Development of the Next 

Generation Air Quality 

Models for Outer 

Continental Shelf (OCS) 

Applications 

Final Report: Volume 1 

March 2006 

Prepared For: 

U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Minerals Management Service, 

Offshore Minerals Management 

Environmental Division 

Contract No. 

1435-01-01-CT-31071 

Prepared By: 

Earth Tech, Inc. 

196 Baker Avenue 

Concord, Massachusetts 01742 

(978) 371-4000 
 Final Report Vol.1 i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Chapter Number & Title Page Number 

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. MODELING SYSTEM FOR OCS APPLICATIONS: OVERVIEW 4

3. TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM UPDATES 8

3.1 CALMET 8 

3.2 CALPUFF 16 

4. MODEL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 25

4.1 Evaluation Datasets 25 

4.2 Model Application & Evaluation Methods 54 

4.3 Evaluation Results 61 

4.4 Recommendations 91 

5. STANDARD DATASET: GULF OF MEXICO 92

6. REFERENCES 125

APPENDIX: COMPILATION OF A HIGH RESOLUTION SEA SURFACE 

TEMPERATURE DATASET FROM SATELLITE MEASUREMENTS FOR THE 

GULF OF MEXICO 129
 Final Report Vol.1 1 

1. INTRODUCTION 

The purpose of this study is to develop an updated regulatory model for evaluating 

air quality impacts from emission sources located on federal waters on the Outer 

Continental Shelf (OCS). The United States Department of the Interior Minerals 

Management Service (MMS) is in charge of a national program to develop the 

mineral resources, including oil and gas and alternative energy sources (such as wind 

power), on the OCS waters of the United States. The areas of development are 

located at distances ranging from three miles to more than 100 miles from shore. In 

the early 1980s the MMS developed the Offshore & Coastal Dispersion (OCD) 

model (Hanna et al., 1985) to evaluate impacts from the so-called “non-reactive” 

pollutants (NO2, SO2, CO, PM) emitted from point, line, or area sources located over 

water. 

Since the science of dispersion modeling has made significant advances over the last 

couple of decades, there is a need to develop a model for application to emission 

sources on the OCS that incorporates, to the extent feasible, the most current 

knowledge and is versatile enough to be used in short-range as well as long-range 

applications. The goal of this study is to enhance an existing air quality model for 

applications involving overwater transport and coastal interaction effects. 

The objectives of the study are: 

• To perform a comprehensive review of existing models and to evaluate their 

applicability to offshore applications based on current knowledge of 

boundary layer and atmospheric dispersion in ocean and shoreline 

environments. 

• To revise or enhance an existing air quality model to make it suitable for 

offshore and coastal applications. 

• To develop a software package that includes the needed meteorological 

pre-processors, meteorological model, air quality model, source codes, test 

cases, and user’s guide. 

• To carry out sensitivity testing and evaluate model performance against 

available tracer data. 

The CALPUFF modeling system CALPUFF (Scire et al., 2000a, 2000b) was selected 

as the modeling platform. CALPUFF has been adopted by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) as a Guideline Model for Class I impact assessments and 

other long range transport applications, and, on a case-by-case basis, near-field 

applications involving complex flows, such as spatial changes in meteorological 

fields due to factors such as the presence of complex terrain or water bodies, plume 
 Final Report Vol.1 2 

fumigation (coastal fumigation or inversion break-up conditions), light wind speed or 

calm wind impacts or other conditions for which a steady-state, straight-line 

modeling approach is not appropriate (EPA, Federal Register, April 15, 2003). 

CALPUFF is also recommended for regulatory use by the Interagency Workgroup of 

Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) in their Phase 2 report (EPA, 1998) and the Federal 

Land Managers Air Quality Related Values Workgroup (FLAG, 2000). 

This Final Report contains the primary results of the model development program in 

terms of describing the modeling system, providing the formulation for new or 

revised elements of the model, describing model evaluation procedures and results, 

presenting the content of the MMS Standard Dataset for modeling in the Gulf of 

Mexico region, and providing detailed documentation and users instructions for the 

entire CALPUFF modeling system. It is comprised of three volumes: 

Volume 1 

• Technical description of those elements of CALMET and CALPUFF that are 

either new or revised 

• Model evaluation procedures and results 

• Description of the Standard Dataset for modeling in the Gulf of Mexico 

region 

• Documentation for the gridded sea surface temperature dataset for mesoscale 

modeling over the Gulf of Mexico 

Volume 2 (System Documentation)

• Geophysical Processors 

TERREL Terrain Preprocessor 

Land Use Data Preprocessors (CTGCOMP and CTGPROC) 

MAKEGEO 

• Meteorological Data Preprocessors 

READ62 Upper Air Preprocessor 

PXTRACT Precipitation Data Extraction Program 

PMERGE Precipitation Data Preprocessor 

SMERGE Surface Meteorological Data Preprocessor 

BUOY Over-Water Meteorological Data Preprocessor 
 Final Report Vol.1 3 

• Prognostic Meteorological Model Processors 

CALMM5 

CALETA 

CALRUC 

CALRAMS 

3D.DAT OUTPUT FILE 

• CALMET 

Volume 3 (System Documentation)

• CALPUFF 

• Meteorological/Concentration Postprocessors 

PRTMET 

APPEND 

CALSUM 

POSTUTIL 

CALPOST 
 Final Report Vol.1 4 

2. MODELING SYSTEM FOR OCS APPLICATIONS: OVERVIEW 

The new model for OCS applications is an updated version of the CALPUFF (Scire 

et al., 2000a, 2000b) modeling system. Individual components had been compared 

with other modeling approaches in OCD (DiCristofaro and Hanna, 1989), AERMOD 

(Cimorelli et al., 2002), and SCIPUFF (EPRI, 2000) during Task 2. These 

comparisons included the model formulation equations as well as sensitivity tests 

performed on individual modules (e.g., boundary layer parameters, turbulence 

profiles over water, plume spread formulations). In Task 3, changes to several 

components in CALMET and CALPUFF were formulated (new options provided) on 

the basis of these comparisons. Enhancements identified in the Task 3 Report were 

implemented, including ease-of-use features as well as new and modified subroutines 

in both the CALMET meteorological model and the CALPUFF dispersion model. 

The performance evaluation of the new version of the model in Task 4 led to the 

formulation of a turbulence advection mechanism in CALPUFF when it was 

discovered that advected turbulence is an important feature of the dispersion 

documented in the Oresund experiments, when releases were made at the coast 

during off-shore flow. 

New CALMET features:

• An option is provided to use the COARE (Coupled Ocean Atmosphere 

Response Experiment) overwater flux model (Fairall et al., 2002) Version 

2.6bw, selected by means of the new model input variable ICOARE: 

o 0: OCD-like original flux model 

o 10: COARE with no wave parameterization (Charnock parameter for 

the open ocean, or “deep water” (default) – can be modified for 

“shallow water”) 

o 11: COARE with wave option 1 (Oost et al., 2002) and default 

equilibrium wave properties 

o -11: COARE with wave option 1 (Oost et al., 2002) and observed 

wave properties (provided in revised SEA.DAT input file) 

o 12: COARE with wave option 2 (Taylor and Yelland, 2001) and 

default equilibrium wave properties 

o -12: COARE with wave option 2 (Taylor and Yelland, 2001) and 

observed wave properties (provided in revised SEA.DAT input file) 

• Convective (rather than mechanical) overwater boundary layer height is 

computed for L<0 (positive surface heat flux). Note that the mixing height is 

computed only when observed values are not provided in a SEA.DAT file. 

• New convective mixing height parameterization option is provided, selected 

by means of the new model input variable IMIXH: 
 Final Report Vol.1 5 

o 1: Maul (1980)-Carson (1973) 

o 2: Batchvarova and Gryning (1991,1994) 

• Surface winds are adjusted from anemometer height to the middle of 

CALMET Layer 1 (usually 10m) 

• Consistent similarity profile equations are used throughout system 

New CALPUFF features:

• A building downwash adjustment is introduced for elevated (platform) 

structures with an open area between the surface and the bulk of the 

structure. This platform height is provided as the new variable ZPLTFM 

(default: 0.0) for point sources, and applies to the ICS downwash option. 

• An option is provided for computing turbulence profiles using the AERMOD 

subroutines, selected by means of the new model input variable MCTURB: 

o 1: Standard CALPUFF subroutines (default) 

o 2: AERMOD subroutines 

• A diagnostic option is provided to specify the Lagrangian time-scale for 

lateral plume growth functions, selected by means of the new model input 

variable MTAULY: 

o 0: Draxler 617.284 (s) (default) 

o 1: Computed as Horizontal Turbulence Length / (0.75 q) -- after 

SCIPUFF 

o 10 < Direct user input (s) 

o Only the default setting is recommended at this time. 

• An option is provided to accept the AERMET version of SURFACE and 

PROFILE meteorological data files. 

• An option is provided to include an adjustment for turbulence advection from 

regions of larger turbulence velocity into regions of smaller turbulence 

velocity. This adjustment is applied to computed (not measured) turbulence. 

• The minimum lateral turbulence velocity (σv) allowed is partitioned to 

distinguish values appropriate for over-land cells and over-water cells. 

BUOY processor:

• This new processor creates revised SEA.DAT files for CALMET with wave 

data for COARE overwater flux options –11 and -12. 
 Final Report Vol.1 6 

• Data files readily obtained from NODC and NDBC web sites are read. 

Graphical user interface (GUI) updates:

• The CALPRO system for geophysical and meteorological preprocessors and 

CALPOST and PRTMET postprocessors was extensively revised and 

enhanced. 

• A GUI for the BUOY processor was developed and integrated into 

CALPRO. 

• A GUI option was added to CALPRO for extracting a subset from the 

surface meteorological data, precipitation data, and ozone data from the Gulf 

of Mexico dataset for a user’s CALMET domain. 

• The CALVIEW display system for meteorological fields and 

concentration/deposition fields using the SURFER® contouring package was 

extensively revised and enhanced. 

Standard Gulf of Mexico Meteorology and Ozone Dataset:

• Meteorological, geophysical and ozone data required for 

CALMET/CALPUFF simulations within the MMS Gulf of Mexico region 

were prepared for year 2003. 

• USGS terrain elevation files with 90m resolution and USGS land use data 

files with 200m resolution were assembled for the domain. 

• Buoy stations in the domain were processed into 13 SEA.DAT files (1 

station/file). 

• Upper-air stations in the domain were processed into 21 UP.DAT files (1 

station/file). 

• 230 NWS hourly surface meteorological stations in the domain were 

processed into the SURF.DAT file. 

• 271 NWS precipitation stations in the domain were processed into the 

PRECIP.DAT file. 

• 201 ozone data stations in the domain were processed into the OZONE.DAT 

file. 

• One full year (2003) of gridded prognostic meteorological output fields from 

the Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) mesoscale weather model were reformatted 
 Final Report Vol.1 7 

into 50 tiles (90 RUC grid-points/tile), for the portion of the 20km RUC grid 

that covers the MMS Gulf of Mexico domain. 

• The RUCDECODE program was created to assemble RUC grid cell data 

from one or more tiles into a 3D.DAT file for a user’s CALMET domain. 
 Final Report Vol.1 8 

3. TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM UPDATES 

3.1 CALMET 

Similarity Profiles for Wind and Temperature 

Some inconsistencies are found in the Monin-Obukhov similarity profile equations 

for wind speed and temperature used in OCD, CALMET, and COARE. The updated 

relations used in COARE for the extended surface layer (z/L >1) are implemented 

throughout CALMET. 

COARE adopts the profile expressions provided in Beljaars and Holtslag (1991), 

who retain the Paulson (1970) and Dyer(1974) stability functions Ψ for the unstable 

surface layer, but propose new functions for the stable surface layer. In addition, 

COARE merges the stability function for the unstable surface layer with a free 

convection relation for large z/L (L is the Monin-Obukhov length) using a weighting 

parameter FΨ (Grachev et al., 2000): 

( ) Ψ = 1− FΨ ΨK + FΨΨC (3-1) 

( )

( )2

2

1 z L

z L F

+

Ψ = (3-2) 

where subscript K denotes the “Kansas” stability function, and subscript C denotes 

the free convection stability function. 

The momentum (M) and heat flux (H) relations for the unstable surface layer (L<0) 

are: 

2 ln[ ] (1 )/ 2 ln[(1 )/ 2] 2 ( ) / 2 2 1 Ψ = + + + − + π − x x Tan x MK (3-3) 

2 ln[(1 )/ 2] 2x ΨHK = + (3-4) 

( )1/ 4

x = 1 − 16 z / L (3-5) 

[ ] ( ) 3 3

1 2 1.5ln 1 / 3 3 2 1 π ⎟ +

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ + Ψ = + + − − M

MC M M

y y y Tan (3-6) 

[ ] ( ) 3 3

1 2 1.5 ln 1 / 3 3 2 1 π ⎟ +

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ + Ψ = + + − − H

HC H H

y y y Tan (3-7) 

( )1/ 3

yM = 1−10.15 z/ L (3-8) 
 Final Report Vol.1 9 

( )1/3

yH = 1− 34.15z/ L (3-9) 

The momentum (M) and heat flux (H) relations for the stable surface layer (L>0) are: 

d

bc

L

z d

d

c

L

z b

L

z M ⎟ +

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟ − ⎠⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ − Ψ = + − exp (3-10) 

exp 1

3

2 1

3/ 2

⎟ + − ⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟ − ⎠⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟ + − ⎠⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ − Ψ = +

d

bc

L

z d

d

c

L

z b

L

z H (3-11) 

where b=2/3, c=5, and d=0.35. 

COARE Bulk Flux Algorithm Option 

The COARE 2.6bw bulk flux model represents fluxes for momentum, heat, and water 

vapor from the sea surface to the atmosphere in terms of the mean profiles as: 

x d S x w' x' = c c ∆ (3-12) 

where 

x is either wind speed (S), potential temperature (θ), or water 

vapor mixing ratio (q) 

cx is the bulk transfer coefficient for the variable x

cd is the bulk transfer coefficient for wind speed 

S is the mean wind speed relative to the sea surface at a reference 

height, including a gustiness component 

∆x is the sea-air difference in the mean value of x at a reference 

height, xs-x(zr) 

The three flux quantities can also be expressed as the similarity scaling parameters u*, 

θ*, and q*: 

2

* w'u' = −u (3-13) 
 Final Report Vol.1 10 

* * w'θ ' = −u θ (3-14) 

* * w'q' = −u q (3-15) 

The gustiness component of the speed is related to large-scale eddies in the 

convective boundary layer, and is proportional to the convective scaling velocity w*: 

2 2 2 2 U g S = u + v + (3-16) 

25 * U g = 1. w (3-17) 

( ) L

u z T q Tu g z

w z

T

g w i i

v i

κ

θ θ

3

*

* *

3 ' *

* = ' = − + 0.61 = − (3-18) 

( ) 2 * *

*

0.61 1 T q

u T

g

L = θ +

κ (3-19) 

where zi is the mixing height (m), κ is the von Karman constant (0.4), L is the MoninObukhov length (m), and g is the acceleration due to gravity (m/s2

) . 

The bulk transfer coefficients are defined for the reference height zr in terms of the 

neutral (1/L=0) transfer coefficient (cxn) and the corresponding empirical stability 

function for the mean profile, Ψx: 

1 (z L)

c

c

c

x r

xn

xn

x

− Ψ

=

κ

 (3-20) 

( ) r x

xn z z

c

0 ln

κ = (3-21) 

The stability functions are those given in Equations 3-1 through 3-11, where ΨM is 

used for the wind speed, and ΨH is used for θ and q. Scalar roughness lengths are 

related to the roughness Reynolds number Rr: 

Rr = u* z0 ν (3-22) 

0 0 z z S = (3-23) 

( ) 0.6

0 0 , − = q = MIN a bRr z z θ (3-24) 

where a=1.1·10-4 and b=5.5·10-5. 
 Final Report Vol.1 11 

During execution, the bulk algorithm computes the sea-air differences from air 

measurements of wind speed, temperature, and humidity (water vapor), and water 

temperature, and iterates to find the balanced set of scaling parameters u*, θ*, q*, and 

L that satisfy Equation 3-12. Submodels for a cool-skin water surface temperature 

and for the diurnal warm-layer temperature structure in the upper few meters of the 

water column (Fairall et al., 1996) can be activated to estimate the water surface 

temperature from the temperature measured below the surface. The specific 

humidity at the water surface is obtained from the vapor pressure of sea water (0.98 

times that of pure water) evaluated at the water surface temperature. 

An extension has been added in the CALMET implementation of the COARE 

algorithm to modify the roughness length z0 (m) computed for shallow coastal areas. 

The COARE roughness length without wave model adjustments is given by: 

g

u

u

z

2

*

*

0

0.11υ α = + (3-25) 

where υ is the kinematic viscosity of dry air (~1.5x10-5 m2

/s), g is the acceleration 

due to gravity (m/s2

), and u* is the friction velocity (m/s). The Charnock parameter α

is held at 0.011 for u10 up to 10m/s and then it increases linearly to its maximum 

value of 0.018 at u10=18m/s. The first term is the aerodynamically smooth limit in 

which the thickness of viscous sublayer is inversely proportional to the wind stress. 

Sattler et al. (2002) describe a coupled ocean wave model (WAM) with the Danish 

Meteorological Institute High Resolution Limited Area Model (DMI-HIRLAM) for 

atmospheric forecasting. When the coupling to the wave model is turned off, the 

DMI-HIRLAM uses a larger Charnock parameter in shallow coastal waters. They 

claim that setting α = αc = 0.032 is supported by the measurements of Oost (1998), 

Hansen and Larsen (1997), and Maat et al. (1991), although the wave age appears to 

be the parameter that controls the increased roughness. Therefore, a modifying factor 

for the Charnock parameter Fα is introduced in CALMET. It multiplies the COARE 

Charnock parameter to create a transition from a coastal value αc to the standard 

COARE value α over a length scale for the coastal region, Lc: 

⎥

⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢

⎢

⎣

⎡

⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟ − ⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ = − −

4

1 1 exp

c

c

L

x F α

α α

 (3-26) 

This factor is order αc/α for distances less than 0.5Lc, and is order 1 for distances 

greater than 1.5Lc. 

Two wave parameterizations are also available in the COARE module: 

• wave=1: use the Oost et al. (2002) wave-age parameterization 
 Final Report Vol.1 12 

4.5

*

*

0 2

0.11 50

⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛ = +

P

P

c

L u

u

z

π

υ (3-27) 

• wave=2: use the Taylor and Yelland (2000) wave slope/height model 

4.5

*

0 1200 0.11

⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛ = +

P

S

S L

H H

u

z

υ (3-28) 

where LP is the wavelength (m) and cP is the phase speed (m/s) of the dominant wave 

at the peak of the spectrum and HS/LP represents the significant wave slope. COARE 

2.6bw contains defaults, derived for a fully developed equilibrium wave field in deep 

water, for significant wave height Hs and wavelength Lp and phase speed cp for the 

dominant wave period: 

Hs = 0.0248*U2

 , Lp = 0.829*U2 , cp = 1.14*U (3-29) 

The overwater bulk flux model options in CALMET include the original OCD-type 

model and six variants of the COARE model: 

• 0: OCD-like original flux model 

• 10: COARE with no wave parameterization (Charnock parameter for the 

open ocean, or “deep water” – can be modified for “shallow water”) 

• 10: COARE with no wave parameterization (Charnock parameter modified 

for “shallow water”) 

• 11: COARE with wave option 1 (Oost et al., 2002) and default equilibrium 

wave properties 

• -11: COARE with wave option 1 (Oost et al., 2002) and observed wave 

properties (provided in revised SEA.DAT input file) 

• 12: COARE with wave option 2 (Taylor and Yelland, 2001) and default 

equilibrium wave properties 

• -12: COARE with wave option 2 (Taylor and Yelland, 2001) and observed 

wave properties (provided in revised SEA.DAT input file) 

Two changes to COARE 2.6bw identified by MacDonald et al. (2002) are also 

implemented in CALMET. The first is a change in the net solar heat absorbed, which 

is used in the cool-skin model. This change reduces the leading coefficient applied to 

the incoming short-wave radiation from 0.137 to 0.060, which in turn corrects an 

observed problem in the computed evaporative cooling. The second change imposes 

a minimum wind stress of 0.002N/m2

 in the calculation of the warm layer thickness. 

The thickness could become exceedingly small in calm or near calm conditions, 

leading to unrealistic skin temperature increases. 
 Final Report Vol.1 13 

Anemometer Height Adjustment for Layer 1 

An adjustment to near-surface measured wind speeds is applied to estimate the speed 

at the mid-point height of Layer 1 (usually 10m above the surface). Previously, such 

an adjustment must be accomplished outside of the CALMET/CALPUFF system. 

Anemometer heights are provided for all surface wind stations used in an application, 

so similarity theory, or even a simple power law adjustment, can be used to make the 

adjustment. 

CALMET supports an option to scale the near-surface measured winds to other 

layers aloft using either similarity theory, a stability-dependent power law, or a usersupplied set of multipliers (one for each layer). The same option has been 

implemented for adjusting the observed surface data to a height of 10 m, for Layer 1. 

In addition, if no extrapolation to layers aloft is selected, a neutral logarithmic wind 

profile is applied to estimate the wind speed at 10m from that measured at 

anemometer height. 

Wind speed extrapolation is controlled by variable IEXTRP. For layer 1, the 

following options are available: 

1 extrapolate vertically using a logarithmic wind 

profile 

2 extrapolate vertically using a power law equation 

3 extrapolate vertically using user-defined scaling factors 

IEXTRP = 

4 extrapolate vertically using similarity theory 

If zm is the anemometer height (m) of the surface wind observation and um is the 

measured wind speed (m/s), the extrapolation equation options are: 

( ) ( )

( ) 0

0

ln

ln 10 1: 10

z z

z

u = u 

m

m (3-30) 

u( )= u ( ) / zm

P 2 : 10 m 10 (3-31) 

3 : u( ) 10 = um FEXTRP(1) (3-32) 
 Final Report Vol.1 14 

( )

⎥

⎦

⎤ ⎢

⎣

⎡ ⎟

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛

⎥

⎦

⎤ ⎢

⎣

⎡ ⎟

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛

=

L

z - z

z ln 

L

10 - 10 ln

4 : 10

M

o

M

o

m m

m

z 

u u

ψ

ψ

 (3-33) 

Following Douglas and Kessler (1988) in the Diagnostic Wind Model (DWM), a 

value of the power-law exponent P of 0.143 is used over land, and P of 0.286 is used 

over water. FEXTRP(1) is the user-specified scaling factor for Layer 1. 

Batchvarova-Gryning Mixing Height Option 

The Batchvarova and Gryning (1991, 1994) model for the height of the mixed layer 

is a zero-order model for the height that shares many similarities with the CALMET 

modified Carson (1973) model, based on Maul (1980). It differs in that there is a 

term for subsidence, and there is a newer formulation for computing the virtual 

potential temperature jump across the entrainment zone at the top of the layer. It also 

has an explicit term for the “spin-up” growth early in the development of the mixed 

layer. The authors state that this term is typically important only when the layer is 

less that 100 m. 

The subsidence velocity (ws) must be provided from the flow field. This is set to 

zero in the current implementation. 

The rate of change of the mixing height, dh/dt, is given by: 

( )

A h B L

Cu T g

A h B L

h

w

w

dt

dh v

s

κ

γ

κ

θ γ

+ − ++ −

− =

(1 2 ) 2 (1 )

' '

2

*

2 (3-34) 

where the symbols are defined as: 

γ (oK/m) potential temperature lapse rate above the mixed layer 

 w’θv’ (oKm/s) kinematic heat flux at the surface 

θv (oK) virtual potential temperature 

κ von Karman constant 

 L (m) Monin-Obukhov length 

 u* (m/s) surface friction velocity 
 Final Report Vol.1 15 

 T (oK) temperature 

 g (m/s2

) gravitational acceleration 

The constants A, B, and C have suggested values of 0.2, 2.5, and 8, respectively. 

Adjustments to Heat Flux in Convective Mixing Height 

( ) ( )

A h B L

Cu T g

A h B L

h

w w

w

dt

dh th v v

s

κ

γ

κ

θ θ γ

+ − ++ −

− − =

(1 2 ) 2 (1 )

( ' ' ' '

2

*

2

) (3-35)

 

where (w’θv’)th is the threshold kinematic heat flux at the surface. 

Observed positive values of the surface buoyancy flux over the Gulf of Mexico 

during summer time when the overwater mixing layer is at equilibrium suggest that 

the warm surface destabilizing effect is balanced by dissipation. 

Although the equilibrium might be owing to various processes such as turbulence 

dissipation, radiative cooling at the top of marine stratocumulus layer, or large scale 

subsidence, it is best modeled with a threshold surface buoyancy flux required to 

sustain convective mixing height growth over warm waters. Moreover it is intuitive 

that this threshold should increase with the convective mixing height. Therefore this 

threshold is expressed as a surface heat flux required to sustain convective mixing 

growth, per meter of mixing height. This ensures that the convective mixing heights 

never grow ad infinitum and reach an equilibrium. 

A default value for the threshold parameter overwater (THRESHW), based on the 

observed surface buoyancy flux at equilibrium state during summer months in the 

Gulf of Mexico, is set to 0.05 W/m3

. THRESHW is related to (w’θv’)th by (w’θv’)th

= (THRESHW)(ht-1)/(ρcp) where ht-1 is the convective mixing height at the previous 

time step. THRESHW is an user-input parameter and can therefore be adjusted so 

that observed equilibrium conditions are best represented in the model. The threshold 

is implemented both in the Gryning and Batchvarova method (Equation 3-35) and in 

the Maul-Carson method. 

A similar threshold (THRESHL) was implemented overland, although with the 

diurnal surface heating/cooling cycle and generally much larger values of surface 

heat flux over land surfaces, the threshold effect is normally much less important 

than over water where the positive heat fluxes may persist under cold air advection 

situations for days at a time. 
 Final Report Vol.1 16 

3.2 CALPUFF 

Platform Downwash 

The existing CALPUFF Huber-Snyder/Schulman-Scire (HS/SS) downwash modules 

are used to model downwash effects due to elevated structures by using that portion 

of the structure that is “solid”. A platform height (zplat) is added to the list of 

variables that describe the effective building dimensions The effective building 

width Hw and building height Hb are prepared for each of 36 wind directions (10-

degree intervals) by neglecting the gap below zplat. That is, the structure is defined as 

if the solid portion rests on the “ground”, and the EPA Building Profile Input 

Program (BPIP) can be used to develop the direction-specific effective height and 

width. Any point-source emission released on or near the structure is prescribed 

using the full release height hs above the “ground”, not the height above the platform 

deck. 

The full release elevation above ground is adjusted by subtracting the platform height 

prior to any tests that define the downwash potential (e.g., the 2.5 building-height 

rule for GEP), and any downwash plume enhancements that depends on the effective 

stack height. This adjusted stack height is not used as the physical release height in 

any other calculations. 

The Huber-Snyder (Huber and Snyder, 1976; Huber, 1977) technique is used for 

s plat Hb Tbd Lb h − z > + (3-36) 

where Lb is the lesser of the effective building height and width, and Tbd has a default 

value of 0.5. A negative value of Tbd indicates the Huber-Snyder method is used for 

all stacks, and a value of 1.5 results in the Schulman-Scire (Scire and Schulman, 

1980; Schulman and Hanna, 1986) method always being used. If TTb is set equal to 

0.5 (its default value), the CALPUFF treatment will be equivalent to that in ISC3. 

When the Huber-Snyder technique is used, the first step is to compute the effective 

plume height He due to momentum rise at a downwind distance of 2 Hb. This rise 

uses the wind speed at the full stack height, hs. If (He–zplat) exceeds Hb + 1.5 Lb, 

building downwash effects are assumed to be negligible. Otherwise, buildinginduced enhancement of the plume dispersion coefficients is evaluated. For adjusted 

stack heights hs–zplat less than 1.2Hb, both σy and σz are enhanced. Only σz is 

enhanced for adjusted stack heights above 1.2 Hb (but below Hb + 1.5 Lb). 

Enhancements to σy and σz are not functions of hs or hs-zplat. 

When the Schulman-Scire technique is used, a linear decay factor is applied to the 

building-induced enhancement of the vertical dispersion coefficient, and plume rise is 
 Final Report Vol.1 17 

adjusted to account for the effect of downwash. The plume rise equations are not 

functions of hs or hs-zplat. The linear decay factor for σz is determined as: 

σ z Aσ z ′′ = ′ (3-37) 

where σ z

′ is determined from the HS downwash equations, and 

⎪

⎪

⎩

⎪

⎪

⎨

⎧

+ − − =

0

1

2

( )

1

b

b e plat

L

H H z

A

2 ( )

( ) 2

( )

b b e plat

b e plat b b

e b plat

H L H z

H H z H L

H H z

+ < −

< − ≤ +

≤ −

(3-38) 

AERMOD Turbulence Profile Option 

The turbulence velocity for horizontal fluctuations is computed from contributions 

from shear and buoyancy. The total turbulence velocity is obtained by summing the 

component variances: 

2 2 σ v = σ vs +σ vb (3-39) 

The shear component is modeled with a variance that is a maximum at the ground 

(σvs

2

=3.6u*

2

), and decreases linearly through the depth of the mechanically mixed 

layer to a residual value of 0.25 m2

/s2, if this residual value is less than the value at 

the ground. If the residual value is larger, the value at the ground is used for all 

heights. The buoyancy component is constant (σvb

2

=0.35w*

2

) up to zi, and decreases 

linearly to the residual value at 1.2zi. Again, the value at the ground is used at all 

heights if it is less than the residual value. 

The turbulence velocity for vertical fluctuations is also computed from shear and 

buoyancy contributions. The buoyancy component of the variance is computed as: 

1.6 ( ) ( 0.1 ) 2 2 / 3

*

2

wb i i σ = w z z z ≤ z (3-40) 

0.35 ( 0.1 ) 2

*

2

wb i i σ = w z = z to z (3-41) 

0.35 ( ) 2 6( )

*

2

i

z z z

wb w e z z i i = > − − σ (3-42) 

The shear component has both a surface-driven contribution (from u*) and a residual 

contribution from turbulence aloft that is assumed to have an intensity of order 2% of 

the wind speed at zi: 

1.3 (1 ) (0.02 / ) ( ) 2 2

*

2

ws i zi i i σ = u − z z + u z z z ≤ z (3-43) 
 Final Report Vol.1 18 

0.02 ( ) ws zi i σ = u z > z (3-44) 

The total turbulence velocity is obtained from the sum of these components: 

2 2

σ w = σ wb +σ ws (3-45) 

Minimum Turbulence Velocities

CALPUFF accepts minimum lateral turbulence velocities σv as a function of stability 

class (6 values). A minimum value establishes a floor, so that any computed lateral 

turbulence less than the minimum is replaced. The default value for each stability 

class had been set to 0.5m/s. An additional set of minimum values for overwater 

cells has been added, so now there are 12 values, two for each stability class. The 

original set of six is now used for overland cells, and the default of 0.5m/s is retained. 

The AERMOD minimum lateral variance, 0.25 m2

/s2, is equivalent. The new set of 

six used for overwater cells is set to a default of 0.37 m/s, a value originally used in 

the OCD model for overwater dispersion, and one that performed well in the model 

evaluations with the offshore tracer data sets. 

Similarly, a set of overland and overwater minimum vertical turbulence velocities σw

are also accepted, two for each stability class (12 values). The default values for 

overwater cells are equal to those for overland cells. 

 ---------- LAND ---------- --------- WATER ---------- 

 Stability Class : A B C D E F A B C D E F 

 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 

 Default SVMIN : .50, .50, .50, .50, .50, .50, .37, .37, .37, .37, .37, .37 

 Default SWMIN : .20, .12, .08, .06, .03, .016, .20, .12, .08, .06, .03, .016 

Lateral Puff Timescale Diagnostic Option 

For steady homogeneous dispersion, Taylor’s (1921) original expression for lateral 

plume spread σy as a function of time is: 

σ 2σ τ ( ) τ τ exp( /τ ) 2 2 t t y = v − + − (3-46) 

where τ is the Lagrangian timescale and σv is the lateral turbulence intensity. This is 

typically approximated as: 

σ σ t /(1 t / 2τ ) y = v + (3-47) 

which has the same limits as Equation 3-46 for small and large t/τ. Lateral growth in 

CALPUFF uses Draxler’s (1976) expression, which is equal to Equation 3-47 when 

τ=617.3s. 
 Final Report Vol.1 19 

Two methods of supplying the timescale τ were implemented for testing: 

• direct numeric input as a constant, and 

• selection of a timescale that is proportional to a characteristic length scale in 

the boundary layer divided by the lateral turbulence velocity. 

For the second option, a timescale estimate based on that in SCIPUFF (EPRI, 2000) 

is used: 

q

H

0.75

Λ

τ = (3-48) 

where q is the turbulence velocity scale and ΛH is approximately 0.3zi within much of 

the surface layer, and may be of order 1000m or larger outside the surface layer. In 

the CALPUFF implementation, testing will be limited to near-surface tracer releases 

so the mesoscale limit for ΛH is not included. 

SCIPUFF explicitly considers the effects of shear-driven eddies and buoyancy-driven 

eddies separately. Their length scales in the boundary layer (z<zi) are 

2 2 2 (0.65 )

1

(0.3 )

1 1

0.3

z z

z

S i

B i

= +

Λ

Λ =

 (3-49) 

A single length scale is formed for CALPUFF that retains the linear behavior of ΛS

near the surface, and 0.3 zi aloft, by weighting the shear and buoyancy scales by the 

associated turbulence velocity variances. In neutral and stable boundary layers, the 

scale is simply ΛH = ΛS. In convective boundary layers (L<0) the scale is : 

2 2

2 2

vS vB

vS S vB B

H

σ σ

σ σ

+

Λ + Λ Λ = (3-50) 

where the SCIPUFF equations for the lateral turbulence are: 

0.13(1 1.5 )

2.5(1 )

2 /

*

2

2

*

2

i z z

vB

vS i

w e

u z z

− = +

= −

σ

σ

 (3-51) 

Performance results using this computed lateral timescale that is proportional to a 

characteristic length scale in the boundary layer divided by the turbulence velocity 

have not been acceptable. Reasons for this have not been determined. 
 Final Report Vol.1 20 

Turbulence Advection Option 

Gryning (1985) presents an overview of the Oresund experiments, and comments on 

particular features of the boundary layer resolved by measurements made during the 

June 5 experiment. There is evidence of vertical motion in the flow over the Oresund 

strait that may be associated with the changes in surface properties across the landsea boundary. There are also direct measurements of turbulence dissipation at a 

number of elevations along transects that cross the strait. One transect at about 270m 

on June 5 cited by Gryning shows a distinct and gradual lowering of the turbulence 

with distance across the strait, and an abrupt rise downwind of the far shoreline (over 

Copenhagen). 

Initial modeling of the Oresund experiments with CALMET/CALPUFF substantially 

overpredicts peak concentrations in five of the nine experiments, four of these by 

about a factor of 10. Peak concentrations predicted for the remaining four 

experiments are well within a factor of two. No application issues have been 

identified that can account for the overpredictions, but they are all associated with 

elevated (95m-high) non-buoyant tracer releases from a shoreline tower on the 

upwind side of the strait. The initial dispersion of these releases across the 20km 

distance to the opposite shore is controlled by the calculated overwater turbulence, 

which is much smaller than the turbulence calculated over land both upwind and 

downwind of the strait. 

This suggests that advected turbulence energy is an important factor to include in 

these simulations. CALMET includes the effect of advection on mixing heights and 

temperatures, but turbulence velocities are computed locally in CALPUFF. This 

local calculation can be broadened to incorporate a contribution from upwind cells. 

Vickers et al. (2001) discuss the decay of turbulence energy with downwind distance 

in offshore flow in terms of the local value of the friction velocity at a given height. 

They define an advective-decay timescale τ over which the friction velocity 

transitions from the (larger) overland value u*0 to the (smaller) overwater equilibrium 

value u*eq with transport time from the coast, t, and write: 

( ) 2 /τ

*

2

*0

2

*

2

*

t

eq eq u u u u e − = + − (3-52) 

We approximate the exponential decay as a linear decay to limit the number of 

upwind cells to process each sampling step and write: 

σ σ (σ σ )(1 0.7 /τ ) 2

,

2

,

2

,

2

, t w v = w vL + w vU − w vL − (3-53) 

where the σw,v refers to either σw or σv, subscript L identifies the local value at puff 

height, and subscript U identifies the upwind value at the same puff height. The local 
 Final Report Vol.1 21 

cell is the cell that determines the current puff properties. The time t is determined 

by the wind speed at puff height in the local cell and the distance from the center of 

the local cell to the particular upwind cell being processed. Only cells that are 

upwind and within the time horizon t = τ/0.7, and that have a turbulence velocity 

larger that the local turbulence velocity are processed, and only the largest increase in 

σ2

 (the second term on the right including the decay factor) is retained. 

The advective-decay timescale τ is entered as a control file input to CALPUFF. A 

value that is representative of the Oresund experiments can be estimated from aircraft 

measurements. Turbulence dissipation profiles at several heights during three of the 

experiments are shown in Figures 3-1 through 3-3. The upwind shoreline is at about 

grid coordinate 370 km and the transport is to the west or from right to left in these 

figures. A linear decay in turbulence is approximated by eye to obtain a subjective 

decay distance across the strait that ranges from 12-14 km on May 29 and June 4, and 

14-16 km on June 5. CALMET wind speeds in the layer between 90m and 120m 

during the hour in which the flights were made are extracted near the upwind shore 

and halfway across the strait to estimate average transport speeds near the release 

height (95m). The easting component of these speeds average 11.4 m/s on May 29, 

12.8 m/s on June 4, and 11.8 m/s on June 5. The corresponding decay times average 

1145s, so the inferred timescale (τ = 0.7 t) is about 800s. 

The performance evaluation of CALPUFF using the 800s turbulence advective-decay 

timescale shows a substantial improvement. 
 Final Report Vol.1 22 

Figure 3-1. Longitudinal turbulence dissipation ε

1/3 (cm2/3/s) measured by aircraft on May 29, 1984 along 

transects that cross the strait of Oresund in the study area. The east coast of the strait at Barseback is 

located at about 370000m Easting (UTM 33N: datum EUR-M), and the west coast is located at about 

349000 Easting. The wind is from the east (right side). Altitudes listed are approximate, as the aircraft 

elevation varied along the transect. 

May 29 (1140-1220 CET)

0

1

2

3

4

5

310000 330000 350000 370000 390000

Easting (m)

L. Turbulence (R-scale)

300m

200

140m

75m

30m
 Final Report Vol.1 23 

Figure 3-2. Longitudinal turbulence dissipation ε

1/3 (cm2/3/s) measured by aircraft on June 4, 1984 along 

transects that cross the strait of Oresund in the study area. The east coast of the strait at Barseback is 

located at about 370000m Easting (UTM 33N: datum EUR-M), and the west coast is located at about 

349000 Easting. The wind is from the east (right side). Altitudes listed are approximate, as the aircraft 

elevation varied along the transect. 

June 4 (1130-1230 CET)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

310000 330000 350000 370000 390000

Easting (m)

L. Turbulence (R-scale)

280m

180m

100m

80m
 Final Report Vol.1 24 

Figure 3-3. Longitudinal turbulence dissipation ε

1/3 (cm2/3/s) measured by aircraft on June 5, 1984 along 

transects that cross the strait of Oresund in the study area. The east coast of the strait at Barseback is 

located at about 370000m Easting (UTM 33N: datum EUR-M), and the west coast is located at about 

349000 Easting. The wind is from the east (right side). Altitudes listed are approximate, as the aircraft 

elevation varied along the transect. 

June 5 (1100-1200 CET)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

310000 330000 350000 370000 390000

Easting (m)

L. Turbulence (R-scale)

300m

200m

100m
 Final Report Vol.1 25 

4. MODEL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 

The model performance evaluation performed in Task 4 assessed overall model 

performance, focusing on five tracer dispersion datasets described in Task 2 that 

emphasize overwater transport with shoreline impact. These datasets include shortrange (1 km – 8 km) overwater dispersion experiments for on-shore flow, and longerrange (22 km – 42 km) dispersion experiments with both off-shore and on-shore flow 

transitions. The short-range experiments test the over-water boundary layer and 

shoreline transition components of CALMET and CALPUFF with geophysical 

characteristics resolved to the limit of the 200-m land use dataset, and meteorological 

data developed for the overwater release locations. The longer-range experiments 

test both over-land and over-water components with land-water and water-land 

transitions, resolve geophysical features with a resolution of 1 km, and incorporate 

meteorological data obtained at locations across the study area. None of these 

datasets address model performance for transport distances on the order of 100 km to 

300 km. Simulations on this scale will be made for OCS areas using the full 

modeling system that couples the output from a mesoscale meteorological model 

with the CALMET/CALPUFF system. Such simulations will depend on the 

transport and dispersion components of CALMET/CALPUFF evaluated here as well 

as the circulation features captured by the mesoscale model. 

The sensitivity of simulations to the new features developed for the system is also 

assessed in the evaluation. Alternative CALMET simulations are made with each of 

the COARE and mixing height options. Alternative CALPUFF simulations are made 

with each turbulence profiling option, and with lateral Lagrangian timescale options 

0 and 1. Note that not all options are tested for each evaluation dataset. In addition, 

CALPUFF simulations are made with two choices for the minimum lateral 

turbulence velocity: 0.37m/s and 0.5m/s. This is a user-configured property. The 

CALPUFF default setting is 0.5m/s, but the OCD evaluations had indicated that 

0.37m/s provided better results for overwater dispersion experiments. Because 

CALPUFF performance for the overwater evaluation datasets improves when the 

minimum lateral turbulence velocity is 0.37m/s, a new overwater set of minimums 

has been added to the model, and the default for these is set to 0.37m/s. 

4.1 Evaluation Datasets 

Cameron, Louisiana 

Description

The over water dispersion study in the Cameron, Louisiana area was conducted along 

the coast of the Gulf of Mexico during four test days in July 1981 and five test days 

in December 1982 (Dabberdt et al., 1982). The area is very flat and typically wet, 

with numerous swamps, lakes, fens, and bayous extending inland from the coast. 
 Final Report Vol.1 26 

Chevron Platform 28A served as the SF6 tracer release site on seven of the test days, 

and a 20m boat was used on two of the days due to the prevailing wind direction. 

Platform 28A is located 6.75 km from shore, and the tracer was released 13m above 

mean low water. The boat locations used are about four km from shore, and the 

tracer release was from a mast 13m above the water. Thirty-five (35) samplers 

placed in a single arc along the coast over a span of about 17 km provide sequential 

hour-averaged concentrations. 

Meteorological data were obtained at Platform 28A, at a 10m mast installed on the 

shore 5m to 20m from the water, and at a 25m tower located 2 km inland. Horizontal 

and vertical profiles of temperature, dew-point temperature and turbulence were 

obtained by aircraft. The OCD4 evaluation dataset (DiCristofaro and Hanna, 1989) 

uses meteorological data from these sources in the following way: 

Aircraft estimated mixing height and overwater dT/dz 

Platform 28A water temperature, wind speed (18m), air temperature (18m) 

10 m Mast σθ(10m), RH(10m), wind speed (10m), air temperature (10m) 

Wind speed and temperature measurements at the 10m mast are used only to replace 

missing values at Platform 28A. No air temperatures were measured at Platform 28A 

during the July 1981 experiments, so the air temperature measured at the shoreline 

10m mast is used for the air-sea temperature difference in July. 

Geophysical Processing

Gridded land use and terrain elevation data for the CALMET geophysical file are 

obtained from the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The terrain data are 

from the one-degree 1:250,000-scale DEM dataset, with an approximate resolution of 

90m. Land use data are from the 1:250,000-scale Composite Grid Theme (CTG) 

dataset, with a resolution of 200m. Because the spatial variation in land use is the 

primary geophysical property for this application, a modeling grid is chosen that 

places each land use datapoint in the center of a model grid cell. The modeling grid 

chosen to cover the area is defined by: 

Map Projection: UTM (Zone 15N) 

Datum: NAS-C (North American 1927) 

SW Corner Coordinates (km): (464.9,3285.7) 

Number of cells (nx,ny): (135,65) 

Cell Size (km): 0.200 
 Final Report Vol.1 27 

The CALMET preprocessors TERREL, CTGPROC, and MAKEGEO are applied to 

convert the geophysical datasets to this modeling grid, creating the CALMET 

GEO.DAT file. 

Coordinate transformations are applied to the source and receptor locations listed in 

the OCD4 model runs in order to register these features to land use and terrain data in 

the GEO.DAT file. The OCD4 dataset references all of these locations to 

Platform 28A, which is located at approximately (29 ̊43' N and 93 ̊14' W). This 

location is transformed to UTM Zone 15 (NAS-C) and all sampler locations are 

translated accordingly. The model grid of land use, an aerial photograph of the 

Louisiana coast in the Cameron area in the same map projection and datum, the 

coastline data points contained in the World Vector Shoreline dataset, and the release 

and sampler positions are plotted and compared to the map of sampler positions to 

refine the coordinate transformations needed to place the samplers along the coast. 

This process places Platform 28A at (477.850, 3287.225) in UTM zone 15 (NAS-C). 

A difference in the shape of the coastline from that shown on the experiment layout 

diagram requires an additional nonlinear adjustment of the samplers in the northsouth direction of 330m or less in the center of the arc. 

The resulting map of the experiment region is shown in Figure 4-1. The moist 

character of much of this region is reflected in the “wetland” classification that is 

assigned to over half of the land area in the grid. The sampler locations follow the 

coastline well, both as resolved by the gridded land use and as contained in the World 

Vector Shoreline dataset. 

Source & Receptor Characterization

Three source locations are used in this experiment. These are characterized as 

modeled in the OCD4 evaluation. Platform 28A is modeled without downwash due to 

the lack of significant structures on the platform. The boat releases are modeled with 

downwash, using the boat dimensions as a solid building with the length 

perpendicular to the wind. A minimal exit velocity is used to remove any momentum 

rise. 

Table 4-1 

Source Characterization for Cameron, LA Tracer Releases 

Source X* (km) Y* (km) 

Ht. 

(m) 

Elev. 

(m) 

Diam. 

(m) 

W 

(m/s) 

T 

(oK) 

Hb 

(m) 

Lb 

(m) 

Platform 28A 477.85 3287.225 13.0 0.0 .2 0.01 270.0 0.0 0.0 

Boat 2/15/1982 482.557 3290.166 13.0 0.0 .2 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

Boat 2/24/1982 482.524 3289.505 13.0 0.0 .2 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

* Locations are in the UTM (Zone 15N) map projection with datum NAS-C 
 Final Report Vol.1 28 

Figure 4-1. Geophysical properties of the site of the 1981/1982 Cameron, Louisiana tracer experiment, as 

gridded for use in the CALMET/CALPUFF simulations. The grid cell size is 200m. Tracer concentrations 

were measured at the indicated sampler locations. Tracer release locations indicate boat positions used on 

2/15/1982 and 2/24/1982, and Platform 28A used for all other periods. 
 Final Report Vol.1 29 

All sampler locations are used as receptors, but additional ones are added to increase 

the density of receptor spacing along the shoreline. Intermediate receptors are placed 

at approximately 50m intervals, with elevations interpolated from the actual sampler 

elevations. In this case, all elevations are 1.5m MSL. A total of 380 receptors are 

used in the CALPUFF modeling. 

Meteorological Processing

Meteorological data files for applying CALMET/CALPUFF to the Cameron study 

are developed primarily from files used to run OCD4. The “release” meteorology 

identified for OCD4 is used to construct representative SEA.DAT (over water) and 

SURF.DAT (over land) input files for CALMET. Cloud observations made at the 

Cameron shoreline during the study are included in the SURF.DAT file. The 

SEA.DAT station is placed at Platform 28A, while the SURF.DAT station is placed 

onshore at (480, 3295). 

The original OCD4 evaluation files indicate that air temperature and wind speed are 

measured at 18m for all of the hours. This is true most of the time, but there are 

periods when data from 10m at the shoreline mast are substituted for the 18m data at 

Platform 28A. This occurs on: 

Temperature at 10m 

7/**/1981 all hours (platform did not measure air temperature in July) 

2/15/1982 all hours 

2/17/1982 1300-1400 

2/23/1982 1000-1100 

Wind Speed at 10m 

7/20/1981 all hours 

2/15/1982 all hours 

2/17/1982 1300-1400 

The anemometer height associated with the SURF.DAT wind data during these 

periods is set to 10m. Because CALMET accepts a single measurement height for the 

speed and temperature in the SEA.DAT file, that height is reset to 10m whenever the 

temperature measurement height is 10m. Wind speed is profiled from the actual 

anemometer height to the temperature measurement height when these are different. 

Boundary layer parameters computed by OCD are used with Monin-Obukhov 

similarity profiles to compute the wind speed adjustment. 

Wind directions used in the OCD4 datasets are those that align the source and the 

sampler with the peak concentration each hour. This allows the evaluation to focus 
 Final Report Vol.1 30 

on processes other than the net transport direction. These directions replace measured 

wind directions during the hours contained in the evaluation dataset. Measured wind 

directions are not altered for hours that are not part of the evaluation dataset. 

Table 4-2 lists meteorological data used in the SEA.DAT file after the adjustments 

are made. The hours that correspond to the evaluation dataset are marked as bold. 

The lateral turbulence intensity (Iy) is used in the CALPUFF turbulence profile file. 

Table 4-2a 

Over-water Meteorological Data for Cameron, Louisiana 

1981 

Year Month Day 

Julian 

Day Hour 

Height 

(m) 

WS 

(m/s)

WD 

(deg) 

Tair 

(oK) 

TairTsea 

(oK) 

RH 

(%) 

Mixing 

Ht (m) 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) Iy 

81 7 20 201 14 10.0 4.60 202 302.4 -2.7 63.0 800.0 -0.0098 0.112

81 7 20 201 15 10.0 4.80 210 302.6 -2.6 64.0 800.0 -0.0098 0.086

81 7 20 201 16 10.0 4.80 240.0 302.7 -2.3 65.0 800.0 -0.0098 0.141

81 7 20 201 17 10.0 5.00 243.0 302.8 -2.1 66.0 800.0 -0.0098 -999

81 7 20 201 18 10.0 4.80 243.0 302.7 -2.1 67.0 800.0 -0.0098 0.087

81 7 23 204 15 10.0 3.72 236.0 303.3 -1.8 74.0 225.0 -0.0098 0.083

81 7 23 204 16 10.0 3.52 230.0 303.4 -1.6 74.0 225.0 -0.0098 0.086

81 7 23 204 17 10.0 4.19 232 303.6 -1.4 73.0 225.0 -0.0098 0.083

81 7 23 204 18 10.0 4.95 229 303.7 -1.2 74.0 225.0 -0.0098 0.083

81 7 27 208 20 10.0 2.06 176 300.2 -4.4 82.0 400.0 -0.0098 -999

81 7 27 208 21 10.0 2.74 163.0 300.0 -4.5 80.0 425.0 -0.0098 -999

81 7 27 208 22 10.0 4.40 151 300.0 -4.5 82.0 450.0 -0.0098 -999

81 7 29 210 14 10.0 3.91 237.0 302.6 -2.1 70.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.113

81 7 29 210 15 10.0 4.39 232.0 302.8 -2.3 70.0 410.0 -0.0098 0.141

81 7 29 210 16 10.0 4.49 218 303.0 -2.2 69.0 420.0 -0.0098 0.169

81 7 29 210 17 10.0 4.89 240 303.0 -2 68.0 430.0 -0.0098 0.113

81 7 29 210 18 10.0 5.63 252.0 303.1 -1.8 67.0 440.0 -0.0098 0.141

81 7 29 210 19 10.0 4.88 241 303.1 -1.7 68.0 450.0 -0.0098 0.169

Note: Bold identifies hours in the evaluation dataset 
 Final Report Vol.1 31 

Table 4-2b 

Over-water Meteorological Data for Cameron, LA 

1982 

Year Month Day 

Julian 

Day Hour 

Height 

(m) 

WS 

(m/s)

WD 

(deg) 

Tair 

(oK) 

TairTsea 

(oK) 

RH 

(%) 

Mixing 

Ht (m) 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) Iy 

82 2 15 46 14 10.0 5.90 140.0 286.3 -0.5 90.0 200.0 0.0502 -999

82 2 15 46 15 10.0 5.80 146.0 286.5 -0.7 89.0 200.0 0.0502 -999

82 2 15 46 16 10.0 5.70 142 287.4 0 89.0 200.0 0.0502 -999

82 2 15 46 17 10.0 5.60 134 287.1 -0.8 88.0 200.0 0.0502 -999

82 2 15 46 18 10.0 7.40 142.0 287.1 -1 88.0 200.0 0.0502 -999

82 2 15 46 19 10.0 6.40 140.0 287.5 -0.4 88.0 200.0 0.0502 -999

82 2 15 46 20 10.0 5.90 147 287.4 -0.4 87.0 200.0 0.0502 -999

82 2 17 48 14 10.0 3.30 178 288.8 2.1 93.0 200.0 0.0202 0.043

82 2 17 48 15 18.0 3.70 195 288.1 0.9 93.0 200.0 0.0202 0.134

82 2 17 48 16 18.0 4.30 210 288.0 0.6 93.0 200.0 0.0202 0.068

82 2 17 48 17 18.0 3.50 206 287.7 -0.2 93.0 200.0 0.0202 0.066

82 2 17 48 18 18.0 3.50 193 287.4 -0.7 93.0 200.0 0.0202 0.036

82 2 17 48 19 18.0 3.80 160.0 287.1 -0.8 93.0 200.0 0.0202 0.078

82 2 22 53 13 18.0 4.00 157.0 290.0 1 75.0 100.0 0.0202 0.318

82 2 22 53 14 18.0 5.20 171 290.6 1.3 75.0 100.0 0.0202 0.047

82 2 22 53 15 18.0 5.60 177.0 291.0 1.4 81.0 100.0 0.0202 0.048

82 2 22 53 16 18.0 4.70 172 290.6 0.9 76.0 100.0 0.0202 0.042

82 2 22 53 17 18.0 4.50 182 290.9 0.8 76.0 100.0 0.0202 0.049

82 2 22 53 18 18.0 5.60 187.0 290.6 0.5 80.0 100.0 0.0202 0.053

82 2 22 53 19 18.0 5.10 192.0 289.5 -0.6 83.0 100.0 0.0202 0.059

82 2 23 54 11 18.0 4.00 147.0 291.0 3.2 85.0 50.0 0.0152 0.101

82 2 23 54 12 18.0 3.80 150.0 290.8 3 85.0 50.0 0.0152 0.06

82 2 23 54 13 18.0 4.20 141.0 291.3 3.7 86.0 50.0 0.0152 0.099

82 2 23 54 14 18.0 4.80 152 291.5 3.7 84.0 50.0 0.0152 0.011

82 2 23 54 15 18.0 4.90 145.0 291.5 3.3 84.0 60.0 0.0152 0.069

82 2 23 54 16 18.0 5.40 144.0 291.0 2.4 86.0 70.0 0.0152 0.048

82 2 23 54 17 18.0 6.20 165 291.2 2.3 88.0 80.0 0.0152 0.056

82 2 23 54 18 18.0 6.00 155.0 290.4 2 88.0 90.0 0.0152 0.061

82 2 23 54 19 18.0 6.10 155.0 290.2 1.8 88.0 100.0 0.0152 0.059

82 2 24 55 15 18.0 3.70 143 293.1 5 49.0 50.0 0.0372 0.048

82 2 24 55 16 18.0 3.70 143 292.9 4.6 50.0 50.0 0.0372 0.056

82 2 24 55 17 18.0 3.50 140 292.9 4.7 50.0 50.0 0.0372 0.057

82 2 24 55 18 18.0 3.30 130.0 292.5 3.8 47.0 50.0 0.0372 0.04

82 2 24 55 19 18.0 4.10 156 290.7 2.7 52.0 50.0 0.0372 0.046

82 2 24 55 20 18.0 4.40 148.0 290.7 2.6 52.0 50.0 0.0372 0.043

Note: Bold identifies hours in the evaluation dataset 
 Final Report Vol.1 32 

The UP.DAT (upper-air) input file is designed to provide CALMET with vertical 

profiles of wind and temperature representative of the onshore flow at 00Z (mid to 

late afternoon) during the tracer sampling. Both 00Z and 12Z vertical profiles of 

wind and temperature are developed for four levels: surface, 10m, overwater mixing 

height, and model-top (3000m). The 00Z wind speed at release height is extended to 

levels up to the mixing height using a stability-class-dependent power-law profile 

(A,B=0.07; C=0.10; D,E,F=0.15) and the speed at the model-top is set to that at the 

mixing height. The surface wind speed is set to that at 10m, which has been adjusted 

from the anemometer height to 10m. Wind direction at all levels equals the release 

wind direction. Temperature at the surface equals the air temperature in the 

SEA.DAT file, and temperature aloft is computed from this using the temperature 

gradient dT/dz (in the SEA.DAT file) up to the overwater mixing height. The default 

CALMET temperature gradient -0.0045 oK/m is used above the mixing height. 

Pressure is assumed to be 1013 mb at the surface, and decreases with height at 0.1 

mb/m. 

Carpinteria, California 

Description

The tracer dispersion study in the Carpinteria, California area was conducted along 

the California coast during 10 test days in September and October 1985 (Johnson and 

Spangler, 1986). The area is complex in that there are abrupt changes in land use and 

terrain elevation. There is a sharp bluff at the coast that rises about 30m above the 

ocean, and the first line of samplers is placed along the top of this bluff. The western 

portion of the study area is relatively flat beyond the bluff face, with the elevation 

rising from 30m to 50m in about 2 km. At this point the terrain rises steadily inland at 

a rate of about 200 m/km. Terrain in the eastern portion of the study area rises to an 

elevation of about 60m within 400m of the coast, and about 80m within 1 km of the 

coast. 

Two distinct dispersion experiments make up this dataset. The first is a complex 

terrain study conducted in the eastern portion of the study area. Samplers were 

located along two primary arcs atop the shoreline bluff and at twice the elevation 

about 400m inland, with supplementary sampler locations 500m to 1 km inland at 

elevations as high as 80m. SF6 releases were made from a boat 300m to 700m from 

shore at elevations between 18m and 30m. A second tracer, CF3Br, was released at 

elevations between 24m and 61m. The second is a fumigation study conducted in the 

western portion of the study area. Samplers were also located along two primary arcs 

atop the shoreline bluff and about 400m inland. SF6 releases were made from a boat 

about 1 km from shore at elevations between 64m and 91m. Concentration data were 

obtained between 0800 and 1300 as one-hour averages in the complex terrain study 

and between 0900 and 1100 as 1⁄2 hour averages in the fumigation study. 
 Final Report Vol.1 33 

Meteorological data used in the OCD4 evaluation dataset includes wind speed and 

temperature measured by tethersonde at the release location, and air-sea temperature 

difference obtained at a nearby oil platform. 

Geophysical Processing

Gridded land use and terrain elevation data for the CALMET geophysical file are 

obtained from the USGS. The terrain data are from the one-degree 1:250,000-scale 

DEM dataset, with an approximate resolution of 90m, and from the 1:100,000-scale 

DEM dataset with 30m resolution. Land use data are from the 1:250,000-scale CTG 

dataset, with a resolution of 200m. Because the spatial variation in terrain elevation is 

important at this site, a 100m grid cell is selected for the modeling grid. This grid is 

positioned so that a single 200m land use cell is centered on a cluster of four of the 

100m grid cells. The modeling grid chosen to cover the area is defined by: 

Map Projection: UTM (Zone 11N) 

Datum: NAS-C (North American 1927) 

SW Corner Coordinates (km): (267.0,3805.0) 

Number of cells (nx,ny): (100,100) 

Cell Size (km): 0.100 

The CALMET preprocessors TERREL, CTGPROC, and MAKEGEO are applied to 

convert the geophysical datasets to this modeling grid, creating the CALMET 

GEO.DAT file. 

No coordinate transformations are required for the source and receptor locations 

listed in the OCD4 model runs because they are already in this projection. The 

resulting map of the experiment region is shown in Figure 4-2. 

Source & Receptor Characterization

Tracer releases are characterized as modeled in the OCD4 evaluation. All are 

modeled without downwash. 

All sampler locations are used as receptors, but additional ones are added to increase 

the density of receptor spacing along the two primary arcs in each experiment. 

Intermediate receptors are placed at approximately 50m intervals, with elevations 

interpolated from the actual sampler elevations. 93 receptors are used in modeling 

the complex terrain study periods, and 75 are used in modeling the fumigation study 

periods.
 Final Report Vol.1 34 

Table 4-3 

Source Characterization for Carpinteria, California Tracer Releases 

Tracer: Date 

X* 

(km) Y* (km) 

Ht. 

(m) 

Elev. 

(m) 

Diam. 

(m) 

W 

(m/s) 

T*** 

(oK) 

Hb 

(m) 

Lb 

(m) 

Complex Terrain Study 

SF6: 9/19/1985 270.343 3806.910 30.48 0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 9/22/1985 

CF3Br: 

270.133 3806.518 18.29 

36.58 

0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 9/25/1985 

CF3Br: 

271.024 3806.663 24.38 

45.72 

0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

CF3Br: 9/26/1985 269.524 3807.333 24.38 0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 9/28/1985 ** 

CF3Br: 

271.289 3806.343 24.38 

42.67 

0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 9/28/1985 ** 

CF3Br: 

270.133 3806.518 24.38 

39.62 

0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 9/29/1985 

CF3Br: 

270.133 3806.518 30.48 

60.96 

0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

Fumigation Study 

SF6: 10/1/1985 269.783 3806.518 88.39 0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 10/3/1985 269.572 3806.777 64.00 0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 10/4/1985 269.693 3806.831 79.25 0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

SF6: 10/5/1985 269.747 3806.657 91.44 0.0 .01 1.0 270.0 0.0 0.0 

 * Locations are in the UTM (Zone 11N) map projection with datum NAS-C 

** Location was repositioned after 1100 

*** Temperature set below ambient to simulate a non-buoyant release. 
 Final Report Vol.1 35 

Figure 4-2. Geophysical properties of the site of the 1985 Carpinteria, CA tracer experiment, as gridded 

for use in the CALMET/CALPUFF simulations. The grid cell size is 100m. Tracer concentrations were 

measured at the indicated sampler locations during distinct “complex terrain” and “fumigation” 

experiments. Tracer release locations indicate boat positions used during each type of experiment. 

3806

3807

3808

3809

3810

3811

3812

3813

3814

UTM North (km) Zone 11N, Datum: NAS-C

268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276

UTM East (km) Zone 11N, Datum: NAS-C

Snow/Ice

Tundra

Barren

Wetland

Water

Forest

Range

Agriculture

Urban/Built-Up

Land Use

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

. .

. .

CARPINTERIA, CA

Sampler Locations:

-- Complex Terrain

-- Fumigation

Tracer Releases:

-- Complex Terrain

-- Fumigation
 Final Report Vol.1 36 

Meteorological Processing

Meteorological data files for applying CALMET/CALPUFF to the Carpinteria study 

are developed primarily from files used to run OCD4, with supplemental data from 

the Santa Barbara Municipal Airport located about 1 km from the coast about 32 km 

to the west. The “release” meteorology identified for OCD4 is used to construct 

representative SEA.DAT (over water) and SURF.DAT (over land) input files for the 

tracer-release periods. Temperatures are measured at 9m above the water, and wind 

speed is measured by tethersonde at heights ranging from 24m to 91m, depending on 

the tracer release height. Because CALMET accepts a single measurement height for 

the speed and temperature in the SEA.DAT file, the wind speed is profiled from the 

anemometer height to 9m for use in both the SEA.DAT and SURF.DAT files. 

Boundary layer parameters computed by OCD are used with Monin-Obukhov 

similarity profiles to compute the wind speed adjustment. 

Wind directions used in the OCD4 datasets are those that align the source and the 

sampler with the peak concentration each hour. This allows the evaluation to focus 

on processes other than the net transport direction. These directions are used for all 

CALMET input files. 

Data from the airport reported September 19 through midday on October 5 are 

processed using SMERGE to create another SURF.DAT file that covers the complete 

period. Local winds for the release replace the airport observations for the tracerrelease periods. This creates a continuous hourly meteorological record with winds 

that are consistent with the SEA.DAT file during the tracer periods. Temperature, 

relative humidity, and cloud cover data from the airport remain in the file to 

characterize conditions over land. 

The SEA.DAT station is placed at the release location appropriate for the time 

period, while the SURF.DAT station is placed onshore at (271, 3808). 

Table 4-4 lists meteorological data used in the SEA.DAT file after the adjustments 

are made. The lateral turbulence intensity (Iy) is used in the CALPUFF turbulence 

profile file. 
 Final Report Vol.1 37 

Table 4-4 

Over-water Meteorological Data for Carpinteria, California 

1985 

Year Month Day 

Julian 

Day Hour 

Height 

(m) 

WS 

(m/s)

WD 

(deg) 

Tair 

(oK) 

TairTsea 

(oK) 

RH 

(%) 

Mixing 

Ht (m) 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) Iy 

 

85 9 19 262 9 9.0 1.26 259.7 289.45 -1.10 79.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.506

85 9 19 262 10 9.0 1.26 235.4 289.95 -0.80 79.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.541

85 9 19 262 11 9.0 2.49 214.1 290.15 -0.70 80.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.454

85 9 19 262 12 9.0 2.95 252.9 290.25 -0.70 80.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.646

85 9 22 265 9 9.0 0.91 220.8 290.55 0.50 71.0 500.0 0.0102 0.628

85 9 22 265 10 9.0 1.02 251.1 290.15 0.30 81.0 500.0 0.0102 0.314

85 9 22 265 11 9.0 1.26 253.8 289.55 1.00 92.0 500.0 0.0102 0.140

85 9 22 265 12 9.0 1.45 248.4 289.45 1.10 91.0 500.0 0.0102 0.314

85 9 25 268 10 9.0 0.62 163.8 294.35 2.80 60.0 500.0 0.0002 0.890

85 9 25 268 11 9.0 0.65 163.8 294.15 2.30 70.0 500.0 0.0002 0.174

85 9 25 268 12 9.0 0.42 165.6 294.05 2.10 90.0 500.0 0.0002 0.489

85 9 25 268 13 9.0 0.42 175.0 294.55 2.70 90.0 500.0 0.0002 0.332

85 9 26 269 12 9.0 3.54 265.1 291.85 -0.70 84.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.192

85 9 26 269 13 9.0 3.73 257.4 291.95 -1.00 81.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.209

85 9 28 271 10 9.0 5.09 155.8 291.25 -0.60 85.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.157

85 9 28 271 11 9.0 3.07 174.7 291.15 -0.80 84.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.192

85 9 28 271 13 9.0 1.46 234.5 291.45 -0.60 82.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.192

85 9 28 271 14 9.0 2.03 215.0 291.65 -0.30 82.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.200

85 9 29 272 11 9.0 3.21 243.7 291.35 -0.30 86.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.332

85 9 29 272 12 9.0 2.94 238.9 291.25 -0.40 88.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.087

85 10 1 274 10 9.0 1.90 215.5 289.65 -0.90 92.0 500.0 -0.0098 0.349

85 10 3 276 9.5 9.0 0.34 164.6 299.45 2.10 89.0 500.0 0.0602 0.227

85 10 3 276 11 9.0 0.60 215.5 297.95 3.40 96.0 500.0 0.1202 0.646

85 10 4 277 10 9.0 0.48 216.9 294.75 3.30 70.0 500.0 0.0002 0.262

85 10 4 277 10.5 9.0 0.72 231.2 294.85 3.30 72.0 500.0 0.0002 0.209

85 10 4 277 11 9.0 0.48 186.4 294.45 3.30 76.0 500.0 0.0002 0.244

85 10 5 278 10 9.0 1.18 171.3 294.05 0.70 67.0 500.0 0.0102 0.541

85 10 5 278 10.5 9.0 1.39 208.2 294.45 0.70 65.0 500.0 0.0102 0.349

85 10 5 278 11 9.0 0.94 195.2 294.65 0.70 63.0 500.0 0.0002 0.541
 Final Report Vol.1 38 

The UP.DAT (upper-air) input file is designed to provide CALMET with vertical 

profiles of wind and temperature representative of the onshore flow at 00Z (mid to 

late afternoon) during the tracer sampling. Both 00Z and 12Z vertical profiles of 

wind and temperature are developed for four levels: surface, 10m, overwater mixing 

height, and model-top (3000m). The 00Z wind speed at 9m is extended to levels up to 

the mixing height using a stability-class-dependent power-law profile (A,B=0.07; 

C=0.10; D,E,F=0.15) and the speed at the model-top is set to that at the mixing 

height. The surface wind speed is set to that at 10m, which has been adjusted from 

the anemometer height to 10m.. Wind direction at all levels equals the release wind 

direction. Temperature at the surface equals the air temperature in the SEA.DAT file, 

and temperature aloft is computed from this using the temperature gradient dT/dz (in 

the SEA.DAT file) up to the overwater mixing height. The default CALMET 

temperature gradient -0.0045 oK/m is used above the mixing height. Pressure is 

assumed to be 1013 mb at the surface, and decreases with height at 0.1 mb/m. 

Pismo Beach, California 

Description

The tracer dispersion study in the Pismo Beach, California area was conducted along 

the California coast during five test days in December 1981 and five test days in June 

1982 (Dabberdt et al., 1983, Brodzinsky et al., 1982, and Schacher et al., 1982). SF6

tracer was released about 13m above the water from a boat located 6 to 8 km from 

shore, and sampled along an arc that covered about 15 km of the shoreline. Several 

samplers were also located along a shorter secondary arc approximately 7 km inland. 

Evaluation of OCD4 with this dataset focused on the one-hour average 

concentrations measured at the shoreline. 

Meteorological data used in the OCD4 evaluation dataset includes wind at 20.5m, 

temperature at 7m, and air-sea temperature difference measured at the release 

location, and vertical temperature gradient measured over the water by an aircraft. 

Geophysical Processing

Gridded land use and terrain elevation data for the CALMET geophysical file are 

obtained from the USGS. The terrain data are from the one-degree 1:250,000-scale 

DEM dataset, with an approximate resolution of 90m. Land use data are from the 

1:250,000-scale CTG dataset, with a resolution of 200m. Because the spatial 

variation in land use is the primary geophysical property for this application, a 

modeling grid is chosen that places each land use datapoint in the center of a model 

grid cell. The modeling grid chosen to cover the area is defined by: 

Map Projection: UTM (Zone 10N) 
 Final Report Vol.1 39 

Datum: NAS-C (North American 1927) 

SW Corner Coordinates (km): (708.1, 3864.1) 

Number of cells (nx,ny): (100,130) 

Cell Size (km): 0.200 

The CALMET preprocessors TERREL, CTGPROC, and MAKEGEO are applied to 

convert the geophysical datasets to this modeling grid, creating the CALMET 

GEO.DAT file. 

Coordinate transformations are applied to the source and receptor locations listed in 

the OCD4 model runs in order to register these features to land use and terrain data in 

the GEO.DAT file. The OCD4 dataset uses a grid system that is referenced to a local 

latitude/longitude grid, as depicted in the OCD4 Users Guide (Dicristofaro and 

Hanna, 1989). These (x,y) coordinates are scaled to latitude/longitude by matching 

sampler location (x,y) coordinates with their position on the site map. The 

latitude/longitude positions obtained in this way are then transformed to the UTM 

(Zone 10N) map projection in datum NAS-C. 

The resulting map of the experiment region is shown in Figure 4-3. The beach area 

where nearly all of the coastline samplers are located falls into the barren 

classification, and this is consistent with area photographs. Significant terrain 

features do not influence these sampler locations, and probably do not affect the 

secondary samplers located further inland. 

Source & Receptor Characterization

Tracer releases are characterized as modeled in the OCD4 evaluation. All are 

modeled with downwash, using the boat dimensions as a solid building with the 

length perpendicular to the wind. A minimal exit velocity is used to remove any 

momentum rise. 

All sampler locations are used as receptors, but additional ones are added to increase 

the density of receptor spacing along the two arcs in each experiment. Intermediate 

receptors are placed at approximately 100m intervals along the shoreline arc and 

250m along the inland arc, with elevations interpolated from the actual sampler 

elevations. Two hundred forty-one (241) receptors are used in all. 
 Final Report Vol.1 40 

Figure 4-3. Geophysical properties of the site of the 1981/1982 Pismo Beach, CA tracer experiments, as 

gridded for use in the CALMET/CALPUFF simulations. The grid cell size is 200m. Tracer concentrations 

were measured at the indicated sampler locations. Tracer release locations indicate boat positions used 

during each of the 10 experiment-days. 

3865

3870

3875

3880

3885

3890

UTM North (km) Zone 10N, Datum: NAS-C

710 715 720 725

UTM East (km) Zone 10N, Datum: NAS-C

Snow/Ice

Tundra

Barren

Wetland

Water

Forest

Range

Agriculture

Urban/Built-Up

Land Use

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

. .

. .

Sampler Locations

Tracer Releases

Pismo Beach, CA
 Final Report Vol.1 41 

Table 4-5 

Source Characterization for Pismo Beach, California Tracer Releases 

Date X* (km) Y* (km) 

Ht. 

(m) 

Elev. 

(m) 

Diam. 

(m) 

W 

(m/s) 

T 

(oK) 

Hb 

(m) 

Lb 

(m) 

12/8/1981 709.633 3880.150 13.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

12/11/1981 709.889 3882.651 13.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

12/13/1981 709.778 3880.685 13.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

12/14/1981 710.065 3881.406 13.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

12/15/1981 710.057 3881.759 13.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

6/21/1982 709.620 3880.682 13.6 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

6/22/1982 709.415 3876.411 13.6 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

6/24/1982 709.811 3879.268 13.6 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

6/25/1982 709.649 3879.445 13.6 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

6/27/1982 709.754 3881.752 13.6 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

* Locations are in the UTM (Zone 10N) map projection with datum NAS-C 

Meteorological Processing

Meteorological data files for applying CALMET/CALPUFF to the Pismo Beach 

study are developed primarily from files used to run OCD4, with supplemental cloud 

observations from the Santa Maria Airport located about 19 km to the ESE. The 

“release” meteorology identified for OCD4 is used to construct representative 

SEA.DAT (over water) and SURF.DAT (over land) input files for the tracer-release 

days. Temperatures are measured at 7m above the water, and wind speed is measured 

at 20.5m. Because CALMET accepts a single measurement height for the speed and 

temperature in the SEA.DAT file, the wind speed is profiled from the anemometer 

height to 7m for use in the SEA.DAT file. Boundary layer parameters computed by 

OCD are used with Monin-Obukhov similarity profiles to compute the wind speed 

adjustment. Wind speeds at 20.5m are used in the SURF.DAT file. 

Wind directions used in the OCD4 datasets are those that align the source and the 

sampler with the peak concentration each hour. This allows the evaluation to focus 

on processes other than the net transport direction. These directions are used for all 

CALMET input files. 

The SEA.DAT station is placed at the release location appropriate for the time 

period, while the SURF.DAT station is placed onshore at (719, 3879). 
 Final Report Vol.1 42 

Table 4-6 lists meteorological data used in the SEA.DAT file after the adjustments 

are made. The lateral turbulence intensity (Iy) is used in the CALPUFF turbulence 

profile file. 

The UP.DAT (upper-air) input file is designed to provide CALMET with vertical 

profiles of wind and temperature representative of the onshore flow at 00Z (mid to 

late afternoon) during the tracer sampling. Both 00Z and 12Z vertical profiles of 

wind and temperature are developed for four levels: surface, 10m, overwater mixing 

height, and model-top (3000m). The 00Z wind speed at 7m is extended to levels up to 

the mixing height using a stability-class-dependent power-law profile (A,B=0.07; 

C=0.10; D,E,F=0.15) and the speed at the model-top is set to that at the mixing 

height. The surface wind speed is set to that at 10m, which has been adjusted from 

the anemometer height to 10m. Wind direction at all levels equals the release wind 

direction. Temperature at the surface equals the air temperature in the SEA.DAT file, 

and temperature aloft is computed from this using the temperature gradient dT/dz (in 

the SEA.DAT file) up to the overwater mixing height. The default CALMET 

temperature gradient -0.0045 oK/m is used above the mixing height. Pressure is 

assumed to be 1013 mb at the surface, and decreases with height at 0.1 mb/m. 

Ventura, California 

Description

The tracer dispersion study in the Ventura, California area was conducted along the 

California coast during four test days in September 1980 and four test days in 

January 1981 (Areovironment, 1980 and 1981, Zanetti et al., 1981, and Schacher et 

al., 1982). Data from all four of the test days in September and three of the four test 

days in January are in the dataset. SF6 tracer was released about 8m above the water 

from a boat located 6 to 8 km from shore, and sampled along two arcs about 10 to 12 

km long. The first arc is 1⁄2 km to 1 km from the shoreline and the second arc is about 

7 km from the shoreline. Evaluation of OCD4 with this dataset focused on the onehour average concentrations measured close the shoreline in Arc 1. 

Meteorological data used in the OCD4 evaluation dataset includes wind at 20.5m, 

temperature at 7m, and air-sea temperature difference measured at the release 

location, and vertical temperature gradient measured over the water by an aircraft. 
 Final Report Vol.1 43 

Table 4-6a 

Over-water Meteorological Data for Pismo Beach, California 

1981 

Year Month Day 

Julian 

Day Hour 

Ht 

(m) 

WS 

(m/s) 

WD 

(deg) 

Tair 

(oK) 

TairTsea 

(oK) 

RH 

(%) 

Mix 

Ht 

(m) 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) Iy 

 81 12 8 342 14 7 1.60 265.0 287.4 0.9 66.0 100.0 0.0202 0.120 

81 12 8 342 15 7 1.32 261.0 287.7 1.3 67.0 100.0 0.0202 0.166 

81 12 8 342 16 7 0.97 284.0 287.5 1.2 75.0 100.0 0.0202 0.229 

81 12 8 342 17 7 0.50 284.0 287.7 1.4 72.0 100.0 0.0202 0.422 

81 12 8 342 18 7 0.40 241.0 287.6 1.5 72.0 100.0 0.0202 1.000 

81 12 11 345 14 7 4.22 275.0 285.6 -0.4 74.0 600.0 0.0002 0.098 

81 12 11 345 15 7 5.00 283.0 286.1 0.0 73.0 600.0 0.0002 0.080 

81 12 11 345 16 7 7.20 283.0 286.2 0.2 80.0 700.0 0.0002 0.061 

81 12 11 345 17 7 7.78 289.0 286.0 0.1 84.0 700.0 0.0002 0.037 

81 12 11 345 18 7 7.30 290.0 286.0 0.1 80.0 800.0 0.0002 0.661 

81 12 11 345 19 7 7.14 305.0 286.1 0.2 81.0 900.0 0.0002 1.000 

81 12 13 347 14 7 5.05 289.0 285.5 -0.8 95.0 50.0 -0.0098 0.016 

81 12 13 347 15 7 5.67 280.0 285.3 -0.8 97.0 50.0 -0.0098 0.042 

81 12 13 347 16 7 7.10 287.0 285.6 -0.4 95.0 50.0 -0.0098 0.061 

81 12 13 347 17 7 7.06 301.0 286.2 0.3 92.0 50.0 0.0502 0.033 

81 12 13 347 18 7 5.90 292.0 286.4 0.5 91.0 50.0 0.0502 0.040 

81 12 13 347 19 7 6.00 302.0 286.4 0.6 90.0 50.0 0.0502 0.113 

81 12 14 348 13 7 6.63 292.0 287.2 1.3 79.0 50.0 0.0102 0.021 

81 12 14 348 14 7 7.70 293.0 286.7 0.6 86.0 50.0 0.0102 0.021 

81 12 14 348 15 7 9.70 292.0 286.4 0.4 90.0 50.0 0.0102 0.021 

81 12 14 348 16 7 9.30 292.0 286.7 0.8 89.0 50.0 0.0102 0.040 

81 12 14 348 17 7 8.71 296.0 286.7 0.9 88.0 50.0 0.0102 0.031 

81 12 14 348 18 7 8.40 303.0 286.9 0.8 87.0 50.0 0.0102 0.129 

81 12 14 348 19 7 7.70 306.0 286.4 0.4 90.0 50.0 0.0102 0.140 

81 12 15 349 13 7 5.01 304.0 286.1 0.3 88.0 50.0 0.0002 0.257 

81 12 15 349 14 7 5.14 299.0 287.7 1.1 83.0 50.0 0.0002 1.000 

81 12 15 349 16 7 6.80 294.0 288.7 2.9 73.0 50.0 0.0002 0.169 

81 12 15 349 17 7 7.60 301.0 288.3 2.2 77.0 50.0 0.0002 0.072 

81 12 15 349 18 7 5.70 301.0 288.4 2.4 77.0 50.0 0.0102 0.068 

81 12 15 349 19 7 0.97 321.0 289.4 3.4 70.0 50.0 0.0202 1.000 

Note: Bold identifies hours in the evaluation dataset
 Final Report Vol.1 44 

Table 4-6b 

Over-water Meteorological Data for Pismo Beach, California 

1982 

Year Month Day 

Julian 

Day Hour 

Ht 

(m) 

WS 

(m/s) 

WD 

(deg) 

Tair 

(oK) 

TairTsea 

(oK)

RH 

(%) 

Mixing 

Ht (m) 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) Iy 

82 6 21 172 14 7 2.70 280.0 287.7 2.0 83.0 800.0 -0.0018 0.073 

82 6 21 172 15 7 3.11 276.0 287.5 1.5 84.0 800.0 -0.0018 0.024 

82 6 21 172 16 7 2.61 269.0 287.3 1.4 86.0 800.0 -0.0018 0.037 

82 6 21 172 17 7 1.60 261.0 287.3 1.5 87.0 800.0 -0.0018 0.120 

82 6 21 172 18 7 1.86 276.0 286.9 1.2 89.0 800.0 -0.0018 0.358 

82 6 22 173 15 7 2.42 274.0 288.6 1.7 80.0 700.0 -0.0048 0.106 

82 6 22 173 16 7 3.82 268.0 288.8 2.1 78.0 700.0 -0.0048 0.058 

82 6 22 173 17 7 2.90 268.0 288.7 2.4 77.0 700.0 -0.0048 0.049 

82 6 22 173 18 7 2.80 274.0 287.9 2.0 81.0 700.0 -0.0048 0.072 

82 6 22 173 19 7 2.06 289.0 287.2 1.3 84.0 700.0 -0.0048 0.187 

82 6 22 173 20 7 1.90 280.0 286.6 0.8 87.0 700.0 -0.0048 0.175 

82 6 24 175 13 7 3.07 269.0 288.1 0.9 82.0 600.0 0.0002 0.527 

82 6 24 175 14 7 2.80 271.0 288.2 0.8 83.0 600.0 0.0002 0.290 

82 6 24 175 15 7 4.62 269.0 288.1 0.6 84.0 600.0 0.0002 0.131 

82 6 24 175 16 7 4.60 272.0 288.4 0.8 83.0 600.0 0.0002 0.026 

82 6 24 175 17 7 4.40 268.0 288.4 0.9 83.0 600.0 0.0002 0.037 

82 6 24 175 17 7 4.60 262.0 288.4 1.0 84.0 600.0 0.0002 0.037 

82 6 25 176 12 7 4.22 286.0 288.9 2.2 76.0 100.0 0.0002 0.024 

82 6 25 176 13 7 4.98 280.0 288.5 2.6 80.0 100.0 0.0002 0.028 

82 6 25 176 14 7 6.60 278.0 288.3 2.3 83.0 100.0 0.0002 0.031 

82 6 25 176 15 7 8.25 286.0 288.3 2.6 82.0 100.0 0.0002 0.096 

82 6 25 176 16 7 7.51 288.0 288.3 2.9 82.0 100.0 0.0002 0.016 

82 6 25 176 17 7 7.83 290.0 288.4 3.2 81.0 100.0 0.0002 0.021 

82 6 25 176 18 7 8.20 294.0 288.8 3.8 78.0 100.0 0.0002 0.051 

82 6 27 178 12 7 7.00 290.0 286.9 2.9 94.0 100.0 0.0002 0.061 

82 6 27 178 13 7 10.50 284.0 286.8 3.0 95.0 100.0 0.0002 0.016 

82 6 27 178 14 7 10.10 284.0 286.8 3.0 95.0 100.0 0.0002 0.019 

82 6 27 178 15 7 10.30 283.0 286.8 3.0 95.0 100.0 0.0002 0.035 

82 6 27 178 16 7 10.79 287.0 287.0 3.4 93.0 100.0 0.0002 0.019 

82 6 27 178 17 7 10.40 285.0 287.5 3.8 93.0 100.0 0.0002 0.021 

82 6 27 178 18 7 8.35 285.0 287.7 3.7 94.0 100.0 0.0002 0.136 

Note: Bold identifies hours in the evaluation dataset
 Final Report Vol.1 45 

Geophysical Processing

Gridded land use and terrain elevation data for the CALMET geophysical file are 

obtained from the USGS. The terrain data are from the one-degree 1:250,000-scale 

DEM dataset, with an approximate resolution of 90m. Land use data are from the 

1:250,000-scale Composite Grid Theme (CTG) dataset, with a resolution of 200m. 

Because the spatial variation in land use is the primary geophysical property for this 

application, a modeling grid is chosen that places each land use datapoint in the 

center of a model grid cell. The modeling grid chosen to cover the area is defined by: 

Map Projection: UTM (Zone 11N) 

Datum: NAS-C (North American 1927) 

SW Corner Coordinates (km): (282.1, 3779.1) 

Number of cells (nx,ny): (115,100) 

Cell Size (km): 0.200 

The CALMET preprocessors TERREL, CTGPROC, and MAKEGEO are applied to 

convert the geophysical datasets to this modeling grid, creating the CALMET 

GEO.DAT file. 

Coordinate transformations are applied to the source and receptor locations listed in 

the OCD4 model runs in order to register these features to land use and terrain data in 

the GEO.DAT file. The OCD4 dataset uses a local grid system that is not referenced 

to UTM coordinates. These (x,y) coordinates are translated to align the sampler 

locations with roadway features that are discernable on aerial photographs and that 

are indicated on the experiment site map. 

The resulting map of the experiment region is shown in Figure 4-4. Sampling Arc 1, 

nearest the coast, lies at elevations between 3m and 6m. Most of sampling Arc 2 lies 

at elevations between 15m and 25m, but the terrain at the northern end rises to more 

than 100m. 

Source & Receptor Characterization

Tracer releases are characterized as modeled in the OCD4 evaluation. All are 

modeled with downwash, using the boat dimensions as a solid building with the 

length perpendicular to the wind. A minimal exit velocity is used to remove any 

momentum rise. 
 Final Report Vol.1 46 

Figure 4-4. Geophysical properties of the site of the 1980/1981 Ventura, CA tracer experiments, as 

gridded for use in the CALMET/CALPUFF simulations. The grid cell size is 200m. Tracer concentrations 

were measured at the indicated sampler locations. Tracer release locations indicate boat positions used 

during each of the seven experiment-days in the evaluation dataset (2 locations are the same). 

3780

3782

3784

3786

3788

3790

3792

3794

3796

3798

UTM North (km) Zone 11N, Datum: NAS-C

284 286 288 290 292 294 296 298 300 302 304

UTM East (km) Zone 11N, Datum: NAS-C

Snow/Ice

Tundra

Barren

Wetland

Water

Forest

Range

Agriculture

Urban/Built-Up

Land Use

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

. .

. .

VENTURA, CA

Sampler Locations

Tracer Releases
 Final Report Vol.1 47 

Table 4-7 

Source Characterization for Ventura, California Tracer Releases 

Date 

X* 

(km) Y* (km) 

Ht. 

(m) 

Elev. 

(m) 

Diam. 

(m) 

W 

(m/s) 

T 

(oK) 

Hb 

(m) 

Lb 

(m) 

1/6/1980 285.133 3792.012 8.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

1/9/1980 284.675 3790.902 8.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

1/13/1980 284.675 3790.902 8.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

9/24/1981 283.297 3790.534 8.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

9/27/1981 283.444 3791.646 8.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

9/28/1981 283.444 3790.534 8.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

9/29/1981 284.521 3787.935 8.1 0.0 .02 0.01 270.0 7.0 20.0 

* Locations are in the UTM (Zone 11N) map projection with datum NAS-C 

All sampler locations are used as receptors, but additional ones are added to increase 

the density of receptor spacing along Arc 1 in each experiment. Intermediate 

receptors are placed at approximately 100m intervals, with elevations interpolated 

from the actual sampler elevations. One hundred twenty-seven (127) receptors are 

used in Arc 1, and 26 are used in Arc 2. 

Meteorological Processing

Meteorological data files for applying CALMET/CALPUFF to the Ventura study are 

developed from files used to run OCD4. The “release” meteorology identified for 

OCD4 is used to construct representative SEA.DAT (over water) and SURF.DAT 

(over land) input files for the tracer-release days. Temperatures are measured at 7m 

above the water, and wind speed is measured at 20.5m. Because CALMET accepts a 

single measurement height for the speed and temperature in the SEA.DAT file, the 

wind speed is profiled from the anemometer height to 7m for use in the SEA.DAT 

file. Boundary layer parameters computed by OCD are used with Monin-Obukhov 

similarity profiles to compute the wind speed adjustment. Wind speeds at 20.5m are 

used in the SURF.DAT file. 

Wind directions used in the OCD4 datasets are those that align the source and the 

sampler with the peak concentration each hour. This allows the evaluation to focus 

on processes other than the net transport direction. These directions are used for all 

CALMET input files. 

The SEA.DAT station is placed at the release location appropriate for the time 

period, while the SURF.DAT station is placed onshore at (295, 3790). 
 Final Report Vol.1 48 

Table 4-8 lists meteorological data used in the SEA.DAT file after the adjustments 

are made. The lateral turbulence intensity (Iy) is used in the CALPUFF turbulence 

profile file. 

The UP.DAT (upper-air) input file is designed to provide CALMET with vertical 

profiles of wind and temperature representative of the onshore flow at 00Z (mid to 

late afternoon) during the tracer sampling. Both 00Z and 12Z vertical profiles of 

wind and temperature are developed for four levels: surface, 10m, overwater mixing 

height, and model-top (3000m). The 00Z wind speed at 7m is extended to levels up 

to the mixing height using a stability-class-dependent power-law profile (A,B=0.07; 

C=0.10; D,E,F=0.15) and the speed at the model-top is set to that at the mixing 

height. The surface wind speed is set to that at 10m, which has been adjusted from 

the anemometer height to 10m. Wind direction at all levels equals the release wind 

direction. Temperature at the surface equals the air temperature in the SEA.DAT 

file, and temperature aloft is computed from this using the temperature gradient 

dT/dz (in the SEA.DAT file) up to the overwater mixing height. The default 

CALMET temperature gradient -0.0045 oK/m is used above the mixing height. 

Pressure is assumed to be 1013 mb at the surface, and decreases with height at 0.1 

mb/m. 

Oresund, Denmark/Sweden 

Description

The tracer dispersion study over the strait of Oresund was conducted between the 

coasts of Denmark and Sweden during nine test days between May 15 and June 14, 

1984 (Mortensen and Gryning, 1989). SF6 was released as a nonbuoyant tracer from 

a tower at either 95m above the ground on the east side of the strait of Oresund 

(Barseback, Sweden) or 115m above the ground on the west side of the strait of 

Oresund (Gladsaxe, Denmark), and was sampled at arcs set up along the opposite 

shore and at distances 2-8 km inland. The strait is about 20km wide, and the flow 

was not always perpendicular to its axis, so transport distances vary between 22 and 

42 km. Air-sea temperature differences were as large as 6 ̊C to 8 ̊C in five of the 

experiment-days with warm air being advected over colder water, and 2 ̊C to –2 ̊C in 

the other four experiment-days. On each experiment-day, the tracer release started 

about three hours before the samplers were turned on, and the sampling lasted for one 

hour. Sampling usually occurred between 1100 and 1200 CET, but was as late as 

1330 to 1430 CET. 

Meteorological data included in the study were obtained from synoptic stations, a 

lighthouse in the strait, meteorological towers and masts, SODARS, three-hourly 

radiosondes, and occasional minisondes released from a boat in the strait. These data 

and the tracer release and sampling data are distributed on CD in a general magnetic 
 Final Report Vol.1 49 

tape format called GF-3. These data are available from the Riso National Laboratory, 

Roskilde, Denmark. 

Table 4-8 

Over-water Meteorological Data for Ventura, California 

1980/1981 

Year Month Day 

Julian 

Day Hour 

Ht 

(m) 

WS 

(m/s)

WD 

(deg)

Tair 

(oK) 

TairTsea 

(oK) 

RH 

(%) 

Mixing 

Ht (m) 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) Iy 

80 9 24 268 15 7 3.70 262.0 288.40 -2.10 70.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.134

80 9 24 268 16 7 3.91 266.0 288.30 -2.10 72.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.140

80 9 24 268 17 7 5.80 265.0 288.20 -2.00 77.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.124

80 9 24 268 18 7 5.83 281.0 288.00 -2.00 78.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.114

80 9 24 268 19 7 6.44 292.0 288.00 -2.10 77.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.105

80 9 27 271 14 7 5.91 272.0 288.50 -1.90 80.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.082

80 9 27 271 15 7 7.00 272.0 288.80 -1.90 80.0 400.0 -0.0098 -999

80 9 27 271 16 7 7.90 272.0 289.30 -1.90 80.0 400.0 -0.0098 -999

80 9 27 271 18 7 7.00 272.0 289.40 -1.90 80.0 400.0 -0.0098 -999

80 9 27 271 19 7 5.71 272.0 289.20 -1.00 80.0 400.0 -0.0098 0.063

80 9 28 272 17 7 3.30 251.0 290.00 -1.10 80.0 250.0 0.0002 0.080

80 9 28 272 18 7 2.96 265.0 290.00 -1.00 80.0 250.0 0.0002 0.077

80 9 28 272 19 7 2.70 256.0 289.80 -1.00 80.0 250.0 0.0002 0.079

80 9 29 273 14 7 3.15 256.0 288.70 -0.80 76.0 100.0 0.0152 0.087

80 9 29 273 15 7 3.60 262.0 289.10 -0.60 76.0 100.0 0.0152 0.058

80 9 29 273 16 7 4.75 264.0 289.30 0.00 76.0 100.0 0.0152 0.068

80 9 29 273 17 7 4.40 266.0 289.30 0.00 76.0 50.0 0.0152 0.042

80 9 29 273 18 7 4.83 264.0 289.20 -0.10 76.0 50.0 0.0152 0.091

81 1 6 6 15 7 3.90 300.0 290.10 1.30 64.0 50.0 0.0002 0.298

81 1 6 6 16 7 3.02 276.0 290.30 1.60 60.0 50.0 0.0002 0.394

81 1 6 6 17 7 4.12 283.0 290.60 1.70 58.0 50.0 0.0002 0.232

81 1 6 6 18 7 3.84 276.0 290.40 1.80 60.0 50.0 0.0002 0.166

81 1 9 9 13 7 3.90 278.0 287.30 -1.30 84.0 100.0 -0.0098 0.122

81 1 9 9 14 7 4.10 275.0 287.40 -1.10 87.0 100.0 -0.0098 0.117

81 1 9 9 15 7 4.42 286.0 287.60 -0.90 87.0 100.0 -0.0098 0.059

81 1 9 9 16 7 4.31 277.0 288.00 -0.50 85.0 100.0 -0.0098 0.084

81 1 9 9 17 7 2.90 275.0 288.30 -0.20 85.0 100.0 -0.0098 0.161

81 1 9 9 18 7 4.57 274.0 288.20 -0.30 87.0 100.0 -0.0098 0.054

81 1 13 13 14 7 4.50 291.0 289.50 0.90 70.0 50.0 0.0002 0.103

81 1 13 13 15 7 4.90 274.0 290.10 1.40 65.0 50.0 0.0002 0.206

81 1 13 13 16 7 4.60 254.0 289.40 0.70 77.0 50.0 0.0002 0.129

81 1 13 13 17 7 3.71 242.0 289.00 0.40 84.0 50.0 0.0002 0.150

Note: Bold identifies hours in the evaluation dataset
 Final Report Vol.1 50 

Geophysical Processing

Gridded land use and terrain elevation data for the CALMET geophysical file are 

obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey. The terrain data are from the global 30 

arc-second dataset GTOPO30, with an approximate resolution of 900m. Land use 

data are from the global Lambert Azimuthal dataset, with a resolution of 1 km. 

Because the data resolution is about 1 km, a modeling grid is chosen with the same 

resolution, and uses the same projection and datum as positional data contained in the 

dataset. The modeling grid chosen to cover the area is defined by: 

Map Projection: UTM (Zone 33N) 

Datum: EUR-M (European 1950) 

SW Corner Coordinates (km): (300.0, 6130.0) 

Number of cells (nx,ny): (100,100) 

Cell Size (km): 1.000 

The CALMET preprocessors TERREL, CTGPROC, and MAKEGEO are applied to 

convert the geophysical datasets to this modeling grid, creating the CALMET 

GEO.DAT file. 

The resulting map of the experiment region is shown in Figure 4-5. The three 

releases from the Gladsaxe tower are transported across about 7 km of urban/built-up 

land in and around Copenhagen before reaching the strait. The six releases from the 

Barseback tower are very near the strait, with a more rural upwind fetch. 

Source & Receptor Characterization

Tracer releases are characterized as point sources and a minimal exit velocity is used 

to remove any momentum rise. There is no downwash. Actual emission rates of the 

tracer are modeled explicitly, although these rates are steady throughout an 

experiment and vary little between experiments. All six of the releases from 

Barseback are at 6.17 g/s, and those three from Gladsaxe are at 5.05 g/s, 5.09 g/s, and 

5.39 g/s. Release times are typically on the hour or half hour, and last three to five 

hours. These times are simulated in CALPUFF by using the diurnal emissions cycle 

for point sources. The 24 emission factors in the cycle are set to 1.0 only during the 

release period, and the release period begins at the start of the first hour of actual 

release. If the tracer starts at 0830 CET (Central European Time), Hour 9 in the 

diurnal array has the first non-zero value. These times and other point source 

characteristics used in the modeling are listed in Table 4-9. 
 Final Report Vol.1 51 

Figure 4-5. Geophysical properties of the site of the 1984 Oresund tracer experiments, as gridded for use 

in the CALMET/CALPUFF simulations. The grid cell size is 1.0 km. Tracer concentrations were 

measured at a subset of the indicated sampler locations during each of the nine tests, depending on the 

transport. Six tracer releases were made from the Barseback tower, and three were made from the 

Gladsaxe tower. 

300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400

UTM East (km) Zone 33N, Datum: EUR-M

6130

6140

6150

6160

6170

6180

6190

6200

6210

6220

6230

UTM North (km) Zone 33N, Datum: EUR-M

Gladsaxe Barseback

Snow/Ice

Tundra

Barren

Wetland

Water

Forest

Range

Agriculture

Urban/Built-Up

Land Use

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

. .

. .

Strait of Oresund

Denmark Sweden

Sampler Locations

Tracer Releases

Terrain Contour 25m
 Final Report Vol.1 52 

Table 4-9 

Source Characterization for Oresund Tracer Releases 

Date X* 

(km) 

Y* 

(km) 

Ht. 

(m) 

Elev 

(m) 

Diam 

(m) 

W 

(m/s) 

T 

(oK) 

ON – OFF 

(CET) 

Emission 

Hours 

Emission 

Rate (g/s) 

5/16/1984 370.13 6179.91 95 5 .01 0.01 270.0 0930-1430 10-15 6.17 

5/18/1984 342.58 6179.61 115 45 .01 0.01 270.0 0830-1310 9-13 5.09 

5/22/1984 370.13 6179.91 95 5 .01 0.01 270.0 0900-1200 10-12 6.17 

5/29/1984 370.13 6179.91 95 5 .01 0.01 270.0 0800-1200 9-12 6.17 

5/30/1984 370.13 6179.91 95 5 .01 0.01 270.0 0800-1200 9-12 6.17 

6/4/1984 370.13 6179.91 95 5 .01 0.01 270.0 0830-1200 9-12 6.17 

6/5/1984 370.13 6179.91 95 5 .01 0.01 270.0 0800-1200 9-12 6.17 

6/12/1984 342.58 6179.61 115 45 .01 0.01 270.0 0830-1245 9-13 5.39 

6/14/1984 342.58 6179.61 115 45 .01 0.01 270.0 1015-1355 11-14 5.05 

* Locations are in the UTM (Zone 33N) map projection with datum EUR-M 

All sampler locations are used as receptors, and these are the actual sampler locations 

reporting values during the particular experiment. 

Meteorological Processing

Data from surface stations (i.e., 10m to 30m masts), towers, SODARs, minisondes 

and radiosondes are used to drive three-dimensional CALMET wind and temperature 

fields for the modeling domain. These data are extracted from the GF-3 databank 

files, averaged to one-hour periods where necessary, and reformatted as one 

SURF.DAT, one SEA.DAT, and six UP.DAT files for input to CALMET. Wind 

directions in the databank files are modified by adding two degrees to the geodetic 

(virtually the same as magnetic) directions to reference them to grid-North in the 

UTM Zone 33N projection. Specialized codes are developed for accomplishing these 

tasks. Locations of those stations used in this modeling are shown in Figure 4-6. 
 Final Report Vol.1 53 

Figure 4-6. Locations of meteorological stations used for CALMET modeling of the 1984 Oresund tracer 

experiments. 

300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400

UTM East (km) Zone 33N, Datum: EUR-M

6130

6140

6150

6160

6170

6180

6190

6200

6210

6220

6230

UTM North (km) Zone 33N, Datum: EUR-M

Gladsaxe Barseback

TOWER

RSONDE

RSONDE

SEA

SFC

SFC

SFC

SFC SFC

SFC

SFC

SFC

SFC

SODAR

SODAR

SODAR

Snow/Ice

Tundra

Barren

Wetland

Water

Forest

Range

Agriculture

Urban/Built-Up

Land Use

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

. .

. .

Strait of Oresund

Denmark Sweden

Terrain Contour 25m

Meteorological Stations: Radiosonde Surface/Mast Tower SODAR Sea
 Final Report Vol.1 54 

A two-station radiosonde program provided high-resolution wind and temperature 

soundings on each side of the strait at three-hour intervals. These data are 

interpolated to hourly periods and placed into the UP.DAT file format. Sub-hourly 

SODAR wind data were successfully obtained at three locations (the tracer release 

location in Gladsaxe, Denmark, an island about 2 km from the western edge of the 

strait, and a site about 10 km inland in Sweden), and sub-hourly wind and 

temperature data were obtained at the 95 m tower from which tracer releases were 

made in Barseback, Sweden. These SODAR and tower profiles are averaged to 

hourly periods and merged with the nearest radiosonde UP.DAT data to produce 

hourly UP.DAT files at 4 more locations. 

Meteorological data obtained from instrumented masts at eight locations and hourly 

weather observations at one location are reformatted and placed in a SURF.DAT file. 

Cloud cover observations are provided at two locations, and are inferred from 

shortwave radiation measurements at three locations using the conversion 

relationships between cloud cover and shortwave radiation that are in CALMET. 

A SEA.DAT file is created from wind, air temperature, and sea temperature data at 

one location in the strait, at the Oskarsgrundet NE lighthouse denoted as SEA in 

Figure 2-6. Relative humidity data for SEA.DAT are taken from a mast located at 

the downwind shore of the strait. That is, the relative humidity in the onshore flow is 

used to characterize the relative humidity over the strait. The mixing height over the 

strait and the vertical temperature gradient below and above the mixing height for 

SEA.DAT are estimated from occasional minisonde profiles obtained from a boat in 

the strait. Typically two good profiles are available during all but one experiment, 

May 22. This experiment has an air-sea temperature difference of 5C to 6C which is 

similar to that on May16 and June 4 and 5, so we assume that the overwater surface 

layer can be represented by measurements on May16 and June 4 and 5. 

Table 4-10 lists meteorological data used in the SEA.DAT file for those hours in 

which SF6 was released. 

4.2 Model Application & Evaluation Methods 

CALMET Configuration 

Cameron, Carpinteria, Pismo Beach, Ventura

CALMET is applied to each of the OCD4 datasets in the same way, emphasizing the 

near-surface overwater meteorological structure. CALMET is configured to 

extrapolate the surface observations in the SURF.DAT and SEA.DAT files in the 

vertical using Monin-Obukhov similarity relations and the local values of the 

roughness length (z0), Monin-Obukhov length (L), and friction velocity (u*). 
 Final Report Vol.1 55 

Table 4-10 

SEA.DAT Meteorological Data for Oresund 

Tracer Release Hours 

Exp Year Month Day 

Julian 

Day 

Hour 

(end) 

Ht 

(m) 

WS 

(m/s) 

WD* 

(deg) 

Tair 

(oK) 

TairTsea 

(oK) 

RH 

(%) 

Mix 

Ht 

(m) 

Zi 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) 

below 

Zi 

dT/dz 

(oK/m) 

above 

Zi 

 1 84 5 16 137 10 10 3.8 125.0 285.9 4.10 97. 50 0.05 -0.008 

1 84 5 16 137 11 10 4.6 135.0 286.5 4.70 94. 50 0.05 -0.008 

1 84 5 16 137 12 10 5.0 136.0 287.6 5.70 88. 50 0.05 -0.008 

1 84 5 16 137 13 10 5.0 130.0 288.6 6.70 83. 50 0.05 -0.008 

1 84 5 16 137 14 10 4.2 130.0 289.8 7.80 78. 50 0.05 -0.008 

1 84 5 16 137 15 10 7.2 131.0 289.8 7.80 70. 50 0.05 -0.008 

2 84 5 18 139 9 10 6.3 202.0 282.8 0.10 97. 800 -0.008 -0.008 

2 84 5 18 139 10 10 6.1 204.0 283.1 0.40 97. 800 -0.008 -0.008 

2 84 5 18 139 11 10 6.0 201.0 283.4 0.60 96. 800 -0.008 -0.008 

2 84 5 18 139 12 10 5.2 210.0 283.4 0.50 94. 800 -0.008 -0.008 

2 84 5 18 139 13 10 3.1 199.0 283.7 0.80 90. 800 -0.008 -0.008 

3 84 5 22 143 10 10 10.2 73.0 288.4 5.30 85. 50** 0.04** -.008** 

3 84 5 22 143 11 10 11.0 73.0 288.9 5.80 83. 50** 0.04** -.008** 

3 84 5 22 143 12 10 9.4 76.0 289.4 6.30 80. 50** 0.04** -.008** 

4 84 5 29 150 9 10 9.0 75.0 287.8 3.80 88. 700 -0.008 -0.008 

4 84 5 29 150 10 10 8.7 74.0 289.0 4.90 84. 700 -0.008 -0.008 

4 84 5 29 150 11 10 7.0 75.0 289.7 5.50 79. 100 0.035 -0.008 

4 84 5 29 150 12 10 7.0 76.0 290.4 6.10 73. 100 0.035 -0.008 

5 84 5 30 151 9 10 3.3 115. 285.3 1.30 96. 700 -0.008 -0.007 

5 84 5 30 151 10 10 3.3 128. 284.9 0.90 97. 1000 -0.007 -0.007 

5 84 5 30 151 11 10 3.0 140. 285.8 1.80 97. 1400 -0.006 -0.007 

5 84 5 30 151 12 10 3.5 156. 285.9 1.90 94. 1400 -0.006 -0.007 

6 84 6 4 156 9 10 8.3 74. 290.7 4.80 86. 50 0.035 -0.005 

6 84 6 4 156 10 10 8.1 75. 291.5 5.60 84. 50 0.035 -0.005 

6 84 6 4 156 11 10 6.5 69. 291.7 5.80 84. 50 0.035 -0.005 

6 84 6 4 156 12 10 9.0 80. 293.4 7.50 79. 50 0.035 -0.005 

7 84 6 5 157 9 10 7.7 71. 290.1 5.20 88. 50 0.04 -0.007 

7 84 6 5 157 10 10 9.0 76. 290.9 6.00 84. 50 0.04 -0.007 

7 84 6 5 157 11 10 10.6 76. 292.1 7.10 80. 50 0.04 -0.007 

7 84 6 5 157 12 10 8.5 74. 292.3 7.30 77. 50 0.04 -0.007 

8 84 6 12 164 9 10 3.5 228. 285.4 -1.60 75. 2200 -0.008 -0.004 

8 84 6 12 164 10 10 3.5 228. 285.3 -2.10 70. 2200 -0.008 -0.004 

8 84 6 12 164 11 10 3.2 205. 285.5 -1.90 69. 2200 -0.008 -0.004 

8 84 6 12 164 12 10 4.7 198. 285.8 -1.60 74. 2200 -0.008 -0.004 

8 84 6 12 164 13 10 4.6 193. 286.3 -1.10 77. 2200 -0.008 -0.004 

9 84 6 14 166 11 10 4.2 331. 286.8 0.20 76. 2300 -0.008 -0.007 

9 84 6 14 166 12 10 4.5 350. 287.2 0.50 72. 2300 -0.008 -0.007 

9 84 6 14 166 13 10 6.3 294. 287.3 0.00 72. 2300 -0.008 -0.007 

9 84 6 14 166 14 10 7.0 291. 287.5 1.00 74. 2300 -0.008 -0.007 

* Wind direction is relative to UTM North = Geo North + 2 degrees 

** No minisonde data --- mixing height and temperature gradient ASSUMED similar to May 16 and June 4/5 
 Final Report Vol.1 56 

Winds in the UP.DAT file are given no influence in the boundary layer where the 

tracer transport and dispersion takes place. 

Over water, the boundary layer structure is characterized by the wind speed, air-sea 

temperature difference, relative humidity and vertical temperature gradient listed in 

the SEA.DAT file. The overwater mixing height is taken directly from the 

SEA.DAT file and treated as an observation. Over land, the boundary layer structure 

is characterized by the wind speed and cloud cover listed in the SURF.DAT file, 

along with the gridded surface characteristics contained in the geophysical data file 

that account for land use variations. The daytime mixing height over land includes 

the history of the computed surface fluxes and accounts for the modification of the 

temperature structure aloft provided in the UP.DAT file. Note that mixing heights 

are modified for advection affects which for on-shore flow typical of these datasets 

produces a daytime thermal internal boundary layer (TIBL). 

Alternate methods for computing the overwater boundary layer parameters are 

selected at each site to explore the sensitivity of model performance to these choices. 

The new COARE algorithm option switch (ICOARE) has the following settings: 

 0: OCD-like original flux model (default) 

 10: COARE with no wave parameterization (Charnock parameter for the open 

ocean, or “deep water” – can be modified for “shallow water”) 

 11: COARE with wave option 1 (Oost et al., 2002) and default equilibrium wave 

properties 

-11: COARE with wave option 1 (Oost et al., 2002) and observed wave 

properties (provided in revised SEA.DAT input file) 

 12: COARE with wave option 2 (Taylor and Yelland, 2001) and default 

equilibrium wave properties 

-12: COARE with wave option 2 (Taylor and Yelland, 2001) and observed wave 

properties (provided in revised SEA.DAT input file) 

Because observed wave properties are not part of these datasets, options -11 and -12 

are not tested. When ICOARE=10, an adjustment to the Charnock constant in the 

roughness length can be applied to differentiate between open-ocean (“deep water”) 

locations and near-shore (“shallow water”) locations. We test this using both the 

original deep water and the proposed shallow water limits to determine if the original 

deep-water formulation may be used everywhere. The goal of this endeavor is to 

determine if any of these options is able to produce significantly better performance, 

thereby guiding the recommendation for configuring this aspect of the COARE 

module. Results for each of these options are labeled as 0, 10d, 10s, 11, 12, where 
 Final Report Vol.1 57 

the numbers refer to ICOARE values, and the “d” and “s” refer to the deep-water and 

shallow-water Charnock parameter limits. 

CALMET must be started no later than the hour that ends at 0500 in the base time 

zone (typically LST) and it does not need to create meteorological fields for hours 

after the end of sampling, since no CALPUFF simulations are made after the 

sampling terminates. Therefore each experiment-day is simulated in a separate 

CALMET application. 

The fumigation study at Carpinteria is made up of several 1⁄2-hour periods instead of 

the one-hour periods used in the other datasets. These are simulated as one-hour 

experiments. On 10/4/1985 and 10/5/1985, three contiguous 1⁄2-hour sampling and 

meteorological averaging periods must be addressed (10:00, 10:30, 11:00). This is 

done by making two simulations of each day, with Hour 11 set to the 10:30 period in 

one, and 11:00 in the other. Hour 10 is period 10:00 in both runs. 

Oresund

Emphasis is given to using all available measured winds and temperatures at sites 

upwind of, across, and downwind of the strait of Oresund. Unlike most regular 

CALMET applications, there is a wealth of data on the vertical structure. Therefore, 

CALMET is configured to NOT extrapolate the surface observations. Winds in the 

UP.DAT files are given primary influence on the tracer transport and dispersion of 

these elevated releases. 

Over the Oresund itself, the boundary layer structure is characterized by the wind 

speed, air-sea temperature difference, relative humidity and vertical temperature 

gradient listed in the SEA.DAT file. The overwater mixing height is taken directly 

from the SEA.DAT file and treated as an observation when it is provided, or it is 

computed when it is not provided. CALMET is run both with and without estimated 

overwater mixing heights. Over land, the boundary layer structure is characterized 

by the wind speed and cloud cover listed in the SURF.DAT file, along with the 

gridded surface characteristics contained in the geophysical data file that account for 

land use variations. The daytime mixing height over land includes the history of the 

computed surface fluxes and accounts for the modification of the temperature 

structure aloft provided in the UP.DAT files. Note that all mixing heights (over land 

and over water, whether computed or provided in the SEA.DAT file) are modified for 

advection affects which includes both off-shore and on-shore flow in this study. 

Alternate methods for computing mixing heights are selected to explore the 

sensitivity of model performance to these choices. Overwater mixing heights are 

either provided in the SEA.DAT file (these heights are listed in Table 4-10), or 

computed internally. Whenever the mixing height is computed (land or water) and 

the surface heat flux is positive, either the modified Maul-Carson model is used 
 Final Report Vol.1 58 

(IMIXH = 1), or the newly implemented Batchvarova-Gryning model is selected 

(IMIXH = 2). 

CALMET must be started no later than the hour that ends at 0500 in the base time 

zone (CET) and it does not need to create meteorological fields for hours after the 

end of sampling, since no CALPUFF simulations are made after the sampling 

terminates. Therefore each experiment-day is simulated in a separate CALMET 

application. 

CALPUFF Configuration 

Cameron, Carpinteria, Pismo Beach, Ventura

CALPUFF is applied to each of the OCD4 datasets in the same way, with a unit 

emission rate (1 g/s), starting one hour before the first sampling period. The peak 

simulated concentration each evaluation hour is retained for comparison with the 

corresponding peak observed concentration, scaled by the tracer emission rate (e.g., 

Χ/Q). 

Tracer emissions are characterized as non-reacting passive Gaussian puffs with no 

plume rise. Default plume-path-coefficient terrain adjustments are used, and ISClike downwash adjustments are applied to those releases made from boats and 

modeled with downwash in the OCD evaluations. None of these releases is from a 

platform with significant structures, so the new platform downwash module is not 

tested in these applications. Turbulence-based dispersion is selected, with the default 

transition to Heffter curves for σy at σy = 550m. 

For each of the five CALMET configurations, 16 CALPUFF configurations are run 

to identify the performance impact of using all combinations of: 

• Measured versus predicted lateral turbulence (Iy) 

• CALPUFF versus AERMOD turbulence profiling assumptions 

• Draxler (1976) Fy curves for sigma-y growth with a fixed Lagrangian 

timescale versus a SCIPUFF-like computed Lagrangian timescale 

• Minimum σv = 0.5 m/s (CALPUFF default) versus σv = 0.37 m/s (OCD 

default) 

Oresund

CALPUFF is applied to each experiment-day in the Oresund dataset with the actual 

emission rate, for the actual release period (in whole hours). The resulting hourly 

concentrations are postprocessed using CALPOST to select only those concentrations 
 Final Report Vol.1 59 

that are simulated during the one-hour sampling period. The peak simulated 

concentration on each sampling arc is retained for comparison with the corresponding 

peak observed concentration. Because the sampling period spans two simulation 

hours on May 16th (1330-1430) and May 18th (1220-1320), the appropriate simulation 

hour is ambiguous. For these two experiments, the peak one-hour concentration from 

the two-hour simulation period that contains the sampling hour is selected for each 

arc. 

Tracer emissions are characterized as non-reacting passive Gaussian puffs with no 

plume rise. Turbulence-based dispersion is selected, with the default transition to 

Heffter curves for σy at σy = 550m. The Draxler Fy function is selected for lateral 

cloud growth with the standard CALPUFF turbulence profiling assumptions. Default 

plume-path-coefficient terrain adjustments are used. The subgrid TIBL option is 

used here to better resolve its onshore development because the grid resolution is 1 

km. 

For each of the 4 CALMET configurations, two CALPUFF configurations are run to 

identify the performance impact of using a minimum σv = 0.5 m/s (CALPUFF 

default) versus σv = 0.37 m/s (OCD default). 

Evaluation Statistics 

The evaluation focuses on the peak observed concentrations each hour, paired in time 

but not in space. As in the OCD applications, the wind direction used in the 

CALMET input files for the OCD4 datasets (Carpinteria, Cameron, Pismo Beach and 

Ventura) is that which is directed from the source to the sampler with the peak 

concentration. Unlike OCD, this may not align the center of the CALPUFF footprint 

with a sampler location due to changes in the transport direction (CALPUFF 

trajectories are not straight lines). Therefore, additional receptors are placed along 

the sampling arcs in the OCD4 datasets to better resolve peak modeled 

concentrations within the sampling zone. Spacing for additional receptors along 

sampling lines is typically 100 m or less. For the Oresund simulations, wind 

directions are used as measured (adjusted for grid North), and no additional receptors 

are used. 

Model predictions are quantitatively compared against measured concentrations and 

the resulting performance measures are compared with those for OCD5 (Carpinteria, 

Cameron, Pismo Beach and Ventura). The original OCD4 input files are recast for 

OCD5, and the revised OCD model is rerun on these data. Using the peak observed 

(Co) and peak modeled (Cp) concentrations each hour, the evaluation measures are 

computed from ln(Co/Cp). This gives equal weight to overpredictions and 

underpredictions (e.g., ln(Co/Cp) for Co/Cp = 1⁄2 and two are equal in magnitude but 

of opposite sign). The performance measures are the geometric mean (MG), 
 Final Report Vol.1 60 

geometric variance (VG), the correlation coefficient (R), and the fraction within a 

factor of two (FAC2). 

If Co and Cp are identical, MG is 1.0 and VG is 0. A factor of two scatter with no 

bias results in a VG of about 1.6. The minimum possible VG is related to the MG as 

lnVGmin=(lnMG)2

. 

Confidence limits generated by bootstrap resampling techniques are used to assess 

the significance of any differences in these measures. Resampling is done in blocks 

that preserve the seasonal features in each of the datasets, as originally done in the 

OCD4 evaluations. Resampling blocks are chosen to preserve the representation of 

each site, and seasonality (e.g., each resampled set contains 17 entries for “Cameron 

Winter”, which are randomly chosen with replacement from the 17 periods that 

comprise “Cameron Winter”). Data from Oresund are not split. The number of 

periods in each block are: 

BLOCK Number

Ventura Fall 9 

Ventura Winter 8 

Pismo Beach Summer 16 

Pismo Beach Winter 15 

Cameron Summer 9 

Cameron Winter 17 

Carpinteria Sf6 18 

Carpinteria Freon 9 

Carpinteria Fumigation 9 

Oresund 9 

2 0.5 ( / ) 2

(ln ln )(ln ln )/( )

exp((ln( / )) )

exp(ln( / )

ln ln

2

= ≤ ≤

= − −

=

=

FAC fraction Co Cp

R Co Co Cp Cp

VG Co Cp

MG Co Cp

σ Coσ Cp
 Final Report Vol.1 61 

4.3 Evaluation Results 

Cameron, Carpinteria, Pismo Beach, Ventura 

A total of 60 CALPUFF simulations are needed for each experiment-hour in the 

OCD4 dataset to explore the sensitivity of model performance to the five CALMET 

configurations associated with the use of the COARE module and the 16 CALPUFF 

configurations associated with choices for minimum σv, turbulence velocity profiles 

in the vertical, use of observed Iy, and the utility of computing the lateral Lagrangian 

timescale from boundary layer parameters. Note that 60 simulations are needed 

instead of 80 because the choice of the minimum σv is only applied to modeled 

turbulence, not observed turbulence. 

Individual CALPUFF configurations are labeled A through H, covering all 

combinations except the minimum σv: 

PuffA -- Modeled Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

PuffB -- Observed Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

PuffE -- Modeled Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

PuffF -- Observed Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

PuffC -- Modeled Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Variable TLy 

PuffD -- Observed Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Variable TLy 

PuffG -- Modeled Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Variable TLy 

PuffH -- Observed Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Variable Tly 

Analysis of these results leads to the following conclusions: 

• The COARE “0” option (OCD-based overwater flux model) tends to produce 

more scatter (larger VG) than the other COARE options, and a mean bias 

toward smaller peak χ/Q. 

• COARE variations 10d, 10s, 11, and 12 result in small performance 

differences, with the shallow-water adjustment 10s usually associated with 

smaller bias. 

• The standard COARE option 10d and the two wave model options 11 and 12 

do not have a significantly different VG, and the MG for option 10d 

produces a consistently small overprediction bias. 

• CALPUFF results show less scatter than OCD5, and less tendency to 

overpredict with the Draxler Fy curve. This CALMET/CALPUFF 

configuration places a larger fraction of the modeled peak χ/Q within a factor 

of two of the observed peak χ/Q, and exhibits a better correlation over all 

experiment-hours. 
 Final Report Vol.1 62 

• Based on mean performance across all 4 datasets, the prototype model for 

OCS applications improves upon the previous model designed for OCS 

applications. It has a small mean bias toward overprediction, and exhibits 

scatter that is typical in that it is close to a factor of two. 

• A computed Lagrangian timescale for lateral dispersion produces a 

statistically significant factor of two overprediction. Runs with the standard 

Draxler Fy curve produce a small overprediction bias that is not statistically 

different from zero (MG=1). 

• Using modeled Iy in CALPUFF with a minimum σv of 0.37 m/s produces 

less scatter and slightly smaller overpredictions than using the observed Iy. 

Using modeled Iy in CALPUFF with a minimum σv of 0.5 m/s reduces the 

bias and produces a statistically significant underprediction (MG>1) with the 

Draxler Fy curves. 

• CALPUFF/AERMOD turbulence profile choice produces similar results, 

with the AERMOD choice being slightly more conservative (larger peak 

χ/Q). 

Influence of COARE Options in CALMET

Inspection of these results indicates that the choice among COARE options in 

CALMET does not have a large influence on model performance. The largest 

influence on performance appears to be selecting the test algorithm for computing a 

Lagrangian timescale for lateral diffusion rather than using the timescale implicit in 

the Draxler Fy curves. To better illustrate the effect of the COARE options, results 

are collected and processed to form the geometric performance measures for the 

subset of CALPUFF configurations that do not include the computed Lagrangian 

timescale (PuffA, PuffB, PuffE and PuffF). Also, we choose to include just the 

PuffA and PuffE configurations that use a minimum σv of 0.37 m/s. Results of 

applying the model evaluation software, including 95% confidence limits, are listed 

in Tables 4-11 through 4-14, and in Figures 4-7 through 4-10. 

Inclusion of the COARE module in CALMET/CALPUFF appears to offer a distinct 

performance advantage over the original OCD-based overwater flux module. The 

scatter that is quantified as VG is smaller for all 4 CALPUFF configurations when 

any of the non-zero COARE options is selected, and the difference in VG is 

statistically significant for all configurations except PuffB. Differences in MG 

appear smaller, but all of these differences are statistically significant except that 

between option c0 and c10s for the PuffB configuration. 

Among the COARE options for treating wave effects on roughness length, the 

shallow water adjustment to the Charnock parameter (denoted here as 10s) does not 
 Final Report Vol.1 63 

improve model performance relative to using the standard Charnock parameter 

formulation (denoted here as 10d). These near-shore locations may present windwave interactions that are different from those in the open ocean, but the simple 

adjustment in option c10s does not capture these. Perhaps wave observations in 

combination with the COARE wave options in c11 or c12 would improve model 

performance in “shallow” water, but such observations are not contained in these 

datasets. Based on this evaluation, the standard COARE option (denoted here as 

c10d) may be used at near shore locations in the OCS regions. 
 Final Report Vol.1 64 

Table 4-11 

Performance Statistics for PuffA Configuration 

(Modeled Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy) 

OUTPUT OF THE BOOT PROGRAM, LEVEL 960626 

 No. of observations = 110 

 No. of models = 6 

 (with the observed data counted as one) 

 No. of blocks = 9 

 No. of pieces in each block 

 9 8 15 16 9 17 18 9 9 

 All data (no blocking) (N= 110) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.53 1.32 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 109 102 n/a 

 A:c0 1.47 1.36 0.06 1.84 0.831 0.609 1.067 60 49 n/a 

 A:c10d 1.53 1.28 0.00 1.71 0.842 0.655 1.003 59 55 n/a 

 A:c10s 1.50 1.31 0.04 1.73 0.841 0.636 1.038 60 55 n/a 

 A:c11 1.52 1.29 0.01 1.72 0.841 0.645 1.015 59 55 n/a 

 A:c12 1.55 1.27 -0.02 1.71 0.841 0.636 0.982 59 55 n/a 

SUMMARY OF CONFIDENCE LIMITS ANALYSES 

 ------------------------------------- 

 D(log(vg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A A A A A 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 A:c0 | X X X X 

 A:c10d | 

 A:c10s | 

 A:c11 | 

 D(log(mg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A A A A A 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 A:c0 | X X X X 

 A:c10d | X X X 

 A:c10s | X X 

 A:c11 | X 

 log(vg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A A A A A 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 X X X X X 

 log(mg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A A A A A 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 
 Final Report Vol.1 65 

Figure 4-7. Graphical depiction of MG,VG model performance results for CALPUFF 

configuration PuffA (Modeled Iy with minimum σv = 0.37 m/s, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy) 

with all COARE options tested in CALMET (c0 - OCD, c10d -deep water, c10s -shallow water, 

c11 - wave option 1, and c12 - wave option 2). 
 Final Report Vol.1 66 

Table 4-12 

Performance Statistics for PuffB Configuration 

(Observed Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy ) 

 OUTPUT OF THE BOOT PROGRAM, LEVEL 960626 

 No. of observations = 110 

 No. of models = 6 

 (with the observed data counted as one) 

 No. of blocks = 9 

 No. of pieces in each block 

 9 8 15 16 9 17 18 9 9 

 All data (no blocking) (N= 110) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.53 1.32 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 109 102 n/a 

 B:c0 1.52 1.44 0.01 2.04 0.816 0.573 1.009 194 155 n/a 

 B:c10d 1.56 1.39 -0.03 1.90 0.827 0.582 0.972 204 123 n/a 

 B:c10s 1.54 1.40 0.00 1.91 0.828 0.582 0.997 204 123 n/a 

 B:c11 1.55 1.40 -0.02 1.91 0.826 0.582 0.978 204 123 n/a 

 B:c12 1.58 1.39 -0.04 1.91 0.825 0.582 0.958 204 123 n/a 

 

SUMMARY OF CONFIDENCE LIMITS ANALYSES 

 ------------------------------------- 

 D(log(vg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 B B B B B 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 B:c0 | 

 B:c10d | 

 B:c10s | 

 B:c11 | 

 D(log(mg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 B B B B B 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 B:c0 | X X X 

 B:c10d | X X X 

 B:c10s | X X 

 B:c11 | X 

 log(vg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 B B B B B 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 X X X X X 

 log(mg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 B B B B B 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 
 Final Report Vol.1 67 

Figure 4-8. Graphical depiction of MG,VG model performance results for CALPUFF configuration 

PuffB (Observed Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy) with all COARE options tested in CALMET (c0 - 

OCD, c10d -deep water, c10s -shallow water, c11 - wave option 1, and c12 - wave option 2). 
 Final Report Vol.1 68 

Table 4-13 

Performance Statistics for PuffE Configuration 

(Modeled Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy) 

 

 OUTPUT OF THE BOOT PROGRAM, LEVEL 960626 

 No. of observations = 110 

 No. of models = 6 

 (with the observed data counted as one) 

 No. of blocks = 9 

 No. of pieces in each block 

 9 8 15 16 9 17 18 9 9 

 All data (no blocking) (N= 110) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.53 1.32 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 109 102 n/a 

 E:c0 1.46 1.39 0.08 1.86 0.833 0.609 1.081 59 57 n/a 

 E:c10d 1.55 1.30 -0.02 1.69 0.848 0.664 0.978 62 58 n/a 

 E:c10s 1.51 1.32 0.02 1.72 0.844 0.655 1.018 62 59 n/a 

 E:c11 1.54 1.31 -0.01 1.70 0.847 0.664 0.990 62 58 n/a 

 E:c12 1.57 1.29 -0.04 1.68 0.848 0.664 0.964 62 58 n/a 

 SUMMARY OF CONFIDENCE LIMITS ANALYSES 

 ------------------------------------- 

 D(log(vg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 E E E E E 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 E:c0 | X X X X 

 E:c10d | X 

 E:c10s | X 

 E:c11 | 

 D(log(mg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 E E E E E 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 E:c0 | X X X X 

 E:c10d | X X X 

 E:c10s | X X 

 E:c11 | X 

 log(vg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 E E E E E 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 X X X X X 

 log(mg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 E E E E E 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 

 
 Final Report Vol.1 69 

Figure 4-9. Graphical depiction of MG,VG model performance results for CALPUFF configuration 

PuffE (Modeled Iy with minimum σv = 0.37 m/s, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy) with all COARE 

options tested in CALMET (c0 - OCD, c10d -deep water, c10s -shallow water, c11 - wave option 1, and 

c12 - wave option 2). 
 Final Report Vol.1 70 

Table 4-14 

Performance Statistics for PuffF Configuration 

(Observed Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy) 

 

 OUTPUT OF THE BOOT PROGRAM, LEVEL 960626 

 No. of observations = 110 

 No. of models = 6 

 (with the observed data counted as one) 

 No. of blocks = 9 

 No. of pieces in each block 

 9 8 15 16 9 17 18 9 9 

 All data (no blocking) (N= 110) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.53 1.32 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 109 102 n/a 

 F:c0 1.52 1.47 0.01 2.08 0.816 0.582 1.010 253 195 n/a 

 F:c10d 1.59 1.41 -0.06 1.88 0.834 0.600 0.941 265 161 n/a 

 F:c10s 1.57 1.42 -0.03 1.90 0.833 0.591 0.966 265 161 n/a 

 F:c11 1.59 1.41 -0.05 1.89 0.832 0.609 0.947 265 161 n/a 

 F:c12 1.60 1.40 -0.07 1.87 0.834 0.600 0.932 265 161 n/a 

 SUMMARY OF CONFIDENCE LIMITS ANALYSES 

 ------------------------------------- 

 D(log(vg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 F F F F F 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 F:c0 | X X X X 

 F:c10d | 

 F:c10s | 

 F:c11 | 

 D(log(mg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 F F F F F 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 F:c0 | X X X X 

 F:c10d | X X X 

 F:c10s | X X 

 F:c11 | X 

 log(vg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 F F F F F 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 X X X X X 

 log(mg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 F F F F F 

 : : : : : 

 c c c c c 

 0 1 1 1 1 

 0 0 1 2 

 d s 

 -------------------- 

 
 Final Report Vol.1 71 

Figure 4-10. Graphical depiction of MG,VG model performance results for CALPUFF configuration 

PuffF (Observed Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy) with all COARE options tested in CALMET (c0 - 

OCD, c10d -deep water, c10s -shallow water, c11 - wave option 1, and c12 - wave option 2). 
 Final Report Vol.1 72 

Influence of Minimum σv in CALPUFF

The performance of CALPUFF when using modeled lateral turbulence with either the 

default minimum σv of 0.5 m/s or the OCD minimum σv of 0.37 m/s is evaluated 

using runs made with the standard COARE option, denoted here as c10d. Results 

from Appendix A are collected and processed to form the geometric performance 

measures for CALPUFF configurations PuffA, PuffC, PuffE and PuffG. Results of 

applying the model evaluation software, including 95% confidence limits, are listed 

in Table 4-15 and Figure 4-11. 

A minimum σv provides a lower limit to the rate of lateral dispersion, so using a 

smaller value is expected to lead to larger modeled concentrations whenever 

predicted lateral turbulence is small. This may happen often in these overwater 

datasets due to small turbulence during stable periods. Differences can be seen in the 

performance results, and as expected, peak modeled concentrations with the default 

value of 0.5 m/s are smaller than those with 0.37 m/s. Furthermore, the results 

indicate that this leads to an underprediction with the Draxler Fy configuration 

(PuffA and PuffE). The configurations with a computed Lagrangian timescale TLy 

(PuffC and PuffG) still overpredict by about a factor of two. All of the differences in 

MG seen in Figure 4-11 are statistically significant, and only CALPUFF 

configurations with Draxler Fy and the minimum σv = 0.37 m/s have a confidence 

interval that overlaps zero bias. 

Therefore, overwater applications of CALMET/CALPUFF should use a minimum σv

= 0.37 m/s, and an option for specifying an overwater minimum should be added to 

CALPUFF. 
 Final Report Vol.1 73 

Table 4-15 

Performance Statistics for CALPUFF Configurations 

with Modeled Iy for Minimum σv = 0.37 and 0.5 m/s 

 OUTPUT OF THE BOOT PROGRAM, LEVEL 960626 

 No. of observations = 110 

 No. of models = 9 

 (with the observed data counted as one) 

 No. of blocks = 9 

 No. of pieces in each block 

 9 8 15 16 9 17 18 9 9 

 All data (no blocking) (N= 110) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 A:37 1.53 1.28 0.00 1.71 0.842 0.655 1.003 59 55 n/a 

 E:37 1.55 1.30 -0.02 1.69 0.848 0.664 0.978 62 58 n/a 

 C:37 2.20 1.31 -0.67 3.20 0.794 0.482 0.511 147 110 n/a 

 G:37 2.24 1.32 -0.71 3.19 0.810 0.500 0.493 149 129 n/a 

 A:50 1.33 1.22 0.21 1.77 0.838 0.645 1.229 44 44 n/a 

 E:50 1.36 1.23 0.18 1.72 0.845 0.636 1.192 49 45 n/a 

 C:50 2.09 1.28 -0.55 2.71 0.796 0.518 0.575 123 98 n/a 

 G:50 2.12 1.29 -0.59 2.71 0.810 0.491 0.554 124 114 n/a 

 SUMMARY OF CONFIDENCE LIMITS ANALYSES 

 ------------------------------------- 

 D(log(vg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A E C G A E C G 

 : : : : : : : : 

 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 

 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 

 -------------------------------- 

 A:37 | X X X X 

 E:37 | X X X X 

 C:37 | X X X X 

 G:37 | X X X X 

 A:50 | X X X 

 E:50 | X X 

 C:50 | 

 D(log(mg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A E C G A E C G 

 : : : : : : : : 

 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 

 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 

 -------------------------------- 

 A:37 | X X X X X X X 

 E:37 | X X X X X X 

 C:37 | X X X X X 

 G:37 | X X X X 

 A:50 | X X X 

 E:50 | X X 

 C:50 | X 

 log(vg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A E C G A E C G 

 : : : : : : : : 

 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 

 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 

 -------------------------------- 

 X X X X X X X X 

 log(mg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 A E C G A E C G 

 : : : : : : : : 

 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 

 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 

 -------------------------------- 

 X X X X X X 

 
 Final Report Vol.1 74 

Figure 4-11. Graphical depiction of MG,VG model performance results for CALPUFF configurations 

with Modeled Iy for minimum σv = 0.37 m/s (:37 labels) and 0.5 m/s (:50 labels). 

A -- Modeled Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

E -- Modeled Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

C -- Modeled Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Variable TLy 

G -- Modeled Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Variable TLy 
 Final Report Vol.1 75 

Performance of CALPUFF Configurations Using Standard COARE in CALMET 

The performance of all eight CALPUFF configurations tested are intercompared 

using runs made with the standard COARE option, denoted here as c10d, with a 

minimum σv = 0.37 m/s. Results from Appendix A are collected and processed to 

form the geometric performance measures. OCD5 results are also included as a 

reference point. Results of applying the model evaluation software, including 95% 

confidence limits, are listed in Table 4-16 and Figure 4-12. Note that OCD5 with 

observed Iy produces a peak χ/Q less than 0.001 μs/m3

 in one of the Carpinteria 

fumigation study periods. This is seen as a “zero” by the performance evaluation 

software which precludes forming measures based on ln(Co/Cp). The OCD5 peak 

χ/Q for this period is increased to 0.001 μs/m3

. With predicted Iy, OCD5 produced a 

peak χ/Q equal to 0.010 μs/m3

 for this period, whereas the observed is 5.20 μs/m3. 

MG,VG results in Figure 4-12 fall into three groups. The first includes CALPUFF 

configurations with computed TLy based on the turbulence at puff height, the height 

of the surface layer, and the Monin-Obukhov length. This group shows the strongest 

bias toward overprediction, with an MG of about 0.5 (factor of two overprediction). 

This overprediction may result from details chosen for the implementation of this 

new algorithm (i.e., more development work might improve on this performance), or 

it may result from problems inherent in using properties of the boundary layer that 

are poorly known at times. Whatever the reason, the implementation tested here 

performs poorly compared to the use of the standard Fy function for lateral cloud 

growth in CALPUFF. 

The second group includes the two OCD5 results, for modeled and observed Iy. 

While the tendency toward overprediction is about 10-20%, the scatter is relatively 

large at VG = 3 to 4. Some of the scatter is due to the fumigation event that OCD5 

“misses”. Even with this singular event that tends to increase the MG (reduces the 

degree of overprediction), the overall MG using the predicted Iy is significantly 

different from 1.0 because the 95% confidence interval does not overlap 1.0. 

The third group includes CALPUFF simulations with the Draxler Fy function for 

lateral cloud growth in the near field and turbulence profiles from either CALPUFF 

or AERMOD. All 4 configurations have an MG that is near 1.0, and are not 

significantly different from 1.0. VG for these lies between 1.7 and 1.9, which is 

slightly greater than the 1.6 that indicates about a factor of two scatter. Within this 

group, use of the AERMOD turbulence profiles leads to slightly larger concentrations 

(smaller MG). Using observed Iy also leads to slightly larger concentrations, and 

larger scatter. The small difference in MG between using the CALPUFF and 

AERMOD turbulence profiles is statistically significant, but the difference between 

using observed and predicted Iy is not. 
 Final Report Vol.1 76 

The performance evaluation system also provides results for the fraction of model 

predictions that are within a factor-of-2 of the observations (FAC2), and the 

correlation: 

Modeled Iy FAC2 Correlation

CALPUFF 

 (CALPUFF Turbulence Profile) 

0.655 0.842 

CALPUFF 

 (AERMOD Turbulence Profile) 

0.664 0.848 

OCD5 0.536 0.712 

 

Observed Iy FAC2 Correlation

CALPUFF 

 (CALPUFF Turbulence Profile) 

0.582 0.827 

CALPUFF 

 (AERMOD Turbulence Profile) 

0.600 0.834 

OCD5 0.545 0.663 

Based on these measures across all 4 datasets, the prototype model for OCS 

applications improves upon the previous model designed for OCS applications. It 

has a small mean bias toward overprediction, and exhibits scatter that is typical in 

that it is close to a factor of two. 
 Final Report Vol.1 77 

Table 4-16 

Performance Statistics for All CALPUFF Configurations 

(Modeled Iy uses minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

 

 OUTPUT OF THE BOOT PROGRAM, LEVEL 960626 

 No. of observations = 110 

 No. of models = 11 

 (with the observed data counted as one) 

 No. of blocks = 9 

 No. of pieces in each block 

 9 8 15 16 9 17 18 9 9 

 All data (no blocking) (N= 110) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.53 1.32 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 109 102 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 1.72 1.39 -0.19 2.98 0.712 0.536 0.830 203 191 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 1.61 1.54 -0.08 4.15 0.663 0.545 0.925 232 200 n/a 

 A:c10d 1.53 1.28 0.00 1.71 0.842 0.655 1.003 59 55 n/a 

 B:c10d 1.56 1.39 -0.03 1.90 0.827 0.582 0.972 204 123 n/a 

 E:c10d 1.55 1.30 -0.02 1.69 0.848 0.664 0.978 62 58 n/a 

 F:c10d 1.59 1.41 -0.06 1.88 0.834 0.600 0.941 265 161 n/a 

 C:c10d 2.20 1.31 -0.67 3.20 0.794 0.482 0.511 147 110 n/a 

 D:c10d 2.20 1.40 -0.67 3.50 0.784 0.482 0.511 269 183 n/a 

 G:c10d 2.24 1.32 -0.71 3.19 0.810 0.500 0.493 149 129 n/a 

 H:c10d 2.24 1.41 -0.70 3.47 0.801 0.509 0.494 345 215 n/a 

 Block 1: Ventura_Fall (N= 9) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. -0.29 0.72 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 3 2 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 0.47 0.22 -0.76 2.63 0.572 0.222 0.467 3 2 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 0.47 0.28 -0.76 2.31 0.849 0.444 0.467 2 2 n/a 

 A:c10d -0.48 0.56 0.19 1.39 0.668 0.889 1.212 1 1 n/a 

 B:c10d -0.32 0.65 0.02 1.31 0.721 0.778 1.025 2 1 n/a 

 E:c10d -0.46 0.57 0.17 1.37 0.678 0.889 1.181 2 1 n/a 

 F:c10d -0.29 0.66 0.00 1.30 0.726 0.778 1.004 2 1 n/a 

 C:c10d 0.23 0.67 -0.52 1.89 0.628 0.444 0.593 4 3 n/a 

 D:c10d 0.25 0.73 -0.54 1.96 0.645 0.667 0.580 4 3 n/a 

 G:c10d 0.26 0.69 -0.55 1.96 0.633 0.444 0.574 4 3 n/a 

 H:c10d 0.29 0.76 -0.58 2.03 0.659 0.667 0.561 4 3 n/a 

 Block 2: Ventura_Winter (N= 8) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 0.71 0.33 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 3 3 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 0.98 0.13 -0.28 1.24 -0.188 0.875 0.758 3 3 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 0.47 0.57 0.24 1.24 0.724 0.875 1.266 4 3 n/a 

 A:c10d 0.44 0.67 0.27 1.72 0.210 0.625 1.310 4 3 n/a 

 B:c10d 0.31 0.56 0.40 1.58 0.343 0.625 1.490 4 3 n/a 

 E:c10d 0.41 0.65 0.29 1.69 0.221 0.625 1.341 4 3 n/a 

 F:c10d 0.29 0.56 0.42 1.59 0.369 0.625 1.522 4 3 n/a 

 C:c10d 1.59 0.78 -0.88 4.14 0.120 0.375 0.416 13 13 n/a 

 D:c10d 1.39 0.75 -0.68 2.56 0.394 0.500 0.508 10 10 n/a 

 G:c10d 1.57 0.76 -0.86 3.91 0.128 0.375 0.422 12 12 n/a 

 H:c10d 1.37 0.75 -0.66 2.48 0.410 0.500 0.515 10 10 n/a 

 Block 3: Pismo_Winter (N= 15) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.34 0.58 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 9 7 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 1.20 0.68 0.13 2.28 -0.008 0.467 1.143 9 9 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 1.02 1.26 0.32 3.63 0.510 0.467 1.376 14 13 n/a 

 A:c10d 1.18 0.59 0.15 1.89 0.098 0.667 1.167 9 6 n/a 

 B:c10d 1.12 0.79 0.22 1.64 0.565 0.600 1.244 10 10 n/a 

 E:c10d 1.15 0.58 0.18 1.85 0.125 0.600 1.203 9 7 n/a 

 F:c10d 1.12 0.80 0.22 1.59 0.602 0.667 1.247 10 10 n/a 

 C:c10d 1.89 0.77 -0.56 3.65 -0.075 0.467 0.573 17 17 n/a 

 D:c10d 1.79 0.79 -0.46 2.52 0.272 0.400 0.633 17 17 n/a 

 G:c10d 1.88 0.73 -0.55 3.28 -0.027 0.600 0.580 18 16 n/a 

 H:c10d 1.80 0.79 -0.46 2.36 0.340 0.400 0.630 18 17 n/a 
 Final Report Vol.1 78 

Table 4-16 (continued) 

Performance Statistics for All CALPUFF Configurations 

(Modeled Iy uses minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

 

 Block 4: Pismo_Summer (N= 16) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.15 0.38 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 8 5 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 1.20 0.51 -0.05 1.44 0.111 0.625 0.952 7 6 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 1.31 0.85 -0.16 1.76 0.507 0.688 0.853 12 12 n/a 

 A:c10d 1.60 0.42 -0.45 1.57 0.224 0.688 0.637 8 7 n/a 

 B:c10d 1.68 0.77 -0.53 1.91 0.622 0.438 0.589 17 13 n/a 

 E:c10d 1.60 0.49 -0.45 1.68 0.189 0.625 0.639 8 8 n/a 

 F:c10d 1.71 0.77 -0.56 2.01 0.608 0.438 0.572 19 13 n/a 

 C:c10d 2.45 0.37 -1.29 6.58 0.266 0.125 0.274 24 20 n/a 

 D:c10d 2.55 0.56 -1.39 8.53 0.611 0.125 0.248 31 31 n/a 

 G:c10d 2.47 0.42 -1.32 7.29 0.218 0.125 0.268 24 20 n/a 

 H:c10d 2.55 0.57 -1.40 8.87 0.579 0.125 0.246 34 30 n/a 

 Block 5: Cameron_Summer (N= 9) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. -0.29 0.78 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 3 2 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 0.48 0.13 -0.77 2.90 0.735 0.444 0.464 2 2 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 0.46 0.29 -0.76 2.53 0.724 0.556 0.470 2 2 n/a 

 A:c10d -0.49 0.47 0.20 1.68 0.467 0.667 1.218 1 1 n/a 

 B:c10d -0.54 0.66 0.25 1.87 0.459 0.667 1.283 1 1 n/a 

 E:c10d -0.39 0.40 0.10 1.49 0.595 0.778 1.105 1 1 n/a 

 F:c10d -0.45 0.59 0.16 1.61 0.543 0.556 1.172 1 1 n/a 

 C:c10d -0.16 0.50 -0.13 1.59 0.527 0.778 0.874 2 2 n/a 

 D:c10d -0.19 0.60 -0.11 1.64 0.513 0.667 0.899 2 2 n/a 

 G:c10d -0.07 0.44 -0.23 1.50 0.646 0.667 0.798 2 2 n/a 

 H:c10d -0.10 0.54 -0.19 1.52 0.611 0.667 0.825 2 2 n/a 

 Block 6: Cameron_Winter (N= 17) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.92 1.01 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 37 35 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 1.81 0.76 0.11 1.45 0.804 0.706 1.114 17 16 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 2.28 0.83 -0.37 1.71 0.777 0.588 0.694 33 30 n/a 

 A:c10d 1.85 0.72 0.07 2.25 0.503 0.412 1.076 17 17 n/a 

 B:c10d 2.30 0.91 -0.38 3.42 0.414 0.471 0.686 38 31 n/a 

 E:c10d 1.83 0.71 0.09 2.22 0.510 0.412 1.091 17 17 n/a 

 F:c10d 2.28 0.90 -0.36 3.27 0.422 0.471 0.698 36 31 n/a 

 C:c10d 2.86 0.92 -0.94 6.96 0.438 0.353 0.389 60 59 n/a 

 D:c10d 3.15 1.00 -1.23 15.81 0.380 0.294 0.292 82 80 n/a 

 G:c10d 2.84 0.91 -0.92 6.55 0.445 0.353 0.397 59 59 n/a 

 H:c10d 3.12 0.98 -1.21 14.17 0.394 0.294 0.299 83 81 n/a 

 Block 7: Carpinteria_SF6 (N= 18) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 3.43 0.77 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 109 102 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 3.70 0.93 -0.28 1.78 0.669 0.611 0.758 203 191 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 3.29 1.14 0.13 1.95 0.707 0.444 1.144 232 200 n/a 

 A:c10d 3.26 0.46 0.17 1.49 0.611 0.722 1.183 59 55 n/a 

 B:c10d 3.18 0.93 0.24 1.68 0.696 0.611 1.278 204 123 n/a 

 E:c10d 3.36 0.46 0.06 1.39 0.671 0.833 1.066 62 58 n/a 

 F:c10d 3.29 0.98 0.14 1.69 0.693 0.722 1.150 265 161 n/a 

 C:c10d 3.67 0.69 -0.24 1.61 0.611 0.778 0.786 147 110 n/a 

 D:c10d 3.60 1.01 -0.18 1.82 0.674 0.722 0.836 269 183 n/a 

 G:c10d 3.80 0.73 -0.38 1.66 0.674 0.833 0.685 149 129 n/a 

 H:c10d 3.74 1.06 -0.31 1.95 0.705 0.833 0.733 345 215 n/a 
 Final Report Vol.1 79 

Table 4-16 (continued) 

Performance Statistics for All CALPUFF Configurations 

(Modeled Iy uses minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

 

 Block 8: Carpinteria_Fumigation (N= 9) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 1.78 0.52 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 15 12 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 1.29 2.29 0.49 527.07 -0.225 0.222 1.627 25 14 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 0.72 2.78 1.06 11909.10 -0.088 0.333 2.899 10 10 n/a 

 A:c10d 1.85 0.23 -0.07 1.32 0.203 0.778 0.934 9 8 n/a 

 B:c10d 1.73 0.66 0.04 2.00 0.027 0.556 1.046 32 8 n/a 

 E:c10d 1.84 0.23 -0.06 1.32 0.211 0.778 0.937 9 8 n/a 

 F:c10d 1.73 0.66 0.04 2.00 0.026 0.556 1.046 32 8 n/a 

 C:c10d 2.30 0.43 -0.52 1.81 0.305 0.667 0.594 20 16 n/a 

 D:c10d 2.21 0.67 -0.43 2.18 0.188 0.778 0.650 47 14 n/a 

 G:c10d 2.30 0.44 -0.52 1.81 0.309 0.667 0.595 20 16 n/a 

 H:c10d 2.21 0.67 -0.43 2.18 0.191 0.778 0.650 47 14 n/a 

 Block 9: Carpinteria_CF3Br (N= 9) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 2.15 0.59 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 25 18 n/a 

 OCD5PIY 2.92 0.28 -0.77 2.61 0.205 0.444 0.462 28 24 n/a 

 OCD5OIY 2.68 0.28 -0.53 1.75 0.464 0.556 0.588 30 16 n/a 

 A:c10d 2.61 0.21 -0.46 2.12 -0.566 0.556 0.632 22 17 n/a 

 B:c10d 2.38 0.34 -0.23 1.68 -0.004 0.667 0.797 16 15 n/a 

 E:c10d 2.69 0.22 -0.54 2.25 -0.459 0.556 0.585 24 17 n/a 

 F:c10d 2.45 0.34 -0.30 1.70 0.061 0.667 0.742 18 16 n/a 

 C:c10d 2.91 0.29 -0.76 3.10 -0.328 0.444 0.467 32 26 n/a 

 D:c10d 2.74 0.24 -0.59 2.15 -0.042 0.444 0.555 23 19 n/a 

 G:c10d 2.98 0.30 -0.83 3.42 -0.304 0.444 0.438 37 27 n/a 

 H:c10d 2.81 0.23 -0.66 2.32 -0.018 0.556 0.517 21 21 n/a 
 Final Report Vol.1 80 

Table 4-16 (concluded) 

Performance Statistics for All CALPUFF Configurations 

(Modeled Iy uses minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

 

 SUMMARY OF CONFIDENCE LIMITS ANALYSES 

 ------------------------------------- 

 D(log(vg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 O O A B E F C D G H 

 C C : : : : : : : : 

 D D c c c c c c c c 

 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 P O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

 I I d d d d d d d d 

 Y Y 

 ---------------------------------------- 

 OCD5PIY | 

 OCD5OIY | 

 A:c10d | X X X X 

 B:c10d | X X X X 

 E:c10d | X X X X 

 F:c10d | X X X X 

 C:c10d | 

 D:c10d | 

 G:c10d | 

 D(log(mg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 O O A B E F C D G H 

 C C : : : : : : : : 

 D D c c c c c c c c 

 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 P O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

 I I d d d d d d d d 

 Y Y 

 ---------------------------------------- 

 OCD5PIY | X X X X X 

 OCD5OIY | X X X X 

 A:c10d | X X X X X 

 B:c10d | X X X X X 

 E:c10d | X X X X 

 F:c10d | X X X X 

 C:c10d | X 

 D:c10d | X 

 G:c10d | 

 log(vg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 O O A B E F C D G H 

 C C : : : : : : : : 

 D D c c c c c c c c 

 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 P O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

 I I d d d d d d d d 

 Y Y 

 ---------------------------------------- 

 X X X X X X X X X X 

 log(mg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 O O A B E F C D G H 

 C C : : : : : : : : 

 D D c c c c c c c c 

 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 P O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

 I I d d d d d d d d 

 Y Y 

 ---------------------------------------- 

 X X X X X 

 
 Final Report Vol.1 81 

Figure 4-12. Graphical depiction of MG,VG model performance results for OCD5 and for all CALPUFF 

configurations using CALMET with the standard COARE option (c10d). 

A -- Modeled Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy (minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

B -- Observed Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

E -- Modeled Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy (minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

F -- Observed Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Draxler Fy 

C -- Modeled Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Variable TLy (minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

D -- Observed Iy, CALPUFF Turb(z), Variable TLy 

G -- Modeled Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Variable TLy (minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

H -- Observed Iy, AERMOD Turb(z), Variable Tly 

OCD5PIY -- OCD5 with Modeled Iy (minimum σv = 0.37 m/s) 

OCD5OIY -- OCD5 with Observed Iy 
 Final Report Vol.1 82 

Oresund 

A total of 16 CALPUFF simulations are run for each experiment-hour in the Oresund 

dataset to explore the sensitivity of model performance to the 4 CALMET 

configurations associated with mixing height computations and the 2 CALPUFF 

configurations associated with the choice for minimum σv. Predicted and observed 

concentrations for all of these simulations are listed in Tables 4-17 and 4-18. 

Analysis of these results leads to the following conclusions: 

• The choice for the convective mixing height model can change individual 

arc-peak concentrations in the Oresund dataset by about 20%. On average, 

the Batchvarova–Gryning option (IMIXH=2) reduces these peak 

concentrations by about 10% from those obtained with the Maul-Carson 

option (IMIXH=1). 

• The choice of either calculated overwater mixing height or using the heights 

estimated from the temperature profiles over the strait (listed in Table 4-10) 

can change individual arc-peak concentrations in the Oresund dataset by 

about 20%. On average, computing an overwater mixing height increases 

these peak concentrations by about 3% to 6% from those obtained with the 

estimated heights. 

• Using either 0.5 m/s or 0.37 m/s for the minimum calculated σv has no effect 

on simulations of the three releases from the Gladsaxe tower in Denmark. 

The initial 7 km transport across this built-up area, plus the lack of a very 

stable overwater boundary layer during these releases appears to promote 

computed σv values at puff height that exceed both of these minimums. For 

the Barseback, Sweden releases, using 0.37 m/s for the minimum σv

increases the arc-peak concentrations by 10% to 40% compared to results 

obtained with using 0.5 m/s. All of the releases from the Barseback tower 

experience little initial over land transport, and the air temperatures on these 

days is significantly warmer than the Oresund temperatures, producing a 

stable overwater boundary layer. 

• None of these conclusions include an assessment of which of these choices 

performs best because in four of the nine experiments the results show a 

large overprediction tendency that is well beyond the 10% to 40% changes 

noted above. 

Further consideration of the dispersion conditions captured in the Oresund 

experiments suggests that turbulence advection, particularly in the offshore flow 

when the overwater turbulence is much weaker than that over land, must be explicitly 

simulated in order to improve performance. A test algorithm introduces this feature 
 Final Report Vol.1 83 

into CALPUFF, and the simulations are repeated. Revised predicted and observed 

concentrations are listed in Tables 4-19 and 4-20. 

Analysis of these results with turbulence advection leads to the following 

conclusions: 

• On average, the Batchvarova–Gryning option (IMIXH=2) reduces individual 

arc-peak concentrations in the Oresund dataset by about 10% from those 

obtained with the Maul-Carson option (IMIXH=1). Similarly, computing an 

overwater mixing height increases these arc-peak concentrations by about 

3% to 6% from those obtained with the estimated heights. While this 

average behavior with the turbulence advection adjustment is nearly the same 

as that without it, changes in the individual arc-peak concentrations cover a 

slightly smaller range. 

• Using either 0.5 m/s or 0.37 m/s for the minimum calculated σv has no effect 

on simulations of the three releases from the Gladsaxe tower in Denmark, 

and only about a 5% effect on releases from the Barseback, Sweden tower. 

With turbulence advection, σv exceeds both minimum values over a longer 

portion of the trajectory across the strait. 

• Advected turbulence increases the diffusion of the Barseback releases as the 

tracer is transported across the Oresund, reducing the tendency of the model 

to overpredict peak concentrations at the opposite shore. It has virtually no 

influence on the impact of the Gladsaxe releases because these are already 

mixed substantially before reaching the Oresund, and turbulence levels over 

the Oresund are not as small as during the Barseback releases. 

• The prototype model for OCS applications should be modified to include 

turbulence advection. With this addition, it has a small mean bias toward 

overprediction, and exhibits scatter that is typical in that it is close to a factor 

of two. 

• The performance of CALPUFF with turbulence advection improves (smaller 

bias) when the Batchvarova – Gryning convective mixing height model is 

selected (IMIXH=2). This improvement is statistically significant at the 95% 

confidence level. 
 Final Report Vol.1 84 

Table 4-17 

Oresund Results with Minimum σv = 0.37 m/s 

 IMIXH=1 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=1 

Est. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Est. OW 

Zi 

Release 

Location 

Month Day Julian End 

Time 

Ta-Ts 

(degC) 

Arc Dist 

(km) 

Cobs 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

 

Barseback 5 16 137 1430 7.5 1 36.3 1199.2 939.3 754.1 946.1 757.2 

 5 16 137 1430 2 38.4 1055.7 511.6 413.2 509.6 401.2 

 

Gladsaxe 5 18 139 1320 0.7 1 31.7 148.7 153.1 135.7 136.0 122.8 

 5 18 139 1320 2 33.5 174.1 153.1 135.7 139.2 123.6 

Barseback 5 22 143 1200 6.1 1 22.2 308.2 3293.2 3153.2 2908.2 3173.1 

 5 22 143 1200 2 22.6 377.2 1035.0 1093.8 955.0 1080.9 

 5 22 143 1200 3 25.3 276.9 777.4 689.3 711.8 685.8 

Barseback 5 29 150 1200 5.8 1 22.0 201.6 2481.1 2117.8 2476.2 2116.1 

 5 29 150 1200 2 25.5 189.5 960.5 835.7 975.4 840.5 

Barseback 5 30 151 1200 1.9 2 32.8 66.5 * 691.8 673.5 732.0 727.4 

Barseback 6 4 156 1200 6.7 1 22.0 227.4 2386.1 2114.9 2252.2 2129.7 

 6 4 156 1200 2 23.6 404.9 122.9 101.2 124.2 105.1 

 6 4 156 1200 3 25.3 168.8 574.2 488.5 555.0 498.0 

Barseback 6 5 157 1200 7.2 1 22.0 1380.3 2748.4 3349.9 3239.2 3379.7 

 6 5 157 1200 2 25.3 752.8 1118.2 797.4 984.9 837.2 

 6 5 157 1200 3 27.2 1191.9 588.7 424.9 535.4 433.0 

 6 5 157 1200 4 30.0 688.4 319.6 237.0 296.4 238.2 

Gladsaxe 6 12 164 1300 -1.4 1 29.1 26.2 103.2 101.9 92.4 92.3 

 6 12 164 1300 2 34.8 52.1 86.3 85.6 79.6 79.3 

Gladsaxe 6 14 166 1400 0.5 1 34.6 95.3 101.1 100.4 91.0 90.5 

 6 14 166 1400 2 36.1 97.1 91.7 91.1 85.0 84.4 

 6 14 166 1400 3 42.0 79.4 62.0 59.8 52.9 51.7 

* Data Bank Report indicates plume missed most samplers (not used in evaluation statistics) 

IMIXH = 1 : Modified Maul – Carson convective mixing height 

IMIXH = 2 : Batchvarova - Gryning convective mixing height 

Calc. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is computed 

Est. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is provided in SEA.DAT file 
 Final Report Vol.1 85 

Table 4-18 

Oresund Results with Minimum σv = 0.5 m/s 

 IMIXH=1 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=1 

Est. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Est. OW 

Zi 

Release Month Day Julian Time Ta-Ts 

(degC) 

Arc Dist 

(km) 

Cobs 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

 Barseback 5 16 137 1430 7.5 1 36.3 1199.2 666.6 550.9 670.1 552.1 

 5 16 137 1430 2 38.4 1055.7 403.8 322.0 403.2 314.3 

Gladsaxe 5 18 139 1320 0.7 1 31.7 148.7 153.1 135.7 136.0 122.8 

 5 18 139 1320 2 33.5 174.1 153.1 135.7 139.2 123.6 

Barseback 5 22 143 1200 6.1 1 22.2 308.2 2263.4 2242.2 2116.2 2243.1 

 5 22 143 1200 2 22.6 377.2 1225.2 1183.2 1062.3 1176.8 

 5 22 143 1200 3 25.3 276.9 664.0 599.3 612.9 595.0 

Barseback 5 29 150 1200 5.8 1 22.0 201.6 2128.4 2017.4 2116.8 2017.4 

 5 29 150 1200 2 25.5 189.5 920.4 802.8 936.3 808.3 

Barseback 5 30 151 1200 1.9 2 32.8 66.5 * 606.2 592.3 638.7 631.4 

Barseback 6 4 156 1200 6.7 1 22.0 227.4 2197.5 1967.1 2078.3 1982.0 

 6 4 156 1200 2 23.6 404.9 144.8 117.9 146.0 123.2 

 6 4 156 1200 3 25.3 168.8 548.8 470.6 531.0 479.0 

Barseback 6 5 157 1200 7.2 1 22.0 1380.3 2164.0 2729.7 2608.2 2747.4 

 6 5 157 1200 2 25.3 752.8 1035.5 748.8 917.0 784.1 

 6 5 157 1200 3 27.2 1191.9 567.3 414.7 517.4 423.2 

 6 5 157 1200 4 30.0 688.4 309.3 233.1 288.0 234.9 

Gladsaxe 6 12 164 1300 -1.4 1 29.1 26.2 103.2 101.9 92.4 92.3 

 6 12 164 1300 2 34.8 52.1 86.3 85.6 79.6 79.3 

Gladsaxe 6 14 166 1400 0.5 1 34.6 95.3 101.1 100.4 91.0 90.5 

 6 14 166 1400 2 36.1 97.1 91.7 91.1 85.0 84.4 

 6 14 166 1400 3 42.0 79.4 62.0 59.8 52.9 51.7 

* Data Bank Report indicates plume missed most samplers (not used in evaluation statistics) 

IMIXH = 1 : Modified Maul – Carson convective mixing height 

IMIXH = 2 : Batchvarova - Gryning convective mixing height 

Calc. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is computed 

Est. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is provided in SEA.DAT file 
 Final Report Vol.1 86 

Table 4-19 

Oresund Results with Minimum σv = 0.37 m/s 

CALPUFF with Turbulence Advection Timescale = 800s 

 IMIXH=1 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=1 

Est. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Est. OW 

Zi 

Release 

Location 

Month Day Julian End 

Time 

Ta-Ts 

(degC) 

Arc Dist 

(km) 

Cobs 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

 

Barseback 5 16 137 1430 7.5 1 36.3 1199.2 542.0 399.9 547.1 401.1 

 5 16 137 1430 2 38.4 1055.7 342.2 260.1 343.8 257.7 

 

Gladsaxe 5 18 139 1320 0.7 1 31.7 148.7 150.8 132.4 133.4 118.1 

 5 18 139 1320 2 33.5 174.1 151.6 133.0 137.4 119.0 

Barseback 5 22 143 1200 6.1 1 22.2 308.2 727.0 637.2 715.2 636.9 

 5 22 143 1200 2 22.6 377.2 649.5 563.8 633.4 560.8 

 5 22 143 1200 3 25.3 276.9 333.9 295.8 341.2 292.1 

Barseback 5 29 150 1200 5.8 1 22.0 201.6 663.2 640.2 666.9 640.2 

 5 29 150 1200 2 25.5 189.5 441.1 389.8 443.5 390.9 

Barseback 5 30 151 1200 1.9 2 32.8 66.5 * 519.0 500.0 501.8 482.3 

Barseback 6 4 156 1200 6.7 1 22.0 227.4 656.2 626.3 666.2 642.2 

 6 4 156 1200 2 23.6 404.9 77.2 68.9 76.1 72.7 

 6 4 156 1200 3 25.3 168.8 255.1 235.8 247.4 236.8 

Barseback 6 5 157 1200 7.2 1 22.0 1380.3 917.5 795.8 868.1 803.7 

 6 5 157 1200 2 25.3 752.8 382.5 290.9 338.0 299.7 

 6 5 157 1200 3 27.2 1191.9 167.0 132.4 153.9 137.1 

 6 5 157 1200 4 30.0 688.4 100.6 82.5 95.5 84.6 

Gladsaxe 6 12 164 1300 -1.4 1 29.1 26.2 87.4 86.4 80.0 79.9 

 6 12 164 1300 2 34.8 52.1 74.3 73.5 68.5 68.6 

Gladsaxe 6 14 166 1400 0.5 1 34.6 95.3 85.6 84.7 74.0 73.6 

 6 14 166 1400 2 36.1 97.1 78.3 77.4 70.1 69.7 

 6 14 166 1400 3 42.0 79.4 55.8 54.5 49.3 48.3 

* Data Bank Report indicates plume missed most samplers (not used in evaluation statistics) 

IMIXH = 1 : Modified Maul – Carson convective mixing height 

IMIXH = 2 : Batchvarova - Gryning convective mixing height 

Calc. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is computed 

Est. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is provided in SEA.DAT file 
 Final Report Vol.1 87 

Table 4-20 

Oresund Results with Minimum σv = 0.5 m/s 

CALPUFF with Turbulence Advection Timescale = 800s 

 IMIXH=1 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Calc. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=1 

Est. OW 

Zi 

IMIXH=2 

Est. OW 

Zi 

Release Month Day Julian Time Ta-Ts 

(degC) 

Arc Dist 

(km) 

Cobs 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

Cpred 

(ng/m3) 

 

Barseback 5 16 137 1430 7.5 1 36.3 1199.2 501.7 392.5 505.4 393.5 

 5 16 137 1430 2 38.4 1055.7 322.8 256.1 323.9 253.9 

 

Gladsaxe 5 18 139 1320 0.7 1 31.7 148.7 150.8 132.4 133.4 118.1 

 5 18 139 1320 2 33.5 174.1 151.6 133.0 137.4 119.0 

Barseback 5 22 143 1200 6.1 1 22.2 308.2 711.9 637.2 697.6 636.9 

 5 22 143 1200 2 22.6 377.2 637.7 563.7 620.1 516.8 

 5 22 143 1200 3 25.3 276.9 327.1 295.8 333.0 292.1 

Barseback 5 29 150 1200 5.8 1 22.0 201.6 663.2 640.2 666.9 640.2 

 5 29 150 1200 2 25.5 189.5 441.1 389.8 443.5 390.9 

Barseback 5 30 151 1200 1.9 2 32.8 66.5 * 491.4 475.7 474.8 458.5 

Barseback 6 4 156 1200 6.7 1 22.0 227.4 656.2 626.3 666.2 642.2 

 6 4 156 1200 2 23.6 404.9 77.2 68.9 76.1 72.7 

 6 4 156 1200 3 25.3 168.8 255.1 235.8 247.4 236.8 

Barseback 6 5 157 1200 7.2 1 22.0 1380.3 912.5 795.8 861.5 803.7 

 6 5 157 1200 2 25.3 752.8 379.8 290.9 334.6 299.7 

 6 5 157 1200 3 27.2 1191.9 166.1 132.4 152.9 137.1 

 6 5 157 1200 4 30.0 688.4 100.1 82.5 95.1 84.6 

Gladsaxe 6 12 164 1300 -1.4 1 29.1 26.2 87.4 86.4 80.0 79.9 

 6 12 164 1300 2 34.8 52.1 74.3 73.5 68.5 68.6 

Gladsaxe 6 14 166 1400 0.5 1 34.6 95.3 85.6 84.7 74.0 73.6 

 6 14 166 1400 2 36.1 97.1 78.3 77.4 70.1 69.7 

 6 14 166 1400 3 42.0 79.4 55.8 54.5 49.3 48.3 

* Data Bank Report indicates plume missed most samplers (not used in evaluation statistics) 

IMIXH = 1 : Modified Maul – Carson convective mixing height 

IMIXH = 2 : Batchvarova - Gryning convective mixing height 

Calc. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is computed 

Est. OW Zi : Mixing height over water is provided in SEA.DAT file 
 Final Report Vol.1 88 

The performance of two CALPUFF configurations (no turbulence advection and 

advection with a timescale of 800s) are intercompared using runs made with a 

minimum σv = 0.37 m/s, and all 4 mixing height combinations in CALMET. Peak 

concentrations paired in time but not space (1 per experiment) for eight of the nine 

Oresund experiments are processed to form the geometric performance measures. 

The experiment from May 30 is excluded because it contains very few sampling 

points and the Data Bank Report (Mortensen and Gryning, 1989) specifically warns 

that the northern part of the tracer plume was not sampled. 

Results of applying the model evaluation software, including 95% confidence limits, 

are listed in Table 4-21 and Figure 4-13. The primary feature of the results is the 

dramatic improvement obtained with the turbulence advection formulation. Without 

it, the observations are overpredicted for most Barseback releases so there is a 

substantial mean bias (more than a factor of two overprediction). With turbulence 

advection, MG is close to 1. The confidence interval is large here, in part because 

there are so few data points (8) and the dataset includes cases of both factor-of-two 

overpredictions and underpredictions. The secondary feature is the improvement in 

MG when the Batchvarova – Gryning convective mixing height model is selected 

(IMIXH=2). Note that this improvement is statistically significant at the 95% 

confidence level. 

Based on these measures, the prototype model for OCS applications should be 

modified to include turbulence advection. With this addition, it has a small mean 

bias toward overprediction, and exhibits scatter that is typical in that it is close to a 

factor of two. 
 Final Report Vol.1 89 

Table 4-21 

Performance Statistics for CALPUFF Configurations 

with Modeled Iy for Minimum σv = 0.37 and 0.5 m/s 

 OUTPUT OF THE BOOT PROGRAM, LEVEL 960626 

 No. of observations = 8 

 No. of models = 9 

 (with the observed data counted as one) 

 No. of blocks = 1 

 No. of pieces in each block 

 8 

 Oresund Peak (N= 8) 

 model mean sigma bias vg corr fa2 mg high 2nd high pcor 

 |<--------------- (logarithmic values) ---------------->| (arithmetic values) 

 OBS. 5.66 1.07 0.00 1.00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1380 1199 n/a 

 Zi1 6.59 1.46 -0.94 6.65 0.725 0.625 0.392 3293 2748 n/a 

 Zi2 6.53 1.47 -0.88 5.97 0.728 0.500 0.417 3350 3153 n/a 

 Zi1OW 6.55 1.51 -0.90 6.18 0.746 0.500 0.408 3239 2908 n/a 

 Zi2OW 6.50 1.52 -0.84 5.96 0.732 0.500 0.431 3380 3173 n/a 

 800Zi1 5.83 0.94 -0.17 1.49 0.826 0.750 0.842 918 727 n/a 

 800Zi2 5.73 0.90 -0.07 1.58 0.781 0.750 0.932 796 640 n/a 

 800Zi1OW 5.78 0.99 -0.13 1.50 0.819 0.750 0.882 868 715 n/a 

 800Zi2OW 5.69 0.96 -0.03 1.59 0.780 0.750 0.966 804 642 n/a 

 SUMMARY OF CONFIDENCE LIMITS ANALYSES 

 ------------------------------------- 

 D(log(vg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 (NONE significantly different from zero) 

 D(log(mg)) among models: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 Z Z Z Z 8 8 8 8 

 i i i i 0 0 0 0 

 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 

 O O Z Z Z Z 

 W W i i i i 

 1 2 1 2 

 O O 

 W W 

 -------------------------------- 

 Zi1 | X X X X 

 Zi2 | X X X X 

 Zi1OW | X X X X 

 Zi2OW | X X X X 

 800Zi1 | X X 

 800Zi2 | 

 800Zi1OW| X 

 log(vg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 Z Z Z Z 8 8 8 8 

 i i i i 0 0 0 0 

 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 

 O O Z Z Z Z 

 W W i i i i 

 1 2 1 2 

 O O 

 W W 

 -------------------------------- 

 X X X X X 

 log(mg) for each model: an 'X' indicates significantly different from zero 

 Z Z Z Z 8 8 8 8 

 i i i i 0 0 0 0 

 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 

 O O Z Z Z Z 

 W W i i i i 

 1 2 1 2 

 O O 

 W W 

 -------------------------------- 

 X X 
 Final Report Vol.1 90 

Figure 4-13. Graphical depiction of MG,VG model performance results for CALPUFF configurations 

with and without turbulence advection. 

Zi1 – No Turb Advection, Maul-Carson Mixing Ht 

Zi1OW – No Turb Advection, Maul-Carson Mixing Ht , Obs Overwater 

Zi2 – No Turb Advection, Batchvarova-Gryning Mixing Ht 

Zi1OW – No Turb Advection, Batchvarova-Gryning Mixing Ht , Obs Overwater 

800Zi1 –Turb Advection (800s), Maul-Carson Mixing Ht 

800Zi1OW –Turb Advection (800s), Maul-Carson Mixing Ht , Obs Overwater 

800Zi2 –Turb Advection (800s), Batchvarova-Gryning Mixing Ht 

800Zi1OW –Turb Advection (800s), Batchvarova-Gryning Mixing Ht , Obs Overwater 
 Final Report Vol.1 91 

4.4 Recommendations 

A minimum σv for overwater cells should be introduced in CALPUFF so that a value 

appropriate to overwater dispersion (e.g. 0.37 m/s) can be applied independently of 

the minimum used over land. 

The computed Lagrangian timescale approach for lateral dispersion, based in part on 

the SCIPUFF formulation, leads to unacceptably large overpredictions in CALPUFF 

and this draft option should be removed at this time. 

The COARE overwater flux module should be selected in place of the previous 

OCD-based model. 

The standard COARE option (no shallow water adjustment or wave model option) 

appears suitable to these coastal datasets, and there is little performance sensitivity 

among these options. 

The SEA.DAT format should allow wind and air temperature measurement heights to 

be different. 

The Batchvarova-Gryning convective mixing height option in CALMET was tested 

in the Oresund dataset and showed promising improvements in model performance. 

The Batchvarova-Gryning scheme should be tested further in a wide variety of 

operational simulations for possible general use as the mixing height default option in 

CALMET. 

Turbulence advection should be formulated for general use and implemented in the 

CALMET/CALPUFF system. 

A re-analysis of these evaluation datasets should be conducted once 

CALMET/CALPUFF Version 6 becomes available. The ability of this version to use 

time steps shorter than one hour will facilitate evaluations with the Gaviota and 

Carpinteria 30-minute datasets, and allow the full set of measurements to be used at 

all sites. Although the modeling system will use a one-hour time step operationally, 

evaluations at shorter time steps may allow a better integration of the tracer 

concentrations and meteorological measurements in both space and time. 
 Final Report Vol.1 92 

5. STANDARD DATASET: GULF OF MEXICO 

Dataset Description 

Meteorological, geophysical and ozone data required for CALMET/CALPUFF 

simulations within the MMS Gulf of Mexico region have been assembled in an MMS 

standard dataset for year 2003. With this dataset, air quality analyses can be readily 

configured and run using a complete set of meteorological observations as well as a 

comprehensive database of hourly meteorological fields from the 20km gridded 

output of the Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) weather model, which supplies dynamically 

consistent wind and temperature fields in data-sparse areas such as the waters of the 

Gulf. The dataset includes: 

• USGS terrain elevation files with 90m resolution and USGS land use data files 

with 200m resolution; 

• 13 SEA.DAT files of one full year (2003) of data from buoy stations in the 

domain (1 station/file); 

• 21 UP.DAT files of one full year (2003) of data from upper-air stations in the 

domain (1 station/file); 

• A SURF.DAT file containing one full year (2003) of data from 230 NWS hourly 

surface meteorological stations in the domain; 

• A PRECIP.DAT file containing one full year (2003) of data from 271 NWS 

precipitation stations in the domain; 

• An OZONE.DAT file containing one full year (2003) of data from 201 AIRS and 

CASTNET stations in the domain; 

• One full year (2003) of gridded prognostic meteorological output fields from the 

RUC model formatted as 50 tiles (90 RUC grid-points/tile), for the portion of the 

20km RUC grid that covers the MMS Gulf of Mexico domain. 

Note that the RUCDECODE program is provided to assemble RUC grid cell data 

from one or more tiles into a 3D.DAT file for a user’s CALMET domain, and a 

SUBDOMN utility is provided to extract stations from the SURF.DAT, 

PRECIP.DAT, and OZONE.DAT files for a user’s CALMET domain. The RUC 

data tiles are provided on a set of six DVDs, and all other data are provided on a 

single DVD. 

The base time zone for modeling with these data must be Central Standard Time 

(CST) -- i.e. time zone 6 (UTC-0600) -- because SURF.DAT, PRECIP.DAT, 
 Final Report Vol.1 93 

SEA.DAT and OZONE.DAT files are provided in time zone 6. UP.DAT files are, as 

always, in UTC time (UTC-0000). 

A CALMET/CALPUFF domain for a particular MMS application should be defined 

so that the entire domain is inside the area bordered by the yellow line (MMS 

modeling area) in Figures 5-1 through 5-6. 

Figure 5-1 shows locations of available surface meteorological data stations and 

Table 5-1 lists the station names, numbers and coordinates. Data for these stations 

are contained in the file named STANDARD_S.DAT. 

The locations of available upper air data stations are shown in Figure 5-2 and Table 

5-2. Each UP.DAT file contains twice-daily upper-air profiles for a single station. A 

CALMET application should use the stations and corresponding UP.DAT files that 

lie within and close to the application domain. 

The locations of all available buoys are shown in Figure 5-3 and Table 5-3. Each 

SEA.DAT file contains overwater data from a single buoy. The SEA.DAT files 

should be selected in the groups indicated in Figure 5-3 and Table 5-3 because 

CALMET must have at least one valid sea surface temperature (SST) each hour. If a 

single SEA.DAT file were used in an application, that particular buoy must have 

valid SST data every hour for the whole year. The buoy data at each station in the 

dataset were screened for missing SST data, and then the stations were grouped to 

fulfill this requirement. If a CALMET domain includes one or more of the buoys 

from different groups, then all buoys from those groups should be included. 

Figure 5-4 shows locations of available precipitation data stations and Table 5-4 lists 

the station names, numbers and coordinates. Data for these stations are contained in 

the file named STANDARD_P.DAT. 

Figure 5-5 and Table 5-5 show and list available ozone data for the MMS modeling 

area. There are 194 available AIRS sites and seven CASTNET sites. Data for these 

stations are contained in the file named STANDARD_O.DAT. 

Figure 5-6 shows the location of the RUC data “tiles” arranged by grid-point 

locations. 50 RUC tiles cover the MMS modeling area. Program RUCDECODE 

should be run to extract data from individual tiles into the 3D.DAT files for input to 

CALMET. 

USGS terrain elevation files with 90 m horizontal resolution and USGS land use data 

files with 200 m horizontal resolution are provided for the entire region. Individual 

files with data within the CALMET domain must be processed using the TERREL 

(extracts terrain), CTGPROC (extracts landuse) and MAKEGEO (combines terrain 

and land use) preprocessors to prepare the CALMET GEO.DAT file. The terrain 
 Final Report Vol.1 94 

data files are one-degree sheets, and are named by the latitude and longitude of the 

southeast corner of the sheet. The land use data files are sheets covering one degree 

latitude and two degrees longitude. They are also named by the latitude and 

longitude of the southeast corner of the sheet. 

Extracting Data Subsets 

The SUBDOMN utility must be run via the CALPUFF PROfessional (CALPRO) 

GUI to prepare the surface and precipitation data files for CALMET, and ozone data 

file for CALPUFF. Those stations to be extracted for a simulation are selected by 

providing a latitude and longitude range appropriate to the CALMET domain. The 

output files produced are CALMET/CALPUFF-ready. In addition, SUBDOMN 

requires the map projection and the datum for the CALMET grid coordinates so that 

it can prepare the station information needed for the CALMET control file. The 

station coordinates in the dataset files are transformed to the CALMET coordinates, 

and the full control file section for each (Input Group 7 for surface stations, Input 

Group 9 for precipitation stations) is written to a list file. Surface station information 

is written to SURF_STN.LST; precipitation station information is written to 

PRECIP_STN.LST. An editor can be used to cut-and-paste the control file sections 

from these files into the CALMET control file. Station information for the ozone 

stations, transformed to the CALMET/CALPUFF coordinate system, is included in 

the OZONE.DAT file for CALPUFF. 

Two screens in the GUI are filled in for SUBDOMN. If the “shared information” has 

been identified and saved in a file, the “shared information” is automatically updated 

into the first screen, “Grid setting” (Figure 5-7). Otherwise, all the fields in the first 

screen can be typed in using the CALMET application parameters. The second 

screen, “Inputs/Outputs & Run”, is shown in Figure 5-8. For each of the three data 

sets (surface, precipitation and ozone), a “box” that covers entire modeling domain 

and an appropriate buffer zone around the modeling domain (order of magnitude of 

100 km) should be defined. Minimum and maximum longitude and latitude defining 

that box are the inputs to the second screen, along with the names of the standard data 

files and the data output files. 

The RUCDECODE utility must be run in a command-window to prepare the 

3D.DAT file(s) of RUC data for CALMET. Its control file is configured to identify a 

domain and a time period to extract. Each application of RUCDECODE requires its 

own control file and the user must manage the names of the input and output files 

created. Multiple RUC 3D.DAT files may be needed if the space-time domain of an 

application produces a 3D.DAT file that exceeds the limits imposed by the operating 

system. An example control file is listed in Table 5-6. The RUCDECODE program 

is contained on the DVD with the data files. 
 Final Report Vol.1 95 

-102 -100 -98 -96 -94 -92 -90 -88 -86 -84 -

Longitude

2224262830323436

Latitude

Figure 5-1. Locations of the surface stations in the MMS standard data set. 
 Final Report Vol.1 96 

Table 5-1. 

NWS Hourly Surface Stations 

WMO 

Number 

WBAN 

Number 

Station Identifier Station Name State 

North 

Latitude 

(deg) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

722230 13894 KMOB MOBILE REGIONAL AP AL 30.683 88.250 166.859 722235 13838 KBFM MOBILE DOWNTOWN AP AL 30.633 88.067 184.394 722260 13895 KMGM MONTGOMERY DANNELLY FIELD AL 32.300 86.400 337.917 722265 13821 KMXF MAXWELL AFB AL 32.383 86.350 342.333 722267 3878 KTOI TROY AF AL 31.867 86.017 375.426 722268 99999 KDHN DOTHAN MUNICIPAL AL 31.317 85.450 431.125 722269 3850 KOZR CAIRNS FIELD FORT RUCKER AL 31.267 85.717 406.031 722275 99999 K79J ANDALUSIA/OPP ARPT AL 31.317 86.400 341.139 722276 99999 KGZH EVERGREEN AL 31.417 87.050 279.289 722280 13876 KBHM BIRMINGHAM MUNICIPAL AP AL 33.567 86.750 301.317 722284 99999 KAUO AUBURN-OPELIKA APT AL 32.616 85.433 427.332 722286 93806 KTCL TUSCALOOSA MUNICIPAL AP AL 33.217 87.617 221.708 722287 13871 KANB ANNISTON METROPOLITAN AP AL 33.583 85.850 384.669 722300 53864 KEET SHELBY CO ARPT AL 33.167 86.767 300.921 994420 99999 DPIA1 DAUPHIN ISLAND AL 30.250 88.083 183.536 723418 13977 KTXK TEXARKANA WEBB FIELD AR 33.450 94.000 -371.256 723419 93992 KELD EL DORADO GOODWIN FIELD AR 33.217 92.817 -262.080 723424 99999 KLLQ MONTICELLO MUNI AR 33.567 91.717 -159.202 722010 12836 KEYW KEY WEST INTL ARPT FL 24.550 81.750 832.013 722011 99999 KISM ORLANDO/KISSIMMEE FL 28.283 81.433 834.879 722012 99999 KVVG THE VILLAGES FL 28.950 81.850 789.367 722014 99999 KBKV BROOKSVILLE FL 28.467 82.450 734.643 722015 12850 KNQX KEY WEST NAS FL 24.583 81.683 838.510 722016 99999 KMTH MARATHON AIRPORT FL 24.733 81.050 900.996 722020 12839 KMIA MIAMI INTL AP FL 25.817 80.300 966.790 722021 99999 KVDF TAMPA/VANDENBURG FL 28.017 82.350 747.487 722022 99999 KBCT BOCA RATON FL 26.383 80.100 981.592 722024 99999 KOPF MIAMI/OPA LOCKA FL 25.900 80.283 967.749 722025 12849 KFLL FORT LAUDERDALE HOLLYWOOD INT FL 26.067 80.150 979.472 722026 12826 KHST HOMESTEAD AFB FL 25.483 80.383 961.453 722029 99999 KTMB MIAMI/KENDALL-TAMIA FL 25.650 80.433 955.013 722030 12844 KPBI WEST PALM BEACH INTL ARPT FL 26.683 80.100 978.895 722034 99999 KPGD PUNTA GORDA FL 26.917 81.983 791.304 722037 99999 KHWO HOLLYWOOD/N. PERRY FL 26.000 80.233 971.830 722038 12897 KAPF NAPLES MUNICIPAL FL 26.150 81.767 818.327 722039 99999 KFXE FORT LAUDERDALE FL 26.200 80.167 976.597 722040 12838 KMLB MELBOURNE REGIONAL FL 28.100 80.650 912.594 
 Final Report Vol.1 97 

Table 5-1. (Continued) 

NWS Hourly Surface Stations 

WMO 

Number 

WBAN 

Number 

Station Identifier Station Name State 

North 

Latitude 

(deg) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

722045 12843 KVRB VERO BEACH MUNICIPAL ARPT FL 27.650 80.417 939.204 722046 99999 KTIX TITUSVILLE FL 28.517 80.800 894.498 722049 99999 KPMP POMPANO BEACH FL 26.233 80.100 982.940 722050 12815 KMCO ORLANDO INTL ARPT FL 28.433 81.333 843.427 722053 12841 KORL ORLANDO EXECUTIVE AP FL 28.550 81.333 842.506 722055 99999 KOCF OCALA MUNI (AWOS) FL 29.167 82.217 752.336 722056 12834 KDAB DAYTONA BEACH INTL AP FL 29.183 81.067 863.184 722057 12854 KSFB ORLANDO SANFORD AIRPORT FL 28.783 81.250 848.710 722060 13889 KJAX JACKSONVILLE INTL ARPT FL 30.500 81.700 792.187 722065 93837 KNIP JACKSONVILLE NAS FL 30.233 81.667 797.353 722066 3853 KNRB MAYPORT NS FL 30.400 81.417 819.933 722067 93832 KNZC JACKSONVILLE CECIL FLD NAS FL 30.217 81.883 776.833 722068 99999 KCRG JACKSONVILLE/CRAIG FL 30.333 81.517 810.912 722103 99999 KFPR FT PIERCE/ST LUCIE FL 27.500 80.367 945.406 722104 92806 KSPG ST PETERSBURG ALBERT WHITTED FL 27.767 82.633 721.541 722106 12835 KFMY FORT MYERS PAGE FIELD FL 26.583 81.867 805.204 722108 99999 KRSW FT MYERS/SW FLORIDA FL 26.533 81.750 817.144 722110 12842 KTPA TAMPA INTERNATIONAL AP FL 27.967 82.533 729.967 722115 99999 KSRQ SARASOTA-BRADENTON FL 27.400 82.550 732.143 722116 99999 KPIE SAINT PETERSBURG FL 27.917 82.683 715.653 722119 99999 KLAL LAKELAND REGIONAL FL 27.983 82.017 780.225 722120 12833 KCTY CROSS CITY AIRPORT FL 29.617 83.100 664.259 722123 99999 KBOW BARTOW MUNICIPAL FL 27.950 81.783 803.307 722140 93805 KTLH TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AP FL 30.400 84.350 539.997 722146 12816 KGNV GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AP FL 29.700 82.283 742.229 722200 12832 KAQQ APALACHICOLA MUNI AP FL 29.733 85.033 477.770 722210 13858 KVPS VALPARAISO ELGIN AFB FL 30.483 86.517 332.698 722212 99999 KSGJ ST AUGSUTINE ARPT FL 29.967 81.333 831.354 722213 99999 KLEE LEESBURG MUNI ARPT FL 28.817 81.800 795.192 722215 13884 KCEW CRESTVIEW BOB SIKES AP FL 30.783 86.517 331.747 722223 13899 KPNS PENSACOLA REGIONAL AP FL 30.483 87.183 269.094 722224 99999 K40J PERRY FOLEY ARPT FL 30.067 83.567 616.713 722225 3855 KNPA PENSACOLA FOREST SHERMAN NAS FL 30.350 87.317 256.620 

722226 93841 KNSE WHITING FIELD NAAS FL 30.717 87.017 284.313 722245 99999 KPFN PANAMA CITY/BAY CO. FL 30.217 85.683 413.376 722246 99999 KEGI DUKE FLD/EGLIN AUX FL 30.650 86.517 332.169 747750 13846 KPAM TYNDALL AFB FL 30.067 85.583 423.549 
 Final Report Vol.1 98 

Table 5-1. (Continued) 

NWS Hourly Surface Stations 

WMO 

Number 

WBAN 

Number 

Station Identifier Station Name State 

North 

Latitude 

(deg) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

747760 3818 KMAI MARIANNA FL 30.833 85.183 458.532 747770 3852 KHRT VALPARAISO HURLBURT FL 30.417 86.683 317.044 747880 12810 KMCF MACDILL AFB FL 27.850 82.517 732.325 747930 99999 KGIF WINTERHAVEN FL 28.050 81.750 805.779 747946 99999 KTTS NASA SHUTTLE FCLTY FL 28.617 80.717 901.710 747950 12867 KCOF COCOA BEACH PATRICK AFB FL 28.233 80.600 916.330 994050 99999 LKWF1 LAKE WORTH FL 26.617 80.033 986.103 994220 99999 VENF1 VENICE PIER FL 27.067 82.450 744.242 994360 99999 CSBF1 CAPE SAN BLAS FL 29.667 85.367 445.937 994390 99999 SPGF1 SETTLEMENT POINT FL 26.683 79.000 1,087.381 994410 99999 SAUF1 ST. AUGUSTINE FL 29.867 81.267 838.467 994430 99999 MLRF1 MOLASSES REEF FL 25.017 80.383 965.526 994450 99999 SMKF1 SOMBRERO KEY FL 24.633 81.133 893.462 994560 99999 FWYF1 FOWEY ROCKS FL 25.583 80.100 988.785 994570 99999 SANF1 SAND KEY FL 24.467 81.883 819.232 994620 99999 LONF1 LONG KEY FL 24.833 80.867 918.555 994630 99999 DRYF1 DRY TORTUGAS FL 24.633 82.867 718.964 994640 99999 CDRF1 CEDAR KEY FL 29.133 83.033 673.765 994650 99999 KTNF1 KEATON BEACH FL 29.817 83.583 616.639 722069 99999 KDTS DESTIN FT. WALTON GA 30.400 86.467 337.739 722070 3822 KSAV SAVANNAH INTL AP GA 32.117 81.200 826.888 722090 99999 KLHW FT STEWART/WRIGHT GA 31.883 81.567 794.255 722130 13861 KAYS WAYCROSS WARE CO AP GA 31.250 82.400 720.284 722134 99999 KVDI VIDALIA MUNI ARPT GA 32.183 82.367 716.927 722135 13870 KAMG ALMA BACON COUNTY AP GA 31.533 82.500 708.888 722136 99999 KBQK BRUNSWICK/GLYNCO GA 31.250 81.467 808.571 722137 13878 KSSI BRUNSWICK MALCOLM MCKINNON AP GA 31.150 81.383 817.301 

722160 13869 KABY ALBANY DOUGHERTY COUNTY AP GA 31.533 84.183 549.952 722166 93845 KVLD VALDOSTA WB AIRPORT GA 30.783 83.283 639.541 722170 3813 KMCN MACON MIDDLE GA REGIONAL AP GA 32.683 83.650 593.649 722175 13860 KWRB WARNER ROBINS AFB GA 32.633 83.600 598.611 722176 99999 KCCO NEWNAN GA 33.317 84.767 486.269 722180 3820 KAGS AUGUSTA BUSH FIELD GA 33.367 81.967 745.777 722181 99999 KDNL AUGUSTA\DANIEL FLD GA 33.466 82.033 738.939 722197 99999 KFFC ATLANTA (NEXRAD) GA 33.367 84.550 506.171 722250 99999 KLSF FORT BENNING GA 32.333 85.000 469.115 722255 93842 KCSG COLUMBUS METROPOLITAN ARPT GA 32.517 84.950 472.957 
 Final Report Vol.1 99 

Table 5-1. (Continued) 

NWS Hourly Surface Stations 

WMO 

Number 

WBAN 

Number 

Station Identifier Station Name State 

North 

Latitude 

(deg) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

747804 99999 KSVN HUNTER (AAF) GA 32.017 81.150 832.383 747805 99999 KTBR STATESBORO GA 32.482 81.733 774.136 747806 99999 KOPN THOMASTON GA 32.950 84.267 534.617 747807 99999 KLGC LA GRANGE GA 33.017 85.067 459.757 747810 99999 KVAD MOODY AFB/VALDOSTA GA 30.967 83.200 646.298 722310 12916 KMSY NEW ORLEANS INTL ARPT LA 30.000 90.250 -23.993 722312 99999 KHDC HAMMOND LA 30.517 90.417 -39.824 722314 3934 KARA NEW IBERIA NAAS LA 30.033 91.883 -180.653 722315 53917 KNEW NEW ORLEANS LAKEFRONT AP LA 30.050 90.033 -3.165 722316 12958 KNBG NEW ORLEANS ALVIN CALLENDER F LA 29.817 90.017 -1.634 722317 13970 KBTR BATON ROUGE RYAN ARPT LA 30.533 91.150 -109.810 722319 99999 KIER NATCHITOCHES LA 31.733 93.100 -292.596 722320 12884 BVE BOOTHVILLE WSCMO CIT LA 29.333 89.400 57.947 722329 99999 KPTN PATTERSON MEMORIAL LA 29.717 91.333 -128.272 722366 99999 KASD SLIDELL LA 30.350 89.817 17.505 722390 3931 KPOE FORT POLK AAF LA 31.050 93.183 -302.407 722400 3937 KLCH LAKE CHARLES REGIONAL ARPT LA 30.117 93.233 -309.899 722403 99999 KP92 SALT POINT (RAMOS) LA 29.600 91.300 -125.235 722405 13976 KLFT LAFAYETTE REGIONAL AP LA 30.200 91.983 -189.945 722406 99999 KHUM HOUMA-TERREBONNE LA 29.567 90.667 -64.276 722480 13957 KSHV SHREVEPORT REGIONAL ARPT LA 32.450 93.817 -357.758 722484 53905 KDTN SHREVEPORT DOWNTOWN LA 32.533 93.750 -351.196 722485 13944 KBAD BARKSDALE AFB LA 32.500 93.667 -343.536 722486 13942 KMLU MONROE REGIONAL AP LA 32.517 92.033 -190.446 722487 13935 KESF ALEXANDRIA ESLER REGIONAL AP LA 31.400 92.300 -217.795 722488 99999 KTVR VICKSBURG\TALLULAH LA 32.250 91.033 -97.023 747540 99999 KAEX ALEXANDRIA INT LA 31.333 92.550 -241.621 994010 99999 BURL1 SOUTHWEST PASS LA 28.900 89.433 54.983 994290 99999 GDIL1 GRAND ISLE LA 29.267 89.967 3.189 722340 13865 KMEI MERIDIAN KEY FIELD MS 32.333 88.750 117.310 722345 3866 KNMM MERIDIAN NAAS MS 32.550 88.567 134.200 722347 99999 HBG HATTIESBURG MUNI MS 31.267 89.250 71.115 722348 99999 KPIB PINE BELT RGNL AWOS MS 31.467 89.333 63.123 722350 3940 KJAN JACKSON INTERNATIONAL AP MS 32.317 90.083 -7.791 722354 99999 KHKS HAWKINS FIELD MS 32.213 90.217 -20.389 722356 13939 KGLH GREENVILLE MUNICIPAL MS 33.483 90.983 -91.222 722357 99999 KHEZ NATCHEZ/HARDY(AWOS) MS 31.617 91.300 -122.850 
 Final Report Vol.1 100 

Table 5-1. (Continued)

NWS Hourly Surface Stations 

WMO Number 

WBAN 

Number 

Station Identifier Station Name State 

North 

Latitude 

(deg) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

722358 93919 KMCB MCCOMB PIKE COUNTY AP MS 31.233 90.467 -44.296 722359 13978 KGWO GREENWOOD LEFLORE ARPT MS 33.500 90.083 -7.701 723307 99999 KGTR GOLDEN TRI(AWOS) MS 33.450 88.583 131.538 747685 99999 KGPT GULFPORT-BILOXI MS 30.400 89.067 89.202 747686 13820 KBIX KEESLER AFB MS 30.417 88.917 103.526 747688 99999 KPQL PASCAGOULA MS 30.467 88.533 140.166 722080 13880 KCHS CHARLESTON INTL ARPT SC 32.900 80.033 929.209 722085 93831 KNBC BEAUFORT MCAS SC 32.483 80.717 869.094 723115 53854 KOGB ORANGEBURG SC 33.467 80.850 848.461 994230 99999 FBIS1 FOLLY ISLAND SC 32.683 79.883 945.160 690190 13910 KDYS ABILENE DYESS AFB TX 32.433 99.850 -922.514 722410 12917 KBPT PORT ARTHUR JEFFERSON COUNTY TX 29.950 94.017 -385.635 722416 12971 KBAZ NEW BRAUNFELS TX 29.717 98.050 -774.088 722420 12923 KGLS GALVESTON/SCHOLES TX 29.267 94.867 -470.216 722427 99999 KLVJ HOUSTON/CLOVER FLD TX 29.517 95.233 -504.368 722429 99999 KDWH HOUSTON/D.W. HOOKS TX 30.067 95.550 -532.126 722430 12960 KIAH HOUSTON BUSH INTERCONTINENTAL TX 30.000 95.367 -514.918 722435 12918 KHOU HOUSTON WILLIAM P HOBBY AP TX 29.650 95.283 -508.545 722436 12906 KEFD HOUSTON ELLINGTON AFB TX 29.617 95.167 -497.540 722444 99999 KCXO CONROE TX 30.367 95.417 -517.905 722445 3904 KCLL COLLEGE STATION EASTERWOOD FL TX 30.583 96.367 -607.405 722446 93987 KLFK LUFKIN ANGELINA CO TX 31.233 94.750 -450.429 722447 99999 KUTS HUNTSVILLE TX 30.733 95.583 -531.907 722448 13972 KTYR TYLER/POUNDS FLD TX 32.350 95.400 -506.537 722469 99999 KCRS CORSICANA TX 32.033 96.400 -602.109 722470 3901 KGGG LONGVIEW GREGG COUNTY AP TX 32.383 94.717 -442.362 722479 99999 KGKY ARLINGTON TX 32.667 97.100 -663.793 722489 99999 KTRL TERRELL TX 32.717 96.267 -585.702 722499 99999 KOCH NACOGDOCHES (AWOS) TX 31.583 94.717 -445.799 722500 12919 KBRO BROWNSVILLE S PADRE ISL INTL TX 25.900 97.433 -740.603 722505 12904 KHRL HARLINGEN RIO GRANDE VALLEY I TX 26.233 97.650 -759.882 722506 12959 KMFE MCALLEN MILLER INTL AP TX 26.183 98.233 -818.080 722508 99999 KPIL PORT ISABEL/CAMERON TX 26.167 97.350 -730.560 722510 12924 KCRP CORPUS CHRISTI INTL ARPT TX 27.767 97.517 -736.214 722515 12926 KNGP CORPUS CHRISTI NAS TX 27.683 97.283 -713.879 722516 12928 KNQI KINGSVILLE TX 27.500 97.817 -767.452 722517 12932 KALI ALICE INTL AP TX 27.733 98.033 -786.928 
 Final Report Vol.1 101 

Table 5-1. (Continued) 

NWS Hourly Surface Stations 

WMO 

Number 

WBAN 

Number 

Station Identifier Station Name State 

North 

Latitude 

(deg) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

722520 12920 KLRD LAREDO INTL AP TX 27.533 99.467 -928.864 722523 12970 KSSF SAN ANTONIO/STINSON TX 29.333 98.467 -817.077 722524 99999 KRKP ROCKPORT/ARANSAS CO TX 28.083 97.050 -688.506 722526 12947 KCOT COTULLA FAA AP TX 28.450 99.217 -896.709 722527 99999 KLBX ANGLETON/LAKE JACKS TX 29.117 95.467 -528.893 722530 12921 KSAT SAN ANTONIO INTL AP TX 29.533 98.467 -815.539 722533 12962 KHDO HONDO MUNICIPAL AP TX 29.367 99.167 -884.222 722535 12909 KSKF SAN ANTONIO KELLY FIELD AFB TX 29.383 98.583 -827.862 722536 12911 KRND RANDOLPH AFB TX 29.533 98.283 -797.843 722537 99999 KERV KERRVILLE MUNICIPAL TX 29.983 99.083 -871.053 722539 99999 KHYI SAN MARCOS MUNI TX 29.883 97.867 -755.328 722540 13904 KATT AUSTIN MUELLER MUNICIPAL AP TX 30.300 97.700 -736.398 722541 99999 KTKI MCKINNEY MUNI ARPT TX 33.183 96.583 -612.411 722542 99999 KBMQ BURNET MUNI. TX 30.733 98.233 -784.058 722543 99999 KSGR HOUSTON\SUGAR LAND TX 29.617 95.650 -544.018 722544 13958 KATT CAMP MABRY TX 30.317 97.767 -742.677 722547 99999 KGTU GEORGETOWN (AWOS) TX 30.683 97.683 -732.100 722550 12912 KVCT VICTORIA REGIONAL AP TX 28.867 96.933 -672.155 722553 99999 K11R BRENHAM TX 30.217 96.367 -609.524 722554 99999 K3T5 LAGRANGE TX 29.900 96.950 -667.280 722555 12935 KPSX PALACIOS MUNICIPAL AP TX 28.717 96.250 -606.851 722560 13959 KACT WACO REGIONAL AP TX 31.617 97.233 -683.129 722563 99999 KPWG MC GREGOR (AWOS) TX 31.483 97.317 -691.945 722570 3933 KHLR FORT HOOD TX 31.133 97.717 -732.179 722575 99999 KILE KILLEEN MUNI (AWOS) TX 31.083 97.683 -729.306 722576 3902 KGRK ROBERT GRAY AAF TX 31.067 97.833 -743.640 722577 99999 KTPL TEMPLE/MILLER(AWOS) TX 31.150 97.400 -702.026 722583 13960 KDAL DALLAS LOVE FIELD TX 32.850 96.850 -639.303 722588 99999 KGVT GREENVILLE/MAJORS TX 33.067 96.067 -565.091 722589 99999 KDTO DENTON (ASOS) TX 33.200 97.183 -668.055 722590 3927 KDFW DALLAS-FORT WORTH INTL AP TX 32.900 97.017 -654.552 722593 99999 KFWS DFW NEXRAD TX 32.567 97.300 -683.135 722594 99999 KAFW FORT WORTH/ALLIANCE TX 32.983 97.317 -681.950 722595 13911 KNFW FORT WORTH NAS TX 32.767 97.450 -695.797 722596 13961 KFTW FORT WORTH MEACHAM TX 32.817 97.367 -687.719 722597 93985 KMWL MINERAL WELLS MUNICIPAL AP TX 32.783 98.067 -753.224 722598 99999 KADS DALLAS/ADDISON ARPT TX 32.967 96.833 -636.990 
 Final Report Vol.1 102 

Table 5-1. (Concluded) 

NWS Hourly Surface Stations 

WMO 

Number 

WBAN 

Number 

Station Identifier Station Name State 

North 

Latitude 

(deg) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

722599 99999 KRBD DALLAS/REDBIRD ARPT TX 32.683 96.867 -641.933 722600 3969 SEP STEPHENVILLE CLARK FIELD TX 32.217 98.183 -768.257 722630 23034 KSJT SAN ANGELO MATHIS FIELD TX 31.350 100.500 -993.588 722660 13962 KABI ABILENE REGIONAL AP TX 32.417 99.683 -907.047 722666 99999 KBWD BROWNWOOD MUNICIPAL TX 31.800 98.950 -843.539 747400 13973 KJCT JUNCTION KIMBLE COUNTY AP TX 30.517 99.767 -931.775 994110 99999 PTAT2 PORT ARANSAS TX 27.833 97.050 -690.107 994260 99999 SRST2 SABINE TX 29.667 94.050 -389.844 

1Lambert Conformal Coordinate origin is 28.0N, 90.0W, standard parallels are 23.0N, 33.0N, datum is NWS-84.
 Final Report Vol.1 103 

-102 -100 -98 -96 -94 -92 -90 -88 -86 -84 -

Longitude

2224262830323436

Latitude

72230

72340

72210

72214

72215

72233

72240

72248 72235

72249

72250

72251

72261

72265

72363

Figure 5-2. Locations of the Upper Air stations in the MMS standard data set. 
 Final Report Vol.1 104 

Table 5-2. 

Upper Air Stations 

Lambert C

Coordin

Station 

Identifier WBAN No. WMO No. Station Name State North Latitude (deg) West Longitude (deg) East (km) 

BMX 53823 72230 Birmingham (Shelby APT) AL 33.10 86.70 307.358 

LZK 03952 72340 N Little Rock AR 34.83 92.27 -207.850 

EYW 12836 72201 Key West Int AP FL 24.55 81.75 832.013 

MFL 92803 72202 Miami Intl Univ FL 25.75 80.38 959.419 

JAX 13889 72206 Jacksonville FL 30.43 81.70 792.715 

TBW 12842 72210 Tampa Bay/Ruskin FL 27.70 82.40 744.795 

TLH 93805 72214 Tallahasee FL 30.45 84.30 544.513 

XMR 12868 74794 Cape Kennedy FL 28.48 80.55 919.075 

FFC 53819 72215 Peachtree City GA 33.35 84.56 505.328 

SIL 53813 72233 Slidell LA 30.33 89.82 17.221 

LCH 03937 72240 Lake Charles LA 30.12 93.22 -308.645 SHV 13957 72248 Shreveport Regional AP LA 32.45 93.83 -358.976 

JAN 03940 72235 Jackson/Thompson Fld MS 32.32 90.07 -6.570 

CHS 13880 72208 Charleston SC 32.90 80.03 929.488 

FWD 03990 72249 Ft Worth TX 32.80 97.30 -681.586 

BRO 12919 72250 Brownsville TX 25.90 97.43 -740.304 

CRP 12924 72251 Corpus Christi TX 27.77 97.50 -734.531 

DRT 22010 72261 Del Rio TX 29.37 100.92 -1052.865 

MAF 23023 72265 Midland TX 31.93 102.20 -1147.523 

AMA 23047 72363 Amarillo TX 35.23 101.70 -1065.439 

BMX 53823 72230 Birmingham (Shelby APT) AL 33.10 86.70 307.358 

 1Lambert Conformal Coordinate origin is 28.0N, 90.0W, standard parallels are 23.0N, 33.0N, datum is NWS-84.
 Final Report Vol.1 105 

-102 -100 -98 -96 -94 -92 -90 -88 -86 -84 -

Longitude

2224262830323436

Latitude

42001

42002

42003

42007

42019

42020

42035

42036

42039

42040

Figure 5-3. Locations of the Buoys in the MMS standard data set. 
 Final Report Vol.1 106 

Table 5-3. 

Buoy Stations

WBAN 

No. Station Name State Period1 Buoy Platform2 Anemometer Height3

Air 

Temp. 

Sensor 

Height4

Water 

Temp. 

Sensor 

Depth4

North 

Latitude5

Lo

(m) (m) (degrees) (

41008 Gray’s Reef - 40 NM SE of Savannah GA 01/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 31.402 41012 St. Augustine, FL 40 NM ENE of St Augustine FL 01/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 30.000 

41009 Canaveral East 120 NM East of Cape Canaveral FL 01/01/03 -01/01/04 6m NOMAD 5.0 4.0 1.0 28.500 

42039 W. Tampa - 106 NM WNW of Tampa FL 01/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 28.796 

42036 Pensacola - 115NM ESE of Pensacola FL 01/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 28.506 

01/01/03 -01/10/03 10m Disc 10.0 10.0 1.0 25.883 

42003 East Gulf – 260 NM South of Panama City FL 01/11/03 -01/01/04 10m Disc 10.0 10.0 10 26.001 

42007 Biloxi – 22 NM SSE of Biloxi MS 01/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 30.090 

42040 Mobile South – 64 NM South of Dauphin AL 01/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 29.208 

01/01/03 -08/20/03 10m Disc 10.0 10.0 1.0 25.922 

42001 08/21/03 -08/31/03 10m Disc 10.0 10.0 1.0 25.838 

Mid Gulf – 180 NM South of Southwest Pass LA 09/01/03 -01/01/04 10m Disc 10.0 10.0 1.0 25.860 

01/01/03 -04/11/03 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 29.253 

42035 Galveston – 22 NM East of Galveston TX 04/12/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 29.246 

01/01/03 -08/31/03 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 27.918 

42019 Freeport – 60 NM South of Freeport TX 09/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 27.913 

42020 Corpus Christi – 50 NM SE of Corpus Christi TX 01/01/03 -01/01/04 3m Disc 5.0 4.0 0.6 26.946 

42002 West Gulf – 240 NM SSE of Sabine TX 01/01/03 -01/01/04 10m Disc 10.0 10.0 1.0 25.167 

1. Period indicates the period of time when the station was located at the listed position. Determined based on records 2. Buoy Platforms were determined based on NDBC Data Availability Pages. 3. “Anemometer Height” was read from the NODC Data sets and confirmed based on the Buoy Platform. 4. “Air Temp. Sensor Height” and “Water Temp. Sensor Depth” are determined based on the Buoy Platform. 

 5. Latitude Longitude locations are read from the NODC data files, datum is WGS-84.  6. Lambert Conformal Coordinate origin is 28.0N, 90.0W, standard parallels are 23.0N, 33.0N, datum is NWS-84. 
 Final Report Vol.1 107 

-102 -100 -98 -96 -94 -92 -90 -88 -86 -84 -

Longitude

2224262830323436

Latitude

Figure 5-4. Locations of the precipitation stations in the MMS standard data set. 
 Final Report Vol.1 108 

Table 5-4. 

Hourly NWS Precipitation Stations 

COOP State Station Name 

North 

Latitude 

(deg.) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg.) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

LCC1

North

(km) 

10008 AL ABBEVILLE 31.57 85.25 449.128 404.429 

10140 AL ALBERTA 32.24 87.43 241.708 472.448 

10252 AL ANDALUSIA 3 W 31.31 86.52 329.593 371.128 

10369 AL ASHLAND 2 E 33.28 85.79 391.198 592.759 

10402 AL ATMORE STATE NURSERY 31.17 87.44 243.046 354.158 

10425 AL AUBURN NO 2 32.60 85.47 424.383 517.813 

12124 AL DADEVILLE 2 32.86 85.74 398.051 546.115 

12172 AL DAUPHIN ISLAND #2 30.25 88.08 183.504 250.701 

12377 AL DOTHAN 31.19 85.37 439.139 362.286 

12675 AL ENTERPRISE 5 NNW 31.38 85.90 388.123 381.488 

13519 AL GREENVILLE 31.79 86.61 319.325 425.017 

14193 AL JACKSON 31.53 87.93 195.992 392.315 

15112 AL MARION 7 NE 32.70 87.27 255.449 524.294 

15397 AL MIDWAY 32.08 85.52 421.207 459.806 

15478 AL MOBILE REGIONAL AP 30.69 88.25 167.275 299.054 

15550 AL MONTGOMERY DANNELLY FIELD 32.30 86.41 337.214 481.622 

15553 AL MONTGOMERY 6 SW 32.26 86.22 355.128 477.751 

16370 AL PETERMAN 31.59 87.27 258.222 400.571 

18178 AL THOMASVILLE 31.54 87.88 200.165 394.175 

18209 AL THORSBY EXP STATION 32.92 86.67 310.619 549.878 

18323 AL TROY 31.81 85.97 379.863 428.278 

18385 AL TUSCALOOSA OLIVER DAM 33.21 87.59 223.900 579.998 

18673 AL WARRIOR LOCK AND DAM 32.77 87.83 202.717 531.199 

32300 AR EL DORADO GOODWIN FLD 33.22 92.81 -261.806 582.046 

34548 AR MAGNOLIA 33.25 93.23 -300.732 586.319 

80845 FL BOCA RATON 26.37 80.11 980.714 -141.024 

80975 FL BRANFORD 29.96 82.91 680.224 237.182 

81048 FL BROOKSVILLE 7 SSW 28.48 82.44 735.976 76.131 

81986 FL CRESTVIEW BOB SIKES AP 30.78 86.52 331.234 312.708 

82008 FL CROSS CITY 2 WNW 29.65 83.17 657.671 201.178 

82158 FL DAYTONA BEACH INTL AP 29.18 81.05 864.987 162.784 

82229 FL DELAND 1 SSE 29.02 81.31 840.992 142.749 

82391 FL DOWLING PARK 1 W 30.25 83.26 645.049 267.068 

83186 FL FORT MYERS PAGE FIELD AP 26.59 81.86 805.743 -129.824 

83326 FL GAINESVILLE REGIONL AP 29.69 82.28 743.001 210.967 

83538 FL GRACEVILLE 1 SW 30.96 85.53 424.719 335.480 

84095 FL HOMESTEAD GEN AVIATION 25.50 80.55 944.635 -240.217 

84273 FL INGLIS 3 E 29.03 82.62 714.782 135.217 

84358 FL JACKSONVILLE INTL AP 30.50 81.69 792.833 303.441 

84570 FL KEY WEST INTL AP 24.55 81.76 831.241 -353.977 

84802 FL LAKELAND 2 27.99 82.01 780.495 24.625 

85076 FL LISBON 28.87 81.79 796.094 123.500 

85237 FL LYNNE 29.20 81.93 779.742 158.765 

85391 FL MARINELAND 29.67 81.22 845.023 215.450 

85612 FL MELBOURNE WFO 28.10 80.65 912.976 46.433 

85663 FL MIAMI INTL AP 25.79 80.32 965.393 -206.400 
 Final Report Vol.1 109 

Table 5-4. (Continued) 

Hourly NWS Precipitation Stations

COOP State Station Name 

North 

Latitude 

(deg.) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg.) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

LCC1

North

(km) 

85879 FL MONTICELLO WTP 30.56 83.86 585.713 298.342 

85895 FL MOORE HAVEN LOCK 1 26.84 81.09 880.194 -96.289 

86240 FL NICEVILLE 30.53 86.49 334.936 285.270 

86323 FL NORTH NEW RVR CANAL 2 26.33 80.54 938.754 -148.129 

86628 FL ORLANDO INTL AP 28.43 81.33 844.198 78.110 

86842 FL PANAMA CITY 5 N 30.25 85.66 415.397 256.561 

86880 FL PARRISH 27.61 82.35 750.539 -19.750 

86988 FL PENNSUCO 5 WNW 25.93 80.45 950.507 -192.104 

86997 FL PENSACOLA REGIONAL AP 30.48 87.19 268.730 277.639 

87440 FL RAIFORD STATE PRISON 30.07 82.19 748.286 253.035 

87851 FL SAINT LEO 28.34 82.26 754.014 61.359 

87886 FL ST PETERSBURG 27.76 82.63 722.133 -4.396 

88758 FL TALLAHASSEE WSO AP 30.39 84.35 539.714 277.619 

88780 FL TAMIAMI TRAIL 40 MI BEND 25.76 80.82 915.117 -213.602 

88788 FL TAMPA WSCMO AP 27.96 82.54 729.295 18.048 

88841 FL TAVERNIER 25.01 80.52 951.775 -294.622 

89010 FL TRAIL GLADE RANGES 25.76 80.48 949.587 -210.520 

89176 FL VENICE 27.10 82.44 745.351 -76.489 

89184 FL VENUS 27.14 81.33 853.909 -65.425 

89219 FL VERO BEACH 4 SE 27.65 80.40 940.544 -1.410 

89415 FL WAUSAU 30.65 85.59 420.686 301.583 

89525 FL WEST PALM BEACH INT AP 26.68 80.10 978.935 -105.907 

89795 FL WOODRUFF DAM 30.72 84.87 488.430 311.848 

90010 GA ABBEVILLE 4 S 31.94 83.31 630.152 453.797 

90211 GA ALMA BACON COUNTY AP 31.54 82.51 708.239 413.629 

90586 GA BAINBRIDGE INTL PAPER CO 30.82 84.62 512.378 324.072 

91340 GA BRUNSWICK 31.17 81.50 805.873 379.153 

91345 GA BRUNSWICK MCKINNON AP 31.15 81.39 816.542 378.142 

92166 GA COLUMBUS METRO AP 32.52 84.94 473.689 510.519 

92361 GA CRISP CO POWER DAM 31.85 83.96 569.333 441.230 

92844 GA DUBLIN 2 32.56 82.90 664.532 524.587 

93028 GA EDISON 31.57 84.73 497.744 405.996 

93312 GA FARGO 30.69 82.56 708.635 319.691 

93460 GA FOLKSTON 3 SW 30.80 82.02 759.707 334.961 

93570 GA FRANKLIN 33.28 85.10 455.604 594.301 

94204 GA HAZLEHURST 31.89 82.58 698.862 452.188 

94671 GA JESUP 31.61 81.88 766.877 425.420 

95314 GA LOUISVILLE 1 E 33.01 82.39 708.889 577.990 

95394 GA LUMPKIN 2 SE 32.03 84.78 491.626 457.301 

95443 GA MACON MIDDLE GA REGIONAL AP 32.68 83.65 593.380 534.878 

95876 GA MILLEDGEVILLE DARDC 33.09 83.22 631.342 581.637 

96879 GA PEARSON 31.29 82.84 678.143 384.802 

97847 GA SAVANNAH INTL AP 32.13 81.21 825.846 487.596 

98517 GA SYLVANIA 2 SSE 32.73 81.62 782.999 551.637 

98657 GA THE ROCK 32.96 84.24 536.904 563.138 

98974 GA VALDOSTA 4 NW 30.86 83.35 632.746 333.842 
 Final Report Vol.1 110 

Table 5-4. (Continued) 

Hourly NWS Precipitation Stations

COOP State Station Name 

North 

Latitude 

(deg.) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg.) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

LCC1

North

(km) 

99291 GA WEST POINT 32.87 85.19 449.025 548.817 

160103 LA ALEXANDRIA 5 SSE 31.25 92.45 -232.229 362.349 

160537 LA BASTROP 32.77 92.01 -187.415 530.320 

160548 LA BATON ROUGE CONCORD 30.42 91.13 -108.044 268.510 

160549 LA BATON ROUGE METRO AP 30.54 91.15 -109.513 281.612 

161246 LA BRUSLY 2 W 30.39 91.27 -121.537 265.626 

161287 LA BUNKIE 30.96 92.18 -207.175 329.764 

161411 LA CALHOUN RESEARCH STN 32.51 92.35 -219.938 502.499 

161899 LA CLINTON 5 SE 30.82 90.97 -92.689 312.573 

162534 LA DONALDSONVILLE 4 SW 30.07 91.03 -99.108 229.360 

164030 LA HAMMOND 5 E 30.50 90.37 -35.023 277.023 

164407 LA HOUMA 29.58 90.73 -70.657 175.594 

164696 LA JENA 4 WSW 31.67 92.20 -207.846 408.185 

164700 LA JENNINGS 30.20 92.67 -255.421 246.511 

164739 LA JONESVILLE LOCKS 31.48 91.86 -176.257 387.280 

165021 LA LAFAYETTE 30.22 92.07 -197.763 247.516 

165078 LA LAKE CHARLES AP 30.12 93.23 -309.429 239.471 

165287 LA LEESVILLE 6 SSW 31.05 93.28 -311.510 342.330 

165620 LA LSU BEN HUR FARM 30.37 91.17 -111.577 262.724 

165624 LA LSU CITRUS RESEARCH STN 29.58 89.82 17.103 175.148 

165874 LA MANSFIELD 32.04 93.71 -348.650 453.018 

166244 LA MINDEN 32.61 93.29 -308.353 514.764 

166303 LA MONROE REGIONAL AP 32.52 92.04 -191.157 502.228 

166314 LA MONROE ULM 32.53 92.07 -193.594 504.337 

166394 LA MORGAN CITY 29.68 91.18 -113.211 187.008 

166582 LA NATCHITOCHES 31.77 93.10 -292.066 421.794 

166660 LA NEW ORLEANS INTL AP 29.99 90.25 -24.075 220.776 

166664 LA NEW ORLEANS AUDUBON 29.92 90.13 -12.513 212.323 

167738 LA RED RIVER RESEARCH STN 32.42 93.64 -341.084 495.319 

168163 LA ST JOSEPH 3 N 31.95 91.23 -116.202 438.377 

168440 LA SHREVEPORT AP 32.45 93.82 -358.413 498.659 

168539 LA SLIDELL 30.27 89.77 22.337 251.127 

169357 LA VIDALIA 2 31.57 91.43 -135.490 395.885 

169803 LA WINNFIELD 2 W 31.93 92.67 -251.624 437.986 

169806 LA WINNSBORO 5 SSE 32.10 91.70 -160.083 455.530 

220797 MS BILOXI 9 WNW 30.44 89.03 92.946 270.351 

221094 MS BROOKHAVEN CITY 31.54 90.46 -43.291 392.888 

221389 MS CANTON 4 N 32.67 90.04 -3.352 517.912 

221852 MS COLLINS 31.64 89.56 41.833 403.703 

221900 MS CONAHATTA 1 NE 32.46 89.27 68.480 494.229 

222281 MS DE KALB 32.78 88.68 123.680 530.468 

222658 MS EDINBURG 32.80 89.34 61.971 532.343 

222870 MS ETHEL 33.12 89.47 49.180 567.577 

223920 MS HAZLEHURST 5 SW 31.83 90.45 -42.830 424.887 

224472 MS JACKSON WSFO AIRPORT 32.32 90.08 -7.274 478.876 

224778 MS KOSCIUSKO 13 SE 32.98 89.39 56.860 552.849 
 Final Report Vol.1 111 

Table 5-4. (Continued) 

Hourly NWS Precipitation Stations 

COOP State Station Name 

North 

Latitude 

(deg.) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg.) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

LCC1

North

(km) 

224966 MS LEAKESVILLE 31.15 88.55 137.640 349.865 

225062 MS LEXINGTON 2 NNW 33.13 90.07 -6.208 569.295 

225074 MS LIBERTY 2 E 31.16 90.77 -73.267 350.912 

225247 MS LOUISVILLE 33.14 89.07 86.495 569.839 

225361 MS MACON 3 N 33.15 88.56 134.191 572.434 

225614 MS MCCOMB AIRPORT 31.18 90.47 -44.680 352.769 

225704 MS MEADVILLE 31.47 90.89 -83.755 384.450 

225776 MS MERIDIAN AIRPORT 32.33 88.74 117.855 481.147 

226400 MS NOXAPATER 1 N 33.00 89.06 87.357 555.297 

226718 MS PASCAGOULA 3 NE 30.40 88.48 145.003 266.787 

226750 MS PAULDING 32.01 89.06 88.341 444.266 

226816 MS PELAHATCHIE 3 E 32.32 89.75 23.751 479.053 

227132 MS PORT GIBSON 1 NE 31.99 90.97 -91.524 442.070 

227220 MS PURVIS 2 N 31.18 89.42 55.464 352.230 

227276 MS RALEIGH 6 N 32.14 89.55 41.945 459.208 

227444 MS RICHTON 1 N 31.37 88.93 101.150 373.402 

227560 MS ROLLING FORK 32.90 90.89 -82.627 543.219 

227592 MS ROSE HILL 4 SW 32.10 89.05 89.279 454.852 

227840 MS SAUCIER EXP FOREST 30.63 89.05 90.626 292.105 

228053 MS SHUBUTA 31.87 88.70 122.554 429.222 

229048 MS TYLERTOWN 5 ESE 31.09 90.06 -5.462 342.054 

229218 MS VICKSBURG WATERWAYS EXP ST 32.30 90.87 -81.286 476.695 

229617 MS WHITE SAND 30.80 89.68 30.161 310.270 

229648 MS WIGGINS RANGER STN 30.85 89.15 80.919 316.058 

229860 MS YAZOO CITY 5 NNE 32.90 90.38 -35.777 543.407 

381544 SC CHARLESTON INTL AP 32.90 80.04 928.544 581.154 

410428 TX AUSTIN CAMP MABRY 30.32 97.76 -741.980 280.767 

410509 TX BANKERSMITH 30.14 98.82 -844.609 267.762 

410518 TX BARDWELL DAM 32.26 96.64 -623.037 489.610 

410569 TX BAY CITY WATERWORKS 28.99 95.97 -577.752 124.285 

410639 TX BEEVILLE 5 NE 28.46 97.71 -749.879 74.383 

410690 TX BENAVIDES 2 27.60 98.42 -825.440 -16.132 

410738 TX BERTRAM 3 ENE 30.76 98.02 -763.234 330.934 

411017 TX BRADY 31.12 99.34 -885.557 379.277 

411136 TX BROWNSVILLE INTL AP 25.91 97.42 -739.518 -208.543 

411246 TX BURLESON 32.55 97.32 -685.546 525.276 

411429 TX CANYON DAM 29.87 98.20 -787.026 233.680 

411433 TX CANYON DAM NO 3 29.95 98.40 -806.004 243.643 

411434 TX CANYON DAM NO 4 29.91 98.37 -803.469 239.303 

411436 TX CANYON DAM 6 29.95 98.30 -796.464 242.804 

411541 TX CEDAR CREEK 4 SE 30.03 97.46 -715.249 247.262 

411663 TX CHARLOTTE 5 NNW 28.93 98.75 -847.508 133.160 

411671 TX CHEAPSIDE 29.31 97.35 -709.282 166.513 

411720 TX CHOKE CANYON DAM 28.47 98.25 -802.895 78.969 

411889 TX COLLEGE STA EASTERWOOD AP 30.59 96.36 -607.153 302.711 

411920 TX COMFORT 2 29.96 98.89 -853.149 248.444 
 Final Report Vol.1 112 

Table 5-4. (Continued) 

Hourly NWS Precipitation Stations

COOP State Station Name 

North 

Latitude 

(deg.) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg.) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

LCC1

North

(km) 

411921 TX COMMERCE 4 SW 33.20 95.93 -551.931 590.143 

411956 TX CONROE 30.33 95.48 -524.418 269.553 

412015 TX CORPUS CHRISTI WSFO AP 27.77 97.51 -735.760 -2.453 

412086 TX CRANFILLS GAP 31.77 97.83 -738.686 441.213 

412088 TX CRAWFORD 31.53 97.45 -704.401 413.115 

412096 TX CRESSON 32.53 97.62 -712.965 524.886 

412131 TX CROSS PLAINS 2 32.13 99.16 -860.527 489.690 

412206 TX CYPRESS 29.97 95.69 -546.248 230.552 

412242 TX DAL-FTW INTL AP 32.90 97.02 -654.743 561.961 

412244 TX DALLAS LOVE FIELD 32.85 96.86 -639.805 556.069 

412404 TX DENTON 2 SE 33.20 97.11 -660.816 595.849 

412462 TX DIME BOX 30.36 96.85 -654.398 279.894 

412676 TX EAGLE LAKE RESCH CTR 29.62 96.38 -614.513 195.723 

412715 TX EASTLAND 32.40 98.82 -826.215 517.563 

413005 TX EVANT 1 SSW 31.47 98.17 -772.302 410.059 

413133 TX FERRIS 32.52 96.67 -624.235 517.827 

413156 TX FISCHERS STORE 29.98 98.26 -792.763 245.730 

413171 TX FLAT 31.32 97.63 -722.976 390.181 

413284 TX FORT WORTH MEACHAM FIELD 32.82 97.36 -687.181 555.123 

413285 TX FORT WORTH WSFO 32.83 97.30 -681.364 556.350 

413370 TX FRISCO 33.15 96.82 -634.331 588.889 

413507 TX GEORGETOWN LAKE 30.68 97.72 -735.353 320.613 

413546 TX GILMER 4 WNW 32.75 95.05 -471.875 536.053 

413686 TX GRANGER DAM 30.70 97.35 -700.269 320.263 

413691 TX GRAPEVINE DAM 32.95 97.06 -657.794 568.014 

413771 TX GROESBECK 2 31.53 96.53 -617.397 407.224 

414137 TX HICO 31.99 98.03 -755.754 466.799 

414300 TX HOUSTON BUSH INTL AP 29.98 95.36 -514.345 230.646 

414307 TX HOUSTON HOBBY AP 29.64 95.28 -508.501 192.464 

414309 TX HOUSTON ADDICKS 29.77 95.65 -542.965 208.645 

414311 TX HOUSTON ALIEF 29.72 95.59 -538.165 202.508 

414476 TX IREDELL 31.98 97.87 -740.274 465.417 

414520 TX JACKSBORO 1 NNE 33.24 98.14 -757.066 606.242 

414679 TX JUSTIN 33.08 97.30 -679.414 583.674 

414792 TX KILLEEN 3 S 31.07 97.73 -733.892 363.670 

414866 TX KOPPERL 5 NNE 32.13 97.48 -702.773 479.896 

414972 TX LAKE BRIDGEPORT DAM 33.23 97.83 -728.126 602.887 

415094 TX LAVON DAM 33.03 96.48 -604.032 574.242 

415192 TX LEWISVILLE DAM 33.07 97.01 -652.821 580.905 

415193 TX LEXINGTON 30.42 97.01 -669.754 286.812 

415348 TX LONGVIEW 11 SE 32.35 94.65 -436.549 490.201 

415424 TX LUFKIN ANGELINA CO AP 31.24 94.75 -450.837 367.392 

415463 TX MABANK 4 SW 32.35 96.12 -573.710 496.635 

415528 TX MALONE 3ENE 31.94 96.85 -644.615 455.280 

415661 TX MATHIS 4 SSW 28.04 97.87 -769.052 28.967 

415897 TX MIDLOTHIAN 2 32.48 96.99 -655.075 515.940 
 Final Report Vol.1 113 

Table 5-4. (Concluded) 

Hourly NWS Precipitation Stations

COOP State Station Name 

North 

Latitude 

(deg.) 

West 

Longitude 

(deg.) 

LCC1

East

(km) 

LCC1

North

(km) 

415957 TX MINERAL WELLS 1 SSW 32.78 98.12 -757.852 555.626 

415996 TX MOLINE 31.40 98.32 -786.970 403.639 

416108 TX MOUNT PLEASANT 33.17 95.01 -465.822 582.813 

416177 TX NACOGDOCHES 31.62 94.65 -438.849 409.339 

416210 TX NAVARRO MILLS DAM 31.95 96.70 -630.810 455.161 

416335 TX NEW SUMMERFIELD 2 W 31.97 95.30 -499.367 451.431 

416750 TX PALACIOS MUNICIPAL AP 28.72 96.25 -607.157 95.847 

416757 TX PALESTINE 2 NE 31.78 95.60 -528.543 431.440 

417066 TX PITTSBURG 5 S 32.93 94.94 -460.794 555.561 

417140 TX POINT COMFORT 28.66 96.56 -636.819 89.951 

417174 TX PORT ARTHUR AP 29.95 94.02 -385.974 222.438 

417243 TX PRAIRIE MOUNTAIN 30.58 98.90 -848.652 317.235 

417300 TX PROCTOR RESERVOIR 31.97 98.50 -799.908 467.572 

417422 TX RANDOLPH FIELD 29.54 98.27 -796.859 198.067 

417556 TX RENO 32.95 97.57 -706.065 571.254 

417594 TX RICHMOND 29.58 95.76 -554.320 188.533 

417936 TX SAM RAYBURN DAM 31.06 94.10 -389.560 345.835 

417945 TX SAN ANTONIO INTL AP 29.53 98.47 -815.824 198.199 

417947 TX SAN ANTONIO 8 NNE 29.53 98.45 -814.337 197.201 

418047 TX SANTA ANNA 31.74 99.31 -877.893 448.299 

418081 TX SARITA 7 E 27.22 97.68 -756.323 -62.915 

418531 TX SPICEWOOD 30.48 98.16 -778.945 301.144 

418544 TX SPRING BRANCH 2 SE 29.87 98.38 -804.827 234.337 

418563 TX SPRINGTOWN 4 S 32.91 97.68 -716.130 566.873 

418623 TX STEPHENVILLE 1 N 32.25 98.20 -769.225 496.446 

418743 TX SULPHUR SPRINGS 33.15 95.63 -524.301 583.264 

418778 TX SWAN 4 NW 32.46 95.42 -508.174 505.331 

418845 TX TARPLEY 29.67 99.29 -893.368 218.763 

418996 TX THOMPSONS 3 WSW 29.48 95.62 -542.239 176.877 

419364 TX VICTORIA ASOS 28.86 96.93 -671.927 114.513 

419417 TX WACO DAM 31.60 97.22 -681.723 419.191 

419419 TX WACO REGIONAL AP 31.61 97.23 -682.752 420.487 

419491 TX WASHINGTON STATE PARK 30.33 96.15 -588.118 273.335 

419532 TX WEATHERFORD 32.75 97.77 -725.776 549.634 

419588 TX WESLACO 2 E 26.15 97.97 -791.893 -179.045 

419665 TX WHEELOCK 30.90 96.40 -608.256 337.312 

419715 TX WHITNEY DAM 31.85 97.37 -694.176 447.702 

419815 TX WIMBERLEY 1 NW 30.00 98.07 -773.582 247.250 

419817 TX WINCHELL 31.46 99.17 -867.245 415.865 

419893 TX WOODSON 33.02 99.05 -843.273 587.778 

419976 TX ZAPATA 3 SW 26.87 99.25 -913.532 -90.406 1

Lambert Conformal Coordinate origin is 28.0N, 90.0W, standard parallels are 23.0N, 33.0N, datum is NWS-84. 
 Final Report Vol.1 114 

-102 -100 -98 -96 -94 -92 -90 -88 -86 -84 -

Longitude

2224262830323436

Latitude

SND152 CAD150

SUM156

GAS153

CVL151

Figure 5-5 Location of the ozone (AIRS and CASTNET) stations in the MMS standard data set. 
 Final Report Vol.1 115 

Table 5-5. 

Ozone Stations 

Station ID Station Type

North Latitude 

(degrees)

West Longitude 

(degrees)

LCC1

 East 

(km)

LCC1 North 

(km)

10030010 AIRS 30.50 87.88 202.488 278.731 

10270001 AIRS 33.28 85.80 390.463 592.332 

10510001 AIRS 32.50 86.14 361.611 504.626 

10550011 AIRS 33.90 86.05 364.994 660.516 

10731003 AIRS 33.49 86.91 286.703 612.601 

10731005 AIRS 33.33 87.00 278.792 594.597 

10731009 AIRS 33.27 87.18 262.222 587.526 

10731010 AIRS 33.55 86.55 319.908 620.170 

10732006 AIRS 33.39 86.80 297.199 601.742 

10735002 AIRS 33.70 86.67 308.328 636.548 

10735003 AIRS 33.48 86.56 319.201 612.358 

10736002 AIRS 33.58 86.77 299.425 622.949 

10970003 AIRS 30.77 88.09 181.963 308.331 

10972005 AIRS 30.47 88.14 177.707 275.000 

11011002 AIRS 32.41 86.26 350.679 494.282 

11130002 AIRS 32.47 85.08 460.999 504.872 

11170004 AIRS 33.32 86.82 295.545 593.909 

11190002 AIRS 32.36 88.20 168.879 484.595 

11250010 AIRS 33.09 87.46 236.607 566.940 

120010025 AIRS 29.68 82.49 722.482 208.357 

120013011 AIRS 29.55 82.30 741.645 195.122 

120030002 AIRS 30.20 82.45 722.758 266.108 

120050006 AIRS 30.13 85.73 409.214 243.127 

120090007 AIRS 28.05 80.63 914.968 40.724 

120094001 AIRS 28.31 80.62 913.728 69.510 

120110031 AIRS 26.27 80.29 963.790 -153.226 

120112003 AIRS 26.29 80.10 982.428 -149.500 

120118002 AIRS 26.09 80.11 983.234 -171.670 

120210004 AIRS 26.27 81.71 823.080 -163.635 

120230002 AIRS 30.18 82.62 706.638 262.899 

120310077 AIRS 30.48 81.59 802.822 302.460 

120310100 AIRS 30.26 81.45 817.874 279.064 

120330004 AIRS 30.53 87.20 267.351 283.367 

120330018 AIRS 30.37 87.27 261.065 265.483 

120330024 AIRS 30.40 87.28 260.035 268.786 

120550003 AIRS 27.19 81.34 852.521 -59.416 

120570081 AIRS 27.74 82.47 737.670 -6.003 

120570110 AIRS 27.78 82.16 767.713 0.333 

120571035 AIRS 27.93 82.45 738.325 15.121 
 Final Report Vol.1 116 

Table 5-5. (Continued) 

Ozone Stations 

Station ID Station Type

North Latitude 

(degrees)

West Longitude 

(degrees)

LCC1

 East 

(km)

LCC1 North 

(km)

120571065 AIRS 27.89 82.54 729.805 10.157 

120574004 AIRS 27.99 82.13 769.147 23.732 

120590004 AIRS 30.85 85.60 418.787 323.335 

120690002 AIRS 28.53 81.72 805.096 86.057 

120712002 AIRS 26.55 81.98 794.272 -134.472 

120713002 AIRS 26.45 81.94 798.960 -145.266 

120730012 AIRS 30.44 84.35 539.791 282.832 

120730013 AIRS 30.48 84.20 553.901 287.934 

120813002 AIRS 27.63 82.55 730.587 -18.645 

120814012 AIRS 27.48 82.62 724.736 -35.646 

120814013 AIRS 27.45 82.52 734.748 -38.364 

120830003 AIRS 29.17 82.10 763.609 154.346 

120860021 AIRS 25.92 80.45 950.977 -193.148 

120860027 AIRS 25.73 80.16 981.491 -211.842 

120860029 AIRS 25.59 80.33 965.800 -228.669 

120860030 AIRS 25.39 80.68 932.607 -253.500 

120950008 AIRS 28.45 81.38 838.728 79.510 

120952002 AIRS 28.60 81.36 839.494 96.220 

120972002 AIRS 28.35 81.64 814.229 66.698 

120990009 AIRS 26.73 80.23 965.651 -101.949 

120992004 AIRS 26.47 80.07 983.775 -129.380 

121010005 AIRS 28.33 82.31 749.204 60.191 

121012001 AIRS 28.20 82.76 706.270 43.133 

121030004 AIRS 27.95 82.73 710.844 15.668 

121030018 AIRS 27.79 82.74 710.922 -2.080 

121035002 AIRS 28.09 82.70 712.846 31.321 

121056005 AIRS 27.94 82.00 782.196 19.033 

121056006 AIRS 28.03 81.97 784.469 29.173 

121111002 AIRS 27.39 80.40 943.132 -30.402 

121130014 AIRS 30.41 86.89 297.283 270.786 

121151005 AIRS 27.31 82.57 730.788 -54.142 

121151006 AIRS 27.35 82.48 739.355 -49.177 

121152002 AIRS 27.09 82.36 752.942 -77.186 

121171002 AIRS 28.75 81.31 843.161 113.137 

121272001 AIRS 29.11 80.99 871.209 155.159 

121275002 AIRS 29.21 81.05 864.604 165.779 

121290001 AIRS 30.09 84.16 559.788 244.938 

130210012 AIRS 32.80 83.54 603.234 548.225 

130510021 AIRS 32.07 81.05 841.340 482.045 
 Final Report Vol.1 117 

Table 5-5. (Continued) 

Ozone Stations 

Station ID Station Type

North Latitude 

(degrees)

West Longitude 

(degrees)

LCC1

 East 

(km)

LCC1 North 

(km)

130590002 AIRS 33.92 83.36 613.242 673.536 

130770002 AIRS 33.40 84.75 487.450 609.452 

130890002 AIRS 33.69 84.29 528.619 643.607 

130893001 AIRS 33.85 84.21 535.174 661.748 

130970004 AIRS 33.74 84.78 483.046 647.134 

131130001 AIRS 33.46 84.42 517.763 617.482 

131210055 AIRS 33.72 84.36 521.988 646.641 

131270006 AIRS 31.17 81.50 806.068 379.383 

131350002 AIRS 33.96 84.07 547.508 674.604 

131510002 AIRS 33.43 84.16 542.030 615.278 

132150008 AIRS 32.52 84.94 473.879 510.959 

132151003 AIRS 32.54 84.84 483.145 513.572 

132230003 AIRS 33.93 85.05 457.216 667.228 

132450091 AIRS 33.43 82.02 740.406 626.536 

132470001 AIRS 33.59 84.07 549.511 633.464 

132611001 AIRS 31.95 84.08 557.435 451.359 

220050004 AIRS 30.23 90.97 -92.890 247.411 

220110002 AIRS 30.49 93.14 -299.922 279.725 

220150008 AIRS 32.53 93.75 -351.206 507.636 

220170001 AIRS 32.68 93.86 -360.977 524.616 

220190002 AIRS 30.14 93.37 -322.958 241.532 

220190008 AIRS 30.26 93.28 -313.977 254.592 

220190009 AIRS 30.23 93.58 -342.784 252.076 

220330003 AIRS 30.42 91.18 -112.795 268.648 

220330013 AIRS 30.70 91.06 -101.055 299.583 

220331001 AIRS 30.59 91.21 -115.476 287.521 

220430001 AIRS 31.50 92.46 -232.720 390.224 

220470007 AIRS 30.40 91.43 -136.718 266.687 

220470009 AIRS 30.22 91.32 -126.417 246.618 

220470012 AIRS 30.21 91.13 -108.231 245.326 

220511001 AIRS 30.04 90.28 -26.862 226.015 

220550005 AIRS 30.22 92.05 -196.325 247.584 

220570004 AIRS 29.76 90.77 -74.066 195.190 

220630002 AIRS 30.31 90.81 -77.509 256.166 

220730004 AIRS 32.51 92.05 -192.052 501.626 

220770001 AIRS 30.68 91.37 -130.633 297.660 

220870002 AIRS 29.98 90.00 0.000 219.335 

220890003 AIRS 29.98 90.41 -39.357 219.401 

220930002 AIRS 29.99 90.82 -78.704 220.708 
 Final Report Vol.1 118 

Table 5-5. (Continued) 

Ozone Stations 

Station ID Station Type

North Latitude 

(degrees)

West Longitude 

(degrees)

LCC1

 East 

(km)

LCC1 North 

(km)

220950002 AIRS 30.06 90.61 -58.510 228.347 

221010003 AIRS 29.72 91.21 -116.433 191.102 

221210001 AIRS 30.50 91.21 -115.575 277.544 

280010004 AIRS 31.56 91.39 -131.426 395.282 

280110001 AIRS 33.75 90.72 -66.641 638.099 

280450001 AIRS 30.23 89.57 41.178 247.114 

280450002 AIRS 30.38 89.45 52.595 263.786 

280470008 AIRS 30.39 89.05 90.836 265.130 

280470009 AIRS 30.57 89.18 78.272 284.994 

280490010 AIRS 32.39 90.14 -13.132 486.688 

280590006 AIRS 30.38 88.53 140.569 264.515 

280590007 AIRS 30.52 88.71 123.192 279.839 

280750003 AIRS 32.36 88.73 119.155 483.969 

280890002 AIRS 32.56 90.18 -16.856 505.578 

281490004 AIRS 32.32 90.89 -83.536 479.210 

450030003 AIRS 33.34 81.79 762.387 617.964 

450110001 AIRS 33.32 81.47 792.211 617.785 

450290002 AIRS 33.01 80.96 842.046 586.819 

450370001 AIRS 33.74 81.85 753.850 662.001 

450790021 AIRS 33.82 80.78 851.971 677.933 

480290032 AIRS 29.51 98.62 -830.431 196.634 

480290052 AIRS 29.63 98.57 -824.688 209.556 

480290059 AIRS 29.28 98.31 -802.349 169.138 

480391003 AIRS 29.01 95.40 -522.940 123.453 

480391004 AIRS 29.52 95.39 -519.475 179.853 

480391016 AIRS 29.04 95.47 -529.566 127.075 

480850005 AIRS 33.13 96.79 -631.976 586.530 

480850010 AIRS 33.36 96.55 -608.286 610.851 

481130069 AIRS 32.82 96.86 -640.423 552.485 

481130075 AIRS 32.92 96.81 -635.139 563.321 

481130087 AIRS 32.68 96.87 -642.232 537.003 

481133003 AIRS 32.78 96.53 -609.884 546.353 

481210034 AIRS 33.19 97.19 -668.771 595.325 

481390015 AIRS 32.44 97.03 -658.710 511.235 

481670014 AIRS 29.26 94.86 -469.572 148.924 

481671002 AIRS 29.40 94.93 -475.704 164.692 

481830001 AIRS 32.38 94.71 -441.719 494.105 

482010024 AIRS 29.90 95.33 -511.856 221.663 

482010026 AIRS 29.80 95.13 -493.126 209.767 
 Final Report Vol.1 119 

Table 5-5. (Continued) 

Ozone Stations 

Station ID Station Type

North Latitude 

(degrees)

West Longitude 

(degrees)

LCC1

 East 

(km)

LCC1 North 

(km)

482010029 AIRS 30.04 95.68 -544.721 238.679 

482010046 AIRS 29.83 95.28 -507.393 213.704 

482010047 AIRS 29.83 95.49 -527.560 214.596 

482010051 AIRS 29.62 95.47 -526.683 191.264 

482010055 AIRS 29.69 95.49 -528.258 199.099 

482010062 AIRS 29.63 95.27 -507.390 191.523 

482010070 AIRS 29.73 95.32 -511.718 202.801 

482011015 AIRS 29.76 95.08 -488.508 205.138 

482011035 AIRS 29.73 95.26 -505.950 202.551 

482011039 AIRS 29.67 95.13 -493.732 195.376 

482011041 AIRS 29.75 95.08 -488.554 204.031 

482011050 AIRS 29.58 95.02 -483.562 184.972 

482030002 AIRS 32.67 94.17 -389.995 524.460 

482090614 AIRS 30.21 98.08 -773.349 270.467 

482210001 AIRS 32.44 97.80 -730.766 515.624 

482311006 AIRS 33.15 96.12 -569.560 585.448 

482450009 AIRS 30.04 94.07 -390.388 232.503 

482450011 AIRS 29.89 93.99 -383.261 215.635 

482450022 AIRS 29.86 94.32 -415.065 213.393 

482510003 AIRS 32.36 97.43 -696.686 504.589 

482570005 AIRS 32.57 96.32 -591.498 522.015 

483390078 AIRS 30.35 95.43 -519.231 271.910 

483550025 AIRS 27.77 97.43 -727.684 -3.288 

483550026 AIRS 27.83 97.56 -739.987 4.128 

483611001 AIRS 30.08 93.76 -360.527 235.978 

483670081 AIRS 32.87 97.91 -737.958 563.969 

483970001 AIRS 32.94 96.46 -602.410 563.765 

484230007 AIRS 32.34 95.42 -508.461 492.433 

484390075 AIRS 32.90 97.46 -695.826 564.651 

484391002 AIRS 32.81 97.36 -687.113 554.099 

484392003 AIRS 32.92 97.28 -678.924 565.855 

484393009 AIRS 32.98 97.06 -658.044 571.307 

484393011 AIRS 32.66 97.09 -662.905 535.962 

484530014 AIRS 30.35 97.76 -741.777 283.963 

484530020 AIRS 30.48 97.87 -751.347 299.018 

484530613 AIRS 30.42 97.60 -726.018 290.744 

484690003 AIRS 28.84 97.01 -679.784 112.590 

484790016 AIRS 27.51 99.52 -934.251 -17.767 
 Final Report Vol.1 120 

Table 5-5. (Concluded) 

Ozone Stations 

Station ID Station Type

North Latitude 

(degrees)

West Longitude 

(degrees)

LCC1

 East 

(km)

LCC1 North 

(km)

SND152 CASTNET 34.29 85.97 370.970 704.043 

CAD150 CASTNET 34.18 93.10 -285.568 689.362 

EVE419 CASTNET 25.39 80.68 932.538 -253.383 

IRL141 CASTNET 27.85 80.46 933.722 19.875 

SUM156 CASTNET 30.11 84.99 480.156 243.644 

GAS153 CASTNET 33.18 84.41 520.572 586.287 

CVL151 CASTNET 34.00 89.80 18.567 666.043 1

Lambert Conformal Coordinate origin is 28.0N, 90.0W, standard parallels are 23.0N, 33.0N, datum is NWS-84.
 Final Report Vol.1 121 

-102 -100 -98 -96 -94 -92 -90 -88 -86 -84 -

Longitude

2224262830323436

Latitude

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

332

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

354

355

356

357

358

359

360

361

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

420

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

442

443

444

445

446

447

448

449

464

465

466

467

468

469

470

471

486

487

488

489

490

491

492

493

508

509

510

511

512

513

514

515

530

531

532

533

534

535

536

537

Figure 5-6. Locations of the RUC data tiles in the MMS standard data set. 
 Final Report Vol.1 122 

Figure 5-7. “Grid Settings” screen for SUBDOMN program in CALPUFF PROfessional GUI. 
 Final Report Vol.1 123 

- 

Figure 5-8. “Inputs/Outputs & Run” screen for SUBDOMN program in CALPUFF PROfessional 

GUI. 
 Final Report Vol.1 124 

Table 5-6 

Example RUCDECODE Control File 

Extract 3D.DAT file from Tiled RUC data 

rucdecode.lst ! List file for RUCDECODE.exe 

e:\ ! CD/DVD drive name (Back slash is needed on PC) 

ruc3d.dat ! Output 3D.DAT file name 

1 ! Method of select domain (1: I/J 2: long/lat) 

210, 222 ! Beg/End I indices (range: 3-299) or longitudes 

51, 65 ! Beg/End J indices (range: 4-222) or latitudes 

1,50 ! Beg/End K indices (range: 1-50, Surface is 1) 

2003070900 ! Beginning Date-Hour (UTC) to extract 

2003071407 ! Ending Date-Hour (UTC) to extract 

1 ! Flag (1/0) for batch/interactive mode 

----------------------------------------------------- 

Note: 

1. Select domain as (I,J) RUC grid range or 

 longitude from west to east and latitude from south to north 

2. Longitude is negative for western hemisphere 

 Latitude is negative for southern hemisphere 

3. Flag for batch/interactive mode: 

 Set batch flag to 1 if ALL needed files are on one disk specified 

 on Line 3, and no screen-input is needed. Set the flag to 0 if needed 

 files are on multiple DVD disks. 

4. Scratch files will be created in processing, and should 

 be deleted manually on some machines. The base part of 

 scratch file names are the same as that of output file name 

 except an aditional "s" at the end. The extension of the 

 scratch files are numbered from 001 to XXX. For example, 

 if the output file name is test.dat, then the scratch file 

 names will be tests.001, tests.002.... Delete these files after 

 program finishes. 
 Final Report Vol.1 125 

6. REFERENCES 

Batchvarova, E. and S.-E. Gryning, 1991: Applied model for the growth of the daytime mixed layer. 

Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 56, 261-274. 

Batchvarova, E. and S.-E. Gryning, 1994: An applied model for the height of the daytime mixed layer 

and the entrainment zone. Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 71, 311-323. 

Beljaars, A.C.M. and A.A.M. Holtslag, 1991: Flux parameterization over land surfaces for atmospheric 

models. J. Appl. Meteor., 30, 327-341. 

Brodzinsky, R., W.B. Johnson, B.K.Cantrell, L. Jones, R.E. Stiles, G.H. Taylor, C.R. Scholle, and C.L. 

Seward, 1982: Central California Coastal Air Quality Model Validation Study: Data Compilation 

for June 1982 Field Experiment, two volumes. Prepared for Pacific OCS Office by SRI 

International, Menlo Park, California, 94025. 

Carson, D.J., 1973: The development of a dry, inversion-capped, convectively unstable boundary layer. 

Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 99, 450-467. 

Cimorelli, A.J., S.G. Perry, A. Venkatram, J.C. Weil, R.J. Paine, R.B. Wilson, R.F. Lee, W.D. Peters, 

R.W. Brode, and J.O. Paumier, 2002: AERMOD: Description of Model Formulation. 

EPA/454/R-02-00d. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

Dabberdt, W.F., R. Brodzinsky, B.C. Cantrell, and R.E. Ruff, 1982: Atmospheric Dispersion Over Water 

And In The Shoreline Transition Zone, Final Report Volume I: Analysis and Results. Prepared 

for American Petroleum Institute by SRI International, Menlo Park, California, 94025. 

Dabberdt, W.F., R. Brodzinsky, B.C. Cantrell, and R.M. Trudeau, 1982: Atmospheric Dispersion Over 

Water And In The Shoreline Transition Zone, Final Report Volume II: Data. Prepared for 

American Petroleum Institute by SRI International, Menlo Park, California, 94025. 

Dabberdt, W.F., W.B. Johnson, R. Brodzinsky, and R.E. Ruff, 1983: Central California Coastal Air 

Quality Model Validation Study: Data Analysis and Model Evaluation. Prepared for Pacific OCS 

Office by SRI International, Menlo Park, California, 94025. 

DiCristofaro, D.C. and S.R. Hanna, 1989: The Offshore and Coastal Dispersion Model. Vol. I: Users 

Guide and Vol. II: Appendices. Report no. A085-A, prepared for MMS, 381 Elden St., Herndon, 

VA 22070 by Sigma Research Corporation, Westford, Massachusetts. 

Douglas, S. and R. Kessler, 1988: User's Guide to the Diagnostic Wind Field Model (Version 1.0). 

Systems Applications, Inc., San Rafael, California, 48 pp. 

Draxler, R.R., 1976: Determination of atmospheric diffusion parameters. Atmospheric Environment, 10, 

99-105. 
 Final Report Vol.1 126 

Dyer, A.J., 1974: A review of flux-profile relationships. Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 7, 363-372. 

EPA, 1998: Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase 2 Summary report and 

recommendations for modeling long range transport and impacts on regional visibility. EPA454/R-98-019. U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

EPRI, 2000. SCICHEM Version 1.2: Technical Documentation Final Report, Report No. 1000713, 

prepared by ARAP/Titan Corporation, Princeton, NJ for EPRI, Palo Alto, CA. 

Fairall, C.W., E.F. Bradley, J.E. Hare, A.A. Grachev, and J.B. Edson, 2002: Bulk parameterization of airsea fluxes: updates and verification for the COARE algorithm. Submitted to the WCRP/SCOR 

Workshop on Inter-comparison and Validation of Ocean-Atmosphere Flux Fields special issue of 

the Journal of Climate. 

Fairall, C.W., E.F. Bradley, J.S. Godfrey, G.A.Wick, J.B. Edson, and G.S.Young, 1996: Cool skin and 

warm layer effects on the sea surface temperature. J. Geophys. Res., 101, 1295-1308. 

FLAG, 2000: Federal Land Managers’ Air Quality Related Values Workgroup (FLAG). Phase I report 

(December 2000). US Forest Service, National Park Service, U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Grachev, A.A., C.W. Fairall, and E.F. Bradley, 2000: Convective profile constants revisited. Boundary 

Layer Meteorology, 94, 495-515. 

Gryning, S., 1985: The Oresund Experiment – A Nordic mesoscale dispersion experiment over a landwater-land area. Bulletin of the Amer. Meteor. Soc., 66, 1403-1407. 

Hanna, S.R., L.L. Schulman, R.J. Paine, J.E. Pleim, and M. Baer, 1985: Development and evaluation of 

the Offshore and Coastal Diffusion Model. J. Air Poll. Control Assoc., 35, 1039-1047. 

Hansen, C., and S.E. Larsen, 1997: Further work on the Kitaigorodskii roughness length model: a new 

derivation using Lettau’s expression on steep waves. Geophysica, 33(2), 29-44. 

Huber, A.H. 1977: Incorporating building/terrain wake effects on stack effluents. Preprint volume for 

the Joint Conference on Applications of Air Pollution Meteorology, American Meteorological 

Society, Boston, MA. 

Huber, A.H. and W.H. Snyder, 1976: Building wake effects on short stack effluents. Preprint volume for 

the Third Symposium on Atmospheric Diffusion and Air Quality, American Meteorological 

Society, Boston, MA. 

Johnson, V.C. and T.C. Spangler, 1986: Tracer Study Conducted to Acquire Data for Evaluation of Air 

Quality Dispersion Models. Prepared for API, Washington, by WESTEC Services, Inc., San 

Diego, California. 
 Final Report Vol.1 127 

Maat, N., C. Kraan, and W.A. Oost, 1991: The roughness of wind waves. Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 

54, 89-103. 

MacDonald, C.P., P.T. Roberts, C.A. Knoderer, D.S. Miller, and S.R. Hanna, 2002: Boundary Layer 

Study in the Western and Central Gulf of Mexico. Draft Interim Report STI-998555-2266-DIR. 

Prepared for Minerals Management Service, New Orleans, Louisiana. 

Maul, P.R., 1980: Atmospheric Transport of Sulfur Compound Pollutants. Central Electricity Generating 

Bureau MID/SSD/80/0026/R. Nottingham, England. 

Mortensen, N.G., and S. Gryning, 1989: The Oresund Experiment Data Bank Report. Department of 

Meteorology and Wind Energy, Riso National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark. 

Oost, W.A., 1998: The KNMI HEXMAX stress data reanalysis. Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 86, 447-

468. 

Oost, W.A., G.J. Komen, C.M.J. Jacobs, and C. van Oort, 2002: New evidence for a relation between 

wind stress and wave age from measurements during ASGAMAGE. Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 

103, 409-438. 

Paulson, C.A., 1970: The mathematical representation of wind speed and temperature profiles in the 

unstable atmospheric surface layer. J. Appl. Meteor., 9, 857-861. 

Sattler, K., J. She, B.H. Sass, L Laursen, M. Nielsen, L. Landberg, and H.S. Christensen, 2002: 

Enhanced Description of the Wind Climate in Denmark for Determination of Wind Resources. 

Final report 1363/00-0020, Danish Meteorological Institute, 66 pp. 

Schacher, G.E., K.L. Davidson, and C.W. Fairall, 1982: Atmospheric Marine Boundary Layer 

Convective Mixing Velocities in the California Coastal Region. Atmos. Environ., 16, 1183-1192. 

Schulman, L.L. and S.R. Hanna, 1986: Evaluation of downwash modifications to the Industrial Source 

Complex Model. JAPCA, 36, 258-264. 

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). Earth Tech, Inc., 196 Baker, Avenue, Concord, MA 01741. 

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

Model (Version 5). Earth Tech, Inc., 196 Baker Avenue, Concord, MA 01742. 

Scire, J.S. and L.L. Schulman, 1980: Modeling plume rise from low-level buoyant line and point sources. 

Proceedings Second Point Conference on Applications of Air Pollution Meteorology, 24-28 

March, New Orleans, LA, 133-139. 

Taylor, G.I., 1921: Diffusion by continuous movements. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (Ser.2), 20, 196-211. 
 Final Report Vol.1 128 

Taylor, P.K., and M.A. Yelland, 2001: The dependence of sea surface roughness on the height and 

steepness of waves. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 31, 572-590. 

Vickers, D., L. Mahrt, J. Sun, and T. Crawford, 2001: Structure of offshore flow. Monthly Weather 

Review., 129, 1251-1258. 
 Final Report Vol.1 129 

APPENDIX: COMPILATION OF A HIGH RESOLUTION SEA SURFACE 

TEMPERATURE DATASET FROM SATELLITE 

MEASUREMENTS FOR THE GULF OF MEXICO