prepared forCENRAP/CENSARAprepared byGregory StellaJim WilkinsonT.W. TescheAlpine Geophysics, LLCFt. Wright, KY4 May 2006Appendix A:Methodology for Devising CENRAP RegionalHaze Precursor Reduction ScenariosLa Sal Mountains and Colorado River Canyon Upstream of Moab, UT.ContentsContentsClass I Areas Relevant to CENRAPReasonable Progress Goal (RPG) Increments*atPertinent Class I Area; preliminary and updatedMeasured Extinction (Mm-1) on Worst 20% Days in2002Extinction Fraction on Worst 20% DaysConcentration Reductions (μg/m3) needed toEliminate RPG Increment at Class I Areas3⁄4Assuming proportional reductions fromall species categories (sulfate,nitrate, OC, EC, soil, and coarse mass)3⁄4Assuming reductions from each species category by itself*For ease of discussion, the termFor ease of discussion, the term‘incrementincrement’is used to denote the difference between the 2018 RH progress gis used to denote the difference between the 2018 RH progress goalvisibility levels and the CENRAPinitial and/or final modeled vivisibility levels and the CENRAPinitial and/or final modeled visibility projections.sibility projections.ContentsContents(concluded)(concluded)Identification of Areas of Influence (AOI) for eachClass I AreaEstimating Emissions Reductions needed to ProduceDesired Concentration Reductions at each Class IAreaIdentification of Emissions Source Categories withinTargeted AOI regionsRecommended 2018 Regional Haze ControlScenarios for CENRAPAnalysis Limitations & ObservationsAnalysis Limitations & ObservationsBack trajectory analyses are only partially informative of theAreas of Influence3⁄4RTD most informative of air mass location for 20% worst haze days3⁄4TSSA & PORSCH aids in incorporating emissions impact potentialRoughly half of the pollutant-to-precursor emissionssensitivity coefficients were derived based on assessment ofregional-scale sensitivitiesUse of sensitivity coefficients is applicable only to 2000through 2004 environmental conditionsSufficient CM/FS/EC/OC-to-precursor emissions sensitivityinformation is available to derive coefficients but was notdone given the lack of reasonably available precursoremissions control scenarios for these pollutantsAnalysis Limitations & ObservationsAnalysis Limitations & Observations(continued)(continued)BART sources not included in base case forecast3⁄4These sources presumably would get reduction first3⁄4Lower base case to start fromInternational inventories of unknown quality3⁄4Although both Mexican and Canadian inventories have recently beenupgraded, quality still suspect3⁄4Canadian emission reductions of international transboundaryagreements not used in forecastCurrent analysis limited to AirControlNETstrategy-source type cross-references3⁄4Alternate incremental reductions appear to be available3⁄4More source types could be covered by control technologiesAnalysis Limitations & ObservationsAnalysis Limitations & Observations(continued)(continued)SMOKE control packets were incorrectly configuredfor many sources (since corrected by CENRAP)3⁄4TX and IA point sources most affected3⁄4Unsure of CENRAP stakeholder review of emission projectionoutputsNew data to be continually developed3⁄4ICS may wish to re-examine this study’s strategy recommendations inorder to account for more up-to-date and more accurate model inputsand estimatesBase18b/Typ02a Method 1 predictions for CENRAP+ sites0%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 BADL1 THRO1 LOST1

Percent of target reduction achievedCENRAPVISTASWRAPCENRAP non-CENRAP‘Preliminary’(circa Feb ’06)VISTAS, CENRAP and WRAP Visibility ProjectionsSource: Morris et al., 2006Class I Areas Relevant to CENRAPClass I Areas Relevant to CENRAPClass I Area ST NameBig Bend Nat'l Park TXBIBEBoundary Waters MN BWCABreton Island LABRETCaney CreekAR CACRGuadalupe Mountains TXGUMOHercules Glade MO HEGLMingo MO MINGUpper BuffaloAR UPBUVoyageurs MNVOYA2Wichita Mountains OK WIMOMammoth Cave KY MACASipsey WildernessAL SIPSIsle Royale MI ISLEBadlands SD BADLGreat Sand Dunes CO GRSALostwood Wilderness ND LOSTRocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMOSalt Creek NM SACRTheodore Roosevlt ND THROWheeler Peak NM WHPEWhite Mountains NM WHITWind Cave Wilderness ND WICA-1000 -750 -500 -250 0 250 500 750 1000-1500-1250-1000-750-500-250025050075010001250BRET1BIBE1GUMO1SIKE1SAAN1GICL1SACR1WHIT1BOAP1SIPS1CACR1WIMO1BAND1UPBU1SAPE1ELLI1CHER1WHPE1HEGL1CADI1MING1MACA1MEVE1WEMI1GRSA1ELDO1TALL1LIVO1CEBL1WHRI1WHCL1BOND1ROMO1RMHQ1STPE1MOZI1WAUB1LASU1BRLA1NOPL1HALS1WALT1NIOB1BRID1BLMO1WICA1BADL1GRRI1CLPE11YELL2THBA1NOAB1NOCH1SENE1THRO1ISLE1ULBE1ISRO1BOWA1VOYA2MELA1FOPE1VOYA1LOST1-1000 -750 -500 -250 0 250 500 750 1000-1500-1250-1000-750-500-250025050075010001250BRET1BIBE1GUMO1SIKE1SAAN1GICL1SACR1WHIT1BOAP1SIPS1CACR1WIMO1BAND1UPBU1SAPE1ELLI1CHER1WHPE1HEGL1CADI1MING1MACA1MEVE1WEMI1GRSA1ELDO1TALL1LIVO1CEBL1WHRI1WHCL1BOND1ROMO1RMHQ1STPE1MOZI1WAUB1LASU1BRLA1NOPL1HALS1WALT1NIOB1BRID1BLMO1WICA1BADL1GRRI1CLPE11YELL2THBA1NOAB1NOCH1SENE1THRO1ISLE1ULBE1ISRO1BOWA1VOYA2MELA1FOPE1VOYA1LOST1AdditionalAnalyses NeededPreliminary ResultsLikely to meetMay meetLikely not met‘Preliminary’CENRAP 2018Base B VisibilityProjectionSource: Morris et al., 2006PM Concentration Reductions NeededPM Concentration Reductions NeededThe Relationship Between ThreeVisibility Metrics (Malm, 1999).The Relationship Between Three Visibility Metrics (Malm, 1999).‘Final’ CENRAP Visibility ProjectionsW20% 2000/2004 2018 2018 Deciview Ext AnnualBkgrnd Baseline Goal ForecastIncrementIncrementf(RH)RPO Class I Area ST Name DVDVDVDVDVMm-1CENRAP Big Bend Nat'l Park TX BIBE 6.93 17.10 14.73 16.39 1.66 7.9 2.1CENRAP Boundary Waters MN BWCA11.21 18.30 16.62 17.54 0.92 5.1 3.3CENRAP Breton Island LABRET 11.53 25.59 22.31 22.45 0.14 1.3 3.8CENRAP Caney CreekAR CACR 11.33 25.34 22.07 20.91 -1.16 -10.0 3.2CENRAP Guadalupe Mountains TX GUMO 7.02 17.48 15.04 16.53 1.49 7.2 1.8CENRAP Hercules-Glades MO HEGL 11.27 25.63 22.28 21.94 -0.34 -3.1 3.1CENRAP Mingo MO MING 11.27 26.49 22.94 22.13 -0.81 -7.7 3.2CENRAP Upper BuffaloAR UPBU 11.28 25.31 22.03 21.33 -0.70 -6.1 3.1CENRAPVoyageurs MNVOYA2 11.09 18.46 16.74 17.43 0.69 3.8 3.4CENRAP Wichita Mountains OK WIMO 11.07 23.06 20.26 20.47 0.21 1.6 2.6VISTAS Mammoth Cave KY MACA11.53 29.94 25.65 24.01 -1.64 -19.7 3.2VISTAS Sipsey WildernessAL SIPS 11.39 27.71 23.91 22.72 -1.19 -12.3 3.3MRPO Isle Royale MI ISLE 11.22 20.28 18.16 18.74 0.58 3.7 3.5WRAP Badlands SD BADL 7.30 17.00 14.74 16.37 1.63 7.7 2.6WRAP Great Sand Dunes CO GRSA7.10 13.20 11.78 12.96 1.18 4.1 2.0WRAP Lostwood Wilderness ND LOST 7.33 19.49 16.66 19.28 2.62 15.8 2.9WRAP Rocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMO 7.05 14.15 12.49 13.51 1.02 3.7 2.1WRAP Salt Creek NM SACR 6.99 18.05 15.47 17.59 2.12 11.1 1.8WRAP Theodore Roosevlt ND THRO 7.31 17.66 15.24 17.40 2.16 11.1 3.7WRAP Wheeler Peak NM WHPE 7.04 11.26 10.27 11.14 0.87 2.5 1.9WRAP White Mountain NM WHIT 6.98 14.06 12.41 13.40 0.99 3.6 1.8WRAP Wind Cave SD WICA7.24 15.81 13.81 15.30 1.49 6.4 2.5Difference Between ‘Preliminary’ and ‘FinalCENRAP Visibility ProjectionsChange in Visibility Increment Estimates at Twenty-two Class I Areas in 2018-4.0-3.5-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.5-1.0-0.50.00.51.01.52.02.53.0 B I B E BWCA BRET CACR GU M O HEG L M I N G UPB U VO YA 2 WI MO M AC A SI PS ISLE BADL GR SA LOST RO M O SAC R THR O WHPE W H IT W IC A

2018 Visibility 'Increments', d vPreliminary Visibility EstimatesFinal Visibility Estimates• Use IMPROVE AerosolExtinction Equation– SO4 [assume(NH4)2SO4]– NO3 [assume NH4NO3]– Organic Matter [OM or OMC]– Elemental Carbon [EC or LAC]– Other Fine Particulate [SOIL orIP]– Coarse Matter [CM]IMPROVE RCMIMPROVE Measured SpeciesSO41.375 x ( 3 x S)NO31.29 x NO3_OM 1.4*OC1 + 1.4*OC2 + 1.4*OC3 + 1.4*OC4 + 1.4*OPEC EC1 + EC2 + EC3 – OPSoil 2.2*AL + 2.49*SI + 1.63*CA + 2.42*FE + 1.94*TICM MT – MFRelationships Between IMPROVE RCMRelationships Between IMPROVE RCMand Measured Species Concentrationsand Measured Species Concentrations• Extinction from individual PM components iscalculated from IMPROVE equation:– bSulfate= 3 x f(RH) x [SO4]– bNitrate= 3 x f(RH) x [NO3]– bEC= 10 x [EC]– bOM= 4 x [OM]– bSoil= 1 x [Soil]– bCM= 0.6 x [CM]• Total daily extinction (bext) is sum plus Rayleigh:bext= bRay+ bSulfate+ bNitrate+ bEC+bOM+ bSoil+ bCMHaze Index = HI = 10 ln(bext/10) in deciview (dv)Monthly and Class Iarea specific RHadjustment factors[f(RH)] are usedRelationships Between PM AerosolRelationships Between PM AerosolComponents and ExtinctionComponents and ExtinctionMeasured Extinction at Class I AreasMeasured Extinction at Class I AreasAmm Organic Elem Soil CoarseRPO Class I Area ST Name Sulfate Nitrate Mass Carbon Mass Mass TotalCENRAP Big Bend Nat'l Park TX BIBE 25.86 1.57 5.85 1.80 2.21 4.55 41.84CENRAP Boundary Waters MN BWCA 28.09 24.78 7.76 2.94 0.44 2.10 66.11CENRAP Breton Island LABRET 65.60 8.49 6.13 4.26 0.40 4.45 89.33CENRAP Caney CreekAR CACR 65.68 15.43 17.95 4.27 0.79 2.66 106.78CENRAP Guadalupe Mountains TX GUMO 15.92 4.98 5.51 1.30 2.83 9.99 40.53CENRAP Hercules-Glades MO HEGL 67.23 21.92 21.14 5.12 0.88 2.85 119.14CENRAP Mingo MO MING 80.44 35.11 26.10 8.95 1.55 8.40 160.55CENRAP Upper BuffaloAR UPBU 64.43 17.39 16.47 4.48 0.90 7.23 110.90CENRAPVoyageurs MNVOYA2 10.16 15.14 9.94 2.68 0.46 2.84 41.22CENRAP Wichita Mountains OK WIMO 40.78 28.25 16.64 4.67 0.70 4.06 95.10VISTAS Mammoth Cave KY MACA146.48 10.78 15.58 5.33 1.04 1.76 180.97VISTAS Sipsey WildernessAL SIPS 109.27 8.09 20.22 7.06 0.95 2.66 148.25MRPO Isle Royale MI ISLE 33.33 12.64 9.71 2.93 0.48 3.51 62.60WRAP Badlands SD BADL 20.05 6.58 7.53 1.55 0.75 3.60 40.06WRAP Great Sand Dunes CO GRSA6.20 2.78 6.44 1.30 2.11 3.78 22.61WRAP Lostwood Wilderness ND LOST 28.44 26.00 9.02 2.22 0.41 2.73 68.82WRAP Rocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMO 8.19 4.73 6.37 2.00 1.11 2.78 25.18WRAP Salt Creek NM SACR 17.74 12.42 7.04 2.24 4.18 6.08 49.70WRAP Theodore Roosevlt ND THRO 15.68 16.28 9.95 2.52 0.55 2.99 47.97WRAP Wheeler Peak NM WHPE 5.69 1.26 4.98 2.05 1.59 1.29 16.86WRAP White Mountain NM WHIT 8.77 2.49 8.52 2.11 1.58 3.81 27.28WRAP Wind Cave SD WICA 14.27 8.91 8.35 3.17 0.79 2.08 37.57Measured Extinction (Mm-1) on 20% Worst Days in 2004Measured Extinction at Class I AreasMeasured Extinction at Class I AreasIMPROVE Observed bEXTon Worst 20% Days in 20040255075100125150175200 BIBE BWCA BRET CACR GUMO HEGL MING UPBU VOYA2 WIMO MACA SIPS ISLE BADL GRSA LOST ROMO SACR THRO WHPE WHIT WICA

b EXT (Mm

-1 )Coarse MassSoilElemental CarbonOrganic MassNitrateSulfateMeasured Extinction at Class I AreasMeasured Extinction at Class I AreasIMPROVE Observed bEXTon Worst 20% Days in 20040.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0 BIBE BWCA BRET CACR GUMO HEGL MING UPBU VOYA2 WIMO MACA SIPS ISLE BADL GRSA LOST ROMO SACR THRO WHPE WHIT WICA

Fraction of Total b EXTSulfateNitrateOrganic MassElemental CarbonSoilCoarse MassExtinction Fraction at Class I AreasExtinction Fraction at Class I AreasAmm Amm Organic Elem Soil CoarseRPO Class I Area ST Name Sulfate Nitrate Mass Carbon Mass MassCENRAP Big Bend Nat'l Park TX BIBE 0.62 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.05 0.11CENRAP Boundary Waters MN BWCA0.42 0.37 0.12 0.04 0.01 0.03CENRAP Breton Island LABRET 0.73 0.10 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.05CENRAP Caney CreekAR CACR 0.62 0.14 0.17 0.04 0.01 0.02CENRAP Guadalupe Mountains TX GUMO 0.39 0.12 0.14 0.03 0.07 0.25CENRAP Hercules-Glades MO HEGL0.56 0.18 0.18 0.04 0.01 0.02CENRAP Mingo MO MING 0.50 0.22 0.16 0.06 0.01 0.05CENRAP Upper BuffaloAR UPBU 0.58 0.16 0.15 0.04 0.01 0.07CENRAPVoyageurs MNVOYA2 0.25 0.37 0.24 0.07 0.01 0.07CENRAP Wichita Mountains OK WIMO 0.43 0.30 0.17 0.05 0.01 0.04VISTAS Mammoth Cave KY MACA0.81 0.06 0.09 0.03 0.01 0.01VISTAS Sipsey WildernessAL SIPS 0.74 0.05 0.14 0.05 0.01 0.02MRPO Isle Royale MI ISLE 0.53 0.20 0.16 0.05 0.01 0.06WRAP Badlands SD BADL 0.50 0.16 0.19 0.04 0.02 0.09WRAP Great Sand Dunes CO GRSA0.27 0.12 0.28 0.06 0.09 0.17WRAP Lostwood Wilderness ND LOST 0.41 0.38 0.13 0.03 0.01 0.04WRAP Rocky Mtn Nat'l Park CO ROMO 0.33 0.19 0.25 0.08 0.04 0.11WRAP Salt Creek NM SACR 0.36 0.25 0.14 0.05 0.08 0.12WRAP Theodore Roosevlt ND THRO 0.33 0.34 0.21 0.05 0.01 0.06WRAP Wheeler Peak NM WHPE 0.34 0.07 0.30 0.12 0.09 0.08WRAP White Mountain NM WHIT 0.32 0.09 0.31 0.08 0.06 0.14WRAP Wind Cave SD WICA0.38 0.24 0.22 0.08 0.02 0.06Extinction Fraction for 20% Worst Days by Class I AreaConcentration Reductions (Concentration Reductions (μg/m3) Across) AcrossAll Species to Eliminate DV IncrementAll Species to Eliminate DV IncrementConcentration Reductions (Concentration Reductions (μg/m3) OneSpecie to Eliminate DV IncrementSpecie to Eliminate DV IncrementIdentification of Areas of Influence (AOIs)Identification of Areas of Influence (AOIs)Basis of AOI in Residence Time Differenceback trajectory analysesResults from PORSCH & TSSA analyses usedto further inform spatial location of AOI basedon emissions impact potentialConvert manually drafted AOIs into electronic,geocoded AOI using GISExample Manually Drafted AOIExample Manually Drafted AOIBoundary WatersBoundary Waters-VoyageursVoyageursBoundary 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 BendWhite Mountain-Wheeler Peak(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS 

# )Rocky Mountain-Great Sand Dunes(green=NO3; red=SO4/EC/OC/CM/FS)EC/OC/FS/CMTheodore Roosevelt-LostwoodBadlands-Wind Cave(green=NO3/EC; red=SO4/OC/CM/FS)NO3/EC Level 1 AOIBadland, Wind CaveNO3/EC Level 1 AOITheodore Roosevelt, LostwoodNO3/EC Level 2 AOIBadland, Wind Cave,Theodore Roosevelt, LostwoodSipsey-Mammoth Cave(all pollutants)Emissions Reductions Needed to YieldEmissions Reductions Needed to YieldDesired Concentration Reductions BasedDesired Concentration Reductions Basedon Proportional Reductions in Specieson Proportional Reductions in SpeciesConcentrationConcentrationControls should be developed for emissions precursors for each pollutantEmissions reductions for OC/EC/Soil/CM not provided since reasonably availableprecursor emissions controls for these pollutants do not existEmissions Reductions Needed to YieldEmissions Reductions Needed to YieldDesired Concentration Reductions Based onDesired Concentration Reductions Based onReduction in Single Species ConcentrationReduction in Single Species ConcentrationPrecursor emissions controls need only be developed for a single pollutantEmissions reductions for OC/EC/Soil/CM not provided since reasonably availableprecursor emissions controls for these pollutants do not existIdentification of Targeted EmissionsIdentification of Targeted EmissionsSource Categories within Each AOISource Categories within Each AOIStart with geocoded county list from each AOIIdentify list of sources available for potential controlApply all available control technologies to eachpotential source of reduction3⁄4Limit sources by parameters such asgeography, residual contribution, etc.Incrementally sort reductions and costs by marginalcost from one control to the next3⁄4Eliminate technologies that are notas cost effective as next highestIdentification of Targeted EmissionsIdentification of Targeted EmissionsSource Categories within Each AOISource Categories within Each AOIDevelop incremental cost curve for AOI, sources andpollutants of interestUse desired reduction value from “Rules of Thumb” topick emission reduction requirementLocate emission reduction target on cost effectivenesscurveAssign controls associated with cost curve selection3⁄4Determine if top residual category emission reduction enough•If not, necessary to control more, maybe other sources•Potential to fail to attain reduction target due to outside influence3⁄4Determine if reduction achieved is within “reasonable” cost effectiveness•If not, may have met goals of region progress guidanceExample Cost CurveExample Cost CurveBoundary Waters-VoyageursSO4/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$10,0000 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 200,000

MillionsAnnual Emission Reduction (Tons)

Control Cost (2005$)Top Residual Categories OnlyAll CategoriesExample Cost CurveExample Cost CurveSalt Creek-Guadalupe Mountain-Big BendSO4/EC/OC/CM/FS AOI-1$0$500$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500$3,0000 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000

MillionsAnnual Emission Reduction (Tons)

Control Cost (2005$)Top Residual Categories OnlyAll CategoriesExample Cost CurveExample Cost CurveSalt Creek-Guadalupe Mountain-Big BendSO4/EC/OC/CM/FS AOI-1$0$500$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500$3,0000 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000

MillionsAnnual Emission Reduction (Tons)

Control Cost (2005$)Top Residual Categories OnlyAll CategoriesBig Bend Single Specie Reduction TargetGuadalupe Mountain Single Specie Reduction TargetExample Scenario SelectionsExample Scenario SelectionsSIC Industrial Code Description ControlMeasure Reduction (Tons) Cost (2005$) Ave CPT1311 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 324 $448,705 $1,3831311 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas FGD 58 $3,038,216 $52,7551321 Natural Gas Liquids FGD 1,700 $8,235,351 $4,8442819 Industrial Inorganic Chemicals, NEC Increase %Conversion to MeetNSPS (99.7) 9,439 $3,180,916 $6142819 Industrial Inorganic Chemicals, NEC Sulfuric Acid Plant 12 $12,293,308 $991,2362911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 505 $698,716 $2,7662911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 374 $518,052 $1,3832911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 1,541 $2,132,266 $4,1492911 Petroleum Refining Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas Treatment 56 $77,549 $1,3832911 Petroleum Refining FGD 19,815 $228,384,718 $2,710,0582911 Petroleum Refining FGD Wet Scrubber 14 $24,810,989 $1,824,0693211 Flat Glass FGD 91 $9,887,103 $108,7933221 Glass Containers FGD 877 $35,110,176 $215,5123241 Cement, Hydraulic FGD 9,744 $282,402,039 $3,023,3833253 Ceramic Wall and Floor Tile FGD 77 $12,018,468 $495,6863274 Lime FGD 536 $37,591,319 $455,0593295 Minerals and Earths, Ground or Otherwise Treated FGD 2,443 $9,903,980 $4,0543334 Primary Production of Aluminum Vacuum Carbonate plus Sulfur Recovery Plant 79 $100,963,695 $3,916,9253334 Primary Production of Aluminum Sulfuric Acid Plant 118 $26,358,314 $891,7793334 Primary Production of Aluminum FGD 42,754 $147,146,142 $10,3264911 Electric Services FGD Wet Scrubber 53,601 $227,939,552 $69,9104911 Electric Services Repowering to Natural Gas 58,961 $1,496,985,896 $417,3954911 Electric Services Coal Washing 20,845 $10,028,946 $3,8484922 Natural Gas Transmission FGD 3,653 $8,153,168 $2,232Potential Annual SO2 Reductions and CostSummarySix Class I areas (Big Bend National Park,Boundary Waters, Breton Island, GuadalupeMountains, Wichita Mountains, and Voyageurs)are above the uniform rate of progress line*For each area, sulfate and to a lesser extent, nitratereductions were shown to be most beneficialduring the 20 percent worst visibility episodes* Based on April 10, 2006 visibility projectionsSummaryAlpine implemented the exhaustive list ofadditional controls in each primary AOI foreventual design of control strategiesEach of the areas appear to be able to achieve alevel of emissions reduction necessary to projectbelow the uniform rate of progress line3⁄4Influences such as incrementallyuncontrollable source categoriesand international and inter-RPO emission transport could impactstrategy designRecommended 2018 Regional Haze ControlRecommended 2018 Regional Haze ControlScenarios for CENRAPScenarios for CENRAPRegional3⁄4CAIR Control on Non-CAIR State EGUs•Category retains top residual emission rank for each CENRAP Class IAOI for both SO2 and NOx•Alternative application of “constrained trading”Subregional3⁄4Top 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 reduction to meet target•Determine “reasonable” reduction and apply controls to that levelReferencesEPA, (2005a), “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8-hr Ozone NAAQS”. Office of Air Quality Planning andStandards, U.S. EPA,Research Triangle Park,NC.EPA, (2005b), “Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQSand Regional Haze Regulations”, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,U.S. EPA, ResearchTriangle Park, NC.Malm, W., 1999. “Introduction to Visibility”, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, FortCollins, CO.(http://www2.nature.nps.gov/ard/vis/vishp.html).Malm, W., et al., 2000. “Spatial andSeasonal Patterns and Temporal Variability of Haze and its Constituentsin the United States: Report III. Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Fort Collins,CO.(http://alta_vista.cira.colostate.edu).Morris R. E. et al., 2006. “CENRAP Modeling Update: Performance Evaluation; 12 km Modeling; and VisibilityProjections”, presented at the CENRAP Joint WorkGroups Meeting, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, February6, 2006.Tesche, T. W., and D. E. McNally, 2005. “Five States 8-hr Ozone and PM2.5 Modeling Study: Recent SourceApportionment Results and 2009 Scenario Recommendations”, prepared for the Midwest Ozone Group,prepared by Alpine Geophysics, LLC.Tesche, T. W., and D. E. McNally,2006. “Roll-Out Modeling Resultsfor Six EGU NOx Control Scenarios:Dallas/Ft. Worth Nonattainment Area”, prepared for City Public Service, prepared by AlpineGeophysics, LLC.