The Benham Companies, LLC 3700 W. Robinson, Ste. 200 Nonnan, OK 73072

# ~BEIU_ Telephone405.321.3895 

## infrastructure 

## & environment Fax405.364.1708
info@benham.com www.benham.com


## December 1, 2006

Mr. Eddie Terrill Air Quality Division Oklahoma Departmentof-Environmental Quality 707 N. Robinson Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1677

Re: Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant, Enid, Oklahoma Class I Area Visibility Analysis and BART Waiver Application Submittal

Dear Mr. Terrill:
On behalf of Koch Nitrogen Company (KNC), The Benham Companies, LLC is submitting the enclosed three (3) copies of a Class I area visibility analysis and Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) waiver application for the Enid Nitrogen Plant (Facility) located in Garfield County Oklahoma.

Benham is submitting the enclosed modeling analysis and application on KNC's behalf pursuant to the requirements under Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC) 252:100-8-75(c), which states that the "owner or operator of a BART-eligible source shall submit to the Director by December 1,2006, an application for a waiver pursuantto OAC 252:100-8-73."

Based on the information presented in the enclosed report, it is not believed that KNC causes or contributesto visibility impairment in a Class 

## I area. Therefore, KNC is requesting a waiver from ODEQthat a BART determination isnot required in accordance with OAC 252:100-8-73.
If you should have any questions or need further information regarding the modeling methodologyor results, please contact Cody Greenfield at (580) 249-4870.

# k)~ KimberlyWahne Air Quality Specia ist 

# RECEIVED Enclosures

cc: Cody Greenfield, KNC 

# AIR QbJAblTY

# I I I

CLASS IAREAVISIBLITY MODELING ANALYSIS 

# I AND BARTWAIVERAPPLICATION 

# I KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY ENID NITROGEN PLAN GARFIELD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# I

Submitted To: 

# I AirQuality Division Oklahoma Departmentof Environmental Quality 707 North Robinson 

# I Oklahoma City, OK 73101 

# I 

# I For Information Contact: Mr. Cody Greenfield Koch Nitrogen Company 1619 South 78th Enid, Oklahoma 73702 

# I (580) 249-4870 

# I Prepared By: The Benham Companies, LLC 

# I Infrastructure and Environment 3700 West Robinson, Suite #200 Norman, Oklahoma 73072 

# I (405), 321-3895 

# I 

# I November2006 

# I DEC"Ql 7006 

# AIR QUALITY 

# I 

# I

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant 

### N""""mh,,,,,, 2006 

# I TABLE OF CONTENTS


# Section 

# I 1.0 INTRODUCTION

.................................................... "! •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 

# 1-1 

# 2.0 SOURCE DESCRIP'rlON

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

# I 2.1 Facility Location

..........................................................................................2-1 2.2 Facility Description

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

# I 2.3 BART Eligible Sources

.................... ..........................................................2-1 2.4 Affected Class I'Areas

................................................................................2-4 

# I 3.0 AIR QUALITY MODELAND MODELING INPUTDATA

..............................3-1 3.1 Model Selection

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

# I 3.2 Domain Configurations and Receptors

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

# I 3.3 Source Parameters and Emissions Input

.................................................3-3 3.4 Dispersion Modeling (CALPUFF)

...............................................................3-6 

# I 3.5 Post Processing (CALPOST)

......................................................................3-7 4.0 MODELING RESULTS

.................................................................................4-1 

# I 5.0 REFERENCES

..............................................................................................5-1 

# I I I 

# I I I I

1:I2DDSI4100S0091211D_EnvifollD_ReportIBARTWalverIKNC BARTWaiverApp FINAL.doc 

# I

# I I

Class IArea Visibility ModelingAnalysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006



## . LIST OF APPENDICES 

# I Appendix 

# I A Summary of CALPUFF Control File Inputs 

# I B Summary of POSTUTILControl File Inputs C Summary of CALPOST Control File Inputs D Copy of Monthly f(RH) Values for Each Mandatory Class IArea 

# I E Modeling Files on DVD-ROM 

# I I I I I I I I I I 

# I I

1:\20OSI4100500912170_Envirn\10_Repor!\BARTWaiverIKNC BARTWai"",API>FINAl-doc 

# I

# I 

# I CLASS IAREA VISIBLITY MODELING ANALYSIS AND BART WAIVER APPLICATION 

# I KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY ENID NITROGEN PLANT GARFIELD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# I NOVEMBER 2006 

# I 1.0 INTRODUCTION


# Koch Nitrogen Company (KNC) operates a nitric' acid, ammonia, urea ammonium 

# I nitrate (UAN), and granular urea production plant (Facility) located in Enid, Oklahoma. The Facility is currently authorized to operate under several permits. The Title V permit 

# I for the Facility is currently under review by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) as PermitApplication No. 99-092-TV (Permit). 

# I

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the Regional Haze 

# I Regulations initially in 1999 to improve visual air quality in national parks and wilderness areas (Class I areas) across the country. The regulation specifically 

# I I requires states to establish goals for improving visibility in Class I areas and to develop long-term strategies for reducing emissions of certain air pollutants. The EPA 

# I published final amendments to the 1999 Regional Haze Rule on July 6, 2005 which includes final guidance for BestAvailable RetrofitTechnology (BART) determinations in 

# I Appendix Y of the Federal Register (70 FR 39104-39172). Under the Regional Haze Rule, states have the authority to exempt certain BART-eligible sources based on 

# I dispersion modeling demonstrating that the source cannot reasonably be anticipated to

cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area. 

# I Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC) 252:100-8, Part 11 addresses BART eligible 

# I sources that may reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in any mandatory federal Class I area. The Air Quality Council (AQC) 

# I approved OAC 252:100-8, Part 11 for permanent rulemaking on April 19, 2006. The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) approved Part 11 as both a permanent and emergency rule on August 22, 2006. The rule was signed by the Governor as 

# I 

# I 1-1 1:1200514100500912\70_Env;roll0_ReportIBARTWaiverIKNC BART.WaiverApp FINALdoc

# I I I I I I I I I I 

# I I I I I I I 

# 'I I Class IArea Visibility ModelingAnalysis and BART WaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant 

### 2006


# emergency on October 8,2006. Part 11 of OAC 252:100-8 is expected to become permanently effective on June 15, 2007.

KNC is. submitting this Class I Area Visibility Modeling Analysis and BART Waiver Application (Application) to request and obtain a waiver from the ODEQ in accordance with OAC 252:1 00-8-73(c)(3), which states a BART determination is not required 

# "ifthe

owneroperatorof

# the BART-eligible source demonstrates bymodeling, in accordance with 

# a protocol approvedby the Director, that

# a source does not emit anyairpollutant which may reasonably be anticipated to cause orcontribute to visibility impainnent in any Class I Federal area." In addition, OAC 252:100-75(c), requires that any BART waiver applications be submitted by December 1, 2006,

At the request of KNC, The Benham Companies, LLC (Benham), has performed an Class 

# IArea visibility modeling analysis to documentthatthe source does not emit any air pollutant which may reasonable be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in any mandatory Class I Federal area. This modeling analysis was performed based on guidance found in the Central Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP) BART Modeling Guidelines (December 2005) (CENRAP Guidance) and from guidance obtained from the ODEQ.

The remaining sections ofthis Application consist ofthe following:

• 2.0

• 3.0



# • 4.0

• 5.0 Source Description Air Quality Model and Model Input Data Modeling Results References

• Appendices

BART WaiverApp FINALdoc

# I

Class IArea Visibility ModelingAnalysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006

. 

# I 2.0 SOURCE DESCRIPTION 

# I 2.1 Facility Location The Facility is located at 1619 South 78th, Enid, Oklahoma. Figure 2-1 shows the 

# I Facility in relation to nearby state highwaysand roadways. The Facility is located in the southwest quarter of Section 17, Township 22 North, Range 5 West, Garfield County, Oklahoma. The Facility is located approximately five (5) miles east ofthe City of Enid, 

# I Oklahoma. 

# I 2.2 Facility Description The Facilityconsists of nitric acid, ammonia, urea ammonium nitrate, and granular urea 

# I production facilities. The Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code forthe Facility is 2873. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code forthe Facility 

# I is 325311. 

# I The following general processes are performed atthe Facility:**~** 

# Natural gas desulphurization 

# I**~** 

# Catalytic steam reforming**~** 

# Carbon monoxide "shift" 

# I**~** 

# Carbon dioxide removal**~** 

# Methanation 

# I**~** 

# Ammonia synthesis**~** 

# Urea synthesis 

# I**~** 

# Urea evaporation 

# I 2.3 BART Eligible Sources**~** 

# Urea granulation**~** 

# Nitric acid synthesis**~** 

# Ammonium nitrate synthesis**~** 

# Urea-ammonium nitrate production**~** 

# Carbon dioxide production**~** 

# Argon production**~** 

# Product Storage and Loading


# I OAC 252:100-8-71 includes definitions used to identify a BART-eligible source. In 

# I addition, OAC 252:100-8-72 incorporates Appendix Y of 40 CFR 51, Guidelines for BART Determinations underthe Regional Haze Rule, by reference. The ODEQ defines 

# I sources that are potentially BART-eligible as existing stationary sources ofair pollutants from one of 26 identified source categories, including any reconstructed source, which 

# I 2-1 1:\200S\4100500912\70_Enviro\10_Report\BARTWaiver\KNC BARTWaiverAppFINAL.dOC

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006 

# I was not in operation prior to August 7, 1962, and was in existence on August 7, 1977, and has the potential to emit (PTE) 250 tons per year 

# (T/yr) or more of any visibility

# I impairing pollutant. 

# I The BART guidelines under Appendix Y of 40 CFR 51 include a step-by-step analysis for determining if a source may be considered to be BART-eligible. The four steps are 

# I as follows: 

# I**~** 

# Step 1: 

# I**~** 

# Step 

# 2:**~** 

# Step 

# 3: 

# I**~** 

# Step 

# 4: 

# I Identifythe emission units in the BART categories Identifythe start-up dates ofthose emission units Compare the potential emissions from the units identified in steps 

# 1 and 2 tothe 250 

# T/yrthreshold Identify the emission units and pollutantsthat constitute the BARTeligible source 

# I A brief summary of each ofthese steps is provided in Sections 2.3.1 through 2.3.4. A
summary ofthe BART-eligible sources atthe Facility is included in Table 2-1. 

# I 2.3.1 Step 1:. Identify Emission Units in the BART 

# Categories The BART categories include major stationary sources as identified on the list of 26 

# I source categories as included in OAC 252:100-8-71. The SIC code for the Facility is 2873. The Facility is included on the list underthree specific source categories: "nitric 

# I acid plants", "chemical process plants", and "fossil-fuel boilers of more than 250 million British Thermal Units per hour (MMBtu/hr) heat input." 

# I

2.3.2 Step 2: Identifythe Start-up Dates ofthe Emission Units 

# I Emission units identified in Step 1 are BART-eligible if they were "in existence" on August 7, 1977 but were not "in operation" before August 7, 1962., Under OAC 

# I 252:100-8-71, the term "in existence" is identified as meaning "that the owner or operator has obtained all necessary preconstruction approvals or permits required by 

# I I 2-2 1:\2005\4100S00912\70_Enviro\10_Report\BARTWaiver\KNC BART WaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November

# 2006

the Department and EPA and either has: (A) begun, or caused to begin, a continuous 

# I program of physical construction of the facility; or (B) entered into binding agreements

or contractual obligations which cannot be cancelled or modified without sUbstantial 

# I loss to the owner or operatorto undertake a program ofconstruction ofthe facility to be completed in a reasonable time." The term "in operation" is defined as "engaged in 

# I activity related to the primary design function ofthe source."


# I I The BART guidelines require facilities to also take into consideration sources which

were in operation before August 7, 1962 and were "reconstructed" during the August 7, 

# I 1962 to August 7, 1977 timeframe. A source is considered reconstructed "if the fixed capital cost of the hew component exceeds 50 percent of the fixed capital cost of a 

# I comparable entirely new source." The current BART regulations do not provide exemptions for sources thatwere "modified" afterAugust 7, 1977. 

# I KNG operates units that were "in existence" prior to August 7, 1977 and were not "in 

# I operation" prior to August 7, 1962. In addition, the units identified have not been "reconstructed" afterAugust7, 1977. 

# I 2.3.3 Step 3: Comparethe Potential Emissionstothe 250 T/yrCutoff 

# The purpose ofthis step is to determine whetherthe total emissions represent a current 

# I PTE that is greater than 250 T/yr of any single visibility-impairing pollutant. The BART guidelines address emissions of sulfur dioxides (S02), nitrogen oxides (NOx ), 

# and 

# I particulate matter (PM) as visibility-impairing pollutants. PM with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns (PM10) is used as an indicator in this step. States have 

# I the option to also include volatile organic compounds (VOG) and ammonia as visibilityimpairing pollutants. The Facility has the potential to emitVOG and ammonia; however, 

# I ammonia and VaG emissions were not inCluded as visibility impairing pollutants in accordance with OAe 252:100-8-73. 

# I I I 2-3 1:\2'0()5\4100500912\70_Enviro\1()_Report\8ARTWaiver\KNC BARTWaiverAppFINALdoc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006


# As presented in Table 2-1, the PTE for NOx

# from the sources identified is greaterthan 

# I 250 T/yr.


# I I 2.3.4 Step 4: Identify the Emissions Units and Pollutants That Constitute the BART-eligible Source 

# I A source is considered BART-eligible ifthe emissions from the list ofemissions units at

a stationary source exceed a PTE of 250 

# T/yrfor any visibility-impairing pollutant. The 

# I guidelines indicate that if a source has 

# a PTE greater than 250 

# T/yr for one visibilityimpairing pollutant (Le. NOx ), 

# then the source is subject to a BART review for all visibility-impairing pollutants (Le. NOx, 

# S02, 

# and PM). 

# I I 2.4 Affected Class I Areas A Class I area is an area of the country with special national or regional value from a 

# I natural, scenic, recreational, or historic perspective. These Class 

# ,I areas are afforded special protection to minimize the impacts ofsources on theirair quality. In accordance 

# I with the CENRAP modeling guidance, all Class I areas located within a 300 kilometer (km) radius ofthe Facility are required to be evaluated forvisibility. 

# I This modeling analysis evaluated visibility impacts at the Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge (WMNWR), located approximately 194 km or approximately 120 miles 

# I to the southwest ofthe Facility. There are no other Class I areas located within a 300 km radius ofthe Facility. 

# I

A map ofthe Facility's.location in relation to each Class I area located within a 300 km 

# I from the F-'acility's center is provided in Figure 2-2. 

# 1 

# 1 I 

# I' 2

# -4 1:1200S1410DSOD912170_Enviroll0_ReporlIBARTWaivenKNCBARTW.;verAppFINAl,doc

# I I I I I I 

# I I 

# I I I I I I I 

# I I I I TABLE 2-1

.SUMMARY OF BART-ELIGIBLESOURCES CLASS I AREA VISIBILTY ANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY ENID NITROGEN PLANT

Emission Source 10 

### Point10

M221 NACIDPLT 101B1 REFORMI 101B2 REFORM2 2202UB SUBOILER 102B1 HEAT1 102B2 T311

Notes: PM10 

### 502 Construction Emission Emission Description Date Rate Rate (T/yr) (T/}'I') NitricAcid Plant 1968



# - - Ammonia Plant#1 Primary Reformer 1973 44.50 3.50 Ammonia Plant #2 Primary Reformer 1975 45.60 3.60 Ammonia Plant Start-up Boiler 1975 3.50 0.20 Ammonia Plant Start-up Heater#1 1973 1.60 0.10 Ammonia Plant Start-up Heater#2 1975 1.60 0.10

Ammonium Nitrate Neutralizer 1968 11.00



# -­ Total 

### 107.80 7.50 Threshold 

### 250 250 >Threshold 

### NO NO NO. Emission

Rate (T/yr) 21.90 717.10 734.30 63.00 21.30 21.30



# - 1578.90

250 YES

1. Emission rates are potential orpermitted emission rates as represented in Permit No. 99-092-lV (pending).

CALPUFFModReportTables.xls 

### ITable 2-1

# -- 

# - 

# I I I 

# I I I 

# I I I

I I

-**~** 

### '-::­ "

# ~**' ,.** **~. :~** **~)~: :~** **~:'**

_"I

. '**~ -.** **-!** 

## ...**.;;.~ -:~**  t-

___'

..• .r**~,**



# -- ':',

## .. ....r



### .-", J . .....,

••**~.....** 

# I"""

..'" I f

, J ;";'1.:..;

. ' e , 

# .'1 ', ; ,. 'I

;' i 

### 1 :::.'"1:1 '
._ .' ,: (

. - " " "j

, 

## ,


# .'

, • •J,­ I

. .

-, f./



## - :1**l**



## r i



# .. "­ 

## _._:'>

_ -1 \**__** 

## __**~', .'** **;- ~~~~'** **-'- .-~**  

# - -=:-

.fr,

­**~..,**

## i**~** l

1

. - I**~**

- '(;



### - 

# , l

- ' -.'!",

- .1

### 1

__.... 

### L



# ..'**t· -:-**  

### r.X61IT

­ ':

,­

.Co';,

. ;

!

"

-',-,

' :>0:

. '-.



# I 0,25 0,5 1.5



# --- - loililes



## RGURETIT LE DATE 1112212006 

# I til('"

---- AREA MAP SCALE 1:48,000

# B~~~**Jnmen t** **rD;:; :;-** **U:M :E** **N:' T;-;T:;-;'T:;-L:-E~C:-:-LA-=-=S:-:S:-:-I-:A:-:R::E-::A-:V~IS:-I:B:-:L-:1:TY:-:-:-M:-:O::D:E:-:L-:I-=-N~G:--:A:-:N-;-A-':-:-L:-:Y:S:-:I::S:----~~:::pEp~S~~:~::::~~~:~:~:W:F** ____

# -I 

# I AND BART WAIVER APPLICATION DRAWN BY SF 

## CLIENT The Benham Companies, LLC PROJECT NUMBER 

## KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY, ENID NITROGEN PLANT infrastructure & 

### environment 

## 4100500912 

# I 3700 W. Robinson, Suite 200 Norman, Oklahoma 73071 

## LOCATION FIGURE NUMBER (405) 321-3895 

## 1619 SOUTH 78TH, ENID,OKLAHOMA 73701 www.benham.com 

# 2-1

# --- I 

# I 

# I I 

# I I 

# I I I I I I I I 

# I I I I I .g

Oklahoma

Wichita Mountains NWR

37 " 

### 75**~** 

# t' 300 km Radius 

# e ..s2 

# 8 Kansas Missouri

Facility Location



# ,

Texas Arkansas



# ... 

# 9**?~5** 

## 1nn

## ~~_iiiiiiii~~_iiiiiiii~~~~~~~~!liiiiiiiiiiii~~ 

# ___**"~~~~~~~~~i** Kilometers

# ~E"'HAM Inff3:UUClurc Eo. e1'101rt1r.r'K'nt

The Benham Companies, LLC infrastructure &environment

370D W. Robinson, Suite 200 Norman, OK 73072

(405) 321-3695 www.benham

. com



# z 0

# ~ (.) 

## :::i 

## e. e. <C II: 

### UJ 

## > 

## <i: 3:lII: 

### <C III I- 

### Cl 

# z Z 

### <C <C ...J 

## e. 

## Ui 

# en 

# z w 

# ...**~** (!J 0 I'­ 

### <C 

### 0 C') Z II: I'­ 

### <C l­ (!) 

### <C 

# Z :E 

# z Q 

### 0 UJ 

## :::i 

# Z :::c Cl 

## w 

# :5 0 

## >"' :E 

# z 0 <C 

# > e.l

## 6 :E 

## :::i 

# z 0 

## e. w 

## iIi (.) 

### <C 

### :E 

## Ui 

# I 

# z I­ 

# :> w 

# en CO (!J 

### :::> <C I'­ 

### 0 UJ 

## C J: II: 

### II: I­ 

### <C l­ 

### <C 

### ::::> II: 

### <D_ 

# Z 0 Fen 

### <D:E 

# en :::c 

# een**F~** 

### gO') (.)

### ~<C**~o** G...J "0 C 

### 0**~~ ~M**  

### .3 (.) 

## 15**~** 

### .9

...

Date 

### 11/ 21/2006 I Scale 1:2,500,000 Designed By SF Approved By 

### KW
Drawn By SF I I
Project Number 

## 4100500912 Figure Number 

# 2-2

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company

. 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006



# 3.0 AIR QUALITY MODELAND MODELING INPUT DATA 

# I 

# I 3.1 Model Selection According to the Regional Haze Rule's BART modeling guidance, a source can use the 

# I California Puff (CALPUFF) model to predictthe visibility impacts from a single source at

a Class I area. 

# I Benham used the CALPUFF screening approach consistent with the procedures outlined in the CENRAP Guidance.. The CALPUFF screening methodology uses a 

# I standard set of default meteorological, air quality, and dispersion conditions that are consistent with the Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM), Phase 2 

# I recommendations for long-range transport guidance (December 1998) and Federal Land Managers' Air Quality Related Values Workgroup (FLAG) Phase 1 

# I recommendations (December 2000). The CALPUFF screening approach provides a conservative analysis to predictthe source's visibility impact at a Class I area. 

# I

Based on guidance obtained from ODEQ, the version of the CALPUFF model used in 

# I this analysis is the CALPUFF VISTAS Recommended Version for BART Modeling (VISTAS Version 5). Benham utilized the BEEST Professional CALPUFF Version 2.33 

# I (BEEST Pro CALPUFF) program, which has incorporated the CALPUFF VISTAS Version 5 modeling system. In addition, the BEEST Pro CALPUFF program includes a 

# I CENRAP screening feature that has incorporated the CALPUFF screening recommendations and defaults. 

# I

There are three (3) main components ofthe CALPUFF modeling system: 

# I**~** 

# Meteorological Data Modeling (CALMET); 

# I**~** 

# Dispersion Modeling (CALPUFF); and,**~** 

# Post Processing (CALPOST). 

# I I I 3-1 1:\2005\4100S00912\70_Enviro\10_Report\BARTWaiveMNC BART WaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I I

Class IArea Visibility ModelingAnalysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006


# The remainder ofthis section provides a description ofthe modeling inputs and general 

# I modeling approach. 

# I 3.2 Domain Configurations and Receptors 

# For the CALPUFF screening approach, model-ready meteorological data sets have 

# I been developed by CENRAP for three (3) CENRAP sub-regional domains. The data
sets cover three (3) contiguous years (2001, 2002, and 2003) and are resolved to a six 

# I I (6) km horizontal resolution grid. Due to the location ofthe Facility and the location of the Class I area in consideration, the CALPUFF screening modeling for the Facility was 

# I conducted using the CENRAP south six (6) km grid for years 2001, 2002, and 2003. The extentofthe CENRAP south sub-regional domain is shown in Figure 3-1. 

# I Based on CENRAP guidance, the computational domain used in the modeling analysis 

# I includes all Class I areas located within 300 km from the Facility. As described previously in Section 2.4, the WMNWR is located approximately 194 km from the 

# I Facility. The computational domain was determined based on the distance from the Facility to the nearest receptor in the Class I area. A buffer of 50 km in each cardinal 

# I direction was then added to the modeling domain. There are no other Class I areas located within 300 km ofthe Facility. The extent ofthe computational domain is shown in Figure 3-2. 

# I Receptors are locations where model results are calculated and provided in the 

# I CALPUFF output files. Receptor locations and elevations were derived from the National Park Service (NPS) Class I area receptor database. The discrete receptors 

# I were necessaryfor calculating visibility impacts in WMNWR. 

# I I I I 3-2 1:I2OOS14100501l912\70_Envi,,\10_ReportIBARTWalvel\KNC BARTWaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company , 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006 

# I 3.3 Source Parameters and Emissions Input 

# I I 3.3.1 Stack Parameters The stack parameters required for modeling the BART-eligible units at the Facility are 

# I stack heightfrom ground, stack diameter, exit gas flow rate, exit gas temperature, base elevation above sea level, and location coordinates of the stack. A summary of the modeled stack parameters is included in Table 3-1. 

# I I 3.3.2 Modeled Emission Rates According to the BART guidance, emission rates applied in the BART analysis should 

# I be based on the 24-hour average actual emission rate from normal operations from the highest emitting day of the year. The highest emitting day ofthe year is determined 

# I based on data from a 3-5 year period. In addition, days where startup, shutdown, or malfunctions occurred should be excluded unless these activities are regular, frequent

occurrences. Based on the guidelines, identification of the maximum 24-hour actual 

# I emission ,rates should be made for the most recent years according to the following prioritization: 

# I

)0> 

# Continuous Emissions Monitoring (CEM) data; 

# I )0> 

# Facility emissionstests;
)0> 

# Emissions factors; 

# I )0> 

# Permit limits; or lastly.
)0> 

# Potential to emit. 

# I

The species that should be modeled in the screening analysis include 

# S02, NOx and 

# I PMlO

. 

# According to OAC 252:1 

# 00-B-73(c)(1) and (2), if a source has the potential to emit less than de minimis 

# quantities (Le. 40 T/yr

# of

# S02 and NOx or less than 15 T/yr

# of 

# I PMlO) 

# a BART determination is not required. 

# I I 3-3 1:\2005\41DOS00912\70_Enviro\10_Report\SAR.TWaivenKNC BARTWaiverAppFINALdoc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006



# I To be conservative, the potential or permitted emission rates for each source were 

# I input into the model instead of actual emission rates. The potential facility-wide S02 emission rates are belowthe de minimis 

# level (Le. less than 40 

# T/yr) and are not subject 

# I to BART review; however, to be conservative, the S02 emissions from the BARTeligible sources atthe Facility were included in the modeling analysis. 

# I A summary ofthe modeled emission rates are provided in Table 3-2. 

# I 3.3.3 Speciation and PM Size Distribution 

# I Particle size parameters were used in the CALPUFF input file for dry deposition of particles. There are default values for "aerosol" species (Le., sulfate (S04), nitrate 

# I (N03), and PM2

.

# 5 ). The defaultvalue for each ofthese species is 0.48 micrometer (IJm) geometric mass mean diameterand 2.0 IJm geometricstandard deviation. 

# I The PM emissions from each source are required to be separated by size category, if 

# I such data is known or available. The size categories employed in this modeling analysis consisted of coarse PM (PMC) and fine PM (PMF). PMC includes particles with an aerodynamic diameter between 10 to 2.5 micrometers and PMF includes 

# I particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 micrometers. 

# I The majority of the BART-eligible sources at the Facility are natural gas-fired combustion units. AP-42 Section 1.4 indicates that all PM is assumed to be less than 

# I 1.0 micrometer in diameter. Therefore, all PM from the natural gas fired sources was assigned to the PMF category orwas assumed to be PM2

.

# 5

. 

# I

For the ammonium nitrate neutralizer, PM emissions were categorized based on 

# I information found in EPA's PM calculator program. PM calculator estimates that 83% ofthe total PM from the neutralizer is less than 2.5 micrometers. Therefore, 83% ofthe 

# I total PM emissions were assigned to the PMF category (Le. PM2.5) and the remainder (i.e. 17%)was assigned to the PMC category (i.e. PM1O). 

# I I 3-4 1:1200514100500912\10_Enviro\10_ReportIBART WaiverIKNC BART WaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company. 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006 

# I A summary ofthe modeled PM emission rates are provided in Table 3-2. 

# I I 3.3.4 Building 

# Downwash Analysis The modeling conducted for BART applications is focused on long range transport 

# I instead of localized impacts. Including the effects ofdownwash in the BART screening analysis is not necessary due to the distance from the Facility in relation to the 

# I WMNWR. However, the CENRAP guidance suggests that building downwash should be included for each BART screening application without taking into consideration the distance ofthe Facility from the Class Iareas. 

# I I The Building Profile Input Program Prime (BPIP-Prime, Version 95086) was used to determine directionally-dependent aerodynamic downwash structure dimensions (i.e. 

# I heights and projected widths) for each emission point modeled, as a function of the layout of the structures and emission points. The automated algorithm used for this analysis was the BEE BPIP-Prime software. The BPIP-Prime algorithm generates 

# I directionally-dependentvertical and horizontal structure dimensions for each emission point, for each 10-degree directional segment. The structure dimensions are then 

# I imported into the CALPUFF model on an emission point-specific basis. 

# I 3.3.5 Meteorological Data Modeling (CALMET) As previously indicated, the 2001-2003 CENRAP-developed CALMET dataset was 

# I applied in the BART screening analysis. Since no observational data were used in the CALMET outputs developed by CENRAP, the prognostic meteorological dataset from 

# I MM5 was not supplemented with surface or upper air observations during the CALMET processing. The use of observations is thought to counterbalance smoothing that may 

# I occur when using the coarse grid scale ofthe MM5 data. Thus, CENRAP considers this screening modeling to be conservative and does not· require the use of 

# I observational data. 

# I I 3-5 1:\2005\4100500912170_Enviroll0_ReportIBARTWaiver\l(NC BART WaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006 

# I Modeling was performed for each of the annual datasets. For year 2003, only 8,736 

# I hours (Le. 364 days) were input into the, model since the dataset only includes 12 hours

on December 31, 2003. A total of8,760 hours was modeled foryears 2001 and 2002. 

# I 3.4 Dispersion Modeling (CALPUFF) 

# I The CALMET output is used as input into the CALPUFF model. The CALPUFF model simulates the effects ofthe meteorological conditions in the transport and dispersion of 

# I pollutants from an individual source. The CENRAP provided default options were used in theCALPUFF model. The CALPUFF model also has a puff-splitting option that splits 

# I puffs that become large over greater transport distances. Based on CENRAP guidance, the puff-splitting option was not used in the screening analysis. 

# I Appendix A includes a summary of the CALPUFF settings used in the screening analysis. 

# I
3.4.1 Ozone and Ammonia Concentrations 

# I Ozone (03 ) and ammonia (NH3) were input into CALPUFF as monthly background values. Background ozone and ammonia concentrations are assumed to be temporally 

# I and spatially invariant and were fixed at 40 and 3 parts per billion (ppb), respectively,

across the entire domain for each month (January thru December). The values used 

# I for background ozone and ammonia concentrations in CALPUFF are consistent with CENRAP guidelines. 

# I

3.4.2 CALPUFF Outputs 

# I TheCALPUFF modeling results are displayed in units of micrograms per cubic meter 

# (lJg/m\ To determine visibility impacts from the Facility on the WMNWR, the 

# I CALPUFF model results must be post processed using the POSTUTIL and CALPOST features. 

# I I I 3-6 t:\200S\4100S00912\70_Enviro\10_Report\BART WaivenKNC BART Waiver- App FINALdoc

# I I Class IAreaVisibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006


# 3.5 Post Processing (CALPOST) 

# I I Post proC?essing involves processing the CALPUFF model results with the POSTUTIL and CALPOST to determine visibility conditions. POSTUTIL takes the concentration 

# I file output from CALPUFF and recalculates the nitric acid and nitrate partition based on total available sulfate and ammonia. CALPOST uses the concentration file processed through POSTUTIL, along with relative humidity data, to perform visibility calculations. 

# I I A summary of the detailed settings used for POSTUTIL are provided in Appendix 

# B. The ammonia limiting method (ALM) in CALPUFF repartitions the nitric acid and nitrate 

# I on a receptor-by-receptor and hour-by-hour basis to account forthe CALPUFF model's

over prediction due to overlapping puffs. The CENRAP guidance suggests that this 

# I correction should be used by setting MNITRATE = 

# 1 in POSTUTIL to perform repartitioning of nitric acid and ammonia. For this screening application, repartitioning 

# I of nitric acid and ammonia was not performed, which results in a more conservative approach fordetermining visibility impacts. 

# I A summary ofthe detailed settings used for CALPOST are provided in Appendix Cwith additional details for specific parameters provided in the following sections

... 

# I

3.5.1 Light Extinction Coefficient 

# I Perceived visibility in deciviews (dv) is derived from the light extinction coefficient. The CALPOST program has several**meth~ds** 

# for computing light extinction. CENRAP 

# I guidance recommends that Method 6 be used to estimate light extinction: Method 6 computes light extinction from speciated particulate matter with monthly Class I area

# I specific relative humidity adjustment factors. Relative humidity is a factor in calculating light extinction since sulfate and nitrate aerosols, which absorb moisture from the air, 

# I have greaterextinction efficiencies with greater relative humidity. 

# I The relative humidity correction factors (f(RH» for the WMNWR was' obtained from EPA's "Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze 

# I 

# I 1;\200SI4100S00912170_Enviro\10_ReportIBARTWaiverIKNC BARTWaiverAppFINAL.doc

# I I Class IAreaVisibility Modeling Analysis and BART WaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006



# I Rule" dated September 2003. The values are provided in Table A-3 of the EPA 

# I "Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze Rule" dated September 2003. For reference, a copy ofthe f(RH) values from the 2003 EPA document are provided in Appendix D. 

# I I 3.5.2 Visibility Impacts 

# The visibility change related to background is calculated using the modeled and 

# I established natural visibility conditions. For the BART screening analysis, daily visibility is expressed as a change in dv (delta dv) compared to natural visibility conditions. 

# I The natural conditions for a Class I area is based on whetherthe Class I area is located 

# I in the eastern or western part of the United States. The data is provided in EPA's "Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze Rule" dated September 2003. The WMNWR is located in the eastern part of the United 

# I States. The annual average**naturallev~ls** 

# of aerosol components at the WMNWR are summarized in Appendix C. 

# I
The EPA BART guidelines allow the use ofthe 98th 

# percentile impact for determining if 

# I a source hasthe potential to cause orcontributeto regional haze in a Class I area. The 98th 

# CENRAP guidance deviates from the use of the percentile. As discussed 

# I previously, the model ready CALMET datasets were processed without using the surface and upper air meteorological observations (i.e. "No-Obs") in the wind field 

# I interpolation. Since the use of "No-Obs" may lead to less conservative calculations as compared to the use of CALMET with observations, EPA has recommended to 

# I CENRAP that the maximum visibility impact be used for the CALPUFF screening analysis. Therefore, the maximum impact was used for determining if the Facility has 

# I the potential to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in the Class I area. 

# I Sources with maximum modeled impacts below the 0.5 dv threshold are exempt from the remainder ofthe BART process. Ifthe impacts are greaterthanthe 0.5 dv, sources 

# I I 3-8 1:\200S\4100S00912'170_Enviro\10_Report\8ARTWaivenKNC BARTWaiverAppFINALdoc

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Plant 

# I have the option of performing a refified CALPUFF analysis to showthat the impacts are below 0.5 dvorcontinue with the BART process and perform a BART analysis. 

# I I I 

# I I I I I I I 

# I I 

# I I I 

# I 3-9 1:\2005\4100500912\10_Enviro\10_Report\BARTWaiver\KNC SARTWaiverApp FINAL,doc

# I I I TABLE 3·1

BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCE STACK PARAMETERS CLASS IAREAVISIBIL TY ANALYSISAND BARTWAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY

ENID NITROGEN PLANT 

# I I I Stack 10#

NACIDPLT 

# I REF

ANNEUT Location UTM Stack Base Base Source Description UTM Height Elevation Elevation UTM East UTM North Zone Oatum

km km ft m ft NitricAcid Plant 611.236 4026.594 14 NAD83 70 367 1.205 Ammonia Plant#1 Primary Reformer 611.016 4026.713 14 NAD83 105 366 1,199 Ammonia Plant#2 Primary Reformer 611.027 4026.868 14 NAD83 105 368 1,207 Ammonia PlantStart-up Boiler 611.052 4026.698 14 NAD83 30 366 1,201 Ammonia Plant Start-up Heater#1 611.024 4026.628 14 NAD83 76 366 1199 Ammonia Plant Start-up Heater#2 611.024 4026.768 14 NAD83 76 367 1,204

Ammonium Nitrate Neutralizer 611.236 4026.576 14 NAD83 40 367 1,205 Gas Exit Stack Diameter Velocity Gas Exit Temp.

ft ftls degF 3.50 26.61 460 10.50 67.49 570 12.99 35.76 350 3.71 55.18 620 4.27 16.40 1,610 4.27 16.40 1,610 2.00 2.20 120 

# I I I I 

# I I I I I I 

# I I I CALPUFFModReportTables.xls I Table 3-1

# I I I I I I I I I I I I I I



# I I I I TABLE 

## 3-2

BART-ELIGIBLESOURCE STACK PARAMETERS CLASS IAREAVISIBILTVANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY ENID NITROGEN PLANT

Modeled Emission Rates 1



### S02 NO. 

### PM10-

### 2

.S 

### PMu 

### Particle Speciation l 

### Stack ID# ' Source Description Emissions 2 

### Emissions Emissions Emissions (PMF) (PMC) filterable condensable PM 10 

### PM10 

### Ibs/hr Ibs/hr Ibs/hr Ibslhr 

### % % NACIDPLT NitricAcid Plant 

# OOO=gl 0.00= 0.00 0 0 REFORM1 Ammonia Plant#1 Primary Reformer 26.30 181.90 0.00 10.20 0 100 REFORM2 Ammonia Plant #2 Primary Reformer 26.50 86.30 0.00 10.40 0 100 SUBOILER Ammonia Plant Start-up Boiler 0.10 0.00 1.60 0 100

HEAT1 Ammonia Plant Start-up Heater#1 0.03 4.90 0.00 

# °ffi 0 100 HEAT2 Ammonia Plant Start-up Heater#2

# ==f 4.90 

# Ii! O. 0 100 ANNEUT Ammonium Nitrate Neutralizer 0.00 0.00 2.16 

### 17 83



### Noles: 1. Unless otherwise indicated, modeled emission rates are as represented in Permit No. 99-092-TV (pending). 2. Facility-wide S02 emissions are less than de minimis (i.e. 40 

### T/yr); however, S02 emissions were modeled to be conservative. 3

.. Particle speciation data for combustion of natural gas was obtained from AP-42 Section 1.4. Particle speciation data forthe ammonium nitrate neutralizerwas obtained from EPA's PMCalculator program.

CALPUFFModReportTables.xls, Table 3-2

# I I I 

# II I I I I I I I I I I**I~~--------------~ ~~** **------------~** Legend 

# o USFS Class IAreas 

# I

N?S Class IAreas FWS Class IAreas

DATE 11120106 

# I FIGURE TITLE SCALE 1 : 10.000.000 

### CENRAP 6 KM SOUTH CALPUFF METEORLOGICAL DOMAIN

# ~BENHAm DESIGNED BY 1(\11' infr

2:structur e & environment DOCUMENTTITLE 

### CLASS IAREAVISIBILITYAND MODELING ANALYSIS 

# I APPROVED BY SF 

### AND BART WAIVER APPLICATION DRAWN BY KW CLIENT 

### The Benham Companies, LLC PROJECT NUMBER 

### KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY, ENID NITROGEN PLANT infrastructure 

### & environment 

# I 4100500912 3700 W. Robinson, Suite 200

Norman, Oklahoma 73071 LOCATION FIGURE NUMBER (405) 321-3895 

### GARFIELD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA www.benham.com 

## 3-1 "'-"- 

### .. 

## 0 ) c:::-

_ "-'

-'-, "**"'** 

## ...\.,S

D

D 

# • Facility Location CENRAP 6 km Domain

# ---------- 

# I I 

# I I I I I I I I I I**I~----~------~----~--~**

'- JJ /..**--.:f**



## -..



# .. -;;­


## S:I "....



# ..""\

. 0.

- . r( \'''­ 

# 2J**\~**



## ""

'1>

# ~

(

# .. . I 

## Facility Location CENRAP6 km 

## Domain**"""""~--,** 

## Computational

Domain

# :**~** I Legend



## .D USFS Class IAr.as 

# o NPS Class IAreas FWS Class IAreas 

# I I I o 100 200 400 600 800 Kilometers

# ~BE",HAM infrastructure &env lrunmert FIGURE TITLE 

### CALPUFF COMPUTATIONAL DOMAIN DATE "120/06 SCALE , : ,0.000,000

DESIGNED BY KW DOCUMENTTITLE 

### CLASS IAREAVISIBILITYAND MODELING ANALYSIS APPMOVED BY SF 

### AND BART WAIVER APPLICATION DRAWN BY KIN

PMOJECT NUMBER 

### The Benham Companies, LLC infrastructure & 

### environment

3700 W

. Robinson, Suite 200

Norman, Oklahoma 73071 (405) 321·3895 ·wv;w

.benham.com CLIENT 

### KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY, ENID NITROGEN PLANT 

## 4100500912

FIGURE NUMBEM LOCATION 

### GARFIELD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# 3-2

# I 

# I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006 

# I 4.0 MODELING RESULTS 

# I The CALPOST processor computes the daily (24-hour) maximum change in (delta) deciviews at the Class I area from the modeled sources. A summary of the daily maximum delta deciviewfor each year is provided in Table 4-1. 

# I
A summary ofthe modeling results is as follows: 

# I**~** 

# Number of receptors within each Class I area with impacts> 0.5 dv = 0 

# I**~** 

# Numberofdays at all receptors within each Class I area with impacts> 0.5 dv = 0**~** 

# Largest delta deciview = 0.489 

# I

As indicated in the results provided in Table 4-1, the daily maximum change in 

# I deciviewsis below the threshold of 0.5; therefore, the Facility is not expected to cause

or contribute to visibility impairment in the WMNWR. In addition, the CALPUFF 

# I screening modeling approach recommended by CENRAP and utilized for this application includes a high degree of conservatism compared with the refined 

# I CALPUFF methodology. 

# I In accordance with OAC 252:100-8-73(c), KNC is eligible to obtain a waiver for the Facility from ODEQ that a BART determination is not required and further refined 

# I modeling is not warranted. 

# I Electronic copies ofthe modeling files on DVD-ROM are provided in Appendix 

# E. 

# I I 

# I I 

# I 4-1 1:\200S\4100S00912\70_Enviro\10_Report\BARTWaiver\KNC BART WaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I I

TABLE 4·1 

# I 

# I SUMMARYOF MODELING RESULTS CLASS I AREAVISIBILTVANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY ENID NITROGEN PLANT 

# I I I Class IArea 2001 2002 2003 Maximum Delta- Delta- DeltaDeciview Deciview Deciview Delta-Deciview
Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge 

## 52 0.489 0.365 

## 0.489


# I I 

# I I I I 

# I I 

# I 

# 'I I 

# I CALPUFFModReportTables.xls 

## ITable 4-1

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company 

# I Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006


# 5.0 REFERENCES 

# I I AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, DocumentAP-42, Fifth Edition, May 1995, as amended. 

# I Alpine GeophysicS, 2005, CENRAP BART Modeling Guidelines, Prepared by Alpine 

# I Geophysics for the Central Region Air Planning Association, December 15, 2005. 

# I EPA, 1998, 

# Phase 2 

# Summary Reporl and Recommendations for .Modeling Long

.Range Transporl Impacts, Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling 

# I (lWAQM), EPA454/R-98-019, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

# I
EPA, 2003, 

# Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional 

# I Haze Rule, EPA-454/B-03-005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

# I
EPA, 2005, Regional Haze Regulations and Guidelines for Best Available Retrofit 

# I Technology (BART) Determinations, Federal Register, 70 FR39104, July 6, 2005. 

# I
FLAG, 2000, Federal Land Managers Air Quality Related Values Workgroup Phase 1 

# I Report, U.S. Forest Services, National Park Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, December, 2000. 

# I
IWAQM, 1998, 

# Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase 2 

# I Summary Reporl and Recommendations for Modeling Long Range Transporl and Impacts on Regional Visibility, EPA-454/R-98-019, U.S. Environmental 

# I Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

# I 

# I 5-1 1:\200S14100S00912170_EnvirollO_ReportIBARTWaiveli1<NC BARTWaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I I
Class IArea Visibility ModelingAnalysis and BART'WaiverApplication Koch Nitrogen Company Enid Nitrogen Plant November2006 

# I Oklahoma Administrative Code, Title 252, Chapter 100, June 15, 2006. 

# I TCEQ, 2006, 

# Best Available· Retrofit Technology (BART) Modeling Protocol to 

# I Determine Sources Subject to BARTin the State of 

# Texas, Texas Commission

on Environmental Quality, Air Permits Division, September2006. 

# I VISTAS, 2005, VISTAS Protocol for the Application of the CALPUFF Model for 

# I Analyses ofBestAvailable RetrofitTechnology (BART), Prepared by the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association ofthe Southeast (VISTAS) Technical 

# I Analysis Workgroup (TAWG) and Earth Tech, Inc. 

# I I I I I I I 

# I I I I 5-2 1;\200SI4100500912170_Envlmll0_ReportIBARTWaiverIKNC BARTWaiverApp FINAL.dOC

# I I I I I I I I I

APPENDIX A 

# I SUMMARY OF CALPUFF CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I I I I I I 

# I I 

# •

# I I

APPENDIX A 

# I SUMMARYOFCALPUFF CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I CLASS I AREAVISIBILTVANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY ENID NITROGEN PLANT 

# I I 

# I I I 

# I I I 

# I I I 

# I Variable

METRUN IBYR IBMO IBDY XBTZ

IRLG

NSPEC NSE METFM AVET PGTIME

MTIP MBOW

MSHEAR MSPLIT

MCHEM MAQCHEM MWET MDRY

MOISP

MTURBVW

MDISP2 MROUGH MPARTL MTINV

MPDF MSGTIBl MBCON MFOG

MREG



### , Description InputValue Default? Comments INPUTGROUP 1: GENERAL RUN CONTROL PARAMETERS Control parameter for running all periods in met file (O=no; 1=yes) 0 Y All model period in metfile(s) will be run Starting yearofCALPU FF run 2001 nfa 2002 and 2003 also modeled Starting month 1 nfa Starting day 1 nfa Base time zone (6-CSn 6 nfa Central standard time 2002 = 8760 hours Length ofthe run (hours) 8760 nfa 2003 = 8746 hours (0 hours on 12131/03) NumberofMESPUFF II chemical species Total number ofspecies modeled 7 

### 5 modeled Numberofspecies emitted 4 3 Meteorological data fomnat 1 Y CALMET Averaging time (minutes) 60 Y Averaging time (minutes) for PG 60 Y INPUTGROUP2: TECHNICALOPTIONS

1 Y 3 Y telTain module 0 Y modeled ngated 0 Y No 1 Y Transitional plume rise modeled 1 Y Slacktipdownwash used Method used 10 simulate building downwash? 2 N PRIME method used Verticalwind shear abovestack top modeled 

## Iplume rise? 0 Y No Puffsplitting allowed? 0 Y No Transfomnation rates computed intemally Chemical mechanismflag 1 Y 

## I(MESOPUFF II scheme) 0 Y Aqueous phase notmodeled Wetremoval modeled? 1 Y Yes Drydeposition modeled? 1 Y Yes PG dispersion coefficients in RURAL areas Method used to computedisperion coefficients 3 Y and MP coefficients in urban areas Use both sigma-v/sigma-theta from Sigma-vfsigma-theta, sigma-w measurements PROFILE.OATtocompute sigma-yand used? 3 3 sioma-z Backup method used to compute dispersion when PG dispersion coefficients in RURALareas measured turbulence data are miSSing 3 Y and MPcoefficients in urban areas

# ~ 0 Y No sion? 1­ Y Yes 0 Y No use or n un erconvective conditions? 0 Y No Sub..grid TIBlModule used for shoreline? 0 Y No Boundaryconditions (concentration) modeled? 0 

### Y No 0 Y No

TESToptions specified to see iftheyconform to Technicaloptions mustcontomn to USEPA regulatoryvalues? 1 

### Y long RangeTansport (LRnguidance 

# I I I

# I I I I I I I I 

# I I I I I I I 

# I

I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments INPUTGROUP 3: Species List DryDeposition (O=none, 1=computed

gas, 2=computed Emitted particle, 3=user 

### CSPEC Mode/ed(1=yes, O=no) (1=yes, O=no) specified) OutputGroup Number (O=none) S02 

### 1 1 1 0 SO. 1 0 2 0 NOx 1 1 1 0 HN03 1 0 1 0 N03 1 0 2 0 PMC 1 1 2 0 PMF 1 1 2 0 INPUTGROUP 4: Map Projection and GridControl Parameters PMAP 

### IMap projection LCC N FEAST 

### IFalse Easting 0 Y

# ~ 0 Y 40N n/a 97W nla 33N nfa 45N nfa WGS-S4 GRS SO spheroid, global DATUM Datum region for the coordinates WGS-G N coverage (WGSS4) NX No, X grid cells in metgrid 306 NY No, Y grid cells in metgrid 246 NZ Novertical layers in metgrid 10 nla DGRIDKM Grid spacing (km) 6 nla 0, 20, 40, 80, 160.320.640, 1200,2000, ZFACE Cell face heights (m) 3000.4000 n/a XORIGKM Reference X coordinate ofSWcomer of -100S meteorological grid cell (km) nla Reference Y coordinate ofSWcomerof YORIGKM meteorological grid cell (km) -1620 nla Com!2Ylatignal Grig ISCOMP X indexoflower left comer 116 JBCOMP Y index oflowerleftcomer 164 IECOMP X indexof upper right corner 191 JECOMP Y indexofupper right corner 244 nla LSAMP Logical flag indicating ifsampling grid is used F T Sampling grid is not used Samj2ling Grid IBSAMP X indexoflower left corner 116 JBSAMP Y indexoflower leftcorner 164 IESAMP X index of upper right corner 191 Must be equal toora subsetofthe JESAMP Y indexofupper right corner 244 computational grid MESHDN Nesting factorofsampling grid 1 Y INPUTGROUP5: OutputOptions 1 - createfile, 0 = do notcreate file; Outputfile CONC,DAT containing concentrations Concentrations saved for S02, S04, NOX, ICON is created 1 Y HN03, N03, PM2,5, PM10 Output file DFLX.DATcontaining concentrations is lORY created 1 Y Outputfile WFLX,DAT containing concentrations IWET is created 1 Y Outputfile containing relative humiditydata is IVIS created 1 Y LCOMPRS Perform data compression in outputfile T Y , Create standard series of output files suitable for ICAPLOT plotting? 1 Y 1=ves, 0 = no Mass flux across specified boundaries for selected IMFLX species reported? 0 Y Do not calculate mass flux



# . Mass balance for each species n IMBAL Mass balance for each species reported? 0 Y reported ICPRT Printconcentration fields tothe output listfile? 0 Y 1 -' print, 0 = do not print 

### I IDPRT Print dryfluxes to the output listfile? 0 Y IWPRT Printwet fluxes tothe output listfile? 0 Y Concentrationfields are printed to output listfile 1

### =g/m3for concentration, g/m3/s for ICFRQ everyhour 1 Y deposition

# I I I I 

# 1 1 1 I 

# I 

# I' I 

# I I I I 

# I I I 

# I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments Dryflux fields are printed to output listfile every IDFRQ hour 1 Y Wetflux fields are printed to output listfile every IWFRQ hour 1 Y 1- g/m3 for concentration, g/m2ls for IPRTU Units for line printeroutput 1 Y deposition Messagestracking the progress.of run written to 2 = yes

### \'fYYYJJJHH,# old puffs, # IMESG screen 2 Y emitted puffs) LDEBUG LO(lical value for debug output F Y IPFDEB First puffto track 1 Y NPFDEB Number of puffs to track 1000 N NN1 Met period to startoutput 1 Y NN2 Met period to end output 8760 N INPUT GROUP 6: Subgrid scale complex terrain inputs (CTSG)

NHILL Numberofterrain features 0 Y NCTREC Numberofspecial complex terrain receptors 0 Y Inputterrain and receptor data for CTSG hills MHILL input in CTDM format 2 n/a Hill data created bv OPTHILL Conversion factor for changing horizontal XHILL2M dimensionsto mete'rs 1 Y Conversion factor for changing vertical ZHILL2M dimensionsto meters 1 Y X origin ofCDTM system relative to CALPUFF XCTDMKM coordinate system (km) 0.0 E+OO n/a Y origin ofCDTM system relative to CALPUFF YCTDMKM coordinate system (km) 0.0 E+OO n/a INPUT GROUP 7: Chemical Parameters for Dry Deposition ofGases

SPECIES Chemical parameters for dry deposition of(lases



# - Y S02 NOX HN03 DIFFUSIVITY Y 0.1509 0.1656 0.1628 ALPHA STAR Y 1000 1 1 REACTIVITY Y 8 8 18 MESO RES Y 0 5 0 HENRYSC Y 0.04 3.5 8.0E-8 INPUT GROUP 8: Size Parameters fordrydeposition ofparticles SPECIES S04 Geometric mass mean diameter**(~m)** 0.48. 0.48 Standard deviation = 2.0 N03 Geometric mass mean diameter**(~m)** 0.48 2.0 Standard deviation

- 2.0 PMC Geometricmass mean diameter**(~m)** 6.0 2.0 Standard deviation

- 2.0 PMF Geometric mass mean diameter**(~m)** 0.48 2.0 Standard deviation

- 2.0 INPUT GROUP 9: Miscellaneous Dry Deposition Parameters RCUTR Reference cuticle resistance (s/cm) 30 Y RGR Reference Qround resistance (s/cm) 10 Y REACTR Reference pollutant reactivity 8 Y Number ofparticle size intervals to evaluate NINT effective particle deposition velocity 9 Y 1-vegitation in non-irrigated areas is active IVEG Vegetation state in non-irrigated areas 1 Y and unstressed INPUT GROUP 10: Wet Deposition Parameters SPECIES Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (s' ) 3.21E-5 S02 Scavengina coefficent for frozen precip (s") 0 Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (s' ) 1.0E-4 S04 Scavenaing coefficentforfrozen precip (s·') 3.0E-5 Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (s' ) 6.0E-5 HN03 Scavenaina coefficentforfrozen precip (s-') 0 Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (s' ) 1.0E-4 N03 Scavenaing coefflcentfor frozen precip (s·') 3.0E-5 Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (s' ) 1.0E-4 PMC Scavenging coefficentforfrozen precip (s-') 3.0E-5 Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (s- ) 1.0E-4 PMF Scavenging coefficentforfrozen precip (s") 3.0E-5 Y INPUT GROUP 11: Chemistry Parameters
MOZ Ozone inputdata option 1 N 1=use a monthlv background ozone value

BCK03 Monthly background ozone concentrations (pob) 12·40 N

# I I 

# I 

# I I I I I I 

# I I 

# I I 

# I I 

# I I 

# I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments BCKNH3 Monthly background NH3 concentrations (ppb) 12·3 N RNITE1 Niahttime S02 loss rate in percenVhour 0.2 Y RNITE2 Niahttime NOx loss rate in percenVhour 2.0 Y RNITE3 Nighttime HN03formation rate in percenVhour 2.0 Y

MH202 H202 data inputoption 1 Y Aqueous phasetransformations not modeled (MQACHEM = 0, not used)

BCKH202 Background monthly H202concentrations 1 Y Aqueous phase transformations not modeled (MQACHEM = 0, not used) BCKPMF OFRAC VCNX Fine particulate concentration for SOA option Organicfraction offine particulate VOC/NOx ration for SOA option 1 0.2 50 Y Y Y MCHEM = 1, therefore, SOA option not used INPUT GROUP 12: Dispersion and Computational Parameters

SYDEP Horizontal size ofa puff in meters beyond which the time dependant dispersion equation of Heffler is used 550 Y

MHFTSl Switch for using Heffler equation for sigma z as above 0 Y Do not use Hefflerformulas for sigma z

JSUP Stability class used to determine plume growth rates for puffs above boundary layer 5 Y

CONK1 Vertical dispersion constantfor stable conditions 0.01 Y

CONK2 Vertical dispersion constantfor neutral/unstable conditions 0.1 Y

TBD Factordetermining transition pointfrom Schulman Scire to Huber-Snyder building 0.5 Y Use ISC transition point

IURB1 Lower range of land use categories forwhich urban dispersion is assumed 10 Y METFM=1, not used

IURB2 Upper range ofland use categories forwhich urban dispersion is assumed 19 Y METFM=1, not used ILANDUIN Land use categoryfor modelina domain 

## - - METFM=1, not used lOIN Rouahness length for modeling domain (m)


# -­ - METFM-1, not used XLAIIN Leafarea index for modelina domain


# -­ -­ METFM=1, not used ELEVIN Elevation above sea level



### - - METFM-1, not used XLATIN Latitude (dearees) for met location



### - - METFM=1, not used XLONIN Longitude (degrees) for met location 

## -­ -­ METFM-1, not used ANEMHT Anemometer height (m) 

## - - METFM-1, not used ISIGMAV Form of lateral turbulence data in PROFILE.DAT 1 Y Read siama v IMIXCTDM Choice ofmixina heiahts


# -­ - METFM=1, not used

XMXLEN Maximum length ofemitted slug in meteorological arid units 1 Y

XSAMLEN Maximum travel distance ofa puff/slug during one samplina unit 1 Y

MXNEW Maximum numberof puffs or slugs released from
one source during one time step 99 Y

MXSAM Maximum numberofsampling steps during one time step 99 Y

NCOUNT Numberofiterations used when computing the transportwind for a sampling step that includes transitional plume rise 2 Y SYMIN Minimum sioma y for a new puff/slug (m) 1 Y SlMIN Minimum sioma z for a new puff/slug (m) 1 Y

SVMIN Minimum lateral turbulence velocities (m/s) for each stability class 0.5 Y

SWMIN Minimum vertical turbulence velocities (m/s) for each stability class



### - Y A B C 

### D E F 0.2 0.12 0.08 0.06 0.03 0.016

CDIV Divergence criterion for dw/dzacross puff used to initiate adjustmentfor horizontal convergence 0,0 Y WSCALM Minimum non-calm wind speeds (m/s) 0.5 Y XMAXZ1 Maximum mixing height (m) 3000 Y XMINl1 Minimum mixing height (m) 20 N

WSCAT Defaultwind speed classes



# -­ Y 1 2' 3 4 5 1.54 3.09 5.14 8.23 10.80

PLXO Default wind speed profile power-law exponents for stabilities 1-6



### -­ Y (lSC RURAl) A B C 

### D E F 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.15 0.35 0.55

PTGO Default potential temperature gradient for stable classes E, F (deg KIm) 0.020, 0.035 Y

PPC Default plume path coefficientsfor eacih stability class



### -­ Y A B C D E F 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.35 0.35 SL2PF Maximum Sy/puff length 10 Y

NSPLIT Number of puffsthat result everytime a j)uff is split 3 Y

# I I I I I 

# I I I I I 

# I I I I I I I 

# I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments
Time ofdaywhen split puffsare eligibleto be split once again (typically once perday, around sunset IRESPLIT before nocturnal sheardevelops) Hour17=1 

### Y ZISPLIT Previous hours mimimum mixing height (m) 100 

### Y Previous max mixing height/current mixing height ratio, must be lessthan this valuetoallow puffto ROLDMAX split 0.25 

### Y NSPLITH Numberofpuffs resulting from a split 5 

### Y imum sigma-y ofpuff before it maysplit 1 

### Y Minimum puffelongation rate duetowind shear

# ~' 2 

### Y n!ration ofeach species in puff split 1.00E-07 

### Y
r SLUG sampling 1.00E-04 

### Y
r area source integration 1.00E-06 

### Y

OSRISE Trajectorystep-length for n 1 

### Y Minimum height (m) towhi HTMINBC as theyare emitted. 500 

### Y Search radius (in BC segment lengths) abOut a RSAMPBC receptorfor sampling nearest BC puff. 10 

### Y Near-surface depletion adjustmentto concentration profile used when sampling BC MDEPBC Ipuffs? 1 

### Y Adjustconcentration for -,",
INPUT GROUP 13: Point Source Parameters NPT1 Numberofpoint sourceswith parameters 7 nla IPTU Unitsfor point source emission rates 3­ N 3

### =Iblhr Numberofpointsource-speciescombinations NSPT1 with variable emissions scaling factors 0 Y Numberofpointsourceswith variable emission NPT2 

## Iparameters provided in external file 0 nla Other point source parameters include stack height (H). stack diameter (d), exittemperature (T), exitvelocity (v), downwash flag and emissions MISC byspecies



### - nla INPUT GROUP 14:Area Source Parameters

- Not Used
INPUTGROUP 15: LineSource Parameters

- Not Used
INPUT GROUP 16: Volume Source Parameters

- NotUsed
INPUTGROUP 17: Non-gridded (Discrete) Receptor Information NREC Numberofnon-gridded receptors 

## I 59 nla IWichita Mountains NWR

# I I I I I I I I I

APPENDIX B 

# I
SUMMARYOF POSTUTIL CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I I I I I 

# I I I I

# I I

APPENDIX B 

# I SUMMARYOF POSTUTILCONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I CLASS I AREAVISIBIL TVANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY

ENID NITROGEN PLANT

Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments 

# I ISYR ISMO lOY 

# I ISHR

NPER 

# I NSPECINP NSPECOUT 

# I NSPECCMP MDUPLCT NSCALED

MNITRATE

BCKNH3 

# I AVET PGTIME INPUTGROUP 1: GENERAL RUN CONTROL PARAMETERS Starting year Starting month Starting day Starting hour

Number of periods to process Number ofspecies to process from CALPUFF
runs Numberofspecies to write to outoutfile Numberofspecies to computefrom those modeled Stop run ifduplicate soecies names found? NumberofCALPUFF data files to 'scale' Re-compute the HN03fN03 partition for concentrations? Default ammonia concentration used for HN03fN03 oartition Averaging time (minutes) Averaaina time (minutes) for PG 2001 1 1 1

8760

7 9

2 0 0

0

0 60 60 nfa nfa nfa nfa

nfa

nfa nfa

nfa Y Y

Y

nfa Y Y INPUT GROUP 2: SPECIES PROCESSING INFORMATION 2002 and 2003 also modeled 2002 and 2003 also modeled

2002 = 8760 hours 2003 = 8746 hours (0 hours on 12131f03)

Multiolefiles are not used

Ammonia limitina method not used

No backaround used 

# I ASPECI

ASPECO 

# I 

# I CSPECCMP 

# I I CSPECCMP

MODDAT 

# I I 

# I I I NSPECINP species will be processed



### - nfa S02, S04, NOX, HN03, N03, PMF, PMC S02, S04, NOX, HN03, N03, PMF, PMC, NSPECOUTsoecieswill be written



### - nfa N,S

Nitrogen speciesto be computed by scaling and summing one or more ofthe processed input species using the scaling factors for each ofthe NSPECINP input species

Sulfur species to be computed by scaling and summing one or more ofthe processed input species using the scaling factors for each ofthe NSPECINP inputspecies Each species in NSCALED CALPUFF data files may be scaled before processing. 

### -



## -

- nfa

nfa



### - CSPECCMP-N S02 = 0.0 S04 = 0.291667 NO = 0.466667 N02 = 0.304348 HN03 = 0.222222 N03 = 0.451613 PMC =0.0 PMF = 0.0 CSPECCMP =S S02 = 0.50 S04 = 0.333333 NO = 0.0 N02= 0.0 HN03 = 0.0 N03 = 0.0 PMC = 0.0 PMF = 0.0

This ootion was not used

# I 

# I I I 

# I' I I I I

APPENDIX C 

# I SUMMARYOF CALPOST CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I I I I I I 

# I I 

# I

# I I I

APPENDIXC
SUMMARYOF CALPOST CONTROL FILE INPUTS CLASS IAREAVISIBIL TVANALYSISAND BARTWAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY 

# I ENID NITROGEN PLANT 

# I I I I I 

# I I I I 

# I I I 

# I I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments INPUTGROUP 1: GENERAL RUN CONTROL PARAMETERS METRUN Option to run all periodsfound in metfiles 0 Y Run period explicitlydefined ISYR Starting year 2001 nfa 2002 and 2003 also modeled ISMO Starting month 1 nfa 2002 and 2003 also modeled IDY Starting day 

### 1 nfa ISHR Starting hour 1 nfa 2002

# =8760 hours NHRS of periods to process 8760 n/a 2003

# =8746 hours (0 hours on 12131/03) NREP every hourofdata? 1 Y Every hour processed ASEPC Species to process VISIB n/a Visibility processing

### ~.oo_ 

# . 1 Y CALPUFF concentrations orsX (new) = X (old) •A+B 0,0 Y No scatinafactors used background concentrationslfluxes?

# EtJ Y

! process source contributions Y LG Gridded receptors processed? N LD Discrete receptors processed? Y Receptors located in Class Iarea LCT CTSG complexterrain receptors processed? F Y LORING Report results by DISCRETE receptor RING? F Y Flag for all receptors afterthe lastone assigned is NORECP setto"O" ·1 Y Select aU discrete receptors IBGRID X index oflower left comer ofindex grid -1 Y Entiregrid processed if LG=T JBGRID Y index oflower leftcomer ofindexgrid -1 Y IEGRIO X index ofupper right comer ofindex grid -1 Y JEGRID Y index ofupper right comer ofindex grid -1 Y NGONOFF Number ofgridded receptor rows 0 Y NGXRECP Exclude specific gridded receptors 1 0 Gridded receptor not processed INPUT GROUP 2: SPECIES PROCESSING INFORMATION Particle growth curve f{RH) for hygroscopic MFRH species 2 Y FLAG (2000)f(RH}tabulation RHMAX Maximum RH (%) used in particle growth curve 98 Y Notused LVS04 Compute lightextinction for sulfate? T Y LVN03 Compute lightextinction for nitrate? T Y LVOC Compute lightextinction for organiccarbon? F N LVPMC Compute Ught extinction for coarse particles? T Y L VPMF Compute lightextinction forfine particles? T Y

# ~',""_,~","? F N L VBK in extinction calculation? Y PMC Y Fine particulate species PMF Y EEPMC Extinction efficiency forcoarse particulates 0,6 Y EEPMF Extinction efficiencyforfine particulates 1.0 Y Extinction efficiencyfor background course EEPMCBK particulates 0,6 Y EES04 Extinction efficiencyfor ammonium sulfate 3,0 Y EEN03 Extinction effiCiency for ammonium nitrate 3,0 Y EEOC Extinction efficiencyfor organiccarbon 4,0 Y EESOIL Extinction efficiencyforsoil 1,0 Y EEEC Extinction efficiencyfor elemental carbon 10,0 Y LAVER Background extinction computation F Y MethOd 6 used for background light extinction. Compute extinction from speciated PM measurements. FLAG RH adjustmentfactorapplied toobserved and MVISBK Method used for background lightextinction 6 

### N modeled sulfateand nitrate.

Extinction coefficientsfor modeled and Factorsfrom EPA (2003) guidance background hygroscopic speciescomputed using document, TableA-3, used forWichita RHFAC EPA (2003) monthly RH adjustmentfactors


# - n/a Mountains NWR BKS04 Background sulfate extinction coefficient 0.12 n/a BKN03 Background nitrateextinction coefficient 0.10 n/a

# I I I I

INPUTGROUP 3: OUTPUTOPTIONS 

# I 

# I I I I I I 

# I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments Background coarse particulate extinction BKPMC coefficient 3.0 nfa

BKOC Background organic carbon extinction coefficient 0.47 nfa BKSOIL**~ground** soil extinction coefficient nfa kground elemental carbon extinction**~** coefficient

. nfa 

# F""''''"oo,",

\0 R

....'gh

# ,~tte""' {1lMm, Y

ILDOe IPrintdocumentation image? 

### F Y Print output units (lJgfmifor concentrations and <Ilglm2lSec) for IPRTU Unitsforall output 3 N deposition

..1HR Report 1 houraveraging times 

### F N L3HR Report 3 houraveraging times 

### F N L24HR Report24 houraveraging times T Y LRUNL Report run·length (annual) averaging times 

### F N LT50 Top50 table 

### F N LTOPN Top 'N' table 

### F Y NTOP Numberoftop 'N' values at each receptor 

### F Y ITOP Ranks oftop 'N' values ateach receptor 0 nla LEXCD Threshold exceedance counts 

### F Y THRESH1 Averaging timethresholdfor 1 houraverage ·1 Y THRESH3 Averaging timethreshold for 3 houraverage ·1 Y THRESH24**~Id** for 24 houraverage ·1 Y old for NAVG·hr average ·1 Y INDAY Accumulation period, days 0 

### Y INCOUNT Numberofexceedances allowed 

# FH Y

# ~ Y Y 

### F Y utput 366'0 Y fileoplion 

### F Y formatoption 

### F Y Createfile of DAILY (24 hour) Delta·. MDVIS Outputfile with visibility changeateach receptor? 1 N Deciview LDEBUG Output information fordebugging? 

### F 

### .y



# I I I 

# I I I

# I I I I I I I I I

APPENDIX D 

# I MONTHLYf(RH) VALUES FOR CLASS IAREAS 

# I I I I 

# I I I I I

# I



# I I 

# I

I I

# - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

GuidanceforEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions UndertlteRegionalHazeRule



# TableA-3 Monthly Site-Specific f(RH) Values forEachMandatoryFederalClass I Area, Based on theCentroid oftheArea (SupplementalInformation)

Class IArea Site Site Name Ma 10 Code St LAT LONG Acadia Agua Tibia Alpine Lakes Anaconda·Pintler AnselAdams Arches Badlands Bandelier Bering Sea(a) Big Bend Black Canyonofthe Gunnison Bob Marshall Bosque del Apache BoundaryWaters Canoe Area Breton Bridger Brigantine Bryce Canyon CabinetMountains CaneyCreek Canyonlands Cape Romain Capitol Reel Caribou Carlsbad Caverns Chassahowitzka Chlricahua NM Chiricahua W Cohutta CraterLake Craters01 the Moon Cucamonga Denali Desolation Diamond Peak Dolly Sods Dome Land Eagle Cap Eagles !'Jest Acadia 1 ACAD1 ME 44.37 68.26 Agua Tibia 100 AGTI1 CA 33.41 116.96 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.3 Snoqualmie Pass 80 SNPA.l WA 47.42 121.42 4.3 3.6 3.5 3.9 2.9 3.2 2.9 Sula 71 SULAl MT 45.96 113.42 3.3 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.9 Kaiser 110 KAISl CA 37.65 119.20 3.0 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.6 Canyonlands 50 CANY1 UT 38.64 109.56 2.6 2.3 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.5 Badlands 59 BADL1 SO 43.74 101.94 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.4 Bandelier 33 BANDl NM 35.76 106.27 2.2 2.1 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.7 2.1 60.45 172.79 Big Bend 31 BIBEl TX 29.31 103.19 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.S 1.7 2.0 Weminuche 55 WEMll CO 36.56 107.70 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.6 1.7 1.9 Monture 73 MONT1 MT 47.75 113.38. 3.S 3.1 2.8 2.S 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.2 BosquedelApache 38 BOAP1 NM 33.79 106.63 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.6 2.0 BoundaryWaters 23 BOWA1 MN 47.95 91.50 3.0 2.6 2.7 2.4 2.3 2.9 3.1 3.4 Breton 20 BRETl LA 29.73 68.86 3.7 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.6 4.0 4.3 4.3 Bridger 65 BRIDl WY 42.98 109.76 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.5 Brigantine 5 BRIG1· NJ 39.46 74.45 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.6 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.7 Bryce Canyon 49 BRCA1 UT 37.62 112.17 2.6 2.4 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.5 Cabinet Mountains 75 CABll MT 48.21 115.71 3.6 3.3 2.9 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.2 CaneyCreek 29 CACRl AR 34.41 94.08 3,4 3.1 2.9 3.0 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.4 Canyonlands 50 CANY1 UT 36.46 109.62 2.6 2.3 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.5 Cape Romain 15 ROMAl SC 32.94 79.66 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.8 3.2 3.7 3.6 4.1 Capitol Reel 52 CAPll UT 38.36 111.05 2.7 2.4 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.6 LassenVolcanic 90 LAV01 CA 40.50 121.18 3.7 3.1 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 GuadalupeMountains 32 GUM01 TX 32.14 104.46 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.1 Chassahowitzka 18 CHASl 

### Fl 28.75 82.55 3.8 3.5 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.9 3.9 4.2 Chiricahua 39 CHIRl 

### AZ. 32.01 109.39 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.6 2.1 Chirlcahua 39 CHIRl 

### AZ. 31.84 109.27 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.8 2.1 Cohutta 12 COHU1 GA 34.92 84.56 3.3 3.1 3.0 2.6 3.4 3.8 4.0 4.2 CraterLake 86 CRLA1 OR 42.90 122.13 4.6 3.9 3.7 3.4 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.9 Craters ofthe Moon 69 CRMOl 10 43.47 113.55 3.1 2.7 2.3 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.4 San Gabriel 93 SAGAl CA 34.25 117.57 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 Denali 102 DENAl AK 63.72 148.97 2.5 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.2 2.5 3.0 Bliss 95 BLlSl CA 36.96 120.12 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.6 CraterLake 86 CRLA1 OR 43.53 122.10 4.5 4.0 3.6 3.7 3.2 3.1 2.9 2.9 Dolly Sods 8 DOSOl WV 39.11 79.43 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.6 3.1 3.4 3.5 3.9 Dome Land 109 DOMEl CA 35.70 118.19 2.5 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.8 1.6 Starkey 76 STAR1 OR 45.10 117.29 3.8 3.2 2.5 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.6 White River 56 WHRll CO 39.69 106.25 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.1**1.~** 1.6 2.0 2.3 3.3 2.1 1.6 1.6 2.2 1.9

2.1 2.0 2.6 1.9 3.5 4.2 1.7 3.6 1.5 2.6 3.6 1.6 4.0 1.6 2.2 2.2 4.1 1.6 1.6 4.2 3.1 1.6 2.2 2.6 1.7 3.1 3.9 1.6 1.6 2.0 2.3 3.9 2.5 1.6 1.6 2.3 1.7

1.9 1.8 2.9 1.6 2.8 3.7 2.0 3.3 1.6 3.0 3.5 1.6 3.7 1.7 2.4 1.6 3.9 1.5 1.5 3.8 3.6 2.0 2.2 2.9 1.9 3.7 3.3 1.9 2.3 1.9 2.1 4.5 3.2 2.3 2.0 2.7 2.0

1.6 2.1 3.5 1.8 3.2 3.7 2.4 2.9 2.0 3.7 3.4 2.0 3.4 2.1 3.0 1.9 3.7 1.6 1.6 3.4 4.6 2.6 2.1 3.0 2.4 4.6 3.0 2.0 3.4 2.1 2.2 4.5 3.3 2.7 2.3 2.7 2.2

1.9 2.3 3.5 2.2 3.2 3.7 2.4 2.8 2.4 3.9 3.5 2.3 3.2 2.5 3.4 2.1 3.9 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.6 3.0 2.2 3.1 3.0

. 4.6 3.1 2.2 4.0 2.1



## A-JO

# - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

GuidanceforEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions UndertlteRegionalHazeRule

,. 

# TableA-3 

# MonthlySite-Specific f(RH) 

# Values for Each MandatoryFederalClassI Area, Based on theCentroid oftheArea(SupplementalInformation)

Class I Area Site Jan 

### Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Site Name Map 10 Code St LAT LONG f(RH) f(RH) f{RH) f(RH) f{RHI f(RH) fIRH) f{RHI Sap flRHI Oct f(RHI Nov f(RHI Dac f(RHI Emigrant Everglades Fitzpatrick FlatTops Galiuro Gates of\he Mountains Gearhart Mountain Gila Glacier Glacier Peak Goat Rocks Grand Canyon Grand Teton Great Gulf Great Sand Dunes Great Smoky Mountains Guadalupe Mountains Haleakala Hawaii Volcanoes Hells Canyon Hercules

- Glade Hoover Isle Royale James River Face Jarbidge John Muir JoshuaTree Joyce Kilmer

- Slickrock Kaiser Kalmiopsis Kings Canyon La Garita Lassen Volcanic Lava Beds Linville Gorge Lostwood Lye Brook Mammoth Cave Marble Mountain Maroon Bells

- Snowmass Yosemite 96 YOSE1 CA 38.20 119.75 3.2 2.8 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.5

. 1.6 Everglades 19 EVER1 FL 25.39 60.66 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.7 2.6 2.9 Bridger 65 BRIDl WY 43.27 109.57 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.6 1.5 1.5 White River 56 WHRI1 CO 39.97 107.25 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.7 1.9 Chiricahua 39 CHIRl AZ. 32.56 110.32 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.6 Gates of\he Mountains 74 GAM01 MT 46.67 111.81 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.0 1.9 Crater Lake 86 CRLAl OR 42.49 120.85 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.3 Gila Cliffs 42 GrCLl NM 33.22 106.25 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.2 2.1 2.0 Glacier 72 GLAC1 MT 46.51 114.00 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 2.8 2.6 North Cascades 81 NOCA1 WA 48.21 121.04 4.2 3.7 3.4 3.8 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.1 White Pass 79 WHPA1 WA 46.54 121.46 4.3 3.6 3.4 4.2 2.6 3.4 3.0 3.2 Grand Canyon, Hance 48 GRCA2 AZ. 35.97 111.96 2.4 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.7 Yellowstone 66 YELL2 WY 43.68 110.73 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.B 1.5 1.5 Great Gulf 4 GRGU1 NH 44.31 71.22 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.6 Great Sand Dunes 53 GRSAl CO 37.73 105.52 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.6 1.9 2.3 Great Smoky Mountains 10 GRSMl TN 35.63 63.94 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.7 3.2 3.9 3.6 4.0 Guadalupe Mountains 32 GUMOl TX 31.63 104.60 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.9 2.2 Haleakala 106 HALE1 HI 20.61 156.28 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.4 Hawaii Volcanoes 107 HAV01 HI 19:43 155.27 3.2 2.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.1 3.2 Hells Canyon 77 HECA1 OR 45.34 116.57 3.7 3.1 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 Hercules

- Glade 26 HEGL1 MO 36.69 92.90 3.2 2.9 2.7 2.7 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 Hoover 97 HOOV1 CA 36.14 119.45 3.1 2.6 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.5 Isle Royale 25 ISLE1 Ml 47.99 6B.83 3.1 2.5 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.6 3.0 3.2 James River Face 7 JARll VA 37.62 79.46 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.4 3.0 3.3 

### 3.4 3.7

. Jarbidge 66 JARB1 NV 41.89 115.43 3.0 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 1.6 1.4 Kaiser 110 KAIS1 CA 37.39 116.64 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.7 Joshua Tree 101 JOSH1 CA 34.03 116.16 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.0 Great Smoky Mountains 10 GRSMl TN 35.43 64.00 3.3 3.1 2.9 2.7 3.3 3.8 4.0 4.2 Kaiser 110 KAISl CA 37.26 119.16 3.0 2.7 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.7 Kalmiopsis 89 KALM1 OR 42.27 123.93 4.5 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.2 Sequoia 96 SEOU1 CA 36.62 116.76 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.7 1.7 Weminuche 55 WEMI1 CO 37.96 106.61 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.6 1".B 1.6 1.7 2.1 LassenVolcaniC 90 LAV01 CA 40.54 121.57 3.6 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 Lava Beds 67 LABE1 CA 41.71 121.34 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.3 Linville Gorge 13 LlGOl NC 35.69 61.69 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.1 4.5 Lostwood 62 LOSTl NO 48.60 102.46 3.0 2.9 2.9 2.3 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.4 Lye Brook 3 LYBRl VT 43.15 73.12 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 3.0 3.3 3.6 Mammoth Cave 9 MACAl KY 37.22 86.07 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.6 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.9 Trinity 104 TRIN1 CA 41.52 123.21 4.4 3.6 3.7 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 White River 56 WHRI1 CO 39.15 106.62 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 1.7

. 1.9 2.2 1.6 3.0 1.7 1.9 1.6 2.1 2.4 1.8 3.2 3.3 3.1 1.6 1.7 4.0 2.2 4.2 2.2 2.4 3.2 1.B 3.4 1.6 3.a 3.6 1.4 1.7 2.0 4.2 1.7 3.3 1.6 2.0 2.2 2,4 4.4 2.3 3.7 3.9 3.2 2.1 1.9 2.6 2.0 1.6 1.5 2.4 2.8 1.6 3.5 3.9 3.6 1:6 2.0 3.4 1.9 3.6 1.6 2.5 3.2 2.4 3.1 1.6 2.7 3.2 1.6 1.9 2.0 3.6 1.9

. 3.6

1.9 1.8 2.4 2.7 3.7 2.4 3.3 3.4 3.4 1.8 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.2 1.6 2.8 3.7 1.8 3.8 4.4 4.4 1.9 2.4 3.1 2.4 3.3 1.9 2.6 3.7 3.5 3.1 2.3 3.3 2.6 2.4 2.2 1.9 3.3 2.3 4.4 2.3 2.2 3.1 3.5 3.2 3.2 2.9 3.2 4.1 2.1 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.8 3.6 2.2 3.9 4.4 4.6 2.3 2.6 2.9 2.4 3.4 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.9 3.3 2.6 3.3 3.0 2.6 2.6 2.0 3.5 2.7 4.3 2.5 2.3 3.5 3.6 3.4 3.2 2.6 3.5 4.2 2.1



# A-ll

# - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - •

Guidance forEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions UndertheRegionalHazeRule
TableA-3 Monthly Site-Specific f(RH) Values for EachMandatoryFederalClass I Area, Based on the CentroidoftheArea (SupplementalInformation)

Site Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Oec Class IArea Site Name Map 10 Code St LAT LONG f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RHl !LRHJ f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) Mazatzal Ike's Backbone 46 IKBA1 AZ. 33.92 111.43 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.7 2.1 Medicine Lake • Medicine Lake 63 MELA1 MT 48.50 104.29 3.0 2.9 2.9 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.2 2.4 3.2 3.2 Mesa Verde Mesa Verde 54 MEVE1 CO 37.20 108.49 2.5 2.3 1.9

. 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.6 2.0 1.9 1.7 2.1 2.3 Mingo Mingo 26 MING1 MO 36.98 90.20 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.6 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.1 3.1 3.3 Mission Mountains Monture 73 MONT1 MT 47.40 113.85 3.6 3.1 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.5 3.6 Mokelumne Bliss 95 BLIS1 CA 38.58 120.03 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.4 2.9 Moosehorn Moosehorn 2 MOOS1 ME' 45.12 67.26 3.0 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.4 3.8 3.9 3.5 3.2

. 3.2 MountAdams White Pass 79 WHPA1 WA 46.19 121.50 4.3 3.8 3.4 4.4 2.9 3.5 3.1 3.3 3.1 3.9 4.5 4.6 Mount Baldy Mount Baldy 43 BALD1 AZ. 34.12 109.57 2.2 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.6 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.2 Mount Hood Mount Hood 85 MOH01 OR 45.38 121.69 4.3 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.0 3.2 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.9 4.5 4.6 Mount Jefferson Three Sisters 84 THSI1 OR 44.55 121.83 4.4 3.9 3.6 3.7 3.1 3.1 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.8 4.6 4.5 Mount Rainier Mount Rainier 78 MORA1 WA 46.76 122.12 4.4 4.0 3.6 4.7 3.1 3.7 3.3 3.5 3.4 4.1 4.7 4.7 Mount Washington Three Sisters 84 THSI1 OR 44.30 121.87 4.4 3.9 3.6 3.7 3.1

. 3.1 3.0 2.9 3.0 3.8 4.6 4.6 MountZirkel MountZirkel 58 MOZI1 CO 40.55 106.70 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.1 2.1 Mountain Lakes Crater Lake 86 CRLA1 OR 42.34 122.11 4.3 3.6 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.6 3.1 4.1 4.3 North Absaroka North Absoraka 67 NOAB1 'NY 44.77 109.78 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.4 2.4 North Cascades North Cascades 81 NOCA1 WA 48.54 121.44 4.1 3.7 3.4 3.7 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.9 4.4 4.4 Okefenokee Okefenokee 16 OKEF1 GA 30.74 82.13 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.0 3.6 3.7 3.7 4.1 4.0 3.8 3.5 3.6 Olympic Olympic 83 OLYM1 WA 47.32 123.35 4.5 4.1 3.8 4.1 3.2 3.5 3.1 3.5 3.7 4.4 4.8 4.8 Otter Creek Dolly Sods 8 DOS01 WV 39.00 79.65 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.6 3.2 3.5 3.7 4.1 4.0 3.3 3.0 3.1 Pasay1en Pasayten 82 PASA1 WA 48.85 120.52 4.2 3.7 3.4 3.7 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.2 3.3 3.9 4.4 4.5 Pecos Wheeler Peak 35 WHPE1 NM 35.93 105.64 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.0 1.7 2.0 2.2 Petrified Forest Petrified Forest 41 PEF01 AZ. 35.08 109.77 2.4 2.2 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.9 2.3 Pine Mountain Ike's Backbone 46 IKBA1 AZ 34.31 111.80 2.2 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.4 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.7 2.1 Pinnacles Pinnacles 92 PINN1 CA 36.49 121.16 3.2 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.9 Point Reyes Point Reyes 91 PORE1 CA 38.12 122.90 3.6 3.3 3.1 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.3 Presidential Range

- Dry River GreatGulf 4 GRGU1 NH 44.21 71.35 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.4 3.7 4.0 4.3 3.5 3.1 3.0 Rawah MountZirkel 58 MOZI1 CO 40.70 105.94 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.1 2.0 Red Rock Lakes Yellowstone 66 YELL2 'NY 44.67 111.70 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.6 2.7 Redwood Redwood 88 REDW1 CA 41.56 124.08 4.4 3.9 4.6 3.9 4.5 4.7 4.9 4.7 4.3 3.7 3.8 3.4 Rocky Mountain Rocky Mountain 57 ROM01 CO 40.28 105.55 1.7 1.9 1.9 2.1

. 2.3 2.0 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.7 Roosevelt Campobello Moosehorn 2 MOOS1 ME 44.88 66.95 3.0 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.4 3.8 3.9 3.5 3.3 3.2 Saguaro Saguaro 40 SAGU1 AZ.. 32.25 110.73 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.1 1.1. 1.1 1.4 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.6 2.1 Saint Marks Saint Marks 17 SAMA1 FL 30.12 84.08 3.7 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 4.0 4.1 4.4 4.2 3.8 3.7 3.8 Salt Creek Salt Creek 36 SACR1 NM 33.61 104.37 2.1 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.1 1.8 1.8 2.1 San Gabriel San Gabriel 93 SAGA1 CA 34.27 117.94 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.2 San Gorgonio San Gorgonio 99 SAG01 CA 34.18 '116.90 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.2 San Jacinto San Gorgonio 99 SAG01 CA 33.75 116.65 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.1 San Pedro Parks San Pedro Parks 34 SAPE1 NM 36.11 106.81 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.7 2.1 2.2 San Rafael San Rafael 94 RAFA1 CA 34.78 119.83 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.3 2.5



# A -12

# - - - - - ..- - - - - - - - - - - - ­

Guidance forEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions Under tlteRegionalHazeRule

I 

# TableA-3 MonthlySite-Specificf(RH) Values forEachMandatoryFederalClass I Area, Based on theCentroidoftheArea (SupplementalInformation)

ClassIArea Site Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Site Name Map 10 Code St LAT LONG f{RHI f(RHI flRHI flRHI f{RH) f{RHI f{RHI f(RH) fIRH) Oct f{RHI Nov fIRH} Dec f(RHI 

## i Sawtooth Scapegoat Selway

- Bitterroot Seney Sequoia Shenandoah Shining Rock SierraAncha Simeonof Sipsey South Warner StrawberryMountain Superstition Swanquarter Sycamore Canyon Teton Theodore Roosevelt Thousand Lakes Three Sisters Tuxednl UL Bend Upper Buffalo Ventana Virgin Islands (b) Voyageurs Washakie Weminuche WestElk Wheeler Peak White Mountain Wichita Mountains Wind Cave Wolf Island Yellowstone Yolla Bolly

- Middle Eel Yosemite 

### lion Sawtooth 70 SAWT1 10 44.18 114.93 3.3 2.9 2.3 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.5 Monture 73 MONTl MT 47.17 112.73 3.2 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.1 2.0 2.3 Sula 71

. SULAl MT 45.66 114.00 3.5 3.0 2.6 2.3 2.4 2.3 1.9 1.9 2.1 Seney 22 SENEl MI 46.26 66.03 3.3 2.6 2.9 2.7 2.6 3.1 3.6 4.0 4.1 Sequoia 96 SEQUl CA 36.50 116.62 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6 Shenandoah 6 SHENl VA 38.52 76.44 3.1 2.8 2.6 2.5 3.1 3.4 3.5 3.9 3.9 Shining Rock 11 SHROl NC 35.39 62.76 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.7 3.4 3.9 4.1 4.5 4.4 SierraAncha 45 SIANl p.z 33.62 110.66 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.3 {1 1.5 1.8 1.6 Simeonof 105 SIMEl AK 54.92 159.26 4.3 4.1 3.6 3.9 3.9 4.3 5.0 5.2 4.5 Sipsey 21 SIPSl AL 34.34 67.34 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.6 3.3 3.7 3.9 3.9 3.9 lava Beds 67 LABEl CA 41.33 120.20 3.6 3.1 2.7
. 2.4 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.0 Starkey 76 STARt OR 44.30 118.73 3.9 3.3 2.6 2.9 2.3 2.4 2.0 2.0 1.9 Tonto 44 TONT1 p.z 33.63 111.10 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.7 1.6 Swanquarter 14 SWANl NC 35.31 76.26 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.9 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.4 Sycamore Canyon 47 SYCAl p.z 34.03 116.16 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 Yellowstone 66 YELL2 

### WY 44.09 110.16 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.7 Theodore Roosevelt 61 THROl NO 47.30 104.00 2.9 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.2 LassenVolcanic 90 LAVOl CA 40.70 121.56 3.8 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.2 Three Sisters 64 THSll OR 44.29 122.04 4.5 4.0 3.6 3.7 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.9 3.0 Tuxedn! 103 TUXE1 

### AK 60.15 152.60 3.5 3.3 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.9 3.6 4.0 3.9 Ul Bend 64 ULBEl MT 47.55 107.67 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.0 1.6 1.9 Upper Buffalo 27 UPBUl AR 35.63 93.21 3.3 3.0 2.7 2.8 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.6 Pinnacles 92 PINNl CA 36.22 121.59 3.2 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.2 Virgin Islands 106 VIISl VI 16.33 64.79 Voyagaurs 24 VOYA2 MN 46.59 93.17 2.8 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.3 3.1 2.7 3.0 3.2 North Absoraka 67 NOABl 

### WY 43.95 109.59 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.6 Weminuche 55 WEMl1 CO 37.65 107.60 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.9 White River 56 WHRll CO 36.69 107.19 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.6 2.1 2.0 WheelerPeak 35 WHPEl NM 36.57 105.42 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 2.2 2.1 White Mountain 37 WHlTl NM 33.49 105.63 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.6 2.0 2.0 Wichita Mountains 30 WlM01 OK 34.74 96.59 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.4 3.0 2.7 2.3 2.5 2.9

> Wind Cave 60 WICAl 

### SO 43.55 103.46 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.2 Okefenokee 16 OKEFl GA 31.31 61.30 3.4 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.3 3.7 3.7 4.1 4.0 Yellowstone 66 YELL2 

### WY 44.55 110.40 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.6 Trinity 104 TRINl CA 40.11 122.96 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.6 Yosemite 

### 96 YOSEl CA 37.71 119.70 3.3 3.0 2.6 2.3 2.1 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 lion 51 ZIONl UT 37.25 11301 2.7 2.4 2.0 1 6 15 1 3 1 2 1.4 14 2.0 2.6 2.6 3.4 1.9 3.2 3.6 1.5 3.6 3.6 2.3 2.6 1.5 3.1 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.4 3.6 3.5 2.2 3.3 2.4

2.6 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.6 2.2 3.7 2.1 2.7 1.6 16 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.6 2.3 3.0 3.3 1.7 4.0 3.3 3.1 3.7 1.7 2.6 1.9 2.4 3.0 3.1 4.6 3.5 2.7 3.2 2.5

2.9 2.4 2.1 2.1 2.2 1.8 2.7 2.6 3.5 2.5 3.3 2.4 2.0 3.3 : 3.1 3.5 3.5 2.3 3.1 3.4 2.1 4.3 3.4 3.4 4.1 2.1 2.9 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.6 3.7 2.7 3.3 2.9

2.6 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.B 2.6 3.5 2.5 3.6 2.6 24 

## a: No particulate mattersampling orvisibility monitoring is conducted in theBering SeaWilderness. b:f(RH)

## values for Virgin IslandsNational Parkwere notcalculated because ofthe limitedRH data available.



## A -13

# I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX E

MODELING FILES ON DVD-ROM 

# I 

# I I I I 

# I I I I

# I I I I I I I 

# I I APPENDIX E

SUMMARY OF CALPUFF FILES ON DVD-ROM CLASS I AREA VISIBILTVANALYSIS AND BART WAIVER REQUEST KOCH NITROGEN COMPANY ENID NITROGEN PLANT

CALPUFF File Names* Description Type ofAnalysis CALPUFF.INP CALPUFF.LST CONC.DAT DFLX.DAT WFLX.DAT VISB.DAT CALPLIFF Input File CALPUFF Output File CALPUFF Output File CALPLIFF Output File CALPUFF Output File CALPLIFF Output File CALPUFF UserControl File CALPUFF List File

. Concentration File

Dry Flux File Wet Flux File Relative Humidity File POSTUTIL.lNP POSTUTIL.LST TFLX.DAT POSTUTIL Input File POSTUTIL Output File POSTUTIL Output File POSTUTIL UserControl File POSTUTIL List File Total Flux File CALPOST.INP CALPOST.LST DECIVIEW.DAT CALPOST Input File CALPOST Output File CALPOSTOutput File CALPOST User Control File CALPOST List File Daily Visibility Impacts File *Generated for each year - 2001, 2002, 2003 

# I I I I I I I I I I