# Appendix L.6: Mississippi Power Company: Chevron Cogeneration, Plant Daniel

and Plant Watson

Appendix L.6 contents:

L.6.1 Appendix summaries

L.6.2 BART information request letters

L.6.3 BART elig ibility letters

L.6.4 Modeling protocols

L.6.5 EPA comments on modeling protocols

L.6.6 BART modeling reports

L.6.7 BART exemption letter

L.6.8 New IMPROVE equation information request letter

L.6.9 New IMPROVE equation spreadsheets

# MS Power Company – Chevron Cogenera tion (1280-00048) BART Process Summary

As a fossil fuel fired steam electric plant, MS Power – Chevron Cogeneration meets the

initial BART eligibility requirement of s ource category code. Chevron Cogeneration is

48 km from Breton National Wildlife Refuge, a Class I area, and has a possible visibility

impact. Therefore, on February 28, 2002, Mi ssissippi Department of Environmental

Quality (MDEQ) sent them a letter requesting information to determine BART eligibility.

Based on the information received from MS Power – Chevron Cogeneration, several

units were deemed BART eligible because they met the following criteria:

• operating or under construction between Aug.7, 1962 to Aug.7, 1977

• having potential emissions that exceed the limit of 250 tons per year for

SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , or PM10.

The following are the BART-eligible point sources for MS Power–Chevron Cogen.

SO 2 

# NO

x 

# PM 10



# Combustion Turbine w/HRSG 306 n/a n/a 8 n/a

Combustion Turbine w/HRSG 306 n/a n/a 9 n/a

Combustion Turbine w/HRSG 456 n/a n/a 11 n/a

Combustion Turbine w/HRSG 456 n/a n/a 11 n/a

Totals 003 9 Emission Unit Heat Duty

(MMBtu/hr) Maximum Emission Rates (tons per year) Existing

Control Equip.



# As a result, Chevron Cogeneration was requi red to perform CALPU FF modeling on these

units. The new IMPROVE equation was used in the modeling analysis. No sea salt value

was available for Breton; therefore, the sea salt value for St. Marks, Florida was used

because it is the nearest coas tal Gulf of Mexico IMPROVE site. The modeling analysis

demonstrated a 98 th 

# percentile 24-hour average visi bility impact of 0.02 dv for Breton.

The threshold contribution for BART subject ivity is 0.5 dv; therefore, MS Power –

Chevron Cogeneration is not BART subject.

# MS Power Company – Plant Daniel (1280-00090) BART Process Summary

As a fossil fuel fired steam electric plant, MS Power – Plant Daniel meets the initial

BART eligibility requirement of source cate gory code. Plant Daniel is 61 km from

Breton National Wildlife Refuge, a Class I area, and has a possible visibility impact.

Therefore, on February 28, 2002, Mississipp i Department of Environmental Quality

(MDEQ) sent them a letter requesting information to determine BART eligibility. Based

on the information received from MS Power – Plant Daniel, several units were deemed

BART eligible because they met the following criteria:

• operating or under construction between Aug.7, 1962 to Aug.7, 1977

• having potential emissions that exceed the limit of 250 tons per year for

SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , or PM10.

The following are the BART-eligible point sources for MS Power–Plant Daniel

SO 2 

# NO

x 

# PM 10



# Utility Boiler 1 5461 n/a n/a 249 ESP

Utility Boiler 2 5461 n/a n/a 291 ESP

Totals 0 0 540 Emission Unit Heat Duty

(MMBtu/hr) Maximum Emission Rates (tons per year) Existing Control

Equip.



# As a result, Plant Daniel was required to perform CALPUFF mode ling on these units.

The new IMPROVE equation was used in the modeling analysis. No sea salt value was

available for Breton; therefore, the sea salt value for St. Marks, Florida was used because

it is the nearest coastal Gulf of Mexico IMPROVE site. The modeling analysis

demonstrated a 98 th 

# percentile 24-hour average visi bility impact of 0.23 dv for Breton.

The threshold contribution for BART subjectiv ity is 0.5 dv; therefore, MS Power – Plant

Daniel is not BART subject.

# MS Power Company – Plant Watson (1280-00055) BART Process Summary

As a fossil fuel fired steam electric plant, MS Power – Plant Watson meets the initial

BART eligibility requirement of source ca tegory code. Plant Watson is 45 km from

Breton National Wildlife Refuge, a Class I area, and has a possible visibility impact.

Therefore, on February 28, 2002, Mississipp i Department of Environmental Quality

(MDEQ) sent them a letter requesting information to determine BART eligibility. Based

on the information received from MS Power – Plant Watson, several units were deemed

BART eligible because they met the following criteria:

• operating or under construction between Aug.7, 1962 to Aug.7, 1977

• having potential emissions that exceed the limit of 250 tons per year for

SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , or PM10.

The following are the BART-eligible point sources for MS Power–Plant Watson

SO 2 

# NO

x 

# PM 10



# Utility Boiler 4 2526 n/a n/a 558 ESP

Utility Boiler 5 5095 n/a n/a 1276 ESP

Totals 0 0 1834 Emission Unit Heat Duty

(MMBtu/hr) Maximum Emission Rates (tons per year) Existing Control

Equip.



# As a result, Plant Watson was required to perform CALPUFF modeling on these units.

The new IMPROVE equation was used in the modeling analysis. No sea salt value was

available for Breton; therefore, the sea salt value for St. Marks, Florida was used because

it is the nearest coastal Gulf of Mexico IMPROVE site. The modeling analysis

demonstrated a 98 th 

# percentile 24-hour average visi bility impact of 0.42 dv for Breton.

The threshold contribution for BART subjectiv ity is 0.5 dv; therefore, MS Power – Plant

Watson is not BART subject.

# MISSISSIPPI



# October 22, 2003

Mr. C.R. Berry

Mississippi Power Company

P.O. Box 4079

Gulfport, MS 39502-4079



# Re:

. 

# BART eligibility

Watson Plant 

# - Facility # 1020-00055

Harrison County, Mississippi

Chevron Plant 

# - Facility # 1280-00048

Jackson County, Mississippi



# Daniel Plant



# - Facility # 1280-00090

Jackson County, Mississippi

Dear Mr. Berry :

This letter is to update you on the status of the Best Available Retrofit Technology

(BART) regulations and guidelines. Based on our previous information request and

your response, the referenced facilities have been identified as BART eligible and will

be listed on the VISTAS website (hnp:/ /www. vistas-sesarm.org) as such by the end of

October. Only the company name and city will be listed on the site. Please note that a

BART eligible source is one that will be considered for retrofit technology controls. It

does not necessarily mean that additional controls will be required for the source.

Those determinations will be made over the next several years during the Regional

Haze planning and our State Implementation Plan (SIP) development process.

EP A entered into a consent decree stating it will issue proposed rules and guidelines for

the BART Rule by April 15, 2004 and will issue the fmal rule on this matter by April

15,2005. In order to meet the Regional Haze SIP schedule, we will work to identify

the specific emission units and emissions control requirements at the facility prior to the

fmal rule. However, conclusive decisions concerning the BART requirements will not

be made until the fmal rule and guidance documents are published.

We will continue to update you on the

your facility as this work

~ STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

DAVID RONALD M\.JSOROVE, 

# GovERNoIl

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

CHAIu.Es H. CHISOLM. ExECl1TlVE Dl1'.ECJ'OR



# - Watson Plant, Chevron Plant, & Daniel Plant

statUs of this rule and the potential impact on

If you have questions or comments regarding the progresses,

# BART requirements or this designation, please contact me at (601) 961-5176 or

Deborah Boleware at (601) 961-5768.



# Sincerely, 

# £~:.i~~J;'~r

Elliott Bickerstaff, P.E., DEE

Chief, Air Support Branch

~

# BART Modeling Protocol:

Mississippi Power Company

Plant Chevron

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation

for Mississippi Power Company

August 2006

# August 2006 

# i 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introd ucti on............................................................................................................... ................................ 1-1

1.1 Objectives..................................................................................................................... ................... 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. re levant Cla ss I Areas ................................................................................ 1- 1

1.3 Organization of pr otocol do cument.............................................................................................. ... 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissi ons da ta ...................................................................................... ......... 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data...................................................................................................... ........... 2-1

3.0 Input data to the CALPUFF model ............................................................................................ ............. 3-1

3.1 General modeli ng procedu res: ................................................................................................... .... 3-1

3.2 Air quality database (backg round ozone and a mmonia) ............................................................... 3-1

3.3 Natural conditions and monthly f(RH) at Cla ss I Areas ................................................................. 3-1

4.0 Air quality mode ling pro cedures ............................................................................................ ............... 4-1

4.1 Model selecti on and feat ures................................................................................................... ....... 4-1

4.2 Modeling domain and rec eptors .................................................................................................. ... 4-1

4.3 Technical options us ed in the modeling ......................................................................................... 4-1

4.4 Light extinction and haze impact calcul ations ................................................................................ 4- 2

5.0 Presentation of modeling r esults........................................................................................... ................ 5-1

Appendix A Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Acid Emissions for BART Baseline Case..............A-1

# August 2006 

# ii 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc



# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant Chevron modeling e mission paramet ers ....................................................................... 2-2



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Plant Chevro n................................................... 1-2

# August 2006 

# 1-1 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that

‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be antici pated to cause or contribute to any impairment of

visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Purs uant to federal regulations, states have the option of

exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requirements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating

that the source cannot reasonably be anti cipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I

area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states subject

to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determi ne that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for electric generating units (EGUs). Prelimi nary feedback from the Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality indicates that they anticipate making the decision that CAIR satisfies BART for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling protocol focuses on performing the BART modeling analysis for

particulate matter (PM) only.

Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 at Plant Chevron, located near Pascagoula, which are owned and operated by Mississippi

Power Company, have been identified as a BART-eligib le source. The purpose of this document is to

summarize the procedures by which a modeling analysis will be conducted for this source. The modeling

procedures outlined will be used to determine whether the source is subject to BART requirements (exemption

modeling). If it is determined that th e source is subject to BART, this prot ocol will be updated (e.g., adding data

to Table 2-1) and then the procedures below will be used to evaluate the visibility improvement factor in the

BART determination step (determination modeling). The modeling procedures are consistent with those

outlined in the updated final VISTAS common BART modeli ng protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3

– July 18, 2006), available at http://www.vistassesarm.org/BART/BARTModelingProtocol_rev3_18Jul2006.pdf . This source-specific BART modeling protocol

references relevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling protocol.



# 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Mississippi Department of Environm ental Quality, which is in char ge of the state’s BART program, has

determined that Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 at Plant Chevron are BART-eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of

Plant Chevron relative to nearby Class I Areas. There is one Class I area within 300 km of the plant: Breton

Island (48.1 km). The BART exemption modeling will be conducted for this Class I area in accordance with the

referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in this source-specific

BART modeling protocol. If necessary, visibility improvement modeling for the BART determination step will

be performed for this Class I area if the exemptio n modeling shows a greater than 0.5 deciview impact.



# 1.3 Organization of protocol document

Section 2 of this protocol describes the source emissi ons that will be used as input to the BART exemption

modeling and, if necessary, the BART determination modeli ng. Section 3 describes the input data to be used

for the modeling including the modeling domain, terrain and land use, and meteorological data. Section 4

describes the air quality modeling procedures and Secti on 5 discusses the presentation of modeling results.

Since all of the references cited are also included in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (Section

7.), no additional references section is included in th is document. Appendix A provides additional information

on the baseline source emissions.

# August 2006 

# 1-2 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant Chevron

# August 2006 

# 2-1 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the vi sibility impacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant Chevron

are discussed in this section. As noted earlier, indi cations from the Mississippi Department of Environmental

Quality are that they will issue rules statin g that CAIR will suffice for EGU BART for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# . Therefore,

this protocol focuses only on PM 10 

# . Since various components of PM 10 

# emissions have different visibility

extinction efficiencies, the PM 10 

# emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS

common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and 4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5.) allows for the use of sourcespecific emissions and speciation factors and/or default values from AP-42. The PM 10 

# emissions and

speciation approach to be used for the modeling described in this protocol is indicated in the bullets below.

Where default speciation values are used, the data represents a combustion turbine unit firing natural gas with

no post-combustion control equipment .

• Total PM 10 

# is comprised of filterable and condensable emissions.

• Since stack tests are not performed for the Chevron Units, baseline filterable PM 10 

# emissions are

based on AP-42 emissions factors and the highest 24 hour fuel burn for the most recent 3-year period

(2003-2005). This results in the “maximum 24- hour average emission rate” as required by the

VISTAS protocol.

• All of the filterable PM 10 

# is assumed to be fine (less than 2.5 microns in size). Of the fine portion,

6.7% is elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fine particulates (soil).

• Condensable PM 10 

# consists of inorganic and organic compounds . The inorganic portion is by default

assumed to be H 2 

# SO 4 

# , although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The

organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols. Total condensable PM 10 

# emissions are based on the

emissions factor in AP-42, Table 3.1-2a.

• Baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions are calculated consistent wi th the method used by Mississippi Power to

derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach assumes that the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released

from the stack are proportional to SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type

and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream equipment (i.e., heat recovery steam generator). Appendix

A provides the basis for the site-specific value used.

• Baseline emissions of secondary organic aerosol s (the remaining portion of condensable PM 10 

# ) are

derived as the difference between t he total condensable emissions and the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emi ssion parameters to be used in the BART CALPUFF

modeling, consistent with the source emissions data presented in Appendix A for the baseline. All of the

emissions in Table 2-1 were derived from fuel burn data for the 2003 to 2005 period and represent the

maximum 24-hour average lb/hr rates (excluding days wher e startup, shutdown, or malfunctions occurred).

For NO

x 

# , SO 2 

# , and filterable PM 10 

# the values are calculated using daily fuel burn data and emission factors

from AP-42, Tables 3.1-1 and 3.1-2a. PM 10 

# speciation was then performed as indicated above such that total

Filterable PM 10 

# is all assumed to be Fine PM (i.e., total of Fine Soil plus Elemental Carbon).

If the BART exemption modeling indicates that a BART det ermination is required, then one or more particulate

matter control options will be considered for the modeling to determine visibility im provement from the baseline

case. The BART engineering analysis w ill provide the justifications for the selected, technically feasible

options and the species-specific control efficiencies. Table 2-1 will be updated to provide the modeling

parameters for these feasible options and resubmitted to the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

for review. Any site-specific deviations from the de fault particulate matter speciation guidance would be

outlined at that time.August 20062-2082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.docTable 2-1 Plant Chevron modeling emission parametersLocation UTM(Zone 16 NAD-83)Emissions1Particle Speciation2CaseSource/ UnitUTMEastUTMNorthActualStack HtBaseElev.FlueDiameterGasExitVel.StackGasExitTemp.SO2NOXPM10Filt.PM10CoarseSoilFinePMFineSoilECCond.PM10H2SO4Organicm m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 1 356,694 3,357,386 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9 491.3 0.75119.58 1.90 0.54 0.00 0.540.51 0.04 1.36 0.03 1.33Baseline Unit 2 356,662 3,357,383 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9 498.6 0.78122.63 1.95 0.56 0.00 0.560.52 0.04 1.40 0.03 1.36Baseline Unit 3 356,652 3,357,370 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1 506.9 1.00159.23 2.55 0.73 0.00 0.730.68 0.05 1.81 0.04 1.77Baseline Unit 4 356,633 3,357,391 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1 514.7 0.98156.84 2.50 0.72 0.00 0.720.67 0.05 1.78 0.04 1.74Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 1 Unit 1 356,694 3,357,386 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9 491.3 0.75119.58 1.90 0.54 0.00 0.540.51 0.04 1.36 0.03 1.33Stack 2 Unit 2 356,662 3,357,383 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9 498.6 0.78122.63 1.95 0.56 0.00 0.560.52 0.04 1.40 0.03 1.36Stack 3 Unit 3 356,652 3,357,370 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1 506.9 1.00159.23 2.55 0.73 0.00 0.730.68 0.05 1.81 0.04 1.77Stack 4 Unit 4 356,633 3,357,391 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1 514.7 0.98156.84 2.50 0.72 0.00 0.720.67 0.05 1.78 0.04 1.74Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/secg/sec g/sec g/secg/secg/sec g/sec g/secStack 1 Unit 1 356,694 3,357,386 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9 491.3 0.0915.07 0.24 0.07 0.00 0.070.06 0.01 0.17 0.01 0.17Stack 2 Unit 2 356,662 3,357,383 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9 498.6 0.1015.45 0.25 0.07 0.00 0.070.07 0.01 0.18 0.01 0.17Stack 3 Unit 3 356,652 3,357,370 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1 506.9 0.1320.06 0.32 0.09 0.00 0.090.09 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.22Stack 4 Unit 4 356,633 3,357,391 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1 514.7 0.1219.76 0.32 0.09 0.00 0.090.08 0.01 0.22 0.01 0.22Retrofit Control Options (if BART analysis is required4Control 1 Unit 1ÈUnit 1Control n Unit 1Control 1 Unit 2ÈUnit 2Control n Unit 2August 20062-3082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.docTable 2-1 (Continued) Plant Chevron modeling emission parametersNotes:1SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sources in CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of theBART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference inthe computation of certain particle species such as H2SO4.2Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10and H2SO4and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that H2SO4is input to CALPUFF asSO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4and SO4are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4to SO4is 96/98.3Stack height credit is equal to actual height; stack height is less than 65 m de minimis GEP height.4This data will be provided later if aBART determination analysis is required.

# August 2006 

# 3-1 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 3.0 Input data to the CALPUFF model

3.1 General modeling procedures:

VISTAS has developed five sub-regional 4-km CALMET meteorological databases for three years (2001-

2003) (VISTAS common protocol Section 4.4.2). Th e sub-regional modeling domains are strategically

designed to cover all potential BART eligible sources with in VISTAS states and all PSD Class I areas within

300 km of those sources (to the nearest edge). The ext ents of the 4-km sub-regional domains are shown in

Figure 4-4 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protoc ol. The BART modeling for Plant Chevron will be

done using the 4-km subdomain 4.

USGS 90-meter Digital Elevation Model (DEM) files were used by VISTAS to generate the terrain data at 4-km

resolution for input to the 4-km sub-regional CALMET run. Likewise, USGS 90-meter Composite Theme Grid

(CTG) files were used by VISTAS to generate the land us e data at 4-km resolution for input to the 4-km subregional CALMET run.

Three years of MM5 data (2001-2003) were used by VISTAS to generate the 4-km sub-regional

meteorological datasets. See Sections 4.3.2 and 4. 4.2 in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol for

more detail on these issues.

It is intended that all of the modeling for Plant Chevron w ill use the 4-km subdomain 4. However, if the results

indicate that the modeling could be improved with a CA LPUFF run using a finer grid, then refinements in the

modeling procedures will be considered and the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality will be

asked to approve these refinements.

In the event that a finer grid resolution is used, CALM ET must be rerun. Other modifications to inputs of

CALMET would include the extent of the modeling domain, the resolution of the terrain and land use data, and

other relevant settings. The same MM5 data and obs ervations as used for the 4-km sub-regional CALMET

simulations would be used. The extent of the modeling domain may need to be changed because of disk

space restrictions. The size of the CALMET output is di rectly proportional to the grid resolution of the run. The

domain would be limited to the source and the exclus ive Class I area(s) being assessed with a higher grid

resolution, including a 50-km buffer in all directions.

If CALMET needs to be run at even a finer grid resoluti on, then the appropriate model setting/files (specifically

the GEO.DAT file) will be modified. A summary of th ese modifications would be provided to the Mississippi

Department of Environmental Qual ity for review and approval.



# 3.2 Air quality data base (background ozone and ammonia)

Hourly measurements of ozone from all non-urban moni tors, as generated by VISTAS and available on the

VISTAS CALPUFF page on the Earth Tech web site (http://www.src.com/verio/download/sample_files.htm),

will be used as input to CALPUFF. For ammonia, a 0.5 ppb background value as recommended by VISTAS

will be used. However, since only PM emissions are being modeled, ozone and ammonia data is not really

needed given that this data has no effect on PM results in CALPUFF.



# 3.3 Natural conditions and mont hly f(RH) at Class I Areas

For each of the applicable Class I areas, natural bac kground conditions must be established in order to

determine a change in natural conditions related to a s ource’s emissions. The modeling described by this

protocol document intends to use annual average natura l background light extinction (EPA 2003 values).

# August 2006 

# 3-2 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# To determine the input to CALPUFF, it is first necessa ry to convert the deciviews to extinction using the

equation:

Extinction (Mm -1 

# ) = 10 exp(deciviews/10).

For example, the EPA guidance document indicates fo r Great Smoky Mountains National Park that the

deciview value for the average of the days is 7.60. This is equivalent to an ex tinction of 21.38 inverse

megameters (Mm -1 

# ).

This extinction includes the default 10 Mm-1 for Ra yleigh scattering. The remain ing extinction is due to

naturally occurring particles, and should be held constant fo r the entire year’s simulation. Therefore, the data

provided to CALPOST for Great Smoky Mountains woul d be the total natural background extinction minus 10

(expressed in Mm -1 

# ), or 11.38. This is most easily inpu t as fine soil concentrations (11.38 μg/m 3 

# ) in CALPOST,

since the extinction efficiency of soil (PM-fine) is 1. 0 and there is no f(RH) component. The concentration

entries for all other particle constituents would be set to zero, and the fine soil concentration would be kept the

same for each month of the year. The monthly values for f(RH) that CALPOST needs will be taken from

"Guidance for Tracking Progress Under the Regional Haze Rule" (EPA, 2003) Appendix A, Table A-3.

# August 2006 

# 4-1 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 4.0 Air quality mo deling procedures

This section provides a summary of the modeling procedur es outlined in the VISTAS pr otocol that will be used

for the refined CALPUFF analysis to be conducted for Plant Chevron.



# 4.1 Model selection and features

As noted in the VISTAS protocol (Summary, Reco mmendations Section II.), VI STAS will use CALPUFF

Version 5.754 and CALMET Version 5.7, which can be obtained at

http://www.src.com/verio/down load/download.htm#VISTAS_VERSION . These versions contain

enhancements funded by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) and VISTAS. They are maintained on

TRC’s Atmospheric Studies Group CALPUFF website fo r public access. This release includes CALMET,

CALPUFF, CALPOST, CALSUM, and PO STUTIL as well as CALVIEW.

The major features of the CALPUFF modeling system , including those of CALMET and the post processors

(CALPOST and POSTUTIL), are referenced in Section 3 of the VISTAS protocol.



# 4.2 Modeling domai n and receptors

The initial Plant Chevron BART runs will use the sub- domain 4, 4-km CALMET data supplied by VISTAS, as

discussed above. This domain includes all Class I areas wi thin 300 km of the source, plus a 50-km buffer. If

there is the need for a refined analysis with a finer grid, a supplement to this modeling protocol will be provided

describing the proposed procedures.

The receptors used for each of the Class I areas are based on the NPS database of Class I receptors, as

recommended by the VISTAS common protocol (Section 4.3.3).

The BART exemption modeling will be conducted for Chev ron Units 1 thru 4 (BART eligible units) for each

Class I area within 300 km of the source (Breton Island ). If necessary, Unit 1 thru 4 will each be modeled

separately for the visibility improv ement modeling for the BART determination step for Breton Island if

exemption modeling shows a great er than 0.5 deciview impact.



# 4.3 Technical options used in the modeling

CALMET modeling for the VISTAS-provided 4-km subdomai ns will be performed per the procedures specified

in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. If it is decided to conduct additional modeling with a finer

grid than 4 km, this modeling protoc ol will be updated to specify the te chnical options to be used in the

CALMET run, in order to allow for state agency review and approval.

For CALPUFF model options, Plant Chevron will follow the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol

(Section 4.4.1), which states that we should us e IWAQM (EPA, 1998) guidance. The VISTAS protocol

(Section 4.3.3) also notes that building downwash effects are not required to be included unless the state

directs the source to include these effects. Since Plan t Chevron is more than 40 km from the nearest Class I

area, building downwash effects will not be included in the CALPUFF modeling.

The POSTUTIL utility program (VISTAS common protocol Section 4.4.2) will be used to repartition HNO 3 

# and

NO 3 

# using VISTAS-provided ammonia concentrations der ived from previous 2002 CMAQ modeling conducted

by EPA or the alternate ammonia concentrations approach recommended by VISTAS, if the CMAQ data is

unavailable. As indicated earlier, since only PM em issions are being modeled, the treatment of ammonia

should not have an affect on PM results from CALPUFF.

# August 2006 

# 4-2 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 4.4 Light extinction and haze impact calculations

The CALPOST postprocessor will be used as prescribed in the VISTAS protocol for the calculation of the

impact from the modeled source’s prima ry and secondary particulate matter c oncentrations on light extinction.

The formula that is used is the existing (not the November 2005 revised) IMPROV E/EPA formula, which is

applied to determine a change in light extinction due to increases in the particulate matter component

concentrations. Using the notation of CALPOST, the formula is the following:

b ext 

# = 3 f(RH) [(NH 4 

# )2SO 4 

# ] + 3 f(RH) [NH 4 

# NO 3 

# ] + 4[OC] + 1[Soil] + 0.6[Coarse Mass] + 10[EC] + b Ray



# The concentrations, in square brackets, are in ug/m 3 

# and b ext 

# is in units of Mm -1 

# . The Rayleigh scattering term

(b Ray 

# ) has a default value of 10 Mm -1 

# , as recommended in EPA guidance for tracking reasonable progress

(EPA, 2003a).

The assessment of visibility impacts at the Class I areas will use CALPOST Method 6 (VISTAS common

protocol Section 4.3.2). Each hour’s source-caused exti nction is calculated by first using the hygroscopic

components of the source-caused concentrations, due to ammonium sulfate and nitrate, and monthly Class I

area-specific f(RH) values. The cont ribution to the total source-caused extinction from ammonium sulfate and

nitrate is then added to the other, non-hygroscopic com ponents of the particulate concentration (from coarse

and fine soil, secondary organic aerosols, and from elemental carbon) to yi eld the total hourly source-caused

extinction.

The BART rule significance threshold for the contribution to visibility impairment is 0.5 deciviews. The VISTAS

protocol (Section 4.3.2) indicates that with the use of the 4-km sub-regional CALMET database, a source does

not cause or contribute to visibility impairment if the 98th percentile (or 8th highest) day’s change in extinction

from natural conditions does not exceed 0.5 deciviews for any of the modeled years (an added check is: the

22nd highest prediction over the three years modeled should also not exceed 0.5 deciviews for a source to be

exempted from a BART determination). Both the 98th percentile (or 8th highest) day's change in extinction

from natural conditions for any modeled year and the 22nd highest prediction over the three years modeled

will be evaluated. The maximum impact from each method should not exceed 0.5 deciviews for the source

to be exempted from a BART determination.

Figure 4-1 of the VISTAS common BAR T modeling protocol presents a fl ow chart showing the components of

that protocol for the analysis to determine whether a sour ce is subject to BART. Again, it should be noted that

the modeling for Plant Chevron will focus on Subregional Fine-Scale modeling as depicted in the lower half of

the figure.

If the exemption modeling demonstrates that Plant C hevron does not cause or contribute to visibility

impairment, then the source will no t be subject to BART requirements, and no further analysis is needed.

Otherwise, the source will proceed to perform BART determination modeling for the baseline and each control

option in a similar manner as has been described in this document. This protocol will be supplemented with a

revised Table 2-1 and any other source specific adjust ments if the source is determined to be subject-toBART.

# August 2006 

# 5-1 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 5.0 Presentation of modeling results

The BART exemption and, if necessary, the BART dete rmination modeling results for Plant Chevron will be

provided to the state agency in a manner as described in the VISTAS protocol (Section 4.5). A report will be

produced that includes the following elements (a s suggested in the VISTAS protocol):

1. A map of the source location and Class I areas within 300 km of the source.

2. For the CALPUFF modeling domain, a table listing all Class I areas in the VISTAS domain and those

in neighboring states and impacts from the BART 4-km grid exemption modeling at those Class I

areas within 300 km of the source, as illust rated in Table 4-3 of the VISTAS protocol.

3. A discussion of the number of Class I areas with visibility impairment due to source emissions for the

98th percentile days in each year (and the 98th percent ile over all three years modeled) greater than

0.5 dv.

4. For the Class I area with the maximum impact, a discussion of the number of days beyond those

excluded (e.g., the 98th percentile for refined analys es) that the impact of the source exceeds 0.5

dv, the number of receptors in the Class I area where the impact exceeds 0.5 dv, and the maximum

impact.

5. For any finer grid CALPUFF exemption modeling, re sults for those Class I areas for which impacts of

the source exceeded 0.5 dv in the 4-km initial mode ling. We would report the same type of results

as provided for 4-km exemption modeling.

The BART determination modeling will be performed fo r those Class I areas shown in the exemption modeling

to exceed 0.5 dv impact. The extent of the BART determination modeling results will depend on the number of

technically viable controls identified in the engineeri ng analysis phase of the BART assessment. The results

presented will be a comparison of the 98 th 

# percentile value for the baseline and each control strategy derived

as is outlined above for the exemption modeling. The same statistics as those mentioned above in Steps 3

and 4 would be provided, and a summary of the relati ve results among all emission scenarios run would be

produced.

Additionally, the appropriate electronic files used to conduct the CALPUFF modeling will be submitted on CDROM or DVD media.

# August 2006 

# A -1 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix A

Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Acid Emissions for BART

Baseline Case

# August 2006 

# A -2 082506 Chevron BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix A

Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Ac id Emissions for BART Baseline Case

Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4) Emissions

During the combustion of sulfur-containing fuels, a percentage of the SO 2 

# formed is further oxidized to SO 3



# . As the flue gas cools across the air heater, this SO 3 

# combines with flue gas mo isture to form vapor-phase

and/or condensed sulfuric acid (H 2 

# SO 4 

# ). The baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions shown in Table 2-1 of this BART

modeling protocol were calculated consistent with t he method used by Southern Company to derive these

emissions for Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) purposes. This method is documented in a report titled

Estimating Total Sulfuric Acid Emissions from Stati onary Power Plants: Revision 3 (2005) prepared by Keith

Harrison and Dr. Larry Monroe (Southern Company Serv ices) and Edward Cichanowicz (Consultant). The

approach described in this report assumes that H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released from th e stack are proportional to

SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream

equipment (i.e., heat recovery steam generator).

The calculations below show baseline sulfuric acid emi ssions that are expected. Since this facility does not

contain post combustion NO

x 

# controls, the baseline sulfuric acid emissions estimate accounts for the

manufacture of H 2 

# SO 4 

# through combustion. Calculated sulfuric acid releases then account for loss or removal

within the system.

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Combustion (EMComb):

EMComb = K x F1 x E2

where,

EMComb = total sulfuric acid manu factured from combustion, lbs/yr

K = Molecular weight and units conversion constant = 98.07 / 64.04 * 2000 = 3,063

(98.07 = Molecular weight of sulfuric acid; 64.04 = Molecular weight of SO2; Conversion from tons per

year to pounds per year – multiply by 2000.)

F1 = Fuel Impact Factor (from the emissions estimating report)

E2 = Sulfur dioxide emission s, tons (from CEMS data).

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Combustion is:

Chevron 1:

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.0555 x 0.750 lbs/hr / 2000 = 0.064 lbs/hr

Chevron 2

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.0555 x 0.775 lbs/hr / 2000 = 0.066 lbs/hr

Chevron 3:

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.0555 x 1.000 lbs/hr / 2000 = 0.085 lbs/hr

Chevron 4

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.0555 x 0.983 lbs/hr / 2000 = 0.084 lbs/hr

Sulfuric Acid Released from Combustion (ERComb)

ERComb = EMComb x F2 (technology impact factor for HRSG)

ERComb = EMComb x (0.5)

Chevron 1

ERComb = 0.064 lbs/hr x (0.5) = 0.032 lbs/hr

Chevron 2

ERComb = 0.066 lbs/hr x (0.5) = 0.033 lbs/hr

Chevron 3

ERComb = 0.085 lbs/hr x (0.5) = 0.043 lbs/hr

Chevron 4

ERComb = 0.084 lbs/hr x (0.5) = 0.042 lbs/hr

# BART Modeling Protocol:

Mississippi Power Company

Plant Daniel

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation

for Mississippi Power Company

August 2006

# August 2006 

# i 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introd ucti on............................................................................................................... ................................ 1-1

1.1 Objectives..................................................................................................................... ................... 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. re levant Cla ss I Areas ................................................................................ 1- 1

1.3 Organization of pr otocol do cument.............................................................................................. ... 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissi ons da ta ...................................................................................... ......... 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data...................................................................................................... ........... 2-1

3.0 Input data to the CALPUFF model ............................................................................................ ............. 3-1

3.1 General modeli ng procedu res: ................................................................................................... .... 3-1

3.2 Air quality database (backg round ozone and a mmonia) ............................................................... 3-1

3.3 Natural conditions and monthly f(RH) at Cla ss I Areas ................................................................. 3-1

4.0 Air quality mode ling pro cedures ............................................................................................ ............... 4-1

4.1 Model selecti on and feat ures................................................................................................... ....... 4-1

4.2 Modeling domain and rec eptors .................................................................................................. ... 4-1

4.3 Technical options us ed in the modeling ......................................................................................... 4-1

4.4 Light extinction and haze impact calcul ations ................................................................................ 4- 2

5.0 Presentation of modeling r esults........................................................................................... ................ 5-1

Appendix A Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Acid Emissions for BART Baseline Case..............A-1

Appendix B Estimated Emissions of Primary Total Carbon and Primary Sulfate From

Coal-Fired Power Plants ..................................................................................................... ..B-1

# August 2006 

# ii 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc



# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant Daniel modeling em ission paramet ers........................................................................... 2-3



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Pl ant Dani el....................................................... 1-2

# August 2006 

# 1-1 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that

‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be antici pated to cause or contribute to any impairment of

visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Purs uant to federal regulations, states have the option of

exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requirements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating

that the source cannot reasonably be anti cipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I

area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states subject

to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determi ne that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for electric generating units (EGUs). Prelimi nary feedback from the Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality indicates that they anticipate making the decision that CAIR satisfies BART for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling protocol focuses on performing the BART modeling analysis for

particulate matter (PM) only.

Units 1 and 2 at Plant Daniel, located near Escatawpa, which are owned and operated by Mississippi Power

Company, have been identified as a BART-eligible source. The purpose of this document is to summarize the

procedures by which a modeling analysis will be cond ucted for this source. The modeling procedures

outlined will be used to determine whether the source is subject to BART require ments (exemption modeling).

If it is determined that the source is subject to BART, this protocol will be updated (e.g., adding data to Table 2-

1) and then the procedures below will be used to evalua te the visibility improvement factor in the BART

determination step (determination modeling). The modeli ng procedures are consistent with those outlined in

the updated final VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3 – July 18,

2006), available at http://www.vistas-sesarm.org/BART/BA RTModelingProtocol_rev3_18Jul2006.pdf . This

source-specific BART modeling protoc ol references relevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling

protocol.



# 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Mississippi Department of Environm ental Quality, which is in char ge of the state’s BART program, has

determined that Units 1 and 2 at Plant Daniel are BART -eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of Plant

Daniel relative to nearby Class I Areas. There is one Cl ass I area within 300 km of the plant: Breton Island

(61.3 km). The BART exemption modeling will be c onducted for this Class I area in accordance with the

referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in this source-specific

BART modeling protocol. If necessary, visibility improvement modeling for the BART determination step will

be performed for this Class I area if the exemptio n modeling shows a greater than 0.5 deciview impact.



# 1.3 Organization of protocol document

Section 2 of this protocol describes the source emissi ons that will be used as input to the BART exemption

modeling and, if necessary, the BART determination modeli ng. Section 3 describes the input data to be used

for the modeling including the modeling domain, terrain and land use, and meteorological data. Section 4

describes the air quality modeling procedures and Secti on 5 discusses the presentation of modeling results.

Since all of the references cited are also included in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (Section

7.), no additional references section is included in this document. Appendices A and B provide additional

information on the baseline source emissions.

# August 2006 

# 1-2 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant Daniel

# August 2006 

# 2-1 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the visi bility impacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant Daniel are

discussed in this section. As noted earlier, indica tions from the Mississippi Department of Environmental

Quality are that they will issue rules statin g that CAIR will suffice for EGU BART for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# . Therefore,

this protocol focuses only on PM 10 

# . Since various components of PM 10 

# emissions have different visibility

extinction efficiencies, the PM 10 

# emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS

common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and 4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5.) allows for the use of sourcespecific emissions and speciation factors and/or default values from AP-42. The PM 10 

# emissions and

speciation approach to be used for the modeling described in this protocol is indicated in the bullets below.

Where default speciation values are used, the data r epresents a unit where current (baseline) emission

controls include electrostatic precipit ators (ESPs), but no post-combustion NO

x 

# or SO 2 

# control equipment

exists.

• Total PM 10 

# is comprised of filterable and condensable emissions.

• Baseline filterable PM 10 

# emissions are based on the highest stack test for the most recent 3-year

period (2003-2005). This stack test is combined wi th the highest 24 hour heat input value for this

period from CEMS data to calculate the “maximum 24-hour average emission rate” as required by the

VISTAS protocol.

• Filterable PM 10 

# will be subdivided by size category consistent with the default approach from AP-42

Table 1-1.6, and as noted on pages 43 and 44 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The

AP-42 Table 1-1.6 specifies for the emission controls indicated above that 55.6% of filterable PM 10 

# emissions is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in size ) and 44.4% is fine. Of the fine portion, 3.7% is

elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fine particulates (soil).

• Condensable PM 10 

# consists of inorganic and organic compounds . The inorganic portion is by default

assumed to be H 2 

# SO 4 

# , although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The

organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols.

• Baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions are calculated consistent wi th the method used by Mississippi Power to

derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach assumes that the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released

from the stack are proportional to SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type

and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater). For eastern

bituminous coal the baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# release rate is in the range of 0.3 to 0.5% of the SO 2 

# emissions.

Appendix A provides the basis for th e site-specific values used.

• Baseline emissions of condensable organics (the remaining portion of condensable PM 10 

# ) are derived

based on the supporting field observational informat ion in Appendix B and is estimated as 0.32% of

SO 2 

# emitted.

• Coarse filterable particles (between 2.5 and 10 micr ons in size) will be modeled with a geometric mass

mean diameter of 5 microns, while fine filterable and all condensable particles wi ll be modeled with a

geometric mass mean diameter of 0.48 microns, cons istent with the CALPUFF default value for fine

particles. The geometric standard deviation for both fine and coarse particles will be set to 2 microns,

consistent with the CALPUFF default value. The 0.48 micron diameter value for fine particles comes

from the default values in sample input files pr esented on the TRC web site. There is no default

value presented for the coarse particles on the TR C web site. However, since 5 is the geometric

mass mean diameter of 2.5 and 10 (the bounds of coar se particle sizes), it is a reasonable estimate

for the geometric mass mean diameter for that class of particles.

# August 2006 

# 2-2 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# In practice, CALPUFF allows for the user to input certain components of PM 10 

# as separate species and

separate sizes, which will result in more accurate wet and dry deposition velocity results and also more

accurate effects on light scattering. As noted above, th e particle size distribution information is provided in

AP-42 Table 1-1.6, and will be used for the BART ex emption modeling as well as the BART determination

modeling, if needed.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emi ssion parameters to be used in the BART CALPUFF

modeling, consistent with the source emissions data pr esented in Appendices A and B for the baseline. All of

the emissions in Table 2-1 were derived from CEMS data for the 2003 to 2005 period and represent the

maximum 24-hour average lb/hr rates (excluding days wher e startup, shutdown, or malfunctions occurred).

For NO

x 

# and SO 2 

# the values are directly from CEMS. Filterable PM 10 

# emissions were calculated using the

highest stack test over the 2003 to 2005 period and mu ltiplying these values times the maximum 24-hour

average heat input derived from CEMS. These values were then adjusted using AP-42 factors from Table 1.1-

6 that indicate that PM 10 

# is 67% of total PM for a pulverized coal unit with an ESP. PM 10 

# speciation was then

performed as indicated above such that total Filterable PM 10 

# is made up of Coarse Soil plus total Fine PM and

total Fine PM is made up of Fine Soil plus Elemental Carbon (EC).

If the BART exemption modeling indicates that a BART det ermination is required, then one or more particulate

matter control options will be considered for the modeling to determine visibility im provement from the baseline

case. The BART engineering analysis w ill provide the justifications for the selected, technically feasible

options and the species-specific control efficiencies. Table 2-1 will be updated to provide the modeling

parameters for these feasible options and resubmitted to the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

for review. Any site-specific deviations from the de fault particulate matter speciation guidance would be

outlined at that time.August 20062-3082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.docTable 2-1 Plant Daniel modeling emission parametersLocation UTM(Zone 16 NAD-83)Emissions1Particle Speciation2CaseSource/ UnitUTMEastUTMNorthActualStack HtBaseElev.FlueDiameterGasExitVel.StackGasExitTemp.SO2NOXPM10Filt.PM10CoarseSoilFinePMFineSoilECCond.PM10H2SO4Organicm m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 1 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.421.7 419.1 5718.332156.0956.90 12.46 6.93 5.53 5.33 0.20 44.43 26.14 18.30Baseline Unit 2 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.421.7 419.1 5451.72186.4066.41 24.01 13.35 10.66 10.27 0.39 42.40 24.96 17.45Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 1 1&2 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.4 21.7 419.111170.05 4342.49123.31 36.47 20.28 16.19 15.59 0.60 86.86 51.09 35.74Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/secg/sec g/sec g/secg/secg/sec g/sec g/secStack 1 1&2 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.4 21.7419.1 1407.43 547.15 15.54 4.60 2.56 2.04 1.960.80 10.94 6.44 4.50Retrofit Control Options (if BART analysis is required4Control 1 Unit 1ÈUnit 1Control n Unit 1Control 1 Unit 2ÈUnit 2Control n Unit 21SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sources in CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of theBART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference inthe computation of certain particle species such as H2SO4.2Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10and H2SO4and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that H2SO4is input to CALPUFF asSO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4and SO4are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4to SO4is 96/98.3Stack credit is equal to actual stack height sincethis stack is grandfathered under stack height regulations.4This data will be provided later if aBART determination analysis is required.

# August 2006 

# 3-1 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 3.0 Input data to the CALPUFF model

3.1 General modeling procedures:

VISTAS has developed five sub-regional 4-km CALMET meteorological databases for three years (2001-

2003) (VISTAS common protocol Section 4.4.2). Th e sub-regional modeling domains are strategically

designed to cover all potential BART eligible sources with in VISTAS states and all PSD Class I areas within

300 km of those sources (to the nearest edge). The ext ents of the 4-km sub-regional domains are shown in

Figure 4-4 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The BART modeling for Plant Daniel will be done

using the 4-km subdomain 4.

USGS 90-meter Digital Elevation Model (DEM) files were used by VISTAS to generate the terrain data at 4-km

resolution for input to the 4-km sub-regional CALMET run. Likewise, USGS 90-meter Composite Theme Grid

(CTG) files were used by VISTAS to generate the land us e data at 4-km resolution for input to the 4-km subregional CALMET run.

Three years of MM5 data (2001-2003) were used by VISTAS to generate the 4-km sub-regional

meteorological datasets. See Sections 4.3.2 and 4. 4.2 in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol for

more detail on these issues.

It is intended that all of the modeling for Plant Daniel will use the 4-km subdomain 4. However, if the results

indicate that the modeling could be improved with a CA LPUFF run using a finer grid, then refinements in the

modeling procedures will be considered and the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality will be

asked to approve these refinements.

In the event that a finer grid resolution is used, CALM ET must be rerun. Other modifications to inputs of

CALMET would include the extent of the modeling domain, the resolution of the terrain and land use data, and

other relevant settings. The same MM5 data and obs ervations as used for the 4-km sub-regional CALMET

simulations would be used. The extent of the modeling domain may need to be changed because of disk

space restrictions. The size of the CALMET output is di rectly proportional to the grid resolution of the run. The

domain would be limited to the source and the exclus ive Class I area(s) being assessed with a higher grid

resolution, including a 50-km buffer in all directions.

If CALMET needs to be run at even a finer grid resoluti on, then the appropriate model setting/files (specifically

the GEO.DAT file) will be modified. A summary of th ese modifications would be provided to the Mississippi

Department of Environmental Qual ity for review and approval.



# 3.2 Air quality data base (background ozone and ammonia)

Hourly measurements of ozone from all non-urban moni tors, as generated by VISTAS and available on the

VISTAS CALPUFF page on the Earth Tech web site (http://www.src.com/verio/download/sample_files.htm),

will be used as input to CALPUFF. For ammonia, a 0.5 ppb background value as recommended by VISTAS

will be used. However, since only PM emissions are being modeled, ozone and ammonia data is not really

needed given that this data has no effect on PM results in CALPUFF.



# 3.3 Natural conditions and mont hly f(RH) at Class I Areas

For each of the applicable Class I areas, natural bac kground conditions must be established in order to

determine a change in natural conditions related to a s ource’s emissions. The modeling described by this

protocol document intends to use annual average natura l background light extinction (EPA 2003 values).

# August 2006 

# 3-2 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# To determine the input to CALPUFF, it is first necessa ry to convert the deciviews to extinction using the

equation:

Extinction (Mm -1 

# ) = 10 exp(deciviews/10).

For example, the EPA guidance document indicates fo r Great Smoky Mountains National Park that the

deciview value for the average of the days is 7.60. This is equivalent to an ex tinction of 21.38 inverse

megameters (Mm -1 

# ).

This extinction includes the default 10 Mm-1 for Ra yleigh scattering. The remain ing extinction is due to

naturally occurring particles, and should be held constant fo r the entire year’s simulation. Therefore, the data

provided to CALPOST for Great Smoky Mountains woul d be the total natural background extinction minus 10

(expressed in Mm -1 

# ), or 11.38. This is most easily inpu t as fine soil concentrations (11.38 μg/m 3 

# ) in CALPOST,

since the extinction efficiency of soil (PM-fine) is 1. 0 and there is no f(RH) component. The concentration

entries for all other particle constituents would be set to zero, and the fine soil concentration would be kept the

same for each month of the year. The monthly values for f(RH) that CALPOST needs will be taken from

"Guidance for Tracking Progress Under the Regional Haze Rule" (EPA, 2003) Appendix A, Table A-3.

# August 2006 

# 4-1 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 4.0 Air quality mo deling procedures

This section provides a summary of the modeling procedur es outlined in the VISTAS pr otocol that will be used

for the refined CALPUFF analysis to be conducted for Plant Daniel.



# 4.1 Model selection and features

As noted in the VISTAS protocol (Summary, Reco mmendations Section II.), VI STAS will use CALPUFF

Version 5.754 and CALMET Version 5.7, which can be obtained at

http://www.src.com/verio/down load/download.htm#VISTAS_VERSION . These versions contain

enhancements funded by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) and VISTAS. They are maintained on

TRC’s Atmospheric Studies Group CALPUFF website fo r public access. This release includes CALMET,

CALPUFF, CALPOST, CALSUM, and PO STUTIL as well as CALVIEW.

The major features of the CALPUFF modeling system , including those of CALMET and the post processors

(CALPOST and POSTUTIL), are referenced in Section 3 of the VISTAS protocol.



# 4.2 Modeling domai n and receptors

The initial Plant Daniel BART runs will use the s ub-domain 4, 4-km CALMET data supplied by VISTAS, as

discussed above. This domain includes all Class I areas wi thin 300 km of the source, plus a 50-km buffer. If

there is the need for a refined analysis with a finer grid, a supplement to this modeling protocol will be provided

describing the proposed procedures.

The receptors used for each of the Class I areas are based on the NPS database of Class I receptors, as

recommended by the VISTAS common protocol (Section 4.3.3).

The BART exemption modeling will be conducted for Dani el Units 1 and 2 (BART eligible units) for each Class

I area within 300 km of the source (Breton Island). If necessary, Unit 1 and 2 will each be modeled separately

for the visibility improvement modeling for the BART determination step for Breton Island if exemption

modeling shows a greater than 0.5 deciview impact.



# 4.3 Technical options used in the modeling

CALMET modeling for the VISTAS-provided 4-km subdomai ns will be performed per the procedures specified

in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. If it is decided to conduct additional modeling with a finer

grid than 4 km, this modeling protoc ol will be updated to specify the te chnical options to be used in the

CALMET run, in order to allow for state agency review and approval.

For CALPUFF model options, Plant Daniel will follow the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (Section

4.4.1), which states that we should use IWAQM (EPA, 1998) guidance. The VISTAS pr otocol (Section 4.3.3)

also notes that building downwash effects are not required to be included unless the state directs the source to

include these effects. Since Plant Daniel is more than 40 km from the nearest Class I area, building

downwash effects will not be included in the CALPUFF modeling.

The POSTUTIL utility program (VISTAS common protocol Section 4.4.2) will be used to repartition HNO 3 

# and

NO 3 

# using VISTAS-provided ammonia concentrations der ived from previous 2002 CMAQ modeling conducted

by EPA or the alternate ammonia concentrations approach recommended by VISTAS, if the CMAQ data is

unavailable. As indicated earlier, since only PM em issions are being modeled, the treatment of ammonia

should not have an affect on PM results from CALPUFF.

# August 2006 

# 4-2 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 4.4 Light extinction and haze impact calculations

The CALPOST postprocessor will be used as prescribed in the VISTAS protocol for the calculation of the

impact from the modeled source’s prima ry and secondary particulate matter c oncentrations on light extinction.

The formula that is used is the existing (not the November 2005 revised) IMPROV E/EPA formula, which is

applied to determine a change in light extinction due to increases in the particulate matter component

concentrations. Using the notation of CALPOST, the formula is the following:

b ext 

# = 3 f(RH) [(NH 4 

# )2SO 4 

# ] + 3 f(RH) [NH 4 

# NO 3 

# ] + 4[OC] + 1[Soil] + 0.6[Coarse Mass] + 10[EC] + b Ray



# The concentrations, in square brackets, are in ug/m 3 

# and b ext 

# is in units of Mm -1 

# . The Rayleigh scattering term

(b Ray 

# ) has a default value of 10 Mm -1 

# , as recommended in EPA guidance for tracking reasonable progress

(EPA, 2003a).

The assessment of visibility impacts at the Class I areas will use CALPOST Method 6 (VISTAS common

protocol Section 4.3.2). Each hour’s source-caused exti nction is calculated by first using the hygroscopic

components of the source-caused concentrations, due to ammonium sulfate and nitrate, and monthly Class I

area-specific f(RH) values. The cont ribution to the total source-caused extinction from ammonium sulfate and

nitrate is then added to the other, non-hygroscopic com ponents of the particulate concentration (from coarse

and fine soil, secondary organic aerosols, and from elemental carbon) to yi eld the total hourly source-caused

extinction.

The BART rule significance threshold for the contribution to visibility impairment is 0.5 deciviews. The VISTAS

protocol (Section 4.3.2) indicates that with the use of the 4-km sub-regional CALMET database, a source does

not cause or contribute to visibility impairment if the 98th percentile (or 8th highest) day’s change in extinction

from natural conditions does not exceed 0.5 deciviews for any of the modeled years (an added check is: the

22nd highest prediction over the three years modeled should also not exceed 0.5 deciviews for a source to be

exempted from a BART determination). Both the 98th percentile (or 8th highest) day's change in extinction

from natural conditions for any modeled year and the 22nd highest prediction over the three years modeled

will be evaluated. The maximum impact from each method should not exceed 0.5 deciviews for the source

to be exempted from a BART determination.

Figure 4-1 of the VISTAS common BAR T modeling protocol presents a fl ow chart showing the components of

that protocol for the analysis to determine whether a sour ce is subject to BART. Again, it should be noted that

the modeling for Plant Daniel will focus on Subregiona l Fine-Scale modeling as depicted in the lower half of

the figure.

If the exemption modeling demonstrates that Plant Daniel does not cause or contribut e to visibility impairment,

then the source will not be subjec t to BART requirements, and no furt her analysis is needed. Otherwise, the

source will proceed to perform BART determination m odeling for the baseline and each control option in a

similar manner as has been described in this document. Th is protocol will be supplemented with a revised

Table 2-1 and any other source specific adjustments if the source is determined to be subject-to-BART.

# August 2006 

# 5-1 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 5.0 Presentation of modeling results

The BART exemption and, if necessary, the BART dete rmination modeling results for Plant Daniel will be

provided to the state agency in a manner as described in the VISTAS protocol (Section 4.5). A report will be

produced that includes the following elements (a s suggested in the VISTAS protocol):

1. A map of the source location and Class I areas within 300 km of the source.

2. For the CALPUFF modeling domain, a table listing all Class I areas in the VISTAS domain and those

in neighboring states and impacts from the BART 4-km grid exemption modeling at those Class I

areas within 300 km of the source, as illust rated in Table 4-3 of the VISTAS protocol.

3. A discussion of the number of Class I areas with visibility impairment due to source emissions for the

98th percentile days in each year (and the 98th percent ile over all three years modeled) greater than

0.5 dv.

4. For the Class I area with the maximum impact, a discussion of the number of days beyond those

excluded (e.g., the 98th percentile for refined analys es) that the impact of the source exceeds 0.5

dv, the number of receptors in the Class I area where the impact exceeds 0.5 dv, and the maximum

impact.

5. For any finer grid CALPUFF exemption modeling, re sults for those Class I areas for which impacts of

the source exceeded 0.5 dv in the 4-km initial mode ling. We would report the same type of results

as provided for 4-km exemption modeling.

The BART determination modeling will be performed fo r those Class I areas shown in the exemption modeling

to exceed 0.5 dv impact. The extent of the BART determination modeling results will depend on the number of

technically viable controls identified in the engineeri ng analysis phase of the BART assessment. The results

presented will be a comparison of the 98 th 

# percentile value for the baseline and each control strategy derived

as is outlined above for the exemption modeling. The same statistics as those mentioned above in Steps 3

and 4 would be provided, and a summary of the relati ve results among all emission scenarios run would be

produced.

Additionally, the appropriate electronic files used to conduct the CALPUFF modeling will be submitted on CDROM or DVD media.

# August 2006 

# A-1 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix A

Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Acid Emissions for BART

Baseline Case

# August 2006 

# A-2 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix A

Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Ac id Emissions for BART Baseline Case

Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4) Emissions

During the combustion of sulfur-containing fuels, a percentage of the SO 2 

# formed is further oxidized to SO 3



# . As the flue gas cools across the air heater, this SO 3 

# combines with flue gas mo isture to form vapor-phase

and/or condensed sulfuric acid (H 2 

# SO 4 

# ). The baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions shown in Table 2-1 of this BART

modeling protocol were calculated consistent with t he method used by Southern Company to derive these

emissions for Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) purposes. This method is documented in a report titled

Estimating Total Sulfuric Acid Emissions from Stati onary Power Plants: Revision 3 (2005) prepared by Keith

Harrison and Dr. Larry Monroe (Southern Company Serv ices) and Edward Cichanowicz (Consultant). The

approach described in this report assumes that H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released from th e stack are proportional to

SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream

equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater).

The calculations below show baseline sulfuric acid emi ssions that are expected. Since this facility does not

contain post combustion NO

x 

# or SO 2 

# controls, the baseline sulfuric acid emissions estimate only accounts for

the manufacture of H 2 

# SO 4 

# through combustion. This facility contains a flue gas conditioning system the

sulfuric acid emissions estimate al so accounts for the manufacture of H 2 

# SO 4 

# through injection of SO 3 

# prior to

the ESP. Calculated sulfuric acid releases then account for loss or removal within the system.

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Combustion (EMComb):

EMComb = K x F1 x E2

where,

EMComb = total sulfuric acid manu factured from combustion, lbs/yr

K = Molecular weight and units conversion constant = 98.07 / 64.04 * 2000 = 3,063

(98.07 = Molecular weight of sulfuric acid; 64.04 = Molecular weight of SO2; Conversion from tons per

year to pounds per year – multiply by 2000.)

F1 = Fuel Impact Factor (from the emissions estimating report)

E2 = Sulfur dioxide emission s, tons (from CEMS data).

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Combustion is:

Daniel 1:

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.008 x 5,718.3 lbs/hr / 2000 = 70.1 lbs/hr

Daniel 2

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.008 x 5,451.7 lbs/hr / 2000 = 66.8 lbs/hr

Sulfuric Acid Released from Combustion (ERComb)

ERComb = EMComb x F2 (technology impact factors for air heater and ESP)

ERComb = EMComb x (0.49) x (0.49)

Daniel 1

ERComb = 70.1 lbs/hr x (0.24) = 16.8 lbs/hr

Daniel 2

ERComb = 66.8 lbs/hr x (0.24) = 16.0 lbs/hr

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Flue Gas Conditioning (EMfgc):

EMfgc = Ke x B x fe x Is

where,

EMfgc = total sulfuric acid manufactured fr om flue gas conditioning system, lbs/hr

Ke = Conversion Factor = 3,799

B = Coal burn in TBtu/hr

# August 2006 

# A-3 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# fe = Operating factor of FGC system, fraction of coal burned when FGC operates

Is =SO3 injection rate in ppmv at 6% O2, wet

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from FGC system is:

Daniel 1

EMfgc = 3,799 x 0.006129 x 1.0 x 4.0 = 93.1 lbs/hr

Daniel 2

EMfgc = 3,799 x 0.005871 x 1.0 x 4.0 = 89.2 lbs/hr

Sulfuric Acid Released from FGC (ERfgc)

ERfgc = [EMfgc – (Ke * B * fe * I NH3 

# )] * F3 x F2

where,

ERfgc = Total sulfuric acid released from FGC, lbs per hour

EMfgc = Total sulfuric acid manufactured from FGC, lbs per hour

Ke = Conversion factor = 3799

B = Coal burn in TBtu/hr

fe = Operating factor of FGC system, fraction of coal burn when FGC operates

I NH3 

# = NH3 injection for dual flue gas conditioning system, ppmv at 6% O2, wet (= 0 if no NH3 used)

F3 = Technology Impact Factors for FGC

F2 = Technology Impact Factors for equipment after ESP only

If no control after ESP, F2 = 1

Sulfuric Acid Released from FGC system is:

Daniel 1

ERfgc = [93.1 – (3799 x 0.006129 x 1.0 x 0.0) x 0.10 x 1.0] = 9.3 lbs/hr

Daniel 2

ERfgc = [89.2 – (3799 x 0.005871 x 1.0 x 0.0) x 0.10 x 1.0] = 8.9 lbs/hr

Total Sulfuric Acid Released (TSAR):

TSAR = ERComb + ERfgc

Daniel 1:

TSAR = 16.8 + 9.3 = 26.1 lb/hr

Daniel 2:

TSAR = 16.0 + 8.9 = 25.0 lb/hr

# August 2006 

# B-1 082506 Daniel BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix B

Estimated Emissions of Primary Total Carbon and Primary Sulfate

From Coal-Fired Power Plants

[The above titled paper is include d as a separate document along with

this site specific BART modeling protoc ol. This paper was prepared for

Southern Company by Er ic S. Edgerton of Atmospheric Research &

Analysis, Inc.]

# BART Modeling Protocol:

Mississippi Power Company

Plant Watson

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation

for Mississippi Power Company

August 2006

# August 2006 

# i 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introd ucti on............................................................................................................... ................................ 1-1

1.1 Objectives..................................................................................................................... ................... 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. re levant Cla ss I Areas ................................................................................ 1- 1

1.3 Organization of pr otocol do cument.............................................................................................. ... 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissi ons da ta ...................................................................................... ......... 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data...................................................................................................... ........... 2-1

3.0 Input data to the CALPUFF model ............................................................................................ ............. 3-1

3.1 General modeli ng procedu res: ................................................................................................... .... 3-1

3.2 Air quality database (backg round ozone and a mmonia) ............................................................... 3-1

3.3 Natural conditions and monthly f(RH) at Cla ss I Areas ................................................................. 3-1

4.0 Air quality mode ling pro cedures ............................................................................................ ............... 4-1

4.1 Model selecti on and feat ures................................................................................................... ....... 4-1

4.2 Modeling domain and rec eptors .................................................................................................. ... 4-1

4.3 Technical options us ed in the modeling ......................................................................................... 4-1

4.4 Light extinction and haze impact calcul ations ................................................................................ 4- 2

5.0 Presentation of modeling r esults........................................................................................... ................ 5-1

Appendix A Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Acid Emissions for BART Baseline Case..............A-1

Appendix B Estimated Emissions of Primary Total Carbon and Primary Sulfate From

Coal-Fired Power Plants ..................................................................................................... ..B-1

# August 2006 

# ii 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc



# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant Watson modeling em ission paramet ers......................................................................... 2-3



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Pl ant Wats on .................................................... 1-2

# August 2006 

# 1-1 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that

‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be antici pated to cause or contribute to any impairment of

visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Purs uant to federal regulations, states have the option of

exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requirements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating

that the source cannot reasonably be anti cipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I

area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states subject

to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determi ne that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for electric generating units (EGUs). Prelimi nary feedback from the Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality indicates that they anticipate making the decision that CAIR satisfies BART for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling protocol focuses on performing the BART modeling analysis for

particulate matter (PM) only.

Units 4 and 5 at Plant Watson, located near Gulf port, which are owned and operated by Mississippi Power

Company, have been identified as a BART-eligible source. The purpose of this document is to summarize the

procedures by which a modeling analysis will be cond ucted for this source. The modeling procedures

outlined will be used to determine whether the source is subject to BART require ments (exemption modeling).

If it is determined that the source is subject to BART, this protocol will be updated (e.g., adding data to Table 2-

1) and then the procedures below will be used to evalua te the visibility improvement factor in the BART

determination step (determination modeling). The modeli ng procedures are consistent with those outlined in

the updated final VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3 – July 18,

2006), available at http://www.vistas-sesarm.org/BART/BA RTModelingProtocol_rev3_18Jul2006.pdf . This

source-specific BART modeling protoc ol references relevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling

protocol.



# 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Mississippi Department of Environm ental Quality, which is in char ge of the state’s BART program, has

determined that Units 4 and 5 at Plant Watson are BART- eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of Plant

Watson relative to nearby Class I Areas. There is one Cl ass I area within 300 km of the plant: Breton Island

(44.8 km). The BART exemption modeling will be c onducted for this Class I area in accordance with the

referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in this source-specific

BART modeling protocol. If necessary, visibility improvement modeling for the BART determination step will

be performed for this Class I area if the exemptio n modeling shows a greater than 0.5 deciview impact.



# 1.3 Organization of protocol document

Section 2 of this protocol describes the source emissi ons that will be used as input to the BART exemption

modeling and, if necessary, the BART determination modeli ng. Section 3 describes the input data to be used

for the modeling including the modeling domain, terrain and land use, and meteorological data. Section 4

describes the air quality modeling procedures and Secti on 5 discusses the presentation of modeling results.

Since all of the references cited are also included in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (Section

7.), no additional references section is included in this document. Appendices A and B provide additional

information on the baseline source emissions.

# August 2006 

# 1-2 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant Watson

# August 2006 

# 2-1 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the vi sibility impacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant Watson

are discussed in this section. As noted earlier, indi cations from the Mississippi Department of Environmental

Quality are that they will issue rules statin g that CAIR will suffice for EGU BART for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# . Therefore,

this protocol focuses only on PM 10 

# . Since various components of PM 10 

# emissions have different visibility

extinction efficiencies, the PM 10 

# emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS

common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and 4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5.) allows for the use of sourcespecific emissions and speciation factors and/or default values from AP-42. The PM 10 

# emissions and

speciation approach to be used for the modeling described in this protocol is indicated in the bullets below.

Where default speciation values are used, the data r epresents a unit where current (baseline) emission

controls include electrostatic precipit ators (ESPs), but no post-combustion NO

x 

# or SO 2 

# control equipment

exists.

• Total PM 10 

# is comprised of filterable and condensable emissions.

• Baseline filterable PM 10 

# emissions are based on the highest stack test for the most recent 3-year

period (2003-2005). This stack test is combined wi th the highest 24 hour heat input value for this

period from CEMS data to calculate the “maximum 24-hour average emission rate” as required by the

VISTAS protocol.

• Filterable PM 10 

# will be subdivided by size category consistent with the default approach from AP-42

Table 1-1.6, and as noted on pages 43 and 44 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The

AP-42 Table 1-1.6 specifies for the emission controls indicated above that 55.6% of filterable PM 10 

# emissions is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in size ) and 44.4% is fine. Of the fine portion, 3.7% is

elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fine particulates (soil).

• Condensable PM 10 

# consists of inorganic and organic compounds . The inorganic portion is by default

assumed to be H 2 

# SO 4 

# , although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The

organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols.

• Baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions are calculated consistent wi th the method used by Mississippi Power to

derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach assumes that the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released

from the stack are proportional to SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type

and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater). For eastern

bituminous coal the baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# release rate is in the range of 0.3 to 0.5% of the SO 2 

# emissions.

Appendix A provides the basis for th e site-specific values used.

• Baseline emissions of condensable organics (the remaining portion of condensable PM 10 

# ) are derived

based on the supporting field observational informat ion in Appendix B and is estimated as 0.32% of

SO 2 

# emitted.

• Coarse filterable particles (between 2.5 and 10 micr ons in size) will be modeled with a geometric mass

mean diameter of 5 microns, while fine filterable and all condensable particles wi ll be modeled with a

geometric mass mean diameter of 0.48 microns, cons istent with the CALPUFF default value for fine

particles. The geometric standard deviation for both fine and coarse particles will be set to 2 microns,

consistent with the CALPUFF default value. The 0.48 micron diameter value for fine particles comes

from the default values in sample input files pr esented on the TRC web site. There is no default

value presented for the coarse particles on the TR C web site. However, since 5 is the geometric

mass mean diameter of 2.5 and 10 (the bounds of coar se particle sizes), it is a reasonable estimate

for the geometric mass mean diameter for that class of particles.

# August 2006 

# 2-2 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# In practice, CALPUFF allows for the user to input certain components of PM 10 

# as separate species and

separate sizes, which will result in more accurate wet and dry deposition velocity results and also more

accurate effects on light scattering. As noted above, th e particle size distribution information is provided in

AP-42 Table 1-1.6, and will be used for the BART ex emption modeling as well as the BART determination

modeling, if needed.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emi ssion parameters to be used in the BART CALPUFF

modeling, consistent with the source emissions data pr esented in Appendices A and B for the baseline. All of

the emissions in Table 2-1 were derived from CEMS data for the 2003 to 2005 period and represent the

maximum 24-hour average lb/hr rates (excluding days wher e startup, shutdown, or malfunctions occurred).

For NO

x 

# and SO 2 

# the values are directly from CEMS. Filterable PM 10 

# emissions were calculated using the

highest stack test over the 2003 to 2005 period and mu ltiplying these values times the maximum 24-hour

average heat input derived from CEMS. These values were then adjusted using AP-42 factors from Table 1.1-

6 that indicate that PM 10 

# is 67% of total PM for a pulverized coal unit with an ESP. PM 10 

# speciation was then

performed as indicated above such that total Filterable PM 10 

# is made up of Coarse Soil plus total Fine PM and

total Fine PM is made up of Fine Soil plus Elemental Carbon (EC).

If the BART exemption modeling indicates that a BART det ermination is required, then one or more particulate

matter control options will be considered for the modeling to determine visibility im provement from the baseline

case. The BART engineering analysis w ill provide the justifications for the selected, technically feasible

options and the species-specific control efficiencies. Table 2-1 will be updated to provide the modeling

parameters for these feasible options and resubmitted to the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

for review. Any site-specific deviations from the de fault particulate matter speciation guidance would be

outlined at that time.August 20062-3082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.docTable 2-1 Plant Watson modeling emission parametersLocation UTM(Zone 16 NAD-83)Emissions1Particle Speciation2CaseSource/ UnitUTMEastUTMNorthActualStack HtBaseElev.FlueDiameterGasExitVel.StackGasExitTemp.SO2NOXPM10Filt.PM10CoarseSoilFinePMFineSoilECCond.PM10H2SO4Organicm m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 4 305,854 3,368,909 106.7 5.5 4.925.0 397.6 8596.271626.48127.35 74.56 41.45 33.10 31.88 1.22 52.80 25.29 27.51Baseline Unit 5 305,854 3,368,909 121.9 5.56.4 28.4 444.510540.08 4122.86291.29 211.46117.5793.89 90.42 3.4779.83 46.10 33.73Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 4 Unit 4 305,854 3,368,909 106.7 5.5 4.925.0 397.6 8596.271626.48127.35 74.56 41.45 33.10 31.88 1.22 52.80 25.29 27.51Stack 5 Unit 5 305,854 3,368,909 121.9 5.56.4 28.4 444.510540.08 4122.86291.29 211.46117.5793.89 90.42 3.4779.83 46.10 33.73Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/secg/sec g/sec g/secg/secg/sec g/sec g/secStack 4 Unit 4 305,854 3,368,909 106.7 5.5 4.9 25.0 397.6 1083.13 204.9416.05 9.39 5.22 4.17 4.07 0.15 6.65 3.19 3.47Stack 5 Unit 5 305,854 3,368,909 121.9 5.5 6.4 28.4 444.5 1328.05 519.4836.70 26.64 14.81 11.83 11.39 0.44 10.06 5.81 4.25Retrofit Control Options (if BART analysis is required4Control 1 Unit 1ÈUnit 1Control n Unit 1Control 1 Unit 2ÈUnit 2Control n Unit 21SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sources in CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of theBART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference inthe computation of certain particle species such as H2SO4.2Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10and H2SO4and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that H2SO4is input to CALPUFF asSO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4and SO4are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4to SO4is 96/98.3Stack credit is equal to actual stack height sincethis stack is grandfathered under stack height regulations.4This data will be provided later if aBART determination analysis is required.

# August 2006 

# 3-1 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 3.0 Input data to the CALPUFF model

3.1 General modeling procedures:

VISTAS has developed five sub-regional 4-km CALMET meteorological databases for three years (2001-

2003) (VISTAS common protocol Section 4.4.2). Th e sub-regional modeling domains are strategically

designed to cover all potential BART eligible sources with in VISTAS states and all PSD Class I areas within

300 km of those sources (to the nearest edge). The ext ents of the 4-km sub-regional domains are shown in

Figure 4-4 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protoc ol. The BART modeling for Plant Watson will be

done using the 4-km subdomain 4.

USGS 90-meter Digital Elevation Model (DEM) files were used by VISTAS to generate the terrain data at 4-km

resolution for input to the 4-km sub-regional CALMET run. Likewise, USGS 90-meter Composite Theme Grid

(CTG) files were used by VISTAS to generate the land us e data at 4-km resolution for input to the 4-km subregional CALMET run.

Three years of MM5 data (2001-2003) were used by VISTAS to generate the 4-km sub-regional

meteorological datasets. See Sections 4.3.2 and 4. 4.2 in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol for

more detail on these issues.

It is intended that all of the modeling for Plant Watson will use the 4-km subdomain 4. However, if the results

indicate that the modeling could be improved with a CA LPUFF run using a finer grid, then refinements in the

modeling procedures will be considered and the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality will be

asked to approve these refinements.

In the event that a finer grid resolution is used, CALM ET must be rerun. Other modifications to inputs of

CALMET would include the extent of the modeling domain, the resolution of the terrain and land use data, and

other relevant settings. The same MM5 data and obs ervations as used for the 4-km sub-regional CALMET

simulations would be used. The extent of the modeling domain may need to be changed because of disk

space restrictions. The size of the CALMET output is di rectly proportional to the grid resolution of the run. The

domain would be limited to the source and the exclus ive Class I area(s) being assessed with a higher grid

resolution, including a 50-km buffer in all directions.

If CALMET needs to be run at even a finer grid resoluti on, then the appropriate model setting/files (specifically

the GEO.DAT file) will be modified. A summary of th ese modifications would be provided to the Mississippi

Department of Environmental Qual ity for review and approval.



# 3.2 Air quality data base (background ozone and ammonia)

Hourly measurements of ozone from all non-urban moni tors, as generated by VISTAS and available on the

VISTAS CALPUFF page on the Earth Tech web site (http://www.src.com/verio/download/sample_files.htm),

will be used as input to CALPUFF. For ammonia, a 0.5 ppb background value as recommended by VISTAS

will be used. However, since only PM emissions are being modeled, ozone and ammonia data is not really

needed given that this data has no effect on PM results in CALPUFF.



# 3.3 Natural conditions and mont hly f(RH) at Class I Areas

For each of the applicable Class I areas, natural bac kground conditions must be established in order to

determine a change in natural conditions related to a s ource’s emissions. The modeling described by this

protocol document intends to use annual average natura l background light extinction (EPA 2003 values).

# August 2006 

# 3-2 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# To determine the input to CALPUFF, it is first necessa ry to convert the deciviews to extinction using the

equation:

Extinction (Mm -1 

# ) = 10 exp(deciviews/10).

For example, the EPA guidance document indicates fo r Great Smoky Mountains National Park that the

deciview value for the average of the days is 7.60. This is equivalent to an ex tinction of 21.38 inverse

megameters (Mm -1 

# ).

This extinction includes the default 10 Mm-1 for Ra yleigh scattering. The remain ing extinction is due to

naturally occurring particles, and should be held constant fo r the entire year’s simulation. Therefore, the data

provided to CALPOST for Great Smoky Mountains woul d be the total natural background extinction minus 10

(expressed in Mm -1 

# ), or 11.38. This is most easily inpu t as fine soil concentrations (11.38 μg/m 3 

# ) in CALPOST,

since the extinction efficiency of soil (PM-fine) is 1. 0 and there is no f(RH) component. The concentration

entries for all other particle constituents would be set to zero, and the fine soil concentration would be kept the

same for each month of the year. The monthly values for f(RH) that CALPOST needs will be taken from

"Guidance for Tracking Progress Under the Regional Haze Rule" (EPA, 2003) Appendix A, Table A-3.

# August 2006 

# 4-1 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 4.0 Air quality mo deling procedures

This section provides a summary of the modeling procedur es outlined in the VISTAS pr otocol that will be used

for the refined CALPUFF analysis to be conducted for Plant Watson.



# 4.1 Model selection and features

As noted in the VISTAS protocol (Summary, Reco mmendations Section II.), VI STAS will use CALPUFF

Version 5.754 and CALMET Version 5.7, which can be obtained at

http://www.src.com/verio/down load/download.htm#VISTAS_VERSION . These versions contain

enhancements funded by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) and VISTAS. They are maintained on

TRC’s Atmospheric Studies Group CALPUFF website fo r public access. This release includes CALMET,

CALPUFF, CALPOST, CALSUM, and PO STUTIL as well as CALVIEW.

The major features of the CALPUFF modeling system , including those of CALMET and the post processors

(CALPOST and POSTUTIL), are referenced in Section 3 of the VISTAS protocol.



# 4.2 Modeling domai n and receptors

The initial Plant Watson BART runs will use the sub- domain 4, 4-km CALMET data supplied by VISTAS, as

discussed above. This domain includes all Class I areas wi thin 300 km of the source, plus a 50-km buffer. If

there is the need for a refined analysis with a finer grid, a supplement to this modeling protocol will be provided

describing the proposed procedures.

The receptors used for each of the Class I areas are based on the NPS database of Class I receptors, as

recommended by the VISTAS common protocol (Section 4.3.3).

The BART exemption modeling will be conducted for Watson Units 4 and 5 (BART eligible units) for each

Class I area within 300 km of the source (Breton Isla nd). If necessary, Unit 4 and 5 will each be modeled

separately for the visibility improv ement modeling for the BART determination step for Breton Island if

exemption modeling shows a great er than 0.5 deciview impact.



# 4.3 Technical options used in the modeling

CALMET modeling for the VISTAS-provided 4-km subdomai ns will be performed per the procedures specified

in the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. If it is decided to conduct additional modeling with a finer

grid than 4 km, this modeling protoc ol will be updated to specify the te chnical options to be used in the

CALMET run, in order to allow for state agency review and approval.

For CALPUFF model options, Plant Watson will follow the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (Section

4.4.1), which states that we should use IWAQM (EPA, 1998) guidance. The VISTAS pr otocol (Section 4.3.3)

also notes that building downwash effects are not required to be included unless the state directs the source to

include these effects. Since Plant Watson is more than 40 km from the nearest Class I area, building

downwash effects will not be included in the CALPUFF modeling.

The POSTUTIL utility program (VISTAS common protocol Section 4.4.2) will be used to repartition HNO 3 

# and

NO 3 

# using VISTAS-provided ammonia concentrations der ived from previous 2002 CMAQ modeling conducted

by EPA or the alternate ammonia concentrations approach recommended by VISTAS, if the CMAQ data is

unavailable. As indicated earlier, since only PM em issions are being modeled, the treatment of ammonia

should not have an affect on PM results from CALPUFF.

# August 2006 

# 4-2 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 4.4 Light extinction and haze impact calculations

The CALPOST postprocessor will be used as prescribed in the VISTAS protocol for the calculation of the

impact from the modeled source’s prima ry and secondary particulate matter c oncentrations on light extinction.

The formula that is used is the existing (not the November 2005 revised) IMPROV E/EPA formula, which is

applied to determine a change in light extinction due to increases in the particulate matter component

concentrations. Using the notation of CALPOST, the formula is the following:

b ext 

# = 3 f(RH) [(NH 4 

# )2SO 4 

# ] + 3 f(RH) [NH 4 

# NO 3 

# ] + 4[OC] + 1[Soil] + 0.6[Coarse Mass] + 10[EC] + b Ray



# The concentrations, in square brackets, are in ug/m 3 

# and b ext 

# is in units of Mm -1 

# . The Rayleigh scattering term

(b Ray 

# ) has a default value of 10 Mm -1 

# , as recommended in EPA guidance for tracking reasonable progress

(EPA, 2003a).

The assessment of visibility impacts at the Class I areas will use CALPOST Method 6 (VISTAS common

protocol Section 4.3.2). Each hour’s source-caused exti nction is calculated by first using the hygroscopic

components of the source-caused concentrations, due to ammonium sulfate and nitrate, and monthly Class I

area-specific f(RH) values. The cont ribution to the total source-caused extinction from ammonium sulfate and

nitrate is then added to the other, non-hygroscopic com ponents of the particulate concentration (from coarse

and fine soil, secondary organic aerosols, and from elemental carbon) to yi eld the total hourly source-caused

extinction.

The BART rule significance threshold for the contribution to visibility impairment is 0.5 deciviews. The VISTAS

protocol (Section 4.3.2) indicates that with the use of the 4-km sub-regional CALMET database, a source does

not cause or contribute to visibility impairment if the 98th percentile (or 8th highest) day’s change in extinction

from natural conditions does not exceed 0.5 deciviews for any of the modeled years (an added check is: the

22nd highest prediction over the three years modeled should also not exceed 0.5 deciviews for a source to be

exempted from a BART determination). Both the 98th percentile (or 8th highest) day's change in extinction

from natural conditions for any modeled year and the 22nd highest prediction over the three years modeled

will be evaluated. The maximum impact from each method should not exceed 0.5 deciviews for the source

to be exempted from a BART determination.

Figure 4-1 of the VISTAS common BAR T modeling protocol presents a fl ow chart showing the components of

that protocol for the analysis to determine whether a sour ce is subject to BART. Again, it should be noted that

the modeling for Plant Watson will focus on Subregional Fine-Scale modeling as depicted in the lower half of

the figure.

If the exemption modeling demonstrates that Plant Watson does not cause or contribute to visibility

impairment, then the source will no t be subject to BART requirements, and no further analysis is needed.

Otherwise, the source will proceed to perform BART determination modeling for the baseline and each control

option in a similar manner as has been described in this document. This protocol will be supplemented with a

revised Table 2-1 and any other source specific adjust ments if the source is determined to be subject-toBART.

# August 2006 

# 5-1 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# 5.0 Presentation of modeling results

The BART exemption and, if necessary, the BART dete rmination modeling results for Plant Watson will be

provided to the state agency in a manner as described in the VISTAS protocol (Section 4.5). A report will be

produced that includes the following elements (a s suggested in the VISTAS protocol):

1. A map of the source location and Class I areas within 300 km of the source.

2. For the CALPUFF modeling domain, a table listing all Class I areas in the VISTAS domain and those

in neighboring states and impacts from the BART 4-km grid exemption modeling at those Class I

areas within 300 km of the source, as illust rated in Table 4-3 of the VISTAS protocol.

3. A discussion of the number of Class I areas with visibility impairment due to source emissions for the

98th percentile days in each year (and the 98th percent ile over all three years modeled) greater than

0.5 dv.

4. For the Class I area with the maximum impact, a discussion of the number of days beyond those

excluded (e.g., the 98th percentile for refined analys es) that the impact of the source exceeds 0.5

dv, the number of receptors in the Class I area where the impact exceeds 0.5 dv, and the maximum

impact.

5. For any finer grid CALPUFF exemption modeling, re sults for those Class I areas for which impacts of

the source exceeded 0.5 dv in the 4-km initial mode ling. We would report the same type of results

as provided for 4-km exemption modeling.

The BART determination modeling will be performed fo r those Class I areas shown in the exemption modeling

to exceed 0.5 dv impact. The extent of the BART determination modeling results will depend on the number of

technically viable controls identified in the engineeri ng analysis phase of the BART assessment. The results

presented will be a comparison of the 98 th 

# percentile value for the baseline and each control strategy derived

as is outlined above for the exemption modeling. The same statistics as those mentioned above in Steps 3

and 4 would be provided, and a summary of the relati ve results among all emission scenarios run would be

produced.

Additionally, the appropriate electronic files used to conduct the CALPUFF modeling will be submitted on CDROM or DVD media.

# August 2006 

# A-1 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix A

Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Acid Emissions for BART

Baseline Case

# August 2006 

# A-2 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix A

Basis for Source-Specific Sulfuric Ac id Emissions for BART Baseline Case

Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4) Emissions

During the combustion of sulfur-containing fuels, a percentage of the SO 2 

# formed is further oxidized to SO 3



# . As the flue gas cools across the air heater, this SO 3 

# combines with flue gas mo isture to form vapor-phase

and/or condensed sulfuric acid (H 2 

# SO 4 

# ). The baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions shown in Table 2-1 of this BART

modeling protocol were calculated consistent with t he method used by Southern Company to derive these

emissions for Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) purposes. This method is documented in a report titled

Estimating Total Sulfuric Acid Emissions from Stati onary Power Plants: Revision 3 (2005) prepared by Keith

Harrison and Dr. Larry Monroe (Southern Company Serv ices) and Edward Cichanowicz (Consultant). The

approach described in this report assumes that H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released from th e stack are proportional to

SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream

equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater).

The calculations below show baseline sulfuric acid emi ssions that are expected. Since this facility does not

contain post combustion NO

x 

# or SO 2 

# controls, the baseline sulfuric acid emissions estimate only accounts for

the manufacture of H 2 

# SO 4 

# through combustion. Also, since Watson 5 contains a flue gas conditioning system

the sulfuric acid emissions estimate for this unit also accounts for the manufacture of H 2 

# SO 4 

# through injection

of SO 3 

# prior to the ESP. Calculated sulfuric acid releases then account for loss or removal within the system.

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Combustion (EMComb):

EMComb = K x F1 x E2

where,

EMComb = total sulfuric acid manu factured from combustion, lbs/yr

K = Molecular weight and units conversion constant = 98.07 / 64.04 * 2000 = 3,063

(98.07 = Molecular weight of sulfuric acid; 64.04 = Molecular weight of SO2; Conversion from tons per

year to pounds per year – multiply by 2000.)

F1 = Fuel Impact Factor (from the emissions estimating report)

E2 = Sulfur dioxide emission s, tons (from CEMS data).

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Combustion is:

Watson 4:

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.008 x 8,596.3 lbs/hr / 2000 = 105.3 lbs/hr

Watson 5

EMComb = 3,063 x 0.008 x 10,540.1 lbs/hr / 2000 = 129.1 lbs/hr

Sulfuric Acid Released from Combustion (ERComb)

ERComb = EMComb x F2 (technology impact factors for air heater and ESP)

ERComb = EMComb x (0.49) x (0.49)

Watson 4

ERComb =105.3 lbs/hr x (0.24) = 25.3 lbs/hr

Watson 5

ERComb = 129.1 lbs/hr x (0.24) = 31.0 lbs/hr

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from Flue Gas Conditioning (EMfgc):

EMfgc = Ke x B x fe x Is

where,

EMfgc = total sulfuric acid manufactured fr om flue gas conditioning system, lbs/hr

Ke = Conversion Factor = 3,799

B = Coal burn in TBtu/hr

# August 2006 

# A-3 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# fe = Operating factor of FGC system, fraction of coal burned when FGC operates

Is =SO3 injection rate in ppmv at 6% O2, wet

Sulfuric Acid Manufactured from FGC system is:

Watson 5

EMfgc = 3,799 x 0.005677 x 1.0 x 7.0 = 151.0 lbs/hr

Sulfuric Acid Released from FGC (ERfgc)

ERfgc = [EMfgc – (Ke * B * fe * I NH3 

# )] * F3 x F2

where,

ERfgc = Total sulfuric acid released from FGC, lbs per hour

EMfgc = Total sulfuric acid manufactured from FGC, lbs per hour

Ke = Conversion factor = 3799

B = Coal burn in TBtu/hr

fe = Operating factor of FGC system, fraction of coal burn when FGC operates

I NH3 

# = NH3 injection for dual flue gas conditioning system, ppmv at 6% O2, wet (= 0 if no NH3 used)

F3 = Technology Impact Factors for FGC

F2 = Technology Impact Factors for equipment after ESP only

If no control after ESP, F2 = 1

Sulfuric Acid Released from FGC system is:

Watson 5

ERfgc = [151.0 – (3799 x 0.005677 x 1.0 x 0.0) x 0.10 x 1.0] = 15.1 lbs/hr

Total Sulfuric Acid Released (TSAR):

TSAR = ERComb + ERfgc[Watson 5 only]

Watson 4:

TSAR = 25.3 lb/hr

Watson 5:

TSAR = 31.0 + 15.1 = 46.1 lb/hr

# August 2006 

# B-1 082506 Watson BART Modeling Protocol.doc 

# Appendix B

Estimated Emissions of Primary Total Carbon and Primary Sulfate

From Coal-Fired Power Plants

[The above titled paper is include d as a separate document along with

this site specific BART modeling protoc ol. This paper was prepared for

Southern Company by Er ic S. Edgerton of Atmospheric Research &

Analysis, Inc.]

# U.S. EPA Region 4 Comments on the

BART Modeling Protocols for:

Mississippi Power Comp any, Plant Chevron

Mississippi Power Comp any, Plant Daniel

Mississippi Power Company, Plant Watson

September 29, 2006

Comments Applicable to All Three Protocols:

1. The modeling protocols for each of the three Mississippi Power Company plants

were prepared by Southern Company Se rvices and ENSR Co rporation and each

contain similar content. The protocols st ate that the procedures for conducting the

modeling will generally follow the VISTAS Bart Modeling Protocol, dated July

18, 2006. EPA Region 4 supports the proposal to follow the procedures contained

in the VISTAS protocol. (Note that a more recent revision to the VISTAS

protocol, Revision 3.2, dated August 31, 2006, is available and should be

referenced). Overall, the modeling pr ocedures described in the protocols are

acceptable to EPA Region 4.

2. The three Mississippi Power Company modeling protocols indicate that a 0.5

deciview (dv) threshold will be used for determining if the BART eligible

emission sources contribute to visibility impairment at Class I areas. The

Mississippi Department of Environm ental Quality should decide on the

appropriateness of the 0.5 dv threshold for excluding sources from the need to

further evaluate BART controls. Missi ssippi will be requi red to provide an

explanation for selection of the contribu tion threshold, whether it is 0.5 dv or

some other threshold, in the Regional H aze SIP submitted to EPA. As described

in the BART Guidelines contained in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix Y, the number of

emission sources affecting the Class I areas at issue, the magnitude of the sources’

impacts, and the location of the sources should be considered when establishing

this threshold. (See 70 FR 39161-39162, July 6, 2005.) EPA will evaluate the

thresholds selected by Mississippi for reasonableness based on these

considerations.

3. One of the most important factors in any modeling exercise is to ensure that the

source parameters (e.g., emission rates, stack parameters) are correct. EPA

Region 4 recommends that Mississippi carefully compares these parameters with

existing permits and databases to ensure th at appropriate values are being used for

the BART modeling.

4. The protocols do not provide a discussion of the quality assu rance and quality

control (QA/QC) procedures that will be followed to ensure the quality of the

modeling results. The QA/QC issues di scussed in Section 6 of the VISTAS

BART Modeling Protocol should be a ddressed. The report containing the

# modeling results should pr ovide documentation that ad equate QA/QC procedures

were followed.

5. Section 4.3 of the protocols indicates that POSTUTIL will be used to repartition

HNO 3 

# and NO 3 

# using ammonia concentratio ns from 2002 CMAQ modeling or

alternate ammonia concentrations if th e CMAQ data is unavailable. EPA is

currently evaluating the technical merits of using CMAQ data to develop the

background ammonia concentration inputs fo r POSTUTIL. This evaluation may

not be completed in time to meet MS DEQ’s BART processing schedule.

Therefore, EPA recommends that the protoc ols be revised to be consistent with

the latest version of the VISTAS pr otocol (Revision 3.2, 8/31/2006) which

indicates that background ammonia con centrations should be developed in

accordance with the IWAQM Phase 2 Guidance.

# BART Exemption Modeling Report:

Mississippi Power Company

Plant Chevron

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation

for Mississippi Power Company

January 2007

# January 2007 

# i 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introd ucti on............................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Objectives........................................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Cl ass I Areas ................................................................................ 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissi ons da ta ............................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data................................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 Air quality mode ling pro cedures ............................................................................................

............... 3-1

3.1 Modeling domain and rec eptors ..................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Light extinction and haze impact calc ulations ................................................................................ 3-1

3.3 General quality assu rance pr ocedur es........................................................................................... 3-3

4.0 Modeling results...........................................................................................................

............................ 4-1

Appendix A Delta-Deciview Values for The Top 20 Days – For Each Year/Each Class I Area

and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years .....................................................................A-1

Appendix B Breton Wi lderness R ecepto rs......................................................................................... .....B-1

# January 2007 

# ii 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc



# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant Chevron modeling emission par ameters ....................................................................... 2-2



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Plant C hevron................................................... 1-2

# January 2007 

# 1-1 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that

‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be antici pated to cause or contribute to any impairment of

visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Purs uant to federal regulations, states have the option of

exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requirements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating

that the source cannot reasonably be anti cipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I

area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states subject

to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determi ne that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for electric generating units (EGUs). Feedback from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

indicates that CAIR satisfies BART for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling report focuses on

performing the BART modeling analysis for particulate matter (PM) only.

Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 at Plant Chevron, located near Pascagoula, which are owned and operated by Mississippi

Power Company, have been identified as a BART-eligib le source. The modeling procedures outlined in the

source-specific modeling protocol for Plant Chevron were used to determine whether the source is subject to

BART requirements (exemption modeling). The modeling pr ocedures are consistent wi th those outlined in the

updated final VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3.2 – August 31,

2006), available at http://www.vistas-sesarm.or g/documents/BARTModeli ngPro tocol_rev3.2_31Aug06.pdf

. The source-specific BART modeling protocol references relevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling

protocol.



# 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Mississippi Department of Environm ental Quality, which is in char ge of the state’s BART program, has

determined that Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 at Plant Chevron are BART-eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of

Plant Chevron relative to nearby Class I Areas. There is one Class I area within 300 km of the plant: Breton

Island (48.1 km). The BART exemption modeling was c onducted for this Class I area in accordance with the

referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source-specific

BART modeling protocol.

# January 2007 

# 1-2 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant Chevron

# January 2007 

# 2-1 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the vi sibility impacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant Chevron

are discussed in this section. The Mississippi Departm ent of Environmental Quality has indicated that CAIR

will satisfy BART for EGUs for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# . Therefore, this BART exemption modeling analysis focuses only

on PM 10 

# . Since various components of PM 10 

# emissions have different visibility extinction efficiencies, the PM 10 

# emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and

4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5.) allows fo r the use of source-specific emissions and speciation

factors and/or default values from AP-42. The PM 10 

# emissions and speciation approach that were used for the

modeling is indicated below. Where default speciation values are used, the data represents a combustion

turbine unit firing natural gas with no post-combustion control equipment.

• Total PM 10 

# is comprised of filterable and condensable emissions.

• Since stack tests are not performed for the Chevron Units, baseline filterable PM 10 

# emissions are

based on AP-42 emissions factors and the highest 24 hour fuel burn for the most recent 3-year period

(2003-2005). This results in the “maximum 24- hour average emission rate” as required by the

VISTAS protocol.

• All of the filterable PM 10 

# is assumed to be fine (less than 2.5 microns in size). Of the fine portion,

6.7% is elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fine particulates (soil).

• Condensable PM 10 

# consists of inorganic and organic compounds . The inorganic portion is by default

assumed to be H 2 

# SO 4 

# , although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The

organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols. Total condensable PM 10 

# emissions are based on the

emissions factor in AP-42, Table 3.1-2a.

• Baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions are calculated consistent wi th the method used by Mississippi Power to

derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach assumes that the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released

from the stack are proportional to SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type

and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream equipment (i.e., heat recovery steam generator). Appendix

A of the site-specific modeling protocol provides the basis for the site-specific value used.

• Baseline emissions of secondary organic aerosol s (the remaining portion of condensable PM 10 

# ) are

derived as the difference between t he total condensable emissions and the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emi ssion parameters used in the BART CALPUFF modeling,

consistent with the source emissions data presented in Appendix A of the site-specific modeling protocol for

the baseline. All of the emissions in Table 2-1 we re derived from fuel burn data for the 2003 to 2005 period

and represent the maximum 24-hour average lb/hr rates (excluding days where startup, shutdown, or

malfunctions occurred). For NO

x 

# , SO 2 

# , and filterable PM 10 

# the values are calculated using daily fuel burn data

and emission factors from AP-42, Tables 3.1-1 and 3.1-2a. PM 10 

# speciation was then performed as indicated

above such that total Filterable PM 10 

# is all assumed to be Fine PM (i.e., total of Fine Soil plus Elemental

Carbon).January 20072-2010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.docTable 2-1 Plant Chevron modeling emission parametersLocation UTM(Zone 16 NAD-83)Emissions1ParticleSpeciation2CaseSource/ UnitUTMEastUTMNorthActualStack HtBaseElev.FlueDiameterGasExitVel.StackGasExitTemp.SO2NOXPM10Filt.PM10CoarseSoilFinePMFineSoilECCond.PM10H2SO4Organicm m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 1 356,694 3,357,386 11.9 2.6 3.18.9 491.3 0.750119.5831.903 0.542 0.000 0.542 0.5050.0361.361 0.032 1.329Baseline Unit 2 356,662 3,357,383 11.9 2.6 3.18.9 498.6 0.775122.6351.954 0.558 0.000 0.558 0.5210.0371.396 0.033 1.363Baseline Unit 3 356,652 3,357,370 18.0 2.6 3.09.1 506.9 1.000159.2252.545 0.733 0.000 0.733 0.6840.0491.812 0.042 1.769Baseline Unit 4 356,633 3,357,391 18.0 2.6 3.09.1 514.7 0.983156.8422.502 0.717 0.000 0.717 0.6690.0481.785 0.042 1.743Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 1 Unit 1 356,694 3,357,386 11.9 2.6 3.18.9 491.3 0.750119.5831.903 0.542 0.000 0.542 0.5050.0361.361 0.032 1.329Stack 2 Unit 2 356,662 3,357,383 11.9 2.6 3.18.9 498.6 0.775122.6351.954 0.558 0.000 0.558 0.5210.0371.396 0.033 1.363Stack 3 Unit 3 356,652 3,357,370 18.0 2.6 3.09.1 506.9 1.000159.2252.545 0.733 0.000 0.733 0.6840.0491.812 0.042 1.769Stack 4 Unit 4 356,633 3,357,391 18.0 2.6 3.09.1 514.7 0.983156.8422.502 0.717 0.000 0.717 0.6690.0481.785 0.042 1.743Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/secg/sec g/sec g/sec g/secg/sec g/sec g/secg/secg/sec g/sec g/secStack 1 Unit 1 356,694 3,357,386 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9491.3 0.095 15.068 0.2400.068 0.000 0.068 0.0640.0050.172 0.004 0.167Stack 2 Unit 2 356,662 3,357,383 11.9 2.6 3.1 8.9498.6 0.098 15.452 0.2460.070 0.000 0.070 0.0660.0050.176 0.004 0.172Stack 3 Unit 3 356,652 3,357,370 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1506.9 0.126 20.062 0.3210.092 0.000 0.092 0.0860.0060.230 0.005 0.223Stack 4 Unit 4 356,633 3,357,391 18.0 2.6 3.0 9.1514.7 0.124 19.762 0.3150.090 0.000 0.090 0.0840.0060.225 0.005 0.220January 20072-3010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.docTable 2-1 (Continued) Plant Chevron modeling emission parametersNotes:1SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sources in CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of theBART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference inthe computation of certain particle species such as H2SO4.2Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10and H2SO4and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that H2SO4is input to CALPUFF asSO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4and SO4are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4to SO4is 96/98.3Stack height credit is equal to actual height; stack height is less than 65 m de minimis GEP height.

# January 2007 

# 3-1 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.0 Air quality modeling procedures

The BART exemption modeling was conducted for this Cl ass I area in accordance with the referenced VISTAS

common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source-specific BART modeling

protocol for Plant Chevron. This section provides a discussion of additional mode ling procedures that were

used and describes the quality assurance procedure was followed.



# 3.1 Modeling domain and receptor s

The Plant Chevron BART runs used the sub-domain 4, 4- km CALMET data supplied by VISTAS, as discussed

in the source-specific modeling protoc ol. This domain includes all Class I areas within 300 km of the source,

plus a 50-km buffer.

The BART exemption modeling was conducted for Chevron Units 1 thru 4 (BART eligible units) for each Class

I area within 300 km of the source (Breton Island). The receptors used for each of the Class I areas are based

on the NPS database of Class I receptors, as recommended by the VISTAS common protocol (Section 4.3.3).

For Breton, Mississippi Power has included in the modeli ng analysis all of the receptors that the US F&WS

has identified. However, Mississippi Power does not believe that all of the receptors ar e still valid receptors.

As a result of hurricane activity, several of the re ceptors identified by the US F&WS for Breton are now

located over water, rather than over land. Pursuant to the Wilderness Act of 1964, which defines wilderness

as "land," and because Congress made clear when it created the Breton wilderness area that only the land

mass was designated as wilderness , receptors that are now over wa ter are not relevant for assessing

visibility impacts at Breton. Nevertheless, Mississippi Power is including both the valid and invalid receptors

for purposes of this analysis. Appendix B provides more detailed support for the identification and

elimination of invalid receptors at Breton.



# 3.2 Light extinction and haze impact calculations

The CALPOST postprocessor was used as prescribed in the VISTAS protocol for the calculation of the impact

from the modeled source’s primary and secondary particu late matter concentrations on light extinction. The

formula that is currently used in CALPOST is the existing (not the November 2005 revised) IMPROVE/EPA

formula, which is applied to determine a change in light ex tinction due to increases in the particulate matter

component concentrations. Using the notation of CALPOST, the formula is the following:

b ext 

# = 3 f(RH) [(NH 4 

# )2SO 4 

# ] + 3 f(RH) [NH 4 

# NO 3 

# ] + 4[OC] + 1[Soil] + 0.6[Coarse Mass] + 10[EC] + b Ray



# The concentrations, in square brackets, are in ug/m 3 

# and b ext 

# is in units of Mm -1 

# . The Rayleigh scattering term

(b Ray 

# ) has a default value of 10 Mm -1 

# , as recommended in EPA guidance for tracking reasonable progress

(EPA, 2003a).

New IMPROVE Equation. Mississippi Power Company used the new IMPROVE equation to analyze the

CALPUFF results for Breton Island. This was done for several reasons. First, the new equation is the result of

an extensive evaluation of the most recent scienti fic data, undertaken by an ad hoc group of scientists

including representatives from the National Park Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, academia, and industry. The old equation was based on data and information that was over a

decade old. The new equation is based on the most recent data and information gleaned from scientific

studies done over the past decade. T he new equation adds more accurate terms for estimating light extinction

due to sulfate and nitrate, through the incorporation of size differentiation and revisions to the extinction

coefficients. Organic matter estimates are improved through a refinement to the organic compound mass to

organic mass ratio. Second, the new equation corrects several errors and omissions in the old equation. For

example, sea salt, which affects light extinction, was not part of the old equation, but has been added to the

# January 2007 

# 3-2 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# new equation. Moreover, the old equation’s constant Rayl eigh scattering term (corresponding to scattering at

10,000 feet elevation) has been revised to reflect the actual elevation of the specific Class I area.

The ad hoc group of scientists who recommended the c hanges to the equation drafted a technical support

document entitled “Revised IM PROVE Algorithm for Estimati ng Light Extinction from Particle Speciation Data”

(November 30, 2005). That document demonstrates that , for 21 Class I areas with nephelometer data, the

new equation produces more accurate results than the old equation. The IMPROVE Steering Committee

reviewed the work of the ad hoc group and its tec hnical support document, and approved the new equation in

December 2005.

The revisions to the IMPROVE equation are particularly impor tant for coastal sites (suc h as Breton). Sea salt

is an important component of extinction at coastal site s, and thus should be included in the equation for

estimating visibility impacts. In addi tion, the site-specific Rayleigh scatterin g term is important for coastal sites

because the default value in the old equation (10 Mm-1) was based on an elevation of 10,000 feet. At nearzero sea level, the new equation uses a more accurate coefficient of 11 Mm-1.

The new formula is shown below.

The apportionment of the total concentration of sulfat e compounds into the concentrations of the small and

large size fractions is accomp lished using the following equations.

This revised version of the IMPROVE Equation was used to perform the BART exemption modeling. Dr. Ivar

Tombach (VISTAS consultant) has produced a spreadsheet tool (Sept ember 29, 2006) to allow the new

IMPROVE formula results to be derived from the basic CALPOST outputs. Also, since the BART modeling is

focused only on PM, NO 2 

# was set to zero in the new formula. Fo r informational purposes, results from the old

equation are also presented. 

# )]([33.0 ) ( ] [6.0 ][)(7.1 ][1 ] [10 ] [1.6] [8.2 ] [)(1.5] [)(4.2 ] [)(8.4] [)(2.2

2 

# ppbNO SpecificSite Scattering Rayleigh Mass Course SaltSeaRHf SoilFine Carbon

Elemental Mass OrganicrgeLa Mass Organic Small NitratergeLaRHf Nitrate Small RHf SulfatergeLaRHf Sulfate Small RHf b

SS L S L S ext



# ×+ + ×+ ××+ ×+ ×+ ×+ ×+ ××+ ××+ × × + ××≈

3

3 

# /20] [], [

/20 ] [ ] [ mg Sulfate Total Sulfate Total

mg Sulfate Total SulfatergeLa μ

μ < × =

3 

# /20] [], [] [ mg Sulfate Total Sulfate Total SulfatergeLa μ ≥

=

] [] [] [ SulfatergeLa Sulfate Total Sulfate Small

− =

# January 2007 

# 3-3 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.3 General quality assurance procedures

Chapter 6 of the Final VISTAS Model ing Protocol discusses Quality Assur ance (QA). The purpose of the QA

program is to establish procedures for ensuring that products produced by the ap plication of the modeling

techniques for BART studies satisfy the regulatory objectives of the BART program.

The air quality modeling staff at Southern Company Services is managing and/or conducting the BART

Exemption Modeling application for this plant owned by Mi ssissippi Power Company. They made sure that all

recommended methods specified in the Final VISTAS M odeling Protocol were followed and that the modeling

was carefully and professionally conducted. Initially, the Company retained the services of ENSR/AECOM to

supplement the training received as part of VISTAS tr aining courses. Additionally, ENSR/AECOM experts

were given source data for one of Southern Company ’s BART eligible sources, and they performed a

complete analysis following the VISTAS common protocol. During this process, the lead Southern Company

modelers were taught each technical step.

ENSR/AECOM was used as a third-party review for th e CALPUFF analyses. ENSR has conducted numerous

CALPUFF analyses, and uses CALDESK animation softw are as well as Lakes Environmental CALVIEW

software with base maps to visualize the sources, rec eptors, and meteorology. ENSR/AECOM also uses the

CALPUFF QA output files in conjunction with ArcMap GI S software to plot the locations of the sources and

receptors as CALPUFF interprets them from the inpu t data. The output files from CALPUFF and CALPOST

are typically reviewed independently by ENSR/AECOM staff to assure accuracy and compliance with

approved regulatory procedures.

For the exemption modelin g, Southern Company’s BART modelers m ade sure that all checks were made

manually/visually as well as by using UltaEdit-32, a fi le comparing software. Additionally, these datasets were

randomly checked by another Southern Company modeler. During the modeling process, periodic progress

meetings were conducted with the project management team members, and phone calls and e-mail

exchanges were made with the CALPUFF modeling experts at ENSR/AECOM to resolve issues as they

arose.

The VISTAS Modeling Protocol states, “To the extent that modeling applications are using pre-defined

CALMET files and CALPUFF templates, t he quality assurance will be straigh tforward. More detailed steps are

needed for the setup of modeling files fo r source-specific applications of s ub-regional domains finer than 4

km.” For this application, the 4-km grid-spaced CALMET files for sub-domain 4 developed by VISTAS and the

CALPUFF templates were used. Southern Company BAR T modelers used the test met file to “benchmark”

the use of the CALMET files on their computers as indi cated on page 59 of the VISTAS common protocol. For

this BART exemption modeling application, documents we re developed and will be submitted that contained

source data required by the CALPUFF modeling system (CALPUFF, CALPOST and POSTUTIL).

# January 2007 

# 4-1 010207 Chevron BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 4.0 Modeling results

The exemption modeling results are provided in Table 4- 1, and Appendix A lists delta-deciview results for the

top 20 days for each year modeled and the top 25 days for the overall three years at each Class I area. The

table indicates that both the 8 th 

# highest day’s impacts for each year and the 22 nd 

# highest day’s impacts over all

three years are below 0.5 delta-dv. These results demonstrate that Plant Chevron’s PM 10 

# emissions do not

cause or contribute to visibility impairment. Therefore, the sour ce is not subject to BART for PM 10 

# , and no

further BART analysis is required.

Electronic data related to this application are provided on the attached disk. They include all input (INP) and

list (LST) files.

# Table 4-1 Summary of Results – Plant Chevron Refined BART Exemption Modeling

2001 2002 2003

Class I area Distance

from source

to Class I

area

boundary # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv Highest of

8 th 

# Highest

delta-dv

for the 3-

years 22 nd



# Highest

delta-dv

over 3-

year

period

km Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv delta-dv delta-dv

Breton

Island

New Improve

Orig Recept 48.1 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.02 0.02

New Improve

Valid Recept 48.1 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.02 0.02

Old Improve

Orig Recept 48.1 0 0 0.03 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.03 0.03 0.03

Old Improve

Valid Recept 48.1 0 0 0.03 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.03 0.03

# Appendix A

Delta-Deciview Values for the Top 20 Days – for Each Year/Each

Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years

# New IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Rank ed Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 294 35 8.09 8.02 0.07 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.85% 0.00% 76.59% 7.29% 0.00% 9.28% 1

2001 266 35 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.89% 0.00% 75.09% 7.86% 0.00% 9.16% 2

2001 118 33 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.65% 0.00% 75.71% 8.14% 0.00% 9.50% 3

2001 234 22 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.80% 0.00% 74.97% 7.95% 0.00% 9.28% 4

2001 293 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.35% 0.00% 75.99% 7.40% 0.00% 9.25% 5

2001 180 35 8.23 8.21 0.03 4.5 3.3 4.9 7.60% 0.00% 76.04% 7.27% 0.00% 9.09% 6

2001 82 33 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.46% 0.00% 75.64% 7.51% 0.00% 9.39% 7

2001 254 14 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.27% 0.00% 74.43% 7.69% 0.00% 9.61% 8

2001 308 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 9

2001 59 35 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.67% 0.00% 76.52% 8.41% 0.00% 8.41% 10

2001 119 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.37% 0.00% 76.85% 6.76% 0.00% 9.02% 11

2001 313 33 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 12

2001 255 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.01% 0.00% 75.70% 6.98% 0.00% 9.31% 13

2001 120 30 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 5.95% 0.00% 77.07% 7.28% 0.00% 9.71% 14

2001 58 33 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 5.90% 0.00% 76.76% 7.43% 0.00% 9.91% 15

2001 43 35 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 16

2001 317 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 17

2001 33 12 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.26% 0.00% 75.34% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 18

2001 321 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 19

2001 315 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 20

2002 101 30 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.38% 0.00% 76.69% 7.81% 0.00% 9.11% 1

2002 241 24 8.36 8.33 0.03 4.9 3.5 5.1 9.03% 0.00% 74.87% 7.16% 0.00% 8.95% 2

2002 13 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.24% 0.00% 76.08% 7.86% 0.00% 9.82% 3

2002 272 35 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.40% 0.00% 74.05% 7.80% 0.00% 9.75% 4

2002 27 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.44% 0.00% 76.17% 7.02% 0.00% 9.36% 5

2002 142 35 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.97% 0.00% 75.07% 7.27% 0.00% 9.69% 6

2002 47 33 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 7

2002 307 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.14% 0.00% 75.83% 7.73% 0.00% 10.30% 8

2002 298 20 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 9

2002 183 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.62% 0.00% 73.44% 7.69% 0.00% 10.25% 10

2002 249 9 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.24% 0.00% 75.95% 8.40% 0.00% 8.40% 11

2002 248 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.40% 0.00% 75.42% 8.59% 0.00% 8.59% 12

2002 141 26 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.25% 0.00% 75.12% 8.82% 0.00% 8.82% 13

2002 153 9 8.22 8.21 0.02 4.5 3.3 4.9 7.36% 0.00% 75.03% 8.81% 0.00% 8.81% 14

2002 116 20 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.79% 0.00% 76.32% 6.36% 0.00% 9.54% 15

2002 343 35 8.03 8.02 0.01 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.79% 0.00% 75.88% 6.53% 0.00% 9.80% 16

2002 147 30 8.12 8.10 0.01 4.2 3.2 4.6 8.03% 0.00% 75.68% 6.51% 0.00% 9.77% 17

2002 135 34 8.12 8.10 0.01 4.2 3.2 4.6 8.46% 0.00% 74.39% 6.86% 0.00% 10.29% 18

2002 35 24 7.95 7.94 0.01 3.8 2.9 4.3 5.62% 0.00% 76.70% 7.07% 0.00% 10.61% 19

2002 282 35 8.03 8.02 0.01 4.0 3.0 4.5 5.78% 0.00% 76.04% 7.27% 0.00% 10.91% 20

2003 294 35 8.07 8.02 0.06 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.92% 0.00% 75.65% 7.84% 0.00% 9.58% 1

2003 326 35 8.05 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.47% 0.00% 75.64% 8.13% 0.00% 9.76% 2

2003 287 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.05% 0.00% 76.98% 7.10% 0.00% 8.87% 3

2003 145 30 8.13 8.10 0.03 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.70% 0.00% 75.45% 7.49% 0.00% 9.36% 4

2003 66 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 5

2003 71 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 6

2003 133 20 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.68% 0.00% 75.97% 7.01% 0.00% 9.34% 7

2003 237 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.99% 0.00% 75.40% 7.12% 0.00% 9.50% 8

2003 293 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 9

2003 279 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 9

2003 221 20 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.29% 0.00% 74.46% 7.39% 0.00% 9.86% 11

2003 70 20 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.14% 0.00% 75.83% 7.73% 0.00% 10.30% 12

2003 235 30 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.45% 0.00% 73.96% 7.54% 0.00% 10.05% 13

2003 312 12 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 14

2003 308 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.57% 0.00% 76.88% 8.27% 0.00% 8.27% 15

2003 286 24 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.72% 0.00% 76.38% 8.45% 0.00% 8.45% 16

2003 280 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.02% 0.00% 75.30% 8.84% 0.00% 8.84% 17

2003 60 35 7.95 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 7.40% 0.00% 77.05% 6.22% 0.00% 9.33% 18

2003 118 14 8.03 8.02 0.01 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.99% 0.00% 75.72% 6.52% 0.00% 9.78% 19

2003 57 35 7.95 7.94 0.01 3.8 2.9 4.3 5.32% 0.00% 77.91% 6.71% 0.00% 10.06% 20

# New IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 294 35 8.09 8.02 0.07 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.85% 0.00% 76.59% 7.29% 0.00% 9.28% 1

2003 294 35 8.07 8.02 0.06 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.92% 0.00% 75.65% 7.84% 0.00% 9.58% 2

2002 101 30 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.38% 0.00% 76.69% 7.81% 0.00% 9.11% 3

2001 266 35 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.89% 0.00% 75.09% 7.86% 0.00% 9.16% 4

2001 118 33 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.65% 0.00% 75.71% 8.14% 0.00% 9.50% 5

2001 234 22 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.80% 0.00% 74.97% 7.95% 0.00% 9.28% 6

2003 326 35 8.05 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.47% 0.00% 75.64% 8.13% 0.00% 9.76% 7

2003 287 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.05% 0.00% 76.98% 7.10% 0.00% 8.87% 8

2002 241 24 8.36 8.33 0.03 4.9 3.5 5.1 9.03% 0.00% 74.87% 7.16% 0.00% 8.95% 9

2001 293 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.35% 0.00% 75.99% 7.40% 0.00% 9.25% 10

2001 180 35 8.23 8.21 0.03 4.5 3.3 4.9 7.60% 0.00% 76.04% 7.27% 0.00% 9.09% 11

2001 82 33 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.46% 0.00% 75.64% 7.51% 0.00% 9.39% 12

2003 145 30 8.13 8.10 0.03 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.70% 0.00% 75.45% 7.49% 0.00% 9.36% 13

2002 13 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.24% 0.00% 76.08% 7.86% 0.00% 9.82% 14

2001 254 14 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.27% 0.00% 74.43% 7.69% 0.00% 9.61% 15

2001 308 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 16

2003 66 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 17

2002 272 35 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.40% 0.00% 74.05% 7.80% 0.00% 9.75% 18

2001 59 35 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.67% 0.00% 76.52% 8.41% 0.00% 8.41% 19

2001 119 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.37% 0.00% 76.85% 6.76% 0.00% 9.02% 20

2001 313 33 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 21

2003 71 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 22

2002 27 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.44% 0.00% 76.17% 7.02% 0.00% 9.36% 23

2003 133 20 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.68% 0.00% 75.97% 7.01% 0.00% 9.34% 24

2001 255 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.01% 0.00% 75.70% 6.98% 0.00% 9.31% 25

# New IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibili ty Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 294 35 8.09 8.02 0.07 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.85% 0.00% 76.59% 7.29% 0.00% 9.28% 1

2001 266 35 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.89% 0.00% 75.09% 7.86% 0.00% 9.16% 2

2001 118 33 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.65% 0.00% 75.71% 8.14% 0.00% 9.50% 3

2001 234 22 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.80% 0.00% 74.97% 7.95% 0.00% 9.28% 4

2001 293 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.35% 0.00% 75.99% 7.40% 0.00% 9.25% 5

2001 180 35 8.23 8.21 0.03 4.5 3.3 4.9 7.60% 0.00% 76.04% 7.27% 0.00% 9.09% 6

2001 82 33 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.46% 0.00% 75.64% 7.51% 0.00% 9.39% 7

2001 254 14 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.27% 0.00% 74.43% 7.69% 0.00% 9.61% 8

2001 308 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 9

2001 59 35 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.67% 0.00% 76.52% 8.41% 0.00% 8.41% 10

2001 119 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.37% 0.00% 76.85% 6.76% 0.00% 9.02% 11

2001 313 33 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 12

2001 255 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.01% 0.00% 75.70% 6.98% 0.00% 9.31% 13

2001 120 30 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 5.95% 0.00% 77.07% 7.28% 0.00% 9.71% 14

2001 58 33 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 5.90% 0.00% 76.76% 7.43% 0.00% 9.91% 15

2001 43 35 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 16

2001 317 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 17

2001 33 12 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.26% 0.00% 75.34% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 18

2001 321 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 19

2001 315 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 20

2002 101 30 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.38% 0.00% 76.69% 7.81% 0.00% 9.11% 1

2002 241 24 8.36 8.33 0.03 4.9 3.5 5.1 9.03% 0.00% 74.87% 7.16% 0.00% 8.95% 2

2002 13 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.24% 0.00% 76.08% 7.86% 0.00% 9.82% 3

2002 272 35 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.40% 0.00% 74.05% 7.80% 0.00% 9.75% 4

2002 27 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.44% 0.00% 76.17% 7.02% 0.00% 9.36% 5

2002 142 35 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.97% 0.00% 75.07% 7.27% 0.00% 9.69% 6

2002 47 33 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 7

2002 307 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.14% 0.00% 75.83% 7.73% 0.00% 10.30% 8

2002 298 20 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 9

2002 183 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.62% 0.00% 73.44% 7.69% 0.00% 10.25% 10

2002 249 9 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.24% 0.00% 75.95% 8.40% 0.00% 8.40% 11

2002 248 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.40% 0.00% 75.42% 8.59% 0.00% 8.59% 12

2002 141 26 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.25% 0.00% 75.12% 8.82% 0.00% 8.82% 13

2002 153 9 8.22 8.21 0.02 4.5 3.3 4.9 7.36% 0.00% 75.03% 8.81% 0.00% 8.81% 14

2002 116 20 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.79% 0.00% 76.32% 6.36% 0.00% 9.54% 15

2002 343 35 8.03 8.02 0.01 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.79% 0.00% 75.88% 6.53% 0.00% 9.80% 16

2002 147 30 8.12 8.10 0.01 4.2 3.2 4.6 8.03% 0.00% 75.68% 6.51% 0.00% 9.77% 17

2002 135 34 8.12 8.10 0.01 4.2 3.2 4.6 8.46% 0.00% 74.39% 6.86% 0.00% 10.29% 18

2002 35 24 7.95 7.94 0.01 3.8 2.9 4.3 5.62% 0.00% 76.70% 7.07% 0.00% 10.61% 19

2002 282 35 8.03 8.02 0.01 4.0 3.0 4.5 5.78% 0.00% 76.04% 7.27% 0.00% 10.91% 20

2003 294 35 8.07 8.02 0.06 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.92% 0.00% 75.65% 7.84% 0.00% 9.58% 1

2003 326 35 8.05 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.47% 0.00% 75.64% 8.13% 0.00% 9.76% 2

2003 287 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.05% 0.00% 76.98% 7.10% 0.00% 8.87% 3

2003 145 30 8.13 8.10 0.03 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.70% 0.00% 75.45% 7.49% 0.00% 9.36% 4

2003 66 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 5

2003 71 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 6

2003 133 20 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.68% 0.00% 75.97% 7.01% 0.00% 9.34% 7

2003 237 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.99% 0.00% 75.40% 7.12% 0.00% 9.50% 8

2003 293 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 9

2003 279 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.02% 0.00% 76.30% 7.58% 0.00% 10.10% 9

2003 221 20 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.29% 0.00% 74.46% 7.39% 0.00% 9.86% 11

2003 70 20 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.14% 0.00% 75.83% 7.73% 0.00% 10.30% 12

2003 235 30 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.45% 0.00% 73.96% 7.54% 0.00% 10.05% 13

2003 312 12 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.27% 0.00% 75.33% 7.89% 0.00% 10.51% 14

2003 308 30 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.57% 0.00% 76.88% 8.27% 0.00% 8.27% 15

2003 286 24 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.72% 0.00% 76.38% 8.45% 0.00% 8.45% 16

2003 280 35 8.03 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.02% 0.00% 75.30% 8.84% 0.00% 8.84% 17

2003 60 35 7.95 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 7.40% 0.00% 77.05% 6.22% 0.00% 9.33% 18

2003 118 14 8.03 8.02 0.01 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.99% 0.00% 75.72% 6.52% 0.00% 9.78% 19

2003 57 35 7.95 7.94 0.01 3.8 2.9 4.3 5.32% 0.00% 77.91% 6.71% 0.00% 10.06% 20

# New IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 294 35 8.09 8.02 0.07 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.85% 0.00% 76.59% 7.29% 0.00% 9.28% 1

2003 294 35 8.07 8.02 0.06 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.92% 0.00% 75.65% 7.84% 0.00% 9.58% 2

2002 101 30 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.38% 0.00% 76.69% 7.81% 0.00% 9.11% 3

2001 266 35 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.89% 0.00% 75.09% 7.86% 0.00% 9.16% 4

2001 118 33 8.05 8.02 0.04 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.65% 0.00% 75.71% 8.14% 0.00% 9.50% 5

2001 234 22 8.37 8.33 0.04 4.9 3.5 5.1 7.80% 0.00% 74.97% 7.95% 0.00% 9.28% 6

2003 326 35 8.05 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.47% 0.00% 75.64% 8.13% 0.00% 9.76% 7

2003 287 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.05% 0.00% 76.98% 7.10% 0.00% 8.87% 8

2002 241 24 8.36 8.33 0.03 4.9 3.5 5.1 9.03% 0.00% 74.87% 7.16% 0.00% 8.95% 9

2001 293 35 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.35% 0.00% 75.99% 7.40% 0.00% 9.25% 10

2001 180 35 8.23 8.21 0.03 4.5 3.3 4.9 7.60% 0.00% 76.04% 7.27% 0.00% 9.09% 11

2001 82 33 8.04 8.02 0.03 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.46% 0.00% 75.64% 7.51% 0.00% 9.39% 12

2003 145 30 8.13 8.10 0.03 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.70% 0.00% 75.45% 7.49% 0.00% 9.36% 13

2002 13 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.24% 0.00% 76.08% 7.86% 0.00% 9.82% 14

2001 254 14 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.27% 0.00% 74.43% 7.69% 0.00% 9.61% 15

2001 308 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 16

2003 66 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 6.34% 0.00% 75.71% 7.98% 0.00% 9.97% 17

2002 272 35 8.36 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.40% 0.00% 74.05% 7.80% 0.00% 9.75% 18

2001 59 35 7.96 7.94 0.02 3.8 2.9 4.3 6.67% 0.00% 76.52% 8.41% 0.00% 8.41% 19

2001 119 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.37% 0.00% 76.85% 6.76% 0.00% 9.02% 20

2001 313 33 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 21

2003 71 35 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.31% 0.00% 76.59% 6.90% 0.00% 9.20% 22

2002 27 24 8.04 8.02 0.02 4.0 3.0 4.5 7.44% 0.00% 76.17% 7.02% 0.00% 9.36% 23

2003 133 20 8.12 8.10 0.02 4.2 3.2 4.6 7.68% 0.00% 75.97% 7.01% 0.00% 9.34% 24

2001 255 35 8.35 8.33 0.02 4.9 3.5 5.1 8.01% 0.00% 75.70% 6.98% 0.00% 9.31% 25

# Old IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 294 35 7.778 7.692 0.086 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 1

2001 266 38 7.739 7.692 0.047 4.2 7.84 0 78.58 6.04 0 7.54 2

2001 234 22 7.735 7.692 0.043 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 3

2001 118 33 7.734 7.692 0.042 3.6 6.79 0 79.49 6.1 0 7.62 4

2001 308 38 7.727 7.692 0.036 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 5

2001 293 38 7.726 7.692 0.034 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 6

2001 180 39 7.726 7.692 0.034 4 7.49 0 78.88 6.06 0 7.56 7

2001 82 33 7.722 7.692 0.03 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 8

2001 254 14 7.721 7.692 0.029 4.2 7.84 0 78.59 6.04 0 7.54 9

2001 183 40 7.719 7.692 0.028 4.3 8.01 0 78.45 6.02 0 7.52 10

2001 59 37 7.719 7.692 0.027 3.5 6.62 0 79.63 6.11 0 7.64 11

2001 119 24 7.717 7.692 0.026 3.6 6.79 0 79.48 6.1 0 7.62 12

2001 313 33 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 13

2001 296 40 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.1 0 7.61 14

2001 255 35 7.717 7.692 0.025 4.2 7.84 0 78.58 6.03 0 7.54 15

2001 317 37 7.715 7.692 0.024 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 16

2001 205 40 7.716 7.692 0.024 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 17

2001 120 30 7.715 7.692 0.024 3.6 6.79 0 79.48 6.1 0 7.62 18

2001 312 40 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 19

2001 176 40 7.715 7.692 0.023 4 7.49 0 78.88 6.05 0 7.57 20

2002 101 30 7.736 7.692 0.044 3.6 6.79 0 79.47 6.11 0 7.62 1

2002 241 24 7.724 7.692 0.032 4.3 8.01 0 78.45 6.02 0 7.52 2

2002 272 37 7.722 7.692 0.03 4.2 7.83 0 78.59 6.03 0 7.54 3

2002 13 35 7.721 7.692 0.029 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 4

2002 142 38 7.719 7.692 0.027 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.07 0 7.59 5

2002 27 24 7.716 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 6

2002 248 39 7.716 7.692 0.024 4.2 7.83 0 78.6 6.02 0 7.54 7

2002 307 37 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 8

2002 183 38 7.715 7.692 0.023 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 9

2002 47 33 7.714 7.692 0.023 3.5 6.62 0 79.64 6.11 0 7.64 10

2002 282 40 7.714 7.692 0.022 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 11

2002 343 39 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 12

2002 298 19 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 13

2002 249 10 7.713 7.692 0.021 4.2 7.84 0 78.59 6.03 0 7.54 14

2002 153 8 7.711 7.692 0.02 4 7.49 0 78.87 6.06 0 7.56 15

2002 141 26 7.711 7.692 0.019 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.07 0 7.59 16

2002 116 19 7.71 7.692 0.018 3.6 6.79 0 79.48 6.1 0 7.62 17

2002 147 30 7.709 7.692 0.017 3.8 7.14 0 79.19 6.07 0 7.59 18

2002 135 34 7.708 7.692 0.017 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.07 0 7.59 19

2002 304 8 7.708 7.692 0.016 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 20

2003 294 35 7.757 7.692 0.065 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 1

2003 287 37 7.728 7.692 0.036 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 2

2003 326 37 7.727 7.692 0.035 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 3

2003 145 30 7.722 7.692 0.031 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.08 0 7.59 4

2003 66 35 7.72 7.692 0.028 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.1 0 7.61 5

2003 293 39 7.718 7.692 0.026 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.08 0 7.61 6

2003 280 40 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.11 0 7.61 7

2003 237 37 7.717 7.692 0.025 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.03 0 7.52 8

2003 133 20 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.08 0 7.59 9

2003 71 37 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.08 0 7.61 10

2003 279 30 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 11

2003 221 19 7.715 7.692 0.023 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 12

2003 60 40 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.5 6.62 0 79.63 6.11 0 7.64 13

2003 278 40 7.713 7.692 0.022 3.7 6.97 0 79.34 6.08 0 7.61 14

2003 235 30 7.714 7.692 0.022 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.03 0 7.52 15

2003 70 19 7.714 7.692 0.022 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 16

2003 312 12 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 17

2003 308 30 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 18

2003 286 24 7.712 7.692 0.02 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 19

2003 118 14 7.709 7.692 0.018 3.6 6.79 0 79.47 6.1 0 7.62 20

# Old IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 294 35 7.778 7.692 0.086 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 1

2003 294 35 7.757 7.692 0.065 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 2

2001 266 38 7.739 7.692 0.047 4.2 7.84 0 78.58 6.04 0 7.54 3

2002 101 30 7.736 7.692 0.044 3.6 6.79 0 79.47 6.11 0 7.62 4

2001 234 22 7.735 7.692 0.043 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 5

2001 118 33 7.734 7.692 0.042 3.6 6.79 0 79.49 6.1 0 7.62 6

2001 308 38 7.727 7.692 0.036 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 7

2003 287 37 7.728 7.692 0.036 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 8

2003 326 37 7.727 7.692 0.035 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 9

2001 293 38 7.726 7.692 0.034 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 10

2001 180 39 7.726 7.692 0.034 4 7.49 0 78.88 6.06 0 7.56 11

2002 241 24 7.724 7.692 0.032 4.3 8.01 0 78.45 6.02 0 7.52 12

2003 145 30 7.722 7.692 0.031 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.08 0 7.59 13

2001 82 33 7.722 7.692 0.03 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 14

2002 272 37 7.722 7.692 0.03 4.2 7.83 0 78.59 6.03 0 7.54 15

2001 254 14 7.721 7.692 0.029 4.2 7.84 0 78.59 6.04 0 7.54 16

2002 13 35 7.721 7.692 0.029 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 17

2001 183 40 7.719 7.692 0.028 4.3 8.01 0 78.45 6.02 0 7.52 18

2003 66 35 7.72 7.692 0.028 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.1 0 7.61 19

2001 59 37 7.719 7.692 0.027 3.5 6.62 0 79.63 6.11 0 7.64 20

2002 142 38 7.719 7.692 0.027 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.07 0 7.59 21

2001 119 24 7.717 7.692 0.026 3.6 6.79 0 79.48 6.1 0 7.62 22

2003 293 39 7.718 7.692 0.026 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.08 0 7.61 23

2001 313 33 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 24

2001 296 40 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.1 0 7.61 25

# Old IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibili ty Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 294 35 7.778 7.692 0.086 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 1

2001 266 35 7.735 7.692 0.043 4.2 7.84 0 78.58 6.04 0 7.54 2

2001 234 22 7.735 7.692 0.043 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 3

2001 118 33 7.734 7.692 0.042 3.6 6.79 0 79.49 6.1 0 7.62 4

2001 180 35 7.723 7.692 0.032 4 7.49 0 78.88 6.06 0 7.57 5

2001 293 35 7.723 7.692 0.031 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 6

2001 82 33 7.722 7.692 0.03 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 7

2001 308 35 7.72 7.692 0.029 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 8

2001 254 14 7.721 7.692 0.029 4.2 7.84 0 78.59 6.04 0 7.54 9

2001 59 35 7.719 7.692 0.027 3.5 6.62 0 79.64 6.11 0 7.64 10

2001 119 24 7.717 7.692 0.026 3.6 6.79 0 79.48 6.1 0 7.62 11

2001 313 33 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 12

2001 255 35 7.717 7.692 0.025 4.2 7.84 0 78.58 6.03 0 7.54 13

2001 120 30 7.715 7.692 0.024 3.6 6.79 0 79.48 6.1 0 7.62 14

2001 317 35 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 15

2001 58 33 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.5 6.62 0 79.61 6.12 0 7.64 16

2001 43 35 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.5 6.62 0 79.63 6.11 0 7.64 17

2001 321 30 7.713 7.692 0.022 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.08 0 7.61 18

2001 326 20 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 19

2001 315 30 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.08 0 7.61 20

2002 101 30 7.736 7.692 0.044 3.6 6.79 0 79.47 6.11 0 7.62 1

2002 241 24 7.724 7.692 0.032 4.3 8.01 0 78.45 6.02 0 7.52 2

2002 272 35 7.72 7.692 0.029 4.2 7.83 0 78.59 6.03 0 7.54 3

2002 13 35 7.721 7.692 0.029 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 4

2002 27 24 7.716 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 5

2002 142 35 7.715 7.692 0.024 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.08 0 7.59 6

2002 47 33 7.714 7.692 0.023 3.5 6.62 0 79.64 6.11 0 7.64 7

2002 307 35 7.714 7.692 0.022 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 8

2002 183 35 7.714 7.692 0.022 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 9

2002 298 20 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 10

2002 249 9 7.712 7.692 0.021 4.2 7.84 0 78.6 6.03 0 7.54 11

2002 248 35 7.712 7.692 0.02 4.2 7.83 0 78.6 6.02 0 7.54 12

2002 153 9 7.711 7.692 0.019 4 7.49 0 78.87 6.06 0 7.56 13

2002 141 26 7.711 7.692 0.019 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.07 0 7.59 14

2002 116 20 7.71 7.692 0.018 3.6 6.79 0 79.48 6.1 0 7.62 15

2002 343 35 7.709 7.692 0.017 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 16

2002 147 30 7.709 7.692 0.017 3.8 7.14 0 79.19 6.07 0 7.59 17

2002 135 34 7.708 7.692 0.017 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.07 0 7.59 18

2002 282 35 7.707 7.692 0.016 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 19

2002 35 24 7.708 7.692 0.016 3.5 6.62 0 79.63 6.11 0 7.64 20

2003 294 35 7.757 7.692 0.065 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 1

2003 326 35 7.727 7.692 0.035 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 2

2003 287 35 7.725 7.692 0.033 3.7 6.97 0 79.31 6.11 0 7.61 3

2003 145 30 7.722 7.692 0.031 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.08 0 7.59 4

2003 66 35 7.72 7.692 0.028 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.1 0 7.61 5

2003 133 20 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.8 7.14 0 79.18 6.08 0 7.59 6

2003 71 35 7.717 7.692 0.025 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 7

2003 237 35 7.716 7.692 0.024 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.03 0 7.52 8

2003 293 35 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.08 0 7.61 9

2003 279 30 7.715 7.692 0.023 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 10

2003 221 20 7.715 7.692 0.023 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.02 0 7.52 11

2003 235 30 7.714 7.692 0.022 4.3 8.01 0 78.44 6.03 0 7.52 12

2003 70 20 7.714 7.692 0.022 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 13

2003 312 12 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 14

2003 308 30 7.713 7.692 0.021 3.7 6.97 0 79.32 6.09 0 7.61 15

2003 286 24 7.712 7.692 0.02 3.7 6.97 0 79.33 6.09 0 7.61 16

2003 280 35 7.711 7.692 0.019 3.7 6.97 0 79.3 6.12 0 7.61 17

2003 60 35 7.71 7.692 0.019 3.5 6.62 0 79.63 6.11 0 7.64 18

2003 118 14 7.709 7.692 0.018 3.6 6.79 0 79.47 6.1 0 7.62 19

2003 278 35 7.709 7.692 0.017 3.7 6.97 0 79.3 6.12 0 7.61 20

# Old IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 294 35 7.78 7.69 0.09 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.33 6.09 0.00 7.61 1

2003 294 35 7.76 7.69 0.07 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.33 6.09 0.00 7.61 2

2002 101 30 7.74 7.69 0.04 3.6 6.79 0.00 79.47 6.11 0.00 7.62 3

2001 266 35 7.74 7.69 0.04 4.2 7.84 0.00 78.58 6.04 0.00 7.54 4

2001 234 22 7.74 7.69 0.04 4.3 8.01 0.00 78.44 6.02 0.00 7.52 5

2001 118 33 7.73 7.69 0.04 3.6 6.79 0.00 79.49 6.10 0.00 7.62 6

2003 326 35 7.73 7.69 0.04 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.33 6.09 0.00 7.61 7

2003 287 35 7.73 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.31 6.11 0.00 7.61 8

2001 180 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 4.0 7.49 0.00 78.88 6.06 0.00 7.57 9

2002 241 24 7.72 7.69 0.03 4.3 8.01 0.00 78.45 6.02 0.00 7.52 10

2001 293 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.33 6.09 0.00 7.61 11

2003 145 30 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.8 7.14 0.00 79.18 6.08 0.00 7.59 12

2001 82 33 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.32 6.09 0.00 7.61 13

2001 308 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.32 6.09 0.00 7.61 14

2001 254 14 7.72 7.69 0.03 4.2 7.84 0.00 78.59 6.04 0.00 7.54 15

2002 272 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 4.2 7.83 0.00 78.59 6.03 0.00 7.54 16

2002 13 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.33 6.09 0.00 7.61 17

2003 66 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.32 6.10 0.00 7.61 18

2001 59 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.5 6.62 0.00 79.64 6.11 0.00 7.64 19

2001 119 24 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.6 6.79 0.00 79.48 6.10 0.00 7.62 20

2001 313 33 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.32 6.09 0.00 7.61 21

2001 255 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 4.2 7.84 0.00 78.58 6.03 0.00 7.54 22

2002 27 24 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.33 6.09 0.00 7.61 23

2003 133 20 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.8 7.14 0.00 79.18 6.08 0.00 7.59 24

2003 71 35 7.72 7.69 0.03 3.7 6.97 0.00 79.33 6.09 0.00 7.61 25

# Appendix B

Breton Wilderness Receptors

[The material referenced in Appe ndix B is included as a separate

document along with this site specific BART modeling report.]

# BART Exemption Modeling Report:

Mississippi Power Company

Plant Daniel

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation

for Mississippi Power Company

January 2007

# January 2007 

# i 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introd ucti on............................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Objectives........................................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Cl ass I Areas ................................................................................ 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissi ons da ta ............................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data................................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 Air quality mode ling pro cedures ............................................................................................

............... 3-1

3.1 Modeling domain and rec eptors ..................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Light extinction and haze impact calc ulations ................................................................................ 3-1

3.3 General quality assu rance pr ocedur es........................................................................................... 3-3

4.0 Modeling results...........................................................................................................

............................ 4-1

Appendix A Delta-Deciview Values for The Top 20 Days – For Each Year/Each Class I Area

and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years .....................................................................A-1

Appendix B Breton Wi lderness R ecepto rs......................................................................................... .....B-1

# January 2007 

# ii 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc



# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant Daniel modeling emission par ameters........................................................................... 2-3



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Plant D aniel....................................................... 1-2

# January 2007 

# 1-1 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that

‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be antici pated to cause or contribute to any impairment of

visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Purs uant to federal regulations, states have the option of

exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requirements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating

that the source cannot reasonably be anti cipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I

area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states subject

to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determi ne that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for electric generating units (EGUs). Feedback from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

indicates that CAIR satisfies BART for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling report focuses on

performing the BART modeling analysis for particulate matter (PM) only.

Units 1 and 2 at Plant Daniel, located near Escatawpa, which are owned and operated by Mississippi Power

Company, have been identified as a BART-eligible s ource. The modeling procedures outlined in the sourcespecific modeling protocol for Plant Daniel were used to determine whet her the source is subject to BART

requirements (exemption modeling). The modeling proc edures are consistent with those outlined in the

updated final VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3.2 – August 31,

2006), available at http://www.vistas-sesarm.or g/documents/BARTModeli ngPro tocol_rev3.2_31Aug06.pdf

. The source-specific BART modeling protocol references relevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling

protocol.



# 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Mississippi Department of Environm ental Quality, which is in char ge of the state’s BART program, has

determined that Units 1 and 2 at Plant Daniel are BART -eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of Plant

Daniel relative to nearby Class I Areas. There is one Cl ass I area within 300 km of the plant: Breton Island

(61.3 km). The BART exemption modeling was conduct ed for this Class I area in accordance with the

referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source-specific

BART modeling protocol.

# January 2007 

# 1-2 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant Daniel

# January 2007 

# 2-1 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the visi bility impacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant Daniel are

discussed in this section. The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality has indicated that CAIR will

satisfy BART for EGUs for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# . Therefore, this BART exemptio n modeling analysis focuses only on

PM 10 

# . Since various components of PM 10 

# emissions have different visibility extinction efficiencies, the PM 10 

# emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and

4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5.) allows fo r the use of source-specific emissions and speciation

factors and/or default values from AP-42. The PM 10 

# emissions and speciation approach that were used for the

modeling is indicated below. Where default speciati on values are used, the data represents a unit where

current (baseline) emission controls include electr ostatic precipitators (ESPs), but no post-combustion NO

x 

# or

SO 2 

# control equipment exists.

• Total PM 10 

# is comprised of filterable and condensable emissions.

• Baseline filterable PM 10 

# emissions are based on the highest stack test for the most recent 3-year

period (2003-2005). This stack test is combined wi th the highest 24 hour heat input value for this

period from CEMS data to calculate the “maximum 24-hour average emission rate” as required by the

VISTAS protocol.

• Filterable PM 10 

# has been subdivided by size category consis tent with the defaul t approach from AP-42

Table 1-1.6, and as noted on pages 43 and 44 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The

AP-42 Table 1-1.6 specifies for the emission controls indicated above that 55.6% of filterable PM 10 

# emission is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in size) and 44.4% is fine. Of the fine portion, 3.7% is

elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fine particulates (soil).

• Condensable PM 10 

# consists of inorganic and organic compounds . The inorganic portion is by default

assumed to be H 2 

# SO 4 

# , although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The

organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols.

• Baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions are calculated consistent wi th the method used by Mississippi Power to

derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach assumes that the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released

from the stack are proportional to SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type

and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater). For eastern

bituminous coal the baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# release rate is in the range of 0.3 to 0.5% of the SO 2 

# emissions.

Appendix A of the site-specific modeling protocol provides the basis for the site-specific values used.

• Baseline emissions of condensable organics (the remaining portion of condensable PM 10 

# ) are derived

based on the supporting field observational informat ion in Appendix B of the site-specific modeling

protocol and is estimated as 0.32% of SO 2 

# emitted.

• Coarse filterable particles (between 2.5 and 10 mic rons in size) are modeled with a geometric mass

mean diameter of 5 microns, while fine filter able and all condensable particles are modeled with a

geometric mass mean diameter of 0.48 microns, cons istent with the CALPUFF default value for fine

particles. The geometric standard deviation for both fine and coarse particles are set to 2 microns,

consistent with the CALPUFF default value. The 0.48 micron diameter value for fine particles comes

from the default values in sample input files pr esented on the TRC web site. There is no default

value presented for the coarse particles on the TRC web site. However, since 5 is the geometric

mass mean diameter of 2.5 and 10 (the bounds of coarse particle sizes), it is a reasonable estimate

for the geometric mass mean diameter for that class of particles.

In practice, CALPUFF allows for the user to input certain components of PM 10 

# as separate species and

separate sizes, which will result in more accurate wet and dry deposition velocity results and also more

# January 2007 

# 2-2 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# accurate effects on light scattering. As noted above, th e particle size distribution information is provided in

AP-42 Table 1-1.6, and was used for the BART exemption modeling.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emi ssion parameters used in the BART CALPUFF modeling,

consistent with the source emissi ons data presented in Appendices A and B of the site-specific modeling

protocol for the baseline. All of the emissions in T able 2-1 were derived from CEMS data for the 2003 to 2005

period and represent the maximum 24-hour average lb/h r rates (excluding days where startup, shutdown, or

malfunctions occurred). For NO

x 

# and SO 2 

# the values are directly from CEMS. Filterable PM 10 

# emissions were

calculated using the highest stack test over the 2003 to 2005 period and multiplying these values times the

maximum 24-hour average heat input derived from CEMS . These values were then adjusted using AP-42

factors from Table 1.1-6 that indicate that PM 10 

# is 67% of total PM for a pulv erized coal unit with an ESP. PM 10 

# speciation was then performed as indicated above such that total Filterable PM 10 

# is made up of Coarse Soil

plus total Fine PM and total Fine PM is made up of Fine Soil plus Elemental Carbon (EC).January 20072-3010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.docTable 2-1 Plant Daniel modeling emission parametersLocation UTM(Zone 16 NAD-83)Emissions1ParticleSpeciation2CaseSource/ UnitUTMEastUTMNorthActualStack HtBaseElev.FlueDiameterGasExitVel.StackGasExitTemp.SO2NOXPM10Filt.PM10CoarseSoilFinePMFineSoilECCond.PM10H2SO4Organicm m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 1 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.421.7 419.1 5718.332156.0956.90 12.46 6.93 5.53 5.33 0.20 44.43 26.14 18.30Baseline Unit 2 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.421.7 419.1 5451.72186.4066.41 24.01 13.35 10.66 10.27 0.39 42.40 24.96 17.45Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 1 1&2 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.4 21.7 419.111170.05 4342.49123.31 36.47 20.28 16.19 15.59 0.60 86.86 51.09 35.74Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/secg/sec g/sec g/sec g/secg/sec g/sec g/secg/secg/sec g/sec g/secStack 1 1&2 350,592 3,378,843 106.7 7.0 10.4 21.7419.1 1407.43 547.15 15.54 4.60 2.56 2.04 1.960.80 10.94 6.44 4.501SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sources in CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of theBART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference inthe computation of certain particle species such as H2SO4.2Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10and H2SO4and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that H2SO4is input to CALPUFF asSO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4and SO4are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4to SO4is 96/98.3Stack credit is equal to actual stack height sincethis stack is grandfathered under stack height regulations.

# January 2007 

# 3-1 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.0 Air quality modeling procedures

The BART exemption modeling was conducted for this Cl ass I area in accordance with the referenced VISTAS

common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source-specific BART modeling

protocol for Plant Daniel. This section provides a di scussion of additional modeling procedures that were used

and describes the quality assur ance procedure was followed.



# 3.1 Modeling domain and receptor s

The Plant Daniel BART runs used the sub-domain 4, 4-km CALMET data supplied by VISTAS, as discussed

in the source-specific modeling protoc ol. This domain includes all Class I areas within 300 km of the source,

plus a 50-km buffer.

The BART exemption modeling was conducted for Daniel Units 1 and 2 (BART eligible units) for each Class I

area within 300 km of the source (Breton Island). Th e receptors used for each of the Class I areas are based

on the NPS database of Class I receptors, as recommended by the VISTAS common protocol (Section 4.3.3).

For Breton, Mississippi Power has included in the modeli ng analysis all of the receptors that the US F&WS

has identified. However, Mississippi Power does not believe that all of the receptors ar e still valid receptors.

As a result of hurricane activity, several of the re ceptors identified by the US F&WS for Breton are now

located over water, rather than over land. Pursuant to the Wilderness Act of 1964, which defines wilderness

as "land," and because Congress made clear when it created the Breton wilderness area that only the land

mass was designated as wilderness , receptors that are now over wa ter are not relevant for assessing

visibility impacts at Breton. Nevertheless, Mississippi Power is including both the valid and invalid receptors

for purposes of this analysis. Appendix B provides more detailed support for the identification and

elimination of invalid receptors at Breton.



# 3.2 Light extinction and haze impact calculations

The CALPOST postprocessor was used as prescribed in the VISTAS protocol for the calculation of the impact

from the modeled source’s primary and secondary particu late matter concentrations on light extinction. The

formula that is currently used in CALPOST is the existing (not the November 2005 revised) IMPROVE/EPA

formula, which is applied to determine a change in light ex tinction due to increases in the particulate matter

component concentrations. Using the notation of CALPOST, the formula is the following:

b ext 

# = 3 f(RH) [(NH 4 

# )2SO 4 

# ] + 3 f(RH) [NH 4 

# NO 3 

# ] + 4[OC] + 1[Soil] + 0.6[Coarse Mass] + 10[EC] + b Ray



# The concentrations, in square brackets, are in ug/m 3 

# and b ext 

# is in units of Mm -1 

# . The Rayleigh scattering term

(b Ray 

# ) has a default value of 10 Mm -1 

# , as recommended in EPA guidance for tracking reasonable progress

(EPA, 2003a).

New IMPROVE Equation. Mississippi Power Company used the new IMPROVE equation to analyze the

CALPUFF results for Breton Island. This was done for several reasons. First, the new equation is the result of

an extensive evaluation of the most recent scienti fic data, undertaken by an ad hoc group of scientists

including representatives from the National Park Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, academia, and industry. The old equation was based on data and information that was over a

decade old. The new equation is based on the most recent data and information gleaned from scientific

studies done over the past decade. T he new equation adds more accurate terms for estimating light extinction

due to sulfate and nitrate, through the incorporation of size differentiation and revisions to the extinction

coefficients. Organic matter estimates are improved through a refinement to the organic compound mass to

organic mass ratio. Second, the new equation corrects several errors and omissions in the old equation. For

example, sea salt, which affects light extinction, was not part of the old equation, but has been added to the

# January 2007 

# 3-2 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# new equation. Moreover, the old equation’s constant Rayl eigh scattering term (corresponding to scattering at

10,000 feet elevation) has been revised to reflect the actual elevation of the specific Class I area.

The ad hoc group of scientists who recommended the c hanges to the equation drafted a technical support

document entitled “Revised IM PROVE Algorithm for Estimati ng Light Extinction from Particle Speciation Data”

(November 30, 2005). That document demonstrates that , for 21 Class I areas with nephelometer data, the

new equation produces more accurate results than the old equation. The IMPROVE Steering Committee

reviewed the work of the ad hoc group and its tec hnical support document, and approved the new equation in

December 2005.

The revisions to the IMPROVE equation are particularly impor tant for coastal sites (suc h as Breton). Sea salt

is an important component of extinction at coastal site s, and thus should be included in the equation for

estimating visibility impacts. In addi tion, the site-specific Rayleigh scatterin g term is important for coastal sites

because the default value in the old equation (10 Mm-1) was based on an elevation of 10,000 feet. At nearzero sea level, the new equation uses a more accurate coefficient of 11 Mm-1.

The new formula is shown below.

The apportionment of the total concentration of sulfat e compounds into the concentrations of the small and

large size fractions is accomp lished using the following equations.

This revised version of the IMPROVE Equation was used to perform the BART exemption modeling. Dr. Ivar

Tombach (VISTAS consultant) has produced a spreadsheet tool (Sept ember 29, 2006) to allow the new

IMPROVE formula results to be derived from the basic CALPOST outputs. Also, si nce the BART modeling is

focused only on PM, NO 2 

# was set to zero in the new formula. Fo r informational purposes, results from the old

equation are also presented. 

# )]([33.0 ) ( ] [6.0 ][)(7.1 ][1 ] [10 ] [1.6] [8.2 ] [)(1.5] [)(4.2 ] [)(8.4] [)(2.2

2 

# ppbNO SpecificSite Scattering Rayleigh Mass Course SaltSeaRHf SoilFine Carbon

Elemental Mass OrganicrgeLa Mass Organic Small NitratergeLaRHf Nitrate Small RHf SulfatergeLaRHf Sulfate Small RHf b

SS L S L S ext



# ×+ + ×+ ××+ ×+ ×+ ×+ ×+ ××+ ××+ × × + ××≈

3

3 

# /20] [], [

/20 ] [ ] [ mg Sulfate Total Sulfate Total

mg Sulfate Total SulfatergeLa μ

μ < × =

3 

# /20] [], [] [ mg Sulfate Total Sulfate Total SulfatergeLa μ ≥

=

] [] [] [ SulfatergeLa Sulfate Total Sulfate Small

− =

# January 2007 

# 3-3 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.3 General quality assurance procedures

Chapter 6 of the Final VISTAS Model ing Protocol discusses Quality Assur ance (QA). The purpose of the QA

program is to establish procedures for ensuring that products produced by the ap plication of the modeling

techniques for BART studies satisfy the regulatory objectives of the BART program.

The air quality modeling staff at Southern Company Services is managing and/or conducting the BART

Exemption Modeling application for this plant owned by Mi ssissippi Power Company. They made sure that all

recommended methods specified in the Final VISTAS M odeling Protocol were followed and that the modeling

was carefully and professionally conducted. Initially, the Company retained the services of ENSR/AECOM to

supplement the training received as part of VISTAS tr aining courses. Additionally, ENSR/AECOM experts

were given source data for one of Southern Company ’s BART eligible sources, and they performed a

complete analysis following the VISTAS common protocol. During this process, the lead Southern Company

modelers were taught each technical step.

ENSR/AECOM was used as a third-party review for th e CALPUFF analyses. ENSR has conducted numerous

CALPUFF analyses, and uses CALDESK animation softw are as well as Lakes Environmental CALVIEW

software with base maps to visualize the sources, rec eptors, and meteorology. ENSR/AECOM also uses the

CALPUFF QA output files in conjunction with ArcMap GI S software to plot the locations of the sources and

receptors as CALPUFF interprets them from the inpu t data. The output files from CALPUFF and CALPOST

are typically reviewed independently by ENSR/AECOM staff to assure accuracy and compliance with

approved regulatory procedures.

For the exemption modelin g, Southern Company’s BART modelers m ade sure that all checks were made

manually/visually as well as by using UltaEdit-32, a fi le comparing software. Additionally, these datasets were

randomly checked by another Southern Company modeler. During the modeling process, periodic progress

meetings were conducted with the project management team members, and phone calls and e-mail

exchanges were made with the CALPUFF modeling experts at ENSR/AECOM to resolve issues as they

arose.

The VISTAS Modeling Protocol states, “To the extent that modeling applications are using pre-defined

CALMET files and CALPUFF templates, t he quality assurance will be straigh tforward. More detailed steps are

needed for the setup of modeling files fo r source-specific applications of s ub-regional domains finer than 4

km.” For this application, the 4-km grid-spaced CALMET files for sub-domain 4 developed by VISTAS and the

CALPUFF templates were used. Southern Company BAR T modelers used the test met file to “benchmark”

the use of the CALMET files on their computers as indi cated on page 59 of the VISTAS common protocol. For

this BART exemption modeling application, documents we re developed and will be submitted that contained

source data required by the CALPUFF modeling system (CALPUFF, CALPOST and POSTUTIL).

# January 2007 

# 4-1 010207 Daniel BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 4.0 Modeling results

The exemption modeling results are provided in Table 4- 1, and Appendix A lists delta-deciview results for the

top 20 days for each year modeled and the top 25 days for the overall three years at each Class I area. The

table indicates that both the 8 th 

# highest day’s impacts for each year and the 22 nd 

# highest day’s impacts over all

three years are below 0.5 delta-dv. These results demonstrate that Plant Daniel’s PM 10 

# emissions do not

cause or contribute to visibility impairment. Therefore, the sour ce is not subject to BART for PM 10 

# , and no

further BART analysis is required.

Electronic data related to this application are provided on the attached disk. They include all input (INP) and

list (LST) files.

# Table 4-1 Summary of Results – Plant Daniel Refined BART Exemption Modeling

2001 2002 2003

Class I area Distance

from source

to Class I

area

boundary # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv Highest of

8 th 

# Highest

delta-dv

for the 3-

years 22 nd



# Highest

delta-dv

over 3-

year

period

km Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv delta-dv delta-dv

Breton

Island

New Improve

Orig Recept 61.3 0 0 0.23 0 0 0.22 0 0 0.22 0.23 0.23

New Improve

Valid Recept 61.3 0 0 0.20 0 0 0.17 0 0 0.21 0.21 0.20

Old Improve

Orig Recept 61.3 0 0 0.29 0 0 0.28 0 0 0.26 0.29 0.28

Old Improve

Valid Recept 61.3 0 0 0.24 0 0 0.21 0 0 0.26 0.26 0.25

# Appendix A

Delta-Deciview Values for the Top 20 Days – for Each Year/Each

Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years

# New IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Rank ed Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 24 32 8.46 8.02 0.45 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.01% 0.00% 14.78% 0.80% 1.30% 2.10% 1

2001 270 40 8.65 8.33 0.32 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.91% 0.00% 12.38% 0.69% 1.24% 1.79% 2

2001 365 39 8.32 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.84% 0.00% 14.74% 0.88% 1.47% 2.06% 3

2001 300 38 8.32 8.02 0.30 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.80% 0.00% 14.72% 0.90% 1.49% 2.09% 4

2001 117 40 8.31 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.89% 0.00% 14.75% 0.78% 1.56% 2.03% 5

2001 337 32 8.30 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.08% 0.00% 14.81% 0.79% 1.26% 2.05% 6

2001 77 38 8.26 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.83% 0.00% 14.74% 0.92% 1.48% 2.03% 7

2001 144 19 8.34 8.10 0.23 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.96% 0.00% 14.00% 0.77% 1.35% 1.92% 8

2001 275 37 8.23 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.83% 0.00% 14.73% 0.84% 1.48% 2.11% 9

2001 344 40 8.23 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.81% 0.00% 14.67% 0.86% 1.51% 2.15% 10

2001 23 30 8.23 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.92% 0.00% 14.76% 0.87% 1.30% 2.16% 11

2001 86 30 8.21 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.78% 0.00% 14.75% 0.94% 1.41% 2.11% 12

2001 269 33 8.52 8.33 0.19 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.81% 0.00% 12.50% 0.69% 1.15% 1.84% 13

2001 355 19 8.20 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.04% 0.00% 14.80% 0.73% 1.47% 1.96% 14

2001 316 12 8.20 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.29% 0.00% 14.71% 0.75% 1.25% 2.00% 15

2001 326 40 8.19 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.90% 0.00% 14.78% 0.76% 1.53% 2.03% 16

2001 314 39 8.19 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.90% 0.00% 14.78% 0.76% 1.53% 2.03% 16

2001 281 40 8.19 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.99% 0.00% 14.67% 0.77% 1.53% 2.05% 18

2001 175 12 8.38 8.21 0.17 4.5 3.3 4.9 82.93% 0.00% 13.20% 0.77% 1.29% 1.81% 19

2001 33 40 8.11 7.94 0.17 3.8 2.9 4.3 79.96% 0.00% 15.51% 0.80% 1.60% 2.13% 20

2002 350 38 8.33 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.02% 0.00% 14.79% 0.87% 1.30% 2.02% 1

2002 334 40 8.29 8.02 0.27 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.71% 0.83% 1.50% 2.00% 2

2002 96 30 8.28 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.79% 0.00% 14.69% 0.87% 1.56% 2.09% 3

2002 2 33 8.25 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.06% 0.00% 14.72% 0.77% 1.34% 2.11% 4

2002 95 40 8.25 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.77% 0.00% 14.76% 0.78% 1.55% 2.14% 5

2002 83 40 8.25 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.76% 0.00% 14.73% 0.78% 1.57% 2.15% 6

2002 167 19 8.43 8.21 0.23 4.5 3.3 4.9 82.84% 0.00% 13.24% 0.79% 1.37% 1.77% 7

2002 140 40 8.32 8.10 0.22 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.73% 0.00% 14.05% 0.81% 1.41% 2.01% 8

2002 305 24 8.23 8.02 0.22 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.67% 0.83% 1.46% 2.08% 9

2002 26 19 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.78% 0.00% 14.66% 0.87% 1.52% 2.17% 10

2002 312 38 8.21 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.82% 0.00% 14.68% 0.95% 1.42% 2.13% 11

2002 287 36 8.20 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.72% 0.00% 14.72% 0.96% 1.44% 2.16% 12

2002 336 37 8.20 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.94% 0.00% 14.79% 0.75% 1.51% 2.01% 13

2002 291 40 8.19 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.99% 0.00% 14.67% 0.77% 1.53% 2.05% 14

2002 332 22 8.18 8.02 0.17 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.90% 0.00% 14.80% 0.81% 1.34% 2.15% 15

2002 60 40 8.10 7.94 0.17 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.12% 0.00% 15.50% 0.82% 1.37% 2.19% 16

2002 34 24 8.09 7.94 0.15 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.06% 0.00% 15.47% 0.89% 1.49% 2.09% 17

2002 70 35 8.17 8.02 0.15 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.73% 0.00% 14.74% 0.91% 1.51% 2.11% 18

2002 54 22 8.06 7.94 0.12 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.00% 0.00% 15.54% 0.74% 1.49% 2.23% 19

2002 27 40 8.13 8.02 0.12 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.91% 0.00% 14.87% 0.77% 1.54% 1.92% 20

2003 118 40 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.94% 0.00% 14.72% 0.87% 1.44% 2.02% 1

2003 259 37 8.77 8.33 0.44 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.91% 0.00% 12.43% 0.69% 1.19% 1.78% 2

2003 82 38 8.40 8.02 0.38 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.90% 0.00% 14.73% 0.83% 1.42% 2.12% 3

2003 144 24 8.43 8.10 0.32 4.2 3.2 4.6 82.24% 0.00% 14.06% 0.82% 0.96% 1.92% 4

2003 276 40 8.33 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.72% 0.86% 1.44% 2.01% 5

2003 43 38 8.18 7.94 0.25 3.8 2.9 4.3 79.98% 0.00% 15.42% 0.92% 1.47% 2.21% 6

2003 313 40 8.26 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.80% 0.00% 14.73% 0.93% 1.49% 2.05% 7

2003 249 35 8.55 8.33 0.22 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.76% 0.00% 12.39% 0.81% 1.21% 1.82% 8

2003 133 40 8.31 8.10 0.21 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.88% 0.00% 14.06% 0.85% 1.28% 1.92% 9

2003 148 35 8.31 8.10 0.21 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.95% 0.00% 13.97% 0.86% 1.29% 1.93% 10

2003 318 28 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.82% 0.00% 14.79% 0.88% 1.54% 1.97% 11

2003 104 24 8.22 8.02 0.20 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.24% 0.00% 14.70% 0.90% 1.13% 2.03% 12

2003 312 40 8.21 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.59% 0.00% 14.72% 0.94% 1.64% 2.11% 13

2003 13 39 8.20 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.18% 0.00% 14.80% 0.75% 1.26% 2.01% 14

2003 25 40 8.19 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.07% 0.00% 14.84% 0.77% 1.28% 2.04% 15

2003 37 30 8.11 7.94 0.17 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.03% 0.00% 15.35% 0.81% 1.63% 2.17% 16

2003 292 33 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.05% 0.00% 14.75% 0.84% 1.40% 1.96% 17

2003 275 35 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.74% 0.00% 14.77% 0.84% 1.68% 1.96% 18

2003 40 40 8.09 7.94 0.16 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.20% 0.00% 15.41% 0.88% 1.46% 2.05% 19

2003 28 19 8.17 8.02 0.15 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.68% 0.00% 14.78% 0.91% 1.51% 2.12% 20

# New IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2003 118 40 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.94% 0.00% 14.72% 0.87% 1.44% 2.02% 1

2001 24 32 8.46 8.02 0.45 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.01% 0.00% 14.78% 0.80% 1.30% 2.10% 2

2003 259 37 8.77 8.33 0.44 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.91% 0.00% 12.43% 0.69% 1.19% 1.78% 3

2003 82 38 8.40 8.02 0.38 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.90% 0.00% 14.73% 0.83% 1.42% 2.12% 4

2003 144 24 8.43 8.10 0.32 4.2 3.2 4.6 82.24% 0.00% 14.06% 0.82% 0.96% 1.92% 5

2001 270 40 8.65 8.33 0.32 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.91% 0.00% 12.38% 0.69% 1.24% 1.79% 6

2003 276 40 8.33 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.72% 0.86% 1.44% 2.01% 7

2002 350 38 8.33 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.02% 0.00% 14.79% 0.87% 1.30% 2.02% 8

2001 365 39 8.32 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.84% 0.00% 14.74% 0.88% 1.47% 2.06% 9

2001 300 38 8.32 8.02 0.30 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.80% 0.00% 14.72% 0.90% 1.49% 2.09% 10

2001 117 40 8.31 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.89% 0.00% 14.75% 0.78% 1.56% 2.03% 11

2001 337 32 8.30 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.08% 0.00% 14.81% 0.79% 1.26% 2.05% 12

2002 334 40 8.29 8.02 0.27 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.71% 0.83% 1.50% 2.00% 13

2002 96 30 8.28 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.79% 0.00% 14.69% 0.87% 1.56% 2.09% 14

2003 43 38 8.18 7.94 0.25 3.8 2.9 4.3 79.98% 0.00% 15.42% 0.92% 1.47% 2.21% 15

2001 77 38 8.26 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.83% 0.00% 14.74% 0.92% 1.48% 2.03% 16

2003 313 40 8.26 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.80% 0.00% 14.73% 0.93% 1.49% 2.05% 17

2002 2 33 8.25 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.06% 0.00% 14.72% 0.77% 1.34% 2.11% 18

2001 144 19 8.34 8.10 0.23 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.96% 0.00% 14.00% 0.77% 1.35% 1.92% 19

2002 95 40 8.25 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.77% 0.00% 14.76% 0.78% 1.55% 2.14% 20

2002 83 40 8.25 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.76% 0.00% 14.73% 0.78% 1.57% 2.15% 21

2002 167 19 8.43 8.21 0.23 4.5 3.3 4.9 82.84% 0.00% 13.24% 0.79% 1.37% 1.77% 22

2002 140 40 8.32 8.10 0.22 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.73% 0.00% 14.05% 0.81% 1.41% 2.01% 23

2002 305 24 8.23 8.02 0.22 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.67% 0.83% 1.46% 2.08% 24

2003 249 35 8.55 8.33 0.22 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.76% 0.00% 12.39% 0.81% 1.21% 1.82% 25

# New IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibili ty Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 24 31 8.46 8.02 0.45 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.12% 0.00% 14.75% 0.80% 1.21% 2.11% 1

2001 337 33 8.30 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.08% 0.00% 14.81% 0.79% 1.26% 2.05% 2

2001 365 35 8.27 8.02 0.25 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.81% 0.00% 14.75% 0.89% 1.42% 2.13% 3

2001 144 20 8.33 8.10 0.23 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.97% 0.00% 13.96% 0.77% 1.36% 1.94% 4

2001 275 35 8.23 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.84% 0.00% 14.65% 0.86% 1.50% 2.15% 5

2001 23 30 8.23 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.92% 0.00% 14.76% 0.87% 1.30% 2.16% 6

2001 77 35 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.89% 0.00% 14.74% 0.87% 1.53% 1.97% 7

2001 270 35 8.53 8.33 0.20 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.93% 0.00% 12.49% 0.67% 1.12% 1.79% 8

2001 86 30 8.21 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.78% 0.00% 14.75% 0.94% 1.41% 2.11% 9

2001 269 33 8.52 8.33 0.19 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.81% 0.00% 12.50% 0.69% 1.15% 1.84% 10

2001 300 35 8.20 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.04% 0.00% 14.80% 0.73% 1.47% 1.96% 11

2001 355 12 8.20 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.00% 0.00% 14.83% 0.74% 1.47% 1.96% 12

2001 316 12 8.20 8.02 0.18 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.29% 0.00% 14.71% 0.75% 1.25% 2.00% 13

2001 175 12 8.38 8.21 0.17 4.5 3.3 4.9 82.93% 0.00% 13.20% 0.77% 1.29% 1.81% 14

2001 116 24 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.91% 0.00% 14.65% 0.83% 1.67% 1.95% 15

2001 70 35 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.10% 0.00% 14.72% 0.84% 1.40% 1.95% 16

2001 196 24 8.49 8.33 0.16 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.73% 0.00% 12.46% 0.82% 1.36% 1.63% 17

2001 69 24 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.97% 0.00% 14.76% 0.85% 1.42% 1.99% 18

2001 344 35 8.17 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.02% 0.00% 14.67% 0.86% 1.43% 2.01% 19

2001 301 12 8.17 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.02% 0.00% 14.67% 0.86% 1.43% 2.01% 20

2002 350 35 8.30 8.02 0.28 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.07% 0.00% 14.74% 0.81% 1.29% 2.09% 1

2002 96 30 8.28 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.79% 0.00% 14.69% 0.87% 1.56% 2.09% 2

2002 2 33 8.25 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.06% 0.00% 14.72% 0.77% 1.34% 2.11% 3

2002 167 20 8.43 8.21 0.22 4.5 3.3 4.9 82.75% 0.00% 13.30% 0.79% 1.38% 1.78% 4

2002 305 24 8.23 8.02 0.22 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.67% 0.83% 1.46% 2.08% 5

2002 26 14 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.89% 0.00% 14.74% 0.87% 1.53% 1.97% 6

2002 287 35 8.20 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.72% 0.00% 14.72% 0.96% 1.44% 2.16% 7

2002 332 22 8.18 8.02 0.17 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.90% 0.00% 14.80% 0.81% 1.34% 2.15% 8

2002 312 35 8.18 8.02 0.17 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.91% 0.00% 14.70% 0.82% 1.37% 2.20% 9

2002 336 35 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.86% 0.00% 14.73% 0.83% 1.38% 2.20% 10

2002 95 35 8.17 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.92% 0.00% 14.70% 0.88% 1.46% 2.04% 11

2002 34 24 8.09 7.94 0.15 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.06% 0.00% 15.47% 0.89% 1.49% 2.09% 12

2002 70 35 8.17 8.02 0.15 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.73% 0.00% 14.74% 0.91% 1.51% 2.11% 13

2002 140 24 8.25 8.10 0.15 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.49% 0.00% 13.99% 0.90% 1.50% 2.11% 14

2002 291 35 8.16 8.02 0.15 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.78% 0.00% 14.65% 0.91% 1.52% 2.13% 15

2002 60 35 8.07 7.94 0.13 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.08% 0.00% 15.45% 1.03% 1.38% 2.06% 16

2002 54 22 8.06 7.94 0.12 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.00% 0.00% 15.54% 0.74% 1.49% 2.23% 17

2002 40 35 8.05 7.94 0.12 3.8 2.9 4.3 79.92% 0.00% 15.40% 0.78% 1.56% 2.34% 18

2002 318 12 8.12 8.02 0.11 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.87% 0.83% 1.25% 2.09% 19

2002 83 35 8.12 8.02 0.11 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.63% 0.00% 14.73% 0.84% 1.69% 2.11% 20

2003 259 35 8.72 8.33 0.38 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.98% 0.00% 12.39% 0.68% 1.25% 1.70% 1

2003 82 35 8.37 8.02 0.35 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.95% 0.00% 14.69% 0.90% 1.41% 2.05% 2

2003 144 24 8.43 8.10 0.32 4.2 3.2 4.6 82.24% 0.00% 14.06% 0.82% 0.96% 1.92% 3

2003 118 35 8.27 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.66% 0.88% 1.40% 2.10% 4

2003 43 35 8.16 7.94 0.22 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.13% 0.00% 15.49% 0.83% 1.46% 2.08% 5

2003 249 35 8.55 8.33 0.22 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.76% 0.00% 12.39% 0.81% 1.21% 1.82% 6

2003 148 35 8.31 8.10 0.21 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.95% 0.00% 13.97% 0.86% 1.29% 1.93% 7

2003 318 28 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.82% 0.00% 14.79% 0.88% 1.54% 1.97% 8

2003 104 24 8.22 8.02 0.20 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.24% 0.00% 14.70% 0.90% 1.13% 2.03% 9

2003 313 35 8.21 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.79% 0.00% 14.66% 0.96% 1.44% 2.15% 10

2003 37 30 8.11 7.94 0.17 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.03% 0.00% 15.35% 0.81% 1.63% 2.17% 11

2003 292 33 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.05% 0.00% 14.75% 0.84% 1.40% 1.96% 12

2003 275 35 8.18 8.02 0.16 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.74% 0.00% 14.77% 0.84% 1.68% 1.96% 13

2003 13 35 8.17 8.02 0.15 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.10% 0.00% 14.74% 0.89% 1.19% 2.08% 14

2003 25 35 8.17 8.02 0.15 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.06% 0.00% 14.77% 0.89% 1.19% 2.09% 15

2003 28 20 8.16 8.02 0.15 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.78% 0.00% 14.65% 0.91% 1.52% 2.13% 16

2003 276 35 8.16 8.02 0.14 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.99% 0.00% 14.61% 0.94% 1.26% 2.20% 17

2003 312 35 8.16 8.02 0.14 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.81% 0.00% 14.63% 0.98% 1.63% 1.95% 18

2003 133 35 8.23 8.10 0.13 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.92% 0.00% 13.93% 0.69% 1.38% 2.07% 19

2003 273 35 8.46 8.33 0.13 4.9 3.5 5.1 84.07% 0.00% 12.55% 0.68% 1.01% 1.69% 20

# New IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 24 31 8.46 8.02 0.45 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.12% 0.00% 14.75% 0.80% 1.21% 2.11% 1

2003 259 35 8.72 8.33 0.38 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.98% 0.00% 12.39% 0.68% 1.25% 1.70% 2

2003 82 35 8.37 8.02 0.35 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.95% 0.00% 14.69% 0.90% 1.41% 2.05% 3

2003 144 24 8.43 8.10 0.32 4.2 3.2 4.6 82.24% 0.00% 14.06% 0.82% 0.96% 1.92% 4

2001 337 33 8.30 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.08% 0.00% 14.81% 0.79% 1.26% 2.05% 5

2002 350 35 8.30 8.02 0.28 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.07% 0.00% 14.74% 0.81% 1.29% 2.09% 6

2002 96 30 8.28 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.79% 0.00% 14.69% 0.87% 1.56% 2.09% 7

2003 118 35 8.27 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.66% 0.88% 1.40% 2.10% 8

2001 365 35 8.27 8.02 0.25 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.81% 0.00% 14.75% 0.89% 1.42% 2.13% 9

2002 2 33 8.25 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.06% 0.00% 14.72% 0.77% 1.34% 2.11% 10

2001 144 20 8.33 8.10 0.23 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.97% 0.00% 13.96% 0.77% 1.36% 1.94% 11

2002 167 20 8.43 8.21 0.22 4.5 3.3 4.9 82.75% 0.00% 13.30% 0.79% 1.38% 1.78% 12

2003 43 35 8.16 7.94 0.22 3.8 2.9 4.3 80.13% 0.00% 15.49% 0.83% 1.46% 2.08% 13

2002 305 24 8.23 8.02 0.22 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.96% 0.00% 14.67% 0.83% 1.46% 2.08% 14

2003 249 35 8.55 8.33 0.22 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.76% 0.00% 12.39% 0.81% 1.21% 1.82% 15

2001 275 35 8.23 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.84% 0.00% 14.65% 0.86% 1.50% 2.15% 16

2001 23 30 8.23 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.92% 0.00% 14.76% 0.87% 1.30% 2.16% 17

2003 148 35 8.31 8.10 0.21 4.2 3.2 4.6 81.95% 0.00% 13.97% 0.86% 1.29% 1.93% 18

2001 77 35 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.89% 0.00% 14.74% 0.87% 1.53% 1.97% 19

2002 26 14 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.89% 0.00% 14.74% 0.87% 1.53% 1.97% 20

2003 318 28 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.82% 0.00% 14.79% 0.88% 1.54% 1.97% 21

2003 104 24 8.22 8.02 0.20 4.0 3.0 4.5 81.24% 0.00% 14.70% 0.90% 1.13% 2.03% 22

2001 270 35 8.53 8.33 0.20 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.93% 0.00% 12.49% 0.67% 1.12% 1.79% 23

2001 86 30 8.21 8.02 0.19 4.0 3.0 4.5 80.78% 0.00% 14.75% 0.94% 1.41% 2.11% 24

2001 269 33 8.52 8.33 0.19 4.9 3.5 5.1 83.81% 0.00% 12.50% 0.69% 1.15% 1.84% 25

# Old IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 24 32 8.253 7.692 0.561 3.7 81.44 0 15.22 0.68 1.01 1.66 1

2001 270 40 8.078 7.692 0.386 4.2 83.18 0 13.7 0.61 1.02 1.49 2

2001 365 39 8.077 7.692 0.385 3.7 81.32 0 15.2 0.68 1.15 1.65 3

2001 300 38 8.072 7.692 0.38 3.7 81.24 0 15.18 0.67 1.25 1.65 4

2001 337 32 8.053 7.692 0.361 3.7 81.42 0 15.22 0.68 1.03 1.66 5

2001 117 40 8.049 7.692 0.357 3.6 80.86 0 15.53 0.69 1.22 1.69 6

2001 77 38 8.001 7.692 0.309 3.7 81.28 0 15.19 0.68 1.2 1.65 7

2001 144 19 7.981 7.692 0.289 3.8 81.72 0 14.87 0.66 1.13 1.62 8

2001 275 37 7.963 7.692 0.271 3.7 81.29 0 15.19 0.68 1.19 1.65 9

2001 344 40 7.958 7.692 0.266 3.7 81.26 0 15.19 0.68 1.22 1.65 10

2001 23 30 7.956 7.692 0.264 3.7 81.43 0 15.22 0.68 1.02 1.66 11

2001 86 30 7.935 7.692 0.243 3.7 81.28 0 15.19 0.68 1.2 1.65 12

2001 355 19 7.926 7.692 0.234 3.7 81.32 0 15.2 0.68 1.15 1.65 13

2001 269 33 7.924 7.692 0.233 4.2 83.14 0 13.69 0.61 1.07 1.49 14

2001 316 12 7.922 7.692 0.23 3.7 81.41 0 15.22 0.68 1.04 1.66 15

2001 314 39 7.918 7.692 0.226 3.7 81.28 0 15.19 0.68 1.2 1.65 16

2001 326 40 7.917 7.692 0.225 3.7 81.29 0 15.19 0.68 1.19 1.65 17

2001 281 40 7.916 7.692 0.224 3.7 81.26 0 15.19 0.68 1.22 1.65 18

2001 33 40 7.907 7.692 0.215 3.5 80.39 0 15.88 0.71 1.29 1.73 19

2001 175 12 7.905 7.692 0.214 4 82.49 0 14.26 0.63 1.06 1.55 20

2002 350 38 8.085 7.692 0.393 3.7 81.43 0 15.22 0.68 1.02 1.66 1

2002 334 40 8.034 7.692 0.343 3.7 81.27 0 15.19 0.68 1.21 1.65 2

2002 96 30 8.012 7.692 0.32 3.6 80.85 0 15.53 0.69 1.23 1.69 3

2002 2 33 7.99 7.692 0.298 3.7 81.39 0 15.21 0.68 1.07 1.66 4

2002 83 40 7.983 7.692 0.291 3.7 81.27 0 15.19 0.68 1.21 1.65 5

2002 95 40 7.979 7.692 0.287 3.6 80.85 0 15.53 0.69 1.24 1.69 6

2002 167 19 7.971 7.692 0.28 4 82.44 0 14.25 0.63 1.13 1.55 7

2002 140 40 7.968 7.692 0.276 3.8 81.65 0 14.86 0.66 1.22 1.62 8

2002 305 24 7.966 7.692 0.275 3.7 81.36 0 15.21 0.68 1.1 1.66 9

2002 26 19 7.955 7.692 0.263 3.7 81.25 0 15.19 0.67 1.23 1.65 10

2002 312 38 7.933 7.692 0.241 3.7 81.36 0 15.21 0.68 1.1 1.66 11

2002 287 36 7.93 7.692 0.238 3.7 81.27 0 15.19 0.68 1.21 1.65 12

2002 336 37 7.92 7.692 0.228 3.7 81.27 0 15.19 0.68 1.21 1.65 13

2002 291 40 7.916 7.692 0.225 3.7 81.3 0 15.2 0.68 1.17 1.65 14

2002 332 22 7.905 7.692 0.213 3.7 81.3 0 15.2 0.68 1.17 1.65 15

2002 60 40 7.901 7.692 0.21 3.5 80.51 0 15.91 0.71 1.15 1.73 16

2002 34 24 7.885 7.692 0.193 3.5 80.48 0 15.9 0.71 1.18 1.73 17

2002 70 35 7.882 7.692 0.19 3.7 81.24 0 15.18 0.67 1.25 1.65 18

2002 54 22 7.847 7.692 0.155 3.5 80.38 0 15.88 0.71 1.31 1.73 19

2002 27 40 7.842 7.692 0.15 3.7 81.26 0 15.19 0.68 1.22 1.65 20

2003 118 40 8.263 7.692 0.571 3.6 80.88 0 15.54 0.69 1.2 1.69 1

2003 259 37 8.225 7.692 0.533 4.2 83.17 0 13.69 0.61 1.03 1.49 2

2003 82 38 8.171 7.692 0.479 3.7 81.36 0 15.21 0.68 1.1 1.66 3

2003 144 24 8.094 7.692 0.402 3.8 82 0 14.92 0.66 0.79 1.62 4

2003 276 40 8.087 7.692 0.395 3.7 81.32 0 15.2 0.68 1.15 1.66 5

2003 43 38 8.001 7.692 0.309 3.5 80.49 0 15.9 0.71 1.17 1.73 6

2003 313 40 7.998 7.692 0.306 3.7 81.34 0 15.2 0.68 1.13 1.66 7

2003 249 35 7.956 7.692 0.264 4.2 83.2 0 13.7 0.61 1 1.49 8

2003 318 28 7.953 7.692 0.261 3.7 81.24 0 15.18 0.67 1.24 1.65 9

2003 133 40 7.953 7.692 0.261 3.8 81.76 0 14.88 0.66 1.08 1.62 10

2003 148 35 7.952 7.692 0.26 3.8 81.71 0 14.87 0.66 1.14 1.62 11

2003 104 24 7.94 7.692 0.248 3.6 81.14 0 15.59 0.69 0.88 1.7 12

2003 312 40 7.936 7.692 0.244 3.7 81.21 0 15.18 0.67 1.28 1.65 13

2003 13 39 7.92 7.692 0.228 3.7 81.47 0 15.23 0.68 0.97 1.66 14

2003 25 40 7.917 7.692 0.225 3.7 81.34 0 15.2 0.68 1.12 1.66 15

2003 37 30 7.903 7.692 0.211 3.5 80.46 0 15.9 0.71 1.2 1.73 16

2003 292 33 7.897 7.692 0.205 3.7 81.33 0 15.2 0.68 1.13 1.66 17

2003 275 35 7.896 7.692 0.204 3.7 81.23 0 15.18 0.67 1.26 1.65 18

2003 40 40 7.889 7.692 0.197 3.5 80.42 0 15.89 0.71 1.25 1.73 19

2003 28 19 7.881 7.692 0.189 3.7 81.35 0 15.21 0.68 1.11 1.66 20

# Old IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2003 118 40 8.263 7.692 0.571 3.6 80.88 0 15.54 0.69 1.2 1.69 1

2001 24 32 8.253 7.692 0.561 3.7 81.44 0 15.22 0.68 1.01 1.66 2

2003 259 37 8.225 7.692 0.533 4.2 83.17 0 13.69 0.61 1.03 1.49 3

2003 82 38 8.171 7.692 0.479 3.7 81.36 0 15.21 0.68 1.1 1.66 4

2003 144 24 8.094 7.692 0.402 3.8 82 0 14.92 0.66 0.79 1.62 5

2003 276 40 8.087 7.692 0.395 3.7 81.32 0 15.2 0.68 1.15 1.66 6

2002 350 38 8.085 7.692 0.393 3.7 81.43 0 15.22 0.68 1.02 1.66 7

2001 270 40 8.078 7.692 0.386 4.2 83.18 0 13.7 0.61 1.02 1.49 8

2001 365 39 8.077 7.692 0.385 3.7 81.32 0 15.2 0.68 1.15 1.65 9

2001 300 38 8.072 7.692 0.38 3.7 81.24 0 15.18 0.67 1.25 1.65 10

2001 337 32 8.053 7.692 0.361 3.7 81.42 0 15.22 0.68 1.03 1.66 11

2001 117 40 8.049 7.692 0.357 3.6 80.86 0 15.53 0.69 1.22 1.69 12

2002 334 40 8.034 7.692 0.343 3.7 81.27 0 15.19 0.68 1.21 1.65 13

2002 96 30 8.012 7.692 0.32 3.6 80.85 0 15.53 0.69 1.23 1.69 14

2001 77 38 8.001 7.692 0.309 3.7 81.28 0 15.19 0.68 1.2 1.65 15

2003 43 38 8.001 7.692 0.309 3.5 80.49 0 15.9 0.71 1.17 1.73 16

2003 313 40 7.998 7.692 0.306 3.7 81.34 0 15.2 0.68 1.13 1.66 17

2002 2 33 7.99 7.692 0.298 3.7 81.39 0 15.21 0.68 1.07 1.66 18

2002 83 40 7.983 7.692 0.291 3.7 81.27 0 15.19 0.68 1.21 1.65 19

2001 144 19 7.981 7.692 0.289 3.8 81.72 0 14.87 0.66 1.13 1.62 20

2002 95 40 7.979 7.692 0.287 3.6 80.85 0 15.53 0.69 1.24 1.69 21

2002 167 19 7.971 7.692 0.28 4 82.44 0 14.25 0.63 1.13 1.55 22

2002 140 40 7.968 7.692 0.276 3.8 81.65 0 14.86 0.66 1.22 1.62 23

2002 305 24 7.966 7.692 0.275 3.7 81.36 0 15.21 0.68 1.1 1.66 24

2001 275 37 7.963 7.692 0.271 3.7 81.29 0 15.19 0.68 1.19 1.65 25

# Old IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibili ty Change for Breton (Top 20 Days Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 24 31 8.25 7.69 0.56 3.7 81.46 0.00 15.22 0.68 0.98 1.66 1

2001 337 33 8.05 7.69 0.36 3.7 81.42 0.00 15.22 0.68 1.03 1.66 2

2001 365 35 8.01 7.69 0.32 3.7 81.32 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.15 1.66 3

2001 144 20 7.98 7.69 0.29 3.8 81.71 0.00 14.87 0.66 1.14 1.62 4

2001 275 35 7.96 7.69 0.27 3.7 81.32 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.15 1.66 5

2001 23 30 7.96 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.43 0.00 15.22 0.68 1.02 1.66 6

2001 77 35 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.28 0.00 15.19 0.68 1.19 1.65 7

2001 86 30 7.94 7.69 0.24 3.7 81.28 0.00 15.19 0.68 1.20 1.65 8

2001 270 35 7.93 7.69 0.24 4.2 83.20 0.00 13.70 0.61 1.00 1.49 9

2001 355 12 7.93 7.69 0.23 3.7 81.35 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.11 1.66 10

2001 300 35 7.93 7.69 0.23 3.7 81.25 0.00 15.19 0.67 1.24 1.65 11

2001 269 33 7.92 7.69 0.23 4.2 83.14 0.00 13.69 0.61 1.07 1.49 12

2001 316 12 7.92 7.69 0.23 3.7 81.41 0.00 15.22 0.68 1.04 1.66 13

2001 175 12 7.91 7.69 0.21 4.0 82.49 0.00 14.26 0.63 1.06 1.55 14

2001 70 35 7.90 7.69 0.21 3.7 81.33 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.14 1.66 15

2001 116 24 7.89 7.69 0.20 3.6 80.81 0.00 15.52 0.69 1.29 1.69 16

2001 69 24 7.89 7.69 0.20 3.7 81.24 0.00 15.18 0.67 1.24 1.65 17

2001 344 35 7.89 7.69 0.20 3.7 81.26 0.00 15.19 0.67 1.23 1.65 18

2001 301 12 7.89 7.69 0.20 3.7 81.36 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.10 1.66 19

2001 196 24 7.89 7.69 0.20 4.3 83.44 0.00 13.42 0.60 1.08 1.46 20

2002 350 35 8.05 7.69 0.35 3.7 81.44 0.00 15.22 0.68 1.00 1.66 1

2002 96 30 8.01 7.69 0.32 3.6 80.85 0.00 15.53 0.69 1.23 1.69 2

2002 2 33 7.99 7.69 0.30 3.7 81.39 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.07 1.66 3

2002 167 20 7.97 7.69 0.28 4.0 82.44 0.00 14.25 0.63 1.13 1.55 4

2002 305 24 7.97 7.69 0.28 3.7 81.36 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.10 1.66 5

2002 26 14 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.26 0.00 15.19 0.67 1.23 1.65 6

2002 287 35 7.93 7.69 0.24 3.7 81.27 0.00 15.19 0.68 1.21 1.65 7

2002 332 22 7.91 7.69 0.21 3.7 81.30 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.17 1.65 8

2002 336 35 7.90 7.69 0.21 3.7 81.28 0.00 15.19 0.68 1.20 1.65 9

2002 312 35 7.90 7.69 0.21 3.7 81.38 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.08 1.66 10

2002 34 24 7.89 7.69 0.19 3.5 80.48 0.00 15.90 0.71 1.18 1.73 11

2002 95 35 7.88 7.69 0.19 3.6 80.86 0.00 15.53 0.69 1.23 1.69 12

2002 70 35 7.88 7.69 0.19 3.7 81.24 0.00 15.18 0.67 1.25 1.65 13

2002 291 35 7.88 7.69 0.19 3.7 81.35 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.11 1.66 14

2002 140 24 7.88 7.69 0.19 3.8 81.71 0.00 14.87 0.66 1.14 1.62 15

2002 60 35 7.86 7.69 0.17 3.5 80.53 0.00 15.91 0.71 1.12 1.73 16

2002 54 22 7.85 7.69 0.16 3.5 80.38 0.00 15.88 0.71 1.31 1.73 17

2002 40 35 7.84 7.69 0.15 3.5 80.50 0.00 15.90 0.71 1.16 1.73 18

2002 318 12 7.83 7.69 0.14 3.7 81.40 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.05 1.66 19

2002 83 35 7.83 7.69 0.14 3.7 81.29 0.00 15.19 0.68 1.19 1.65 20

2003 259 35 8.16 7.69 0.47 4.2 83.15 0.00 13.69 0.61 1.06 1.49 1

2003 82 35 8.13 7.69 0.44 3.7 81.35 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.11 1.66 2

2003 144 24 8.09 7.69 0.40 3.8 82.00 0.00 14.92 0.66 0.79 1.62 3

2003 118 35 8.01 7.69 0.32 3.6 80.90 0.00 15.54 0.69 1.17 1.69 4

2003 43 35 7.97 7.69 0.28 3.5 80.49 0.00 15.90 0.71 1.17 1.73 5

2003 249 35 7.96 7.69 0.26 4.2 83.20 0.00 13.70 0.61 1.00 1.49 6

2003 318 28 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.24 0.00 15.18 0.67 1.24 1.65 7

2003 148 35 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.8 81.71 0.00 14.87 0.66 1.14 1.62 8

2003 104 24 7.94 7.69 0.25 3.6 81.14 0.00 15.59 0.69 0.88 1.70 9

2003 313 35 7.93 7.69 0.24 3.7 81.32 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.15 1.65 10

2003 37 30 7.90 7.69 0.21 3.5 80.46 0.00 15.90 0.71 1.20 1.73 11

2003 292 33 7.90 7.69 0.21 3.7 81.33 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.13 1.66 12

2003 275 35 7.90 7.69 0.20 3.7 81.23 0.00 15.18 0.67 1.26 1.65 13

2003 25 35 7.88 7.69 0.19 3.7 81.40 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.05 1.66 14

2003 13 35 7.89 7.69 0.19 3.7 81.50 0.00 15.23 0.68 0.93 1.66 15

2003 28 20 7.88 7.69 0.19 3.7 81.35 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.11 1.66 16

2003 276 35 7.87 7.69 0.18 3.7 81.40 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.05 1.66 17

2003 312 35 7.87 7.69 0.18 3.7 81.21 0.00 15.18 0.67 1.28 1.65 18

2003 222 11 7.85 7.69 0.16 4.3 83.44 0.00 13.42 0.60 1.08 1.46 19

2003 133 35 7.85 7.69 0.16 3.8 81.79 0.00 14.89 0.66 1.04 1.62 20

# Old IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 24 31 8.25 7.69 0.56 3.7 81.46 0.00 15.22 0.68 0.98 1.66 1

2003 259 35 8.16 7.69 0.47 4.2 83.15 0.00 13.69 0.61 1.06 1.49 2

2003 82 35 8.13 7.69 0.44 3.7 81.35 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.11 1.66 3

2003 144 24 8.09 7.69 0.40 3.8 82.00 0.00 14.92 0.66 0.79 1.62 4

2001 337 33 8.05 7.69 0.36 3.7 81.42 0.00 15.22 0.68 1.03 1.66 5

2002 350 35 8.05 7.69 0.35 3.7 81.44 0.00 15.22 0.68 1.00 1.66 6

2001 365 35 8.01 7.69 0.32 3.7 81.32 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.15 1.66 7

2002 96 30 8.01 7.69 0.32 3.6 80.85 0.00 15.53 0.69 1.23 1.69 8

2003 118 35 8.01 7.69 0.32 3.6 80.90 0.00 15.54 0.69 1.17 1.69 9

2002 2 33 7.99 7.69 0.30 3.7 81.39 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.07 1.66 10

2001 144 20 7.98 7.69 0.29 3.8 81.71 0.00 14.87 0.66 1.14 1.62 11

2002 167 20 7.97 7.69 0.28 4.0 82.44 0.00 14.25 0.63 1.13 1.55 12

2002 305 24 7.97 7.69 0.28 3.7 81.36 0.00 15.21 0.68 1.10 1.66 13

2003 43 35 7.97 7.69 0.28 3.5 80.49 0.00 15.90 0.71 1.17 1.73 14

2001 275 35 7.96 7.69 0.27 3.7 81.32 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.15 1.66 15

2001 23 30 7.96 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.43 0.00 15.22 0.68 1.02 1.66 16

2003 249 35 7.96 7.69 0.26 4.2 83.20 0.00 13.70 0.61 1.00 1.49 17

2001 77 35 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.28 0.00 15.19 0.68 1.19 1.65 18

2002 26 14 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.26 0.00 15.19 0.67 1.23 1.65 19

2003 318 28 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.7 81.24 0.00 15.18 0.67 1.24 1.65 20

2003 148 35 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.8 81.71 0.00 14.87 0.66 1.14 1.62 21

2003 104 24 7.94 7.69 0.25 3.6 81.14 0.00 15.59 0.69 0.88 1.70 22

2001 86 30 7.94 7.69 0.24 3.7 81.28 0.00 15.19 0.68 1.20 1.65 23

2001 270 35 7.93 7.69 0.24 4.2 83.20 0.00 13.70 0.61 1.00 1.49 24

2003 313 35 7.93 7.69 0.24 3.7 81.32 0.00 15.20 0.68 1.15 1.65 25

# Appendix B

Breton Wilderness Receptors

[The material referenced in Appe ndix B is included as a separate

document along with this site specific BART modeling report.]

# BART Exemption Modeling Report:

Mississippi Power Company

Plant Watson

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation

for Mississippi Power Company

January 2007

# January 2007 

# i 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introd ucti on............................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Objectives........................................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Cl ass I Areas ................................................................................ 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissi ons da ta ............................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data................................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 Air quality mode ling pro cedures ............................................................................................

............... 3-1

3.1 Modeling domain and rec eptors ..................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Light extinction and haze impact calc ulations ................................................................................ 3-1

3.3 General quality assu rance pr ocedur es........................................................................................... 3-3

4.0 Modeling results...........................................................................................................

............................ 4-1

Appendix A Delta-Deciview Values for The Top 20 Days – For Each Year/Each Class I Area

and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years .....................................................................A-1

Appendix B Breton Wi lderness R ecepto rs......................................................................................... .....B-1

# January 2007 

# ii 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc



# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant Watson modeling emission par ameters......................................................................... 2-3



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Plant Wa tson .................................................... 1-2

# January 2007 

# 1-1 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that

‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be antici pated to cause or contribute to any impairment of

visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Purs uant to federal regulations, states have the option of

exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requirements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating

that the source cannot reasonably be anti cipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I

area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states subject

to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determi ne that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

# and

NO

x 

# for electric generating units (EGUs). Feedback from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

indicates that CAIR satisfies BART for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling report focuses on

performing the BART modeling analysis for particulate matter (PM) only.

Units 4 and 5 at Plant Watson, located near Gulf port, which are owned and operated by Mississippi Power

Company, have been identified as a BART-eligible s ource. The modeling procedures outlined in the sourcespecific modeling protocol for Plant Watson were used to determine whether the source is subject to BART

requirements (exemption modeling). The modeling proc edures are consistent with those outlined in the

updated final VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3.2 – August 31,

2006), available at http://www.vistas-sesarm.or g/documents/BARTModeli ngPro tocol_rev3.2_31Aug06.pdf

. The source-specific BART modeling protocol references relevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling

protocol.



# 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Mississippi Department of Environm ental Quality, which is in char ge of the state’s BART program, has

determined that Units 4 and 5 at Plant Watson are BART- eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of Plant

Watson relative to nearby Class I Areas. There is one Cl ass I area within 300 km of the plant: Breton Island

(44.8 km). The BART exemption modeling was conduct ed for this Class I area in accordance with the

referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source-specific

BART modeling protocol.

# January 2007 

# 1-2 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant Watson

# January 2007 

# 2-1 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the vi sibility impacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant Watson

are discussed in this section. The Mississippi Departm ent of Environmental Quality has indicated that CAIR

will satisfy BART for EGUs for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# . Therefore, this BART exemption modeling analysis focuses only

on PM 10 

# . Since various components of PM 10 

# emissions have different visibility extinction efficiencies, the PM 10 

# emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and

4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5.) allows fo r the use of source-specific emissions and speciation

factors and/or default values from AP-42. The PM 10 

# emissions and speciation approach that were used for the

modeling is indicated below. Where default speciati on values are used, the data represents a unit where

current (baseline) emission controls include electr ostatic precipitators (ESPs), but no post-combustion NO

x 

# or

SO 2 

# control equipment exists.

• Total PM 10 

# is comprised of filterable and condensable emissions.

• Baseline filterable PM 10 

# emissions are based on the highest stack test for the most recent 3-year

period (2003-2005). This stack test is combined wi th the highest 24 hour heat input value for this

period from CEMS data to calculate the “maximum 24-hour average emission rate” as required by the

VISTAS protocol.

• Filterable PM 10 

# has been subdivided by size category consis tent with the defaul t approach from AP-42

Table 1-1.6, and as noted on pages 43 and 44 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The

AP-42 Table 1-1.6 specifies for the emission controls indicated above that 55.6% of filterable PM 10 

# emission is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in size) and 44.4% is fine. Of the fine portion, 3.7% is

elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fine particulates (soil).

• Condensable PM 10 

# consists of inorganic and organic compounds . The inorganic portion is by default

assumed to be H 2 

# SO 4 

# , although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The

organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols.

• Baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions are calculated consistent wi th the method used by Mississippi Power to

derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach assumes that the H 2 

# SO 4 

# emissions released

from the stack are proportional to SO 2 

# emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type

and the removal of H 2 

# SO 4 

# by downstream equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater). For eastern

bituminous coal the baseline H 2 

# SO 4 

# release rate is in the range of 0.3 to 0.5% of the SO 2 

# emissions.

Appendix A of the site-specific modeling protocol provides the basis for the site-specific values used.

• Baseline emissions of condensable organics (the remaining portion of condensable PM 10 

# ) are derived

based on the supporting field observational informat ion in Appendix B of the site-specific modeling

protocol and is estimated as 0.32% of SO 2 

# emitted.

• Coarse filterable particles (between 2.5 and 10 mic rons in size) are modeled with a geometric mass

mean diameter of 5 microns, while fine filter able and all condensable particles are modeled with a

geometric mass mean diameter of 0.48 microns, cons istent with the CALPUFF default value for fine

particles. The geometric standard deviation for both fine and coarse particles are set to 2 microns,

consistent with the CALPUFF default value. The 0.48 micron diameter value for fine particles comes

from the default values in sample input files pr esented on the TRC web site. There is no default

value presented for the coarse particles on the TRC web site. However, since 5 is the geometric

mass mean diameter of 2.5 and 10 (the bounds of coarse particle sizes), it is a reasonable estimate

for the geometric mass mean diameter for that class of particles.

In practice, CALPUFF allows for the user to input certain components of PM 10 

# as separate species and

separate sizes, which will result in more accurate wet and dry deposition velocity results and also more

# January 2007 

# 2-2 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# accurate effects on light scattering. As noted above, th e particle size distribution information is provided in

AP-42 Table 1-1.6, and was used for the BART exemption modeling.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emi ssion parameters used in the BART CALPUFF modeling,

consistent with the source emissi ons data presented in Appendices A and B of the site-specific modeling

protocol for the baseline. All of the emissions in T able 2-1 were derived from CEMS data for the 2003 to 2005

period and represent the maximum 24-hour average lb/h r rates (excluding days where startup, shutdown, or

malfunctions occurred). For NO

x 

# and SO 2 

# the values are directly from CEMS. Filterable PM 10 

# emissions were

calculated using the highest stack test over the 2003 to 2005 period and multiplying these values times the

maximum 24-hour average heat input derived from CEMS . These values were then adjusted using AP-42

factors from Table 1.1-6 that indicate that PM 10 

# is 67% of total PM for a pulv erized coal unit with an ESP. PM 10 

# speciation was then performed as indicated above such that total Filterable PM 10 

# is made up of Coarse Soil

plus total Fine PM and total Fine PM is made up of Fine Soil plus Elemental Carbon (EC).January 20072-3010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.docTable 2-1 Plant Watson modeling emission parametersLocation UTM(Zone 16 NAD-83)Emissions1ParticleSpeciation2CaseSource/ UnitUTMEastUTMNorthActualStack HtBaseElev.FlueDiameterGasExitVel.StackGasExitTemp.SO2NOXPM10Filt.PM10CoarseSoilFinePMFineSoilECCond.PM10H2SO4Organicm m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 4 305,854 3,368,909 106.7 5.5 4.925.0 397.6 8596.271626.48127.35 74.56 41.45 33.10 31.88 1.22 52.80 25.29 27.51Baseline Unit 5 305,854 3,368,909 121.9 5.56.4 28.4 444.510540.08 4122.86291.29 211.46117.5793.89 90.42 3.4779.83 46.10 33.73Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 4 Unit 4 305,854 3,368,909 106.7 5.5 4.925.0 397.6 8596.271626.48127.35 74.56 41.45 33.10 31.88 1.22 52.80 25.29 27.51Stack 5 Unit 5 305,854 3,368,909 121.9 5.56.4 28.4 444.510540.08 4122.86291.29 211.46117.5793.89 90.42 3.4779.83 46.10 33.73Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/secg/sec g/sec g/sec g/secg/sec g/sec g/secg/secg/sec g/sec g/secStack 4 Unit 4 305,854 3,368,909 106.7 5.5 4.9 25.0 397.6 1083.13 204.9416.05 9.39 5.22 4.17 4.02 0.15 6.65 3.19 3.47Stack 5 Unit 5 305,854 3,368,909 121.9 5.5 6.4 28.4 444.5 1328.05 519.4836.70 26.64 14.81 11.83 11.39 0.44 10.06 5.81 4.251SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sources in CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of theBART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference inthe computation of certain particle species such as H2SO4.2Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10and H2SO4and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that H2SO4is input to CALPUFF asSO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4and SO4are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4to SO4is 96/98.3Stack credit is equal to actual stack height sincethis stack is grandfathered under stack height regulations.

# January 2007 

# 3-1 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.0 Air quality modeling procedures

The BART exemption modeling was conducted for this Cl ass I area in accordance with the referenced VISTAS

common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source-specific BART modeling

protocol for Plant Watson. This section provides a discussion of additional mode ling procedures that were

used and describes the quality assurance procedure was followed.



# 3.1 Modeling domain and receptor s

The Plant Watson BART runs used the sub-domain 4, 4-km CALMET data supplied by VISTAS, as discussed

in the source-specific modeling protoc ol. This domain includes all Class I areas within 300 km of the source,

plus a 50-km buffer.

The BART exemption modeling was conducted for Watson Un its 4 and 5 (BART eligible units) for each Class I

area within 300 km of the source (Breton Island). Th e receptors used for each of the Class I areas are based

on the NPS database of Class I receptors, as recommended by the VISTAS common protocol (Section 4.3.3).

For Breton, Mississippi Power has included in the modeli ng analysis all of the receptors that the US F&WS

has identified. However, Mississippi Power does not believe that all of the receptors ar e still valid receptors.

As a result of hurricane activity, several of the re ceptors identified by the US F&WS for Breton are now

located over water, rather than over land. Pursuant to the Wilderness Act of 1964, which defines wilderness

as "land," and because Congress made clear when it created the Breton wilderness area that only the land

mass was designated as wilderness , receptors that are now over wa ter are not relevant for assessing

visibility impacts at Breton. Nevertheless, Mississippi Power is including both the valid and invalid receptors

for purposes of this analysis. Appendix B provides more detailed support for the identification and

elimination of invalid receptors at Breton.



# 3.2 Light extinction and haze impact calculations

The CALPOST postprocessor was used as prescribed in the VISTAS protocol for the calculation of the impact

from the modeled source’s primary and secondary particu late matter concentrations on light extinction. The

formula that is currently used in CALPOST is the existing (not the November 2005 revised) IMPROVE/EPA

formula, which is applied to determine a change in light ex tinction due to increases in the particulate matter

component concentrations. Using the notation of CALPOST, the formula is the following:

b ext 

# = 3 f(RH) [(NH 4 

# )2SO 4 

# ] + 3 f(RH) [NH 4 

# NO 3 

# ] + 4[OC] + 1[Soil] + 0.6[Coarse Mass] + 10[EC] + b Ray



# The concentrations, in square brackets, are in ug/m 3 

# and b ext 

# is in units of Mm -1 

# . The Rayleigh scattering term

(b Ray 

# ) has a default value of 10 Mm -1 

# , as recommended in EPA guidance for tracking reasonable progress

(EPA, 2003a).

New IMPROVE Equation. Mississippi Power Company used the new IMPROVE equation to analyze the

CALPUFF results for Breton Island. This was done for several reasons. First, the new equation is the result of

an extensive evaluation of the most recent scienti fic data, undertaken by an ad hoc group of scientists

including representatives from the National Park Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, academia, and industry. The old equation was based on data and information that was over a

decade old. The new equation is based on the most recent data and information gleaned from scientific

studies done over the past decade. T he new equation adds more accurate terms for estimating light extinction

due to sulfate and nitrate, through the incorporation of size differentiation and revisions to the extinction

coefficients. Organic matter estimates are improved through a refinement to the organic compound mass to

organic mass ratio. Second, the new equation corrects several errors and omissions in the old equation. For

example, sea salt, which affects light extinction, was not part of the old equation, but has been added to the

# January 2007 

# 3-2 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# new equation. Moreover, the old equation’s constant Rayl eigh scattering term (corresponding to scattering at

10,000 feet elevation) has been revised to reflect the actual elevation of the specific Class I area.

The ad hoc group of scientists who recommended the c hanges to the equation drafted a technical support

document entitled “Revised IM PROVE Algorithm for Estimati ng Light Extinction from Particle Speciation Data”

(November 30, 2005). That document demonstrates that , for 21 Class I areas with nephelometer data, the

new equation produces more accurate results than the old equation. The IMPROVE Steering Committee

reviewed the work of the ad hoc group and its tec hnical support document, and approved the new equation in

December 2005.

The revisions to the IMPROVE equation are particularly impor tant for coastal sites (suc h as Breton). Sea salt

is an important component of extinction at coastal site s, and thus should be included in the equation for

estimating visibility impacts. In addi tion, the site-specific Rayleigh scatterin g term is important for coastal sites

because the default value in the old equation (10 Mm-1) was based on an elevation of 10,000 feet. At nearzero sea level, the new equation uses a more accurate coefficient of 11 Mm-1.

The new formula is shown below.

The apportionment of the total concentration of sulfat e compounds into the concentrations of the small and

large size fractions is accomp lished using the following equations.

This revised version of the IMPROVE Equation was used to perform the BART exemption modeling. Dr. Ivar

Tombach (VISTAS consultant) has produced a spreadsheet tool (Sept ember 29, 2006) to allow the new

IMPROVE formula results to be derived from the basic CALPOST outputs. Also, si nce the BART modeling is

focused only on PM, NO 2 

# was set to zero in the new formula. Fo r informational purposes, results from the old

equation are also presented. 

# )]([33.0 ) ( ] [6.0 ][)(7.1 ][1 ] [10 ] [1.6] [8.2 ] [)(1.5] [)(4.2 ] [)(8.4] [)(2.2

2 

# ppbNO SpecificSite Scattering Rayleigh Mass Course SaltSeaRHf SoilFine Carbon

Elemental Mass OrganicrgeLa Mass Organic Small NitratergeLaRHf Nitrate Small RHf SulfatergeLaRHf Sulfate Small RHf b

SS L S L S ext



# ×+ + ×+ ××+ ×+ ×+ ×+ ×+ ××+ ××+ × × + ××≈

3

3 

# /20] [], [

/20 ] [ ] [ mg Sulfate Total Sulfate Total

mg Sulfate Total SulfatergeLa μ

μ < × =

3 

# /20] [], [] [ mg Sulfate Total Sulfate Total SulfatergeLa μ ≥

=

] [] [] [ SulfatergeLa Sulfate Total Sulfate Small

− =

# January 2007 

# 3-3 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.3 General quality assurance procedures

Chapter 6 of the Final VISTAS Model ing Protocol discusses Quality Assur ance (QA). The purpose of the QA

program is to establish procedures for ensuring that products produced by the ap plication of the modeling

techniques for BART studies satisfy the regulatory objectives of the BART program.

The air quality modeling staff at Southern Company Services is managing and/or conducting the BART

Exemption Modeling application for this plant owned by Mi ssissippi Power Company. They made sure that all

recommended methods specified in the Final VISTAS M odeling Protocol were followed and that the modeling

was carefully and professionally conducted. Initially, the Company retained the services of ENSR/AECOM to

supplement the training received as part of VISTAS tr aining courses. Additionally, ENSR/AECOM experts

were given source data for one of Southern Company ’s BART eligible sources, and they performed a

complete analysis following the VISTAS common protocol. During this process, the lead Southern Company

modelers were taught each technical step.

ENSR/AECOM was used as a third-party review for th e CALPUFF analyses. ENSR has conducted numerous

CALPUFF analyses, and uses CALDESK animation softw are as well as Lakes Environmental CALVIEW

software with base maps to visualize the sources, rec eptors, and meteorology. ENSR/AECOM also uses the

CALPUFF QA output files in conjunction with ArcMap GI S software to plot the locations of the sources and

receptors as CALPUFF interprets them from the inpu t data. The output files from CALPUFF and CALPOST

are typically reviewed independently by ENSR/AECOM staff to assure accuracy and compliance with

approved regulatory procedures.

For the exemption modelin g, Southern Company’s BART modelers m ade sure that all checks were made

manually/visually as well as by using UltaEdit-32, a fi le comparing software. Additionally, these datasets were

randomly checked by another Southern Company modeler. During the modeling process, periodic progress

meetings were conducted with the project management team members, and phone calls and e-mail

exchanges were made with the CALPUFF modeling experts at ENSR/AECOM to resolve issues as they

arose.

The VISTAS Modeling Protocol states, “To the extent that modeling applications are using pre-defined

CALMET files and CALPUFF templates, t he quality assurance will be straigh tforward. More detailed steps are

needed for the setup of modeling files fo r source-specific applications of s ub-regional domains finer than 4

km.” For this application, the 4-km grid-spaced CALMET files for sub-domain 4 developed by VISTAS and the

CALPUFF templates were used. Southern Company BAR T modelers used the test met file to “benchmark”

the use of the CALMET files on their computers as indi cated on page 59 of the VISTAS common protocol. For

this BART exemption modeling application, documents we re developed and will be submitted that contained

source data required by the CALPUFF modeling system (CALPUFF, CALPOST and POSTUTIL).

# January 2007 

# 4-1 010207 Watson BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 4.0 Modeling results

The exemption modeling results are provided in Table 4- 1, and Appendix A lists delta-deciview results for the

top 20 days for each year modeled and the top 25 days for the overall three years at each Class I area. The

table indicates that both the 8 th 

# highest day’s impacts for each year and the 22 nd 

# highest day’s impacts over all

three years are below 0.5 delta-dv. These results demonstrate that Plant Watson’s PM 10 

# emissions do not

cause or contribute to visibility impairment. Therefore, the sour ce is not subject to BART for PM 10 

# , and no

further BART analysis is required.

Electronic data related to this application are provided on the attached disk. They include all input (INP) and

list (LST) files.

# Table 4-1 Summary of Results – Plan t Watson Refined BART Exemption Modeling

2001 2002 2003

Class I area Distance

from source

to Class I

area

boundary # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv # of days and

receptors

beyond 98 th



# percentile with

impact > 0.5

delta-dv 8 th



# Highest

delta-dv Highest of

8 th 

# Highest

delta-dv

for the 3-

years 22 nd



# Highest

delta-dv

over 3-

year

period

km Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv delta-dv delta-dv

Breton

Island

New Improve

Orig Recept 44.8 0 0 0.37 0 0 0.42 0 0 0.41 0.42 0.40

New Improve

Valid Recept 44.8 0 0 0.32 0 0 0.38 0 0 0.37 0.38 0.35

Old Improve

Orig Recept 44.8 0 0 0.45 1 1 0.52 1 1 0.50 0.52 0.48

Old Improve

Valid Recept 44.8 0 0 0.39 0 0 0.47 0 0 0.46 0.47 0.43

# Appendix A

Delta-Deciview Values for the Top 20 Days – for Each Year/Each

Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years

# New IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 9 39 8.68 8.02 0.66 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.33% 0.00% 14.78% 3.54% 7.08% 9.28% 1

2001 13 40 8.56 8.02 0.54 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.37% 0.00% 14.71% 3.54% 7.00% 9.39% 2

2001 195 40 8.73 8.33 0.40 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.01% 0.00% 13.15% 3.06% 5.79% 7.98% 3

2001 34 4 8.33 7.94 0.39 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.54% 0.00% 16.25% 3.57% 6.44% 9.20% 4

2001 37 34 8.33 7.94 0.39 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.39% 0.00% 16.62% 3.34% 6.79% 8.86% 5

2001 73 40 8.40 8.02 0.39 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.23% 0.00% 15.62% 3.47% 5.67% 9.02% 6

2001 206 40 8.70 8.33 0.37 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.18% 0.00% 13.80% 2.92% 5.50% 7.60% 7

2001 359 5 8.39 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.61% 0.00% 14.71% 3.65% 6.68% 9.36% 8

2001 66 37 8.37 8.02 0.35 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.84% 0.00% 15.26% 3.47% 6.30% 9.13% 9

2001 20 37 8.35 8.02 0.33 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.26% 0.00% 14.59% 3.63% 7.12% 9.41% 10

2001 177 40 8.53 8.21 0.32 4.5 3.3 4.9 68.63% 0.00% 14.65% 2.99% 5.71% 8.02% 11

2001 25 37 8.34 8.02 0.32 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.56% 0.00% 15.72% 3.38% 6.47% 8.87% 12

2001 353 40 8.33 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.54% 0.00% 14.93% 3.47% 6.80% 9.26% 13

2001 7 40 8.33 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.60% 0.00% 15.47% 3.35% 6.70% 8.88% 14

2001 10 4 8.32 8.02 0.30 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.80% 0.00% 14.62% 3.71% 6.38% 9.50% 15

2001 168 40 8.48 8.21 0.27 4.5 3.3 4.9 68.41% 0.00% 14.01% 3.26% 6.02% 8.30% 16

2001 143 5 8.37 8.10 0.27 4.2 3.2 4.6 67.03% 0.00% 14.18% 3.46% 6.26% 9.06% 17

2001 336 40 8.28 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.73% 0.00% 15.64% 3.45% 6.21% 8.97% 18

2001 81 38 8.27 8.02 0.25 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.32% 0.00% 14.75% 3.62% 7.07% 9.24% 19

2001 360 2 8.25 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.63% 0.00% 14.67% 3.67% 6.57% 9.46% 20

2002 44 40 8.71 7.94 0.77 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.45% 0.00% 15.36% 3.72% 6.75% 9.73% 1

2002 239 37 9.03 8.33 0.70 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.20% 0.00% 13.24% 3.04% 5.60% 7.91% 2

2002 205 24 8.89 8.33 0.56 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.25% 0.00% 12.73% 3.17% 5.57% 8.28% 3

2002 362 40 8.51 8.02 0.49 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.70% 0.00% 13.33% 3.98% 6.69% 10.31% 4

2002 240 17 8.81 8.33 0.47 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.65% 0.00% 13.27% 3.02% 5.03% 8.04% 5

2002 346 40 8.47 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.96% 0.00% 16.37% 3.22% 5.95% 8.49% 6

2002 63 40 8.45 8.02 0.43 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.36% 0.00% 14.59% 3.64% 6.96% 9.45% 7

2002 363 40 8.44 8.02 0.42 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.23% 0.00% 16.57% 3.19% 5.63% 8.39% 8

2002 49 40 8.34 7.94 0.41 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.38% 0.00% 15.95% 3.56% 6.78% 9.33% 9

2002 73 40 8.42 8.02 0.40 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.34% 0.00% 17.56% 2.93% 5.40% 7.77% 10

2002 311 40 8.40 8.02 0.38 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.35% 0.00% 14.58% 3.62% 7.00% 9.45% 11

2002 64 39 8.39 8.02 0.38 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.76% 0.00% 14.70% 3.57% 6.43% 9.53% 12

2002 43 40 8.30 7.94 0.36 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.70% 0.00% 15.48% 3.66% 6.44% 9.72% 13

2002 349 40 8.34 8.02 0.33 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.50% 0.00% 14.89% 3.57% 6.72% 9.32% 14

2002 215 2 8.66 8.33 0.32 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.26% 0.00% 12.87% 3.10% 5.53% 8.23% 15

2002 187 6 8.65 8.33 0.32 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.21% 0.00% 13.25% 3.03% 5.51% 7.99% 16

2002 345 37 8.32 8.02 0.30 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.83% 0.00% 14.88% 3.75% 4.80% 9.74% 17

2002 340 40 8.31 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.72% 0.00% 14.84% 3.55% 6.48% 9.41% 18

2002 58 38 8.23 7.94 0.29 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.07% 0.00% 15.29% 3.75% 7.20% 9.70% 19

2002 55 40 8.22 7.94 0.28 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.45% 0.00% 15.25% 3.68% 6.87% 9.75% 20

2003 354 40 8.71 8.02 0.69 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.86% 0.00% 14.71% 3.63% 6.31% 9.49% 1

2003 82 40 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.88% 0.00% 14.96% 3.58% 6.29% 9.29% 2

2003 359 9 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.41% 0.00% 14.93% 3.59% 5.54% 9.52% 3

2003 23 6 8.44 8.02 0.43 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.60% 0.00% 15.45% 3.37% 6.63% 8.95% 4

2003 301 1 8.43 8.02 0.42 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.74% 0.00% 14.97% 3.54% 6.43% 9.32% 5

2003 50 39 8.35 7.94 0.41 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.63% 0.00% 15.31% 3.82% 6.43% 9.81% 6

2003 143 6 8.51 8.10 0.41 4.2 3.2 4.6 66.92% 0.00% 14.55% 3.34% 6.36% 8.83% 7

2003 333 33 8.42 8.02 0.41 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.55% 0.00% 14.62% 3.64% 6.72% 9.47% 8

2003 117 4 8.42 8.02 0.40 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.76% 0.00% 14.96% 3.57% 6.46% 9.25% 9

2003 222 40 8.72 8.33 0.38 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.56% 0.00% 13.50% 2.94% 5.20% 7.80% 10

2003 346 40 8.39 8.02 0.38 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.51% 0.00% 14.71% 3.58% 6.79% 9.42% 11

2003 62 7 8.39 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.72% 0.00% 14.82% 3.60% 6.49% 9.37% 12

2003 83 13 8.35 8.02 0.34 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.56% 0.00% 14.99% 3.60% 6.66% 9.19% 13

2003 223 40 8.66 8.33 0.32 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.34% 0.00% 13.66% 2.96% 5.38% 7.66% 14

2003 11 4 8.33 8.02 0.32 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.34% 0.00% 14.71% 3.54% 7.08% 9.34% 15

2003 89 2 8.31 8.02 0.30 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.60% 0.00% 14.63% 3.62% 6.64% 9.51% 16

2003 15 1 8.31 8.02 0.30 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.48% 0.00% 14.68% 3.66% 6.72% 9.46% 17

2003 100 40 8.31 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.79% 0.00% 14.81% 3.57% 6.52% 9.31% 18

2003 5 4 8.30 8.02 0.28 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.64% 0.00% 14.59% 3.70% 6.59% 9.48% 19

2003 91 40 8.29 8.02 0.27 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.74% 0.00% 14.60% 3.63% 6.44% 9.58% 20

# New IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2002 44 40 8.71 7.94 0.77 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.45% 0.00% 15.36% 3.72% 6.75% 9.73% 1

2002 239 37 9.03 8.33 0.70 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.20% 0.00% 13.24% 3.04% 5.60% 7.91% 2

2003 354 40 8.71 8.02 0.69 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.86% 0.00% 14.71% 3.63% 6.31% 9.49% 3

2001 9 39 8.68 8.02 0.66 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.33% 0.00% 14.78% 3.54% 7.08% 9.28% 4

2002 205 24 8.89 8.33 0.56 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.25% 0.00% 12.73% 3.17% 5.57% 8.28% 5

2001 13 40 8.56 8.02 0.54 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.37% 0.00% 14.71% 3.54% 7.00% 9.39% 6

2002 362 40 8.51 8.02 0.49 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.70% 0.00% 13.33% 3.98% 6.69% 10.31% 7

2002 240 17 8.81 8.33 0.47 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.65% 0.00% 13.27% 3.02% 5.03% 8.04% 8

2003 82 40 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.88% 0.00% 14.96% 3.58% 6.29% 9.29% 9

2003 359 9 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.41% 0.00% 14.93% 3.59% 5.54% 9.52% 10

2002 346 40 8.47 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.96% 0.00% 16.37% 3.22% 5.95% 8.49% 11

2002 63 40 8.45 8.02 0.43 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.36% 0.00% 14.59% 3.64% 6.96% 9.45% 12

2003 23 6 8.44 8.02 0.43 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.60% 0.00% 15.45% 3.37% 6.63% 8.95% 13

2002 363 40 8.44 8.02 0.42 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.23% 0.00% 16.57% 3.19% 5.63% 8.39% 14

2003 301 1 8.43 8.02 0.42 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.74% 0.00% 14.97% 3.54% 6.43% 9.32% 15

2003 50 39 8.35 7.94 0.41 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.63% 0.00% 15.31% 3.82% 6.43% 9.81% 16

2003 143 6 8.51 8.10 0.41 4.2 3.2 4.6 66.92% 0.00% 14.55% 3.34% 6.36% 8.83% 17

2002 49 40 8.34 7.94 0.41 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.38% 0.00% 15.95% 3.56% 6.78% 9.33% 18

2003 333 33 8.42 8.02 0.41 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.55% 0.00% 14.62% 3.64% 6.72% 9.47% 19

2003 117 4 8.42 8.02 0.40 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.76% 0.00% 14.96% 3.57% 6.46% 9.25% 20

2002 73 40 8.42 8.02 0.40 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.34% 0.00% 17.56% 2.93% 5.40% 7.77% 21

2001 195 40 8.73 8.33 0.40 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.01% 0.00% 13.15% 3.06% 5.79% 7.98% 22

2001 34 4 8.33 7.94 0.39 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.54% 0.00% 16.25% 3.57% 6.44% 9.20% 23

2001 37 34 8.33 7.94 0.39 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.39% 0.00% 16.62% 3.34% 6.79% 8.86% 24

2001 73 40 8.40 8.02 0.39 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.23% 0.00% 15.62% 3.47% 5.67% 9.02% 25

# New IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 9 35 8.62 8.02 0.61 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.33% 0.00% 14.84% 3.57% 7.00% 9.26% 1

2001 13 34 8.42 8.02 0.41 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.61% 0.00% 14.78% 3.52% 6.72% 9.36% 2

2001 37 34 8.33 7.94 0.39 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.39% 0.00% 16.62% 3.34% 6.79% 8.86% 3

2001 195 35 8.69 8.33 0.35 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.17% 0.00% 13.25% 3.07% 5.65% 7.86% 4

2001 66 35 8.35 8.02 0.34 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.92% 0.00% 15.23% 3.45% 6.24% 9.16% 5

2001 73 35 8.35 8.02 0.34 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.07% 0.00% 15.52% 3.47% 5.87% 9.07% 6

2001 206 35 8.66 8.33 0.33 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.38% 0.00% 14.15% 2.78% 5.29% 7.40% 7

2001 25 33 8.33 8.02 0.32 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.61% 0.00% 15.71% 3.42% 6.42% 8.84% 8

2001 20 35 8.33 8.02 0.32 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.42% 0.00% 14.61% 3.57% 6.99% 9.42% 9

2001 177 35 8.52 8.21 0.31 4.5 3.3 4.9 68.63% 0.00% 14.50% 3.09% 5.76% 8.01% 10

2001 7 35 8.28 8.02 0.27 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.46% 0.00% 15.45% 3.38% 6.76% 8.95% 11

2001 336 35 8.27 8.02 0.25 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.85% 0.00% 15.62% 3.42% 6.12% 8.99% 12

2001 353 34 8.26 8.02 0.25 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.91% 0.00% 15.13% 3.50% 6.26% 9.20% 13

2001 168 27 8.44 8.21 0.24 4.5 3.3 4.9 68.52% 0.00% 13.99% 3.16% 5.95% 8.37% 14

2001 81 35 8.25 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.27% 0.00% 14.66% 3.67% 7.14% 9.26% 15

2001 65 35 8.25 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.27% 0.00% 14.23% 3.71% 7.23% 9.57% 16

2001 143 7 8.32 8.10 0.22 4.2 3.2 4.6 67.10% 0.00% 14.19% 3.54% 6.03% 9.15% 17

2001 92 35 8.22 8.02 0.20 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.76% 0.00% 14.76% 3.58% 6.50% 9.41% 18

2001 67 35 8.22 8.02 0.20 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.50% 0.00% 14.77% 3.63% 6.80% 9.30% 19

2001 83 35 8.21 8.02 0.20 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.64% 0.00% 15.00% 3.46% 6.68% 9.22% 20

2002 239 35 9.01 8.33 0.68 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.21% 0.00% 13.25% 3.03% 5.56% 7.96% 1

2002 44 27 8.59 7.94 0.65 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.94% 0.00% 15.48% 3.77% 6.02% 9.79% 2

2002 205 24 8.89 8.33 0.56 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.25% 0.00% 12.73% 3.17% 5.57% 8.28% 3

2002 240 17 8.81 8.33 0.47 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.65% 0.00% 13.27% 3.02% 5.03% 8.04% 4

2002 346 35 8.46 8.02 0.44 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.25% 0.00% 16.26% 3.25% 5.59% 8.64% 5

2002 362 34 8.45 8.02 0.43 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.85% 0.00% 13.48% 3.91% 6.48% 10.28% 6

2002 63 34 8.41 8.02 0.39 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.54% 0.00% 14.61% 3.67% 6.66% 9.53% 7

2002 73 27 8.40 8.02 0.38 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.41% 0.00% 17.63% 2.96% 5.20% 7.81% 8

2002 363 35 8.38 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.22% 0.00% 16.54% 3.20% 5.54% 8.50% 9

2002 64 35 8.37 8.02 0.35 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.92% 0.00% 14.72% 3.69% 6.11% 9.55% 10

2002 49 35 8.26 7.94 0.32 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.79% 0.00% 16.18% 3.50% 6.30% 9.24% 11

2002 187 7 8.65 8.33 0.32 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.21% 0.00% 13.25% 3.03% 5.51% 7.99% 12

2002 349 35 8.32 8.02 0.31 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.60% 0.00% 15.09% 3.54% 6.49% 9.29% 13

2002 43 35 8.23 7.94 0.29 3.8 2.9 4.3 65.15% 0.00% 15.64% 3.78% 5.67% 9.77% 14

2002 345 35 8.30 8.02 0.29 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.81% 0.00% 14.84% 3.76% 4.86% 9.73% 15

2002 58 35 8.22 7.94 0.28 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.12% 0.00% 15.32% 3.75% 7.18% 9.63% 16

2002 311 34 8.29 8.02 0.27 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.50% 0.00% 14.64% 3.64% 6.79% 9.44% 17

2002 340 16 8.29 8.02 0.27 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.40% 0.00% 15.04% 3.68% 5.35% 9.53% 18

2002 241 7 8.59 8.33 0.26 4.9 3.5 5.1 71.30% 0.00% 13.42% 3.02% 4.20% 8.06% 19

2002 199 35 8.58 8.33 0.25 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.45% 0.00% 13.53% 3.03% 5.16% 7.83% 20

2003 354 34 8.63 8.02 0.61 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.94% 0.00% 15.06% 3.69% 4.77% 9.54% 1

2003 359 9 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.41% 0.00% 14.93% 3.59% 5.54% 9.52% 2

2003 23 7 8.44 8.02 0.42 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.60% 0.00% 15.40% 3.40% 6.69% 8.91% 3

2003 143 7 8.51 8.10 0.41 4.2 3.2 4.6 66.85% 0.00% 14.67% 3.35% 6.37% 8.75% 4

2003 333 33 8.42 8.02 0.41 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.55% 0.00% 14.62% 3.64% 6.72% 9.47% 5

2003 50 35 8.34 7.94 0.40 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.78% 0.00% 15.24% 3.84% 6.21% 9.93% 6

2003 82 35 8.39 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.82% 0.00% 14.99% 3.60% 6.24% 9.36% 7

2003 62 7 8.39 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.72% 0.00% 14.82% 3.60% 6.49% 9.37% 8

2003 222 35 8.68 8.33 0.35 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.55% 0.00% 13.57% 2.98% 5.09% 7.82% 9

2003 83 14 8.35 8.02 0.34 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.56% 0.00% 14.99% 3.60% 6.66% 9.19% 10

2003 346 11 8.34 8.02 0.33 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.14% 0.00% 14.85% 3.58% 5.92% 9.51% 11

2003 301 7 8.29 8.02 0.28 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.76% 0.00% 14.88% 3.58% 6.34% 9.43% 12

2003 223 35 8.60 8.33 0.26 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.31% 0.00% 13.69% 2.97% 5.28% 7.75% 13

2003 18 35 8.28 8.02 0.26 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.83% 0.00% 14.70% 3.62% 6.38% 9.48% 14

2003 100 34 8.25 8.02 0.24 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.66% 0.00% 15.06% 3.62% 5.14% 9.52% 15

2003 5 7 8.24 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.04% 0.00% 14.40% 3.75% 6.13% 9.68% 16

2003 103 33 8.24 8.02 0.23 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.80% 0.00% 15.63% 3.39% 6.19% 8.98% 17

2003 105 35 8.24 8.02 0.22 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.16% 0.00% 15.32% 3.50% 5.76% 9.26% 18

2003 324 35 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.35% 0.00% 14.98% 3.69% 5.43% 9.55% 19

2003 340 7 8.22 8.02 0.21 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.48% 0.00% 14.83% 3.74% 5.50% 9.45% 20

# New IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

F(RH) % of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV S L SS %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2002 239 35 9.01 8.33 0.68 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.21% 0.00% 13.25% 3.03% 5.56% 7.96% 1

2002 44 27 8.59 7.94 0.65 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.94% 0.00% 15.48% 3.77% 6.02% 9.79% 2

2003 354 34 8.63 8.02 0.61 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.94% 0.00% 15.06% 3.69% 4.77% 9.54% 3

2001 9 35 8.62 8.02 0.61 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.33% 0.00% 14.84% 3.57% 7.00% 9.26% 4

2002 205 24 8.89 8.33 0.56 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.25% 0.00% 12.73% 3.17% 5.57% 8.28% 5

2002 240 17 8.81 8.33 0.47 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.65% 0.00% 13.27% 3.02% 5.03% 8.04% 6

2003 359 9 8.48 8.02 0.46 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.41% 0.00% 14.93% 3.59% 5.54% 9.52% 7

2002 346 35 8.46 8.02 0.44 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.25% 0.00% 16.26% 3.25% 5.59% 8.64% 8

2002 362 34 8.45 8.02 0.43 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.85% 0.00% 13.48% 3.91% 6.48% 10.28% 9

2003 23 7 8.44 8.02 0.42 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.60% 0.00% 15.40% 3.40% 6.69% 8.91% 10

2003 143 7 8.51 8.10 0.41 4.2 3.2 4.6 66.85% 0.00% 14.67% 3.35% 6.37% 8.75% 11

2001 13 34 8.42 8.02 0.41 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.61% 0.00% 14.78% 3.52% 6.72% 9.36% 12

2003 333 33 8.42 8.02 0.41 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.55% 0.00% 14.62% 3.64% 6.72% 9.47% 13

2003 50 35 8.34 7.94 0.40 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.78% 0.00% 15.24% 3.84% 6.21% 9.93% 14

2001 37 34 8.33 7.94 0.39 3.8 2.9 4.3 64.39% 0.00% 16.62% 3.34% 6.79% 8.86% 15

2002 63 34 8.41 8.02 0.39 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.54% 0.00% 14.61% 3.67% 6.66% 9.53% 16

2002 73 27 8.40 8.02 0.38 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.41% 0.00% 17.63% 2.96% 5.20% 7.81% 17

2003 82 35 8.39 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.82% 0.00% 14.99% 3.60% 6.24% 9.36% 18

2003 62 7 8.39 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.72% 0.00% 14.82% 3.60% 6.49% 9.37% 19

2002 363 35 8.38 8.02 0.37 4.0 3.0 4.5 66.22% 0.00% 16.54% 3.20% 5.54% 8.50% 20

2001 195 35 8.69 8.33 0.35 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.17% 0.00% 13.25% 3.07% 5.65% 7.86% 21

2002 64 35 8.37 8.02 0.35 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.92% 0.00% 14.72% 3.69% 6.11% 9.55% 22

2003 222 35 8.68 8.33 0.35 4.9 3.5 5.1 70.55% 0.00% 13.57% 2.98% 5.09% 7.82% 23

2001 66 35 8.35 8.02 0.34 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.92% 0.00% 15.23% 3.45% 6.24% 9.16% 24

2003 83 14 8.35 8.02 0.34 4.0 3.0 4.5 65.56% 0.00% 14.99% 3.60% 6.66% 9.19% 25

# Old IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 9 39 8.497 7.692 0.806 3.7 67.79 0 15.77 2.93 5.84 7.67 1

2001 13 40 8.35 7.692 0.658 3.7 67.87 0 15.67 2.96 5.76 7.74 2

2001 195 40 8.175 7.692 0.484 4.3 71.12 0 14.48 2.6 4.99 6.81 3

2001 37 34 8.169 7.692 0.477 3.5 66.62 0 17.66 2.79 5.58 7.34 4

2001 34 4 8.169 7.692 0.477 3.5 66.88 0 17.28 2.89 5.35 7.59 5

2001 73 40 8.167 7.692 0.475 3.7 68.46 0 16.55 2.84 4.71 7.44 6

2001 206 40 8.145 7.692 0.453 4.3 71.19 0 15.22 2.46 4.68 6.46 7

2001 359 5 8.143 7.692 0.451 3.7 68.05 0 15.7 2.97 5.52 7.77 8

2001 66 37 8.12 7.692 0.428 3.7 68.2 0 16.23 2.88 5.15 7.54 9

2001 20 37 8.1 7.692 0.408 3.7 67.83 0 15.56 2.98 5.85 7.78 10

2001 177 40 8.085 7.692 0.393 4 69.71 0 16.08 2.57 4.86 6.77 11

2001 25 37 8.083 7.692 0.392 3.7 67.92 0 16.66 2.77 5.39 7.27 12

2001 353 40 8.072 7.692 0.38 3.7 67.97 0 15.88 2.93 5.57 7.66 13

2001 7 40 8.071 7.692 0.379 3.7 67.86 0 16.44 2.81 5.54 7.36 14

2001 10 4 8.063 7.692 0.371 3.7 68.23 0 15.56 3.02 5.33 7.87 15

2001 168 40 8.02 7.692 0.328 4 69.7 0 15.36 2.72 5.1 7.12 16

2001 143 5 8.019 7.692 0.328 3.8 68.72 0 15.43 2.92 5.29 7.64 17

2001 336 40 8.013 7.692 0.321 3.7 68.15 0 16.61 2.8 5.1 7.34 18

2001 81 38 7.997 7.692 0.305 3.7 67.78 0 15.7 2.95 5.87 7.7 19

2001 360 2 7.978 7.692 0.286 3.7 68.17 0 15.7 2.98 5.36 7.79 20

2002 44 40 8.625 7.692 0.933 3.5 66.94 0 16.34 3.09 5.57 8.07 1

2002 239 37 8.544 7.692 0.852 4.3 71.26 0 14.59 2.59 4.78 6.78 2

2002 205 24 8.368 7.692 0.676 4.3 71.39 0 14.05 2.71 4.78 7.07 3

2002 362 40 8.292 7.692 0.6 3.7 68.35 0 14.23 3.29 5.57 8.55 4

2002 240 17 8.268 7.692 0.576 4.3 71.64 0 14.6 2.62 4.29 6.85 5

2002 346 40 8.253 7.692 0.561 3.7 68.14 0 17.35 2.65 4.89 6.98 6

2002 63 40 8.217 7.692 0.525 3.7 67.87 0 15.58 2.98 5.79 7.78 7

2002 363 40 8.209 7.692 0.518 3.7 68.26 0 17.57 2.62 4.66 6.9 8

2002 49 40 8.184 7.692 0.493 3.5 66.79 0 16.96 2.95 5.57 7.73 9

2002 73 40 8.182 7.692 0.49 3.7 68.18 0 18.57 2.41 4.45 6.39 10

2002 311 40 8.161 7.692 0.469 3.7 67.88 0 15.59 2.98 5.77 7.78 11

2002 64 39 8.152 7.692 0.46 3.7 68.2 0 15.63 3 5.34 7.83 12

2002 43 40 8.127 7.692 0.435 3.5 67.1 0 16.5 3.07 5.31 8.03 13

2002 349 40 8.093 7.692 0.401 3.7 67.97 0 15.9 2.93 5.55 7.65 14

2002 215 2 8.085 7.692 0.393 4.3 71.43 0 14.17 2.69 4.69 7.02 15

2002 187 6 8.078 7.692 0.386 4.3 71.29 0 14.56 2.6 4.75 6.8 16

2002 345 37 8.06 7.692 0.368 3.7 69.2 0 15.76 3.06 3.98 7.99 17

2002 340 40 8.049 7.692 0.357 3.7 68.17 0 15.76 2.97 5.34 7.76 18

2002 58 38 8.043 7.692 0.352 3.5 66.63 0 16.34 3.06 5.98 7.99 19

2002 55 40 8.037 7.692 0.345 3.5 66.86 0 16.26 3.09 5.7 8.08 20

2003 354 40 8.535 7.692 0.843 3.7 68.3 0 15.63 3.01 5.21 7.85 1

2003 82 40 8.256 7.692 0.564 3.7 68.27 0 15.92 2.95 5.16 7.71 2

2003 359 9 8.254 7.692 0.562 3.7 68.71 0 15.89 2.99 4.58 7.82 3

2003 23 6 8.211 7.692 0.52 3.7 67.93 0 16.41 2.82 5.45 7.39 4

2003 301 1 8.202 7.692 0.51 3.7 68.17 0 15.95 2.93 5.28 7.67 5

2003 50 39 8.194 7.692 0.502 3.5 67.12 0 16.33 3.11 5.33 8.12 6

2003 333 33 8.188 7.692 0.497 3.7 68.02 0 15.57 2.99 5.59 7.82 7

2003 143 6 8.189 7.692 0.497 3.8 68.55 0 15.8 2.83 5.4 7.42 8

2003 117 4 8.175 7.692 0.483 3.6 67.51 0 16.22 2.99 5.46 7.81 9

2003 222 40 8.161 7.692 0.469 4.3 71.49 0 14.89 2.55 4.4 6.68 10

2003 346 40 8.151 7.692 0.459 3.7 67.99 0 15.68 2.97 5.59 7.76 11

2003 62 7 8.148 7.692 0.456 3.7 68.18 0 15.75 2.97 5.32 7.77 12

2003 83 13 8.104 7.692 0.413 3.7 68 0 15.94 2.92 5.5 7.63 13

2003 223 40 8.088 7.692 0.396 4.3 71.26 0 15.09 2.49 4.63 6.54 14

2003 11 4 8.08 7.692 0.388 3.7 67.83 0 15.64 2.96 5.82 7.74 15

2003 89 2 8.057 7.692 0.365 3.7 68.06 0 15.64 2.98 5.52 7.8 16

2003 15 1 8.052 7.692 0.361 3.7 68.04 0 15.59 2.99 5.56 7.81 17

2003 100 40 8.041 7.692 0.349 3.6 67.56 0 16.08 3.02 5.44 7.89 18

2003 5 4 8.035 7.692 0.343 3.7 68.17 0 15.56 3.01 5.4 7.86 19

2003 91 40 8.026 7.692 0.334 3.7 68.19 0 15.52 3.02 5.38 7.88 20

# Old IMPROVE/Old Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2002 44 40 8.625 7.692 0.933 3.5 66.94 0 16.34 3.09 5.57 8.07 1

2002 239 37 8.544 7.692 0.852 4.3 71.26 0 14.59 2.59 4.78 6.78 2

2003 354 40 8.535 7.692 0.843 3.7 68.3 0 15.63 3.01 5.21 7.85 3

2001 9 39 8.497 7.692 0.806 3.7 67.79 0 15.77 2.93 5.84 7.67 4

2002 205 24 8.368 7.692 0.676 4.3 71.39 0 14.05 2.71 4.78 7.07 5

2001 13 40 8.35 7.692 0.658 3.7 67.87 0 15.67 2.96 5.76 7.74 6

2002 362 40 8.292 7.692 0.6 3.7 68.35 0 14.23 3.29 5.57 8.55 7

2002 240 17 8.268 7.692 0.576 4.3 71.64 0 14.6 2.62 4.29 6.85 8

2003 82 40 8.256 7.692 0.564 3.7 68.27 0 15.92 2.95 5.16 7.71 9

2003 359 9 8.254 7.692 0.562 3.7 68.71 0 15.89 2.99 4.58 7.82 10

2002 346 40 8.253 7.692 0.561 3.7 68.14 0 17.35 2.65 4.89 6.98 11

2002 63 40 8.217 7.692 0.525 3.7 67.87 0 15.58 2.98 5.79 7.78 12

2003 23 6 8.211 7.692 0.52 3.7 67.93 0 16.41 2.82 5.45 7.39 13

2002 363 40 8.209 7.692 0.518 3.7 68.26 0 17.57 2.62 4.66 6.9 14

2003 301 1 8.202 7.692 0.51 3.7 68.17 0 15.95 2.93 5.28 7.67 15

2003 50 39 8.194 7.692 0.502 3.5 67.12 0 16.33 3.11 5.33 8.12 16

2003 333 33 8.188 7.692 0.497 3.7 68.02 0 15.57 2.99 5.59 7.82 17

2003 143 6 8.189 7.692 0.497 3.8 68.55 0 15.8 2.83 5.4 7.42 18

2002 49 40 8.184 7.692 0.493 3.5 66.79 0 16.96 2.95 5.57 7.73 19

2002 73 40 8.182 7.692 0.49 3.7 68.18 0 18.57 2.41 4.45 6.39 20

2001 195 40 8.175 7.692 0.484 4.3 71.12 0 14.48 2.6 4.99 6.81 21

2003 117 4 8.175 7.692 0.483 3.6 67.51 0 16.22 2.99 5.46 7.81 22

2001 37 34 8.169 7.692 0.477 3.5 66.62 0 17.66 2.79 5.58 7.34 23

2001 34 4 8.169 7.692 0.477 3.5 66.88 0 17.28 2.89 5.35 7.59 24

2001 73 40 8.167 7.692 0.475 3.7 68.46 0 16.55 2.84 4.71 7.44 25

# Old IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2001 9 35 8.43 7.69 0.74 3.7 67.81 0.00 15.80 2.93 5.79 7.66 1

2001 13 34 8.19 7.69 0.50 3.7 68.02 0.00 15.77 2.95 5.53 7.72 2

2001 37 34 8.17 7.69 0.48 3.5 66.62 0.00 17.66 2.79 5.58 7.34 3

2001 195 35 8.12 7.69 0.43 4.3 71.20 0.00 14.64 2.58 4.84 6.75 4

2001 66 35 8.11 7.69 0.42 3.7 68.21 0.00 16.20 2.89 5.14 7.56 5

2001 73 35 8.11 7.69 0.41 3.7 68.40 0.00 16.51 2.84 4.80 7.45 6

2001 206 35 8.10 7.69 0.40 4.3 71.21 0.00 15.55 2.39 4.55 6.30 7

2001 25 33 8.08 7.69 0.39 3.7 67.95 0.00 16.66 2.77 5.35 7.27 8

2001 20 35 8.08 7.69 0.39 3.7 67.85 0.00 15.59 2.97 5.81 7.77 9

2001 177 35 8.07 7.69 0.38 4.0 69.70 0.00 15.96 2.60 4.92 6.82 10

2001 7 35 8.02 7.69 0.33 3.7 67.87 0.00 16.44 2.81 5.52 7.36 11

2001 336 35 8.00 7.69 0.31 3.7 68.23 0.00 16.65 2.80 4.98 7.34 12

2001 353 34 7.99 7.69 0.30 3.7 68.25 0.00 16.17 2.90 5.10 7.58 13

2001 168 27 7.98 7.69 0.29 4.0 69.69 0.00 15.34 2.72 5.12 7.12 14

2001 81 35 7.98 7.69 0.29 3.7 67.79 0.00 15.66 2.96 5.87 7.73 15

2001 65 35 7.98 7.69 0.28 3.7 67.82 0.00 15.18 3.05 5.98 7.96 16

2001 143 7 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.8 68.82 0.00 15.46 2.93 5.15 7.65 17

2001 67 35 7.94 7.69 0.24 3.7 68.03 0.00 15.69 2.97 5.55 7.77 18

2001 92 35 7.94 7.69 0.24 3.6 67.55 0.00 15.93 3.05 5.51 7.96 19

2001 83 35 7.93 7.69 0.24 3.7 67.97 0.00 15.91 2.92 5.55 7.64 20

2002 239 35 8.51 7.69 0.82 4.3 71.26 0.00 14.57 2.59 4.78 6.79 1

2002 44 27 8.48 7.69 0.79 3.5 67.34 0.00 16.50 3.09 4.98 8.09 2

2002 205 24 8.37 7.69 0.68 4.3 71.39 0.00 14.05 2.71 4.78 7.07 3

2002 240 17 8.27 7.69 0.58 4.3 71.64 0.00 14.60 2.62 4.29 6.85 4

2002 346 35 8.23 7.69 0.54 3.7 68.41 0.00 17.21 2.70 4.58 7.11 5

2002 362 34 8.22 7.69 0.53 3.7 68.48 0.00 14.43 3.27 5.34 8.48 6

2002 63 34 8.17 7.69 0.48 3.7 68.08 0.00 15.58 3.00 5.51 7.83 7

2002 73 27 8.16 7.69 0.47 3.7 68.30 0.00 18.59 2.42 4.28 6.41 8

2002 363 35 8.14 7.69 0.45 3.7 68.32 0.00 17.48 2.64 4.60 6.96 9

2002 64 35 8.12 7.69 0.43 3.7 68.39 0.00 15.69 3.00 5.06 7.85 10

2002 49 35 8.09 7.69 0.39 3.5 67.00 0.00 17.21 2.92 5.22 7.65 11

2002 187 7 8.08 7.69 0.39 4.3 71.29 0.00 14.56 2.60 4.76 6.80 12

2002 349 35 8.07 7.69 0.37 3.7 68.11 0.00 16.03 2.91 5.33 7.62 13

2002 345 35 8.04 7.69 0.35 3.7 69.18 0.00 15.76 3.06 4.00 7.99 14

2002 43 35 8.04 7.69 0.35 3.5 67.52 0.00 16.62 3.09 4.70 8.07 15

2002 58 35 8.03 7.69 0.34 3.5 66.65 0.00 16.31 3.07 5.96 8.01 16

2002 311 34 8.03 7.69 0.33 3.7 67.96 0.00 15.61 2.98 5.66 7.79 17

2002 340 16 8.02 7.69 0.33 3.7 68.87 0.00 15.96 2.99 4.35 7.82 18

2002 241 7 8.01 7.69 0.32 4.3 72.10 0.00 14.80 2.61 3.64 6.84 19

2002 199 35 7.99 7.69 0.30 4.3 71.46 0.00 14.97 2.53 4.41 6.63 20

2003 354 34 8.44 7.69 0.75 3.7 69.20 0.00 15.97 3.02 3.92 7.89 1

2003 359 9 8.25 7.69 0.56 3.7 68.71 0.00 15.89 2.99 4.58 7.82 2

2003 23 7 8.21 7.69 0.52 3.7 67.91 0.00 16.40 2.82 5.48 7.39 3

2003 333 33 8.19 7.69 0.50 3.7 68.02 0.00 15.57 2.99 5.59 7.82 4

2003 143 7 8.19 7.69 0.50 3.8 68.55 0.00 15.94 2.81 5.36 7.35 5

2003 50 35 8.18 7.69 0.48 3.5 67.28 0.00 16.26 3.14 5.13 8.19 6

2003 82 35 8.15 7.69 0.46 3.7 68.31 0.00 15.92 2.95 5.11 7.72 7

2003 62 7 8.15 7.69 0.46 3.7 68.18 0.00 15.75 2.97 5.32 7.77 8

2003 222 35 8.12 7.69 0.43 4.3 71.49 0.00 14.93 2.54 4.38 6.66 9

2003 83 14 8.10 7.69 0.41 3.7 67.99 0.00 15.93 2.92 5.52 7.64 10

2003 346 11 8.09 7.69 0.40 3.7 68.47 0.00 15.77 3.00 4.94 7.82 11

2003 301 7 8.03 7.69 0.34 3.7 68.20 0.00 15.84 2.96 5.27 7.73 12

2003 223 35 8.02 7.69 0.32 4.3 71.32 0.00 15.03 2.51 4.56 6.58 13

2003 18 35 8.01 7.69 0.32 3.7 68.22 0.00 15.62 3.00 5.31 7.84 14

2003 100 34 7.98 7.69 0.29 3.6 68.34 0.00 16.28 3.05 4.35 7.98 15

2003 5 7 7.97 7.69 0.28 3.7 68.48 0.00 15.40 3.07 5.04 8.01 16

2003 103 33 7.96 7.69 0.27 3.6 67.56 0.00 16.88 2.86 5.19 7.50 17

2003 105 35 7.96 7.69 0.27 3.6 67.84 0.00 16.61 2.94 4.91 7.70 18

2003 324 35 7.95 7.69 0.26 3.7 68.76 0.00 15.86 3.00 4.53 7.84 19

2003 340 7 7.95 7.69 0.25 3.7 68.79 0.00 15.84 3.01 4.50 7.86 20

# Old IMPROVE/New Receptors - Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Breton (Top 25 Days Over 3 Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Rank

2002 239 35 8.51 7.69 0.82 4.3 71.26 0.00 14.57 2.59 4.78 6.79 1

2002 44 27 8.48 7.69 0.79 3.5 67.34 0.00 16.50 3.09 4.98 8.09 2

2003 354 34 8.44 7.69 0.75 3.7 69.20 0.00 15.97 3.02 3.92 7.89 3

2001 9 35 8.43 7.69 0.74 3.7 67.81 0.00 15.80 2.93 5.79 7.66 4

2002 205 24 8.37 7.69 0.68 4.3 71.39 0.00 14.05 2.71 4.78 7.07 5

2002 240 17 8.27 7.69 0.58 4.3 71.64 0.00 14.60 2.62 4.29 6.85 6

2003 359 9 8.25 7.69 0.56 3.7 68.71 0.00 15.89 2.99 4.58 7.82 7

2002 346 35 8.23 7.69 0.54 3.7 68.41 0.00 17.21 2.70 4.58 7.11 8

2002 362 34 8.22 7.69 0.53 3.7 68.48 0.00 14.43 3.27 5.34 8.48 9

2003 23 7 8.21 7.69 0.52 3.7 67.91 0.00 16.40 2.82 5.48 7.39 10

2001 13 34 8.19 7.69 0.50 3.7 68.02 0.00 15.77 2.95 5.53 7.72 11

2003 333 33 8.19 7.69 0.50 3.7 68.02 0.00 15.57 2.99 5.59 7.82 12

2003 143 7 8.19 7.69 0.50 3.8 68.55 0.00 15.94 2.81 5.36 7.35 13

2003 50 35 8.18 7.69 0.48 3.5 67.28 0.00 16.26 3.14 5.13 8.19 14

2001 37 34 8.17 7.69 0.48 3.5 66.62 0.00 17.66 2.79 5.58 7.34 15

2002 63 34 8.17 7.69 0.48 3.7 68.08 0.00 15.58 3.00 5.51 7.83 16

2002 73 27 8.16 7.69 0.47 3.7 68.30 0.00 18.59 2.42 4.28 6.41 17

2003 82 35 8.15 7.69 0.46 3.7 68.31 0.00 15.92 2.95 5.11 7.72 18

2003 62 7 8.15 7.69 0.46 3.7 68.18 0.00 15.75 2.97 5.32 7.77 19

2002 363 35 8.14 7.69 0.45 3.7 68.32 0.00 17.48 2.64 4.60 6.96 20

2001 195 35 8.12 7.69 0.43 4.3 71.20 0.00 14.64 2.58 4.84 6.75 21

2002 64 35 8.12 7.69 0.43 3.7 68.39 0.00 15.69 3.00 5.06 7.85 22

2003 222 35 8.12 7.69 0.43 4.3 71.49 0.00 14.93 2.54 4.38 6.66 23

2001 66 35 8.11 7.69 0.42 3.7 68.21 0.00 16.20 2.89 5.14 7.56 24

2001 73 35 8.11 7.69 0.41 3.7 68.40 0.00 16.51 2.84 4.80 7.45 25

# Appendix B

Breton Wilderness Receptors

[The material referenced in Appe ndix B is included as a separate

document along with this site specific BART modeling report.]CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2002 44 040 785.506 -1068.61 D2.11 21.58 23.69 9.78 3.5 1.412 0 0.345 0.065 0.118 0.17 18.62 7.692002239037788.168-1071.18D1.91921.5823.4998.894.31.36700.280.050.0920.1328.547.692002205024792.307-1081.11D1.50921.5823.0896.994.31.07700.2120.0410.0720.10738.377.692002362040785.506-1068.61D1.33421.5822.9146.183.70.91200.190.0440.0740.11448.297.692002240017791.921-1085.83D1.2821.5822.865.934.30.91700.1870.0330.0550.08858.277.692002346040785.506-1068.61D1.24521.5822.8255.773.70.84800.2160.0330.0610.08768.257.69200263040785.506-1068.61D1.16421.5822.7445.393.70.7900.1810.0350.0670.09178.227.692002363040785.506-1068.61D1.14621.5822.7265.313.70.78300.2010.030.0530.07988.217.69200249040785.506-1068.61D1.0921.5822.675.053.50.72800.1850.0320.0610.08498.187.69200273040785.506-1068.61D1.08521.5822.6655.033.70.7400.2010.0260.0480.069108.187.692002311040785.506-1068.61D1.03621.5822.6164.83.70.70300.1610.0310.060.081118.167.69200264039786.394-1069.47D1.01721.5822.5974.713.70.69300.1590.030.0540.08128.157.69200243040785.506-1068.61D0.9621.5822.544.453.50.64400.1580.0290.0510.077138.137.692002349040785.506-1068.61D0.88321.5822.4634.093.70.600.140.0260.0490.068148.097.69200221502779.971-1115.94D0.86621.5822.4464.014.30.61800.1230.0230.0410.061158.097.69200218706789.227-1101.06D0.84921.5822.4293.934.30.60500.1240.0220.040.058168.087.692002345037788.168-1071.18D0.8121.5822.393.753.70.5600.1280.0250.0320.065178.067.692002340040785.506-1068.61D0.78521.5822.3653.643.70.53500.1240.0230.0420.061188.057.69200258038787.281-1070.32D0.77221.5822.3523.583.50.51500.1260.0240.0460.062198.047.69200255040785.506-1068.61D0.75921.5822.3393.513.50.50700.1230.0230.0430.061208.047.69200228905785.607-1106.07D0.7521.5822.333.483.70.51300.1180.0230.0370.059218.037.692002199040785.506-1068.61D0.72521.5822.3053.364.30.51800.1090.0180.0320.048228.027.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)200244040785.506-1068.61D1.74822.1223.8988.06861.12600.2680.0650.1180.17018.717.942002239037788.168-1071.18D1.64323.0124.6827.26901.15300.2180.050.0920.13029.038.332002205024792.307-1081.11D1.29323.0124.3255.71900.90800.1650.0410.0720.107038.898.332002362040785.506-1068.61D1.10622.2923.4175.05870.72700.1470.0440.0740.114048.518.022002240017791.921-1085.83D1.09423.0124.1244.84900.77300.1450.0330.0550.088058.818.332002346040785.506-1068.61D1.02422.2923.3364.69870.67600.1680.0330.0610.087068.478.02200263040785.506-1068.61D0.96322.2923.2724.40870.62900.140.0350.0670.091078.458.022002363040785.506-1068.61D0.94222.2923.2524.31870.62400.1560.030.0530.079088.448.02200249040785.506-1068.61D0.90022.1223.0344.15860.57900.1440.0320.0610.084098.347.94200273040785.506-1068.61D0.88822.2923.1994.07870.58900.1560.0260.0480.0690108.428.022002311040785.506-1068.61D0.85722.2923.1643.92870.5600.1250.0310.060.0810118.408.02200264039786.394-1069.47D0.83922.2923.1463.84870.55200.1230.030.0540.080128.398.02200243040785.506-1068.61D0.79222.1222.9233.65860.51200.1230.0290.0510.0770138.307.942002349040785.506-1068.61D0.72922.2923.0343.33870.47800.1090.0260.0490.0680148.348.02200221502779.971-1115.94D0.74123.0123.7643.27900.52100.0950.0230.0410.0610158.668.33200218706789.227-1101.06D0.72623.0123.7493.21900.5100.0960.0220.040.0580168.658.332002345037788.168-1071.18D0.66722.2922.9713.05870.44600.0990.0250.0320.0650178.328.022002340040785.506-1068.61D0.64822.2922.9512.96870.42600.0960.0230.0420.0610188.318.02200258038787.281-1070.32D0.63922.1222.7682.95860.4100.0980.0240.0460.0620198.237.94200255040785.506-1068.61D0.62622.1222.7542.88860.40300.0950.0230.0430.0610208.227.94200228905785.607-1106.07D0.61922.2922.9212.83870.40800.0920.0230.0370.0590218.298.022002199040785.506-1068.61D0.61923.0123.6402.74900.43600.0850.0180.0320.0480228.608.336. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2001 9 039 786.394 -1069.47 D1.811 21.58 23.391 8.39 3.7 1.227 0 0.285 0.053 0.106 0.139 18.50 7.69200113040785.506-1068.61D1.46821.5823.0486.83.70.99600.230.0430.0850.11428.357.692001195040785.506-1068.61D1.06921.5822.6494.954.30.7600.1550.0280.0530.07338.187.69200137034789.224-1073.89D1.05521.5822.6354.893.50.70300.1860.0290.0590.07748.177.6920013404781.422-1113.94D1.05521.5822.6354.893.50.70500.1820.0310.0560.0858.177.69200173040785.506-1068.61D1.0521.5822.634.863.70.71900.1740.030.0490.07868.177.692001206040785.506-1068.61D1.00121.5822.5814.644.30.71200.1520.0250.0470.06578.157.69200135905785.607-1106.07D0.99621.5822.5764.623.70.67800.1560.030.0550.07788.147.69200166037788.168-1071.18D0.94321.5822.5234.373.70.64300.1530.0270.0490.07198.127.69200120037788.168-1071.18D0.89921.5822.4794.173.70.6100.140.0270.0530.07108.107.692001177040785.506-1068.61D0.86521.5822.4454.0140.60300.1390.0220.0420.059118.087.69200125037788.168-1071.18D0.86221.5822.4423.993.70.58500.1440.0240.0460.063128.087.692001353040785.506-1068.61D0.83621.5822.4163.883.70.56900.1330.0240.0470.064138.077.6920017040785.506-1068.61D0.83421.5822.4143.873.70.56600.1370.0230.0460.061148.077.6920011004781.422-1113.94D0.81621.5822.3963.783.70.55700.1270.0250.0430.064158.067.692001168040785.506-1068.61D0.7221.5822.33.3340.50200.1110.020.0370.051168.027.69200114305785.607-1106.07D0.71921.5822.2993.333.80.49400.1110.0210.0380.055178.027.692001336040785.506-1068.61D0.70321.5822.2833.263.70.47900.1170.020.0360.052188.017.69200181038787.281-1070.32D0.66821.5822.2483.093.70.45300.1050.020.0390.051198.007.69200136002779.971-1115.94D0.62721.5822.2072.93.70.42700.0980.0190.0340.049207.987.69200165037788.168-1071.18D0.6221.5822.22.883.70.42100.0940.0190.0370.049217.987.692001349040785.506-1068.61D0.61221.5822.1922.833.70.41600.1010.0170.0330.045227.977.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)20019039786.394-1069.47D1.49822.2923.8176.85870.97900.2210.0530.1060.139018.688.02200113040785.506-1068.61D1.21522.2923.5285.55870.79400.1790.0430.0850.114028.568.022001195040785.506-1068.61D0.91523.0123.9414.04900.6400.120.0280.0530.073038.738.33200137034789.224-1073.89D0.86922.1223.0034.01860.55900.1440.0290.0590.077058.337.9420013404781.422-1113.94D0.86922.1223.0034.01860.56100.1410.0310.0560.08048.337.94200173040785.506-1068.61D0.86522.2923.1733.96870.57300.1350.030.0490.078068.408.022001206040785.506-1068.61D0.85523.0123.8813.78900.600.1180.0250.0470.065078.708.33200135905785.607-1106.07D0.82322.2923.1293.76870.5400.1210.030.0550.077088.398.02200166037788.168-1071.18D0.77822.2923.0843.56870.51200.1190.0270.0490.071098.378.02200120037788.168-1071.18D0.74422.2923.0493.40870.48600.1090.0270.0530.070108.358.022001177040785.506-1068.61D0.73622.7223.4703.30890.50500.1080.0220.0420.0590118.538.21200125037788.168-1071.18D0.71022.2923.0153.25870.46600.1120.0240.0460.0630128.348.022001353040785.506-1068.61D0.69122.2922.9953.16870.45300.1030.0240.0470.0640138.338.0220017040785.506-1068.61D0.68722.2922.9913.14870.45100.1060.0230.0460.0610148.338.0220011004781.422-1113.94D0.67422.2922.9773.08870.44300.0980.0250.0430.0640158.328.022001168040785.506-1068.61D0.61422.7223.3462.75890.4200.0860.020.0370.0510168.488.21200114305785.607-1106.07D0.60722.4823.1022.75880.40700.0860.0210.0380.0550178.378.102001336040785.506-1068.61D0.58022.2922.8822.65870.38100.0910.020.0360.0520188.288.02200181038787.281-1070.32D0.55222.2922.8532.52870.36100.0810.020.0390.0510198.278.02200136002779.971-1115.94D0.51822.2922.8182.37870.3400.0760.0190.0340.0490208.258.02200165037788.168-1071.18D0.51322.2922.8132.34870.33500.0730.0190.0370.0490218.258.022001349040785.506-1068.61D0.50422.2922.8052.31870.33100.0780.0170.0330.0450228.248.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2003 354 034 789.224 -1073.89 D1.677 21.58 23.257 7.77 3.7 1.161 0 0.268 0.051 0.066 0.132 18.44 7.69200335909791.146-1095.26D1.24821.5822.8285.783.70.85800.1980.0370.0570.09828.257.6920032307789.783-1098.2D1.14321.5822.7235.33.70.77600.1870.0320.0630.08438.217.692003333033790.111-1074.75D1.09921.5822.6795.093.70.74700.1710.0330.0610.08648.197.69200314307789.783-1098.2D1.09621.5822.6765.083.80.75100.1750.0310.0590.08158.197.69200350035789.14-1072.97D1.07121.5822.6514.963.50.72100.1740.0340.0550.08868.187.69200382035789.14-1072.97D1.00921.5822.5894.673.70.68900.1610.030.0520.07878.157.6920036207789.783-1098.2D1.00821.5822.5884.673.70.68700.1590.030.0540.07888.157.692003222035789.14-1072.97D0.94421.5822.5244.384.30.67500.1410.0240.0410.06398.127.69200383014792.172-1088.61D0.90921.5822.4894.213.70.61800.1450.0270.050.069108.107.692003346011791.701-1092.4D0.8821.5822.464.083.70.60300.1390.0260.0430.069118.097.69200330107789.783-1098.2D0.74521.5822.3253.453.70.50800.1180.0220.0390.058128.037.692003223035789.14-1072.97D0.7121.5822.293.294.30.50600.1070.0180.0320.047138.027.69200318035789.14-1072.97D0.70421.5822.2843.263.70.4800.110.0210.0370.055148.017.692003100034789.224-1073.89D0.62621.5822.2062.93.60.42800.1020.0190.0270.05157.987.692003507789.783-1098.2D0.61321.5822.1932.843.70.4200.0940.0190.0310.049167.977.692003103033790.111-1074.75D0.59621.5822.1762.763.60.40300.1010.0170.0310.045177.967.692003105035789.14-1072.97D0.57921.5822.1592.683.60.39300.0960.0170.0280.045187.967.692003324035789.14-1072.97D0.55821.5822.1382.593.70.38400.0890.0170.0250.044197.957.69200334007789.783-1098.2D0.55221.5822.1322.563.70.3800.0870.0170.0250.043207.947.69200315035789.14-1072.97D0.53221.5822.1122.473.70.36100.0910.0140.0280.038217.947.69200391034789.224-1073.89D0.52221.5822.1022.423.70.35800.0820.0160.0250.041227.937.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2003354034789.224-1073.89D1.38322.2923.7016.33870.92600.2080.0510.0660.132018.638.02200335909791.146-1095.26D1.02922.2923.3404.71870.68400.1540.0370.0570.098028.488.0220032307789.783-1098.2D0.94222.2923.2524.31870.61800.1450.0320.0630.084038.448.022003333033790.111-1074.75D0.90822.2923.2164.15870.59500.1330.0330.0610.086058.428.02200314307789.783-1098.2D0.92622.4823.4274.19880.61900.1360.0310.0590.081048.518.10200350035789.14-1072.97D0.88622.1223.0194.08860.57400.1350.0340.0550.088068.347.94200382035789.14-1072.97D0.83422.2923.1403.81870.54900.1250.030.0520.078078.398.0220036207789.783-1098.2D0.83222.2923.1393.81870.54700.1230.030.0540.078088.398.022003222035789.14-1072.97D0.80623.0123.8313.56900.56900.1090.0240.0410.063098.688.33200383014792.172-1088.61D0.75122.2923.0563.43870.49200.1120.0270.050.0690108.358.022003346011791.701-1092.4D0.72622.2923.0313.32870.4800.1080.0260.0430.0690118.348.02200330107789.783-1098.2D0.61522.2922.9172.81870.40400.0920.0220.0390.0580128.298.022003223035789.14-1072.97D0.60623.0123.6272.68900.42600.0830.0180.0320.0470138.608.33200318035789.14-1072.97D0.58022.2922.8822.65870.38200.0850.0210.0370.0550148.288.022003100034789.224-1073.89D0.52522.2922.8262.40870.3500.0790.0190.0270.050158.258.022003507789.783-1098.2D0.50622.2922.8062.31870.33400.0730.0190.0310.0490168.248.022003103033790.111-1074.75D0.50122.2922.8022.29870.3300.0780.0170.0310.0450178.248.022003105035789.14-1072.97D0.48622.2922.7862.22870.32100.0740.0170.0280.0450188.248.022003324035789.14-1072.97D0.46122.2922.7602.11870.30600.0690.0170.0250.0440198.228.02200334007789.783-1098.2D0.45522.2922.7542.08870.30200.0670.0170.0250.0430208.228.02200315035789.14-1072.97D0.43822.2922.7372.00870.28700.0710.0140.0280.0380218.218.02200391034789.224-1073.89D0.43022.2922.7291.97870.28500.0640.0160.0250.0410228.218.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2002 239 035 789.14 -1072.97 D1.85 21.58 23.43 8.57 4.3 1.318 0 0.27 0.048 0.088 0.126 18.51 7.69200244027790.446-1078.47D1.76621.5823.3468.193.51.1900.2910.0550.0880.14328.487.692002205024792.307-1081.11D1.50921.5823.0896.994.31.07700.2120.0410.0720.10738.377.692002240017791.921-1085.83D1.2821.5822.865.934.30.91700.1870.0330.0550.08848.277.692002346035789.14-1072.97D1.19521.5822.7755.543.70.81800.2060.0320.0550.08558.237.692002362034789.224-1073.89D1.17421.5822.7545.443.70.80400.1690.0380.0630.168.227.69200263034789.224-1073.89D1.05421.5822.6344.883.70.71700.1640.0320.0580.08378.177.69200273027790.446-1078.47D1.03121.5822.6114.783.70.70500.1920.0250.0440.06688.167.692002363035789.14-1072.97D0.98821.5822.5684.583.70.67500.1730.0260.0450.06998.147.69200264035789.14-1072.97D0.9521.5822.534.43.70.6500.1490.0290.0480.075108.127.69200249035789.14-1072.97D0.86821.5822.4484.023.50.58200.1490.0250.0450.066118.097.69200218707789.783-1098.2D0.84921.5822.4293.934.30.60500.1240.0220.040.058128.087.692002349035789.14-1072.97D0.82121.5822.4013.83.70.55900.1320.0240.0440.063138.077.692002345035789.14-1072.97D0.77321.5822.3533.583.70.53500.1220.0240.0310.062148.047.69200243035789.14-1072.97D0.7721.5822.353.573.50.5200.1280.0240.0360.062158.047.69200258035789.14-1072.97D0.74121.5822.3213.433.50.49400.1210.0230.0440.059168.037.692002311034789.224-1073.89D0.73121.5822.3113.393.70.49700.1140.0220.0410.057178.027.692002340016792.004-1086.76D0.72521.5822.3053.363.70.49900.1160.0220.0320.057188.027.69200224107789.783-1098.2D0.69921.5822.2793.244.30.50400.1030.0180.0250.048198.017.692002199035789.14-1072.97D0.65721.5822.2373.054.30.4700.0980.0170.0290.044207.997.69200229007789.783-1098.2D0.63121.5822.2112.923.70.43500.10.0190.0270.05217.987.692002360035789.14-1072.97D0.61721.5822.1972.863.70.42400.0970.0190.0290.049227.977.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2002239035789.14-1072.97D1.58423.0124.6217.00901.11200.210.0480.0880.126019.018.33200244027790.446-1078.47D1.46122.1223.6056.74860.94800.2260.0550.0880.143028.597.942002205024792.307-1081.11D1.29323.0124.3255.71900.90800.1650.0410.0720.107038.898.332002240017791.921-1085.83D1.09423.0124.1244.84900.77300.1450.0330.0550.088048.818.332002346035789.14-1072.97D0.98422.2923.2954.50870.65200.160.0320.0550.085058.468.022002362034789.224-1073.89D0.97322.2923.2814.44870.64100.1310.0380.0630.1068.458.02200263034789.224-1073.89D0.87122.2923.1793.98870.57100.1270.0320.0580.083078.418.02200273027790.446-1078.47D0.84622.2923.1553.88870.56100.1490.0250.0440.066088.408.022002363035789.14-1072.97D0.81222.2923.1193.72870.53800.1340.0260.0450.069098.388.02200264035789.14-1072.97D0.78522.2923.0913.59870.51800.1160.0290.0480.0750108.378.02200249035789.14-1072.97D0.71522.1222.8453.30860.46300.1160.0250.0450.0660118.267.94200218707789.783-1098.2D0.72623.0123.7493.21900.5100.0960.0220.040.0580128.658.332002349035789.14-1072.97D0.67822.2922.9823.10870.44500.1020.0240.0440.0630138.328.022002345035789.14-1072.97D0.63722.2922.9412.91870.42600.0950.0240.0310.0620158.308.02200243035789.14-1072.97D0.63522.1222.7632.93860.41400.0990.0240.0360.0620148.237.94200258035789.14-1072.97D0.61322.1222.7402.82860.39300.0940.0230.0440.0590168.227.942002311034789.224-1073.89D0.60422.2922.9062.76870.39600.0880.0220.0410.0570178.298.022002340016792.004-1086.76D0.59822.2922.9002.74870.39700.090.0220.0320.0570188.298.02200224107789.783-1098.2D0.59523.0123.6162.63900.42400.080.0180.0250.0480198.598.332002199035789.14-1072.97D0.56223.0123.5822.48900.39600.0760.0170.0290.0440208.588.33200229007789.783-1098.2D0.52022.2922.8202.38870.34600.0780.0190.0270.050218.258.022002360035789.14-1072.97D0.51022.2922.8102.33870.33700.0750.0190.0290.0490228.258.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2001 9 035 789.14 -1072.97 D1.658 21.58 23.238 7.68 3.7 1.124 0 0.262 0.049 0.096 0.127 18.43 7.69200113034789.224-1073.89D1.121.5822.685.13.70.74800.1730.0320.0610.08528.197.69200137034789.224-1073.89D1.05521.5822.6354.893.50.70300.1860.0290.0590.07738.177.692001195035789.14-1072.97D0.95221.5822.5324.414.30.67800.1390.0250.0460.06448.127.69200166035789.14-1072.97D0.91521.5822.4954.243.70.62400.1480.0260.0470.06958.117.69200173035789.14-1072.97D0.9121.5822.494.223.70.62200.150.0260.0440.06868.107.692001206035789.14-1072.97D0.88821.5822.4684.114.30.63200.1380.0210.040.05678.107.69200125033790.111-1074.75D0.85121.5822.4313.943.70.57800.1420.0240.0450.06288.087.69200120035789.14-1072.97D0.84921.5822.4293.933.70.57600.1320.0250.0490.06698.087.692001177035789.14-1072.97D0.83621.5822.4163.8840.58300.1330.0220.0410.057108.077.6920017035789.14-1072.97D0.71721.5822.2973.323.70.48700.1180.020.040.053118.027.692001336035789.14-1072.97D0.67521.5822.2553.133.70.4600.1120.0190.0340.05128.007.692001353034789.224-1073.89D0.65921.5822.2393.053.70.4500.1060.0190.0340.05137.997.692001168027790.446-1078.47D0.63221.5822.2122.9340.4400.0970.0170.0320.045147.987.69200181035789.14-1072.97D0.62721.5822.2072.913.70.42500.0980.0190.0370.048157.987.69200165035789.14-1072.97D0.6221.5822.22.873.70.4200.0940.0190.0370.049167.987.69200114307789.783-1098.2D0.5721.5822.152.643.80.39200.0880.0170.0290.044177.957.69200167035789.14-1072.97D0.53321.5822.1132.473.70.36300.0840.0160.030.041187.947.69200192035789.14-1072.97D0.53221.5822.1122.463.60.35900.0850.0160.0290.042197.947.69200183035789.14-1072.97D0.52721.5822.1072.443.70.35800.0840.0150.0290.04207.937.692001136030791.167-1077.47D0.51521.5822.0952.393.80.35400.0820.0150.0260.038217.937.69200135907789.783-1098.2D0.51321.5822.0932.383.70.34900.0810.0150.0290.04227.937.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)20019035789.14-1072.97D1.37222.2923.6896.27870.89600.2040.0490.0960.127018.628.02200113034789.224-1073.89D0.90822.2923.2164.15870.59600.1340.0320.0610.085028.428.02200137034789.224-1073.89D0.86922.1223.0034.01860.55900.1440.0290.0590.077038.337.942001195035789.14-1072.97D0.81423.0123.8393.60900.57100.1080.0250.0460.064048.698.33200166035789.14-1072.97D0.75422.2923.0593.45870.49700.1150.0260.0470.069058.358.02200173035789.14-1072.97D0.75022.2923.0553.43870.49500.1160.0260.0440.068068.358.022001206035789.14-1072.97D0.75623.0123.7813.35900.53200.1070.0210.040.056078.668.33200125033790.111-1074.75D0.70122.2923.0063.21870.4600.110.0240.0450.062088.338.02200120035789.14-1072.97D0.70122.2923.0053.20870.45900.1020.0250.0490.066098.338.022001177035789.14-1072.97D0.71122.7223.4453.19890.48800.1030.0220.0410.0570108.528.2120017035789.14-1072.97D0.59222.2922.8952.71870.38800.0920.020.040.0530118.288.022001336035789.14-1072.97D0.55622.2922.8582.54870.36600.0870.0190.0340.050128.278.022001353034789.224-1073.89D0.54322.2922.8452.48870.35800.0820.0190.0340.050138.268.022001168027790.446-1078.47D0.53822.7223.2682.41890.36800.0750.0170.0320.0450148.448.21200181035789.14-1072.97D0.51822.2922.8192.37870.33800.0760.0190.0370.0480158.258.02200165035789.14-1072.97D0.51222.2922.8122.34870.33400.0730.0190.0370.0490168.258.02200114307789.783-1098.2D0.48122.4822.9742.18880.32300.0680.0170.0290.0440178.328.10200167035789.14-1072.97D0.44122.2922.7402.02870.28900.0650.0160.030.0410198.228.02200192035789.14-1072.97D0.44622.2922.7462.04870.29400.0660.0160.0290.0420188.228.02200183035789.14-1072.97D0.43422.2922.7331.98870.28500.0650.0150.0290.040208.218.022001136030791.167-1077.47D0.43422.4822.9261.97880.29100.0640.0150.0260.0380218.308.10200135907789.783-1098.2D0.42422.2922.7231.94870.27800.0630.0150.0290.040228.218.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2003 118 040 785.506 -1068.61 D1.269 21.58 22.849 5.88 3.6 1.026 0 0.197 0.009 0.015 0.021 18.26 7.692003259037788.168-1071.18D1.18221.5822.7625.484.20.98300.1620.0070.0120.01828.237.69200382038787.281-1070.32D1.05921.5822.6394.913.70.86100.1610.0070.0120.01838.177.692003144024792.307-1081.11D0.88621.5822.4664.113.80.72700.1320.0060.0070.01448.097.692003276040785.506-1068.61D0.86921.5822.4494.033.70.70700.1320.0060.010.01458.097.69200343038787.281-1070.32D0.67821.5822.2583.143.50.54600.1080.0050.0080.01268.007.692003313040785.506-1068.61D0.6721.5822.253.13.70.54500.1020.0050.0080.01178.007.692003249035789.14-1072.97D0.57721.5822.1572.684.20.4800.0790.0040.0060.00987.967.692003318028791.25-1078.39D0.5721.5822.152.643.70.46300.0870.0040.0070.00997.957.692003133040785.506-1068.61D0.57121.5822.1512.643.80.46600.0850.0040.0060.009107.957.692003148035789.14-1072.97D0.56821.5822.1482.633.80.46400.0840.0040.0060.009117.957.692003104024792.307-1081.11D0.54221.5822.1222.513.60.4400.0840.0040.0050.009127.947.692003312040785.506-1068.61D0.53221.5822.1122.473.70.43200.0810.0040.0070.009137.947.69200313039786.394-1069.47D0.49821.5822.0782.313.70.40600.0760.0030.0050.008147.927.69200325040785.506-1068.61D0.49121.5822.0712.273.70.39900.0750.0030.0050.008157.927.69200337030791.167-1077.47D0.46121.5822.0412.143.50.37100.0730.0030.0060.008167.907.692003292033790.111-1074.75D0.44821.5822.0282.073.70.36400.0680.0030.0050.007177.907.692003275035789.14-1072.97D0.44621.5822.0262.063.70.36200.0680.0030.0060.007187.907.69200340040785.506-1068.61D0.4321.5822.011.993.50.34500.0680.0030.0050.007197.897.69200328019792.559-1083.9D0.41221.5821.9921.913.70.33500.0630.0030.0050.007207.887.692003149040785.506-1068.61D0.39521.5821.9751.833.80.32200.0590.0030.0050.006217.877.692003273039786.394-1069.47D0.37321.5821.9531.734.20.3100.0510.0020.0040.006227.867.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2003118040785.506-1068.61D1.03922.2923.3504.75870.84100.1530.0090.0150.021018.488.022003259037788.168-1071.18D1.01123.0124.0394.47900.84800.1260.0070.0120.018028.778.33200382038787.281-1070.32D0.84822.2923.1563.88870.68600.1250.0070.0120.018038.408.022003144024792.307-1081.11D0.72822.4823.2263.30880.59900.1020.0060.0070.014048.438.102003276040785.506-1068.61D0.69522.2923.0003.18870.56300.1020.0060.010.014058.338.02200343038787.281-1070.32D0.54322.1222.6702.51860.43400.0840.0050.0080.012068.187.942003313040785.506-1068.61D0.53722.2922.8392.46870.43400.0790.0050.0080.011078.268.022003249035789.14-1072.97D0.49423.0123.5132.18900.41400.0610.0040.0060.009088.558.332003318028791.25-1078.39D0.45622.2922.7562.09870.36800.0670.0040.0070.0090118.228.022003133040785.506-1068.61D0.46922.4822.9612.12880.38400.0660.0040.0060.009098.318.102003148035789.14-1072.97D0.46622.4822.9592.11880.38200.0650.0040.0060.0090108.318.102003104024792.307-1081.11D0.44322.2922.7432.03870.3600.0650.0040.0050.0090128.228.022003312040785.506-1068.61D0.42722.2922.7261.95870.34400.0630.0040.0070.0090138.218.02200313039786.394-1069.47D0.39822.2922.6971.82870.32300.0590.0030.0050.0080148.208.02200325040785.506-1068.61D0.39222.2922.6901.79870.31700.0580.0030.0050.0080158.198.02200337030791.167-1077.47D0.36922.1222.4921.70860.29500.0570.0030.0060.0080168.117.942003292033790.111-1074.75D0.35722.2922.6551.64870.2900.0530.0030.0050.0070178.188.022003275035789.14-1072.97D0.35722.2922.6551.63870.28800.0530.0030.0060.0070188.188.02200340040785.506-1068.61D0.34222.1222.4651.58860.27400.0530.0030.0050.0070198.097.94200328019792.559-1083.9D0.33022.2922.6281.51870.26700.0490.0030.0050.0070208.178.022003149040785.506-1068.61D0.32522.4822.8151.47880.26500.0460.0030.0050.0060218.258.102003273039786.394-1069.47D0.31923.0123.3351.41900.26700.040.0020.0040.0060228.478.336. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2002 350 038 787.281 -1070.32 D0.864 21.58 22.444 4.01 3.7 0.704 0 0.132 0.006 0.009 0.014 18.08 7.692002334040785.506-1068.61D0.75221.5822.3323.493.70.61100.1140.0050.0090.01228.037.69200296030791.167-1077.47D0.70221.5822.2823.253.60.56800.1090.0050.0090.01238.017.6920022033790.111-1074.75D0.65321.5822.2333.033.70.53100.0990.0040.0070.01147.997.69200283040785.506-1068.61D0.63721.5822.2172.953.70.51800.0970.0040.0080.01157.987.69200295040785.506-1068.61D0.62821.5822.2082.913.60.50800.0980.0040.0080.01167.987.692002167019792.559-1083.9D0.61221.5822.1922.8440.50400.0870.0040.0070.00977.977.692002140040785.506-1068.61D0.60421.5822.1842.83.80.49300.090.0040.0070.0187.977.692002305024792.307-1081.11D0.60121.5822.1812.783.70.48900.0910.0040.0070.0197.977.69200226019792.559-1083.9D0.57521.5822.1552.673.70.46700.0870.0040.0070.01107.957.692002312038787.281-1070.32D0.52721.5822.1072.443.70.42900.080.0040.0060.009117.937.692002287036788.252-1072.11D0.5221.5822.12.413.70.42200.0790.0040.0060.009127.937.692002336037788.168-1071.18D0.49821.5822.0782.313.70.40500.0760.0030.0060.008137.927.692002291040785.506-1068.61D0.4921.5822.072.273.70.39800.0740.0030.0060.008147.927.692002332022792.391-1082.04D0.46521.5822.0452.153.70.37800.0710.0030.0050.008157.917.69200260040785.506-1068.61D0.45721.5822.0372.123.50.36800.0730.0030.0050.008167.907.69200234024792.307-1081.11D0.4221.58221.953.50.33800.0670.0030.0050.007177.887.69200270035789.14-1072.97D0.41421.5821.9941.923.70.33600.0630.0030.0050.007187.887.69200254022792.391-1082.04D0.33721.5821.9171.563.50.27100.0540.0020.0040.006197.857.69200227040785.506-1068.61D0.32621.5821.9061.513.70.26500.050.0020.0040.005207.847.69200240035789.14-1072.97D0.3221.5821.91.483.50.25800.0510.0020.0040.006217.847.6920023037788.168-1071.18D0.31721.5821.8971.473.70.25800.0480.0020.0040.005227.847.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2002350038787.281-1070.32D0.69222.2922.9973.17870.56100.1020.0060.0090.014018.338.022002334040785.506-1068.61D0.60122.2922.9042.75870.48600.0880.0050.0090.012028.298.02200296030791.167-1077.47D0.57522.2922.8782.63870.46500.0850.0050.0090.012038.288.0220022033790.111-1074.75D0.52122.2922.8232.39870.42300.0770.0040.0070.011048.258.02200283040785.506-1068.61D0.51122.2922.8122.34870.41200.0750.0040.0080.011068.258.02200295040785.506-1068.61D0.51522.2922.8162.36870.41600.0760.0040.0080.011058.258.022002167019792.559-1083.9D0.50922.7223.2402.28890.42200.0670.0040.0070.009078.438.212002140040785.506-1068.61D0.49722.4822.9902.25880.40600.070.0040.0070.01088.328.102002305024792.307-1081.11D0.48122.2922.7812.20870.38900.0710.0040.0070.01098.238.02200226019792.559-1083.9D0.46022.2922.7602.11870.37200.0670.0040.0070.010108.228.022002312038787.281-1070.32D0.42222.2922.7221.93870.34100.0620.0040.0060.0090118.218.022002287036788.252-1072.11D0.41622.2922.7151.90870.33600.0610.0040.0060.0090128.208.022002336037788.168-1071.18D0.39822.2922.6971.82870.32200.0590.0030.0060.0080138.208.022002291040785.506-1068.61D0.39122.2922.6901.79870.31700.0570.0030.0060.0080148.198.022002332022792.391-1082.04D0.37222.2922.6701.70870.30100.0550.0030.0050.0080158.188.02200260040785.506-1068.61D0.36522.1222.4881.69860.29300.0570.0030.0050.0080168.107.94200234024792.307-1081.11D0.33622.1222.4581.55860.26900.0520.0030.0050.0070178.097.94200270035789.14-1072.97D0.33122.2922.6291.52870.26700.0490.0030.0050.0070188.178.02200254022792.391-1082.04D0.26922.1222.3911.24860.21500.0420.0020.0040.0060198.067.94200227040785.506-1068.61D0.26122.2922.5571.19870.21100.0390.0020.0040.0050208.138.02200240035789.14-1072.97D0.25722.1222.3781.18860.20500.040.0020.0040.0060218.057.9420023037788.168-1071.18D0.25322.2922.5491.16870.20500.0370.0020.0040.0050228.138.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2001 24 032 790.195 -1075.68 D1.245 21.58 22.825 5.77 3.7 1.014 0 0.19 0.008 0.013 0.021 18.25 7.692001270040785.506-1068.61D0.8521.5822.433.944.20.70700.1160.0050.0090.01328.087.692001365039786.394-1069.47D0.84821.5822.4283.933.70.68900.1290.0060.010.01438.087.692001300038787.281-1070.32D0.83621.5822.4163.873.70.67900.1270.0060.010.01448.077.692001337032790.195-1075.68D0.79321.5822.3733.673.70.64500.1210.0050.0080.01358.057.692001117040785.506-1068.61D0.78421.5822.3643.633.60.63400.1220.0050.010.01368.057.69200177038787.281-1070.32D0.67721.5822.2573.143.70.5500.1030.0050.0080.01178.007.692001144019792.559-1083.9D0.63421.5822.2142.943.80.51800.0940.0040.0070.0187.987.692001275037788.168-1071.18D0.59221.5822.1722.743.70.48100.090.0040.0070.0197.967.692001344040785.506-1068.61D0.58121.5822.1612.693.70.47200.0880.0040.0070.01107.967.69200123030791.167-1077.47D0.57721.5822.1572.683.70.4700.0880.0040.0060.01117.967.69200186030791.167-1077.47D0.53121.5822.1112.463.70.43200.0810.0040.0060.009127.937.692001355019792.559-1083.9D0.51121.5822.0912.373.70.41600.0780.0030.0060.008137.937.692001269033790.111-1074.75D0.50821.5822.0882.354.20.42200.070.0030.0050.008147.927.692001316012792.339-1090.47D0.50221.5822.0822.333.70.40900.0760.0030.0050.008157.927.692001326040785.506-1068.61D0.49221.5822.0722.283.70.400.0750.0030.0060.008167.927.692001314039786.394-1069.47D0.49321.5822.0732.283.70.400.0750.0030.0060.008177.927.692001281040785.506-1068.61D0.48921.5822.0692.273.70.39800.0740.0030.0060.008187.927.69200133040785.506-1068.61D0.46921.5822.0492.183.50.37700.0750.0030.0060.008197.917.692001175012792.339-1090.47D0.46621.5822.0462.1640.38400.0660.0030.0050.007207.917.69200170035789.14-1072.97D0.44921.5822.0292.083.70.36500.0680.0030.0050.007217.907.692001116024792.307-1081.11D0.44121.5822.0212.043.60.35600.0680.0030.0060.007227.897.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)200124032790.195-1075.68D0.99822.2923.3094.57870.80800.1470.0080.0130.021018.468.022001270040785.506-1068.61D0.72723.0123.7503.21900.6100.090.0050.0090.013028.658.332001365039786.394-1069.47D0.67922.2922.9833.11870.54900.10.0060.010.014038.328.022001300038787.281-1070.32D0.66922.2922.9733.06870.54100.0980.0060.010.014048.328.022001337032790.195-1075.68D0.63322.2922.9372.90870.51400.0940.0050.0080.013068.308.022001117040785.506-1068.61D0.64122.2922.9452.94870.51900.0950.0050.010.013058.318.02200177038787.281-1070.32D0.54222.2922.8432.48870.43800.080.0050.0080.011078.268.022001144019792.559-1083.9D0.52022.4823.0142.36880.42700.0730.0040.0070.01088.348.102001275037788.168-1071.18D0.47422.2922.7742.17870.38300.070.0040.0070.01098.238.022001344040785.506-1068.61D0.46522.2922.7652.13870.37600.0680.0040.0070.010108.238.02200123030791.167-1077.47D0.46222.2922.7622.12870.37400.0680.0040.0060.010118.238.02200186030791.167-1077.47D0.42622.2922.7251.95870.34400.0630.0040.0060.0090128.218.022001355019792.559-1083.9D0.40822.2922.7081.87870.33100.060.0030.0060.0080148.208.022001269033790.111-1074.75D0.43423.0123.4521.92900.36400.0540.0030.0050.0080138.528.332001316012792.339-1090.47D0.40022.2922.6991.83870.32500.0590.0030.0050.0080158.208.022001326040785.506-1068.61D0.39322.2922.6921.80870.31800.0580.0030.0060.0080168.198.022001314039786.394-1069.47D0.39322.2922.6921.80870.31800.0580.0030.0060.0080168.198.022001281040785.506-1068.61D0.39122.2922.6901.79870.31700.0570.0030.0060.0080188.198.02200133040785.506-1068.61D0.37522.1222.4981.73860.300.0580.0030.0060.0080208.117.942001175012792.339-1090.47D0.38822.7223.1161.74890.32100.0510.0030.0050.0070198.388.21200170035789.14-1072.97D0.35822.2922.6561.64870.2900.0530.0030.0050.0070228.188.022001116024792.307-1081.11D0.36022.2922.6581.65870.29100.0530.0030.0060.0070218.188.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2003 259 035 789.14 -1072.97 D1.033 21.58 22.613 4.79 4.2 0.859 0 0.141 0.006 0.011 0.015 18.16 7.69200382035789.14-1072.97D0.97621.5822.5564.523.70.79400.1480.0070.0110.01628.137.692003144024792.307-1081.11D0.88621.5822.4664.113.80.72700.1320.0060.0070.01438.097.692003118035789.14-1072.97D0.69821.5822.2783.233.60.56500.1080.0050.0080.01248.017.69200343035789.14-1072.97D0.60121.5822.1812.783.50.48400.0960.0040.0070.0157.977.692003249035789.14-1072.97D0.57721.5822.1572.684.20.4800.0790.0040.0060.00967.967.692003318028791.25-1078.39D0.5721.5822.152.643.70.46300.0870.0040.0070.00977.957.692003148035789.14-1072.97D0.56821.5822.1482.633.80.46400.0840.0040.0060.00987.957.692003104024792.307-1081.11D0.54221.5822.1222.513.60.4400.0840.0040.0050.00997.947.692003313035789.14-1072.97D0.52121.5822.1012.413.70.42400.0790.0040.0060.009107.937.69200337030791.167-1077.47D0.46121.5822.0412.143.50.37100.0730.0030.0060.008117.907.692003292033790.111-1074.75D0.44821.5822.0282.073.70.36400.0680.0030.0050.007127.907.692003275035789.14-1072.97D0.44621.5822.0262.063.70.36200.0680.0030.0060.007137.907.69200313035789.14-1072.97D0.42121.5822.0011.953.70.34300.0640.0030.0040.007147.897.69200325035789.14-1072.97D0.4221.58221.943.70.34200.0640.0030.0040.007157.887.69200328020792.475-1082.97D0.40921.5821.9891.893.70.33300.0620.0030.0050.007167.887.692003276035789.14-1072.97D0.39821.5821.9781.843.70.32400.060.0030.0040.007177.877.692003312035789.14-1072.97D0.38421.5821.9641.783.70.31200.0580.0030.0050.006187.877.692003222011791.701-1092.4D0.35221.5821.9321.634.30.29400.0470.0020.0040.005197.857.692003133035789.14-1072.97D0.35221.5821.9321.633.80.28800.0520.0020.0040.006207.857.692003273035789.14-1072.97D0.34721.5821.9271.614.20.28900.0480.0020.0030.005217.857.692003221033790.111-1074.75D0.33621.5821.9161.564.30.28100.0450.0020.0040.005227.857.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2003259035789.14-1072.97D0.88323.0123.9083.90900.74100.1090.0060.0110.015018.728.33200382035789.14-1072.97D0.78122.2923.0883.58870.63300.1150.0070.0110.016028.378.022003144024792.307-1081.11D0.72822.4823.2263.30880.59900.1020.0060.0070.014038.438.102003118035789.14-1072.97D0.57122.2922.8732.61870.46200.0840.0050.0080.012048.278.02200343035789.14-1072.97D0.48022.1222.6062.22860.38500.0740.0040.0070.01058.167.942003249035789.14-1072.97D0.49423.0123.5132.18900.41400.0610.0040.0060.009068.558.332003318028791.25-1078.39D0.45622.2922.7562.09870.36800.0670.0040.0070.009088.228.022003148035789.14-1072.97D0.46622.4822.9592.11880.38200.0650.0040.0060.009078.318.102003104024792.307-1081.11D0.44322.2922.7432.03870.3600.0650.0040.0050.009098.228.022003313035789.14-1072.97D0.41822.2922.7171.91870.33700.0610.0040.0060.0090108.218.02200337030791.167-1077.47D0.36922.1222.4921.70860.29500.0570.0030.0060.0080118.117.942003292033790.111-1074.75D0.35722.2922.6551.64870.2900.0530.0030.0050.0070128.188.022003275035789.14-1072.97D0.35722.2922.6551.63870.28800.0530.0030.0060.0070138.188.02200313035789.14-1072.97D0.33622.2922.6341.54870.27300.050.0030.0040.0070148.178.02200325035789.14-1072.97D0.33622.2922.6331.54870.27200.050.0030.0040.0070158.178.02200328020792.475-1082.97D0.32822.2922.6251.50870.26500.0480.0030.0050.0070168.168.022003276035789.14-1072.97D0.31822.2922.6151.46870.25800.0460.0030.0040.0070178.168.022003312035789.14-1072.97D0.30722.2922.6041.41870.24800.0450.0030.0050.0060188.168.022003222011791.701-1092.4D0.29523.0123.3111.30900.24700.0360.0020.0040.0050218.468.332003133035789.14-1072.97D0.28922.4822.7791.31880.23700.040.0020.0040.0060198.238.102003273035789.14-1072.97D0.29623.0123.3121.31900.24900.0370.0020.0030.0050208.468.332003221033790.111-1074.75D0.28223.0123.2981.25900.23700.0350.0020.0040.0050228.468.336. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2002 350 035 789.14 -1072.97 D0.775 21.58 22.355 3.59 3.7 0.632 0 0.118 0.005 0.008 0.013 18.04 7.69200296030791.167-1077.47D0.70221.5822.2823.253.60.56800.1090.0050.0090.01228.017.6920022033790.111-1074.75D0.65321.5822.2333.033.70.53100.0990.0040.0070.01137.997.692002167020792.475-1082.97D0.60821.5822.1882.8240.50100.0870.0040.0070.00947.977.692002305024792.307-1081.11D0.60121.5822.1812.783.70.48900.0910.0040.0070.0157.977.69200226014792.172-1088.61D0.57221.5822.1522.653.70.46500.0870.0040.0070.00967.957.692002287035789.14-1072.97D0.51921.5822.0992.413.70.42200.0790.0040.0060.00977.937.692002332022792.391-1082.04D0.46521.5822.0452.153.70.37800.0710.0030.0050.00887.917.692002336035789.14-1072.97D0.45421.5822.0342.13.70.36900.0690.0030.0050.00897.907.692002312035789.14-1072.97D0.45421.5822.0342.13.70.3700.0690.0030.0050.008107.907.69200234024792.307-1081.11D0.4221.58221.953.50.33800.0670.0030.0050.007117.887.69200295035789.14-1072.97D0.41921.5821.9991.943.60.33900.0650.0030.0050.007127.887.69200270035789.14-1072.97D0.41421.5821.9941.923.70.33600.0630.0030.0050.007137.887.692002291035789.14-1072.97D0.40921.5821.9891.93.70.33300.0620.0030.0050.007147.887.692002140024792.307-1081.11D0.40221.5821.9821.863.80.32900.060.0030.0050.007157.887.69200260035789.14-1072.97D0.36421.5821.9441.683.50.29300.0580.0030.0040.006167.867.69200254022792.391-1082.04D0.33721.5821.9171.563.50.27100.0540.0020.0040.006177.857.69200240035789.14-1072.97D0.3221.5821.91.483.50.25800.0510.0020.0040.006187.847.692002318012792.339-1090.47D0.321.5821.881.393.70.24400.0460.0020.0030.005197.837.69200283035789.14-1072.97D0.29521.5821.8751.373.70.2400.0450.0020.0040.005207.837.69200216012792.339-1090.47D0.29521.5821.8751.373.70.2400.0450.0020.0040.005217.837.6920023035789.14-1072.97D0.29221.5821.8721.363.70.23800.0440.0020.0040.005227.837.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2002350035789.14-1072.97D0.62122.2922.9242.84870.50300.0920.0050.0080.013018.308.02200296030791.167-1077.47D0.57522.2922.8782.63870.46500.0850.0050.0090.012028.288.0220022033790.111-1074.75D0.52122.2922.8232.39870.42300.0770.0040.0070.011038.258.022002167020792.475-1082.97D0.50722.7223.2372.27890.41900.0670.0040.0070.009048.438.212002305024792.307-1081.11D0.48122.2922.7812.20870.38900.0710.0040.0070.01058.238.02200226014792.172-1088.61D0.45822.2922.7582.09870.3700.0670.0040.0070.009068.228.022002287035789.14-1072.97D0.41622.2922.7151.90870.33600.0610.0040.0060.009078.208.022002332022792.391-1082.04D0.37222.2922.6701.70870.30100.0550.0030.0050.008088.188.022002336035789.14-1072.97D0.36322.2922.6611.66870.29400.0530.0030.0050.0080108.188.022002312035789.14-1072.97D0.36422.2922.6621.67870.29400.0530.0030.0050.008098.188.02200234024792.307-1081.11D0.33622.1222.4581.55860.26900.0520.0030.0050.0070128.097.94200295035789.14-1072.97D0.34322.2922.6401.57870.27700.050.0030.0050.0070118.178.02200270035789.14-1072.97D0.33122.2922.6291.52870.26700.0490.0030.0050.0070138.178.022002291035789.14-1072.97D0.32822.2922.6251.50870.26500.0480.0030.0050.0070158.168.022002140024792.307-1081.11D0.33222.4822.8221.51880.27100.0460.0030.0050.0070148.258.10200260035789.14-1072.97D0.29122.1222.4131.34860.23300.0450.0030.0040.0060168.077.94200254022792.391-1082.04D0.26922.1222.3911.24860.21500.0420.0020.0040.0060178.067.94200240035789.14-1072.97D0.25722.1222.3781.18860.20500.040.0020.0040.0060188.057.942002318012792.339-1090.47D0.24022.2922.5351.10870.19400.0360.0020.0030.0050198.128.02200283035789.14-1072.97D0.23722.2922.5321.08870.19100.0350.0020.0040.0050208.128.02200216012792.339-1090.47D0.23722.2922.5321.08870.19100.0350.0020.0040.0050208.128.0220023035789.14-1072.97D0.23422.2922.5301.07870.18900.0340.0020.0040.0050228.128.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2001 24 031 790.279 -1076.61 D1.242 21.58 22.822 5.76 3.7 1.012 0 0.189 0.008 0.012 0.021 18.25 7.692001337033790.111-1074.75D0.79221.5822.3723.673.70.64500.1210.0050.0080.01328.057.692001365035789.14-1072.97D0.70221.5822.2823.253.70.57100.1070.0050.0080.01238.017.692001144020792.475-1082.97D0.62921.5822.2092.913.80.51400.0930.0040.0070.0147.987.692001275035789.14-1072.97D0.58221.5822.1622.73.70.47300.0880.0040.0070.0157.967.69200123030791.167-1077.47D0.57721.5822.1572.683.70.4700.0880.0040.0060.0167.967.69200177035789.14-1072.97D0.57221.5822.1522.653.70.46500.0870.0040.0070.00977.957.69200186030791.167-1077.47D0.53121.5822.1112.463.70.43200.0810.0040.0060.00987.937.692001270035789.14-1072.97D0.52321.5822.1032.424.20.43500.0720.0030.0050.00897.937.692001355012792.339-1090.47D0.51121.5822.0912.373.70.41500.0780.0030.0060.008107.937.692001300035789.14-1072.97D0.51221.5822.0922.373.70.41600.0780.0030.0060.008117.937.692001269033790.111-1074.75D0.50821.5822.0882.354.20.42200.070.0030.0050.008127.927.692001316012792.339-1090.47D0.50221.5822.0822.333.70.40900.0760.0030.0050.008137.927.692001175012792.339-1090.47D0.46621.5822.0462.1640.38400.0660.0030.0050.007147.917.69200170035789.14-1072.97D0.44921.5822.0292.083.70.36500.0680.0030.0050.007157.907.692001116024792.307-1081.11D0.44121.5822.0212.043.60.35600.0680.0030.0060.007167.897.69200169024792.307-1081.11D0.4421.5822.022.043.70.35800.0670.0030.0050.007177.897.692001344035789.14-1072.97D0.43721.5822.0172.023.70.35500.0660.0030.0050.007187.897.692001301012792.339-1090.47D0.43621.5822.0162.023.70.35500.0660.0030.0050.007197.897.692001196024792.307-1081.11D0.43721.5822.0172.024.30.36500.0590.0030.0050.006207.897.692001314035789.14-1072.97D0.41521.5821.9951.923.70.33700.0630.0030.0050.007217.887.692001249035789.14-1072.97D0.41221.5821.9911.914.20.34200.0560.0030.0040.006227.887.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)200124031790.279-1076.61D0.99422.2923.3054.55870.80700.1470.0080.0120.021018.468.022001337033790.111-1074.75D0.63322.2922.9372.90870.51400.0940.0050.0080.013028.308.022001365035789.14-1072.97D0.56322.2922.8652.57870.45500.0830.0050.0080.012038.278.022001144020792.475-1082.97D0.51622.4823.0102.34880.42300.0720.0040.0070.01048.338.102001275035789.14-1072.97D0.46622.2922.7662.13870.37600.0680.0040.0070.01058.238.02200123030791.167-1077.47D0.46222.2922.7622.12870.37400.0680.0040.0060.01068.238.02200177035789.14-1072.97D0.45822.2922.7582.09870.3700.0670.0040.0070.009078.228.02200186030791.167-1077.47D0.42622.2922.7251.95870.34400.0630.0040.0060.009098.218.022001270035789.14-1072.97D0.44723.0123.4651.98900.37500.0560.0030.0050.008088.538.332001355012792.339-1090.47D0.40822.2922.7071.87870.3300.060.0030.0060.0080128.208.022001300035789.14-1072.97D0.40822.2922.7081.87870.33100.060.0030.0060.0080118.208.022001269033790.111-1074.75D0.43423.0123.4521.92900.36400.0540.0030.0050.0080108.528.332001316012792.339-1090.47D0.40022.2922.6991.83870.32500.0590.0030.0050.0080138.208.022001175012792.339-1090.47D0.38822.7223.1161.74890.32100.0510.0030.0050.0070148.388.21200170035789.14-1072.97D0.35822.2922.6561.64870.2900.0530.0030.0050.0070168.188.022001116024792.307-1081.11D0.36022.2922.6581.65870.29100.0530.0030.0060.0070158.188.02200169024792.307-1081.11D0.35222.2922.6501.61870.28500.0520.0030.0050.0070188.188.022001344035789.14-1072.97D0.34922.2922.6461.60870.28200.0510.0030.0050.0070198.178.022001301012792.339-1090.47D0.34922.2922.6461.60870.28200.0510.0030.0050.0070198.178.022001196024792.307-1081.11D0.36723.0123.3841.62900.30700.0460.0030.0050.0060178.498.332001314035789.14-1072.97D0.33222.2922.6291.52870.26800.0490.0030.0050.0070228.178.022001249035789.14-1072.97D0.35123.0123.3681.55900.29500.0430.0030.0040.0060218.498.336. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2003 294 035 789.14 -1072.97 D0.142 21.58 21.722 0.66 3.7 0.01 0 0.112 0.009 0 0.011 17.76 7.692003287037788.168-1071.18D0.07721.5821.6570.363.70.00500.0610.00500.00627.737.692003326037788.168-1071.18D0.07721.5821.6570.353.70.00500.0610.00500.00637.737.692003145030791.167-1077.47D0.06621.5821.6460.313.80.00500.0520.00400.00547.727.69200366035789.14-1072.97D0.06121.5821.6410.283.70.00400.0490.00400.00557.727.692003293039786.394-1069.47D0.05721.5821.6370.273.70.00400.0450.00300.00467.727.692003280040785.506-1068.61D0.05421.5821.6340.253.70.00400.0430.00300.00477.727.692003237037788.168-1071.18D0.05421.5821.6340.254.30.00400.0430.00300.00487.727.692003133020792.475-1082.97D0.05421.5821.6340.253.80.00400.0420.00300.00497.727.69200371037788.168-1071.18D0.05521.5821.6350.253.70.00400.0430.00300.004107.727.692003279030791.167-1077.47D0.04921.5821.6290.233.70.00300.0390.00300.004117.717.692003221019792.559-1083.9D0.04921.5821.6290.234.30.00400.0390.00300.004127.717.69200360040785.506-1068.61D0.0521.5821.630.233.50.00300.040.00300.004137.717.692003278040785.506-1068.61D0.04721.5821.6270.223.70.00300.0370.00300.004147.717.692003235030791.167-1077.47D0.04821.5821.6280.224.30.00400.0380.00300.004157.717.69200370019792.559-1083.9D0.04821.5821.6280.223.70.00300.0380.00300.004167.717.692003312012792.339-1090.47D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0370.00300.004177.717.692003308030791.167-1077.47D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0360.00300.003187.717.692003286024792.307-1081.11D0.04421.5821.6240.23.70.00300.0350.00300.003197.717.692003118014792.172-1088.61D0.03821.5821.6180.183.60.00300.030.00200.003207.717.69200357037788.168-1071.18D0.03921.5821.6190.183.50.00300.0310.00200.003217.717.69200332040785.506-1068.61D0.03821.5821.6180.183.70.00300.030.00200.003227.717.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2003294035789.14-1072.97D0.11522.2922.4140.55870.00800.0870.00900.011018.078.022003287037788.168-1071.18D0.06222.2922.3580.30870.00400.0470.00500.006028.058.022003326037788.168-1071.18D0.06222.2922.3580.30870.00400.0470.00500.006028.058.022003145030791.167-1077.47D0.05322.4822.5410.25880.00400.040.00400.005048.138.10200366035789.14-1072.97D0.05022.2922.3450.24870.00300.0380.00400.005058.048.022003293039786.394-1069.47D0.04522.2922.3390.22870.00300.0350.00300.004068.048.022003280040785.506-1068.61D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.004078.048.022003237037788.168-1071.18D0.04423.0123.0570.20900.00300.0330.00300.0040108.358.332003133020792.475-1082.97D0.04322.4822.5300.20880.00300.0330.00300.004098.128.10200371037788.168-1071.18D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.004078.048.022003279030791.167-1077.47D0.04022.2922.3330.19870.00200.030.00300.0040128.038.022003221019792.559-1083.9D0.04123.0123.0540.19900.00300.030.00300.0040138.358.33200360040785.506-1068.61D0.04022.1222.1590.20860.00200.0310.00300.0040117.967.942003278040785.506-1068.61D0.03822.2922.3320.18870.00200.0290.00300.0040168.038.022003235030791.167-1077.47D0.04023.0123.0530.19900.00300.0290.00300.0040158.358.33200370019792.559-1083.9D0.03922.2922.3320.19870.00200.0290.00300.0040148.038.022003312012792.339-1090.47D0.03822.2922.3320.18870.00200.0290.00300.0040168.038.022003308030791.167-1077.47D0.03622.2922.3300.17870.00200.0280.00300.0030188.038.022003286024792.307-1081.11D0.03522.2922.3290.17870.00200.0270.00300.0030198.038.022003118014792.172-1088.61D0.03122.2922.3240.15870.00200.0230.00200.0030218.038.02200357037788.168-1071.18D0.03122.1222.1490.15860.00200.0240.00200.0030207.957.94200332040785.506-1068.61D0.03122.2922.3240.15870.00200.0230.00200.0030228.038.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2002 101 030 791.167 -1077.47 D0.095 21.58 21.675 0.44 3.6 0.006 0 0.076 0.006 0 0.007 17.74 7.692002241024792.307-1081.11D0.06921.5821.6490.324.30.00600.0540.00400.00527.727.692002272037788.168-1071.18D0.06421.5821.6440.34.20.00500.050.00400.00537.727.69200213035789.14-1072.97D0.06321.5821.6430.293.70.00400.050.00400.00547.727.692002142038787.281-1070.32D0.05921.5821.6390.273.80.00400.0470.00400.00557.727.69200227024792.307-1081.11D0.05321.5821.6330.253.70.00400.0420.00300.00467.727.692002248039786.394-1069.47D0.05221.5821.6320.244.20.00400.0410.00300.00477.727.692002307037788.168-1071.18D0.0521.5821.630.233.70.00400.040.00300.00487.717.692002183038787.281-1070.32D0.0521.5821.630.234.30.00400.0390.00300.00497.717.69200247033790.111-1074.75D0.04921.5821.6290.233.50.00300.0390.00300.004107.717.692002282040785.506-1068.61D0.04721.5821.6270.223.70.00300.0380.00300.004117.717.692002343039786.394-1069.47D0.04521.5821.6250.213.70.00300.0350.00300.003127.717.692002298019792.559-1083.9D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0370.00300.004137.717.692002249010791.785-1093.33D0.04521.5821.6250.214.20.00400.0350.00300.003147.717.69200215308791.23-1096.19D0.04221.5821.6220.240.00300.0330.00300.003157.717.692002141026791.334-1079.32D0.04221.5821.6220.193.80.00300.0330.00300.003167.717.692002116019792.559-1083.9D0.03921.5821.6190.183.60.00300.0310.00200.003177.717.692002147030791.167-1077.47D0.03721.5821.6170.173.80.00300.030.00200.003187.717.692002135034789.224-1073.89D0.03621.5821.6160.173.80.00300.0280.00200.003197.717.69200230408791.23-1096.19D0.03521.5821.6150.163.70.00200.0280.00200.003207.717.692002261040785.506-1068.61D0.03621.5821.6160.164.20.00300.0280.00200.003217.717.69200235024792.307-1081.11D0.03521.5821.6150.163.50.00200.0280.00200.003227.717.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2002101030791.167-1077.47D0.07722.2922.3730.37870.00500.0590.00600.007018.058.022002241024792.307-1081.11D0.05623.0123.0700.26900.00500.0420.00400.005028.368.332002272037788.168-1071.18D0.05223.0123.0660.24900.00400.0390.00400.005048.368.33200213035789.14-1072.97D0.05122.2922.3450.25870.00300.0390.00400.005038.048.022002142038787.281-1070.32D0.04922.4822.5360.23880.00300.0360.00400.005058.138.10200227024792.307-1081.11D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.004068.048.022002248039786.394-1069.47D0.04223.0123.0560.20900.00300.0320.00300.004088.358.332002307037788.168-1071.18D0.04122.2922.3350.20870.00300.0310.00300.004078.048.022002183038787.281-1070.32D0.04123.0123.0540.19900.00300.030.00300.0040108.358.33200247033790.111-1074.75D0.04022.1222.1580.19860.00200.030.00300.004097.967.942002282040785.506-1068.61D0.03922.2922.3320.19870.00200.0290.00300.0040118.038.022002343039786.394-1069.47D0.03522.2922.3290.17870.00200.0270.00300.0030138.038.022002298019792.559-1083.9D0.03822.2922.3320.18870.00200.0290.00300.0040128.038.022002249010791.785-1093.33D0.03723.0123.0500.17900.00300.0270.00300.0030148.358.33200215308791.23-1096.19D0.03422.7222.7570.16890.00300.0260.00300.0030168.228.212002141026791.334-1079.32D0.03422.4822.5200.16880.00200.0260.00300.0030158.128.102002116019792.559-1083.9D0.03122.2922.3250.15870.00200.0240.00200.0030178.038.022002147030791.167-1077.47D0.03122.4822.5170.15880.00200.0230.00200.0030188.128.102002135034789.224-1073.89D0.02922.4822.5150.14880.00200.0220.00200.0030198.128.10200230408791.23-1096.19D0.02822.2922.3210.14870.00200.0220.00200.0030228.038.022002261040785.506-1068.61D0.02923.0123.0420.14900.00300.0220.00200.0030218.358.33200235024792.307-1081.11D0.02822.1222.1460.14860.00200.0220.00200.0030207.957.946. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2001 294 035 789.14 -1072.97 D0.187 21.58 21.767 0.87 3.7 0.013 0 0.149 0.011 0 0.014 17.78 7.692001266038787.281-1070.32D0.10121.5821.6810.474.20.00800.0790.00600.00827.747.692001234022792.391-1082.04D0.09321.5821.6730.434.30.00700.0730.00600.00737.737.692001118033790.111-1074.75D0.09121.5821.6710.423.60.00600.0720.00600.00747.737.692001308038787.281-1070.32D0.07721.5821.6570.363.70.00500.0610.00500.00657.737.692001293038787.281-1070.32D0.07421.5821.6540.343.70.00500.0590.00400.00667.737.692001180039786.394-1069.47D0.07321.5821.6530.3440.00500.0580.00400.00677.737.69200182033790.111-1074.75D0.06521.5821.6450.33.70.00500.0520.00400.00587.727.692001254014792.172-1088.61D0.06321.5821.6430.294.20.00500.050.00400.00597.727.692001183040785.506-1068.61D0.0621.5821.640.284.30.00500.0470.00400.004107.727.69200159037788.168-1071.18D0.05921.5821.6390.273.50.00400.0470.00400.005117.727.692001119024792.307-1081.11D0.05521.5821.6350.263.60.00400.0440.00300.004127.727.692001313033790.111-1074.75D0.05521.5821.6350.253.70.00400.0430.00300.004137.727.692001296040785.506-1068.61D0.05421.5821.6340.253.70.00400.0430.00300.004147.727.692001255035789.14-1072.97D0.05421.5821.6340.254.20.00400.0420.00300.004157.727.692001317037788.168-1071.18D0.05121.5821.6310.243.70.00400.040.00300.004167.727.692001205040785.506-1068.61D0.05121.5821.6310.244.30.00400.040.00300.004177.727.692001120030791.167-1077.47D0.05121.5821.6310.243.60.00300.0410.00300.004187.727.692001312040785.506-1068.61D0.0521.5821.630.233.70.00400.040.00300.004197.717.692001176040785.506-1068.61D0.0521.5821.630.2340.00400.0390.00300.004207.717.69200158033790.111-1074.75D0.0521.5821.630.233.50.00300.040.00300.004217.717.69200143035789.14-1072.97D0.04921.5821.6290.233.50.00300.0390.00300.004227.717.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2001294035789.14-1072.97D0.15122.2922.4530.73870.0100.1160.01100.014018.098.022001266038787.281-1070.32D0.08223.0123.0990.38900.00700.0610.00600.008028.378.332001234022792.391-1082.04D0.07523.0123.0910.35900.00600.0570.00600.007048.378.332001118033790.111-1074.75D0.07422.2922.3700.35870.00500.0560.00600.007038.058.022001308038787.281-1070.32D0.06222.2922.3580.30870.00400.0470.00500.006058.058.022001293038787.281-1070.32D0.06022.2922.3550.29870.00400.0460.00400.006068.048.022001180039786.394-1069.47D0.05922.7222.7840.28890.00400.0450.00400.006078.238.21200182033790.111-1074.75D0.05322.2922.3480.26870.00400.040.00400.005088.048.022001254014792.172-1088.61D0.05223.0123.0660.24900.00400.0390.00400.005098.368.332001183040785.506-1068.61D0.04923.0123.0630.23900.00400.0360.00400.0040118.368.33200159037788.168-1071.18D0.04922.1222.1680.24860.00300.0360.00400.0050107.967.942001119024792.307-1081.11D0.04422.2922.3380.21870.00300.0340.00300.0040128.048.022001313033790.111-1074.75D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.0040138.048.022001296040785.506-1068.61D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.0040138.048.022001255035789.14-1072.97D0.04323.0123.0570.20900.00300.0330.00300.0040158.358.332001317037788.168-1071.18D0.04122.2922.3350.20870.00300.0310.00300.0040178.048.022001205040785.506-1068.61D0.04123.0123.0550.19900.00300.0310.00300.0040208.358.332001120030791.167-1077.47D0.04122.2922.3350.20870.00200.0320.00300.0040168.048.022001312040785.506-1068.61D0.04122.2922.3350.20870.00300.0310.00300.0040178.048.022001176040785.506-1068.61D0.04122.7222.7640.19890.00300.030.00300.0040228.238.21200158033790.111-1074.75D0.04022.1222.1590.20860.00200.0310.00300.0040197.967.94200143035789.14-1072.97D0.04022.1222.1580.19860.00200.030.00300.0040217.967.946. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2003 294 035 789.14 -1072.97 D0.142 21.58 21.722 0.66 3.7 0.01 0 0.112 0.009 0 0.011 17.76 7.692003326035789.14-1072.97D0.07621.5821.6560.353.70.00500.060.00500.00627.737.692003287035789.14-1072.97D0.07121.5821.6510.333.70.00500.0560.00400.00537.727.692003145030791.167-1077.47D0.06621.5821.6460.313.80.00500.0520.00400.00547.727.69200366035789.14-1072.97D0.06121.5821.6410.283.70.00400.0490.00400.00557.727.692003133020792.475-1082.97D0.05421.5821.6340.253.80.00400.0420.00300.00467.727.69200371035789.14-1072.97D0.05521.5821.6350.253.70.00400.0430.00300.00477.727.692003237035789.14-1072.97D0.05321.5821.6330.244.30.00400.0410.00300.00487.727.692003293035789.14-1072.97D0.04921.5821.6290.233.70.00300.0390.00300.00497.717.692003279030791.167-1077.47D0.04921.5821.6290.233.70.00300.0390.00300.004107.717.692003221020792.475-1082.97D0.04921.5821.6290.234.30.00400.0390.00300.004117.717.692003235030791.167-1077.47D0.04821.5821.6280.224.30.00400.0380.00300.004127.717.69200370020792.475-1082.97D0.04821.5821.6280.223.70.00300.0380.00300.004137.717.692003312012792.339-1090.47D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0370.00300.004147.717.692003308030791.167-1077.47D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0360.00300.003157.717.692003286024792.307-1081.11D0.04421.5821.6240.23.70.00300.0350.00300.003167.717.692003280035789.14-1072.97D0.04221.5821.6220.193.70.00300.0330.00300.003177.717.69200360035789.14-1072.97D0.0421.5821.620.193.50.00300.0320.00200.003187.717.692003118014792.172-1088.61D0.03821.5821.6180.183.60.00300.030.00200.003197.717.692003278035789.14-1072.97D0.03721.5821.6170.173.70.00300.0290.00200.003207.717.692003148020792.475-1082.97D0.03621.5821.6160.173.80.00300.0290.00200.003217.717.69200357035789.14-1072.97D0.03721.5821.6170.173.50.00200.030.00200.003227.717.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2003294035789.14-1072.97D0.11522.2922.4140.55870.00800.0870.00900.011018.078.022003326035789.14-1072.97D0.06122.2922.3570.30870.00400.0460.00500.006028.058.022003287035789.14-1072.97D0.05622.2922.3510.27870.00400.0430.00400.005038.048.022003145030791.167-1077.47D0.05322.4822.5410.25880.00400.040.00400.005048.138.10200366035789.14-1072.97D0.05022.2922.3450.24870.00300.0380.00400.005058.048.022003133020792.475-1082.97D0.04322.4822.5300.20880.00300.0330.00300.004078.128.10200371035789.14-1072.97D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.004068.048.022003237035789.14-1072.97D0.04223.0123.0560.20900.00300.0320.00300.004088.358.332003293035789.14-1072.97D0.04022.2922.3330.19870.00200.030.00300.004098.038.022003279030791.167-1077.47D0.04022.2922.3330.19870.00200.030.00300.004098.038.022003221020792.475-1082.97D0.04123.0123.0540.19900.00300.030.00300.0040118.358.332003235030791.167-1077.47D0.04023.0123.0530.19900.00300.0290.00300.0040138.358.33200370020792.475-1082.97D0.03922.2922.3320.19870.00200.0290.00300.0040128.038.022003312012792.339-1090.47D0.03822.2922.3320.18870.00200.0290.00300.0040148.038.022003308030791.167-1077.47D0.03622.2922.3300.17870.00200.0280.00300.0030158.038.022003286024792.307-1081.11D0.03522.2922.3290.17870.00200.0270.00300.0030168.038.022003280035789.14-1072.97D0.03422.2922.3270.16870.00200.0260.00300.0030178.038.02200360035789.14-1072.97D0.03222.1222.1500.16860.00200.0250.00200.0030187.957.942003118014792.172-1088.61D0.03122.2922.3240.15870.00200.0230.00200.0030198.038.022003278035789.14-1072.97D0.03022.2922.3230.14870.00200.0220.00200.0030218.038.022003148020792.475-1082.97D0.03022.4822.5160.14880.00200.0220.00200.0030228.128.10200357035789.14-1072.97D0.03022.1222.1480.14860.00200.0230.00200.0030207.957.946. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2002 101 030 791.167 -1077.47 D0.095 21.58 21.675 0.44 3.6 0.006 0 0.076 0.006 0 0.007 17.74 7.692002241024792.307-1081.11D0.06921.5821.6490.324.30.00600.0540.00400.00527.727.692002272035789.14-1072.97D0.06221.5821.6420.294.20.00500.0490.00400.00537.727.69200213035789.14-1072.97D0.06321.5821.6430.293.70.00400.050.00400.00547.727.69200227024792.307-1081.11D0.05321.5821.6330.253.70.00400.0420.00300.00457.727.692002142035789.14-1072.97D0.05121.5821.6310.243.80.00400.040.00300.00467.727.69200247033790.111-1074.75D0.04921.5821.6290.233.50.00300.0390.00300.00477.717.692002307035789.14-1072.97D0.04821.5821.6280.223.70.00300.0380.00300.00487.717.692002183035789.14-1072.97D0.04721.5821.6270.224.30.00400.0370.00300.00497.717.692002298020792.475-1082.97D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0370.00300.004107.717.69200224909791.146-1095.26D0.04521.5821.6250.214.20.00300.0350.00300.003117.717.692002248035789.14-1072.97D0.04321.5821.6230.24.20.00300.0340.00300.003127.717.69200215309791.146-1095.26D0.04121.5821.6210.1940.00300.0330.00300.003137.717.692002141026791.334-1079.32D0.04221.5821.6220.193.80.00300.0330.00300.003147.717.692002116020792.475-1082.97D0.03921.5821.6190.183.60.00300.0310.00200.003157.717.692002343035789.14-1072.97D0.03721.5821.6170.173.70.00300.030.00200.003167.717.692002147030791.167-1077.47D0.03721.5821.6170.173.80.00300.030.00200.003177.717.692002135034789.224-1073.89D0.03621.5821.6160.173.80.00300.0280.00200.003187.717.692002282035789.14-1072.97D0.03421.5821.6140.163.70.00200.0270.00200.003197.717.69200235024792.307-1081.11D0.03521.5821.6150.163.50.00200.0280.00200.003207.717.69200228033790.111-1074.75D0.03421.5821.6140.163.70.00200.0270.00200.003217.717.69200230409791.146-1095.26D0.03321.5821.6130.153.70.00200.0260.00200.003227.717.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2002101030791.167-1077.47D0.07722.2922.3730.37870.00500.0590.00600.007018.058.022002241024792.307-1081.11D0.05623.0123.0700.26900.00500.0420.00400.005028.368.332002272035789.14-1072.97D0.05123.0123.0650.24900.00400.0380.00400.005048.368.33200213035789.14-1072.97D0.05122.2922.3450.25870.00300.0390.00400.005038.048.02200227024792.307-1081.11D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.004058.048.022002142035789.14-1072.97D0.04122.4822.5280.20880.00300.0310.00300.004068.128.10200247033790.111-1074.75D0.04022.1222.1580.19860.00200.030.00300.004077.967.942002307035789.14-1072.97D0.03922.2922.3320.19870.00200.0290.00300.004088.038.022002183035789.14-1072.97D0.03923.0123.0520.18900.00300.0290.00300.0040108.358.332002298020792.475-1082.97D0.03822.2922.3320.18870.00200.0290.00300.004098.038.02200224909791.146-1095.26D0.03623.0123.0490.17900.00300.0270.00300.0030118.358.332002248035789.14-1072.97D0.03523.0123.0480.16900.00300.0260.00300.0030128.358.33200215309791.146-1095.26D0.03422.7222.7570.16890.00300.0260.00300.0030148.228.212002141026791.334-1079.32D0.03422.4822.5200.16880.00200.0260.00300.0030138.128.102002116020792.475-1082.97D0.03122.2922.3250.15870.00200.0240.00200.0030158.038.022002343035789.14-1072.97D0.03122.2922.3240.15870.00200.0230.00200.0030168.038.022002147030791.167-1077.47D0.03122.4822.5170.15880.00200.0230.00200.0030178.128.102002135034789.224-1073.89D0.02922.4822.5150.14880.00200.0220.00200.0030188.128.102002282035789.14-1072.97D0.02822.2922.3200.13870.00200.0210.00200.0030208.038.02200235024792.307-1081.11D0.02822.1222.1460.14860.00200.0220.00200.0030197.957.94200228033790.111-1074.75D0.02822.2922.3200.13870.00200.0210.00200.0030208.038.02200230409791.146-1095.26D0.02722.2922.3190.13870.00200.020.00200.0030228.038.026. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2001 294 035 789.14 -1072.97 D0.187 21.58 21.767 0.87 3.7 0.013 0 0.149 0.011 0 0.014 17.78 7.692001266035789.14-1072.97D0.09421.5821.6740.434.20.00700.0740.00600.00727.747.692001234022792.391-1082.04D0.09321.5821.6730.434.30.00700.0730.00600.00737.737.692001118033790.111-1074.75D0.09121.5821.6710.423.60.00600.0720.00600.00747.737.692001180035789.14-1072.97D0.06821.5821.6480.3240.00500.0540.00400.00557.727.692001293035789.14-1072.97D0.06721.5821.6470.313.70.00500.0530.00400.00567.727.69200182033790.111-1074.75D0.06521.5821.6450.33.70.00500.0520.00400.00577.727.692001308035789.14-1072.97D0.06221.5821.6420.293.70.00400.0490.00400.00587.727.692001254014792.172-1088.61D0.06321.5821.6430.294.20.00500.050.00400.00597.727.69200159035789.14-1072.97D0.05821.5821.6380.273.50.00400.0470.00400.004107.727.692001119024792.307-1081.11D0.05521.5821.6350.263.60.00400.0440.00300.004117.727.692001313033790.111-1074.75D0.05521.5821.6350.253.70.00400.0430.00300.004127.727.692001255035789.14-1072.97D0.05421.5821.6340.254.20.00400.0420.00300.004137.727.692001120030791.167-1077.47D0.05121.5821.6310.243.60.00300.0410.00300.004147.727.692001317035789.14-1072.97D0.0521.5821.630.233.70.00300.0390.00300.004157.717.69200158033790.111-1074.75D0.0521.5821.630.233.50.00300.040.00300.004167.717.69200143035789.14-1072.97D0.04921.5821.6290.233.50.00300.0390.00300.004177.717.692001321030791.167-1077.47D0.04721.5821.6270.223.70.00300.0370.00300.004187.717.692001326020792.475-1082.97D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0360.00300.003197.717.692001315030791.167-1077.47D0.04621.5821.6260.213.70.00300.0370.00300.004207.717.692001169024792.307-1081.11D0.04521.5821.6250.2140.00300.0350.00300.003217.717.69200133012792.339-1090.47D0.04621.5821.6260.213.50.00300.0370.00300.004227.717.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2001294035789.14-1072.97D0.15122.2922.4530.73870.0100.1160.01100.014018.098.022001266035789.14-1072.97D0.07623.0123.0920.36900.00600.0570.00600.007028.378.332001234022792.391-1082.04D0.07523.0123.0910.35900.00600.0570.00600.007048.378.332001118033790.111-1074.75D0.07422.2922.3700.35870.00500.0560.00600.007038.058.022001180035789.14-1072.97D0.05522.7222.7800.26890.00400.0420.00400.005068.238.212001293035789.14-1072.97D0.05422.2922.3490.26870.00400.0410.00400.005058.048.02200182033790.111-1074.75D0.05322.2922.3480.26870.00400.040.00400.005078.048.022001308035789.14-1072.97D0.05022.2922.3450.24870.00300.0380.00400.005098.048.022001254014792.172-1088.61D0.05223.0123.0660.24900.00400.0390.00400.005088.368.33200159035789.14-1072.97D0.04822.1222.1670.23860.00300.0360.00400.0040107.967.942001119024792.307-1081.11D0.04422.2922.3380.21870.00300.0340.00300.0040118.048.022001313033790.111-1074.75D0.04322.2922.3370.21870.00300.0330.00300.0040128.048.022001255035789.14-1072.97D0.04323.0123.0570.20900.00300.0330.00300.0040138.358.332001120030791.167-1077.47D0.04122.2922.3350.20870.00200.0320.00300.0040148.048.022001317035789.14-1072.97D0.04022.2922.3330.19870.00200.030.00300.0040178.038.02200158033790.111-1074.75D0.04022.1222.1590.20860.00200.0310.00300.0040157.967.94200143035789.14-1072.97D0.04022.1222.1580.19860.00200.030.00300.0040167.967.942001321030791.167-1077.47D0.03822.2922.3320.18870.00200.0290.00300.0040198.038.022001326020792.475-1082.97D0.03622.2922.3300.17870.00200.0280.00300.0030218.038.022001315030791.167-1077.47D0.03822.2922.3320.18870.00200.0290.00300.0040198.038.022001169024792.307-1081.11D0.03622.7222.7590.17890.00300.0270.00300.0030228.228.21200133012792.339-1090.47D0.03822.1222.1560.18860.00200.0290.00300.0040187.967.946. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------CALPOST-IMPROVE Processor for the EastREVISED DRAFT2 August 2006CALPOST Recalculation with New IMPROVE AlgorithmYEARDAY HR RECEPTORTYPEBEXT(Model)BEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGEF(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMCbxPMFRankYEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km)TYPE BEXT(Model) BEXT(BKG) BEXT(Total) %CHANGE F(RH) bxSO4 bxNO3 bxOC bxEC bxPMC bxPMFdv(total) dv(bkg)2003 354 040 785.506 -1068.61 D1.898 21.58 23.478 8.79 3.7 1.296 0 0.297 0.057 0.099 0.149 18.53 7.69200382040785.506-1068.61D1.25221.5822.8325.83.70.85400.1990.0370.0650.09628.267.69200335909791.146-1095.26D1.24821.5822.8285.783.70.85800.1980.0370.0570.09838.257.6920032306789.227-1101.06D1.15121.5822.7315.333.70.78200.1890.0320.0630.08548.217.69200330101777.71-1118.01D1.1321.5822.715.243.70.7700.180.0330.060.08758.207.69200350039786.394-1069.47D1.1121.5822.695.153.50.74500.1810.0350.0590.0968.197.69200314306789.227-1101.06D1.121.5822.685.13.80.75400.1740.0310.0590.08278.197.692003333033790.111-1074.75D1.09921.5822.6795.093.70.74700.1710.0330.0610.08688.197.69200311704781.422-1113.94D1.06921.5822.6494.953.60.72100.1730.0320.0580.08398.187.692003222040785.506-1068.61D1.03621.5822.6164.84.30.74100.1540.0260.0460.069108.167.692003346040785.506-1068.61D1.01421.5822.5944.73.70.6900.1590.030.0570.079118.157.6920036207789.783-1098.2D1.00821.5822.5884.673.70.68700.1590.030.0540.078128.157.69200383013792.256-1089.54D0.90921.5822.4894.213.70.61800.1450.0270.050.069138.107.692003223040785.506-1068.61D0.87121.5822.4514.044.30.62100.1310.0220.040.057148.097.6920031104781.422-1113.94D0.85421.5822.4343.963.70.5800.1340.0250.050.066158.087.6920038902779.971-1115.94D0.80221.5822.3823.723.70.54600.1250.0240.0440.063168.067.6920031501777.71-1118.01D0.79221.5822.3723.673.70.53900.1240.0240.0440.062178.057.692003100040785.506-1068.61D0.76621.5822.3463.553.60.51800.1230.0230.0420.06188.047.692003504781.422-1113.94D0.75221.5822.3323.493.70.51300.1170.0230.0410.059198.037.69200391040785.506-1068.61D0.73321.5822.3133.393.70.500.1140.0220.0390.058208.037.69200318037788.168-1071.18D0.71721.5822.2973.323.70.48900.1120.0220.0380.056218.027.6920033601777.71-1118.01D0.69921.5822.2793.243.50.46600.1150.0210.0410.056228.017.69110.03YEARDAYHRRECEPTORTYPEBEXT(SourceBEXT(BKGBEXT(Total)%CHANGERH(%)bsSO4bsNO3bsOCbsECbsPMCbsPMFbaNO2dv(total)dv(bkg)2003354040785.506-1068.61D1.57022.2923.8907.18871.03400.2310.0570.0990.149018.718.02200382040785.506-1068.61D1.03322.2923.3444.72870.6800.1540.0370.0650.096028.488.02200335909791.146-1095.26D1.02922.2923.3404.71870.68400.1540.0370.0570.098038.488.0220032306789.227-1101.06D0.95022.2923.2594.34870.62300.1470.0320.0630.085048.448.02200330101777.71-1118.01D0.93322.2923.2424.27870.61300.140.0330.060.087058.438.02200350039786.394-1069.47D0.91722.1223.0514.23860.59300.140.0350.0590.09068.357.94200314306789.227-1101.06D0.92822.4823.4294.21880.62100.1350.0310.0590.082078.518.102003333033790.111-1074.75D0.90822.2923.2164.15870.59500.1330.0330.0610.086088.428.02200311704781.422-1113.94D0.89722.2923.2064.10870.5900.1340.0320.0580.083098.428.022003222040785.506-1068.61D0.88523.0123.9113.91900.62400.1190.0260.0460.0690108.728.332003346040785.506-1068.61D0.83922.2923.1463.83870.5500.1230.030.0570.0790118.398.0220036207789.783-1098.2D0.83222.2923.1393.81870.54700.1230.030.0540.0780128.398.02200383013792.256-1089.54D0.75122.2923.0563.43870.49200.1120.0270.050.0690138.358.022003223040785.506-1068.61D0.74423.0123.7673.29900.52300.1020.0220.040.0570148.668.3320031104781.422-1113.94D0.70722.2923.0113.23870.46200.1040.0250.050.0660158.338.0220038902779.971-1115.94D0.66322.2922.9663.03870.43500.0970.0240.0440.0630168.318.0220031501777.71-1118.01D0.65522.2922.9583.00870.42900.0960.0240.0440.0620178.318.022003100040785.506-1068.61D0.64422.2922.9472.95870.42400.0950.0230.0420.060188.318.022003504781.422-1113.94D0.62222.2922.9252.84870.40800.0910.0230.0410.0590198.308.02200391040785.506-1068.61D0.60522.2922.9082.77870.39800.0880.0220.0390.0580208.298.02200318037788.168-1071.18D0.59222.2922.8942.71870.38900.0870.0220.0380.0560218.288.0220033601777.71-1118.01D0.57822.1222.7052.66860.37100.0890.0210.0410.0560228.207.946. Enter desired NO2/Nratio (default is 0)5. Check calculated valubelow against CALPOST"Ranked Daily VisibilityNewRank---------------------------- INPUT from CALPOST (based on old IMPROVE algorithm) -----------3. Enter value of site-specific Rayleigh scattering coefficient, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet1. At cell A7, import "Ranked Daily Visibility Change" (bext) table, including columnheadings, from CALPOST (22 days, max)COORDINATES (km)COORDINATES (km)4. (Optional) Insert annual average sea salt concentration, from "Rayleigh & Sea Salt"worksheet. Leave blank if not used, i.e. default is 0.---------------------------------- OUTPUT (based on new IMPROVE algorithm) ---------------------------