Western Regional Air Partnership 

Work Plan Update 

(2005-07) 

May 5, 2005 

 
Table of Contents

I. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 

II. Project Summaries ............................................................................................... 7 

Initiatives Oversight Committee ........................................................................ 7 

Stationary Sources Joint Forum ....................................................................... 7 

Fire Emissions Joint Forum ............................................................................ 8 

Dust Emissions Joint Forum ................................................................ 12 

Mobile Source Forum ................................................................................. 14 

Sources In and Near Class I Areas Forum ......................................................... 14 

Economic Analysis Forum ............................................................................... 15 

Air Quality Modeling Forum ........................................................................... 17 

Emissions Forum ........................................................................................ 22 

 Tribal Data Development Work Group ............................................................. 26 

Ambient Monitoring and Reporting Forum .......................................................... 28 

Technical Oversight Committee ............................................................ 29 

Attribution of Haze Work Group ...................................................................... 30 

309 Coordinating Committee ........................................................................... 31 

Air Managers Committee .............................................................................. 31 

Communications Committee .......................................................................... 35 

Figure 1. Strategic Plan Timeline (Updated October 13, 2004) ...................................... 4 

Figure 2. Summary of 2018 Regional Haze Control Strategy Evaluations (March 2005) ......... 6 

 
I. INTRODUCTION 

This work plan summarizes activities and expenditures planned by the Western Regional Air 

Partnership (WRAP) for calendar years 2005-2007, including activities initiated in earlier years 

and new activities. The WRAP is funded through annual grants from the U.S. EPA. This work 

plan will be submitted to EPA in support of the WRAP’s grant application for the federal FY05 

funds awarded ($2,936,826) to the WRAP to support ongoing technical and policy work related 

to the development of state and tribal regional haze plans for the West. 

The most recent WRAP work plan (calendar year 2005 work plan funded with the WRAP’s 

federal FY04 grant) was finalized on December 7, 2004. Recently, the EPA has accelerated its 

grant award process such that the FY05 grant is available to the WRAP and other regional haze 

planning organizations approximately six months sooner than in years past. Since the latest 

WRAP work plan is only a few months old, the WRAP is responding to the early availability of 

EPA funds by providing an update to the December 7, 2004 work plan. Background information 

about the WRAP, its management process, and stakeholder involvement are not repeated here, 

but can be found in the December 7, 2004 version of the work plan, available at 

http://www.wrapair.org/WRAP/docs.html. 

In addition to including new and expanded tasks, this work plan update covers an expanded 

period of 2005 through 2007. This is a critical time period since most of the WRAP’s technical 

and policy work must be completed by the end of 2006 so that states can incorporate the 

WRAP’s products in their implementation plans which are due to the EPA by December 2007 

(tribes are not subject to this deadline). 

In developing this work plan, WRAP forums and committees were asked to consider the 

essential needs of state and tribal implementation plans and to ensure they could be met in this 

time frame and with the available resources. This work plan update assumes that the vast 

majority of technical and policy endeavors should be completed with the funds available as of 

this grant and by the end of 2006. 

This work plan follows the direction set in the WRAP’s long-term strategic plan, which was 

adopted in 2003.1

 Figure 1 shows the strategic plan time line and major project milestones. The 

time line and major milestones from the strategic plan provide the overall schedule and 

objectives for this work plan. The Strategic Plan also serves as an instrument of coordination 

and provides the direction and transparency needed to foster stakeholder participation and 

consensus-based decision making, which are key features of the WRAP process. The strategic 

plan also provides guidance to the individual plans of WRAP forums and committees which are 

included in this work plan. 

 

1

 See http://www.wrapair.org/forums/sp/docs.html

 1 
On a more general level, the WRAP’s planning process must accommodate a unique landscape 

of environmental, social, economic, and political issues. The WRAP region includes 116 (or 

75 percent) of the nation’s 156 mandatory federal Class I areas, half the land mass of the United 

States (not including Alaska), a very large portion of publicly-owned lands, and numerous tribal 

jurisdictions (many with large land areas). It also emits a minority of total U.S. emissions, 

borders both Canada and Mexico, and receives pollution from Asia. 

Most WRAP members will not have to contend with ongoing ozone and particulate matter 

nonattainment issues, which simplifies air quality planning to some extent, but many WRAP 

members are faced with rapid population growth and other challenges to preventing deterioration 

of air quality. Moreover, the WRAP must be sensitive to other regionally-important 

environmental issues, such as fire and drought. This presents a unique and challenging 

environment for long-term planning which is best addressed through a single, well-funded and 

well-organized institution at the appropriate political level. The WRAP, with the appropriate 

EPA financial support, provides such an institution, especially given its co-management structure 

shared between the Western Governors’ Association and the National Tribal Environmental 

Council. 

Finally, the WRAP’s long-term planning process must be prepared to deal with relevant events 

beyond its control, such as federal initiatives and the ramifications of legal challenges to the 

RHR. One way the WRAP contends with these events is to have sufficient staffing to track the 

issues and to foster a constructive dialogue among its members. 

 2 
Table 1: Currently Pending Projects & FY05 Grant Projects

Project Title

2005 2006 2007

STATIONARY SOURCES

Regional Stationary Source Strategy Development 250,000 158,000

FIRE

Fire Tracking System 85,000 50,000 50,000

Regional coordination of smoke management programs 50,000

2002 Wildfire Emission Inventories Comparative Analysis. 26,500

Smoke Mgmt Technical and Policy Workshop 25,000

Assessment of Apportionment Methods 25,000

Feasibility Criteria for WRAP Fire Policies 60,000

MOBILE SOURCES

Offroad Retrofit Program 100,000

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Development of Baseline Economic Data 55,000

Enhancement of Cost and Benefit Unit Values 50,000

Screening Tool 20,000

Economic Assessment Capability 130,000

MODELING

2005 RMC Support 500,000 500,000

EMISSIONS

2005-2007 EDMS Hosting / Operation 55,000 180,000 180,000

EDMS Enhancements 128,000

Support for Control Strategy Analysis 75,000

TRIBAL DATA

Emissions Data Development Support 103,000 200,000

Continue Emissions Inventory & TEISS Technical Support 98,000

DUST

Enhanced Ambient Data Analysis - CoH 50,000

Update Handbook 20,000

Pilot Project -NM 80,000

Addition to Fine Fraction 30,000

AMBIENT MONITORING AND REPORTING

Causes of Haze 225,000 100,000

ATTRIBUTION OF HAZE

Phase 2 Technical Support Contractor 75,000

WIGIMS Implementation 167,000

AIR MANAGERS COMMITTEE

Contractor Assistance 130,000

State Caucus Coordinator 120,000 120,000

Health and Environmental Assessment of Haze-Related Improvements 15,000

Traditional Tribal Practices and Regional Haze 10,000

308 Implementation Work Group - State and Tribal Support 76,000

Workshops on Effective Collaboration 35,000

COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE

Public Outreach and Communication on WRAP Issues 55,000

Web Site Maintenance 23,500 25,000

Subtotal for Pending Projects 2,419,000

Contract Subtotal

FYO5 Grant

2,091,000

 3 

Table 1: Currently Pending Projects & FY05 Grant Projects

Project Title

2005 2006 2007

STATIONARY SOURCES

Regional Stationary Source Strategy Development 250,000 158,000

FIRE

Fire Tracking System 85,000 50,000 50,000

Regional coordination of smoke management programs 50,000

2002 Wildfire Emission Inventories Comparative Analysis. 26,500

Smoke Mgmt Technical and Policy Workshop 25,000

Assessment of Apportionment Methods 25,000

Feasibility Criteria for WRAP Fire Policies 60,000

MOBILE SOURCES

Offroad Retrofit Program 100,000

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Development of Baseline Economic Data 55,000

Enhancement of Cost and Benefit Unit Values 50,000

Screening Tool 20,000

Economic Assessment Capability 130,000

MODELING

2005 RMC Support 500,000 500,000

EMISSIONS

2005-2007 EDMS Hosting / Operation 55,000 180,000 180,000

EDMS Enhancements 128,000

Support for Control Strategy Analysis 75,000

TRIBAL DATA

Emissions Data Development Support 103,000 200,000

Continue Emissions Inventory & TEISS Technical Support 98,000

DUST

Enhanced Ambient Data Analysis - CoH 50,000

Update Handbook 20,000

Pilot Project -NM 80,000

Addition to Fine Fraction 30,000

AMBIENT MONITORING AND REPORTING

Causes of Haze 225,000 100,000

ATTRIBUTION OF HAZE

Phase 2 Technical Support Contractor 75,000

WIGIMS Implementation 167,000

AIR MANAGERS COMMITTEE

Contractor Assistance 130,000

State Caucus Coordinator 120,000 120,000

Health and Environmental Assessment of Haze-Related Improvements 15,000

Traditional Tribal Practices and Regional Haze 10,000

308 Implementation Work Group - State and Tribal Support 76,000

Workshops on Effective Collaboration 35,000

COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE

Public Outreach and Communication on WRAP Issues 55,000

Web Site Maintenance 23,500 25,000

Subtotal for Pending Projects 2,419,000

Contract Subtotal

FYO5 Grant

2,091,000

 3 
Figure 1. Strategic Plan Timeline (Updated October 13, 2004). 

 4 
 5 
Figure 2. Summary of 2018 Regional Haze Control Strategy Evaluations (March 2005). 2018 Base Case Control Programs

• Federal on-road and non-road m

obile emissions 

• §309 SIPs (5-state SO2 Annex) 

• Controllable fire emissio

ns (use 2000-04 baseline for 2018) 

• P

oint a

n

d

area so

urces:

1) Statutes and rules “on the books” as of 12/2004 t

o be

im

plemented

before 2

018

2) Sources to be operational before 2018 (permitted and under 

co

nstructio

n

as of 12/2

0

0

4)

3) Inclu

des q

u

a

ntified

SIP

measures, N

E

A

Ps, E

A

Cs, MACT, etc.

4) Accounts for economic and demographic factors 

2018 Base Case Definition

• Known control programs, i.e., what 

emissions will be in 2018 if no additional controls are adopted 

• Projected from 2002 emissions (2000-

04 in the case of fire emissions) 

2018 Regional Control Options

C

alifornia

P

M2.5 a

n

d

ozo

ne SIP

measures

BART- individual eligible sources added up for regional analysisPoint Source backstop cap and trade for BART + other point sources, options for:

 Regional NOx Regional SO2

 Nested §309 SO2

 Others?Fire - greater application of Emissions Reduction 

Techniques for fire emissions to meet definition of 

regionally consistent enh

anced smoke management programs – sensitivity evaluatio

n

Dust - greater control levels and/or spatial extent of existing Dust Control programs – sensitivity evaluation 

3⁄4 Area sources in general

3⁄4 Dust sources in general 

June through 

September 2005

October 2005 

through March 

2006

Not for regional 

analysis 

 6 
II. PROJECT SUMMARIES 

Initiatives Oversight Committee

The IOC provides overall direction and review to the forums evaluating potential emissions 

control strategies for regional haze in the West. The IOC has identified two general areas of 

investigation related to how the work of the individual forums might be aggregated into regional 

haze plans. 

IO1: Reasonable Progress Criteria 

The regional haze rule requires states, when establishing reasonable progress goals, to consider 

the following statutory factors: the cost of compliance, the time necessary for compliance, the 

energy and nonair quality environmental impacts of compliance, and the remaining useful life of 

any potentially affected source. Furthermore, states must include a demonstration in their SIPs 

showing how these factors were taken into consideration in selecting each goal. The purpose of 

this task is to explore these factors (e.g., how they have been used or interpreted in other 

environmental programs) and to provide further definition and guidance with respect to using 

them in a regional haze SIP demonstration. 

IO2: Process for Identifying Control Strategies 

The WRAP strategic plan identifies a “navigational challenge” identifying and selecting 

emission control strategies among the large number of those potentially available. It also 

provides some general ideas on how to “narrow the field.” The purpose of this task is to develop 

a process by which the most effective control strategies will be identified and refined. 

Stationary Sources Joint Forum

The focus of the SSJF is on developing a stationary source control program to help meet the 

reasonable progress and BART requirements of the Clean Air Act and Regional Haze Rule. The 

WRAP approach focuses on market-based alternatives to a plant-by-plant approach, with a 

particular emphasis on SO2 and NOx. This work plan assumes that source-by-source BART 

approaches will be undertaken by those jurisdictions which choose to implement BART under 

Section 308(e)(1) of the Regional Haze Rule. 

The SSJF will conduct the analyses necessary to support market-based alternatives, such as 

identifying BART-eligible sources and demonstrating that any alternatives demonstrate greater 

reasonable progress that BART per Section 308(e)(2). The SSJF will also help coordinate any 

plant-by-plant BART analyses the states or tribes may choose to pursue. 

Other activities by the SSJF will include tracking EPA’s BART rules and proposed guidelines. 

The SSJF will also work with the 309 Coordinating Committee to conduct any additional 

analyses that may be necessary to allow states and tribes to resubmit the SO2 milestone and 

backstop emissions trading program following the court’s decision in CEED v. EPA. 

 7 
Finally, NOx and PM emissions must be addressed in such a way as to satisfy the SIP revision 

requirements under Section 309 of the Regional Haze Rule, as well as the Section 308 BART 

requirements for all states. 

Work will include emissions inventory analysis, improvements, and future year projections; 

examination of control technology capabilities; maintenance of the list of BART-eligible sources 

in the WRAP region; and technical demonstrations that alternatives developed for BART provide 

for greater reasonable progress than BART. 

There are several uncertainties that must be factored into this work. These include the final 

federal rules for Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) which are scheduled to come out 

June (308(e)(1)) and November (308(e)(2)) 2005, and the extent to which WRAP states and 

tribes choose to implement source-specific BART rather than an alternative emissions trading 

program. As a result, there is a need to maintain flexibility in program design and to assess new 

information as it becomes available, including information from ongoing WRAP technical 

studies which will provide more information on the contribution of various sources to regional 

haze in the West. A single contractor or team of contractors will be sought for consistency over 

the course of the project, as developing a point and area source program will be an iterative 

process and may require revisiting analyses as assumptions change or new data become

available. 

The forum will also conduct activities needed to address sources and/or pollutants which are not 

included in the alternative programs. 

In summary, to the extent practical, and as requested by WRAP members, the forum will 

coordinate the implementation of BART and address trading program design issues, such as 

2018 and interim milestones; geographic, new source, and tribal considerations; monitoring and 

reporting requirements; enforcement provisions; economic impact assessments; and a general 

method for allowance allocation. 

Fire Emissions Joint Forum

The FEJF projects identified in the existing 2005 WRAP Workplan, and the proposed FEJF 

projects for the 2006 WRAP Workplan, fall into two main categories: 

1) The first grouping includes Planning projects to directly support the development of policy 

and technical tools for SIP/TIP development under §308. 

2) The second grouping includes Implementation projects to directly support the existing fire

policies and programs applicable to the implementation needs for §309 and §308. 

The allocation of funding for the ongoing and planned 2005 and proposed 2006 FEJF projects is 

presented below at the end of the FEJF workplan. In addition to reprogramming funds allocated 

to FEJF in the 2005 WRAP Workplan, additional 2006 Workplan funding in the amount of 

$115,000 is identified. 

 

 8 
PLANNING

FF“C”: 2002 Inventory of Wildfire and Prescribed Fire: Phase I & Phase II 

This project was funded and started in 2003 and will continue into early 2005. The 2002 base 

year inventories will be prepared for the contiguous WRAP region for wildfire, prescribed fire, 

and wildland fire use on wildland and rangeland. Agricultural burning is also included. Phase I 

developed an initial emission inventory to allow the RMC to initialize the 2002 modeling efforts. 

Phase II involves further refinement of the Phase I inventory with greater QA/QC and state/tribal 

review of the fire activity estimates. Data collection to support estimates of private rangeland

burning and augmentation of agricultural burning will occur in Phase II. The 2002 emission

inventory will include “anthropogenic” / “natural” apportionment to support the Attribution of

Haze reports. These projects directly support the modeling for the §308 SIPs/TIPs. 

At the request of WRAP states, statewide CERR Reports for US EPA will be developed for the 

Phase II inventory for all fire sources. This will allow WRAP states to submit to US EPA 

reports, which will partially fulfill the states’ emissions inventory reporting requirements. 

The task of generating QC wildfire and prescribed fire notebooks specifically for Federal Land 

Managers was not included in the original Phase II scope of work. This task was requested by the

FEJF in the fall of 2004. This portion of the project was funded by reprogramming 2005 funding. 

FF6/3: Phase III and Phase IV Inventories & Assessment of Apportionment Methods 

This project was funded in 2004 and will be started in early 2005. Phase III is for the Baseline 

Planning Apportionment and create a 2000-2004 representative emissions inventory. Phase IV is 

for the 2018 Planning Apportionment and will be a 2018 representative inventory. The 2018 

inventory may include a range of potential control scenarios and possible ranges of emissions to 

reflect the high degree of uncertainty in this type of forecast. The inventories will be prepared

for the WRAP region for wildfire, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use on wildland and 

rangeland as well as agricultural burning. This effort also includes development of technical 

approaches to apportion the impact of fire emissions between “natural” and “anthropogenic” 

source categories. These projects directly support the modeling for the §308 SIPs/TIPs. 

This second portion of the project was funded by reprogramming 2005 funding and will be 

started after completion of the Phase III and Phase IV inventories. The additional assessment of 

apportionment methods is necessary to assess the impact of the various fire emissions inventories 

and apportionment methods. This project directly supports the model assessment for the §308 

SIPs/TIPs. 

FF7: 2002 National Wildfire Emissions Inventory

This project was funded and started in 2004. The 2002 National emissions inventory for wildfire 

will be developed through an inter-RPO effort funded by EPA, based on a scope of work 

discussed amongst the RPOs. The FEJF has lead RPO responsibilities for this project. These

projects directly support the modeling for the §308 SIPs/TIPs. 

 9 
The 2002 National inventory is of the most benefit to the WRAP in performing a comparative

analysis to the WRAP 2002 Phase II wildfire inventory. This comparative analysis would 

identify the specific changes and improvements between the two wildfire inventories. The 

implementation of FCCS for fuel loading for the WRAP region in the National inventory is 

being evaluated on its technical merits by the FEJF. The National inventory paired with a 

comparative analysis would also be beneficial to the WRAP for the 2018 inventory to reflect 

sensitivity to the specific changes and improvements between the two inventories. Upon further 

evaluation, this task may be requested by the FEJF in early 2005 with 2005 funding. This task 

directly supports the modeling needs for the §308 SIPs/TIPs. 

FF12: Smoke Management Technical and Policy Workshop 

This project was funded in 2005 and will be started in 2005. A three-day workshop in late 2005 

is planned to assess technical work to date, §309 policy and SIP implementation and refinement

of policy options under §308. This effort will build on the two FEJF workshops held in 2004 to

ensure that the needed technical and policy tools are in place for SIP/TIP development under 

§308. 

IMPLEMENTATION

FF9: Regional Coordination of Smoke Management Programs 

This project was funded in 2003 and was started with in-kind support in early 2005. Regional 

Coordination is a required element within the ESMP Policy as coordination of burning activity 

(ranging from passive to active) is critical to avoiding cumulative smoke impacts within and 

across source types in mandatory Class I areas. Avoiding cumulative smoke impacts to cultural 

resources is also critical. Methods for this inter-jurisdictional and regional coordination will

need to be developed for wildland and agricultural prescribed fire smoke management programs,

information sharing, and public notification. Proposed options will be developed, and then 

presented and reviewed at a facilitated conference, to be held in 2005. The task of developing 

proposed options may require a facilitated process. Upon further evaluation, the need for a 

facilitated process may be identified by the FEJF in early 2005 with reprogrammed 2005 

funding. This project directly supports the implementation of the ESMP requirement in §309 as 

well as similar implementation issues for §308. 

FF5/8: Fire Tracking System 

Portions of this project were funded prior to 2002 as well as in 2004, 2005, and 2006 and will

start in 2005 and continue into 2006/2007. Evaluation of existing fire emissions inventory 

systems to develop a Fire Tracking System as identified in the Fire Tracking System policy to

calculate emissions from fire activity data. Develop user guidance to support the FTS Policy 

identifying a specific format, parameters, defaults, structure and methods of emission calculation 

for required and optional FTS elements. Develop user guidance to support the tracking of ERTs

and the calculation of emissions averted, which is an optional FTS Policy element. This project 

 10 
directly supports the implementation of the FTS and AEG requirements in §309 as well as 

similar implementation issues for §308. 

In support of the AEG Policy, an annotated bibliography on ERTs was completed in the spring 

of 2004. Through the use of in-kind support, work was initiated in the fall of 2004 to develop 

technical guidance on ERTs applicable for wildland, rangeland, and agricultural burning for use

in the establishment and support of AEGs. Upon completion of the technical guidance, it will 

become integral to the method to calculate the emission benefits of ERTs within the FTS. 

FF“D”: Sensitivity Runs Phase II: Regional & Mesoscale 

This project was funded in 2003 and, now that the initial Model Assessment/Sensitivity Runs are 

complete, will be started in 2005. Conduct an air quality source/impact analysis with two scales

of modeling: regional and mesoscale. The regional-scale modeling features chemistry capacity

with regional and longer temporal scales. The mesoscale modeling features complex terrain 

capacity with smaller geographic and temporal scales. Together, these two approaches will 

provide a comprehensive analysis of potential de minimus levels to assist states and tribes with 

maximizing efficiency for fire tracking, public notification and regional coordination. This 

project directly supports the implementation of the FTS and ESMP requirements in §309 as well 

as similar implementation issues for §308. 

FF2: User Guidance and Review of Feasibility Criteria for WRAP Fire Policies 

This project was funded by reprogramming 2005 funding and will be started in 2006. Feasibility 

criteria for the implementation of smoke management policies and programs were identified in 

the RHR as efficiency, economics, law, emission reduction opportunities, land management

objectives and reduction of visibility impact. Furthermore, as described in the IOC transmittal 

letter regarding the 2001 Fire Categorization Policy, implications to cultural resources will also

be examined. Feasibility criteria were adopted into the WRAP Fire Policies which in addition to 

the RHR criteria include safety, technical and environmental concerns. As States and Tribes 

assess their program options for addressing smoke from fire under §308, additional guidance will 

be needed as to the application of these criteria for feasibility determinations. The WRAP called

for further user guidance to be developed to support the existing WRAP Policy for Categorizing 

Fire Emissions. This project directly supports the implementation of the requirements in §309 as 

well as similar implementation issues for §308. 

 11 
Funding* Code Project Title

2005 2006

Planning 

FF”C” 2002 Inventory of Wildfire and Prescribed Fire: Phase I & 

Phase II 

25,000 

FF6/3 Phase III & Phase IV Inventories & 

Assessment of Apportionment Methods 

163,224 

25,000 

FF7 2002 National Wildfire Emissions Inventory (Inter-RPO) 26,500 

FF12 Smoke Management Technical and Policy Workshop 25,000 

Implementation 

FF9 Regional Coordination of Smoke Management Programs 50,000 

FF5/8 Fire Tracking System 85,000 100,000**

FF”D” Sensitivity Runs Phase II: Regional & Mesoscale (RMC) 45,000 

FF2 User Guidance and Review of Feasibility Criteria for 

WRAP Fire Policies 

60,000 

Dust Emissions Joint Forum

DF1: Establish a Common Definition of Dust and Dust Emission Types 

This project is described in previous WRAP work plans. During the initial contractor bidding 

process, it was determined that the scope of work and budget should be increased from $45,000 

to $65,000. Hence, $20,000 in additional funds is requested for this project. 

DF3: Determination of Fugitive Dust PM2.5 to PM10 Ratios 

This project is described in previous WRAP work plans. An additional $30,000 is requested to 

ensure project completion, collection of additional samples (for a total greater than five), and/or

integration of results into AP-42 and WRAP emissions and air quality modeling efforts. 

DF6: Analysis of Sources and Control Options in High-Dust Areas 

This project was described in previous WRAP work plans, but was not funded at the time. 

Hence, a revised, more detailed description is provided here. This project is a pilot study to test

and demonstrate how various WRAP technical and policy products can be integrated to address 

the contribution of dust to regional haze at Class I areas in the WRAP region. Strengths and 

weaknesses of the WRAP products will be identified so that they may be improved before state 

and tribal implementation plans are finalized. Results will be shared with other WRAP members 

to inform their planning and assessment processes. 

 

*

 Funding reprogrammed from FEJF allocation in 2005 Workplan (FFY04 Funding) combined with an additional 

 $115,000 allocated in the 2006 Workplan (FFY05 Funding). ** $50,000 in 2006 and $50,000 in 2007. 

 12 
The NM Environment Department Air Quality Bureau (AQB) will take the lead in this effort and 

provide project results. The Class I area(s) selected in NM for the pilot project will have many 

of its 20% worst visibility days dominated by dust and will be representative of other dustimpacted Class I areas in the Southwest. The WRAP products to be used in the study, to the 

extent available, will include the Desert Research Institute’s analysis of ambient data; 

ENVIRON’s fugitive dust emissions inventory and modeling procedure for wind erosion; 

Countess Environmental’s Fugitive Dust Handbook; the dust definition under development; and 

the Attribution of Haze results. To the extent possible, the role of dust transport from Mexico 

will also be examined (e.g., by examining various transboundary studies and coordinating efforts 

with DF2, Enhanced Ambient Data Analysis). 

The duration of the study is expected to be nine months. The study will include the development 

of a general emissions inventory of all sources associated with dust-related haze within the 

selected Class I Area. The emission inventory will likely be subcontracted, and the AQB would 

act as project manager to ensure completion of the project in a timely and costly manner. The 

AQB will use the emission inventory and the tools provided by the WRAP to develop a SIPquality analysis for dust-related haze in Class I areas. 

Inter-Relationship of Dust Emission Joint Forum Projects 

Dust

Definition and

Categorization

DF1

Fine Fraction

Evaluation

DF3

Area Source

Dust Inventory

Windblown

Dust Inventory

DF4

CMAQ

Modeling

Attribution

of Haze

Ambient Data

Analysis

DF2

NM SIP

Pilot

DF6

Mexican Dust

Characterization

(not funded)

Fugitive Dust

Handbook

DF5

Dust

Definition and

Categorization

DF1

Fine Fraction

Evaluation

DF3

Area Source

Dust Inventory

Windblown

Dust Inventory

DF4

CMAQ

Modeling

Attribution

of Haze

Ambient Data

Analysis

DF2

NM SIP

Pilot

DF6

Mexican Dust

Characterization

(not funded)

Fugitive Dust

Handbook

DF5

 13 
Mobile Sources Forum

The MSF work plan is a continuation of the prior work plan. No new projects or funding are 

being added. Below are summaries of the existing projects. 

MS1: WRAP Offroad Retrofit Program

Initiated in the summer of 2004, the goal of the retrofit program is to promote voluntary emission 

reductions from existing offroad vehicles and equipment in the WRAP region. In 2005-06, the 

MSF, with contractor support, will continue to provide WRAP members and vehicle/equipment 

owners with written guidance, technical support, outreach services, identification of incentives 

and public policy options, and examples of successful efforts and reduction opportunities. 

MS2: Offroad Retrofit Credits 

The MSF will work with the EPA and other stakeholders to develop and implement, if 

appropriate, a program that uses retrofits of existing offroad sources to generate credits for 

compliance with new engine emission standards under the Tier IV nonroad diesel regulations. 

EPA has indicated an interest in working with stakeholders during 2004 – 2005 to examine the 

feasibility of this compliance option and implement it if appropriate. Other uses of offroad 

retrofit credits (e.g., for use in SIPs and TIPs) will be addressed by the Forum as needed. 

MS3: Review of EPA Analyses and Proposals 

The MSF will review and where appropriate recommend WRAP comments on EPA technical 

analyses (e.g., for small nonroad diesel engines) and regulatory proposals (e.g., for ocean-going 

vessels and locomotives). 

Sources In and Near Class I Areas Forum

IN1: Update Near Inventory and Displays 

The goal of this project is to replace the 1996 maps and data currently on the In/Near website 

with 2002 maps and data, and to add some additional features. The 2002 products will likely be

developed by the WIGIMS / Technical Data Portal project. The Forum will cooperate in this 

project, and as necessary ENVIRON (the developer of the 1996 maps and data), to transfer the 

emission estimation procedures and display methods carefully developed for the 1996 data into 

the new system. 

IN2: In/Near Strategies for Reasonable Progress 

This project will identify which control strategies may be most effective at addressing local 

sources of visibility impairment. As a first step, the Forum will hire a contractor to identify all 

the PM10 SIPs, maintenance plans, and natural events action plans in the West focused primarily 

 14 
on local, primary sources of PM. Many of the existing plans rely on one or two control strategies 

for the bulk of emission reductions. A subset of these plans will be selected for further review. 

The plans selected, in total, will cover a variety of control strategy types. They will also be 

selected on the basis of their historical record – that is, they should provide a sufficient history of 

ambient data and implementation and enforcement experience to offer lessons and insights to 

groups involved in Class I area visibility protection (federal land managers, state and local 

officials, environmental groups, etc.). The result of this project will be a report summarizing the 

approach, success, and limitations of the most common PM10 control measures; their 

applicability and transferability to Class I areas; and a list of contacts for more information. It 

will include ambient PM10 data for the areas studied and summaries of interviews with officials 

who implemented and enforce the strategies. This project is underway and should be completed 

in the summer of 2005. 

Economic Analysis Forum

EA2: Development of Baseline Economic Data for States and Tribes 

Baseline economic and demographic data (2002 and 2018) are required to assess the potential 

economic impacts of proposed haze reduction strategies. A particular challenge within this task 

will be the continued collection and development of tribal baseline data. This portion of the 

effort will be closely coordinated with the Tribal Data Development Work Group (TDWG) and 

with the ongoing joint RPO effort to define appropriate tribal economic data requirements and 

templates. The overall data collection effort is being coordinated with the Emissions and 

Stationary Source Joint Forums (ERG contract) because many baseline emissions are based on 

the same types of economic and demographic data used in economic assessments. To date, 

baseline data has been collected for three states in the WRAP region at both the state and substate level as part of the recently-completed Framework Test Application. These data were 

collected from IMPLAN and the states themselves. EAF will participate in the overall effort to 

compile baseline data for the remaining WRAP states. 

An RFP has been written to compile comprehensive baseline data for the remaining WRAP 

states. The RFP is undergoing final modifications before issuance. The final baseline data 

product is expected to be delivered late summer 2005. Development of the baseline economic 

and demographic data includes careful documentation of both the process and sources employed. 

In addition, that documentation will include easily applied rule sets for both modifications (if 

needed) and deconfliction as new information becomes available over next 2-3 years. The EAF 

and its contractor will provide assistance to WRAP and its respective stakeholders in generating 

those required baseline data and projection updates as part of the overall analyses processes as 

spelled out in the 2003-2008 strategic plan. In concert with the Emissions and Stationary Source 

Joint Forums, the EAF and its support contractor would work to ensure consistency is 

maintained between the baseline projections and their subsequent use by the Air Quality 

Modeling Forum in the conduct of its model runs of the alternative broad strategy formulations. 

The TDDWG, in concert with the joint-RPO sponsored contractor are working toward a standard 

data “template” which is designed to formally and effectively develop the needed demographic 

and economic data and data sets required to support consistent economic impact and tradeoff 

 15 
analysis by all. The tribal baseline work will implement that template as it works toward a 

complete picture of tribal conditions, and forecasts, in the WRAP region. The EAF will delay 

development and collection of tribal baseline data until summer 2005, when the template is to be 

completed. 

EA3: Enhancement of Cost and Benefit Unit Values Used in WRAP Economic Analysis 

The net benefit calculated for any haze reduction strategy will depend heavily on both the unit 

cost values (e.g., $/ton pollutant reduced) and the unit benefit values (e.g., $/deciview 

improvement and $/statistical life saved). These values are available from only a limited number 

of studies. The EAF will actively seek partners to complete the effort of improving existing air 

quality unit cost and benefit values. It will also tack ongoing efforts, such as the National Park 

Service’s effort to improve benefit values for visibility improvements in national parks. As unit 

values are improved for costs and benefits, care will be taken as to whether and how the data 

may be tailored to suit western visibility assessment purposes. 

EA4: Screening Tool 

The screening tool will be based on the WRAP Economic Analysis Framework but allow more 

routine, rapid, and cost-effective applications for assessing and ranking a variety and number of 

individual possible control measures. The WRAP Framework, in turn, would be used more 

occasionally to assess “packages” of control strategies that have either been well defined and/or 

are nearing serious consideration by WRAP stakeholders. 

Before proceeding with development of the screening tool, the EAF will explore opportunities to 

collaborate with other RPOs and with EPA, which has already developed many components of a 

screening tool and integrated them into a program called ASAP. Depending on the status and 

plans of ASAP, it is possible that no new tool would be needed, but rather a tailoring of existing 

tool(s). 

EA5: Coordination and Outreach 

This is an ongoing and inherent task of the Forum. As noted above, the Emissions Forum and 

Economic Analysis Forum will co-develop and share a common set of economic and 

demographic baseline data. In addition, because economic analysis is dependent upon results 

from air quality modeling, the EAF will work closely with the Air Quality Modeling Forum. A 

critical area of coordination will be with tribal issues (e.g., baseline data, distributional impacts, 

and alternative cost/benefit unit values). Finally, outreach to other WRAP Forums and 

stakeholders is important to ensure proper use and understanding of economic principles and 

analytical results, especially since formal, comprehensive economic analysis is not typically a 

part of state, local, and tribal air quality analysis efforts. To improve coordination and outreach, 

the EAF will take advantage of WRAP-wide meetings to host periodic workshops on the 

application of the tools and interpretation of results of the Forum’s analyses framework and 

supporting data sets. 

 16 
EA6: Economic Assessment Capability 

The EAF and its supporting contractor(s) will provide WRAP and its stakeholders with some

level of on-going economic assessment capability. This may include consultation, guidance on 

the use of various economic data and models, and economic analysis. 

Air Quality Modeling Forum

The Air Quality Modeling Forum has two major areas of activity planned for April 2005 through 

September 2006. The Regional Modeling Center will continue operation, to apply the tools and 

improvements developed in 2003-04, using the same team of contractors. A list of tasks is 

provided below, with a final RMC work plan completed, as described below and in a larger 

separate document, for 2005-06. The final RMC work plan is in the process of being amended 

into the existing RMC contract. The second major area of activity is to review meteorological 

modeling results for Class I areas in Alaska, and perform necessary and useful Alaska air quality 

modeling. 

MF1: Regional Modeling Center 

The Modeling Forum plans to continue operation of the Regional Modeling Center (RMC) with 

the same team of contractors as their single major project, including modeling of Alaska regional 

haze. The RMC will continue to provide documentation of their ongoing analysis work 

(including support of the Attribution of Haze Workgroup and Fire Emissions Joint Forum

sensitivity analyses), protocols and technical support documents for the various analyses and 

work products, and disseminating this information through monthly Modeling Forum conference 

calls, the RMC E-Mail listserv, and periodic meetings. 

The proposed 2005-06 work plan for the RMC will primarily focus on completing emissions 

processing and air quality modeling evaluations of revised and final 2002 emissions and 2018 

emissions projections. The RMC has prepared a specific 2005-06 cost proposal and work plan 

that has been reviewed and approved by the Modeling Forum, and the RMC contract is now 

being amended to reflect this work plan. Below is a list of RMC activities for 2005-06. These 

tasks continue work from earlier RMC work plans as identified in the WRAP Strategic Plan. 

• Process revised 2002 emissions and 2018 emissions projections 

• Update new model codes for SMOKE, MCIP, and CMAQ as needed 

• Continue to update post-production displays 

• Run CMAQ and CAMx models with 2002 and 2018 inputs 

• Conduct source apportionment/sensitivity model runs 

• QA/QC: 

o Implement version control mechanism 

o EI data file to SMOKE outputs analysis & reports 

o Model performance evaluation 

• Summer 2005 - 2002 final base case modeling results report 

• Fall 2005 

o 2018 final base case modeling results report, followed by: 

 17 
o 2018 base case final source apportionment modeling results report 

• Late 2005/mid-2006 - Three to five [3-5] 2018 control strategy sensitivity modeling results 

reports 

MF2: Alaska Region Modeling 

This portion of the RMC work is aimed at providing a credible evaluation of the potential 

contributions to regional haze in the Class I areas of Alaska that are more likely to be affected by 

in-state emissions, namely Tuxedni and Denali. During 2004, the RMC completed two tasks: 1) 

Develop appropriate methods for running MM5 over central Alaska, including Cook Inlet, the 

Alaska Range, to north of Fairbanks, and 2) Run MM5 for this region for several time periods 

representing different seasonal and meteorological conditions and evaluate the meteorological 

model results. During Spring 2005, RMC staff will present the results of their work to date at a 

technical meeting in Alaska. Pending more specific direction after that meeting, the 2005 Alaska 

modeling tasks will focus on: 

• Assuming the MM5 model test period runs are credible, run the MM5 model for all of 

2002. 

• Then run a LaGrangian model, such as CALPUFF, for the largest point sources in the 

region (up to about 10, addressing BART) - provide a modeling results report. 

• Run the LaGrangian model [chosen previously] to evaluate the potential for impacts from

the urban areas of Anchorage and Fairbanks - provide a modeling results report. 

Summary of RMC Work Plan for 2005-06 

As part of the 2003 work plan, the RMC completed §309 modeling for regional haze plans that 

were due December 2003 and began work on tasks associated with §308 requirements. Efforts in 

2003 and 2004 included developing new emissions and meteorology data sets for calendar year 

2002 to be used in regional haze modeling to support §308 SIPs and TIPs; implementing 

improvements to existing modeling tools; and developing and testing new analysis tools. Major 

activities in the 2004 work plan included development of emissions data for use in the 2002 

modeling, meteorology modeling on both the 36-km and nested 12-km grid, testing and QA of 

preliminary emissions data for calendar year 2002, development and evaluation of modeling 

tools for the Alaska region, and source apportionment modeling using the 2002 datasets. 

The following table lists high priority tasks for the 2005-06 work plan, most of which are 

continuation of tasks begun either in 2003 or 2004 modeling effort. More detailed descriptions 

of these 2005 tasks are provided in Section 3 of the RMC work plan (separate document). The 

RMC will consist of the same team of contractors with the University of California Riverside 

(UCR) as the prime contractor, and ENVIRON Corporation and the University of North Carolina 

(UNC) as subcontractors. 

 18 
Deliverables for the 2005-06 RMC work plan. 

Task Deliverables Date Budget

Task 1.1 Project Administration 

Ongoing tasks include conference calls and 

meeting, presentations, and project coordination. 

1. Progress Reports 

2. Monthly Project Management

Calls 

3. Monthly Modeling Forum

Calls 

4. Present Interim Results at 

WRAP Meetings (pending

schedule of forum meetings) 

Monthly

Monthly

Monthly

As needed 

$99,065 

Task 1.2 Major Reports 

$7500 Jeanne Eichinger

$7500 JE 

$7500 JE 

$12,000 JE

1. Final report 2004

2. 2002 model performance (see 

Task 4) 

 - Draft Report on 2002 

Modeling 

 - Final Report on 2002

Modeling 

3. 2018 base case modeling (see 

Task 4) 

 - Draft Report on 2018 base

 - Final Report on 2018 base 

4. RMC 2005-06 Project Final 

Report (includes as appendices 

reports on each 2018 control 

scenario – for SIPs/TIPs.) 

4/05

8/05

10/05 

10/05 

12/05 

through

8/06

$110,459

Task 1.3 Computer Systems Administration 1. Maintain Website and

Listservs 

2. Computer systems 

maintenance 

Ongoing

Ongoing

$78,562 

Task 2. Emissions Modeling and Processing 

A. Final 2002 Version A emissions and QA

reports 

B. SMOKE - new Mexico EI, new Canada EI

C. “improved" WRAP region 2002 EIs from

EDMS 

D. Typical Fire 2000-04

E. Initial WRAP region 2018 base case EI 

F. 2018 control strategy scenarios from EDMS: 5 

cases, one of which is the BART EI from Task 

6 

G. 2018 Updates from other RPOs 

36-km emissions (Final02a) 

12-km emissions (Final02a_12) 

Final 2002 version B emissions 

(Final02b) 

Final 2002 version C 

Base 2018 emissions

6/05

6/05

6/05

9/05

starting 

9/05

ongoing

$168,079

Task 3. Meteorological modeling: No new

work planned

$0

 19 
Task Deliverables Date Budget

Task 4. Air Quality Modeling 

A. CAMx Evaluation 

B. CAMx and/or CMAQ: MX and Canada

Emissions Updates 

C. CAMx and/or CMAQ: 2002 Improved

Emissions from EDMS 

D. Report on 2002 Modeling including:

1) Modeling report – emissions, met,

procedures 

2) individual model diagnostic analysis, 

3) complete performance analysis metrics 

for both models

4) protocol to identify primary vs. 

corroborative and 

reconcile/compare/analyze 2 models’ 

results 

5) RRF/visibility projection protocol (by 

species) finalized 

E. CAMx and/or CMAQ: 2018 Base Case using 

EDMS emissions 

Report on 2018 Base Case Modeling including:

1) individual models’ results, 

2) apply protocol to identify primary vs. 

corroborative and 

reconcile/compare/analyze 2 models’ 

results 

3) apply RRF/visibility projection protocol

AQM simulations at either 36-km or 12-km

resolution for each of the five (5) 2018 control 

emissions scenarios listed in Task 2.

Pre02d 36km simulation w/ MPE 

evaluation 

Pre02d 12km simulation w/ MPE 

2002 36km simulations w/MPE 

12-km MPE simulation w/ MPE 

Final 2002 36km simulations

w/MPE 

Final 12km MPE w/MPE 

(optional) 

Draft protocol and ppt

presentation 

Final protocol and ppt

Final 2018 base case 36-km

simulations 

12km simulations (optional)

Draft results report and ppt 

Final results report and ppt 

ppt for each scenario

Final results in RMC 2005-06 

report and ppt

4/30/05 

5/30/05 

6/05

7/05

6/05

8/05

10/05 

10/05 

12/05 

12/05 –

7/06

By 8/06

$172,677

 20 
Task Deliverables Date Budget

Task 5. Wind Blown Dust Model Diagnostic evaluation of CMAQ

results 

Additional work per DEJF: 

1. Modify transport factors?

2. Modify Coarse & Fine 

emissions factors 

3. Natural versus

Anthropogenic emissions 

4. Emissions Sensitivity Cases 

4/05

through

7/05

through

7/05

through

7/05

through

8/05

$26,033 

Task 6. BART Modeling Project 

A. Determine visibility impact of BARTeligible sources in the WRAP region. 

B. Determine the improvement from

application of BART to sources based 

on criteria from the EPA BART Rule as 

specified by the Stationary Sources Joint 

Forum.

C. From #2, prepare up to 3 WRAP regional

BART emissions scenarios for 2018 

control strategy scenario modeling 

analysis using CMAQ and/or CAMx

models. 

Modeling protocol for A and B,

following. 

Use CalPuff model as specified 

in EPA April 2005 rule – Report

tabulating results 

Use CalPuff model as specified 

in EPA rule, for individual 

sources meeting criteria as 

provided by SSJF – Report

tabulating results 

BART regional emissions 

scenarios following criteria from

SSJF – Summary report. 

5/05

Start 6/05 

Start 9/05 

12/05 

$105,239

Task 7. Fire Sensitivity Phase 2 – Regional

and Mesoscale 

A. small fires and clusters in and near Class 

I areas 

B. Large fire vertical distribution – test 

EPA SMOKE tool 

1) simple sensitivity run, 

2) develop new plume rise model

for fires (optional) 

EI; AQM results, ppt file, text for 

white paper 

New EI for wild fire, AQM 

results, ppt file 

9/05

9/05

$47,224 

Task 8. Completion of Alaska Modeling

A. Present MM5 and AQ work to date – 

April 26-27, 2005

B. Continue regional modeling work for

Alaska (optional)

Initial Results, recommendations

Final Report 

TBD 

4/05

5/05

no 2005-06

$, complete 

with 2004 $

 21 
Task Deliverables Date Budget

Task 9. Natural Haze Emissions Inventory: 

Motivation – identify model “floor” for clean

conditions (NOT attempting to simulate actual 

natural conditions) 

Emissions modes or data are currently available 

for: 

Natural wild fires 

Natural dust emissions

GEOS-CHEM boundary conditions 

Emissions mode available but needs to be run: 

Sea Salt 

Emissions Models still needed for these 

categories: 

Lightning NOx

Geogenic seeps and volcanoes 

Emissions Inventory

CMAQ Simulation

After

natural dust 

EI is 

available 

$12,265 

Task 10. Source Apportionment: 

Final report on 2004 modeling is in progress. 

Additional model simulations using CAMx/PSAT 

as needed pending completion of AQM modeling 

in Task 4

Source Apportionment report 4/05

9/05 $47,376 

Task 11. Technology Transfer and Data

Distribution: 

Training classes available from CMAS. 

Free support available through CMAS. 

Additional support can be provided from RMC

team if requested.

Met, Emissions, and AQM 

results available to be sent by

FedEx on portable disks 

Document describing standard

configuration for computer 

systems and model setup. 

As needed 

6/05

$0 

roll over of

funds from

2004

Task 12. Computer Hardware: 

New equipment - 30k for 8 TB Xserve RAID5

disk storage, includes support contract, 5k

replacement parts for compute nodes 

Additional equipment costs for 12-km modeling 

12km needs - TBD 

$35,000 

Emissions Forum

The Emissions Forum is planning to continue a major project and several specific supplementary 

projects during 2006. The Emissions Data Management System (EDMS) is the major project of 

the Forum, as an ongoing data center and repository. During 2006, EDMS operation and 

maintenance of EDMS will continue. Several EDMS enhancements are planned. The

enhancements include some of the items that were postponed from earlier budget plans, and 

referred to as Phase II enhancements. Others were identified during Beta testing and are defined 

in the EDMS Acceptance Plan. 

 22 
In addition to EDMS work, some states have begun to identify needs for more emissions 

inventory data to develop §309 SIP control strategies. The work plan includes an effort to poll 

states for these needs and to assist states in meeting some of these data requests. 

Budget Summary for 2006 

EF1: EDMS operation and maintenance...........................................$180,000 

EF2: Phase II EDMS enhancements.................................................$128,000 

EF3: Emissions support for control strategy development...................... $75,000 

Total funding requirements for 2006...............................................$383,000 

Emissions Forum Projects 

EF1: EDMS Hosting / Operation 

This project supports ongoing operation, maintenance, standard software and hardware 

upgrades, and computer system hosting for the EDMS during 2006. The amount of 

$60,000 is set aside for E.H. Pechan, for hosting and hardware support by their computer 

systems subcontractor, Carolina Environmental Programs. In addition, $120,000 is 

proposed to continue Pechan’s operation and administration of the EDMS, including data 

analysis products, data provider/user assistance, and general oversight. This will be

accomplished by Pechan’s database administrator and a data analyst. 

EF2: Phase II EDMS Development Efforts 

1. Acceptance of XML Data Submittals - Estimated Cost: $20,000 

Description/Deliverable: This task entails adding parsing routines to accept and report 

data in the XML format. 

Benefits: Would allow acceptance of data in XML format. New Mexico needs this 

format for future data submissions. 

Strategic Plan Timing Issues: XML format needed in time for next data submission for 

New Mexico, which would be next year’s SO2 tracking data. 

2. Other Enhancement Needs Identified During Beta Testing - GIS Display 

improvements and improvements from Acceptance Plan: $38,400 

There are currently 20 issues marked as potential enhancements that were identified 

during the EDMS Beta testing effort. These issues were identified in the EDMS 

Acceptance Plan and are shown below. Time and cost estimates should be considered 

‘ballpark’ and not heavily researched. The enhancements that appear below are thought 

to be outside of the original design. 

 23 
Enhance Facility GIS Display - Reduce the overall number of facilities manipulated by

the GIS interface so that performance is not taxed. The facilities to be presented might 

be limited by emissions volume, such as: 

• Facilities with emissions greater than X for any pollutant - value x to be fixed 

rather than user-prescribed. It is estimated that this functionality can be added for 

20 hours programming time plus 4 hours DBA time ($1,872). 

• Top X% facilities in WRAP region for specific pollutant. Value x to be fixed 

rather than user-prescribed; pollutant to be selected by user from pick list. It is 

estimated that this functionality can be added for 32 hours programming time 

plus 8 hours DBA time (~$2,392). 

• Filter Facilities based on SIC Code. It is estimated that this functionality can be 

added for 32 hours programming time plus 8 hours DBA time (~$2,392). 

• Filter Facilities based on tiered SCC code, similarly to standard reports 

functionality. It is estimated that this functionality can be added for 40 hours 

programming time plus 10 hours DBA time (~$2,990). 

• Total for GIS Display enhancement is $9,646. 

Enhancements from the Acceptance Plan

Description 

Time Estimate 

(hours) 

Cost Estimate

(dollars) 

Add a ‘Back’ button on submitted data summary screen to facilitate 

submission of several files. 

8 programmer; 

1 DBA 

$678

Tabular report suggestions: Add user ability to change the filter parameters 

in the 

Tabular data view and not have to go back to the graphical chart view; add 

user ability to select more than one county (and less than all counties) in a 

state to view on the graphs and tables; add user ability to view state totals 

without viewing county totals also. 

16 programmer;

8 DBA 

$2,064

Efficiency on Extraction Transfer Loading (ETL) from Transaction 

Database (TXN) to Staging Database (STG) - driver script needs review to

improve efficiency, currently Record Add/Record Delete and Delete steps 

commented out in production since they are not needed. 

8 programmer; 

8 DBA 

$1,504

Change return of ETL and diagnose procedure from number to error 

message. Use production master diagnose as guide.

16 programmer;

2 DBA 

$1,356

Diagnose flags QC check not scaling well for very large files, review to

improve efficiency. 

8 programmer; 

8 DBA 

$1,504

state/tribal names - make sure the differentiating part is early in the string 

expression so that it will be useful in pulldowns

4 programmer; 

1 DBA 

$398

Modify the function that creates Excel and Access export files to produce

null valued fields rather than zero-valued fields where no data is reported. 

20 programmer;

8 DBA 

$2,344

GIS – provide bigger border for states so that states can be differentiated 

from counties when zoomed in. 

8 programmer; 

1 DBA 

$678

GIS – Add tool tips on GIS buttons 8 programmer; 

1 DBA 

$678

 24 
Description 

Time Estimate 

(hours) 

Cost Estimate

(dollars) 

Disaggregate information in NAME column on standard reports, currently

contains name, address, other values in one field. 

8 programmer; 

2 DBA 

$796

Provide checks that data owner has submitted data for only their own 

jurisdiction 

32 programmer;

16 DBA 

$4,128

Write jpeg files generated on the fly to temporary storage so that they can 

be exported normally, allowing users to open directly rather than requiring

them to save to disk first. 

8 programmer; 

2 DBA 

$796

Change spacing near all colons (:) 6 programmer; 

1 DBA 

$538

SVG may not work with IE 5.0 on a MAC 32 programmer;

16 DBA 

$4,128

Section 508 compliance – graphics portrayed with patterns instead of 

colors, all-text versioning. 

If pursued, more 

definition required. 

Switched to Tabular view without hitting "go" 20 programmer;

4 DBA 

$1,872

GIS – combine select and update into one button click 16 programmer;

4 DBA 

$1,592

Timeout message needed 8 programmer; 

2 DBA 

$796

"Export /PDF" function for bar charts produces charts wit... 8 programmer; 

4 DBA 

$1,032

GIS - Import/Export/Edit list of selected features 

20 programmer;

4 DBA 

$1,872

3. Capability to Geo-Code Certain Area Source Categories: Estimated Cost $20,000 

Description/Deliverable: Entails minor modifications to database and supplementary 

data submittal formats, as well as data uptake system and GIS display routines. 

Benefits: Would allow for certain area sources to be geo-coded in the database (e.g. 

landfills, minor point sources). 

Strategic Plan Timing Issues: Could provide useful geo-information for attribution and 

control analyses, etc. scheduled for 2005-2006. 

4. Low Graphics Version of EDMS: Estimated Cost $30,000 

Description/Deliverable: Provide users without high-speed Internet connections an 

attractive and intuitive interface to view, query, and report EDMS data 

Benefits: Would allow users that do not have high speed to access data more easily thus 

improving access/communication of data to certain stake holders. This may be of more 

 25 
benefit to tribal users that may not have high speed computer access as well as other 

stakeholders and public users. 

Strategic Plan Timing Issues: Does not help to meet any strategic planning milestone. 

5. Method for Biogenic/Dust Feedback Loop: Estimated Cost $20,000 

Description/Deliverable: This task entails devising a method to return required revisions 

to modeled outputs concerning biogenic and dust emissions back to the relevant model 

inputs. This outcome of this task is more likely to be a statement of protocol rather than 

specific modifications to functionality of EDMS or other systems. 

Benefits: If states/tribes provide biogenic or dust emissions, this method would be a first 

step at getting those emissions/activities back to the RMC. At this time the RMC would 

not have the disaggregated information coming from EDMS to feed back into their 

process. 

Strategic Plan Timing Issues: Does not help to meet any strategic planning milestone, 

would improve data flow between EDMS and RMC. 

EF3: Emissions Support for Control Strategy Development

Now that the Attribution of Haze project is providing additional information that will 

enable states to identify emission sectors and possible control strategies, the Emissions 

Forum anticipates requests from forums and states for additional emissions data in areas 

that are key concerns for their Class I areas. The Emissions Forum intends to poll states 

in the first half of 2006 to determine their specific data needs, particularly for states that 

do not collect emissions data for some sectors. We do not anticipate that all needs can be 

met, but request $75,000 in 2006 to provide assistance on priority tasks. 

2007 Emission Forum Work Plan 

EF1: EDMS Hosting / Operation 

EDMS operation and maintenance will continue at an estimated cost of $180,000. Our 

experience with EDMS during 2005 will allow us to better estimate annual cost for future years. 

Tribal Data Development Work Group

The Tribal Data Development Work Group is planning to continue a major project and several 

specific supplementary projects during 2006. The Emissions Data Management System (EDMS) 

is the major project of the Forum, as an ongoing data center and repository. During 2006, EDMS 

operation and maintenance of EDMS will continue. Several EDMS enhancements are planned. 

The enhancements include some of the items that were postponed from earlier budget plans, and 

referred to as Phase II enhancements. Others were identified during Beta testing and are defined 

in the EDMS Acceptance Plan. 

 26 
In addition to EDMS work, some states have begun to identify needs for more emissions 

inventory data to develop §309 SIP control strategies. The work plan includes an effort to poll 

states for these needs and to assist states in meeting some of these data requests. 

TDDWG Budget Summary for 2006 

TW1: Analyses to support Tribal partnerships in developing SIPs .................... $100,000 

TW2: Tribal data into the 308 SIP/TIP Technical Support Document ................$ 50,000 

TW3: Continued Support of the Tribal Emissions Inventory Software Solution ....$ 50,000 

Total 2006 TDDWG Request................................................................$ 200,000 

TW 1: Specific analysis to facilitate effective Tribal partnership in developing SIPs:

Estimated Costs: $100K. 

Goal: Effective Tribal participation in the SIP decision-making process that the States will 

undergo in for the first round of 308 SIPs due in 2006/2007. 

Objective: To provide specific technical analyses for each of the developing SIPs which will 

give, in a timely manner, the information that Tribes need to participate effectively in the SIP 

processes. These analyses would be done by a contractor(s) who has both Tribal policy and 

technical expertise and knows how state actions can affect Tribes. 

Deliverables: Analytical documents that specifically address each developing SIP and how they 

may impact Tribes. These documents may include, but are not limited to, the following types of 

analyses: 

• Analysis of current or draft Federal, state and local smoke management programs and current 

tribal plans and how they may affect Tribes in the WRAP region. As an example: an analysis 

of the current actions in Region 10 to create a FIP to address smoke management on or near 

Tribal lands.

• Analysis of regional haze point source control programs and how they may affect Tribes. 

TW 2: Incorporation of Tribal data into the 308 SIP/TIP Technical Support Document:

Estimated Cost $50,000 

Goal: As Tribes develop their TIPs and identify specific sources that need to be factored into the 

regional efforts to reduce haze, it will be important to amend the TSD to account for these 

sources and to provide states with guidance on how to best incorporate Tribal data into their 

SIPs. This task would provide for a contractor to track the TSD as it is developing and to ensure 

that Tribal data is accurately incorporated into it. 

Objective: SIPs that accurately reflect Tribal emissions and monitoring data. 

Deliverable: A report to the TDDWG regarding incorporation and coordination of Tribal data 

into the TSD. 

 27 
TW3: Continued Support of the Tribal Emissions Inventory Software Solution (TEISS): 

Estimated Cost $50,000

 2 Trainings. There is an ongoing need to continue TEISS training for Tribal air staff due to 

employee turnover and the fact that there are developing Tribal air programs that will be 

ready to conduct EIs in the future - estimated cost: $40,000 

 Annual update of TEISS license - $10,000 

Ambient Monitoring and Reporting Forum

The Causes of Haze Study is a complex, multi-year project, with results posted to a web site as 

available. The tasks from the original proposal are outlined below. In addition to these specific 

tasks, considerable effort has been expended setting up the web site. A request of $225,000 for 

2006 work detailed below, to complete the original scope of the project, and is accompanied by a 

$100,000 request to maintain and update the website during 2007. 

1 Emissions Mapping & Description 

2 Monitoring Site Settings 

3 Meteorological Setting

4 Aerosol Description

5 Back Trajectory Analysis 

6 Conceptual Model

7 Reporting

8 Episode Analysis

9 Detailed Meteorological Analysis 

10 Emissions Trends

11 Receptor Modeling

Tasks 1-5 have been completed, as described more fully in a memorandum sent to WGA on 

December 1, 2004. Further back trajectory analysis, however, will be conducted for 2003-04. 

Task 6 (conceptual model development) has been indefinitely postponed in order to focus on the 

trajectory regression attribution (see Task 11 discussion). 

Task 7 (reporting) is ongoing with results posted to the COHA website (www.coha.dri.edu) as 

completed. 

Task 8 (episode analysis) has been performed for the following episodes: 

• Forest fires 7/10/99, 8/2/00 

• Eastern US sulfate transport to Colorado Plateau 9/3/97, September 1998 

• West coast nitrate 2/16/02

• Fall stagnation 9/5/02 

• High wind dust episode 4/22/01 

• Wildfires and dust 8/11/01- 8/23/01 

• Colorado Plateau sulfate 4/7/01 

 28 
• Southern Arizona dust 10/16/01 

• Asian dust 4/16/01 

• Volcanic sulfate in Hawaii 

Additional episode analysis is planned. 

Task 9 (detailed meteorological analysis) will include an assessment of the representativeness of 

2002 (the year used for air quality modeling purposes) relative to the 2000-2004 baseline 

conditions. Some assessment of the quality of the back trajectory data is also planned. 

Task 10 (emission trends) will be amended to focus on trends in haze and its constituents, as 

opposed to emissions. Much of this work has already been completed. 

Task 11 (receptor modeling) is being done using back trajectory endpoints and aerosol data to 

apportion sulfate and light extinction to geographic regions (e.g. individual states, groups of 

states, Canada, Mexico). This analysis will be completed in early December 2004 for all sites 

with at least one year of aerosol data during the 2000-2002 period. 

ToC1: GIS Landuse Database Update

The overall objective of the GIS Landuse Database project is to develop updated, current year 

(2000-04) GIS databases for use in air quality and emission inventory development efforts. 

Specific uses of these data may include the following: 

Technical Oversight Committee (ToC)

• air quality analysis and support of source attribution/apportionment activities; 

• improvement of near-field activity data and analysis of emissions strengths; 

• provide more uniform landuse and demographic data to make temporally consistent 

regional estimates of biogenics, ammonia, and windblown dust emissions, as well as 

providing a consistent baseline for area source activity data and planning; and 

• development of appropriate GIS data layers for Canada and Mexico. 

The Planning Team approved the $50,000 funding at their March 2005 meeting, for this shortterm project to be complete in June 2005, using existing budget resources. The data and 

products from this project will be put to immediate use by the RMC, for the AoH projects 

described below, and by planners and managers at state and tribal air agencies. As this project is 

already underway, this project is not shown on the “March 2005 Status Report - Pending 

Projects” table earlier in the workplan. 

 29 
In support of the activities described WRAP Strategic Plan, the TOC established an Attribution 

of Haze Workgroup in early 2004. This “Phase I” Attribution analysis and report for all Class I 

areas in the WRAP region was completed in March 2005. The next step in this process will be 

complementary 2005-06 analysis activities by the various Forums and Workgroups in support of 

the AoH “Phase II” project, anticipated to begin in mid-Summer 2005, to analyze improvements 

in haze between the final/revised 2002 emissions estimates available early in 2005, and the 

emissions estimates for the 2018 base and control strategy scenarios’ cases. No additional 2006 

funds are requested. 

AoH1: Attribution of Haze – Phase 2 Contractor Support

The AoH Workgroup plans to execute the Phase II AoH project described above. It is planned 

that the Technical Data Portal project listed next will accomplish most, if not all, of the reporting 

formats and capabilities needed in the Phase II project, funds are set aside to ensure that 

technical support and preparation work can be completed in a timely manner. If the Technical 

Data Portal project is moving ahead on schedule, then these funds may be redirected to that 

project, or not used by the AoH workgroup. If needed, similar to the Phase I AoH contractor 

support project, for the $75,000 currently budgeted from the 2005 workplan, the contractor will: 

Attribution of Haze Workgroup (AoH)

 Attend AoH Workgroup meetings and distill members’ opinions and results of discussions 

into a schedule and methodology to accomplish the Phase II tasks; 

 Possibly subcontract with independent experts for analytical work; 

 Gather and format the resulting information and data from WRAP Forums, independent 

experts, and other related air quality analyses, all for review by the Workgroup; 

 Draft a “Phase II AoH Report” for review and comment by the Workgroup; and 

 Complete and publish a “Final Phase II Attribution of Haze Report”. 

AoH2: Technical Data Portal Project

At the direction of the TOC during 2004, Pangaea Information Technologies prepared a series of 

3 white papers comprising the WRAP Integrated Geospatial Information Management Strategy 

(WIGIMS) report: (http://wrapair.org/forums/toc/documents/wigims/WIGIMS_Strategy_Reportfinal.pdf ). These papers document a progression from a needs assessment to a resource 

inventory and a final strategy document. The strategy document lays out a range of options and 

a recommended approach to create a structure for data and information management of 

monitoring data/analyses, emissions information, air quality modeling simulation results, and 

ancillary data. The concept is to allow WRAP users and interested parties to access these data 

through a single web-based technical data portal (TDP) using web-based Geographic 

Information System[s] (GIS) tools to view and analyze the data used in WRAP regional haze 

planning work. Implementing the WIGIMS recommendations and strategies through a WRAP 

TDP project will incorporate suggestions and recommendations from the Pangaea strategy 

document into a phased approach, resulting in a scope of work for contractor support to build 

and operate a technical data portal for the WRAP region. 

 30 
While still under development, the scope of work for this approach to the WRAP TDP project 

would likely consist of three components and provide access to data that could be used for a 

wide variety of analyses. At a minimum, this RFP would need to list: 

1. Examples of the specific analytical products and “canned” regional technical documentation 

and displays needed for the §308 regional haze implementation plans (SIPs and TIPs); 

2. A description of a structure(s) for a flexible data access structure for more detailed analyses 

needed for individual SIPs and TIPs (borrowing options from the Pangaea reports); and 

3. Flexibility for ad hoc storage, and subsequent data query and analysis for interested parties, 

so “weight of evidence” demonstrations used in individual SIPs and TIPs can be reviewed. 

The ability to combine air quality observations/analyses, modeling results, emission inventory 

estimates, and any ancillary GIS data makes preparing the “weight of evidence” analyses 

described in #2 and #3 possible. The $167,000 currently budgeted from the 2005 workplan will 

be used for this project. 

The purpose of this committee is to coordinate the implementation of Section 309 SIPs and TIPs. 

This includes tracking emissions for the backstop SO2 trading program and addressing issues 

related to that program. EPA’s process of reviewing, proposing approval, taking public 

comment, and taking final action on the 309 SIPs submitted in 2003 has been put on hold 

pending resolution of issues raised in CEED v. EPA. 

The committee will continue to interact with EPA to identify and address any revisions and 

updates to certain SIP elements and will serve as the coordination point for the 309 states as this 

process moves forward. Committee members include representatives from the states that 

submitted Section 309 SIPs and tribes interested in submitting Section 309 TIPs. 

2006 will be the third year of the current strategic plan. Practically, this is the final year to

conclude the essential technical and policy work needed by states and tribes for 2007 SIP and 

TIPs. The Air Managers Committee role to assure and assist in completion of these projects will

be essential. The state and tribal caucuses will continue their current staffing levels, including the 

Alaska Tribal Coordinator, to help accomplish its goals in 2006. The AMC Implementation 

Work Group “customers” began their work in earnest in 2004. The IWG will continue through 

2006 to: 

309 Coordinating Committee

Air Managers Committee

• Help guide and assess project output from the other WRAP forums and workgroups; 

• Develop a roadmap or template/framework that states and tribes may use to construct 

their individual SIPs and TIPs; 

• Compile information on supplemental benefits of regional haze control strategies, and; 

• Facilitate the essential understandings between states and tribes to develop and 

implement their SIPs and TIPs. 

 31 
AMC1: Staff Support for the State and Tribal Caucuses

 The State and Tribal Caucuses each have a caucus coordinator as staff to assist the tribal and 

state air directors with continual tracking and reporting of WRAP activities, issue identification 

and communication among the WRAP partners, recruitment of WRAP participants from states 

and tribes, and facilitation of issue resolution. The State Caucus Coordinator position is filled 

through a services contract between WGA and WESTAR, and is listed as an AMC budget item. 

The Tribal Caucus Coordinator and the Alaska Tribal Outreach Coordinator positions are funded 

directly through NTEC, are not included in the AMC budget table below, but they are included 

as part of the NTEC budget for WRAP support. 

 

AMC3: Summary of Supplemental Benefits of Regional Haze Controls

Although virtually all of the work within the WRAP is directed toward supporting states and 

tribes in meeting requirements of the Regional Haze Rule, it is apparent that there are 

supplemental benefits to reducing air pollutants associated with haze. These benefits are related 

to health, ecosystem, cultural, agricultural and other factors. While haze is the primary focus of 

any control measures considered under the Regional Haze Rule, it is helpful when considering 

potential emission control measures, to also evaluate supplemental benefits where possible. 

Much of this information can be gained from the results of on-going WRAP activities and other 

outside sources, but it scattered and not organized in a useable form for consideration. Distilling 

such information and putting it into a communication package for managers, stakeholders and 

the public will assist states and tribes in describing the full value of emission control measures 

considered to meet regional haze requirements. 

The purpose of this project is to identify and describe these supplemental benefits and how they 

would follow from regional haze controls in a way the public can understand. The final summary 

material will be useful to WRAP participants for communicating the full merits of their regional 

haze control programs, and identifying ways in which existing WRAP datasets, models, and

monitoring networks may be optimized to provide more quantitative estimates of supplemental 

benefits. 

Although this project will be carried by AMC, it is expected that the Economic Analysis Forum 

will actively participate in it. The work of identifying and compiling the available information 

will require the assistance of outside expertise with knowledge of where the data is, how it can 

be used. The final work product will consist of written and visual material in one or more

formats suitable for workshop settings. This may include printed and PowerPoint® 

presentations. 

 32 
AMC4: Development of TSD “Section” Addressing Visibility Impact to Traditional 

Tribal Lifeways

Although there are several forums, (i.e. CoHA and FEJF,) addressing Tribal visibility impacts, 

this data needs to be compiled into a technical support document (TSD) component that would 

be useful in the development of SIPs/TIPs. This task would give a comprehensive view of the 

relationship between regional haze and its effects on Tribal lands and traditional lifeways. The 

document will describe why tribes need to be concerned with regional haze and how their 

involvement in the WRAP serves to reduce the haze that may interfere with their traditional 

practices. 

This document will serve as an educational tool for WRAP participants (and members of other 

regional planning organizations) that regularly work with and/or live near tribal lands. It is 

anticipated that the documents will be professionally developed into a document to be included 

in the 308 TSD. 

 

AMC5: Implementation Work Group (IWG)

The IWG got up and running in 2004, and will continue its work in two principle areas through

2006: First, IWG is on track to develop one or more “templates,” or “roadmaps,” to assist states 

and tribes in writing their 308 and 309(g) plans. In addition the IWG will maintain ongoing 

communication with the other forums and oversight committees as needed, prompting timely 

information from states and tribes, and in turn providing feedback to the forums to ensure they

are focused on the critical planning questions. WESTAR provides direct staff assistance under a

services contract with WGA. The State of New Mexico provides additional part-time contract 

staff to address the specific planning needs of tribes. 

 

AMC6: Workshops on Effective Collaboration

In the last year, during discussions among states and among tribes, reference has been made

several times, along the lines, “The Tribes won’t talk to us.” or “State (agency) is making 

assumptions we don’t agree with.” Although there are examples of collaboration among states 

and tribes on specific projects, states in general have more mature air programs than most tribes

and they must meet certain deadlines. Tribes are not subject to these deadlines. There is strong 

opinion among some of the tribes that they are included in WRAP work when it is convenient or 

in name only. Some states have little to no working relationship with tribes in their respective 

states. A number of tribes are reluctant to release tribal information because they are distrustful

of state and federal regulators. 

This task would begin to strengthen working relationships between states and tribes that is 

essential in order to fulfill the requirements of the regional haze planning process and the 

Regional Haze Rule. EPA’s Regional Haze Rule explicitly addresses state-tribal relationships and

directs them to work collaboratively with each other and in “partnership with other interested

stakeholders,” but provides little guidance in this regard. The goal of these workshops is to 

facilitate improvements in working relationships within WRAP and among individual states, 

tribes and federal agencies, by enhancing the understandings of leadership and staffs of these 

 33 
entities about how each of them functions within their organizations, their various operational 

protocols and traditions.

In general, the form of this project is a series of sub-regional workshops at selected locations

within the WRAP region to instruct state and tribal WRAP partners in tribal/state protocols. 

Tribal and state leaders would address in turn their procedures and expectations of consultation, 

their governing structures, environmental priorities and their efforts toward collaboration. The 

focus would include identification of barriers to collaboration and ways to overcome them. 

Interested stakeholders would be invited to give insight into their organizational structures and

collaborative efforts. 

AMC 2006 Budget Table 

1 These figures represent decreases from 2005. 

Project 

Code Project Title Projects Pending 

2006 

Request 

AMC1 State Caucus Staff Support (WESTAR) 120,000 

AMC3 Supplemental benefits of Haze-related control measures 15,000 

(-30k)1

AMC4 TSD Section on Haze and Traditional Tribal Lifeways 10,000 

(-25k)1

AMC5 308 Implementation Work Group Support (WESTAR, New 

Mexico) 20,0002 38,000 

AMC6 Workshops on Effective Collaboration 35,000 

Contractor Assistance 145,5313

Totals 225,531 158,000

2

 This figure may have been expended for staff support to develop 309 TIP template. 3

 This figure includes -$11,049 from 2005 for the tribal emission inventory part of the Stationary Sources

Joint Forum EI project approved by AMC in February 2005. 

 34 
Communications Committee

CC1: Web Site Maintenance 

Primary communications tool for the WRAP. Consider additional funding for transition to new 

Operations/Maintenance Contract for improved performance. 

CC2: Continue and Expand Publications 

This work is intended for both internal and external audiences and includes the following: 

• Collect inputs, draft and publish The WRAP Sheet on the Web site; 

• Print, mail, and/or fax hard copies of The WRAP Sheet to selected recipients; and 

• Produce brochures, fact sheets, and other handout materials for conferences, exhibits, and 

public meetings. 

CC3: Update Presentation Materials to Tell the WRAP Story: 

• Tailor the WRAP 301A, 401 and Tribal version presentations to meet needs of various 

forums/committees; and

• Convert presentations to various video formats (CD, VHS, 35mm, etc.) and make copies for 

multiple venues. 

CC4: Expand Speakers' Bureau 

Assure exposure of WRAP story to state and tribal general audiences throughout the WRAP 

region. Tailor to individual audiences as appropriate: 

• Develop and maintain data base of prospective audiences; 

• Work with state and tribal air directors/forum and committee chairs and follow up on 

contacts to schedule presentations; and 

• Coordinate presentation and support materials for all scheduled events. 

CC5: Support WRAP Forums and Committees in Conducting Public Meetings 

Inform and obtain public input on WRAP products and related SIP/TIP development efforts: 

• Assist with arrangements for meeting venues; and 

• Coordinate presentation and support materials for all scheduled events. 

CC6: Other Outreach Efforts to Reach Wider Audience 

Investigate partnering with other agencies/programs with shared goals – e.g., Pollution 

Prevention Roundtable for AP2 presentation: 

• Identify potential partnerships and follow up to develop cooperative ventures; and 

• Participate in joint ventures with mutual benefit. 

 35