# BART Exemption Modeling Report:

Georgia Power Company Plant Kraft

Prepared by:

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation for Georgia Power Company

September 2006September 2006 

### i 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

# Contents

1.0 Introduction...................................

................................................... ................................................... ...... 1-1

1.1 Objectives .........................................

................................................... ............................................ 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas ......

................................................... ....................... 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissions data ..........

................................................... .................................. 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data..........................

................................................... .................................... 2-1

3.0 Modeling results...............................

................................................... ................................................... .. 3-1

Appendix A Delta-Deciview Values for The Top 20 Day s – For Each Year/Each Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years......

................................................... ............A-1September 2006 

### ii 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

# List of Tables

Table 2-1 Plant Kraft modeling emission parameters...........

................................................... ................ 2-3

Table 3-1 Summary of Results – Plant Kraft Refined BART Exemption Modeling........................... ..... 3-1



# List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Plant Kraft .............................................. ........... 1-2September 2006 1-1 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retr ofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that ‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be a nticipated to cause or contribute to any impairment of visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Pursuant to federal regulations, states have the o ption of exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requ irements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating that the source cannot reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Ag ency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states s ubject to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determin e that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO 2 

### and NO x 

### for electric generating units (EGUs). Feedback fr om the Georgia Environmental Protection Division 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 particula te matter (PM) only.

Units 3 and 4 at Plant Kraft, located near Savannah , which is owned and operated by Georgia Power Company ∗ 

### , has been identified as a BART-eligible source. T he modeling procedures outlined in the sourcespecific BART modeling protocol for Plant Kraft wer e used to determine whether the source is subject t o BART requirements (exemption modeling). The modeling pr ocedures 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/BARTModelingProto col_rev3_18Jul2006.pdf . This source-specific BART modeling protocol references r elevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling protocol.



## 1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas

The Georgia Environmental Protection Division, whic h is in charge of the state’s BART program, has determined that Units 3 and 4 at Plant Kraft are BA RT-eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of Pla nt Kraft relative to nearby Class I Areas. There are three Class I areas within 300 km of the plant: Cape Roma in (161.7 km), Okefenokee (159.0 km), and Wolf Island (87.0 km). The BART exemption modeling was conducted for these Class I areas in accordance wit h the referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the procedures described in the source -specific BART modeling protocol.

∗ 

### The merger of Georgia Power and Savannah Electric has been completed. Therefore, these units are now owned and operated by Georgia Power Company.September 2006 1-2 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

### Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation t o Plant KraftSeptember 2006 2-1 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 2.0 Source description and emissions data

2.1 Unit-specific source data

The emissions data used to assess the visibility im pacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant K raft are discussed in this section. The Georgia Environment al Protection Division 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 eff iciencies, 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 source-specific emissions and speciatio n factors and/or default values from AP-42. For the Kraft 3 coal-fired unit, where default speciation values ar e used, the data represents a unit where current (baseline) emi ssion controls include electrostatic precipitators (ESPs), but no post-combustion NO x 

### or SO 2 

### control equipment exists. The PM 10 

### emissions and speciation approach used for the Kraft 3 modeling is indicated in the bullet s below.

• Total PM 10 

### is comprised of filterable and condensable emissio ns.

• Baseline filterable PM 10 

### emissions are based on the highest stack test for t he 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 consistent wi th 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 contro ls indicated above that 55.6% of filterable PM 10 

### emissions is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in si ze) and 44.4% is fine. Of the fine portion, 3.7% i s elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fin e 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 with the metho d used by Georgia Power to derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach as sumes 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 0.8% 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 rem aining portion of condensable PM 10 

### ) are derived based on the supporting field observational informa tion 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) will be modeled with a geometric mass mean diameter of 5 microns, while fine filterable a nd all condensable particles will be modeled with a geometric mass mean diameter of 0.48 microns, consi stent with the CALPUFF default value for fine particles. The geometric standard deviation for bo th fine and coarse particles will be set to 2 micro ns, consistent with the CALPUFF default value. The 0.48 micron diameter value for fine particles comes from the default values in sample input files prese nted 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 coa rse particle sizes), it is a reasonable estimate for the geometric mass mean diameter for that class of particles.September 2006 2-2 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

### Kraft 4 has can fire either natural gas or #6 oil. Since the highest emission rates for Kraft 4 occur when #6 oil is fired, where default speciation values are used they are based on this fuel. The PM 10 

### emissions and speciation approach used for Kraft 4 is indicated i n the bullets below.

• Total PM 10 

### is comprised of filterable and condensable emissio ns.

• Since stack tests are not performed for Kraft 4, ba seline filterable PM 10 

### emissions are based on AP-42 emissions factors and the highest 24 hour heat inpu t for the most recent 3-year period (2003-2005). This results in the “maximum 24 hour average emissi on rate” as required by the VISTAS protocol.

• Filterable PM 10 

### has been subdivided by size category consistent wi th the default approach from AP-42 Table 1-3.4, and as noted on pages 43 and 44 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The AP-42 Table 1-3.4 specifies for an uncontrolled boi ler that 26.8% of filterable PM 10 

### emissions is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in size) and 73.2% is fin e. Of the fine portion, 7.4% is elemental carbon a nd 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 with the metho d used by Georgia Power to derive these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach as sumes 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., Kraft 4 includes ai r heater). Appendix A of the site-specific modeling protocol provides the basis for the site-specific value used.

• Baseline emissions of secondary organic aerosols (t he remaining portion of condensable PM 10 

### ) are derived consistent with the default approach based on AP-42 Table 1.3-2 (i.e., 0.225 lb/1000 gal).

In practice, CALPUFF allows for the user to input c ertain components of PM 10 

### as separate species and separate sizes, which will result in more accurate wet and dry deposition velocity results and also mo re accurate effects on light scattering. As noted abo ve, the particle size distribution information is p rovided in AP-42 Tables 1-1.6 and 1-3.4, and will be used for the BART exemption modeling.

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emissi on parameters used in the BART CALPUFF modeling, consistent with the source emissions data presented in Appendices A and B of the site-specific modelin g protocol for the baseline. All of the emissions fo r Kraft 3 in Table 2-1 were derived from CEMS data for the 2003 to 2005 period and represent the maximum 24-ho ur average lb/hr rates (excluding days where startu p, 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 t est over the 2003 to 2005 period and multiplying th ese values times the maximum 24-hour average heat input derived from CEMS. These values were then adjuste d 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 s uch 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).

For Kraft 4, baseline emission values for NOx, SO2, and PM 10 

### are based on AP-42 factors for a #6 oil-fired boiler considering the highest 24 hour heat input f or the most recent 3-year period (2003-2005). PM 10 

### speciation was then performed as indicated above su ch 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).September 20062-3091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.docTable 2-1 Plant Kraft 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/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrBaseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis)Baseline Unit 3 486,248 3,556,917 83.8 1.5 6.7 13.4413.6 1828.50 754.42 51.65 40.42 22.47 17.95 17.280.66 11.23 5.38 5.85Baseline Unit 4 486,248 3,556,917 83.8 1.5 6.7 13.4413.6 2815.72 212.56 187.33 133.01 35.65 97.36 90.16 7.20 54.32 52.83 1.49Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)ModeledStk Ht3m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrlbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hrStack 1 3&4 486,248 3,556,917 83.8 1.5 6.7 13.4 413.6 4644.22 966.98 238.98 173.43 58.12115.31 107.447.87 65.55 58.20 7.35Stack 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 3&4 486,248 3,556,917 83.8 1.5 6.7 13.4 413.6 585.17 121.84 30.11 21.85 7.32 14.53 13.54 0.998.26 7.33 0.931SO2and NOxemissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sourcesin CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation of the BART final rule. Theemissions for SO2and NOxare provided for information purposes, and for reference in the 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 height. GEP of 327 ft (99.7 m) is greater than actual height therefore actual height is used for modeling.September 2006 3-1 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

# 3.0 Modeling results

The exemption modeling results are provided in Tabl e 3-1, and Appendix A lists delta-deciview results for the top 20 days for each year modeled and the top 25 da ys 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 Kraft’s PM 10 

### emissions do not cause or contribute to visibility impairment. Therefore, the source is not subject to BART for PM 10 

### , and no further BART analysis is required.

Electronic data related to this application are pro vided on the attached disk. They include all input (INP) and list (LST) files.September 2006 3-1 091506 Kraft BART Modeling Report.doc 

### Table 3-1 Summary of Results – Plant Kraft 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 de lta-dv delta-dv delta-dv

Cape Romain 161.7 0 0 0.15 0 0 0.14 0 0 0.18 0.18 0.16

Okefenokee 159.0 0 0 0.17 0 0 0.18 0 0 0.16 0.18 0.17

Wolf Island 87.0 0 0 0.19 0 0 0.20 0 0 0.21 0.21 0.21

# Appendix A

Delta-Deciview Values for the Top 20 Days – for Eac h Year/Each Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Y ears

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Cape Romain (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY HR REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 313 0 531 7.746 7.519 0.227 3.4 76.91 0 2.84 7 .56 2.35 10.34 1 2001 241 0 578 7.728 7.519 0.209 4.1 80.58 0 2.47 6 .57 1.39 8.99 2 2001 240 0 534 7.711 7.519 0.192 4.1 79.96 0 2.45 6 .52 2.15 8.92 3 2001 224 0 532 7.711 7.519 0.192 4.1 80.2 0 2.46 6. 54 1.86 8.94 4 2001 8 0 532 7.693 7.519 0.174 3.3 76.47 0 2.91 7.7 5 2.28 10.59 5 2001 220 0 531 7.666 7.519 0.147 4.1 80.16 0 2.46 6 .53 1.91 8.94 6 2001 242 0 532 7.664 7.519 0.146 4.1 80.35 0 2.46 6 .55 1.68 8.96 7 2001 225 0 532 7.664 7.519 0.145 4.1 79.82 0 2.45 6 .51 2.33 8.9 8 2001 222 0 562 7.657 7.519 0.138 4.1 80.33 0 2.46 6 .55 1.7 8.96 9 2001 63 0 562 7.657 7.519 0.138 2.9 74.37 0 3.22 8. 57 2.12 11.72 10 2001 158 0 532 7.651 7.519 0.132 3.7 78.39 0 2.66 7 .08 2.18 9.69 11 2001 277 0 532 7.65 7.519 0.131 3.7 78.15 0 2.65 7. 06 2.48 9.66 12 2001 233 0 562 7.648 7.519 0.129 4.1 80.46 0 2.46 6 .56 1.55 8.97 13 2001 201 0 531 7.648 7.519 0.129 3.6 77.78 0 2.71 7 .22 2.4 9.88 14 2001 53 0 531 7.646 7.519 0.127 3 74.18 0 3.11 8.26 3.15 11.3 15 2001 223 0 547 7.636 7.519 0.117 4.1 80.27 0 2.46 6 .54 1.78 8.95 16 2001 139 0 531 7.634 7.519 0.116 3.2 76.07 0 2.99 7 .95 2.13 10.87 17 2001 221 0 531 7.631 7.519 0.112 4.1 80.49 0 2.47 6 .56 1.5 8.98 18 2001 48 0 532 7.63 7.519 0.111 3 74.33 0 3.11 8.28 2.95 11.33 19 2001 192 0 578 7.624 7.519 0.105 3.6 78.24 0 2.73 7 .26 1.83 9.94 20

2002 198 0 532 7.687 7.519 0.169 3.6 77.8 0 2.71 7. 22 2.39 9.88 1 2002 232 0 532 7.687 7.519 0.168 4.1 79.97 0 2.45 6 .52 2.14 8.92 2 2002 231 0 531 7.683 7.519 0.164 4.1 80.27 0 2.46 6 .54 1.77 8.95 3 2002 146 0 562 7.683 7.519 0.164 3.2 76.09 0 2.99 7 .95 2.1 10.87 4 2002 6 0 532 7.683 7.519 0.164 3.3 76.16 0 2.9 7.71 2.68 10.55 5 2002 233 0 578 7.681 7.519 0.163 4.1 79.98 0 2.45 6 .52 2.14 8.92 6 2002 236 0 550 7.679 7.519 0.16 4.1 80.16 0 2.46 6. 54 1.9 8.94 7 2002 202 0 692 7.657 7.519 0.138 3.6 78.07 0 2.72 7 .25 2.04 9.91 8 2002 260 0 532 7.656 7.519 0.137 4 79.69 0 2.5 6.66 2.04 9.11 9 2002 214 0 531 7.654 7.519 0.135 4.1 80.42 0 2.46 6 .56 1.6 8.97 10 2002 187 0 578 7.652 7.519 0.133 3.6 77.94 0 2.72 7 .24 2.21 9.9 11 2002 272 0 531 7.649 7.519 0.13 4 79.71 0 2.5 6.66 2.01 9.11 12 2002 199 0 681 7.648 7.519 0.129 3.6 78.35 0 2.73 7 .27 1.7 9.95 13 2002 153 0 562 7.646 7.519 0.127 3.7 78.45 0 2.66 7 .09 2.11 9.69 14 2002 179 0 562 7.644 7.519 0.125 3.7 78.75 0 2.67 7 .11 1.73 9.73 15 2002 123 0 572 7.644 7.519 0.125 3.2 76.01 0 2.98 7 .94 2.21 10.86 16 2002 209 0 626 7.64 7.519 0.121 3.6 78.16 0 2.73 7. 26 1.93 9.93 17 2002 169 0 537 7.637 7.519 0.119 3.7 78.12 0 2.65 7 .06 2.51 9.65 18 2002 237 0 531 7.637 7.519 0.118 4.1 79.97 0 2.45 6 .52 2.14 8.92 19 2002 18 0 532 7.633 7.519 0.114 3.3 76.72 0 2.92 7. 77 1.96 10.63 20

2003 172 0 580 7.739 7.519 0.22 3.7 78.62 0 2.67 7. 1 1.89 9.71 1 2003 317 0 532 7.72 7.519 0.202 3.4 77.06 0 2.85 7. 58 2.16 10.36 2 2003 211 0 571 7.708 7.519 0.189 3.6 77.77 0 2.71 7 .22 2.42 9.88 3 2003 263 0 578 7.707 7.519 0.188 4 80.43 0 2.53 6.7 2 1.13 9.19 4 2003 128 0 532 7.702 7.519 0.183 3.2 75.75 0 2.97 7 .91 2.54 10.82 5 2003 35 0 532 7.697 7.519 0.178 3 74.63 0 3.12 8.31 2.56 11.37 6 2003 236 0 579 7.695 7.519 0.176 4.1 80.25 0 2.46 6 .54 1.79 8.95 7 2003 230 0 537 7.694 7.519 0.175 4.1 80.1 0 2.45 6. 53 1.98 8.93 8 2003 3 0 532 7.688 7.519 0.169 3.3 76.56 0 2.91 7.7 5 2.16 10.61 9 2003 178 0 540 7.679 7.519 0.16 3.7 78.56 0 2.67 7. 1 1.96 9.71 10 2003 202 0 531 7.674 7.519 0.155 3.6 77.61 0 2.71 7 .21 2.62 9.86 11 2003 198 0 550 7.674 7.519 0.155 3.6 78.28 0 2.73 7 .27 1.77 9.94 12 2003 190 0 558 7.672 7.519 0.154 3.6 77.69 0 2.71 7 .21 2.52 9.87 13 2003 186 0 595 7.671 7.519 0.152 3.6 78.01 0 2.72 7 .24 2.11 9.91 14 2003 185 0 531 7.664 7.519 0.145 3.6 78.04 0 2.72 7 .25 2.08 9.91 15 2003 218 0 531 7.66 7.519 0.141 4.1 79.84 0 2.45 6. 51 2.3 8.9 16 2003 192 0 533 7.66 7.519 0.141 3.6 77.63 0 2.71 7. 21 2.6 9.86 17 2003 6 0 562 7.658 7.519 0.139 3.3 77.17 0 2.94 7.8 2 1.39 10.69 18 2003 147 0 577 7.656 7.519 0.137 3.2 75.82 0 2.98 7 .92 2.45 10.83 19 2003 322 0 693 7.642 7.519 0.123 3.4 77.02 0 2.85 7 .57 2.2 10.36 20

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Cape Romain (Top 25 Days Over Three Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 313 531 7.746 7.519 0.227 3.4 76.91 0.00 2.84 7.56 2.35 10.34 1 2003 172 580 7.739 7.519 0.220 3.7 78.62 0.00 2.67 7.10 1.89 9.71 2 2001 241 578 7.728 7.519 0.209 4.1 80.58 0.00 2.47 6.57 1.39 8.99 3 2003 317 532 7.720 7.519 0.202 3.4 77.06 0.00 2.85 7.58 2.16 10.36 4 2001 240 534 7.711 7.519 0.192 4.1 79.96 0.00 2.45 6.52 2.15 8.92 5 2001 224 532 7.711 7.519 0.192 4.1 80.20 0.00 2.46 6.54 1.86 8.94 6 2003 211 571 7.708 7.519 0.189 3.6 77.77 0.00 2.71 7.22 2.42 9.88 7 2003 263 578 7.707 7.519 0.188 4.0 80.43 0.00 2.53 6.72 1.13 9.19 8 2003 128 532 7.702 7.519 0.183 3.2 75.75 0.00 2.97 7.91 2.54 10.82 9 2003 35 532 7.697 7.519 0.178 3.0 74.63 0.00 3.12 8 .31 2.56 11.37 10 2003 236 579 7.695 7.519 0.176 4.1 80.25 0.00 2.46 6.54 1.79 8.95 11 2003 230 537 7.694 7.519 0.175 4.1 80.10 0.00 2.45 6.53 1.98 8.93 12 2001 8 532 7.693 7.519 0.174 3.3 76.47 0.00 2.91 7. 75 2.28 10.59 13 2002 198 532 7.687 7.519 0.169 3.6 77.80 0.00 2.71 7.22 2.39 9.88 14 2003 3 532 7.688 7.519 0.169 3.3 76.56 0.00 2.91 7. 75 2.16 10.61 15 2002 232 532 7.687 7.519 0.168 4.1 79.97 0.00 2.45 6.52 2.14 8.92 16 2002 231 531 7.683 7.519 0.164 4.1 80.27 0.00 2.46 6.54 1.77 8.95 17 2002 146 562 7.683 7.519 0.164 3.2 76.09 0.00 2.99 7.95 2.10 10.87 18 2002 6 532 7.683 7.519 0.164 3.3 76.16 0.00 2.90 7. 71 2.68 10.55 19 2002 233 578 7.681 7.519 0.163 4.1 79.98 0.00 2.45 6.52 2.14 8.92 20 2002 236 550 7.679 7.519 0.160 4.1 80.16 0.00 2.46 6.54 1.90 8.94 21 2003 178 540 7.679 7.519 0.160 3.7 78.56 0.00 2.67 7.10 1.96 9.71 22 2003 202 531 7.674 7.519 0.155 3.6 77.61 0.00 2.71 7.21 2.62 9.86 23 2003 198 550 7.674 7.519 0.155 3.6 78.28 0.00 2.73 7.27 1.77 9.94 24 2003 190 558 7.672 7.519 0.154 3.6 77.69 0.00 2.71 7.21 2.52 9.87 25

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Okefenokee (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY HR REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 303 0 500 7.905 7.608 0.297 3.8 79.76 0 2.64 7 .02 0.99 9.6 1 2001 322 0 499 7.884 7.608 0.276 3.5 77.56 0 2.78 7 .41 2.11 10.13 2 2001 23 0 494 7.866 7.608 0.258 3.5 77.99 0 2.8 7.4 5 1.58 10.19 3 2001 271 0 214 7.829 7.608 0.221 4 80.47 0 2.53 6.7 2 1.08 9.2 4 2001 338 0 499 7.798 7.608 0.19 3.6 78.73 0 2.75 7. 31 1.21 10 5 2001 295 0 493 7.787 7.608 0.179 3.8 79.47 0 2.63 6 .99 1.35 9.56 6 2001 273 0 499 7.775 7.608 0.167 4 80.62 0 2.53 6.7 4 0.89 9.21 7 2001 292 0 499 7.773 7.608 0.165 3.8 78.7 0 2.6 6.9 2 2.3 9.47 8 2001 310 0 477 7.758 7.608 0.15 3.5 78.23 0 2.81 7. 47 1.28 10.22 9 2001 203 0 494 7.757 7.608 0.149 3.7 78.71 0 2.67 7 .11 1.78 9.73 10 2001 272 0 122 7.755 7.608 0.146 4 80.16 0 2.52 6.7 1.46 9.16 11 2001 238 0 499 7.753 7.608 0.145 4.1 80.53 0 2.47 6 .57 1.46 8.98 12 2001 294 0 494 7.752 7.608 0.144 3.8 78.84 0 2.61 6 .93 2.13 9.48 13 2001 274 0 253 7.744 7.608 0.136 4 80.71 0 2.53 6.7 4 0.79 9.22 14 2001 50 0 498 7.741 7.608 0.133 3.2 76.9 0 3.02 8.0 3 1.06 10.99 15 2001 320 0 477 7.734 7.608 0.126 3.5 78.45 0 2.82 7 .49 0.99 10.25 16 2001 281 0 222 7.733 7.608 0.125 3.8 80.01 0 2.64 7 .04 0.69 9.63 17 2001 170 0 477 7.73 7.608 0.122 3.7 78.51 0 2.67 7. 09 2.03 9.7 18 2001 59 0 479 7.721 7.608 0.113 3.2 75.91 0 2.98 7. 93 2.34 10.84 19 2001 196 0 499 7.714 7.608 0.106 3.7 78.76 0 2.67 7 .12 1.72 9.73 20

2002 343 0 499 7.895 7.608 0.287 3.6 78.5 0 2.74 7. 29 1.51 9.97 1 2002 246 0 487 7.853 7.608 0.245 4 80.44 0 2.53 6.7 2 1.11 9.19 2 2002 325 0 498 7.834 7.608 0.226 3.5 77.85 0 2.79 7 .44 1.75 10.17 3 2002 344 0 500 7.827 7.608 0.219 3.6 77.95 0 2.72 7 .24 2.19 9.9 4 2002 247 0 499 7.806 7.608 0.198 4 80 0 2.51 6.69 1 .66 9.14 5 2002 342 0 33 7.802 7.608 0.194 3.6 78.28 0 2.73 7. 27 1.78 9.94 6 2002 217 0 499 7.788 7.608 0.18 4.1 80.11 0 2.45 6. 53 1.97 8.93 7 2002 296 0 499 7.783 7.608 0.175 3.8 79.82 0 2.64 7 .02 0.91 9.6 8 2002 283 0 494 7.768 7.608 0.16 3.8 79.52 0 2.63 6. 99 1.29 9.57 9 2002 221 0 499 7.766 7.608 0.158 4.1 80.33 0 2.46 6 .55 1.71 8.96 10 2002 46 0 479 7.763 7.608 0.155 3.2 76.22 0 2.99 7. 96 1.94 10.89 11 2002 253 0 493 7.748 7.608 0.14 4 79.58 0 2.5 6.65 2.17 9.1 12 2002 96 0 500 7.747 7.608 0.139 3 75.41 0 3.16 8.4 1.54 11.49 13 2002 141 0 122 7.743 7.608 0.134 3.6 78.42 0 2.74 7 .28 1.61 9.96 14 2002 333 0 33 7.734 7.608 0.126 3.5 78.07 0 2.8 7.4 6 1.47 10.2 15 2002 306 0 494 7.733 7.608 0.125 3.5 78.15 0 2.8 7. 46 1.37 10.21 16 2002 140 0 189 7.73 7.608 0.122 3.6 78.79 0 2.75 7. 32 1.13 10.01 17 2002 331 0 323 7.72 7.608 0.112 3.5 78.18 0 2.81 7. 47 1.33 10.21 18 2002 27 0 499 7.719 7.608 0.111 3.5 77.86 0 2.79 7. 44 1.74 10.17 19 2002 143 0 498 7.712 7.608 0.104 3.6 79.03 0 2.76 7 .34 0.84 10.04 20

2003 256 0 464 7.893 7.608 0.285 4 80.12 0 2.52 6.6 9 1.52 9.16 1 2003 255 0 486 7.846 7.608 0.238 4 79.96 0 2.51 6.6 8 1.71 9.14 2 2003 274 0 499 7.819 7.608 0.211 4 80.42 0 2.53 6.7 2 1.15 9.19 3 2003 254 0 499 7.818 7.608 0.21 4 79.82 0 2.51 6.67 1.88 9.12 4 2003 32 0 464 7.812 7.608 0.204 3.5 78.26 0 2.81 7. 47 1.23 10.22 5 2003 307 0 493 7.784 7.608 0.176 3.5 77.34 0 2.78 7 .39 2.4 10.1 6 2003 314 0 189 7.772 7.608 0.164 3.5 78.88 0 2.83 7 .53 0.45 10.3 7 2003 273 0 222 7.769 7.608 0.161 4 80.69 0 2.53 6.7 4 0.81 9.22 8 2003 362 0 499 7.767 7.608 0.159 3.6 78.74 0 2.75 7 .31 1.2 10 9 2003 284 0 499 7.76 7.608 0.152 3.8 78.87 0 2.61 6. 94 2.09 9.49 10 2003 315 0 500 7.754 7.608 0.146 3.5 78.76 0 2.83 7 .52 0.6 10.29 11 2003 293 0 237 7.746 7.608 0.138 3.8 79.53 0 2.63 7 1.28 9.57 12 2003 259 0 464 7.746 7.608 0.138 4 80.5 0 2.53 6.73 1.04 9.2 13 2003 319 0 487 7.738 7.608 0.13 3.5 78.28 0 2.81 7. 48 1.21 10.23 14 2003 326 0 499 7.733 7.608 0.125 3.5 77.12 0 2.77 7 .37 2.67 10.07 15 2003 337 0 499 7.728 7.608 0.12 3.6 78.84 0 2.75 7. 32 1.07 10.01 16 2003 361 0 464 7.723 7.608 0.115 3.6 78.89 0 2.75 7 .33 1.01 10.02 17 2003 276 0 33 7.718 7.608 0.11 3.8 79.88 0 2.64 7.0 3 0.84 9.61 18 2003 261 0 494 7.718 7.608 0.11 4 80.51 0 2.53 6.73 1.03 9.2 19 2003 257 0 499 7.707 7.608 0.099 4 80.3 0 2.52 6.71 1.29 9.18 20

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Okefenokee (Top 25 Days Over Three Years)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 303 500 7.905 7.608 0.297 3.8 79.76 0.00 2.64 7.02 0.99 9.60 1 2002 343 499 7.895 7.608 0.287 3.6 78.50 0.00 2.74 7.29 1.51 9.97 2 2003 256 464 7.893 7.608 0.285 4.0 80.12 0.00 2.52 6.69 1.52 9.16 3 2001 322 499 7.884 7.608 0.276 3.5 77.56 0.00 2.78 7.41 2.11 10.13 4 2001 23 494 7.866 7.608 0.258 3.5 77.99 0.00 2.80 7 .45 1.58 10.19 5 2002 246 487 7.853 7.608 0.245 4.0 80.44 0.00 2.53 6.72 1.11 9.19 6 2003 255 486 7.846 7.608 0.238 4.0 79.96 0.00 2.51 6.68 1.71 9.14 7 2002 325 498 7.834 7.608 0.226 3.5 77.85 0.00 2.79 7.44 1.75 10.17 8 2001 271 214 7.829 7.608 0.221 4.0 80.47 0.00 2.53 6.72 1.08 9.20 9 2002 344 500 7.827 7.608 0.219 3.6 77.95 0.00 2.72 7.24 2.19 9.90 10 2003 274 499 7.819 7.608 0.211 4.0 80.42 0.00 2.53 6.72 1.15 9.19 11 2003 254 499 7.818 7.608 0.210 4.0 79.82 0.00 2.51 6.67 1.88 9.12 12 2003 32 464 7.812 7.608 0.204 3.5 78.26 0.00 2.81 7 .47 1.23 10.22 13 2002 247 499 7.806 7.608 0.198 4.0 80.00 0.00 2.51 6.69 1.66 9.14 14 2002 342 33 7.802 7.608 0.194 3.6 78.28 0.00 2.73 7 .27 1.78 9.94 15 2001 338 499 7.798 7.608 0.190 3.6 78.73 0.00 2.75 7.31 1.21 10.00 16 2002 217 499 7.788 7.608 0.180 4.1 80.11 0.00 2.45 6.53 1.97 8.93 17 2001 295 493 7.787 7.608 0.179 3.8 79.47 0.00 2.63 6.99 1.35 9.56 18 2003 307 493 7.784 7.608 0.176 3.5 77.34 0.00 2.78 7.39 2.40 10.10 19 2002 296 499 7.783 7.608 0.175 3.8 79.82 0.00 2.64 7.02 0.91 9.60 20 2001 273 499 7.775 7.608 0.167 4.0 80.62 0.00 2.53 6.74 0.89 9.21 21 2001 292 499 7.773 7.608 0.165 3.8 78.70 0.00 2.60 6.92 2.30 9.47 22 2003 314 189 7.772 7.608 0.164 3.5 78.88 0.00 2.83 7.53 0.45 10.30 23 2003 273 222 7.769 7.608 0.161 4.0 80.69 0.00 2.53 6.74 0.81 9.22 24 2002 283 494 7.768 7.608 0.160 3.8 79.52 0.00 2.63 6.99 1.29 9.57 25

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Wolf Island (Top 20 Days for Each Year)

% of Modeled Extinction by Species

YEAR DAY HR REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking 2001 260 0 524 8.011 7.58 0.431 4 79.68 0 2.5 6.66 2.05 9.11 1 2002 1 0 524 7.909 7.58 0.329 3.5 77.41 0 2.78 7.39 2.3 10.11 2 2001 261 0 508 7.865 7.58 0.285 4 79.57 0 2.5 6.65 2.19 9.09 3 2001 275 0 530 7.857 7.58 0.277 3.7 78.13 0 2.65 7. 06 2.5 9.65 4 2001 272 0 527 7.84 7.58 0.26 4 79.49 0 2.5 6.64 2. 29 9.08 5 2001 365 0 530 7.828 7.58 0.248 3.5 77.76 0 2.79 7. 43 1.87 10.16 6 2001 291 0 530 7.789 7.58 0.209 3.7 78.76 0 2.67 7. 12 1.72 9.73 7 2001 172 0 524 7.77 7.58 0.19 3.7 78.43 0 2.66 7.09 2.13 9.69 8 2001 44 0 530 7.758 7.58 0.178 3.1 75.64 0 3.06 8.1 6 1.98 11.15 9 2001 36 0 524 7.753 7.58 0.173 3.1 75.46 0 3.06 8.1 4 2.22 11.13 10 2001 45 0 502 7.747 7.58 0.167 3.1 75.84 0 3.07 8.1 8 1.72 11.18 11 2001 55 0 530 7.745 7.58 0.165 3.1 75.53 0 3.06 8.1 4 2.13 11.14 12 2001 11 0 529 7.742 7.58 0.162 3.4 76.65 0 2.83 7.5 4 2.67 10.31 13 2001 3 0 529 7.74 7.58 0.16 3.4 77.09 0 2.85 7.58 2 .11 10.37 14 2001 4 0 524 7.729 7.58 0.149 3.4 76.73 0 2.83 7.54 2.58 10.32 15 2001 274 0 524 7.715 7.58 0.135 4 79.63 0 2.5 6.65 2.11 9.1 16 2001 228 0 530 7.715 7.58 0.135 4.1 79.78 0 2.44 6. 5 2.38 8.9 17 2001 356 0 529 7.707 7.58 0.127 3.5 77.48 0 2.78 7. 4 2.22 10.12 18 2001 24 0 529 7.695 7.58 0.115 3.4 76.73 0 2.83 7.5 4 2.58 10.32 19 2001 68 0 529 7.692 7.58 0.112 3.1 74.87 0 3.03 8.0 7 2.98 11.04 20

2002 308 0 529 8.107 7.58 0.527 3.5 77.12 0 2.77 7. 37 2.67 10.07 1 2002 56 0 528 7.963 7.58 0.383 3.1 75.01 0 3.04 8.0 9 2.8 11.06 2 2002 126 0 530 7.938 7.58 0.358 3.3 76.78 0 2.92 7. 78 1.88 10.64 3 2002 337 0 524 7.912 7.58 0.332 3.5 77.49 0 2.78 7. 4 2.21 10.12 4 2002 307 0 529 7.82 7.58 0.24 3.5 77.31 0 2.77 7.38 2.44 10.1 5 2002 155 0 529 7.807 7.58 0.227 3.7 78.12 0 2.65 7. 06 2.52 9.65 6 2002 324 0 524 7.804 7.58 0.224 3.5 77.6 0 2.78 7.4 1 2.07 10.14 7 2002 331 0 524 7.78 7.58 0.2 3.5 77.36 0 2.78 7.39 2.36 10.11 8 2002 341 0 524 7.772 7.58 0.192 3.5 77.88 0 2.79 7. 44 1.71 10.17 9 2002 312 0 530 7.767 7.58 0.187 3.5 77.8 0 2.79 7.4 3 1.82 10.16 10 2002 261 0 528 7.763 7.58 0.183 4 79.37 0 2.49 6.63 2.43 9.07 11 2002 17 0 530 7.733 7.58 0.153 3.4 76.72 0 2.83 7.5 4 2.59 10.32 12 2002 305 0 524 7.727 7.58 0.147 3.7 78.87 0 2.68 7. 12 1.59 9.74 13 2002 352 0 527 7.723 7.58 0.143 3.5 77.43 0 2.78 7. 4 2.28 10.11 14 2002 281 0 529 7.721 7.58 0.141 3.7 78.35 0 2.66 7. 08 2.23 9.68 15 2002 135 0 530 7.713 7.58 0.133 3.3 76.46 0 2.91 7. 75 2.29 10.59 16 2002 286 0 530 7.709 7.58 0.129 3.7 77.93 0 2.65 7. 04 2.76 9.63 17 2002 319 0 524 7.706 7.58 0.126 3.5 77.13 0 2.77 7. 37 2.67 10.07 18 2002 54 0 530 7.702 7.58 0.122 3.1 75.12 0 3.04 8.1 2.66 11.08 19 2002 301 0 530 7.7 7.58 0.12 3.7 77.92 0 2.65 7.04 2.76 9.63 20

2003 335 0 530 7.914 7.58 0.334 3.5 77.27 0 2.77 7. 38 2.48 10.09 1 2003 253 0 524 7.893 7.58 0.313 4 79.7 0 2.5 6.66 2 .02 9.11 2 2003 252 0 517 7.888 7.58 0.308 4 79.38 0 2.49 6.63 2.42 9.07 3 2003 356 0 529 7.82 7.58 0.24 3.5 77.42 0 2.78 7.39 2.3 10.11 4 2003 259 0 524 7.813 7.58 0.233 4 79.48 0 2.5 6.64 2.29 9.08 5 2003 83 0 524 7.803 7.58 0.223 3.1 74.9 0 3.03 8.08 2.95 11.05 6 2003 251 0 518 7.802 7.58 0.222 4 79.85 0 2.51 6.67 1.84 9.13 7 2003 292 0 524 7.789 7.58 0.209 3.7 78.26 0 2.66 7. 07 2.34 9.67 8 2003 284 0 524 7.774 7.58 0.194 3.7 79.04 0 2.68 7. 14 1.37 9.77 9 2003 279 0 530 7.769 7.58 0.189 3.7 78.26 0 2.66 7. 07 2.35 9.67 10 2003 347 0 530 7.76 7.58 0.18 3.5 77.58 0 2.78 7.41 2.09 10.13 11 2003 256 0 530 7.757 7.58 0.177 4 79.97 0 2.51 6.68 1.69 9.14 12 2003 361 0 524 7.732 7.58 0.152 3.5 77.15 0 2.77 7. 37 2.64 10.08 13 2003 331 0 529 7.732 7.58 0.152 3.5 77.84 0 2.79 7. 43 1.77 10.17 14 2003 261 0 530 7.727 7.58 0.147 4 79.38 0 2.49 6.63 2.42 9.07 15 2003 135 0 529 7.702 7.58 0.122 3.3 76.37 0 2.91 7. 74 2.4 10.58 16 2003 144 0 530 7.701 7.58 0.121 3.3 77.06 0 2.93 7. 81 1.53 10.68 17 2003 32 0 524 7.695 7.58 0.115 3.4 76.98 0 2.84 7.5 7 2.26 10.35 18 2003 114 0 529 7.687 7.58 0.107 3 74.58 0 3.12 8.31 2.62 11.36 19 2003 342 0 524 7.685 7.58 0.105 3.5 77.49 0 2.78 7. 4 2.21 10.12 20

### Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Wolf Island (Top 25 Days Over Three 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 308 529 8.107 7.580 0.527 3.5 77.12 0.00 2.77 7.37 2.67 10.07 1 2001 260 524 8.011 7.580 0.431 4.0 79.68 0.00 2.50 6.66 2.05 9.11 2 2002 56 528 7.963 7.580 0.383 3.1 75.01 0.00 3.04 8 .09 2.80 11.06 3 2002 126 530 7.938 7.580 0.358 3.3 76.78 0.00 2.92 7.78 1.88 10.64 4 2003 335 530 7.914 7.580 0.334 3.5 77.27 0.00 2.77 7.38 2.48 10.09 5 2002 337 524 7.912 7.580 0.332 3.5 77.49 0.00 2.78 7.40 2.21 10.12 6 2002 1 524 7.909 7.580 0.329 3.5 77.41 0.00 2.78 7. 39 2.30 10.11 7 2003 253 524 7.893 7.580 0.313 4.0 79.70 0.00 2.50 6.66 2.02 9.11 8 2003 252 517 7.888 7.580 0.308 4.0 79.38 0.00 2.49 6.63 2.42 9.07 9 2001 261 508 7.865 7.580 0.285 4.0 79.57 0.00 2.50 6.65 2.19 9.09 10 2001 275 530 7.857 7.580 0.277 3.7 78.13 0.00 2.65 7.06 2.50 9.65 11 2001 272 527 7.840 7.580 0.260 4.0 79.49 0.00 2.50 6.64 2.29 9.08 12 2001 365 530 7.828 7.580 0.248 3.5 77.76 0.00 2.79 7.43 1.87 10.16 13 2002 307 529 7.820 7.580 0.240 3.5 77.31 0.00 2.77 7.38 2.44 10.10 14 2003 356 529 7.820 7.580 0.240 3.5 77.42 0.00 2.78 7.39 2.30 10.11 15 2003 259 524 7.813 7.580 0.233 4.0 79.48 0.00 2.50 6.64 2.29 9.08 16 2002 155 529 7.807 7.580 0.227 3.7 78.12 0.00 2.65 7.06 2.52 9.65 17 2002 324 524 7.804 7.580 0.224 3.5 77.60 0.00 2.78 7.41 2.07 10.14 18 2003 83 524 7.803 7.580 0.223 3.1 74.90 0.00 3.03 8 .08 2.95 11.05 19 2003 251 518 7.802 7.580 0.222 4.0 79.85 0.00 2.51 6.67 1.84 9.13 20 2001 291 530 7.789 7.580 0.209 3.7 78.76 0.00 2.67 7.12 1.72 9.73 21 2003 292 524 7.789 7.580 0.209 3.7 78.26 0.00 2.66 7.07 2.34 9.67 22 2002 331 524 7.780 7.580 0.200 3.5 77.36 0.00 2.78 7.39 2.36 10.11 23 2003 284 524 7.774 7.580 0.194 3.7 79.04 0.00 2.68 7.14 1.37 9.77 24 2002 341 524 7.772 7.580 0.192 3.5 77.88 0.00 2.79 7.44 1.71 10.17 25