Appendix 5c - Additional BART information for SABIC 
This page intentionally left blank. 
BEST AVAILABLE RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY (BART) MODELING

PROTOCOL

FOR SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS MT. VERNON, LLC

MT. VERNON, INDIANA

“Draft- for Discussion with IDEM 02/25/08”

Submitted to: Indiana Department of Environmental Management

Office of Air Management

100 N. Senate Avenue

P.O. Box 6015

Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015

Submitted by: Sabic Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC

1 Lexan Lane

Mt. Vernon, IN 47620

Prepared by: Alpine Geophysics, LLC

2655 South County Road 750 East

Dillsboro, Indiana 47018

Project No. TS-313

and

GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.

11499 Chester Road, Suite 511

Cincinnati, Ohio 45246

Project No. 20.0151188.20

February 2008
i

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ON BART 1

1.2 BACKGROUND ON SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS 1

1.3 STUDY OBJECTIVES 3

1.4 CALPUFF MODELING SYSTEM 3

1.5 LOCATION OF SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS VS. CLASS I AREAS 5

2.0 COARSE MODELING APPROACH 8

2.1 MODEL SELECTION 8

2.2 MODELING DOMAIN 8

2.3 RECEPTOR LOCATIONS FOR CLASS I AREAS 9

2.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA 10

2.5 CALPUFF MODEL OPTIONS AND CONFIGURATION 10

2.6 VISIBILITY IMPACT THRESHOLD 11

2.7 CALPOST AND POSTUTIL ANALYSIS 11

2.8 DOCUMENTATION AND CALPUFF MODEL OUTPUTS 12

3.0 FINER GRID MODELING METHODOLOGY 14

3.1 MODEL SELECTION 14

3.2 MODELING DOMAIN 14

3.3 RECEPTOR LOCATIONS FOR CLASS I AREAS 15

3.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA 16

3.5 CALPUFF MODEL OPTIONS AND CONFIGURATION 17

3.6 VISIBILITY IMPACT THRESHOLD 17

3.7 CALPOST AND POSTUTIL ANALYSIS 17

3.8 DOCUMENTATION AND CALPUFF MODEL OUTPUTS 18

4.0 BART CONTROL MODELING 20
ii

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

5.0 REFERENCES 22

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(Continued)

APPENDICES

Appendix A Sabic Innovative Plastics BART-Eligible Sources

Appendix B UTM and LCC Coordinates

Appendix C Sabic Innovative Plastics BART-Eligible Source Maximum 24-Hour Emission

Appendix D Maps of Class I Area Receptors

Appendix E CALPUFF Options
iii

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document provides the modeling protocol for the application of the CALPUFF Model to

determine visibility impacts and Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) applicability for

the Sabic Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC (Sabic Innovative Plastics) facility, (formerly GE

Plastics Mt. Vernon, Inc.), located just southwest (about 1 mile) of Mt. Vernon, Indiana. Indiana

is part of the Midwest Regional Planning Organization (Midwest RPO), which was organized

and funded by the U.S. EPA to facilitate the assessment of visibility impairment in the region.

The Midwest RPO has not developed any specific guidance for air quality modeling for visibility

impacts in support of BART exemptions and BART application review. However, the Lake

Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) developed the Single Source Modeling to Support

Regional Haze BART Modeling Protocol (March 21, 2006), which they followed in providing

visibility impacts for non-EGU sources across the Midwest RPO. Also, neighboring Kentucky

sources along the south shore of the Ohio River have been evaluated following guidance

provided by the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS).

Due to the similarity between these river sites and the lack of specific Indiana or Midwest RPO

BART visibility impact modeling guidance, this protocol follows guidance provided by the

general guidelines of the U.S. EPA in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix W and Appendix Y, the

VISTAS protocol guidance, and the LADCO protocol. The specific VISTAS documentation is

called the Protocol for the Application of the CALPUFF Model for Analysis of Best Available

Retrofit Technology (BART) (Revision 3.2 – 8/31/06) which describes “common procedures for

carrying out air quality modeling to support BART determinations in the VISTAS states that are

consistent with guidelines of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 40 CFR Part 51

Appendix W and Appendix Y”.

The modeling that is proposed herein focuses on the modeling analysis to determine if the

visibility impacts due to the Sabic Innovative Plastics emissions from the BART-eligible source

are less than or greater than the visibility level of 0.5 deciviews (dv) which is the threshold used

to determine whether a source contributes to visibility impairment. Previous screening level

modeling performed by LADCO on behalf of IDEM indicated that the Sabic Innovative Plastics

sources would exceed the 0.5 dv threshold for visibility impacts at five Class I areas for a total of

28 days over a three year modeling period, with 19 of those days being in the Mammoth Cave

National Park and six being in Mingo Wilderness. The highest exceedence in a single year was 9

days at Mammoth Cave National Park in 2003. This previous modeling used a 36km grid

resolution meteorological and modeling domain and released all emissions from one combined

stack at Sabic Innovative Plastics; which, by most modeling guidelines for such analyses, would

be considered a screening level analysis. The modeling herein proposes to build on this baseline

analysis by LADCO, and with consideration of individual stacks and their associated emissions

as well as a higher resolution 4km meteorological and modeling domain. The improved

modeling resolution and source apportionment are considered to be more “refined” modeling

than the original coarse 36km, combined stack modeling by LADCO. Such modeling analysis

will provide a more robust analysis of the visibility impacts and days of significant impact for

emissions from the Sabic Innovative Plastics BART-eligible source. The refined modeling also

considers applicable federally enforceable emission caps and unit limitations. If this refined

modeling results in visibility impacts of 0.5 dv for < 8 days for all individual years and < 22 days
iv

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

for all three years combined, then IDEM should exempt the Sabic Innovative Plastics facility

from further BART analysis. Conversely, if the more refined modeling results in visibility

impacts of 0.5 dv for ≥8 days for all individual years and ≥22 days for all three years combined,

the results would not support exempting the Sabic Innovative Plastics source from BART

analysis. If the latter case is true, additional modeling will be performed that calculates the

incremental impact of selected BART controls on specific units using the 4km refined

methodology presented herein.

This protocol describes the modeling methodologies to be followed for two steps, namely, the

updated 36km modeling approach and the 4km refined grid modeling approach. Details

regarding model selection, model options, sources, meteorological data, speciation, chemical

formulation, visibility calculations, post-processing, and presentation of results are provided in

this protocol. The methodology also describes the Sabic Innovative Plastics facility in Mt.

Vernon, the sources and emissions, the locations of each source, and the selection of the

appropriate modeling domain. Summary tables of all visibility calculations will be presented as

specified in the final documentation for the modeling.
1

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND ON BART

On 6 July 2005, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published final amendments

to its 1999 Regional Haze Rule (RHR) in the Federal Register, including Appendix Y, the final

guidance for Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) determinations (70 FR 39104-39172).

The rule applies to any BART-eligible source that ‘‘emits any air pollutant which may

reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to any impairment of visibility” in any

mandatory Class I federal area. States retain the authority to exempt certain BART-eligible

sources based on dispersion modeling demonstrating that the source cannot reasonably be

anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area. States also have the

authority to define the modeling procedures used to establish BART emissions limits on those

sources for which controls are required (IDEM has not exercised such authority although they

have performed preliminary exemption modeling through LADCO). To assist the states, the

EPA has offered guidelines for how BART modeling should be conducted. The regional air

group, the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS),

which is comprised of all States in the Southeast U.S. (including Kentucky, Florida, South

Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia,

and the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Nation) also has prepared guidance to follow in how

BART visibility impact modeling should be conducted. Because these states are immediately

adjacent to Sabic Innovative Plastics in the Midwest RPO, the VISTAS guidance provides a

relevant initial framework for this proposed modeling protocol for the Sabic Innovative Plastics

source in Mt. Vernon, Indiana. In developing this protocol, the LADCO single source protocol

(entitled Single Source Modeling to Support Regional Haze BART Modeling Protocol (March

21, 2006) was also used as a guide.

1.2 BACKGROUND ON SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS

Sabic Innovative Plastics owns and operates a chemical manufacturing source in Posey County,

Indiana. The source is located on the north side of the Ohio River, near Mt. Vernon, Indiana.

The area is characterized by rolling, forested, and mixed residential, farm, and industrial land

use. Terrain is notable, but not a significant feature in the area and across the potential study

modeling domain, and will be considered in the modeling. The facility makes a variety of

polymers using chemical processes, which are supported by heaters, boilers, and non-chemical

manufacturing activities. The Sabic Innovative Plastics facility is located on about 1000 acres

and employs more than 1500 persons. Operations in the chemical process BART-eligible source

include boilers and heaters as well as other processes that account for emissions of SO2, NOx,

and PM10 in the plant. Figure 1 shows the approximate location of the Sabic Innovative Plastics

plant, and Figure 2 shows a topographical map (USGS 7.5’ quadrangle) of the near vicinity.
2

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Figure 1. Regional Location Map of Sabic Innovative Plastics

Figure 2. USGS Map of the Mt. Vernon, Indiana Area
3

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

In December 2005, Sabic Innovative Plastics provided information pertaining to its

BART-eligible source emission units in response to IDEM’s BART survey. The BART-eligible

source point and fugitive sources, along with their source parameters, are shown in Appendix A.

(Appendix A reflects updated information developed from additional evaluations conducted

since the December 2005 survey.) All coordinates for the sources, originally in Universal

Transverse Mercator (UTM), Zone 16 coordinates, were converted to the Lambert Conformal

Coordinates (LCC) as presented in Appendix B (specifications for this conversion are described

in Section 2.2). The maximum 24hr emission rates for each pollutant are presented in Appendix

C.

1.3 STUDY OBJECTIVES

A recent modeling study by LADCO/IDEM at a 36km grid scale indicated that that the Sabic

Innovative Plastics sources would exceed the 0.5 dv contribution threshold for visibility impacts

at five Class I areas for a total of 28 days over a three year modeling period. The distribution of

days above 0.5 dv was 19 days at Mammoth Cave NP (KY), six days at Mingo Wilderness

(MO), and one day each at Sipsey Wilderness (AL), Linville Gorge (NC), and Hercules-Glades

Wilderness (MO). The highest exceedence in a single year was 9 days at Mammoth Cave

National Park in 2003. The LADCO/IDEM modeling used a 36km grid resolution

meteorological and modeling domain and released the combined SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions

from one combined stack with arithmetically averaged parameters at Sabic Innovative Plastics.

The objective of the modeling proposed herein is to analyze the visibility impacts of the

individual stacks and their associated emissions using the coarse 36km modeling domain as well

as an improved 4km meteorological and modeling domain. The improved modeling resolution

and source apportionment are considered to be more “refined” modeling that will allow a more

defined modeling approach than the original LADCO/IDEM coarse grid analysis and provide

more representative visibility impacts. This modeling is intended to replace the coarse grid

modeling. If this improved resolution modeling results in a visibility impact greater than the

visibility impact threshold of 0.5 dv for ≥8 days for all individual years and ≥22 days for all

three years combined, the Sabic Innovative Plastics sources that are subject to BART controls

will undergo additional modeling to calculate the incremental impact of selected BART controls.

1.4 CALPUFF MODELING SYSTEM

The modeling for Class I area visibility impacts will be performed with the CALPUFF Model

and its various companion programs, including CALMET (meteorological processing),

CALPOST, and POSTUTIL (both post-processing programs). The CALPUFF modeling system

has been adopted by the EPA as a guideline model for source-receptor distances greater than 50

km. CALPUFF was recommended for Class I impact assessments by the FLM Workgroup

(FLAG, 2000), by the Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) (EPA, 1998),

and by VISTAS (VISTAS, 2006) for BART modeling. As recommended in these guidance

documents, CALPUFF is the primary modeling system for the initial and refined grid sourcespecific modeling applications for Class I areas. The model’s formulation provides the

appropriate tools for assessing and simulating the various geographical and meteorological
4

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

influences, the stack and stack gas conditions, the atmospheric and physical processes and the

gas-phase, aerosol, and aqueous-phase chemical processes that influence ambient air

concentrations, deposition, and visibility.

The CALPUFF modeling system was originally developed as a component of a three-part

modeling system sponsored by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in the mid-1980s.

The CARB sought to develop a new puff-based model, a new grid-based model and an improved

meteorological processor that would support application of the two. CALGRID was the urbanscale photochemical grid model resulting from the project (Yamartino et al., 1992) comparable

in science and capabilities to the Urban Airshed Model (UAM-IV) (Scheffe and Morris, 1993).

The model formulation was aimed at overcoming the deficiencies in EPA’s steady-state

Gaussian plume models that were routinely used for inert and linearly reactive materials

(principally SO2) from elevated point sources. Thus, the CALGRID model was designed to treat

the complexities of urban-scale photochemical processes while CALPUFF was formulated to

treat the non-steady state transport, diffusion, linear reaction, and deposition of primary

pollutants from point sources.

CALPUFF is a non-steady state numerical air quality model that simulates the transport,

diffusion, deposition, and chemical transformation of SO2, NOx, and particulate emissions from

point, line, and area sources. Emissions are characterized by diffusing puffs that are transported

by the wind and within which chemical reactions take place. The main components of the model

are CALMET (a three-dimensional kinematic meteorological interpolator), CALPUFF (the core

dispersion and chemical transformation module), and CALPOST (a post-processing package).

Figure 3 from the CALPUFF User’s Guide (Scire et al, 2000) shows a flow diagram of the

model. The most recent EPA approved version of CALPUFF (Version 5.8) is proposed for use

in this study.

The CALMET processor is used to generate meteorological data sets for modeling studies using

a combination of meteorological, geophysical, land use, and elevation data. For this analysis

meteorological data at the 4km resolution will be used and consists of three years of data for

2001-2003 using MM5-generated (version 3.6) data supplemented with National Weather

Service surface and upper air sounding observations. Because the VISTAS RPO has already

processed such 4km data through the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services in Denver, Colorado in

CALMET 5.8 format in a domain that covers southern Indiana and Eastern U.S., these data are

proposed for use in this modeling.

The CALPUFF Model contains the algorithms for determining the transport and dispersion of

emissions into modeling grids at time steps commensurate with meteorology and puff tracking.

To perform the most representative analysis possible of the potential visibility impacts of Sabic

Innovative Plastics, the modeling study will follow the applicable guidelines as noted in more

detail in the sections that follow.

Post-processors will be used after the CALPUFF Model calculates hourly air concentrations.

CALPOST, POSTUTIL, and CALSUM will be used as needed to generate air concentrations on

an individual emission basis for various averaging times to be used in the visibility calculations.
5

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

The processors will then also be used to estimate potential visibility impacts, combining particle

size contributions, repartitioning of nitrates, and summation of individual source impacts if

required.

Figure 3. CALPUFF Modeling Schematic (Scire, et al., 2000)

1.5 LOCATION OF SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS VS. CLASS I AREAS

A number of Class I areas are in the eastern U.S. region surrounding the Sabic Innovative

Plastics facility in Mt. Vernon, Indiana. Most Class I areas considered by the LADCO/IDEM

modeling will be considered in the proposed 4km analysis. Those Class I areas within 300 km of

Sabic Innovative Plastics are within the range of the most credible application of CALPUFF.

The distance from Sabic Innovative Plastics to the nearest receptor and the farthest receptor in

each Class I area is presented below.

 Boundary Waters Canoe Area, Minnesota 1127-1211 km

 Brigantine National Wildlife Refuge, New Jersey 1191-1205 km

 Dolly Sods Wilderness Area, West Virginia 754-762 km

 Great Gulf Wilderness Area, New Hampshire 1570-1576 km

 Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee 437-503 km

 Hercules-Glades Wilderness, Missouri 459-468 km

 Isle Royale National Park, Michigan 1100-1154 km

 James River Face Wilderness Area, Virginia 745-753 km
6

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

 Linville Gorge Wilderness Area, North Carolina 578-587 km

 Lyle Brook Wilderness, Vermont 1387-1398 km

 Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky 165-186 km

 Mingo National Wildlife Refuge, Missouri 221-231 km

 Seney Wilderness, Michigan 935-947 km

 Shenandoah National Park, Virginia 799-861 km

 Sipsey Wilderness, Alabama 393-404 km

 Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota 1215-1263 km

Figure 4 shows the approximate location of these areas with regard to Sabic Innovative Plastics.

Some very distant areas to the north and northeast are not shown. All identified Class I areas

listed above will be modeled in the 36km grid analysis while only those Class I areas with

receptors within the 4km modeling domain of Sabic Innovative Plastics, i.e. Dolly Sods, James

River Face, Mammoth Cave, Great Smokies, Linville Gorge, Mingo, and Sipsey will be included

in the refined modeling. Outlines of the individual Class I areas and all associated receptors

arranged in a gridded array over each area as found on the National Park Service website are

shown in Appendix D. Only those Class I areas having impacts above the visibility threshold

levels will be further modeled if BART controls are required to be evaluated.
7

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

(Boundary Waters, Great Gulf, Isle Royale, Lye Brook, Seney and Voyageurs not shown)

Figure 4. Locations of Class I Areas
8

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

2.0 COARSE MODELING APPROACH

The first step that is proposed in this BART visibility modeling protocol is to use the

LADCO coarse 36km grid meteorology and modeling domain with Sabic Innovative Plastics

unit differentiation and specific source emissions. This modeling is intended to confirm the

baseline LADCO modeling as well as provide additional source and emission refinement to

evaluate whether Sabic Innovative Plastics can be exempted from further BART analysis using a

consistent and conservative set of meteorological and dispersion options. A pre-computed set of

meteorological files provided by IDEM in the 36km format and pre-defined CALPUFF input

option configurations, based on LADCO CALPUFF modeling which followed guidance in the

final BART rule (70 FR 39104-39172) and other EPA and FLAG model guidance, allows

relatively simple screening simulations. The regional modeling domain for the coarse modeling

approach will include all Class I areas in the original LADCO modeling that are presented in

Section 2 herein. The objective of this analysis is to determine whether more detailed analysis

(i.e., more than the LADCO/IDEM combined source approach) of Sabic Innovative Plastics

emissions for those BART-eligible sources identified by IDEM result in visibility impacts

greater than the threshold of 0.5 dv. The second objective of this coarse grid modeling is to

determine which Class I areas should be included in a refined analysis if the coarse modeling

indicates a source may significantly impact visibility. This coarse modeling approach uses threedimensional meteorological fields and the full CALPUFF model, and thus can be considered to

be a reasonable indicator of the outcome from a refined CALPUFF analysis considering a high

probability of moderate conservatism.

This section discusses the modeling data fields, the model options, and presentation of results

that will be used and generated for performing the visibility modeling analysis for the Sabic

Innovative Plastics facility.

2.1 MODEL SELECTION

As recommended by recent protocols and guidance, the CALPUFF modeling system will be used

for visibility impact assessment. For the 36km coarse grid modeling, the version of CALPUFF

that was used by LADCO will likewise be used here even though this is not the most current

regulatory version recommended by U.S. EPA. CALPUFF Version 5.771a along with the

CALMET Version 5.53a 36km meteorological data will be used for this coarse visibility

modeling.

2.2 MODELING DOMAIN

The computational modeling domain serves as the basis for all dispersion and visibility modeling

that will be performed. The domain represents the extent of the study area and the modeling grid

provides a consistent format for conducting the modeling and for translating the meteorology

data to the computation level. The computational grid will be specified in a Lambert Conformal

Conic (LCC) grid. This protocol proposes the use of the 36km grid domain that was used in the
9

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

LADCO/IDEM modeling. The grid consisted of 97 36km cells in the east-west direction and 90

36km cells in the north-south direction. In terms of LCC coordinates, the two matching parallels

were 33oand 45o, the latitude and longitude of the center of the grid was 40o N and 97o W,

respectively, and the grid origin was at -900km east and -1620km north. Figure 5 shows the

overall LCC-based 36km modeling domain with the location of Sabic Innovative Plastics

indicated.

Figure 5. Proposed 36-km Modeling Grid

For the Sabic Innovative Plastics Modeling

2.3 RECEPTOR LOCATIONS FOR CLASS I AREAS

Receptors used by the LADCO/IDEM CALPUFF modeling over the 36km grid domain for each

Class I area were taken from the website of the National Park Service (NPS) Class I receptor

database (http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/Maps/Receptors/index.cfm). These locations were

projected into the computational grid, and reformatted for input into CALPUFF. Elevations for

each receptor were determined from digital elevation data from the NPS receptor data sets. A

graphical representation of the locations of the Class I areas for this 36km modeling is shown in

Figure 5.
10

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

2.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA

Pre-processed CALMET 5.53a meteorological files were obtained from IDEM on a 36km grid

basis for the modeling domain shown in Figure 5. These will be used in all coarse grid

modeling. Three years of MM5 meteorological data were processed by LADCO using

CALMET Version 5.53a and are available for this regional coarse grid CALPUFF modeling

effort. These base data sets include the years 2002, 2003, and 2004.

These meteorological data sets were processed using CALMET in a No-Observations mode and

produced annual meteorological data files at the 36km grid resolution for the overall eastern U.S.

meteorological domain. The CALMET output files in the form of CALPUFF-ready threedimensional meteorological files were made available and obtained from IDEM in August 2007.

2.5 CALPUFF MODEL OPTIONS AND CONFIGURATION

The CALPUFF modeling parameters will follow the LADCO/IDEM 2006 guidance and

previous modeling. A brief discussion of several key inputs is provided below.

Chemical mechanism: MESOPUFF II module

Species modeled: SO2, SO4, NOx, HNO3, NO3 and PM2.5 for these coarse grid runs. All emission

rates will be based on the most appropriate level of the EPA BART guidance, i.e., monitored

data or the 24-hour potential-to-emit emission rate using the fuel characteristics, the maximum

capacity of each unit, and the appropriate AP-42, or other, emission factor. Emissions will be

included for all species originally modeled by LADCO/IDEM, namely, SO2, NOx, and PM2.5.

Excluded emissions: VOC and ammonia/ammonia compound emitting sources will be excluded

from the modeling. All other emissions specified by BART will be included. All other

emissions were greater than the de minimis levels (40 tons per year for SO2 and NOx and 15 tons

per year for PM10) and thus, all will be modeled.

Dispersion coefficients: The Pasquill-Gifford dispersion coefficients will be used.

Ozone dataset: Seasonal domain averaged ozone concentrations based on the LADCO modeling

will be used for the coarse grid modeling. These values are monthly and equal: 31, 31, 31, 37,

37, 37, 33, 33, 33, 27, 27, 27 ppb.

Background ammonia concentration: Seasonal domain averaged ammonia concentrations based

on the LADCO/IDEM modeling will be used for the coarse grid modeling. These values are

monthly and equal: .3, .3, .3, .5, .5, .5, .5, .5, .5, .5, .5, .5 ppb

Puff representation: the integrated puff sampling methodology will be used.

Building downwash: Building and structure downwash effects will be ignored as all Class I

areas are greater than 50 km from Sabic Innovative Plastics.
11

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

2.6 VISIBILITY IMPACT THRESHOLD

Pursuant to the final BART guidance, the LADCO/IDEM protocol (March 2006), and 326 IAC

26-1-4(a) the criteria to determine if a source is contributing to visibility impairment is the 98th

percentile value in the modeling that is equal to 0.5 dv. This 0.5 dv visibility impairment is a 0.5

dv change from natural conditions. The 98th percentile is interpreted as any source with ≥22

days of visibility impairment over the three year modeling period or ≥8 days of visibility

impairment over any one year modeled. Along with this threshold determination, within each

Class I area the number of days above 0.5 dv and the number of receptors greater than 0.5 dv

will be determined.

2.7 CALPOST AND POSTUTIL ANALYSIS

The CALPUFF Model calculates air concentrations of all species modeled, and postprocessor

programs are used to generate the final visibility impairment in terms of light extinction. The

visibility analysis evaluates the potential change in light extinction relative to the natural

background due to the Sabic Innovative Plastics BART-eligible sources. The two main

postprocessors of interest for this BART application are the CALPOST and POSTUTIL

programs. CALPOST will be used to process the CALPUFF outputs. When performing

visibility-related modeling, CALPOST uses concentrations from CALPUFF to compute light

extinction and related measures of visibility (e.g., haze index in deciviews), with results reported

for a 24-hour averaging time. The CALPOST processor contains several options for evaluating

visibility impacts, including the method described in the BART guidance, which uses monthly

average relative humidity values.

The POSTUTIL processor is a program that allows the cumulative impacts of multiple sources

from different simulations to be summed, which may be required if the number of units at Sabic

Innovative Plastics require multiple CALPUFF runs. POSTUTIL also contains a chemistry

module to evaluate the equilibrium relationship between nitric acid and nitrate aerosols. This

capability allows the potential non-linear effects ammonia scavenging by background sulfate and

nitrate sources to be evaluated in the formation of nitrate from an individual source.

Inputs that will be designated for the CALPOST and POSTUTIL analysis include:

 Visibility calculations: Method 6 will be used in this coarse grid modeling approach

using Class I area-specific (centroid) monthly average relative humidity values (from

EPA, 2003a)

 Species considered in visibility analysis: sulfate, nitrate, and fine PM.

 Natural background light extinction: EPA (2003b) values at the haze index value in

deciviews for the 20% best days will be used for the natural background light extinction.

This analysis will use the LADCO natural background light extinction, Bext, technique

which adjusts the Class I area specific chemically speciated natural background

concentrations (using the Eastern U.S. as the basis).
12

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

 Rayleigh scattering value: 10 Mm-1 (all Class I areas)

 Light extinction efficiencies: the default EPA (2003b) values will be used and are in the

LADCO/IDEM input files

 Ammonia limiting technique: will be used in the initial approach modeling

2.8 DOCUMENTATION AND CALPUFF MODEL OUTPUTS

For the coarse grid modeling approach a number of products documenting the analysis will be

prepared. These will include:

 Map of the Sabic Innovative Plastics facility location and Class I areas (similar to that

presented in this protocol),

 A table listing all Class I areas in the modeling domain and those in neighboring states, as

well as a table listing the impacts at those Class I areas as shown by example in Table 2,

 A summary table summarizing the results of the initial approach modeling,

 Discussion of whether the Sabic Innovative Plastics sources were greater than or less than

the impact threshold of 0.5 dv, the Class I areas affected, and the number of such events.

Table 2. Format of Table of CALPUFF Model Results in the 36km Modeling

Domain to Demonstrate Sabic Innovative Plastics Visibility Impacts

Class I Area

Distance from

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics to

Nearest Class I

area boundary,

km

# of days and # of

receptors with

impact > 0.5 dv in

Class I area: 2002

# of days and # of

receptors with

impact > 0.5 dv in

Class I area: 2003

# of days and # of

receptors with

impact > 0.5 dv in

Class I area: 2004

# of days and # of

receptors with impact

>0.5 dv in Class I

area for 3-yr period:

2002-2004

Max. 24-hr

impact over

3 yr period

Boundary

Waters, MN 1127

Brigatine, NJ 1191

Dolly Sods,

WV 754

Great Gulf,

NH 1570

Great Smoky

Mts., TN 435

Hercules

Glade, MO 459

Isle Royale,

MI 1100

James River 745
13

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Class I Area

Distance from

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics to

Nearest Class I

area boundary,

km

# of days and # of

receptors with

impact > 0.5 dv in

Class I area: 2002

# of days and # of

receptors with

impact > 0.5 dv in

Class I area: 2003

# of days and # of

receptors with

impact > 0.5 dv in

Class I area: 2004

# of days and # of

receptors with impact

>0.5 dv in Class I

area for 3-yr period:

2002-2004

Max. 24-hr

impact over

3 yr period

Face, VA

Linville

Gorge, NC 578

Lyle Brook,

VT 1387

Mammoth

Cave, KY 165

Mingo, MO 221

Seney, MI 935

Shenandoah,

VA 799

Sipsey, AL 393

Voyageurs,

MN 1215
14

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

3.0 FINER GRID MODELING METHODOLOGY

The coarse grid (36km) analysis outlined in Section 2 was intended to verify the LADCO/IDEM

CALPUFF modeling results and to introduce better source and emissions data into the analysis.

If this coarse grid visibility modeling of the Sabic Innovative Plastics sources shows 98th

percentile visibility impacts that are greater than the contributing impact threshold of 0.5 dv for

BART applicability, even considering the additional source differentiation and spatial allocation

of emissions, further modeling analysis will be performed using a 4km refined grid modeling

approach. This second modeling step uses a more detailed modeling grid at the 4km grid

spacing, more robust meteorological data also at the 4km spacing, and other less conservative

model assumptions in CALPUFF. This finer grid resolution modeling will allow a more

representative characterization of complex terrain and wind flow in and around Sabic Innovative

Plastics as well as at each Class I area. While Sabic Innovative Plastics may not be in a

significant complex terrain situation, many of the Class I areas are in such situations along with

intervening regions between Sabic Innovative Plastics and the Class I areas. This finer grid

modeling proposes to utilize recently developed (summer 2007) CALMET 4km meteorological

data sets produced by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service in the CALMET Version 5.8 format.

These are available for five sub-regional domains in the VISTAS RPO covering much of the

eastern U.S. If this modeling does not pass the visibility impact threshold for the finer grid

modeling, i.e., the 98th percentile change in deciviews, further modeling of BART alternative

controls will be performed following this 4km modeling approach. Pre-computed sets of

meteorological files at a 4km grid spacing and a pre-defined CALPUFF input option

configuration (proposed herein), based on guidance in the final BART rule (70 FR 39104-39172)

and other EPA and FLAG model guidance, will allow a straightforward application of the

CALPUFF Model in this finer grid modeling approach.

3.1 MODEL SELECTION

The CALPUFF modeling system will be used for all sources at the Sabic Innovative Plastics

facility for the finer grid visibility impact assessment. This protocol proposes to use CALPUFF

Version 5.8 for all modeling which is the most recent U.S. EPA recommended regulatory version

and is consistent with the CALMET Version 5.8 meteorological data sets.

3.2 MODELING DOMAIN

The computational modeling domain serves as the basis for all dispersion and visibility modeling

that will be performed. The domain represents the extent of the study area and the modeling grid

provides a consistent format for conducting the modeling and for translating the meteorology

data to the computation level. The VISTAS RPO is broken into five sub-regional domains with

the 4km resolution. These are shown in Figure 6. Sub-Domain 3 was selected to be used for the

finer grid modeling for Sabic Innovative Plastics as it covered the areas most likely to have Class

I areas influenced by Sabic Innovative Plastics. Other areas will be included if coarse grid

modeling results in visibility impacts greater than the 0.5 dv threshold. Sub-Domain 3 contains a

4 km grid meteorological data set which will be used for all computational analyses in
15

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

CALPUFF. This proposed modeling grid encompasses most of the Class I areas within 300-400

km of Sabic Innovative Plastics.

Figure 6. Sub-Domain 3 for 4km Grid Modeling Within All VISTAS Domains

The computational grid will be specified in Lambert Conformal Conic (LCC) grid coordinates.

The grid will have a 4km grid cell spacing with approximately 263 columns by 185 rows. In

terms of LCC coordinates, the two matching parallels will be 33oand 45o, the latitude and

longitude of the center of the grid is 40o N and 97o W, respectively, and the grid origin was at

538 and -638 km, respectively for east and north. Figure 7 shows the proposed 4km modeling

domain.

3.3 RECEPTOR LOCATIONS FOR CLASS I AREAS

The Class I area receptor locations will be taken from the National Park Service (NPS) Class I

receptor database (http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/Maps/Receptors/index.cfm). These locations

will be projected into the computational grid, and reformatted in Lambert Conformal Conic

coordinates for input into CALPUFF. Elevations for each receptor will be determined from

digital elevation data from the NPS information. All Class I areas that did not pass the initial
16

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

screening visibility modeling in Section 2 will be included in this analysis or at a minimum all

seven of those areas shown in Sub-Domain 3 that were illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 7. Sub-domain 3 for the 4km CALMET Finer Grid Modeling and Proposed Sabic

Innovative Plastics CALPUFF Computational Grid

3.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA

Sub-Domain 3, as shown in Figure 7, will be the data set that will be used to best characterize the

Sabic Innovative Plastics impact area. Three years of pre-computed sub-regional CALMET

meteorological data for Sub-Domain 3 will be used for the Sabic Innovative Plastics visibility

modeling. Three years of MM5 meteorological data along with NWS observations were used by

the US F&WS to generate these 4km meteorological datasets using CALMET 5.8. These data

sets include the years 2001-2003:

 2001 MM5 dataset at 12-km and 36-km grid (developed for EPA)
17

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

 2002 MM5 dataset at 12-km and 36-km grid (developed by VISTAS)

 2003 MM5 dataset at 36-km grid (developed by the Midwest Regional Planning

Organization).

These data sets were processed using CALMET in a hybrid mode using both the MM5 data to

define the initial guess fields and meteorological observational data in the CALMET

calculations. These 4km CALMET (Version 5.8) output files in the form of CALPUFF-ready

three-dimensional meteorological files have been made available and currently reside on the

Alpine Geophysics computers in Denver, Colorado.

3.5 CALPUFF MODEL OPTIONS AND CONFIGURATION

The CALPUFF modeling parameters and options selection adhered to VISTAS, EPA, and FLM

guidance documents as well as being mindful of the LADCO/IDEM protocol. A summary of the

proposed modeling option selections on a parameter by parameter input basis is provided in

Appendix E. Most of the discussion concerning these options that was presented in Section 2.5

of this protocol for the coarse modeling is the same for the finer grid modeling. A few

exceptions are noted below which address features of the finer grid modeling that make it less

conservative than the initial modeling approach and also make it more consistent with a finer

grid modeling approach.

 Terrain data: use higher resolution terrain DEM data (~3 arc second USGS data)

 Ammonia limiting technique (ALM): will be used in the finer grid modeling

3.6 VISIBILITY IMPACT THRESHOLD

In accordance with the final BART guidance and 326 IAC 26-1-4(a), the threshold value to

define whether a source “contributes” to visibility impairment is a 0.5 dv change from natural

conditions. For this finer grid BART modeling, the test for evaluating whether Sabic Innovative

Plastics is contributing to visibility impairment is based on the 98th percentile modeled 24-hour

visibility impact from the CALPUFF modeling. For this analysis the facility would be

considered to not contribute to visibility impairment in a given year if the 7th highest day is

lower than 0.5 dv and over a three year period if the 21st highest 24-hour impact is less than 0.5

DV.

3.7 CALPOST AND POSTUTIL ANALYSIS

The CALPUFF Model calculates air concentrations of all species modeled, and postprocessor

programs are used to generate the final visibility impairment in terms of light extinction. The

visibility analysis evaluates the potential change in light extinction relative to the natural

background due to the Sabic Innovative Plastics BART-eligible sources. The two main

postprocessors of interest for this BART application are the CALPOST and POSTUTIL

programs. CALPOST will be used to process the CALPUFF outputs. When performing

visibility-related modeling, CALPOST uses concentrations from CALPUFF to compute light
18

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

extinction and related measures of visibility (e.g., haze index in deciviews), with results reported

for a 24-hour averaging time. The CALPOST processor contains several options for evaluating

visibility impacts, including the method described in the BART guidance, which uses monthly

average relative humidity values.

POSTUTIL also contains a chemistry module to evaluate the equilibrium relationship between

nitric acid and nitrate aerosols. This capability allows the potential non-linear effects ammonia

scavenging by background sulfate and nitrate sources to be evaluated in the formation of nitrate

from an individual source. POSTUTIL will also be used to apply the ammonia limiting method

to the results which adjusts for a hierarchy of reactivity of SO2 and NOx in the atmosphere.

Inputs that will be designated for the CALPOST and POSTUTIL analysis for the finer grid

modeling include:

 Visibility calculations: Method 6 will be used in this 4km finer modeling approach using

Class I area-specific (centroid) monthly relative humidity values (from EPA, 2003a)

 Species considered in visibility analysis: SO2, NOx, and PM2.5. The consideration of

other particulate species may be considered if the results of this PM2.5-only approach

show the SABIC Innovative Plastics source contributes to visibility impairment at a Class

1 area. Elemental carbon, secondary organics and other particle sizes may be considered,

as appropriate.

 Natural background light extinction: EPA (2003b) values at the haze index value in

deciviews for the 20% best days will be used for the natural background light extinction.

The technique employed by LADCO/IDEM will be used.

 The LADCO natural background light extinction, Bext, technique adjusts the Class I area

specific chemically speciated natural background concentrations (using the Eastern U.S.

as the basis).

 Rayleigh scattering value: 10 Mm-1 (all Class I areas)

 Light extinction efficiencies: the default EPA (2003b) values will be used

3.8 DOCUMENTATION AND CALPUFF MODEL OUTPUTS

For the finer modeling approach a number of products documenting the analysis will be

prepared. These will include:

 Map of the Sabic Innovative Plastics facility location and Class I areas that did not pass

the initial modeling approach and were subject to this finer grid modeling,

 A discussion of any visibility impairment attributed to the Sabic Innovative Plastics

source on 98th percentile days in each meteorological year (8th highest) and 98th percentile

days over all three meteorological years (22nd highest), which ever is greater compared to

the 0.5 dv threshold. The impact from Sabic Innovative Plastics is the change in visibility
19

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

above natural background or the delta-dv in the CALPUFF output. It is calculated by

taking the total visibility impairment minus impairment on the 20% best days for natural

background visibility which equals delta-dv, the visibility impact attributed to Sabic

Innovative Plastics,

 For the Class I area with the maximum visibility impact, a discussion of the number of

days below the 98th percentile that the impact of Sabic Innovative Plastics exceeds 0.5 dv,

the number of receptors where the impact exceeds 0.5 dv, and the maximum visibility

impact will be prepared,

 A table comparing the results of the 36km coarse grid modeling and the 4km finer grid

modeling for those Class I areas for which visibility impacts exceeded the 0.5 dv

threshold in the 36km modeling, and

 A table comparing the results of the LADCO/IDEM modeling to this 4km modeling.
20

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

4.0 BART CONTROL MODELING

If the Sabic Innovative Plastics BART-eligible source is determined by modeling, under this

protocol, to cause or contribute to visibility impairment at a Class 1 area, Sabic Innovative

Plastics will prepare and submit to IDEM a BART analysis, in accordance with 326 IAC 26-1-6.

The finer grid modeling methodology set forth in Section 3 will be used for all additional

modeling for the BART analysis.
21

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
22

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

5.0 REFERENCES

AP-42, 1995. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and

Area Sources. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, AP-42, Fifth Edition, January , 1995,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Earth Tech. 2005a. Comments on observations vs. no-observations mode in CALMET. Prepared

for VISTAS Technical Analysis Work Group, Asheville, NC.

Earth Tech. 2005b. Summary of methods for computing visibility in CALPUFF. Prepared for

VISTAS Technical Analysis Work Group, Asheville, NC.

EPA, 2003a. Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze

Rule, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. EPA-454/B-03-005.

EPA, 2003b. Guidance for Tracking Progress Under the Regional Haze Rule”, U.S. EPA,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. EPA-454/B-03-004..

FLAG, 2000. Federal Land Managers' Air Quality Values Workgroup Phase I Report, prepared

by the Federal Land Managers Advisory Group, December 2000.

Grell, G. A., J. Dudhia, and D. R. Stauffer. 1994. A Description of the Fifth Generation Penn

State/NCAR Mesoscale Model (MM5). NCAR Tech. Note, NCAR TN-398-STR, 138 pp.

IWAQM. 1998. Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase 2 Summary

Report and Recommendations for Modeling Long-Range Transport and Impacts on Regional

Visibility. EPA-454/R-98-019. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Part, NC.

Notar, J. 2005. Federal Land Managers Class I Visibility Issues. EPA Regional, State, and Local

Dispersion Modeler’s Workshop, 16-20 May. New Orleans, LA.

Available at: http://www.cleanairinfo.com/modelingworkshop/disp_index.htm

Reisman, J. and G. Frisbie, 2004: Calculating Realistic PM10 Emissions from Cooling Towers,

Environmental Progress, Volume 21, Issue 2, Greystone Environmental Consultants,

Sacramento, CA.

Scire, J. S., F. R. Robe, M. E. Fernau, and R. J. Yamartino, 2000a: A user’s guide for the

CALMET Meteorological Model (version 5.0). Tech. Rep., Earth Tech, Inc., Concord, MA, 332

pp. [Available online at http://www.src.com/calpuff/calpuffl.htm.

Scire, J. S., D. G. Strimaitis, and R. J. Yamartino, 2000b: A user’s guide for the CALPUFF

Dispersion Model (version 5.0). Tech. Rep., Earth Tech, Inc., Concord, MA, 521 pp. [Available

online at http://www.src.com/calpuff/calpuffl.htm.]
23

Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Scire, J.S., Z. Wu and G. Moore, 2003: Evaluation of the CALPUFF model in predicting

concentration, visibility and deposition at Class I areas in Wyoming. Presented at the AWMA

Specialty Conference: Guideline on Air Quality Models: The Path Forward. Mystic, CT, 22-24

October 2003.

NPS, 2006. http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/permits/ect/index.cfm, U. S. National Park Service

website, July, 2006.

VISTAS, 2006. Tombach, I., P. Brewer, T. Rogers, and C. Arrington. Protocol for the

Application of the CALPUFF Model for Analysis of Best Available Retrofit Technology

(BART), Revision 3.2 of the December 22, 2005 version, August 31, 2006.
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

APPENDIX A

SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCE EMISSION UNITS

To Be Provided
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

APPENDIX B

UTM AND LCC COORDINATES

To Be Provided
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

APPENDIX C

SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCE

MAXIMUM 24-HR EMISSION RATES

To Be Provided
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

APPENDIX D

MAPS OF CLASS I AREA RECEPTORS
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

APPENDIX E

CALPUFF OPTIONS
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Table E-1. Input Groups in the CALPUFF Control File.

Input Group Description Applicable to Sabic

Innovative Plastics?

0 Input and output file names Yes

1 General run control parameters Yes

2 Technical options Yes

3 Species list Yes

4 Grid control parameters Yes

5 Output options Yes

6 Sub grid scale complex terrain inputs No

7 Dry deposition parameters for gases Yes

8 Dry deposition parameters for particles Yes

9 Miscellaneous dry deposition for parameters Yes

10 Wet deposition parameters Yes

11 Chemistry parameters Yes

12 Diffusion and computational parameters Yes

13 Point source parameters Yes

14 Area source parameters Yes

15 Line source parameters No

16 Volume source parameters No

17 Discrete receptor information Yes

Table E-2. CALPUFF Model Input Group 0: Input and Output File Names.

Parameter

FLM/EPA

Default

Sabic Innovative Plastics

Refined Modeling Comments

METDAT CALMET.DAT varies by year and month Met input

PUFLST CALPUFF.LST varies by year Output

CONDAT CONC.DAT varies by year Output concentrations

DFDAT DFLX.DAT N/A Output dry deposition

WFDAT WFLX.DAT N/A Output wet deposition

VISDAT VISB.DAT varies Output visibility calculations

OZDAT OZONE.DAT N/A Ozone data – use monthly

averages

LCFILES -- T File names converted to upper

case

NMETDAT 1 364/yr & 12/yr Number of CALMET.DAT files

NPTDAT 0 0 Number of PTEMARB.DAT

files

NARDAT 0 0 Number of BAEMARB.DAT

files

NVOLDAT 0 0 Number of VOLEMARB.DAT

files
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Table E-3. CALPUFF Model Input Group 1: General Run Control Parameters

Parameter FLM/EPA

Default

Sabic Innovative Plastics

Initial and Finer Modeling Comments

METRUN 0 0 All model periods in met file(s)

were run

IBYR variable Starting year – 2001, 2002, 2003

IBMO - 1 Starting month

IBDY - 1 Starting day

IBHR - 1 Starting hour

XBTZ 0 Base time zone (0 = MM5 data)

IRLG - Hrs in met set Length of run (hrs)

NSPEC 5 6 Number of chemical species

NSE 3 3 Number of chemical species to be

emitted

ITEST 2 2 Program is executed after SETUP

phase

MRESTART 0 0 Do not read or write a restart file

during run

NRESPD 0 0 File written only at last period

METFM 1 1 CALMET binary file

(CALMET.MET)

AVET 60 60 Averaging time in minutes

PGTIME 60 60 PG Averaging time in minutes

Table E-4. CALPUFF Model Input Group 2: Technical Options

Parameter FLM/EPA

Default

Sabic Innovative Plastics

Initial and Finer Modeling Comments

MGAUSS 1 1 Gaussian distribution used in near field

MCTADJ 3 3 Partial plume path terrain adjustment

MCTSG 0 0 Scale-scale complex terrain not modeled

MSLUG 0 0 Near-field puffs not modeled as elongated

MTRANS 1 1 Transitional plume rise modeled

MTIP 1 1 Stack tip downwash used

MSHEAR 0 0 (0,1) Vertical wind shear (not modeled, modeled)

MSPLIT 0 0 Puffs are not split

MCHEM 1 1 Transformation rates computed internally using (RIVID/ARM3)

scheme

MAQCHEM 0 0 Aqueous phase transformation not modeled

MWET 1 1 Wet removal modeled

MDRY 1 1 Dry deposition modeled

MDISP 3 3 PG dispersion coefficients for rural areas (computed using ISCST

approximation) and MP coefficients in urban areas

MTURBVW 3 3 Use both σv and σw from PROFILE.DAT to compute σy and σz

(n/a)

MDISP2 3 3 PG dispersion coefficients for rural areas (computed using ISCST3

approximation) and MP coefficients in urban areas when measured

turbulence data is missing

MROUGH 0 0 PG σy and σz not adjusted for roughness
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Parameter FLM/EPA

Default

Sabic Innovative Plastics

Initial and Finer Modeling Comments

MPARTL 1 1 No partial plume penetration of elevated inversion

MTINV 0 0 Strength of temperature inversion computed from default gradients

MPDF 0 0 PDF not used for dispersion under convective conditions

MSGTIBL 0 0 Sub-grid TIBL module not used for shoreline

MBCON 0 0 Boundary concentration conditions not modeled

MFOG 0 0 Do not configure for FOG model output

MREG 1 1 Technical option selections must conform to USEPA Long Range

Transport (LRT) guidance

Table E-5. CALPUFF Model Input Group 3: Species List-Chemistry Options.

CSPEC Modeled1Emitted2 Dry Deposition3 Output Group

Number

SO2 1 1 1 0

SO4

-2 1 0 2 0

NOx 1 1 1 0

HNO3 1 0 1 0

NO3 1 0 2 0

PM25 1 1 2 0

Notes: 1.) 0=no, 1=yes

2.) 0=no, 1=yes

3.) 0=none, 1=computed gas, 2=computed particle, 3=user-specified

Table E-6. CALPUFF Model Input Group 4: Map Projection and Grid Control Parameters.

Parameter Default

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics

Initial and

Finer

Modeling

Comments

PMAP UTM LCC Map projection system

IUTMZN - - UTM zone for grid coordinates

UTMHEM - - Hemisphere for UTM coordinate system

DATUM WGS-G NAS-C/

NWS-84

Datum-region for output coordinates

NX - 97/263 Number of X grid cells in meteorological grid

NY 90/185 Number of Y grid cells in meteorological grid

NZ - 15/10 Number of vertical layers in meteorological grid

DGRIDKM - 36/4 Grid spacing (km)

ZFACE - 0,20,40,80,

160,320,640,

1200,2000,

3000, 4000

Cell face heights in 4km meteorological grid (m)

XORIGKM - -900/538 Reference X coordinate for SW corner of grid cell (1,1) of

meteorological grid (km)
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Parameter Default

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics

Initial and

Finer

Modeling

Comments

YORIGKM - -1600/-638 Reference Y coordinate for SW corner of grid cell (1,1) of

meteorological grid (km)

IBCOMP - 1 X index of lower left corner of the computational grid

JBCOMP - 1 Y index of lower left corner of the computational grids

IECOMP - 97/263 X index of the upper right corner of the computational grid

JECOMP - 90/185 Y index of the upper right corner of the computational grid

LSAMP T F Sampling grid is not used

IBSAMP - 1 X index of lower left corner of the sampling grid

JBSAMP - 1 Y index of lower left corner of the sampling grid

IESAMP - 97/263 X index of upper right corner of the sampling grid

JESAMP - 90/185 Y index of upper right corner of the sampling grid

MESHDN 1 1 Nesting factor of the sampling grid

Table E-7. CALPUFF Model Input Group 5: Output Options.

Parameter Default Sabic Innovative Plastics

Initial and Finer Modeling Comments

ICON 11 Output file CONC.DAT containing concentrations is

created

IDRY 10 Output file DFLX.DAT containing dry fluxes is

created

IWET 10 Output file WFLX.DAT containing wet fluxes is

created

IVIS 11 Output file containing relative humidity data is not

created

LCOMPRS T T Perform data compression in output file

IMFLX 0 0 Do not calculate mass fluxes across specific

boundaries

IMBAL 0 0 Mass balances for each species reported hourly

ICPRT 0 0 Do not print concentration fields to the output list file

IDPRT 0 0 Do not print dry flux fields to the output list file

IWPRT 0 0 Do not print wet flux fields to the output list file

ICFRQ 1 1 Concentration fields are printed to output list file

every 1 hour

IDFRQ 1 1 Dry flux fields are printed to output list file every 1

hour

IWFRQ 1 1 Wet flux fields are printed to output list file every 1

hour

IPRTU 1 3 Units for line printer output are in specified by user

for concentration and for deposition

IMESG 1 2 Messages tracking the progress of run are written on

screen

LDEBUG F F Logical value for debug output

IPFDEB 1 1 First puff to track
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Parameter Default Sabic Innovative Plastics

Initial and Finer Modeling Comments

NPFDEB 1 1 Number of puffs to track

NN1 1 1 Meteorological period to start output

NN2 10 10 Meteorological period to end output

Table E-8. CALPUFF Model Input Group 6: Sub-Grid Scale Complex Terrain Inputs.

Parameter Default

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics

Initial and

Finer

Modeling

Comments

NHILL 0 0 Number of terrain features

NCTREC 0 0 Number of special complex terrain receptors

MHILL - - Input terrain and receptor data for CTSG hills input in CTDM

format

XHILL2M 1 1 Conversion factor for changing horizontal dimensions to meters

ZHILL2M 1 1 Conversion factor for changing vertical dimensions to meters

XCTDMKM - - X origin of CTDM system relative to CALPUFF coordinate system

(km)

YCTDMKM - - Y origin of CTDM system relative to CALPUFF coordinate system

(km)

Table E-9. CALPUFF Model Input Group 7: Dry Deposition Parameters for Gases.

Species Default Sabic Innovative PlasticsInitial and Finer Modeling Comments

SO2 0.1509 0.1509 Diffusivity

1000 1000 Alpha star

8.0 8.0 Reactivity

0.0 0.0 Mesophyll resistance

0.04 0.04 Henry’s Law coefficient

NOx 0.1656 0.1656 Diffusivity

1.0 1.0 Alpha star

8 8 Reactivity

5 5 Mesophyll resistance

3.5 3.5 Henry’s Law coefficient

HNO3 0.1628 0.1628 Diffusivity

1 1 Alpha star

18 18 Reactivity

0 0 Mesophyll resistance

0.00000008 0.00000008 Henry’s Law coefficient for
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Table E-10. CALPUFF Model Input Group 8: Dry Deposition Parameters for Particles.

Species Default East Bend Initial and

Finer Modeling Comments

SO4

- 2 0.48 0.48 Default mass mean diameter of SO4-2 [μm]

NO3

-

0.48 0.48 Default mass mean diameter of NO3-[μm]

PM25 0.48 0.48 Default mass mean diameter used by

LADCO/IDEM

Table E-11. CALPUFF Model Input Group 9: Miscellaneous Dry Deposition Parameters.

Parameters

Default

Sabic Innovative

Plastics Initial

and Finer

Modeling

Comments

RCUTR 30 30 Reference cuticle resistance (s/cm)

RGR 10 10 Reference ground resistance (s/cm)

REACTR 8 8 Reference pollutant reactivity

NINT 9 9 Number of particle size intervals for effective particle

deposition velocity

IVEG 1 1 Vegetation in non-irrigated areas is active and unstressed

Table E-12. CALPUFF Model Input Group 10: Wet Deposition Parameters.

Species Default East Bend Initial and

Finer Modeling Comments

3.0E-05 3.0E-05 Scavenging coefficient for liquid precipitation [s1] SO2

0.0 0.0 Scavenging coefficient for frozen precipitation [s1]

1.0E-04 1.0E-04 Scavenging coefficient for liquid precipitation [s1] SO4 -2

3.0E-05 3.0E-05 Scavenging coefficient for frozen precipitation [s1]

0.0 0.0 Scavenging coefficient for liquid precipitation [s1] NOx

0.0 0.0 Scavenging coefficient for frozen precipitation [s1]

6.0E-05 6.0E-05 Scavenging coefficient for liquid precipitation [s1] HNO3

0.0 0.0 Scavenging coefficient for frozen precipitation [s1]

1.0E-04 1.0E-04 Scavenging coefficient for liquid precipitation [s1] NO3

-

3.0E-05 3.0E-05 Scavenging coefficient for frozen precipitation [s1]
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Table E-13. CALPUFF Model Input Group 11: Chemistry Parameters.

Parameters Default

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics Initial

and Finer

Modeling

Comments

MOZ 1 - Hourly ozone values will not be used

BCKO3 - Varies Background ozone concentration (ppb) by month

BCKNH3 12*10 Varies Background ammonia concentration (ppb) by month

RNITE1 0.2 0.2 Nighttime NO2 loss rate in percent/hour

RNITE2 2 2 Nighttime NOX loss rate in percent/hour

RNITE3 2 2 Nighttime HNO3 loss rate in percent/hour

MH202 1 1 Background H2O2 concentrations (Aqueous phase

transformations not modeled)

BCKH202 - 1 Background monthly H2O2 concentrations (Aqueous

phase transformations not modeled)

BCKPMF - - Fine particulate concentration for Secondary Organic

Aerosol Option

OFRAC - - Organic fraction of fine particulate for SOA Option

VCNX - - VOC/NOx ratio for SOA Option

Table E-14. CALPUFF Model Input Group 12: Miscellaneous Dispersion

and Computation Parameters.

Parameters Default

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics

Initial and

Finer

Modeling

Comments

SYDEP 550 550 Horizontal size of a puff in meters beyond which

the time dependant dispersion equation of Heffter

(1965) is used

MHFTSZ 0 0 Do not use Heffter formulas for sigma z

JSUP 5 5 Stability class used to determine dispersion rates

for puffs above boundary layer

CONK1 0.01 0.01 Vertical dispersion constant for stable conditions

CONK2 0.1 0.1 Vertical dispersion constant for neutral/stable

conditions

TBD 0.5 0.5 Use ISC transition point for determining the

transition point between the Schulman-Scire to

Huber-Snyder Building Downwash scheme

IURB1 10 10 Lower range of land use categories for which

urban dispersion is assumed

IURB2 19 19 Upper range of land use categories for which

urban dispersion is assumed

ILANDUIN 20 20 Land use category for modeling domain

XLAIIN 3.0 3.0 Leaf area index for modeling domain
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Parameters Default

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics

Initial and

Finer

Modeling

Comments

ZOIN 0.25 0.25 Roughness length in meters for modeling domain

ELEVIN 0.0 0.0 Elevation above sea level

XLATIN -999 0. North latitude of station in degrees

XLONIN -999 0. South latitude of station in degrees

ANEMHT 10 10 Anemometer height in meters

ISIGMAV 1 1 Sigma-v is read for lateral turbulence data

IMIXCTDM 0 0 Predicted mixing heights are used

XMXLEN 1 1 Maximum length of emitted slug in

meteorological grid units

XSAMLEN 1 1 Maximum travel distance of slug or puff in

meteorological grid units during one sampling

unit

MXNEW 99 99 Maximum number of puffs or slugs released from

one source during one time step

MXSAM 99 99 Maximum number of sampling steps during one

time step for a puff or slug

NCOUNT 2 2 Number of iterations used when computing the

transport wind for a sampling step that includes

transitional plume rise

SYMIN 1 1 Minimum sigma y in metres for a new puff or

slug

SZMIN 1 1 Minimum sigma z in metres for a new puff or slug

Table E-15. CALPUFF Model Input Group 13: Point Source Parameters.

Parameters Default

Sabic

Innovative

Plastics

Initial and

Finer

Modeling

Comments

NPT1 - 5 Number of point sources with constant stack parameters or

variable emission rate scale factors

IPTU 1 3 Units for point source emission rates are lb/hr

NSPT1 0 0 Number of source-species combinations with variable

emissions scaling factors

NPT2 - 0 Number of point sources with variable emission

parameters provided in external file
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Table E-16. CALPUFF Model Input Group 14: Area Source Parameters.

Parameters Default

Sabic Innovative

Plastics Initial and

Finer Modeling

Comments

NAR1 1Number of polygon area sources

IARU 1 3 Units for area source emission rates are g/m2/s

NSAR1 0 -Number of source species combinations with variable

emissions scaling factors

NAR2

- -

Number of buoyant polygon area sources with variable

location and emission parameters

Table E-17. CALPUFF Model Input Group 15: Line Source Parameters.

Parameters Default

Sabic Innovative

Plastics Initial and

Finer Modeling

Comments

NLN2 - 0 Number of buoyant line sources with variable location and

emission parameters

NLINES - - Number of buoyant line sources

ILNU 1 - Units for line source emission rates is g/s

NSLN1 0 - Number of source-species combinations with variable

emissions scaling factors

MXNSEG 7 - Maximum number of segments used to model each line

NLRISE 6 - Number of distance at which transitional rise is computed

XL - - Average line source length (m)

HBL - - Average height of line source height (m)

WBL - - Average building width (m)

WML - - Average line source width (m)

DXL - - Average separation between buildings (m)

FPRIMEL - - Average buoyancy parameter (m4/s3)

Table E-18. CALPUFF Model Input Group 16: Volume Source Parameters.

Parameter Default Sabic Innovative Plastics

Initial and Finer Modeling Comments

NVL1 - 0 Number of volume sources

IVLU 1 - Units for volume source emission rates is g/s

NSVL1 0 - Number of source-species combinations with

variable emissions scaling factors

IGRDVL - - Gridded volume source data is not used

VEFFHT - - Effective height of emissions (m)

VSIGYI - - Initial sigma y value (m)

VSIGZI - - Initial sigma z value (m)
Sabic BART Modeling Protocol 2008 Draft for 022508 IDEM Meeting.doc

Table E-19. CALPUFF Model Input Group 19: Discrete Receptor Information.

Parameter Default Sabic Innovative Plastics

Initial and Finer Modeling Comments

NREC -

Number per Class I area Number of discrete receptors for each Class I

area
Innovdtive

i)lasti(,~ s"",;\

May 6, 2008

FedEx Tracking No. 7920 5050 3409

r--'''''''

\ i F! .... ,") ! "~, '"

J ·L'i'i. _.".Ji8 I

!liENT OF OO'IRONMENiAL lIIANAGEMaH \

q;;~ BF AIR QUALITY J

Re: BART Exemption Demonstration for SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC

Mr. Ken Ritter, Section Chief

Indiana Department of Environmental Management

Air Programs Branch, Office of Air Quality

100 North Senate Avenue, MC 61-50

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-2251

Dear Mr. Ritter:

By letter dated February 8, 2008, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management

(IDEM) notified SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC (SABIC) that IDEM determined

SABIC is subject to BART requirements. Pursuant to 326 IAC 26-1-6 (a), SABIC is required to

submit to IDEM either (1) a BART analysis, or (2) a description and analysis of the BARTeligible emission units sufficient to demonstrate that the source is not subject to BART. This

letter and the enclosed companion reports provide a description and analysis demonstrating that

SABIC is not subject to BART. This BART exemption demonstration is being submitted by

May 8, 2008 (i.e., within ninety (90) days of IDEM's February 8 notification); accordingly, this

submittal is timely pursuant to 326 IAC 26-1-6(a)(2).

BART Exemption Demonstration

On February 25, 2008, SABIC and its consultants (GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. and Alpine

Geophysics, LLC) met with IDEM staff to discuss the draft modeling protocol proposed to be

used by SABIC for BART CALPUFF modeling demonstrations. By letter, dated February 28,

2008, IDEM provided its comments and acceptance of the modeling protocol. CALPUFF

modeling conducted for this BART exemption demonstration used the accepted protocol, as

revised to incorporate the comments offered in IDEM's February 28, 2008 letter. The modeling

protocol is set forth in the enclosed document "Revised Best Available Retrofit Technology

(BART) Modeling Protocolfor SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC, Mt. Vernon,

Indiana", April 2008. CALPUFF model input selections, stack parameters, and emissions for

the BART-eligible emission units are also provided in the enclosed modeling protocol

document. The basis for emissions used in the CALPUPF model are provided in the enclosed

document "Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Emission Inputsfor CALPUFF

Modelingfor SABlC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC, Mt. Vernon, Indiana", April 2008.

CALPUFF Modeling Results

CALPUFF modeling results, for the three (3) years 2001-2003, conducted in accordance with

the enclosed protocol are provided in the enclosed report "Best Available Retrofit Technology

SABle Innovative Plastics

One Lexan Lane

Mount Vernon, IN 47620

USA

T: +18128314945

F: +18128317942

E: dave.boggs@sabic-ip.com

www.sablc-ip.com
BEST AVAILABLE RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY (BART) EXEMPTION

MODELING RESULTS FOR SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS MT.

VERNON,LLC

MT. VERNON, INDIANA

Submitted to:

Submitted by:

Prepared by:

Indiana Department of Environmental Management

Office ofAir Management

100 N. Senate Avenue

P.O. Box 6015

Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015

SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC

1 Lexan Lane

Mt. Vernon, IN 47620

Alpine Geophysics, LLC

2655 South County Road 750 East

Dillsboro, Indiana 47018

Project No. TS-313

and

GZA GeoEnvironmental,Inc.

11499 Chester Road, Suite 511

Cincinnati, Ohio 45246

Project No. 20.0151188.30

April 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY II

1.0 RESULTS OF THE 36KM COARSE GRID MODELING 1

2.0 REFINED GRID MODELING METHODOLOGY 4

3.0 REFINED GRID CALPUFF MODELING SCENARIOS AND RESULTS 5

4.0 CONCLUSIONS 6

5.0 REFERENCES 7

APPENDIX A: SABIC BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCE MAXIMUM 24-HR EMISSION RATES

FOR REFINED 4KM GRID SCENARIOS

APPENDIX B: BART CALPUFF RESULTS FOR SABIC EMISSION SCENARIOS

1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document provides the results of the visibility exemption modeling that followed the

guidelines of the u.s. Environmental Protection Agency in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix Y for the

analysis of the Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) at the SABIC Innovative Plastics

Mt. Vernon, LLC (SABIC) facility (formerly GE Plastics Mt. Vernon, Inc.). The facility is

located just southwest (about 1 mile) of Mt. Vernon, Indiana. All Class I BART modeling

followed the Revised Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Modeling Protocol for Sabic

Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC, Mt. Vernon, Indiana, (April,2008) which is an updated

version of the draft document dated February 2008 that now includes all IDEM comments (as

prescribed by IDEM in a letter to David Boggs from Mark Dert). The modeling included all

BART-eligible processes at the plant with emissions of S02, NOx, and particulates (expressed in

the modeling in the PM2.5 size range) from boilers (coal-fired, oil-fired, and natural gas-fired),

heaters, process units, and plant-wide fugitive emissions at the Mt. Vernon facility.

Indiana is part of the Midwest Regional Planning Organization (Midwest RPO), which was

organized and funded by the U.S. EPA to facilitate the assessment of visibility impairment in the

region. The Midwest RPO has not developed any specific guidance for air quality modeling for

visibility impacts in support ofBART exemptions and BART application review. This modeling

followed the combined guidance of the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) in

their Single Source Modeling to Support Regional Haze BART Modeling Protocol (March 21,

2006) and ofthe Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association ofthe Southeast (VISTAS)

in Protocol for the Application ofthe CALPUFF Model for Analysis ofBest Available Retrofit

Technology (BART) (Revision 3.2 - 8/31/06). General guidance from the 40 CFR Part 51,

Appendix W, the Guideline on Air Quality Models was also followed.

The modeling that has been performed and is documented herein focused on analysis to

determine if the visibility impacts due to the SABIC emissions from the BART-eligible sources

are less than or greater than the visibility level of 0.5 deciviews (dv) which is the threshold used

to determine whether a source contributes to visibility impairment. Previous screening level

modeling performed by LADCO on behalf of IDEM indicated that the SABIC sources would

exceed the 0.5 dv threshold for visibility impacts at five Class I areas for a total of28 days over a .

three year modeling period, with 19 of those days being in the Mammoth Cave National Park

and six being in Mingo Wilderness. The highest single year number of visibility impacts

exceeding the 0.5 dv threshold in the LADCO modeling was 9 days at Mammoth Cave National

Park using a 2003 meteorological data set. This previous modeling used a 36km grid resolution

meteorological and "modeling domain and released all emissions from one combined stack at

SABIC; which, by most modeling guidelines for such analyses, would be considered a screening

level analysis. The 36km modeling with a single representative stack was repeated in this study

with identical results to that of LADCO.

More refined modeling was also performed in this study which considered individual stacks and

their associated emissions as well as a higher resolution 4km meteorological and modeling

11
domain. This modeling resolution and source apportionment were considered to be more refined

. modeling than the original coarse 36km, coinbined stack modeling by LADCO.

The refined CALPUFF runs included two scenarios. Run 1: Oil Scenario represents firing

residual oil in the B&W Boiler (Source 09-001). This has not been done in 10 years and the

storage tank and oil supply system is no longer operable. Since this scenario still exists as a

permit condition, SABIC included emissions under this scenario in the BART exemption

modeling runs. Run 2: No Oil Scenario, represents firing natural gas plus supplemental hydrogen

in the B&W Boiler, which is the current and on-going scenario for this boiler. It was included

because its emissions are substantially lower than for the Run 1: Oil Scenario. Appendix A

provides the maximum 24-hour average actual hourly (M24HAA) emission rates by emission

unit for these two scenarios.

The visibility analyses conducted and documented herein at the 4km resolution using the two

scenarios described above for individual sources of BART-eligible emissions demonstrated

visibility impacts greater than the 0.5 dv threshold for each year of meteorology at each Class I

area reviewed but less than the 98th percentile number of values greater than the 0.5 dv

exemption level. For an individual year this was less than 8 day-receptor occurrences and less

than 22 day-receptors for all three years combined. Thus, BART-eligible sources at the SABIC

facility should be exempt from any further BART analysis. Summary tables of all visibility

calculations are presented in Appendix B ofthis final documentation for the modeling.

111
1.0 RESULTS OF THE 36KM COARSE GRID MODELING

The first step in the modeling was to reproduce the LADCO coarse 36kIn grid modeling

visibility results using identical sources, emissions, meteorology and modeling domain. I This

modeling was intended to confirm the baseline LADCO modeling to ensure that additional

source and emission refinement and refined analysis were performed in a consistent manner. A

pre-computed set of meteorological files provided by IDEM in the 36kIn format and pre-defined

CALPUFF input option configurations, based on LADCO CALPUFF modeling were followed.

The regional modeling domain for the coarse modeling approach was identical to that of

LADCO and included all Class I areas in the original LADCO modeling. Those Class I areas,

along with the distances from SABIC to the nearest receptor and the farthest receptor in each

Class I area are shown below:

• Boundary Waters Canoe Area, Minnesota 1127-1211 kIn

• Brigantine National Wildlife Refuge, New Jersey 1191-1205 kIn

• Dolly Sods Wilderness Area, West Virginia 754-762 kIn

• Great Gulf Wilderness Area, New Hampshire 1570-1576 kIn

• Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee 437-503 kIn

• Hercules-Glades Wilderness, Missouri 459-468 kIn

• Isle Royale National Park, Michigan 1100-1154 kIn

• James River Face Wilderness Area, Virginia 745-753 kIn

• Linville Gorge Wilderness Area, North Carolina 578-587 kIn

• Lyle Brook Wilderness, Vermont 1387-1398 kIn

• Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky 165-186 kIn

• Mingo National Wildlife Refuge, Missouri 221-231 kIn

• Seney Wilderness, Michigan 935-947 kIn

• Shenandoah National Park, Virginia 799-861 kIn

• Sipsey Wilderness, Alabama 393-404 kIn

• Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota 1215-1263 kIn

The results ofthese analyses are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1 compares the number of days

where the visibility impact was above the threshold of 0.5 dv. As can be seen the analyses

performed independently using theLADCO files produced identical results to those of LADCO

at every Class I area, thus demonstrating similar model performance and setting the baseline for

1 Please see Revised Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Modeling Protocolfor Sabic Innovative Plastics

Mt. Vernon, LLC, Mt. Vernon, Indiana, (April 2008), Appendix A, for the LADCO 36 km source parameters and

single source emissions ofNOx, S02, PMlO and PM2.5 emissions. .
meteorological grid and source refinement in the refined, 4krn modeling. Table 2 shows the

maximum 24-hour visibility impact in each Class I area for each year of meteorology used in the

modeling derived from the SABle 36krn CALPUFF modeling.

Table 1. Comparison of the LADCO and SABIC 36km CALPUFF Modeling of

Class I Visibility Impacts

SABIC Mt. Vernon, IN

2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004

Class 1 Areas LADCO SABIC LADCO· SABIC LADCO SABIC

Boundary Waters - MN 0 0 0 0 0 0

Brigantine Wild. - NJ 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dolly Sods - WV 0 0 0 0 0 0

Great Gulf Wild - NH 0 0 0 0 0 0

Great Smokey Mount - TN 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hercules - Glades Wild. - MO 0 0 0 0 1 1

Isle Royale - MI 0 0 0 0 0 0

James River Face - VA 0 0 0 0 0 0

Linville Gorge - NC 0 0 0 0 1 1

Lye Brook Wild. - VT 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mammoth Caves - KY 6 6 9 9 4 4

Mingo Wild. - MO 2 2 3 3 1 1

Seney Wild. - MI 0 0 0 0 0 o·

Shenandoah N.P. - VA 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sipsey Wild. - AL 1 1 0 0 0 0

Voyageurs N.P. - MN 0 0 0 0 0 0

Days per year> 0.5 9 9 12 12 7 7

Total Days ('02-'04) > 0.5 LADCO 36 28 SABIC 28

km 36km

Total Days Mammoth > 0.5 dv LADCO 36 19 SABIC 19

km 36km

* A source that contributes greater than 0.5 dv> 7 days per year at any Class 1 area IS consIdered to be a

BART-eligible source.

2
Table 2. Maximum 24-hour Deciview Impact for Each class I Area in the in the 36km

Modeling Domain Attributable to SABle

Class I Area

Distance from

SABIC to Nearest

Class I area

boundary, km

Max. 24-hr impact

over 2002

Max. 24-hr impact

over 2003

Max. 24-hr impact

over 2004

Boundary Waters, MN 1127 0.040 0.162 0.050

Brigatine, NJ 1191 0.166 0.091 0.127

Dolly Sods, WV 754 0.106 0.107 0.137

Great Gulf, NH 1570 0.115 0.116 0.131

Great Smoky Mts., TN 435 0.140 0.253 0.343

Hercules Glade, MO 459 0.191 0.445 ";~\j~t~!~!

Isle Royale, MI 1100 0.121 0.238 0.100

James River Face, VA 745 0.069 0.163 0.264

Linville Gorge, NC 578 0.132 0.210 .~~~;"

Lyle Brook, VT 1387 0.187 0.201 0.281

Mammoth Cave, KY 165 1~'J''l73 *'11/09"1" $~~\X" ::::~:,

{:::f:':·· ''1.058

Mingo, MO 221 .(!1;!I>ll~": l:if028 ·rQ't74.Jl

Seney, MI 935 0.144 0.269 0.194

Shenandoah, VA 799 0.157 0.154 0.188

Sipsey, AL 393 ~~¥',i 0.222 0.491

Voyageurs, MN 1215 0.019 0.095 0.021

3
2.0 REFINED GRID MODELING METHODOLOGY

Refined modeling using a 4km spaced grid for meteorology and modeling in the CALPUFF

Model was performed for SABIC sourCes. 2 Specific source differentiation and spatial allocation

of emissions as discussed in the modeling protocol was performed using the 4km refined grid

modeling approach. This finer grid resolution modeling allowed a more representative

characterization of terrain features and wind flow for the areas between SABIC and each Class I

area. A map of the 4km modeling domain which included a subset of Class I areas compared to

the 36km domain is shown in Figure 1.

538.00 lQ8

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

1586.00

98.00

er Face

o 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 263-638 ,

SABIC 4km CALJVrET & Modeling Domaiu

31 JaulUuy 2008

Figure 1. Refined 4km Grid Used in the SABle

CALPUFF Visibility Modeling

2 Please see Revised Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Modeling Protocolfor Sabic Innovative Plastics

Mt. Vernon, LLC, Mt, Vernon, Indiana, (April 2008), Appendix A, for the refined 4 kIn grid analysis source

parameters for individual SABle BART eligible emission units,

4
In accordance with the final BART guidance and 326 lAC 26-1-4(a), the threshold value to

define whether a source "contributes" to visibility impairment is a 0.5 dv change from natural

conditions. For this refined grid BART modeling, the test for evaluating whether SABIC is

contributing to visibility impairment was based on the 98th percentile modeled 24-hour visibility

impacts from the CALPUFF modeling. For this analysis the facility would be considered to not

contribute to visibility impairment in a given year if the 7th highest day is lower than 0.5 dv and

over a three year period ifthe 21st highest24-hour impact is less than 0.5 dv.

3.0 REFINED GRID CALPUFF MODELING SCENARIOS AND RESULTS

CALPUFF modeling for visibility impacts was performed for two scenarios of emissions at

SABIC which are explained in detail in the companion report entitled "Best Available Retrofit

Technology (BART) Emission Inputsfor CALPUFF Modelingfor SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt.

Vernon, LLC, Mt. Vernon, Indiana ", April 2008. (the Emissions Input Report) These CALPUFF

runs included two scenarios. Run 1: Oil Scenario represents firing residual oil in the B&W Boiler

(Source 09-001). This has not been done in 10 years and the storage tank and oil supply system

is no longer operable. Since this scenario still exists as a permit condition, SABIC included

emissions under this scenario in the BART exemption modeling runs. Run 2: No Oil Scenario,

represents firing natural gas plus supplemental hydrogen in the B&W Boiler, which is the current

and on-going scenario for this boiler. It was included because its emissions are substantially

lower than for the Run 1: Oil Scenario. This is the current and future operating scenario for this

boiler. Appendix A provides the maximum 24-hour average actual hourly (M24HAA) emission

rates by emission unit for these two scenarios.3

Appendix B provides a series of tables summarizing the results of the two SABIC emission

scenarios that were modeled for BART. Tables B-1 through B-4, present the results of the

refined grid modeling for Run 1: Oil Scenario and Tables B-5 through B-8 for Run 2: No Oil

Scenario. Tables B-1 and B-5 cover the number of days above the 0.5 dv threshold for each

Class I area in the modeling domain for each emissions case, Run 1: Oil Scenario and Run 2: No

Oil Scenario, respectively. As can be seen in the tables B-1 and B-5, the only two Class I areas

with visibility impacts above the 0.5 dv were Mammoth Cave National Park and Mingo National

Wildlife Refuge. The Run 1: Oil Scenario visibility impacts were generally about 10-15%

higher than those of Run 2: No Oil Scenario which can be primarily attributed to the difference

in S02 emissions at the B&W boiler. The number of days above the 0.5 dv threshold over the

three year period of meteorological data modeled was 15 and 12 for Mammoth Cave for Runs 1

and 2, respectively, and 5 and 4 for Mingo for Runs 1 and 2, respectively. Thus, the remaining

tables focus on the impacts at Mammoth Cave rather than Mingo (the number of values above

0.5 dv on either an annual or three year basis to identify SABle as having "contributed" to

visibility impairment was not exceeded at Mingo).

Tables B-2 and B-6 show the distribution ofthe number of days above 0.5 dv at Mammoth Cave

for Run 1: Oil Scenario and Run 2: No Oil Scenario and illustrate that each year's number of

values above 0.5 dv was less than the 98th percentile or eight days of occurrence. Thus, SABIC

does not cause or contribute to visibility impairment at Matnmoth Cave. To further demonstrate

3 The M24HAA emission rates for the two CALPUFF model runs are also provided in Appendix C ofRevised Best

Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Modeling Protocolfor Sabic Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC, Mt.

. Vernon, Indiana, (April 2008).

5
this conclusion in a more robust manner, Tables B5 and B-9 show the estimated maximum

visibility impairment change for each year for each case. Table B-5 for Run 1: Oil Scenario

shows that for the 2003 meteorological data set, the sixth highest value at 0.506 is just above the

0.5 dv threshold while the seventh highest value at 0.369 is well below 0.5 dv. Similarly, for

Run 2: No Oil Scenario, the fifth highest values for years 2002 and 2003 at 0.521 and 0.507 are

just above the 0.5 dv threshold while the sixth highest values at 0.392 and 0.462 are below 0.5

dv. Other years have fewer numbers of days greater than the 0.5 dv threshold. Finally, Tables

B-6 and B-1 0 present the maximum days for each year and a contribution percentage attributable

to each constituent. Sulfates due to S02 emissions are the major contributors in all cases with

very little due to particulates.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS

This report has provided detailed information on the results ofthe Run 1: Oil and Run 2: No Oil

BART emission scenarios modeled for BART applicability using CALPUFF. A summary ofthe

number of days> 0.5 deciviews during the highest single year and the total number of days> 0.5

deciviews over the 3 year modeling period for Mammoth Cave National Park is provided in

Table 3, below, along with a summary ofthe emissions associated with each scenario.

e 3. CALPUFF Results and Emission Inputs Comparison

Table

CALPUFFResllUsa(

M~iliIl1oth~~ye .....

Niltionnp~rk:Rjinl:()il Scenario

RnIl2:,Nh on

Scenario

Highest Single Year,

Days> 0.5 Deciviews

TotaI3-Year, Days>

0.5 deciviews

BART Applicable?

Total NOx Emissions,

Ib/hr*

Total S02 Emissions,

Ib/hr*

Total PMI0 Emissions,

Ib/hr*

Total PM2.5

Emissions, Ib/hr*

Total NOx, S02 and

PMI0 Emissions,

Ib/hr*

6

15

No

197.8

1336.7

41.6

33.4

1576.1

5

12

No

184.2

1219.1

32.1

27.0

1435.4

*See companion "Emission Input Report" for more detailed information on the basis

for the emission inputs to CALPUFF

The conclusion is that SABlC will not "cause or contribute to visibility impairment" in any Class

I areas. These results demonstrate that the SABlC Mt. Vernon facility is exempt from having to

perform a BART analysis on its BART eligible emission units because, even for Run 1: Oil

Scenario (with oil utilized in the B&W Boiler), the number of days> 0.5 deciviews for the

highest single year from 2001 through 2003 is 6, which is less than the BART applicability

threshold of 8 days in any year, and the three year total is 15 days> 0.5 deciviews, which is less

6 ALPINE
than the 22 day threshold for the three year mOdeling period. It is noted that the results using the

Run 2: No Oil Scenario, where the fuel in the B&W Boiler is natural gas plus supplemental

hydrogen, show even fewer days> 0.5 deciviews than the Run 1: Oil Scenario, which presumes

oil firing in the B&W Boiler.

5.0 REFERENCES

1. 40 CFR Part 51, "Regional Haze Regulations and Guidelines for Best Available

Retrofit Technology (BART) Determinations (Appendix Y)"; Final Rule Federal

Register: July 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 128)

2. Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM). Indiana Administrative Code,

ARTICLE 26. REGIONAL HAZE. Rule 1. Best Available Retrofit Technology (lAC 326-1).

Effective February 22,2008.

3. "Revised Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Modeling Protocol for SABIC

Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC, Mt. Vernon, Indiana." April 2008. Alpine Geophysics

LLC and GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc.

4. "Best Available Retrofit TechnologyEmission Inputs for CALPUFF Modeling for SABle

Innovative Plastics, Mt. Vernon LLC," Apri12008. Sabic Innovative Plastics and GZA

GeoEnvironmental Inc.

7
APPENDIX A

SABIC BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCE

MAXIMUM 24-HR EMISSION RATES FOR REFINED 4KM GRID SCENARIOS
Table A-I. SABle Refined 4 km Grid, Run 1: Oil Scenario in B&W Boiler

NOx Emissions S02 Emissions PM10 Emissions PM2.5 Emissions

UnitlD BART Emission

Unit Description

Ib/hr Ib/hr Ib/hr Ib/hr

09-001 09-001 B& W 54.2 117.6 10.81 7.64

09-002 09-002 Erie 81.2 702.8 17.75 15.88

09-002 09-002 Lasker 42.0 363.3 8.24 7.50

09-002 Flare

08-706 (COS) going to 0.62 152.8 0.03 0.007

08-706

09-106 09-106 Riley 17.9 0.11 1.343 1.34

12-001 12-001 (H109) 1.9 0.011 0.14 0.14 Hot Oil Heater

Transfer &

00000 Finishing Fugitive 0.0 0 3.42 0.86

Emissions

Emission Totals 197.7 1336.6 41.7 33.4

A-I
Table A-2. SABle Refined 4 kIn Grid, Run 2: No Oil Scenario in B&W Boiler

NOx Emissions 502 Emissions PM10 Emissions PM2.5 Emissions

Unit ID BART Emission

Unit Description

Ib/hr Ib/hr Ib/hr Ib/hr

09-001 09-001 B& W 40.6 0.10 1.30 1.30

09-002 09-002 Erie 81.2 702.8 17.75 15.88

09-002 09-002 Lasker 42.0 363.3 8.24 7.50

09-002 Flare

08-706 (COS) going to 0.62 152.8 0.03 0.007

08-706

09-106 09-106 Riley 17.9 0.11 1.343 1.34

12-001 12-001 (H109) 1.9 0.011 0.14 0.14 Hot Oil Heater

Transfer &

00000 Finishing Fugitive 0.0 0 3.42 0.86

Emissions

Emission Totals 184.1 1219.1 32.2 27.0

A-2
APPENDIXB

BART CALPUFF RESULTS FOR SABIC EMISSION SCENARIOS
.:;;:

Table B-1. Summary of Run 1: Oil Scenario in B&W Boiler - CALPUFF/CALPOST

Model Results FOR ALL CLASS I AREAS in the 4km Refined Grid FOR SABIC Mt.

Vernon, Indiana

Distance # of days and # of from source # of days and # of # of days and # of # of days and # of

to Class I receptors with receptors with receptors with receptors with Max. 24-hr

Class I Area impact> 0.5 dv in impact> 0.5 dv in impact> 0.5 dv in impact >1. 0 dv in impact over area Class I area for 3-yr 3- yr period boundary, Class I area: 200 I Class I area: 2002 Class I area: 2003

km period: 2001-2003

Dolly Sods

Wilderness, 754 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.200

WV

James River

Face 745 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.205

Wilderness, VA

Mammoth 165 4 2 5 4 6 6 0 ..~'

Cave, KY 0 ... i9~

Great Smoky 435 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.334 Mts., TN

Linville Gorge 578 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.312 Wilderness, NC

Mingo National

Wildlife 221 0 0 2 1 3 2 0 0 _~?~"J\

Refuge, MO

Sipsey 393 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.423 Wilderness, AL

'4

B-1
TABLE B-2. CLASS I AREA VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT ANALYSIS OF RUN 1: OIL

SCENARIO IN B&W BOILER AT MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK DUE TO

SABIC MT. VERNON, INDIANA USING REFINED 4KM GRID

Visibility Impairment

Year

Maximum Plume Extinction Number of Days> 0.5 dv

2001 0.732 4

2002 0.954 5

2003 1.019 6

BART

Threshold

Maximum 0.5 N/A Extinction

Change in Class

I Area

B-2
TABLE B-3. SUMMARY OF RANKEDRUN 1: OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILER

CALPUFF/CALPOST MODEL RESULTS FOR MAMMOTH CAVE

NATIONAL PARK IN THE 4KM REFINED GRID FOR SABIC MT.

VERNON, INDIANA

2001 Delta- 2002 Delta- 2003 DeltaClass I Area Rank deciview deciview deciview

Ranks 1-8 Ranks 1-8 Ranks 1-8

I 0.732 0.954 1.019

2 0.656 0.868 0.644

3 0.534 0.614 0.561

4 0.51 0.593 0.556

Mammoth

Cave, KY

5 0.467 0.54 0.551

6 0.444 0.43 0.506

7 0.423 0.402 0.369

8 0.422 0.399 0.356

Shaded cells are greater than 0.5 dv.

B-3
TABLE B-4. SUMMARY OF RUN 1: OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILER -

CONTRIBUTING CONSTITUENTS TO DELTA-DV FOR MAMMOTH

CAVE NATIONAL PARK IN THE 4KM REFINED GRID FOR SABle MT.

VERNON, INDIANA

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DELTA DV % 804 % N03 % PMF

2001 55 302 0.732 76.00 22.67 1.33

2001 241 302 0.656 95.77 3.56 0.67

2001 240 119 0.534 97.02 1.86 1.12

2001 264 119 0.51 76.27 21.57 2.16

2002 347 21 0.954 88.72 10.68 0.59

2002 213 300 0.868 98.16 0.9 0.94

2002 361 297 0.614 60.68 37.42 1.9

2002 202 297 0.593 98.64 0.4 0.96

2002 358 47 0.54 67.72 29.9 2.38

2003 349 227 1.019 81.72 17.4 0.88

2003 156 65 0.644 90.46 7.74 1.8

2003 171 275 0.561 94.58 4.46 0.96

2003 340 302 0.556 78.58 19.92 1.5

2003 263 300 0.551 92.28 6.62 1.09

2003 6 297 0.506 82.14 16.44 1.42

B-4
TABLE B-5. SUMMARY OF RUN 2: NO OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILERCALPUFF/CALPOST MODEL RESULTS FOR ALL CLASS I AREAS IN THE 4KM

REFINED GRID FOR SABIC MT. VERNON, INDIANA

Distance # of days and # of from source # of days and # of # of days and # of # of days and # of receptors with Max. 24-hr

Class I Area to Class I receptors with receptors with receptors with impact >1. 0 dv in impact over area impact> 0.5 dv in impact> 0.5 dv in impact> 0.5 dv in Class I area for 3-yr 3- yr period boundary, Class I area: 2001 Class I area: 2002 Class I area: 2003 period: 2001-2003 km

Dolly Sods

Wilderness, 754 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.182

WV

James River

Face 745 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.187

Wilderness, VA

Mammoth 165 2 1 5 4 5 5 0 0 0.934 Cave, KY

Great Smoky 435 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.310 Mts., TN

Linville Gorge 578 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.284 Wilderness, NC

Mingo National

Wildlife 221 0 0 1 1 3 2 0 0 0.772

Refuge, MO

Sipsey 393 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.386 Wilderness, AL

B-5
TABLE B-6. CLASS I AREA VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT ANALYSIS OF RUN 2: NO

OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILER AT MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK DUE

TO SABIC MT. VERNON, INDIANA USING REFINED 4KM GRID

Visibility Impairment

Year

Maximum Plume Extinction Number of Days> 0.5 dv

2001 0.668 2

2002 0.882 5

2003 0.934 5

BART

Threshold

Maximum 0.5 N/A Extinction

Change in Class

I Area

B-6
TABLE B-7. SUMMARY OF RANKED RUN 2: NO OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILER

CALPUFF/CALPOST MODEL RESULTS FOR MAMMOTH CAVE

NATIONAL PARK IN THE 4KM REFINED GRID FOR SABIC MT.

VERNON, INDIANA

2001 Delta- 2002 Delta- 2003 DeltaClass I Area Rank deciview deciview deciview

Ranks 1-8 Ranks 1-8 Ranks 1-8

1 0.668 0.882 0.934

2 0.598 0.804 0.59

3 0.487 0.561 0.514

4 0.459 0.549 0.511

Mammoth

Cave, KY

5 0.423 0.521 0.507

6 0.406 0.392 0.462

7 0.389 0.365 0.336

8 0.367 0.364 0.326

Shaded cells are greater than 0.5 dv

B-7
TABLE B-8. SUMMARY OF RUN 2: NO OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILERCONTRIBUTING CONSTITUENTS TO DELTA-DV FOR MAMMOTH

CAVE NATIONAL PARK IN THE 4KM REFINED GRID FOR SABIC MT.

VERNON, INDIANA

YEAR - DAY RECEPTOR DELTADV % 804 % N03 % PMF

2001 55 302 0.668 75.68 23.14 1.18

2001 241 302 0.598 95.75 3.66 0.6

2002 347 21 0,882 88.6 10.86 0.53

2002 213 300 0.804 98.22 0.92 0.85

2002 361 297 0.561 60.12 38.2 1.68

2002 202 297 0.549 98.72 0.4 0.88

2002 358 47 0.521 67.75 30.03 2.22

2003 349 227 0.934 81.49 17.73 0.78

2003 156 65 0.59 90.43 7.95 1.62

2003 171 275 0.514 94.58 4.57 0.86

2003 340 302 0.511 78.39 20.27 1.34

2003 263 300 0.507 92.24 6.78 0.98

B-8
ALPINE.·.···.·.·.· .... h •••••• ••••••

~EqPHY~ICS

Atmospheric & Hydrologic SCiences

June 11, 2008

Mr. David L. Boggs

Principal Environmental Leader

SABIC Innovative Plastics Mt. Vernon, LLC

1 Lexan Drive

Mt. Vernon, Indiana 47620-9364

Re: Tables ofMaximmn Days of Visibility Greater Than 0.5 dv for Each Class I Area in the

4 km Modeling Domain ofSABIC Innovative Plastics

Dear Mr. Boggs:

As we have discussed and at the request of Mr. Mark Derf of the Indiana Department of

EnvironmentafManagement, I have prepared tables that smnmarize the refined grid modeling results

for days with visibility impacts greater than 0.5 dv in each Class I area where applicable. The two

areas were Mammoth Cave National Park in Kentucky (as presented in the SABIC BART modeling

report in Tables B-4 and B.8) and Mingo Wilderness Area in Missouri. Visibility impacts are

presented for two modeling scenarios, namely, Run 1: Oil Scenario which represents firing residual oil

in the B&W Boiler (Source 09-001) and Run 2: No .Oil Scenario which represents firing natural gas

plus supplemental hydrogen in the B&W Boiler. The latter scenario is the current and on-going

scenario for this boiler while residual oil has not been used in the B&W boiler in over ten years.

Tables B-4 and B-8 repeat the tables provided in the original document submitted to IDEM entitled

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BAR1) Exemption Modeling Results for SABIC Innovative

Plastics MI. Vernon LLC, Mt. Vernon, Indiana. Tables B-4A and B-8A provide similar tables for

Mingo Wilderness.

If you have any questions regarding these tables or their contents, please feel free to call me at 812-

432-9484. I believe these tables are responsive to the request ofMr. Derf.

Respectfully yours,

George J. Schewe, CCM, QEP

Partner and Principal Meteorologist

Alpine Geophysics, LLC

cc: Michael Szabo

Alpine GCOpl1ysics, LLC 2655 South County Road 750 E, Dillsboro, Indiana 47018 (812) 432-9484 (8I2) 432-5013 FAX

".. ;. .
TABLE B-4. SUMMARY OF RUN 1: OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILER - CONTRIBUTING

CONSTITUENTS TO DELTA-DV FOR MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK IN

THE 4KM REFINED GRID FOR SABIC MT. VERNON, INDIANA

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DELTADV %_S04 %_N03 %_PMF

2001 55 302 0.732 76.00 22.67 1.33

2001 241 302 0.656 95.77 3.56 0.67

2001 240 119 0.534 97.02 1.86 1.12

2001 264 119 0.51 76.27 21.57 2.16

2002 347 21 0.954 88.72 10.68 0.59

2002 213 300 0.868 98.16 0.9 0.94

2002 361 297 0.614 60.68 37.42 1.9

2002 202 297 0.593 98.64 0.4 0.96

2002 358 47 0.54 67.72 29.9 2.38

2003 349 227 1.019 81.72 17.4 0.88

2003 156 65 0.644 90.46 7.74 1.8

2003 171 275 0.561 94.58 4.46 0.96

2003 340 302 0.556 78.58 19.92 1.5

2003 263 300 0.551 92.28 6.62 1.09

2003 6 "297 0.506 82.14 16.44 1.42

Alpine Geophysics, LLC 2655 South County Road 750 E, Dillsboro, Indiana 47018 (812) 432-9484 (812) 432-5013 FAX
TABLE B-8. SUMMARY OF RUN 2: NO On. SCENARIOIN B&W BOn.ERCONTRIBUTING CONSTITUENTS TO DELTA-DV FOR MAMMOTH CAVE

NATIONAL PARK IN THE 4KM REFINED GRID FOR SABIC MT. VERNON,

INDIANA

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DELTADV %_804 o/e.;..N03 %_PMF

2001 55 302 0.668 75.68 23.14 1.18

2001 241 302 0.598 95.75 3.66 0.6

2002 347 21 0.882 88.6 10.86 0.53

2002 213 300 0.804 98.22 0.92 0.85

2002 361 297 0.561 60.12 38.2 1.68

2002 202 297 0.549 98.72 0.4 0.88

2002 358 47 0.521 67.75 30.03 2.22

2003 349 227 0.934 81.49 17.73 0.78

2003 156 65 0.59 90.43 7.95 1.62

2003 171 275 0.514 94.58 4.57 0.86

2003 340 302 0.511 78.39 20.27 1.34

2003 263 300 0.507 92.24 6.78 0.98

Alpine Geophysics, LLC 2655 South County Road 750 E, Dillsboro, Indiana 47018 (812) 432-9484 (812) 432-5013 FAX
TABLE B-4A. SUMMARY OF RUN 1: On. SCENARIO IN B&W BOILERCONTRIBUTING CONSTITUENTS TO »ELTA-DV FOR MINGO WD...DERNESS

IN THE 4KM REFINED.GRID FOR SABIC MT. VERNON, INDIANA

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DELTADV %_804 %_N03 %_PMF

2002 345 .19 0.816 71.19 26.98 1.84

2002 187 19 0.511 98.78 0.4 0.82

2003 253 19 0.838 94.18 5.22 0.6

2003 53 46 0.806 90.19 9.12 0.69

2003 252 19 0.616 94.45 4.94 0.61

TABLE B;.SA. SUMMARY OF RUN 2: NO OIL SCENARIO IN B&W BOILERCONTRIBUTING CONSTITUENTS TO DELTA-DV FOR MlNGO WILDERNESS

IN THE 4KM REFINED GRID FOR SABIC MT. VERNON, INDIANA

YEAR DAY RECEPTOR DELTADV %_804 %_N03 %_PMF

2002 345 19 0.751 71.12 27.28 1.59

2003 253 19 0.772 94.13 5.34 0.88

2003 53 46 0.742 90.05 9.34 1.8

2003 252 19 0.56 94.41 5.05 0.96

Alpine Geophysics, LLC 2655 South County Road 750 E, Dillsboro, Indiana 47018 (812) 432-9484 (812) 432-5013 FAX
July 9,2,Q08

Mr. Dav!cl L. Boggs

'P:clPoipal Eri~it0i1nlental Lead¢):'

SAllIe Innovative Plasties Mt. V~tnon1' LLC

1Le.xan Dtive.

Mt. Venlo)J,Indiana 47620-9364

iRe: Additional Tabl~s B,.lA W!Jllgl1 !h8A f~r 'Manm),(>tl1·Cave' NPand Min,goNational Wildlife

Refuge

The methodology followed in llsing the annualave.ragenatwal background bex/was the same as that

used in the previous modeling Md fQllowed the technique used in the LADCO March 21, 2006

protocol entitled Single Source Modeling to S1:/Pport lJ.-egional f:JaztJ, B.ART Modeling Protocol. As

shown in the LADCO protocol, annual average backgfOundconcentrafions for the Eastern United

States from Table 2-1 ofthe Guidtmce for Estimating Natural Visihility Condttions under the Regional

Haze Rule (EPA-454/B-03-005,September, 200S) for specific species were scaled to higher or lower

values until a Class I area-spe.cifie natural visibility is produced, Tllis scaJing procedure \VaS

performed for each Class I area in the LADCQ protocol using the 2;0% best visibility dElYs. In this

additional analysis, the 20% best visibility background was r~p'Jaced 'bY theannualaver<lge visibility

background and each concentration rescaled. The mathematical relationship between the annual

average natural background in deciviews and visual range, (l/Megameters (MID)) is:

Annl.lalavg. visuc;tl range (l/Mni) = 10* exp (annual avg. deciviews/lO) .

Alpine Gcophysi~s, LtC 2.655 Sm!th CQupty j{o<\{) 750 IS, I)il!sPQfP, 1114iMiH7qT3 (8J2) 432-'94?4 . (812) 432-5013 FAX
C,..

The anntJal ave~e ,Dil;¢ i¥aiues- fQr Mammoth C~v~:and.M1ngo, Wilderness .wer.etik¢j[.ftQm.~PP¢ndix

13 of the EPA's ,tJyidanceiliJr Estimating Natural 'f:i!i;i:bilf'IfY Cp.nditions under the fe;gMiileiZllnze]ttlle

(EPA-454/B~Q@"@@~:)i: :$f~,Pi~llloor" 1003 an:dwere7iti9: dyand 7,;4 dv, respective1r~ '11ie-s'tt co~mej'ents

'wen~conv€rted ;f~ ~:i~u!!f t!@ge in units.ofllMm :~sltoWnin the fonnt;11~abQ¥~:~q ~1iLyea visual

range of215S: and 2'L:Q'3' ;(i):r Mammoth CaveN'Pand.'Mingo WIlderness, resp'¢f.}tiv~ly, ·irihes.-e v~lues

Were then used in;th"¢; (~qu:aJt!:!n which :rel;;\testb:e annual.average natural hac:kgtPJ:mQ;tj;)'~a¢p: $~(;t'ies

concentration with an. "X"ent~redin each compone1l1 contribution as the scalingJactot. Thi$~qUgl,tion

is shown below; ;,

Annual avg. visual range (J/MmJ =S~f1W*[~mmQniuI!lsu1fatej*X:+ 3 *fR:H*[ammoniumniW:wJ*:X:+4:li[OCJ*X +

10*[EC]*:X + l*ISOILJ*::>'Lif O,.6*[CNi]*;X +RaMgb $ca:tti<f;ib:gl

Where Raleigh Bcatt~ring is lQ/M~: The bracketed concentrations.are e~q~{e~~sedgl,,5~g!m3.:rh~fRH

values represent annuaI';a¥~tage 00l.. ~alGulated from the 12 monthly site speci.'[ip 'mE' V~'!l~$\taken

from TabLe A,.3 ofBPA.c4541.l5,.03·...D0S. ',

This relationship WaslJseq to calculate a scaling factor (X) for the naMal background concentrations

for the .Eastern U,S"whieh were then applied to the base back;ground eonGentlla:tio)Js,· ··Ibe·$caiing

fh:etors :were 1.013[0t" M~~1~th.:P§tye~d'.Q:;.~~4. torMingcWHdemess; Table l'b~lowsb.QWs the

~%l~~~~~i .... \"iI'G~~~':::~~~:'~fi~~:~::t:J' b1~kiitQW9<lt~fleh orIhe two Class.. Iar,eas. Th~s~s~al~d.. y?tlueSl~eI:e ,entered' ,dmeetl.¥ fot the ;hal;?k~~1Mil.€l, 'GQJ3lP~l;lJJiJildQns'lnthe ,a~j)jfq:priateCALPUST filesft'JT vfsffuiHty ¢alc]J,1~tl:9ns.

Table L S¢a;led~1J}j;l A;y¢t~~¢'~~~:I;lp~t 'B~d,k~9und. Values

~¢~1¢.4 $~;:jI¢.!J :~J:)31jld. '$if~~etl~t«ted

tJ!l~!l3.I~(!l-JJI,~d.lt4 Scaled. Amm. Annm Q!'g3i!i'jJ El¢I!X!H!t~J ;~!l~b~(! :limblit: Ni3t!!t~l' lS~d!.tnll *!![I!t~l$iJlfateNitrate cat]jOfi catbou:$.:(ii! IlfllSS

t,:l~sstB.a:(jk,'gr., Backg'"I' Scaling llyer3ge conii'. C"iiC coil'c. coil'~

.~t,i'<lJQ¥' li1Um"~aC:f~r' .,mn-.... t~;;::~. (.:;~3) :(u~i;n~(u;t~~(J!gfm;;1" f!!2/ID~)

If you haveanyqueslions regarding th:es~ tables or their contents, pleas.e feel free 10ca11tneat 81:2- 4~2~94&4. .

Respectfully yours,

George J. Schewe, CeM, QEP

Partner and Principal Meteotologist

Alpine Geophysics, LLC

cc: Michael S'Zabo, GZA

Ajpine Geophysics, LtG 2<155Sp.utbCmmJY!<Q1\9 750 F~,DmslwrQ, Indian? 470J8 (:8! 2) 432-9484 (812)432-50J3FAX
ADDITIClN'AL TABLES

APPE~DIX.B

-B~')?CAt:r'uFF~SUL1'$·jOi;s~lm·~Nt~~~()~;\~~E~~'OS'· .~

Alpine Geophysi<;$, LLC 2(J55 SQlJt!1 CP1,ll!ty RQacl 75QI;, PiJJ$PQFfJ, IMinfla47018 (812) 432-9484 (812) 432c501 3 FAX
Distance

fl'PIll source

to Class I

area

bound<rty,

km

# of days and # of

receptqtsvv:itlJ

impact >()~ SCi" ;in

Class I area: 2001

# 9fd!lcys and # of

reeeptors With

im[!@t.> 0.5 ely in

Class rarea: 2002

# Qf4ay§:md #9*

receptors with

impi\cPQ,5 dv in

Class r area: 2003

'#ofdays and #'of

teQeptdrs with

inmaQt >.1, 04v in CI~ss I area fot 3-

yrperiod: 2001·

I" ,;W03

Max. ~4-hr

imjfactover

3-yrperi9d

M.imii1lQtlJ

Cave,J<Y'l' 165 2 1 o o

;!

'.. 1

/\Jpine G~QphY:'ij~~, JiU:: ;1S55 S04~h Cpunty Road 750 E, Dillsboro, Indiana 47018 (812) 432-9.484 (812) 432-5013

fAX
Year

2001

.2Q.()2

4003

N'iumberoflibl:Ys >0.5 dv

2

1

BART

trh~eshold ··~·':i "M;~\li)hium ·I . . ...

~:x.t.p~tiQP

Chang¢ inCJa1!$

I Are3

os' .'... ..... - i·)·!· ....

/\Jpill.<; qeopnY$ics,P-C 2655 South County Road 750 E, DiIlshoro, Indlalill47018 (&12) 432-9484 (8)2) 432-5013

FAX
el'assJ Area Rank

2'001 Delta- .2002 DeltaQ,e§iyj¢w' deciview

Ranks 1-8;* Ranks 1-8*

2Q030enlli"

deciview

Ra!iksl)$*

6

7

8

0,107

0,289

0.288

0.293

0.275

0.273 0.243

Alpiuc Ocpphysic$, LLC ~05?$pllthC\1!mJY R9i!d 15q E, Dillsboro, Indiana 47018 (812) 432-94$4 (812,,) 434-5013 , , fAX
. {'-,'":'.

2001

2DI12

2002

2003

DAy

55

3'47

213

349

21 O.6.~7

3C)OO.595

2270..703

.:" .' :...... .:' ,<.: " ••, "

" ...-i

76.00

88."12

9'8.16

81:J2

10,,6$

OJ))

17.4

1.33

0.59

0.94

0.88

Alpine Gc'lphy:<;ics. I.L( 2.655Sopth CmJUt.y RQll4 750 E,PHlsporo, IniJimJ1l470J 8 (812,) 432"9484 (812) 432-5DJ3

FAX
Class I Area

:ot~w)PC

f1i.ol'll.source

to,Class'J

IlJ!~

boundary, km .

.# QLclaysll,l}d..# !'if

receptOrs with

impact >0.5 dv in

Class I area: ZOO 1

# o:fdays,ancl.#ol

rf;:ceptQJ;s wi!l~

impa4f>cOS dV'in C;lm;~j 'area: '2£102

#·Qf days ancL.# of

,receptors with

impact >0.5 dv in

Class.I area: 2003

# oldays'iind;# of

f4::f.lcpt9fs 'i¥i,tfl

impacf>!. J;);.dYi'n

Chiss'Iatteaf6f 3-

yr PCrlQij,: 2001 "

':lOllS

Max, 24·111'

impaetover

3. yr per,iod.

.Miltiimdtl1

Gave,KY* t65

221

o

o

o

o

2 0

220

. .".>" ,"",' I...:,:.; ° 0,529

Alpj!);; Ge9physlps,LL,~~ 4q:5~ $pllthCounly Road 750 E, DiJlsborq, Il1dian~) 470F8 (812) 432.9484 (8i2) '132.5013

F,1.{(
Ye~r

2001

2002

2003

BART .. Tbr~$.bQld

Ma:ximwm

E<xfmcUon

Change i:nClass

iAr~3

Alpine Geophysics, OJ:

o

2

0.643 1

0.$ MIA

2655 Smlth CWl1liy RO~lC;l75Q t~; Dillsboro; Indiann4701$(8J2) 43Zc9484 (3J2) 432-5013

FAX
Class 1 Area Rank

.20.flJ :&elta- 2002 Tiellad~civ:i~w 4¢ciyfew

Ranks 1-8'1'. Ran~s l-&~

201!l3 De1ta-

'deciview

RaQk~1"8*

'''''''''"'';''-'''''-;''

MW);).mp:t;l),

0Iw~,RY

1 0.461

2 00407

3 0331 O·$J~4 Q&~;2

4 0.31% b'~&:Q (j.349

p 0.,2:9:0 0.35:6 0.344

6 0',2:80 0.266 0.3 16

7 0.265 024.9 0.229

g 0.251 0.·219 0.222

AJpineGcQphysics.LLC 265;; Somb Cl)Ul1.ly Roa,q 750 n, l)jJJ~~l,n'(), lhqi,wa 470)~ (1512) 432-9484 (812) 432-5013

'FAX
..''''''

2002

2'002

1003

347

213

34~

21 0.607

300 0.$50

227 0,643

.;..•. :

~~A)

9822

81.49

, ...,;...•.•.

"/oJ'ld3

10.86

0.92

17.73

%.PMF

0.53

0,8S

0.78

AJpiuc.Gcophysics, LLC 2655 SOllthCounly Road 750 I~, Dillshor0, Indiana 470J8 (812) 432-9484 (812) 432-5013

FAX
This page intentionally left blank. 
A..ugust8 ... , 2'(Jt)'g .....

Mr; bay.'id L B{)l~'t!$

Principal Hmvimmnental Lea:dtlf

$ABOCC' ,Innovative l>lasiics :NIt. Vernon, LLC

1 L~xan iQriv~

Mt. V~mon.l Indiana 47620-9364

: .~.

'Re: Table g~4Afot iRunUQilS¢¢n~ripforMfill1mpthCay,eNatiomUPatkand Tabl¢ B.-4BfQr

Mingo NatidflalWilcHif¢.Refuge

Dear Mr. Boggs:

As te~ueste~ bY,,Mt:,.~at~J)'~~ff::~f\t~e~fficeof Air Quality with the Jndlananep~m~mt~~'fk

'.EJ;nviromnental Man.a~¢,fu¢n~;· T ha.:v~~*.tt~~te(~t;§Q;p;r.,e additional 'inf'dooa'tiortcQ]j¢eming th.e vlsihIWt;y . " hnPMt§ [pr ~$gtmrc InnoMatlve TeoMologies tot Impg¢t§ Qp.th~MhlgpWildemessat~a inM'issoutL I

havept;¢~}tt,~daT~b1~: :$-4BforMi1tgoWi1d~t1tesSfQ(Rtm It'(JilS~eJX~ti,potd-~~, as requestea. Ihave

tepeal¢,dand inQluded Tabl~B,.[A :£rpm the pteviutIssummary .analysts as a r~fe:t'enQe' for the,Mingp

wildemesssutmnaryofvislbi1i.ty -hq1p~Gts, 1have also jficl1ia~d frrepre:viQusl¥pr.@sc;m.ted T~bl~i?-44

for Man:ii:tlo'th Cav~ Nationa.l Park.' All of th~$e t.ables used the revisedatlhual average nat\l.tal

'p1l,Rkground be:xt1liatwaspt:e.'s¢hle.cl in the Ju.ly 7,20Q'8' '1~tter aesGrl'bing the teYisedm0.d~lingand

ba¢~grpundtrrethO'dol(}8¥' ,"

If yml havea'nY gJ.ie"Sil<.in$t~gatQh1g these tables or tneirbOntenfs,please feeltTee to ¢all trre;~l -81.2- 432-~4i84,.

Respectfully yours,

J1~~8J~~ George J. Schewe, CCM, QEP

Pattnerand Principal Meteorologist

Alpine Geophysics, LLC

cc: Michael Szabo, GZA
AionlTIONAL T¥&:atJE'~

APPEN'D~:@

.. ,;t";;ii,?)~;[·f,:·;r:~;·:;.i~.'.·.·;..l>~j.~,·,.:~..,'.,:',:.·.\.·.:':JL.~;.:·,~.:~(.·.·;~.:.~.·.-;~i,.,•..•. ....(.. ,•.·.i\ ..•.·.•.,·,· ·.·u.·.: .•.. .•T:f1, •..,.;•..·:.•.•.'C·'.· A•. '••,T..~.·.IJ·.·..·..F·'Ii' ..'...•..,n..<.··..'Ii' •...•c.,.·.,•.•..••:n.. ·. ,.·.T','.••...:!T1 C.·: .'U,..,r-li.·.; •.•.'D,' .....•... , •....C! 'B.·fi':.;,p.' "'.:, :v.".·M· "'."..T.·'.' c.:.;C.••..·.•"):.·.·.·..•.•. ..:..·.:,,:.'i!il.·.· •.·,,:.·:T.·.·:,·•.i~.·.··.· •.·•.•·.•·.·ID.·.·.·,::'.'.'i.· .'.. '.,' ·cj,

lc

!k."'·'''Y'' ;-C, .,'. ..

_ ',•• I ~~~W~., ~:Li:£ .I!,.J;~.\"-;V,.L<J •..l-:Q .l1'VA "".a 1I:L '£I,I.~@.i!Uk~ QMi. -i:'~:i?:~~3~:~~~k..~;ti{f11~,

AlphwGGQphY$i<:;$.I~LC 2655 SQulhC\):ulJ(Y fh1il£l75()E, f)illsbnro, lndialJil 470J 8 (8]2) 432-9484 (812) 432-50]3 FAX:
I)i::;laffil"

from; sOQ.f<;te

lPClassi .

~.11

boundlU¥,

kill

#'Qfq~XSand iii of r¢c~ptQrs ~i14

inipacti>i.O.$ <brin

.Qlll§$lllt¢a:2(lOI

'# lol;:iilays aud fh~:f

tee:eptors'With

imp.llPJ,,:?·O•.54vin

(flasslat'ea.: 2002

-,.

f#ofdaysand #of

r¢gl<plQ.r~with

itIwaet>O.5dvin class I area:ZQOa

# ofdays and #0/

n;peplprs wLtb

impact>l. O"dyin

ClassI area for 3-

yr periqd: 2001r

2003

M~;4.4';br

impactovet

.3-yrperl'@

···.:~{'i'>

?I< \VithannuaJaYer~g~ @t!1.Ff!'] ~a§~~oun(i

Mammoth

c;~¥~;J<Y·

M)'!l'!!;P

National

Wi1q1Jfe ..Refuge,MO*-

16$ 1 .

o

1

Q

:2:

.... J. ':' . '"i

2

r-·

o

o

o

o 0.57$

A.lpintGGQPhysi<;s.p.C 2655 SQllth Cmniy Roafl 7$OE, Dillsbm,o, Indiana. 470J8 (812) 432-9484 (812) 432-50 J3

'rAJ>(
DAY

7'6.00

'2002

ZOOA

3'41

21$

21

300

227

(;);.(j~7

0595

0.703

[i;68.72

9.8,1l5

10;t5S

O~9

17.4

0,.5~

0;94

19 7LW 1.84

2003

2003

253

53

19

46

0.575

0.558

94.18

9£1.19

5.22

9.12

0.60

0.69

A.lpLt,cqcojJhysics, LLC 2655 South Cl)llniyRO~Hl 750 rs, Llil!slwrq, fn9i,lpn 470 I? (8! 2)43209484 is! 2) 432-5013

FAX