NMED Exhibit 16 -- Corrections to Chapter 10 and Appendix D

1

September 5 2013 Corrected Table 10-4 of Chapter 10 and Table 22 of Appendix D

Class I Area 4 SCR 4 SNCR

2 SNCR/2 

Shutdown

Difference Difference 4 SCR 

to 2 SNCR/2 

Shutdown

4 SCR to 4 

SNCR

Arches 1.30 0.48 1.23 0.82 0.07

Bandelier 0.77 0.28 0.78 0.49 -0.01

Black Canyon 0.77 0.28 0.72 0.49 0.05

Canyonlands 2.02 0.64 1.78 1.38 0.24

Capitol Reef 0.70 0.25 0.74 0.45 -0.04

Grand Canyon 0.30 0.10 0.34 0.20 -0.04

Great Sand Dunes 0.77 0.29 0.74 0.48 0.03

La Garita 1.01 0.37 0.95 0.64 0.06

Maroon Bells 0.35 0.13 0.35 0.22 0.00

Mesa Verde 2.91 0.61 2.44 2.30 0.47

Pecos 0.68 0.24 0.69 0.44 -0.01

Petrified Forest 0.26 0.11 0.29 0.15 -0.03

San Pedro 1.38 0.47 1.29 0.91 0.09

West Elk 0.87 0.31 0.79 0.56 0.08

Weminuche 1.55 0.47 1.42 1.08 0.13

Wheeler Peak 0.64 0.25 0.67 0.39 -0.03

June 27, 2013 2013 version of Table 10-4 of Chapter 10 and Table 22 of Appendix D

Class I Area 4 SCR 4 SNCR

2 SNCR/2 

Shutdown

Difference Difference 4 SCR 

to 2 SNCR/2 

Shutdown

4 SCR to 4 

SNCR

Arches 1.06 0.37 0.97 0.69 0.09

Bandelier 0.61 0.23 0.64 0.38 -0.03

Black Canyon 0.37 0.16 0.41 0.21 -0.04

Canyonlands 1.54 0.48 1.38 1.06 0.16

Capitol Reef 0.34 0.10 0.42 0.24 -0.08

Grand Canyon 0.18 0.08 0.25 0.10 -0.07

Great Sand Dunes 0.73 0.27 0.69 0.46 0.04

La Garita 0.78 0.29 0.73 0.49 0.05

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.07 0.22 0.13 -0.02

Mesa Verde 2.69 0.55 2.41 2.14 0.28

Pecos 0.70 0.25 0.66 0.45 0.04

Petrified Forest 0.16 0.07 0.25 0.09 -0.09

San Pedro 1.41 0.49 1.29 0.92 0.12

West Elk 0.45 0.17 0.43 0.28 0.02

Weminuche 1.29 0.41 1.23 0.88 0.06

Wheeler Peak 0.59 0.24 0.58 0.35 0.01
NMED Exhibit 16 -- Corrections to Chapter 10 and Appendix D

2

Description 

Table 10-4 in Chapter 10 (at p. 10-13) and Table 22 in Appendix D (at p.42) of the revised SIP 

are identical tables, entitled “2001-2003 Average Visibility Improvement for 4 SCR, 4 SNCR and 

2 SNCR/2 Shutdown Scenarios.” In the June 27, 2013 public review drafts of those documents, 

these tables were incorrect because they actually contained visibility data for a single year, 2003, 

rather than for the 2001-2003 period. Accordingly, the 4th graph in Figure 11 on p. 41 of 

Appendix D is also incorrect. (A corrected version of Figure 11 appears in the written testimony 

of Gi-Dong Kim, NMED Ex. 12)

This same error is also reflected in the text at p. 37 of Appendix D, in the last sentence. The 

sentence should state that the largest average differences in visibility improvement from the 4 

SCR and the 2 SNCR/2 shutdown scenarios are 0.47 dv (rather than 0.28 dv) at Mesa Verde and 

0.24 dv (rather than 0.16 dv) at Canyonlands. This same textual error is replicated in paragraph 

6 of the BART determination at p. 10-15 of Chapter 10 and p. 45 of Appendix D.

Finally, there is a transcription error that appears in Tables 16 – 19 on pp. 25 -28 of Appendix D. 

On each table, the NOx emission rate for the baseline scenario should be 0.33 lbs/MMBtu, not 

0.30. The error is only in the table, not in the underlying modeling. That is, the inputs to 

Calpuff were correct; they were merely transcribed incorrectly into the table.