prepared for

CENRAP/CENSARAprepared by Gregory StellaJim WilkinsonT.W. TescheAlpine Geophysics, LLCFt. Wright, KY4 May 2006 

Appendix A: 

Methodology for Devising CENRAP Reg

Haze Precursor Reduction Scenario

La Sal Mountains and Colorado River Canyon Ups
Contents Contents

 Class I Areas Relevant to CENRAP Reasonable Progress Goal (RPG) Increme

Pertinent Class I Area; preliminary and u

 Measured Extinction (Mm-1) on Worst 20

2002

 Extinction Fraction on Worst 20% Days Concentration Reductions (μg/m3) needed 

Eliminate RPG Increment at Class I Area

3⁄4 Assuming proportional reductions from all species categor

nitrate, OC, EC, soil, and coarse mass)

3⁄4 Assuming reductions from each species category by itself

*For ease of disc For ease of discussion, the term ussion, the term ‘increment increment’ is used to denote the differenc is used to denote the difference between the 20

e between the 20

visibility levels and the CENRAP visibility levels and the CENRAP initial and/or final modeled vi initial and/or final modeled visibility projections. sibility projections.
Contents Contents (concluded) (concluded)

 Identification of Areas of Influence (AOI) 

Class I Area

 Estimating Emissions Reductions needed 

Desired Concentration Reductions at each Area

 Identification of Emissions Source Catego

Targeted AOI regions

 Recommended 2018 Regional Haze Contr

Scenarios for CENRAP
Analysis Limitations & Observatio

Analysis Limitations & Observatio

 Back trajectory analyses are only partially inform

Areas of Influence

3⁄4 RTD most informative of air mass location for 20% worst ha3⁄4 TSSA & PORSCH aids in incorporating emissions impact po

 Roughly half of the pollutant-to-precursor emiss

sensitivity coefficients were derived based on assregional-scale sensitivities

 Use of sensitivity coefficients is applicable only to 

through 2004 environmental conditions

 Sufficient CM/FS/EC/OC-to-precursor emission

information is available to derive coefficients but done given the lack of reasonably available precuemissions control scenarios for these pollutants
Analysis Limitations & Observations Analysis Limitations & Observations

(continued) (continued)

 BART sources not included in base case fo

3⁄4 These sources presumably would get reduction first3⁄4 Lower base case to start from

 International inventories of unknown qua

3⁄4 Although both Mexican and Canadian inventories hav

upgraded, quality still suspect

3⁄4 Canadian emission reductions of international transbo

agreements not used in forecast

 Current analysis limited to AirControlNE

strategy-source type cross-references

3⁄4 Alternate incremental reductions appear to be availabl3⁄4 More source types could be covered by control technol
Analysis Limitations & Observations Analysis Limitations & Observations

(continued) (continued)

 SMOKE control packets were incorrectly con

for many sources (since corrected by CENRA

3⁄4 TX and IA point sources most affected3⁄4 Unsure of CENRAP stakeholder review of emission proj

outputs

 New data to be continually developed

3⁄4 ICS may wish to re-examine this study’s strategy recom

order to account for more up-to-date and more accurate and estimates
Base18b/Typ02a Method 1 predictions for CENRAP+ sites

0%

20%40%60%80%

100%120%140%160%180%200%

BIBE1

GUMO1

WIMO1

CACR1

UPBU1

HEGL1

MING1

BRET1

VOYA2

MACA1

SIPS1

ISLE1

SACR1

WHIT1

WHPE1

GRSA1

ROMO1

WICA1

Percent of target reduction achieved

CENRAP non-CENRAP

‘Preliminary’ (circa Feb ’06) VISTAS, CENRAP and WRAP Visibility Projec

Source
Class I Areas Relevant to CENRA

Class I Areas Relevant to CENRA

Class I Area ST Name

Big Bend Nat'l Park T

X BIBE

Boundary Waters MN BWC

A

Breton Island L

A BRET

Caney Creek

AR CACR

Guadalupe Mountains T

X GUMO

Hercules Glade MO HEGLMingo MO MINGUpper Buffalo

AR UPBU

Voyageurs MN

VOYA2

Wichita Mountains OK WIMOMammoth Cave KY MAC

A

Sipsey Wilderness

AL SIPS

Isle Royale MI ISLEBadlands SD BADLGreat Sand Dunes CO GRS

A

Lostwood Wilderness ND LOSTRocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMOSalt Creek NM SACRTheodore Roosevlt ND THROWheeler Peak NM WHPEWhite Mountains NM WHITWind Cave Wilderness ND WIC

A

-1000 -750 -500 -250 0 

-1500-1250-1000

-750-500-250

0

250500750

10001250

BIBE1 

GUMO1 

SAAN1

GICL1 WHIT1SACR1

BOAP1

WIMO1

BAND1

SAPE1 ELLI1 CHER1

WHPE1 

MEVE1

WEMI1 GRSA1 

TALL1

CEBL1

WHRI1

WH

RMHQ1 ROMO1 STPE1 MOZI1 WAU

BRLA1 NOPL1 HALS1

WALT1

NIOB1

BRID1 BLMO

WICA1 BADL1 

CLPE1

YELL21

THBA1

NOAB1

NOCH1

THRO1

ULBE1 

FOPE1 MELA1 

LOST1
-1000 -750 -500 -250 0 250 500 750 100

0

-1500-1250-1000

-750-500-250

0

250500750

10001250

BIBE1 BRET1

GUMO1 SIKE1

SAAN1

GICL1 WHIT1SACR1

BOAP1

SIPS1

CACR1

WIMO1

BAND1

UPBU1

SAPE1 ELLI1 CHER1

WHPE1 HEGL1

MING1 CADI1

MEVE1 MACA1

WEMI1 GRSA1 ELDO1 TALL1

LIVO1

CEBL1

WHRI1

WHCL1

BOND1

RMHQ1 ROMO1 STPE1 MOZI1 WAUB1 LASU1

BRLA1 NOPL1 HALS1

WALT1

NIOB1

BRID1 BLMO1 WICA1 BADL1 GRRI1

CLPE1

YELL21

THBA1

NOAB1

NOCH1

SENE1

THRO1

ISLE1

ULBE1 BOWA1 ISRO1

VOYA2

FOPE1 MELA1 VOYA1 LOST1

Add

Analy

Prelimin

Like

May Like

‘Preli

CENR

Base B 

Proj

Source
PM Concentration Reductions Need

PM Concentration Reductions Need

The Relationship Between Three Vi The Relationship Between Three Visibility Metrics (Malm, 

sibility Metrics (Malm, 
‘Final’ CENRAP Visibility Projectio

W20% 2000/2004 2018 2018 Deciview E

Bkgrnd Baseline Goal ForecastIncrementIncre

RPO Class I Area ST Name D

V

D

V

D

V

D

V

D

V Mm

CENRAP Big Bend Nat'l Park TX BIBE 6.93 17.10 14.73 16.39 1.66 7CENRAP Boundary Waters MN BWC

A 11.21 18.30 16.62 17.54 0.92 5

CENRAP Breton Island L

A BRET 11.53 25.59 22.31 22.45 0.14 1

CENRAP Caney Creek

AR CACR 11.33 25.34 22.07 20.91 -1.16 -1

CENRAP Guadalupe Mountains TX GUMO 7.02 17.48 15.04 16.53 1.49 7CENRAP Hercules-Glades MO HEGL 11.27 25.63 22.28 21.94 -0.34 -3CENRAP Mingo MO MING 11.27 26.49 22.94 22.13 -0.81 -7CENRAP Upper Buffalo

AR UPBU 11.28 25.31 22.03 21.33 -0.70 -6

CENRAP

Voyageurs MN

VOYA2 11.09 18.46 16.74 17.43 0.69 3

CENRAP Wichita Mountains OK WIMO 11.07 23.06 20.26 20.47 0.21 1

VISTAS Mammoth Cave KY MAC

A 11.53 29.94 25.65 24.01 -1.64 -1

VISTAS Sipsey Wilderness

AL SIPS 11.39 27.71 23.91 22.72 -1.19 -1

MRPO Isle Royale MI ISLE 11.22 20.28 18.16 18.74 0.58 3WRAP Badlands SD BADL 7.30 17.00 14.74 16.37 1.63 7WRAP Great Sand Dunes CO GRS

A 7.10 13.20 11.78 12.96 1.18 4

WRAP Lostwood Wilderness ND LOST 7.33 19.49 16.66 19.28 2.62 15WRAP Rocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMO 7.05 14.15 12.49 13.51 1.02 3WRAP Salt Creek NM SACR 6.99 18.05 15.47 17.59 2.12 1WRAP Theodore Roosevlt ND THRO 7.31 17.66 15.24 17.40 2.16 1WRAP Wheeler Peak NM WHPE 7.04 11.26 10.27 11.14 0.87 2WRAP White Mountain NM WHIT 6.98 14.06 12.41 13.40 0.99 3WRAP Wind Cave SD WIC

A 7.24 15.81 13.81 15.30 1.49 6
Difference Between ‘Preliminary’ and ‘F

CENRAP Visibility Projections

Change in Visibility Increment Estimates at Twenty-two Class I Areas in 

-4.0-3.5-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.5-1.0-0.5

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0

BIBE

BWCA

BRET

CACR

GUMO

HEGL

MING

UPBU

VOYA2

WIMO

MACA

SIPS

ISLE

BADL

GRSA

LOST

ROMO

SACR

T

2018 Visibility 'Increments', dv

Preliminary Visibility Estimates Final Visibility Estimates
• Use IMPROVE Aerosol 

Extinction Equation

– SO4 [assume 

(NH

4

)

2SO

4

]

– NO3 [assume NH

4NO

3

]

– Organic Matter [OM – Elemental Carbon [E– Other Fine Particula

IP]

– Coarse Matter [CM]

IMPROVE RCM IMPROVE Measured Species 

SO

4 1.375 x ( 3 x S) 

NO

3 1.29 x NO3_ 

OM 1.4*OC1 + 1.4*OC2 + 1.4*OC3 + 1.4*OC

EC EC1 + EC2 + EC3 – OP 

Soil 2.2*AL + 2.49*SI + 1.63*CA + 2.42*FE 

CM MT – MF 

Relationships Between IMPROVE R

Relationships Between IMPROVE R

and Measured Species Concentrati

and Measured Species Concentrati
• Extinction from individual PM compo

calculated from IMPROVE equation:

– bSulfate = 3 x f(RH) x [SO

4

]

– bNitrate = 3 x f(RH) x [NO

3

]

– bEC = 10 x [EC]

– bOM = 4 x [OM]– bSoil = 1 x [Soil]– bCM = 0.6 x [CM]

• Total daily extinction (bext) is sum plus Ray

bext = bRay + bSulfate + bNitrate + bEC +bOM + bSo

Haze Index = HI = 10 ln(bext/10) in decivie

Monthly 

area sp

adjustm

[f(RH)

Relationships Between PM Aeroso

Relationships Between PM Aeroso

Components and Extinction Components and Extinction
Measured Extinction at Class I Ar

Measured Extinction at Class I Ar

Amm Organic Elem S

RPO Class I Area ST Name Sulfate Nitrate Mass Carbon M

CENRAP Big Bend Nat'l Park TX BIBE 25.86 1.57 5.85 1.80 2CENRAP Boundary Waters MN BWCA 28.09 24.78 7.76 2.94 0CENRAP Breton Island L

A BRET 65.60 8.49 6.13 4.26 0

CENRAP Caney Creek

AR CACR 65.68 15.43 17.95 4.27 0

CENRAP Guadalupe Mountains TX GUMO 15.92 4.98 5.51 1.30 2CENRAP Hercules-Glades MO HEGL 67.23 21.92 21.14 5.12 0CENRAP Mingo MO MING 80.44 35.11 26.10 8.95 1CENRAP Upper Buffalo

AR UPBU 64.43 17.39 16.47 4.48 0

CENRAP

Voyageurs MN

VOYA2 10.16 15.14 9.94 2.68 0

CENRAP Wichita Mountains OK WIMO 40.78 28.25 16.64 4.67 0

VISTAS Mammoth Cave KY MAC

A 146.48 10.78 15.58 5.33 1

VISTAS Sipsey Wilderness

AL SIPS 109.27 8.09 20.22 7.06 0

MRPO Isle Royale MI ISLE 33.33 12.64 9.71 2.93 0WRAP Badlands SD BADL 20.05 6.58 7.53 1.55 0WRAP Great Sand Dunes CO GRS

A 6.20 2.78 6.44 1.30 2

WRAP Lostwood Wilderness ND LOST 28.44 26.00 9.02 2.22 0WRAP Rocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMO 8.19 4.73 6.37 2.00 1WRAP Salt Creek NM SACR 17.74 12.42 7.04 2.24 4WRAP Theodore Roosevlt ND THRO 15.68 16.28 9.95 2.52 0WRAP Wheeler Peak NM WHPE 5.69 1.26 4.98 2.05 1WRAP White Mountain NM WHIT 8.77 2.49 8.52 2.11 1WRAP Wind Cave SD WICA 14.27 8.91 8.35 3.17 0

Measured Extinction (Mm-1) on 20% 
Measured Extinction at Class I Ar

Measured Extinction at Class I Ar

IMPROVE Observed bEXT on Worst 20% Days 

0

255075

100125150175200

BIBE

BWCA

BRET

CACR

GUMO

HEGL

MING

UPBU

VOYA2

WIMO

MACA

SIPS

ISLE

BADL

GRSA

LOST

ROMO

SACR

bEXT (Mm-1)

Coarse MSoilElementOrganic NitrateSulfate
Measured Extinction at Class I Ar

Measured Extinction at Class I Ar

IMPROVE Observed bEXT on Worst 20% Days 

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0

BIBE

BWCA

BRET

CACR

GUMO

HEGL

MING

UPBU

VOYA2

WIMO

MACA

SIPS

ISLE

BADL

GRSA

LOST

ROMO

Fraction of Total bEXT 

Sulfate Nitrate Organic Mass Elemental Carbon So
Extinction Fraction at Class I Are

Extinction Fraction at Class I Are

Amm Amm Organic Ele

RPO Class I Area ST Name Sulfate Nitrate Mass Carb

CENRAP Big Bend Nat'l Park TX BIBE 0.62 0.04 0.14 0.0CENRAP Boundary Waters MN BWC

A 0.42 0.37 0.12 0.0

CENRAP Breton Island L

A BRET 0.73 0.10 0.07 0.0

CENRAP Caney Creek

AR CACR 0.62 0.14 0.17 0.0

CENRAP Guadalupe Mountains TX GUMO 0.39 0.12 0.14 0.0CENRAP Hercules-Glades MO HEGL 0.56 0.18 0.18 0.0CENRAP Mingo MO MING 0.50 0.22 0.16 0.0CENRAP Upper Buffalo

AR UPBU 0.58 0.16 0.15 0.0

CENRAP

Voyageurs MN

VOYA2 0.25 0.37 0.24 0.0

CENRAP Wichita Mountains OK WIMO 0.43 0.30 0.17 0.0

VISTAS Mammoth Cave KY MAC

A 0.81 0.06 0.09 0.0

VISTAS Sipsey Wilderness

AL SIPS 0.74 0.05 0.14 0.0

MRPO Isle Royale MI ISLE 0.53 0.20 0.16 0.0WRAP Badlands SD BADL 0.50 0.16 0.19 0.0WRAP Great Sand Dunes CO GRS

A 0.27 0.12 0.28 0.0

WRAP Lostwood Wilderness ND LOST 0.41 0.38 0.13 0.0WRAP Rocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMO 0.33 0.19 0.25 0.0WRAP Salt Creek NM SACR 0.36 0.25 0.14 0.0WRAP Theodore Roosevlt ND THRO 0.33 0.34 0.21 0.0WRAP Wheeler Peak NM WHPE 0.34 0.07 0.30 0.1WRAP White Mountain NM WHIT 0.32 0.09 0.31 0.0WRAP Wind Cave SD WIC

A 0.38 0.24 0.22 0.0

Extinction Fraction for 20% Wors
Concentration Reductions ( Concentration Reductions (μg/m

3) Acro

) Acro

All Species to Eliminate DV Incremen

All Species to Eliminate DV Incremen
Concentration Reductions ( Concentration Reductions (μg/m

3) On

Specie to Eliminate DV Increment Specie to Eliminate DV Increment
Identification of Areas of Influence (AO

Identification of Areas of Influence (AO

 Basis of AOI in Residence Time Differenc

back trajectory analyses

 Results from PORSCH & TSSA analyses 

to further inform spatial location of AOI on emissions impact potential

 Convert manually drafted AOIs into elec

geocoded AOI using GIS
Example Manually Drafted AOI Example Manually Drafted AOI

Boundary Waters Boundary Waters

-Voyageurs Voyageurs
Boundary Waters-Voyageurs

(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS)
Wichita Mountain

(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC; blue=CM/FS
Breton Island

(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC/CM; blue=FS
Hercules Glade-Mingo WildernessUpper Buffalo-Caney Creek

(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS)
Salt Creek-Guadalupe Mountain-Big Ben

White Mountain-Wheeler Peak

(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS)
Rocky Mountain-Great Sand Dune

(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS)

EC/OC/FS/CM
Theodore Roosevelt-LostwoodBadlands-Wind Cave

(green=NO3/EC; red=SO4/OC/CM/FS)

NO3/EC Level 1 AOI

Badland, Wind Cave

NO3/EC Level 1 AOI

Theodore Roosevelt, Lostwood

NO3/EC Level 2 AOI

Badland, Wind Cave,

Theodore Roosevelt, Lostwood
Sipsey-Mammoth Cave

(all pollutants)
Emissions Reductions Needed to Yie

Emissions Reductions Needed to Yi

Desired Concentration Reductions Ba

Desired Concentration Reductions Ba

on Proportional Reductions in Speci

on Proportional Reductions in Spec

Concentration Concentration

Controls should be developed for emissions precursors for each polEmissions reductions for OC/EC/Soil/CM not provided since reasonprecursor emissions controls for these pollutants do not exist
Emissions Reductions Needed to Yiel

Emissions Reductions Needed to Yie

Desired Concentration Reductions Base

Desired Concentration Reductions Base

Reduction in Single Species Concentrat

Reduction in Single Species Concentra

Precursor emissions controls need only be developed for a single poEmissions reductions for OC/EC/Soil/CM not provided since reasonprecursor emissions controls for these pollutants do not exist
Identification of Targeted Emissions Identification of Targeted Emissions 

Source Categories within Each AOI Source Categories within Each AOI

 Start with geocoded county list from each A Identify list of sources available for potentia Apply all available control technologies to e

potential source of reduction

3⁄4 Limit sources by parameters such as geography, residual c

 Incrementally sort reductions and costs by m

cost from one control to the next

3⁄4 Eliminate technologies that are not as cost effective as nex
Identification of Targeted Emissions Identification of Targeted Emissions 

Source Categories within Each AOI Source Categories within Each AOI

 Develop incremental cost curve for AOI, sou

pollutants of interest

 Use desired reduction value from “Rules of 

pick emission reduction requirement

 Locate emission reduction target on cost effe

curve

 Assign controls associated with cost curve se

3⁄4 Determine if top residual category emission reduction eno

• If not, necessary to control more, maybe other sources• Potential to fail to attain reduction target due to outsid

3⁄4 Determine if reduction achieved is within “reasonable” co

• If not, may have met goals of region progress guidanc
Example Cost Curve Example Cost Curve

Boundary Waters-Voyageurs

SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS AOI-1

$0

$1,000$2,000$3,000$4,000$5,000$6,000$7,000$8,000$9,000

$10,000

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 

Millions

Annual Emission Reduction (Tons)

Control Cost (2005$)

Top Residual Categories OnlyAll Categories
Example Cost Curve Example Cost Curve

Salt Creek-Guadalupe Mountain-Big Bend

SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS AOI-1

$0

$500

$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500$3,000

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 

Millions

Annual Emission Reduction (Tons)

Control Cost (2005$)

Top Residual Categories OnlyAll Categories
Example Cost Curve Example Cost Curve

Salt Creek-Guadalupe Mountain-Big Bend

SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS AOI-1

$0

$500

$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500$3,000

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 

Millions

Annual Emission Reduction (Tons)

Control Cost (2005$)

Top Residual Categories OnlyAll CategoriesBig Bend Single Specie Reduction TargetGuadalupe Mountain Single Specie Reduction Target
Example Scenario Selections Example Scenario Selections

SIC Industrial Code Description Control Measure Reduction (Tons) Co1311 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 324 1311 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas FGD 58 $1321 Natural Gas Liquids FGD 1,700 $2819 Industrial Inorganic Chemicals, NEC Increase % Conversion to Meet NSPS (99.7) 9,439 $

2819 Industrial Inorganic Chemicals, NEC Sulfuric Acid Plant 12 $12911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 505 2911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 374 2911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 1,541 $2911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 56 2911 Petroleum Refining FGD 19,815 $222911 Petroleum Refining FGD Wet Scrubber 14 $23211 Flat Glass FGD 91 $3221 Glass Containers FGD 877 $33241 Cement, Hydraulic FGD 9,744 $283253 Ceramic Wall and Floor Tile FGD 77 $13274 Lime FGD 536 $33295 Minerals and Earths, Ground or Otherwise Treated FGD 2,443 $3334 Primary Production of Aluminum Vacuum Carbonate plus Sulfur Recovery Plant 79 $103334 Primary Production of Aluminum Sulfuric Acid Plant 118 $23334 Primary Production of Aluminum FGD 42,754 $144911 Electric Services FGD Wet Scrubber 53,601 $224911 Electric Services Repowering to Natural Gas 58,961 $1,494911 Electric Services Coal Washing 20,845 $14922 Natural Gas Transmission FGD 3,653 $

Potential Annual SO2 R
Summary

 Six Class I areas (Big Bend National Park

Boundary Waters, Breton Island, GuadaluMountains, Wichita Mountains, and Voyare above the uniform rate of progress lin

 For each area, sulfate and to a lesser exte

reductions were shown to be most benefiduring the 20 percent worst visibility epis

* Based on April 10, 2006 visibility projections
Summary

 Alpine implemented the exhaustive list o

additional controls in each primary AOI feventual design of control strategies

 Each of the areas appear to be able to ach

level of emissions reduction necessary to below the uniform rate of progress line 

3⁄4 Influences such as incrementally uncontrollable sourc

and international and inter-RPO emission transport costrategy design
Recommended 2018 Regional Haze Cont

Recommended 2018 Regional Haze Cont

Scenarios for CENRAP Scenarios for CENRAP

 Regional

3⁄4 CAIR Control on Non-CAIR State EGUs

• Category retains top residual emission rank for each C

AOI for both SO2 and NOx

• Alternative application of “constrained trading”

 Subregional

3⁄4 Top Residual Category Emission Reduction

• All scenarios have EGU reduction component

– CAIR and non-CAIR States alike

• Sources to control are specific to each Class I AOI-1

• Limited number of source types identified for reductio• Determine “reasonable” reduction and apply controls t
References

EPA, (2005a), “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstratio

hr Ozone NAAQS”. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research TrNC.

EPA, (2005b), “Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Ma

and Regional Haze Regulations”, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, 

Triangle Park, NC.

Malm, W., 1999. “Introduction to Visibility”, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosp

Collins, CO. (http://www2.nature.nps.gov/ard/vis/vishp.html).

Malm, W., et al., 2000. “Spatial and Seasonal Patterns and Temporal Variability of Haze and its 

in the United States: Report III. Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, CO. (http://alta_vista.cira.colostate.edu).

Morris R. E. et al., 2006. “CENRAP Modeling Update: Performance Evaluation; 12 km Modeling; 

Projections”, presented at the CENRAP Joint Work Groups Meeting, Baton Rouge, Louisia

6, 2006.

Tesche, T. W., and D. E. McNally, 2005. “Five States 8-hr Ozone and PM2.5 Modeling Study: R

Apportionment Results and 2009 Scenario Recommendations”, prepared for the Midwest prepared by Alpine Geophysics, LLC. 

Tesche, T. W., and D. E. McNally, 2006. “Roll-Out Modeling Results for Six EGU NOx Control S

Dallas/Ft. Worth Nonattainment Area”, prepared for City Public Service, prepared by AlpGeophysics, LLC.