N

South Pass

Up --- Down Up

Gypsum Creek

Up --- Down Up

Pinedale Up --- Down Up

Summary of South Pass DataSummary of South Pass Data

• NH4 is on an upward trend and has basically doubled at most sites

• NO3 shows no trend but values have increased substantially in winter, spring and fall seasons

• SO4 is on a downward trend and has decreased by 25-50%

• Inorg-N shows no trend at 95% level but upward trend at 90%, which is a concern

High Elevation LakesHigh Elevation Lakes

Lake Chemistry TrendLake Chemistry TrendLake Location ANC NO3 SO4

Black Joe Inlet Up Up ---

Outlet Up Up Up

Epilimnion --- --- ---

Hypolimnion Up Up ---

Deep Inlet --- Up ---

Outlet --- --- Down

Epilimnion --- --- Down

Hypolimnion --- --- Down

Hobbs Inlet --- Up Down

Outlet Down --- ---

Epilimnion --- --- Down

Hypolimnion --- --- Down

Lower Saddlebag Inlet Down Up ---

Outlet --- --- ---

Epilimnion Down --- ---

Hypolimnion --- Up ---

Ross Inlet Down Up ---

Outlet Down --- Down

Epilimnion Down --- ---

Hypolimnion Down --- Down

Summary of Lake DataSummary of Lake Data

• ANC is on a downward trend– Perhaps explained by upward NO3 trend– Magnitude of change at Ross Lake a real concern– Black Joe Lake is an exception

• NO3 is on an upward trend– Upward trend at lake inlets and no trend at outlets a

real concern relative to eutrophication

• SO4 is on a downward trend– Perhaps due to reduction in use of high-sulphur diesel

Bulk DepositionBulk Deposition

Deposition TrendDeposition TrendTotal Nitrogen (N as NH4 + NO3) Deposition

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

Year

Nit

rog

en

De

po

sit

ion

(K

g/H

a/Y

r)

Total Sulfur (S) Deposition

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Year

Su

lfu

r D

ep

osit

ion

(K

g/H

a/Y

r)

Summary of Bulk Deposition DataSummary of Bulk Deposition Data

• Above average total N and S at Hobbs and Black Joe Lake sites for 2005.

• Same high values at Black Joe Lake for 2006.• Total N

– Black Joe Lake 2005 & 2006 = 3.74 & 3.79 kg/ha/yr(Average total N = 2.66 kg/ha/yr)

– Hobbs Lake 2005 & 2006 = 3.66 & 2.44 kg/ha/yr(Average Total N = 2.30 kg/ha/yr)

Bulk Deposition (cont.)Bulk Deposition (cont.)

• Rocky Mtn. NP has established a “critical load” for N deposition of 1.5 kg/ha/yr.– Changes in Lake Diatom Communities Affecting Lake Function

• BTNF N deposition is > 2x that level some years.

• BTNF average N depositions are 50-75% greater than NPS critical load.

• Need to conduct more studies on BTNF.• BTNF looking to adopt that critical load.

IMPROVEIMPROVE

Summary of IMPROVE DataSummary of IMPROVE Data

• Visibility has improved slightly since 2002, however:– Pinedale site is not ideally located for

monitoring impacts from nearby developments.

– Securing a new monitor for monitoring maximum impact from developments. (2008)

– Modeling for NEPA projects show visibility impacts are occurring.

Ozone ChallengesOzone Challenges

• Ozone Issues(2005, 2006 and 2008)– State issued 5 ozone warnings in February and March 2008– Exceeded old standard 7 times and new standard 14 times– 3 year average may place the area in “Non-Attainment”– May affect human health, visibility and plant growth on the

Forest

• Ozone Study (2007 and 2008)– Need to re-think science of ozone formation – not just a warm

weather event

• Ammonia Study (2007 and 2008)

NEPA Modeling FindingsNEPA Modeling Findings

• Visibility – show days of impairment in Class I areas (PAPA 2000-2005 45 days > 1 dv, cumulative 77-88 days)

• PM 10 – levels nearing Class I Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Significant Impact Level (SIL)

• NOx – emissions higher than originally modeled (PAPA 2000 693.5 tpy vs 2005 3,512 tpy, 5 x higher)

• Ozone – models predict levels exceeding new NAAQS

Concern SummaryConcern Summary

• Visibility degradation in Class I areas

• Lake chemistry changes

• Increasing nitrogen deposition

• Ozone

• Scale and pace of oil and gas development

Coordination EffortsCoordination Efforts

• Wyoming DEQ-AQD

• EPA

• BLM

• Industry

FS workloadFS workload

• Continue existing monitoring

• Add additional monitoring

• Continue review of upwind NEPA efforts

• Continue dialogue with industry, State, and Federal agencies

• Solidify critical loads documentation

• If needed, certify impairment of wilderness values

Questions/DiscussionQuestions/Discussion