Appendix L.4: Holcim

Appendix L.4 contents:

L.4.1 Appendix summary

L.4.2 BART information request letter

L.4.3 BART elig ibility letter

L.4.4 Modeling protocol

L.4.5 EPA comments on modeling protocol

L.4.6 Facility response to EPA comments

L.4.7 BART exemption model report

L.4.8 BART exemption letterHolcim (1680-00025) BART Process Summary

As a portland cement plant, Holcim meets the initial BART eligibility requirement of source category code. Holcim is 148 km from Sipsey Wilderness Area, a Class I area, and has a possible visibility impact. Th erefore, on February 28, 2002, Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) sent them a letter requesting information to determine BART eligibility. Based on the information received from Holcim, one unit was deemed BART eligible becau se it met the following criteria:

• operating or under construction between Aug.7, 1962 to Aug.7, 1977

• having potential emissions that exceed the limit of 250 tons per year for SO 2 , NO x , or PM10.

The following is the BART-eligible point source for Holcim.

• Wet process cement kiln

o installed in 1973

o potential SO 2 emissions of 5593 tons per year.

o potential NO x emissions of 3390 tons per year

o potential PM10 emissions of 95 tons per year

o electrostatic precipitator

As a result, Holcim was required to perform CALPUFF mode ling on this unit. Using the conservative default option of disabling puff splitting algorithms and the old IMPROVE equation, the modeling analysis demonstrated a 98 th percentile 24-hour average visibility impact of 0.34 dv for Si psey. The threshold contribution for BART subjectivity is 0.5 dv; therefore, Holcim is not BART subject.BEST AVAILABLE RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY (BART) EXEMPTION MODELING PROTOCOL FOR THE HOLCIM FACILITY IN ARTESIA, MISSISSIPPI

Prepared for: Holcim(US) Inc. 8677 Highway 45 South Alternate Artesia, MS 39736

Prepared by: RTP Environmental Associates 304A West Millbrook Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27609

July 2006i Table of Contents

1.0 INTROD UCTION.................................................................................................... 1

2.0 FACILITY LOCATION, DESCRIPTION OF SOURCES AND CLASS I AREAS TO BE EVALUATE D ............................................................................... 2

3.0 OVERVIEW OF BART EXEMPT ION MODELING APPROACH ............................ 8 3.1 CALPU FF Input ................................................................................................... 9 Modeling Do main ...................................................................................................... 9 Class I Area Re ceptors ........................................................................................... 10 Control File Setti ngs................................................................................................ 10 Ozone and Ammonia Backg round Va lues ............................................................... 10 3.2 CALPOS T Input................................................................................................. 12

4.0 INTERPRETATION AND PRESENT ATION OF MODE L RESULTS.................... 13

List of Tables

Table 1. Modeled St ack Paramete r Data ....................................................................... 5

List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of the Holcim Artesi a Facilit y ............................................................ 3

Figure 2. Location of t he Sipsey Cla ss I Area ................................................................ 7

Figure 3. Proposed CALP UFF Modeling Domain ......................................................... 111 1.0 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agen cy (EPA) published final amendments to its 1999 regional haze rule on July 6, 2005 (70 FR 39104). Under this regulation, certain existing stationary sources that emit visi bility impairing pollutants must install and operate the Best Available Retrofit Technol ogy (BART). BART is required for sources that fit specific criteria and that “may r easonably be anticipated to cause or contribute” to visibility impairment in any Class I area. The determination of what constitutes BART is made on a case-by-case basis considering technical feasibility, costs of compliance, energy impacts, and the modeled reduction in visibility impacts. Air quality modeling is

used both to determine whether a source ma y reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to a visibility impact (i.e., whether a source is subject to BART) and as a means for evaluating the degree of visibility improvement resulting from BART. This document constitutes the proposed protoc ol for conducting the BART exemption component of the modeling for th e Holcim(US) Inc. (Holcim) facility located in Artesia, Mississippi.

The Visibility Improvement St ate and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS) Regional Planning Organization (RPO) recent ly issued its final protocol for the application of the CALPUFF model for analysis of BART. 1 Protocols for exemption modeling for individual sources are due t he Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) by August 31 , 2006. Without ex ception, this protocol follows the latest guidance outlined in the final VISTAS protocol.

1 “Protocol for the Appication of the CALPUFF Model for An alysis of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART), December 22, 2005 (with revisions January 23 and March 9, 2006).2 2.0 FACILITY LOCATION, DESCRIPTION OF SOURCES AND CLASS I AREAS TO BE EVALUATED

The Holcim (US) Inc. Artesia facility is lo cated in northeastern Mississippi in Lowndes County. The facility is approximately 25 miles south-southwest of Columbus. The approximate Lambert Conformal Conic (LCC ) coordinates of the facility are

775.257 kilometers east and -699.150 kilometers north. Figure 1 s hows the location of the facility on the Crawford West 7. 5 minute USGS topographic quadrangle.

The Artesia plant produces portland cement us ing a wet process kiln, which means the raw materials are fed to the kiln using water. The primary raw materials (sand, iron ore, limestone, and chalk) are eit her mined on-site or transport ed to the plant site. The

materials are crushed or milled. Water is added to the raw mill to create a pumpable slurry, or slip, of approximately 65% solids. The slurry is stor ed in a basin until it is fed to the kiln for pyroprocessing. The fac ility operates one kiln with a total production capacity of 525,000 tons of clinker per year . The clinker is milled and combined with

other raw materials to form ce ment. The total annual cement capacity of the facility is approximately 650,000 tons per y ear. The kiln accounts for nearly 98% of total facility (all pollutants) emissions. Material handling, which consists of numerous conveyor belts and transfer operations, as well as milling activities and roadways also contribute to particulate matter emissions from the fa cility, although to a much lesser extent.

The BART provisions focus on reducing emissi ons from large sources that, due to age, were exempted from other control requirement s in the Clean Air Act. An emissions source is considered eligible for BART if it falls into one of 26 listed categories, has the potential to emit at least 250 tons per year of any haze forming pollutant, and existed on August 7, 1977, yet was not in operation before August 7, 1962. Thus, the BART provisions do not cover all sources that may cause or contribute to visibility impairment

in a Class I area.3 0 600 1,200 1,800 2,400 300 Meters 

# ® Holcim Artesia

Figure 1. Location of th e Holcim Artesia Facility4 Only the kiln will be evaluated for potential BART eligibility. The kiln is the only BARTeligible source that emits appreciable amounts of NOx and SO 2 . The remaining emission units emit only particulate matter and are generally fugitive in nature. These sources are not anticipated to result in visibility impacts.

Maximum, 24-hour actual emission ra tes during normal operation for the 2001-2003 period will be determined and modeled in CALPUFF. NOx and SO 2 emissions from the

kiln will be obtained from cont inuous emission monitors (CEM S). Particulate emissions will be based upon stack test data. All PM 10 emission will be assumed to be filterable and will be speciated, using VISTAS provided speciation profiles for wet process cement kilns, into PM 10 (PMC or PM Coarse), PM 2.5 (PMF or PM Fine), and elemental carbon (EC). As recommended by VISTAS, the condensable PM 10 fraction will be

assumed to be 20.8% of the total PM 10 emissions rate. The total PM 10 rate will be

calculated from the filt erable fraction assuming t hat the filterable frac tion is 79.2% of the

total. The condensable fraction will then be speciated (again using the VISTAS recommended speciation profiles) into sulfates and secondary organic aerosols (SOA).

Based upon the latest guidance from VISTAS, Holcim will only model emissions of NOx,

SO 2 , and PM 10 . Holcim does not intend to evaluate emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or ammonia. The st ack parameters that will be evaluated are provided in Table 1.5Table 1. Modeled Stack Parameter DataModelSourceIDSourceDescriptionLCC E(km)aLCC N(km)aStackHeight(m)BaseElevation(m)StackDiameter(m)ExitVelocity(m/sec)Temp.(K)SigmaY (m)SigmaZ (m)MomentumFluxS26 Kiln 775.257 -699.15060.96 86.3 3.35 16.4 424 0 0 1aLambert Conformal Conic (LCC) coordinates are based upon an originof 40.0N and 97.0W with Standard Parallels of 33.0N and 45.0N (NWS-84 Datum).6 Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas in which visibility is more stringently protected under the Clean Air Ac t than any other areas in the United States. The VISTAS protocol r equires evaluation of impacts at all Class I areas that are located within 300 km of a BART-eligible source.

There is one Class I area located within 300 km of the Holcim site that requires evaluation: the Sipsey Wilder ness Area. Sipsey is locat ed 148 km to the northeast of the Holcim facility. Figure 2 shows the loca tion of this Class I area with respect to the Holcim facility. Figure 2 also shows the other Class I areas in the vicinity of Holcim, but greater than 300 km away.7 

### [ 300km Radius from Holcim

Holcim Artesia Facility Sipsey Wilderness Area Mingo NWR

Breton NWR

Breton NWR Mammoth Cave NP



# ® 0 75,000 150,000 225,000 300,000

37,500 Meters

Figure 2. Location of the Sipsey Class I Area8 3.0 OVERVIEW OF BART EXEM PTION MODELING APPROACH

According to the BART regulation (FR 39162), an individual source is considered to contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area if it has at least a 0.5 deciview (dv) impact. Sources which d o not contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area are not subject to the BART requirements. The objec tive of this modeling protocol is to describe the procedures that will be employed in evaluating whether the Holcim facility in Artesia, MS is subject to BART.

The BART determination process includes ot her steps in addition to the modeling described in this protocol. These steps , which include evaluation of costs of compliance, energy and non-air quality impacts, remaining useful life of the emission units, existing pollution control technologie s, and improvements in visibility expected

from the use of BART contro ls, are not addressed in this protocol. The modeling proposed by Holcim involves modeling sour ce-specific units and comparing modeled impacts to the 0.5 deciview threshold. If t he BART-eligible emission units at Holcim are

determined to contribute less than a 0.5 dv change at the Sipsey Class I area, the plant will be exempt from fu rther BART review.

The modeling will generally follow EPA’s Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) and VISTAS guidance, Phase 2 recommendations, for long-range transport. 2 The IWAQM guidance was developed to address air quality impacts—as assessed through the Prevention of Significa nt Deterioration permitting program.

A two tier approach is recommended by VI STAS for conducting the BART exemption analysis. For the initial modeling, VIST AS recommends use of the CALPUFF modeling system with a 3-yr, 12 km CALMET meteorolog ical dataset provided by VISTAS. The maximum, 24-hour average value across all re ceptors in each Class I area is compared

2 2 Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQ M) Phase 2 Summary Report and Recommendations for Modeling Long_Range Transport Impacts , EPA-454/R-98-019, U.S. Environmental Protection A gency, Air Quality Modeling Group, Research Triangle Park , North Carolina. December, 1998.9 to the threshold value of 0.5 dv. If the maximum, 24-hr average value is below 0.5 dv at all Class I area receptors, t hen the demonstration is made that the facility in question is not subject to BART. If t he maximum value is above 0.5 dv, then the source proceeds

to the second tier of the ev aluation. The second tier in volves use of a finer, 4 km CALMET dataset, also provided by VISTAS. For the finer grid analysis, the 98 th
percentile impact value for the 24-hr average is used to determine whether the source contributes greater t han a .05 change in deciview. Either the 8 th highest day in each year or the 22 nd highest day in the 3-year period, whichever is more conservative, is to be used for comparison to the exemption threshol d. Holcim will forgo the initial tier of the modeling and proceed directly to the finer, 4km grid modeling.

In creating the CALMET input files, VISTAS used the MM5 databases developed by EPA for 2001, VISTAS for 2002, and Midwest RPO for 2003. The 12 km grid, large domain covering the entire VISTAS region, we re created using the No-Obs setting (i.e., did not include additional surface and upper ai r observations beyond those incorporated in the MM5 calculations). For finer resolution subdomains (4 km grid or less), available surface and upper air observations were used in addition to MM5 me teorological model outputs.

3.1 CALPUFF Input

The VISTAS-provided CALMET output will be input to the CALPUFF model, which

simulates the effects of t he meteorological conditions on the transport and dispersion of pollutants from an individual source. No CALMET runs will ther efore be required to process meteorological, land use, or terrain data. As a result, CALMET settings are not discussed in this protocol.

Modeling Domain

The CALPUFF modeling domain is designed to include the Holcim facility and the Sipsey Class I areas (this is the only Class I Area within 300 km of Holcim). A 50 km

buffer zone in each direction was included in establishing the modeling domain. The10 domain dimensions are ther efore 207 km east-west by 224 km north-south. The proposed modeling domain is shown in Figure 3. For the 4 km grid runs, 52 grid cells will be employed in the east-west ax is and 56 in the north-south axis.

Class I Area Receptors

Holcim will use the FLM Class I receptors for Sipsey, with elevations, as obtained from the National Parks Service. The NPS recept ors are shown in Figure 3. The receptor coordinates and elevations are provided in Appendix A.

Control File Settings

In general, Holcim proposes to use default options in the CALPUFF model. 3 The

deviations from the default values are discussed below.

• The MESOPUFF II module will be used for chemical transformation (MCHEM=1)

• Number of vertical layers (NZ) will be se t to 11 and cell face heights (ZFACE) of 0, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, 640, 1200, 2000, 3000, 4000 meters will be used (to be consistent with CALMET runs)

.

• The integrated puff sampling methodology will be used for puff recognition.

• Building downwash will be ignored becaus e the Class Areas I are located greater than 50 km from the source and downwas h should not influence concentration estimates.

Ozone and Ammonia Background Values

CALPUFF uses background ozone (O 3 ) values in its chemistry module. The model accepts either a single background value or an input file of hourly ozone values commensurate with the period of the meteorological data. Holcim proposes to use

observed ozone data for 2001-2003 from CASTNe t and AIRS stations (the hourly data have been provided by VISTAS and extract ed for the modeling domain using the subdomn utility provided in the CALPUFF GUI) . Per VISTAS Guidance, Holcim also

intends to us a constant amm onia background value of 0.5 ppb.

3 As defined by pages B-2 through B-8 of the IWAQM Phase 2 Summary Report.11 

### [ Meteorological Domain

Computational Domain



# ® 0 58,000 116,000 174,000 232,000

29,000 Meters Sipsey Receptors

Figure 3. Proposed CAL PUFF Modeling Domain12 3.2 CALPOST Input

Input required by CALPOST includes an inpu t control file and the hourly concentration output file from CALPUFF. The primary se ttings for the CALPOST control file are

associated with the method for calculation of li ght extinction. The CALPOST control file will be set such that the background light ex tinction calculation Visibility Method 6 (MVISBK=6) is used. This is the VISTAS default value as described in VISTAS’ protocol document. As required by Method 6, The EPA Class I area-specific (centroid) monthly relative humidity values for the Sips ey Class I area will be used. These values

will be obtained from Table A-3 of the EPA’s “G uidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze Rule”. 4

To develop background conditions for visibili ty Method 6, Holcim will use Equation 3-2 of the VISTAS protocol document to calculate the extinction coefficient that corresponds to EPA’s haze index value for the Sipsey. The Rayleigh scattering value of 10Mm -1 will

then be subtracted from this value and ent ered as the soil concentration (in μg/m 3 ) in

CALPOST.

4 “Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze Rule”, EPA-450/B-03-005, September 2003.13 4.0 INTERPRETATION AND PRESENTATION OF MODEL RESULTS

The CALPUFF modeling system will be executed with input data and settings as

described in Sections 2 and 3. Delta-deciv iew results, necessary for comparison with the 0.5 dv visibility threshol d, will be obtained from the “24HR VISIBILITY (deciview)” table in the CALPOST output file. The regional haze regulation and BART guideline

state that the 98 th percentile of 24-hour CALPUFF mode ling results are to be compared with the contribution threshold for purposes of determining BART applicability. A 24- hour prediction greater than 0.5 delta-deciview at any recept or in a Class I area would constitute a day of exceedance. Up to 7 days of exceedance are therefore allowed per year per Class I area (i.e., the 98 th percentile is approximated by the eighth-highest daily prediction). If more than 7 days/yr are calculated with a delta deciview value greater than 0.5, Holcim may be cons idered as BART-applicable.

A report will be prepared to deta il the procedures and results of the modeling analysis.

Electronic versions of all CALPUFF and CALPOST input and output files will be provided with the BART modeling report.APPENDIX A

Sipsey Receptor Locations and Elevations

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) Source 775.2574 -699.150 89.6112 Holcim 1 872.6781 -586.3988 255.000 Sipsey 149.008 2 873.4377 -586.31875 235.000 Sipsey 149.567 3 874.1974 -586.23862 236.000 Sipsey 150.127 4 874.9571 -586.15842 244.000 Sipsey 150.689 5 875.7168 -586.07815 243.000 Sipsey 151.252 6 876.4764 -585.99781 237.000 Sipsey 151.818 7 877.2361 -585.91741 213.000 Sipsey 152.385 8 877.9957 -585.83693 187.000 Sipsey 152.954 9 871.062 -585.63922 244.000 Sipsey 148.537 10 871.8216 -585.55931 274.000 Sipsey 149.089 11 872.5812 -585.47933 250.000 Sipsey 149.642 12 873.3408 -585.39928 237.000 Sipsey 150.198 13 874.1004 -585.31916 214.000 Sipsey 150.756 14 874.86 -585.23897 226.000 Sipsey 151.315 15 875.6196 -585.15871 183.000 Sipsey 151.877 16 876.3792 -585.07838 243.000 Sipsey 152.440 17 877.1387 -584.99798 213.000 Sipsey 153.005 18 877.8983 -584.91752 182.000 Sipsey 153.571 19 878.6579 -584.83698 179.000 Sipsey 154.140 20 879.4174 -584.75637 249.000 Sipsey 154.710 21 870.9653 -584.71973 244.000 Sipsey 149.178 22 871.7248 -584.63983 255.000 Sipsey 149.728 23 872.4843 -584.55986 253.000 Sipsey 150.279 24 873.2439 -584.47982 244.000 Sipsey 150.833 25 874.0034 -584.39971 244.000 Sipsey 151.388 26 874.7629 -584.31953 181.000 Sipsey 151.945 27 875.5224 -584.23928 220.000 Sipsey 152.504 28 876.2819 -584.15896 214.000 Sipsey 153.065 29 877.0414 -584.07857 243.000 Sipsey 153.627 30 877.8009 -583.99811 215.000 Sipsey 154.191 31 878.5603 -583.91758 239.000 Sipsey 154.758 32 879.3198 -583.83699 183.000 Sipsey 155.325 33 880.0793 -583.75632 210.000 Sipsey 155.895 34 880.8387 -583.67558 252.000 Sipsey 156.466 35 881.5981 -583.59477 262.000 Sipsey 157.039 36 868.5902 -584.03952 228.000 Sipsey 148.194 37 869.3497 -583.95984 219.000 Sipsey 148.735 38 870.1091 -583.88009 245.000 Sipsey 149.278 39 870.8686 -583.80026 231.000 Sipsey 149.823 40 871.6281 -583.72037 242.000 Sipsey 150.370 41 872.3875 -583.64041 208.000 Sipsey 150.919 42 873.1469 -583.56037 226.000 Sipsey 151.470

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) 43 873.9064 -583.48027 244.000 Sipsey 152.023 44 874.6658 -583.4001 180.000 Sipsey 152.578 45 875.4252 -583.31986 244.000 Sipsey 153.134 46 876.1846 -583.23955 225.000 Sipsey 153.693 47 876.944 -583.15917 244.000 Sipsey 154.253 48 877.7034 -583.07872 233.000 Sipsey 154.815 49 878.4628 -582.9982 177.000 Sipsey 155.379 50 879.2222 -582.91761 214.000 Sipsey 155.944 51 879.9816 -582.83695 255.000 Sipsey 156.511 52 880.7409 -582.75622 245.000 Sipsey 157.080 53 881.5003 -582.67543 274.000 Sipsey 157.651 54 868.4938 -583.12003 245.000 Sipsey 148.848 55 869.2532 -583.04036 244.000 Sipsey 149.387 56 870.0125 -582.96061 213.000 Sipsey 149.928 57 870.7719 -582.8808 192.000 Sipsey 150.471 58 871.5313 -582.80092 195.000 Sipsey 151.015 59 872.2906 -582.72096 244.000 Sipsey 151.562 60 873.05 -582.64094 221.000 Sipsey 152.111 61 873.8093 -582.56085 244.000 Sipsey 152.661 62 874.5687 -582.48068 244.000 Sipsey 153.213 63 875.328 -582.40045 259.000 Sipsey 153.768 64 876.0873 -582.32015 244.000 Sipsey 154.324 65 876.8467 -582.23978 244.000 Sipsey 154.881 66 877.606 -582.15934 208.000 Sipsey 155.441 67 878.3653 -582.07883 230.000 Sipsey 156.003 68 879.1246 -581.99825 177.000 Sipsey 156.566 69 879.8839 -581.9176 183.000 Sipsey 157.131 70 880.6431 -581.83688 191.000 Sipsey 157.697 71 881.4024 -581.75609 184.000 Sipsey 158.266 72 882.1617 -581.67523 242.000 Sipsey 158.836 73 868.3973 -582.20056 250.000 Sipsey 149.506 74 869.1566 -582.12089 213.000 Sipsey 150.043 75 869.9159 -582.04115 252.000 Sipsey 150.581 76 870.6752 -581.96135 254.000 Sipsey 151.121 77 871.4345 -581.88147 187.000 Sipsey 151.664 78 872.1938 -581.80153 226.000 Sipsey 152.208 79 872.9531 -581.72151 213.000 Sipsey 152.754 80 873.7123 -581.64143 214.000 Sipsey 153.302 81 874.4716 -581.56128 244.000 Sipsey 153.852 82 875.2308 -581.48105 253.000 Sipsey 154.404 83 875.9901 -581.40076 214.000 Sipsey 154.958 84 876.7493 -581.3204 185.000 Sipsey 155.513 85 877.5085 -581.23997 215.000 Sipsey 156.070 86 878.2678 -581.15946 241.000 Sipsey 156.629

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) 87 879.027 -581.07889 215.000 Sipsey 157.190 88 879.7862 -580.99825 182.000 Sipsey 157.753 89 881.3046 -580.83676 274.000 Sipsey 158.883 90 882.0637 -580.75591 264.000 Sipsey 159.451 91 867.5417 -581.36068 274.000 Sipsey 149.635 92 868.3009 -581.28109 274.000 Sipsey 150.167 93 869.0601 -581.20143 262.000 Sipsey 150.701 94 869.8193 -581.12171 276.000 Sipsey 151.237 95 870.5786 -581.04191 263.000 Sipsey 151.775 96 871.3378 -580.96204 206.000 Sipsey 152.315 97 872.0969 -580.88211 231.000 Sipsey 152.856 98 872.8561 -580.8021 249.000 Sipsey 153.400 99 873.6153 -580.72203 257.000 Sipsey 153.946 100 874.3745 -580.64188 271.000 Sipsey 154.494 101 875.1336 -580.56167 242.000 Sipsey 155.043 102 875.8928 -580.48138 240.000 Sipsey 155.594 103 876.652 -580.40103 223.000 Sipsey 156.148 104 877.4111 -580.32061 187.000 Sipsey 156.703 105 878.1702 -580.24011 252.000 Sipsey 157.259 106 878.9294 -580.15955 183.000 Sipsey 157.818 107 879.6885 -580.07892 213.000 Sipsey 158.378 108 867.4453 -580.44121 283.000 Sipsey 150.301 109 868.2045 -580.36163 266.000 Sipsey 150.830 110 868.9636 -580.28198 277.000 Sipsey 151.362 111 872.0001 -579.96269 275.000 Sipsey 153.508 112 872.7592 -579.8827 240.000 Sipsey 154.049 113 873.5183 -579.80263 274.000 Sipsey 154.593 114 874.2774 -579.7225 274.000 Sipsey 155.138 115 875.0365 -579.64229 258.000 Sipsey 155.685 116 875.7955 -579.56202 205.000 Sipsey 156.234 117 876.5546 -579.48167 217.000 Sipsey 156.785 118 877.3137 -579.40126 183.000 Sipsey 157.338 119 871.9033 -579.04329 236.000 Sipsey 154.162 120 872.6623 -578.96331 273.000 Sipsey 154.701 121 873.4213 -578.88325 275.000 Sipsey 155.242 122 874.1803 -578.80312 259.000 Sipsey 155.785 123 874.9393 -578.72292 213.000 Sipsey 156.330 124 875.6983 -578.64266 249.000 Sipsey 156.877 125 876.4572 -578.56232 258.000 Sipsey 157.425 126 877.2162 -578.48192 212.000 Sipsey 157.976 127 877.9752 -578.40144 268.000 Sipsey 158.528 128 872.5653 -578.04392 226.000 Sipsey 155.356 129 873.3243 -577.96388 274.000 Sipsey 155.894 130 874.0832 -577.88376 271.000 Sipsey 156.435

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) 131 874.8421 -577.80357 228.000 Sipsey 156.978 132 875.601 -577.72331 251.000 Sipsey 157.522 133 876.3599 -577.64299 244.000 Sipsey 158.068 134 877.1188 -577.56259 243.000 Sipsey 158.616 135 871.7096 -577.20452 208.000 Sipsey 155.479 136 872.4684 -577.12455 213.000 Sipsey 156.013 137 873.2273 -577.04451 252.000 Sipsey 156.549 138 873.9861 -576.9644 274.000 Sipsey 157.088 139 874.7449 -576.88423 274.000 Sipsey 157.628 140 875.5037 -576.80398 244.000 Sipsey 158.170 141 876.2625 -576.72366 215.000 Sipsey 158.714 142 877.0213 -576.64327 267.000 Sipsey 159.260 143 873.1302 -576.12516 247.000 Sipsey 157.207 144 873.889 -576.04506 305.000 Sipsey 157.743 145 874.6477 -575.96489 267.000 Sipsey 158.281 146 875.4065 -575.88465 269.000 Sipsey 158.821 147 876.1652 -575.80434 271.000 Sipsey 159.363 148 873.7919 -575.12573 247.000 Sipsey 158.401BEST AVAILABLE RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY (BART) EXEMPTION MODELING FOR THE HOLCIM FACILITY IN ARTESIA, MISSISSIPPI

Prepared for: Holcim(US) Inc. 8677 Highway 45 South Alternate Artesia, MS 39736

Prepared by: RTP Environmental Associates 304A West Millbrook Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27609

November 2006i Table of Contents

1.0 INTROD UCTION.................................................................................................... 1

2.0 FACILITY LOCATION, DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE S AND CLASS I AREA EVALU ATED ............................................................................................... 2

3.0 OVERVIEW OF BART EXEMPT ION MODELING APPROACH ............................ 8 3.1 CALPU FF Input ................................................................................................... 9 Modeling Do main ...................................................................................................... 9 Class I Area Re ceptors ............................................................................................. 9 Control File Setti ngs................................................................................................ 10 Ozone and Ammonia Backg round Va lues ............................................................... 10 3.2 CALPOS T Input................................................................................................. 12

4.0 MODEL R ESULTS............................................................................................... 13

List of Tables

Table 1. Modeled St ack Paramete r Data ....................................................................... 5

Table 2. Modeled Emission Ra tes.................................................................................. 5

Table 3. Delta Deciview Visibility Impact Rankings (4km CALM ET Grid, Annual Average Concentration s as Backg round) ................................................................ 13

List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of the Holcim Artesi a Facilit y ............................................................ 3

Figure 2. Location of t he Sipsey Cla ss I Area ................................................................ 7

Figure 3. CALPUFF Modeling Do main ......................................................................... 111 1.0 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agen cy (EPA) published final amendments to its 1999 regional haze rule on July 6, 2005 (70 FR 39104). Under this regulation, certain existing stationary sources that emit visi bility impairing pollutants must install and operate the Best Available Retrofit Technol ogy (BART). BART is required for sources that fit specific criteria and that “may r easonably be anticipated to cause or contribute” to visibility impairment in any Class I area. The determination of what constitutes BART is made on a case-by-case basis considering technical feasibility, costs of compliance, energy impacts, and the modeled reduction in visibility impacts. Air quality modeling is

used both to determine whether a source ma y reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to a visibility impact (i.e., whether a source is subject to BART) and as a means for evaluating the degree of visibility improvement resulting from BART.

This document presents the procedures an d results of an air dispersion modeling analysis conducted for the Holcim(US) Inc. (Holcim) facility located in Artesia, Mississippi. The modeling was conducted to evaluate whether the Holcim site may reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to a visibility impact and therefore be subject to BART. As documented herein, t he visibility impact from emissions of BARTeligible sources at the Holcim facility is le ss than 0.5 deciviews (dv). The Holcim facility is therefore not subject to BART.

The Visibility Improvement St ate and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS) Regional Planning Organization (RPO) recent ly issued its final protocol for the application of the CALPUFF model for analysis of BART. 1 The Protocols for exemption modeling for individual sources were due to the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) by August 1, 2006. Holcim submitted its modeling protocol to the MDEQ prior to this date. The protocol was subsequently approved by

the MDEQ.

1 “Protocol for the Appication of the CALPUFF Model for An alysis of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART), December 22, 2005 (with revisions January 23 and March 9, 2006).2 2.0 FACILITY LOCATION, DESCRIPT ION OF SOURCES AND CLASS I AREA EVALUATED

The Holcim (US) Inc. Artesia facility is lo cated in northeastern Mississippi in Lowndes County. The facility is approximately 25 miles south-southwest of Columbus. The approximate Lambert Conformal Conic (LCC ) coordinates of the facility are

775.257 kilometers east and -699.150 kilometers north. Figure 1 s hows the location of the facility on the Crawford West 7. 5 minute USGS topographic quadrangle.

The Artesia plant produces portland cement us ing a wet process kiln, which means the raw materials are fed to the kiln as a slurry . The primary raw mate rials (sand, iron ore, limestone, and chalk) are eit her mined on-site or transport ed to the plant site. The

materials are crushed or milled. Water is added to the raw mill to create a pumpable slurry, or slip, of approximately 65% solids. The slurry is stor ed in a basin until it is fed to the kiln for pyroprocessing. The fac ility operates one kiln with a total production capacity of 525,000 tons of clinker per year . The clinker is milled and combined with

other raw materials to form ce ment. The total annual cement capacity of the facility is approximately 650,000 tons per year. The kiln exhaust gas es account for all of the gaseous emission from the fac ility and the majority of t he particulate emissions. Material handling, which consists of numerou s conveyor belts and transfer operations, as well as milling activities and roadways also contribute to particu late matter emissions from the facility, although to a much lesser extent.

The BART provisions focus on reducing emissi ons from large sources that, due to age, were exempted from other control requirement s in the Clean Air Act. An emissions source is considered eligible for BART if it falls into one of 26 listed categories, has the potential to emit at least 250 tons per year of any haze forming pollutant, and existed on August 7, 1977, yet was not in operation before August 7, 1962. Thus, the BART provisions do not cover all sources that may cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area. The Artesia facility co mmenced operation in March of 1974. In addition, the kiln has the potential to emit in excess of 250 tons per year. The kiln is therefore subject to BART review.3 0 600 1,200 1,800 2,400 300 Meters 

# ® Holcim Artesia

Figure 1. Location of th e Holcim Artesia Facility4 Only the kiln at the Holcim facility was evaluat ed for potential BART eligibility. The kiln is the only BART-eligible source that emits appreciable am ounts of NOx and SO 2 . The remaining emission units emit only particu late matter and are generally fugitive in nature. These sources are not anticipat ed to result in visibility impacts.

Maximum, 24-hour actual emission ra tes during normal operation for the 2001-2003 period were determined and model ed in CALPUFF. NOx and SO 2 emissions from the

kiln were obtained from continuous emi ssion monitors (CEMS) during the 2001-2003 period. 2 Particulate emissions were based upon stack test data conducted during 2001-

2003. The test that result ed in the maximumlb PM/ton clinker emission factor was multiplied by the highest daily average clinke r rate to calculate maximum particulate

emissions. All PM 10 emission were assumed to be filt erable and were speciated, using VISTAS provided speciation profiles for wet process cement kilns, into PM 10 (PMC or PM Coarse), PM 2.5 (PMF or PM Fine), and elemental ca rbon (EC). As recommended by VISTAS, the condensable PM 10 fraction were assumed to be 20.8% of the total PM 10 emissions rate. The total PM 10 rate was calculated from the filterable fraction assuming

that the filterable fr action is 79.2% of the total. The condensable fraction was then speciated (again using the VISTAS recommended speciation profiles) into sulfates and secondary organic aerosols (SOA).

Based upon the latest guidance from VISTAS, Holcim only modeled emissions of NOx,

SO 2 , and PM 10 . Holcim did not evaluate emissi ons of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or ammonia. The stack parameters and emission ra tes that were modeled are provided in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. The emission calculations can be found in Appendix A.

2 Please note that CEMS data were only available from April of 2001. CEMS were not in use at the site prior to that date.5Table 1. Modeled Stack Parameter DataModelSourceIDSourceDescriptionLCC E(km)aLCC N(km)aStackHeight(m)BaseElevation(m)StackDiameter(m)ExitVelocity(m/sec)Temp.(K)SigmaY (m)SigmaZ (m)MomentumFluxS26 Kiln 775.257 -699.15060.96 86.3 3.35 16.4 424 0 0 1aLambert Conformal Conic (LCC) coordinates are based upon an originof 40.0N and 97.0W with Standard Parallels of 33.0N and 45.0N (NWS-84 Datum).Table 2. Modeled Emission RatesModelSourceIDSourceDescriptionSO2(lb/hr)SO4(lb/hr)NOx(lb/hr)HNO3(lb/hr)NO3(lb/hr)PMC(lb/hr)PMF(lb/hr)EC(lb/hr)SOA(lb/hr)S26 Kiln 1277 3.97 774 0.00 0.00 4.25 12.1 0.86 0.54Notes: PMFine (PMF) or "soil" = PM < 2.5 um in diameter. PMCoarse (PMC) = PM between 2.5 and 10 um in diameter. SOA = secondary organicaerosols. EC = elemental carbon. Kiln PMspeciation based upon VISTAS guidance.6 Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas in which visibility is more stringently protected under the Clean Air Ac t than any other areas in the United States. The VISTAS protocol r equires evaluation of impacts at all Class I areas that are located within 300 km of a BART-eligible source.

There is one Class I area located within 300 km of the Holcim site that required evaluation: the Sipsey Wilder ness Area. Sipsey is locat ed 148 km to the northeast of the Holcim facility. Figure 2 shows the loca tion of this Class I area with respect to the Holcim facility. Figure 2 also shows the other Class I areas in the vicinity of Holcim, but greater than 300 km away.7 

### [ 300km Radius from Holcim

Holcim Artesia Facility Sipsey Wilderness Area Mingo NWR

Breton NWR

Breton NWR Mammoth Cave NP



# ® 0 75,000 150,000 225,000 300,000

37,500 Meters

Figure 2. Location of the Sipsey Class I Area8 3.0 OVERVIEW OF BART EXEM PTION MODELING APPROACH

According to the BART regulation (FR 39162), an individual source is considered to contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area if it has at least a 0.5 deciview (dv) impact. Sources which to not contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area are not subject to the BART requirements. This document describes the procedures employed

and the results of the modeling conducted in evaluating w hether the Holcim facility in Artesia, MS is subject to BART.

The modeling conducted by Holcim invo lved modeling source-specific units and comparing modeled impacts to the 0.5 dec iview threshold. Since the modeling

demonstrates that the BART-eligible emission unit at Ho lcim contribute less than a 0.5 dv change at the Sipsey Wilderness Class I area, the plant is exempt from further BART

review.

The modeling followed EPA’s Interagency Wo rkgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) and VISTAS guidance, Phase 2 recommendations, for long-range transport. 3 The IWAQM guidance was developed to address air quality impacts—as assessed through the Prevention of Significant Deterioration permitting program. A two tier approach, as recommended by VISTAS, was used in the BART exemption analysis. For the initial modeling, INVISTA used CA LPUFF (Version 5.756) with a 3-yr, 12 km CALMET meteorological dataset provided by VIST AS. The maximum, 24-hour average value across all receptors in each Class I area was co mpared to the threshol d value of 0.5 dv.

It was determined that the maximum value ex ceeded the 0.5 dv at Sipsey. Holcim

therefore obtained the 4 km s ubregional CALMET meteorologic al dataset from VISTAS.

The 98 th percentile value (i.e., the 8 th highest value for each year and the 22 nd highest value from the full three y ears) from the 4 km data as well as the annual average background values were used in making the comparison to the 0.5 dv criterion.

3 3 Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQ M) Phase 2 Summary Report and Recommendations for Modeling Long_Range Transport Impacts , EPA-454/R-98-019, U.S. Environmental Protection A gency, Air Quality Modeling Group, Research Triangle Park , North Carolina. December, 1998.9 In creating the CALMET input files, VISTAS used the MM5 databases developed by EPA for 2001, VISTAS for 2002, and Midwest RP O for 2003. The 12 km grid, large domain covering the entire VISTAS region, was created using the No-Obs setting (i.e., did not include additional surface and upper ai r observations beyond those incorporated in the MM5 calculations). For the finer re solution subdomain (4 km grid), available surface and upper air observations were used in addition to MM5 me teorological model outputs.

3.1 CALPUFF Input

Output from the VI STAS-provided CALMET model wa s input to the CALPUFF model,

which simulates the effects of the met eorological conditions on the transport and dispersion of pollutants from an individual source. No CALMET runs were therefore required to process meteorological, land use, or terrain data. As a result, CALMET settings are not discussed further.

Modeling Domain

The CALPUFF modeling domain was designed to include the Holcim facility and the Sipsey Class I area (this is the only Class I Area within 300 km of Holcim). A 50 km

buffer zone in each direction was included in establishing the co mputational modeling

domain. The domain dimensio ns are therefore 207 km eas t-west by 224 km northsouth. The proposed modeling domain is shown in Figure 3. For the 4 km grid runs, 52 grid cells were employed in the east-we st axis and 56 in the north-south axis.

Class I Area Receptors

Holcim used the FLM Class I receptors for Si psey, with elevations, as obtained from the National Parks Service. The NPS receptor s are shown in Figure 3. The receptor coordinates and elevations are provided in Appendix B.10 Control File Settings

In general, Holcim used the default options in the CALPUFF model. 4 The deviations

from the default values are discussed below.

• The MESOPUFF II module was used for chemical transformation (MCHEM=1)

• Number of vertical layers (NZ) was se t to 11 and cell face heights (ZFACE) of 0, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, 640, 1200, 2000, 3000, 4000 meters were used (to be consistent with CALMET runs)

.

• The integrated puff sampling methodol ogy was used for puff recognition.

• Building downwash was ignored because t he Class Area is located greater than 50 km from the source and downwash should not influence concentration estimates.

Ozone and Ammonia Background Values

CALPUFF uses background ozone (O 3 ) values in its chemistry module. The model accepts either a single background value or an input file of hourly ozone values commensurate with the period of the meteorological data. Holcim used observed ozone

data for 2001-2003 from CASTNet and AIRS stations (the hourly data were provided by

VISTAS and extracted for t he modeling domain using the subdomn utility provided in the CALPUFF GUI). Per VISTAS Guidanc e, Holcim used a constant ammonia background value of 0.5 ppb.

4 As defined by pages B-2 through B-8 of the IWAQM Phase 2 Summary Report.11 

### [ Meteorological Domain

Computational Domain



# ® 0 58,000 116,000 174,000 232,000

29,000 Meters Sipsey Receptors

Figure 3. CALPUFF Modeling Domain12 3.2 CALPOST Input

Calculation Methods for Background Light Extinction Input required by CALPOST includes an inpu t control file and the hourly concentration output file from CALPUFF. The primary se ttings for the CALPOST control file are

associated with the method for calculation of li ght extinction. The CALPOST control file was set such that the backg round light extinction calcul ation Visibility Method 6 (MVISBK=6) was used. This is the VISTAS default value as described in VISTAS’ protocol document. As required by Method 6, The EPA Class I area-specific (centroid) monthly relative humidity values for the Si psey Class I area were used. These values

were obtained from Table A-3 of the EPA’s “G uidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze Rule”. 5

In Visibility Method 6, CALP OST also requires monthly ba ckground concentrations of ammonium sulfate, ammonium nitrate, coarse particulate mass, organic carbon, soil, and elemental carbon. Annual averages reflecti ve of natural background conditions for these species were obtained from the EPA’s “Gui dance for Natural Visibi lity” document.

Light Extinction Efficiencies and Rayleigh Scattering Value The other values required to execute CALPOS T include the light extinction efficiencies for the pollutant species identified above (i.e ., ammonium sulfate, ammonium nitrate, etc.) and the extinction due to Rayleigh scattering (BEXTRAY). Dry extinction efficiencies for the pollutant species were set equal to the Table 2-1 values of the EPA Visibility Guidance Document. The val ue for Rayleigh scattering was set to 10 Mm -1

.

5 “Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze Rule”, EPA-450/B-03-005, September 2003.13 4.0 MODEL RESULTS

The CALPUFF modeling system was exec uted with input data and settings as

described in Sections 2 and 3. Delta-deciv iew results, necessary for comparison with the 0.5 dv visibility threshold, were obtai ned from the “24HR VISI BILITY (deciview)” table in the CALPOST output files. The regional haze regulatio n and BART guideline

state that the 98 th percentile of 24-hour CALPUFF mode ling results are to be compared with the contribution threshold for purposes of determining BART applicability. A 24- hour prediction greater than 0.5 delta-deciview at any recept or in a Class I area would constitute a day of exceedance. Up to 7 days of exceedance are therefore allowed per year per Class I area (i.e., the 98 th percentile is approximated by the eighth-highest daily prediction). In addition, as requested by VISTAS, Holcim compared the 22 nd highest value from the full three y ears of meteorology to t he 0.5 dv criterion.

The results from the 4 km grid runs are presented in Table 3. As shown, the 98% value

is below the 0.5 dv criterion. The Holcim Arte sia facility is therefore exempt from further BART consideration. Model summary outpu t data can be found in Appendix C. The CALPUFF and CALPOST input and output f iles are provided on the enclosed CD.

Table 3. Delta Deciview Visibility Im pact Rankings (4km CALMET Grid, Annual Average Concentrations as Background)

Year of Meteorology

Class I Area Delta Deciview Rank (highest

to lowest) 2001 2002 2003

1 1.008 0.713 0.497 2 0.642 0.653 0.461 3 0.580 0.43 0.418 4 0.493 0.386 0.413 5 0.436 0.344 0.384 6 0.363 0.341 0.309 7 0.362 0.292 0.3 Sipsey Wilderness Area

8 0.340 0.245 0.291 22nd highest for 3-yr period is 0.307 dv.

.APPENDIX A

Emission CalculationsModelSource IDSourceDescription PollutantEmissionFactor (lb/tonfeed)aEmission Factor ReferenceMaximum 24-hrProduction (tonfeed/hr)Emissions(lb/hr)S26 KilnPM100.1625 Annual Stack Test (2001-2003) 105.90 17.21S26 Kiln NOx NA CEMS Analysis (2001-2003) NA 774S26 KilnSO2NA CEMS Analysis (2001-2003) NA 1,277Holcim Artesia Maximum 24-hr EmissionsaPM testing values from 2001, 2002, and 2003 were reviewed. The lb/hr tested values were as follows: 2001 = 3.161, 2002 = 3.43,2003 = 15.96. The feed rates during each test were then divided into the tested hourly rates to develop a lb/ton feed emissionfactor.The ton/hr feed rates during the test were as follows: 2001 = 105.5, 2002 = 105.0, 2003 = 105.69. The 2003 stack test wasdetermined to yield the maximum emission factor which was 0.163 lb PM/ton feed. The highest daily average feed rate of 105.9ton/yr was then multiplied by the highest lb/ton feed emission factor to calculate the maximum emission rate for the model.PM SpeciationVISTAS Recommended Speciation DataControlled PM10 Emissionsm(Boldvalue is estimated.)Kiln Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR ParticleType (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Filterable) (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Condensible) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Condensible) Type Ext.Coef.Wet 100% 79.2% 24.7% 0.6 75.3% 70.3% 15.0%10 20.8% 88.0% SO4 3 12.0% SOA 4Holcim Calculated Model InputUncontrolled PM10 Emissions(BoldValue isInputby user.)Kiln Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR ParticleType (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef.Wet 21.717.24.3 0.6 13.0 12.10 1 0.9 10 4.5 3.97 SO4 3 0.5 SOA 4APPENDIX B

Sipsey Receptor Locations and Elevations

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) Source 775.2574 -699.150 89.6112 Holcim 1 872.6781 -586.3988 255.000 Sipsey 149.008 2 873.4377 -586.31875 235.000 Sipsey 149.567 3 874.1974 -586.23862 236.000 Sipsey 150.127 4 874.9571 -586.15842 244.000 Sipsey 150.689 5 875.7168 -586.07815 243.000 Sipsey 151.252 6 876.4764 -585.99781 237.000 Sipsey 151.818 7 877.2361 -585.91741 213.000 Sipsey 152.385 8 877.9957 -585.83693 187.000 Sipsey 152.954 9 871.062 -585.63922 244.000 Sipsey 148.537 10 871.8216 -585.55931 274.000 Sipsey 149.089 11 872.5812 -585.47933 250.000 Sipsey 149.642 12 873.3408 -585.39928 237.000 Sipsey 150.198 13 874.1004 -585.31916 214.000 Sipsey 150.756 14 874.86 -585.23897 226.000 Sipsey 151.315 15 875.6196 -585.15871 183.000 Sipsey 151.877 16 876.3792 -585.07838 243.000 Sipsey 152.440 17 877.1387 -584.99798 213.000 Sipsey 153.005 18 877.8983 -584.91752 182.000 Sipsey 153.571 19 878.6579 -584.83698 179.000 Sipsey 154.140 20 879.4174 -584.75637 249.000 Sipsey 154.710 21 870.9653 -584.71973 244.000 Sipsey 149.178 22 871.7248 -584.63983 255.000 Sipsey 149.728 23 872.4843 -584.55986 253.000 Sipsey 150.279 24 873.2439 -584.47982 244.000 Sipsey 150.833 25 874.0034 -584.39971 244.000 Sipsey 151.388 26 874.7629 -584.31953 181.000 Sipsey 151.945 27 875.5224 -584.23928 220.000 Sipsey 152.504 28 876.2819 -584.15896 214.000 Sipsey 153.065 29 877.0414 -584.07857 243.000 Sipsey 153.627 30 877.8009 -583.99811 215.000 Sipsey 154.191 31 878.5603 -583.91758 239.000 Sipsey 154.758 32 879.3198 -583.83699 183.000 Sipsey 155.325 33 880.0793 -583.75632 210.000 Sipsey 155.895 34 880.8387 -583.67558 252.000 Sipsey 156.466 35 881.5981 -583.59477 262.000 Sipsey 157.039 36 868.5902 -584.03952 228.000 Sipsey 148.194 37 869.3497 -583.95984 219.000 Sipsey 148.735 38 870.1091 -583.88009 245.000 Sipsey 149.278 39 870.8686 -583.80026 231.000 Sipsey 149.823 40 871.6281 -583.72037 242.000 Sipsey 150.370 41 872.3875 -583.64041 208.000 Sipsey 150.919 42 873.1469 -583.56037 226.000 Sipsey 151.470

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) 43 873.9064 -583.48027 244.000 Sipsey 152.023 44 874.6658 -583.4001 180.000 Sipsey 152.578 45 875.4252 -583.31986 244.000 Sipsey 153.134 46 876.1846 -583.23955 225.000 Sipsey 153.693 47 876.944 -583.15917 244.000 Sipsey 154.253 48 877.7034 -583.07872 233.000 Sipsey 154.815 49 878.4628 -582.9982 177.000 Sipsey 155.379 50 879.2222 -582.91761 214.000 Sipsey 155.944 51 879.9816 -582.83695 255.000 Sipsey 156.511 52 880.7409 -582.75622 245.000 Sipsey 157.080 53 881.5003 -582.67543 274.000 Sipsey 157.651 54 868.4938 -583.12003 245.000 Sipsey 148.848 55 869.2532 -583.04036 244.000 Sipsey 149.387 56 870.0125 -582.96061 213.000 Sipsey 149.928 57 870.7719 -582.8808 192.000 Sipsey 150.471 58 871.5313 -582.80092 195.000 Sipsey 151.015 59 872.2906 -582.72096 244.000 Sipsey 151.562 60 873.05 -582.64094 221.000 Sipsey 152.111 61 873.8093 -582.56085 244.000 Sipsey 152.661 62 874.5687 -582.48068 244.000 Sipsey 153.213 63 875.328 -582.40045 259.000 Sipsey 153.768 64 876.0873 -582.32015 244.000 Sipsey 154.324 65 876.8467 -582.23978 244.000 Sipsey 154.881 66 877.606 -582.15934 208.000 Sipsey 155.441 67 878.3653 -582.07883 230.000 Sipsey 156.003 68 879.1246 -581.99825 177.000 Sipsey 156.566 69 879.8839 -581.9176 183.000 Sipsey 157.131 70 880.6431 -581.83688 191.000 Sipsey 157.697 71 881.4024 -581.75609 184.000 Sipsey 158.266 72 882.1617 -581.67523 242.000 Sipsey 158.836 73 868.3973 -582.20056 250.000 Sipsey 149.506 74 869.1566 -582.12089 213.000 Sipsey 150.043 75 869.9159 -582.04115 252.000 Sipsey 150.581 76 870.6752 -581.96135 254.000 Sipsey 151.121 77 871.4345 -581.88147 187.000 Sipsey 151.664 78 872.1938 -581.80153 226.000 Sipsey 152.208 79 872.9531 -581.72151 213.000 Sipsey 152.754 80 873.7123 -581.64143 214.000 Sipsey 153.302 81 874.4716 -581.56128 244.000 Sipsey 153.852 82 875.2308 -581.48105 253.000 Sipsey 154.404 83 875.9901 -581.40076 214.000 Sipsey 154.958 84 876.7493 -581.3204 185.000 Sipsey 155.513 85 877.5085 -581.23997 215.000 Sipsey 156.070 86 878.2678 -581.15946 241.000 Sipsey 156.629

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) 87 879.027 -581.07889 215.000 Sipsey 157.190 88 879.7862 -580.99825 182.000 Sipsey 157.753 89 881.3046 -580.83676 274.000 Sipsey 158.883 90 882.0637 -580.75591 264.000 Sipsey 159.451 91 867.5417 -581.36068 274.000 Sipsey 149.635 92 868.3009 -581.28109 274.000 Sipsey 150.167 93 869.0601 -581.20143 262.000 Sipsey 150.701 94 869.8193 -581.12171 276.000 Sipsey 151.237 95 870.5786 -581.04191 263.000 Sipsey 151.775 96 871.3378 -580.96204 206.000 Sipsey 152.315 97 872.0969 -580.88211 231.000 Sipsey 152.856 98 872.8561 -580.8021 249.000 Sipsey 153.400 99 873.6153 -580.72203 257.000 Sipsey 153.946 100 874.3745 -580.64188 271.000 Sipsey 154.494 101 875.1336 -580.56167 242.000 Sipsey 155.043 102 875.8928 -580.48138 240.000 Sipsey 155.594 103 876.652 -580.40103 223.000 Sipsey 156.148 104 877.4111 -580.32061 187.000 Sipsey 156.703 105 878.1702 -580.24011 252.000 Sipsey 157.259 106 878.9294 -580.15955 183.000 Sipsey 157.818 107 879.6885 -580.07892 213.000 Sipsey 158.378 108 867.4453 -580.44121 283.000 Sipsey 150.301 109 868.2045 -580.36163 266.000 Sipsey 150.830 110 868.9636 -580.28198 277.000 Sipsey 151.362 111 872.0001 -579.96269 275.000 Sipsey 153.508 112 872.7592 -579.8827 240.000 Sipsey 154.049 113 873.5183 -579.80263 274.000 Sipsey 154.593 114 874.2774 -579.7225 274.000 Sipsey 155.138 115 875.0365 -579.64229 258.000 Sipsey 155.685 116 875.7955 -579.56202 205.000 Sipsey 156.234 117 876.5546 -579.48167 217.000 Sipsey 156.785 118 877.3137 -579.40126 183.000 Sipsey 157.338 119 871.9033 -579.04329 236.000 Sipsey 154.162 120 872.6623 -578.96331 273.000 Sipsey 154.701 121 873.4213 -578.88325 275.000 Sipsey 155.242 122 874.1803 -578.80312 259.000 Sipsey 155.785 123 874.9393 -578.72292 213.000 Sipsey 156.330 124 875.6983 -578.64266 249.000 Sipsey 156.877 125 876.4572 -578.56232 258.000 Sipsey 157.425 126 877.2162 -578.48192 212.000 Sipsey 157.976 127 877.9752 -578.40144 268.000 Sipsey 158.528 128 872.5653 -578.04392 226.000 Sipsey 155.356 129 873.3243 -577.96388 274.000 Sipsey 155.894 130 874.0832 -577.88376 271.000 Sipsey 156.435

### CALPUFF Receptor Locations (LCC)

LCC Origin: 40.0N, 97.0W, Standard Parallels: 33.0N, 45.0N

Receptor No. LCC East (km) LCC West (km) z (m) Description Distance to Holcim (km) 131 874.8421 -577.80357 228.000 Sipsey 156.978 132 875.601 -577.72331 251.000 Sipsey 157.522 133 876.3599 -577.64299 244.000 Sipsey 158.068 134 877.1188 -577.56259 243.000 Sipsey 158.616 135 871.7096 -577.20452 208.000 Sipsey 155.479 136 872.4684 -577.12455 213.000 Sipsey 156.013 137 873.2273 -577.04451 252.000 Sipsey 156.549 138 873.9861 -576.9644 274.000 Sipsey 157.088 139 874.7449 -576.88423 274.000 Sipsey 157.628 140 875.5037 -576.80398 244.000 Sipsey 158.170 141 876.2625 -576.72366 215.000 Sipsey 158.714 142 877.0213 -576.64327 267.000 Sipsey 159.260 143 873.1302 -576.12516 247.000 Sipsey 157.207 144 873.889 -576.04506 305.000 Sipsey 157.743 145 874.6477 -575.96489 267.000 Sipsey 158.281 146 875.4065 -575.88465 269.000 Sipsey 158.821 147 876.1652 -575.80434 271.000 Sipsey 159.363 148 873.7919 -575.12573 247.000 Sipsey 158.401APPENDIX C

Model Summary ResultsHolcim Artesia CALPUFF Summary Results

YEAR DAY HR RECEPTOR COORDINATES (km) TYPE DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF

2001 354 0 10 871.822 -585.559 D 8.647 7.639 1. 008 3.4 24.76 74.07 0.1 0.4 0.12 0.56 2001 6 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 8. 281 7.639 0.642 3.4 20.65 78.22 0.1 0.38 0.11 0.54 2001 278 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.311 7.731 0. 580 3.6 34.73 63.87 0.12 0.47 0.14 0.67 2001 90 0 1 872.678 -586.399 D 7. 899 7.406 0.493 2.9 78.77 20. 67 0.05 0.19 0.06 0.27 2001 243 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.303 7.867 0. 436 3.9 91.93 7.31 0.06 0.26 0.08 0.36 2001 201 0 91 867.542 -581.361 D 8.229 7.867 0. 363 3.9 98.44 0.95 0.05 0.21 0.06 0.29 2001 277 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.093 7.731 0. 362 3.6 45.55 53.61 0.07 0.28 0.08 0.4 2001 8 0 147 876.165 -575.804 D 7. 979 7.639 0.340 3.4 35.38 64. 16 0.04 0.15 0.05 0.22 2001 38 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.823 7.5 0. 324 3.1 52.04 47.11 0.07 0.29 0.09 0.41 2001 313 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.9 7.593 0.307 3.3 49.32 50.04 0.05 0.22 0.06 0.31 2001 229 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.167 7.867 0. 300 3.9 82.75 16.62 0.05 0.21 0.06 0.3 2001 138 0 89 881.305 -580.837 D 7.878 7.593 0. 285 3.3 58.05 38.56 0.29 1.15 0.34 1.61 2001 7 0 91 867.542 -581.361 D 7. 918 7.639 0.279 3.4 38.58 60. 97 0.04 0.15 0.04 0.21 2001 232 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 8.142 7.867 0. 276 3.9 85.35 13.07 0.13 0.54 0.16 0.75 2001 239 0 10 871.822 -585.559 D 8.124 7.867 0. 257 3.9 68.46 30.25 0.11 0.43 0.13 0.61 2001 240 0 53 881.5 -582.675 D 8. 119 7.867 0.253 3.9 80.01 18. 09 0.16 0.64 0.19 0.9 2001 245 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.119 7.867 0. 252 3.9 85.34 13.77 0.08 0.3 0.09 0.42 2001 119 0 53 881.5 -582.675 D 7. 605 7.358 0.247 2.8 36.8 61. 56 0.14 0.56 0.16 0.78 2001 131 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.829 7.593 0. 236 3.3 85.92 13.27 0.07 0.27 0.08 0.39 2001 133 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 7.814 7.593 0. 222 3.3 48.58 49.62 0.15 0.61 0.18 0.86 2001 221 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.079 7.867 0. 212 3.9 95.11 3.81 0.09 0.37 0.11 0.52 2001 190 0 1 872.678 -586.399 D 8. 077 7.867 0.210 3.9 90.54 8. 76 0.06 0.24 0.07 0.34

2002 193 0 9 871.062 -585.639 D 8. 579 7.867 0.713 3.9 78.92 19. 84 0.11 0.42 0.12 0.59 2002 364 0 5 875.717 -586.078 D 8. 292 7.639 0.653 3.4 34.24 63.97 0.15 0.6 0.18 0.85 2002 300 0 9 871.062 -585.639 D 8.16 7.731 0.43 3.6 83.19 16.33 0.04 0.16 0.05 0.23 2002 326 0 1 872.678 -586.399 D 7. 979 7.593 0.386 3.3 30.09 69. 09 0.07 0.28 0.08 0.39 2002 236 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.211 7.867 0. 344 3.9 80.5 18.07 0.12 0.48 0.14 0.68 2002 213 0 91 867.542 -581.361 D 8.207 7.867 0. 341 3.9 94.08 5.18 0.06 0.25 0.07 0.35 2002 65 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 7.698 7.406 0. 292 2.9 29.19 69.22 0.14 0.54 0.16 0.76 2002 155 0 36 868.59 -584.04 D 8.021 7.776 0. 245 3.7 98.36 1.22 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.2 2002 18 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.873 7.639 0. 234 3.4 57.3 40.41 0.19 0.78 0.23 1.09 2002 328 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.825 7.593 0. 232 3.3 40.76 58.34 0.08 0.31 0.09 0.43 2002 350 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.86 7.639 0. 222 3.4 51.56 47.04 0.12 0.47 0.14 0.67 2002 9 0 9 871.062 -585.639 D 7. 856 7.639 0.217 3.4 58 41. 26 0.06 0.25 0.07 0.35 2002 165 0 91 867.542 -581.361 D 7.987 7.776 0. 211 3.7 96.93 2.19 0.07 0.3 0.09 0.42 2002 324 0 8 877.996 -585.837 D 7. 798 7.593 0.206 3.3 75.37 23. 54 0.09 0.37 0.11 0.52 2002 111 0 53 881.5 -582.675 D 7. 561 7.358 0.203 2.8 62.44 33. 73 0.33 1.29 0.38 1.82 2002 232 0 36 868.59 -584.04 D 8.068 7.867 0. 201 3.9 94.05 5.27 0.06 0.23 0.07 0.32 2002 179 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.964 7.776 0. 188 3.7 94.91 3.84 0.11 0.42 0.13 0.6 2002 192 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.047 7.867 0. 18 3.9 95.16 4.03 0.07 0.27 0.08 0.38 2002 331 0 1 872.678 -586.399 D 7. 756 7.593 0.163 3.3 66.4 32.9 0.06 0.24 0.07 0.33 2002 231 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.027 7.867 0. 16 3.9 50.21 47.99 0.15 0.61 0.18 0.86 2002 261 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.025 7.867 0. 158 3.9 96.46 2.44 0.09 0.37 0.11 0.52 2002 146 0 1 872.678 -586.399 D 7.743 7.593 0.15 3.3 98.6 0.54 0.07 0.29 0.09 0.41

2003 197 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.363 7.867 0. 497 3.9 91.59 7.4 0.09 0.34 0.1 0.48 2003 105 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.819 7.358 0. 461 2.8 42.56 55.79 0.14 0.56 0.17 0.79 2003 335 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.01 7.593 0. 418 3.3 42.24 56.33 0.12 0.48 0.14 0.68 2003 167 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.189 7.776 0. 413 3.7 69.45 28.79 0.15 0.6 0.18 0.84 2003 188 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.251 7.867 0. 384 3.9 95.85 3.33 0.07 0.28 0.08 0.39 2003 195 0 1 872.678 -586.399 D 8. 176 7.867 0.309 3.9 92.42 6. 78 0.07 0.27 0.08 0.38 2003 34 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.799 7.5 0.3 3.1 40.62 57.61 0.15 0.6 0.18 0.84 2003 214 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.157 7.867 0. 291 3.9 84.43 14.58 0.08 0.33 0.1 0.47 2003 278 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.018 7.731 0. 288 3.6 50.75 46.98 0.19 0.77 0.23 1.08 2003 240 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 8.153 7.867 0. 286 3.9 68.57 29.7 0.15 0.59 0.17 0.82 2003 196 0 1 872.678 -586.399 D 8. 131 7.867 0.264 3.9 97.22 2. 05 0.06 0.25 0.07 0.35 2003 233 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.115 7.867 0. 248 3.9 95.98 3.55 0.04 0.16 0.05 0.22 2003 191 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 8.108 7.867 0. 241 3.9 84.58 13.93 0.13 0.51 0.15 0.71 2003 295 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 7.967 7.731 0. 236 3.6 31.6 66.55 0.16 0.63 0.19 0.88 2003 215 0 91 867.542 -581.361 D 8.091 7.867 0. 225 3.9 96.37 3.28 0.03 0.12 0.03 0.17 2003 339 0 8 877.996 -585.837 D 7. 855 7.639 0.217 3.4 79.79 19.63 0.05 0.2 0.06 0.28 2003 247 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 8.084 7.867 0. 217 3.9 93.88 5.08 0.09 0.35 0.1 0.49 2003 169 0 8 877.996 -585.837 D 7. 984 7.776 0.208 3.7 91.69 7. 74 0.05 0.19 0.06 0.27 2003 203 0 108 867.445 -580.441 D 8.074 7.867 0. 207 3.9 80.86 17.41 0.15 0.58 0.17 0.82 2003 3 0 53 881.5 -582.675 D 7.846 7.639 0.207 3.4 34.33 65.1 0.05 0.19 0.06 0.27 2003 20 0 8 877.996 -585.837 D 7.84 7.639 0.201 3.4 44.41 54.99 0.05 0.2 0.06 0.29 2003 326 0 35 881.598 -583.595 D 7.787 7.593 0. 195 3.3 37.29 61.34 0.12 0.47 0.14 0.65 0.307 22nd highest over 3 yrs 0.340 8th highest from each of 3 yrs